XC - Quarter 4 - Babies

I do not think any culture had a better way of parenting than the others; they all had their good methods and bad methods. My thought on the baby in Namibia is that there were minimal interaction between the baby and the parent, especially right after birth. The baby was left on the bed and it also happened when the baby knew how to crawl; the parent gave more attention towards the beginning and a little more when the baby started to understand the parents. In the beginning when the baby was first born, the mother breastfed the baby and when the baby started to crawl, she waited around for the baby to go to them to feed themselves when they are hungry. After the baby knew how to crawl, the mother allowed the baby to interact with others and learn to discover new things themselves. I guess this could be a good thing; the baby would be able to rely on himself and not have to depend on the parent too much. The good things were that the baby was breastfed and there was a point when the parent treated the baby like an adult; she spoke to him with a stern voice and punished him for what he did. In their society, I guess they treated babies like adults so they can mature faster so the baby in the movie was treated like one. The baby was also taught things like balancing a can on his head when the parent felt it was time for him to learn the things that their society thought was necessary.

I thought that the baby in Mongolia was neglected a little too much; he was tied up, left on the bed, and really did not have much to play with. All the baby got after birth was getting breastfed but the mother also tried to force the baby to drink milk; she even squirted milk at him. Although some may argue that babies should drink milk at specified times, I did not think the mother had the patience to allow the baby to drink the milk for himself rather than squirting milk at him. When the baby did something wrong, like the time he spilled the water, he was scold at and spanked on the butt. It seems like discipline were taught by raising voices and spanking but the mother also did not show sympathy; she walked away when the baby went near her. I feel like the movie portrayed this baby to be the slowest to learn how to walk and I think this was caused by the mother's negligence. Then again, the movie also showed that he did not give up trying to get the paper towel while the movie kept going back to the Japanese baby.

While these two babies were often neglected, I feel that the Japanese baby had too much attention after birth. It was either because the mother and the father attended the baby too many time but this baby gave up more easily when she could not figure stuff out. I think the baby was also a little neglected when she was at the dinner table; the mother was busy and left her alone. As the baby got older, the parents left the baby at a daycare center while they went to do their own thing. The father was talking on the phone while using toys to entertain his baby and I think this distances himself from the baby.The good things that this parent did was taking her to interacting lessons and taking her to the park to interact with others. And although she was at the park, the parents were not in the camera half the time so they might or might not have been there to supervise.

The main thing I did not like about the baby in San Francisco was the fact that the baby was all wired up and was packed like a present. The other thing was when he was left on the door bouncing while his mother was cooking something. Based on an article I read online, it said that parents should allow their baby to watch everything they do. The mother should have held her baby so she can connect better with her baby while she was cooking. Other than that, I think the parents did a pretty good job taking her to lessons and allowing her to do things herself. The father allowed her to peel her own banana and take a bite of the nasty part, so she can learn to not eat that part the next time.

I noticed that many societies want their babies to first learn the word "mom." In the movie, the father was no where to be seen in Namibia and in Mongolia; they were rarely seen in San Francisco and in Japan. Since the mother took most of the time raising the baby, they feel that it is right for them to have their baby learn the word "mom" first. This way, they know that they matter to the baby's existence and that ten months of pregnancy mattered. And even though the babies could have been just making sounds, the moms like to perceive these sounds as "mom."

Parenting 102

When Ms. Plaza was asked if she would correct her child immediately when her child does something wrong, she said that it "depends; if it is in danger." Ms. Plaza called her child an it; does Ms. Plaza feel superior to her child? Does she think that her child is just a little animal that cries and crawls? Maybe people do have children to have meaningful lives, like Snyder says; parents are like Gods to them, their creator. Cindy, like many other kids including myself, have been taught to call our parents, with a pronoun rather than their name. She says that only her peers can call her by her first name, her children cannot; and maybe this is because she was brought up to call her superiors mom, dad.

I thought it was weird for Mr. Marks to compare the experience of having children to a science fair. He makes it sound like children are our experimenting objects and we all try to get the better outcome so it makes the experimenter look good. Marks also said that the middle class coaches their kids while the lower class tells their kids what to do and "the natural approach does not prepare kids for the economy." He also said that the middle class bothers to do research for their kids while the lower class waits for things to happen to their kids. This reflects the economy; because of capitalism, many parents use the normal approach to prepare their kids for the economy. While the economy allows the middle class to be more educated to coach their kids, the lower class does not know enough so they were told what to do and so will their kids. The middle class works hard for the outcome so they do research on parenting while most of the lower class are tired of trying to become rich so they just wait for things to happen and do the same for their kids.

I do not feel like I have learned much from this short parenting mini unit; I still do not know how kids should be parented, whether it should be an authoritative, authoritarian, or permissive style. There were not specific things that stood out to me; the research and interviews just reinforced the obvious. Marks did say that he took his daughter to various places like the music class to broaden her choices in the future. He also said that when you have kids, there is absolutely no time for yourself so the kid must be the center of attention. The websites said that babies should sleep with the parents and that they should be breast fed rather than formulas. What I did find out is that parenting might just be something that comes to you when you are in the situation.

However, there were some small stuff that I learned. Babies do not get spoiled when you attend their needs very often, it is a method of communication. Marks said that having kids will make you a slave, and I totally agree; you would have to keep your eye on the kid 24 hours a day and "look like a moron" to make them happy. In the future if I ever have kids, I should probably take them to classes at the early years to give them a head start. Then again, maybe not having kids will save me that extra trip to depression.

Parenting 101

I think parents should sleep with their kids; it gives the kids the sense of attachment and physical connection. Breast feeding also adds to that physical connection; it is natural and does not contain harmful chemicals. Although I was the only one of my three siblings who was not breast fed, I feel like I can connect more with my mom. It could be possible that I will lose that connection in the future or that because I did not have that connection when I was an infant, I yearn for that connection. Of course, there are other factors that affect parent-child relationships; I was brought up by my parents themselves along with my older sister while my younger siblings were sent back to China because my parents did not have the time to look after them. Most people would probably say that kids should be the center of attention but I sometimes wonder if all the attention is healthy for the kids. I am afraid that if a kid gets too much attention, then the kid will grow accustom to the attention and might ask for more attention when the kid does not get it.

