This paper was written about five years ago during my first year of college. I was lucky to find it saved and decided that I would post it just as it was written then. The state of education in Oregon and throughtout this country is still the same if not worse and desperately needs aggressive addressing. I’m grateful to professor Ray Nowak for allowing to and actually forcing me to express myself as I processed the world around me at that time.

Where are All the Minorities?

 

          I can’t believe it. I live in a town that boasts itself as being liberal, diverse, and multicultural. But three years ago when at a future educator’s seminar, I was asked the question: “What percentage of Oregon’s teaching workforce do minorities make up?” I must admit I was startled at the results. At this point, I hadn’t seriously thought about the disparity in diversity I grew up with in Oregon, especially with relation to my teachers. For example, how many Latino teachers have you had? How many African-American, Asian, Russian, or Puerto Rican, etc.? So I ask the question: “Where’s all the minorities?” I now believe that Oregon has very little diversity among its teachers, this has come through an analysis of statistics and personal experiences.

When looking at numbers, it’s almost impossible for anyone to gainsay the fact of America’s lack of diversity. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, in 1999, 87 percent of America’s teachers were white (Double 1). Contrary to popular belief, we Oregonians aren’t exempt from this type of disparity either; in fact, the numbers in Oregon are even worse. The Oregon Minority Teachers Report of 2001 showed that the number of white teachers in Oregon were roughly at 96 percent (9). These are just a few fairly recent statistics that made it easy to formulate my belief. Another form of a statistic is called a projection. Projections are statistics that help analyze and prepare for the future.

Recent projections in the area of education not only show that we have a large mountain to climb, but that the mountain is getting larger. Our students, who are projected by the U.S. Census Bureau to be 56 percent minority by the year 2020, will need more teachers of color, much more than today, if we plan to accurately represent our population (Educating 6). Although projections aren’t facts, they’re generally reliable (especially coming from the U.S. Census Bureau). Today, students of color represent about 21 percent of Oregon classrooms, versus teachers of color which is at 4 percent (Oregon 13). Statistics, whether past facts or future projections, helped change my mind about Oregon’s diversity; moreover, they coincide with my personal experiences that were instrumental in shaping my belief.

America has a variety of cultures, but many Americans seldom experience this variety. For instance, I know a college professor, who just two weeks ago mentioned she hadn’t physically seen an African-American person until she was 18 years old. Her first experience happened to be in a prison when she moved to Oregon as a corrections officer. Without doubt, her perspective if not skewed must be limited. Granted, this is an extreme case, it endorses the lack of diversity belief. Here we have a college professor, who has very little cultural awareness, who teaches hundreds of college students every year from her limited perspective. Unfortunately, this is a part of Oregon’s teaching structure and is a situation that helped solidify my belief. I must say that I’m a product of this same structure, thus my cross-cultural awareness is also limited.       

Growing up in Oregon was culturally challenging. Most of my educational history I was one of a few if not the only African-American in my classes. Right now I’m a sophomore in college and I can count on one hand the African-American teachers I’ve had in my entire educational history. I’ve had two Asian teachers, three Latino teachers, no Russian, Native American, or any other minority teachers. It doesn’t take a genius to figure out I don’t know much about the cultures around me; in fact, I don’t think many of my contemporaries do either. How could you? One would have to get experiential knowledge from being around these cultures for a substantial amount of time. Besides that, you’d have to read a great number of books to get the vast history behind these cultures. On the contrary, if Oregon was diverse among its teachers, students would grow up with this knowledge. This would supply an opportunity for all students to have a well-rounded education, not simply being educated to succeed financially, but also being educated to racial understanding and harmony. I experienced an education that lacked diversity; however, future students shouldn’t be subject to this type of disadvantaged learning experience.

