Cycle 2: Schooling, Cultural Assimilation and Social Mobility

Reflection:

As I read Phibben’s article, “How One Law Banning Ethnic Studies Led to Its Rise,” I reflected on the experiences of those Spanish-speaking students enrolled in my classes each year. When a student’s first language is Spanish, he or she is often placed in upper level Spanish courses. This seems logical and it happens for a couple of reasons. First, the initial weeks of the entry-level sections are spent reviewing concepts that native speakers have mastered before entering kindergarten. Consequently, those students quickly become bored with the material. Secondly, often the assumption is made that Spanish-speaking students read and write in their first language with the same fluency as they speak. As much as our curriculum promotes conversational fluency, the reality is our classes are also heavily focused on literacy. This can be problematic for our heritage speakers and, in some cases, works against their potential for success in Spanish class. As an example, in our honors curriculum students are penalized one half point on tests for each misspelled vocabulary word and, I should note, the misuse of accent marks qualifies as a misspelling. One can imagine how a student who has only ever spoken Spanish would struggle to succeed on this type of assessment.

A possible solution for this issue is a Spanish course designed for heritage speakers. Perhaps this type of course could address students’ gaps in literacy, and also spend more meaningful time on the study of history and culture. Due to the range of skill levels found amongst my heritage speakers, it might be difficult to determine which class each should take. It may also be difficult to create a fluid curriculum that can address both literacy skills and ethnic studies that touch on all Spanish-speaking cultures. I envision a quality heritage program to offer various levels, much like our regular Spanish courses. This way, students can focus on multiple skills and various histories or pieces of literature as they progress through the program. An important thing to consider, however, is how heritage speakers themselves might feel about enrolling in this type of course. More specifically, I wonder if Richard Rodriguez would have felt disdain toward heritage speaker classes, as enrollment in such a class might be a direct correlation to one’s race rather than one’s interests or cultural identity.

Related to this, I have to mention that I was fascinated by Hunger of Memory by Richard Rodriguez. His straddling of two languages, and by extension two worlds, in and outside of school mirrors some situations I have seen Spanish-speaking students face. Often, a student who carries a Latino last name is looked to by other students as the resident expert in Spanish class. However, this label has proven burdensome to those who have distanced themselves from their home language on account of assimilation or social mobility and perhaps have parents who do not speak Spanish at home. I was feeling mixed emotions when I read that Rodriguez’s parents began to make a conscious effort to speak English at home in place of their first language. One part of me understood this decision, because as advocates of earning an education, they wanted their children to have full access to the education provided in American public schools. However, the other part of me felt sad when I considered what this family may have lost in striving to assimilate.

Toward the end of the autobiography, we learn about Rodriguez’s strife and loneliness while writing this book. He felt the need to ignore his mother’s plea to not reveal his family’s personal world to the gringos, and yet her plea speaks to one of the important takeaways of this autobiography, which is the fact that Rodriguez’s family in fact had two separate worlds: public and private.

As passionate as Rodriguez seemed about telling his story, I was very surprised to read that he has now distanced himself from the man who wrote that book many years ago. As he expressed to a student at the University of Houston, “a book finds an author at a certain time” (Contreras, 2002). I would like to sit down with him today and pick his brain about his current opinion regarding affirmative action, bilingual education, the implementation of heritage speaker classes and ethnics studies. Perhaps still he would prefer to distance himself from any courses or reforms that identify or separate people by their backgrounds, especially those that do not sufficiently serve those who are most in need.

Sharing:

This article makes an argument against bilingual education and identifies some of its inherent flaws. Because he had shown opposition to such programs, I think Rodriguez would relate to this article at the time he wrote his autobiography.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1998/05/the-case-against-bilingual-education/305426/

This blog features a Spanish teacher’s experience while instructing a heritage speaker’s class. She acknowledges difficulty in placing students correctly due to their ranging skill sets, something that I too anticipated to be a struggle. She also highlights the heritage speaking students’ biggest challenge as reading. She has identified this to be more of a literacy issue rather than a language-specific issue. That is, those students who struggle in English reading also struggle with Spanish reading.

https://senorab1972.wordpress.com/2015/02/28/my-experiences-teaching-spanish-as-a-heritage-language/

References:

Russell Contreras. (2002, July 19). Brown Like Us? Texas Observer.

Cycle One: The Culture of Childhood

Cycle One: The Culture of Childhood

Playtime:

I grew up in the 90’s and playtime with my older brother, Paul, or with my friends was centered on imagination and creativity. For example, one Christmas Paul and I were gifted roller-blades and spent the winter creating rollerblading obstacle courses throughout our parents’ unfinished basement. We used whatever was available to us to construct courses: rolls of carpet, paint cans, buckets, boxes, you name it. We then challenged each other to race, competing for record times and the pride of winning. In our haste it was not uncommon to take hard falls on the cement and wind up with bruises, scrapes or cuts, but we never thought twice about it and we never saw our parents running down the stairs to chaperon this playtime. While reading about the nontraditional parks for children in North Wales where kids find entertainment with items such as old tires and wood, I happily reflected on my days of jumping over a stack of newspapers with my roller-blades on. In addition to my skating days, my friends and I built tree forts and hosted picnics with imaginary food on a large flat rock in the woods behind our house. We also played with Barbie’s or Polly Pockets and conjured up a theme for the day’s “episode,” developing unique story-lines for each doll. So, even where toys or other gadgets were involved, it was up to our minds and creativity to make these things fun.

