Summary
Submit a weekly response based on the week’s readings. You do not need to submit a response if you are facilitating for the week. The responses should respond to at least one of the As from the Four As Protocol.
What assumptions does the author of the text hold?
What do you agree about and/or within the text?
What do you want to argue within the text?
What parts of the text do you want to aspire to? (act upon)?
All responses are due on the Wednesday before class by 8:30 p.m.
One of the main things I hope to learn from this course is how to be able to utilize the teaching strategies or pedagogy strategies of people from the past to help me become a better teacher now and into the future. As a first-year teacher, I look forward to learning as much as I can from this course, as well as learning from my peers, so that I can use any techniques that will assist me in being able to teach my students and facilitating a learning environment. One way I intend to contribute to our class community is by doing my best to engage in discussion and being an avid listener to every one of my peers in and out of class. I look forward to reading my peers’ discussions and listening to our facilitators as they engage with us with the weekly readings. The one thing that I will probably need support with would be understanding how to teach in the lower grades and how to ask more engaging questions of my students.
Weekly Response 2/5
The author assumes that history is fundamentally interpretive and argumentative instead of a fixed set of facts. That students get the most benefit when they have the chance to part take in historical debates instead of being leaned away from them. I can agree with the authors point of view that the controversial work such as “The 1619 Project” separate from their flaws, are pedagogically based due to the historical significance, interpretation and argument. These skills are so important for developing students to think critically. By putting light on student centered inquiry and the use of first and second sources, the texts argues that being able to engage with more than one perspective helps students better understand how historical narratives are created and contested. This makes teaching history more meaningful in the classroom, giving students this opportunity.
While reading the C3 Framework and the NGSS National Curriculum Standards, I found my self to be drawn to the part where they spoke about informed action, this being the ultimate goal of social studies education. It gave me a sense of continued motivation to try to apply the idea that learning is active rather than theoretical knowledge. Having students practice the “arts and habits of civic life” in real world contexts. By learning more about the Inquiry Arc’s stress of developing compelling questions and evidence, I connected to the idea of creating a learning environment that does more than just prepare for tests, it should give students the ability to build critical thinking and collaborative skills that can help students better prepare for the reality of our world today. This is something I have been very interested in and have been learning throughout my time here in Brooklyn College, I have already seen the positive effects this transition can have on students with the knowledge I have in it so far. I am excited to learn and expand my knowledge even more, in order to better help my students be as successful as they possibly can be.
Hi Elizabeth!
I really liked how you explained history as interpretive rather than just factual. I agree that students become more engaged and involved in history lessons when content is presented through debate. Teaching in this way allows students to consider various perspectives and helps them think critically about real-world issues. I really appreciated that you mentioned that student-centered learning prepares students for civic life, not just for assessments.
The other day, while teaching my third-grade students about internal and external traits, I used myself as an example. I stood in front of the class and asked students to identify my external traits before moving on to my internal ones. The external traits came quickly: I have black-brown hair, I wear glasses, and I was wearing a red sweater. When we shifted to internal traits, the responses were all positive. Students shared that I am loving because I care about them and kind because I use kind words. One response, however, made me pause. A student said I am intelligent because I “have all the answers.” I explained that this isn’t true, that I don’t always have the answers and often encourage students to research questions on their own. I also shared that while I have many positive internal traits, I have challenges as well because I am human. For example, I can be impatient, especially when I repeat directions and am asked the same question again. At that point, my students glanced at one another, unsure whether it was acceptable to acknowledge a negative trait about their teacher.
Teachers are often viewed as having all the answers and serving as the primary authority in the classroom. However, I agree with Erford (2021), who emphasizes that the goal of history and social studies education in the United States is to develop citizens who can think critically. This perspective challenges the belief that the teacher is always right and instead highlights the importance of student inquiry. This idea connects closely to the strategies of effective readers. Good readers continuously ask questions as they read, allowing them to engage with the text, challenge ideas, and reflect on their own thinking. Encouraging students to question what they read strengthens their critical thinking skills and helps them make meaningful connections between new information and their own beliefs. When students are given opportunities to reflect and question, they become more independent learners. Rather than relying solely on the teacher for answers, they learn how to think for themselves. Ultimately, the goal of teaching is to scaffold learning in a way that supports students’ growth toward independence, empowering them to engage critically with content both inside and outside the classroom.
Hi Nicole!
I really liked how you used yourself as an example when teaching internal and external traits. It made the lesson feel more personal and helped students see that teachers don’t always have all the answers. This is also a perspective that I don’t think many students get the chance to think about. Teachers are often seen as authority figures, and especially with younger students, it’s assumed that you always know what to do. Teaching your students that you are also just a person is powerful and really helps create deeper thinking. The fact that you shared moments of uncertainty emphasizes how important it is to question and reflect. I also appreciated how you turned that moment into an opportunity to encourage independent thinking. By showing students that it’s okay to ask questions and reflect, you’re helping them become more confident and independent learners. These ideas should definetly also be applied to social studies teaching! I think this creates a supportive classroom where students learn to think for themselves, which is so important both in school and beyond. I completely agree with your points!
Hi Nicole, I really love the example you pulled from your class to highlight the reading! Teaching, in many ways, is about helping students develop the framework necessary to build their own knowledge. This goes hand-in-hand with developing literacy. Developing critical thought, and nurturing a sense of curiosity is an important step towards making sense of the world around us, as well as our historical past.
In the text “THE 1619 PROJECT AND THE IMPORTANCE OF HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE AND ARGUMENTATION IN THE HISTORY AND SOCIAL STUDIES CLASSROOM” the assumptions that the author of the text hold is that the students are not the driving force in many classrooms. The class is not student centered. For example in the text it says “If the goal of history and social studies education in the United States is to produce citizens capable of thinking critically about our shared past, present, and future, then students need to become adept at engaging difficult historical questions and developing strong historical arguments that they believe in.” This shows that the authors believes if students are to actually become involved in history or the learning process of the past, present or future. They need to be involved in the learning process rather than just sitting learning through just listening to the history. The teacher must create the learning environment in which students are asked critical questions that allow them to broaden their thinking. Teachers must engage students in a perpetual conversation of historical study by either doing debate or raising questions that involve student be engage in the discussions rather than just listening to the teacher.
I agree with this text. I believe when the teacher is student centered that’s when the actual learning happens. Student centered learning can be through jigsaw reading or cubing activities that allow differentiation through the process of learning. When students are engaged they learn better because they question their own thinking and expand on the thinking of their peers.Develops critical thinking and problem-solving. Students will analyze, evaluate, and create rather than memorize facts. Which also is similar to blooms taxonomy. Hands on learning or student centered learning also supports deeper understanding. Active learning and real-world tasks promote long-term retention.
The parts of the text that I plan to aspire upon is to engage students through questioning. For example, in the text it states, “A simple and affordable way to engage students at the beginning of a history course and at the
The beginning of units and modules is to work through questions of when, where, and what.” This shows that students can be engaged throughout the technique of questioning which will allow them to brainstorm ideas. When opening a new unit or question I will start with having students discuss different ideas using questions that allow them to brainstorm ideas that could be debatable.
Weekly Reading: Week 2- February 5, 2026
Social studies is important because it helps students really think about history and the past as well as the present time. The article explains that the 1619 Project is not viewed as the project is right or wrong but it is mainly about helping students understand how history is looked at and how you study history. The author informs that history is more than just memorizing information, it is more interpretation and creating discussion and using the evidence to support the ideas of a question. The 1619 Project shows students that history can come with agreement and disagreement about American history and when it began or ended. Also what years it started. Exploring different perspectives such as articles, textbooks and pictures. Students could learn and think critically about the information that is presented. The 1619 Project is useful for the classrooms because it really helps students learn how historians argue and use evidences to support their thinking. They could compare arguments, examine evidence and create interpretation.
The second article talks about the C3 Framework . The purpose of the article is to improve social studies, and focus on inquiry, not just memorizing information. The four disciplines are history, economics, geography and civics. The article explains the C3 Framework and the National Curriculum Standard are meant to support each other while teaching social studies. Exploring ideas and using evidence that help students learn while standard helps guide what topics and skills. It helps encourage critical thinking and student participation more. Together, they help teachers create engaging lesson plans and prepare students for life.
Overall the key question is Social studies is important because it helps students understand the world and the history of the world. Both articles show that social studies is not just memorizing facts but it helps students create questions, think critically and learn different perspectives on the topics. My teaching will be that my main focus is that students learn best when they are encouraged to explore the ideas, and discuss issues that are happening. Then use evidence for books and articles to support their thoughts. I want my classroom to be a space for students to feel comfortable sharing ideas and learning history that could be presented in different ways. Through social studies , students build good skills and are more informed about the information that is presented.
Work Cited
Erford, A. (2021). “The 1619 Project and the Importance of Historical Significance and Argumentation in the History and Social Studies Classroom.” Teaching History (Emporia, Kan.), 46(2), 30–34. Jan 31, 2026
Herczog, M. M. (2013). “The links between the C3 framework and the NCSS national curriculum standards for social studies. Social Education”, 77(6), 331-333. Retrieved from https://brooklyn.ezproxy.cuny.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/trade-journals/links-between-c3-framework-ncss-national/docview/3155755892/se-2. Jan 31, 2026
What do you agree with in the text?
