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.

"Waiting for Superman" and "TEACH" Reading Response 6

In the documentaries, Waiting for Superman and TEACH, Davis Guggenheim paints teachers in two very different lights. In Waiting for Superman, Guggenheim does not claim teachers are heroes and instead claims teachers are the main reason for America's poor education system. Therefore, he suggests that a teacher can only be declared a hero unless they work extremely hard at their job and produce good results. Meanwhile, in TEACH, Guggenheim describes five teachers just as that- hard working individuals who go above-and-beyond what their jobs seem to require. In James Trier's (2015) article, "The Dialectical Progression: From The First Year and Waiting for “Superman” to TEACH," he too adds to Guggenheim's claim about teachers as heroes;

          ...teachers are not doing enough unless they are devoting all of their time outside 

           of school planning lessons and units and doing some kins of rigorous evaluation 

           of student work; unless all of their students succeed academically; unless 

           entire groups of students do well on standardized tests; unless one has contacted 

           all the students' parents...

What makes a teacher a good teacher then? Who should be the one to evaluate them? Guggenheim leaves this up to his audience while also advocating that teachers are needed. Particularly in TEACH, Guggenheim is advocating for people to become teachers more so than in Waiting for Superman. By following five teachers, and revealing the reasons why it is rewarding for them is crucial for people who are interested in teaching. Even though the profession may be difficult and time consuming, there are instances that can be rewarding. 

In Waiting for Superman, Guggenheim complicates the hero role for teachers and actually suggests teachers are a major contributing factor of the "failed" American education system. For he claims teacher unions and tenure are the reasons for education reform to not occur. I do not agree with his argument completely for I believe there are multiple aspects other than poor teachers that contribute to poor education. One of the major criticisms I have for the movie is that it does not talk about the students who genuinely do not care about school or how parents contribute to the system. 

In Barnett Berry's article, "Good Schools and Teachers for All Students: Dispelling Myths, Facing Evidence, and Pursuing the Right Strategies," he further complicates Waiting for Superman in the sense that he proposes similar but different ideas to how to "fix" the educational system. One of the suggestions detailed how teachers should have more experience until they are released independently into the work-force. I highly agree with this statement for uneducated teachers simply does not make sense. Although, he seems to suggest that teachers should go through a much more intense evaluation system until they can be certified to independently teach. I find this to be interesting because with my experience in the work-force, you need experience to get experience. How does Berry expect teachers to receive excellent training from amazing teachers if they do not qualify? Most of the time, people are given more credibility as the amount of schooling they have received has gone up in which case they might have a higher chance at getting better training. Although, sitting in classrooms is not the same as interacting with people. Particularly in the teaching profession, being taught how to teach does not mean sitting in a classroom but as Berry claims, teachers need experience to improve. So what can be done? 

Trier, J. (2015). The dialectical progression: From The First Year and Waiting for “Superman” to TEACH. In D.P. Liston & I.P. Renga (Eds.) Teaching, learning, and schooling in film: Reel education. New York, NY: Routledge.

Berry, B. (2013). Good schools and teachers for all students: Dispelling myths, facing evidence, and pursuing the right strategies. In P.L. Carter & K.G. Welner (Eds.) Closing the opportunity gap (pp. 181-192). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

"Waiting for Superman" and "TEACH" Film Reviews

These two documentaries are both directed by Davis Guggenheim and both highlight the problems within the American education system. Waiting for Superman is an amazing movie that is thought-provoking and interesting. While TEACH is much shorter (about 30mins), Guggenheim was able to convey four interesting opinions from teachers. These movies not only highlight the problems within the American education system, they also discuss how complicated education is. I would argue, these movies are not advocating for education, instead they are advocating for change. 

