A Lesson from the Past

            This weekend I went to see the movie “Lincoln.”  In my humble opinion Lincoln was very good and a movie and it should get a couple of Oscar nominations and possibly a couple of wins.

            The great part about “Lincoln” was its portrayal of the internal conflict over federalizing the abolishment of slavery, what this action meant for the present and future of a young United States and the future of an oppressed people.  “Lincoln” portrayed the emotion and fortitude of a President who had to bring together and heal a nation torn by an ideological chasm.  This portrayal was not the type of Lincoln children are taught in school.

            As I reflected over the movie while eating dinner, my thoughts drew upon my love of history and how this love was supported and flourished during my high school and college years.  I recalled the passionate teachings of my history teachers and how they made history relevant.  There was one specific teacher in high school who during the summer break traveled to various states and countries abroad making documentaries that he would show us during the school year to enhance the curriculum and to expose us to places and countries outside of our world of Santa Monica, California.  History became more than just dates and events, it was something that we could visualize and sometimes touch during the times when the teacher would bring artifacts from his trips.

            In college, my professors provided us a sense of our heritage by placing the African and African-American experience in the context of history.  We were taught the rich heritage that was left out of our high school history texts and we were taught to view history through a critical and multicultural lens that encompassed the contributions of people of color.  Our textbooks gave us the historical perspective from the conquered and the oppressed giving voice to the Native American, the African slave and women.  We also learned how people of color throughout the world continued to thrive under oppression and eventually overcame their oppressors.  Lastly, we were reminded that we are living history everyday and our directive was to make history no matter how large or small and to write the history so that our children would understand the tremendous contributions and achievements people of color have made throughout the world.

            This is how history should be taught.  History (or any subject) should not be taught in a manner that is stale or irrelevant.  History is a living and relevant subject that has the ability to teach children social justice, equality, compassion and develops the tools to become the agents of change the world needs.  Teaching history in this manner also develops the decision-making skills by showing how to consider all aspects of problem and to consider the impact on the people in the final decision.

This is how children should learn history.

Elements of a Dedicated Teacher

                        “I have come to a frightening conclusion

I am the decisive element in the classroom

It is my personal approach that creates the climate

It is my daily mood that makes the weather

As a teacher, I possess tremendous power to make

a child’s life miserable or joyous

I can be a tool of torture or an instrument of inspiration

I can humiliate or humor, hurt or heal

In all situations, it is my response that decides whether

a crisis will be escalated or de-escalated, and a child

                        humanized or de-humanized[i]

            The following quote summarizes the critical role the teacher plays in the educational engagement of a child.  While there are some who believe poverty is responsible for educational engagement, a dedicated teacher has the ability to help children engage in school despite turmoil in their personal lives.

            Outside of the home, children spend most of their time in school with a teacher.  A dedicated teacher has the ability to inspire children to value education by helping them believe they are capable of learning.  A dedicated teacher has the ability to create an environment in the classroom that is conducive to learning, is based on differentiated learning, and a place where there are high, but reachable expectations.  More importantly, children understand the classroom is a place where they will learn academically and increase confidence in their ability to learn.

            A dedicated teacher also understands they are a presence that can be perceived as positive, indifferent, or negative to the children they teach.  Understanding that children look to the cues of the adults to gage their behavior and their engagement level, a dedicated teacher understands how their demeanor will affect their ability to teach.  A child’s academic engagement for a single class or day can be based on how they are greeted by the teacher when they enter the classroom, how the teacher addresses (or doesn’t address) children who appear to be in a bad mood, or how the teacher has their classroom set up influences a child’s engagement level.  Lastly, the energy level the teacher demonstrates about a certain subject or lesson plan and how much interaction is allowed by the teacher (as opposed to children sitting and listening) will affect a child’s level of engagement.

            Finally, a dedicated teacher understands the failure of the child is unacceptable.  Understanding that the blame should not only be given to the child or the child’s circumstances, a dedicated teacher views a child’s failure as their failure.  A dedicated teacher understands that a child’s failure is a result of the inability of the teacher to teach the child the material on their level and raise the child’s level.  These are the elements of a dedicated teacher, which all teachers should strive to be.

---

[i] Dr. Haim G. Ginott (1975), Teacher and Child: a Book for Parents and Teachers, New York, NY: MacMillian.

Making Wrong Assumptions About Public Education and Public Schools

            Yesterday I received a “voter report card” from MoveOn.org.  The report card informed me that during the last five general elections, I voted only once compared to my neighbors who had voted in more than one general election. 