I agree that students learn better when they are encouraged to help ask questions and discuss as a class their ideas instead of just answering the question and moving on. The idea that social studies prepare students for their careers and really get them thinking about the events that happen and how they analyze the information.
Weekly Response 2/5: After reading both texts, I believe that teachers should empower students to ask questions, debate ideas they don’t agree with, and deeply analyze the world around them, which helps prepare them to become thoughtful citizens. In the text “The 1619 Project and the Importance of Historical Significance and Argumentation in the History and Social Studies Classroom,” I found the use of Paulo Freire’s “banking” concept to be very deliberate because I feel that students should not only memorize facts from textbooks or simply agree with everything their teachers teach them without questioning or challenging the material but they should also, be taught how to curate their own thoughts and form their own opinions about history.
Both texts emphasize that the goal of teaching social studies is to create a classroom environment that encourages students to analyze, question, and form their own opinions. In my future classroom, I’d support this approach by providing students with a variety of documents, pictures, videos, and other materials that present multiple perspectives on history, allowing them to explore different viewpoints and draw their own conclusions. I believe this approach better prepares students for society because it teaches them the importance of researching and thinking independently, rather than simply accepting information they are told. I’d also want to incorporate the NCSS Learning Guidelines to guide students in using their power of questioning and curiosity as tools for exploring history, while also using their own knowledge and sources to create their own products on a topic. Thus, in the future, I want to create a meaningful classroom environment that is student-centered, where students have the tools and the freedom to own their own thinking and opinions.
Week 2 Reading – 2/5
I enjoyed both readings, and what I took away from them is that both readings assume that social studies should be about more than memorizing facts—it should help students ask questions and understand why history matters. I really agree with this, especially after finishing my student teaching in a third-grade classroom and working as a substitute teacher across Pre-K through fifth grade in the NYC DOE. I’ve seen that students are much more engaged when they’re encouraged to talk, ask questions, and explain their thinking. Erford’s focus on historical significance stood out to me because even young students can think deeply about history when lessons feel meaningful and connected to real people and events. I also took a social studies class last year – Social Discourses in Education: Integrating Social Sciences in Childhood Education (7205T) – and it focused solely on this topic.
What I really want to take away from these readings is the idea of being more intentional about using inquiry in the classroom, even when I’m subbing and don’t have much time to plan. Herczog’s explanation of the C3 Framework made me realize how asking good questions and encouraging students to support their ideas can fit naturally into everyday lessons. I also appreciated Erford’s emphasis on inclusive and honest historical narratives, which feels especially important in a diverse school system like NYC. Moving forward, I hope to create more opportunities for student voice and critical thinking whenever possible.
I could certainly agree that the experiences in the classroom aligns well with these readings. I liked your point about being intentional with inquiry even if your a sub and in the room for a short amount of time. It’s a good reminder that the framework is not always about big/ long period of time, at times it could just be asking the right questions to get students minds activated for explaining their thinking.
Both of these articles equally showed how social studies instruction should improve, as they focus on different viewpoints and instructional approaches. Erford focuses on how history shouldn’t just be about memorization but more about understanding why an event took place and why it matters to history. While Herzog explains how the C3 framework aligns with the standards and why it matters to lessons. When you put them together, it’s clear that good social studies teaching needs both. Erford is really about pushing teachers and students to think deeper about history and whose stories are being told, while Herczog focuses more on the structure behind lessons and how inquiry fits into what we’re required to teach. Both make the point that social studies should get students thinking and questioning, not just remembering information.
One thing both authors seem to assume is that students can handle more than we sometimes give them credit for. Erford assumes students can talk about complicated and even uncomfortable parts of history if teachers focus on discussion and argument instead of just facts. Herczog also assumes that inquiry should be the foundation of social studies, not something extra added on. I agree with that, especially because lessons feel more meaningful when students are asking questions instead of just listening. Growing up, I was always one in my history class to ask the most questions. But I was lucky enough to have a great history teacher to make me comfortable and curious to ask these questions. At the same time, I think both readings make this kind of teaching sound easier than it sometimes is in real classrooms, where time, testing, and pushback can get in the way. What I want to take from these readings is the idea that social studies should help students think critically and see why history matters, and that’s something I want to keep in mind when I plan lessons, even when it feels messy or challenging.
Hey Diellza,
I completely agree with idea that Social Studies is much than that just memorization, but more preparing them with information and skills about the real world. Inquiry is emphasized to be the key factor into teaching Social Studies. I believe that social studies learning block should be more student-centered where they aren’t just listening to lengthy information, but able to ask questions and make predictions/ conclusions.
Weekly Response 2/5
As an educator, I deeply agree with the emphasis on historical significance and argumentation that Erford highlights in relation to “The 1619 Project”. The historical events that occurred in 1619, specifically the arrival of the first enslaved Africans, reminds us that history is more than simply a list of dates. Instead, it tells a story of lived human experiences that have had a profound impact on the lives we live today. I appreciate the drive to move students toward understanding not only what happened in history, but also understanding why it matters and how it has shaped our present society.
Likewise, I resonate strongly with Herczog’s discussion of the C3 Framework, as it aligns with the instructional goals I have for my own social studies classes. I agree that social studies should be an inquiry-based learning experience that integrates student thinking, communication, and evaluation of evidence rather than rote memorization. The C3 Framework’s inquiry arc highlights the importance of students developing questions, using disciplinary tools, evaluating sources, and communicating conclusions. This serves as a guide for educators to help create learning environments where students don’t simply memorize facts, but they learn how to think like real historians and engaged citizens. In my own classroom, I aspire to enact this by designing lessons where children can explore, discuss their findings, and present their thinking in creative ways.
Hello Breanna
I agree with you that the 1619 Project helps tell the story of lived human experiences by allowing students to understand a history that happened before so that we can connect it with our lives today. The study of history shows us that even though these things happened, we can try to figure out how they happened and what the mindset of the people who did it was. Students today need to understand the things that happened in the past so that they can be able to shape their present and their future. The only thing is, when it comes to social studies, many times it is not taught as often, especially in elementary school classes. As an educator, I have seen firsthand that the core lessons of reading, writing, and math are taught first and often and social studies is usually put on the back burner. Nevertheless, this is important for our students to know, and I like how the author shows that we all should have different opinions so that we can create dialogue and also different pieces of work, such as the 1776 Commission and the 1620 paper, which give a different perspective on when America officially began. I look forward to reading more of what you have to say and hearing you in class.
Hello, I agree with your ideas about teaching history in a more meaningful way rather than just giving the information to the students to memorize. The example of 1619 shows that history is not about just memorizing the important dates,but about understanding the people’s experiences and how their past affects our lives today. Also the connection to the C3 Framework I agree with how focusing on students asking questions about the topics and discussing instead of just memorizing the fact is a good way for students to share their ideas. Overall good response.
In the text about the 1619 project, I feel that one assumption that the author made was that all history needs to be looked at and researched so that we all can have different understandings of what happened in the past. Every student can be a researcher, and every teacher needs to teach history so that we can create critical thinkers out of our students. We should never take history as this is what happened, and that’s it. We have to look at what caused the actions of the people of the past, and that’s what the 1619 Project article makes us think about. With so many people disagreeing with the 1619 project, that made them create different articles about different eras in America, which gave a different perspective on when America began. I feel that was the author’s goal and I agree with him when he says “If the goal of history and social studies education in the United States is to produce citizens capable of thinking critically about our shared past, present, and future, then students need to become adept at engaging difficult historical questions and developing strong historical arguments that they believe in.” (Erford 2021).
One of the parts of the text that I aspire to be is an educator who creates critical thinkers. I am a person who loves history and would love to ignite or engage my students in deeper thought so that they can ask why people of the past did what they did or what they thought would be the outcome of their decisions.
Hello Akiel,
I find your post on how interesting about how each student IS their own researcher! Completely agree! I love how you talk about never taking just the history as it is, how we should see how the actions impacted other people. I also wish to create critical thinkers in the future and ask questions that allow them to think further.
Zahra Umer- Weekly Response 2/5
Both readings from this week, The 1619 Project and the Importance of Historical Significance and Argumentation in the History and Social Studies Classroom and The Links between the C3 Framework and the NCSS National Curriculum Standards for Social Studies, emphasize that social studies should focus on questions, arguments, and evidence rather than simple memorization of facts. Erford explains that history is built through interpretation and argument, and that projects like 1619 help students analyze competing perspectives and determine historical significance. Similarly, Herczog describes how the C3 Framework centers learning around inquiry having students develop questions, evaluate evidence, and communicate conclusions
out.
.
I strongly agree with this idea because students should be able to create meaningful connections with what they are learning. Often, the readings we encounter in class come from America’s point of view, which automatically creates bias. We do not always know if what is presented is the full truth. One example that has come up across many classes is Christopher Columbus. He is frequently taught as someone who “found” America and sparked a joyful discovery, when in reality his arrival led to the displacement of Native Americans and the spread of disease that killed many people. When history is taught this way, students are likely to accept it without questioning.