          

In Waiting for Superman, Guggenheim follows the story of five students ranging from elementary school to middle school. Although, the movie is spent mostly talking about the adult politics that secretly determine the lives of these innocent children. At some point, both Waiting for Superman and TEACH underline how education is NOT about the students but rather the adults. This is a sad and harsh reality that is not fair for people who all deserve the best education. Waiting for Superman discusses this issue thoroughly. They movie discussed bad teachers, or teachers who were not producing good results for their students. Most would think, well why not just fire them? One of the many problems with that though, is due to tenure. Tenure is a legal contract that is supposed to protect teachers who may not deserve to be fired. Although, the movie argued that tenure is given out after a short period of time (two years) to unworthy teachers who then decide to no longer do their job- but since they have tenure, it is much harder for them to get fired. Consequently, schools preform the "lemon dance." The lemon dance is essentially when schools hand-off under-preforming teachers to other schools. Although, if this continues with countless other schools, eventually one school becomes a haven of bad teachers- which then bad students are sent to and the problem continues.

Tenure is not the only source of problems within the education system. Waiting for Superman also discussed how teacher unions have a negative impact on students. Teacher unions were designed to also protect teachers and essentially act as an insurance policy although, since the teachers know that they have a legal contract that is fully supported by the teachers’ unions, they tend to slack off in their instruction and effort that they give their students. What happens is that teachers are unable to be fired by the school board. In the film, we see that one of the teachers is relaxing in his chair reading a newspaper article while students in the back are gambling. The director also uses clips from previous research where a student puts a camera in his backpack and video tapes the class as it is in motion. By using this form of evidence, Guggenheim is making the statement that teacher union contracts and teacher tenures produce lazy, uncaring, and clueless teachers.

Not all teachers who are part of union contracts or have tenure are lazy or uncaring. In TEACH, Guggenheim follows the teaching lives of four adults: Maurice, Geneviève, Andrew and George. Each of these teachers do not have it easy with their job but each of them claim teaching is worth it. These four teachers work hard and even spend their own money, time and effort outside of class to make sure their students are developing. For example, Maurice spends his time trying to connect with an inconsistent speech therapist who is not helping and instead, he decides to tutor his struggling student outside of class. Andrew spends his time contacting social workers for his students who have been the victim of domestic violence and George organized students to talk to a board so their funding wouldn't get withdrawn. Even though TEACH is short, Guggenheim was able to capture complicated aspects of the education system. 


Personally, I greatly appreciated these two documentaries. Together, I would give them 4.75 stars out of 5. As I mentioned, they gave insight into the complicated problem of the American education system. They were thought-provoking and had excellent examples with detailed explanations. I would not give it 5/5 because I thought Waiting for Superman did not look at how the education system is a combination of not only the politics between teachers and government, but also parents. From the five families the movie followed, each were of good students who cared about their education and had parents who cared for them too. That is not always true of families. I would have liked to movie to have gotten insight from families who do not care about education because Waiting for Superman, at least for me, pointed too much blame at the teachers. 

'The Giver' Reading Response 5

After reading these two articles, I have been enlightened to view student-teacher relationships in a different light. Based on Carl Jung's theory about archetypes, these readings describe and analyze three of the many archetypes: hero, trickster, and sage. In the hero narrative, a person, typically younger, endures trials and tribulations which ultimately help all of society. The trickster's narrative is more simple and tends to be perceived as the villain. The trickster's story typically begins with them feeling trapped and then rebelling towards which they may or may not learn anything about themselves. The sage, on the other hand, is a mysterious and yet complicated archetype. The sage is described to typically be physically different, isolated from society, and yet compose "dangerous knowledge" or wisdom. These three archetypes have made me realize how I view certain teachers and even students. In my own experiences, I have been taught by a sage and also a trickster but I have never been taught by a "hero." I do not expect my teacher to be a hero because personally, I do not and have not known my teacher's personal lives enough to declare them as heroes. The heroic journey has been studied and described for hundreds of years and is depicted as having a clear outline. For a teacher to be a hero, not only do their significant others or coworkers have to know about their personal lives, students do too. In most, school settings, the student-teacher relationship is bounded by specific social guidelines and expectations (i.e. no touching or outside relationships). Although, if one understands a teacher's personal life, describing them as a hero can be more appropriate. In the reading, "Exploring the Heroic Teacher Narrative...", the authors argue that teachers can do heroic actions for their students but do all teachers have to as well? In the movie, Freedom Writers, Erin Gruwell decides to help her students by buying new books for them amongst other activities, but in doing so, she needs to get two other jobs outside of being a full-time teacher. Her bravery and willingness to give up her freedom for her students is heroic, although, is it sustainable? Not all teachers are as invested in their students' learning and well-being. With that in mind, the sage is an archetype that is not always the constant hero in people's lives.

