“I didn’t expect it would be all women and it was a small classroom and about 40 women were sort of sitting in a semicircle and the thought of spending two hours every week sitting there for the next four months was overwhelming.”
Male expects special accommodation because he doesn’t want to be around women, and then sues for discrimination. Amazing.
homeboy never heard of dropping??
So…he was stuck into the same situation that many women in STEM fields are stuck in but it’s different because it scared his little man feelings?
An actual shy person wouldn’t go to court over this. All that exposure and scrutiny? No thanks.
No, because see, he’s love shy which is a chronic inability to deal with women because they might not want to date you.
He went to a women’s studies class expecting men
HE WENT TO A WOMEN’S STUDIES CLASS EXPECTING MEN
I have -1920% sympathy for this douche.
lol attendance and participation were only 15% of the grade. it would have been possible to pass without ever attending if his work wasn’t shit.
He wasn’t stuck in the same situation as women in STEM fields (as said above) because this was only ONE single class. Women in STEM fields experience being outnumbered and ostracized for their entire academic career. NOT ONE PUNY LITTLE SEMESTER LONG CLASS.
I hope the judge laughs him out of the courtroom.
Students aren’t people who attend schools, being a student is simply about the endless pursuit to learn and explore. I’ve always said that I’ll be a student for life.
Last week, I attended the retirement party for one of my teachers, Dr. Chittum. He was one of the best.
During the event, several faculty and staff went up to tell stories or extend their humble thank you to Dr. Chittum - one of the lessons they mentioned was his proclamation to “teach the student, not the subject.” His thinking was that he could teach a course on car manufacturing if he wanted to. He doesn’t know the subject, but that was never his concern. He knew a legendary course started with the teacher, not the textbook.
I enjoyed hearing those words because when I was in his class I always wondered what went through his head. Any teacher can teach by-the-book, but pedagogy isn’t about following the book, it’s about feel. Grades don’t make you a better student, and mastering a subject won’t make you the best teacher on the topic.
A school, whether Kindergarten or a Doctorate Conservatory, isn’t a place to teach subjects. It’s a place to teach students. It’s a place to take risks, be surrounded by an osmosis of failure, passion, learning, excitement, and experiences. They all go hand-in-hand in the journey to succeed and learn.
Hearing some of those stories and mindsets was interesting that afternoon because when I was in school I simply attended classes (or illegally slept overnight in the recording studio since I didn’t live on campus) every day. But this event felt like looking inside a machine - one that you didn’t understand years prior. Now I was being included in the circle - it felt like inside baseball. It felt like I was in a secret club learning about top-secret tips and tricks that were used on me without me knowing why it was so effective.
I always try to apply what I learn each day to my own career and community. At ForOrchestra it’s similar but different.
I may not be teaching but I’m making the blog I always wanted to read. That’s the lesson. My own version of Dr. Chittum’s mindset would perhaps be “don’t speak to the community, be a part of it”.
I always wanted to be surrounded by freaks, geeks, artists, weirdos, creators, and wishers. Here I am, not on a podium looking outward, but on the ground surrounded by each other, lost in the scene.
We’re all students, together.
Pay attention to the Oscar nominees - Steve McQueen’s 12 Years a Slave is now/soon mandatory viewing in school. Despite reports that a low percentage of the
Arizona’s law banning Mexican-American studies is constitutional, judge rules
February 25, 2014
A court upheld most provisions of an Arizona state law used to prohibit a controversial Mexican-American Studies curriculum in Tucson on Friday.
The ruling dealt a blow to supporters of the suspended classes, who had hoped the courts would overturn a 2010 law championed by Arizona conservatives determined to shut down the unconventional courses.
“I was really surprised at the decision,” Jose Gonzalez, a former teacher of Tucson’s suspended Mexican-American Studies classes, told The Huffington Post. “But as a student and teacher of history, I know in civil rights cases like this there’s always setbacks.”
The experimental Tucson curriculum was offered to students in different forms in some of the local elementary, middle and high schools. It emphasized critical thinking and focused on Mexican-American literature and perspectives. Supporters lauded the program, pointing to increased graduation rates, high student achievement and a state-commissioned independent audit that recommended expanding the classes.
