Hello everyone. My name is Ann Hughes. I am from the Lascassas community and a life-long resident of Rutherford County. I am currently teaching at Oakland Middle School. I was excited to accept this position this year because it is five minutes from my home, and my son will be attending school there next year. Plus, I am able to take my son to school everyday at Lascassas Elementary. The whole middle school concept gave Lascassas residents the ebbie jeebies because we loved our k-8 community school. Therefore, I had some ulterior motives in going to the new school myself (to spy on my child :) ha!). I worried for no reason. Oakland Middle is a beautiful facility with many, many opportunities for the students, and if I may say so, a fantastic staff.
I am currently working toward my Ed.S. in Administration/Supervision, and I hope to become a school administrator in the very near future.
Saturday, September 4, 2010
Melting Pot or Not? Blog #4
Immigration plus immigration plus immigration equals the face and color of society in America. Although America has, for many years, been called the land of opportunity, many Americans really wish that "opportunity" would stop knocking on the doors of future immigrants! The question of multicultural education raises it head frequently in regard to the duty that we as American educators have to present the entire spectrum of our society's heritage. What a task! So much for the term "melting pot" which implies that the population of this great nation will meld into a single proud society. Instead, many school districts and their teachers feel overwhelmed at the daunting task of presenting a varied sampling of America's citizens' multi-faceted history. The task has become not only to present the past but to present it in a cross curricular approach. This feat seems almost too much to think about in addition to teaching "reading, writing, and arithmetic."
One hundred years ago when I was in elementary school and then high school (not really, just the 70's and 80's - gasp), I would say the curriculum in regard to culture was centered upon basic American values. There was no real emphasis on the understanding of different cultures. The history books had not been rewritten to include the impact of other cultures and the roles they played in shaping American society. We were still "politically incorrect" I suppose. Social control was communicated through "good old fashioned" emphasis on right and wrong. The "wrong" emphasis was re-emphasized to the "tune of the hickory stick" (the dreaded paddle).
As a student, I was not part of a minority group. Furthermore, I was not concerned about the exploration of other cultures. I, however, was concerned with whether or not I was receiving the best possible training in order to prepare myself for success on the ACT and consequently college. I honestly do not recall that a multicultural education would have improved my score on the ACT. I also must admit, eventhough it is politically incorrect, that I do not believe that a multicultural education would have had a significant impact on my college performance. Sorry, that's my story, and I have to stick to it.
Reference:
Diner, Hasia. (2008). Immigration and U.S. History. America.gov. Retrieved from
http://www.america.gov/.
Immigration plus immigration plus immigration equals the face and color of society in America. Although America has, for many years, been called the land of opportunity, many Americans really wish that "opportunity" would stop knocking on the doors of future immigrants! The question of multicultural education raises it head frequently in regard to the duty that we as American educators have to present the entire spectrum of our society's heritage. What a task! So much for the term "melting pot" which implies that the population of this great nation will meld into a single proud society. Instead, many school districts and their teachers feel overwhelmed at the daunting task of presenting a varied sampling of America's citizens' multi-faceted history. The task has become not only to present the past but to present it in a cross curricular approach. This feat seems almost too much to think about in addition to teaching "reading, writing, and arithmetic."
One hundred years ago when I was in elementary school and then high school (not really, just the 70's and 80's - gasp), I would say the curriculum in regard to culture was centered upon basic American values. There was no real emphasis on the understanding of different cultures. The history books had not been rewritten to include the impact of other cultures and the roles they played in shaping American society. We were still "politically incorrect" I suppose. Social control was communicated through "good old fashioned" emphasis on right and wrong. The "wrong" emphasis was re-emphasized to the "tune of the hickory stick" (the dreaded paddle).
As a student, I was not part of a minority group. Furthermore, I was not concerned about the exploration of other cultures. I, however, was concerned with whether or not I was receiving the best possible training in order to prepare myself for success on the ACT and consequently college. I honestly do not recall that a multicultural education would have improved my score on the ACT. I also must admit, eventhough it is politically incorrect, that I do not believe that a multicultural education would have had a significant impact on my college performance. Sorry, that's my story, and I have to stick to it.
Reference:
Diner, Hasia. (2008). Immigration and U.S. History. America.gov. Retrieved from
http://www.america.gov/.