    I think we owe it to our students, all of our students, to have teachers in the classroom that look like them. Teachers from the same ethnic backgrounds are often unable to educate students about other cultures. We all benefit from diversity. In a report to the Oregon Board of Education, on July 21, 2001, the Chancellor’s Office summed up some of the benefits by reporting:

Recent research supports the assertion that benefits from diversity are experienced by individuals (minority and nonminority alike), educational institutions, and organizations, as well as society as a whole”. The report went on to say that “students generally show greater active-thinking processes and demonstrating higher levels of intellectual engagement and motivation. Faculties are also affected; they are more likely to utilize active-learning methods in the classroom, and engage in research on race/ethnicity. They also possess an increased racial and cultural awareness. Society also benefits by having an educated citizenry with greater cross-cultural awareness” (Oregon 3). 

 

 

 

 

 

Works Cited

            Double Degree, School of Education, Oregon State University.23 Feb. 2003.16

                        March 2004.      

<http://oregonstate.edu/education/doubledegree/rationale.html>

          “Educating the Emerging Majority”. The Alliance for Equity in Higher Education.

                         Sept. 2000. 16 March 2004

<http://www.ihep.org/Pubs/PDF/FinalTeacherED.pdf>

          Oregon Minority Teacher Report. 28 Feb. 2001. 23 Feb. 2004

                         <http://www.ous.edu/aca/MTR/2001.htm>

 

         

 

mattpresentation

What to do about high academic standards?

“It is a travesty to expect all children to reach the same standards when only a few receive adequate resources”   Asa Hilliard III

            Like every conversation about effective schooling and the notion of reform, this conversation, the one about standards, is very slippery and complicated. I struggle to know from which angle to come at this thing. It is such an overwhelming issue. It includes so many different aspects. To truly have a conversation about standards one must also have the conversation about the means to reach those standards; in addition, the conversation about the valid, unbiased means of measuring those standards must also be held.

            I’m all for high standards. I think it would be difficult to find any competent person to argue that issue. What I find to be more at the heart issue is how we actually carry out providing teachers and students with resources to reach these standards. Sure, we can always say that we need higher standards and even uniform standards across the country (which sounds logical but when testing is implemented can become a monster), but our main problem hasn’t been standards but resources. Teachers and students who have been provided adequate resources haven’t been on the radar for not performing, it’s the teachers and students that haven’t had resources allocated to them that struggle. Underperforming schools aren’t underperforming simply because of a lack of high or uniform standards, they often struggle because they have so many hurdles in their way to reaching their already lofty goals. Can schools truly be held responsible to produce certain results without being given the adequate resources to reach those goals?

            As a side note, resources come in various forms. The main resource that “failing” schools are lacking is financial funding. Other resources that are often missing in these contexts include technology, books, manipulatives, etc…. One resource that hasn’t been addressed is the issue of the preparation of teachers to teach an ever-growing diverse student population. Let’s face it, most teachers are white, middle-class females, who were raised in a segregated community, and who went to college in segregated contexts; though many of these teachers have mastered their content, they haven’t been adequately prepared to work with students from so many diverse backgrounds. Well, if we’re honest (and specific), they often times haven’t been adequately prepared to teach any students who don’t emulate mainstream, dominant cultural “norms”. The experience of becoming culturally competent is wrapped up in academic articles, workshops and “observations”, not meaningful relationships that explain not just what students do but also why they do it. Our current teacher prep programs are very problematic in this way.

Dissin’ “the Standard”: Ebonics as Guerrilla Warfare at Capital High

Something that I wish more researchers, educators, and scholars would study and write about is the socialization and assimilation process that students go through during their “education”. For all students, this is a very difficult time and process. Recently I’ve spent a bit of time reading and analyzing how African-American students manage this period of time in their lives. One of my all-time favorite articles is one by Signithia Fordham called, “Dissin’ ‘the Standard’: Ebonics as Guerrilla Warfare at Capital High”. In this article, an aspect of the issues that Black students go through is examined and discussed. Specifically, Fordham extricates “the way in which the speakers’ discourse style convey meaning and both conceal and make manifest a perception of power”. Many academically “successful” African-American students lease “Standard English” during the hours of school and then return to their home language after school is out (code-switching); on the contrary, most academically “unsuccessful” African-American students choose not to lease the mainstream version of English—choosing to use Ebonics (African America Vernacular English (AAVE)) and resist that which has been deemed the “Standard”.

