Authoethnography on 1.5 generation students
Roberge, M.(2003). Generation 1.5 immigrant students: What special experiences,
characteristics and educational needs to they bring to our English classes? Presented at the 37 Annual TESOL Convention, Baltimore, MD.
The struggles that a 1.5 generation student faces in the Elementary, Secondary, and College level system is something to which I can easily relate. Having been born in the Philippines in 1982 and moving to the United States in 1990, I am what Roberge considers a 1.5 Generation student. The assimilation process that I went through in the United States was a difficult process academically and socially. However, I did have one advantage as a 1.5 Generation student. I had an American father who made sure, even though I was born in the Philippines, I was immersed not just in the Philippines life, but also the American culture. Even living in the Philippines, I had at least 3 English tutors who came into my home and taught me English. Moreover, I was not allowed to speak Tagalog (the Philippine national language) in my house. Only situations such as schooling or association with my Filipino friends allowed me to speak Tagalog. My father was an extremely strict military man who ensured I became proficient at both Tagalog and English.
However, my proficiency in both languages changed when I moved to the United States. I wanted to fit in with my new American friends so I tried not to speak Tagalog. I was embarrassed when I spoke Tagalog so much that I stopped speaking it outside my home. When my brother and I would play baseball together, we communicated in English because we both felt awkward speaking Tagalog. Even when I came home, I would tell my mother not to speak Tagalog to me. It is because of this, and the enforcement of the school, that I speak ‘English only’ and lost my Tagalog tongue by the age of 10. I remember vividly the struggles I dealt with as a 1.5 Generation student in the Elementary classroom. I was placed in remedial classes and held back a grade. I graduated in 2001, when I should have graduated in 2000. It was embarrassing being placed in second grade when I should have been in the third grade.
The more specific struggles I dealt with were in High School. I was quite bright in Math but my writing and reading comprehension was so weak. The proper reasons for the mistakes I was making were never provided to me. It was not actually until my sophomore of college that an English professor helped me with my writing in a way that truly impacted in my life. She demonstrated for me how to construct an academic paper as well as how important it is to write in an active voice, rather than a passive voice. She also showed me how to edit my paper and find my own grammatical mistakes. She invested a large amount of time into helping me improve my writing. Unfortunately, I have been away from college now for four years and the last academic paper I wrote was approximately 5 years ago, so I am in a situation now where I feel I am back in High School.
However, I keep in mind the teachings of the English professor who guided me. It is very important for me then that educators become more aware of the problems that 1.5 Generation students have in classrooms. These students exist and sometimes all they need is just one educator to make an impact in their life.
draft
Monday, December 14, 2009
Sunday, November 29, 2009
Sexual Identities in ESL: Queer Theory and Classroom Inquiry
Sexual Identities in ESL: Queer Theory and Classroom Inquiry
Today, many studies are conducted in the field of EFL/ESL for the improvement of textbook curricula and educational pedagogies. One of the key focuses is identity as well as its impact on teaching and learning. Indeed, it plays an essential role in the EFL/ESL classroom. However, there is one type of identity, ‘sexual identity,’ that has been neglected in the EFL/ESL classroom. In this article, Sexual Identities in ESL: Queer Theory and Classroom Inquiry, the author “proposes that queer theory, an emerging body of work that draws on poststructuralist theories of identity, may be of practical use in both explaining why gay-friendly teaching practices are important and suggesting how such practices might be accomplished. Queer theory shifts the focus from gaining civil rights to analyzing discursive and cultural practices, from affirming minority sexual identities to problematising all sexual identities. Pedagogies of inclusion thus become pedagogies of inquiry.” (Nelson, 373) The article also provides insights for educators on how to handle problems in the ESL/EFL classrooms when confronting topics in relations to lesbian and gay identity. The article addresses the following 4 questions:
“1. How are sexual identities theorized according to queer theory?
2. What does theory imply for classroom practice?
3. What did this researcher find noteworthy while observing an ESL class discussion in which the topic of lesbian and gay identities came up?
4. How can classroom practice be analyzed with queer theory in mind?”
(Nelson, 374)
The first question is answered by the author providing an explanation for definitions of the word queer. First, it can be used to reject the traditional sense of sexual identity, and second, it can signify, gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transsexual. The author also adds that queer theory should be based upon the actions of their participants rather than standards created by other individuals. The article is intended to look at the teaching of sexual identities through a queer theory, not just by the teaching of lesbians and gays.
