I’ve recently heard a lot about transforming buildings (including schools) to make them more ‘green.’ Being the optimist that I am, I was all for this transformation. I quickly absorbed the advantages that the green schools, in particular, could have on the environment, energy costs, as well as student achievement. Why wouldn’t we be for them? Well that was before I looked at the actualities of the matter and read the article titled, Green Schools Don’t Make the Grade by Todd Myers. (Hence why I said ‘I was all for them.’)
Congress has considered funding the Green High-Performing Public School Facilities Act. This Act would provide $20 billion dollars to build public schools that meet environmental standards. This is a great amount of money for a project that Congress doesn’t even know will work yet. Like I said I’m an optimist, so I at first was for the passing of this Act. However, the results of schools that meet the standards of this act have not been exactly what Congress had suspected.
Let me first mention what people are saying could be advantages of these green schools.
Advocates for green schools argue that the place in which learning occurs (schools) impact what they learn. And because of this, more schools need to become green.
Recent studies have shown that the average school in America was built at least 50 years ago causing students and faculty to suffer from poor indoor air quality, inadequate lighting and ineffective heating and cooling (Van Roekel, 2009). These same schools require about $17 billion dollars a year to upkeep their existing structures.
In an article by Dennis Van Roekel, the advantages of green schools are listed as, they can protect the environment, improve the health of students and educators, raise academic performance, reduce absenteeism and save a substantial amount of money over the years. He also states that upgrading schools can create new jobs.
When I first read that green school could improve absenteeism, I was curious to find out how this could happen. I discovered that studies have shown that students taught in classrooms with better air quality can reduce outbreaks of asthma by almost 40%. Asthma is the number one cause of absences from schools than any other chronic illness (Van Van Roekel, 2009).
My first argument to this is that the University of Michigan Health System states that Asthma is the most common chronic illness for children to have. So of course it causes the most absences in schools, because so many students actually have the illness. Absences caused from cerebral palsy and sickle cell anemia (both chronic illnesses) are of course less common, because not as many children have these illnesses. Turning schools into green schools does not cure students from having Asthma.
My second argument with green schools is that if may save on energy costs, but how much more expenses need to be added for reasons other than energy. Van Roekel states “Green schools can also be a powerful engine for creating new jobs” (2009). A recent NEA analysis suggests that investing $20 billion over a five-year period for repair and maintenance of school facilities would support 50,000 jobs per year.” I realize that many people are out of work at this moment in time, but does it make sense to spend an extra $20 billion dollars in five years in order to repair the schools’ facilities. To me this means, that they know a lot of technical issues are going to occur with these schools and we already have to set aside an extremely high amount of money for this issue.
Todd Myers also has arguments with the concept of green schools in America. He states that green schools in Washington failed to perform as expected. In those schools, none of the green schools were the most energy-efficient (especially not 30% less as what was projected). He also states that some of the green schools were at least 25% higher than the most efficient non-green school in the same district.
The schools also failed to reduce absenteeism and economic costs.
Lastly, Myers argues that the standards of the green school are often contradictory. He states that the increasing the amount of windows for more sunlight will also increase energy costs by letting in cold air in the winter and warm air in the summer. Not only this, but when school recirculate air more frequently to ‘improve health’ of the students and faculty, which means running heating and air conditioning systems more frequently, thus increasing energy use!
The results are clear that (at least in Washington) the green school that Congress could be funding to build, are not performing as they were projected to do. So should this act be funded? I don’t believe so anymore.
References:
Children with Chronic Conditions: Your Child: University of Michigan Health System. (n.d.). University of Michigan Health System. Retrieved June 25, 2010, from http://www.med.umich.edu/yourchild/topics/chronic.htm
Green Schools Initiative. (n.d.). Green Schools Initiative : Index. Retrieved June 25, 2010, from http://www.greenschools.net/display.php?modin=52&uid=172
Myers, T. (2008). Green Schools Don’t Make the Grade Publications National Center for Policy Analysis NCPA. Free-Market Public Policy National Center for Policy Analysis NCPA. Retrieved June 25, 2010, from http://www.ncpa.org/pub/ba622
Van Roekel, D. (2009). NEA - President's Viewpoint - The Need for Green Schools. NEA - NEA Home. Retrieved June 25, 2010, from http://www.nea.org/home/30576
Friday, June 25, 2010
Wednesday, June 23, 2010
Entry #4 Multiculturalism in the Curriculum
As I’ve noted before, I grew up an all-white farm town in Illinois, where the closest thing we had to a minority was the family that owed the Chinese restaurant. My school was so far from teaching multiculturalism in the curriculum, that the educators most likely never even heard of the word ‘multicultural.’ I guess they thought what doesn’t apply to the students (at that moment) doesn’t need to be taught. What they weren’t doing was preparing their students' minds for the future. A future that consists of many different cultures.
