Liberalism: A Mental Disorder?

Over this passed weekend I have been dealing with a lot of unnecessary stress due to politics. My Uncle in Texas, who is a extremely conservative Republican, continues to send me emails about conservative psychiatrists who have been diagnosing people with liberal beliefs as "mental patients".

I wrote back, asking for him to please stop pressing his beliefs upon me , to only get a reponse back saying that he was trying to teach me how to think like an intellectual. I was told that I had a small frame of reference due to my lack of years of experience. He told me that if I am in my 20's and I don't vote liberal that I don't have a heart, but if I am in my 40's and I don't vote conservative that I don't have a brain.

My Uncle is a college professor, and he also teaches elementary piano, but does that mean that he has the right to "teach" everyone a lesson? There was nothing two-sided to anything that he told me at all, and the fact that he is a teacher bothers me. When is enough, enough? What if I were a student in one of his classes and he said all of this to me? How could a student deal with a radical of high authority who bullies them intellectually?

Cus We All Could Use A Little Laughter

So with the stress of the semester hitting all of us, below is a link that should certainly get all of you laughing.
Scarlet Takes A Tumble
This video really doesn't connect at all to what we have been talking about in class, but I felt that we could all use something to brighten our day.

Tolerence, Education, and Prop 8

With the results of Proposition 8 in California looming over our country and my conscious, and the Supreme court agreeing today to at least hear the challenges of Prop 8, I could not help but look into what educators thought of all of this, and if education has anything to do with it

I found an commercial for the Prop 8 supporters that depicts a young girl coming home and telling her mother that she learned in school that two prince’s could marry and that she could marry a princess.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_SKZgF804O0

This commercial is ridiculous in that there is nothing about Prop 8 that is connected to public education in any way. There is also nothing in California state law that would require the teaching of marriage in any of its forms. Also most State laws (California being one) allows parents to opt students out of lessons they find to be out of keeping with their personal beliefs. The "Yes on 8" advertisements suggesting that students will be taught about same-sex marriage if the proposition fails are untruthful and ridiculous.

Supporters of Prop 8 have said the idea of same-sex marriage could be integrated into all aspects of school lessons, not just sex-ed. One example used is of a math book containing a word problem that tells the story of "Johnny's two mommies" going to the store or celebrating an anniversary. They are concerned this will infiltrate literature, vocabulary, social studies, science, math and all the subjects that kids learn.

I realize I was brought up in a pretty Liberal environment, and that my close connection to gay culture can leave me at time possible biased, but I believe as an educator, and human being these kinds of ideas of limiting groups abilities is wrong and against what educators stand for.

Are we not the ones trying to expand the minds, views and tolerance of our students? I can find understanding in why certain peoples religious beliefs skew the image of the homosexual individual, but isn’t part of religion also love and tolerance for fellow human. By eliminating a whole group of people from school curriculum are we not teaching hate instead of acceptance?

I consider this to be no different than when schools began integration, or text books used “ethnic” names in their text, as well as the California Supreme Court's 1948 decision to overturn a ban on interracial marriages.

I recommend everyone read the comments by pro 8 writers and decide if that is the America you want for the future. Let's stop these kinds of propositions now before it gets out of hand. When future generations look back on us let's be remembered as expanding rights and accepting people. Let's not be the people blocking the schoolhouse door.

Post-Modern-ism wtf?

We are drilled in Critical Pedagogy II that Critical Pedagogy is not a method but a Postmodern teaching philosophy.  What exactly does that mean?  Do we ever discuss what postmodern means? Why would be promote a teaching philosophy when we don't fully understand the vocabulary we absorb and blindly use?  How can I understand what postmodernism is when I don't think I know what being Modern is?

