Critical Project for Week 4
Diversity in Education
Laura Nugent
Statistics reported that many governing board trustees of US colleges and universities do not have diversity among their membership. In 2006, The Chronicle of Higher Education, Section B, Diversity in Academe, Governing Boards Make Gains in Diversity, Kathryn Masterson, Vol. LVI, No.8, 10/16/09) found that 90% of trustees were white and 64% were male. As the world of education globalizes, it needs executive board members who understand diversity needs. Financial decisions need to be made concerning the allocations of funds that support departments that serve the students from various cultures. An extra effort has to be made to search out board members who represent diverse cultures, races and sexual orientations. In recessionary times, some trustees may regard diversity departments as a luxury but as global education grows, so should the needs to meet these changes grow. Some of the issues that board members need to address are the establishment of affirmative action programs, marketing to the international community and outreach programs and services for diversity issues. Some new concerns are dealing with age, sexual orientation, transgender, disabilities and socioeconomic classes.
Different countries have different diversity concerns. In Britain, socioeconomic status divides people, in the Middle East discrimination against women has been a problem and in Brazil, racism is a concern. In the US there is much concern about serving the minorities. US is a country of immigrants. The minorities of today will be the majorities of tomorrow. The underserved from marginalized communities are given opportunities in the US thru financial aid and grants. The disabled also have access to education. Most colleges have a disabilities department to tutor exceptional students. Affirmative action programs have given opportunities to the underserved by balancing out the ethnic variety in an institution by way of their admissions policy. (CHE, Section B Diversity in Academe, Affirmative Action, Brazilian Style, Marion Lloyd, Vol. LVI, Number 8, 10/16/09)
Marketing to the international community is expanding. Many prestigious universities in the US are establishing a global presence abroad. Such institutions are New York University, Michigan State and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. New York University is opening up a campus in the United Arab Emirates in 2010. It will be a global network university that will recruit students from all over the world especially Africa, Asia and Europe. NY students will be able to study at both NY and Abu Dhabi campuses. (CHE, Section B, Diversity in Academe, Catching Up in the Persian Gulf, Vol. LVI, No. 8, 10/16/09)
What’s needed for diversity in education? The faculty body needs to represent diversity. Ongoing professional development workshops for diversity training are needed.
Students need tutoring in foreign languages. International advising for foreign students, housing for international students, ethnic clubs, sexual Orientation clubs are a few issues.
Campus diversity profiles; many US students, due to the recession are looking into schools abroad and at the same time we are experiencing an influx of international students. An example is Portland State University. Between 2005 and 2006, there was an influx of Saudis. In 2008 new students arrived from Libya and Vietnam and in 2010 a new wave of Chinese students are expected. In the US, 40% percent of our college students come from India, China, South Korea, Vietnam Saudi Arabia and China.These new shifts in student migration challenge faculty and staff. New and evolving issues will arise that need creative solutions. For example, more Basic English classes are needed, more tutoring program and cultural counseling. The study of comparative religions should be in the curriculum. (CHE, Section B, Diversity in Academe, Colleges Large and Small Help International Students Adjust to American Life, Josh Keller, Vol. LVI No.8, 10/16/09)
What’s needed regarding professional development? Faculty can use diversity as great learning tool for transformative learning. Faculty need to be aware of their own prejudices and biases. There are management consultants and cultural translators who can teach faculty how to bridge the generation divide among young students and teachers. One such company is BridgeWorks, LLC
All countries will now be focusing on educational equity for their students as they prepare them to become members of the globally competitive workplace.
All of the above information is referenced from:
The Chronicle of Higher Education, Section B, Diversity in Academe Volume LVI, Number 8, Oct. 16, 2009.
Friday, October 23, 2009
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
Critical Project #3
Funding Inequities in Education
Karen Y. Carter
Funding education has never been an easy job. With the recent economic crisis, states are cutting the budgets of many school districts while at the same time, parents from underserved communities are questioning funding and spending formulas states use to provide money to their schools. Voters in many states are choosing not to approve bills which provide education funding to their districts.
In 1993, the organization called Campaign for Fiscal Equity filed a lawsuit against New York State charging that New York City schoolchildren are being short changed via the funding formula used to provide money to its schools thereby denying the students their constitutional right to a decent education. After a twelve year battle, the case made its way to the State Supreme Court which ruled that New York State had indeed short changed New York City schoolchildren and must change its funding formula. The governor at that time, George Pataki, chose to appeal the ruling three times rather that adhere to the ruling. The end result came on November 20, 2006 when the State Court of Appeals upheld the right of NYC public school children to a sound basic education and established a minimum funding amount for NYC public schools. There are also at least nineteen other states who face such litigations.