At some point, I will definitely have to write a paper on this subject, if not a book. In order to avoid assimilating and succumbing to a discourse and system that they view as oppressive to them, many African-American students choose resistance to the “Standard”. This resistance is perceived as their only means of power and the vehicle to stay true to one’s self. Both “successful” and “unsuccessful” students are navigating through this web of ascribing to dominant culture’s idea of success while attempting to stay true to one’s self and group[1]. There are huge identity issues being contemplated and at stake here. Few of the students that are going through this know, understand, or can begin to intricately articulate this experience. But make no mistake about it, this is real, being experienced in schools and campuses nationwide, and there isn’t a student that doesn’t have to “choose” allegiance to their people group or “the system”.

What I would like to write about in detail some day is how one can remain connected to the Self, one’s group, and simultaneously do well academically. Because students of color almost exclusively are forced to leave their culture and group identity at the front door of their schools, this entire issue is exacerbated. This should not be happening. Students should be able to go to school to learn and acquire the problem solving skills they need in order to reach success in their eyes and influence their community in positive ways. Students of color are often preoccupied with finding a middle ground of how to navigate through school and not lose who they are.

Quoting Fordham, I attempt to illustrate how different groups of students cope:

          “…while resistance is the common weapon the high- and underachieving students use in constructing a Black (school) identity, the specific ways they resist do not converge and are noteworthy…the high achievers resistance is manifested as conformity to school rules and practices in order both to achieve academic success and to negate state-supported claims of Black intellectual inferiority…the underachieving students resist the larger society’s claims of Black intellectual deficits through avoidance. Avoidance includes lack of attendance, tardiness, refusing to study or participate in class, disobeying clearly established rules of conduct or behavior, and so on…sadly, the underachievers’ refusal to lease the discourse practices that they view as foreign or hostile to their own identity is influential in marking them for academic and social failure”.

It is sad. These students are trapped—there’s no way out. Where are they going to go where their existence isn’t dominated by mainstream (in this country Anglo) norms, values, curriculums, social systems, etc…? Many of these students would rather fall on their swords as it were, than succumb to being another pawn or puppet in a society that oppresses them. I can’t blame them I just wish I had the platform, along with a plethora of others who are aware of this, to provide vehicles out or through this web of social failure.

What’s likely worse is that FEW teachers in this country are aware of this. Even many teachers of color, who are also products of this society and eurocentric teacher education programs, think that children who behave in these manners are just bad kids, disabled from experiencing disjointed homes, and culturally deprived. Educators are oblivious to the fact that this immense struggle is going on in children from elementary through higher education, so they see “bad” behavior and write it off as personal deficiencies. EEERRRG!!! These children are subconsciously asking for help.

 

---

[1]“…because members of the African American community have been indelibly marked by their ancestors’ enslavement, the descendants of those Americans have incorporated into their cultural practices an organizational structure that celebrates group rather than individual achievement” Signithia Fordham

 

 

 

Good Intentions Are Not Enough!

                  Good Intentioned Educators

Good intentioned educators come in all shapes, sizes, colors, religious backgrounds, and people groups.
Good intentioned educators think they’re helping students by telling them to stop using their “broken-English” and replacing it with “standard English” only.
Good intentioned educators think they’re helping by postulating dominant culture norms as “normal” and “good” and everything else then as abnormal and not good.
Good intentioned educators think that whatever they do is okay because of the notion that they’re trying with “good” motives.
Good intentioned educators think of certain students’ cultural qualities as deficiencies rather than assets.
Good intentioned educators perpetuate oppression by stereotyping their students.
Good intentioned educators perpetuate oppression by not actively fighting against it.
Good intentioned educators think that because they aren’t overtly racist that they can’t be upholding racism.
Good intentioned educators think that because of the Civil Rights Movement, “things have changed” and oppression and racism has all but disappeared.
Good intentioned educators never challenge the current systems of our country that were orchestrated by and for racist people hundreds of years ago.
Good intentioned educators subconsciously teach students to be dependant rather than independent.
Good intentioned educators think that mediocre results from some students are normal and the best that some students can do; in other words, these educators have low expectations for certain students.
Good intentioned educators naively think that their academic success will properly prepare them to be successful teachers of all students.
Good intentioned educators think that if what they were taught in school doesn’t work with students then there’s something wrong with the students.
Good intentioned educators are many times liberal, non-religious, environment-friendly, and “tolerant”; at the same time good intentioned educators can be scary to me and I wish many of them wouldn’t teach.
Having good intentions is not enough to become a successful teacher of all students.