            What annoyed me about this voter report card was that it did not consider or possibly know that during the 2008 election, I lived and voted in Indiana.  In the 2000 election, I voted in Pennsylvania, but I lived in another part of the city.  However, with limited information, MoveOn.org made assumptions about me that were not accurate.  This got me thinking about the assumptions made about public education and public schools.

            There are a lot of assumptions made about public education and public schools.  Assumptions about the effectiveness of public education, assumptions about the teachers who work in public schools, and assumptions about the students who attend public schools are often generalized to all schools, all teachers and all students. 

Since most assumptions are based on an individual’s perception, speculation or interpretation of information, what an individual reads, listens to, or engages in discussion, the information is filtered and processed via their socio-economic lens and assumptions are made.  Since, a majority of the information comes from non-objective sources, the individual fails to understand their assumptions are based on partial information.

            Assumptions by themselves are innocuous.  However when assumptions develop or influence educational policy or affirm stereotypes of urban and suburban schools and students, assumptions can be very harmful. 

            One such example is the assumption of the underachieving urban, public school student.  The assumption that urban, public school students are poor, born out of wedlock, undereducated and involved in criminal activity has been detrimental to these students as they apply for jobs.  Unemployment and underemployment is extremely high among urban, public school students because the assumptions made about them have influenced the decision to hire them.  Another example of how assumptions have been detrimental is when these students apply to college, these assumptions have hurt urban, public school students who are denied acceptance into top tier colleges because colleges view their schools as academically inferior and they do not believe these students have the skills to graduate in four years.

Finally, what is most disheartening is the assumptions are likely to follow these students into their adulthood.  Because of where they live and where they graduated, these students are likely to become underemployed or unemployed adults.  These students should not be judged on assumptions, they should be judged on their ability and potential. 

The Mississippi School to Prison Pipeline?

            A federal civil rights lawsuit was filed against a Mississippi school district for operating a “school-to-prison pipeline.”  The suit claims that district officials are jailing students’ days at a time for minor infractions without a probable cause hearing.  The suit further claims that students’ are arrested in school, handcuffed and sent to a youth court and denied their constitutional rights for minor infractions.  Infractions such as talking back to teachers or violating the dress code have students’ being transported 80 miles to a youth detention center in another county[i].

            With the majority of student offenders being African-American and students with disabilities, many of the students are placed on probation for these minor infractions.  Being placed on probation for infractions such as wearing the wrong color socks or undershirt, tardiness, use of vulgar language and yelling at the teacher is a harsh penalty for such an insignificant offense.  What is even more concerning is that harsher penalties can be placed on these students for future school violations.  A violation in school could lead to a probation violation and possible incarceration in a juvenile detention center[ii].

            While there are some who would claim that what occurred in the district was a result of Zero Tolerance policies, those claims would be false.  Zero Tolerance policies were not intended to place students’ in the juvenile justice system for minor infractions.  Zero Tolerance policies were intended to curb major violations (drugs, weapons, etc) that affected school climate by removing student offenders through expulsion.  What has allegedly occurred in the school district in Mississippi appears to be an intentional attempt to criminalize African-American students.

            The filing of the federal lawsuit stated that incarceration was used as a “medium for school discipline.”  The filing also claimed the district made children wait more than 48 hours for a hearing and made students to admit to formal charges without first being advised of their Miranda rights[iii].

            Schools are not supposed to be in the business of criminalizing behaviors that are minor in nature.  Any district that would do so, demonstrates that it does not have the best interest of children. In a state that traditionally ranks among the poorest economically and educationally, to consider minor behaviors as criminal demonstrates the school district does not understand (or cares not to understand) the circumstances of its students.  To assume that wearing the wrong colors socks or shirt, coming late to school, using vulgar language, or yelling at the teacher is a justifiable reason to be arrested, incarcerated, given a record, and placed on probation demonstrates that district officials and school staff view students with a negative, punitive lens.  Instead, the lens should view these minor infractions in the contexts surrounding the lives of students’.  

            Being a state with one of the highest poverty rates in the country, consideration should be given to students’ who are late due to having to wake up, clothe, feed, and take a younger sibling to school.  Consideration should be given to students’ who may wear the wrong color shirt or socks due to not having the money to wash their school clothes.  Finally, consideration should be given to students’ who yell at the teacher because there is trauma in the home.  Students’ come to school upset having internalized their anger to the point where they yell at a teacher.  This is not criminal behavior; this is the reality of life for many students’ who are affected by circumstances beyond their control.  The district should be finding ways to support its students’ not create criminals.

---

[i] www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/25/federal-civil-rights-lawy_n_2018947

[ii] Ibid

[iii] ibid