The Tyak reading was interesting because it raises some important questions that are just as relevent now as they were to our founding Fathers.
On the very first page of this reading we are told that American society was "socially diverse, scattered across a continent, politically contentious, religiously splintered, and averse to government." No big difference there.
We also learn that all forms of education have a hidden (or not so hidden) agenda that may have political, moral or religious teachings at its core, and that public education's early founders were "apt to assume that people like themselves were exemplars of worthy citizenship (page 11)."
Although our forefathers may have been blindsighted in their views, considering the historial context, it made sense for a new nation to be concerned about the civic education of its citizens, and the establishment of public education, with all its flaws was a great legacy that cannot be denied.
So in our class, "Public Purposes of Education", it can be said that the first purpose of American public education was to teach civic duty and responsibility. According to Tyak, sub-purposes of a republican education were to stabalize society (ie: law and order) and to preserve freedom.
On page 12, Tyak makes what I think is a critical point, and that is that education today may have shifted in purpose to one of "economic survivalism". In plain speak this means that schools today must prepare students to make a living and survive in what has become an increasingly competitive "dog-eat-dog" global world -- hence another item to put on the list of "public purposes of education".
In spite of their zeal in perpetuating their agenda, these forefathers being the intelligent men that they were, realized the many shortcomings in a single approach to educating people from so many diverse cultures, and therefore took measures to prevent controversy and to ensure that students became as ethnically cleansed as possible.
By contrast, today's educators place much emphasis on teaching "cultural diversity". So the question is, is there a standard for teaching curriculum that every American citizen should know, that is free of cultural bias while preserving the individual's identity at the same time?
I think the answer is yes and no.
On another classmate's posting, there was a reference to those African-Americans who feel that the public school system is just trying to make them "white" and look with distain to others of their race who are trying to "fit in" by achieving. (And yes, I agree with this classmate, that this attitude is not held by every member of this group). Yet, I do not see what is "white" about achieving good grades, and learning what you need to know to be an informed and contributing citizen.
While hip-hop music, for example, may be cool and may even be considered to be an art form by some, it does not (in my opinion), espouse anything that will help its listeners to get ahead and succeed in the world. Therefore, to some degree, I think we have to stop worrying about being politically correct all the time, (you can't please all of the people all of the time) and agree on the basic values that are common to all humanity-- those that as John Swett astutely identified in 1855 - self-knowledge, self-restraint, honesty, impartiality, patience, courtesy, etc. - have not really changed.
What needs to adapt itself to changing times however, is content knowledge making sure that what is being taught academically is preparing students for the challenging times ahead. Global-warming, its causes and solution, for example is something that previously was not found in textbooks.
So is there room for cultural diversity in the classroom? Yes, I think our cultures can be expressed in our artwork, the foods we eat, the music we listen to, the clothes we wear and in a thousand other myriad ways. But in the end, we are ALL global citizens with much to learn together and from each other both in and out of the classroom.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
The trick in public schools, I guess, is to find that balance between stamping out a student's culture and completely ignoring to 'Americanize' the student. what you've written about African American students suspicious of being pigeon holed into acting white is, sadly, sometimes true, but I like your personal commentary about it. Why is academic sucess seen as a 'white' thing in 2007? Obviously, there's some message these kids are receiving that minorites aren't 'suppossed' to be studious. It must be our job as teachers to find out whhere it's coming from...
I agree with most of what you said, and you summarized/ took some good points out of the reading. However, i do not think the question is really "Is there room for cultural diversity in the classroom," only because there is and there always will be cultural diversity in the classroom. I do agree that yes there is room for cultural diversity in the classroom. Then the question that comes to mind is what are we really trying to teach. If we are so concerned with cultural diversity in the class room, are some teachers in fact trying to shelter students from different cultures. I believe the goal of teachers is to teach kids how to learn for themselves, and not just teach them certain things. Although we will be teaching them certain skills, the best skill they can learn from us is how to learn without being taught in a formal setting. It may sound dumb but some people really don't know how to pull knowledge out of the world you live in every day. The point is that it should not be the case of is there room for cultural diversity, but there without a doubt should be, because it will only further students knowledge.
Post a Comment