Interesting, Fun Website

I received the link to this website in my inbox the other night, and thought that I would share it.

The URL is www.freerice.com

Not only can you expand on your vocabulary, but for every word that you define correctly 10 grains of rice is donated by the United Nations! It's not much, but it's better than nothing ...

I do warn you, it's addictive! (which is not necessarily a bad thing, all things considered)

The First Thanksgiving

In the spirit of historical accuracy, I thought you might enjoy a 30-second promo for the History Channel's docu-drama, Desperate Crossing, which tells the story of those who journeyed across the Atlantic on the Mayflower. I tried to link to it directly, but couldn't get it to work. To view it, go to www.youtube.com, type "What is Thanksgiving" in the search bar, and then click on the first result that pops up. The promo basically asks the question: "What if the traditional elementary school Thanksgiving play told the real story?"

And in the same spirit, what kinds of activities/lessons/celebrations are you seeing in your schools this week focused on Thanksgiving? Any little Pilgrims with buckled hats and shoes? Or any "alternative" looks at the Thanksgiving story that go beyond the traditional approach?

"How to teach Controversial Content and not get Fired"

Today during class I discussed this article with my group. I meant to bring it up to the whole class, but we never got to this article. I was hoping someone might help clarify things for me.

The teacher explains how she taught a unit on the civil rights movement and her students wrote and prepared a class play. The class presented it at the school's February assembly, which was a "black history" theme. Isn't that a little contradictory to teach about such an important topic, expecially for blacks, during black history month? Doesn't that send students the wrong message? I remember talking about in class how in February schools might teach about important African American figures, but only during that time. We discussed how we should be teaching these things throughout the year, because otherwise we are showing our students we only care about blacks during February. I was just wondering what other people thought about this.

I was also wondering about something she said at the end of the article. I asked as teachers, should we expect ourselves to integrate social justice perspective in every thing we teach and teach about specific issues of justice within everything as much as possible? Is this the same as having a multicultural classroom? Is it either all there, or it doesn't exist? We were talking about integrating it within everything and how teachers are expected to do this with their math and science curriculum. We felt Social Studies, Literature, art, and music were all great opportunities for this but we weren't sure how to do it all the time.

Thanks for your opinions!

"Putting Compassion Into Action"

As Mary Cowhey states in her chapter, "Compassion, action, and change," the typical model of the school food drive should be looked at critically. It wasn't until I read this article that I thought about how food drives "inadvertently reinforce stereotypes about poor people, oversimplify the problem and the solution, fail to teach an understanding of the causes of poverty or local effort to improve conditions, and further stigmatize low-income children in the school." It was truly eye opening for me as I was reading everything that she did NOT want children to believe because she was describing everything that I always believed. I believed many of the things she described children should NOT believe because when it came to school food drives, I was never given an explanation beyond "We're collecting food for poor people because they deserve a nice dinner/holiday, too." What's more is we were only encouraged to collect food and clothing around the holidays. I was completely left in the dark about "the complex reasons why people go hungry or cannot afford housing." I was also blind-sighted to the fact that poverty-stricken people lived in my neighborhood 365 days a year; it wasn't just a seasonal thing. My concern is that if I never truly understood the complexity of poverty growing up, then obviously many others did not either.

From here, we move to taking action today. I really liked the idea of reimagining food drives, and putting children into the driver's seat as far as taking action beyond simple collection of items. Also, I felt "The Giving Tree" would be extremely beneficial for families within the schools and families in the community. Is it possible for us to take some of Cowhey's ideas and integrate them into the schools we're currently working in? As student teachers, or even first and second year teachers, what are some ways we can help students understand the complexity of poverty and put our "compassion into action?"

Addressing the issue of gangs in our classrooms

We had talked about the issue of gangs in class a while ago now. In my second phase, the issue was a little more prominent with our students. We had some students whose parents were openly involved in gangs and some students who had the potential of getting involved within the next few years.

How would you begin the discussion in your classroom about gangs without sounding naive or causing some students to get mad? Is it likely for the students who are already involved to become more offended and pull away? Or could it have the opposite affect?

Atheist's teen daughter fights Illinois' moment-of-silence law

After discussing in class about whether or not it is wrong to say the Pledge of Allegiance in class, I automatically thought about a local issue in the Wheeling school district and Buffalo Grove High School that deals with the same issue. For those of us teaching in Wheeling, or have heard about Rob Sherman, we know that he is an Atheist father whose children are very outspoken about including anything religious within the school. I found the following article, written on October 26 in the International Herald Tribune, a newspaper in France. I was shocked to see that this issue was so global. Let me know what you think!


