Reading Response 10

Democracy is a central pillar of the American government and determines multiple aspects of people's lives. In terms of education, democracy impacts the learning of millions of students. According to Deborah Meier (2002), schools are where Americans learn the meaning of democracy, that is, how one's actions impact their community and its reputation. Understanding reputation requires the understanding of uneasy balances such as between institutional resistance and peer pressure. When one understands how to effectively balance life requirements in school, the opportunity to demand change is available. Meier argues schools actively teach democratic principles in the sense of understanding one's rights and ability to effectively protest authority. Although, with this power, Meier believes Americans need to have trust. 

Trust is not the easiest quality to teach people although it is necessary for societies to function properly. According to Meier, People tend to trust and feel more comfortable with others who are like-minded to them. This can potentially lead to good and bad outcomes. For example, finding a group of similar people as one's self can lead to a sense of belonging and comfort although, this could lead to negative thoughts or belief systems (i.e. racism). For this reason, education serves as a training-ground for young people to learn how to trust others who are not like themselves. Meier's arguments have sound judgment but I find she is just stating the obvious. 

Trust and democracy go hand-in-hand although I would argue our democracy is falling apart. With the current government administration and countless other examples, democracy seems to have lost all of its purpose. U.S. schools reflect this inconsistency and lack of trust, as Carter and Welner (2013) claim: "...our schools and students are steeped within the folds of formidable economic, political, cultural, and social contexts. We deceive ourselves if we believe that we can insulate schooling outcomes from poverty or wealth, from unemployment or wages, or from racism and discrimination" (p. 218). Children tend to be the burden of poor decisions made by adults. Consequently, the idea of trust is no longer accountable. In Carter and Welner's final chapter, "Building Opportunities to Achieve," they summarize the issues within the United State's education system and how they impact students' understanding of social institutions. An important aspect of the chapter that I thought was interesting was a short sentence of which the authors have discussed indirectly throughout the book: success. The authors argue: "...we must re-conceptualize how we define student achievement and success" (p. 222). In the U.S., success is often equated with money and this is reflected in countless schools that either attract wealthier or poorer students. To hold schools accountable and to measure their "success," the government has implemented standardized testing which determines the amount of funding the schools receive. This mentality leads to students feeling insignificant objects whose only goal is to graduate. Personally, I felt this way when I was in middle and high school. Instead of the school being genuinely concerned about my education and well-being, they seemed to be focused on getting me out of their hair. There is a lack of interest in the administration who sadly are over-worked and underpaid. I believe this is partially due to the overwhelming amount of students they have. 

The United States and world population is growing everyday and with that, tensions within education systems grow. I do not have much hope for education in the United States for this reason. The amount of people in the world is crushing resources and as long as teachers are being paid poor wages amongst countless other issues, will education injustice continue. Along with the rise of social media and technology, the amount of in-person connection between students is decreasing. Technology has made education more accessible in multiple aspects but students are less interested in communicating with people who are right in front of them. I believe this tendency of students will cause a decrease in trust amongst people and an increase in mental illnesses. As mentioned before, trust is a central pillar in democracy and trust is not evident in our society currently. 

Meier, D. (2002). Democracy and public education. In schools we trust: Creating communities               of learning in an era of testing and standardization. Boston, MA: Beacon.

       Carter, P.L., & Welner, K.G. (2013). Building opportunities to achieve.

'Precious Knowledge' Reading Response 9

The reading "White Supremacy, Neo/Colonial Education, and The struggle for Precious Knowledge," explains and challenges the concept of white supremacy in relation to Mexican American Studies. In MAS, students are taught about their culture, how to respect others, take pride in their heritage but above all, how to love. Having these awarenesses about oneself is crucial and a determining force for social justice. For that reason, MAS is precious while also a threat to certain lawmakers.
In MAS, teachers implement critically compassionate intellectualism (CCI) which is an approach to interacting with students: "CCI draws from the ethics of care in educational literature that proposes that caring in schools should be relational and reciprocal, and that love is a way of living with others in the world" (188). Throughout Precious Knowledge, the teachers and students reiterate the fact that MAS has helped them appreciate school more because they have a sense of community. This community is enhanced through love and support for one another. For this reason, the Mexican American Studies program is considered precious.

