The article "Educating Children of Katrina" lists multiple problems that this natural disaster caused. Hurricane Katrina displaced at least 372,000 students. Louisiana had more than 247,000 public and private school students displaced with 489 school closings. Mississippi had more than 125,000 displaced students. 226 schools across 30 counties were closed and 30 schools were completely distroyed.
These children had to attend schools somewhere. Fortunately, school districts in Texas opened up their doors to these displaced students. But, with this surplus of kids, there was a possibility that there were not going to be enough teachers to properly educate these children. This article suggests that mathematicians and scientists should be allowed in the classroom without training or a teacher certification in order to help fill the void.
This article also indicates that parents who were victims of Katrina should be able to make their own choice as to where their child should attend school. But, how do parents decide this? For example, if a displaced family moved to Texas because of Katrina, they would probably wish their student to attend a private school, or a wealthy school district. However, this article suggests that this thinking may be a mistake because some wealthy or private schools do not necessarily give the best education to minority students.
For instance Harrell Budd Elementary School contains many 6th grade students who come from low SES background and/or minority backgrounds. The school also has less money to spend per student than other schools. Yet, Budd is one of the best schools in Dallas because it excells with every type of student.
Even though I have never experienced a disaster to the extent as Katrina, the school I work for, Waverly Elementary (WES), got flooded during the May 1 rains. Although the school was not destroyed, it was considerably damaged, and school had to be let out for the remainder of the year. This made for these students to lose 10% of their academic year. This disaster will also, inevitably, cause them to be behind at the beginning of the 2010-2011 school year.
Funding and insurance has become a major issue with this whole ordeal, and I am still not sure what the outcome will be. All I know is WES is still expected to open up come the first day of class.
The flooding in my county was a drop in the bucket (literally) compared to what happened in Nashville. I could not imagine the stress and financial difficulty the school disctricts in Nashville have faced. The flood has affected countless amounts of people. The flood caused many school districts to lose facilities, teachers to lose materials and personal items, and children to miss out on a significant part of their schooling. But, like people from Katrina have triumphed...so will people in Tennessee.
https://elearn.mtsu.edu/d2l/orgTools/ouHome/ouHome.asp?ou=1439730
Friday, June 25, 2010
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
Blog #4 Ethnic Loyalty and Cosmopolitanism
These three articals discuss the common theme of multiculturalism in the classroom. The last artical by E. D. Hirsch Jr. described two multiculturalism curriculums- ethnic loyalty and cosmopolitanism. An ethnic loyalist would appreciate being considered an African-American, or Asian-American because these terms indicate identity to a person. They would also prefer a curriculum that pertains to their culture and values. However, a cosmopolitanist would not consider these terms to identify a person because not all African-Americans or Asian-Americans possess the same values. They would prefer a curriculum from the perspective of all ethnicities and cultures.
How do these two views affect teachers and students in the school environment? Hirsch indicates that it is impossible for teachers to completely understand what a child knows or what they should know academically because of children coming from various backgrounds. Students' cultural or ethnic background may also effect the way a child learns. This is why learning is a slow process throughout the school year.
No curriculum no matter if it contains more of a ethnic loyalist perspective or cosmopolitan perspective would be the perfect method for teaching students. However, Hirsch believes that a cosmopolitan curriculum would assist in student's understanding of values and culture than an ethnic loyalist one. Hirsch does stress that no matter how "good" the cosmopolitan curriculum may be, it should not replace or hinder basic social studies, science, math and literacy skills.
After reading the articals and information, I think that having a cosmopolitan curriculum would be a positive aspect for teaching pedagogy. As a teacher, I would stress how important it is for my students to understand and appreciate their classmates' background. But, I would also express for them to appreciate and respect their own culture as well. Children's appreciation for other ethnicities is important, but a child must understand their own history and and their own roots before they can truly know who they are.
I am an ESL teacher in my school. I have worked with students from a variety of backgrounds. However, I have noticed how the curriculum, policies and structure of the school is a means for social control. For example, having simple rules, schedules, and class procedures controls student behavior. School disciplinary policies and teacher protocols are also a means of social control. I don't use one specific curriculum, but a variety of methods and blend them all together. Because I mainly teacher Hispanic students, I try to plan a variety of ways to teach and incorporate their culture into the lessons. However, even with this method, there still runs the danger of sterotyping a student and their culture.