Atheist's teen daughter fights Illinois' moment-of-silence law
The Associated Press
Published: October 26, 2007

CHICAGO: A 14-year-old girl and her outspoken atheist father filed a federal lawsuit Friday challenging an Illinois state law requiring a brief period of prayer or reflective silence at the start of every school day.
The lawsuit asks the court to declare the law unconstitutional, said attorney Gregory Kulis, who represents Dawn Sherman, a freshman at Buffalo Grove High School, and her father, the atheist-advocate and radio talk show host Robert Sherman.
Kulis said the law is an attempt to inject religion into public schools in violation of the First Amendment. The suit also seeks a temporary restraining order to halt schools' obeying the law until the case is decided. A judge will consider that request at a Monday morning hearing.
The lawsuit names Gov. Rod Blagojevich and local school officials as defendants. The governor's office and state attorney general's office had no immediate comment Friday. School district spokeswoman Venetia Miles said schools will continue to comply with the law.
The suit also names high school teacher Binh Huynh, who according to the lawsuit is the teacher responsible for ensuring the girl prays silently or reflects quietly on the anticipated events of the day.
"What we object to is Christians passing a law that requires the public school teacher to stop teaching during instructional time, paid for by the taxpayers, so that Christians can pray," Sherman told The Associated Press.
An Illinois law called the Silent Reflection and Student Prayer Act already allowed schools to observe a moment of silence if they wanted. The new measure changed just a single word: "may" observe became "shall" observe.
Sherman said he went to court after he asked the school board to ignore the law and was rebuffed.
It is not Sherman's first church-and-state lawsuit and not the first to involve one of his children. He has sought removal of religious symbols from city seals and a ban on Boy Scout meetings at public schools.
In 1989, he sued challenging a state law requiring public-school children to recite the Pledge of Allegiance. Sherman's then 7-year-old son, Richard, appeared at a news conference that year, dressed in a blue blazer and red-and-blue striped tie. The boy recited the pledge without the phrase "under God."
"How can I raise Ricky to be a good little atheist when he's required to say the words 'under God' at the start of each day?" Sherman said at the event.
In 1998, Sherman was convicted of beating Richard, by then a teenager, and later was sentenced to jail for failing to complete domestic violence counseling. He claimed at the time he hit his son twice because he refused to baby-sit his sister, making Sherman late for his radio show.
On Friday, Sherman told The Associated Press he is "the best-known atheist activist in the Midwest."

Jonathan Kozol's hunger strike and NCLB

I recently read , in the announcements on icampus of all places, something that I found particularly interesting. The announcement was about Jonathan Kozol and his recent action taken in regards to No Child Left Behind. Since July, Kozol has been on a hunger strike to protest the federal No Child Left Behind Act, which is now up for reauthorization. He is 71. Although I do feel that his cause is a noble one, and that NCLB is an act worth protesting, I cannot help but wonder if Kozol will net a result from his actions. Throughout his career, Kozol has written many eye-opening accounts on the reality faced by many children in America's inner city public schools. His most recent being Letters to a Young Teacher and The Shame of the Nation. His writing is both honest and surreal and allows you to see into the lives of the children who are experiencing unequal educational opportunity in this country. I feel that is impossible for Kozol's activism through his writing to go unnoticed.

It is safe to say that many people have had their disagreements with NCLB since its reenactment in 2002 and that many of these people have voiced their arguments throughout the years. Educators, administrators and parents alike have voiced their opinions in regards to such issues as accountability, funding, etc. Is it possible for Kozol to make more of an impact by going on a hunger strike? And, in general, can one person really make a difference?

Teachers and the First Amendment, Take 2

Here's a news story about another teacher's collision with the First Amendment. See what you think:

Teacher wouldn't pledge allegiance:

Woman has filed lawsuit against school

seacoastonline.com

October 12, 2007 6:00 AM

SEABROOK — Seabrook Middle School teacher Dianne Dunfey is suing the school district and Principal Stan Shupe for alleged retaliation for her refusal to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance.

Dunfey, a Rye resident, claims that since the 2004 incident, Shupe and the district singled her out for disciplinary action and created a negative public controversy. She claims she was unfairly disciplined for leaving the building without signing out and mandated to submit lesson plans when no other teacher was required to do so.