I think I would be a horrible parent and this is why I wonder whether a child should have all the attention or not. Kids need a lot of attention, thus, they should be treated like puppies. But if the kid is capable of acting like an adult (which is rare), then I believe that they have the right to be treated like adults. I think that parenting can come naturally if one can pick it up quickly when exposed to other parents and their kids. But I think that there should be some research done; does not have to be books, could be asking other parents for help. My parents never read books on parenting; I think that my mom learned to parent from her parents, just by observing how she and her siblings were treated. She probably asked her mom when she was helpless at times but she knew how to treat a swollen ankle with starch and vinegar. Kids learn from their parents, therefore, if they were physically disciplined, then they will discipline their kids physically also.

The authoritative, authoritarian, and permissive parenting styles were first introduced to me two or three years ago. At that time, I thought the authoritative (consisting of elements from both the authoritarian and permissive) parenting was the ideal type of parenting. However, in the parenting descriptions, Baumrind makes all of then sound beautiful and positive in their own way. Then in the background information, she seems to favor the authoritative parenting, then the authoritarian parenting, and implies that the permissive parenting does not work at all. I think that my mom is using the authoritarian parenting style; I tend to give up easily and my brother often swings his arms when he does not get what he wants.

I think the Attachment Parenting website basically states things that a nurturing mother should know with a few exceptions that I learned. It should obvious that the mother should be physically close with her child; this includes breast feeding and sleeping with the child. What I did not know is that carrying your baby around wherever you go allows the child to be more alert. The website also touches upon the question of whether a mother would be spoiling the child if she attended to all the child's needs. The website says that being attentive to the baby's needs builds trust between the baby and the parent. When, then, does a mother stop attending to the baby's needs; when does the baby start to take advantage?

Interviews & Survery Questions

On a scale of 1-5 (1 being the lowest), how:

1. open are you?
2. easily do you make friends?
3. difficult do you find it to approach someone?
4. much do you avoid unnecessary interactions?
5. much do you talk?

6. Do you talk to your acquaintances about your life? If so, why?

Person #1:

On a scale of 1-5 (1 being the lowest), how:

1. open are you? 4
2. easily do you make friends? 4
3. difficult do you find it to approach someone? 2
4. much do you avoid unnecessary interactions? 4
5. much do you talk? 3.5

6. Do you talk to your acquaintances about your life? If so, why? No

Person #2:

On a scale of 1-5 (1 being the lowest), how:

1. open are you? 4
2. easily do you make friends? 5
3. difficult do you find it to approach someone? 1
4. much do you avoid unnecessary interactions? 5
5. much do you talk? 4

6. Do you talk to your acquaintances about your life? If so, why? Yes; because if they want to know, I'm open to telling them. Just not the really personal stuff.

Person #3:

On a scale of 1-5 (1 being the lowest), how:

1. open are you? 2
2. easily do you make friends? 5
3. difficult do you find it to approach someone? 3
4. much do you avoid unnecessary interactions? 1
5. much do you talk? 3

6. Do you talk to your acquaintances about your life? If so, why? No

First I needed to determine whether or not the person I interviewed was an extrovert so I stole the first 5 questions from the personality test we took. The way I determined this was, the person had to score a 3 or above on questions 1,2, or 5 or a 3 or lower on questions 2 and 3. If the person fulfilled 3 or more of these criteria, then that person is an extrovert. By looking at my data, all three of them fulfilled 4 of the criteria. Then I wanted to see whether they interacted with their acquaintances and were open enough to tell their acquaintances about their life. To my surprise, only 1 person would. This interview/survey provided evidence to support the claim that being more social does not mean that one needs more attention from the people they see daily. But I think this survey was not enough to determine this; instead of asking whether they talk to their acquaintances about their life, I think I should have made it broader and asked how many times they make conversations with their acquaintances and about what. This way, we get to see why people need other people and how frequently do we ask of our acquaintances.

Survey Question: How often do you talk to your acquaintances about your life?

HW 55

Part 1:

What social and emotional needs can be met by people we see daily?

Part 2:

Jia Min: It seems like you have more questions for your second topic so you would have more to write about and research on. I would go with that one and it sounds pretty interesting. Maybe your EQ can be "What more does a closer friend have to do than just a friend?"

Amber: Interesting question. Are you focusing on family or other people? I think attention is the word; why do people tend to seek attention outside the family. Just a suggestion.

Part 3:

What emotional needs can be met by our acquaintances?

Lewin, Tamar. "Teenage Insults, Scrawled on Web, Not on Walls." http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/06/us/06formspring.html. New York Times. Web. 12 May 2010.

Formspring.me is a website that allows teenagers to write anonymous comments instead of writing on bathroom walls. Since the comments are anonymous, teenagers often insult the user. The user can select comments s/he chooses to post and answer to but most do not filter the nasty ones; they are more tempted to post them. One teenager had stopped wearing a particular clothing because someone had made a comment on it. The website has even caused a suicide of a teenager because of the nasty comments posted about him.

Teenagers take advantage of the nasty and inappropriate comments from other people to attract attention to themselves. Other teenagers that we see daily, but do not consider as friends, serve as a game piece to draw attention. It is the same thing as going to a party and making out with someone so that you have something to tell your friends about, thus drawing attention to yourself. Users are crushed by the critical comments on the website but they still read them. It seems that people who are not that close to you would be the ones telling you the truth and it is the only way you can figure out how to "fix" yourself. People you see daily are there to give you feedback on how you should act or how you should look.

Lloyd, Tracey. "The Process Of Deindividuation." http://social-therapy.suite101.com/article.cfm/the_process_of_deindividuation. Suite101.com. Web. 13 May 2010.