By encouraging students to ask questions and form arguments, they may come to very different conclusions. For example, I’ve heard students ask, “If Columbus found the land, why were there already people living there?” Questions like this naturally open the door to discussion and deeper thinking. It also helps to correct any flaws in our learning system. Another example is Thanksgiving, during my time in elementary school it was taught to be a happy feast between the pilgrims and Native Americans and nothing more. However last semester when I did my observations in my old elementary school they were now teaching what actually happened and how it wasn’t a happy event. This shows students different perspectives and realities of history rather than what the textbook says which may be incorrect. This also prepares students for the real world, we want them to be the best citizens they can be. Simply giving facts might help them pass an exam, but it does not teach them how to think critically. Critical thinking is a skill that is used for every subject, to say it shouldn’t be utilized when learning about history doesn’t make sense. This is a skill that I want to encourage in my future classroom. Teaching students to question sources, consider multiple perspectives, and use evidence helps them become informed individuals who do not blindly accept information without context.
2/5 Response
In the article, “The 1619 Project And The Importance of Historical Significance And Argumentation In The History and Social Studies Classroom”, author Andrew Erford holds the assumption that social studies education should be more than just the acquisition of facts and dates. Erford believes that social studies education should have students engaged in research that brings meaning to historical events through analysis and argumentation. He states that this method of learning history provides students with agency as they can develop their own arguments while using primary and secondary sources to support their claims. He further explains that the 1619 project, while not a document that should be the only thing students study about U.S founding, got students and historians alike discussing, analyzing, and thinking about American history.
I tend to agree with the author’s claims in this article as social studies education does seem to mostly center around learning facts which are usually forgotten once the class is over. I think it is important for students to have agency over their learning as then they will more likely be intrigued and interested in the material. I remember in a world history class in high school we used to have mock trials for different historical figures and these trials had us examining different primary and secondary sources to form our arguments. While, both sides had access to the same resources they were each able to form different arguments which also shows how history is not clear-cut and cannot be taught in such a straight forward way of just listing facts and dates. Furthermore, I think teaching social studies in the way as detailed in the article sets up students to be critical thinkers and not just take everything as fact when they encounter ideas or information in their lives. This is also detailed in the second article about social studies frameworks and standards that posits that the true purpose of social studies education is to prepare students for their further education, their careers, and their civic lives. This is especially true with the prevalence of social media where information can be spread very quickly and one needs to use critical thinking before taking things as fact.
Week 2:
The article, “The Links between the C3 Framework and the NCSS National Curriculum Standards for Social Studies” I want to aspire a new view and integration on the purpose the content of Social Studies has in my classroom. Reflecting on this article, this author focused in part on the differences between the traditional Social studies curriculum and how the C3 Framework is an enhancement of that baseline. My take away from this article is that the reason for this enhancement of the C3 framework is due to how the the expectation of the NCSS focus on memorization and content knowledge. On the other hand, the C3 framework, prepares students for the future and real life experiences/expectations. I completely agree with the article when it explains the ways students should reach their social studies academic goals, through questioning, planning, using disciplinary tools, gather evidence, study that evidence in order to communicate these conclusions in a collaboration. Another piece of information I agree with from the text, is using these two tools, the NCSS and the C3 framework “hand in hand”. These two resources should be used together, one enhancing and one being reinforced.
Speaking from my personal experience and current situation, my difficult comes with the limitations that exist. For examples, the insufficient amount of time and instructional support (deepening on the class size) to integrate inquiry as a key factor when teaching social studies. In my situation, I only have social studies twice a week at the end of the day, that will dismissal is around 30 real instruction minutes. With those short class period and testing windows, it wouldn’t balance out in my classroom. My school, the it comes to Social Studies, it is expected and realistically prioritizing literacy strategies, instead of what Social studies really is and should be according to the C3 framework.
I think the main assumption made by both articles is that the current social studies education being pushed on children is doing them a disservice, while also recognizing that attempts to change this curriculum often come with significant political backlash. Both articles also emphasize a shift toward student-led and student-focused learning. I have no major disagreements with the core arguments presented.
I strongly believe that teachers should have flexibility when deciding where to “start” history. Last semester, I learned about a teacher who began their curriculum with Native American history, an idea that both amazed me and frustrated me because it is not the standard approach. Because of that experience, the introduction of the 1619 Project felt immediately aspirational to me. We should be starting history from perspectives other than a white, colonial lens, and schools’ efforts to integrate this project into their curriculum, I believe, is an immediate benefit to students. I am, however, not surprised that the project faced media backlash, as education and historical narratives are often heavily politicized.
I do not believe teachers should be bound strictly to textbooks. The article’s emphasis on students taking control of their education made me reflect on what a classroom would look like if students were asked where they believe history should begin. I imagine a classroom where students research different historical “beginnings” and bring their findings back to the group. For example, a long-term project for high school students could involve exploring and comparing different starting points, such as the introduction of African slavery, the colonization of America, or the histories and lives of Native Americans, and examining how each starting point shapes understanding. A project like this would empower students to seek answers independently while aligning with the C3 Framework’s emphasis on inquiry.
Hi Jasmine! I completely agree with everything you said in your post. I also shared in my post that to me, American history does begin with Native American history. I don’t think there is any way that those years can be disregarded and left out of our history and I too think that should be the standard approach. History absolutely should be taught from perspectives other than white colonizers. As for the second part of your response, I also don’t believe teachers should be strictly bound to textbooks. There is so much information left out of textbooks that are probably left out for a reason, and it’s our jobs as teachers to reveal all sides and aspects of history to our students.
Week 2/5 response
In Andrew Erford’s article about the argument and historical significance of history in the classroom, one topic I really agree with is that there is the idea of thinking and debating and not just stating the facts. History has so many sides and not just one story. It’s based on the idea that what we teach inside the classroom matters.
One thing I wish to apply into the classroom is asking questions such as, “do you disagree or agree and why?” Asking questions such as “who is making this claim?” In addition, questions like “why does it even matter?” Would be thought provoking and allows the student to understand their stance. Furthermore, teaching students to use secondary sources intentionally, meaning that all sources many not agree on the same event in history, depending on the author and reader the source may be interpreted differently.
Hi Annie, I like the additional questions you included like “do you disagree or agree?” and “why does it even matter?”. I feel like most of my social studies classes I was just being tasked with memorizing facts and dates and important historical events but my teachers never bothered asking deeper, more though provoking questions that really got us thinking critically. So I agree with you, I will also apply these practices in my classroom.
I enjoyed the readings this week, especially the first reading about the 1619 Project because I was not familiar with this concept or that it was a debate amongst scholars and educators. The author states that the 1619 Project argues that the year 1619, when enslaved Africans were brought to the British colonial shores of America, should be the “start” of American history. By starting the article this way, I think maybe the author holds an assumption that as readers, we would know that the main critics of the 1619 Project argue that American history actually starts later than 1619. When I read the first paragraph, my immediate thought was that American history started before 1619 when the European colonizers first arrived on the land that maybe wasn’t yet, but would become America. Colonizers from Spain and Great Britain did arrive in the late 1500s, and even before that, Native Americans were living on this land. I think the oppression and violence that the Native Americans were met with cannot be left out of American History. Considering I felt this way, I was shocked to learn that a popular opposing argument to the 1619 Project is 1776 Unites, which states that American history truly begins in 1776 when the Declaration of Independence was written and signed. I found this to be a very narrow interpretation of this subject, American historical narratives can’t simply disregard the previous ~200+ years of oppression that occurred and pretend nothing happened. Sure, before America was officially established maybe it wasn’t actually the United States of America committing these atrocities, but the people that did would become Americans, and they wouldn’t do anything to fix or right these atrocities for years to come, or maybe even ever. Aside from these two approaches to American history, overall I do agree with the author on the concept of teachers asking questions such as “when did American history begin?” to hook their students and show how everyone has a different answer to this. With a question like this, there can be a multitude of different responses and students can really learn a lot from and about each other through answers to a question like this one. I really liked the additional questions that the author provided when it comes to defining American history, especially “What does it mean to be an American?”. This question would likely be an intense and controversial one and probably one to debate with students of a certain age considering what is going on in our country, especially when it comes to immigration policy, but I would hope that this question would allow some people to see all of the different ways a person can be an American and that it doesn’t need to just be based on where they were born. Even asking a question like this to a group of younger students might allow some people to see through the innocent eyes of children the different ways one can and should be considered an American.