The sage archetype has a more flexible role in students' lives. As depicted in countless movies and novels, the sage is an aloof character that does not seem to be interested in all students' lives but instead is focused on one or a few. In The Giver, Harry Potter, and The Hunger Games, the sage characters (The Giver, Professor Dumbledore, and Haymitch Abernathy respectively) all take an interest in a specific character (which is often the hero). Sages act more as mentors in the sense that they help guide people on their own journeys. They do not necessarily care about the life choices of their mentees but rather the overall outcome of which they know their mentees will accomplish.

In terms of applying the sage archetype to teachers, most teachers do not have the time nor are allowed to focus on one student. Although, I wouldn't mind having someone their dedicated to helping me. If I were to be Jonas in The Giver, I would be excited to have someone to experience unfamiliar territory with and I would appreciate their perspectives. Despite this, I am not sure if I would like a student-teacher relationship that is portrayed in The Giver. Most relationships in life are not like Jonas' and the Giver's, for parents often fill in the role of caring for their children the most. Teachers are generally distant from all of their students and do not act as a mentor like the sage archetype. I would appreciate a teacher who had the time to focus on my personal well-being but in the classrooms that we are in today, that is nearly impossible especially when classroom sizes are growing. As mentioned in the reading, "Wisdom, Mystery, and Dangerous Knowledge...", the problem with the sage character is that it insinuates the idea that only certain people are worthy of the sage's attention. In current school settings, I have witnessed teachers being forced to focus on certain students. These students are often the trouble-makers or disrupt the class to the point where the teacher needs to intervene- at least this is what I have experienced. Who is to argue which student is "worthy" enough of the teacher's attention then- if there are students who are more respectful compared to others? In nearly all sage and prodigy relationships, the prodigy already has the ability to express respect, therefore, comparing the sage to teachers is not always adequate. 

Renga, I.P. (2015). Exploring the heroic teacher narrative with help from the trickster. In D.P. Liston & I.P. Renga (Eds.) Teaching, learning, and schooling in film: Reel education. New York, NY: Routledge.

Renga, I.P., & Lewis, M.A. (2018). Wisdom, mystery, and dangerous knowledge: Exploring depictions of the archetypal sage in young adult literature.Study and Scrutiny: Research on Young Adult Literature, 3(1), 25-50. DOI: 10.15763/issn.2376-5275.2018.3.1.25-50

'The Giver' Film Review

The Giver contains big-name actors and actresses along with a heart warming story. Based on the children's novel by Lois Lowry, the movie visualizes the futuristic and utopian society of a white-dominated "community." The story takes place after "The Ruin" in which it is assumed caused chaos and immediate need for a shift in social norms. In this community, there are endless amounts of rules towards which the population must follow. With that, there are no memories of the past nor The Ruin and there are no emotions. Jonas, is a young man who becomes the next "receiver of memory" towards which his job is to advise the government. The Giver explores what it means to be in a "perfect" society and the consequences of not having emotion.

              

In the beginning of the movie, we are introduced to the society of which the precise rules are laid-out to the audience, some of which include: proper usage of language, take the daily medication, always return to one's dwelling before curfew, and never lie. Soon, it is clear the medication alters reality for it does not allow people to see color nor experience any emotion. Along with the proper usage of language and the curfew, the society has been carefully organized and designed around control.

