Activism: Does it Matter?

Everyday my Inbox is full of entreaties to protest for, petition in support of, and donate to a myriad of causes. Most are in response to the continuing assault on the environment, human rights, immigrant rights, education, and to fight the Trump administration’s agenda.

Although I am a supporter of the activist spirit (as I myself have been activist, both passive and active), I wonder sometimes how much of what I sign, write about, or donate to, has any effect whatsoever. Sometimes I feel I would be better occupied by continuing to educate future people– so that these same issues, and the clearly destructive decisions by those in control, can at last be eradicated by a more intelligent, compassionate generation.

Of course, how we engage with current events and social issues is also being watched by those whom we teach. How we deal with them is watched by our own children. If we do nothing, say nothing, then they will think there is nothing to be done. And so, the cycle continues.

So—even if it feels as if we gain no real ground by venting our discontent with the status quo and the wrongs of the world, through our passive and active acts of protest, perhaps we should continue to do so. Diligently, conscientiously, but not randomly. We cannot hope to fix everything, especially by passively signing every petition on social media or in our e-mail. We must make our truth a reality by living it.

Being honest about what we believe in and support, without negligent judgement, or pressure (especially on the younger generation) is an important first step. Showing, instead of telling. Encouraging others’ exploration into issues that concern us all. And then, asking those who read or hear us to decide for themselves.

It is our responsibility, almost a sacred duty, to educate and prepare the next generation. But we need to be prepared to ask and answer the hard questions, always and without fail.

And occasionally, delete some petitions in favor of others. Small but significant steps.

einstein

A BBC Video Explains What Teachers Think About and Deal With Daily

This brilliant video shows teachers, presumably from Britain, discussing what it is like to be a teacher, what questions they’re asked, and why they stay in the profession…and surprise, surprise! It’s almost EXACTLY the same discussions teachers here in the states would have, probably teachers around the world, come to think of it. Watch this funny and touching video, and feel free to comment in this forum, especially if you are a teacher.

Enjoy!

Culturally Relevant Education Workshop with Dr. Love

I recently attended a 3-day workshop and seminar at the U of A, called The Culturally Relevant Education Seminar, sponsored by the Department of Culturally Relevant Pedagogy & Instruction within my district. With the temps hitting upwards of 115 degrees for most of those 3 days, I was happy to be in the air-conditioned kiva, learning with colleagues from across the city. I was also honored to be in the presence of so many awesome educators, community leaders, and speakers of color, as well as artists and performers sharing their cultures and craft.

But I was most affected by this keynote speaker and educator, Dr. Bettina Love. Dr. Love  is an award-winning author and Associate Professor of Educational Theory & Practice at the University of Georgia. I had seen her present before, through a video on TEDx UGA that was required viewing in my Cultural Education Foundations coursework. So I was very surprised and pleased when she was featured on day three of the seminar.

Dr. Love uses hip-hop sensibility and culture to transform urban education, tapping into students’ cultural intelligences, informing the way in which students can learn about their social and cultural identities, while being active in social justice. She uses music, digital technologies, and full-body kinesthetic learning techniques to enhance student engagement, and provide them with a voice. She makes a very eloquent argument for shifting the current paradigm of education to include tools and experiences that relate directly to the lives and academic needs of students of color.

As a teacher of inner-city youth myself, I have tried, with limited success, to bring some of these techniques and methods to bear in the classroom, particularly the inclusion of musical genres that the students share and respond to. I realize, as a white educator in a predominantly WASP culture, my understanding of Hip-Hop culture and what it is like to be African American in our society is limited at best. But what I do know is, my students–African American, Latino, Indigenous, along with many other cultures–want to learn, but most importantly, they want to be accepted and heard. So I will continue to use all the tools and research at my disposal to provide them with a voice, and an alternative way to learn.

I invite my readers to check out Dr. Bettina Love’s website, and view the TEDX video, as this was pretty much a similar presentation to what I experienced at the CRE seminar.

She is launching a website soon that will feature a curriculum, tools and materials to enhance learning in the urban classroom, called Get Free. I believe it is still a work in progress, but if you watch Dr. Love’s website,  I think it will be available soon.