But conservative opponents accused the teachers of encouraging students to adopt left-wing ideas and resent white people, a charge the teachers deny. Aiming squarely at Tucson’s Mexican-American Studies program, the Arizona legislature passed HB 2281 — a law banning courses that promote the overthrow of the U.S. government, foster racial resentment, are designed for students of a particular ethnic group or that advocate ethnic solidarity.
Federal Judge Wallace Tashima said the plaintiffs failed to show the law was too vague, broad or discriminatory, or that it violated students’ first amendment rights.
The news wasn’t all bad for supporters of the suspended classes. Tashima ruled that the section of the law prohibiting courses tailored to serve students of a particular ethnicity was unconstitutional.
Originally filed in October of 2010 on behalf of the program’s former teachers, who lost standing because they are public employees, the case is currently brought by former Mexican-American Studies student Nicholas Dominguez and his mother Margarita Dominguez. They will likely appeal the ruling to the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals within the next 30 days, their lawyer Richard Martinez told The Huffington Post.
“This case is not over,” Martinez said. “It’s not only important to Arizona, but to the country as a whole that this statute be addressed.”
Arizona Attorney General Tom Horne began a campaign to eliminate the Mexican-American Studies program from Tucson Unified School District in 2006, when he was serving as the state’s Superintendent of Public Education.
Angered that Mexican-American civil rights leader Dolores Huerta had said that “Republicans hate Latinos” in a speech to Tucson students, Horne sent Deputy Superintendent Margaret Dugan, a Latina Republican, to give an alternate view. But the intellectual exercise turned confrontational when students, who said they were not allowed to ask Dugan questions, sealed their mouths with tape and walked out of the assembly room.
“As superintendent of schools, I have visited over 1,000 schools and I’ve never seen students be disrespectful to a teacher in that way,” Horne said in an interview last year.
The final product of his efforts was House Bill 2281, which then-State Sen. John Huppenthal (R) helped pilot through the Arizona legislature. Huppenthal, who succeeded Horne as state superintendent of schools, then found Tucson out of compliance with the new law and ordered the district to shut Mexican-American Studies down or lose 10 percent of its annual funding — some $14 million over the fiscal year. In January of 2012, the school board complied, voting 4 to 1 to discontinue the classes.
The decision drew national attention as administrators plucked Latino literature that once belonged to the curriculum from classrooms, explicitly banning seven titles from instruction.
This is what I’m often referring to when I talk about backlash and suppression of education in the United States. There is literally legislation that bans teaching the history of colonization and civil rights movements in various states-states like Arizona, in which 43% of the population are “minorities”…30% of Arizona is Hispanic/Latin@.
That’s not actually a coincidence. :|
This is systematic, institutional disenfranchisement in action.
In highschool, I would’ve gotten up at ass’o’clock in the morning for a zero hour class just to take a course on the history of my people. The Latino people of Arizona have been robbed.
And what’s worse is that Arizona is so rich with Native and Mexican culture, it’s so disheartening to see the government fight it so aggressively from their racist soap boxes. It makes me sick.
LAFAYETTE, Colo. – An elementary school principal says she was fired for protecting children from humiliation.
Noelle Roni says she fought against a policy requiring kids to get their hands stamped if they don’t have enough money in their lunch account. She was fired from Peak to Peak Charter School in Lafayette in the fall.
“The kids are humiliated. They’re branded. It’s disrespectful. Where’s the human compassion? And these are little children,” she said.
Roni was principal for nine years before being fired. She calls it a wrongful termination, and wants her job back.
Why in the living fuck is this not signal boosted the shit out of?
This is what a hero looks like…her name’s Noelle Roni.
Shout, shout, shout. This woman took a stand against shaming poor children, against disrespecting poor people.
They’re making an example of this woman for saying enough is enough….against a freakin’ charter school principal. You know, charter schools, which were supposed to bring access to poor and minority students to better educations and have turned out to be highly variable, and this woman said enough.
Noelle Roni. Remember her name, because she stood up. It’s time for us to return the favor.
Force kids in school to read crappy, overrated books that are “the best books ever written” solely because they’re “classics” and then call those kids idiots because those aren’t the kind of books they like to read and sit back and wonder why we have a nation full of multiple generations worth of people who willfully and proudly refuse to read.
