multicultural education
Im not sure if this is properly stated in anywhere but I assume this would be a topic tied with history, and theres already a lot of history to learn. If it isnt tied with history where would this slot into the American education system? It seems very plausible.
This chapter discusses the confusion over goals in multicultural edu-cation, describes its goals and challenges, and states the rationale for a transformative multicultural curriculum. Important goals of multicul-tural education are to help teachers and students transform their thinking about the nature and development of the United States and the world and to develop a commitment to act in ways that will make the United States and the world more democratic and just.
When reading this the only thing I could think of is the famous White Egyptian dude shown in the elementary / middle school history text books. I remember first seeing that and going huh I dont think thats right.
Tiger Parents bodes even worse for Asian-American children who fall under LGBTQ+ spectrum
I bet it is, from what I heard about the Asian-American parenting I bet they would disown their child. One of my Chinese friends grandfather got upset at her and the whole family when she dated a Japanese man in the early years of high school.
Many Asian parents, most especially those who rear their children to be academically successful,tend to label “dating” and “romantic relationships” in school as distractions that could preventtheir child from studying effectively.
I have this vietenmese friend whos family was like this and I feel like this was so drilled into him as a kid that he hasnt really had a desire to have any relationships. However, on one hand you might assume hes cooked for not ever having a relationship yet, on the other hand he isnt weird and understands the trends and will figure it out when he gets there. Goodluck Caleb (He goes to UCD so hes cooked anyways).
Oftentimes when non-LGBTQ+ people hear the term “coming-out,”they always attribute it to this giant event that happens once in a person's life
I thought this too, but then my brother came out and said he's gay. It wasn't a big deal because it was so evident for a long time. For him, it was something that evolved and, at least for him, was pretty evident from the beginning. As a kid, he'd love to watch Barbie movies, and I'd watch them with him because I was bored. I had the bigger brother, so he was chill, but then when he said hey, I'm gay, I'm like, ya, checks out!
These examples point to the need to address homophobia and sexualminority issues through multilevel approaches. Youth are capable of as-serting themselves and finding community with others, but without theinstitutional support of schools and the interventions of respectful adults,the struggles they may have to face are all the more daunting. Ensuringthat sexual minority and gender minority youth have space and time tomeet together creates one space in school that addresses their communities.Incorporating LGBTQ and gender-identity issues in curricula, teacher edu-cation, school leadership programs, and school anti-discrimination policiesare all strategies that reinforce inclusion across the entire school institution.
I think this whole thing is funny because regardless of what rules are put into effect, the kids in schools follow no rules but whos the best at sports and who brings the best snacks to the lunch table. Its anarchy and the thought of attempting to control it humors me.
The topic of bullying has gotten much media coverage and school-basedattention in the past several years.
Excluding LGBTQ coverage - I think bullying builds character and is a necessary part of society that forces users to conform to norms, which is good to a degree, and teaches how to thicken their skin. Teachers people how to harness their inner anger and teaches them about themselves. This is a very manly opinion explicitly directed at men as well.
The pressure on straightallies of LGBTQ students to not express their opposition to homophobiamay indicate that not supporting gay people is an integral part of indicatingone's own heterosexuality.
This is a pretty exciting statement because, as a straight dude with a gay brother, I love my brother and support whatever he wants to do or be, but just because he is gay or there are gay people in this world does not mean I'm going to learn everything about them and crusade for them. If someone harrases my brother for being gay, then I'll fight them for hating on my brother, not for them hating gay people. LGBTQ is like politics; if I dont care about politics and let the world do its thing, then there are so many problems and stress I avoid, regardless of what I'm missing out on.
he honors students never became my friends-my friends were in nonhonors classes-but they were cordial to me.
It's interesting to think that low-performing students are not only usually not friends with honor students but are specifically separated. Even at UCI, honor students have separate study labs in the library. While on some level, this may be unfair for students who want to become honor students, I feel that ultimately, an honor student is truly on another learning speed. It is necessary to segregate them so that honor students can succeed properly.
I loved being Black, but I hated being poor.
As I read this, the thought of comparing racism and classism is interesting because they're similar and have kind of have similar solutions, but ultimately, while racism can, I guess, be solved through thousands of more years of intermingling, classism can not, and I dont think there is or ever will be a solution for it. Interestingly, this thought has a lot of holes in it, but I wanted to state it regardless.