The need for this way of teaching, and a curriculum to deliver it,  is  so important now, more than ever. With the predominance of racial violence, intolerance, and the negation of social and economic resources being made available to multi-racial cultures and the poor in this country, we must begin to inspire the hearts and minds of the next generation, show them that their lives do matter, and be active in the call for social justice.

Education is Power. Knowledge is Freedom.

http://www.bettinalove.com/videos/

Week #6 Journal-Thoughts on Culturally Responsive Pedagogy

As is obvious from the history and undeniable evidence presented in the Brown Lecture by Teresa McCarty, that culturally responsive pedagogy is extremely successful in bringing about positive change, not only in education as a whole, but in providing students, their families, and communities, a voice…not only through the application of their first language, but through social action, activism, and applied cultural traditions and life-ways, within the framework of American Education. In reading from The Cultural Responsive Teaching website, I found this quote foremost on my mind:

“Parents are the child’s first teacher and are critically important partners to students and teachers. To help parents become aware of how they can be effective partners in the education process, teachers should engage in dialogue with parents as early as possible about parents’ hopes and aspirations for their child, their sense of what the child needs, and suggestions about ways teachers can help. Teachers explain their own limitations and invite parents to participate in their child’s education in specific ways” (The Education Alliance, Brown University ). 

It has become increasingly important that we include parents in the conversation about what is best for their children’s education. In my experience, most parents expect the best, but may have come to the conclusion that it is outside of their power to say anything, or to try to change “the status-quo”. When I ask them what they wish to see in their child’s English Language support program, I get very little response, or the exchanges go something like: “I want my child to speak English to do well in school”, or “I don’t want them to get held back, I want them to be as successful as their (mainstream) classmates”. They are terrified that their child will be singled out for failure, or looked at as “less than” (a deficit condition) because they are thought to need “special” support in English. And although it is my job to teach them English, I can understand their point of view.

What they don’t seem to get is that, although I am not fluent in all the students’ first languages, I intend that they stay “bi-literate”…that is to say, as they are learning English, I wish their parents to still instill in them a love and learning of their first language, alongside their second language acquisition, English. I make this very clear at the outset. But I feel as if they do not believe me, or are just agreeing to whatever I tell them, because one does not “argue with the teacher”.

In most of these exchanges, I’ve tried to share the students’ data, their strengths, as well as their misconceptions and areas needing intervention, with a sensitivity to their cultures and individual needs. But it has become clear to me that, sometimes,  the parents do not feel they need to be more involved, particularly if they do not themselves speak much English. And this may be the reason: I send home communications in their home language, translated by district Language Acquisition specialists. Up until fairly recently, when I was unable to get district help with this, I would rely on online transcription (Google Translate, Babelfish, etc.). It was some time before I found out that this was a bad idea.

But it was not a parent who told me. In one case, an Arabic-speaking student of mine said (when I queried him about whether his Dad understood a letter I sent home in Arabic), “My Dad said it was unreadable. It was not the right dialect, and was in the wrong direction (left to right)”. From that time on, I have tried hard to seek out correct translations, or even ask district interpreters to call their homes. But this has been hit and miss, because there is such a shortage of reliable interpreters, even with our Meaningful Access mandates. I feel it is difficult for parents to take anything we (teachers and representatives of the district) say seriously, when we can’t even get through to them in their preferred or home languages.

This also goes for state testing and adopted curriculum concerns. Parents I have met do not seem to question the assessment process, or understand it fully. We, as teachers, currently have little if any say in what is to be found in the Common Core. We can adapt material to the curriculum, yes…up to a point. I feel very fortunate that my curriculum, as an ELD specialist, allows for more cultural awareness and appreciation, but it is still a bit dated. So I am constantly adapting and updating it with resources I find: Online videos of traditional dancing, and music in other languages; artwork and creation/folk stories (The Big Myth comes to mind, a really cool resource); Realia that I find, or that the students bring from home, that exemplifies an aspect of their cultural identity; sharing my own ancestry and traditions (anecdotal information), as they relate to their own; Collecting language phrases for a “first language” word wall. These are just some of the things I have implemented. I am fortunate to be able to do this, because I know from when I was a mainstream classroom teacher, how difficult it was to get the administration or grade-level colleagues on board with anything outside of the regular curriculum offerings.