Deindividuation "suggests that strong identification with a group culture may lead to decreased personal responsibility." This terminology was created in the 1950s by Festinger. Psychologists believe that individuals behave more aggressively than those who are deindividualized. Deindividualizing one allows the responsibility to be shared among the group so that one does not need to carry all the burden. The article goes on, giving examples of evidence proving the success of deindividuation.

This is not the best article but I think the concept of deindividuation partly answers the question why teachers like to put us in groups and why we are in classrooms as opposed to homeschooling. When we work on projects with a group, we do not have to be responsible for all the requirements because we have others to share the responsibility. As a whole class, we do not have to feel like we need to have all the answers because we have others in class to build ideas off of. Our classmates are there to carry some of the responsibility so that we do not have to take it on by ourselves.

Cherry, Kendra. "Effects of Group Size on Problem Solving." http://psychology.about.com/od/psychologynews/qt/groupsize.htm. About.com. Web. 13 May 2010.

Working in groups of three to five people do better at tasks than just one person alone. A study done with groups of three provided results showing that the group was able to solve more difficult problems. The study also show that just two people is not enough, the group must consist of three to five people; working with just two people is just as bad as one person working alone.

Again, this connects to my students in the classroom; we often work in groups because more heads are better than one. Maybe teachers should consider this study and allow students to work in groups of three to five people to see if any significant changes occur. As students, other students serve as other brains that we can work off of, or better phrase, work together with.

HW 54

Part 1:

I took the Jung test result and I thought the percent breakdowns were pretty accurate but the second box was not. The results show that I am introverted, sensing, feeling, and perceiving. But then it says artist and that I am interested in fine arts, express primarily through art form. In fact, I am no artist, not very interested in fine arts, and rarely express myself through the form of art. I feel like this test does not provide sufficient information to determine whether it is useful. It just breaks the categories down but does not give a description of your personality.

On the other hand, I thought this test was pretty accurate for J.M.H.; she is introverted, intuitive, feeling, and judging. She keeps a lot of things to herself, tries to find meaning behind everything, sensitive, and draws conclusions really quickly. The second part of the results was pretty accurate; I think she has some sort of drive to help others and enjoys doing it. She has a very complex personality. I think that the Big Five Test is more accurate and useful because it explains what the results mean. J.M.H. scored low for the extroversion part which suggests that she is reclusive, quiet, unassertive, and secretive which is very true.

Part 2:

I thought that my brother was an ISTP but his results were ISFP. As discussed in class, these personality tests measure how one view one's preferences rather than one's personality. Therefore, I think these test will entertain (like the audience at a magic show) those who were truthful when taking the test. This test did not really do anything for my brother or for me; he just took it and went back to watching videos. The test did not make me stop and think about how he is going to act in the future or change how I will act towards him. Basically, I take these tests for fun to see how accurate the questions being asked are.

Survey Analysis

Part 2:

This survey actually made me think thoroughly about the questions and reflect on them. Those were the questions that made me put myself back into the situation so I could get the full feel from it even if these situations were daily occurrences. They were not that personal (except for one or two) since they were anonymous and I did not feel pressured in answering them.

Part 3:

I was surprised to see that 30 people said that they talk to an adult in their family for more than 5 minutes every day but only 24 have more than 20 minutes of "face time" with a caring adult per day. Do their family not care about them for at least 20 minutes? I also noticed that 32.7% of those who took the survey chose maybe when asked whether friendship is for their own benefit. Do we really not know if we are taking advantage of friendship or we do not want to admit that we are using other people? On the other hand, 39.2% said that people think about themselves only; then why did 32.7% choose maybe when asked if they were thinking about themselves when making friends. The popular vote went to not much when asked if they made others feel bad to make themselves feel good. I had expected the popular vote to go to not at all; are we that selfish or is there an excuse behind it? 21 people said that they were not sure if they were happy about their identities; just shows that the represented population is still creating their identity. I was also surprised that the popular answer was affirmative when asked if people were tired of others in school. Why is this the case; have we been with each other for too long that we want to meet new people?? Why do we want to see new people, can't we just stay with each other? Is it because people change or we know them long enough to see their true self and start to dislike them? The popular vote went to maybe when asked whether people worry what others thought of them. I expected the votes to lean towards the negative side because I always hear people say that they don't care what others thought of them.

Part 3:

In the NYCGOV website survey, survey found that more than 50% of high school students had been sexually active; in our sample size, exactly 50% answered yes. 8% of NYC high school students are having safe sex, much lower than the percentage shown in our survey. One reason for this huge difference is that our sample size was not large enough to represent the whole population, in this case, NYC high school students. Within this small sample size, the number of people who were not truthful when filling out this survey can cause an effect on the results. One thing that was not provided on the website were the questions that were asked in the survey. The questions in the surveys could have been worded differently and this could also cause a change in the answers that will change our results.

Initial Theories of Human Relationships

Parents like to take their anger out on their kids when they are in a bad mood. Like when your brother gets your mom mad and when you come home, your mom starts to yell at you. Not only parents do this, but friends, acquaintances, and strangers do this to us. When your friend is already in a bad mood, you walk up to say hi him/her and s/he gives you the attitude. I believe psychologists call this catharsis. Catharsis is when someone lets out all their emotions so that they can feel better afterward. If a person is having a bad day at work, they could go take it out at the boxing ring. Psychologists would not recommend this method to relieve emotions; catharsis makes one more prone to the emotion. Does that mean we should find other ways to relieve our emotions? What other choices do we have?

I sometimes see people chase after things they cannot get. Like people who are obsessed with the Jonas Brothers or Justin Bieber, they know they cannot marry these people, so why bother saying so? Maybe it gives the people something to long for, to give their life a purpose, to keep them distracted and busy. They know they cannot marry these famous people but they want to experience this obsession, so they chase after these stars. And when they meet the stars or get the chance to spend time with the stars, they would not know what to do because people would not know how to deal with these situations.