Getting out of that small uni-cultural town was probably the best thing for me. Living and working here in Nashville has made me feel more like a person of the world. As an educator in a diverse school, I realize how every single student brings something unique to the classroom community.
Hirsh’s article opened my eyes to the two different definitions of multiculturalism (cosmopolitanism and ethnocentrism). Cosmopolitanism focuses on the various traits that make up an individual’s person while ethnocentrism identifies ethnicity as the essence of the person (Hirsh, 1992)
The author begins with the assumption that all people are in agreement that children should be taught from an early age to respect all people and should be taught the basic foundations of diverse people and cultures and classroom learning cannot go forward effectively unless all students in the class share some common points of reference. Because I experienced elementary school with a lack of any diversity as well as instruction on the material, I feel like I completely missed out on this.
He goes on to discuss the difficulty teachers have in dealing with the difficulty of “bridging the vagueness about what children need to learn in each grade
causes the learning gap to widen between haves and have nots” (Hirsh, 1992) Because of these gaps the idea of having a core curriculum, particularly in the early grades of school, seems to be a somewhat logical solution to this problem. Hirsh points out that the core curriculum would mostly pertain to the literature and history portions of the curriculum (which would give all children the same common foundations and points of reference) This curriculum would also only take up fifty percent of the total curriculum, leaving teachers the other half of their time to individualize their instruction for local variation, including integration with a more ethnically-centered curricula.
Exhibited in Hirsh’s curriculum, the Core Knowledge Sequence, are these three characteristics: 1) It encourages knowledge of and sympathy towards the diverse cultures of the world. 2) It fosters respect for every child's home culture as well as for the cosmopolitan school- based culture. 3) It gives all children competence in the current system of language and allusion that is dominant in the nation's economic and intellectual discourse.
Hirsh ends his article by stating the cosmopolitanism is the “only valid multiculturalism for the modern era. Only a cosmopolitan, centrist core curriculum can enable all children to be well educated” (1992)
I was so intrigued by the idea of cosmopolitanism that I conducted some research of my own on the subject.
Martha Nussbaum writes in her essay, Patriotism and Cosmopolitanism, "Our nation is appallingly ignorant of the rest of the world" (Scott, 2006).
Nussbaum believes that a cosmopolitan education, in which students are taught, that they are, above all, "citizens of the world," will help produce the kind of adults that will see the commonality in other human beings.
By examining the rest of the world, American students can learn more about their own
As I was reading about cosmopolitan education, I thought about what kind of impact it would have on the social structure within the classroom. Will it help create an open environment where students will respect and find commonality among each other as fellow human beings? In my opinion, I think it would. I think if teachers reinforce that idea that every student comes from a different background, but also creating the idea that in the grand scheme of things, we’re all human. Here. In the classroom. Learning Together.
As Hirsh states, children learn to cooperate and sustain one another only if the school-based culture they gain makes them feel that they truly belong to the larger society.
As an educator, I believe that it is my responsibility to teach all children to respect one another and to be tolerant of individual differences. My hope that that through my example as well as the tone I set for the classroom environment, my students will develop a multicultural mindset which will stay with them wherever they might go.
