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).

Literacy With An Attitude 2/13

Patrick Finn argues in Literacy with an Attitude that your social class and economic factors determine the type of literacy and education you receive. Lower class/middle-class students receive functional literacy, which creates productive dependable people, and more affluent/higher-class students get powerful literacy which allows for more access to opportunities. 

One of the things that stood out to me in reading chapter two, while comparing the different schools- the middle/working class to affluent- was an idea around child movement, regulation, and control. For example, on page 11, when talking about a working class school: “students were ordered to remain in their seats unless given specific instruction to move. When permitted to leave the room they needed a pass with the time and date.” While in affluent schools: “not more than three children could be out of the room at one time…they merely signed their name on the chalkboard and left the room when they needed to. There were no passes” (17). Both schools have some rules and regulations around childrens movements, and while one seemed more strict in comparison, they both did have a system of knowing who was out of the room. The question this raised for me was: is it about controlling students, or is it for safety concerns? Is there a balance between both worlds? I also frequently try to connect what I read to what I experience everyday- and is it different in high school? Do elementary students require different needs? Should high-schoolers have passes requiring them to sign in/sign out when they return? My school does, and administration stamps its use from a safety perspective. If someone doesn’t know where you are, or if you are in an undesignated area, they say, that would be problematic. I never thought about it as a way to control behavior or movement of an individual. 

Another question that popped up after reading and seeing the data from different schools was: does the data relate directly to where the educators come from? Does that actually influence how teachers are teaching the content? The curriculum was the same across five schools- so why was it taught so differently? “In the working-class schools, most of the teachers were born in the same city as the school but lived in better sections. Most of them were young and had graduated from the local teachers college” (10). Is it really a caste type system? What was surprising to me was in my reflection, I realized I also did go to a middle/working class high school, and I ended up working in a similar spot. Why am I then trying to teach differently? 

In the personal experience account from one of Finn’s students, an experience they shared was “parents were relentless in their persistence to have their kids receive the best education possible” (23). I have a friend who works at a private boarding school in Massachusetts and we used to work together. She told me the difference between parent communication and expectations was shocking for her too. She had never experienced parents who were so involved. That isn’t to say the parents where I work do not care for their students- I feel this just ties into the argument that education is different based on class. If you are from a working-class family, the parents are most likely working during the day and are focusing on providing for their family. 

Finn’s text states, “She skipped pages dealing with mathematical reasoning and inferences because they were too hard. The teacher in the second working class-school said “these pages are for creativity-they’re extras”... they used a social studies textbook that was described by its publisher as intended for ‘low ability students’” (10). This idea of skipping lessons because it was too hard, or teaching something not on grade level connects to Ken William’s ideas in Ruthless Equity. In William’s chapter on Radioactive Rhetoric, he says “there is a fine line between they shouldn’t have to learn this, and they can’t learn this”. Those two statements breed the same results- low expectations and low work. The idea behind it is that you are letting students get away with less because of societal status. You are allowing them to become victims, and to be treated differently in education. The same is true from those teachers in Finn’s chapter- they skipped because it is too hard. 

Connected to that same idea, and the same book, on page 48, Williams notes: “students lose because educators don’t grow and get better”. In Finn’s chapters, that is taking place. I see the middle-class educators not doing anything different. They are not growing themselves, or trying to improve. They are allowing themselves to be complacent, even if unintentionally. Finn says “no matter what the solutions are, it’s hard-bitten school teachers who will need to implement them” (8). It is the teachers on the ground who have to do the work to see the change. All five schools were given the same curriculum. 