Fast forward to 2009, four years after the final ruling of the lawsuit where we find New York City schools suffering through two rounds of mid-year budget cuts approved by Mayor Michael Bloomberg and the forthcoming cuts in the state budget outlined by Governor David Patterson. Compounding the problem is the collapse of many financial institutions on Wall Street as well as rising unemployment and shrinking tax base adding to New York City’s dismal economic picture. Many other states such as Michigan with the loss of the automotive industry are looking at the same type of economic picture and have cut spending in education as well as other essential services. Voters in many states are also not eager to increase funding for schools in their state either. Some examples, voters in Maine did not approve a property tax cap which may result in state cuts in education funding and in Washington, Nevada, Arkansas and Missouri; voters went against bills which would give more money to their school districts. Oklahoma is one of the few states who actually voted to add money to their school districts by approving a state lottery system. “Education advocates say that funding defeats are not a signal that voters aren’t in favor of school spending, just that they are cautious about how money is raised”. (Silverman, p .16)
The Policy Information Center of the Educational Testing Service (ETS) released a report called, The State of Inequality, which analyzed data from the 1990 state-by-state assessment of mathematics achievement. Included in this data are results of other factors including spending inequities. Among their findings:
“After adjusting for cost of living differences, the average expenditures per student range from almost $7,000 in New York to $3,000 in Utah. States vary in both their wealth and their willingness to spend on education. Wyoming spends almost 8 percent of its personal income on education compared to New Hampshire’s 3 percent. When degree of effort is taken into account, state ranks change. New Jersey is second in absolute spending, but about in the middle when effort is calculated. Utah rises from last to the top tier”. (Lewis, p. 62)
After taking all of these factors into consideration, it is no wonder that many school systems in the United States are struggling to make ends meet so that they can provide their students with a quality education and why there is such a disparity.
References
Funding Inequities in Education
Karen Y. Carter
Funding education has never been an easy job. With the recent economic crisis, states are cutting the budgets of many school districts while at the same time, parents from underserved communities are questioning funding and spending formulas states use to provide money to their schools. Voters in many states are choosing not to approve bills which provide education funding to their districts.
In 1993, the organization called Campaign for Fiscal Equity filed a lawsuit against New York State charging that New York City schoolchildren are being short changed via the funding formula used to provide money to its schools thereby denying the students their constitutional right to a decent education. After a twelve year battle, the case made its way to the State Supreme Court which ruled that New York State had indeed short changed New York City schoolchildren and must change its funding formula. The governor at that time, George Pataki, chose to appeal the ruling three times rather that adhere to the ruling. The end result came on November 20, 2006 when the State Court of Appeals upheld the right of NYC public school children to a sound basic education and established a minimum funding amount for NYC public schools. There are also at least nineteen other states who face such litigations.
Fast forward to 2009, four years after the final ruling of the lawsuit where we find New York City schools suffering through two rounds of mid-year budget cuts approved by Mayor Michael Bloomberg and the forthcoming cuts in the state budget outlined by Governor David Patterson. Compounding the problem is the collapse of many financial institutions on Wall Street as well as rising unemployment and shrinking tax base adding to New York City’s dismal economic picture. Many other states such as Michigan with the loss of the automotive industry are looking at the same type of economic picture and have cut spending in education as well as other essential services. Voters in many states are also not eager to increase funding for schools in their state either. Some examples, voters in Maine did not approve a property tax cap which may result in state cuts in education funding and in Washington, Nevada, Arkansas and Missouri; voters went against bills which would give more money to their school districts. Oklahoma is one of the few states who actually voted to add money to their school districts by approving a state lottery system. “Education advocates say that funding defeats are not a signal that voters aren’t in favor of school spending, just that they are cautious about how money is raised”. (Silverman, p .16)
The Policy Information Center of the Educational Testing Service (ETS) released a report called, The State of Inequality, which analyzed data from the 1990 state-by-state assessment of mathematics achievement. Included in this data are results of other factors including spending inequities. Among their findings:
“After adjusting for cost of living differences, the average expenditures per student range from almost $7,000 in New York to $3,000 in Utah. States vary in both their wealth and their willingness to spend on education. Wyoming spends almost 8 percent of its personal income on education compared to New Hampshire’s 3 percent. When degree of effort is taken into account, state ranks change. New Jersey is second in absolute spending, but about in the middle when effort is calculated. Utah rises from last to the top tier”. (Lewis, p. 62)
After taking all of these factors into consideration, it is no wonder that many school systems in the United States are struggling to make ends meet so that they can provide their students with a quality education and why there is such a disparity.
