FEI 6

1. What is the author referring to by “free enterprise”? A free enterprise system is usually used in reference to an economy that has very little restrictions placed on it and is allowed to sort itself out via competition. In an educational sense I interpreted it more as driving competition between students, as well as letting the issues of focus be determined by society’s whims.

2. I enjoyed reading this over because I got the overwhelming sense of history repeating itself while reading it over, and I believe it is extremely important for us as educators to try and ensure that future generations do not repeat the mistakes of our generation and the ones before us. In order to grow as a society and develop a better knowledge of the world we need to change and always be striding to be better, to have a better view of the world and more thorough understanding of the problems we face in the field of our choice. This feeling was particularly felt while reading pages 4 and 5. Specifically the references to 1960’s culture and how the youth of that generation, upon developing a better understanding of the “American Dream” in its reality, rejected it and fought for change on a multitude of fronts. This upheaval was years long, and we still see today that a lot of the issues that were being fought over(Minorities not being treated fairly, equal rights for women, anger over wealth inequalities) were never properly dealt with and settled the right way, because we are still seeing marches, and protests, and unfair treatment continuing today. Occupy Wall Street protesting the wage gap and in their minds the exploitation of the lower and middle class, opposing what they view as social oppression the same way some of their mothers and fathers protested in the 1960’s. I think it is our job to provide an education not just in the subject matter we choose to specialize in, but on social issues as well. I think this falls under the idea of “enlightened persuasion” touched on in the paper, but I would prefer the term “enlightened apprising”. I don’t want to persuade my students that what I am telling them is true, I want to to tell them the truth as we know it, as well as the counter-points to that so they might draw their own conclusions.

3. Did Arthur Jensen really believe IQ was innately inherited? I do believe that genetics plays some part in intelligence, but to argue that poor people are poor because they are unintelligent seems like madness. Taking into consideration the innate disadvantages that having little money brings to “moving up” the social ladder makes it all to understandable why many poor families are poor for generations. How is someone supposed to take the time off to go to school full-time to get a degree if they have to work 2 jobs in order to make ends meet? Is it a poor persons fault that schools in poor areas are typically lacking and provide an education that is less robust than a wealthier districts school, thus leading to even more disadvantages when it comes time to take standardized tests such as the OGTs,SATs or ACTs? Standardized tests by themselves are a hot debate topic, but when you take into consideration that these tests are typically being updated fairly regularly, often at a pace that makes it difficult for a poor school to keep up, what with buying new training and learning materials or adopting new curriculum.

FEI 5

1.)What is cultural capital? More specifically, cultural capital refers to something that can help you move up in society that isn’t related to financial assets or social connections. It can be a skill or a piece of knowledge, or even an attitude that you inherited from your family.

2.) I really enjoyed the breakdown of points-of-view and how differently situations can be interpreted depending on the type of discourse you engage in(page 73). I think I personally would lean towards a liberal discourse, but I think that in order to ensure students are well-rounded, they need conservative discourse as well. Hooks uses the examples of liberal discourse focusing on the points of view or issues of women and minorities and conservative discourse focusing on the works of great men. I think this summation is a little political, but it is still an accurate statement about our society and schools in general. For example, I think a section in History class that focuses on the backstories as well as wartime problems of generals during the Civil War would be insightful, but there should also be an equal amount of time and effort given to looking at the issues faced by minorities fighting for the Union as well as the roles women and foreign armies played at the time. I suppose this ties into the idea of macro and micro methodology as well, and as is usually the case in life, a healthy balance of both would be the best option in my opinion. Truth as a construction of society is very important as well, and it reminded me of a simple lesson I was taught in around the 3rd grade. The lesson basically boiled down to the teacher writing HISTORY on the board and putting a line through it like so HIS|STORY>History. That is to say, up until this point in time(thanks to the internet age where virtually any statement can be verified by some determined searching) history was often written by the winner, be it a war or an invention or an idea. Thomas Edison is often credited as the father of electricity even though is now widely agreed that Nikola Tesla was the superior mind and inventor. Edison knew how to play the game however, and realized that it didn’t matter what people thought of him at the time, because history would remember him as a great man.