Without an adult to encourage her to cake algebra, the gateway to college preparatory math and science courses, or to advise her on where she might seek academic support, Chantelle made a decision that is likely to affect her preparation for college and therefore will have bearing in the long term on her opportunities after high school. By taking prealgebra in the ninth grade, Chantelle is all hut ensured that she will be unable to meet the admissions requirements to the UC or California State University (CSU) systems. Given that so much is at stake, it must be recognized that a system of course assignment that allows students to choose which classes to take will invariably work better for some than others.
This is an interesting statement to me because one of my buddies from last year went to UCI but transferred to USC, grew up very wealthy in a wealthy private school, and even there, the student counselors screwed his whole grade with college application choices due to the ideology that students should apply to higher prestige college with a major they dont want to do, so they have a higher chance to get in, but it ended up working oppositely. Students apply for majors they didn't want and do not get into anything where historically they should have. Ultimately, having advisers and adults around you is important; it's even more important to have higher quality authoritative figures, no matter the quality or necessarily what department they come from.
There is relatively little that the school can do to address the inequalities in the backgrounds of students like Jennifer and Chantelle. However, it is possible to address school conditions that contribute to disparities in achievement, such as school size, the student-to-counselor ratio, procedures that are used to track stu-dents into higher-an<l lower-level courses, and processes used to provide academic support co students who are struggling. These aspects of the school structure all contribute co the achievement gap, and unlike the backgrounds of students, they can be easily modified and reformed.
I'd like to disagree with this statement. I dont think it's straightforward for a school to "simply" change things such as school size, student-to-counselor ratio, procedures, and yada yada. While on paper, it is pretty easy to do this, hire some people here or accept fewer students here; I feel like in practice, it permanently cripples. I doubt a high school has an HR team that can hire the most amazing people to solve all these issues because if it was this easy, then this would be the solution, and there wouldn't be any more problems. I've seen too many times a school attempt to replace a principal or vice principal to make it better for it to usually be worse, typically in the student's eyes, with no public knowledge of anything being made better.
Also, children from low-income families are more likely to engage in antisocial behavior and to have mental health problems.
As someone who had a childhood friend who was not only low income but had a pretty messed up family situation, I've seen firsthand this antisocial and mental health problem behavior. While I was friends with them in middle school and not at an age group this low, this, in addition to the above, is true when it states that they are preoccupied because of home troubles. However, adding to the preoccupied side effect, not only are they occupied with the issue, but by the end of the day, they have the next issue of returning to it. These two issues that come and go throughout the school day make the student's nerves melt into a weird, harmful stew of unnatentativness.
Which of these factors are most powerful in determining a child's s Uc-cess in school?
While I certainly haven't read past this point, it's interesting that they gave the financial and parental goals of the two opposites before asking this question, for it seems like the well-off student will be more ambitious to conquer the goals set in him since birth. And through UCI, I see that. While I can't tell what students are operating in poverty, the students from wealthier families are more academically smart and strive for a much higher goal than everyone else.
Teaching in a Multicultural World
This is very nitpicking, but I feel like most of these issues are American-specific. While I dont live anywhere else, I feel like in other places it is much more straightforward and less personal feelings/opinions being dragged into conversations for more subjects compared to the United States school system.
'1 thought this was supposed to be an English class, why are we talking so much about feminism?" (Or, they might add, race or class.)
I agree with the students in this regard because (while I don't have any wild opinions) I am scared of being judged by someone, especially if someone thinks of me less because I poorly communicated a statement. After all, I was tired that day. Growing up, I've seen a trend of women specifically either calling people out for race/class/opinions they dislike and getting upset or spreading it around as hate.
As the classroom becomes more diverse, teachers are faced with the way the politics of domina-don are often reproduced in the educational setting. For exam-ple, white male students continue to be the most vocal in our classes. Students of color and some white women express fear that they will be judged as intellectually inadequate by these peers.
This is quite an interesting comment as someone who is white (and comes from a place where it was predominantly rowdy white and Hispanic folk always messing around in the classroom). It's weird to observe how little the students at UCI like to talk and interact with the teacher and each other in the classroom. I remember being in Writing 50, where I was the only white person, and I would have to talk since the teacher would get angry that no one would speak. This made her like me, and I got a good grade, so no complaining!!! However the lack of outgoing people kills me.
The unwillingness to approach teaching from a standpoint that includes awareness o f race, sex, and class is often rooted in the fear that classrooms will be uncontrollable, that emotions and passions will not be contained.
When I first read this I was in agreement, especially in places such as California, and as I thought about it more I remember when teachers would talk about subject like these they're intellectual vocabulary would double and they're speaking speed would halve as to not say something controversial. While I know they can get introuble in a legal aspect It makes sense that on a smaller scale the classroom could certainly get rowdy.
Why are people poor? Most notably, why do the same groups of people te~d to endure poverty from generation to generation?