The conceptualization of postmodernism is certainly a journey, which I have chosen to embark upon.  I can honestly say that I have only began to touch the surface of a complex, fragmented, and multifaceted philosophy.  My journey began because I became increasingly frustrated by merely uttering words while explaining a phenomenon that felt organic and natural to myself.  I felt that my education was incomplete because I didn't know that I knew what it meant to live, teach, and learn through a postmodern education.  Many times this frustration lead to an all out assault on the tenets of Critical Pedagogy.  In addition to this frustration was the conflict that arose from my religious and spiritual beliefs.  The ideas of universality, absolute truth, and resolution were tightly ingrained in my identity and my reality.  Consequently, The concepts, notions, and ideas promoted by postmodernism at times not only challenged by faith and world view but created anxiety, tension, and at times anger and hostility.  Such feelings were simply not directed towards postmodernism but also myself, society, and being.  The process of learning, relearning, and unlearning continues to be a hard fought and sometimes painful undertaking.  For centuries society has relied upon the powerful wisdom of sages, teachers, intellectuals, philosophers, and artists.  Through there music, art, and prose people searched for answers to questions unknown.  I remember vividly a segment from a popular movie titled "Hitchhikers guide to the universe".  The segment highlighted how the human beings are always looking for the the answer to the ultimate question.  Eventually human beings develop the largest and smartest computer that answers the ultimate question and tells them the answer is 46.  However,  the computer never tells them the ultimate question.  Instead it directs them to discover the ultimate question.  This movie illustrates the notions of postmodernism.  A modernist seeks to answer the ultimate question and uses religion, art, and prose, to communicate the answer.  In the process the modernist clings to the past to search for clues, and interprets art to seek meaning.  The emphasis is placed upon logic and rationality.  However, one may also argue that I am over simplifying the nature and origins of modernism.  While I may be not giving much credit to the modernist platform I do credit some modernist movements for their liberatory power.  Like postmodernism, modernism is hard to define because one can argue that modernism declared war on itself several times during the course of world history.  However, modernism continued to seek homogeneity under the disguise of unity, absolutism through truth, and equality through universalism.  Modernism provides an end to the means and instills a sense of hope for citizens to aspire too.  Such a notion leaves many citizens vulnerable to manipulation, control, and oppression.  What was once was the powerful progenitor of democracy, liberation easily became a new, clandestine, and power mode of oppression.  Such power can be witnessed in the art and music of stalinism and nazism.  One can certainly argue that such perversion can be witnessed in elements of the capitalist American society.  For example, the advertising industry, Americana music, political campaigns, military recruitment, and education.  

Modernism tried challenging and reinventing itself many times which helped keep society relatively heterogeneous.  However, postmodernism goes beyond simple rejection and questioning.  Postmodernism is about living through challenge, tension, difference, and diversity.  There is a skepticism about accepting hierarchy, establishments, and absoluteness but and acceptance towards challengeing the status quo, intense transformation, and critical reflection.  One must be aware however that there is no single definition or conceptualization about postmodernism.  Postmodernism is a very open, playful, and radical philosophy that takes contemplation.  Another, tenet of postmodernism especially in education is problem posing.  Paulo Friere coined that term by stating that students and teachers must redistribute power among teachers and students.  In addition the goal of the teacher is to engage students in the process of problem posing.  In postmodernism questions are more important than answers. Such a mindset can have intensely powerful results in education.  Rather than me tell you exacally what post modernism actually is I suggest reading "Introducing Postmodernism:  A graphic guide to cutting edge thinking".

Boys and Girls

A common feeling that I get towards multiculturalism is that all people should be treated equality. I feel that we must embrace the differences between people. The differences are what make us unique and what bond people with similar differences together. 

We haven't talked much about the difference of gender. To me there is an obvious difference between the male and female sex. In my elementary practicum class, you can tell major differences between the little boys and the little girls. The girls "seem" to be well behaved but when they misbehave, they go about about it in a "sneaky" matter. The boys on the other hand don't "seem" to be as well behaved as the girls. Boys at this age are generally more rambunctious then the little girls. However when the boys misbehave they are not "sneaky", they will misbehave directly in front of your face. 

I could write forever about the differences between the male and female sex. As we get older it just becomes more evident. Should boys and girls be treated differently in the classroom? Some parents send their children to an all boys school or an all girls school, I personally believe it's important for boys and girls to interact especially during their younger years. 

If we need to treat boys and girls differently in the classroom, do we need to take sexual preference into consideration? There are many little girls in my elementary practicum that look and act like little boys. They have boy haircuts and wear clothing from the boys department. How do we treat these students, like girls or like boys? Should we not be biased by gender? 

Multiculturalism in College

My sister Stacy is a first year student at St. Peter’s College in Jersey City. For those of you who know the area, you know it is not the best place to be by yourself, especially at night. My sister has been having some difficulties with her roommates and the other students at the school. At St. Peter’s, Stacy is the minority. Her roommates happen to both be black. If you knew my sister in high school, you would know that she is not racist in any way. She was friends with all types of people and accepted everyone. At her college, she is the one being discriminated against. Because she is one of the only white people, everyone judges her the second she walks in the door – despite her bubbly personality and pretty smile.