At a certain age, young people go through the "ceremony of commencement" towards which they are assigned to jobs the "elders" have carefully chosen for them. Meryl Streep's character is the Chief Elder and is the leader of the community. She demands respect and also commands the audience's attention. She is compliant with the rules of the community and is unaccepting of differences or unexpected behavior. Jonas (Brenton Thwaites) is selected to be the next receiver of memory and consequently, the next receiver of emotions.

After a few trainings with "the giver" (Jeff Bridges), Jonas realizes there is more to life than the controlled environment he and his community blindly lives in. He experiences all of the emotions the Chief Elders have been trying to suppress for the hopes of creating a society without pain, racism, hatred, sexism, and murder. Jonas' tolerance of this concept was rejected when he found out what it meant for the elderly people and sickly babies to be "released." Instead of calling it murder, they changed the meaning to "release to elsewhere." People are unaware of the true meaning of being released and are convinced being released is a good thing. Although, when Jonas discovers murder and death, he is outraged by the hypocrisy and the brainwashing him and his loved ones are experiencing. In the effort to enlighten his community, he endures a difficult adventure towards which he crosses the "boundary of memories." Once the boundary was crossed, the entire community experienced the emotions that were stollen from them.

The Giver is a heart-warming story and highlights the problems with a controlling society meant to be "perfect." The movie explores the idea of a society without emotion and yet remains intact and functional. The movie also argues that emotions are a fundamental human right and should not be undermined or controlled. And even to a certain extent, the movie argues pessimism is more dangerous than pain. The Chief Elder is an example of this idea for she believes that emotions are the reason for pain. She is not wrong, but her inability to grow and learn from bad experiences does not help the community either. The Giver underlines the idea that for a society to be "perfect," people must have the desire and understanding of good experiences and therefore, have an optimistic mindset. If I were to rate this movie, I would give it three out of five stars. I enjoyed the provocative story and appreciated the cinematography but there were too many plot holes of the movie. I do not mind the "hollywood" effect is has for I believe if the movie was taken more seriously, it would be confusing and not as heart-warming. Although, I had a lot of questions that were not addressed. For example, how is it scientifically possible for people to "transfer" memories through the touch of hands? How do words come to Jonas if he was never taught them? If they didn't want bad emotions, couldn't the society have taught better coping mechanisms instead? I have a lot of questions for how certain aspects of the movie worked. It leaves me to wonder if modern society would benefit from more "sameness" or not. 

'Freedom Writers' Film Review

Based on the true story and the 1999 novel The Freedom Writer's Diary, the movie Freedom Writers depicts the story of Woodrow Wilson High School "at-risk" students and their influential teacher, Erin Gruwell (Hilary Swank). 
The story is predictable and yet heart-warming for Mrs. Gruwell is a dedicated new English teacher who helps initiate inspiration in her diverse classroom. She is naïve about her students and has high expectations for them but in the process of becoming a better teacher, her students learn to appreciate her along with them selves. Freedom Writers is a deeply earnest film that challenges the United States education system and yet follows a predictable and familiar storyline. 

Tensions are high in the early 1990's of Long Beach, California for the movie takes place in a gang- violent ridden environment. The story begins with the background of the young Eva Benitez (April Lee Hernández) when she was- you could say- uncorrupted. Eva witnessed her neighbor's drive-by-murder which her father is then falsely accused and convicted of. The audience is therefore, introduced to the difficult and anxious lives the students have and are experiencing. Erin Gruwell shortly-there-after comes into the scene. She is depicted as energetic and naïve about her students and unaware that wearing pearls to class may not be the greatest idea. Despite this, she is head-strong and wanting to teach the 'at-risk' students she was assigned to. Woodrow Wilson High School was described as once being an "A-school" in which the students were high achievers but after "voluntary integration," students became "at-risk." On her first day, tensions in the classroom grew quickly and regardless of her optimistic expectations, the students break-out into a fight which needed assistance. To further set the tone of the movie, we continue to follow Eva's story but in high school. She has pessimistic and stubborn opinions about people, she claims she hates white people (for falsely convicting her father), and that race is the only thing that matters. She describes school "...like a city and cities are like a prison." She acknowledges the racial tensions in her school for different races group together with their "own kind." Erin Gruwell is therefore forced to also acknowledge the racial tension in her classroom. 

