Ruthless Equity Chapter Nine 4/23

Ken Williams argues in Chapter Nine of “Ruthless Equity” that educators have to decide to become ruthless, and they need to make decisions in their day-to-day practices that help every student reach “the crown” set for them. 

Early in the section, Williams says: “When you ‘de-cide’ it means you’ve put ALL other options to death” (186). Teachers need to make intentional choices in their work every day. Settling for ‘less than’ is a disservice to students, and leads educators into a state of complacency, which Williams mentions often. He argues that once this decision is made, the results will be clear.

“If you decide to take this powerful step, I promise that you'll look back on this moment as a career turning point” (186). This particularly struck me. Are educators conscious of this shift? At what point would I know if this moment is reached? Or is it not one moment, but an evolving mindset? 

“Complenancy shows up when you decide students need multiple opportunities to demonstrate mastery” (186). Why? Is this saying providing more than one at-bat on an assignment or task is not the best way to do it? That does not seem fair. Or, is this the idea that I as the educator should have taught it right the first time, and they should have understood it? Either way this confirms Williams point- it is important to hold both myself and my students to high expectations to avoid that feeling of complacency.

“I am because of who they are” (187). This is a powerful statement. Having individuals in our lives who see us and support us is an unmatched feeling. Sometimes, just ourselves is not enough, and we need people to help push us to strive for more than we think we deserve or can do. The work though, is still difficult. Williams supplements this idea with his own stories in this chapter about people who inspired him and pushed him to write this book. Motivation can be an important determinant. 

“While not letting someone down isn’t the most authentic way to move forward, it was effective because once I broke through my own barriers and saw results, my moving forward became intrinsic” (187). In my Psychological Perspectives on Learning and Teaching course, we spent a good chunk of time discussing motivations both extrinsic and intrinsic. I don’t think it actually matters if something is “authentic” because it was what motivated someone to get it done. If an individual will only do work because they get candy, a clearly extrinsic motivator, who cares?  At the end of the day the task, or challenge, is still completed. 

“Become ruthless and do what you were brought to this amazing profession to do!” (189) How? I love the ideas this book discusses, and I do find myself shifting my mindset, but I am still struggling with how. How do I get here and do all of it? Together, these concepts can feel overwhelming. When I consider elements of my everyday work, like data tracking, connecting to standards, tracking uniforms, monitoring cell phone use, printing and organizing materials, assisting other teachers and managing my own personal life just to name a few, how does a teacher continuously find time and energy to reach this goal that Williams calls being a “ruthless educator”. And, I acknowledge that Williams would call my list “excuses”, however saying that does not change the amount of bandwidth I have to complete all of these tasks, along with the general unpredictability of working in a school each day. 

“Treat others as they wish to be treated” was Yoshino and Glasgow’s 7th principle in “Say the Right Thing”. This idea, different from the golden rule, requires a deep understanding and empathy for other people. You have to understand different perspectives, cultures,  identities etc. If you don’t honor and respect the above, how will you be able to help anyone? This ties to William’s overall view in which educators have to know their students. They can’t make excuses or list reasons for why something is not happening or changing. Educators have to meet every learner where they are and continue to raise the bar. Equity can’t happen without respect. 

Ruthless Equity Chapter Eight 4/16

 Ken Williams argues in Chapter Eight of “Ruthless Equity” that teachers and educators alike need to adjust and change their mindsets to be truly equitable and to take responsibility for actions.

Your mood as an educator should not impact your actions and responsibilities at work. You “have to stay outcome focused” (174). As adults, life happens and things come up but one of the biggest challenges is that “you are always in control of your response, behavior, and choices” (174). You can have a bad day or morning, and things can feel bad, but ultimately, we have to try and not let that show in front of the students. I find that hard to grapple with, especially in educating teenagers. If teachers are expected to be real and honest, how does coming to work with a pretend smile help anyone?  How do you push past your mood-driven demeanor and show up fully present? 