Now, we are living in a world of technology, and many children I know spend a lot of time in front of screens. Children as young as toddlers are often reaching for their parents’ cell phones or iPads, requesting to watch a video or play a game. I am not familiar enough with phone or iPad applications designed for preschoolers to know the extent to which they foster creativity and the use of imagination, however I would venture to guess those opportunities do exist. Outside of screen time, I see a large push for today’s preschoolers’ playtime to involve learning a second language, developing literacy skills before entering school, and participating in organized sports starting as early as age three. As a result, I cannot claim that my version of play as a child was more beneficial to my development or more physically engaging than the kids of today, but I do know mine was much less supervised, less structured and less academic.

Parents and Schools:

As a high school teacher and as a friend to people with small children, I have noticed a difference in parents today and their relationship with teachers and school curricula. When I was in school, if a child misbehaved the punishment the teacher decided upon was not up for negotiation. That is to say, parents supported the decision of the teacher. The same was true for academics. It would have been strange to hear the parents of my classmates inquiring about how a teacher planned to reach certain curricular goals or content standards. Yet, these are conversations I have each year at our Parent Open House and parent-teacher conferences. Often, concern over academia begins before the child enters school and conversations about learning take place with daycare providers or other childcare facilities. This is akin to what we read about China’s evolution in preschools between 1985 and 2002. The authors write, “Now the parent-teacher relationship has fundamentally changed: parents are becoming customers” (Tobin et al, 2009, p. 40). I have found this to be especially true since I began teaching honors students, as their parents are very involved with their children’s academic success and outcomes. I do worry that serving parents as customers has allowed students to miss opportunities to advocate for themselves and to learn how to face their own challenges as they progress toward high school and graduation. 

Culture in the Classroom:

While reflecting on this week’s readings I am most struck by the idea of teaching culture in the classroom and how its importance is viewed differently by schools and the families they serve in the study of Alhambra Preschool in Phoenix (Tobin et al, 2009). The comment I found particularly noteworthy read, “More concerned about their children learning English than about the possible loss of their Spanish or their Mexican identity or cultural patrimony, most of the Hispanic parents at Alhambra, unlike progressive American early childhood education scholar, are not strong proponents of bilingual or multicultural education” (Tobin et al, 2009, p. 217). Perhaps the parents consider themselves their children’s guide to their home culture and the school a place where they learn aspects of American culture. Whatever the case, this sentiment from the Alhambra parents and other immigrant parents contrasts with our push for multicultural education in American classrooms and immersion programs and schools. I would like to know more about this from people who work in contexts that are similar to what is described here. Have you found that parents push English over their home language in an academic setting? Or, have you found the parents to be concerned about the preservation of their culture and its appropriate representation in schools?

References:

Joseph Tobin, Yeh Hsueh, & Mayumi Karasawa. (2009). Preschool in Three Cultures Revisited: China, Japan, and the United States. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.

Sharing:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/nation-wimps/201401/helicopter-parenting-its-worse-you-think

This article speaks to my concern of parents over-advocating for their children and teachers adhering to parental demands in order to best serve them as customers. According to this article, this problem can persist into graduate school admissions.  

http://nepc.colorado.edu/blog/preschools-china-japan-and-us

This link provides a summary of Tobin’s study, highlighting the fact that culture is what makes the largest difference between preschools across the world. He provides guiding questions to consider and video links that showcase the classrooms visited in the study.

http://www.theatlantic.com/education/archive/2016/07/why-did-it-take-so-long-for-class-based-school-integration-to-take-hold/489863/

This article advocates for strategic socioeconomic integration in schools. In my community, integrating differentiated socioeconomic status would result in the integration of a wide variety of cultures in our schools. This had me thinking, again, about the concept of culture and how socioeconomic status adds a new element to understanding and navigating culture.

Introductory Post

Hello, TE 822! My name is Stephanie Furlow, a Michigan native who now lives and works in Omaha, Nebraska. Long before arriving in the Cornhusker state, I was raised in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula in a small town called Iron Mountain. After high school, I moved to East Lansing where I earned my undergraduate degree from Michigan State with a major in English and a minor in Spanish. I continued my studies at MSU for one year post-graduation in order to student teach and obtain my secondary level teaching certification. My job search then led me to Indianapolis, Indiana where I taught both Spanish and English for one year at a large suburban high school. Next, I moved north to West Lafayette and taught middle and high school Spanish for three years. In 2013, I was hired by an International Baccalaureate high school here in Omaha where I have enjoyed teaching Spanish in their Honors program for the last three years.  

Outside of teaching I enjoy reading, traveling, golfing, working out, trying new restaurants, and walking my German Shepard, Ryka. Perhaps it is a little known fact, but Omaha is a great city where the music, business and restaurant scenes are really thriving. Additionally, we are lucky enough to host large sporting events like the College World Series or the recent Olympic Swim Trials. I have really enjoyed getting to know all that Omaha has to offer.