Dunfey brought suit in federal court in Concord in May, and the case is scheduled for trial in October 2008. Dunfey declined comment Thursday at the school, where she teaches seventh-grade social studies.

In the suit, Dunfey claims her First Amendment rights were violated. She seeks relief against retaliatory interference in her teaching duties and compensatory and punitive damages, as well as attorneys' fees and costs...

Dunfey's choice to remain seated during the pledge was unpopular with parents, who complained to the Seabrook School Board...

The controversy began in the fall of 2004, when Shupe learned Dunfey and some students in her homeroom class remained seated during the Pledge of Allegiance. Shupe, according to Dunfey's court records, called each student one at a time into his office and "falsely accused the Plaintiff of attempting to persuade her students not to participate." Shupe denied that claim in court records.

Dunfey said at the time she did not instruct students to remain seated during the pledge.

At subsequent School Board meetings attended by parents upset by Dunfey's actions, members approved a policy urging respect for the U.S. flag. The board, Dunfey said in court records, "...was barred by law from taking disciplinary action against the Plaintiff for not participating in the Pledge of Allegiance."

Dunfey claims disparaging comments about her at these meetings and the board's expressed desire to take disciplinary action created a negative public controversy that made her fearful for her and her family's personal safety.

Dunfey never stated publicly why she chose to remain seated during the Pledge. "My position is I support federal law, state law and school policy," Dunfey said at the time. "The policy in print at Seabrook Middle School is participation is optional."

Dunfey has taught at the school since 1986. She alleged in the court complaint that in March Shupe told her she was being involuntarily transferred from teaching eighth-grade 20th-century American history to seventh-grade geography.

The suit lists numerous complaints against Shupe and the district...

"It was a culmination of all of the things, going back to a difference of opinion over the pledge issue," said Steven Sacks, a staff attorney with National Education Association, which filed the suit in Dunfey's behalf. "Or the principal's perception of Dianne somehow not setting the right example for these kids."

Teaching the "sanitized" version of Columbus

During class, we discussed the article, "Teaching History so Children Will Care." It made me really think about the effects teachers have in teaching the "unsanitized" version of Columbus and who he really was. I believe that teachers should be able to teach what they want in the classroom, whether that be the real truth about Columbus, or the watered down version. What I am concerned with is, what will happen the next year with a new teacher who teaches the "sanitized" version to a student who was taught the real truth the year before? How will the student react to this?
I think the student will be flustered about the whole subject and not know which teacher to believe. Will this make the student start to doubt texts, and lose interest in the subject altogether? After all, if I were told two different stories, I would not know which one to believe.
As the teacher in this situation, what would you do? I think the teacher would need to have a plan on what actions to take for this child.

The Boston Massacre

While preparing for the teach-in about the Revolutionary War my group and I found some interesting information about the different perspectives of the Boston Massacre. One book I found had a quote from Captain Thomas Preston who was in charge of the British troops involved in the Boston Massacre. Here is the statement he gave in court while being tried for ordering his soldiers to fire at the colonists:

“The mob still increased and were more outrageous, striking their clubs or bludgeons against one another, and calling out, come on you rascals, you bloody backs, you lobster scoundrels, fire if you dare… fire and be damned, we know you dare not, and much more such language was used. At this time I was between the soldiers and the mob, parleying with, and endeavoring all in my power to persuade them to retire peaceably, but to no purpose. They advanced to the points of the bayonets, struck some of them and even the muzzles of the pieces, and seemed to be endeavoring to close with the soldiers. On which some well behaved persons asked me if the guns were charged. I replied yes. They then asked me if I intended to order the men to fire. I answered no, by no means, observing to them that I was advanced before the muzzles of the men’s pieces, and must fall a sacrifice if they fired; that the soldiers were upon the half cocks and charged bayonets, and my giving the word fire under those circumstances would prove me to be no officer. While I was thus speaking, one of the soldiers having received a severe blow with a stick, stepped a little to one side and instantly fired.”
– American Voices from the Revolutionary War by Susan Provost Beller

Reading this was definitely a shock because I always remember learning about the Boston Massacre from only the colonists’ perspective, which made it seem like the British started killing innocent colonists who just happened to be walking down the street. This account from the British captain who was there shows us this perspective alone may not give an accurate picture of the whole story. After reading this quote I still don’t think it was right for the British troops to kill the colonists who were in Boston that day, but I feel like I have a better understanding of what caused this to happen.