References:
Hirsch, E. D. (1993). Toward a Centrist Curriculum: Two Kinds of Multiculturalism in Elementary. Core Knowledge Foundation, 1. Retrieved June 20, 2010, from http://www.coreknowledge.org/mimik
Rosenthal, J. (n.d.). Patriotism and Cosmopolitanism. Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs. Retrieved June 20, 2010, from http://www.cceia.org/resources/transcripts
Scott, C. (2006). Education and Cosmopolitanism: A Counterargument of Martha Nussbaum's Assertion that U.S. Students Need an Education Based in Cosmopolitan Ideology., Page 3 of 4 - Associated Content - associatedcontent.com. Associated Content - associatedcontent.com. Retrieved June 20, 2010, from http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/36322/education_and_cosmopolitanism_a_counterargument_pg3.html?cat=9
Waxler, A. (2007). Multiculturalism in School Curriculum . ESL Teacher's Board. Retrieved June 20, 2010, from https://elearn.mtsu.edu/d2l/lms/content/viewer/main_frame.d2l?ou=1439730&tId=14284097
Getting out of that small uni-cultural town was probably the best thing for me. Living and working here in Nashville has made me feel more like a person of the world. As an educator in a diverse school, I realize how every single student brings something unique to the classroom community.
Hirsh’s article opened my eyes to the two different definitions of multiculturalism (cosmopolitanism and ethnocentrism). Cosmopolitanism focuses on the various traits that make up an individual’s person while ethnocentrism identifies ethnicity as the essence of the person (Hirsh, 1992)
The author begins with the assumption that all people are in agreement that children should be taught from an early age to respect all people and should be taught the basic foundations of diverse people and cultures and classroom learning cannot go forward effectively unless all students in the class share some common points of reference. Because I experienced elementary school with a lack of any diversity as well as instruction on the material, I feel like I completely missed out on this.
He goes on to discuss the difficulty teachers have in dealing with the difficulty of “bridging the vagueness about what children need to learn in each grade
causes the learning gap to widen between haves and have nots” (Hirsh, 1992) Because of these gaps the idea of having a core curriculum, particularly in the early grades of school, seems to be a somewhat logical solution to this problem. Hirsh points out that the core curriculum would mostly pertain to the literature and history portions of the curriculum (which would give all children the same common foundations and points of reference) This curriculum would also only take up fifty percent of the total curriculum, leaving teachers the other half of their time to individualize their instruction for local variation, including integration with a more ethnically-centered curricula.
Exhibited in Hirsh’s curriculum, the Core Knowledge Sequence, are these three characteristics: 1) It encourages knowledge of and sympathy towards the diverse cultures of the world. 2) It fosters respect for every child's home culture as well as for the cosmopolitan school- based culture. 3) It gives all children competence in the current system of language and allusion that is dominant in the nation's economic and intellectual discourse.
Hirsh ends his article by stating the cosmopolitanism is the “only valid multiculturalism for the modern era. Only a cosmopolitan, centrist core curriculum can enable all children to be well educated” (1992)
I was so intrigued by the idea of cosmopolitanism that I conducted some research of my own on the subject.
Martha Nussbaum writes in her essay, Patriotism and Cosmopolitanism, "Our nation is appallingly ignorant of the rest of the world" (Scott, 2006).
Nussbaum believes that a cosmopolitan education, in which students are taught, that they are, above all, "citizens of the world," will help produce the kind of adults that will see the commonality in other human beings.
By examining the rest of the world, American students can learn more about their own
As I was reading about cosmopolitan education, I thought about what kind of impact it would have on the social structure within the classroom. Will it help create an open environment where students will respect and find commonality among each other as fellow human beings? In my opinion, I think it would. I think if teachers reinforce that idea that every student comes from a different background, but also creating the idea that in the grand scheme of things, we’re all human. Here. In the classroom. Learning Together.
As Hirsh states, children learn to cooperate and sustain one another only if the school-based culture they gain makes them feel that they truly belong to the larger society.
As an educator, I believe that it is my responsibility to teach all children to respect one another and to be tolerant of individual differences. My hope that that through my example as well as the tone I set for the classroom environment, my students will develop a multicultural mindset which will stay with them wherever they might go.