How do these two views affect teachers and students in the school environment? Hirsch indicates that it is impossible for teachers to completely understand what a child knows or what they should know academically because of children coming from various backgrounds. Students' cultural or ethnic background may also effect the way a child learns. This is why learning is a slow process throughout the school year.
No curriculum no matter if it contains more of a ethnic loyalist perspective or cosmopolitan perspective would be the perfect method for teaching students. However, Hirsch believes that a cosmopolitan curriculum would assist in student's understanding of values and culture than an ethnic loyalist one. Hirsch does stress that no matter how "good" the cosmopolitan curriculum may be, it should not replace or hinder basic social studies, science, math and literacy skills.
After reading the articals and information, I think that having a cosmopolitan curriculum would be a positive aspect for teaching pedagogy. As a teacher, I would stress how important it is for my students to understand and appreciate their classmates' background. But, I would also express for them to appreciate and respect their own culture as well. Children's appreciation for other ethnicities is important, but a child must understand their own history and and their own roots before they can truly know who they are.
I am an ESL teacher in my school. I have worked with students from a variety of backgrounds. However, I have noticed how the curriculum, policies and structure of the school is a means for social control. For example, having simple rules, schedules, and class procedures controls student behavior. School disciplinary policies and teacher protocols are also a means of social control. I don't use one specific curriculum, but a variety of methods and blend them all together. Because I mainly teacher Hispanic students, I try to plan a variety of ways to teach and incorporate their culture into the lessons. However, even with this method, there still runs the danger of sterotyping a student and their culture.
Friday, June 18, 2010
Blog # 3- Multiculturalism
These three articals identified an on-going, historical debate between the "multiculturalist" perspective on American society and the "conservative" perspective of society. The multiculturalist's view on historical education is that the school system should incorporate all perspectives of history from various races and cultures. This means that when discussing the Civill War, teachers should not only focus on how it affected the North, South and whites, but how it affected blacks. When addressing the Mexican-American War, teachers should portray not only how America added another state to their country, but how Mexico had to give up a part of their heritage.
Conservatives argue that all cultures and races have their own history that stress a specific country's triumphs. So America has the right to have a similar curriculum, where American history is addressed; not Hispanic, African American or Native American history. Conservatives also believe that American values, culture, and race should be preserved, or there will no longer be an American nation. Multiculturalists, on the other hand, believe that there are so many cultures "mixed" in the American nation, that America has no history or culture.
After reading these articals, I realize that I am more of a Conservative. I believe since every other country in the world has a curriculum that focuses on their own nation, why can't America do the same? I also think that is important for Americans to never forget their history, or where they came from. If people don't know their past, then they don't know who they really are.
Although, I am more of a conservative, I don't think there is anything wrong with learning about other races and cultures, and incorporating this knowledge into the classroom. It has been my experience with teaching that students enjoy learning about other countries. For example, I student taught in Cleveland, TN. I did a social studies unit on Asian culture such as Japan, Korea and China. The students loved it! (I had a lot of fun teaching it too).
I have been and ESL teacher for one year. I have had the opportunity to meet students and their families from a variety of backgrounds. I had one student who was from India. I met her mother and coordinated with her on certain occasions. My student was fluent enough in English that she could translate between Gujarati and English. I really enjoyed learning about their language, culture, religious beliefs and the challenges they went through to come to America to begin a new life.
I taught another student this passed year who was Hispanic. She came into the school system and did not know a word of English. I worked with her for the entire year. I was amazed at how quickly she caught on to the language. She and I could never carry on a fluent conversation, but we were able to communicate very easily after we worked at it. I came to realize that this girl was a good influence on her other classmates, in a school that is predominantly white. She made a difference in these student's lives just by being herself.
In conclusion, I am more of a historical conservative in that, I think that America can have their own curriculum without the influence of other races. I also think that it is important for Americans to never abandon their history, or forget where they came from. However, there is nothing wrong with learning other cultural values and interacting with others who have different perspectives.