The second reading this week, The Links between the C3 Framework and the NCSS National Curriculum Standards for Social Studies, was useful as it gave us as educators/future educators a framework or guideline to use in order to achieve the critical thinking that is desired in asking questions such as the one from the first reading (when did American history begin?). In one of my previous classes, Integrating Social Sciences in Childhood Education, we also learned about the C3 Framework and heavily discussed the NCSS National Curriculum Standards as well as the definition of Social Studies. As a future elementary educator I aspire to implement the C3 Framework and the NCSS Standards for Social Studies in as many ways as possible. However, I find it to be difficult to follow these when there isn’t a lot of time built into teaching social studies during the elementary years. In all of the classes I have observed in, in three different schools, none of administrators had worked time into the schedules to include Social Studies everyday, not even once a week. My classes have taught me to work Social Studies into other subjects wherever possible, like reading, writing or science and as a teacher this is what I aspire to do. However I wonder why teaching elementary social studies cannot be taken more seriously when there are standards that state the importance of teaching social studies to young people in order to prepare them for civic life. Why aren’t we mandating that this be taught and instead are just encouraging teachers to fit in a quick lesson when they have the time?
In the 1619 Project text by Andrew Erford, it is stated that “…parroting reflexive responses to historical questions that use one or more primary sources to ‘prove’ an argument does not have the same value or rigor as interrogating the question of when American history began.” I agree wholeheartedly with the idea that students are able to better grasp ideas related to social studies and develop stronger critical thinking skills when they are engaged with questions about American history, rather than just handed information. Outside of certain historical dates and timelines of events, there is so much subjectivity and perspective in the study of this country’s history. If students are able to engage with multiple perspectives in and of America, including those of their classmates and their own, they are able to make more meaning of it as an ever-evolving series of ideas and events. They are also able to develop personal investments in it as something in which they are involved, rather than something that has already happened outside of them.
I agree with the way in which the 1619 Project text speaks to student work, as well: “Student arguments and products, such as their verbal and written responses, are likely to be sloppy and look nothing like graduate and professional historical scholarship, but that is okay. Students benefit when they think big and attempt to place themselves and others within the context of history.” Teaching social studies through a critical, response-based lens means that students will be practicing their critical-thinking skills in real time. The best place to do this is in the classroom, and that means overseeing students as they build the parameters in which they can learn and express their burgeoning ideas. This level of student engagement will prepare them to be able to further engage with progressively complicated ideas as they age. The contributions of the C3 framework to the National Curriculum Standards for Social Studies supports this in that it centers student questions as the foundation for learning history, followed by demonstration of meaning-making through literacy skills. In a social studies curriculum that seeks to develop critical thought as the basis to becoming a citizen of the world, this seems like the right place to start.
Across both readings, the authors assume that social studies should be about more than memorizing dates and facts. They both emphasize inquiry, critical thinking, and argumentation as key parts of meaningful learning. The connection between the C3 Framework and the NCSS standards shows that students learn best when they are asking questions, working with evidence, and making sense of content rather than just being told information.
I agree with the focus on inquiry and argumentation in social studies classrooms. The C3 Inquiry Arc gives teachers a clear way to guide students through questioning, investigating, and explaining their thinking, while the emphasis on historical significance and argumentation helps students understand why events matter and how different perspectives shape history. Together, these approaches make social studies more engaging and relevant for students.
What I would argue is that these frameworks can be challenging to implement without enough support. Inquiry-based learning and argumentation take time, practice, and strong scaffolding, especially for younger students. Teachers need examples and strategies to help students build these skills gradually.
I aspire to use ideas from both readings in my own teaching by planning lessons around strong questions, giving students chances to work with evidence, and helping them explain their thinking through discussion and writing. I want my classroom to be a space where students feel comfortable questioning ideas and learning how to support their opinions with evidence.
Week 2 – February 05
Across both readings, the authors assume that social studies should be about more than memorizing dates and facts. They both emphasize inquiry, critical thinking, and argumentation as key parts of meaningful learning. The connection between the C3 Framework and the NCSS standards shows that students learn best when they are asking questions, working with evidence, and making sense of content rather than just being told information.
I agree with the focus on inquiry and argumentation in social studies classrooms. The C3 Inquiry Arc gives teachers a clear way to guide students through questioning, investigating, and explaining their thinking, while the emphasis on historical significance and argumentation helps students understand why events matter and how different perspectives shape history. Together, these approaches make social studies more engaging and relevant for students.
What I would argue is that these frameworks can be challenging to implement without enough support. Inquiry-based learning and argumentation take time, practice, and strong scaffolding, especially for younger students. Teachers need examples and strategies to help students build these skills gradually.
I aspire to use ideas from both readings in my own teaching by planning lessons around strong questions, giving students chances to work with evidence, and helping them explain their thinking through discussion and writing. I want my classroom to be a space where students feel comfortable questioning ideas and learning how to support their opinions with evidence.
Week 2 – February 5
Both authors mentioned that teaching social studies is not just about memorizing the history, it’s more about understand, raise questions and construct arguments about the history. I agree with both authors because history is not simply about remembering dates or events, but about understanding their causes, consequences, and significance. By encouraging students to think critically and question history, students can develop deeper insights into the past and apply it to the issues in modern society.
I was very aspire by the reading “The 1619 Project and The importance of Historical significance and Argumentation in History and Social Studies Classroom”, it mentioned student centered, and how it can promote building arguments. It reminds me of debates that I have done before in school, it was interesting and rememberable than justing listening to teacher talking about the history events. Thus, I also want to use this in my future class to promote student questioning, researching, and forming arguments as well as learning about different point of views.
Week 2 – February 5
In the reading of the 1619 project, the argument that the origin of the United States history should be originate from the arrival of enslaved africans on english colonial territory. I don’t agree with this argument because I think the United States history should include the before of the American Indians that originally lived her before the English colonial period. We should include the earliest history of America, as much as possible, so we don’t exclude anyone or be bias on American history.
The NCSS is what I’m leaning more towards on when I’m teaching social studies in class. I think if we don’t want history to repeat itself negatively, we need children to be critical thinkers on decide whether the decision at that time was made right or wrong. I don’t agree that remembering history will be as meaningful as imagining if they were the people living at that time of the history and hear what they say about the decision. It would be interesting to listen to their opinions and their questions when exploring one of the time periods.
Week 3
In James Baldwin’s, A Talk to Teachers, I agree with many of the points that he made about BIPOC and how it is our responsibility to reflect on our actions in order to change the future. In history, BIPOC feelings weren’t considered. Thinking of schools today, children are still forced to stand up and put their hands on their hearts for the Pledge of Allegiance every morning. For some, the Pledge of Allegiance may be more harmful than helpful. Some may feel that they still do not have “liberty and justice.” Others may not believe in God. As a teacher, I want to make sure that my classroom is respectful and understanding of all cultures. If my students don’t feel comfortable saying the pledge or the pledge in full, they don’t have to.
In, An Archaeology of Self for Our Times: Another Talk to Teachers, it states, “If teachers cultivate spaces where they and their students can explore their beliefs and voice their opinions without fear, there is potential for healthy and affirming discussions involving race and school success for BIPOC students.” This reminds me of our class from yesterday, where we learned to question everything, especially our history. History in itself is prejudiced in the sense that everything we learned can be very one sided. If we have a classroom that allows students to voice their opinions and learn to argue with one another in a healthy way, we’ll understand and learn more about our students and help them think critically rather than if we had them memorize dates in a book.
Lastly, in the Case Against Grades, I want to argue that while I understand that grades may be problematic for students, I’m not sure how else we can collect data that reflects on the child’s progress throughout the school year. While nourishing a child’s desire to learn should be the primary goal in school, I also think that some grades are needed and important.
In the article “A Talk to Teachers,” James Baldwin explains that education should push students to question and criticize the world around them and tothink independently. He states, ““The purpose of education, finally, is to create in a person the ability to look at the world for himself, to make his own decisions, to say to himself this is black or this is white, to decide for himself-To ask questions of the universe, and then learn to live with those questions, is the way he achieves his own identity”. I agree with this idea because I believe that, as educators, our role is to provide students with a safe space and all access to information to analyze the world and its history honestly, think critically, question history, and develop their own thinking. Growing up, I often remember learning history from only one perspective. Topics like colonization and the Westward Expansion were taught in ways that left out or lightly touched on other voices and experiences. When I attended college, I learned more deeply about the other side of these stories, and it felt like pieces of the story had been robbed from me because I had never been given the full truth earlier. Education should be taught fully and honestly, not one-sidedly, and I do not want my future students to experience that same loss of understanding.
According to An Archaeology of Self for Our Times: Another Talk to Teachers, the idea of “going for broke” influenced me because it pushes educators to be brave and honest with their students. This quote resonated with me because it reminds me that teaching is not just about staying comfortable or avoiding difficult topics, but about speaking the truth and challenging unfairness when we see it. I aspire to be the kind of teacher who teaches authentically and provides students a space to understand the world as it truly is.
After reading the chapter, The Case Against Grades, I believe that grades are important for tracking progress, providing structure, and guiding instruction. However, after reading the chapter, I realized how certain grading practices can create constant pressure around grades, which can create anxiety and take away from the joy of learning. A student’s quote in the chapter says, “Suddenly, all the joy was taken away. I was writing for a grade—I was no longer exploring for me”. I can strongly agree with this feeling because when students become primarily focused on achieving a high grade, learning can feel overwhelming rather than meaningful. However, I do not believe grading should be completely removed instead, it should be led with more intent and less anxiety-provoking. Using portfolios, discussions, and ongoing feedback can help students show growth without the constant feeling of overwhelm or pressure. I believe that these grading formats can help bring joy and inspiration back into learning, rather than having students do work only for a grade.