References
Barton, P., Coley, R. J., Goertz, M. E. (1991) The State of Inequality. Report Number: PIC-STATEINEQ. The Educational Testing Service.
deMause, N. & Green, E. (2009) The Campaign for Fiscal Equity Lawsuit Was The Best Hope For City Schools. It Failed. The Village Voice. Retrieved from http://www.villagevoice.com/209-1-21/news/the-campaign-for-fiscal-equity-lawsuit-was-the-best-for-city-schools-it-failed/
Fields, C. (2005). Governor needs to move on school equity. New York Amsterdam News, 9, 6 (9), 13. Retrieved from http://search.ebsclhost.com.avoserv.library.fordham.edu
Lewis, A. (1992). Budgets and Inequity. Education Digest, 57 (6), 62. http://search.ebscohost.com
Fields, C. (2005). Governor needs to move on school equity. New York Amsterdam News, 9, 6 (9), 13. Retrieved from http://search.ebsclhost.com.avoserv.library.fordham.edu
Lewis, A. (1992). Budgets and Inequity. Education Digest, 57 (6), 62. http://search.ebscohost.com
Silverman, F. (2005) Voters Send Mixed Messages On Funding Education. Update Department. District Administration. Retrieved from http://www.districtadministration.com/viewarticle.aspx?articleid=689
Monday, October 19, 2009
Why Men Commit Violent Acts Against Women: Feminist Research Dispels the Myths
"Young men are often not encouraged to break out of the expected masculine role with its own rules of what is required to be a man. They may become depressed and have lower self-esteem as they try to conform to the rules (Flood, 2001). Young men should have the opportunity to explore their privileged role in our inequitable society. They should learn to speak for the equity of girls and women ( Gollnick & Chinn, 2009)." The author's reference to "young" would most certainly apply to all men.
Social scientists have been documenting, what was once known as “wife abuse,” for centuries but violence against women was not recognized as a social issue until the 1970s. The women’s movement of the late 1960s and 1970s played a major role in raising awareness about this social ill and feminists were at the forefront of the struggle to expose violence against women for what it really is. Not a private matter affecting a few dysfunctional families or, where sexual assault is concerned, a crime committed by mentally ill men, provoked by the seductively dressed women that lead them on, and then reneged on what was originally consensual. But rather, the manifestation of a male dominated, sexist society (Renzetti & Bergen, 2005).
In leading the movement feminists organized ‘speak-outs’ where victims could discuss their abuse openly, established crisis lines for counseling and support and provided shelters for families transitioning out of their circumstances. In the early 1970s, “…Feminist social scientists started collecting data about partner violence and sexual assault and reframing research questions from, “What’s wrong with women who get raped or abused?” and “What’s wrong with men that abuse or kill the women they claim they love?” to “How do our society’s gender norms contribute to the high rate of violence against women?” and “Does the differential power that males and females have in our society contribute to the problem of domestic violence against women (Renzetti & Bergen, 2005)?”
Violence against women is now a major subfield of social science research and the most influential research in this subfield is published in Social Problems , the journal of the Society for the Study of Social Problems which covers sexual assault, wife abuse, sexual harassment, stalking, as well as institutional and feminist responses to violence against women (Renzetti & Bergen, 2005). This critical body of literature serves as the foundation for researchers to build on. The most common thread amongst the research cited in these articles is challenging "taken-for-granted knowledge", authors change the research lens and look at an issue in a new way, discrediting assumptions that their research exposed as myths (Renzetti & Bergen, 2005, p. 3). "Social Problems provides a lens through which we can analyze, question and dialogue about these critical issues” (Renzetti & Bergen, 2005, p. 10).
Myth: “Irrational, psychopathic men rape to satisfy their sexual appetite.”
54% of violence against women is perpetrated by someone they know (intimate partner, friend or acquaintance) but in most cases the violence is committed by an intimate partner (Renzetti & Bergen, 2005).