References: http://wso.williams.edu/~rcarson/multiculturalism.html
Conservatives argue that all cultures and races have their own history that stress a specific country's triumphs. So America has the right to have a similar curriculum, where American history is addressed; not Hispanic, African American or Native American history. Conservatives also believe that American values, culture, and race should be preserved, or there will no longer be an American nation. Multiculturalists, on the other hand, believe that there are so many cultures "mixed" in the American nation, that America has no history or culture.
After reading these articals, I realize that I am more of a Conservative. I believe since every other country in the world has a curriculum that focuses on their own nation, why can't America do the same? I also think that is important for Americans to never forget their history, or where they came from. If people don't know their past, then they don't know who they really are.
Although, I am more of a conservative, I don't think there is anything wrong with learning about other races and cultures, and incorporating this knowledge into the classroom. It has been my experience with teaching that students enjoy learning about other countries. For example, I student taught in Cleveland, TN. I did a social studies unit on Asian culture such as Japan, Korea and China. The students loved it! (I had a lot of fun teaching it too).
I have been and ESL teacher for one year. I have had the opportunity to meet students and their families from a variety of backgrounds. I had one student who was from India. I met her mother and coordinated with her on certain occasions. My student was fluent enough in English that she could translate between Gujarati and English. I really enjoyed learning about their language, culture, religious beliefs and the challenges they went through to come to America to begin a new life.
I taught another student this passed year who was Hispanic. She came into the school system and did not know a word of English. I worked with her for the entire year. I was amazed at how quickly she caught on to the language. She and I could never carry on a fluent conversation, but we were able to communicate very easily after we worked at it. I came to realize that this girl was a good influence on her other classmates, in a school that is predominantly white. She made a difference in these student's lives just by being herself.
In conclusion, I am more of a historical conservative in that, I think that America can have their own curriculum without the influence of other races. I also think that it is important for Americans to never abandon their history, or forget where they came from. However, there is nothing wrong with learning other cultural values and interacting with others who have different perspectives.
References: http://wso.williams.edu/~rcarson/multiculturalism.html
Thursday, June 17, 2010
Blog 2-Religion in Schools
The artical "Religion in Schools Debate Heats Up" described a lawyer in Illinois who declined to pass a law that required a moment of silence, a time of prayer or reflection, in schools. District Judge Robert Gettleman claimed that the law violated Constitutional rights of separation between church and state.
Those against the law also believed that it was unconstitutional. Others who were advocates for the law believed that there was no violation of Constitutional rights because children were not forced to pray or reflect.
Although, I understand why this law would upset people, I do not think that passing this law would breach children's Constitutional rights if children are not forced to pray. I completed my methods class in college teaching at a school where the school day began with a moment of silence. Some students prayed, others just put their head on their desks, and some continued with their morning work. To my knowledge, no one had questioned the school or claimed that this practice violoated Constitutional rights.
This artical also discussed how people in Texas were upset about how teachers would debate the strengths and weaknesses of scientific theories. They argued that this was a way for people to slip in creationism. They also believed that there is no weaknesses in Darwin's theory.
I think that it is a good idea for Creationism and Darwinism to be discussed and debated is a good idea. It can give students the opportunity for students who are indifferent about the subject to choose what they believe. It also gives students who already have their mind made up to have the opportunity to understand both sides of the issue. This kind of activity would also be a good way to incorporate critical thinking skills into the classroom.
As desctibed in the artical "Library of Congress Artifact" Billy and Lillian Gobitas were expelled from school for not saluting the American flag. Their religion was Jehova's Witness, and they claimed that pledging the flag was against their beliefs. The Watchtower Society of Jehova's Witnesses sued.
My father is in the Army and has fought for our country. I hold the highest respect for those who have served in the military, and I hold deep respect for our country and the American flag. However, even though it might offend me, I could never force a child to pledge the flag, just like I could not force them to pray. I think it is rediculous that those two students were expelled from school. I believe this act did breach their Constitutional rights of freedom of speech and religion.
In my own classroom, I would encourage for the students to stand up, put their hand over their heart and say the pledge. However, if I knew that this violated their beliefs, I would respect that. As long as children are not disrupting the rest of the class during the pledge, children have the right not to say it.
http://www.hughlafollette.com/papers/freedom.of.religion.and.children.htm
Those against the law also believed that it was unconstitutional. Others who were advocates for the law believed that there was no violation of Constitutional rights because children were not forced to pray or reflect.