Many years ago, before becoming a teacher, I saw the 1967 movie titled To Sir, With Love starring Sidney Portier. However, it was not until watching it a second time early in my career that I was especially tuned into its portrayal of the correlation between student-teacher rapport and meaningful teaching and learning. When I was first hired to teach in Indianapolis, the principal of my high school encouraged his staff to bear in mind what he called the three Rs of education: Rapport, Respect and Rigor. He believed that once positive rapport between the teacher and her students is established, then respect will naturally transpire. Further, it is only once rapport and respect are in place that teachers can most successfully take the curriculum to new heights and develop a most prosperous learning community. I know that I have found this to be true, and so did Sidney Portier’s character, Mr. Thackeray, in the film. At the beginning of his teaching career, Mr. Thackeray’s days were spent policing his students while unsuccessfully implementing lecture-based instruction. It was not until Mr. Thackeray created opportunities to learn about his students and for his students to get to know him that he began to earn his students’ respect. At that point, he did away with sit-and-get instruction and instead offered choices in their learning material, developed hands-on classroom experiences, and took the class on a field trip. In many ways, Mr. Thackeray’s lessons were responsive to his students’ needs and, as a result, he became a more flexible and engaging teacher.

Both socioeconomic and racial tensions are presented in this film, and both are addressed by Sidney Portier’s character. But again, it was only with the foundation of rapport and respect that these issues could be effectively addressed in his classroom. Because his students came from poverty, Mr. Thackeray related to his students about his own experience with poverty. Additionally, he addressed cultural differences through the lens of his own African culture, which was different from the majority of his British pupils.

As I have encountered challenging students or have struggled to connect students to aspects of my Spanish curriculum, I often reflect on the journey of Mr. Thackeray along with the three Rs of education. What I find most interesting is how these principles were presented in a movie made in 1967 and are still incredibly valuable in classrooms today.

Stephanie

Introductory Post

Hello, TE 822! My name is Stephanie Furlow, a Michigan native who now lives and works in Omaha, Nebraska. Long before arriving in the Cornhusker state, I was raised in Michigan’s Upper Peninsula in a small town called Iron Mountain. After high school, I moved to East Lansing where I earned my undergraduate degree from Michigan State with a major in English and a minor in Spanish. I continued my studies at MSU for one year post-graduation in order to student teach and obtain my secondary level teaching certification. My job search then led me to Indianapolis, Indiana where I taught both Spanish and English for one year at a large suburban high school. Next, I moved north to West Lafayette and taught middle and high school Spanish for three years. In 2013, I was hired by an International Baccalaureate high school here in Omaha where I have enjoyed teaching Spanish in their Honors program for the last three years.  

Outside of teaching I enjoy reading, traveling, golfing, working out, trying new restaurants, and walking my German Shepard, Ryka. Perhaps it is a little known fact, but Omaha is a great city where the music, business and restaurant scenes are really thriving. Additionally, we are lucky enough to host large sporting events like the College World Series or the recent Olympic Swim Trials. I have really enjoyed getting to know all that Omaha has to offer.

Many years ago, before becoming a teacher, I saw the 1967 movie titled To Sir, With Love starring Sidney Portier. However, it was not until watching it a second time early in my career that I was especially tuned into its portrayal of the correlation between student-teacher rapport and meaningful teaching and learning. When I was first hired to teach in Indianapolis, the principal of my high school encouraged his staff to bear in mind what he called the three Rs of education: Rapport, Respect and Rigor. He believed that once positive rapport between the teacher and her students is established, then respect will naturally transpire. Further, it is only once rapport and respect are in place that teachers can most successfully take the curriculum to new heights and develop a most prosperous learning community. I know that I have found this to be true, and so did Sidney Portier’s character, Mr. Thackeray, in the film. At the beginning of his teaching career, Mr. Thackeray’s days were spent policing his students while unsuccessfully implementing lecture-based instruction. It was not until Mr. Thackeray created opportunities to learn about his students and allowed his students to get to know him that he began to earn his students’ respect. At that point, he did away with sit-and-get instruction and instead offered choices in their learning material, developed hands-on classroom experiences, and took the class on a field trip. In many ways, Mr. Thackeray’s lessons were responsive to his students’ needs and, as a result, he became a more flexible and engaging teacher.

Both socioeconomic and racial tensions are presented in this film, and both are addressed by Sidney Portier’s character. But again, it was only with the foundation of rapport and respect that these issues could be effectively addressed in his classroom. Because his students came from poverty, Mr. Thackeray related to his students about his own experience with poverty. Additionally, he addressed cultural differences through the lens of his own African culture, which was different from the majority of his British pupils.

As I have encountered challenging students or have struggled to connect students to aspects of my Spanish curriculum, I often reflect on the journey of Mr. Thackeray along with the three Rs of education. What I find most interesting is how these principles were presented in a movie made in 1967 and are still incredibly valuable in classrooms today.

Stephanie