Talking Points #5 on Oakes and Lipton from Teaching to Change the World

Premise:
This article is about...

• The ability for any child can be good at something if they put enough effort and determination into it.
• The idea of performing hard work equals success to privileged children more than the underprivileged.
• Children who are poor tend to receive as much help from the institutions as possible but yet also have to help themselves along with it in order to do better.
• The role of merit emphasizing the responsibilities of the individual more then those of the school or society.
• Teachers are taught better teaching methods to prepare students for admission into colleges.
• The usage of scientific management in schools.
• Educational reform.
• The marketplace theory states that the most successful people will survive and the people who are not will disappear.
• Progress becomes more controlled with each generation.
• "Informational Democracy" states that not everyone benefits from progress.
• Trying to change the world rather then promising for a better future.
  
• Democratic Schooling.
• "Modern" theories in teaching.

Author's Argument:
Jeannie Oakes and Martin Lipton argue that people in today's societies must adapt to the changes that are being made within the schools and educational programs. In order for students to be able to do good in school, they must be able to understand the material that is being taught to them. Teachers and schools need to provide them with the assistance they need to do good in the classroom. If teachers want students to do good, then the teachers need to keep updated with the newest materials and programs to use in order to aid their students throughout the class. Parents also need to keep up with what their children are learning about so that way they can help them and encourage them to perform their best in the topic.

Evidence:

1. Among those students who have the resources, opportunities, and connections that come with privilege, the more ambitious and hardworking may well go farther than those who simply do okay in school. Nothing said here belittles the ineffable qualities of character, ambition, or even charisma. However, these meritorious qualities occur with no less frequency in low-income families and among blacks, Latinos, and immigrants. yet these groups cannot parlay these qualities into economic success to the same degree what middle-class and wealthy whites can...When it comes to explaining "success," ability and ambition are often important, but that is not all there is to it. Americans' belief that success in school (and life) follows from ability and aspirations masks the reality that schooling, within the broad social structure, favors children from privileged families.
2. As schools grew larger and mre expensive, politicians, industrialists, and social reformers criticized them for their inefficient methods and dubious success. Many critics suggested that, like workers in all large enterprises, teachers could achieve greater success under factory-like management systems. University professors and school administrators set about conducting the same types of scientific studies of schools that Taylor had done in industry, and they developed schemes for making schools run more like efficient factories. To mention just a few of these new efficiencies, schools divided their large auditorium-like spaces for a hundred or more students into today's familiar classrooms that separated students by ages and subjects. Texts such as readers and spellers proliferated, making it possible to standardize curriculum. Colleges began to specify sequences of courses that would prepare students for admission. Normal schools (the first teacher education institutions) started training teachers in correct and efficient teaching methods.
3. In short, teachers and the public must look both closely and broadly at any "noncommon" school. If the school thrives because of its focused sense of purpose and community, it may benefit its students and the community. But if the school's strength results from winning the local competition for scarce educational resources (i.e., support from the politically powerful parents, money, and highly qualified teachers), then the community will soon suffer. If schools of choice succeed because their students forge closer links with the widest cross section of adults and other students in their communities, then they should be emulated for that reason. But if they serve elite or isolated interests that further divide communities, they will not serve social justice.

Questions/Comments/Points to Share:
This article states that teachers, schools, and parents need to keep up with modern day techniques about how to teach children. Children in today's societies are influenced by everything around them. They are constantly learning new things everyday whether these matters are being taught to them inside a classroom or outside of one. it is the job of the teachers and parents or guardians of the children to provide them with the necessary information and support they will need to do good in school.

School environments should also provide children comfortable places for them to learn in. These children need to be given as much support from their teachers and school environments along with their outside environments as much as possible. If students are not supported throughout their learning processes then they will not be motivated to do their best in the subjects. By teachers and parents providing their children with all the necessities they need to become better in school, then children will become more interested to learn.

Talking Points #4 on Christensen in "Unlearning the Myths That Bind Us"

Premises:
This article is about...

• racism and sexism that is portrayed by cartoons.
• how culture is affected by what is displayed by the media in today's societies.
• how to relate cartoons to the way of life in reality.
• a secret education that is being taught through the media.
• how the media influences our ways of life.

