Blog #5: Ideology and Policy:
Sesame Workshop
I have always been a fan of Sesame Street! From the time of my daughter’s childhood – over twenty years ago – I have been impressed with the way in which this television show and all of the productions of the Sesame Workshop have contributed to the development of our nation’s youth. As presented on the Sesame Workshop website, the organization’s initiatives are health and wellness, respect and understanding, literacy and numeracy, and emotional wellbeing. All of these issues are addressed through the television show that is broadcast on public television. As a show that is available to all people with a television without the expense of cable or the input of commercial advertising, it is able to reach millions of people of all backgrounds and socioeconomic status. And although the show is intended for young children, it serves the function of educating parents as well. In addition to the television show, “Sesame Street”, the Sesame Workshop produces several other children’s television shows including the newly updated “The Electric Company.”
Sesame Workshop also offers a multitude of resources for parents and teachers through their website. These resources fall under the initiative categories mentioned above. Through these resources, Sesame Workshop provides parents and teachers of preschool children an abundance of material to promote literacy, health, and tolerance. Not only does Sesame Workshop reach children, parents, and teachers in this country, it also reaches out around the world. With programs in Brazil, Ireland, Indonesia, and India, it is “working locally to educate and inspire children.”
Sesame Workshop is a nonprofit organization that provides educational experiences to children, parents, and teachers around the world. It begins by identifying needs within cultures. It then proceeds to research that need and identify the best way to address it through child-friendly programming. It has the potential to impact the habits and values of the people it reaches by focusing on very young children. As we have explored in our reading, this has long been a goal of public education in this country and in other countries. It is hoped that through the education of children, we will develop citizens who can work and live together productively and in peace. I think that the Sesame Workshop approach to improving the quality of life for preschool children is effective. I have seen the results both at home and at school.
Friday, May 22, 2009
Monday, May 18, 2009
Blog #4: The Threat of Cultural Pluralism
Blog #4: The Threat of Cultural Pluralism
E. D. Hirsch’s article, “Toward a Centrist Curriculum: Two Kinds of Multiculturalism in Elementary School” made several points worth serious consideration. The first deals with the strengths and weaknesses of cosmopolitanism and ethnocentrism. I think it is very important to see oneself as a member of a large, diverse community and that as a member of that community, certain shared values and experiences are present. The concern about an ethnocentric approach to multiculturalism is a valid one. America is a country of great diversity and despite the many problems present, it is a country characterized by relative peace. Think of Iraq where ethnic differences are the cause of daily combat. People of different ethnic heritage must feel connected to people of other ethnic heritage through some national identity if we are to live in peace.
Another point that Hirsch makes is that neglecting to teach elements of the dominant culture of the time (with the understanding that that might change) is a disservice to our youth because the ability to write and speak in the standard form of the dominant language is the key to successful employment. To refrain from educating segments of the population in this curriculum is to relegate them to menial labor.
How to change the curriculum to provide a more balanced coverage of information pertaining to the many cultures present in our society is a challenging and complex issue. Adam Wexler suggests some possible ways to do this in his article, “Multiculturalism in School Curriculum.” Wexler does not support the idea of focused studies on certain cultures such as Black History Month. Instead he suggests that when studying history that the experiences and viewpoints of all cultures at the time be examined. This sounds like a good approach, but the flaw is in assuming that all viewpoints will be covered. My guess is that our history textbooks do not cover all of these perspectives, and if they do, the coverage is not equally distributed. And in the study of literature the same problem arises. What is clear is that it is crucial that we rethink our curriculum so that it covers both elements of the dominant culture necessary for social advancement while at the same time providing equal time to other cultures.
In “New Immigration Ads Stir the Melting Pot” we are reminded of extremists who exhibit no tolerance for people of differing ethnic backgrounds. The existence of hate groups is real. To ignore them is dangerous. When reading the quoted statements by people associated with the organization FAIR, it is clear that they promote racist attitudes intent on undermining any attempts to develop successful avenues for the assimilation of immigrants in our country.