Hello, after reading your response you talk about the author Baldwin and how the author explains that school should help students think for themselves and questions about what they are taught in school to give them a better understanding. I realize grades can create stress and make students care more about the score not actually learning. Grade could help track students progress but it shouldn’t control student performance in the classroom. Overall good response.
Summarize:
After reading all three articles to summarize what they are about, the first one “The Price of the Ticket” by Jame Baldwin was about education and it talks about how education should help students understand themselves what the world is about. Really understand the past and present, not just memorize the facts. The author says that schools avoid teaching the full truth of the history that needs to be taught to the students. Especially racism, which makes students more confused about society and their identity. Also in the reading it mentions that teachers should encourage students to question ideas and think more deeply about the topic. More critical thinking. The goal for education according to Baldwin is to help students become aware of their surroundings and the world , be more confident and challenge the system. This will help students in the future to bring changes(Baldwin, 1985).
The second reading “An Archaeology of Self for Our Times” by Yolanda Sealey Ruiz says that teachers must first identify their biases,and what they believe so then they could best support students. She calls this “digging into yourself” according to the reading( Sealey-Ruiz (2022). This means to understand how your own experiences affect how others treat you. When teachers don’t reflect, they may judge students and create biases without really knowing that they are doing it. Overall good teaching is not only about lessons but about fairness.
Lastly, the reading “The Case Against Grades” by Alfie Kohn is about how the author argues that grading hurts students’ learning because students focus on getting the point to get good grades. They are not reading, focusing on understanding the materials and the topics. They are just memorizing for the test and then they forget. They make teachers focus on judging the students for the grade rather than helping them. The author said instead of grades he believes students should get feedback that help them improve their learning. Learning should be helping students grow and become more curious.
The key question is to show how well students are doing in their class assignment and their progress for parents, school and for their future. Teachers often use the test, participation, homework and student progress to give them a grade. The school believes that grades help motivate students to work toward their goals to work hard and get good grades. But some believe this is an accurate score that students are getting or does it show their real understanding of math, science, english or social studies. The reading suggests the grade changes the purpose of learning. Kohn explains that students focus on earning full credits instead of actually understanding the materials(Kohn, 2013). Instead of further study about something they just care about getting A’s in the class. Grades also have an effect on students. It creates anxiety, creates competition between other students and if they make a mistake they will have a fear of failing the class or assignment. Maybe that is why students don’t want to come to school.
What do I agree with?
I agree most with the idea that students learn better when the teacher gives them respect and really understands students’ points. Sealey-Ruiz’s point about teachers that they should really think about their beliefs because students can tell when teachers really care about the students. I also agree that grades often make students worry about failing a class and their score and not really understanding the information that is being presented. Many students worry about failing. Also learning should be about connecting to the information, not just memorizing the facts.
Work Cited
Baldwin, J. (1985). The price of the ticket: Collected nonfiction 1948–1985. St. Martin’s Press.
Sealey-Ruiz, Y. (2022). An archaeology of self for our times: Another talk to teachers. English Journal, 111(5), 21–26.
Kohn, A. (2013). The case against grades. In Counterpoints (Vol. 451, pp. 143–153).
Read Week 3:
Based on the article by James Baldwin 1963, education should be a tool not goal in itself. It should help students to be independent and critical thinkers even when the society is not supporting this idea.
He argues a few ideas in the article that I found really valid and relevant not only in America but also anywhere in the world when there is no place for justice to all humans.
Baldwin expressed his feeling towards injustice and how it can affect children and the way they see themselves. As white society sees black people as less human, this kind of treatment is so blatant for children and they are affected by this vision even if they are not able to express these ideas through words.
He argues the idea about education and how it meant to maintain society, yet true education inevitably leads people to question and challenge that society.
He also argues the social responsibility of each and everyone, especially educators who are able to shape children’s minds.
He emphasized how black children face painful contradictions when education teaches them about patriotic ideals of freedom, meanwhile; they face racism everyday.
The other point that revealed how injustice can truly affect someone’s future was the way he described the differences between white neighborhoods and black neighborhoods.
Those images show the gap between ideals and reality.
I do agree with him that justice and equal opportunities should be for all as no one can thrive to success if they don’t feel equal or unable to achieve anything in life because of their ancestry.
As an educator, I do agree on most of these points and I do believe that honesty, critical thinking, and moral justice can save us all.
Another talk to teachers: in this article. The writer discussed how reframing language is important. She urged educators to abandon the term achievement gap to education dept in order to refer to historic and systemic injustice.
It emphasized that the failure of students to achieve is a result of colonization, racism and injustice.
The other point that was mentioned in the article and I found it really important is the archeology of self. As educators, we must examine our biases and beliefs as it could influence our vision, pedagogy and expectations.
I believe that educators can hold the torch to save society through being activists for students rights (all students).
Inclusivity is a must in America. Educators should have a moral duty to be racially literate- to understand systemic racism, question school practices, and actively work to dismantle injustices within their schools.
I do agree with most of the ideas as I believe that students are able to learn when they feel seen and heard. When they feel equal and able to achieve not only academically but also in their personal life. The confidence they build through the trust and the support they get from their teachers can help them have strong self reflection..
One thing I noticed after reading these articles is that they all assume school is never neutral. In James Baldwin’s article, he suggests that education either pushes people to question the world they live in or keeps them comfortable with injustices. Yolanda Ruiz thinks that teachers bring their identities, experiences, and opinions into a classroom. I think that is so true. As a teacher, I feel that the way I was brought up and taught really affects the type of teacher I want to be. Alfie Kohn assumes that grading is more about control than actual learning. I agree with this idea, especially because so many school structures feel neutral even when they negatively affect children. I’ve seen this play out in classrooms I’ve worked in where rules and routines were followed without much questioning.
What I want to push back on a bit is Kohn’s argument against grades. While I agree that grades can be harmful, I think it’s harder for teachers to reject grading when schools and districts require it completely. In my own classroom experiences, I’ve noticed how students can become anxious or discouraged over grades even when they’re genuinely trying to learn. That said, I really connect with Ruiz’s focus on self-reflection and Baldwin’s emphasis on telling the truth, even when it’s uncomfortable. What I want to act on from these readings is being more aware of how my own experiences shape how I teach and making sure students feel seen as more than just their academic performance.
Hi Diellza, I agree with what you said about applying Kohn’s grading practice to the reality of a classroom. Particularly from my experience in the DOE system, it’s incredibly difficult trying to implement structural changes. I think attempting to merge some of Kohn’s assessment ideas into grading practices that already exist could be a first step: introducing more student surverys related to grading and having more check-ins with students regarding their work are the first things that come to mind. Small, incremental additions to traditional grading structures.
In “A Talk to Teachers”, James Baldwin writes on the educator’s moral responsibility to guide students towards their own liberation. His essay urges educators to teach young Black students how to examine and resist the propaganda of American history. Baldwin states that “it is not really a ‘Negro revolution’ that is upsetting the country. What is upsetting the country is a sense of its own identity. If, for example, one managed to change the curriculum in all the schools so that Negroes learned more about themselves and their real contributions to this culture, you would be liberating not only Negroes, you’d be liberating white people who know nothing about their own history. And the reason is that if you are compelled to lie about one aspect of anybody’s history, you must lie about it all.” American society is built on fascistic narratives, nationalistic mythology and the obscuring of truth. I agree with Baldwin that without a curriculum that embraces Black history and identity, all students are underserved—and Black students specifically are kept in a cycle of systematic racialized violence.
Yolanda Sealy-Ruiz’s “An Archaeology of Self for Our Times: Another Talk to Teachers” is written in conversation with Baldwin’s original 1963 essay. She expands on Baldwin’s ideas from a modern perspective: in the year 2022, with Black, Indigenous and students of color still at an academic disadvantage, Sealy-Ruiz urges us to reconsider that “achievement gaps” are actually education debts that American educators and society owes these children. The racial literacy model that she developed in text serves as a guide for how educators can better serve their BIPOC students. By looking inward at one’s own biases and limitations of perspective, educating oneself on systematic and historical forces that have shaped our country, and maintaining a commitment to serving our students and communities, we can become the radically and ethically informed educators we need to be. Sealy-Ruiz urges educators to “accept that the liberation of your students is inextricably linked to your own. If they are not free, then neither are you.” I like how this statement calls back to Baldwin’s essay—in an American education system that fails to meet the needs of its BIPOC students, all are at a disadvantage, all are at a loss of identity, and all are without a foundation of historical truth. Without these standards, entire communities are kept profoundly unliberated.
Alfie Kohn’s “The Case Against Grades” offers alternative approaches to grading that foster collaboration between educators and their students. Rather than cultivating an academic environment where students parrot information in exchange for good grades, he suggests that an actually successful approach to education would involve students receiving thorough written and verbal assessments from their educators, with themselves having a hand in assessing their own work. Kohn states that number and letter grading doesn’t offer meaningful learning experiences for students, and diminishes their innate curiosity and desire to build knowledge. He further states that “grades don’t prepare children for the ‘real world’—unless one has in mind a world where interest in learning and quality of thinking are unimportant.” This speaks to both Baldwin and Sealy-Ruiz’s observation that the American education system upholds systematic biases and fallacies that discourage students from challenging their own societal structure and status. Unless there are educators entering the field with a commitment to radically change the structures in place, students will continue to be disadvantaged with an education lacking quality and true pursuit of knowledge.