Is this fair? We are talking so much about multiculturalism and how important it is for us to accept other cultures and ideas. But what if the other cultures do not accept us or do not want to be accepted? You can try and try and try to accept everyone until you are blue in the face, but nothing will be accomplished if both parties are not willing.

It is extremely frustrating for not just my sister, but for me –especially being on the outside of the issue. Stacy feels she cannot step out of line or say anything that could be interpreted the wrong way for fear that her roommates will gang up on her. If she tries to transfer out of her room because she does not get along with the girls, immediately it will be viewed as a black vs. white situation. She is so upset about what is happening that she wants to transfer. Should my sister have to leave the school because she is willing to be friends but the others will not accept her? Why should she have to pay for the other’s unwillingness to be multicultural?

Attitudes Towards Diversity

In one of the articles I found it talked about Diversity and Learning Outcomes. One of the sections in the article really focused on the three main attitudes that students have about diversity and inequality. These characteristics or attitudes are raised when controversial material is being discussed. In this article, Nancy Davis (1992) identifies resistance, paralysis and rage as the three common types of reaction towards diversity.

Students who fall under the paralysis heading often see these hierarchical systems as fact, or as concrete ideas. They have this attitude of acceptance and the thought that "this is just the way it is". Alternatively students under the enraged heading are often in situations that classify them as disadvantaged. They direct their anger at students who they perceive are more advantaged then they are. This is a situation that is very recognizable. To be blunt, if you are a poor kid from the city, you are going to have some anger directed towards the rich kids of the suburbs who's parents give them whatever they want. This is something that can be translated into the adult world as well. If we are disadvantaged in any way, whether in academic, social or job situations, we have some tension towards the people who are more advantaged then we are.

The last classification is the resisting attitude. Students under this heading either deny the importance of inequality or blame individuals for the inequality. Many of these students have been misinformed by the media, or by other means of communication. It always seems to be anyone's fault but their own. Young students may have not made the decisions that have brought them to the unfair situations they live in now, but they also continue to make the decisions and stereotypes that keep them in the same place.

These classifications definitely helped me figure out the more psychological aspect of what students might be thinking towards diversity. I found it really interesting and I have identified with all three of these classifications in my own experiences with friends, and even myself. The important thing is to be aware of these classifications and if possible try to break them down in our own classrooms one day.

Multiculturalism

With the presidential election this year, there has been an extreme emphasis on multiculturalism in society. Now that we have an African American president, one may argue that some cultures may be pushed aside due to a different kind of custom in the White House.
In class we talked about the concept of multiculturalism and how important or not important it may be to our students. I view our world and society as one big classroom filled with different cultures, individuals and ideas. Together, we must work as a community and learn from each other. Because the world can be related so closely to the concept of a classroom, why can’t we relate multiculturalism within a classroom to the bigger aspect of multiculturalism in the world?
We can focus on diversity in our classrooms, but maybe the classroom is just the catalyst for making EVERYONE aware, not just our students. There are many full grown adults that have issues with diversity and different customs. For example, I cannot tell you how many times during the election process I heard conversations in which people would express that they were fearful of having a black president, simply because they were unsure of others’ ethnicity and customs.
As far as I am concerned, we are all one big community. Like the communities we stress about every day in our classrooms, we must work together to honor the differences we each bring to the table. Think about how boring our lives would be if we all believed in the same things. Variety is the spice of life and as teachers we have the opportunity to foster that in our students right from the start.

"Change We Can Believe In"

Throughout the semester, especially with this past election, we discussed the importance of change in a community. Rebuilding how our government nationally and internationally, educational funding and testing, and creating a new unified health care system, all some of the promised changes. I found it interesting in watching the speech from the new President Elect Senator Barack Obama, how many of these changes that were talked about throughout all the campaigning are now going to be executed.
As many of you know, I did support Senator John McCain in this election for many reasons, and of course was disappointed in the results. However, I was recently inspired to embrace this new change. In a conversation with an Obama supporter and close friend, she mentioned that now she personally is motivated to make changes in her life because of the support and plans for Obama's change in America. This kind of surprised me. Instead of thinking about how this change will affect me megatively, I have now evolved myself to think, "How can this change benefit me and my life?" as well as "How can I work with these ideas to change the world for others".
This election has personally changed me. I have learned so much about my own political beliefs as well as those of others and now plan to accept the changes into my own life. If many Americans can hold onto this "Change We Can Believe In" we can individually make changes in our own lives that will overall effect the change in the country. Although I did not vote for Barack Obama, I really look forward to seeing what he does in our country, and I'm inspired to stand up for my own beliefs because he was able to challenge America to change!