References:
Hirsch, E. D. (1993). Toward a Centrist Curriculum: Two Kinds of Multiculturalism in Elementary. Core Knowledge Foundation, 1. Retrieved June 20, 2010, from http://www.coreknowledge.org/mimik
Rosenthal, J. (n.d.). Patriotism and Cosmopolitanism. Carnegie Council for Ethics in International Affairs. Retrieved June 20, 2010, from http://www.cceia.org/resources/transcripts
Scott, C. (2006). Education and Cosmopolitanism: A Counterargument of Martha Nussbaum's Assertion that U.S. Students Need an Education Based in Cosmopolitan Ideology., Page 3 of 4 - Associated Content - associatedcontent.com. Associated Content - associatedcontent.com. Retrieved June 20, 2010, from http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/36322/education_and_cosmopolitanism_a_counterargument_pg3.html?cat=9
Waxler, A. (2007). Multiculturalism in School Curriculum . ESL Teacher's Board. Retrieved June 20, 2010, from https://elearn.mtsu.edu/d2l/lms/content/viewer/main_frame.d2l?ou=1439730&tId=14284097
Friday, June 18, 2010
Entry #3 Multiculturalism
My initial thought and my post-research thought are the same. I believe that multiculturalism should be taught and practiced in schools.
The fact of the matter is that the population in schools are growing in diversity. I believe that affirming this diversity is above all, about social justice. Given the vastly unequal educational outcomes among students of different backgrounds, equalizing conditions for student learning needs to be at the core of a concern for diversity. Also, in concern for social justice, we need to look critically at why and how our schools are unjust for some students.
As Taylor states, there are always two sides a winner and a loser. However, children from both sides are now in our classrooms. How do we as educators model empathy for both sides? By teaching the truth with out any sugar coating the views or actions of either side.
The truth is that History did happen and we need to teach it, all of it, to our students. As Famularo (1996) states, “The old curriculum is essentially based on the premise that America has one cultural heritage augmented by minor contributions from other peoples who by and large have presented ‘problems’ to the primary culture.”
Growing up in a small, all-white farm town in Illinois, I didn’t see much (if any) of cultural difference in my community. There were two kids that I saw at the local Chinese restaurant, but they were home schooled so I never thought of them as a part of our ‘community’ (which is sad, but true). All students in my elementary school were middle-class and white. I didn’t even hear about black history month until I was in middle school. My educators did a poor job of helping my classmates and I to understand equality.
As an educator today, I work at a fairly diverse school in Nashville. In my class last year there were 4 African American, 1 Indian, 1 German and 1 South African. I remember the week before Martin Luther King Jr. Day, we had several lessons about equality and fairness which brought up in-depth conversations about diversity in which every student at some point, made a contribution to the conversations (it was truly a sight to see!). I do feel like the minority students in the class would not have been as active in the discussions if they felt like a minority. Instead, my co-teacher and I made a point to create an atmosphere of the classroom to celebrate equality and diversity. As everyone had a special part in the classroom community, and without that student, our classroom wouldn’t be the same.
One way we were able to do this, to LEARN about their cultural differences and building relationships with their families. Two of the principles of Responsive Classroom Approach (the approach we use to teach) are: (1) Knowing the children we teach-individually, culturally, and developmentally-is as important as knowing the content we teach. (2) Knowing the families of the children we teach and working with them as partners is essential to children's education. As Nieto states, “All students of all backgrounds bring talents and strengths to their learning and as educators, we need to find ways to build on these.”
Finally, acknowledging and affirming diversity is to everyone’s interest, including middle-class white students. Understanding people of other backgrounds, speaking languages other than English and learning to respect and appreciate difference are skills the benefit all students and our nation as a whole. It is a disservice to all when we prepare students to live in a society that no longer exists. Instead we should accept diversity and help educate students to be comfortable with differences. Pertaining outside of the classroom as well, we all bring to the community something unique, and without diversity, I feel, we’d live in a pretty boring place.
On the other hand, Famularo states that “Multicultural education is undermined by two fatal flaws. The first is that the more the curriculum represents a multicultural text based upon ‘exposure to diversity,’ the more shallow and superficial learning becomes” (1996). He argues that multiculturalism ultimately reduces education to its shallowest possibilities by glossing over diverse subject matter. I don’t agree with this one bit. Let’s look at the definition of multiculturalism: Banks & Banks (1995) states, "Multicultural education not only draws content, concepts, paradigms, and theories from specialized interdisciplinary fields such as ethnic studies and women studies (and from history and the social and behavioral sciences), it also interrogates, challenges, and reinterprets content, concepts, and paradigms from the established disciplines. Therefore, Multicultural education applies content from these fields and disciplines to pedagogy and curriculum development in educational settings. This doesn’t sound like shallow and superficial learning to me.