Dale Spender, an Australian feminist who has been a strong advocate of female rights in this area, noted that teachers who tried to restore the balance by deliberately ‘favouring’ the girls were astounded to find that despite their efforts they continued to devote more time to the boys in their classrooms. Another study reported that a male science teacher who managed to create an atmosphere in which girls and boys contributed more equally to discussion felt that he was devoting 90 per cent of his attention to the girls. And so did his male pupils. They complained vociferously that the girls were getting too much talking time.
In other public contexts, too, such as seminars and debates, when women and men are deliberately given an equal amount of the highly valued talking time, there is often a perception that they are getting more than their fair share. Dale Spender explains this as follows:
The talkativeness of women has been gauged in comparison not with men but with silence. Women have not been judged on the grounds of whether they talk more than men, but of whether they talk more than silent women.
In other words, if women talk at all, this may be perceived as ‘too much’ by men who expect them to provide a silent, decorative background in many social contexts. This may sound outrageous, but think about how you react when precocious children dominate the talk at an adult party. As women begin to make inroads into formerly ‘male’ domains such as business and professional contexts, we should not be surprised to find that their contributions are not always perceived positively or even accurately."
As a teacher, I give girls what I hope is a lot of attention. I don’t know if I give girls their fair share, but I aspire to, especially after noticing that boys are willing to use their greater share of teachers’ attention to get girls who they feel aren’t being quiet and docile enough punished. I have therefore acquired a reputation for “caring more about the girls.” This has had two marked results: Some straight boys have gotten more hostile toward me, and most girls have gotten more confident around me. This makes me think I’m doing something right.
Longer thoughts on how this phenomenon relates to sexual harassment in classrooms, if you’re interested: The girls figured out I won’t report them if they hit boys who are sexually harassing them, I’ll only report the boys. This led to an increase in how often girls got the last word and boys got smacked in my classes, and, also, to a DECREASE IN HOW OFTEN GIRLS GOT SEXUALLY HARASSED. The sexual harassers seem to have been depending on the sort of “equal blame” and “retaliation is never warranted” and “don’t hurt others’ feelings” perspectives so many schools try to instill in kids; the sexual harassers were usually the ones bringing me into the situation by saying, “Miss, she hit me! You should write her up!” Once they figured out I was only ever going to respond, “If you don’t treat girls like that, they won’t hit you,” the girls got more confident and the sexual harassers largely shut the fuck up.
In schools, fighting against sexual harassment is often punished exactly the same as, or more severely than, sexual harassment — a lot of discipline codes make no distinction between violence and violence in self-defence, and violence is ALWAYS the highest level of disciplinary infraction, whereas verbal sexual harassment rarely is. Sexual harassers, at least in the schools I’ve been in, rely heavily on GETTING GIRLS IN TROUBLE WITH HIGHER AUTHORITIES as a strategy of harassment — creating an external punishment that penalises girls for and therefore discourages girls from fighting back. Sexual harassers are willing to use their greater share of floorspace to ask to get girls who won’t date them punished. By and large, teachers do punish those girls when they swear or hit. Schools condition girls to ignore sexual harassment by punishing them when they speak up or fight back instead.
Once the sexual harassers in my classes understood that girls wouldn’t be punished for rejecting them, they backed off around me. And there started to be a flip in what conversations I get called into — girls are telling me when boys are being nasty (too loud and dominant), instead of boys telling me when girls are being uncooperative (louder and more dominant than boys think they should be).
reblogging again for the wonderful commentary.
legitimate criticisms of education
- most teaching methods only compliment a few ways of learning
- large workloads that require students to compromise their physical or emotional health
- Cs are supposed to be average but are treated by teachers and parents as failure
non-legitimate criticisms of education
- "if teachers only teach one subject how do they expect students to learn 5 subjects?"
Telling someone they’re not good enough is not okay
Telling someone they’re not good enough is not okay
I don’t care if you’re joking. I don’t care if you think ‘It will push them to work harder.’ Because it isn’t a joke, and it will not always make someone want to work harder to prove you wrong.
Sometimes they accept it as a fact, then they live with a mindset of “Why try when I’m just going to fail?”
It’s not okay.
I remember acing my AP European History test and being ecstatic about it until I told my father and he shrugged it off like it was nothing. Then I felt terrible for feeling so proud of myself.
My dad does this to me all of the time. I don’t want to try anymore.
School had right idea- keep a teacher who thinks that’s OK away from kids. Courts said nope, and she’s gonna be working with disabled kids again.