The author answers the second question by describing how portraying sexual identities, such as gays and lesbians, can be a difficult task in ESL/EFL textbooks. It is almost impossible to determine someone’s sexual identity by their appearance alone. Therefore, teaching of queer theory should be through an inquiry approach (open-ended questions) “analyzing how language and culture work with regard to all sexual identities” (Nelson, 377). Teachers are unable to provide answers to all possible questions, but, they should investigate and lead the students in the classroom to discuss their thoughts on sexual identities. Some of these thought provoking discussions should deal with how certain sexual identities have been portrayed as natural or unnatural.
The third and fourth question is answered through research the author has conducted. She observed a grammar-based ESL class at a community college while writing a transcript of the class’s discussion with an experienced ESL teacher. The teacher, Roxanne, through inquiry approach, introduced topics involving sexual identity. There were 26 immigrant and refugee students in the class, from 13 different countries. They were at an advanced level between the ages of 20-70.
The teacher asked the class whether two 30 year old men walking arm and arm down a street in the United States could be brothers. The author found it noteworthy to write that the question was asked four times. She did not know whether they were surprised by the question, or fascinated with it. Eventually though, several students participated with many of them agreeing that the men were gay. The students seemed sure of their answers and often compared it to two men walking arm and arm in their country. Some would make comments on how people of the same sex holding hands may be seen as gay in America, but in their country it is normal and only shows friendly affection. Others would say how two men holding hands in their country would be seen as immoral, and may even be shot. The dialogue continued with a discussion of how certain actions among people can portray their sexual identity, and how its portrayal affects their own actions with their friends. The teacher’s topic of discussion on sexual identity indicates how “the students’ comments are congruent with a queer theory view of sexual identities as culturally readable acts of positioning that are inevitable, if complex, part of day-to-day interactions.” (Nelson, 388)
The author of this article provided an insightful look on the teaching practice of queer theory in the ESL/EFL classroom. She showed the importance of the discussion of sexual identities in the EFL/ESL classroom and its relevance to language and culture. Her indication of teaching sexual identities, through an inquiry method, is a fantastic idea and I believe contributes effectively to the field of TESOL. Most importantly, the author explained how the inquiry method can improve a teacher’s ability, who doesn’t feel they are experts in the field of sexual identities. I also did not feel competent in teaching about gays and lesbians in the EFL/ESL classroom until I read this article. Now I see that a teacher does not have to be an expert to involve topics on gays and lesbians because they can teach the topics through an inquiry approach.
This article has definitely opened my eyes and showed me how feasible it is to teach about sexual identities in the classroom. I know that I would definitely feel more comfortable teaching topics such as gay marriage in an EFL classroom with advanced students over the age of 18. However, 5 years ago during my 1st grade student teaching experience, I was asked to read and talk about the book, Heather Has Two Mommies. The book was about a little girl born into a family of two mothers. I wasn’t quite comfortable reading the story and discussing a 7 year old girl raised by two women. I don’t know why, I just couldn’t do it. Perhaps this is because of the age of the students, or I was merely afraid to say something wrong and meet disapproval from the parents. In either case, what I would ask this author is if a teacher can approach younger learners about sexual identities through an inquiry method? Is there alternative way of teaching about gays and lesbians for younger learners other than the inquiry approach? Though this method may work well for advanced learners of EFL, does it break down when applied to children?
Today, many studies are conducted in the field of EFL/ESL for the improvement of textbook curricula and educational pedagogies. One of the key focuses is identity as well as its impact on teaching and learning. Indeed, it plays an essential role in the EFL/ESL classroom. However, there is one type of identity, ‘sexual identity,’ that has been neglected in the EFL/ESL classroom. In this article, Sexual Identities in ESL: Queer Theory and Classroom Inquiry, the author “proposes that queer theory, an emerging body of work that draws on poststructuralist theories of identity, may be of practical use in both explaining why gay-friendly teaching practices are important and suggesting how such practices might be accomplished. Queer theory shifts the focus from gaining civil rights to analyzing discursive and cultural practices, from affirming minority sexual identities to problematising all sexual identities. Pedagogies of inclusion thus become pedagogies of inquiry.” (Nelson, 373) The article also provides insights for educators on how to handle problems in the ESL/EFL classrooms when confronting topics in relations to lesbian and gay identity. The article addresses the following 4 questions:
“1. How are sexual identities theorized according to queer theory?