From an economic perspective, there must be poor people in America who do cheap labor. Actually, I don't need to do this because I realized I only need to do seven across the two readings, not just this one. Have a good day!
Tnh er-. ese teachers of tomorrow are particularly concerned that even after all students h been offered "12 years of free schooling," they are unable to "lift themselv::~ out of poverty.
This issue interests me because I think that education in-school isn't the cause and doesn't have a solution. I believe this is a societal, mindset, and location-based problem that can never be solved with in school unless in a communist state. That is a pretty cool theory I made; thank you for reading.
For years I have been floored by the number of candidates who believe not only that public education is the great equalizer but also that children and families who remain poor are to blame for not exploiting such a freely available opportunity to improve their lots.
It is peplexing to hear the mothers who had students go through college complain about their children being unsuccessful because they didn't exploit certain things at school while they were there. There are so many opportunities out there and 100-fold while in college. What's the disconnect? My answer is how the social side of the college; however, there are some holes in that theory I made in five seconds!
Mann chided the economic elite for shirking obligations to their fellow man by favoring private education over common schools. He conceptualized public education as "the great equalizer," or the most powerful mechanism for abating class-based "prejudice and hatred," and, most important, the only means by which those without economic privilege or generational wealth could experience any hope of equal footing.
That is a lot of big words, and I don't know if I am saying what he meant. However, the idea that public education is "the great equalizer" interests me as I want to be an entrepreneur at UCI. UCI is a great school. However, everyone has the track to do well in school, get a job, and live an everyday life. As an entrepreneur, I'm forced to think differently. I can't study a single subject and be successful as an entrepreneur. I must master many concepts, including a mindset not taught and frankly frowned upon by public education, and then sell a product to this type of people. The mindset of going against the grain makes a lot more sense in a private school that focuses on individuality rather than pumping students through a system for money.
chools too often reinforce rather than contend against the intergenerational paradox at the heart of the American dream.
I'm not entirely sure what this means, to be honest. However, reinforcing something is pretty straightforward (laws are very black and white; either you did it or you didn't), while contending does not seem as easy. Another thing to think about is: What problems are really worth tackling? How much money and time should you spend solving a problem before it outweighs the cost or another solution is found through the action of another problem?
It's interesting to think that local property taxes are the bulk of the expenses, while I heard places such as Texas have differing property tax laws. Where do they get the bulk of their money from? Should it be from somewhere else? Is there another taxable category that would allow more funding and not anger a majority of people?
Most importantly, life chances depend increasingly on attaining higher education, but class back-ground is as important as ever in determining who attends and finishes a four-year college.
This is an interesting statement to me because it isn't necessarily "harder" or "doctorate" education that makes it important; it is also trades education and specialization in blue-collar fields that are more important as technology and methods advance and become more complex than hammering a nail into wood.
Because education is so im-portant to the way the American dream works, people care about it intensely and can strongly disagree about definitions, methods, and priorities.
It is interesting to see how this statement relates to education as necessary to the American dream because, as a business major, I know that the primary way to have a large economy (and be a powerful nation) is to educate people. While this statement makes it seem like it benefits the people, which it is, it is also much broader and even delves into national security.
T HE AMERICAN DREAM IS A POWERFUL CONCEPT.
As the course goes on, I'm interested to see the idea of the "American Dream" integrated into statements and concepts. With the frequency I see this term, it's almost a propoganda line to make America seem great, regardless of its effect. Even in this statement, it states that it's a powerful concept but almost backs away from it being truly powerful.
Americans want neighborhood schools, decentralized decision making, and democratic control. They see these devices in part as ways to ensure that schools can accommodate distinctive community desires, and to give parents a greater say about what goes on in them. Despite the fact that participation in school elections is very low and information on which to base a vote is often scarce, Americans will not surrender local control without a fight.
It's interesting to think that despite few votes for local-level elections, there is a strong desire to have the ability to do so. I feel like this concept will come back in many shapes and forms, particularly with privileges that, on paper, seem great but are either poorly utilized or have lesser-known rules that make them redundant.
The former has proved so far to be too expensive po-litically, and the latter has often been too expensive financially. Americans want all children to have a real chance to learn, and they want all schools to foster democracy and promote the common good, but they do not want those things enough to make them actually happen.
It's interesting to think of an issue as "too expensive politically." I've never heard this statement, and in an attempt to google it, I found that it refers to money. However, even if this is wrong, it's interesting to refer to it as politically expensive as the risk of not being elected to a political position due to the standings on an issue. I dont think there is a worse combination for a problem that is both politically and financially expensive.