The men that refuse to take responsibility for their actions and the family members, friends and counselors that enable them, cite the following reasons for their violent behavior:
· Under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol
· Stress causes them to lose control
· Partner provoked behavior
· Grew up in an abusive household
· Victim of physical abuse
· Suffering from mental illness
(Renzetti & Bergen, 2005)
Research by Diana Scully and Joseph Marolla questioned the popular idea that rape is “ a non-utilitarian act committed by a few ‘sick men.’ Their findings reveal a number of motivations but all rapists interviewed shared a sense of entitlement to the women they objectified and enjoyed the dominance they felt over the women they raped (Renzetti & Bergen, 2005). Among the complex motivations revealed in their research, from the perspective of the convicted rapists, was the complexity of the motivations for rape which spurred future research into why men rape (Renzetti & Bergen, 2005).
Myth: “Women are as violent as men are toward their intimate partners”
This idea comes from research showing women as likely and some say slightly more likely to assault an intimate partner than men are (Archer, 2000; Fiebert, 1997; Strauss, 1999) (Renzetti & Bergen, 2005). According to Russell Dobash (Dobash & Dobash, 1979), the data used as the basis for this claim raises questions about its validity which makes the case for the assertion that men and women often provide different accounts of their own and their partner's behavior (Renzetti & Bergen, 2005).
Myth: “Women stay with their batterer because they are economically dependent on them and/or do not have supportive family/friends to which they can turn.”
Research of Donileen Loseke and Spencer Cahill (Renzetti & Bergen, 2005) shows that both men and women have difficulty leaving their partners even if the relationship is nonviolent but not necessarily happy. Separation and divorce is difficult for all parties involved so their research re-labels a battered women’s decision to stay deviant to normal (Renzetti, Bergen, 2005). In addition, they point to overwhelming empirical evidence that the importance of financial stability and a strong support system is as much a motivating factor for leaving as it is for staying (Baker, Cook, and Norris; Bell, 2003; Moe and Bell, 2004) (Renzetti & Bergen, 2005). “The significance of this research is that it shifts the perception of battered women from passive victims with no options to social agents cautiously deciding whether staying or leaving is in the best interests their children and themselves. Besides, leaving does not ensure a women’s safety (Davis, Lyon, and MontiCatania, 1998; DeKeseredy, 1997; Fleury, Sullivan, and Bybee, 2000) (Renzetti & Bergen, 2005).”
The attention brought to this issue over the past 30 years has influenced local, state and federal policy. Crisis centers that began in the 1970s through grassroots efforts of these women have grown to over 1200 with a wide range of services including legal, medical and counseling and educational outreach. Many studies by feminist social scientists documenting the depth and breadth of this social ill helped pave the way for passing the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 and the reauthorizing it in 2000, which doubled funding for prevention and intervention initiatives (Renzetti & Bergen, 2005).
There are different schools of thought with regard to how we can end men’s violence against women. One is that a social problem needs a social solution by eradicating sexism and leveling the playing field between the men and women of our male dominated society. Another is that these "sick" men need mental/emotional healing through counseling and/or psychotherapy in order to change their behavior. A fact that cannot be ignored is that these so-called "sick" men have no problem controlling their behavior when it comes to dealing with their boss or other people in positions of authority so, clearly, there is a sense of entitlement that justifies violent behavior toward their intimate partner that would not otherwise be acceptable.
It's hard to ignore the catastrophic affect that violence against women has on our families and society at large and it is also important to acknowledge and address how men's health and well being is impacted. The stress of conforming to society’s definition of manhood, including the lifelong practice of suppressing certain emotions, must wreak havoc on them mentally and physically (the depression and low self-esteem cited in Gollnick & Chinn, 2009 are also contributing factors). It's no wonder that, around the world, women outlive men (Jones, 2001).
Kathleen Tierney's (Renzetti & Bergen, 2005) documentation of the first 10 years of the battered women’s movement, using social movements analysis, shows that, unlike other social movements, this movement did not gain momentum because of public outrage which was, at best, indifferent to the problem. Instead, the strong base and supporters recognized how providing resources to the movement would benefit them (Renzetti & Bergen, 2005). Tierney is concerned that yielding to pressure from funders may make the movement more mainstream and service oriented; less political and less radical. Sure enough, there is evidence that some agencies involved in the movement have toned down their feminist rhetoric to make their message more palatable to funders and some have compromised the feminist principles by adopting more bureaucratic policies (Donnelly, Cook & Wilson, 1999) (Renzetti & Bergen, 2005). At the same time many have held to feminist values. While avoiding a ‘militant image’ most agencies continue to lobby for meaningful social change which means challenging patriarchal inequality that favors batterers over victims (Renzetti & Bergen, 2005).