Hello, Nick, I agree with you that America’s sense of its own identity is what’s upsetting the country. America is not a country that has a homogeneous race. America is made up of all types of people with different cultural beliefs and understandings. I feel we need a revolution that causes America to think about everyone inside its borders. As educators, we have a unique opportunity to teach the students who come through our classrooms a history of America that will upset them but could also ignite that spirit of change to make their lives better than our ancestors’. We cannot change history; we can only change our future. It is our duty to embrace the good, bad, and the ugly of the history of America. Once we do that, we’ll be able to teach our students how they can change the world. As a black man who grew up in Bed Stuy in a time when it was stricken with poverty, I know that having educators who are willing to discuss tough subjects and enlighten me with different ideals has made me into the man I am today. I think James Baldwin would appreciate how we as educators are today as we continue to fight to break down the barriers that tried to limit our Student Success. Great post.
In Baldwin’s A Talk to Teachers, Baldwin assumes that schools and teachers have a huge responsibility to help students think for themselves, not just follow rules. He also assumes that children, especially Black children, notice unfairness and racism in society early, and that ignoring it will harm them. I agree that students need to understand the truth about history and society, not just the “myths” we are told. Baldwin’s point that teachers should help children see their own value and think critically makes a lot of sense.
Sealey-Ruiz explains that who we are as teachers, whether it’s our identities, experiences, and even our biases affects how we teach and how our students perform. As a 5th grade dual language teacher, this connects to what I see every day in my classroom. My beliefs about language and culture shape the way I plan lessons and support my students. Because I teach in both English and Spanish, I am very aware of how important it is for students to feel proud of their bilingualism. When I intentionally value their home language and culture, they participate more and feel more confident. I strongly agree that students’ backgrounds, languages, and cultures are strengths. In a dual language classroom, I see every day how powerful it is when students can use both English and Spanish to express themselves. Their bilingualism is not something to “fix”, it’s something to celebrate. When I respect and include both languages and cultures, students feel seen, confident, and more comfortable participating.
Kohn’s “The Case Against Grades” was especially relatable. He assumes that grades influence how students think, learn, and make choices. He assumes that students are motivated more by grades than by learning itself, and that focusing on grades can actually harm curiosity and deep understanding. I agree that grades can make students focus on “getting it right” instead of truly learning. I’ve seen that when students worry about their scores, they often pick the easiest option rather than challenging themselves. I’ve also noticed that when I give detailed feedback without immediately attaching a grade, students are more likely to revise and engage with the comments. However, I don’t think grades can be completely eliminated since my school requires them and families expect them. Instead, I want to use grading that focuses on growth, lets students revise their work, and gives helpful feedback.
Nice response Giselle!
I agree with you when you say supporting student’s home culture and how important it is. I recall being told to ‘speak only English’ during my elementary school years because I was in ESL and needed practice. Overtime this can be very harmful as students become less confident in themselves if we as teachers do not validate them. I also agree with how grades may not be eliminated as it’s been integrated into the system for a long time and parents/schools need some way to measure how kids are doing. I think being able to revise your work and giving students a second chance is a great idea as it allows them to fix their mistakes and improve.
2/19 Response
In, “The Case Against Grades,” I find this section interesting.
“Grades tend to diminish students’ interest in whatever they’re learning
Grades create a preference for the easiest possible task.
Grades tend to reduce the quality of students’ thinking.”
I’m very glad it is recognized that grades have been inherently flawed. These sentences are very telling as it diminishes what students want to go after. Instead of questioning and wanting to learn more, students are left wondering what will be on a test or if it’s counted towards their grade. As a student previously, I refused to do extra work unless it WAS extra credit or counted towards my grade. It felt like a no-brainer. Learning should not be that way as it should pique our curiosity and make us want to seek out more to learn. I’ve also been the student where I chose something I was very familiar with rather than something outside of my comfort zone just so I would have an easier time succeeding. I don’t think this is the mindset to have “what’s easier for me.” In addition, the grades feel like it is linked to their status as to how intelligent they are when it really isn’t. Students who already have bad grades will have less motivation to work hard as it’s incredibly difficult to overcome many bad grades giving them less of a chance to learn more. Learning should be fun when it can be. It should not be tied down to one letter grade as there’s so much more to it.
Reading Response – Week 2/19
One assumption both authors seem to share is that education is never neutral and that teachers have a responsibility to question society, not just repeat what it teaches. James Baldwin argues that the real goal of education is to help a person think for themselves and question the world around them, even if society does not like that kind of independence. Ylanda Sealey-Ruiz builds on this idea by saying teachers must examine their own beliefs and biases because those beliefs affect how they treat students and what they expect from them. I agree with both of them because it makes sense that students notice more than adults think, and if teachers are not aware of their own assumptions, they might unintentionally limit students.
One part I would argue with slightly is how strongly society can seem designed to hold certain groups back. While I understand that point and the historical reasons behind it, I do think there are educators and systems trying to improve things, even if change is slow. Teachers, especially, can be part of changing that reality because they influence how students think, question, and see the world, and that can shape them into future leaders who push for something better. What really stood out to me is the idea that teaching takes courage and honesty, especially when talking about real issues that affect students’ lives. To me, education is not just about helping students understand themselves and the society they live in, but also about giving them the confidence and awareness to improve it and make the changes needed to make life better for others as well.
Week 3 Response
I have previously read only part of James Baldwin’s A Talk to Teachers in one of my classes last semester, and I enjoyed reading the whole thing and found it to be very inspiring. Baldwin’s speech itself is still extremely relevant and applicable today, and I really appreciated in the second article, An Archaeology of Self for Our Times: Another Talk to Teachers, the authors references to Baldwin and what those references might look like in recent years. Yolanda Sealey-Ruiz mentioned so many practices that as a teacher I will act upon. Sealey-Ruiz writes that as teachers, “we must be as unapologetic, raw, and honest as we can be about who we are, while creating space for our students to express their authenticity and vulnerability in ways that have never been allowed before and that support their freedom to learn and become academically successful”. I wholeheartedly agree with this statement and can say that throughout the entirety of my education, when I had a teacher who wasn’t afraid to be themselves, that made me much more comfortable to also be myself. Students spend so much of their early lives with their teachers and we are some of their biggest role models so it is obvious why it is important for us to teach them to express themselves.
In the third reading, The Case Against Grades, Alfie Kohn makes a lot of good points, and while I never thought of myself as someone who was against current grading policies (I honestly never really thought about this), I found myself agreeing with all three points he made about students who are led to focus on grades. He states that grades tend to diminish students’ interest in whatever they’re learning, grades create a preference for the easiest possible task, and grades tend to reduce the quality of students’ thinking. I completely agree with all of this and can say I have experienced all of these thoughts/feelings. As a student, especially in high school and undergrad, I definitely would sometimes do the bare minimum of work in order to get good enough grades. I understand the need to measure students’ success in some way, but I really do think that students could potentially benefit from having more creative freedom and less of strict guideline to follow in order to get them a good grade.
I really liked your post, especially how you connected Baldwin and Sealey-Ruiz to your own experiences as a student. That quote you picked stood out to me too — I totally agree that when a teacher isn’t afraid to be themselves, it makes students feel way more comfortable being themselves too. And that kind of trust is what actually makes learning happen. Also, I related a lot to what you said about grades. Kohn honestly made me realize how often school becomes about chasing a number instead of actually understanding the work. I agree that kids would probably take more risks and think deeper if they weren’t always stressed about getting the “right” answer for a grade.
I totally agree with your reflection, and I love how personal you made it. I can relate to what you said about teachers being unapologetically themselves when a teacher shows their authenticity, it really does make the classroom feel safer and more encouraging. I’ve noticed that students pick up on that and feel more confident to express themselves too, just like you experienced. I also agree with your points about Kohn. I’ve felt the same way as a student sometimes it’s easy to just do the minimum to get a good grade, and it definitely can take away from actually enjoying or thinking deeply about what you’re learning.
2/19 Week 3 Response:
Baldwin and Sealey-Ruiz both made me think about how school is never neutral. They assume that teachers can’t just “teach the lesson” and ignore everything else—because our students’ lives, identities, and experiences are always part of what happens in the classroom. I agree with that a lot. Sealey-Ruiz especially pushed the idea that teachers need to look at their own story and background, so we don’t accidentally cause harm or make assumptions about kids.
Kohn’s piece on grades also really stuck with me because I agree that grades can be more about control than actual learning. I aspire to create a classroom where kids feel safe to try, mess up, and grow—without feeling judged or embarrassed. At the same time, I’d argue that getting rid of grades alone won’t fix everything, because the bigger issue is still about power, bias, and whose voices are valued in school.
