CI: 5410 Reading Response #4

From the list of tonight’s readings, I thought that the Goebel piece “Who Are All These People?” brought up some interesting points that have yet to be addressed in articles or discussion. We all know that students bring a plethora of diverse experiences, values, and expectations. I appreciated that the article voiced some of these expectations and/or assumptions about the role of both teacher and student in the classroom.

I can only talk from my own experience as a woman, but I think that Goebel brings up some interesting ideas about the ways in which female students respond or participate in classroom discussion. He asserts that women are more likely to talk in terms of providing support and in “spirited shared discussions” (Goebel 23). In comparison, he notes that male students tend to thrive more on the competitive nature of classroom debates which are more “content-oriented” (Goebel 23). My own attitudes toward class discussions fit in with Goebel’s presentation of female members of class discussion. For the most part, I don’t like debates. As Jessie’s model suggested on the first day of class, debates connote a winner and a loser in a competition to prove xyz. I would much rather participate in a balanced and open-minded discussion in which speakers are able to validate or at least respect the views of someone else. Even today in our small group discussions, the two male members of my group debated among themselves almost the entire time. On occasion, the other female in the group and I would offer support to one or the other debating males, or voice our own opinion about something that struck us in the reading. In the end, I found myself with a bit of a headache from trying to focus on who seemed to be “winning” their little battle of wits. At one point there was even acknowledgment of the enjoyment each felt when one male mentioned that he would continue on with the topic because he “loved” arguing with the other. I recognize that this is not the case for all males, but it proved true today. Any thoughts?

I also think Goebel’s understanding of power relations in the classroom is worth mentioning. As he states, many teachers assume that they hold the power in the classroom. Said power may be tenuous, but it is theirs to command. Goebel is right in asserting that in order to help students succeed in the classroom, we need to acknowledge the power they bring into the classroom and find ways to put that power to good use.

Moving beyond myself, I think it is important for teachers to acknowledge the different ways in which their students may perceive their role, the role of the teacher, or even the level of importance and/or amount of participation connected with the American education system. Just as multicultural literature can (and should) be used in the classroom as a way to help students understand and explore the cultures and experiences of others and find themselves along the way, teachers should use the multicultural aspects of their students to do the same.

CI: 5410 Reading Response #3

Alright, I am going to be a bit disjointed here, Matt, but I have a few different things to get off my mind…

1.In today’s class discussion about the cultural backgrounds and interpretations of the different poems we used in Jessie’s model, I find myself torn. While I think it is important to recognize, acknowledge, and explore other cultures, I don’t think that we should try to read or insert culture into a text just because the authors are from multicultural backgrounds. The poem I explored, “I Am Singing Now,” did not provide any insight into the culture of the writer other than her location as being somewhere in the south—references to mesas and pickups (I recognize that pickups exist in other spheres, but A LOT of people drive pickups in the south). I don’t think that I should read the name of the author and project my generalized conceptions (and/or misconceptions) of their culture into how I respond to the text. At the same time, these additions might help students take on another perspective…any thoughts on this one?

2.I understand where Pirie is coming from in his diatribe (maybe not a so forceful or bitter, but at least critical exploration of) on the five paragraph essay, but I still am not sure I understand how he suggests that we remedy the situation. I think his examples of dialogues between students and both texts and each other, but I’m not sure I understand his ideas about how we teach student expository writing without such structures. I’m all for trying something new, and I don’t think that I ever really had a firm lesson on the FPE, but what can we do? Where can we find examples for students to work with and learn from? When do we teach them how to write a FPE for success on state/national achievement tests? I loved this article in theory, but how do we go about putting it into practice?

3.This last one is more of a statement…I think the Ibo Diary activity is great! I have done similar things as a student (I wrote from the perspective of Ophelia’s maid in watching the tragic events of Hamlet unfold) and as a teacher (creating a project in which students become a “witness” of genocide and must write about their experiences), and it is such an enlightening experience—both creative and academic. I like reading about activities like this in Becoming (Other)wise and being able to see teacher/student reflection. Very cool!

Fin.

CI: 5410 Reading Response #2

Okay, there was a lot going on in the readings for this evening, so I think I am going to focus on the Dilg chapters that dealt with understanding our histories and self-identities in relation to the histories and identities of others. I encountered a lot of these issues during my student teaching experience and these chapters offered me new insight into why those situations arose.