Another connection I had was tied into what I am seeing in my own curriculum working at a public charter school in Providence Rhode Island, serving students who are primarily Hispanic and African American. In chapter 2 on page 15 the text names “creativity and personal development were important goals for students at the affluent professional schools. Teachers wanted students to think for themselves and to make sense of their own experience.” In addition to that, “it didn’t matter whether they got the right answer. What mattered was that they discussed their ideas. When students asked ‘How should I do this?’ teachers answered, ‘you decide’, or ‘What makes sense to you?’ (15).” I do not work in an affluent school or affluent area, however, the curriculum I am teaching and using, encourages those types of actions and behaviors from students. It does not matter what their background is. My curriculum encourages effort and emphasizes the importance of trying, participating, and ultimately being able to have group discussions to share ideas and come together as a larger group. It focuses on the teacher being a facilitator, and students driving their own learning. This also ties into Carol Dweck’s Growth Mindset. Students with growth mindsets will be more likely to try harder work, and overcome challenges, and that can be fostered by the way educators provide feedback. It is important to focus on growth and progress in student learning/work, over praising them for getting all As or amazing grades based more on compliance. If educators are sticking to teaching out of a textbook, and not allowing for independence and creativity, are they helping or hurting? 

Colorblindness is the New Racism 2/6

In this chapter, “Colorblindness is the New Racism”, authors Armstrong and Wildman argue that this idea of colorblindness is not as progressive as it appears. Not acknowledging the racial realities in our world and society is causing more harm than good. In order to have a more equal society, people need to start addressing, discussing, and learning about other’s experiences. 

“Identifying and understanding whiteness should be an essential component of education in the United States” (65). The text then goes on to raise the question “why do many educators fail to address this normative role played by whiteness?” I understand the idea of wanting to end discrimination, and wanting to address white privilege and power, but when in education would this come up? Is it all grades? Elementary? Collegiate level? What would this look like? I know this chapter provides practices and examples to implement these ideas such as the power line chart, the 24 hour experience, and seeing the “me” to foster safe spaces and learn from one another and see both differences and commonalities beyond just race- but overall I struggled with seeing how this is transferable. These seemed to work really well for law classes, and at the collegiate level, but how would this work for 9th grade biology? 

Tied to the argument statement, if people want more racial equity and justice, we need to start talking about things. “Both whites and people of color need to recognize their own and one another’s individual privileges” (71). How can anything progress if not everyone is taking part? This is an everyone thing, not an individual thing. There needs to be what almost feels like an adoption of a collective mindset around this topic and the conversations surrounding race, making it less “taboo”. 

This text continued to highlight for me this idea that it really is all people, not just yourself. “The emphasis on the personal, the “me” underlines the different perspectives that racialization in society causes. Thus, the exercises help students to see that their own racial perspective is not the only one” (76). I alone can not change everything. I need to acknowledge and take into consideration my own perspectives and privilege, who I am, who I am not, and what my story is while simultaneously learning from everyone around me to do the same. 

As I was reading, there were some connections to class discussions, and Alan Johnson’s  Privilege, Power, and Difference. In my past blog post I highlighted this quote from Johnson, "Privilege is always at someone else's expense and always exacts a cost. Everything that's done to receive or maintain it-however passive and unconscious- results in suffering and deprivation for someone" (10). Why this quote came back to me was because on page 63 in “Colorblindness is the New Racism” Armstrong and Wildman state “white privilege is pervasive, structural, and generally invisible operating on both personal and systemic levels”. Both of these texts are highlighting that white privilege for the most part has become invisible and unconscious. It is ingrained in our society as the “norm”. We as a society need to challenge that norm, we need to change it. 

During class we discussed this idea of cultural relativism where things have to be looked at in a unique context, both space and time. What was the culture like? What is the story? Page 69 highlights this, “race has had different meanings over time and its significance continues to fluctuate. Even word usage has evolved and keeps changing. Thus, color insight begins by considering the different contexts that participants in a discussion of race bring to the table”. 

The bottom line for me is when discussing race and equity, there is no right or wrong, we can not be afraid to share our thoughts and feelings in fear of offending other people. We need to talk about the things we know, and especially the things we do not know for us to learn and grow. If there is no conversation, there is no progression and we are back at square one, where we allow color blindness to take over. 

One last connection I made was around the education system in America. “The law prohibits segregation in public schools yet inequality in opportunity and caliber of education remains rampant” (64). Ken Williams covers this idea in chapter one of “Ruthless Equity”  when he discusses academic tracking. Research has shown this practice is ineffective for all students, but especially for those on lower tracks. “This practice inevitably devolves into a system of exclusion along racial lines, within which “so called minority” students, especially students of color, are more likely to end up in lower level tracks… and in a tracking system, access is denied, and the cycle continues” (7). According to the text, when tracking was removed and students were in heterogeneous classes, everyone benefitted, and racial gaps in challenging courses were reduced. Everyone should have the same opportunities at education.