In my group we also talked about how this event was covered by the press and I learned that the colonist papers never even mentioned the colonists in Boston on the day of this event were taunting and provoking the British soldiers; they focused solely on the fact that the British killed colonists. This is a clear example of propaganda and was very important in rallying the colonists to go to war with the British. Propaganda has been used like this throughout time and is still used today. This example from history underscores the importance of learning about the different perspectives surrounding events and what influences people to act the ways they do. It also reminds us that we need to be critical of how our media portrays events and help our students do the same.

Christopher Columbus

At the beginning of the year in one of our Social Studies classes, I posed a question about whether not Europeans study Christopher Columbus and if they do, what are they taught? Over the last few weeks I have had the opportunity to talk with some European natives from various countries, all of which confirmed the same thing. In Europe, educators teach Christopher Columbus like we do here. They learn the wonders of and glories of Christopher Columbus and his legend.

In some regards I'm surprised, but at the same time I'm not. I guess I assumed if anything there would be a switch in focus, but according to my informal research there isn't. Interesting!

Youth for Human Rights International

Who says you cannot learn something from watching TV? As I was watching TV this afternoon, a commercial came on (surprise surprise) ... This is the commercial I saw ...



I went on the website that was mentioned at the end of the commercial - www.youthforhumanrights.org and found that there are a total of 30 human rights advertisements produced by this company. This is the direct link to the advertisements, which you can click through on the left side of the screen (in orange) or just scroll down the page to view them all: Youth for Human Rights International.

The site also has materials that you can buy (teachers and educators get a discount), but you can view the commercials online for free. I just think that this is a really interesting tool that can be used in the classroom very easily to discuss human rights issues. The majority of the commercials seem to present the information in a way that is easily accessible and understandable for students because it relates to their experiences.

One of the human rights featured was "No Slavery" (video below). I think that this video in particular can open OUR (meaning teachers') eyes to some issues that we discuss in the past tense, but are really still a struggle for our international, world society. What I mean by this is that, in America we do not think twice of issues of being enslaved or tortured, having basic rights and being protected under law for these rights, or other rights that we take for granted in this country. In other countries around the world, these are the realities of life.



So, I just thought that I would share this site with everyone, as well as some of my insight as to the content's usefulness.

Freedom of speech: Should teachers be "neutral"?

Can teachers take stands on issues, or should they remain "neutral?" Should teachers lose their right to freedom of speech when they walk into a school building? Check out this short news article from teachermagazine.org and see what you think:

The U.S. Supreme Court declined last week to hear the appeal of a former Indiana teacher who alleged that she lost her job because she had discussed the Iraq war in her classroom.

The case was notable because it led to a fairly broad ruling by a federal appeals court that teachers have virtually no First Amendment protection for statements made in the classroom, even on a topic of such public importance as the war.

Deborah A. Mayer was a first-year teacher in the 11,000-student Monroe County, Ind., school district in January 2003 when she used an edition of TIME for Kids in a current-events discussion about the then-impending war.

According to court papers, the magazine reported on a peace march in Washington to protest the prospect of a U.S. invasion of Iraq. Ms. Mayer was asked by a student in her multiage classroom of 3rd through 6th graders if she would ever participate in such a peace demonstration. She told them that when she had driven by recent peace marches in Bloomington, Ind., related to the Iraq situation, she had honked her horn in response to a sign that said, “Honk for Peace.”

“And then I went on to say that I thought it was important for people to seek out peaceful solutions to problems before going to war, and that we train kids to be mediators on the playground so that they can seek out peaceful solutions to their own problems,” Ms. Mayer said in a deposition in the case.

Some parents complained to the principal about the brief discussion, and the principal barred Ms. Mayer from discussing “peace” in her classroom, according to court papers. The principal also canceled the school’s traditional “peace month.”

“We absolutely do not, as a school, promote any particular view on foreign policy related to the situation with Iraq,” Principal Victoria Rogers said in a memo to school personnel at the time. “That is not our business.”

The school district decided in April 2003 not to renew Ms. Mayer’s contract for the next school year. The teacher alleged that it was because of her comments on Iraq, and she sued the district on First Amendment and related grounds.

A U.S. District Court judge in Indianapolis granted summary judgment last year to the school district. In a Jan. 24 ruling, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit, in Chicago, ruled unanimously for the district as well.

“The First Amendment does not entitle primary and secondary teachers, when conducting the education of captive audiences, to cover topics, or advocate viewpoints, that depart from the curriculum adopted by the school system,” the appeals court said.