3.)On the subject of social reproduction(Specifically the Bowles and Gaines theory mentioned on page 78), I am curious what the researchers thought they would discover. It seems obvious to me that children from upper socioeconomic classes tend to stay in that group, with the same being true about the lower socioeconomic classes. To  me this just seems like common sense, the less you have the harder it is to move up, and I would expect that people in a “higher” class would be able to keep their positions given the resources at their disposal. So I think the question that needs to be asked isn’t “do students tend to stay in their same class after school?” but, “How do we move as many people up the ladder as possible, and what can we as educators do to help this process along?

FEI 4

1.)What is critical pedagogy? It is defined as a philosophy of education and society that combines education with critical theory. In terms of our class it is the concept of using critical thinking to examine and deconstruct the ways that society’s norms and values affect how we are able to teach in the classroom and the effect that has on students learning abilities.

2.) I see now how the concept of structure without constraint is explored and defined more in depth with Mclaren’s statement of a dialectical school being able to “dominate and liberate” students(pg 62). I also strongly agree with his idea of a critical educator being someone who doesn’t simplify a problem down to two sides and it is either this or that, but explores the many different facets of issues and how those different aspects can relate and play off each other. On page 63 Mclaren seems to heavily favor macro objectives, and points these objectives out as teaching students more critical lessons. While I agree that his definition of a macro objectives are important, and give students a better understanding of the impact of a certain event(i.e the Vietnam War), I think that incorporating micro objectives into the curriculum is important to do our best guarantee that students learn certain lessons.

3.)Who should choose what lessons are the most critical for students? The board of education and the state certainly define benchmarks that students need to hit in the form of standardized tests, but as I’ve state before I don’t believe standardized tests are the best way of evaluating students, and even more so when considering that people in charge of type of material students ‘need’ to learn have their own personal views and biases. Take public schools in Louisiana or Tennessee for example, where creationism is allowed to be taught as part of the curriculum. I think it’s counter-intuitive and a conflict of interests when you teach creationism as fact, but then send your students to biology, chemistry or physics as well. How do we expect our students to reconcile this conflicting knowledge? Or do we teach them to just accept it all as fact and not question the parts that don’t make sense when viewed together. This can apply to any subject matter of course, not just religious in nature. If we allow our personal views and feelings on a matter to be touted as if they are fact, then we are being irresponsible in our duty of disseminating knowledge to our students in a fully truthful matter.

FEI 3

1.) What was the book Strangers in Paradise that Hooks continually refers to? Strangers in Paradise was in it’s 2nd edition when Hooks refers to it. The book was composed of stories from twenty four different college professors who come from working class families and/or backgrounds. Each story is prefaced by remarks from the author meant to encourage thought and dialogue about historical and social(class mainly) factors effecting education as it was in their time.

2.) I really enjoyed reading this post because I think when it comes to class and education, it can be a bit of a vicious circle in our current environment. Inner-city schools often are understaffed due to the reputation of having more unruly students and less funds than suburban or private schools. This means that “top” talent, or the teachers most equipped to help level the playing field are often lured away to more lucrative or less stressful jobs, meanwhile the staffing problems in the inner-city get worse, less teachers means less supervision for the students, which breeds more unruliness and distractions. Not too mention the problems that come from trying to afford college in this day and age when coming from a poorer family. If you can’t afford to go to college, then chances are you won’t be able to land a high-paying job to save up money to move to a better school district for your children or save money for their secondary education. And so the cycle continues. I certainly don’t know how we can break the cycle, but I think that government funded incentives for teachers that take a job at an underfunded or understaffed school should be considered, possible with an escalating bonus or tax credit that increases for staying at the same school and lending some continuity to the staff there. Obviously this would be something very large in scale and possibly very long in the works for something that would be a temporary fix, as the schooling system in general is in need of some modernizing. I don’t think I agree with his statement(page 3, document number 143) that bursts of laughter or loudness and outbursts being socially recognized as indicators of low class, as in my own experience class clowns or loud personalities come in all shapes and sizes and from all backgrounds.