Not until a white-man comes into the scene do things seem to get misinterpreted. This reading brings some light to why people feel threatened by the MAS program. Tom Horne, John Huppenthal and other Republican legislators feel offended by the program because they believe the classes, "...indoctrinate students with anti-American seditious, collectivistic sentiments, and a race-conscious 'tribal' ideology" (183). The law-makers are not aware of what is being taught in the classes and do not want to believe it is about love and acceptance. They are hooked on the image of MAS for all they see is a group of minority students gathering and taking pride in their culture. I would argue the knowledge the students are learning is threatening to the white supremacists because they are afraid of change. As the reading put it, these law-makers are concerned with "normalizing, neutralizing, and naturalizing" people through education. I would also argue, these law-makers are more concerned with their own power and unconsciously (maybe consciously) they want people to remain uneducated because if they were critical of their environment, those students would make sure racists law-makers would not have power. Of course, this is just my own theory that is clearly biased. 

In Ayers' reading, "Teaching for Justice and Care," I think he just summarized everything we have theorized in class but in a must less complicated way. With that being said, I agree with him in his solutions to helping education. He claims educational resources must be distributed fairly and that people need to find a common cause between students and adults. As mentioned in Precious Knowledge students do not have issues with learning, they have issues with the schools or the system of schooling. What is the purpose of education? Students in high school and middle school may answer very differently compared to their parents or Ph.D. students. Ayers is arguing we need to find a common reason for why education is important. I completely agree with this because for a long period in my life, I only viewed education as mandatory and necessary to be "successful" in life. I chose my field of study because I know I will have a steady income of money when I graduate from graduate school. Right now, money and success seem to be driving, not only myself but, a majority of people in America. This mindset needs to change and to do so, we need to consider different ideas of what education is for. 

Ayers, W. (2004). Teaching for justice and care. Teaching the personal and political: Essays on hope and justice. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

García, J., Urrieta Jr., L., & Bybee, E.R. (2015). White supremacy, neo/colonial education, and the struggle for Precious Knowledge. In D.P. Liston & I.P. Renga (Eds.) Teaching, learning, and schooling in film: Reel education. New York, NY: Routledge.

'Precious Knowledge' Film Review

The 2011 documentary, Precious Knowledge details the legalities behind the once Mexican American/Raza studies classes in Tucson High School. Like most documentaries, Precious Knowledge is biased with the intention of discussing the improper treatment of Latino students. Although, I believe this movie was well portrayed and included multiple perspectives.

The ethnic studies program in the Tucson schools were first portrayed as beneficial and excellent education enhancers for struggling students. Taken from the perspective of three students and multiple teachers, the Raza studies program was instrumental in teaching students about respect, pride and love not only for their culture but for America and themselves. Not until an old white man came into the picture did things start to get messy. Precious Knowledge highlights the problems within America's modern education system in the sense of legal convolution about ethnicity.

Tom Horne (the documentary's portrayed antagonist) is the bane of the Raza studies program. I am not going to lie, Precious Knowledge did an excellent job in making me greatly dislike this man. He completely misunderstood the purpose of the program and twisted it into a problem about racism. On multiple accounts, he claimed the ethnic programs were increasing segregation and creating radical students who are anti-American. Although, these allegations were made based on bias and not first-hand experience. Throughout the film, we listen to students and Raza studies teachers lecture, and there is not one instance where they are instigating hatred for America. Rather, the program is enlightening students about the reality of ethnicity problems in America that have been and continue to be ubiquitous. With that being said, there is actually one comment Mr. Horne made about education that I find some truth in. He believed the purpose of the school system should be to transcend tribal tendencies and instead teach people about individuality. I agree with this to an extent for yes, grouping people based on ethnicity is wrong, although, understanding and having respect for multiple cultures is crucial to societal development. America is an individualistic society with a collection of cultures. We cannot and should not hinder a group of students from learning about their culture. If we do, then stop teaching about culture in general. 