Williams makes a powerful statement “you are up against a system that promotes and supports inequity by design. These are cultural norms that are sustained, nourished, promoted, and supported. Fixing inequality isn’t neuroscience, and not fixing it is a deliberate choice”(8). To me this was a different way to synthesize and summarize Armstrong and Wildman. 

Privilege, Power, and Difference 1/29

In his book, Privilege, Power, and Difference (Chapters 1-3), author Alan Johnson argues that privilege and the power that comes with it is a social construct, and understanding that, along with talking about that, is the only way we can fix it. 

Johnson writes, "The concept of oppression points to social forces that tend to 'press' upon people and hold them down, to hem them in and block their pursuit of a good life. Just as privilege tends to open doors of opportunity, oppression tends to slam them shut"(40). Both of these provide a way for power to come into play. If someone has "privilege" they will have the power and ability to do more, have more, and be seen as more likely to succeed. Johnson frequently touches on the idea that no one cares who you are as a person, and what makes you, you, is just what they see. If you are a white male, you will be viewed differently. You add female next to the word white, and you automatically lose opportunities or will be treated differently. There is no power in that. Oppression reinforces the idea of social inequality. 

How did we end up here in society? Was it born out of some deep seeded psychological wants and needs? "Whether it's a matter of can't or won't, the truth is that we simply don't get along" (2). In the past we have not gotten along, today we don't get along, and so the question remains, will we get along? What will it take to do that? Can it be as simple as just reading and doing research, and getting comfortable talking about hard things, and changing how you think and act as an individual? 

 "Privilege is always at someone else's expense and always exacts a cost. Everything that's done to receive or maintain it-however passive and unconscious- results in suffering and deprivation for someone" (10). While I was reading, the piece that stood out to me was passive and unconscious. If these things are happening, regardless if someone is aware or not, how does one bridge the gap? I struggled a bit here, because if privilege is a problem for those who have it, and those who don't, what do we do with that? Is there a conscious piece? What would that look like?

Before reading these chapters, I watched the video The Four I's of Oppression with Luna Malbroux.

After watching the video and finishing the reading, I found the video made deeper connections to some of the points made. The video explains how oppression operates and she, like Johnson, suggest that, to experience oppression, you have to be placed in a category. Those categories are based on gender, race, class, etc. This process of being placed in a category is constructed really early on in life and reinforced as we grow up. For example, we see and hear the stereotypes for what a "boy" should do or not do, like not cry, not rely on their moms too much or they'll be a "momma's boy" (26). Both the video and reading touch on the experiences people have, and how it shapes them later on. 

Another connection I made was related to the supplemental reading  The 4 I’s of Oppression. This reading highlights that “because ideology often presents itself as ‘common sense’ or a way of understanding the world, ideological oppression can have long-standing cultural and historical roots.” The idea of "common sense" helps us understand how oppression can be made. 

In another course I'm taking, we spent time discussing what it means to say "this is common sense". Who decides what is common? Common sense is shaped by personal experience, and personal journeys. Something that feels like common knowledge to one person, might not be true for another. Johnson takes his own experiences into account when he wrote this book. He stated "to some degree this book cannot help having a white, straight, male, middle-class point of view, because that is what my background is" (ix). We are all shaped by different experiences and those impact how we see, view, and live in the world. No experience is the same. We have to learn from others to improve ourselves and try to solve the problems.

About Me

 Hi!

My name is Anna DeFeo. I am 9th grade Biology Teacher! I stumbled into teaching on accident 3 years ago and I am so glad that I did.

I work at Achievement First Providence High School, a public charter here in RI

When I am not at school/ teaching you will often find me reading my books, hanging out with my dog Kiba or spending time outside.

Kiba is the best adventure pal

My goal this year is to read 65 books and a fun fact about me- I always have a book or my kindle on hand (I will even use the app on my phone) 

I am excited for this semester and can't wait to see what comes next!