The schools in which I have worked have used curriculum, policies and the structure of the school as a means of social control. Behavior deemed acceptable is dictated by the school, and procedures are in place to teach and enforce these behaviors. Examples range from simple issues such as how to behave in the hallway and how to prepare oneself for class to more complex issues such as how to show respect to others. In my experience as a teacher, I have seen efforts on the part of teachers and administrators to promote a climate of respect with regard to cultural differences. This has been done in a variety of ways ranging from special programs to honor the accomplishments of black Americans to reading literature by writers of various ethnic heritages to studying the experiences of various types of people in the course of history. Most recently we have started an advisory program in our school that is intended to promote social harmony through respect. The idea of an advisory program is, I think, a good one. Unfortunately, there has not been adequate training to make it very effective. During these advisory sessions it has become clear that racial tension exists. These tensions exist as an undercurrent in the school. During class students usually make remarks that are not offensive. But in less structured environments – in the hall or during lunch – racial and religious tensions surface. For the most part, students keep these tensions away from the eyes and ears of the adults in the school. Only when a fight breaks out are we directly made aware of them. And so it seems that we do a good job of controlling tensions within the school, but we may be making very little progress in changing personal views.
E. D. Hirsch’s article, “Toward a Centrist Curriculum: Two Kinds of Multiculturalism in Elementary School” made several points worth serious consideration. The first deals with the strengths and weaknesses of cosmopolitanism and ethnocentrism. I think it is very important to see oneself as a member of a large, diverse community and that as a member of that community, certain shared values and experiences are present. The concern about an ethnocentric approach to multiculturalism is a valid one. America is a country of great diversity and despite the many problems present, it is a country characterized by relative peace. Think of Iraq where ethnic differences are the cause of daily combat. People of different ethnic heritage must feel connected to people of other ethnic heritage through some national identity if we are to live in peace.
Another point that Hirsch makes is that neglecting to teach elements of the dominant culture of the time (with the understanding that that might change) is a disservice to our youth because the ability to write and speak in the standard form of the dominant language is the key to successful employment. To refrain from educating segments of the population in this curriculum is to relegate them to menial labor.
How to change the curriculum to provide a more balanced coverage of information pertaining to the many cultures present in our society is a challenging and complex issue. Adam Wexler suggests some possible ways to do this in his article, “Multiculturalism in School Curriculum.” Wexler does not support the idea of focused studies on certain cultures such as Black History Month. Instead he suggests that when studying history that the experiences and viewpoints of all cultures at the time be examined. This sounds like a good approach, but the flaw is in assuming that all viewpoints will be covered. My guess is that our history textbooks do not cover all of these perspectives, and if they do, the coverage is not equally distributed. And in the study of literature the same problem arises. What is clear is that it is crucial that we rethink our curriculum so that it covers both elements of the dominant culture necessary for social advancement while at the same time providing equal time to other cultures.
In “New Immigration Ads Stir the Melting Pot” we are reminded of extremists who exhibit no tolerance for people of differing ethnic backgrounds. The existence of hate groups is real. To ignore them is dangerous. When reading the quoted statements by people associated with the organization FAIR, it is clear that they promote racist attitudes intent on undermining any attempts to develop successful avenues for the assimilation of immigrants in our country.
The schools in which I have worked have used curriculum, policies and the structure of the school as a means of social control. Behavior deemed acceptable is dictated by the school, and procedures are in place to teach and enforce these behaviors. Examples range from simple issues such as how to behave in the hallway and how to prepare oneself for class to more complex issues such as how to show respect to others. In my experience as a teacher, I have seen efforts on the part of teachers and administrators to promote a climate of respect with regard to cultural differences. This has been done in a variety of ways ranging from special programs to honor the accomplishments of black Americans to reading literature by writers of various ethnic heritages to studying the experiences of various types of people in the course of history. Most recently we have started an advisory program in our school that is intended to promote social harmony through respect. The idea of an advisory program is, I think, a good one. Unfortunately, there has not been adequate training to make it very effective. During these advisory sessions it has become clear that racial tension exists. These tensions exist as an undercurrent in the school. During class students usually make remarks that are not offensive. But in less structured environments – in the hall or during lunch – racial and religious tensions surface. For the most part, students keep these tensions away from the eyes and ears of the adults in the school. Only when a fight breaks out are we directly made aware of them. And so it seems that we do a good job of controlling tensions within the school, but we may be making very little progress in changing personal views.