Author's Argument:
Christensen argues that students, starting at a young age, in today's societies are influenced by what is in the media. Students do not realize that they are manipulated by the media or they do not want to admit to it until it is pointed out to them in cartoon's or other types of media. They also do not realize how sexist and racist the cartoons and other forms of media are until it is broken down for them. The students believe that by publishing their thoughts and information about this in magazines and newspapers, they would be able to get the message out to others about the influence that the media has on people in today's cultural societies.

Evidence:

1. Our society's culture industry colonizes their minds and teaches them how to act, live, and dream. This indoctrination hits young children especially hard. The "secret education," as Chilean writer Ariel Dorfman dubs it, delivered by children's books and movies, instructs young people to accept the world as it is portrayed in these social blueprints. And often that world depicts the domination of one sex, one race, one class, or one community over a weaker counterpart.
2. Kenneth noticed that people of color and poor people are either absent or servants to teh rich, white, pretty people. Tyler pointed out that the roles of men are limited as well. Men must be virile and wield power or be old and the object of "good-nature" humor. Students began seeing beyond the charts I'd rigged up for them. They looked at how overweight people were portrayed as buffoons in episode after episode. they noted the absence of mothers, the wickedness of stepparents.
3. Most students wrote articles for local and national newspapers or magazines. Some published in neighborhood papers, some in church newsletters. The writing in these articles was tighter and cleaner than for-the-teacher essays because it had the potentials for a real audience beyond the classroom walls. The possibility of publishing their pieces changed the level of students' intensity for the project...But, more importantly, the students saw themselves as actors in the world. They were fueled by the opportunity to convince some parents of the long-lasting effects cartoons impose on their children, or to enlighten their peers about the roots of some for their insecurities. Instead of leaving students full of file, standing around with their hands on their hips, shaking their heads about how bad the world is, I provided them the opportunity to make a difference.

Questions/Comments/Point To Share:
I thought that this article made great points about how the media shapes what we as people are and do in today's communities. The media has the biggest influence on the cultural aspects of societies. People look at the media and become some-what fixated on what is going on with the world around them. People also do not even realize that they are influenced by the media until someone points it out to them. Society sees it as if the media says one thing then it must be either true or close to the truth.

In reading this article, it has made me realize how true it is that the most simplest forms of media, such as children's cartoons, demonstrate racism and sexism in their stories. This article looks at how we can actually watch a cartoon and pick out all the secret hidden messages that occur throughout the cartoons, movies, or even television shows. These types of media have helped shape me to create the ideas that I do believe in. I have also realized that most of the media used to be based around one dominant ethnicity and that is Whiteness. Back then, they did not have colored people play major roles in the media, only whites could. Now, in today's societies, men, women, and people of color are all considered to be equal.

Talking Points #3 on Carlson in Gayness, Multicultural Education, and Community

Premises:
This article discusses...

• The meaning of the term "Gayness" in what is considered to be a normal school community.
• How gayness is ignored throughout school environments.
• How homosexual teachers and students are treated differently in environments due to the fact that it is neglected to be acknowledge in schools and societies in general.
• The idea of what is considered to be of normality and what is not.
• Discrimination against the Homosexual population.
• What others think about Homosexuality in general.

Authors Argument:
Carlson argues that communities categorize people to be normal or abnormal depending upon what their personal characteristics are. People of the normal communities are given more privileges and power then those of the abnormal communities who are discriminated against. These people of the abnormal communities are ignored and treated differently then others, especially in the school environments (referring to both teachers and students).

Evidence:

1. Throughout much of this century, the dominant idea of community in America was represented by what i will call the normalizing community. Within normalizing communities, some individuals and subject positions (i.e., white, middle class, male, heterosexual, etc.) get privileged and represented as "normal" while other individuals and subject positions (i.e., black, working class, female, homosexual, etc.) are disempowered and represented as deviant, sick, neurotic, criminal, lazy, lacking in intelligence, and in other ways "abnormal."
   
2. At the level of state educational policy, it is noteworthy that no state currently recognizes gays and lesbians as legitimate minority or cultural groups to be considered in textbook adoption or to be included in multicultural education; and a number of states explicitly prohibit teaching about homosexuality.
3. Normalizing practices, however, must reach beyond curriculum texts if they are to be effective in constructing a normalizing school community. Throughout this century, one of the primary means of ensuring that gayness was and invisible presence int he school was through the dismissal of teachers who were found to be homosexuals. Early in this century, the dismissal of gay teachers was legitimated as a way of keeping young people from being exposed to improper role models, lechery, and child molestation.