I suppose that point ties into another statement Williams makes when he says “the ‘what is best for adults first’ lens exists because it’s the path of least resistance; in other words, we can get away with it” (174). He points out very clearly that it is easy for us educators to prioritize our own comfort and emotions over the students. I know Williams is not saying do not be human, he even states in his video “everyone operates on feelings” (175).  Yet, for me, it is connecting and bridging that gap to become “ruthless”. Can it be as simple as naming: “I had a bad morning”, or  “I am not feeling well, but I am here and we’re going to do xyz”? I am still showing up for them. 

Aside from mood, Williams names another mindset shift that should occur  around data and results. He says, “Do not be seduced and derailed by short-term results” (183). Everything takes time, and the work we do everyday is hard. Falling into complacency is easy. If students do not achieve the goals or data points you had hoped they would, what do you do next? It is easy to feel like you failed, and to feel like you want to give up. “Why does complacency throw its haymaker punch when you feel most discouraged?” (177). If you are not pushing through the failures, you will never see a breakthrough or a positive change.

Pushing through those feelings of failures can lead to positive outcomes and results. Not just around data and what students are learning, but personal and relationship breakthroughs can occur too. “I decided to spend one-on-one time with him and talk, man to young man”... “As the bell rang and dismissal began, David was making his way to the bus. In a moment, he turned back, walked over to me, and gave me a hug” (180). The first 1:1 conversation did not work and it was frustrating, but they never gave up on the child. In her Ted Talk “Every Kid Needs a Champion” Rita Pierson describes how “no significant learning happens without a significant relationship”. The Ted Talk emphasizes the value of building relationships. 

As teachers, and humans in life, we need to take responsibility and initiative. We can not be run by procrastination. This chapter in particular reminds me of Stephen Covey’s book “The 7 Habits of Highly Effective People”. Both texts highlight the importance of the individual to take responsibility. It is on the person to create a plan, and stick to the plan. Principles and actions must align to yield results.

To ensure you are equitable “you have got to show up differently. You’ve got to be ruthless” (182).

Ruthless Equity Chapter Seven 4/9

 Ken Williams argues in Chapter Seven of “Ruthless Equity” that educators do not hold the same standards for all students, and that learning objectives are inequitable and insufficient. Teachers and educators have to do the work to address inequities anywhere they see it at school, especially in their core instruction.

In Akron, Ohio, teachers in math are using the same approach my school is rolling out. “During the planning phase, we anticipate any misconceptions or questions that may arise, as well as different ways our learners will solve problems. Once we have that sketched out, we create scaffolded assignments” (164). Our school is asking us to complete “IPP” or intentional planning protocols. Our school asks us to take a lesson and similarly think through the areas students may struggle. We then create monitoring keys that can collect data on our “look-fors”, and identify places where we need to provide back pocket questions, or implement feedback. Taking the time to flesh out skills, objectives, and some common misconceptions has been beneficial in helping student learning. I have seen big changes in my whole-class show calls and highlighted student work, and it is easier to engage with the students on areas of improvement and areas of strength. 

The IPP process ties into what Williams was talking about with the “four critical questions that guide the cycle of teaching, learning, and assessment: 1. What do we expect every student to know and be able to do? 2. How will we know when students have learned it? 3. How will we respond when students haven’t learned it? 4. How will we respond when students already know it?” (139). In the text he bolded the first question, and I agree with Williams that identifying learning outcomes is a non-negotiable for equity. Not only do I think it helps for equitable teaching, but how can a teacher be prepared and in front of students if they don’t know what they are teaching or what the students should be doing? Not knowing feels like a recipe for disaster. 

“There is no ‘substitute for’ or “working around” essential outcomes” (138). You have to identify the outcomes. Williams stamps you have to make a commitment and do the work. I think it can be easy to not look at all of the outcomes, or to skip one here and there. Sometimes it feels like teachers have so much to do, that taking the intentional time to pause and do that can be alot. Teachers might feel like they already know everything because they have done it before, or they have run this lesson before and they already get it. If it becomes forced, teachers will feel micromanaged and there might be pushback. I’ve seen this happen in my school, but I don’t fully understand why because fundamentally it makes sense. Teachers need to know what students are working toward each day. 

