Three ways to ensure a french revolution lesson is accessible to non-english native speakers.
0 Comments
After watching the video interview regarding the role social media now plays in the news sector and experiencing the intense emotions on campus following the election results from November 8th, 2016 I am once again reminded to think critically about the relationship my words have with my (re)actions. Though I may be young, I have thought quite a bit about how the world chooses to or not to put their money where their mouth is as the saying goes. Of my peers and those I engage with in my day to day life, very few of them seem to embody this "be the change" Ghandi speaks of. But I also must be careful not to distance myself too far because I too, fall short.
So, when reflecting about why I fall short in following up with my declarations, I come across a realization of sorts: when I choose to act on the words that I speak it is for two reasons: 1. I feel empowered to do so by my circumstance, my education, or my community or 2. I feel a responsibility to protect, educate, or advocate despite foreboding repercussions. I have come to recognize my privilege in that I have felt both of these circumstances but I realize, understand, and empathize how people choose inactions in their absence. The example of Facebook in light of this election season highlights this exceptionally. In a bubble where all that you see is what you yourself agree with what you see, why would you feel any sort of responsibility to advocate or educate further? Or, adversely if you are bombarded with ideas contrary to yours, in addition to assumptions, threats, and insults being thrown at folks who identify similarly to you, then the fear of those repercussions may be too great to speak out. One of the most beautiful ideas of the world wide web was that it was a place for all to speak their mind, practice their liberties, engage with others different from themselves, and create unity over things they are passionate about. I fear that is not the reality. Confirmation bias, cyber trolls, propaganda, and outright misinformation run rampant. People are ostracised and slandered for differing opinions. There is nothing empowering about this culture we've created. So what can be done to change it? Should something be done? As a person who firmly believes in the power of education, I think the key is to be conscious. Be conscious of what our actions and inactions say about who we are and what we stand for. Be conscious of the humans sitting behind the usernames scrolling on your screen. Be conscious of the complexity of social, political, economical, and ecological issues. Be conscious of what you are supporting with your likes, your clicks, your purchases, and your mentions. Summatively, be conscious of the POWER you have with your word; to be kind, to be empathetic, to be interested, to be supportive - or to not be any of these. Yes, we live in a society governed by rules, norms, constructs, and expectations that often feel big and out of our control. We must remember that we ARE the society in which we live, and in that we have the power to change it, but in order to do so, we must be conscious. In consciousness is power. With power comes responsibility. And responsibility, change. This New Yorker article shed light on a horribly misunderstood population of the world. I really enjoyed how it explained the lens in which those on the spectrum see the world. In the diagnosis' infancy, Autism was thought to be a mask of intelligent people as opposed to an indicator of mental inability as previously thought. Then for years and years, scientists and doctors worked to find a "cure". Only recently are we engaging in the proposition that maybe it isn't a problem to be solved but more a gift to be treasured.
One of the big arguments by Foucault is the idea of over "medicalization" in our society and the dangers of powerful pharmaceutical companies for our students. Although I have isolated personal experience with this power in specific context, however I have seen and felt this power they speak of. The news talks of ADD epidemics, and there are more and more people each year it seems identifying or being diagnosed and medicating for a mental illness. This article talks of a similar conclusion in the Autism spectrum. These rising numbers beg to question of addiction, dependence, causes and cures. The thing is, I'm not quite sure these are the things we need to be focusing on. Often, it seems the individual is lost in these conversations. For those students whose diagnosis and medication allow for a complete paradigm shift and a better quality of life for THEM, then for that I advocate. For those who are forced diagnosis and medication because that's what the teacher, doctor, parent, or otherwise determines is best for them, than that is where the issue arises. We should be creating space for the differently abled to not just survive, but to thrive as individuals. I feel we should almost go as far to say that we should take note from these differently abled and what the inability to conform allows them to accomplish. I believe this is especially true for teachers. No, it may not be easy or convenient to create an atmosphere of learning for such a variety of learners, but isn't that the beauty of humanity; individuality and differentiation in thought, action, and emotion. We are a beautiful species that thrives because of our ability to see differently, school should be a place to encourage such exploration and discovery, not squelch in in the name of normal or standard. I do realize though the difficult place this puts teachers, in balancing both non-partican teaching and child advocacy. But here is how I have painted the line for myself: We are here to advocate for the opportunity to learn and discover the world so that they may one day go out into it and make it better. This means the content in which we teach should be diverse yet un-biased whereas the true advocacy comes in ensuring our students are given access to this information in the way that they need. In short, regardless of where the world of science has been in regards to cognitive and behavioral differences, we are not at a place where we recognize the gift of individuality regardless of the different wrappings and as teachers it should be our goal to work WITH our students to discover what is needed to reveal that gift to the world. That I feel is our responsibility as teachers.
b. Explain the distortion that you see AND explain WHY the distortion exists according to the questions on the top of p. 23 in Segall’s piece "Maps As Stories About The World. c. Professional Opinion Q: of the different maps posted on the class page, which one do you find most accurate and why? (1 paragraph) After reading an excerpt of history written by Howard Zinn and listening to a lecture by Eve Tuck, both of which focus on telling the marginalized stories in history. In reflection of this style of teaching history in regards to my own teaching of history this semester. My focus while teaching worked hard to embody empathy to understand unheard voices in the rest of the lessons. After examining how these two historians did this, I saw some things that resonated with me.