Humans are always resetting our reference levels; whether it is the level of happiness, or the level of our metabolism. When we eat a certain amount of food for a long period of time, our body gets used to this amount and expects us to continue eating this much. It is the same thing with our hormones, when we secrete too much epinephrine, our body considers this as the normal amount and therefore our body needs to secrete more to make us happy. Our level of happiness is similar to this concept. When we receive something in life, for example a raise in salary, we get really happy but then we adapt to this change. Our happiness level drops or our body resets the normal level and I think that is why we do not take the time to appreciate what we have; we are constantly looking for other things to cheer us up.

I think understanding people is most important in any relationship; sometimes, the truth or trust is not enough. When interacting with someone, you must understand where this person is coming from; you can look at things from that person's perspective and learn to accept their thinking. By doing so, you can learn what they want and work with it so that you can get what you want, resulting in a win-win situation. Every relationship needs understanding and I think that is what we all look for in a relationship. Whether it is a friend we can talk to about problems, a parent we can talk to about school, or a coworker we can talk to about our boss.

I find it funny sometimes when have to say sorry when you get into someone's way, even though you do not mean it and if you do not say sorry, they think you are rude. Now, it is almost a reflex to say sorry when bumping into someone. This is New York City and we will find ourselves bumping into people one after the other and we will have to say sorry over and over again. Can this be avoided so we can say more meaningful things or is New York City inevitable?

HW 51

Schools are institutions that create a false image for teachers, parents, and students. Teachers believe that they can teach the students life-connected knowledge, parents and students believe that going to school will ensure success in the future. However, the students' savior teacher film, Freire, Sizer, Hirsch, and Ms. D contradicts this claim. All or some of them believe that schools are not teaching students the right information and that schools are just dumbing students down.

Section 1's savior teacher film suggests that students cannot be saved by teachers because the teachers themselves need to be saved. The film portrays the teacher ignoring the papers he was holding, texting on his blackberry, and falling asleep on his desk. He dreams about his "perfect" self teaching a bunch of rude students. The next day, the teacher goes around and insults some of his students after being woken up by a student. He walks around like he was drinking and storms out of the room, leaving the helpless students behind. Some teachers might not know what is best for students and might just teach students that are required from the government. Not all teachers can be a savior, hence the teacher did not do anything to save them; he was actually influencing them in a bad way by drinking.

Freire, in the second chapter of Pedagogy of the Oppressed, uses the analogy of banking to show that schools are not teaching the students as they claim to be. The teachers are depositing information into the students' head while the students obediently sit in classrooms and wait for the information to come. Students are so focused on collecting and storing the information that they forget about critically analyzing the information. Freire describes the students' heads as "containers" and "receptacles" that are ready to be fill by the teachers with information. Because students are being filled with information, they do not process and take the time to understand the information. By just depositing information into students, schools are not allowing students to develop critical thinking skills. Schools need to overcome this education model in order to save students from becoming robots.

Sizer believed that education should be focused primarily during the high school years so students can develop critical thinking. To succeed, one must understand some of the basic knowledge but also set goals for one to achieve. Education should not be shaped by the federal and state administrators but by the students who are getting the education. Test scores do not reflect a student's serious education and in fact proposed to drop the grading system, testing system, and conforming students by age.

Hirsch believed that students should know the basics, i.e., memorizing the presidents of the United States. He emphasizes education more during the early years of school, during elementary school, when students first learn their numbers, how to write, the basic history and sciences. Test scores best reflect how students are doing and how much of the information they memorize; portfolios are too subjective. In order to read college leveled texts, Hirsch recommends knowing basic information because knowing how to tackle college passages are useless; students need to know the basics to connect with the passages. Many schools follow Hirsch's view; they have their students memorize information and then assess their ability to memorize. Only a few has adopted Sizer's ideas and allowed their students to develop critical thinking, allowing them to become more humane than other students.

Ms. D, a teacher at one of Sizer's schools, finds it difficult to connect with every student she teaches. Without this connection with students, she lowers the chances she has to save her students from their problems outside school. Her curriculum consists a mixture of her opinions on what students should know and the standard curriculum. She was required to teach the play Antigone one year but she also decided to teach about world literature to widen her students' knowledge on literature. Although she cannot have that deep connection with students, she tries to save them indirectly by adding in her thoughts on education. She used to assign two essays a week, spent hours grading them, and gave only a few sentences for feedback. To ensure her students were getting the best out of their education, she assigned less essays but spent the same amount of time grading the papers and wrote letters as feedbacks. Ms. D feel obligated to care about her students but she cannot be like a counselor and pass her limit. Her ability to save her students is once again circumscribed. Teachers try to save their students but because they cannot reach out to every student, it makes it harder for them to save the students.

Section 1's film portrays teachers as clueless people who are not teaching the students the right information. Freire describes the classroom as a banking system, in which students do not think about the information they are receiving. Sizer and Hirsch have contradicting views and most schools follow Hirsch's ideas that includes having the students memorize. Ms. D, like any teacher, wants to teach students the important things so the students can use them. However, because of how the schools are set up, schools are not shaping intellectual students and teachers are not really helping the students.

HW 50

"Against School" is about the fact that schools are not helping the students and are in fact harming them. They are boring the students by making the students do meaningless work and if students get bored the teachers cannot get anywhere either. Success is also possible to those who do not go to school and going to school does not guarantee success. Schools are turning students into slaves for the economy by dumbing them down and depressing them. Gatto, in the end, suggests some alternatives that will better educate kids than to send kids to school.

Since schools are dumbing students down for the sake of the economy, students are being compared to the products of a factory. School is like central factory that produces workers to function other factories that run the economy. Schools make things too easy for students, therefore not allowing the students to mature through struggle. This leads to longer years of education which continues to make things easy for students and the students still cannot mature. It is a cycle; an unbreakable cycle created to aid the economy. Parents are advised to have their kids "learn to enjoy their own company;" I feel that this will drive kids to seek company later on in life. Everyone needs attention so if kids do not get it early in life, I think they will seek the attention later. Even if one can stand being alone, one would have difficulty developing social skills; limiting the chance to learn from others.