References:
Banks, J.A., & Banks, C.A.M. (Eds). (1995). Handbook of research on multicultural education. New York: Macmillan.
Nieto, S. (1999) “What Does It Mean to Affirm Diversity? The School Administrator. The American Association of School Administrators.
Noll, J. (2004). Taking Sides: Clashing Views on Controversial Educational Issues. Guilford, CT: McGraw Hill.
Taylor, S. (n.d.). Institute for Historical Review. The Challenge of 'Multiculturalism' In How Americans View the Past and the Future. Retrieved June 18, 2010, from https://elearn.mtsu.edu/d2l/lms/content/viewer/main_frame.d2l?ou=1439730&tId=14284090
The fact of the matter is that the population in schools are growing in diversity. I believe that affirming this diversity is above all, about social justice. Given the vastly unequal educational outcomes among students of different backgrounds, equalizing conditions for student learning needs to be at the core of a concern for diversity. Also, in concern for social justice, we need to look critically at why and how our schools are unjust for some students.
As Taylor states, there are always two sides a winner and a loser. However, children from both sides are now in our classrooms. How do we as educators model empathy for both sides? By teaching the truth with out any sugar coating the views or actions of either side.
The truth is that History did happen and we need to teach it, all of it, to our students. As Famularo (1996) states, “The old curriculum is essentially based on the premise that America has one cultural heritage augmented by minor contributions from other peoples who by and large have presented ‘problems’ to the primary culture.”
Growing up in a small, all-white farm town in Illinois, I didn’t see much (if any) of cultural difference in my community. There were two kids that I saw at the local Chinese restaurant, but they were home schooled so I never thought of them as a part of our ‘community’ (which is sad, but true). All students in my elementary school were middle-class and white. I didn’t even hear about black history month until I was in middle school. My educators did a poor job of helping my classmates and I to understand equality.
As an educator today, I work at a fairly diverse school in Nashville. In my class last year there were 4 African American, 1 Indian, 1 German and 1 South African. I remember the week before Martin Luther King Jr. Day, we had several lessons about equality and fairness which brought up in-depth conversations about diversity in which every student at some point, made a contribution to the conversations (it was truly a sight to see!). I do feel like the minority students in the class would not have been as active in the discussions if they felt like a minority. Instead, my co-teacher and I made a point to create an atmosphere of the classroom to celebrate equality and diversity. As everyone had a special part in the classroom community, and without that student, our classroom wouldn’t be the same.
One way we were able to do this, to LEARN about their cultural differences and building relationships with their families. Two of the principles of Responsive Classroom Approach (the approach we use to teach) are: (1) Knowing the children we teach-individually, culturally, and developmentally-is as important as knowing the content we teach. (2) Knowing the families of the children we teach and working with them as partners is essential to children's education. As Nieto states, “All students of all backgrounds bring talents and strengths to their learning and as educators, we need to find ways to build on these.”
Finally, acknowledging and affirming diversity is to everyone’s interest, including middle-class white students. Understanding people of other backgrounds, speaking languages other than English and learning to respect and appreciate difference are skills the benefit all students and our nation as a whole. It is a disservice to all when we prepare students to live in a society that no longer exists. Instead we should accept diversity and help educate students to be comfortable with differences. Pertaining outside of the classroom as well, we all bring to the community something unique, and without diversity, I feel, we’d live in a pretty boring place.
On the other hand, Famularo states that “Multicultural education is undermined by two fatal flaws. The first is that the more the curriculum represents a multicultural text based upon ‘exposure to diversity,’ the more shallow and superficial learning becomes” (1996). He argues that multiculturalism ultimately reduces education to its shallowest possibilities by glossing over diverse subject matter. I don’t agree with this one bit. Let’s look at the definition of multiculturalism: Banks & Banks (1995) states, "Multicultural education not only draws content, concepts, paradigms, and theories from specialized interdisciplinary fields such as ethnic studies and women studies (and from history and the social and behavioral sciences), it also interrogates, challenges, and reinterprets content, concepts, and paradigms from the established disciplines. Therefore, Multicultural education applies content from these fields and disciplines to pedagogy and curriculum development in educational settings. This doesn’t sound like shallow and superficial learning to me.
