Talking Points 7

Teaching Boys and Girls Seperately
By: Elizabeth Weil

Matthew Sawyer

1. "Have you ever heard of Title IX?' referring to the 1972 Educational Amendments that outlaw all discriminations is education programs on the basis of sex."

2."He might as well have said 'Boys are active, Girls are passive.'

3. "There are too many exceptions to the rule."

*the following response is satire and sarcastic meant as the best possible outcome for venting my frustration of Dr. Sax's ludicris beliefs.

Why separate classes based on sex? Because we should. Infact, why stop just at sex? Why not separate based on race, religion, income, etc.? There is irrefutable proof that boys are more capable of learning what schools are trying to teach than girls are. Why not separate so we can train our boys for the working world and our girls for the kitchen? It would be financially responsible as well, as we could stop educating the female population once we train them how to cook, clean, reproduce and fake an orgasm. Boys on the other hand need proper training on how to perform manual labor, do complex arithmatic, and indepth analysis of documents. As a matter of fact, we should continue the separation to race. As scientific documents put out in the 1700's and beyond state that blacks are scientifically inferior to whites, why should they deserve the same education. And since the Jews killed jesus, why do they deserve education as well. The same could be said for the poor, who are only bred for manual labor. Why not just jump directly to the point and educate only the rich, white, straight, catholic, able-bodied men? why continue to waste money on these lesser classes when we can be funding the education of those that truly deserve it? The country's education program is in a downward-spiral because we are attempting to educate the uneducatable. So please Dr. Sax, help us educate only the deserving, push forth your gender separated education and help us put this country back to the 1700's where it belongs.

Talking Points 6

A Particularly Cheap White Wine
By: Tim Wise

Matthew Sawyer

"The president of the College Republicans at Boston University, announces raced-based scholarships for people of color are the worst form of bigotry confronting America today."

"However the College Republicans at Boston University may seek to sin it, make no mistake, the effort to end affirmative action, whether in terms of admissions or scholarships, will have an undeniable impact."

"Colleges will become increasingly populated with white students whose SAT scores might be mightily impressive, but whose moral and ethical compasses, to say nothing of their understanding of the real world, leave something just as mighty to be desired."

As explained in the first quote, Tim Wise's article focuses on a growing feeling that race-based scholarships are in fact forms of bigotry themselves rather than a means at reducing such bigotry. Wise is very adamant in his position and also very convincing, citing various articles and statistics supporting his claims. Throughout most of his article, Wise had me convinced about the legitimacy about his position, until his final sentence, the third quote i chose. This quote for me, underlines the main purpose of Wise's paper, a statistically backed racist rant explaining why Black students are more deserving of a scholarship than white students. Rather than explaining the need for stricter guidelines regarding race-based scholarships, or scholarships based more on financial need rather than race, Wise continues to explain that Black college students simply have something more "real" to offer to the college than white students. In Wise's mind, white students have compromised morale and ethics and have no real understanding of the real world. It is in this statement that wise's article fails, transforming from an informative essay attempting to persuade a point, into a statistically sound article catered to one man's racist view.

Talking Points 5

In The Service Of What?
By: Joseph Kahne and Joel Westheimer

Matthew Sawyer

1) Service learning makes students active participants in service projects that aim to respond to the needs of the community while furthering the academic goals of students.

2)These curriculum theorists and educational reformers wanted students to engage in service learning projects so that they would recognize that their academic abilities and collective commitments could help them respond in meaningful ways to a variety of social concerns.

3)Citizenship requires that individuals work to create, evaluate, criticize, and change public institutions and programs.

"In the Service of What?" focusses on the debate concerning service learning projects. The debate doesn't concern whether or not to have one, as both sides are pretty adament on the need and benefits of a service learning project, but focuses more on weither or not projects should focus on giving or caring. Giving projects have more to do with physically helping another person, group, or cause while Caring projects focus more on why another person, gorup, or cause needs our help and how to go about changing their place in our culture. Many conservatives believe strongly in Giving projects as their goal is a stronger community less reliant on government intervention while liberals tend to favor Caring projects that help government organizations change and adapt in order to better serve the community as a whole. Kahne and Westheimer disagree with both of these sides and believe in a more unified effort. While giving projects lack an analytical process that identifies a cause and creates workable solutions, caring projects lack a physical component important in a students growth. Thus, a combination of both projects would create a more well rounded student who is able to identify social issues, work with those immediately affected by said issues, and work together to create a solution for these issues. Not only would this type of service learning create a more knowledgeable student, it would facilitate an immediate and long-lasting solution to our societys problems.

two videos concerning gayness

the first video is a response to proposition 8 being accepted. the second video is in response to the various suicides across our nation at the hands of bullies simply because a child was gay or they felt he was gay. *warning the first video contains strong profanity*

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sq4CbGlVf6o

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ax96cghOnY4

Talking Points 4

Unlearning the Myths That Bind Us
By Linda Christensen

Matthew Sawyer

I know this is a bit of a departure from the standard structure of the talking points blog but there were a few things related to the article i wanted to discuss before the quotes. After reading some blogs, i noticed a lot of comments about the stereotypes put in place by the cartoons and movies we grew up with, but what about the stereotypes being broken down by today's children's media. For instance, Shrek shows us that it is okay to be "ugly or fat" by societies standards and still be beautiful on the inside, and that who you are on the inside is what really matters. Also, it shows that two people of different "races" can marry and be happy and that's okay. What about princess and the frog which stars a black female character who starts her own business? How do you think that shows children now what they can accomplish. A lot of people are also forgetting what those Disney movies taught us: the difference between good and evil, how good people act, that good people will eventually get what they desire. There's nothing wrong with desiring love, possessions, and happiness, what is wrong is when we achieve these things at the expense of someone else, a morale that almost every Disney movie teaches us.