This week’s reading ignited in me why I wanted to be a teacher in New York City. Reading the article about James Baldwin’s A Talk to Teachers speech made me realize that hey, we as educators have a lot to do to help the youth and to make sure that they are becoming Nation builders in a country that saw them as nothing but cattle. As a black male educator, I understand firsthand what the education system can make you believe if you are not strong enough to fight through all the chaos that is thrown at you. I understand that we have to teach our students to stand up to Injustice and to make sure that they know their self-worth. Our young black boys experience a lot, especially if they are living in poverty. But I think with educators who are willing to look at their own biases and put themselves in the shoes of their pupils, they will be able to teach them and learn from them. In the article, it states, “I would teach him that if he intends to get to be a man, he must at once decide that his is stronger than this conspiracy and that he must never make his peace with it. And that one of his weapons for refusing to make his peace with it and for destroying it depends on what he decides he is worth.” Baldwin (1963). That statement gives me strength because I know that they were teachers who taught me and gave me the weapons to destroy the way things are in this country. They taught me how to be a man in this country, but also how to recognize that things are put in my way to make it hard for me. That allowed me to be the man I am today, and I will do the same for every single child that comes across my path. I look forward to becoming an educator who will do their best so that every child can become strong enough to overcome the obstacles that are put in their path to make them less than what they truly want to be.
Week 4
Something that stood out to me in Hybrid Pedagogy is, “Open digital pedagogy moves the expertise away from the front of the classroom, with what Pete Rorabaugh and Jesse Stommel call “its roomful of desks in factory-like face-front rows,” and distributes it among the students and instructors.” This makes me think that learning isn’t linear. It doesn’t occur simply between the teacher and student, but learning is a collaboration between everyone in the classroom. I agree that an open digital learning space where students and teachers coexist and learn together can help students become active learners. This makes me reflect on some resources that students and teachers can use to facilitate learning like Padlet and Google Classroom. Padlet is a great resource where students can answer questions and comment on other students’ answers. Similarly to Padlet, Google Classroom is another platform that allows students to converse and ask questions where the responses aren’t always from the teacher.
After reading The Metaverse is Already Here, and K-12 Schools Are Using It for Education, an assumption that the author has is that every child has access to technology. While I agree that the metaverse can definitely be a more hands-on approach to learning that makes it more engaging for students, I have to argue that students may not have access to the technology needed to access the metaverse. Also, I argue that the metaverse may take away from the social emotional learning that students need to work on with their peers. I think that the metaverse is something to dive into, but still, there are many concerns that I have with incorporating the metaverse into a student’s education.
The article, “A Talk To Teachers” goes into depth about the racial injustices that occurred and currently occur in society. It also embraces the responsibility teachers have towards their students’ understanding of their true identities. It is stated, “Now if I were a teacher in this school, or any Negro school, and I was dealing with Negro children, who were in my care only a few hours of every day and would then return to their homes and to the streets, children who have an apprehension of their future which with every hour grows grimmer and darker, I would try to teach them—I would try to make them know—that those streets, those houses, those dangers, those agonies by which they are surrounded, are criminal.” I agree with the message behind this quote and aspire to teach history as is, with honest and validate room for discomfort when teaching it. When discouraging occurs, I will learn to open and promote questioning. Realistically, schools and teachers tend to avoid “controversial or discomforting” topics. But in order for students’ to understand their identity, in Baldwin’s point of view, it is necessary that students learn the truth regardless of the discomfort. As teachers we should be validating our students’ experiences because at the end of the day we play a role in their identity development, and they can find confusion between what they are taught versus what they go through/ lived. Reality is, we teach students that we live in a country that breathes on freedom, but yet there are some students that experience discrimination, stereotypes, and lack of support/opportunities.
There was a very important part of the article, “An Archaeology of Self for Our Times: Another Talk to Teachers”, that as teachers we should be exploring our own beliefs, biases and ideas that will shape how we see race, language and culture when acting in our classrooms. Not only teachers are exploring themselves, but students are seeing themselves in the classroom. It is stated, “The use of culturally responsive literature which reflects the experiences of BIPOC students affirms their experiences and provides opportunities for them to locate themselves in the curriculum and discover ways to navigate their life journeys” (24). This quote inspired me to integrate culturally responsive literature into my classroom in the curriculum. This will allow students to feel themselves in a fostering environment and be able to feel part of the learning process. This integration works for all students through a windows and mirrors framework. Throughout the mirror part of this framework, students are able to see themselves in the mentor texts, they are able to connect and relate to the storyline or characters. That same mentor text, would allow students to see and experience the text through a “window”, where students will have the opportunity to view the life and experiences of others. It would allow them to learn about different cultures and experience and build on empathy.
When reading chapter ten in the book, “A Case Against Grades” I started to understand what it was conveying, but I don’t fully agree with it. Yes I agree that in part the traditional grading style harms a students’ learning and confidence, but grades and levels are still needed in my opinion. Grades represent the grade level expectation of the students and give families a clear understanding of their child’s performance. The reality is that grades in schools prepare those same students for the real-world experiences, such as college, scholarships and opportunities of work. In part, grades can affect students’ confidence and create anxiety, but it can also motivate students and push them to show their full potential and effort. This article argues that grading negatively affects students’ motivation, but in fact as teachers we should be supporting those grades with meaningful feedback and space for growth, hold students’ accountable and build clear communication with families.
Baldwin, J. (1963). A talk to teachers. The Saturday Review.
Sealey-Ruiz, Y. (2022). An archaeology of self for our times: Another talk to teachers. English Journal, 111(5), 21–26. https://doi.org/10.58680/ej202231819
Collectively, these three articles argue that education and the education system should not be a profession dictated by grades. I agree with this statement, and I found the different arguments presented by the three authors to be equally convincing. James Baldwin speaks to the dehumanization of the black man, and asks teachers to question whether they are educating future society changers or enablers. If how they educate only validates the status quo, then did they teach in a transformative way? Alfie Kohn reintroduces the well-argued question of whether we should have numerical or letter grades in school. The quick answer is no. Studies have shown that getting rid of classic grades not only encourages students to focus on learning, but it also creates better relationships between teachers and students. Teachers become more intimate with students’ work, as well as their struggles, rather than being concerned if it is simply right or wrong. Despite the benefits, this has not been widely implemented throughout the country. It brings up the question of whether our goal as a country is to educate our students or categorize them. Finally, in a recent article by Yolanda Sealey Ruiz, she discusses the importance of having current events in the classroom. With the landscape of today’s world, with a second trump presidency, ice rampaging through the streets, and still living during a pandemic, we are doing students a disservice by not relating history to reality. I don’t have any major disagreements with these texts; if anything, I imagine my practice of education to fully embody these ideals. As a black woman, I am not allowed to be ignorant of the world around me, so creating a classroom built on an ignorance I can’t indulge in is out of the question. I think I was more personally influenced by not grading students. In my current profession, I grade a lot of papers, and it’s quickly become mindless busy work. I don’t feel like I’m learning about my students’ struggles, but rather how they rank in class. There is a mindfulness that is not included in the process, that would be revitalized if I wasn’t concerned soley on grades. I’ve been imagining a classroom that is built on these ideas, and I’ve realized I would’ve thrived in that environment. I was a student concerned with grades, but unfortunately, lazy; I usually fought for 80s and 85s. I wonder who I’d be today if my only concern were learning.
After reading A Talk to Teachers by James Baldwin, I realized that as a social studies teacher, I have to teach the truth of American history to my students. They have to know the truth and act as social studies thinkers when studying American history. They have to know what the Black American history of how they were captured as slaves until how Black Americans fought for freedom today. Even though the truth can be painful, but it is how the society forms and changes and it is up to the students are out in the world, it is up to them to change the society if they see unfairness.
As I was reading An Archaeology of self for Our Times: Another talk to teachers by Yolanda Sealey-Ruiz, I thought about the pain that might bring to the BIPOC students.”In We Want to Do More Than Survive: Abolitionist Teaching and the Pursuit of Educational Freedom, Bettina Love refers to the current education system as an “educational survival complex,” which is built on the suffering of BIPOC students and their families. To dismantle these systems and to achieve educational freedom, all stakeholders, but particularly teachers, must embrace an abolitionist stance.“Abolitionist teaching is not a teaching approach: It is a way of life, a way of seeing the world, and a way of taking action against injustice. It seeks to resist, agitate, and tear down the educational survival complex” (89)(Sealey-Ruiz).” I agree with this method because I think the reason of teaching students history is for their resistance against injustice to society. This is how they should act when they become adults.
This week’s readings felt especially meaningful to me because I read A Talk to Teachers last semester in another class. I remember how much it impacted me the first time I read it. Baldwin’s message that education is not neutral and that students should be taught to examine the society they live in really stayed with me. Reading it again reminded me why it felt so powerful. It pushed me to think about the real purpose of teaching, especially in subjects like social studies.