References
Gollnick, D.M. & Chinn, P.C., (2009). Gender and Sexual Orientation. Multicultural Education in a Pluralistic Society.
Jones, J., (2001). Around the Globe, Women Outlive Men [Electronic version]. Retrieved October 9, 2009. from http://www.prb.org/en/Articles/2001/AroundtheGlobeWomenOutliveMen.aspx
Renzetti, C. M. & Bergen, R.K., (2005). Introduction: The Emergence of Violence Against Women as a Social Problem. Violence Against Women. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Social scientists have been documenting, what was once known as “wife abuse,” for centuries but violence against women was not recognized as a social issue until the 1970s. The women’s movement of the late 1960s and 1970s played a major role in raising awareness about this social ill and feminists were at the forefront of the struggle to expose violence against women for what it really is. Not a private matter affecting a few dysfunctional families or, where sexual assault is concerned, a crime committed by mentally ill men, provoked by the seductively dressed women that lead them on, and then reneged on what was originally consensual. But rather, the manifestation of a male dominated, sexist society (Renzetti & Bergen, 2005).
In leading the movement feminists organized ‘speak-outs’ where victims could discuss their abuse openly, established crisis lines for counseling and support and provided shelters for families transitioning out of their circumstances. In the early 1970s, “…Feminist social scientists started collecting data about partner violence and sexual assault and reframing research questions from, “What’s wrong with women who get raped or abused?” and “What’s wrong with men that abuse or kill the women they claim they love?” to “How do our society’s gender norms contribute to the high rate of violence against women?” and “Does the differential power that males and females have in our society contribute to the problem of domestic violence against women (Renzetti & Bergen, 2005)?”
Violence against women is now a major subfield of social science research and the most influential research in this subfield is published in Social Problems , the journal of the Society for the Study of Social Problems which covers sexual assault, wife abuse, sexual harassment, stalking, as well as institutional and feminist responses to violence against women (Renzetti & Bergen, 2005). This critical body of literature serves as the foundation for researchers to build on. The most common thread amongst the research cited in these articles is challenging "taken-for-granted knowledge", authors change the research lens and look at an issue in a new way, discrediting assumptions that their research exposed as myths (Renzetti & Bergen, 2005, p. 3). "Social Problems provides a lens through which we can analyze, question and dialogue about these critical issues” (Renzetti & Bergen, 2005, p. 10).
Myth: “Irrational, psychopathic men rape to satisfy their sexual appetite.”
54% of violence against women is perpetrated by someone they know (intimate partner, friend or acquaintance) but in most cases the violence is committed by an intimate partner (Renzetti & Bergen, 2005).
The men that refuse to take responsibility for their actions and the family members, friends and counselors that enable them, cite the following reasons for their violent behavior:
· Under the influence of drugs and/or alcohol
· Stress causes them to lose control
· Partner provoked behavior
· Grew up in an abusive household
· Victim of physical abuse
· Suffering from mental illness
(Renzetti & Bergen, 2005)
Research by Diana Scully and Joseph Marolla questioned the popular idea that rape is “ a non-utilitarian act committed by a few ‘sick men.’ Their findings reveal a number of motivations but all rapists interviewed shared a sense of entitlement to the women they objectified and enjoyed the dominance they felt over the women they raped (Renzetti & Bergen, 2005). Among the complex motivations revealed in their research, from the perspective of the convicted rapists, was the complexity of the motivations for rape which spurred future research into why men rape (Renzetti & Bergen, 2005).
Myth: “Women are as violent as men are toward their intimate partners”
This idea comes from research showing women as likely and some say slightly more likely to assault an intimate partner than men are (Archer, 2000; Fiebert, 1997; Strauss, 1999) (Renzetti & Bergen, 2005). According to Russell Dobash (Dobash & Dobash, 1979), the data used as the basis for this claim raises questions about its validity which makes the case for the assertion that men and women often provide different accounts of their own and their partner's behavior (Renzetti & Bergen, 2005).