Through multiple exercises, Mrs. Gruwell breaks the racial tensions by having her students understand and appreciate each other's and other's problems. She has them participate in "The Line Game" in which the students step-up to a line in response to a yes or no question. Erin asks them questions on the lines of their experiences with gang-violence. The exercise is emotional and eye-opening for her students not only do they admit their difficulties but they see how nearly everyone else is experiencing similar problems. She then has them write in a journal everyday about anything they want in the hopes that writing about their lives will free them. In another influential exercise, this one more unexpected, Erin teaches her students about the Holocaust. After an offensive and racist note was passed around the class of an African-American student, Mrs. Gruwell compares their actions to that of Nazi Germany and the propagandistic posters of Jewish people. The heated and emotional conversation about the Holocaust further led the plot of the movie in which the students read The Diary of a Young Girl by Anne Frank and even met Hermine "Miep" Gies (owner of the attic in which Anne Frank and her family stayed). The students' experiences with learning and listening about the Holocaust, not only influenced better behavior but taught the students that their lives are not predetermined based on their ethnicity. For as Hermine Gies described it, "... [you] can turn on a small light in a dark room."

 

Freedom Writers is an emotionally raw story which concentrates on the problems in school systems and how ethnicity impacts the opportunity gap. Despite the overall fantastic content and intentions, I thought the film was predictable and oddly familiar. I was not surprised Hilary Swank's character become the heroic figure of the movie, that is, her experiences with her students follow the typical heroic-path. In most story that depict heroes, we are introduced to a character that is naïve and yet optimistic. The hero's strength is tested through multiple trials and tribulations in which their ego is impacted and their motivation decreases. Although, they rise from their difficulties and become a stronger and better hero. The story of Erin Gruwell follows this pattern with of course, a large dose of Hollywood effect. There were multiple aspects of the film that seemed fake or over-exaggerated. Particularly the claim that 100% of the students graduated and the scenes that were emotionally charged. Personally, I believe my bias about Hilary Swank has impacted my opinion of the movie for I generally view her as a less-genuine actress. Despite this, I thought she did a great job depicting a privileged and unexperienced teacher. The movie also tells the familiar story of how a teacher gains the respect of her students through eye-opening lessons. The movie is extremely similar to Dangerous Minds and has aspects of Monsieur Lazhar the only difference is a deeper understanding of the students' lives. Although, there was a lack of information on parental involvement. The school board in the movie along with a few teachers, believed the problem was the students' lack of interest and respect for education but the movie does not address parents as much as they should have. They covered a few students' lives with their parents but the movie did not mention how parents contribute to the problems in the school system. As mentioned in previous blog posts, the complex problem of the poor education system in the United States is not only the way in which the system is designed but also the students and parental involvement. Freedom Writers mostly addresses  'at-risk' students and claims they are the main source of educational distress. Overall, the movie was very interesting and as I mentioned, depicts emotional and controversial topics about the education system. If I were to rate this movie out of five stars, I would give it a three and a half. 

"The Class" Reading Response 4

What does it mean to be 'civil?' How does civility impact cultural differences in education and even the opportunity gap? These controversial and interesting topics were explored in two readings: "Creating Classroom Civility" and "Student and School Cultures and the Opportunity Gap." In the first reading, civility is understood to be a factor of culture which operates in "the interest of privilege and power" (164). In the second reading, the opportunity gap is explained through the misunderstanding of cultural differences in school environments. After watching The Class, these readings give insight of why students and teachers act uncivil towards each other and ultimately the cause of an increasing opportunity gap. 