References:
Banks, J.A., & Banks, C.A.M. (Eds). (1995). Handbook of research on multicultural education. New York: Macmillan.
Nieto, S. (1999) “What Does It Mean to Affirm Diversity? The School Administrator. The American Association of School Administrators.
Noll, J. (2004). Taking Sides: Clashing Views on Controversial Educational Issues. Guilford, CT: McGraw Hill.
Taylor, S. (n.d.). Institute for Historical Review. The Challenge of 'Multiculturalism' In How Americans View the Past and the Future. Retrieved June 18, 2010, from https://elearn.mtsu.edu/d2l/lms/content/viewer/main_frame.d2l?ou=1439730&tId=14284090
Thursday, June 17, 2010
Entry #2 Religion in Schools
My initial stance on the issue of religion in schools is that I believe religion should not be included in public schools. Even as a Christian, I believe that religion is a choice and to bring it into the classroom seems to be forcing students to believe one thing or another, which could confuse the students when they hear conflicting views from their teachers and families. If, for instance, Christianity was taught in schools and a teacher was an out-spoken atheist who revealed her ideals about her 'religion' to her students, the students who grew up to believe in God (or gods) would be greatly confused. I wouldn't want a religion that I didn't believe in to be taught in a school, therefore, I don't think Christianity should be taught in schools because it doesn't give the students the right to choose to believe what they want to believe in.
After reading the two articles, I am reminded of the great heights people will to go in order to stick to what they believe in. Both articles deal with people wanting the right to choose to partake in activity that was enforced by the law. In one case a moment of silence and the other case the recitation of the pledge of allegiance. In the first article, a high school girl does not want to participate in the ‘moment of silence’ that her school has enforced. In Illinois, the state law required public school students to observe a ‘moment of silence’ meant for prayer or personal reflection at the start of each school day.
I found this particular article very interesting because I grew up in Illinois and I didn’t recall ever starting out the day with a moment of silence. (I do however, remember having a moment of silence on 9/11, but that‘s a different story). I researched to find out that the law was passed October 2007 (http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=55754) I guess that’s why I never remembered partaking in such actions).
I think one can argue that ‘reflection’ does not have to be necessarily ‘prayer.’ In fact, the law allows students to reflect on the day's activities rather than pray if that is their choice. Defenders of the law have said it therefore doesn't force religion on anyone. But after thinking about this, I couldn’t see how teachers were to instruct their pupils about prayer and its meaning as well as the limitations on their 'reflection’ and not mention their views about what they (the teachers) pray and reflect about. Think about a first-grade classroom with a lot of precocious children who ask their teacher, “What does it mean to ‘reflect?’” (What would you say to this child? It’s a very difficult concept to explain to a six year old) If the teacher wasn’t prepared for such a question, he/she might answer: “Well, you can pray…I pray to God and Jesus.” All of a sudden it’s no longer a simple moment of silence anymore. Because small children are so impressionable, if they hear that their teacher prays to Jesus (or any other god or gods) that six-year old might be inclined to pray as the teacher does.
I am pleased with Judge Robert Gettleman’s ruling when he said the law was an unconstitutional breach of the separation of church and state. I think that no matter how hard teachers try to give the students the right to choose to pray or reflect, it would be too difficult for those teachers to be unbiased about what they ‘pray’ or ‘reflect’ about.
In the second article, two children chose not to recite the pledge of allegiance because it conflicted with their religious views. The court eventually ruled that the government does not have the authority to require the saluting of the American flag or recitation of the pledge of allegiance. Whether or not I believe that the Jehovah Witness boy’s view of the flag being a form of idolatry or not, I do believe that he should be given the choice to recite the pledge of allegiance or not.