Questions/Comments/Points To Share:
In reading this article by Carlson, I would like to know why we as communities ignore the existence of Homosexuality and classify them as being "abnormal"? Homosexuality is all around us even when we do not know it. People who are homosexual of course are very different then people who are heterosexual, but that does not meant that they are abnormal. There are too many people in todays lifetime for homosexuality to be considered abnormal. We should not judge nor classify people who are different and ignore them in society. people of homosexuality have just as much rights as people of heterosexuality.

I believe that if homosexuality was not neglected as much as it is, then it would not be discriminated against as much in communities. By making it "invisible" in schools and in the communities in general, I believe that this makes the matter worse then it would by actually acknowledging its existence. If it was taught about and discussed more in school environments then I think that we would not have as many problems with it in societies as we do now. By making homosexuality visible to the communities, people would not classify nor judge against others as being "normal" or "abnormal" due to the fact that it would be more commonly known of. Also, people would not be uncomfortable to discuss it or talk about it in any way. While reading this article, Carlson has made me realize how much homosexuality is discriminated against and how heterosexuality is considered to be American cultural norm.

Talking Points #2 on Rodriguez "Aria"

Premise:
This article discusses...

• Bilingulaism
• Individuality
• Americanization
• The American Melting Pot
• Adapting to the societal way of living
• Daily struggles that certain types of families may go through
• Identity loss
• Loss of family interaction

Authors Argument:
Rodriguez argues that if students are bilingual then they tend to loose a great amount of their individual characteristics in their families. They become more accustomed to the characteristics in a public society, which in return can damage the family structure.

Evidence:

1. "Fortunately my teachers my teachers were unsentimental about their responsibility. What they understood was that i needed to speak a public language. So their voices would search me out, asking me questions. Each time I'd hear them, I'd look up in surprise to see a nun's face frowning at me. I'd mumble, not really meaning to answer. The nun would persist, 'Richard, stand up. Don't look at the floor. Speak up. Speak to the entire class, not just to me!' But i couldn't believe that the English language was mine to use. (In part I did not want to believe it.) I continued to mumble, I resisted the teacher's demands. (Did I somehow suspect that once I learned the public language my pleasing family life would be changed?) Silent, waiting for the bell to sound, I remained dazed, diffident, afraid."
2. "Three months. Five. Half a year passed. Unsmiling, ever watchful, my teachers noted my silence. They began to connect my behavior with the difficult progress my older sister and brother were making. Until one Saturday morning three nuns arrived at the house to talk to our parents. Stiffly, they sat on the blue living room sofa. From the doorway of another room, spying the visitors, I noted the incongruity - the clash of two worlds, the faces and voices of school intruding upon the familiar setting of home. I overheard one voice gently wondering, 'Do your children speak only Spanish at home, Mrs. Rodriguez?' While another voice added, 'That Richard especially seems so timid and shy.' ... With great tact the visitors continued, 'Is it possible for you and your husband to encourage your children to practice their English when they are at home?' Of course, my parents complied...In an instant, they agreed to give up the language (the sounds) that had revealed and accentuated our family's closeness. The moment after the visitors left, the change was observed. 'Alhora, speak to us en ingles,' my father and mother united to tell us."
3. "Matching the silence I started hearing in public was a new quiet at home. The family's quiet was partly due to the fact that, as we children learned more and more English, we shared fewer and fewer words with our parents. Sentences needed to be spoken slowly when a child addressed his mother or father. (Often the parent wouldn't understand.) The child would need to repeat himself. (Still the parent misunderstood.) The young voice, frustrated, would end up saying, 'Never mind' - the subject was closed. Dinners would be noisy with the clinking of knives and forks against dishes. My mother would smile softly between her remarks; my father at the other end of the table would chew and chew at his food, while he stared over the heads of his children."

Questions/Comments/Points To Share:
I kind of understood how it was very difficult for the author to learn a completely different language from what he was used to speaking. Since I have been working with ESL children in a fourth grade classroom I can see how it would be difficult for him to learn the characteristics of the English language along with the academics of it. But, what I do not understand is why would learning a second language make him loose his family structure. I know many people who are bilingual and are still very close with their families. I mean sure your lifestyle will change a little bit. You will become more open with others due to the fact that you will be able to understand them and make friends with them, but that should not stop you from being your own self and being close with your family. I think that just because you become more Amercianized then what you used to be does not mean that you should give up on your individuality.