In Megan Laverty's discussion, "Creating Classroom Civility," she addresses the concept that schools are places where civility is taught; "Schools are responsible for shaping society's immature members" (164). So what does it mean to be 'civil?' Well, arguably civility depends on the cultural context but in general civility is a socially accepted way of interaction that is appropriate and sincere. Laverty discusses sincerity as well for she claims civility eliminates the sincere expression of unpopular beliefs. This made me question the relationship between civility and sincerity. In terms of my own experience, sincerity is a cultural virtue that is encouraged. Although, what if someone is sincere about their beliefs but is acting uncivil? Where is the line between being sincere and civil? Civility and sincerity are reflections of societal norms and impact education standards. Since schools are essentially institutions of teaching civility and sincerity, how does one address inappropriate/unwanted behavior in classrooms? The Class and Laverty beat-around-the-bush with the answer but never address it. Punishment is a common resolution in which teachers and schools address uncivil actions but as seen in The Class, punishment has little to no beneficial impact on the students. Rather, positive reinforcement is the most successful and accepting of ways in which to teach people. Positive reinforcement strengthens a behavior by providing a consequence an individual finds rewarding. For example, if your teacher gives you a high-five or positive acknowledgement each time you complete your homework (i.e., a reward) you will be more likely to repeat this behavior in the future, thus strengthening the behavior of completing your homework. With positive reinforcement, parents or teachers or whoever is trying to teach someone, will encourage good behavior and in tern, decrease unwanted behavior. Along these lines, positive reinforcement encourages the idea that everyone is worthy no matter the cultural background. 

Here is a short video about B.F. Skinner's theory of reinforcement

In Prudence Carter's reading, "Student and School Cultures and the Opportunity Gap," he addresses how the opportunity gap is strengthened though the lack of acculturation and understanding of different ethnicities for he claims; "...cultural inequality, both in wider society and within schools, exacerbate that gap" (145). Carter mentions the concept of cultural mismatching, that is, the mismatching of socio economic status and education levels of teachers and students. In The Class, Mr. Marin is a caucasian male who clearly has more education level than his students for his teaching style is described as "bourgeois" and not relevant to the way students actually speak. Meanwhile, his students come from a diverse ethnic background and are struggling to stay in school and receive good grades. According to Carter, this is due to the lack of understanding each other's cultural backgrounds. This lack of understanding is reinforced in curriculum. Particularly in U.S. schools, the teachings of other cultures and ethnicities are limited and often only discussed during certain times of the year. Along with that, when different cultures are rarely taught there is an underlying understanding that those cultures are not valued nor worthy enough compared to "white" culture; "...incongruence Anglo-American cultural purview, tis understood by many of these children as stifling, dehumanizing, degrading, and antagonistic" (151). The lack of exclusivity in school curriculum reinforces the idea that children from minority ethnic backgrounds are not worthy and therefore, their lack of interest and effort in school settings increase. 

What does it mean to be 'civil' then? Civility is related to understanding different cultural backgrounds and the levels of respect that are present in each. With that, civility is a matter of sincerity and no matter who you are, you are subjected to uncivil and insincere actions. The only way to teach civility is through positive reinforcement of what ever is deemed socially appropriate.  

Laverty, M.J. (2015). Creating classroom civility. In D.P. Liston & I.P. Renga (Eds.) Teaching, learning, and schooling in film: Reel education (pp. 130-144). New York, NY: Routledge.

Carter, P.L. (2013). Student and school cultures and the opportunity gap: Paying attention to academic engagement and achievement. In P.L. Carter & K.G. Welner (Eds.) Closing the opportunity gap (pp. 143-155). Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

'The Class' Film Review

Holy cow. There is a lot going on in the 2008 French film The Class. I honestly do not know where to begin. Before watching this movie, I expected it to be similar to the previous movies we watched. That is, I pictured the movie to be centered around the teacher and how he helps his students in a heroic way. The Class was completely opposite. Instead of helping the students grow, the French teacher, Francois Marin (played by Francois Begaudeau), arguably did not even help his students and even potentially even hindered their growth. The Class is an interesting film that demands attention and represents the non-fairy tale movies about teaching.