The second chapter of Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Freire uses the analogy of banking to describe his view on schooling. The teachers deposits information into the students who are sitting there waiting for teachers to deposit something. Students who are so caught up in storing information leaves no room to think critically about the information handed to them. They are like "containers" or "receptacles" ready to be filled with information pouring from teachers. Because they are being "filled" with information, they do not get to process and really understand the information.

Students accept the idea that they are empty ones, thus giving purpose to the teachers so that the teachers think that they are the ones teaching. Teachers do not know everything; there are some things that teachers do not know and that students know. School, beside the fact that it is a place where kids meet and hang out, should be a place where people learn from each other. It should not be just about the teacher teaching because students also have insights to offer. "The more the oppressed can be led to adapt to [a] situation, the more easily they can be dominated." This makes me wonder why colleges and bosses require applicants to be able to adapt to changes. Is it because colleges can better control the students and it is easier for bosses to control the workers? Is being able to adapt a bad thing or do we want to be able to work things out?

Delpit does not fully agree with the progressive approaches to pedagogy but also does not fully agree with the simple "basic skills" approach. The progressive approach worked for some students but not for others and the "basic skills" approach do not encourage critical thinking. Delpit believes that basic knowledge is needed to learn how to pronounce words like "me." Her solution is for teachers to teach materials related to the students' lives and to explicitly explain the purpose of the lesson so students do not feel they are being lied to. In an institution, the ones in power are the ones benefited and everyone else do not matter.

In order to teach the materials related to the students' lives, Delpit suggest that "each classroom incorporate strategies appropriate for all the children." I find this difficult to achieve since everyone live a different lifestyle. For example in Freedom Writers, the teacher was unable to solve everyone's problems in one classroom sitting. The teacher needed to track every student down individually, figure out the problem, and then solve it. For a teacher to develop a curriculum that incorporated materials related to all students is nearly impossible.

Ms. D finds it very difficult to connect with every one of her students. Her curriculum consists of mixture of the standard curriculum and her opinion on the student's education. For example, the standard curriculum required her to teach the play Antigone but she also decided to teach world literature. She used to assign two essays a week and spent hours grading them, providing little feedback for students so she decided to decrease the frequency of essays, allowing her to write her feedbacks in the form of a letter. Ms. D feels obligated to care about her students but there is a limit; it is hard for her to be a counselor because she cannot have that deeper connection with students.

Ms. D is not able to save every one of her students because she cannot connect with all of her students. Even so, she tries to give the same chance of being saved by assigning less essays and analyzing students more. She cannot have that deeper connection with students without it looking like something else. If teachers cannot have that deeper connection with students, the student definitely cannot be saved by teachers. However, her ability to tweak the curriculum so that she can adjust it to fit her ideas will aid her students to save themselves and help them solve their own problems.

HW 49

Initially, I was confused about whether the teacher in section 1's film was thinking about his day or he was dreaming. I figured it was a dream because it was portrayed with his head on his desk and his students did not look out of control the next day. One way I took the film was that the teacher was afraid that his students would one day disregard his wisdom and act out of control. But since there is not enough information to support this, I thought that the message of the film (and I can be totally wrong about this) is that teachers are the ones who need to be taught. The teacher in the film ignores the papers he was once holding, picks up a blackberry to text, and falls asleep on the table due to boredom. He dreams about his "want-to-be" self and the rude students but the next day, we see that things are the other way around. After a student wakes him up, he walks as if he was drinking alcohol, starts insulting the students and walks out the room.

This is different from Freedom Writers, Blackboard Jungle, and Dead Poets Society. It related more to the parody that we saw in class; in both films, the students were the ones knowing what they were doing and the teachers were the clueless ones. While the students in the other films walked into class disrespecting the teacher, the students in section 1's film came into class and waited for the teacher to start class. And when the teacher was still sleeping on his desk, a student went to wake him up, hoping he could enlighten them. Instead, he continues to be hopeless, starts yelling at the innocent students and leaves them behind.

Maybe there is no way schools or teachers can help students, or not all teachers can save students, or not all students can be saved. Each student have their individual and different conflict, which makes it hard for the teacher to save each and every one of them. The teacher in the film did not do anything to save the students and in fact, influencing them in a bad way by drinking in class. Some teachers themselves may be too out of it to teach their students about life. The students might just have to teach themselves on their own and this might just be the alternative to school.

Treatment for Savior/Teacher Movie

Ken Walker = teacher
Kim Steelie = student
Principal Staremann = principal

Ken Walker walks into the classroom to find Kim Steelie with a film so he took the film from Kim and went to return the film to the principal. Kim comes storming after Ken, demanding him for her film back. Ken ignores Kim and keeps walking which pisses Kim off even more so Kim starts throwing a fit. Kim smacks Ken on the back of his head which causes Ken to stop walking. Kim takes a few step back cautiously and then everything stops at that moment; Kim is staring at the back of Ken.

After a moment of awkward silence, Kim uses the book she was carrying and throws it at Ken. Ken, infuriated, picks the book up and throws it back at Kim. Kim, with amazing athletic abilities, dodges the book and the book hits Principal Staremann as the principal walks by. Ken flinches in fear while Kim looks away from the principal as if nothing happened. The principal slowly looks away from them and keeps walking. Kim smirks and starts to head back to the classroom while Ken stands there dumbfounded.

All the other teachers stare at Ken but does not say a word and continues heading to the classroom. Ken chases after Kim to demand for an explanation but walks into the classroom to find students with tattoos, students violating the school dress code, and students reading comic books. The chairs are out of place; some students are throwing papers and pencils around. Ken stands at the doorway, trying to absorb in all of this chaos. Kim, after settling in her seat, stares at Ken and waits for him to do something about the class but Ken just stares off into the distance....

Credits to Jia Min H.

