Great Educator

Dewey argues that social influences like the family, neighborhood, culture and the media impact students more than school do. He believes that education in schools is only a secondary factor.  Although at one point I agreed with this notion, I know school can overcome some social factors.  I have taught in a school where most students have many family and economic problems.  Discipline was out of control and teachers were overwhelmed. As a sixth grade teacher, I was very sad because I felt I could not help these students much. I had 6^th graders dealing drugs and that year we had at least six pregnancies in the 6^th grade class.  When a new principal was assigned to the campus, I believed not much would happen.  I was mistaken. She told all teachers that they were the key to student success.  There were no excuses for our students’ failures, we had to succeed.  She gathered teachers behind her and provided supplemental support for students. Teachers need helped in the classroom received the help they needed. That principal’s second year in the campus, that school received a recognized standing by TEA, a few years later we were exemplary. I know we impacted students even though those social factors existed in their lives. Was this just an academic gain? What happened after the students left this middle school? I cannot answer this questions, but I now believe that if all school and teachers believed that school can impact students more than their social surroundings, then we may continue the success.  Marzano (2003) asks a very important question, “If schools have little chance of overcoming the influence of students’ backgrounds characteristics, why put any energy into school reform” (p. 3)? We can overcome students’ background characteristics with teaching that focuses on the entire student.  We must not only feed the mind, but the heart as well.  Teachers must make students understand that they have no other choice but success and that no excuses can be accepted. Yes, the backgrounds of students make it more difficult to reach the students, but it is not impossible. The principal was moved to a different campus, but the campus is doing just as well as other campuses in the district that do not have the same problems this school has.

Reference

Marzano, R. J.  (2003). What works in schools: translating research into action. Alexandria,             Virginia: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Cultural Hegemony

            John Gaventa stated that people should not ask why rebellions occur in a democracy. They should ask why in the face of so many inequalities it does not. This is evident by the beliefs of elite theorists. They believe that unequal power relationships between two or more cultures, ideologies, socioeconomic groups and others are justified. In contrast to the traditional democratic theory which holds that social order is based on public consensus. What is probably more surprising is that even though a small group of citizens control the political and economic institutions, shape the civic beliefs, values, and behavior of most of the population, social order is maintained through the cooperation of citizens. This is due to that fact that the general population is socialized into accepting these inequalities.

One reason why the general population accepts this domination is due to education, which elite institutions and people control. Although education agencies and the government assign a curriculum for districts and educators to follow, there is a hidden curriculum that many times is ignored. Walter Karp has questioned the purpose of school reform and in turn the purpose of the assigned curriculum. He believes that schools are accomplishing what they were designed to do, socialize people to be compliant, poorly informed about democratic practices, and not to think critically. In social studies classes many truths are withhold and students are told to mostly to accept the ideals of the elite, even though the constitution gives citizens the right go against government with arms. Every morning millions of students rise to pledge allegiance to a flag, which is a sign of respect. Yet, when a student refuses to stand, he is lectured, punished, and in some cases even taken to court. Students are told that the way they participate in government is through voting, but they are not told how that a small elite group is really in power and that affect the power of their vote.

Yet, the belief cultural hegemony makes me question the importance of both cultural pluralism and assimilation. I believe that the elite institutions that control most of the nation’s wealth and power are not affected by either. If a culture is assimilated, that does not make them part of the elite. If cultural pluralism has more control, it does not make them part of the elite. It is even better for these elite institutions to continue the debate, because it takes away the focus on them and makes socializes citizens.

Education for its own sake versus for a particular purpose is now an ongoing debate. Although curriculum for college readiness, specific careers, or even for character building now exists, the curriculum is more for individual purpose. I believe that education should have purpose, but at the same time I believe that the elite institutions controlling the nation do exist and will continue to rule. The majority of citizens can use education for personal improvement and for their personal pursuit of happiness. As long as these elite institutions do not take this rights from us, education is the key for personal happiness in this society.