Successful educators of all students admit when they’re wrong, seek out to build harmonious relationships with their students, look at differences as assets, and hold all students to high expectations; in addition, successful educators weave their students’ related and meaningful cultural facts into their entire curriculum so as to give students a connection and promote high esteem.

 Successful educators are liberators!!!

A few things that shaped my education…

A CursoryEducational Biography

          I was born and raised in Portland, Oregon. Besides visiting other places and vacationing, I’ve lived in Portland all of my life. My parents are both from Texarkana, Arkansas. They grew up in the same neighborhood and were high school sweethearts. Unfortunately for them and for me as a result, they were raised in a region and during a time that sharecropping was normal practice. This had a profound effect on their educational experience which in turn affects mine.
             Legally, sharecropping was supposed to be a situation that provided both signing parties a fruitful ending. It should’ve been a situation where a farmer fronted land and farming materials to a person or family that more often lived on the farmer’s land; housing was most often paid at the end of the year, the same time that the two signing parties “evened up” from crop sales and fronted materials. Both parties were supposed to evaluate how much was fronted versus how much was made by the sharecroppers. The family that was fronted was supposed to have this great opportunity to “better” themselves and get off the ground; in fact, at some point, this family would likely have their own farm. This concept almost reminds me of banks and other creditors that front poor people money knowing that they likely will never get out of debt.
           Anyways, my father filled me in on was how this actually played out in reality. Many sharecroppers had little to no education. It was thus next to impossible for them to adequately keep track of all their expenses. But regardless of this, the farmers always had the final say on how much was truly borrowed and how much was truly owed. This was enforced by intimidation if necessary. Lynching didn’t only happen when a Black man was caught having had sex with a White woman. Seldom did sharecroppers make anything after the tallying was complete; in most cases, they ended up owing money. Both situations kept them working for the boss and perpetually being in debt. This has far reaching consequences when we consider assessing accumulated assets and wealth.
           Since my parents were born into debt, they started life with a serious disadvantage. Tim Wise speaks on accumulated wealth or debt in the first chapter of his excellent book titled, White Like Me. The disadvantage my parents received was passed on to me. People born into this world are born into accumulated assets or accumulated debts. To compile this egregious circumstance, both of my parents only went to school the second half of the year, as they had to tend to helping their families’ farm, pick and chop cotton. In an attempt to be “good” White folks, their teachers always passed them even though they were unable to pass basic reading, writing, and mathematics tests.
           As one could imagine, this has had far reaching results on my education which started before I ever set foot into a classroom. I was hardly if ever read to as a child. Honestly, I don’t recall ever being read to. My memory of children’s books comes around the time I entered school. The language I was taught was one dimensional and that being African-American vernacular English which is considered primitive in mainstream society even though it isn’t true (Leading anthropologists and linguists confirm today that Ebonics/African-American vernacular English is just as legitimate of a dialect/language as mainstream English). This one dimensional aspect of literacy translated into little to no mainstream or academic language contact and a lack of exposure to and practice with mainstream discourses (i.e. “professional” behavior, social “norms” like dining etiquette, and valuing “education”). Many look at these things as norms, but it’s only normal to certain people. Others have to figure these things out as they go which equates to a disadvantage.
           Nonetheless, measured by mainstream standards I was a good student. Through the 10^th grade I was always on the honor roll and had a high B/low A average. Both my elementary and middle schools had students whose parents were overwhelmingly working-class. Seldom do I remember having classmates whose parents owned anything besides their homes and they typically worked jobs similar to my parents. Considering the teaching styles I encountered, I vividly remember coming to class and having many things written on the board so that my classmates and I could copy them in a journal; in addition, we had to have signed and dated hall passes to use the restroom. I was typically taught mechanical, rote memorization type of skills. It would be hard to say that we were being trained to be creative, express our thoughts on life, or lead the country through decision making. We were being trained to follow rules. One of the rules I never quite understood was standing in a line to travel throughout the school.  I remember being in the eighth grade and my classmates and I arguing with the teacher about how we didn’t need rules or to stand in line in order to travel to other classrooms. From my recollection, the teacher just didn’t think we were capable. My high school experience was a bit different.
           I went to a high school that had a significant amount of students from wealthy families. I remember going to parties in high school where my classmates had elevators in their homes. Some of my classmates lived on “the Ridge” (Alameda Ridge that is). In retrospect, it isn’t simply that these experiences are different because of the content of the curriculum, what is also equally important is how the information and experience is transmitted to the student. I had a math class that comes to mind. In this class, I remember being sent to the library for almost weeks at a time to do research creatively. We were given very open instructions as to how to structure our research and to what it could be on. I clearly remember feeling as though I wanted more rules. I also remember some of my classmates going right to it while I pondered; I wasn’t accustomed to having that type of freedom. That part of me, the creative side, had been suppressed.
            Honestly, I have spent the last few years trying to patch up the holes in my mathematics and grammar that I’m positive is a result of this inequity. Much of my math and writing have small unusual holes and gaps that don’t make sense. How can I do 400 level mathematics courses but not be clear on simple aspects of Algebra; how can I write as often and with such enjoyment as I do and never quite understand when and when not to use commas. Matter of fact, I remember asking a number of my writing instructors over the years what the “rules” were for this and I never seemed to get a concrete answer. Maybe I was only taught the basics. The color of my skin, my social class “category”, and my parent’s educational history has had a profound effect on my education. Much of my pertinent education has come outside of the classroom where I study on my own.