What do you think? Should teachers have the right to express their opinions in classroom discussions? Should freedom of speech for teachers be regulated? Where should we draw the line?

Discussing Gay and Lesbian Issues in the Elementary Classroom (revisited)

Hi everybody,

I'm bumping this post from Anna up because it kind of got buried amid some other topics, and I'm hoping that some of you have more to say on this issue -- especially after reading the two pieces from Rethinking Our Classrooms. Anna raises some interesting points and a few important questions as well. See what you think, then weigh in.

Anna said:

I think that the two articles we read from the "Rethinking Our Classrooms" book for this upcoming class meeting were quite interesting. They both brought up some really interesting issues regarding gay and lesbian education, particularly for elementary school teachers, and gave some really good tips on how to discuss these issues in the elementary school classroom.

For starters, I definitely agree that, like Mary Cowhey said, "When schools do get involved in promoting gay-straight alliances and so forth, it is usually at the secondary level" (173). In my own experience, I don't think that discussion about gay and lesbian rights and issues began until late middle school; and gay-straight clubs and groups were definitely not part of extracurricular activities until high school. I wonder why that is, though. I never gave it much thought until reading these two articles, but it definitely seems like although children are beginning to use hurtful words relating to gays and lesbians, like "faggot" or "dyke," at an early age (Gordon claimed even by 1st grade students are using these words to be hurtful towards one another!) the issue is not being addressed until much later in their schooling.

I think that part of the problem might be that we as educators are ourselves still a bit uncomfortable with the issues regarding gays and lesbians. I don't think that there is much of an emphasis in our preparation within the Education program that shows us how to deal with gay and lesbian issues as much as with issues of racism and intolerance. As the articles reveal, however, the issues of anti-gay language and behavior in the classroom are just as much issues of intolerance as anything else that we discuss in the classroom. This is where the other part of the reason comes in ...

Another part of the reason is that parents are also uncomfortable, especially at the elementary school level. I genuinely think that if homosexuality was discussed in the elementary classroom much like issues of antisemitism, racism, womens' rights, etc., there would be a number of parents who would be outraged. Even if the problem of children calling one another "faggot" was dealt with in the proper, educational way, much like Gordon suggested, I don't think that parents would be too pleased. I think that our society is still too deeply rooted in thinking that being gay or lesbian is "wrong" and "taboo." Therefore, until our society accepts being homosexual as just another way of life, then I don't think that we will be seeing these issues discussed as much as other issues of intolerance.

What I wonder is - -
If we are to teach about gay and lesbian issues in the elementary school classroom, when do we do it? Do we make it part of our tolerance curriculum like any other issue, or do we wait until it shows up in our own classroom by a student calling another student an anti-gay or lesbian term that is intended to be hurtful?

(If you want to read a few responses that have already been posted on this topic, scroll down to Anna's original post below.)

Does Zinn matter?

We've spent quite a bit of time so far this semester with Howard Zinn's A People's History of the United States (that's him to the right). So I'm wondering: Do you think Zinn is relevant for elementary teachers? Is there anything -- in terms of his approach to history, the content of the chapters you've read, the voices that are heard in his text -- that will be useful for you as a teacher of social studies? Even if you wouldn't use A People's History with your students, has it taught you anything worthwhile? Or do you think the class time we've spent on Zinn would have been better utilized reading about/discussing methods or strategies that are specifically geared for elementary teachers?

Whatever your opinion, be honest. Don't just say what you think I want to hear.

The world in which you were born...

What, if anything, does the quote on this poster have to do with teaching -- and teaching social studies in particular?

Teaching Values in the Classroom

As the Wolk article states, there is much controversy in teaching values in the classroom. This is a concept that I have many mixed feelings about. I believe that many values should be instilled in the home. Parents have their own values and beliefs; it is their right to pass these on to their children. Furthermore, parents may have beliefs that contradict those of the classroom teacher. In teaching contradictory values, the teacher is inadvertently telling the child that his or her parents are "wrong." This can be very confusing for the child and may also introduce feelings of discomfort in the child.

My uncertainty comes about when a child is making decisions that are considered "poor" in a school setting. For instance, if a child is showing signs of violence or gang relations, schools often intervene in order to try and place the child on a different path. However, what happens if the child has parents who are in a gang? By interfering with the child, he is also being told to go against his parents' values. While it is obvious from a teacher's perspective that gang involvement is wrong, who are we to judge? I'd be interesting in hearing other people's perspectives on this subject matter.