While all this makes sense, there are things I struggle to understand and do myself. On 141 Williams asks: “when you remove ‘can they’? or ‘can’t they’? from the equation, you open the way for maximum levels of creativity, resourcefulness, problem-solving, innovation, and collaboration.” How do you get to that point though? Is it from professional development, a special will? He brings up this idea: “you’re still grappling with your love of how growth mindset sounds, while unwilling to embed growth mindset into your practice” (145). That is me. I know students need all grade level instruction, but again, how can one person do it all? I would LOVE to switch this mindset. How does a teacher track all the data for every kid constantly, especially when teaching more than 70+ per day. How do you provide scaffolds for every individual student.

Williams touched on Carol Dweck, and her idea on “growth mindset”- but when I read that, I remembered reading an article that has similar ties and connections. “If Grit Breeds Success, How Can I Get Grittier?” by Emily Matchar. This article defined grit, and discussed how grit predicts success. People who have grit are more likely to find success and work through tough situations. The article also named that grit could be learned. I tied this in because I asked myself, are the teachers Williams talks about in his book the ones who are raising the bar? Are they, the ones who are “starting with the CROWN, not with the kid” (170), grittier than me? 

Aria and Teaching Multilingual Children 4/3

Rodriguez argues in “Aria”, that learning English and assimilating into American culture caused him to lose his personal identity to his culture, highlighting the difficulty of being multilingual in America. On the flip side, Collier argues in “Teaching Multilingual Children”, that teaching students who are learning more than one language can be effective and they do not have to lose a sense of themselves as long as there are practices in place that honor the diversity and continue to foster learning. 

Rodriguez was recounting the time his family was asked if they speak English at home because he seemed timid and shy in class. His parents were asked “is it possible for you and your husband to encourage your children to practice their English when they are home?”... “of course my parents complied”. This is unsettling. Why does it matter what language the student and their family speaks at home, as long as they are present in school and are trying their best to acquire a new language and understanding. What made it worse is the family felt that was the best option- because who were they to argue against the church? Should there be a separation of church and state? Is that not possible at a catholic school (do they make their own rules?).

Later, Rodriguez named: “at last, at seven years old, I came to believe what had been technically true since my birth: I was an American citizen” (36). He was born an American citizen but did not feel he belonged or was truly worthy of that right all because of a language. Once he knew English well enough to talk in class, that helped. It is disconcerting that people live their lives that way and that they live in a country that makes them feel ‘less than’ because they are learning, or, are already speaking a different language. This idea of learning English came at a great cost. 

As Rodriguez and his siblings learned more English and became more fluent, they lost ties with their Spanish and they “shared fewer and fewer words with our parents” (37). I can’t imagine not being able to communicate with my family because we no longer understand each other. Why is there such an emphasis on forcing students to learn English? 

Collier addresses this as an issue in his article. Despite there being research “which speaks with one voice: to dismiss home language in literacy development instantly places immigrant children at risk” (233), it is still happening, as seen with Rodriguez and his experience. 

Rodriguez and his family could have benefited from the knowledge Collier provides and names:  “English-language learners who can chat comfortably in English do not automatically develop the academic language skills needed to compete… It is worse for many students who are placed in English-only classrooms with teachers who have no training in second language acquisition and who use an English-only curriculum. So, the choice of language in which the student works academically is less important than success in mastering school skills, or academic language proficiency” (225/226). He should have never been forced to only speak English. 

Collier states at early stages of instruction that “using home language for literacy builds the self-worth of language minority students…any academic home language development that benefits a child’s cognitive development, whether written or oral, will transfer to the second language” (233). According to Erikson’s Theory on Psychosocial Development, students who are 6-12 are wrestling with industry vs inferiority. They are wondering “can I make it in the world of people and things?” A strength to help them is competence. If a child is learning a language, they feel comfortable in their own language, are competent, and the skills are applied to their second language, this helps them develop. Students in this stage spend a lot of time at school, and they rely on learning new skills. Providing multi-language learners with new skills and allowing them to use a curriculum that emphasizes their home language is beneficial. How can this be accomplished by individual teachers?