                  

Precious Knowledge is the epitome of education and justice in film. If I were to rate it out of five stars, I would give it four and half. It summarizes yet challenges the problems within the American education system asking difficult questions like: what is the point of an education? What IS an education? How is education related to culture? Should schools teach about different cultures? What is American Culture? And so on. I think Precious Knowledge uncovered a hidden problem within education, that is: knowledge is power and power is dangerous. A reoccurring yet underlying argument made by Republican senators is that if everyone had equal treatment and equal opportunity, there would be no room for financial gain or superiority. Take for example, in the 1800's having a high school diploma was amazing and would be sustainable. Now, most professions require at least a college degree or even a Master's degree to be even considered. If everyone had equal opportunity to go to college, if college wasn't as expensive, eventually a Master's degree will be perceived as less prestigious, and so on. America is no longer the land of opportunity, it is the land of privilege. Precious Knowledge does not address this problem directly although, privilege is a reoccurring theme in education.

'Whale Rider' Reading Response 8

In Steven Weiland's chapter, "Whale Rider: Culture, Cosmopolitanism, and Unofficial Schooling," he analyses the ways in which the film has challenged traditional schooling methods. His term, "unofficial schooling," is essentially a form of teaching that is not supported by an institution or government. Koro, the desperate patriarch of the community, is searching for the next leader by organizing the sacred school. The sacred school is specifically for that Maori community and is not enforced by the New Zealand government. Therefore, the sacred school is a form of unofficial schooling. Unofficial schooling is also seen with Paikea and her family. Instead of teaching raw material like language or reading and writing, Paikea's family has taught her about culture and tradition. Koro is particularly stubborn in the "old ways" of Maori culture in the sense of maintaining a patriarchal leadership line. His stubbornness is ultimately his downfall although, he has indirectly taught his granddaughter the importance of family history while also striving for things that matter to her. To some extent, this is a paradox for despite Koro's endless disdain towards his granddaughter, Paikea is determined to reveal hr loyalty to him and her community. 

Another interesting paradox within Whale Rider is the tension between Koro and his son, Porourangi. Due to Porourangi's act of leaving his community behind and disinterest in completing the traditional waka boat, he seems to depict the inability to lead. Although, because of his travels and Koro's influence towards maintaining the "old ways" on him as a father, Porourangi is a perfect example of cosmopolitain leadership. He acts as a middle ground between the old and the new, between the familiar and the unfamiliar and ultimately is someone who can improve the community. 

In relation to paradoxes in my own education, there are endless examples. One of the most glaring and obvious one is how schooling is intended to help you in the adult world, but learning about taxes and money management is not enforced. How do you expect people to live on their own with a degree that does not help them with daily living skills? Another paradox that I am currently struggling with is the idea of work experience. I have been trying to get a job over the summer that relates to Psychology so it will give me experience before grad school. Although, I have been turned down countless times because "I don't have enough experience." How do graduate programs expect you to have prior experience but no one will hire you because you need experience? To be perfectly i am not sure if these are paradoxes but they are sources of tension in my life.   

Weiland, S. (2015). Whale Rider: Culture, cosmopolitanism, and unofficial schooling. In D.P. Liston & I.P. Renga (Eds.) Teaching, learning, and schooling in film: Reel education. New York, NY: Routledge.

'Whale Rider' Film Review

The 2002 film Whale Rider, directed by Niki Caro, is an extraordinary drama full of symbolism and culture. The movie is about a Maori community in New Zealand during a time of remorse and strife. We follow the story of Paikea (Keisha Castle-Hughes) who was tragically born a girl instead of a boy. The movie begins with the birth scene of Paikea and her twin brother. Sadly her brother died along with her mother during the child birth. Quickly the audience learns she is not wanted by her grandfather, Koro (Rawiri Paratene). Stricken with grief, Paikea's father, Porourangi (Cliff Curtis), leaves his daughter in the hands of her grandparents. Whale Rider is a tale not only about Maori culture but reveals the complicated dynamics between family members.  