1)"No one wants to admit that they have been 'handled' by the media."

I question whether or not the media actually handles anyone. Does the media really determine society, or is media actually just a reflection of the values society holds? Does media influence society or does society influence media? It's almost as if asking whether the chicken or egg came first.

2)"Of course, there should also be more women of color on the supreme court, in Congress, and scrubbing up for surgeries."

This quote is more of an off-hand comment by Christensen and quickly moved away from, but is the root of the problem we see. If the media doesn't cater to society, how could it ever become a successful enterprise? If our society is unwilling to promote more women of color to high education and important positions, then why would one think that they would be interested in seeing a woman of color as the main role in a movie?

3)"They just want to see more rich people of color, or more rich women. Or better yet, be rich themselves."

This quote is exactly my point. These students are criticizing and critiquing these media productions, but further developing their market. Rather than eliminating the gap between rich and poor, they just want a more diverse upper-class. How does this solve anything? When criticizing the media, these students are simply just expressing their distaste for not being one of the "popular" people. Rather than coming up with an actual idea for change, they simply wish to change themselves.

Talking Points 3

Dennis Carlson "Gayness, Multicultural Education, and Community"

Matthew Sawyer

Quotes

1. "Within normalizing communities, some individuals and subject positions get privileged and represented as "normal" while other individuals and subject positions are dissempowered and represented as...."abnormal."

2. "Three techniques of normalization and marginalization have been of primary importance in this regard: (1) the erasure of gayness in the curriculum, (2) the closeting and witch hunting of gay teachers, and (3) verbal and physical intimidation of gay teachers and students."

3. "Fourth, it also means that I am inextricably involved in multiple cultural struggles rather than merely just one."

Points of Discussion

Carlson makes several interesting points in his article. First is the point that America has developed whats called a "normalizing community" where those in power: SCWAMP, are seen of or thought of as normal, and those outside of those boundaries are seen of or thought of as abnormal, thus creating the other. When normalcy is held up to such high regards and standings, those labeled abnormal or the others are looked down upon and dissempowered. Another important point about the normalized culture of America, in specific regards to gayness, is how those in power are able to maintain their power in the school setting, which is labeled as a breeding house for open minds. Schools achieve this by eliminating gayness from the curriculum they teach, slamming openly gay teachers with controversy, and physically, mentally, and emotionally sabotaging the welfare of gay students and teachers alike. In order to overcome this normalized culture though, Carlson states that we need to recognize ourselves in every possible category according to SCWAMP. By doing so, we make it obvious to those possibly dissempowered in a separate category that their dissempowerment relates to ours and is equally as oppressive and by sticking together, both sides can achieve their goals and overthrow the normalized culture.

Talking Points 2

Richard Rodriguez "Aria"

Matthew Sawyer

QUOTES
1. It's not possible for a child - any child - ever to use his family's language in school. Not to understand this is to misunderstand the public uses of schooling and to trivialize the nature of intimate life - family life.

-this quote is Rodriguez's way of explaining why children must be taught in english, his reasoning is that since schools are public institutions, and a child's entrance in to public life, he must learn to communicate in the public's manner. Also, not using english in schools, minimalizes the intimate nature of the family and the family language by making it public

2.So they do not realize that while one suffers a diminished sense of private individuality by becoming assimilated into public society, such assimilation makes possible the achievement of public individuality.

-Rodriguez is explaining the flaw in the argument that a student loses his identity when forced to speak only a foreign language, to him, in school rather than his native language. What this argument fails to recognize, that Rodriguez does point out, is that although the student may feel a drop in his private individuality, he will become an individual in the greater society and no longer be an outsider.

3.Intamacy is not created by a particular language, it is created by intimates.

- Here, Rodriguez states that while some feel full immersion into a new language takes away the intimate feelings of one's native language, the truth is that the intimate feelings conveyed by that language has nothing to do with the language itself, but everything to do with whom those intimate feelings are conveyed between.

POINTS TO SHARE

Richard Rodriguez's "Aria" is an interesting look inside the argument for bilingual education because not only does it support the opinion of the "culture of power," its an opinion put forth by someone outside said culture. Though one could argue, that by learning the rules of the "culture of power," Rodriguez has attained his own power within the culture. Rodriguez's position is one that calls for a full immersion technique for foriegn language speakers despite cries about a decrease in private identity. Rodriguez points out that while a private identity is somewhat diminished, it is more than made up for with a public identity. Only by learning the language of the culture in which you wish to live, are you able to become accepted by that culture and no longer face the hardships and ostracism of an outsider.