This week's readings, albeit not surprising, are thought provoking, especially given where we live (in the center of civic engagement). They also get to the heart of some of the issues behind the reasons I want to teach overall.
I found this quote particularly relevant: "while political engagement is up, community engagement is down." People continue to form civic opinions without a basis steeped in reality, or in their physical communities, for their decision making; the increase in news intake in our society has allowed the general public to grow ever increasingly self involved, and at the same time continue to develop opinions on civics and community. In my mind, this is what bridges the gap in participation between political engagement and community engagement--people believe they are participating because they form opinions, but they are lacking an external investment (believing they are part of a community) to drive engagement in that realm.
I'm inspired by this article to encourage empathy and community engagement as reasons behind teaching civics.
The notion of English and Math being the only tested subjects also drives me to be a social studies teacher. I understand the fundamental logic--that these two classes teach the basic skills of reading, writing, and math. But the social studies classroom (in theory) is so rich with Language Arts practice, that it's almost a matter of fiction versus nonfiction (when it comes to reading and writing material). It should be on the same pedestal.
Long, rambling rant, but the article spoke to my inner social studies teacher!
Monday, February 28, 2011
Sunday, February 13, 2011
Not really about documentary films...
This week's articles on using film in the classroom was thought provoking and timely, given that in the Marcus & Stoddard piece, teachers attribute PBS as their main source of documentary material, yet this week, Congress voted to eliminate their funding ASAP (since this is my blog, I'll take a second to encourage you to sign the petition). I found the suggested uses of the film in the classroom ideal, both because they reinforce the idea of teaching perspective in the classroom, and because they are incredibly progressive and evocative in subject.
It also surprised me that teachers found documentaries to be objective, and then upon reflection, it didn't; in college I made a historical documentary as part of class, and reflecting back on the experience, I realize we had a definitive agenda when we set out making the film--to push the timeline of African American activism much earlier than Rosa Parks and the sit-in movement.
What really got me thinking from these articles, however, wasn't the concept of using film in the classroom--which I plan on doing in the ways that these authors suggest. It was the Bayard Rustin documentary, and the classroom lessons that could be derived from it. I found the notion that, "Gay people have replaced African Americans as the "barometer for civil rights"" (Hess, p. 197), so evocative, and such a conversation starter. It got me thinking whether or not my students will be mature enough to navigate a discussion about that type of subject matter, and whether or not I am unbiased enough to mediate it. The idea of showing such a film, and broaching such a topic, makes me almost nervous enough to avoid doing so. But then this notion got me thinking even further: at what point do I get to decide what is taught in my classroom?
A discussion of this sort would surely bring up responses that are offensive, even if innocent, and a way initially to mitigate those would be to center the discussion around this one quote, and use public opinion data to avoid talking about ourselves. But this would surely still offend some people based on subject alone.
At what point do we allow ourselves to make choices on what we will and will not include in our classrooms: in discussions, in materials, in curriculum? Do I ever get that power? And when we get to these discussions, do I have the power to empower the viewpoint that I believe is right, if it's not written into a handed down curriculum (when it comes to homosexuals, discrimination, etc)?
I think some of these questions are resolved in presenting a variety of perspectives, but at some point, there is a right and a wrong.
It also surprised me that teachers found documentaries to be objective, and then upon reflection, it didn't; in college I made a historical documentary as part of class, and reflecting back on the experience, I realize we had a definitive agenda when we set out making the film--to push the timeline of African American activism much earlier than Rosa Parks and the sit-in movement.
What really got me thinking from these articles, however, wasn't the concept of using film in the classroom--which I plan on doing in the ways that these authors suggest. It was the Bayard Rustin documentary, and the classroom lessons that could be derived from it. I found the notion that, "Gay people have replaced African Americans as the "barometer for civil rights"" (Hess, p. 197), so evocative, and such a conversation starter. It got me thinking whether or not my students will be mature enough to navigate a discussion about that type of subject matter, and whether or not I am unbiased enough to mediate it. The idea of showing such a film, and broaching such a topic, makes me almost nervous enough to avoid doing so. But then this notion got me thinking even further: at what point do I get to decide what is taught in my classroom?
A discussion of this sort would surely bring up responses that are offensive, even if innocent, and a way initially to mitigate those would be to center the discussion around this one quote, and use public opinion data to avoid talking about ourselves. But this would surely still offend some people based on subject alone.
At what point do we allow ourselves to make choices on what we will and will not include in our classrooms: in discussions, in materials, in curriculum? Do I ever get that power? And when we get to these discussions, do I have the power to empower the viewpoint that I believe is right, if it's not written into a handed down curriculum (when it comes to homosexuals, discrimination, etc)?
I think some of these questions are resolved in presenting a variety of perspectives, but at some point, there is a right and a wrong.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)