 

The film begins with the teachers introducing themselves before the start of the school year. The teachers are fresh-faced and ready to take on challenges. Although, immediately the experienced teachers make sure the new teachers know which students are "nice" or "not nice." Soon after, the movie pans to Mr. Marin's class in which most of the movie takes place. Within the first day, it becomes clear he is going to have a difficult time with his students. They challenge him on nearly everything he says. For example, they challenge him for comparing a 55 min class to an hour, his word choices during exercises, and the usage of the imperfect verb tense. The students even question his sexuality at one point which not only was inappropriate but out of context. Either way, tensions steadily grew in the movie as the students continuously challenged Mr. Marin's authority. 

Mr. Marin has interesting encounters with multiple students. The movie is set in a Parisian inner-city high school therefore his class is extremely diverse as there are students from China and Mali. The main project that Mr. Marin had his students complete was a self-portrait. This project though, was initiated after they read The Diary of a Young Girl by Anne Frank. Mr. Marin asked one of his students, Knoumba (Rachel Requlier), to read a section of the autobiography out-loud but instead she refused simply because she didn't want to and believed he was picking on her. Mr. Marin was taken back by her reaction and calls her "insolent" after a heated argument. At the end of the class, he demanded an apology from her which ended up not being sincere. Mr. Marin then kicked his chair in frustration. From this encounter, Mr. Marin asks his class to write a self-portrait describing who they are but of course it was retracted from the class who claimed their lives were not exciting like Anne Frank's.

Continuously throughout the film, tensions grew as teachers cried out of frustration and meetings about punishment were highlighted. The climax of the movie began when the boys started an argument about soccer teams during Mr. Marin's class. Souleymane (Frank Keita) ended up flipping-off one of his classmates which led to a visit to the principal's office. The teachers then conducted a meeting questioning how to punish inappropriate behavior and if punishment is even a good tactic. The meeting includes two students who represent the student perspective but instead of being respectful they were giggling and interrupting the conversation. Despite this, the student representatives told their classmates that Mr. Marin thought lowly of them, particularly Souleymane. This consequently created drama in the class. Out of frustration, Mr. Marin claimed the student representatives were "skanks." In response, Souleymane did not agree with his accusation and one thing led to the next, there was physical fighting and even a bloody eyebrow. Consequently, Souleymane was expelled from the school. 

Like I mentioned before, The Class is a rich and provocative movie with a lot of controversial topics mentioned. Through Souleymane and Mr. Marin's interactions, the movie made me question teacher's authority. That is, the students have a very good point about how they don't have to do anything he has to say, not really. The movie also highlighted the concept of respect. Khoumba was a major proponent in expressing mutual respect between teacher and students after her stressful interaction with Mr. Marin. Throughout the movie, Mr. Marin was desperate for respect but so were his students. Unlike previous movies watched, the mutual respect was never accomplished. Instead, further turmoil. Another important questioned raised by The Class was what are the proper ways to punish bad-behaving students? Is punishment really the answer? During multiple teacher meetings, nearly all the teachers argued the ways in which they should address their disrespectful students but never settled on an answer. In the situations they were in, I would understand their frustrations and desire to punish their students but clearly that does not help any situation. In developmental psychology, it has come to be almost common knowledge that punishment and negative reinforcement does not help a child improve. Rather, positive reinforcement is the most influential technique towards teaching children to do good things. During some of the teacher meetings, positive reinforcement was mentioned but overlooked because other teachers didn't agree with it. The Class was consequently a different and provocative film. Despite this, I believe the problems Mr. Marin was facing are very relatable and realistic. If I had to rate this film out of five stars, I would give it four stars. I appreciated how it didn't tell a general heroic story and didn't have a sappy ending. The movie also was encouraged viewers to question authority while also asking what it means to be respectful. The only aspect of the movie which I would have liked more explanation about was the scene in which a student calls his classmates shameful. I was expecting there to be a greater upset amongst his piers but instead the movie focused on respect- which is also a great topic. Either way, I enjoyed this film and would recommend others to watch it.