2. What does theory imply for classroom practice?
3. What did this researcher find noteworthy while observing an ESL class discussion in which the topic of lesbian and gay identities came up?
4. How can classroom practice be analyzed with queer theory in mind?”
(Nelson, 374)
The first question is answered by the author providing an explanation for definitions of the word queer. First, it can be used to reject the traditional sense of sexual identity, and second, it can signify, gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transsexual. The author also adds that queer theory should be based upon the actions of their participants rather than standards created by other individuals. The article is intended to look at the teaching of sexual identities through a queer theory, not just by the teaching of lesbians and gays.
The author answers the second question by describing how portraying sexual identities, such as gays and lesbians, can be a difficult task in ESL/EFL textbooks. It is almost impossible to determine someone’s sexual identity by their appearance alone. Therefore, teaching of queer theory should be through an inquiry approach (open-ended questions) “analyzing how language and culture work with regard to all sexual identities” (Nelson, 377). Teachers are unable to provide answers to all possible questions, but, they should investigate and lead the students in the classroom to discuss their thoughts on sexual identities. Some of these thought provoking discussions should deal with how certain sexual identities have been portrayed as natural or unnatural.
The third and fourth question is answered through research the author has conducted. She observed a grammar-based ESL class at a community college while writing a transcript of the class’s discussion with an experienced ESL teacher. The teacher, Roxanne, through inquiry approach, introduced topics involving sexual identity. There were 26 immigrant and refugee students in the class, from 13 different countries. They were at an advanced level between the ages of 20-70.
The teacher asked the class whether two 30 year old men walking arm and arm down a street in the United States could be brothers. The author found it noteworthy to write that the question was asked four times. She did not know whether they were surprised by the question, or fascinated with it. Eventually though, several students participated with many of them agreeing that the men were gay. The students seemed sure of their answers and often compared it to two men walking arm and arm in their country. Some would make comments on how people of the same sex holding hands may be seen as gay in America, but in their country it is normal and only shows friendly affection. Others would say how two men holding hands in their country would be seen as immoral, and may even be shot. The dialogue continued with a discussion of how certain actions among people can portray their sexual identity, and how its portrayal affects their own actions with their friends. The teacher’s topic of discussion on sexual identity indicates how “the students’ comments are congruent with a queer theory view of sexual identities as culturally readable acts of positioning that are inevitable, if complex, part of day-to-day interactions.” (Nelson, 388)
The author of this article provided an insightful look on the teaching practice of queer theory in the ESL/EFL classroom. She showed the importance of the discussion of sexual identities in the EFL/ESL classroom and its relevance to language and culture. Her indication of teaching sexual identities, through an inquiry method, is a fantastic idea and I believe contributes effectively to the field of TESOL. Most importantly, the author explained how the inquiry method can improve a teacher’s ability, who doesn’t feel they are experts in the field of sexual identities. I also did not feel competent in teaching about gays and lesbians in the EFL/ESL classroom until I read this article. Now I see that a teacher does not have to be an expert to involve topics on gays and lesbians because they can teach the topics through an inquiry approach.
This article has definitely opened my eyes and showed me how feasible it is to teach about sexual identities in the classroom. I know that I would definitely feel more comfortable teaching topics such as gay marriage in an EFL classroom with advanced students over the age of 18. However, 5 years ago during my 1st grade student teaching experience, I was asked to read and talk about the book, Heather Has Two Mommies. The book was about a little girl born into a family of two mothers. I wasn’t quite comfortable reading the story and discussing a 7 year old girl raised by two women. I don’t know why, I just couldn’t do it. Perhaps this is because of the age of the students, or I was merely afraid to say something wrong and meet disapproval from the parents. In either case, what I would ask this author is if a teacher can approach younger learners about sexual identities through an inquiry method? Is there alternative way of teaching about gays and lesbians for younger learners other than the inquiry approach? Though this method may work well for advanced learners of EFL, does it break down when applied to children?