What is REAL American History? Blog 3
What is REAL American History? Blog 3
"In every era of U.S. history, from colonial times in the 17th century through the early 21st century, women and men from around the world have opted for the American experience. They arrived as foreigners, bearers of languages, cultures, and religions that at times seemed alien to America’s essential core. Over time, as ideas about U.S. culture changed, the immigrants and their descendants simultaneously built ethnic communities and participated in American civic life, contributing to the nation as a whole" (Diner, Hasia, 2008).
This land of America in NOT an exclusive society; it never has been. America is a land formed from a constant influx of immigrants.
In the article "The Challenge of Multiculturalism," the author asserts that American history to the non-white members of society is one-sided. While on the other hand, white society, when exposed to other views of history, claims that such a perspective is not theirs.
While both statements are true, there are two points which cannot be ignored. If new immigrants travel to this country in order to make a home, they should become familiar with its history. "Established" citizens in turn must also acknowledge the contributions made by the newcomers.
Therefore I agree with the term "future history." As time passes and the story of America continues to unfold, there will be new "characters" and new facets to the culture. I also agree with the sentiment that one ethnic group's perspective is not the perspective of another. In fact, my OWN perspective of a situation is not the perspective of another person. However, by listening to another and keeping an open mind, I can begin to understand what is important to that person. This is a lesson I strive to teach my students whenever possible. They are very familiar with my assertion that everyone has a "story" to tell, and everyone has a "lesson" that can be learned from that story. Perhaps American history will need to be told as a narrative in which the plot unfolds and the narrator is omniscient in regard to the characters and their motivations.
When a marriage occurs, two families are united. When a child is born, his history becomes that of the two families. The child becomes a part of the family unit, and this unit is not complete without the raising of the child and the memories he creates.
America is a country with a past which must be remembered, but like the family, its scrapbook must also include "pictures" of the newest members.
Reference:
Diner, Hasia. (2008). Immigration and U.S. History. America.gov. Retrieved from
http://www.america.gov/. 6/20/10 by ann hughes Delete
Edit View
What is REAL American History? Blog 3
"In every era of U.S. history, from colonial times in the 17th century through the early 21st century, women and men from around the world have opted for the American experience. They arrived as foreigners, bearers of languages, cultures, and religions that at times seemed alien to America’s essential core. Over time, as ideas about U.S. culture changed, the immigrants and their descendants simultaneously built ethnic communities and participated in American civic life, contributing to the nation as a whole" (Diner, Hasia, 2008).
This land of America in NOT an exclusive society; it never has been. America is a land formed from a constant influx of immigrants.
In the article "The Challenge of Multiculturalism," the author asserts that American history to the non-white members of society is one-sided. While on the other hand, white society, when exposed to other views of history, claims that such a perspective is not theirs.
While both statements are true, there are two points which cannot be ignored. If new immigrants travel to this country in order to make a home, they should become familiar with its history. "Established" citizens in turn must also acknowledge the contributions made by the newcomers.
Therefore I agree with the term "future history." As time passes and the story of America continues to unfold, there will be new "characters" and new facets to the culture. I also agree with the sentiment that one ethnic group's perspective is not the perspective of another. In fact, my OWN perspective of a situation is not the perspective of another person. However, by listening to another and keeping an open mind, I can begin to understand what is important to that person. This is a lesson I strive to teach my students whenever possible. They are very familiar with my assertion that everyone has a "story" to tell, and everyone has a "lesson" that can be learned from that story. Perhaps American history will need to be told as a narrative in which the plot unfolds and the narrator is omniscient in regard to the characters and their motivations.
When a marriage occurs, two families are united. When a child is born, his history becomes that of the two families. The child becomes a part of the family unit, and this unit is not complete without the raising of the child and the memories he creates.
America is a country with a past which must be remembered, but like the family, its scrapbook must also include "pictures" of the newest members.
Reference:
Diner, Hasia. (2008). Immigration and U.S. History. America.gov. Retrieved from
http://www.america.gov/. 6/20/10 by ann hughes Delete
Edit View
Religion in Public Schools
Religion in Public Schools
If you are old enough, you will recall a late night television program, The Arsenio Hall Show. If you are a "baby," this program was something along the lines of The Tonight Show. This program was made famous by Bill Clinton's "campaign stop" guest appearance when he played the saxophone. If recollection serves me well, he played "Jailhouse Rock." Anyway, Arsenio Hall always included a segment entitled "Things That Make You Go Hmmm?"