Although, I understand why this law would upset people, I do not think that passing this law would breach children's Constitutional rights if children are not forced to pray. I completed my methods class in college teaching at a school where the school day began with a moment of silence. Some students prayed, others just put their head on their desks, and some continued with their morning work. To my knowledge, no one had questioned the school or claimed that this practice violoated Constitutional rights.
This artical also discussed how people in Texas were upset about how teachers would debate the strengths and weaknesses of scientific theories. They argued that this was a way for people to slip in creationism. They also believed that there is no weaknesses in Darwin's theory.
I think that it is a good idea for Creationism and Darwinism to be discussed and debated is a good idea. It can give students the opportunity for students who are indifferent about the subject to choose what they believe. It also gives students who already have their mind made up to have the opportunity to understand both sides of the issue. This kind of activity would also be a good way to incorporate critical thinking skills into the classroom.
As desctibed in the artical "Library of Congress Artifact" Billy and Lillian Gobitas were expelled from school for not saluting the American flag. Their religion was Jehova's Witness, and they claimed that pledging the flag was against their beliefs. The Watchtower Society of Jehova's Witnesses sued.
My father is in the Army and has fought for our country. I hold the highest respect for those who have served in the military, and I hold deep respect for our country and the American flag. However, even though it might offend me, I could never force a child to pledge the flag, just like I could not force them to pray. I think it is rediculous that those two students were expelled from school. I believe this act did breach their Constitutional rights of freedom of speech and religion.
In my own classroom, I would encourage for the students to stand up, put their hand over their heart and say the pledge. However, if I knew that this violated their beliefs, I would respect that. As long as children are not disrupting the rest of the class during the pledge, children have the right not to say it.
http://www.hughlafollette.com/papers/freedom.of.religion.and.children.htm
Monday, June 14, 2010
Blog #1
Innovators and Makers
The "innovators" and "makers" of public schools consist of two different types of people. The "innovators" of public school are people that influenced schools directly by utilizing their philosphies and actions to promote change in education. The "makers" of public school are people who were successful in the "corporate world." Their success began a progressive change in education as well. Children began to be taught how to succed in their society (in the corporate world) instead of learning basic, pertinent knowledge to have a wholistic, broad education.
One "innovator" that I feel like truly affected public education today is Horace Mann. Although, Mann studied to become a lawyer, he eventually dedicated his life to social reforms. He completely revolutionized schools. Many schools had very poor learning environments, and students would only go to school for certain classes during the winter. He developed the State Board of Education and became it's first secretary. He also set up training facilities for teachers, and created funding resources for the schools.
One "maker" that influenced public education is John D. Rockefeller. Rockefeller is the founder of standard oil. He had a natural talent for business. At the age of 20 he established his own oil business with Marice Clark. The Standard Oil Company was developed in 1870 that put other firms out of business. Rockefeller eventually became a philanthropist and contributed to his church and other charitable organizations.
I chose Horace Mann to be an "innovator" because he was a driven, visionary man who improved the condition of schools during his time. His insight has changed how schools function today. Schools still have teacher trainings, decent materials, and they are run by a State Board of Education. I chose John D. Rockefeller as a "maker" of schools because his success in the oil business has caused education to drive their students to be successful in the "corporate world."
John Gatto believes that Rockefeller had a hand in causing students to be molded into a corporate being instead of learning values, and what is truly important in life such as family. Although I understand Gatto's argument, I highly doubt Rockefeller intentionally caused "jail-like schools" to evolved over time. He was an intelligent, driven man who had a natural knack for business and knew how to create a life for himself.
However, I do agree with Gatto in that Rockefeller inadvertantly influenced education through his career. He perhaps unknowingly instilled educators and school boards during his time to teach their students how to be successful like Rockefeller. This mentality has trickled through education since Rockefeller's day and has caused a downward spiral. Now children are forced to go to school. Schools are becoming more dangerous and education has become "dummied down." How is the US school system going to get out this mess?
Resources:http://www.johndrockefeller.org/https://elearn.mtsu.edu/d2l/orgTools/ouHome/ouHome.asp?ou=1439730https://elearn.mtsu.edu/d2l/orgTools/ouHome/ouHome.asp?ou=1439730
Posted by Elena Heath at 7:58 AM 0 comments
About Me
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