"One nation under God"

Our Pledge of Allegiance states: "One nation under God;" and "In God we trust" is printed on our currency. Removing these phrases has long been debated. I am interested in what types of questions and discussions will follow this vision:

“Foundations can’t be moved, without destroying ability. If the foundation of this building we’re in right now were removed, what would happen to the building? It would collapse. Now you can move the building and put it on another foundation, but that foundation…it’s there, because foundations are secure. Because this nation we know what the foundation is. It’s all over the constitution; it’s all over the walls of the Jefferson Memorial, Lincoln Memorial. It’s written throughout history. Regardless of what the politicians believe, regardless of what you and I attest to, treat this truth; the founding fathers built it on the truth of the word of God. Everything about the laws of this land were taken from the scripture of the Old Testament. They were right from the Old Testament books of the law. And so, you can’t move away from that foundation without destroying the nation. And so this whole debate and argument over what’s truth and what’s not truth, the only truth I found of this nation is we left a country of tyranny, for religious freedom to worship." -Sonic Flood

In response to the reading, do you believe these phrases should be removed from our Pledge of Allegiance and/or our currency?

Columbus Day

As Columbus day approaches, many teachers are beginning to teach a little bit on the explorer. I wanted to see how teachers are currently teaching this subject and if you agree with the way it is taught or disagree. I know that my teacher is going to shed a little light on this topic and mention moreso the voyage and who Christopher Columbus was. I am in a first grade classroom and I thought that the way my teacher was going about this topic was just right for this age. She was going to focus on how long the trip was and what kind of ship he traveled with. She was also going to talk about explorers and other famous ones in the United States. She felt that it was important to talk about who he was since we do have a day just for him. I wanted to see how other teachers were going to portray this man and the whole topic of Columbus.

Discussing Gay & Lesbian Issues in the Elementary School

I think that the two articles we read from the "Rethinking Our Classrooms" book for this upcoming class meeting were quite interesting. They both brought up some really interesting issues regarding gay and lesbian education, particularly for elementary school teachers, and gave some really good tips on how to discuss these issues in the elementary school classroom.

For starters, I definitely agree that, like Mary Cowhey said, "When schools do get involved in promoting gay-straight alliances and so forth, it is usually at the secondary level" (173). In my own experience, I don't think that discussion about gay and lesbian rights and issues began until late middle school; and gay-straight clubs and groups were definitely not part of extracurricular activities until high school. I wonder why that is, though. I never gave it much thought until reading these two articles, but it definitely seems like although children are beginning to use hurtful words relating to gays and lesbians, like "faggot" or "dyke," at an early age (Gordon claimed even by 1st grade students are using these words to be hurtful towards one another!) the issue is not being addressed until much later in their schooling.

I think that part of the problem might be that we as educators are ourselves still a bit uncomfortable with the issues regarding gays and lesbians. I don't think that there is much of an emphasis in our preparation within the Education program that shows us how to deal with gay and lesbian issues as much as with issues of racism and intolerance. As the articles reveal, however, the issues of anti-gay language and behavior in the classroom are just as much issues of intolerance as anything else that we discuss in the classroom. This is where the other part of the reason comes in ...

Another part of the reason is that parents are also uncomfortable, especially at the elementary school level. I genuinely think that if homosexuality was discussed in the elementary classroom much like issues of antisemitism, racism, womens' rights, etc., there would be a number of parents who would be outraged. Even if the problem of children calling one another "faggot" was dealt with in the proper, educational way, much like Gordon suggested, I don't think that parents would be too pleased. I think that our society is still too deeply rooted in thinking that being gay or lesbian is "wrong" and "taboo." Therefore, until our society accepts being homosexual as just another way of life, then I don't think that we will be seeing these issues discussed as much as other issues of intolerance.

What I wonder is - -
If we are to teach about gay and lesbian issues in the elementary school classroom, when do we do it? Do we make it part of our tolerance curriculum like any other issue, or do we wait until it shows up in our own classroom by a student calling another student an anti-gay or lesbian term that is intended to be hurtful?

Promising Practices

On the first day of class, we talked about 15 "promising practices" for teaching social studies. They're described in some detail in the first document of your course pack. Are you seeing some of these teaching practices enacted by your mentor teacher (or by you, if you've taught a social studies lesson)? If so, can you share what you've seen? What are some examples of good social studies teaching that you see happening in your classroom?

