Last dialogue journal…can you believe it!? Wahoo! I think I am going to be totally random for this one, so please bear with me. Today in class we talked about institutional forces that dictate who has power and who does not. While I think our brief conversation was interesting, I think that our definition of “institutional forces” would be somewhat difficult for students to understand. I think a better place to start would be defining “institution” and moving on from there. Our illustrious friends at Wikipedia define “institution” as “structures and mechanisms of social order and cooperation governing the behavior of a set of individuals within a given human collectivity. Institutions are identified with a social purpose and permanence, transcending individual human lives and intentions, and with the making and enforcing of rules governing cooperative human behavior.” Whew. That is quite a definition. Regardless, I think if we can get students to first think of different institutions as places or things, then we can discuss what forces control those things—thus, institutional forces. Does that make sense? Maybe they would say school is an institution, then the education system might be the institutional force…I don’t know, but I thought our discussion today was bit messy at times (at least in my group where we had a bit of a debate about some of these “forces”).
Next on the docket...FoKs (or Funds of Knowledge). We read a lot about these in one of our foundation classes in the fall, and I think they are great to bring into the classroom. I would hope that by using time in the classroom to explore the different identities, cultures, and experiences of students through writing, discussion, and literature, we can tap into the FoKs and utilize them in the classroom. If I remember correctly, Amanti was working with elementary school students and, therefore, had a smaller class size which enabled her to physically go to the homes of her students to perform her ethnographic research. This is not practical for secondary school teachers, especially those who have over one hundred students in their classrooms. At this point I don’t know how I feel about entering the home of one of my students in a capacity other than to check in with a student or parent. Maybe as I gain more experience I might find myself more comfortable to follow in Amanti’s footsteps, but not just yet. Regardless, I think there are other ways to find and use our students’ FoKs in the classroom, and I believe in the importance of validating, respecting, and furthering the information and experiences our students bring into the classroom from their lives beyond the classroom.
Pirie. Hmmm. I don’t know how I feel about this article. I like that he is challenging our definition of the “English” classroom and pushing teachers to think examine their goals and actual accomplishments as teachers. I agree with his points on broadening our curriculum, studying interactions within texts and between texts and our own lives, the idea of literature and life consisting of a myriad of networks and webs, emphasis on personal growth and development, all of his bullets on page 97, and the importance of helping students connect with texts, but I don’t know that changing the name of the “English” classroom to “Cultural Studies” would suit. I agree that “English” is extremely limited (maybe even pompous) as far as its connotation, but I also think there are other courses of study which examine culture more explicitly than through language in our classrooms—anthropology, for example. I don’t know what title might be more appropriate…but I think “Language Arts” might be closer to what the “English” classroom is trying to accomplish: the study and development of human life through the use of written, spoken, and physical language. What do you think? My final question to you, have you got a better more appropriate course title?
Showing posts with label CI 5410: Multicultural Literature. Show all posts
Showing posts with label CI 5410: Multicultural Literature. Show all posts
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
CI: 5410 Reading Response #7
Talk about strategies! I loved how these two chapters provided a ton of different classroom ideas for making multicultural literature engaging and eye-opening for students. Parks uses a lot of different strategies and lesson plans that are designed to help students understand institutional racism, diverse perspectives, and the ways that students see and understand the culture around them—both visible and invisible. This is important because many students may find it hard to relate to multicultural literature, especially white students that might not have ever discussed white privilege.
Many of these activities are used to create the sense of “disequilibrium” or “dissensus” in the way that students think and discuss various issues. In doing this, students are pushed into an uncomfortable position that challenges their assumptions. While we can’t assume that we will be able to transform the minds of students across the country, we can provide them with information to think about. As Parks says, “I must prepare my students to be elastic enough to appreciate the various discourse communities they will need to enter to find success and competence in life” (118). Part of this includes “recognizing students’ allegiances to different worlds. It is important that we help students navigate the academic realm while still understanding the power within their own lives as well.
Today in class we discussed the use of stereotypes and I really liked the activity that Parks used in order to help students see that stereotypes exist everywhere in our society. It is important that we unpack these stereotypes by examining where they came from. Just as the students in Parks class became aware of their own stereotypes associated with rural and suburban life based on media images rather than any solid facts and/ or evidence. This was important in helping them understand the ways in which others might likewise have ungrounded or media-based stereotypes about urban lifestyles—including metal detectors in the schools.
Part of Parks’ ideas on how to help students take on different perspectives is through the exploration of dialogic tensions within a text. By examining the different ways in which dialogic tension forms between texts, texts and the world, and between peers, students can look at the tensions between, differences that are, as Parks puts it, brought along and those that are brought about in perspective taking and discussion.
In helping prepare his students for college life, Parks also sought to teach students how to use critical analysis and critical lenses as a tool to define relationships found within texts. Practice in critical analysis is a great way for students to learn how to approach texts from different angles. I think this is a valuable tool because while it is great to take on the perspective of a character it is also important that students learn how to think about different perspectives on their own. If students are to learn how to become critical consumers of literature and media, they need to be able to apply a multitude of different lenses and critical thinking skills beyond the realm of the English classroom.