Sunday, November 15, 2009
Reexamining English Only in the ESL Classroom
‘English Only’ is a method of teaching ESL/EFL that has been utilized by many educators and policy makers throughout history. The concept is evident in classrooms across the United States as well as other countries where English is taught as a second language. The author of the article, Reexaming English Only in the ESL Classroom questions this practice and formulates an opinion that such a method “rests on unexamined assumptions, originates in political agenda of the dominant groups, and serves to reinforce existing relations to power”. (Auerbach,9) In spite of the author’s belief, her primary goal is not to scrutinize the monolingual use of English but rather propose reconsideration to the ‘English Only’ practice in the classroom. She invites the audience to examine the effectiveness of such a method.
The historical implications of ‘English Only’ in the ESL classroom is the author’s first topic of discussion. She explains how immigrants who arrived in the United States were told that in order to succeed in the work force they must speak English well, and the only means of accomplishing this is by speaking only English. She elucidates how such an idea is no more than a part of the dominant groups’ political agenda, and furthermore it continues to be enforced today. She continues by stating that the idea that students should not use their first language in learning English is a common sense assumption and exists without any factual evidence. However, neither case provides evidence that would lead us to conclude that usage of one’s native language hinders the ability to acquire a second language. Through a brief survey conducted at a statewide TESOL conference, she found that 80% of ESL educators, who were asked whether ESL students should or should not use their first language when learning ESL, answered ‘yes’ they should. They responded affirmatively, but seemed uncertain of their answer. They also felt guilty for letting their student use their L1 in the classroom. Their response proves that they had no true evidence justifying their answers and that they assumed the use of L1 should not be allowed in the classroom. Thus this is a commonsense belief not one of factual merit.
The author proves that English only in the classroom is not the best method by demonstrating that it can cause ESL students to remove themselves from their program. It is also particularly evident in adult ESL classrooms where learning a second language can often be more difficult due to weaknesses in their L1 literacy. For example, through interviews conducted by Klassan with ESL adult students for The University of Massachusetts Project; it was found that students who had minimal L1 literacy often felt their teachers were isolating them from the other students. This isolation created frustration for these learners, as well as low self esteem, and in turn, led to the withdrawal of students. Unfortunately, dropping out of the program caused more problems for the students than what they had originally anticipated. It prevented them from acquiring a better job due to their lack of English skill. In the end limited federal and state fundings for bilingual models of teaching inhibited the improvement of quality of life for those who speak little or no English. Here again exists the perpetuation of current relations to power.
The author also explains benefits for the use of L1 in the classroom. One benefit she mentions is “that it reduces affective barriers to English acquisition and allows for more rapid progress to or in ESL.” (Auerbach,19) Hemmindiger (1987) found that nonliterate and nonschooled Hmong refugees who did not use their 1st language, actually learned English at a slower rate than when they were finally permitted to utilize their first language. Moreover, Strohmeyer and McGrail (1988) found that allowing for the exploration of ideas in the L1 served to enhance students’ ESL writing. When students were asked to express their ideas in writing by first using their L1, they were more successful than if they did not use their native language.
This article was extremely insightful in the field of TESOL. I believe the author did an incredible job of presenting several practice and related research in the benefits of using the L1 in the ESL/EFL classroom. She has proved that teachers should not be afraid to allow their students to use their L1 in the classroom. She makes it clear that many teachers think that the L1 in the classroom hinders the students’ ability to learn a second language, when in fact it does the opposite. She also discussed how beginner students learning ESL/EFL who have trouble learning a second language (because they can’t use their first language) often pay the price in their life and can’t acquire better employment. Overall, she managed to establish how important it is for students to use their L1 in the classroom.
I was quite pleased to read this article. It showed that my own practice of teaching EFL is not always the most effective. I was taught that letting the students’ use the L1 in the classroom was not a good idea and it would impede my students from learning English. I had not yet contemplated the benefits of the L1 in the ESL/EFL classroom until I read this article. I know from my own personal experience (moving to the United States at a young age), my teachers and classmates would remind me not to speak my first language in the school. They would tell me that in order to improve my English and blend in with the other students’, I needed to speak ‘English only.’ Now, however, I do not believe this to be entirely true. At that time, I spoke English quite well in that I used English to communicate with my father. All my American friends understood me, so why was I kept from my first language? At the end, the school won. I spoke English only. Within a year I lost my first language. What I have learned from this article is that rather than following what I have been taught is best method for teaching EFL/ESL, I should begin to reconsider my own experiences and implement them in that ESL/EFL classroom.