Dilg addresses the presence of history in the English classroom as “a web of historical threads…woven around us in any given classroom before the first ‘lesson’ begins” (39). I think this is a great way of presenting an image of various personal, familial, and cultural histories that are a tangled yet invisible entity within every classroom from day one. Only through respectful communication between students and teacher, students and students, can we become aware of the complicated ways in which our histories are interwoven. The classroom becomes a place of negotiation, learning, and insight from which students can learn a great deal about themselves and each other. During this time, I think it is the responsibility of the teacher to illustrate both the unique and universal qualities of humans in relation to their unique cultural histories and experiences and their universal emotions—this ties into the important concepts of helping students feel sympathy and/or empathy for the diverse characters in the texts they read. In the meantime, students need to understand the constructed reality of the texts as stories that may or may reflect one experience from a given culture. It is not their job to criticize the actions of the characters in relation to their own perceptions, but to discuss the “multifaceted” existence of and illustrate a sympathetic reaction to the characters within the story while being “thoughtfully skeptical or critical” or situations regarding the motivations/decisions behind the actions/thoughts of the characters (Dilg 54). I think Dilg is correct in assuming that students need to be gradually led into difficult/controversial texts in order to prepare them for the portrayal of characters in a certain light. When reading Night with many of my students, this was crucial in setting up the actions of Elie and the Jewish people of Sighet or preparing students to think about Mexican immigrants when reading The Circuit.

Another issue I faced while student teaching revolved around the idea of who we are in relation to others. In a class comprised on 15 black students, 2 white students, and 2 Latino student, tensions arose between various groups. One white female identified with a group of black female students, and in conversation often referred to a black male student in advanced classes as “not really being black.” Among the black male students, one stood out from the rest due to his style, participation in class, and interest in both writing and reading fantasy books. This separation was noted on a daily basis in the way the other students—who obviously were from similar social circles—talked to him and about him among themselves. One day this tension manifested when the “outsider” male made a comment to the class that was perceived as disrespectful to the others. One black male student jumped up and confronted the “outsider” in a forceful and challenging way saying, “You better not have been talking to me! I know you didn’t say that to me!” After inserting myself and ending the confrontation, I was made acutely aware of the way in which the “outsider” was perceived by his peers in the class. Reading the section of Dilg about how important it is for students to develop an identity for themselves and the repercussions faced among people of their own culture was fascinating, and I hope to be able to use information from this chapter as I continue my foray into the world of adolescents…

CI: 5410 Reading Response #1

When I read I often lost myself in texts. I become so involved in the actions of the characters that I squeal out loud in anxiety, clench my fists in anticipation, and often have to skim over parts of the books that are embarrassing. I tend to feel many emotions of the characters or respond to the plot in ways that evoke deep responses in me. Needless to say, I am a very sympathetic and empathetic read. I read for pleasure, yes, but I also read in order to travel with a character into their world. I like being challenged to think in new ways, but I know that not everyone has the same desire to be provoked or experience visceral responses to the texts they are reading. Like Smagorinsky, I too sometimes assume that “we all not only benefit from exposure to a variety or ideas, but want to see the world from as many perspectives as possible in order to get the clearest sense of our own personal beliefs” (295). When I have been reminded of this by my students asking, “Why do we have to read this?” I realized that it is important to pull them into the texts more deeply in order to help them see the characters and their stories as more than just words on a page.

I agree with Erick Gordon that often students oversimplify their understanding of a story and the actions/motivations of characters within that story. Having just completed a course on gender construction in children’s literature, the concept of forever examining the world through a set of binaries that have little true meaning suggests a lack of reality. There are very few things in the world that are clear cut “black and white.” The hero is rarely completely without some sort of vice or hubris that they struggle to overcome in some way, shape, or form. What about the anti-hero? I think it is important to illustrate this point to students and ask them to think more carefully about the actions, events, and momentum behind a story. For Gordon, the Mockingbird Monologues provided him with an excellent opportunity to push students beyond their comfort zone and think in new terms. I loved the scene in which Atticus is struggling with his self-confidence in tying his tie. As illustrated in the class discussion, this was a side of Atticus that surprised many of the students who resisted any sign of weakness. One student points out though that Atticus is not a superhero; he is an everyday man who has his own inner turmoil to face on a day-to-day basis. Or the scene with Calpurnia in which she points out some of the hypocrisy that arises from her position in the Finch household and her relationship to Atticus.

While I don’t imagine myself doing something that ambitious anytime in the near future, I think the premise is excellent. Allowing students a chance to spend some time diving into the psyche of a character is a great way for them to think beyond and/or in association with their experiences. In doing so, students can learn to experience sympathy and empathy for characters rather than pity—important distinctions made by Gordon. In supporting this kind of interaction with a text, the “other” becomes familiar. Multicultural experiences remain unique, but through an understanding of human motivations, emotions, and experiences, they also become more accessible—and meaningful—to the reader.

I’m sure there are many different ways in which to facilitate a deeper understanding of a text that teaches students how to “talk back” to a text rather than simply “talkinabout” it. Making the invisible visible is an important part of working with students and literature. By using these methods of deeper understanding and awareness with students, I think it is possible, as Ruth Vinz says, to accomplish one of the main goals of multicultural literature education: helping students “acquire the attitudes and knowledge needed to take part in cross-cultural relationships and to encourage their participation in social and civic/democratic action” (2).