I have not forgotten either what I have learned about the “Multiple Intelligences“. When I was studying for my Bachelors in Elementary Ed, I did my thesis paper on the Multiple intelligences theory and the theory of “Indigo Children” (a comparative study). Neither of these theories are subscribed to in the mainstream educational environments I have worked in over the years, with MI being only barely touched upon, when I was taking Structured English Immersion courses for my endorsement. But to this day, I feel that the different ways in which students learn is still relevant, now more than ever, and particularly among bi-cultural students. All students learn differently, and have strengths in different “intelligences” (ie: Artistic, spatial, linguistic, to name a few)… that is patently obvious. This is what “differentiation” in instruction is supposed to address. But I’ve noticed, in most classrooms, that “differentiation” mainly occurs in the form of more varied “activities”, more tasks. Applying this directly to individual student learning styles is largely an after-thought. So, I believe by sharing what I have seen work well with students from any culture, especially when it speaks to their personal experience and interests, is worth sharing.  Some teachers I have worked with have been very receptive to this…but largely, most keep to the way they’ve “always done things”. This comment from Ms. McCarty’s lecture stands out in my mind:

“Educators and parents in these schools understand that sameness, uniformity of approach does not equate with fairness. So, for example, having equal access to a Common Core, whose Common Core, whose languages, knowledge and voices are included and which notches, languages and community futures are placed at risk?  These education projects take seriously the promise that any child may be expected to succeed, understanding that not every child succeeds through the same experiences or measures, and that definitions of success themselves are race, class, and power linked. If we are to fulfill the promise of Brown, we must fight for policies whereby these types of self-determined education practices are not mere examples” (McCarty, 2015).

We need a major paradigm shift in our approach to teaching all students, but particularly bi-cultural students. Some of them do not even realize what they are missing, culturally. When I share something of their culture, I am sometimes surprised that they did not already know something about it. Often, they say that it is not relevant to them. When I ask them why, they say it is something from their parents’ or grandparents’ experience, and not their own. As sad as that is, I must then try to integrate this knowledge of their ancestors’ past cultural identity, with their current cultural identity, because it’s all relevant. This includes the real history of the United States, and their place in it. Many of my students of Spanish-speaking cultures have family from Mexico. The majority do not even realize that they are the result of hundreds of years of racial blending; that they may be of  Indigenous and Spanish decent. The fact that their parents do not always share this gives me pause, and I wonder if it is my place to tell them of this possibility. But I feel that they need to question where they came from, so they can more fully develop their identity. I do not want them to go on thinking they are one thing, what society tells them. They should have access to as much information as they can get. I do this at great risk, sometimes. But so far, it has only helped them, and myself, to build a trusting, meaningful teacher-student relationship.  And that is a start.

IMG_20150904_144306

Week #4 Journal on “Vestiges of Segregation”

Willing to Learn

There is still some evidence that “total inclusion” has yet to be realized in most schools in the U.S, mostly in regards to students with disabilities, including learning disabilities. Although the movement toward “total inclusion” is on in the realm of race, learning disabled and even physically disabled students are not completely mainstreamed even today. In every school I have worked in (and that now totals five), there was either a “self-contained” model for ELLs, Learning Disabled students, or a “pull-out” model within the mainstream school setting (which is what I do as an ELL “Resource” teacher).

There is evidence that this is also the case in some, if not most, middle schools and high schools. In an effort to make schools more racially diverse, many middle schools and high schools are moving to “magnet” status. The rationale for magnet schools is to give “school choice” and focus on “specialization”, and to increase diversity. Some of these magnet specializations include Fine Arts, STEM, and Bilingual (or Dual Language) Education. It remains to be seen if this method of desegregation and school choice will result in more diverse school populations. The quality of education at these magnet schools varies, but it is becoming increasingly evident that thorough “inclusion” and diversification is still a long way off.