After reading the articles "Religion and Schools: the Debate Heats Up 2009" and "Library of Congress Artifacts," I did as I always do when this subject comes up... I think, hmmm?
First, I remember that the United States of America was founded by a group of Separatist seeking religious freedom. Then, I recall that for a long while its school systems were centered on religious education. "Theology was weaved into every song, every thought, and every act of Americans. The idea and belief of God was everywhere" (Dobson, 2007). However, when the Separation of Church and State was put into place as a result of the First Amendment of the Constitution in 1791, "the correlation between God and the good of humanity was suddenly obliterated" (Dobson, 2007).
At this point in time, 1791, the concept of "religious education" began its own evolution. Interesting term to use in regard to religion, don't you think?
I can't help but remember that this country's government was founded by immigrants, and its initial ideals were established by those same immigrants. However, isn't it interesting that as our country evolved (there's that term again) it became populated by more and more immigrants? As a result of this melting pot, new thoughts, ideas, and BELIEFS were firmly planted in American soil. A little over 200 years later, I find it ironic that the ORIGINAL immigrants' ideals have been erased, but not replaced, for the sake of sensitivity toward the NEWER immigrants. So... what are our ideals now? Just a thought.
I DO find it interesting that although the First Ammendment was put into place in 1791, the public school system is still ironing out the wrinkles in regard to religion in 2010. I DO find it interesting that a moment of silence must be specifically defined in regard to intended use. And... I DO find it interesting that if we are teaching U.S. History, Civics, and American Literature, we no longer seem to place importance on at least acknowledging the American flag and its significance to our country. Now, that's evolution! Or... is it CONTRADICTION?
These are just some things that make ME go hmmm?
Reference:
Dobson, A. (17 September 2007). "The Impact of Separartion of Church and State on Education." Retrieved from http://www.associatedcontent.com/. 6/
Religion in Public Schools
If you are old enough, you will recall a late night television program, The Arsenio Hall Show. If you are a "baby," this program was something along the lines of The Tonight Show. This program was made famous by Bill Clinton's "campaign stop" guest appearance when he played the saxophone. If recollection serves me well, he played "Jailhouse Rock." Anyway, Arsenio Hall always included a segment entitled "Things That Make You Go Hmmm?"
After reading the articles "Religion and Schools: the Debate Heats Up 2009" and "Library of Congress Artifacts," I did as I always do when this subject comes up... I think, hmmm?
First, I remember that the United States of America was founded by a group of Separatist seeking religious freedom. Then, I recall that for a long while its school systems were centered on religious education. "Theology was weaved into every song, every thought, and every act of Americans. The idea and belief of God was everywhere" (Dobson, 2007). However, when the Separation of Church and State was put into place as a result of the First Amendment of the Constitution in 1791, "the correlation between God and the good of humanity was suddenly obliterated" (Dobson, 2007).
At this point in time, 1791, the concept of "religious education" began its own evolution. Interesting term to use in regard to religion, don't you think?
I can't help but remember that this country's government was founded by immigrants, and its initial ideals were established by those same immigrants. However, isn't it interesting that as our country evolved (there's that term again) it became populated by more and more immigrants? As a result of this melting pot, new thoughts, ideas, and BELIEFS were firmly planted in American soil. A little over 200 years later, I find it ironic that the ORIGINAL immigrants' ideals have been erased, but not replaced, for the sake of sensitivity toward the NEWER immigrants. So... what are our ideals now? Just a thought.
I DO find it interesting that although the First Ammendment was put into place in 1791, the public school system is still ironing out the wrinkles in regard to religion in 2010. I DO find it interesting that a moment of silence must be specifically defined in regard to intended use. And... I DO find it interesting that if we are teaching U.S. History, Civics, and American Literature, we no longer seem to place importance on at least acknowledging the American flag and its significance to our country. Now, that's evolution! Or... is it CONTRADICTION?
These are just some things that make ME go hmmm?