Scary Columbus

I've been thinking about the discussions we had in class (both in Elgin and Wheeling) about the possibility of using the book Encounter, by Jane Yolen, with primary-aged kids as a way to enter into a discussion about Columbus. Some of you said you would consider using it, but many said you thought it would be more appropriate for older students -- 4th or 5th grade at least. One of the reasons that was given was that the illustrations (like the one of Columbus lusting after a piece of gold, above) were too intense and might scare small children.

That got me thinking: What about all the scary characters in Disney movies that are targeted for young children? There's almost always a villain, and whoever the villain is, he/she is typically depicted in pretty frightening ways. Yet we don't seem to feel conflicted about taking 6 or 7 year-olds to see these movies.

So why is Encounter different? Are we really concerned that it might scare kids any more than the average Disney film does? Or is the real issue that we feel a tinge of guilt about presenting the "hero" Columbus in less than flattering terms?

2 views on Chief Illiniwek

The Indian mascot issue seems to have struck a nerve with several people, so I thought you might be interested in reading an article ("3rd-grade lesson: Illiniwek has to go") I wrote in the Chicago Sun-Times about Chief Illiniwek in 2001. Also, if you'd like to read a response to my article written by Roger Ebert (yes, that Roger Ebert -- he's an alum of U of I), click here.

Native Americans as mascots

Our class had a great discussion about how being called an Indian as a team mascot seems to be degrading to Native Americans--that this is going too far. A question came up while I was thinking more about the discussion we had in class. I want to know your opinions to this question. Do teams choose minority groups as their mascots as their way of recognizing minorities? Is it a way for the majority to let minorities know they acknowledge them and "accept" who they are?
In my opinion, my answer to this is a surprising yes! It's no fun for your team to be named after your own ethnic group. What's the fun in that? By calling a team the Indians, that team is acknowledging this group of people. They are silently suggesting they want to be and act like Indians. Come to think of it, all teams have mascots named after strong or fast animals. I think I just changed my answer! Do teams name themselves Indians, perceiving Indians as animals? There are no other ethnic group mascots except for the Indians, right? I am ashamed to think that Indians are seen as animals like the rest of all the mascots.

Indian Princesses

We were talking in class on Monday about Native Americans and the many stereotypes they face, one being in mascots. I began thinking about when I was younger and involved in Indian Princesses. Each group of girls and dads was a “tribe” and each person had their own “Indian name”. I vividly remember my dad and I thinking of our names and then making a special nametag on our first meeting. My tribe, the Sauk tribe, would meet every week or so. We would also go on campouts with all of the other tribes from our area.
Being that I was young, I don’t know how it was all organized, but we would have many traditions during the campouts such as chanting our tribe name at dinner, competing against other father-daughter tribes, even wearing headdresses. I did some research to see if it is still something that happens and found, it is sponsored by the YMCA and is supposed to support a strong father-daughter relationship.
While none of the activities we did were blatantly mocking Native Americans, I now wonder what their thoughts are on this tradition. Was anybody else involved in something like this? Did you do similar things? Do you know of any Native Americans who are offended by this program?

Analyzing children's books

One topic we'll be discussing this week in class is the importance of using quality children's literature in teaching social studies. One of your readings for this week, "10 Quick Ways to Analyze Children's Books for Racism and Sexism," points out that teachers also need to be aware of bias and stereotypes in children's books, and that they should avoid books that present distorted perceptions of women or people of color.

What do you think of the guidelines for analyzing children's literature that are laid out in the article? Is this good advice, or "political correctness" run amuk? Should teachers put this much thought into what books they choose, or is it asking too much? How important is it for different social groups to be fairly represented on the classroom bookshelves?

Questions, questions, questions

There's lots of good discussion going on here already, and please continue with those threads, but I wanted to post a few questions/comments gleaned from your homework for last class. We'll never be able to give all these the time and attention they deserve, but if nothing else, they'll give you a sense of what some of your classmates are pondering. And if you'd like to start a new thread with one of these questions, feel free.

RE: MULTICULTURALISM

• How are you supposed to integrate a whole unit on a different culture but still keep the main curriculum intact? Where is the time? (Rachel)
• How would you bring about the conversation with principals and parents that multicultural education needs to be brought into schools? Where do you start? (Molly)
• How can we gain administrative support to change the curriculum when administrators are so focused on meeting AYP and NCLB? (Larissa)

RE: RACISM

• Why is racism (historically and currently) always a black/white issue? Why is it that whites are always accused of being the problem? (Marla)
• What conditions still exist today that help racism continue? How can we as teachers work on discovering these conditions and help our students discover them, too? What can we (and our students) do to try to start changing these conditions? (Shannon)

RE: COLUMBUS/ZINN/HOW TO TEACH HISTORY (These also relate to the "To teach or not to teach..." post below.)