Real American Poetry

The article by Walcott has certainly got me thinking alot about the usefulness of bringing RAP into the classroom. As music educators we must be aware of how our previous held notions, ideas, and conceptualizations impact the structure we create for our students. Often times we as teachers confine ourselves into boxes. Such boxes represent our comfort, knowledge, values, ideals, and previous experiences. To many teachers remain within their box that inevitably entraps them in a conservative mindset. Consequently, we not only force our culture onto the diverse cultural representation that manifests itself in our classrooms. This week at my practicum sitet I witnessed critical pedagogy alive within the classroom. As a members of the community we challenged our previous experiences, notions, and concepts. Through the tension we began a lifelong journey to rediscover and define the nature of music, performance, and creation.

At the begining of the year my co op indentified the students who she considers to be disruptive and disengaged. The week before I started my lesson I noticed that one the the "trouble makers" was trying to express himself musically and creatively. Unfortunately, his ideas were pushed aside and the teacher continued with her lesson. As a result of the teacher imposed silence, the student began to disrupt the lesson. Instead of opening to classroom and allowing him to share his musical idea she stripped him of his drum and proceeded to silence him completely.

On monday this particular boy became fully engaged in the lesson due to the progressive structure that governed the community. All voices were free to sound and for once in their academic career they were asked what music is theirs? what is music? Who makes music? why does it occur? Every student in the class had something to contribute, share, and communicate to the community. During the time we set aside for sharing, this "troubled" boy share a deep and profound statement. "Music is culture expressed through sound" he later explained that all to often people try to force their culture and music onto other people as if it is better than theirs. I pondered about this occurance and realized that this experienced reaffirmed by commitment to CP and a liberatory education.

The Whole Picture

In the reading of Charlene Morton's article, it seemed clearer to me that although we read about five different "cases" of multiculturalism, all must be considered to address the issues of how we label and just how far, or how shallow, we reach into what I am now thinking as "the other side." The other side is being able to completely divorce personal experience from the experiences of others, which is what we are attempting to do through the practices of multiculturalism. We must consider the many different ways of approaching the concepts of hegemony and the majority rule (or what is referred to often as Western thought in this article) and the ways that they affect our teaching and true connection to other peoples' worlds.

From Elliott to Woodford to Kincheloe and Steinberg, we wrestle with the different ways in which we approach change in our ways of thinking of race, creed, socio-political affiliation, etc. These issues must be brought up organically by inquiring minds, however, or the assumptions of what music might "mean" to one person (namely, the teacher) would be passed along to his or her students with every intention of NOT passing along these given labels. What the focus should perhaps be is the study of the big picture of time and place and personal experience. We must still be wary of labeling one example of a means for describing the whole since we come from so many diverse backgrounds that one can hardly begin to break down just what it is that makes up our whole. David Elliott, in his quest of breaking down barries through his takes on pluralist multiculturalism, pushes for us to learn "self-understanding through 'otherstanding.' " It is the notion that we are so diverse and many labeled, that once we begin to kind of shed our protective skin of personal identity, we are able to dig into specific musical cultures that can't be so easily defined by white or black, urban or rural, etc.

Critical Multiculturalism gives us the tools to take all the material that we have been given and to try to construct meaning for ourselves, but the tools that we have been given also limit our understanding of how multi-layered the concepts of identity truly become. We often put ourselves in a box of understanding, with walls we come to know as truths and strongholds. But when, in fact, we realize that the labels that we use to try to unlabel stereotypes, we realize that the box is merely a construction of our mind. Our willingness to explore deeper into what makes us who we are then would become opened, making it incredibly difficult to try to appease all citizens of the human race. What connects us are not the identities of where we have come from-which include the labels that we have no control over- but rather, shared experiences and organic learning help plant new seeds for interpretation that goes beyond barriers without even trying. To try and label it would destroy it. It is only when have been able to step away from a situation that we begin to break it down into little compartments, but in the moment, we are not classifying our thoughts as contingent of what makes us "us," but rather who I am in all my parts. The willingness of the mind to becomes free and ever-changing is a process that takes more unlearning than learning. Each situation is unique and can only be labeled by the experiences of those who we in the moment and had no bias for the free exchange of thoughts.

Talking To, or Talking At?

From my first days in elementary school to present day Westminster, I have been experiencing the never-ending issues surrounding teachers and the way that they teach their classes. It is understood by myself and most likely many, that each person has their own way of doing things. As we have previously studied and are still studying, everyone has their own style of learning as well as their own style of teaching. It may just be me, but I do not believe that talking at a classroom full of students constitutes as teaching them.