Reference:
Dobson, A. (17 September 2007). "The Impact of Separartion of Church and State on Education." Retrieved from http://www.associatedcontent.com/. 6/
Innovators v. Makers
Education has seen its share of people who would influence the machine. There are two basic types of influence that have been prevalent throughout the past. One type is the innovators. I feel that innovators are people who are steeped and vested in the system. These people are directly involved in the process of education. They are students, teachers, administrators, etc. An innovator is someone who is an active participant and strives to introduce something new or bring about a change. On the other hand, there are the makers who also have a role in the evolution of education. Makers tend to be like gears which act as a driving force for change. Makers orchestrate change. Historically, makers, to me, have been on the outside looking in, third parties if you will.
Linda Brown Thompson was an innovator, and she had a vested interest in change. Innovators must always be willing to bear the brunt of public opinion both positive and negative. In Linda's case, public opinion was more than negative; it was brutal. Because her last name simply started with a "B," Linda became the face for desegregation of schools in a hostile south when her name became part of the 1954 court case that ended legalized segregation in schools.
Andrew Carnegie occupies the other side of the coin. He was a maker. Andrew Carnegie was also a self-made man. Coming from humble beginnngs as an immigrant and then later as a worker in a cotton factory, Carnegie realized the importance of self improvement. He attended night school, and when he achieved success with the Pennsylvania Railroad Company, Carnegie continued to expand his knowledge by traveling to different countries to study the techniques and practices of other people and companies who enjoyed success stories. At the time of his death, Andrew Carnegie had established a trust fund worth millions of dollars; this fund was set aside for the sole purpose of improving mankind through self improvement and education. Mr. Carnegie was a hard worker, a millionaire, an employer, a benefactor, and a man, who in the end, made education part of his mission statement.
Linda Brown Thompson is an innovator because her personal and literal walk into a school forced the south to change. She had a vested interest as evidenced by the treatment that she was subjected to in order to achieve justice. Andrew Carnegie was a maker because, through his generosity, he ensured opportunities for others. He understood how success is "made." In his opinion, it was achieved through determination, self improvement, and hard work. Both innovators and makers play a vital role in the effectiveness of education.
References
Andrew Carnegie. Spartacus. Retrieved June 13, 2010,from
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAcarnegie.htm
Stone Lantern Films (Producer). (2001, September 3-4). School [Television Broadcast]. Retrieved June 13, 2010, from http://video.pbs.org/
Education has seen its share of people who would influence the machine. There are two basic types of influence that have been prevalent throughout the past. One type is the innovators. I feel that innovators are people who are steeped and vested in the system. These people are directly involved in the process of education. They are students, teachers, administrators, etc. An innovator is someone who is an active participant and strives to introduce something new or bring about a change. On the other hand, there are the makers who also have a role in the evolution of education. Makers tend to be like gears which act as a driving force for change. Makers orchestrate change. Historically, makers, to me, have been on the outside looking in, third parties if you will.
Linda Brown Thompson was an innovator, and she had a vested interest in change. Innovators must always be willing to bear the brunt of public opinion both positive and negative. In Linda's case, public opinion was more than negative; it was brutal. Because her last name simply started with a "B," Linda became the face for desegregation of schools in a hostile south when her name became part of the 1954 court case that ended legalized segregation in schools.
Andrew Carnegie occupies the other side of the coin. He was a maker. Andrew Carnegie was also a self-made man. Coming from humble beginnngs as an immigrant and then later as a worker in a cotton factory, Carnegie realized the importance of self improvement. He attended night school, and when he achieved success with the Pennsylvania Railroad Company, Carnegie continued to expand his knowledge by traveling to different countries to study the techniques and practices of other people and companies who enjoyed success stories. At the time of his death, Andrew Carnegie had established a trust fund worth millions of dollars; this fund was set aside for the sole purpose of improving mankind through self improvement and education. Mr. Carnegie was a hard worker, a millionaire, an employer, a benefactor, and a man, who in the end, made education part of his mission statement.
Linda Brown Thompson is an innovator because her personal and literal walk into a school forced the south to change. She had a vested interest as evidenced by the treatment that she was subjected to in order to achieve justice. Andrew Carnegie was a maker because, through his generosity, he ensured opportunities for others. He understood how success is "made." In his opinion, it was achieved through determination, self improvement, and hard work. Both innovators and makers play a vital role in the effectiveness of education.
References
Andrew Carnegie. Spartacus. Retrieved June 13, 2010,from
http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAcarnegie.htm
Stone Lantern Films (Producer). (2001, September 3-4). School [Television Broadcast]. Retrieved June 13, 2010, from http://video.pbs.org/
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)