“The teacher’s challenge is to find ways to integrate immigrant students with other students their age, while presenting meaningful lessons…the best way is for teachers to use all available language resources at hand” (234). At my school, we do not have a specific MLL or ESL room/ program for students to go to, so ultimately it does fall on the teacher. We were given a website called “Ellevation”- which provides numerous ideas and videos on different types of activities to try in the classroom to enhance the reading, writing and speaking skills of the students. You can break it down by specific skill, or try to find activities that incorporate multiple skills. Ultimately, I found that most of these activities are already done in my room- such as exit tickets, turn and talks, and jigsaws. So, I am left straddling this line. On the one hand, I think I could be helping them by doing these activities, but, on the other hand, I feel like my use of these strategies isn’t having the impact that it needs to for my students. 

If we zoom out from the individual teachers though, and look at the whole school view, we learn that encouraging home language and multiple voices can help with the classroom culture. When “children come to class with their non-standard varieties of English and home language, teachers must look at the benefits of having multiple ways of thinking in the classroom” (227). In the last blog post, I referenced Lisa Delpit and “The Silenced Dialogue” and it proves to be relevant here as well. What stood out in that reading was the teacher who taught her students their native language. She asked them: “that is the way we say things, doesn't that feel good? Isn't it the absolute best way to get that idea across?” Her whiteboard has “Village English” and “Heritage English”. This encourages students to find comfort. To see that it is okay to both speak in their familiar ways, and simultaneously learn new ways, or more “acceptable” ways, as citizens in America. 

The white board, and encouraging both languages, reminded me of Collier’s 5th guideline on code-switching. It is common for bilingual communities to use and do. Students should be encouraged to do this, as it helps them continue to learn and process both languages at once. 

All bilingual or MLL students should feel they have a voice in their education. Learning a new language is hard, and it is a skill. Students should be supported in the best ways possible, not penalized or hurt, or forced to create a public self and a private self, which often results in losing a part of who they are.  

Eliminating Ableism in Education 3/27

Thomas Hehir argues in “Eliminating Ableism in Education” that students with disabilities should be  provided with both equal opportunities and treatment to succeed compared to their nondisabled peers, and that schools need to get better at implementing practices, expectations, and support to make that possible. 

The first quote that stood out to me was on page two of the reading. Penny, a parent referenced in the introductory section was told she: “could not have the same dreams and aspirations for Joe that she had for her seven nondisabled children”.  She was also told “she had to go through a period of mourning the arrival of her disabled child” (2). How can anyone tell someone else how they should or should not feel in any given situation? You can not assume or imply someone will feel the same things you do, or that there is any one way to feel at any point in time. That is still her son, and that son is still a human being. Her child should still have the opportunity to have dreams and goals, and to be told the opposite directly from birth is offensive.  “Disability is not a tragedy, society’s response to disability can have tragic consequences for those who have disabilities” (2). 

Relatedly, Hehir explains: “these narratives speak to the deep cultural prejudice…that disability was negative and tragic and that ‘overcoming’ disability was the only valued result” (4). I raise the question: who decided this? How did we get here? Is this all the same socially constructed concepts that old white men in power just decided one day? Someone was born differently and now they are no good to common society because they can’t perform in the same exact ways?  Lisa Delpit and “The Silenced Dialogue” references this concept with the certain “codes” of those who have power. If those in power often do not have these disabilities, then they would not see value in those who are unlike them.

We see these tragic consequences later on in the reading when we learn about students with learning disabilities. Dyslexia has as “its main symptomology the failure of children to learn to read, a primary goal of education for all students, and that dyslexic children are not the only children who struggle with reading means that explanations for this failure go to the very structure of schooling” (13). At my school, very few students are currently reading on grade level. Based on STAR reading data (a standardized national reading test), our 9th graders read more like 7th graders. Students with learning disabilities scored even lower. There are multiple reasons for that.

Before receiving special education services “the child must first fail to learn the material that his intelligence would indicate he should be able to learn before he can establish eligibility” (14). Allowing students to fail, and not intervene or not teach them is fundamentally wrong. Students need at bats with their education, especially when they are trying to learn new skills, like reading, or when tackling skills that are hard. Teach, practice, practice, practice is a common saying I heard when I was going through taxonomy training at my school. Are schools and teachers doing enough to intervene beforehand? Potentially not. Hehir explains that there is a “reluctance” to intervene, often due to teacher and school preparation and skill. “Some of this reluctance may be due to a lack of appropriate options or inadequate teacher preparation” (14). It is necessary for schools and teachers to build skill around intervention techniques and practices for it to be impactful.  