Friday, May 15, 2009
Blog #3: Nationalism and Multiculturalism
The three articles, "Why Multiculturalism is Wrong," "The Challenge of 'Multiculturalism' in How Americans View the Past and Future," and "Pithissippi Burning: Race, Whate Natinalism and American Culture" represent three views on a continuum of views about multiculturalism in America. The first two clearly oppose the approach of multiculturalism expressing concerns from the idea that multiculturalism actually traps people by placing labels on them to the concern that multiculturalism will distort the teaching of history. In the second article, it is stated that despite efforts to publish textbooks that devote more space to non-white, not-Protestant groups, these other groups are not satisfied and won't be satisfied until the history books eliminate information about whites in the history of America. I think that's a bit extreme. I know there are people who have extreme views, but I am not concerned that we will eventually have no coverage of European colonists' contributions to the development of the nation. I tend to think that people who express these concerns are very uncomfortable with the idea of no longer being in the majority. I do think that there will be less coverage of European contributions as space is made for the contributions of other racial groups and that that is a change we will need to adjust to.
The third article deals with hate groups and expresses concerns that the election of our first black president has angered these people and caused them to be more motivated to take action against what they see to be a threat. This is a concern of mine also. I do think that it is an issue that me must face as a nation. But how? The questions that PJ Tobia poses at the end of the article are good ones: "But what does the other side [those who oppose hate groups] do to advance its agenda? Watch Gandhi? Memorize King's letter from a Birmingham Jail?" In schools, I have heard remarks by students that clearly indicate hate towards people of other races. I have tried on several occasions to make comments that at least get the students to think and explain their remarks. So many times young people repeat what they hear at home. Getting them to think through these remarks by questioning in a non-accusatory manner may be a first - although admittedly small - step to combatting hate.
The third article deals with hate groups and expresses concerns that the election of our first black president has angered these people and caused them to be more motivated to take action against what they see to be a threat. This is a concern of mine also. I do think that it is an issue that me must face as a nation. But how? The questions that PJ Tobia poses at the end of the article are good ones: "But what does the other side [those who oppose hate groups] do to advance its agenda? Watch Gandhi? Memorize King's letter from a Birmingham Jail?" In schools, I have heard remarks by students that clearly indicate hate towards people of other races. I have tried on several occasions to make comments that at least get the students to think and explain their remarks. So many times young people repeat what they hear at home. Getting them to think through these remarks by questioning in a non-accusatory manner may be a first - although admittedly small - step to combatting hate.
Blog #2: Religion and Education
I found both the U.S. News article and the Library of Congress Artifact very interesting. I actually thought that they had similar points: that children should not be forced to participate in an activity that goes against their beliefs. This certainly was the point in the Illinois case dealing with the moment of silence and in the Billy Gobitas case involving saluting the American flag. In both of these cases children were expected to participate in daily rituals that went against their beliefs. I understand the logic in the rulings of both cases. When I have observed the moment of silence in schools, I have never seen a teacher encouraging children to pray. It is, however, entirely possible for that to happen, and I suppose by eliminating the practice, you then eliminate the possiblity of a teacher forcing his or her religious beliefs on children whose parents may have other beliefs.
The case about evolution and creationism in schools is a little different. Creationism is clearly grounded in religious belief. Because schools are operated by the government and because the constitution states that there must be a separation of church and state, then it is clear that religious views should not be taught in science classes. Evolution, on the other hand, is a scientific theory and although some may argue that there are weaknesses in this theory, the vast majority of the scientific community agree that those claims are unfounded. I suppose that some may say that forcing a student to learn about evolution may go against his/her beliefs. But I would argue that it is important for all students to understand the theory of evolution. If they then choose to doubt it or reject it, that is their perogative. But it is the theory that is accepted not only in this county but in most developed countries around the world and an educated person should be informed about it.