The historical implications of ‘English Only’ in the ESL classroom is the author’s first topic of discussion. She explains how immigrants who arrived in the United States were told that in order to succeed in the work force they must speak English well, and the only means of accomplishing this is by speaking only English. She elucidates how such an idea is no more than a part of the dominant groups’ political agenda, and furthermore it continues to be enforced today. She continues by stating that the idea that students should not use their first language in learning English is a common sense assumption and exists without any factual evidence. However, neither case provides evidence that would lead us to conclude that usage of one’s native language hinders the ability to acquire a second language. Through a brief survey conducted at a statewide TESOL conference, she found that 80% of ESL educators, who were asked whether ESL students should or should not use their first language when learning ESL, answered ‘yes’ they should. They responded affirmatively, but seemed uncertain of their answer. They also felt guilty for letting their student use their L1 in the classroom. Their response proves that they had no true evidence justifying their answers and that they assumed the use of L1 should not be allowed in the classroom. Thus this is a commonsense belief not one of factual merit.
The author proves that English only in the classroom is not the best method by demonstrating that it can cause ESL students to remove themselves from their program. It is also particularly evident in adult ESL classrooms where learning a second language can often be more difficult due to weaknesses in their L1 literacy. For example, through interviews conducted by Klassan with ESL adult students for The University of Massachusetts Project; it was found that students who had minimal L1 literacy often felt their teachers were isolating them from the other students. This isolation created frustration for these learners, as well as low self esteem, and in turn, led to the withdrawal of students. Unfortunately, dropping out of the program caused more problems for the students than what they had originally anticipated. It prevented them from acquiring a better job due to their lack of English skill. In the end limited federal and state fundings for bilingual models of teaching inhibited the improvement of quality of life for those who speak little or no English. Here again exists the perpetuation of current relations to power.
The author also explains benefits for the use of L1 in the classroom. One benefit she mentions is “that it reduces affective barriers to English acquisition and allows for more rapid progress to or in ESL.” (Auerbach,19) Hemmindiger (1987) found that nonliterate and nonschooled Hmong refugees who did not use their 1st language, actually learned English at a slower rate than when they were finally permitted to utilize their first language. Moreover, Strohmeyer and McGrail (1988) found that allowing for the exploration of ideas in the L1 served to enhance students’ ESL writing. When students were asked to express their ideas in writing by first using their L1, they were more successful than if they did not use their native language.
This article was extremely insightful in the field of TESOL. I believe the author did an incredible job of presenting several practice and related research in the benefits of using the L1 in the ESL/EFL classroom. She has proved that teachers should not be afraid to allow their students to use their L1 in the classroom. She makes it clear that many teachers think that the L1 in the classroom hinders the students’ ability to learn a second language, when in fact it does the opposite. She also discussed how beginner students learning ESL/EFL who have trouble learning a second language (because they can’t use their first language) often pay the price in their life and can’t acquire better employment. Overall, she managed to establish how important it is for students to use their L1 in the classroom.
I was quite pleased to read this article. It showed that my own practice of teaching EFL is not always the most effective. I was taught that letting the students’ use the L1 in the classroom was not a good idea and it would impede my students from learning English. I had not yet contemplated the benefits of the L1 in the ESL/EFL classroom until I read this article. I know from my own personal experience (moving to the United States at a young age), my teachers and classmates would remind me not to speak my first language in the school. They would tell me that in order to improve my English and blend in with the other students’, I needed to speak ‘English only.’ Now, however, I do not believe this to be entirely true. At that time, I spoke English quite well in that I used English to communicate with my father. All my American friends understood me, so why was I kept from my first language? At the end, the school won. I spoke English only. Within a year I lost my first language. What I have learned from this article is that rather than following what I have been taught is best method for teaching EFL/ESL, I should begin to reconsider my own experiences and implement them in that ESL/EFL classroom.
Monday, November 9, 2009
Going Beyond the Native Speaker
Going Beyond the Native Speaker in Language Teaching
In this article, Vivian Cook argues that language teaching is centered on the native speaker model when it should look at L2 users as a component of their own. She explains that in language teaching, L2s are taught to follow the native speaker model but it is a false misrepresentation because L2s will never achieve the proficiency of a native speaker. The author explains that L2s users are multicompetent language users who can benefit from each other and the focus should be on them, not just on the native speaker.