      

Koro is the elder chief of the community and is desperate to find a new leader. As per tradition, only a first-born son can become a leader. Since Paikea's brother passed away and her father decided to not be apart of the community, Koro is determined to find a replacement. This Maori community is stubborn in maintaining the patriarchal society they are used to, particularly Koro. Despite this, Paikea (now about 10 years old) wants to be a part of her community in more ways than staying at home and cleaning. Throughout the movie, Paikea challenges her grandfather's traditions and opinions. This is illustrated when Koro decided to assemble all of the first-born sons in the community. His goal was to find the next leader by teaching and testing the young boys for courage, strength, and intelligence. At first, Paikea insists on being part of the class but Koro's anger takes charge. Instead, Paikea spends her time secretly watching and practicing the activities with her uncle. 
For the final test, Koro is looking for the spirit within the boys. By doing so, he throws his necklace of a whale tooth into the ocean. The next leader is the one who can retrieve the necklace. Sadly, non of the boys were able to recover the leader's necklace from the ocean. Secretly with her uncle, Paikea swims down and retrieves the necklace along with a lobster for dinner. Before Koro discovers this, he is devastated and prays to the ancient ones to help his community. Paikea recognizes her grandfather's pain and chants to the ancient ones as well. 
Then one day, multiple whales are found stranded on the beach. Immediately the community comes together to help the whales but their efforts go unnoticed. Koro believes it was Paikea's fault not only for the whale's beaching but for turmoil in the community. Determined, Paikea climbs on top of the whale, magically giving it the strength it needs and they ride off into the ocean together. While watching his granddaughter ride away on top of the whale, Koro is enlightened about his ignorance and finds his prayers have been met. 

Whale Rider is a rich educational experience full of culture and meaning. If I were to rate this movie out of five stars, I would give it four and a half. I greatly appreciated how the movie captured family dynamics while in a time of suffering. I thought the characters were well developed and the aims of the story were important to understand. I did not mention this in my summary of the movie but a theme throughout the movie that I thought was important, was understanding the significance of a strong community. Strength was highlighted in multiple aspects of the film. For example, when the boys were being taught how to perform a traditional Maori fighting dance-intimidation and physical strength are encouraged. Another time, Koro informed Paikea of the importance of a strong community through the metaphor of a rope. Most ropes are made of multiple individual ropes which come together to form a greater one. The breaking of the rope is a symbol for the community breaking. This symbol was evident when everyone came together to try and get the whales back into the ocean. Before Paikea was able to help, the community tried wrapping a rope around the tale of a bigger whale, sadly the rope broke, leaving anguish and turmoil amongst everyone. 

Whale Rider highlights the importance of maintaining strong relationships among communities. Although, for this to be done, people must be willing to accept new ways of living. Koro is the epitome of this lesson. His stubbornness came back to bite him in more than one way and when he was able to accept his granddaughter as the next leader, was able to be happier. It is important to have a balance between practicing tradition and understanding new possibilities. Remaining focused in the past does not help a community grow. 

'The History Boys' Reading Response 7

In this reading, "The History Boys and Cosmopolitanism," the authors challenge the traditional teaching methods and the idea of what an education is for. According to David Hansen, the man who developed the cosmopolitan theory, teachers need to embrace cultural differences and understand that a "real" education is one more about socialization. What is the purpose of an education then? Hansen's cosmopolitan idea is honestly quite confusing and not clear. The way I interpreted his theory is that teachers need to understand the difference between thoughts and behaviors for the chapter claims, "David Hansen defines orientation as 'the fusion of perception and action' to maintain a constructive relationship between what we do and what we believe" (134). There is a fine-line between thoughts and behavior-which define a person and how they impact others. The cosmopolitan orientation is the idea that teachers need to understand how their thoughts and behaviors impact their students. In terms of The History Boys, there are three perspectives of teaching of which the eight boys learn to grapple with. 