Many of these activities are used to create the sense of “disequilibrium” or “dissensus” in the way that students think and discuss various issues. In doing this, students are pushed into an uncomfortable position that challenges their assumptions. While we can’t assume that we will be able to transform the minds of students across the country, we can provide them with information to think about. As Parks says, “I must prepare my students to be elastic enough to appreciate the various discourse communities they will need to enter to find success and competence in life” (118). Part of this includes “recognizing students’ allegiances to different worlds. It is important that we help students navigate the academic realm while still understanding the power within their own lives as well.
Today in class we discussed the use of stereotypes and I really liked the activity that Parks used in order to help students see that stereotypes exist everywhere in our society. It is important that we unpack these stereotypes by examining where they came from. Just as the students in Parks class became aware of their own stereotypes associated with rural and suburban life based on media images rather than any solid facts and/ or evidence. This was important in helping them understand the ways in which others might likewise have ungrounded or media-based stereotypes about urban lifestyles—including metal detectors in the schools.
Part of Parks’ ideas on how to help students take on different perspectives is through the exploration of dialogic tensions within a text. By examining the different ways in which dialogic tension forms between texts, texts and the world, and between peers, students can look at the tensions between, differences that are, as Parks puts it, brought along and those that are brought about in perspective taking and discussion.
In helping prepare his students for college life, Parks also sought to teach students how to use critical analysis and critical lenses as a tool to define relationships found within texts. Practice in critical analysis is a great way for students to learn how to approach texts from different angles. I think this is a valuable tool because while it is great to take on the perspective of a character it is also important that students learn how to think about different perspectives on their own. If students are to learn how to become critical consumers of literature and media, they need to be able to apply a multitude of different lenses and critical thinking skills beyond the realm of the English classroom.
Monday, August 2, 2010
CI: 5410 Reading Response #6
I’d like to start out this response by touching a little bit on the various definitions of multicultural literature we went over in class today. I think the first one which claims multicultural literature is that which is written by people of color is extremely limiting in that is neglects the cultural experiences of people not “of color” that still might be divergent from the norm. I think the second definition claiming that multicultural literature represents the perspectives underrepresented cultures gets closer to the truth. This allows for the introduction of perspectives from, say, the Sami people who are the indigenous people of Norway and would not be considered “people of color” yet their perspectives are outside of mainstream Norwegian culture. But I think this definition is still lacking…
The last definition adds even more to these definitions by recognizing how texts create space for presenting conflicting or overlapping cultures. I think this is interesting in exploring and understanding how we deal with encounters between and across cultures. This could mean examining how white American culture conflicts with those of immigrant cultures or how white European culture conflicts with the cultures they encounter during the post-colonial era—as in Conrad’s Heart of Darkness which I mentioned before. I think this text helps students explore their own white privilege and background within the context of its subjugation of an African country and the culture within it.
I also think that including texts that explore religion, sexuality, gender identification, and exceptionalities as Jessie presented in her powerpoint. Especially living in a country that is built upon many different cultures that have assimilated, adapted, or remained strong, I think it is important to understand how individual identity and culture overlap in the different spheres of people’s lives. For some people, their identification as a transgender individual is as much connected to their heritage in terms of culture than other aspects of their identity.
The Athanases article brings up some of the concerns people have in adding so many different pieces into multicultural curriculum by claiming that it “dilutes the focus on race and ethnicity that belongs at the heart of the multicultural agenda” (254). First of all, I think that this statement is very close-minded. I think it’s unfair to assume that the “agenda” of multicultural education is to highlight differences in race and ethnicity when it is more about presenting students with chances to explore other perspectives as they shape and develop their own understandings about the world and themselves. As Athanases goes on to say instead of detracting from these areas, broadening our definition can “deepen students’ understanding about identities and oppression and the ways in which marginal groups both share features and differ” (254). In this way, he argues that a deeper “understanding of common ground for groups divided by difference” can be achieved.
I think we need to keep working on our definition of multicultural literature and, perhaps, explore new terms that can be used to more clearly indicate the ways in which cultural identity is shaped through individual experience.
The last definition adds even more to these definitions by recognizing how texts create space for presenting conflicting or overlapping cultures. I think this is interesting in exploring and understanding how we deal with encounters between and across cultures. This could mean examining how white American culture conflicts with those of immigrant cultures or how white European culture conflicts with the cultures they encounter during the post-colonial era—as in Conrad’s Heart of Darkness which I mentioned before. I think this text helps students explore their own white privilege and background within the context of its subjugation of an African country and the culture within it.
I also think that including texts that explore religion, sexuality, gender identification, and exceptionalities as Jessie presented in her powerpoint. Especially living in a country that is built upon many different cultures that have assimilated, adapted, or remained strong, I think it is important to understand how individual identity and culture overlap in the different spheres of people’s lives. For some people, their identification as a transgender individual is as much connected to their heritage in terms of culture than other aspects of their identity.