I found both the U.S. News article and the Library of Congress Artifact very interesting. I actually thought that they had similar points: that children should not be forced to participate in an activity that goes against their beliefs. This certainly was the point in the Illinois case dealing with the moment of silence and in the Billy Gobitas case involving saluting the American flag. In both of these cases children were expected to participate in daily rituals that went against their beliefs. I understand the logic in the rulings of both cases. When I have observed the moment of silence in schools, I have never seen a teacher encouraging children to pray. It is, however, entirely possible for that to happen, and I suppose by eliminating the practice, you then eliminate the possiblity of a teacher forcing his or her religious beliefs on children whose parents may have other beliefs.
The case about evolution and creationism in schools is a little different. Creationism is clearly grounded in religious belief. Because schools are operated by the government and because the constitution states that there must be a separation of church and state, then it is clear that religious views should not be taught in science classes. Evolution, on the other hand, is a scientific theory and although some may argue that there are weaknesses in this theory, the vast majority of the scientific community agree that those claims are unfounded. I suppose that some may say that forcing a student to learn about evolution may go against his/her beliefs. But I would argue that it is important for all students to understand the theory of evolution. If they then choose to doubt it or reject it, that is their perogative. But it is the theory that is accepted not only in this county but in most developed countries around the world and an educated person should be informed about it.
Wednesday, May 13, 2009
Web Log Entry #1
The PBS site and the Gatto site are very different. I personally have found the PBS site to be very interesting. I was especially interested to read about Deborah Meier. Meier is someone to be admired. She has devoted her life to improving the education of disadvantaged children working in the troubled areas of Harlem and now Roxbury, Massachusetts. She has done what I think is so important: involved parents in the education of their children. She has also spoken out against our preoccupation with standards and testing. I would be very interested to read her book, The Power of Their Ideas, Lessons to America from a Small School in Harlem. I wold also be interested to know her opinion of the Promise Academy in Harlem that is getting press today. (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/08/opinion/08brooks.html?emc=eta1).
Although most of my students do not come from disadvantaged homes, each year I have a few who do. I try hard to involve the parents of these students so that their involvement is similar to that of my other students. It is often difficult to do. The benefits of parent involvement are clear.
Gatto's web page is very different from the PBS site. He is clearly angry about what has gone on in education in this country. I get frustrated reading his material because it is so negative. I understand that there were and are varied forces influencing education and that some are very negative. He paints a bleak picture. Carnegie, Rockefeller, Ford, and Morgan are depicted as really bad people who exploited the masses for their own personal benefit. There is probably some truth in this. I'll have to read more about each of these people before I decide what I think. I do think that there were economic problems when these men lived - that there were many people living in poverty and that education seemed to be a way to both improve the lives of these people and improve the nation's economic well-being. At the same time, I agree with Gatto in that public education is structured in a way to promote conformity and to discourage questioning minds. This, in my opinion, is not a good thing.
Education in America has been influenced by both the "innovators" and the "makers." Examining the history of America would not be thorough if it did not consider both of these influences. I will be curious to see if Gatto will acknowledge in any depth those individuals who have devoted their lives to improving the lives of others - people like Deborah Meier. To ignore those would seem to paint as biased a picture of the history of education as those studies that fail to mention the less-than-admirable motives of others who influenced educational policy.
Although most of my students do not come from disadvantaged homes, each year I have a few who do. I try hard to involve the parents of these students so that their involvement is similar to that of my other students. It is often difficult to do. The benefits of parent involvement are clear.
Gatto's web page is very different from the PBS site. He is clearly angry about what has gone on in education in this country. I get frustrated reading his material because it is so negative. I understand that there were and are varied forces influencing education and that some are very negative. He paints a bleak picture. Carnegie, Rockefeller, Ford, and Morgan are depicted as really bad people who exploited the masses for their own personal benefit. There is probably some truth in this. I'll have to read more about each of these people before I decide what I think. I do think that there were economic problems when these men lived - that there were many people living in poverty and that education seemed to be a way to both improve the lives of these people and improve the nation's economic well-being. At the same time, I agree with Gatto in that public education is structured in a way to promote conformity and to discourage questioning minds. This, in my opinion, is not a good thing.