Myth: “Women stay with their batterer because they are economically dependent on them and/or do not have supportive family/friends to which they can turn.”
Research of Donileen Loseke and Spencer Cahill (Renzetti & Bergen, 2005) shows that both men and women have difficulty leaving their partners even if the relationship is nonviolent but not necessarily happy. Separation and divorce is difficult for all parties involved so their research re-labels a battered women’s decision to stay deviant to normal (Renzetti, Bergen, 2005). In addition, they point to overwhelming empirical evidence that the importance of financial stability and a strong support system is as much a motivating factor for leaving as it is for staying (Baker, Cook, and Norris; Bell, 2003; Moe and Bell, 2004) (Renzetti & Bergen, 2005). “The significance of this research is that it shifts the perception of battered women from passive victims with no options to social agents cautiously deciding whether staying or leaving is in the best interests their children and themselves. Besides, leaving does not ensure a women’s safety (Davis, Lyon, and MontiCatania, 1998; DeKeseredy, 1997; Fleury, Sullivan, and Bybee, 2000) (Renzetti & Bergen, 2005).”
The attention brought to this issue over the past 30 years has influenced local, state and federal policy. Crisis centers that began in the 1970s through grassroots efforts of these women have grown to over 1200 with a wide range of services including legal, medical and counseling and educational outreach. Many studies by feminist social scientists documenting the depth and breadth of this social ill helped pave the way for passing the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 and the reauthorizing it in 2000, which doubled funding for prevention and intervention initiatives (Renzetti & Bergen, 2005).
There are different schools of thought with regard to how we can end men’s violence against women. One is that a social problem needs a social solution by eradicating sexism and leveling the playing field between the men and women of our male dominated society. Another is that these "sick" men need mental/emotional healing through counseling and/or psychotherapy in order to change their behavior. A fact that cannot be ignored is that these so-called "sick" men have no problem controlling their behavior when it comes to dealing with their boss or other people in positions of authority so, clearly, there is a sense of entitlement that justifies violent behavior toward their intimate partner that would not otherwise be acceptable.
It's hard to ignore the catastrophic affect that violence against women has on our families and society at large and it is also important to acknowledge and address how men's health and well being is impacted. The stress of conforming to society’s definition of manhood, including the lifelong practice of suppressing certain emotions, must wreak havoc on them mentally and physically (the depression and low self-esteem cited in Gollnick & Chinn, 2009 are also contributing factors). It's no wonder that, around the world, women outlive men (Jones, 2001).
Kathleen Tierney's (Renzetti & Bergen, 2005) documentation of the first 10 years of the battered women’s movement, using social movements analysis, shows that, unlike other social movements, this movement did not gain momentum because of public outrage which was, at best, indifferent to the problem. Instead, the strong base and supporters recognized how providing resources to the movement would benefit them (Renzetti & Bergen, 2005). Tierney is concerned that yielding to pressure from funders may make the movement more mainstream and service oriented; less political and less radical. Sure enough, there is evidence that some agencies involved in the movement have toned down their feminist rhetoric to make their message more palatable to funders and some have compromised the feminist principles by adopting more bureaucratic policies (Donnelly, Cook & Wilson, 1999) (Renzetti & Bergen, 2005). At the same time many have held to feminist values. While avoiding a ‘militant image’ most agencies continue to lobby for meaningful social change which means challenging patriarchal inequality that favors batterers over victims (Renzetti & Bergen, 2005).
References
Gollnick, D.M. & Chinn, P.C., (2009). Gender and Sexual Orientation. Multicultural Education in a Pluralistic Society.
Jones, J., (2001). Around the Globe, Women Outlive Men [Electronic version]. Retrieved October 9, 2009. from http://www.prb.org/en/Articles/2001/AroundtheGlobeWomenOutliveMen.aspx
Renzetti, C. M. & Bergen, R.K., (2005). Introduction: The Emergence of Violence Against Women as a Social Problem. Violence Against Women. Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Studying Religion in the Classroom
Studying Religion in the Classroom
Rachel Shaw
10/14/09
EDGE 6101
Both the historical and current violent strife over religious disputes necessitate a change in the ways in which religion is discussed in classrooms. Not only must productive talk about different religions take place, but it must cover all religions in an equitable way. For this type of discourse to make an impact, it must occur in several different settings. Teachers must find a way to incorporate the study of religion into their secular and parochial classrooms. Educators must not only work toward respect in classrooms, but they should also strive to reach students’ families through inviting them to the school to share religious cultures and traditions. What is perhaps most imperative, however, is that public and parochial school teachers must reach out to religious leaders to ensure that this new philosophy of teaching religion is taking hold at home and at houses of worship. Without this final step, it is unlikely that any significant change will take hold.
