Are we Truly Democratic?

Our society likes to think that we are teaching our children the democratic way in school. In fact what is being taught to our children is patriotism. Cornell West wrote the purpose of patriotism or nationalism is to "keep the populace differential and complacent." Democracy is not only having the freedoms that we hold so high in our society, but actually using those rights. What is taught to our children is that we are the greatest country in the world and that we have and can do no wrong. This is nationalism not democracy. These ideals are instilled early in our children and unless they seek information for themselves, they will like many before them simply tow the line and not question what our country and more accurately our government does. This is so ingrained in our nation that a group such as the Trilateral Commission can openly state this is the role of schools and so few can actually question it. I personally feel offended that this happened to me and my peers in school. Many students who I went to high school with do not have the opportunity to have access to the knowledge that I have. Elementary, middle and high schools essentially sugarcoat the information we are given, we are not allowed to be free thinkers and question the information we are given, largely because we are not given information to do so. By not revealing the truths of the past, Japanese internment camps, slavery, treatment of Native Americans, to name a few, we are enabling our society to ignore the actions of the present and recent past, Iraq, Kosovo and Vietnam. It is the teaching of nationalism and patriotism rather than true democracy that us doing a disservice to our students and our society.

So how do we fix this problem of not knowing what true democracy is? We of course must start when children are young, get to them before the great political machine does. It is undoubtedly a difficult task to get people to question what they believe is true. However, no one questions more than children. I think because the schools are so indoctrinated into the ideals of patriotism as democracy, we have to start from the outside and work our way in. Informed parents and organizations need to help children and other parents understand what democracy is. People need to begin questioning the system and encouraging students to take a stand in their schools. Within schools, informed student media and groups need to let fellow students know that they have the right and responsibility to speak out and question what they hear and are taught. In addition Chomsky states teachers "have the obligation to serve and tell the truth about things that are important, things that matter." Many teachers understand what democracy is, but are constrained by the system in which they can teach. I see them as unwilling "agents" of nationalism. However, if we are to truly make a change in the understanding of democracy a great burden does fall on them to not only teach the truth of our history, but to show their students that democracy is about exercising your freedoms, even within the school system. It certainly sounds like a daunting task, but once again it is a necessary step to try and show that we acknowledge our mistakes from the past and need to move towards a society that is truly democratic.

This article (http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/262189_democracy09.html) by Walter Parker an author and professor at the University of Washington outlines three steps in helping children understand and embrace democracy in school. For me the most interesting aspect is relating the ideas to topics the children are interested in and that affect them; bullying, dress codes and stealing to name a few. Teach them how democracy affects them now and how they can exercise their freedoms, and we will hopefully see them continue to exercise those rights and responsibilities in the future. The process outlined by Parker will allow and encourage the quietest voice to speak and know that they can be heard.

Censorship

I knew that censorship existed in our society, but I was a little surprised how much it affects schools. As absurd as it was to hear some of the terms that have banned from textbooks in class, it says a lot about the impact the interest groups have had on our schools. Throughout the semester we have discussed the importance of multiculturalism and to hear that virtually any term related to expanding children's knowledge of other groups is omitted from textbooks is counterproductive if not harmful to students learning. It is unfortunate that publishers feel the need to censor their own work, whether textbooks of general reading for fear of offending one person or group, while the vast majority could benefit from the readings as they were intended to be. As Ravitch said, this is not merely a way to protect children from parts of society that a certain population does not want them to encounter, either according to race, sexuality or religious belief. In fact this is much larger, it is an attempt to impose their own personal views on those of others, to create a society that they see as ideal, which is not necessarily realistic to most people. Ravitch also points out that in fact most children are getting their information from television, movies, music and real life. Certainly, while many children do still read, its impact is much less now than in the past. Children see racist and sexual overtones on TV and in school much more often then they would read in a book.

So is the solution to allow access to all reading materials for children? I think in all honesty there must be some regulation on reading materials. I'm certainly not saying do not allow children to read what they want, or keep any book from the library. However if we are to be responsible parents, there are some reading materials that must have a conversation along with the readings. For example, in the community I grew up in, where there was very little cultural or racial differentiation, a child left to read Huckleberry Finn without some discussion as to the context and use of the "N-word" could easily get the wrong impression that may or may not be corrected at some point later on. I'm not saying that censorship is right, it is not, however, there are materials and words that could be misunderstood as Huckleberry Finn could and there are materials that could in fact be harmful. Let's not forget there are readings that are intentionally and overtly sexist and racist. I think the process set up by Reichman of allowing members of the school input and the right to select readings is the right way to go. By doing this we assure that the children are not only receiving proper materials, but a wide variety of books to read and learn from. I also think that publishers need to take a stand. Those who wish to impose their ideals on society are strong and loud, but they are also a minority when it comes to censorship. We live in a country that values our freedoms above all else. Highest among these is the freedom of speech. When Harry Potter first came out it was vilified by the religious right. To this day it is still hugely popular among children and adults. Of course the immense sales of the books enabled the publisher to push aside the complaints of the right, but its popularity also showed that people are willing to read something if it is written well, no matter how it is deemed by the minority. Encourage authors to be representative of the populations, but not at the expense of the quality of the book. If publishers do that, than it becomes more difficult for the right and left wingers to put together arguments that the public will accept or even tolerate. Unfortunately I think at least in the general reading books, this must once again come down to the students taking a stand. Individually children are often not heard, but together they can make an impact. Simply put, tell a child they can not do something and they will react. This article (http://www.charlotte.com/205/story/345430.html) discusses the efforts of some parents to remove books by Pat Conroy in West Virginia. The students however are standing up and saying no to censorship. It is efforts like this that, while may not stop censorship, will make it much more difficult for interest groups to impose their views on children.