Although I do agree with Vivian Cook’s article, I feel that another model other than the native speaker model in language teaching will be a difficult task to achieve. I believe it is attainable but in reality it will be a long process with students and educators needing to be the voice of change. I also agree that L2 learners can teach and learn from other L2 users, and with proper qualifications can teach English as efficiently or even better. I even agree that they should use their 1st language during activities when teaching English. I also have never concurred that English NS’s who lack the qualifications in teaching English should teach it as a second language.
However, I do question why there needs to be a new model in L2 learning when some L2 users have followed a NS model at some point in their language learning. Ofcourse, I can sympathize with L2 learners who feel discouraged after hitting their language wall and cannot achieve the proficiency of a native speaker. In reality though, they hit that wall because they have achieved 90% proficiency of a native speaker, and can properly speak English. Isn’t that the main goal for an L2 user, to speak English well? I believe the mind set of an L2 learner to achieve the proficiency of an NS pushes them to learn English well. Although at the end they feel upset that they did not reach the proficient level of a NS, they still achieved how to suitably speak English and that was made possible through the use of the NS model.
In this article, Vivian Cook argues that language teaching is centered on the native speaker model when it should look at L2 users as a component of their own. She explains that in language teaching, L2s are taught to follow the native speaker model but it is a false misrepresentation because L2s will never achieve the proficiency of a native speaker. The author explains that L2s users are multicompetent language users who can benefit from each other and the focus should be on them, not just on the native speaker.
Although I do agree with Vivian Cook’s article, I feel that another model other than the native speaker model in language teaching will be a difficult task to achieve. I believe it is attainable but in reality it will be a long process with students and educators needing to be the voice of change. I also agree that L2 learners can teach and learn from other L2 users, and with proper qualifications can teach English as efficiently or even better. I even agree that they should use their 1st language during activities when teaching English. I also have never concurred that English NS’s who lack the qualifications in teaching English should teach it as a second language.
However, I do question why there needs to be a new model in L2 learning when some L2 users have followed a NS model at some point in their language learning. Ofcourse, I can sympathize with L2 learners who feel discouraged after hitting their language wall and cannot achieve the proficiency of a native speaker. In reality though, they hit that wall because they have achieved 90% proficiency of a native speaker, and can properly speak English. Isn’t that the main goal for an L2 user, to speak English well? I believe the mind set of an L2 learner to achieve the proficiency of an NS pushes them to learn English well. Although at the end they feel upset that they did not reach the proficient level of a NS, they still achieved how to suitably speak English and that was made possible through the use of the NS model.
Monday, October 5, 2009
Hall, Chapter 6- October 4.
On page 114 of Hall’s book she talks about participatory pedagogy and how teachers should move away from traditional teaching and more into constructive teaching. One kind of participatory pedagogy commonly found in many adolescent immigrant community-based language programs is the problem-posing approach. In this approach, students discuss the problems they face in the community outside the class and talk about it inside the classroom. I agree with this approach and believe this approach should be taught in schools. It helped me when I first moved into the United States. I believe my 2nd grade teacher used this approach in her classroom. Although I already knew a bit of American culture from my American father, I learned most of it after moving into the United States. What I learned took time and over that course of time, I encountered several problems where my Philippine culture often clashed with the American culture. My 2nd grade teacher knew the problems that I encountered and had lessons based on my problems.
Now that I am an elementary teacher myself, I want to use the problem-posing approach when teaching cultural problems students can encounter. I believe though that even teaching cultural problems can have difficulties of their own. For example: One of my undergrad classes that prepared me to teach reading in the classroom taught us how to teach and read a book based on two mommies. We were to read the book in class and discuss what having two moms would be like. Ofcourse it’s easy to use the problem-posing approach in teaching the idea of having two moms, but when it actually came time for me to teach it during my student teaching experience, I couldn’t do it.
Now that I am an elementary teacher myself, I want to use the problem-posing approach when teaching cultural problems students can encounter. I believe though that even teaching cultural problems can have difficulties of their own. For example: One of my undergrad classes that prepared me to teach reading in the classroom taught us how to teach and read a book based on two mommies. We were to read the book in class and discuss what having two moms would be like. Ofcourse it’s easy to use the problem-posing approach in teaching the idea of having two moms, but when it actually came time for me to teach it during my student teaching experience, I couldn’t do it.
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Slideshare
Hello Everyone,
I've gone ahead and posted my powerpoints of Hall, chapter 4 and Kuma, chapter 2 on slideshare.