While public and parochial schools each encounter their own struggles when attempting to teach religion from a multicultural standpoint, all schools must work towards exposing students to all religions. Public school teachers must find ways to teach about different religions in a secular manner. Since religion is so important to many people, there are some important guidelines to follow when teaching about religions. The school should study the beliefs of all people, but should not teach a student what to believe. The school should instruct students on religions but not indoctrinate them. The school should strive for student awareness of different religions, but not press them to accept any religion (Gollnick & Chinn, p.280 - 281). When religions are taught not as a belief system to be inherited but as a tradition to be studied, they no longer conflict with the separation of church and state. We know from numerous college courses that religion can be taught from an objective standpoint.
In parochial schools, the situation is different. Obviously, one component of a religious school is to teach a particular belief as one to be followed and observed. However, this does not mean that other religions cannot and should not be studied, from the elementary level up. It is my experience that when one religion is taught to the exclusion of all others, troubling misconceptions can arise. In the school where I teach, a Jewish day school, I heard some of my second graders talking about how all Christians were bad people. This was extremely troubling to me since it was obvious that due to the lack of information provided by our school, the students had been left to form their own ideas. Oftentimes, children and adults cannot fully understand another person’s views unless they have walked in their shoes. Attempting to see the world through someone else’s eyes is an acquired skill, not something we should be able to pick up on our own (Lewison, Leland, & Harste, p.99).
For an idea to really take hold in a student’s mind, it is essential for that idea to also have a place in the students’ home. If a teacher espouses one idea and the parents reject that idea, the student is much more likely to be confused and conflicted instead of excited about a new perspective or piece of knowledge. Teachers should of course involve parents as much as possible in the learning process. At the beginning of the year, the teacher should make it clear to the parents that the classroom will take a multicultural approach to religion, discussing the facts and beliefs of various faiths without favoring any. Educators might open the discourse by asking families about their religious traditions and beliefs. Understanding the importance of religion to students and their families is an advantage in developing effective teaching strategies for individual students (Gollnick & Chinn, 2009). When explaining a multicultural curriculum, teachers should emphasize the benefit that such a curriculum has for the children – such as, when we study your religion, the other children will know more about the important beliefs in your life.
Involving religious leaders in a multicultural approach to religion would certainly help families to believe that you have the students’ interests in mind when teaching about a wide variety of religious views. Churches and other faith-based organizations have historically served as the nucleus of urban entrepreneurial ventures, political and social activism, and educational reform (Kluth, Straut, & Birken, p.60). Many churches, synagogues, mosques, and other houses of worship have partnerships across religious lines. If these institutions can work with one another, surely we can use their help to teach about different religions in the classroom. Who better to inform educators about the similarities and differences between religions than the religious leaders themselves? You could weave in these members of the community during various social studies units on community and social action. During a study of careers, you could have rabbis and priests come and talk to students about what they do, alongside doctors, electricians, and accountants. There are many ways to involve clergy in your classroom that subtly encourage students to broaden their understanding of previously unknown faiths.
Such a study would have distinct benefits for the individual, community, and the world. By learning in depth about other religions, individual students would confront their own prejudices and stereotypes and have a greater understanding of the importance of religion across cultures. Students would bring this knowledge out into their communities, encouraging different religious institutions to work together on both religious and secular projects. Over time, by forming bonds based on mutual understanding and respect for differences, religious groups across the globe would increasingly work together to create a more peaceful, cooperative society.
Gollnick, D., & C., P. (2008). Multicultural Education in a Pluralistic Society. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Kluth, P., M., D., & Biklen, D. (2003). Access to Academics for All Students. Hillsdale: L. Erlbaum Associates.
Lewison, M., Leland, C., & Harste, J. (2008). Creating Critical Classrooms. Hillsdale: L. Erlbaum Associates.