Assessment and Unequal Resources

I think as assessment is designed today, it is very dangerous to our students. To place the future in the hands of one test as NCLB does can cause pressure on children in an environment that should be doing everything possible to facilitate learning. I think the problem with making a change is that many teachers are unsure as to what other forms of assessment they can use. As it was said in class, at least with summative assessment, you know what you are dealing with. However, this change must be made if we are to truly know that our students are learning. Formative assessment is not only a better judge of how students are doing, it also encourages them to learn. Any child who is receiving encouragement and reinforcement in education is going to be more willing to continue to want to learn. At the same time we do need to assure that we are using a wholistic approach in assessing children. As England explains this is looking at the big picture of the student and not simply a snapshot at one point in time. We need to look at the economic factors, parents participation and how the child learns. All children are not the same as NCLB would like to believe. They have different styles of learning, different subjects they like to learn and some they are better at learning. Because of all of these factors, I feel students need a flexibility in how they are assessed. I think rather than comparing one student to the others as tends to happen in schools today, they need to be judged individually. This will allow choice to enter into assessment. Let's play to the strengths of children rather than assuming a single form of assessment is going to tell us the true story. Sure this is going to create more work for the teacher, but it can also be beneficial. I've never had to sit down and read 30 papers on one subject, but I can assume it will become repetitive and dare I say boring. I think a teacher would enjoy shaking things up a bit and instead of 30 essays on the meaning of Hamlet, they would get to assess an art project, song or oral presentation along with those essays. The students would enjoy it as well as the teachers. Sounds like a win-win solution to me. Here is a video that shows how formative assessment is used in the classroom: http://www.teachers.tv/video/581. The teachers encourage these students to take control of their own learning. These students certainly seem to be enjoying the lesson, certainly a problem in schools today, and the teacher is receiving feedback that displays the students are in fact learning both information and concepts.
One thing that bothers me is the idea that it is okay to play the system when trying to get your child into a desired school. Sure there are problems with the system and people feel the need to work around the rules to benefit their child. Donated money to a school, gets your child enrolled, a well placed friend allows a student to get into a college they may not otherwise, or claiming an address where you don't live to assure more benefits for a child all seem to be accepted as acceptable because you are using the resources available to you. Even if all this is done legally it still leads to the ultimate problem in education, unequal resources. We have talked a lot and Kozol based an entire book on this subject. We have acknowledged that resources go well beyond what students have in school. If we are to truly equalize education these forms of "who you know" must also be taken into account. Perhaps it is because of the background I came from, but to see a student get a place where they may not have earned while another, without those contacts, from a lower economic status is left outside seems to represent many of the problems we have in education. I'm not saying these practices will stop, that would be unrealistic, but we need to stop saying that "who you know, not what you know" is acceptable. These are the hard choices we are making in equalizing resources. It is easy to say that we need to give money to those who need it, it is difficult to truly put everyone on the same playing field and say that they will all have the same access and opportunities and will get what they deserve based on merit rather than who we know and how much we earn. Instead of finding ways around the system, maybe we should be finding ways to fix it, so all can benefit.

School Selection and Conditions

Our presentation and discussion on Wednesday certainly brought up a lot of issues and problems with selection. One important idea that came about is that perhaps school selection is, at least in part, responsible for continuing the trend of segregation. I firmly believe that education needs to be integrated, as its effects go well beyond simply what our children learn in each subject area. I also do not necessarily think that we need to eliminate school selection all together. There are obvious benefits to having the choice of school that children attend. So essentially we need to find a way to have some school selection and assure that it is integrated. I think this starts with, as Kerri-Ann said, social capital. Not everyone has this, obviously, and not everyone can obtain this. So we are left with equalizing the playing field between the have and have nots. This comes with making people aware that they do have choices. We know that people are not always aware of their options, witness the Bard School discussed in class. So who provides this information to people who do not have it? There are people who are aware, and through programs such as our class, are becoming more aware of the inequalities and injustices of our school system. It is up to these people to not only tell others about the problems, but to tell people about the opportunities, they are not aware of. Much of the research we have looked into has told of the problems, not many give solutions. It is the role of those who serve these populations to also advocate for them as well. Tell me what is wrong with the system, but tell me how to fix it as well. Of course solutions are not always easy, however they are there, and we come about these solution through an open conversation that will force those in power to listen and make change.

Unfortunately we were unable to get to much of our discussion of school conditions. Let's just say it would have been great. Basically, school conditions are awful for many of our students and they affect both the learning and teaching abilities a great deal. The question that I asked in class as to who is responsible for solutions can not only be asked of schools condition, but selection and much of what has been discussed in class this semester. The easy answer is to say that the government is responsible for placing these burdens on the schools, NCLB, poor conditions, segregation, etc. That answer would be right. However, while the schools, teachers, parents and students may not have been the cause of many of these problems, I think the solutions lie in their hands. These people are at the ground level, they see the problems everyday. Both the videos we intended to show in class discussed the role that these people must play in fixing these problems. The Youth Education Alliance, seen in the DC Public Schools video, and the AFT, American Federation of Teachers, recognize this fact. If change is going to happen, we can not leave the ultimate decision as to when, in the hands of the government or those in control of the money. The YEA and AFT see the role of students and teachers as advocates for change. So if change at any level of education is going to happen it is through organizations such as these that make people aware of the problems and then hold those in power accountable for assuring that change happens.

Here is the AFT video we were unable to show in class:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5e2bWHkMNi8

Here is the website for YEA, the Youth Education Alliance: http://www.youtheducationalliance.org/ . It shows the role that students can have in making change. Too often students do not think they can make a difference, it is important that they know they can have an effect on their education. This will keep kids from saying and believing things like Fortino said in Kozol, "Your ghetto, so we send you to the factory." (180).