Research and Writing

International Lessons about National Standards compares and contrasts the standards in different countries and comes to a conclusion about which aspects the Unites States should follow. It focuses its studies on education standards and testing in Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, the Netherlands, Russia, Singapore, and South Korea. These countries suggest to create independent institutions that will ensure the development of national standards. Although the independent institutions will make sure national standards exist, they should not be the ones creating them but to provide the encouragement and resources in creating the standards. The United States should develop coherent, focused, and rigorous standards involving English, math, and science. Then, test students during their 4th, 8th, and 12th years in school with some open ended questions to reflect the coherence. Whether the students do poorly or excellent, the students themselves, the teachers and the schools are responsible.

International Lessons about National Standards is the first step towards creating a better education system for the United States. Not only does the study covers China but it also covers nine other countries for additional options for improvement. It first mentions creating an institution that will support the creation of the education standards. Countries around the world emphasize on the knowledge of English, math, and science. To prove their learning in these subjects, students are tested during or a year before they move on to the next school. Having students themselves, teachers, and the schools held responsible for the students' learning puts pressure on all of them to provide the best education for the students.

I think this study and the results of this study is leaning towards Hirsch and his ideas. This study suggests that students learn the basic knowledge of English, math, and science but does not mention anything about preparing the students to be open minded and to think on their own.

"Having so many topics in the curriculum as the U.S. does means that each topic is covered superficially— and, often, repeated grade after grade" (Schmidt, et. al 24). If schools could go in depth in each concept, the topics would not be repeated every year and middle school math would not be "a repetition of the arithmetic topics covered in grades 1-5" (Schmidt, et. al 25). And if topics can be fully covered before high school, students can start to develop their own way of thinking that is aside from lecture and regurgitation.

Hirsch also believed in testing, but why should knowledge be questioned with a number 2 pencil and bubble-in answer sheets? Why not allow the students teach each other on topics that were taught?

Class film preparation 1

• one problem the teacher should overcome is getting a student to re-attend school after deciding to dropout.*
• students should have tattoos*
• violate dress codes*
• disrespect the teacher
• wise but rebellious student*
• students make fun of the teacher
• the teacher should have some kind of secret that students have to figure out
• students should give their teacher a name to show the resolution of the plot*
• students should read in class
• others see the class as hopeless and thinks the students will not graduate
• there should be war in class
• the teacher should visit students' homes

More Big Thoughts on Schools

Hirsch believes that students should know the fundamental information, which includes memorizing the presidents of the United States. In his opinion, education should be taken most seriously during elementary school, where most fundamental studies happen. Test scores are a more accurate method of assessing a student's knowledge and portfolios are too opinionated. Students need to know their basic information so that they are able to read college-level texts. Knowing how to read and tackle difficult passages are useless; students need to know the actual facts related to the subject.

Sizer, on the other hand, believes that education should be more focused during high school, or before the end of education so that students are prepared to critique if necessary. Succeeding, in Sizer's point of view, is to understand some of the basic knowledge but also to set their own realistic standards that they can achieve. Education should not be shaped by the state and federal administrators but by the students whom the education is being taught to. Test scores does not equate with his definition of serious education. In fact, he proposed to drop the system of test scores, grades, and categories based on age.

I feel that Hirsch and Sizer have a chance to work together. Look at Millennium High School in New York City; they offer AP classes, have their students take regents and write exhibitions on top of that. Hirsch suggest that "tests are far fairer than more subjective means of assessing student performance" while Sizer prefer "explore a single subject for several months and then present an ''exhibition'' of their work to demonstrate what they've learned"(Mosle). Millennium incorporates both ideas together to put loads of pressure on students and who knows, it might be better for their students.

In my experience, I think that SOF used to be one of Sizer's schools. Recently, it has become more of Hirsch's, with the division of math and science classes depending on student's speed. The only classes that remains loyal to Sizer are the social studies and English classes. We the students have a say in what we want to learn in the class and the English class is more open to discussions as oppose to in class essays that are treated as tests. Math and science classes require basic knowledge to understand the more complicated materials that appear in further studies.

Big Expectations for School

Obama's view on school is that schools can provide the opportunity to discover your talents. He delivers a great speech but his solution seems too easy. He says that we can have the best schools in the world; easy to say, but what are the steps he is willing to take to create the best schools in the world. What is the best school in the world, relative to him? Obama wants schools to prepare students for the future, to get good jobs and to get the economy going. Even if some students have the best education out there, there are other factors like racism that stop them from getting the job they want. And if everyone gets what they want, the economy is going to be in high demand for the jobs that people are skeptic about applying for. Obama names the people who were determined to finish high school and go to college. Sure, school can teach you to be persistent but is college necessary to get a good job? What do we learn in college that cannot be learned earlier in our lives?

The article about liberal arts also argue about career but at a personality level. Schools mold our ideas, help us learn to discover ideas, and teach us to think creatively. I don't think art is teaching students a necessary skill in the workplace. What corporations look for are practical solutions to problems and if studying art is enforcing imagination skills, then liberal arts may not be all that important. But other than the workplace, I think studying art is a nice personal hobby. Thomas Friedman implies that schools train us to become tools of corporations across the world like Intel. If corporations cannot get the best engineers in their own country, then they will get them out of other countries such as China. I think school is also encouraging students to compete; it has become sort of a battlefield among students not only in schools themselves but throughout the world. Friedman suggests to step up the education a notch and compete with the education around the world. Even schools within America are competing against each other to see whose students get into the best colleges.

Significance

What are the similarities and differences between schools in America and schools in China? How can schools in America learn from schools in China and what aspects should American schools promote to other schools? What elements affect the schooling system and how schools teach, what schools teach?

I want to compare how American schools and their education compare to other countries, especially China. What are we lacking in our schools and what is strong about our education system? I have heard stories about schools in Japan, how Japanese treat their schools like their second home. They wear no shoes, or shoes other than the ones they wear to go out, in school and clean the school as if it were their house. How does this affect their learning and does it affect their point of view on school so that they feel more motivated in school? Chinese immigrants come to America, risking the fact that their children might be less educated than if they had attended school in China. Is it better to send kids to other countries to better their education or is it worth it to have kids stay in America?