I find that the older I get, teachers really don't seem to care about the way they teach their classes. Its always one man for himself--which it should be--but I don't see how caring less about the student benefits the teacher. I know that I respect a teacher more in a lecture based class if there is dialogue about what is being lectured. Talking at people is no way to be respected, you must speak with them in order to get a response.

The Music in Schools Argument

We are forever trying to boost the opinions of the arts in our schools. As I was rereading the Woodford text, I came across the section in Chapter Four that talks about the New Right hijacking the public sphere and its institutions. The quote talks about music and arts being the "soft" subjects.

"By 'soft' subjects I am referring to the nineteenth century notion of 'formal discipline' or the belief that general mental faculties were like muscles that could be strengthened through application to certain difficult or 'hard' subjects such as Latin or Mathematics. Today's 'hard' subjects are language, mathematics, and the sciences-- the one that are most susceptible to quantitative assessment and that are deemed useful in business and the workforce. To many peoples utilitarian way of thinking today, and particularly that of the New Right, subjects such as music and philosophy are not sufficiently 'concrete' to be of much use to anyone." (Pg. 60)

This argument for music in our schools will go on forever until we either get knocked out all together or we get more recognition for what music can accomplish. What is deemed useful in the work place can be learned in a music classroom just as well as any other place. The subject matter may not be of much use, but thinking critically and creatively are great assets to any workplace. Employers look for people who can think outside the box and who can come up with solutions that both work well and are imaginative. This creativity can be learned in a music classroom just as well as it can be learned in another setting. I'll take a step out and say that creativity is associated more with music and the arts than it is with math or science.

Another thing that I wanted to point out is that the New Right deems music and philosophy as not much use to anyone. In fact they are of very good use. Philosophy helps us to think critically and look at things in new and different ways. By learning about the different ways of thinking it moves us to challenge and question all the things that have come before us and that in a way is teaching us how to live in a democratic society.

Non-Bias Views for the Greater Good

For two and a half hours each Wednesday evening, at the Baruch College in Manhattan, two men, former New York Governor Mario M. Cuomo and Douglas A. Muzzio, a veteran professor have merged the scholarly imperatives of the classroom and the gritty realities of the politics to teach a course entitled “The 2008 Presidential Election: Where We Are as a Nation, Where We Want to Be, How We Get There.”

While I understand that this is a class all about politics, and that this is different then discussing democracy and politics in the music or general ed classroom, when I came across an article in the New York Times today I was more intrigued by the way the class is taught and the approach these two men took when discussing this years big election.

When discussing Governor Palin’s acceptance for GOP Vice President cadency, the majority of the 23 member class scoffed and argued of her inexperience and that she was only a governor of a state with a mere 7,000 citizens. Rather than agree and take his own shots, the former Democratic Governor, merely waved a finger and discussed how a state’s size is not the only thing to consider, he said. A governor is a governor. “The fact that what you do affects more people,” he said, “doesn’t change the nature of what you do”

The fact that Cuomo could pull himself away from his own democratic ideas and beliefs and challenge his students to think critically and open mindedly, is an idea we have been discussing a lot in class and I think it is great that I can actually find examples of this in the real world.

We as educators must know when to set our beliefs aside, when it is important to share our ideas, and when to just listen to our students. It is then that democracy has the ability to flourish in our classroom, and create more well rounded students and educators.

Free Starbucks and Election Day

Election day was a very exciting day for everyone. People all around the community were excited and nervous about what was going to become of our country and our community. Many different businesses made enticing deals to try to persuade customers to vote. Ben and Jerry's offered a free ice cream to any customer who had voted. Many other businesses joined in including, Chic-fil-A, Krispy Kreme as well as Starbucks. 

For my "political engagement". I decided to go to Starbucks for my free coffee. The idea was that you were supposed to walk into Starbucks and tell the barista that you had voted, and then she would  give you a free coffee. I walked in, told the barista that I voted and received my free coffee. I was able to talk to a few customer in Starbucks about their opinion on the election. I found that most of the costumers were excited for the change that the country would be seeing. 

I thought it was great that these different companies were trying to entice people in the community to vote. However, shouldn't these costumers WANT to vote? Why should they be bribed with a free coffee, ice cream or donut? People should want to vote for the sake of contributing politically to their country. 

I was excited about getting my coffee for free. I'm sure other costumers were as well, I just hope they were for the right reasons.