Sexual Education 3-25-12

Fine and McLelland’s article makes me wonder about three things in particular:  1) If school’s were not bound by monetary incentives, would schools allow and teachers comfortably reach out and teach the many facets of sexual education necessary and covered in this article; 2) At what grade level do we begin this curriculum – due to the nature and culture of individual student’s homes, as well as maturity level, some have a need for this education earlier than others and others should not be educated too thoroughly, too soon; 3) It seems we should at the same time be educating parents/guardians of our students, especially those of the socio-economically compromised groups, such as “Black, Latino, and Native American youth, those living in poverty, and/or recently immigrated to the United States.“

Regarding the first point, I know of some wonderful Health teachers who would have no problem discussing and being open about any of the topics discussed in the article and others who I think would quickly gloss over certain subjects. That alone could make the difference in a good, comprehensive sexual education.

Health is one of the topics whose coverage in school has been reduced, but not eliminated.  Because some students are more sexually aware, or exposed to more sexual matter or talk in their lives, or possibly abuse, they need to discuss this subject matter much earlier, where other students may not be developmentally ready for as in-depth discussions. So how do we decide at what grade to teach the various topics?

Schools, unfortunately, often fill in gaps that parents and guardians have been unable to talk to their kids about due to work, culture, lack of education, or other factors.  These adults may or may not be receptive, but schools should offer open forums to discuss these matters and explain what services are available to them and their students in the community and how best to speak with their children.

Lastly, to speak to Anderson’ article on homosexual teens, the school I work in has many openly gay and lesbian students, and our students are very accepting, even though I know there are some students who are also homophobic.  We have also had a transgender student who identified as female and began the surgical process of changing to female near the end of the year.   Even so, I agree with the problems and issues related in the article, because homosexuality is so ‘taboo’ during the adolescent years, and I cannot imagine how difficult it must be, added on to the other school and life issues facing pre-teens.

Students Oppose Schooling, Not Education.

Seguin High School is a very large school that appears to be losing many of its students due to scheduling chaos and pre-conceived notions about the students by many of the staff.  How can students who are placed haphazardly into classes – filled to over-capacity and into the wrong placement- feel like their education is valued by the staff at the school?  Many of the examples Valenzeula shares from her time at the school are a sad commentary on teaching that is not geared toward student learning, but on teachers which are convinced students are to blame for their lack of learning.   I was appalled that a teacher would say in front of his students, as Mr. Johnson did, “… Look at them, they’re not going anywhere.  I can tell you right now, a full quarter of these students will drop out of school come May.”   I know from experience teachers can get frustrated with their classes, but negative comments about students should never be okay.  

Many schools lack resources and have overcrowding, but I think, as Valenzuela mentions, there need to be teacher to teacher connections to help teachers discuss ideas for improving classrooms and student learning and to discuss how to help students be successful in their school.  The teacher to student connections are often what help keep the students in school (or sometimes just in particular classes).   Valenzuela’s examples of teachers that were liked by their students (Ms. Aranda, Ms. Novak, Mr. Lundgren) demonstrate that connection and how important caring was for students.

            I was very interested in the student perspectives from both papers, and tried to compare them with my own students’ backgrounds.   As their teachers, we have to try to get students to see value in something (education) that is often very foreign to them – separate from the life they have at home or on the streets -  and put it in context with what their future could hold if they break from the cycle they may currently be in (whether it be drugs, gangs, welfare/poverty, abuse, young parenthood).   This takes time, and so many of our students drop out before we can reach them.   There is pressure from other friends not in school, or sometimes depression, and sometimes situations at home, that prevent students from attending.    Many of our students have already been unsuccessful at their previous schools and are prepared to fail again, and we need to change that mind-set, but we need to keep them coming to school first.   And of course it is a challenge to keep all students interested in all classes all day.  We have a caring environment and caring staff at my school, but it takes time to form these bonds, as Mr. Sosa stated in Valenzeula’s paper.   I need them to stay in school:  Who can teach me to make really good taquitos?

Student Achievement 3-5-12

Chapter 8 in my book, on understanding school achievement, has probably had the most impact on me to date.  Reading about the history of the different theories on the factors influencing student success and failure was informative, but, more importantly for me, confirmed my feelings that there really isn’t any one way to address all students problems with success or failure. 

            I reflected on my own experiences with students when reading about resistance theory, since those descriptors could be used with many students at my school; passive, passive-aggressive, disengaged, skipping classes, not participating (p288).   To answer the question of why students would resist education in this manner, the authors suggest it might be ‘a school climate that rejects students identities.’  I want to think that as a school we are sensitive to student identities, but I really need to give this more thought, and bring it up to other teachers I work with. 

            Prudence Carter, a researcher that disagreed with the former theories, explained academic achievement as a result of ‘attachment to and engagement in school’ and I could not agree more.   Achieving these through cultural identity is something I would like to pursue more in my own practice.

            The case study of Paul Chavez was moving and informative.   He has gained a lot of insight in his short life, and we cannot minimize the positive effect of his parents, particularly his mother and his fifth grade teacher.  The issue of care within the school is just as important as the value of education.  But it is the combination of his personality, character, and outside influences (good and bad) that led him to make the choices that he did and to where he is now, and hopefully to continue on this positive path.   Schools and teachers need to provide the resources, the safe and caring environment, the academic and differentiated instruction, and so much more, and we hope to show to students the many paths available to them, but in the end it is the individual students that make the decisions about what they do with their lives.

Latinos and Caring 3-4-12

Rolon-Dow is in a school with a mix of teachers, some of which have made a connection with students and developed a sense of care with students and some of which have not.  Which is not to say that those who do not have the ‘authentic care’ the girls desire are bad teachers (or good teachers), but the students’ needs are not being met.  So are we saying ‘aesthetic care’ is not enough?  Or aesthetic care is not enough for minority students only?

            Mr. Rosenfield certainly left a lot to be desired in what was demonstrated in this paper of his teaching practice.  Rolon-Dow comments that ‘In his concern with the aesthetic dimensions of teaching and learning, he believed it was best to conduct his classroom as if it existed in isolation from the homes and community of the students.  Interpreting Mr. Rosenfield’s words and actions without examining the racial/ethnic context in which they occurred or his racialized beliefs about that context does not provide enough information to determine why students in his class such as Yanira may have felt uncared for.’  Yet she justifies explaining his care as racist based on the school’s and communities negative racial/ethnic characteristics. (p97)  Was he caring?  Certainly not.  Was it racist?  I don’t think she can make that conclusion.  Particularly if the author wants to conclude that latinos are being racially discriminated against.  All minorities are being uncared for here.  The author's point is that caring and connections is a need that students have beyond the academics in the classroom, and she interviews latino girls to make this point.

          I do agree with the statement that teachers need to become learners in the communities that they teach in and connect with these communities and consequently understand and connect with their students.  ‘Educator’s efforts to critically care by providing a racially conscious pedagogy should also lead to opportunities to use the community as an extension of the classroom.’  (p106)