During elementary school, my next-door neighbors were practicing Jehovah Witnesses and one of the children was in the same grade as me. I remember her standing up while the rest of the class would recite the pledge of allegiance, and I remember children asking her from time to time why she didn’t say anything. I remember one time she replied, “because I don’t believe it.” Why should it be the government’s decision to tell us what we can and cannot believe in?
All in all, I am still against religion being separated from school. If families are religious, I think it’s their responsibility to find time to practice what they believe in. If they want the right to believe what they want to believe, they have to respect that others want the same (whether those people have the same of different views)
I found an interesting news story on NPR about A fifth-grade teacher there claims school officials have quite him when he tries to teach his students about the role that Christianity played in the American Revolution. Many parents in the community feel he has overstepped his bounds. Despite my views on the separation of church and state, I do not feel that religions should be left out of history lessons. Religion is and has been an enormous role many countries and societies. For students to fully understand the history of those countries and societies, religion must be covered. Why is the American Revolution and different? Here’s the audio of the NPR story http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4224577
References:
Illinois Moment of Silence in Schools Ruled Unconstitutional - Local News News Articles National News US News - FOXNews.com. (n.d.). Breaking News Latest News Current News - FOXNews.com. Retrieved June 17, 2010, from http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,481427,00.html
NPR Debate over Religion in California School. (n.d.). Debate over Religion in California School. Retrieved June 16, 2010, from www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4224577
Patterson, J. (n.d.). Daily Herald New law requiring moment of silence in Illinois schools starts today . Daily Herald Home Page. Retrieved June 17, 2010, from http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=55754
https://elearn.mtsu.edu/d2l/lms/content/viewer/main_frame.d2l?ou=1439730&tId=14284087
https://elearn.mtsu.edu/d2l/lms/content/viewer/main_frame.d2l?ou=1439730&tId=14284088
After reading the two articles, I am reminded of the great heights people will to go in order to stick to what they believe in. Both articles deal with people wanting the right to choose to partake in activity that was enforced by the law. In one case a moment of silence and the other case the recitation of the pledge of allegiance. In the first article, a high school girl does not want to participate in the ‘moment of silence’ that her school has enforced. In Illinois, the state law required public school students to observe a ‘moment of silence’ meant for prayer or personal reflection at the start of each school day.
I found this particular article very interesting because I grew up in Illinois and I didn’t recall ever starting out the day with a moment of silence. (I do however, remember having a moment of silence on 9/11, but that‘s a different story). I researched to find out that the law was passed October 2007 (http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=55754) I guess that’s why I never remembered partaking in such actions).
I think one can argue that ‘reflection’ does not have to be necessarily ‘prayer.’ In fact, the law allows students to reflect on the day's activities rather than pray if that is their choice. Defenders of the law have said it therefore doesn't force religion on anyone. But after thinking about this, I couldn’t see how teachers were to instruct their pupils about prayer and its meaning as well as the limitations on their 'reflection’ and not mention their views about what they (the teachers) pray and reflect about. Think about a first-grade classroom with a lot of precocious children who ask their teacher, “What does it mean to ‘reflect?’” (What would you say to this child? It’s a very difficult concept to explain to a six year old) If the teacher wasn’t prepared for such a question, he/she might answer: “Well, you can pray…I pray to God and Jesus.” All of a sudden it’s no longer a simple moment of silence anymore. Because small children are so impressionable, if they hear that their teacher prays to Jesus (or any other god or gods) that six-year old might be inclined to pray as the teacher does.
I am pleased with Judge Robert Gettleman’s ruling when he said the law was an unconstitutional breach of the separation of church and state. I think that no matter how hard teachers try to give the students the right to choose to pray or reflect, it would be too difficult for those teachers to be unbiased about what they ‘pray’ or ‘reflect’ about.
In the second article, two children chose not to recite the pledge of allegiance because it conflicted with their religious views. The court eventually ruled that the government does not have the authority to require the saluting of the American flag or recitation of the pledge of allegiance. Whether or not I believe that the Jehovah Witness boy’s view of the flag being a form of idolatry or not, I do believe that he should be given the choice to recite the pledge of allegiance or not.