Special education services and resource rooms are not the solutions to solving the issues and providing equal opportunities at success. “Reading improvement for these students can continue to occur throughout their schooling if that intervention is sufficiently intensive and appropriate” (16). Oftentimes, IEPs focus on skills centered on reading and writing, and students are not exposed to the same grade level curriculum. I have a 9th grader who was recently brought in for a meeting naming the concern that, as of right now, they will not graduate on time. This student does not have enough credits to progress to 10th grade if they do not pass all of their classes this semester or take credit recovery/summer school (if it’s offered). The issue is that this student was put into a double resource room. Resource room does not provide students with credits for graduation- what it did do was prevent him from taking History. He was not provided the opportunity to take another on grade level course (which could have helped advance him to 10th grade) if he was not double slotted. The worst part is oftentimes in the resource room it seems the only work students are doing is the work they did not finish in class. I do not know how much learning and reteaching is happening. Is it all just catching up? Is this setting up the student for success later down the line? “The problem with special education is that it is neither special nor education” (23). 

One way to potentially end and eliminate ableism in education is through “promoting high standards, not high stakes”. “The most damaging ableist assumption is the belief that disabled people are incapable” (27). Students need access to curriculum. As I was reading, two prior articles and authors stood out to me. Those were Ken Williams, and Patrick Finn. Finn originally argued in “Literacy with an Attitude” that your social class and economic factors determine the type of literacy and education you receive. Now we are seeing that with ability. Students are removed from general classrooms, or are told they have to go to a different school. In William's book “Ruthless Equity” he gets across the idea that teachers can not act like their students are not capable of higher level critical thinking. Similarly, his focus like Finn was on students of color and low income students, but they all intersect. Just because someone is physically different, or has a learning disability and might need more support, does not mean they are less capable of learning. These ideas are seen in a second way for schools to eliminate ableism which is by encouraging “disabled students to develop and use skills and modes of expression that are most effective and efficient for them” (23). Students need autonomy over their learning.

Queering Our Schools 3/20

Both “RI Laws and Policies” and “Queering our Schools” argue that students, specifically transgender and nonconforming students, should have a space where they feel welcome and supported without any discrimination, and that school is safe to attend. All students need a supportive environment if they want to succeed academically.

There is an idea in both readings that not only should students feel safe, but staff and adults in the building do as well. Rhode Island law names:  “RIGL §16-2-17 Right to a safe school asserts that each student, staff member, teacher, and administrator has a right to attend and/or work at a school which is safe and secure, and which is conducive to learning, and which is free from the threat, actual or implied, of physical harm by a disruptive student.” Feeling safe is a basic human right. This applies to both physical and psychological safety.

In “Queering our Schools” the idea is that if the adults are safe then the students are safe. At a conference in Milwaukee, the participants were discussing teachers coming out, and the article said that the conversations kept going back to kids and school being safe for them. The editors were hesitant to this approach: “But no number of classroom discussions about gender stereotypes and homophobia will create a nurturing environment if teachers and parents are afraid to come out. A school that’s a protective community for LGBTQ adults is a school that’s going to be safe for kids” (24). But is that always the case?

I raise that question because at my school, we have many LGBTQ staff members, including our principal. Two of our staff members are married, and they proudly display their pride flags, and “love is love” decor. I believe they undoubtedly create a space for students- but I do not think our school as a whole is welcoming. “Equally important is empowering students to participate- at school and in the community- in organizations fighting for all kinds of social justice, including gay/straight alliances” (24). Our principal has routinely denied students and staff from running and starting a GSA club at my school. She told our LGBTQ staff members that next year the club can start- but the past two years has been a no. So, while our staff might feel supported and safe, is that setting an example for all students? 

The idea of starting the club also made me think maybe there are more students who need that support and community than I realized. 