Thanks.
I've gone ahead and posted my powerpoints of Hall, chapter 4 and Kuma, chapter 2 on slideshare.
Thanks.
Friday, September 25, 2009
Week #5, My thoughts on Chapter 4 of Kumar's book.
Cultural Stereotype and Its Perils
First of all, I just want to say that I really enjoyed reading Chapter 4 of Kumar’s book on Cultural Stereotype and Its Perils. I’m sure others did as well.
As for my thoughts:
I do believe that cultural stereotypes are just something that humans are prone to do. On one section of this Chapter, Obedience to Authority, it talks about the stereotype that humans have towards Asian students. One in particular is the idea that Asian students are obedient to their instructors. Kumar explains that studies show other wise and it’s not true. He even adds his own experience teaching in India where he found his students to be unruly. In another stereotype, Asian students are often perceived as passive in classroom discussions. One study also showed that false and even stated that it could be due to the lack of experience in the teacher.
I must say though that what I read in this section did not come as a surprise. In fact, I had a similar experience that Kumar had while he taught in India. I too had presumed that Asian students would be more obedient to their instructors than other races, at least a lot more than American students. My stereotype was proven false after teaching in Korea. My experience teaching in Korea showed that my students there were much more disobedient than the students I had in America. As for the stereotype of Asian students being passive in classrooms, I also came to Korea with the preconceived notion that my students would be passive in the classroom during class discussions. Again, I was proven wrong. My students in Korea were amazing at conducting class discussions. I learned that all I needed to do was engage them on topics that were interesting to them.
What I’ve come to understand the most though from reading Chapter 4 of Kumar’s book is that “yes”, humans cannot help but stereotype and maybe we should try to avoid it. However, there are cases where I feel stereotypes can be useful. For example: If an Asian girl is not a least bit intellectual and goes to an American school, she may be stereotyped as the typical smart, Asian girl. I believe it would maybe boost her self esteem and possibly reward her friends. What do you think? Maybe it could go the opposite direction too.
First of all, I just want to say that I really enjoyed reading Chapter 4 of Kumar’s book on Cultural Stereotype and Its Perils. I’m sure others did as well.
As for my thoughts:
I do believe that cultural stereotypes are just something that humans are prone to do. On one section of this Chapter, Obedience to Authority, it talks about the stereotype that humans have towards Asian students. One in particular is the idea that Asian students are obedient to their instructors. Kumar explains that studies show other wise and it’s not true. He even adds his own experience teaching in India where he found his students to be unruly. In another stereotype, Asian students are often perceived as passive in classroom discussions. One study also showed that false and even stated that it could be due to the lack of experience in the teacher.
I must say though that what I read in this section did not come as a surprise. In fact, I had a similar experience that Kumar had while he taught in India. I too had presumed that Asian students would be more obedient to their instructors than other races, at least a lot more than American students. My stereotype was proven false after teaching in Korea. My experience teaching in Korea showed that my students there were much more disobedient than the students I had in America. As for the stereotype of Asian students being passive in classrooms, I also came to Korea with the preconceived notion that my students would be passive in the classroom during class discussions. Again, I was proven wrong. My students in Korea were amazing at conducting class discussions. I learned that all I needed to do was engage them on topics that were interesting to them.
What I’ve come to understand the most though from reading Chapter 4 of Kumar’s book is that “yes”, humans cannot help but stereotype and maybe we should try to avoid it. However, there are cases where I feel stereotypes can be useful. For example: If an Asian girl is not a least bit intellectual and goes to an American school, she may be stereotyped as the typical smart, Asian girl. I believe it would maybe boost her self esteem and possibly reward her friends. What do you think? Maybe it could go the opposite direction too.
Week #5, Hall's Chapter 4 and 5 presentation
I will be presenting on Monday, September 28 on Hall's Chapter 4 and 5. Just as I will add my Kumar, Chapter 2 presentation on slide share, I will do the same for Hall's Chapter 4 and 5. It will all be posted Sunday evening.
Thanks.
Thanks.
Week #4- Kumar, Chapter 2 Presentation
This week I presented on Kumar's Chapter 2.
I am not finished presenting the Chapter yet and have made some changes. I will post the final product on slide share Sunday evening.
I am not finished presenting the Chapter yet and have made some changes. I will post the final product on slide share Sunday evening.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