Of the three teachers (Hector, Mrs. Lintott, and Irwin), there are essentially two perspectives: cultural literacy and social justice orientations. Mrs. Lintott is a major supporter for cultural literacy and believes the most important aspect of education is understanding and memorizing facts. Hector and Irwin on the other hand, believe education is about understanding social justice and how students can complicate the world. One could argue though, that an education is the combination of these two perspectives, which is essentially the cosmopolitan orientation. This orientation is mostly about acceptance of difference perspectives. What I find to be interesting is how the chapter does not mention parental influence. Teachers are not the only people who contribute to educating people. In many people's lives, their parents' perspectives and desires take control of their own fates. If the authors of this novel and David Hansen want education to be viewed differently, not only should teachers be aware of this but parents as well. How can we change education when the parents of the children want control in what is being taught? Take for example, my experience with education. I would like to say I have had a range of teachers who are either focused on cultural literacy or social justice. Although, I did not have the option to form opinions on facts until I was older and was expected to complicate ideas. Most of my education was centered around cultural literacy where I was expected to memorize facts. Despite this, my parents were interested in what I was learning and projected their opinions onto me. Therefore, I view certain things in life differently and potentially negatively compared to others. For example, my father is extremely liberal and does not have any patience for people who are either republican or religious or both. Consequently, I view people similarly and my outlook on certain things is negative. I formed these opinions before I was taught in school how to have constructive and open-minded thoughts. To change people's perspectives on the purpose of education, there needs to be and understanding parents contribute as well. 


Liston, D.P., & Renga, I.P. (2015). The History Boys and cosmopolitanism. In D.P. Liston & I.P. Renga (Eds.) Teaching, learning, and schooling in film: Reel education. New York, NY: Routledge.

'The History Boys' Film Review

The History Boys (2006) is an interesting yet at the same time a disappointing movie. The movie takes place in Yorkshire, England, 1983 at Cutler's Grammar School. The movie follows the senior year of eight boys who are intellectually gifted and preparing to apply to either Cambridge or Oxford. In the process of preparation, they are helped by multiple teachers and the headmaster, who are determined to get them into the universities. Despite the extra help, the boys question authority and argue about the purpose of their education.

To be perfectly honest though, I cannot tell you the aims of this movie with confidence. The movie was so scattered in the plot and nearly all of the conversations were random with no resolution. Was the movie about the boys getting into college or was the movie about gay men? I cannot tell you. I have too many questions for this movie and do not understand what the writers were trying to convey to the audience. The only message that I have taken from this movie is that to get into prestigious schools, one cannot be dull. The headmaster hired another teacher, Mr. Irwin (Stephen Campbell Moore), specifically to help the boys have more than general knowledge but to give them "polish or an edge." How does this challenge the education system? I would think nearly everyone knows that to get into a prestigious school, one has to be not only be extremely smart but also an extraordinarily talented person. Also, why do these boys get special attention? What happened to the other students in the school? Are there only eight boys in Cutler's Grammar School? If anything, this movie highlights how the education system does not care about students who do not show intellectual potential. 

Despite these claims being made, they were more difficult to abstract from the movie than other movies. As I mentioned, I could not tell if The History Boys was about eight boys and their journey to get into college or about gay men. Sexuality was a common theme that seemed to have no relevance to the purpose of the movie. One of the teachers, Mr. Hector (Richard Griffiths) was a homosexual and mistakenly was caught touching one of the boys on his motorcycle. The boys were more than aware of his sexual orientation for some of them (Posner, Dakin, and Mr. Irwin) were also homosexual. When Mr. Hector was caught touching one of the boys while giving him a ride home, they were more upset about the potential of him getting fired than anything else. Why aren't there more people upset about Mr. Hector touching underaged boys? The boys clearly appreciate him as their general studies professor but why? The movie does not give any history or context about who the teachers are nor any character in general. All you know about the boys is that they have "A-Level Results," a couple are gay and some are affiliated with certain religions. Despite the movie titled, The History Boys, the movie does not give any history about these boys. Who are they? Why should the audience care about them?

If you cannot tell already, I do not like this movie. This has been one of the few movies were I cannot abstract the aims of the writers. I was left with too many questions and felt as though there was nothing to truly ponder about. If I were to rate this movie out of five stars I would give it two. There was no tension, no major climax nor reason to be interested in the characters. The only reason I gave it the two stars was because I thought the writing was clever and funny at times. Although, there was no clear purpose.