This makes me livid! Not only do they blame parents, specifically they blame mothers for joining the work force. It is essential to look at who controls the narrative.

There are SO many factors that impact students and their learning. It can't be boiled down to women joining the work force.

The two points that struck me were:

1. dialogue is the 'action' that creates change
2. the reexamination of who leads, where they lead and why (p. 15) Community members being agents for change, because it benefits them personally (in addition to the larger community) instead of the idea of people in a community needing to be empowered to create change. Community members know the historical context from lived experience and therefore can lead the dialogue and change effectively. The point that dialogue is an action and can facilitate change was something that we discussed at the Teaching Tolerance workshop on Friday. Dialogue is often the first step because sometimes dialogue is what helps people identify the problem - and from there plans for change are born. Or, people might identify a problem and then use dialogue as the first step in creating change.

This reminds me of the Maria Lugones article, Playfulness, "World" - Travelling, and Loving Perception, about the ability of people to "shift" to other worlds. She noted that, "world" - travellers have the distinct experience of being different in different worlds" (p. 9) I don't know anything (yet) about Brofenbrenner and his theory, but I wonder if he ever considered how race impacts roles and behavior in different microsystems?