I hope my research will help others in the future make the better choice in their education. They have the choice to accelerate their knowledge and have it for future use or they can take their time to develop social skills. It also seems that some countries encourage competition, to see who is good enough to be hired by large corporations. I think it is also weird to have students compete against each other in communist countries like China, where everyone is on the same level. This competition is also parallel to Darwin's survival of the fittest theory; students are trying to better their education so they will not be the ones working at Duane Reade.

Initial Internet Research on Schooling

Heaton, Nora. "Proposed Bill Could Create Charter Schools." http://www.dailyiowan.com/2010/02/22/Metro/15773.html. The Daily Iowan. Web. 22 February 2010.
This state bill was proposed to create schools with an strong focus on the curriculum and more extracurricular opportunities. These schools will focus their education on particular subjects, so if the school will focus on performing arts, then the curriculum and extracurricular offerings will circle the subject.

With more of a focus and more opportunities to explore student's skills, charter schools may be able to do more than traditional public schools. They provide the motivation that some traditional public schools do not and may be a better option for those who have aleady discover their skills.

Ford, Peter. "In China, Kindergarten Costs More Than College." http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia-Pacific/2010/0223/In-China-kindergarten-costs-more-than-college. The Christian Science Monitor. 23 February 2010.

It costs $150 a month to send a kid to kindergarten and $105 a month to send a high school graduate to college. Kindergarten in China are highly competitive and because one parent want the child to get a head start in education, every other parent wants to too.

Every parent in China is having their child learn social skills at the age of 1 and learning another language at the age of 3. Even though it is expensive to pay for kindergarten, parents pay extra to have their child attend after-school for extracurricular classes. Chinese parents are putting emphasis on early education (kindergarten) rather than college education.

Park, Ju-min. "North Korea-Funded Schools In Japan Have an Image Problem." http://www.latimes.com/news/nation-and-world/la-fg-japan-schools23-2010feb23,0,5983432.story. Los Angeles Times. 23 February 2010.

Some schools in Japan are run by Koreans so they require a picture of the leader of North Korea. Koreans attending and teaching at those schools in Japan face a huge identity crisis which include being attacked by the Japanese because of their nationality.

Some Japanese see the picture of North Korea's leader on school walls as an act of propaganda. Therefore, the picture was taken down, South Korea's and Japan's history were added to the curriculum, and students were not required to wear traditional Korean uniforms after-school (but they still wear it in school). Imagine what information are hidden from us and how limited we are in what we can do in or out of school.

Edit:

Fajen, Micholyn. "Chinese, Valley High Teens Speak the Same Language." http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20100302/NEWS02/3020339/-1/AMES/Chinese-Valley-High-teens-speak-the-same-language. DesMoinesRegister. 2 March 2010.

Students in an exchange program from China were surprised that American schools are less about individual work and more about collaborative work. Although Chinese schools are more strict and individual, the students attending schools in China are better educated than Americans.

This article lays out the significance of balancing students' social life and their education. Chinese students do not even have the time to get distracted in class and are not able to communicate as much as Americans do. It seems that both American and Chinese schools are not able to find the balance between social and educational life so they focus on separate aspects.

Clare, John. "Can We Learn From Chinese Schools?" http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/expateducation/4190692/Can-we-learn-from-Chinese-schools.html. Telegraph. 2 March 2010.

Schools in China are very structured; little kids sing a song they memorized to go along with their exercising routine without teacher's instructions. While school administrators in China are opposing their traditional way of teaching, the writer believes that other countries should learn a little from China's method of promoting good behavior.

This article describes some scenario of a typical Chinese school and it shows how well China controls their students. Students in China also dorm at the age of three and this might be as a way to strengthen the community. How does it oppose to living with family (the pros and the downside to it) and what results are produced from having kids live with other kids?

Additional Works Consulted:

• Wade, Stephen. "Teaching About the Beijing Olympics Reaches Deep Into China's Schools." http://www.usatoday.com/sports/olympics/2007-12-18-2096487223_x.htm. USAToday. 2 March 2010.
• Miller, Sunlen. "Obama Tackles High Dropout Rates, Targets "Chronically Troubled' Schools." http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2010/03/obama-tackles-high-dropout-rates-targets-chronically-troubled-schools-.html. ABC News. 2 March 2010.
• Ravitch, Diane. "First, Let's Fire All the Teachers!" http://www.huffingtonpost.com/diane-ravitch/first-lets-fire-all-the-t_b_483074.html. The Huffington Post. 2 March 2010.

School Interviews x 5 & Synthesis

Part A:

Me: First reactions to school.

Brooklyn Tech Student: Boring and a lot of work.

Me: What you learn in school?

BTS: Whatever they teach?

Me: How are the information helpful?

BTS: Brings me to college.

Me: What are you going to learn in college?

BTS: Whatever I am majoring in.

Me: That's gonna help you get a job?

BTS: Yes yes.

Me: First reactions to school.

Baruch Student: Um... it's okay. Boring.

Me: What would you do if you did not have to go to school?

BS: I would have more time to hang out with my friends, sleep in.

Me: So what did you do during the break?

BS: Went to cousin's, went shopping, went to movies, did homework.

Me: You didn't hang out with friends?

BS: Yeah, I did.

Me: Now that vacation is coming to an end, how well did you spend your vacation?

BS: I don't know o_o

I started to ask her more about her vacation. She stayed home, on the computer, played video games, and watched drama. I wanted to know how well she spent her vacation so I asked if she wanted to respend a day during her vacation. She said after being finished with the dramas, "there wasn't much to do" for her. After drama, she started to do homework. She had wished that she went outside but since there was snow, she couldn't really go outside. In a circumstance in which there was no homework but it was snowing that day, she said she doesn't know what to do. She said that she would use her PC to check updates on dramas, chat on AIM, and check her email. If her neighbors had been home, she would have played board games with them. She also mentioned that she would catch up on her sleep. Homework sometimes take up her sleeping time, especially if there are projects. She starts homework at 6 or 7 and gets home at 6 and sometimes 4:30.