“Hispanics” don’t value education?

Ok I don’t have the time to really get into this right now but I need to say something right now. I was listening to Herman Badillo speak on C-Span earlier and though he mentioned many substantially sound things, he also said something that I couldn’t believe. He had the nerve to say that Hispanics generally don’t value education. There are any number of problems with this statement but because it’s late, I’m sleepy and I’m supposed to run 8 miles in six and half hours I’ll just mention one.

The term Hispanic covers all Latin American countries and their descendants. Off the top of my head I don’t know how many countries and various cultures that entails but I know that it’s too many to generalize in this unprofessional and non-academic way. There’s nothing that one could say that all Hispanics generally do  besides speak a variation of Spanish and come from a Latin labeled country. This type (that “they” don’t value education) of generalization is ridiculous. This doesn’t account for different countries with different values, different social class levels which have different values, and the plethora of circumstances that influence ones percieved value of education.

I was honestly floored when I heard this fabrication come out of dudes mouth. He was touted as some champion of Hispanic rights and educational mobility; what a joke. The Latin American immigrants that come here are coming from a system that often is completely different than ours so they view the road to economic mobility (education in the US) different than we do. This doesn’t mean that they don’t value education. In the system that they were socialized in, economic mobility came primarily through family ties and human capital; they also aren’t as individualistic as we are; and they aren’t driven by money and the acquisition of things like we are.

Latin American descendants that are 2nd generation or more are often disengaged from the US educational institution because of various reasons, many of which have to do with the same reason other people of color are. I have written on these issues somewhat extensively in this category, Latinos in Education. Please refer to these discussions. To say that Hispanics don’t value education is a complete oversimplification of the issue and is either naive or disingenuous.

 

On Whiteness and Allies continued…

This response I had to copy from a very informed and straight forward guy that was in my White Studies class I took a few terms ago. I couldn’t have given a better response to this question myself; in fact, I couldn’t get off the floor from laughing so hard when I read it. The post, On Whiteness and Allies, contains a set of questions I designed as a thought provoking survey. This is a response to one of them. For the record, he is half white.

7) Does hearing lectures, reading novels, reading history books and articles, watching films, and volunteering equate one to being an ally?