Rachel Shaw
10/14/09
EDGE 6101
Both the historical and current violent strife over religious disputes necessitate a change in the ways in which religion is discussed in classrooms. Not only must productive talk about different religions take place, but it must cover all religions in an equitable way. For this type of discourse to make an impact, it must occur in several different settings. Teachers must find a way to incorporate the study of religion into their secular and parochial classrooms. Educators must not only work toward respect in classrooms, but they should also strive to reach students’ families through inviting them to the school to share religious cultures and traditions. What is perhaps most imperative, however, is that public and parochial school teachers must reach out to religious leaders to ensure that this new philosophy of teaching religion is taking hold at home and at houses of worship. Without this final step, it is unlikely that any significant change will take hold.
While public and parochial schools each encounter their own struggles when attempting to teach religion from a multicultural standpoint, all schools must work towards exposing students to all religions. Public school teachers must find ways to teach about different religions in a secular manner. Since religion is so important to many people, there are some important guidelines to follow when teaching about religions. The school should study the beliefs of all people, but should not teach a student what to believe. The school should instruct students on religions but not indoctrinate them. The school should strive for student awareness of different religions, but not press them to accept any religion (Gollnick & Chinn, p.280 - 281). When religions are taught not as a belief system to be inherited but as a tradition to be studied, they no longer conflict with the separation of church and state. We know from numerous college courses that religion can be taught from an objective standpoint.
In parochial schools, the situation is different. Obviously, one component of a religious school is to teach a particular belief as one to be followed and observed. However, this does not mean that other religions cannot and should not be studied, from the elementary level up. It is my experience that when one religion is taught to the exclusion of all others, troubling misconceptions can arise. In the school where I teach, a Jewish day school, I heard some of my second graders talking about how all Christians were bad people. This was extremely troubling to me since it was obvious that due to the lack of information provided by our school, the students had been left to form their own ideas. Oftentimes, children and adults cannot fully understand another person’s views unless they have walked in their shoes. Attempting to see the world through someone else’s eyes is an acquired skill, not something we should be able to pick up on our own (Lewison, Leland, & Harste, p.99).
For an idea to really take hold in a student’s mind, it is essential for that idea to also have a place in the students’ home. If a teacher espouses one idea and the parents reject that idea, the student is much more likely to be confused and conflicted instead of excited about a new perspective or piece of knowledge. Teachers should of course involve parents as much as possible in the learning process. At the beginning of the year, the teacher should make it clear to the parents that the classroom will take a multicultural approach to religion, discussing the facts and beliefs of various faiths without favoring any. Educators might open the discourse by asking families about their religious traditions and beliefs. Understanding the importance of religion to students and their families is an advantage in developing effective teaching strategies for individual students (Gollnick & Chinn, 2009). When explaining a multicultural curriculum, teachers should emphasize the benefit that such a curriculum has for the children – such as, when we study your religion, the other children will know more about the important beliefs in your life.
Involving religious leaders in a multicultural approach to religion would certainly help families to believe that you have the students’ interests in mind when teaching about a wide variety of religious views. Churches and other faith-based organizations have historically served as the nucleus of urban entrepreneurial ventures, political and social activism, and educational reform (Kluth, Straut, & Birken, p.60). Many churches, synagogues, mosques, and other houses of worship have partnerships across religious lines. If these institutions can work with one another, surely we can use their help to teach about different religions in the classroom. Who better to inform educators about the similarities and differences between religions than the religious leaders themselves? You could weave in these members of the community during various social studies units on community and social action. During a study of careers, you could have rabbis and priests come and talk to students about what they do, alongside doctors, electricians, and accountants. There are many ways to involve clergy in your classroom that subtly encourage students to broaden their understanding of previously unknown faiths.
Such a study would have distinct benefits for the individual, community, and the world. By learning in depth about other religions, individual students would confront their own prejudices and stereotypes and have a greater understanding of the importance of religion across cultures. Students would bring this knowledge out into their communities, encouraging different religious institutions to work together on both religious and secular projects. Over time, by forming bonds based on mutual understanding and respect for differences, religious groups across the globe would increasingly work together to create a more peaceful, cooperative society.
Gollnick, D., & C., P. (2008). Multicultural Education in a Pluralistic Society. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
Kluth, P., M., D., & Biklen, D. (2003). Access to Academics for All Students. Hillsdale: L. Erlbaum Associates.
Lewison, M., Leland, C., & Harste, J. (2008). Creating Critical Classrooms. Hillsdale: L. Erlbaum Associates.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)