Blog post 10/24

I think a really interesting question to explore would be what is the last step a teacher can do to convince a parent? In other words, after all the options have been exhausted and the parentstill refuses to let their child read a book, where do you draw the line between giving up and being too forceful. In the end, a parent will have the final say about their child's reading content, but it is also important that the student might be missing out on very important and relevant themes. We all want to stand up for those books that we feel absolutely need to be taught. I guarantee that everyone has a book that is at once vital to society (history) and questionable in the face of censorship. But the censored books are the ones that had the biggest impact on the literary world; books that have been banned are often unique, personal insights on a controversial issue. We could persuade and convince all day, but if a parent refuses, what else is there to do? Will you change the entire curriculum because of one parent? If the student gets an alternate book, what if it's shorter and his/her classmates complain? I want to explore where this 'line' is for different teachers (i'm sure it has much to do with personal opinion of the teacher) and when we can cross it; the line between giving up and surrendering to the parent or threatening an F if the student won't read the material.

Blog post on Gee / Delpit

Quickwrite 1 These terms show that literacy, or more specifically, our language systems, are all intertwined. A synchronization is necessary in order to form literate discourses because we must add on to our primary discourse, what we already know, new information – all the time. He is claiming that we acquire certain knowledge from our home setting, then that knowledge is expanded when we get into school and social situations. All of this learning culminates in our identity kit, the skills and knowledge we use to figure out problems, read difficult texts, and write college essays. The terms are relevant because they allow us as teachers to understand that there is a complex background to the literacy of each of our students. In other words, we must be conscious of the many factors that have influenced out students’ discourses, and the many discourses that will be present, so that our lessons reach a wide variety of language and reading levels. In addition, these discourses will give birth to a type of meta-knowledge, an understanding of theories and beliefs outside of our dominant discourse, but nonetheless reachable by using the learning we have gained thus far.Quickwrite 2These terms show Delpit’s understanding of literacy as a learning experiment; our primary (dominant) discourse can be modified, added to, and even transformed to fit the assignment we are working on. She argues that there are tests which determine if a person is in or out of a discourse. She also addresses the issues of non-learning, when a person’s dominant discourse will not allow him or her to access information that is being read, and non-teaching, in which teachers will neglect to correct grammatical mistakes or language errors in order to stay‘safe.’ Delpit argues that each and every person has the potential to reach an advanced dominant discourse, and that one can change their discourse over time and through learning. Her main argument against Gee is that people can in fact move out of their discourses and change their literary skills/knowledge. Blog Entry for Gee vs. Delpit• Gee says that you are fixed Discourse; that your personal set of literacy skills can be added to, but that you cannot transform into another discourse, and you are either completely in or completely out. Delpit rejects this statement, citing examples of people who came from poor communities with low literacy rates but with perseverance toward learning, they ‘escaped’ that discourse and went on to be successful, educated people. Delpit argues that each and every person has the potential to reach an advanced dominant discourse, and that one can change their discourse over time and through learning. Her main argument against Gee is that people can in fact move out of their discourses and change their literary skills/knowledge. She claims that a discourse can be transformed, that we can temporarily take on or assume another set of skills in order to refute an argument that is using that discourse; i.e., using deconstructionism to critique a literary piece based on this theory… of deconstructionism. Yeah.

Political / Education article

May 28, 2008, 4:50 PM
Obama Urges Education Reform
Posted by Allison O'Keefe 4
From CBS News’ Allison O'Keefe: THORNTON, COLO. – Barack Obama talked about turning around the American educational system today, as he viewed the work of students at a private school here. Obama was greeted by eighth graders at the Mapleton Expeditionary School of the Arts who showed Obama bulletin boards of artwork about their education on Africa, slavery, and the Civil War. He met a group of seniors who told him about their success in getting into college, including their scholarships and financial aid money. He met juniors who told him about their community meetings, and ended his tour visiting a classroom of eighth graders, two of whom gave a public presentation about their interests. Obama told them that he couldn’t give such a presentation in eighth grade. “I probably couldn’t have done it when I started running for President,” he said. Later, Obama met with students in the auditorium for a speech on his education policy. He pledged to change certain parts of No Child Left Behind and encourage innovation in education. “I believe it's time to lead a new era of mutual responsibility in education,” he said. “One where we all come together for the sake of our children's success; an era where each of us does our part to make that success a reality – parents and teachers; leaders in Washington and citizens all across America.” During the question and answer period, Obama was asked about bilingual education, especially given current climate of immigration. Obama believes that everyone should be bilingual or even “trilingual.” “When we as a society do a really bad job teaching foreign languages – it is costing us when it comes to being competitive in a global marketplace,” he said. He was also asked about the federal government’s role in a world of charter schools and the success of private foundations on small school public education, such as the school where he was appearing. Obama immediately expressed his support for charter schools, citing the importance of “innovation at the local level.” But Obama treaded lightly, saying that there are always good schools in every state. Earlier in his speech, Obama referred to the ongoing teacher talks in Denver. Dozens of teachers in two different public schools called in sick in opposition to their ongoing contract negotiations. Despite the fact that Obama did not use McCain’s name once today, a McCain spokesperson was quick to respond to Obama’s speech. “While in the U.S. Senate, Barack Obama has never spearheaded education reforms, which despite his lofty rhetoric, demonstrates his weak leadership on an issue that is critical to the economic strength of our country,” said Tucker Bounds. “It’s no coincidence that a leading education magazine noted that Sen. Obama has made no significant mark on education policy.”