3.) Is there a good way to discuss class in the classroom? I say this because I think our society has placed a stigma on being poor, with a lot of assumptions generally being made. In my own personal experience it is very rare for someone to look at a person less well off than themselves and think of the possible environmental factors at play in that persons life, or realizing just how difficult it can be to “go up” a class level when your resources are already stretched thin and raising your qualifications can mean not working one or two jobs that are currently keeping you afloat. I think this leads to a false and negative perception of poor people that are poor because they choose to be that way by nature of not working enough or bad decisions etc. So I think it can be very difficult to bring up class and wealth levels in class without unconsciously embarrassing and singling out students(who in some ways know a lot more about each other and each other’s families than we will, and can be very unsympathetic by nature of their maturity level) that are not as well of as their peers. Not to mention it is a difficult subject matter to understand when you are a full adult, let alone as a young student before you start constructing your opinions based on others reactions around you.

FEI 2

1.)How was compulsory schooling influenced by American society? Horace Mann, who lived from 1796 to 1859, was among the first people in a position of power(he was the Secretary of Education for the state of Massachusetts in the year 1837) to push for the idea of common schooling, the idea that all people should have access to the same educational content. His also pushed for age-grading, as up to this point there was often one class of kids from varying ages all lumped together and given the same instruction. He was able to garner a great deal of support for public schools by tapping his inner curmudgeon and pitching these new age-divided common schools as a way to instill patriotic ideals and turn children into upstanding citizens. By the year 1900, 34 of 45 states had compulsory laws in place, requiring children to attend school until age 14. I believe this is in many ways the birth of the modern school structure we see today.

2.)I agree with Goldfarb’s belief that a democratic society can’t function when the people are not allowed to think for themselves, and in his words, educated to be clever robots(page 11). I don’t think that increasing the reach of student government to the point where students are “running the school”(page 11) would end well, but I do think that the voices of students are not always heard. I think this is partly due to the nature of student government positions, and how they aren’t able to effect any meaningful change. They should be able to be heard when students are able to clarify the reasons behind the impetus for change, and when that change can positively influence learning and expression. In my own experience, student government bodies that bring higher concerns up(other than what kind of snacks the vending machines should have) often have their concerns brushed aside with little thought given to them. I  think it can be a difficult task from a student representative position as well. Student bodies can ideally be very diverse and divided among different lines of thinking. Making sure these different views are allowed to exist and be expressed and co-exist can be a daunting task, and I think that is why all too often we just use a one-size fits all approach that tries to make sure that no one falls through the cracks, but no one really gets to soar high either. I hope that in the future our education curriculum and methods can be much more flexible, and I think the advent of new technology(Smart-boards, access to learning materials from around the world) will allow us to pull knowledge from a deeper pool and make sure that information is able to communicated accurately. I also agree that schools need to become less like a prison and more like a learning experience(page 13), to be honest I think a lot of parents see school as little more than 8 hour babysitting centers.

3.)I think it can be easy to be in the position of an educator or administrator and fall into thinking that we know what’s best and we’ll handle things just fine. I think this is a dangerous line of thinking, and one we should all be wary of falling into, because things are constantly changing, and kids especially adapt and adopt different mannerisms and ideas as they are growing up, who’s to say they don’t see a problem from an angle that we cannot by nature of our position. Goldfarb also has words of caution regarding the overuse and abuse of authority(page 11, 12). We’ve all had teachers that were overly strict, and in my personal experience I had more than one who seemed to take more time out of their days to punish kids rather than teach them. Some may argue that this punishment for infractions is itself a form of learning, and I would agree that school is a place to learn what is socially and publicly acceptable, sometimes by nature of making a mistake and being reprimanded. But when it goes over the line, what do we expect to happen? What lesson can a child take away from “conform or be punished, obey or be punished”? I understand that only so much time is available to us, but if a child is not learning WHY they were punished, there can be no true learning, that is stunting their emotional and social growth.

