identity

The introduction of Ward's "Racial Identity Formation and Transformation" shares the common message we've heard since we entered the field of education: "For some black students, doing well in school is equated with 'selling out' or becoming non-black; thus for them, 'the burden of acting white was too high a price to pay for academic success" (259). This to me is one of the most frustrating things we, as future educators, will have to deal with in an "urban" or more racially diverse school. Primarily, this issue frustrates me because there are sooooo many successful black Americans in many fields of employment that do have high-school and college diplomas. And these aren't hidden in our society; we can buy magazines like Black Enterprise, listen to black politicians speak in the House, senate, and at state and local levels, and watch college basketball on television where more than half the men are the court are black. And college basketball requires at least a high school diploma.

Later, on page 262, she writes, "Transmitted daily to black children are messages that black people are undesirable, inadequate, and inferior... In the face of glaring contradictions between the black experience as non-blacks believe it to be, and the black experience that the black adolescent knows it to be, the task becomes one in which the black child must unravel the faulty and dangerous attacks upon her identity, both individual and group." This message is something very crucial for educators to grasp; especially educators in an urban area or those working with a more racially diverse set of students. The first problem is one we can't fix. We all had a different adolescent experience, and therefore truly know our own. (And really, how well did we know ourselves as adolescents?) This problem aside, adolescence is a difficult and somewhat shitty experience for everyone. Considering the black adolescent experience as a white teacher may be as difficult as our own adolescence was! These kids must "unravel the dangerous attacks on their identity" while at the same time taking in what we're teaching in our classes, because really, isn't that what we're there for? To teach these children our content?

Question being, where and how do we create this balance?

English Language Arts Standards: Scope & Sequence

My research revolves around the English Language Arts standards created by the National Council of Teachers of English and the Wisconsin Model Academic Standards for English Language Arts. For the purpose of this project and course, my research focuses on the eighth grade standards, as these are the standards that should be met by a student's completion of middle school. The question I'm researching specifically is to determine the appropriate scope and sequence and state/national standards for Language Arts.

I am quite familiar with these standards and encounter them daily in my UWM classes as well as my fieldwork/student teaching classroom, and I know how I feel about them (the standards). However, I am encountering a few problems in my research. Primarily, the scope of curriculum used in eighth grade classrooms is HUGE—hundreds of lesson plans shared by teachers online prove that there's a lot that can be taught to eighth graders. Many plans meet/include national standards, but it's interesting to notice how Wisconsin Model Academic Standards expect more of teachers and students than many other state standards do. (We have our work cut out for us!)

Finally, determining the sequence of curriculum and in which order to apply the standards is somewhat difficult. I'm currently in the process of researching NCTE and the Wisconsin standards websites to conclude whether the order of the standards is meant to affect the order of organizing curriculum.

Middle School Content

After this week’s readings, a lot of questions have been brought up regarding middle schools, junior highs, and high schools. A few of us have mentioned some uncertainty about certification and whether middle school teachers should have a separate certification because of the fragile time of adolescence. Here is where I take issue: CONTENT. K-8 certifications do not specify one content area, placing teachers in classrooms where they might teach all of English, Social Studies, Science, and math. My cooperating teacher has a K-8 certification, and has recently taught all of the above courses except for math because she feels quite weak in that area. She confided that my certification is a better way to go because it is more content-focused. In elementary school, the basic materials of these core subjects can be taught by one professional, but as students reach adolescence, many could be missing out on the content they should be receiving.

Dr. Cyrus Smith, a wonderful professor here at UW-M, has engrained this phrase into many of our heads: “Content determines process.” So, when a teacher is weak in content, the process used may not be the best for relaying content. It is not the fault of the K-8 certifiers, but some type of change needs to happen if we are to stop blaming the students for not knowing enough, reading well enough, or writing to meet standards. If teachers are not trained in their [content specific] profession, how are our middle school students going to perform in freshmen English with little prior content?