The Athanases article brings up some of the concerns people have in adding so many different pieces into multicultural curriculum by claiming that it “dilutes the focus on race and ethnicity that belongs at the heart of the multicultural agenda” (254). First of all, I think that this statement is very close-minded. I think it’s unfair to assume that the “agenda” of multicultural education is to highlight differences in race and ethnicity when it is more about presenting students with chances to explore other perspectives as they shape and develop their own understandings about the world and themselves. As Athanases goes on to say instead of detracting from these areas, broadening our definition can “deepen students’ understanding about identities and oppression and the ways in which marginal groups both share features and differ” (254). In this way, he argues that a deeper “understanding of common ground for groups divided by difference” can be achieved.
I think we need to keep working on our definition of multicultural literature and, perhaps, explore new terms that can be used to more clearly indicate the ways in which cultural identity is shaped through individual experience.
Sunday, August 1, 2010
CI: 5410 Reading Response #5
I think both the Encisco and Beach articles were extremely interesting and insightful. Encisco brings up an interesting point that I hadn’t considered before when she discusses the authority presented by her choice of text in the classroom. In choosing Maniac Magee, she is asserting her authority in the classroom. As she notes, “We did not engage in an open discussion about my choice of book, nor…my role in their classroom. Thus the representations of race relations in the literature could be seen by the children to represent my perspectives” (16). She adds in the presence of a Newbery medal on the cover of the book as one more example of an adult authority advocating for a text which might also be connected to the messages within that text. As teachers I think we need to be careful of our own text selections, especially in the realm of multicultural literature. It might be beneficial to have conversations with our classrooms about why a specific text was chosen and how to best use it in a school environment.
I also thought Encisco’s exploration of the dehumanizing metaphor and dehistoricizing allegory was helpful as ways in which to select texts and examine them with students. I think teachers should look for texts which are able to break free from these common structures in literature dealing with diverse cultures (or even in reference to other cultures than the Euro-American/white culture). On the other hand, recognizing the presence of these structures will also provide a way of looking at institutionalized racism in valuable ways. Segue to the Beach article…
What really stood out to me from the Beach article was the astounding lack of awareness among students to issues of institutional racism. I mean, Oprah! Even someone like Oprah Winfrey did a show in 1992 which explored the individual racism rather than addressing the power structures of our society in creating racism? (I do realize that since then she might have done—I would be very surprised if she hasn’t—a show focusing on institutional racism.) Then again, as Beach notes, “those students who benefit from institutional power are rarely aware of the advantages of privilege (insert “White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack” piece here).
I thought it was helpful to read through the different student responses and results of Beach’s study when looking at multicultural literature as a way to see how students might respond in both resistant and engaged manners. Knowing this ahead of time can help us try and structure discussion or reading-related activities in ways that might evoke empathy from our students and connect their lives to the texts (when possible) as they take on or look through someone else’s perspective.
Beach is right in asserting that students take stances on issues and topics that are shaped by their experiences and understandings of the world they live in. Going back to what you said in one of your previous responses, Matt, a girl in the text notices claims that “part of your education is not the classes you take but that you’re learning to deal with all kinds of different people” (Beach 87). She thinks the lack of diversity among the students in her class is a disservice to her and her peers. We can’t expect to change the system overnight, but we can try to bring in some of the missing voices and experiences through literature in one of the few placed available—school.
I also thought Encisco’s exploration of the dehumanizing metaphor and dehistoricizing allegory was helpful as ways in which to select texts and examine them with students. I think teachers should look for texts which are able to break free from these common structures in literature dealing with diverse cultures (or even in reference to other cultures than the Euro-American/white culture). On the other hand, recognizing the presence of these structures will also provide a way of looking at institutionalized racism in valuable ways. Segue to the Beach article…
What really stood out to me from the Beach article was the astounding lack of awareness among students to issues of institutional racism. I mean, Oprah! Even someone like Oprah Winfrey did a show in 1992 which explored the individual racism rather than addressing the power structures of our society in creating racism? (I do realize that since then she might have done—I would be very surprised if she hasn’t—a show focusing on institutional racism.) Then again, as Beach notes, “those students who benefit from institutional power are rarely aware of the advantages of privilege (insert “White Privilege: Unpacking the Invisible Knapsack” piece here).
I thought it was helpful to read through the different student responses and results of Beach’s study when looking at multicultural literature as a way to see how students might respond in both resistant and engaged manners. Knowing this ahead of time can help us try and structure discussion or reading-related activities in ways that might evoke empathy from our students and connect their lives to the texts (when possible) as they take on or look through someone else’s perspective.
Beach is right in asserting that students take stances on issues and topics that are shaped by their experiences and understandings of the world they live in. Going back to what you said in one of your previous responses, Matt, a girl in the text notices claims that “part of your education is not the classes you take but that you’re learning to deal with all kinds of different people” (Beach 87). She thinks the lack of diversity among the students in her class is a disservice to her and her peers. We can’t expect to change the system overnight, but we can try to bring in some of the missing voices and experiences through literature in one of the few placed available—school.
Thursday, July 29, 2010
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.
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.
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
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.
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.
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
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…
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…
Monday, July 26, 2010
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).
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).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)