In the article Vestiges of Segregation in the Implementation of Inclusion Policies in Public High Schools (McCarthy, Mary Rose, et.al. 2012), even after laws passed to racially desegregate public schools, like Brown vs. Board of Education (1954), and legislation passed in 1970, where funding was provided to meet the needs of children termed “handicapped” (McCarthy, et.al. 2012), students continued to be “segregated” within desegregated school districts, even as their civil rights to a public and free education were guaranteed by this legislation—in the form of “special classes”, or even separate schools. In 1974, the reauthorization of the Education of Handicapped Amendment (PL 93-380), Congress had ordered states to develop procedures to ensure that children with disabilities, including children in public and private institutions or private care facilities, were to be educated with their non-disabled peers to the maximum extent possible (McCarthy, et. al. 2012, p.310). After several amendments to provide more resources, provide an appropriate education in “the least restricted environment” as possible, and to protect their rights to due process, these amendments resulted in the 1990 law renamed the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, 1990). Although IDEA had a profound impact on the education of disabled students, now public schools had the responsibility to educate

In 1974, the reauthorization of the Education of Handicapped Amendment (PL 93-380), Congress had ordered states to develop procedures to ensure that children with disabilities, including children in public and private institutions or private care facilities, were to be educated with their non-disabled peers to the maximum extent possible (McCarthy, et. al. 2012, p.310). After several amendments to provide more resources, provide an appropriate education in “the least restricted environment” as possible, and to protect their rights to due process, these amendments resulted in the 1990 law renamed the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, 1990). Although IDEA had a profound impact on the education of disabled students, now public schools had the responsibility to educate all children…which led to a dual system within schools emerging to deal with disabled populations (McCarthy, et. al. 2012, p. 310). This led to a disparity in how much time these students spent in a mainstream classroom, versus a segregated or separate, setting. According to the Dept. of Education (2005), 50.1% or 5.9 million students with disabilities spent some, if not all of their school day in such settings (McCarthy, et. al. 2012, p.311). So, in essence, under IDEA, these segregated classrooms were not only allowed under law, but required by mandates that multiple placement options be “available and considered for each student with disabilities… (which) resulted in distinct administrative structures, unique certifications for teachers, specialized curriculum and instruction, different assessments, as well as unique graduation requirements and diplomas” (Gartner & Lipsky, 1987 via McCarthy, et. al. 2012, p. 311).

Because of this definition of making fully inclusive education available to such populations “whenever possible”, a slew of deviations and reinterpretations of the law affected how these students eventually received their educations, and much was left up to local education teams within the schools to decide  how to implement them. Rationales for how these decisions were being made for the benefit of these and other students, and not merely the convenience of the schools, continue to this day. In one such case, the differences were the “physical and cultural characteristics socially constructed as “race”; in another, they were the physical, cognitive, emotional, and behavioral characteristics socially constructed as “ability”… leading to a sense of Otherness” within the school populations (McCarthy, et. al. 2012, p.312). It has been suggested, in this article and in other similar studies, that with this mindset came the trend of profiling certain races being identified for learning disabled services more and more frequently.

So what can we, as a society, do to stem this trend? We have to change our view of “disability“, of “Otherness“, and our tendency to  profile students as being “potentially less successful” because of race, socio-economic circumstances, and cultural divergence. First, students with physical, mental, or learning “disabilities” should be monitored for what they are able to do, not what they are not able to do. Find their strengths, and you teach to those. Hire more one-on-one aides for mainstream classrooms, so these students can integrate with their peers while still getting support. Do not “dumb down” their curriculum, but teach the same curriculum, with alternative delivery methods and adapted text. As for the race issues, these are more deep-seated. This must be addressed at the societal level, starting at home. Parents need to teach tolerance and appreciation of other races and cultures. Society needs to begin to look at the reasons for poverty and racial disparities and fix the problems outside the schools, and this will eventually address the issues spilling over into the school culture. This would mean a real commitment from all public and private sectors, and most especially our leaders and policy-makers. Until this is done, it is unlikely any real, lasting change will be affected in the school culture…because that culture is modeled on the Dominant culture of our present society.