The article explains the story of Jody Sokolower, who called the teachers union because she was accused of “talking about her sex life” when she came out to her class of students. The article explains that “her district rep immediately promised that the union would fight for her, and sent letters to that effect to the principal and to Jody’s file. That backing was enormously important, both emotionally and practically. Union support is critical” (24-25). What happens if you work at a charter school, or private school that is non unionized? Where or what resources are you provided with? Are you afforded the same protection and safety? 

The video  Woke Read Alouds: They, She, He Easy as ABC connects further to psychological safety. You can show someone respect by making them know you care about who they are. You connect to the whole person. The kids in the story loved themselves and felt good when they were treated right. RI and federal laws try to cover this. In class we talked about Title IX with an emphasis on the sports lens, but the reading focused on the policy as a whole and RIGL §16-38-1.1 states in part that  “Discrimination on the basis of sex is hereby prohibited in all public elementary and secondary schools in the state . . .” The state statute is essentially a restatement of the federal Title IX.” Rhode Island does not allow for any discrimination against students. This, hopefully, with specific teachings, helps provide another level of safety for students.

Another way for students to feel included, safe and welcomed in education is through the curriculum. “Queering our Schools” says “a social justice framework demands an approach to curriculum that integrates queer people—their problems, history, struggles, and contributions—into day-to- day curriculum, K–12, across the subject areas” (25). The curriculum I use tries to do this. While most of the actual curriculum and activities completed do not focus on those areas, there is additional guidance I am provided in the teacher guide to make and find ways to be more inclusive. An example of this, below, is when students start to learn the process of mitosis.

✱ ATTENDING TO EQUITY

The NGSS refers to the cell at the beginning of the cell cycle as the parent cell and the two cells at the end as daughter cells. This language could reinforce gender binary thinking and you may want to consider how to best represent these relationships. For more resources see:

https://www.genderinclusivebiology.com/

By providing me with ideas and resources on how to bridge inequities members of the LGBTQ community might face, I in my teaching can help make them feel more welcome and safe. Switching some of my practices could be a reason a student who originally did not want to attend school because they felt uncomfortable, decided to show up. If every teacher and every curriculum instituted this guidance, support could increase drastically.

“RI Laws and Guidance” states on page 9 “discomfort is not a reason to deny access to the transgender student” and "Queering our Schools” names “none of this is easy. But every step leads to the next one.” While these are not the same concepts and ideas we learned about and discussed in class- with the reading “colorblindness is the new racism” which is aligned to race- the bottom line remains the same: in order to create safe spaces where all students feel welcome, there needs to be a conversation. Dialogue needs to happen in all facets of the education system if there wants to be progress. Teachers, school administration, families and students all need to be in compliance with the laws, and everyone needs to get comfortable talking about uncomfortable and hard things. 

The Silenced Dialogue

 

Lisa Delpit argues in “The Silenced Dialogue” that teachers and educators have to acknowledge and talk about the different power dynamics that are in the classroom. In order to do this, teachers have to teach those who, in her estimation, do not have power, certain “codes” of those who do have power, while also respecting and accepting their own cultural differences and identities. 

Early on Delpit names, “I believe that the actual practice of good teachers of all colors typically incorporates a range of pedagogical orientations”. There is no one best way to teach. If teachers are “headstrong” as Delpit points out early in the text, they could be leaving students behind, and not doing what is best for all, or even most of the students in their room. Delpit discusses the difference clearly when analyzing two types of reading programs. One program provided an opportunity for those who already knew the content to exhibit that they knew it, or at most build one new concept onto what was already known” (30). If a student doing this program did not have the background information or previous knowledge, they would be set up for a lack of success. The other program was slower, but the difference is that it “‘taught’ new information to children who had not already acquired it at home”(30). This is all about balance. The first program was set up for students who are “in power”, not for all students. 

Ken Williams, in his book “Ruthless Equity”, often touches on this idea that students of low income backgrounds and students of color need to be treated like their white and more affluent peers. Teachers and educators can not assume and act like their students are not capable of higher level critical thinking and reasoning. Delpit builds from this idea too: “this does not mean separating children according to family background, but instead, ensuring that each classroom incorporates strategies appropriate for all the children in its confines”. How realistic is that idea? Is it truly possible to find a way to reach all 30 students in a classroom who have different experiences and make them all feel like they are learning in the best way that suits them? Would this be done through scaffolding or staff professional development? Who would help teachers ensure this is happening? 