FEI 1

1.) What was a Trotskyist? Trotskyists were people who subscribed to the theory of social Marxism developed by Leon Trotsky, who’s interpretation was largely focused on the concept of Permanent Revolution. This theory hinged on the idea that a cultural revolution that was won by the upper class would not be sufficient for true change. He argued that it would have to be the working class that succeeded in order to institute true change in areas like Russia. In the context of Goldfarb’s manifesto, his friend belonged to a Socialist youth group seeking change(which he later found in a civil rights movement group, page 8).

2.) I do agree with him on the subject of colleges teaching students how to fill a niche more than broadening their education and preparing them for reality(pages 7,8). When I was in high-school I and my fellow students were told ad nauseam that college would be better, college would be different because you can choose what you want to learn about and study. This was a lie. No matter what your degree is, you will invariably have to take classes that don’t pertain to your major, if only to fill an arbitrary general education requirement. Oftentimes, multiple classes will repeat the same material, and endless PowerPoint slides are presented, again encouraging students to just memorize what’s on the study guide, instead of presenting challenges and encouraging students to learn and look at things from different perspectives. Too often professors and instructors assign too much weight to attendance(which is absurd, considering how much students have to pay just for the ‘privilege’ of being there, they should be able to come and go as they damn well please)  and ‘participation'(which means next to nothing considering I can raise my hand every class but not actually contribute anything substantial) scores. I have said it many times to family and friends, that if my college education was not being paid for by the GI Bill, I would not go, because the value for what I have actually learned versus the amount of money required simply is not there. I believe that schools should offer a more direct approach to the subjects at hand, getting students involved beyond memorizing what is going to show up on a test and then forgetting it completely come summer time. Too often in my personal experience, the first couple weeks of the new school year is spent reviewing what was learned the previous year in a different class. In our current system, if you are a bad test taker, if your memorization skills aren’t finely honed, then you’re a ‘failure’. People who could excel under different teaching methods such as hands-on experience or visualization are told they’re wrong and left by the wayside, as if there aren’t multiple means to the same end. While I agree that schools are influenced heavily by society and what is considered ‘right’ at the time, I do not hold the belief that schools are churning out kids to be mindless automatons who feel compelled to obey the rules(page 8), I think society changes and advances at a rate much faster than schools are able to adopt, due to their bureaucratic nature.

3.) What did Goldfarb believe the solution to this problem of a ‘fascist’ school system was? While I thought the tone Goldfarb used was a bit heavy handed, his points are not without merit. I do believe that schools can get overly involved in telling students what is right or wrong, when the primary focus should be on disseminating facts and ensuring students leave the school system as well-rounded individuals who have a better sense of the world around them. My favorite teacher in high school was my Government teacher, and he was my favorite because he taught the class with impartiality, never allowing his own views to cloud what was being taught, and the issues we discussed in class were directly related to political and societal issues that were occurring at the time. Unfortunately he is in rare company as far as his teaching methods go. His idea that the modern structure of schools should be eliminated entirely is unrealistic and he offers no further support other than “We’d manage”(page 6). He offers up examples of his own experiences of letting students be ‘free’ by changing the seating around or having a non traditional spot in the classroom from which to teach from, but this is still only the illusion of freedom(page 6). Is his idea of an ideal school one where the students have free reign to pick and choose what they’d like to study or can come and go as they please? While that sounds like a good idea on paper, in reality it would be a chaotic and highly distracting learning environment. I believe that students can learn in a structured environment without being constrained.