During elementary school, my next-door neighbors were practicing Jehovah Witnesses and one of the children was in the same grade as me. I remember her standing up while the rest of the class would recite the pledge of allegiance, and I remember children asking her from time to time why she didn’t say anything. I remember one time she replied, “because I don’t believe it.” Why should it be the government’s decision to tell us what we can and cannot believe in?
All in all, I am still against religion being separated from school. If families are religious, I think it’s their responsibility to find time to practice what they believe in. If they want the right to believe what they want to believe, they have to respect that others want the same (whether those people have the same of different views)
I found an interesting news story on NPR about A fifth-grade teacher there claims school officials have quite him when he tries to teach his students about the role that Christianity played in the American Revolution. Many parents in the community feel he has overstepped his bounds. Despite my views on the separation of church and state, I do not feel that religions should be left out of history lessons. Religion is and has been an enormous role many countries and societies. For students to fully understand the history of those countries and societies, religion must be covered. Why is the American Revolution and different? Here’s the audio of the NPR story http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4224577
References:
Illinois Moment of Silence in Schools Ruled Unconstitutional - Local News News Articles National News US News - FOXNews.com. (n.d.). Breaking News Latest News Current News - FOXNews.com. Retrieved June 17, 2010, from http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,481427,00.html
NPR Debate over Religion in California School. (n.d.). Debate over Religion in California School. Retrieved June 16, 2010, from www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4224577
Patterson, J. (n.d.). Daily Herald New law requiring moment of silence in Illinois schools starts today . Daily Herald Home Page. Retrieved June 17, 2010, from http://www.dailyherald.com/story/?id=55754
https://elearn.mtsu.edu/d2l/lms/content/viewer/main_frame.d2l?ou=1439730&tId=14284087
https://elearn.mtsu.edu/d2l/lms/content/viewer/main_frame.d2l?ou=1439730&tId=14284088
Sunday, June 13, 2010
Entry #1- Innovators and "Makers"
Honestly, I didn't know the difference between an innovator and a 'maker' when it came to American education. After reading the PBS site and Gatto's site, I now have a better sense of the differences.
Both innovators and 'makers' had a role in shaping education but each impacted it in different ways. Let me explain.
Innovators
Innovators sought to make education available to the masses and not just to the wealthy and privileged. Innovators like Horace Mann and John Dewey made it possible for common schools to establish themselves as the first public schools in the nation. These innovators paved the way for our public school system as we know it today.
Horace Mann became known as the “Father of the Common School.” He was so influencial in education because he believed that education was a universal right for all. Mann also believed that everyone should have the opportunity to attend school no matter what their social class or income may be. He advocated for a longer school year and the funding of schools to be the responsibility of the state instead of the individual. He helped establish laws for compulsory attendance and these laws were in every state by 1918. Mann also advocated for a more trained and professional teacher. Training institutions called normal schools were established for teachers. Mann knew that the key to elevating the standard of learning was to elevate the standards in which the teachers were trained. Therefore, he sought to make teaching a profession.
As you can see, innovators like Horace Mann were on a quest to help make education everything it could be and he spent his entire life crusading for this cause. Without his mission, public schools today could have been in a lot worse shape than they are now. Because Mann pushed for public education for all social classes to be in one 'common school', I believe he is one of the most important innovators.
'Makers'
The 'Makers' of modern schooling, on the other hand, inspired the "social efficiency" movement. They are a group of money-hungry people who, as Gatto states, had an added fourth purpose which was the driving force of education. One maker worth mentioning is Henry Ford. With Ford's invention of the assembly line, he created the concept: make a lot, sell more. But who was going to buy? He helped drill into the minds of adults as well as youth that everyone should, buy, buy, and buy some more while complying to every direction given without any say in the matter. This idea bled into the school systems which made schools teach students how to be consumers of more and more products.
Being a minimalist (or attempting to be), the idea of this constantly-wanting-more nation makes me sick to my stomach. In my personal opinion, we should all focus less on 'stuff' and more on people. The innovators were the people who did just that. They did what they thought would be best for everyone involved in the education process (including teachers). They understood the possibilites of what people could achieve and went from there. The 'makers' on the other hand, had only two things on their minds: themselves and money. Not the kind of people you want teaching your children, that's for sure!
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)