Tying to this idea of power dynamics in the classroom, everyone needs to learn from everyone. People have different experiences and ideas. It should not matter if you are the teacher- there is always more you can learn, especially from your students. Delpit talks about the students she has talked to and one said the teacher took a “process approach, but what she really did was hide behind fancy words to give herself permission to do nothing in the classroom” (32). Teachers do not want to give up power or control in the classroom. “Somehow to exhibit one’s personal power as an expert source is viewed as disempowering one’s students” (32). What is the point of being an educator? If you are not willing to grow and improve yourself and how you teach and view different ideas in the classroom, you are not only doing a disservice to yourself, but overall to your students. “The teacher cannot be the only expert in the classroom”. Everyone has worthy ideas and everyone in the space is worthy of sharing them. 

I see this struggle at school. “The Silenced Dialogue” touches on the concepts of authority and who has control in the room. The idea is that “an authoritative person gets to be a teacher because she is authoritative”. To students of color, they earned that through their own efforts and personal traits. The flip side of that is some people “expect one to achieve authority by the acquisition of an authoritarian role. That is, the teacher is the authority because she is the teacher” (35). There is one teacher I work with who constantly has power struggles and behavioral issues with her students. She does not manage the class, and students do not respect her. She tries to leverage the idea of respecting your elders, or respecting adults- and she often tells them “they have to do XYZ, or how they treat her is unacceptable”. In conversations she always blames them and their families for their upbringing. 

My coworker refuses to see that she is equally part of the problem. Her own biases cloud what could be her students' reality, and she is stuck in her “power”. This teacher was one example but when thinking about my school as a whole, there are multiple rooms where students take over the class, and teachers are unable to teach because of the behaviors. In those rooms, there is a general idea that classroom management might not be that teacher’s strong suit. This leads me to question: how much is the behavior in the room impacted by a lack of respect and understanding of different viewpoints and cultures? Of upbringing? Could it really be just classroom management as a skill? Or, could teachers see their classroom management improve if they saw themselves in their students' shoes more often?

Delpit mentions “Children have the right to their own language, their own culture…it is not they, the children, who must change, but the schools. To push children to anything else is repressive and reactionary”. This is where the main argument from this article comes into play. Students of color are not set up for success in education where curriculum and materials are built for and by people who are white. Students have different identities, and the “white” way is not necessarily the right way. The students in Alaska learned their native ways along with the “Formal English” ways of speaking. Their teachers allowed them to hold onto who they were and how they talk, but also taught them the reality that not everyone thinks that is acceptable. That teacher worked to help her students survive and succeed in any setting- specifically the America we see today, where people who are white hold the power and make the rules. 

Delpit talks about a Native American woman who submitted a paper whose ideas were lost because of structural issues in sentences and paragraphs. She names “to bring this student into the program and pass her through without attending to obvious deficits in the codes needed for her to function effectively as a teacher is equally criminal” (38). You have to accept students, and teach them. Recently in the news, there was an article that came out about a high school graduate who is suing the Hartford Board of Education and the city of Hartford for negligence. She graduated, but says she is completely illiterate. She says she can’t read or write. This girl was never encouraged to do the work other students were, and she was continuously pushed along. Her mom did not speak English well but tried to advocate on numerous occasions. The girl named she would use text to speech apps to do some of her work. The schools were aware of what was happening but they did not help her. Doctor Jesse Turner is the leader of the literacy center at Central Connecticut State University. He named the main issue as inequality in public education. Students are not taught the “codes” and “ways” to properly succeed in schools with mindsets and materials designed for white upper-class individuals.

When we are in class and we look at case studies part of the protocol is to look at our own identities and how certain things make us feel. We do that because it is hard and uncomfortable. We do that because we need to talk about challenging topics to help us learn and think about other people and other perspectives outside of our own. You have to have the hard talks if you want to see change. “We must keep the perspective that people are experts in their own lives” (47).