Education in America has been influenced by both the "innovators" and the "makers." Examining the history of America would not be thorough if it did not consider both of these influences. I will be curious to see if Gatto will acknowledge in any depth those individuals who have devoted their lives to improving the lives of others - people like Deborah Meier. To ignore those would seem to paint as biased a picture of the history of education as those studies that fail to mention the less-than-admirable motives of others who influenced educational policy.
After reading the assigned selections from both the Spring and the Gatto texts, I find myself contemplating again our society's expectation that public schools can and should solve the problem of poverty. As I review the various programs that have been used to address this expectation, I feel admiration for those who have tried to improve the lives of the poor. And when those programs fail to solve the problem of poverty and are discarded and then replaced by another program, I wonder how long the cycle will repeat itself.
Recently in the news there has been coverage on the new Promise Academy of Harlem. David Brooks devoted one of his Op-Ed pieces to it last week in the New York Times. (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/08/opinion/08brooks.html?_r=1&emc=eta1) This school reports success with raising test scores of poor students in reading and math. Gains of 1.3 to 1.4 standard deviations far surpassed the meager gains of 0.3 standard deviations generated from other programs such as Head Start. This success is attributed to more time in school and the provision of health and psychological services. It sounds great. But is there more to think about.
I wonder what is being done at Promise Academy in the areas of history and science. Rothstein's article makes some important points about the problems that can arise from an exclusive focus on reading and math at the expense of history and science. Will the focus on reading and math deprive poor students of the cultural and scientific knowledge that is more accessible to students in more affluent areas? In addition to having basic skills needed to work, don't all people need education that will promote critical thinking, not to mention the understanding of scientific principles related to health? Rothstein's article raises good questions. I see our schools providing fewer experiences in the areas of history and science, and I think that deprives our students of a full education. What about having more reading and math woven into the disciplines of history and science? And then there is the question of the arts. Where does our preoccupation with reading and math skills as demonstrated through stnadardized tests leave the arts? Will we produce a population that has no appreciation for great music or fine art?
I am a language arts teacher, and I see a need for better instruction in this area. I also am concerned that we are neglecting other important areas. And I remain concern that standardized tests alone do not measure one's ability to think - a skill that is definitely needed for success. I think more is needed to eradicate poverty than good test scores.
Recently in the news there has been coverage on the new Promise Academy of Harlem. David Brooks devoted one of his Op-Ed pieces to it last week in the New York Times. (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/08/opinion/08brooks.html?_r=1&emc=eta1) This school reports success with raising test scores of poor students in reading and math. Gains of 1.3 to 1.4 standard deviations far surpassed the meager gains of 0.3 standard deviations generated from other programs such as Head Start. This success is attributed to more time in school and the provision of health and psychological services. It sounds great. But is there more to think about.
I wonder what is being done at Promise Academy in the areas of history and science. Rothstein's article makes some important points about the problems that can arise from an exclusive focus on reading and math at the expense of history and science. Will the focus on reading and math deprive poor students of the cultural and scientific knowledge that is more accessible to students in more affluent areas? In addition to having basic skills needed to work, don't all people need education that will promote critical thinking, not to mention the understanding of scientific principles related to health? Rothstein's article raises good questions. I see our schools providing fewer experiences in the areas of history and science, and I think that deprives our students of a full education. What about having more reading and math woven into the disciplines of history and science? And then there is the question of the arts. Where does our preoccupation with reading and math skills as demonstrated through stnadardized tests leave the arts? Will we produce a population that has no appreciation for great music or fine art?
I am a language arts teacher, and I see a need for better instruction in this area. I also am concerned that we are neglecting other important areas. And I remain concern that standardized tests alone do not measure one's ability to think - a skill that is definitely needed for success. I think more is needed to eradicate poverty than good test scores.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