• How do you use A People's History and the issues it raises in a primary grade? How can you take this information and make it understandable to a first or second grader? (Sara O.)
• Obviously, teachers and others have glamorized and treated Columbus as a hero, omitting the harsh facts. How can teachers, especially at the primary levels, instruct students about brutal truths in history in a way that they understand? (Kaitlin S.)
• Is it really bad to sugarcoat certain aspects of history for younger grade levels? (Michelle M.)
• The real question is: Which culture is more advanced? Advanced does not necessarily mean technologically advanced or more wealthy. What is really savage? Is it killing people or living in huts? What does it mean to be civilized? (Mary)

Representation in literature & textbooks

While reading "Caught Between Invisibility and Stereotyping: Teaching the Novel Shabanu," I was struck by the following quote. "Said argued that Western authors, artists, scholars and educators have consistently offered their readers highly simplistic representations of the societies we have colonized" (180). My immediate reaction was, we offer simplistic representations because we don't want to feel bad or guilty about what we've done to those complex societies. It appears as though there is a conscience effort made to make the colonization of advanced societies less aversive.

Can we not also include those who manufacture classroom textbooks in simplistic representation of colonized societies? In class last week, we very briefly discussed the textbook industry and the conformity to certain textbooks that is created when California or Texas decide to use a particular one. Will there ever be a time when textbooks accurately represent societies that we have colonized or history in general? And, if this proves to be an impossibility, what can we do as teachers to go against the grain?

Display Name

I started writing Greg an e-mail, but then I decided to make a post about it because I think that there might be at least a few other people who are wondering the same thing --

Is our display name supposed to be our name (i.e. Anna), our ULID (i.e. asilber), or our complete ISU e-mail address (i.e. asilber@ilstu.edu)?

I'm just noticing that we're not all using the same display name format, and wondering if there's one uniform display name form we're supposed to be using. Any input would be much appreciated! Thanks! :)

To teach or not to teach...that is the question

I was curious and wanted to see other views and opinions on this topic. What should be taught in school about "the truth of Columbus"? We were given this information and where do we go from here? Should we incorporate this into the curriculum. I feel that we can let students know that there are many different sides to a story, but should we teach them this side? If we should teach this other side then when? Primary? Intermediate? I had many questions on this topic after reading the chapter and want to see others' opinions.

Taking issue with Enid Lee

Larissa posted this comment, but it was kind of hidden and I didn't know if anybody would see it, so I'm re-posting it here. I'd be interested to hear what others think. (Some of you in Wheeling voiced your opinions on this today).

Larissa said: On a separate note... The article entitled "Taking Multicultural, Anti-Racist Education Seriously" really bothered me. I understand the point of the interview with Enid Lee was to better define what multicultural/anti-racist education is and how it works; however, Lee comes off extremely strong with her point of view. I felt as if Lee looks down upon every single teacher, school, district, and state that does not use this "multicultural/anti-racist education."She states, "If you don't take multicultural education or anti-racist education seriously, you are actually promoting a monocultural or racist education" (ROC, pp. 15).

After reading this comment I felt that if we do not include every other cultrual perspective or every "voice of the people who are frequently silenced," then we are not "taking it seriously." But, it's not possible to include every single culture or every single voice in the curriculum. There just isn't enough time to do something like that. So, my question, then, is are we promoting a false pretense of multicultural or anti-racist education? And, does it mean that we are not taking it seriously??

A People's History of the U.S.

We'll talk about this more during our next class, but I'd be interested to get some feedback on your reading from A People's History (Chapter 1 & 2). I'm particularly interested in your reflections in two areas:

1) The historical content itself -- what you learned, what was new to you, what you questioned, what you had a strong reaction to.

2) Zinn's approach as a historian, which he details on pages 8-12.

And now, for a little historical perspective...

Editorial cartoons can be a great resource to use with 5th-8th grade students when examining current issues. How might you use this cartoon in a social studies class? Or, alternatively, what do you think of the point of view about "illegal" immigration that is being expressed by the cartoonist? Do you think his point is a valid one?

Hi everybody

Welcome to the blog. I look forward to hearing your thoughts, discussing/debating ideas, and thinking through teaching dilemmas together. Remember, you can post your own topics or respond to someone else's -- either way, just be part of the conversation.