In my third interview, the person's (gender unknown but we will call him a he) first reaction to school is "sleeping time!" It is "pretty much" what he does at school because "school is boring." School is "kind of" a waste of time because his "teachers don't really teach [him] anything." He claims to have "bad teachers" who "get really off the subject and don't teach [them] anything. They can't teach for [$#!t]." The teachers talk about their life stories but the students do not learn anything from their stories.

Me: First reaction to school.

SOF Graduate: What school first?

Me: High School and College.

SOFG: For high school, it was quite an experience for me. Earlier on in my educational life, I didn 't go to such a diverse school. So for SOF, I wasn't use to the diversity there. It was pretty uncomfortable for me, but eventually I got use to it. It gave me an opportunity to learn about other cultures.

For college, I didn't really look forward to it. I was yet in another city-environment location, which I didn't really like. It wasn't a pleasant sight for me as I walk around the area of my college. I was worry about college when I first got in. I wasn't sure the difficulty of the things being taught and the pace that they were being taught. After taking courses for a while, I started being comfortable with it. I liked the small community that were formed because of the mandatory group project that needed to be done for the semester. It was a fun project to research on and my groupmates made it even more enjoyable in the process.

Me: What do you think is the point of school?

SOFG: To prepare you for the real world, educationally as well as maturity-wise.

Me: Both High School and College?

SOFG: I guess you can say that. But I feel like HS just prepares you for college. Not too much of what college is "all about."

Me: So what is the point of High School?

SOFG: Hmm...for our high school, I felt like it was just to prepare us for presentations and writing papers. It was also to prepare us for the lower level courses in college.

Me: First reactions to school.

High School Student: I like to learn but I feel like I don't learn enough in school.

Me: What is preventing you from learning?

HSS: Homework, and having to be forced to do so many things. I rather learn for fun.

Me: What is homework doing to us?

HSS: Sometimes, I think some homeworks are useless 'cause it doesn't help me and like I said before, I feel like it's forcing us to learn.

Me: What would you like to learn?

HSS: I like all the subjects but I just don't like the way teachers are teaching it. All they do is power-points and it's soo boring.

Me: How do you want the information presented to you?

HSS: I want to have more experience; like for science, more labs.

Me: What is wrong with the education system?

HSS: There's too much emphasis on testings and grades and students are getting so stressed out from stuff like that. I mean, it's important to test but sometimes, that's what it becomes all about. It's not even about learning anymore, it's about getting like a 5 on an AP exam or something. It's the wrong motivation for kids to learn.

Me: What can we do to eliminate this stress?

HSS: We could get teachers to talk more about learning instead of tests 'cause I know some teachers will be like, "if you don't do this or something, you will fail the test" or "if you guys don't pay attention, you won't be able to pass." They should stop saying stuff like that and they should have fun 'cause then the students have fun.

Part B:

The first snow-day of the year and the day we got back taught us that school is taking up so much of our time that we don't even know what to do without school. I decided to investigate that further and asked my friend about her vacation. When I asked her how she spent her vacation, she did not take the time to think and answered with an "I don't know." It seems that we do not reflect on our vacation, on the things we do in life including what we learn in school. We go to school, go home, and go back to school thinking that we only listen to garbage coming out of teacher's mouths. There is no room to rethink what we have been taught. She didn't know what to do without homework until I suggested board games and computer. What she said about her neighbor may be because I suggested board games or it may not; we won't know. She tries to use little things like checking for updates, email, and chatting on AIM to fill up her day but she does not realize the long day ahead of her.

The SOF Graduate caught me off guard with her first response. People have said boring and all these negative words that are short and simple but she gave me a full response of her experience in High School and her current College experience. I didn't really investigate her experience at school but I wanted her point of view on the purpose of school. She gave an almost-typical answer when she said that school prepares one for the real world but she added that school mature us. I think it is true that schools are meant to mature us but how well are American schools doing so? Colleges may be doing a fine job maturing us and High Schools are meant to prepare us for college. Is this step needed? Do we need to go to toddler school to be prepared for elementary school to be prepared for middle school to be prepared for high school? I believe that we have not learned anything in our past years and that schooling should be cut short and concise, teaching everything that is needed in less than 18 years.

First School Assignment

Powerful questions:

• What percent of students actually go to school to learn?
• Why is a college degree needed to become a bank teller?
• How does physical harm from teachers in school affect level of education?

Ideas:

• College is just another four years of our lives wasted.
• Some teachers at SOF are tired to see students after school because they are tired of playing nice in front of them.
• Maturity and the structure of school have a high correlation; therefore, students are unable to decide on a major at an early stage.

Experiences:

• I go to school to chill with friends.
• I do not know as much about social studies as I should know.
• I am brought up to think that college will teach me everything I need to know to get a career.

One reason why I look foward to school is because my friends are in school. This, I believe, is one of the reasons why some are unable to do well in school. Because their friends are in school, they focus on socializing with their friends rather than getting the most out of their education. On the other hand, some are positively affected by their friends in school. Because their friends are in school and working for their education, they are influenced by their friends so they work for their education. Others are led into a life in which education do not play a role.

This is not a good thing. Students are forced to sit in classrooms for more than six hours a day and all they focus on is relaxing with their friends. If students are able to redefine the purpose of school, then they will never get the most of their education. And if Obama wants to increase the time in school, the level of education would not increase because it would just be more time sitting at desks (and I could use those few hours sleeping).

I think this behavior starts at a young age. Some kids enjoy school because teachers have the time to take them to the park while their parents do not. They learn to connect with other kids at school during recess and look forward to seeing their friends the next day. As students, we all hate the thought of homework and approve the thought of lunch or break from classroom. And as this behavior continues, we will miss the important lessons and become troubled in the future. In order to break away from this behavior, I believe that we must change our point of view on school so that we can actually make room to learn new materials.