Much of what I did was still focused on what we, as people at this time assumed these people lived with. We had a small opportunity to research, but with no structure. If I were to do the lesson over again, I would use historical documents from these different populations to give them voices. I would have to be careful in how I choose these documents because as Tuck emphasized, our entire historical context is on of colonial settlers. So, to go along with the primary sources would select we would have an intense, in-depth sourcing, tone, and purpose educating in regards to historical documents. I also think that in a unit such as this it could be impactful to bring in experts on some of these populations to give insight that I may not have. Creating relationships with the Native peoples in the local area, scholars in african american studies (maybe reaching out to a local college or university), women scholars, etc. These folks would one, allow for instructional differentiation, but two, enable students to see the variety of histories told in just one time period. When listening to 'The Satire Paradox' the main takeaway I got was how although it may be entertaining to have politics and comedy morph into one satirical reality, it doesn't actually do us any good. The satire paradox is that even though more people are willing to hear perspectives other than their own in a satire show, it has proved to have ZERO pull in changing anyone's mind. So to many, they are rendered useless. Tina Fey's depiction of Sarah Palin is a wonderful example of this. Today, the things "remembered" of this VP of the United States Nominee is nothing of her reality, but rather Fey's caricature of her. In this case (as well as many others) satires have been deemed unable to actually educate on real issues or engage an audience to the extent of further conversations. Something the podcast said that stuck with me is this: Satire won't ever be an effective way to educate the masses on issues because the complexity and layers inevitable in these skits are what people end up focusing on sifting through, deconstructing, and processing, NOT the issues themselves.
1) Critical Race Theory argues race and racism are timeless, then challenges constructed ideologies, and is committed to social justice and the end of racial subjugation.
2) Formal curriculum's portrayal of African Americans and Native Americans is extremely lacking. Textbooks focus on eurocentric perspectives and toss other perspectives to the wayside. Where most of the diverse storylines are "showcased" in the columns and footer of textbook pages. 3) The text argues that textbooks are the main way society receives racial messages. I don't know how much I agree with this. I think that this generation receives more context and and messaging from social media and news media. 4) If education is done well, it gives a plethora of opportunities for both students and staff to become aware of their biases as well as becoming aware of the implicit biases in the things we experience everyday. There are simple things that can be done in setting a classroom tone as well as explicit lessons to develop critical thinking skills students can apply to themselves and to the world around them. Every time a new source is introduced, there is a discussion to be had about what the purpose is, who the author is, and what potential biases could be at play. By consistently doing this, it develops a natural habit for students that will slowly work its way into their lives in such a way that is natural and doesn't take an excess of effort. Then, another thing that can be a useful modeling technique is being self-aware as a teacher. Acknowledging personal biases during lessons and discussions will not only increase pathos but will give them something to model when they begin to have discussions about "touchy topics" of their own. You are tasked with planning -and then teaching- your first lesson plan and it is to be a 15-minute lesson on the political spectrum. The main focus is NOT so much on the ‘what’ (the content), but rather the focus and purpose is on the ‘how’, the process of developing and executing a lesson plan. Thus, we won’t fixate on the content knowledge, but rather concern ourselves with the procedures of pedagogy.
Today in class we did an activity that allowed for a sense of community through pretty vulnerable sharing of values and past experiences. This got me thinking of how most of the closest relationships and best experiences have come from similar exchanges and how being authentic and open with the struggles (both past and present) has always been a point of pride for me. I consider myself another learning resource. The things I have experienced, overcome, seen, or pondered have always been fair game for those around me in hopes that engaging in a conversation could spark a novel thought or perspective. This being said, as I think more and more of my professional life, I am constantly met with the struggle of where my frankness will fall in my role as a teacher. Is it appropriate to make it known that I am diagnosed with a mental health disorder and cope with it every day? Should I refrain from telling them about the difficulties my relationship with mother caused growing up? How am I expected to respond when I'm asked about a husband or kids, and I have no desire for either? These are tough questions and conversations that I always wished we had in schools, but now that the shoe is on the other foot, I'm unsure the repercussions of choosing to have them. As I mentioned before, I proudly consider myself another mode of learning for my students, coworkers, family, and friends; will this cost me professionally, or will it allow me to reach populations that would otherwise be lost in the folds of professional expectation.
This question I find fascinatingly difficult because with any time period there is so much that intrigues me, yet so much I'm glad has passed. There is also the question of location, because some time periods look drastically different depending on where you are situated on the globe. For simplicity sake, let's say I'm in the US. I think I would choose to be a fly on the metaphorical wall that is pre-europeans in North America. We have so little information on the realities of that time that isn't clouded by "the white man" that it would be wonderful to experience the native cultures of this geographic area before european influence affected it how and it became suppressed and smothered out. Also, from what I recall learning, many of the native societies were structured in a more matriarchal society which fascinates me because I have always lived in such a patriarchy-centered world.
|
These are just a few photos showcasing my time at MSU. Lots of memories and even more smiles. |