HELL NO. God, this is what I hate about so many white people in Portland. These cats think they’re all educated about shit, they like, totally have an opinion on things, but they don’t do anything about it. They just think that knowing it makes them cool or something. “Hey guys, let’s go sit in a Starbucks and talk about the plight of the people in Indonesian sweatshops and then go to Pioneer Place and buy overpriced clothes one size too small for us!” Woo, that’s how I feel about you bastards. Get off your fucking ass and do something productive. Stop starting shitty bands. Jesus.

A response excerpt from my Sociology of Education class…

          Bourdieu’s concept of cultural capital refers basically to all the sets of beliefs, practices, ways of thinking, knowledge, and skills passed on from ones social class; the idea is that certain cultural behaviors or norms carry along with them certain stratified value. These behaviors also give certain groups advantages in their ability to navigate through social institutions. Examples include but aren’t limited to mainstream English, appearing “clean-cut”, visualizing public education as the means to success, organized religion, “fine” art, golf, and designer clothes.
          In a general sense, middle to upper class students are taught and possess the cultural capital that is valued in our social system. Nonetheless, all students have cultural capital, but all cultural capital isn’t valued the same. Groups belonging to the upper crust of society typically determine what is viewed as acceptable behavior and what behavior is deemed valuable. Though other groups possess valuable cultural assets, they aren’t rewarded by our society and often times are actually seen as inferior.
          Success in school has been linked to certain students having been transmitted the cultural capital that a given society rewards. These students learn how to emulate the behavior that elicits the rewards/resources of mainstream culture (the same culture that they ascribe to). Lower-class students and students of color typically don’t ascribe to mainstream culture; they are many times disturbed by it and see it as antagonistic. Neither mainstream culture nor educational institutions reflect the cultural capital of lower-class and students of color. More often than not, these students resist mainstream culture and the institutions that reward middle to upper-class cultural behavior. Thus Bourdieu assumes that many students are successful not because they are superior students so much as these students knowing and appreciating the things that will bring them “merited” rewards.

Why Can’t We?

          For years I’ve heard people say, “you guys use the N word, why can’t we?”. This same theme happens with other people of color. For instance, Latinos don’t like it when people other than Latinos use terms that are traditionally derogatory towards them. Being that I work with middle and high school students, I hear this question come up all the time. I’m beginning to wonder if this question is on the rise. Perhaps it’s influenced a bit from hip-hop and rap. At any rate, I want to give a non-academic response to why those who aren’t from a particular ethnicity can not use terms that are traditionally derogatory, even if the people within that ethnicity use them.

          When I was growing up, specifically around the time my brother and I were 16 and 12 respectively, I vividly remember frequently being upset with my parents and calling them every bad name I could come up with. Don’t mistake me, I have had the greatest parents that I could imagine. I just happen to be a kid that wanted to do what I wanted to do and they didn’t let me. During this same time period I remember playing down the block from my house with neighbors at a time that I was upset with my mom. I was bad mouthing her when one of the fellas shouts, “yeah, she ain’t #$%^”. Immediately, and simply as a reaction, I slapped him as hard as I could. I then proceeded to tell him not to ever talk about my mother like that–I gave him a look like there was plenty more where that slap came from. Though it would pad my ego if it were, my point isn’t to let you know how I ran my block. There’s a distinct connection between this story and the use of derogatory language.

          Just as that young man wasn’t allowed to say bad things or use derogatory words about my mother, so is it true that people outside of a people group can not use terms that are derogatory about a people group. To make it more complex, it isn’t even PC to use these terms around any group, especially the group for which the term has a connection to.

          Finally, I have a question for those who complain about not being able to use these highly sensitive words. Why would you ever want to use the N word or any other word that carries this type of connotation? What is it that you would get out of using it? This is where critical thinking should be applied. Do you really want to use and be associated with words that have that kind of association? People within certain groups are on a different ground and though it may not be that tactful, they have a right to use these terms when others don’t. To this day, I can say anything I want about my mother; if you do, be looking for that overhand right!