Sometimes social studies can feel like it is just about memorizing dates, names, and events. Students are often expected to remember facts for a test and then move on. But history should be more than that. It should be something students can reflect back on and connect to their present lives. The idea that, “We learn history so we can learn from past mistakes,” is so important, but I do not always think it is accurately reflected in teaching styles. If we only focus on memorization, students are not actually learning from history , they are just storing information temporarily. That is why Baldwin’s idea of teachers being courageous and willing to “go for broke” stands out to me so much. To me, that means turning social studies into meaningful conversations instead of simple lectures. It means encouraging students to ask why events happened, who was impacted, and whose voices may have been left out. When students analyze multiple perspectives and think critically, they are more likely to truly understand history rather than just memorize it.
Sealey Ruiz’s concept of Archaeology of Self also connects to this idea. If we want students to reflect and think deeply, we as teachers have to reflect on ourselves too. The way we present history, the examples we choose, and the discussions we allow all shape how students interpret the past. I aspire to be intentional about that. I want to make sure that my classroom is not just about repeating facts, but about helping students understand the significance behind those facts. Overall, what I want to take from these readings is the reminder that teaching history comes with responsibility. I hope to create lessons that students can look back on years later and remember not just what happened, but why it mattered. Social studies should prepare students to think critically about the world around them. If we truly believe that we learn history to avoid repeating past mistakes, then our teaching needs to reflect that.
week 3
In A Talk to Teachers, James Baldwin suggests that the American school system pick and choose what is taught to the children. He argues that schools often present a censored version of history, especially regarding racism, in order to preserve the nations self-image. This harms students because it prevents them from confronting reality honestly. I agree with Baldwin’s belief that education should develop critical thinking rather than obedience. His idea suggests that the students must learn to question the world around them, even if it crates tension of discomfort. That idea feels important because education not only shapes knowledge, but also self-worth and belonging. If students are not taught to see themselves accurately reflected in history they might create distorted or damaging narratives.
At the same time, Baldwin’s essay raises questions about the limits placed on teachers. He places significant responsibility on the educators to challenge these dominant narratives and help the students think independently. While this may seem inspiring, is also seems demanding given the institutional constraints and political pressure within schools. Baldwin believes that teachers can help students develop awareness, dignity, and a clearer sense of reality. That aspiration feels meaningful because it frames teaching as both intellectual and moral work. Even if the teachers cannot transform the entire system, Baldwin suggests they can influence how students understand temselves and their place in society.
Education as Liberation: Reflecting on Baldwin and Sealey-Ruiz
Education is not neutral. That was the biggest idea that stayed with me after reading James Baldwin’s A Talk to Teachers and Yolanda Sealey-Ruiz’s Another Talk to Teachers. Both authors challenge educators to think deeper about not just how we teach, but why we teach. Baldwin makes it clear that school should not simply prepare students to fit into society, but to question it. He writes that “the purpose of education…is to create in a person the ability to look at the world for himself, to make his own decisions” (Baldwin). That line stood out to me because it shifts the role of a teacher from someone who delivers information to someone who develops independent thinkers.
Baldwin assumes that education either reinforces oppression or works toward liberation. There is no neutral ground. He explains that eventually a Black child realizes that “the country which he is told is his country…does not mean it” (Baldwin). That realization creates tension and confusion if teachers fail to acknowledge historical and social realities. Baldwin challenges teachers to confront the myths embedded in American history rather than shield students from uncomfortable truths. If educators avoid these realities, we risk preparing students to accept injustice rather than question it.
I strongly agree with Baldwin’s belief that students need to become independent thinkers and problem solvers. In my classroom, especially when teaching math, I see the difference between students memorizing procedures and students actually explaining their reasoning. When students articulate their thinking, they take ownership of their learning. They begin to see themselves as capable. Baldwin’s reminder that teachers must see students as fully human resonates deeply with me. When students are reduced to grades, test scores, or labels, they begin to internalize those limits.
Sealey-Ruiz builds on Baldwin’s message but shifts the focus inward toward educators. She argues that before we can create inclusive classrooms, we must examine ourselves. Her framework emphasizes critical love and historical literacy as foundations for equity. Critical love, rooted in both care and accountability (Sealey-Ruiz), reflects how I strive to teach. Loving students critically means believing they are capable of excellence and refusing to lower standards while still affirming who they are.
Sealey-Ruiz also emphasizes that educators must understand “the historical forces that shape our identities and the communities we serve” (Sealey-Ruiz). Ignoring history does not create neutrality; it creates gaps in awareness. Recently, many public schools have reduced social studies time in favor of extended test preparation in reading and math. That concerns me. When students do not have opportunities to develop historical awareness, they lose the tools necessary to understand the systems that influence their communities.
At the same time, I recognize the tension in modern schools. The heavy emphasis on standardized testing creates pressure. When success is defined mainly by test scores, it limits space for dialogue and exploration. Baldwin argues that education must help students look at the world for themselves (Baldwin), but test-driven systems often prioritize measurable outcomes over meaningful understanding.
These readings challenge me to be more intentional in my own classroom. I want to continue cultivating critical love by balancing accountability with genuine care. I want to integrate historical awareness into my lessons and help students see themselves as capable leaders who can shape their communities. Education should not only prepare students to pass exams. It should prepare them to think independently, question systems, and contribute meaningfully to society.
What assumptions does the author of the text hold?
The assumptions the author of the text holds is “Collecting information doesn’t require tests, and
sharing that information doesn’t require grades. In fact, students would be a lot better off
without either of these relics from a less enlightened age” I believe by saying this the author
believes that we do not need to be grading the classic way through exams and tests to grasp if a
student has gained the knowledge of the topic. The authors also explain many downfalls of
grading papers and the effect it has on the students. For example, it says “ Grades tend to
diminish students’ interest in whatever they’re learning” This means that students focus more on
the number of grades they are getting rather than the process of learning and acquiring new
information. Students once they receive a grade might believe they do not need the knowledge
anymore because they have acquired the purpose of just getting a grade. Overall, I believe the
assumptions the author hold is that students should not be graded or evaluated but rather there
should be a way in which they are based on just the learning experience.
Kohn, A. (2013).
“The Case against grades.” Counterpoints
Week 4:
Summary of the Hybrid Pedagogy article
This article explains how using digital tools apps change the dynamic of a classroom in a positive way. Usually it is always the teacher talking and the students are listening. But the apps and websites have more student base learning such as online projects and so it helps students create their own website which is very cool. This gives students more control creating their website and helps their learning and helps them feel more involved in the classwork. The article says learning shouldn’t just be about the teacher giving the information but for students to self- teach them to build knowledge(Rosen & Smale, 2015).
The article “The metaverse is already here, and K–12 schools are using it for education” by Rudra, S talks about how school are starting to use more visual learning called the metaverse. Students can use avatar to explore things such as science lab and for science learning more about the human body. Some schools are already using these platforms for lesson and also classwork assignment. The metaverse can make learning more exciting for students to really participate and learn the online system. But there are also concerns about more screen time meaning everything is online meaning students are always using laptops. It should help support the learning system in the classroom, not take over the learning in the classroom.
The key question is how can technology help or hurt our teaching? Technology can help by making lessons more engaging for students in new ways to express learning. It helps students work together and helps make learning more creative by creating your own website and everything is organized on the laptop for students. But on the other hand it could hurt students because not all students have access to laptops or technology and if they use laptops from school it is usually slow and takes up all the class time. As a future teacher I think technology should be used carefully and be part of the learning and not take over the class.
I agree that technology can help students feel more involved and increase participation in the classroom. Students could be more creative and create their own projects and share their ideas with other students. This helps them to work together digitally. I also agree that tools like virtual models can be more fun and interesting for students to work with. Maybe it is easier to understand and a visual hand on experiment for learners.
I would argue that even if technology is better for learning , it is not a permanent solution for the classroom because not all students have access to a computer. I also think it will distract students because they will not really learn that much.
Reading Response – Week 2/26
One idea I agree with from the readings is that learning works best when students are active participants, not just passive listeners. The article about open digital pedagogy explains that using open online tools lets students work together, share ideas, and even help shape their learning spaces, instead of just following instructions from a teacher. I like this because it treats students as capable thinkers who can contribute something meaningful, not just people waiting to be taught. The metaverse article connects to this idea by showing how virtual environments can give students more choice in how they learn, like exploring different parts of a virtual body instead of all studying the same thing in the same order. To me, both readings suggest that when students feel involved and curious, they are more motivated and take more ownership of their learning.
Something I keep thinking about after these readings is how powerful technology can be when people actually experience it for themselves. During the pandemic, my kids got bored, so we made a homemade VR headset out of cardboard and an old cellphone just to watch 360-degree videos on YouTube. They were fighting over it, especially my son, so we eventually bought a Meta Quest 3. At first it was exciting for everyone, but after a while it got put away and forgotten. About a year ago we took it back out, and now my son uses it every day and keeps discovering new things he can do with it. Even my husband uses it more now, and when guests visit we sometimes let them try it for the first time. That experience really made me see why immersive tools can be so engaging for learners, especially since virtual environments can let students explore and interact with content instead of just reading about it. At the same time, I also understand why teachers might feel overwhelmed thinking about how to actually use these tools in a classroom or guide students in virtual spaces. Still, having seen it myself, I feel excited about the possibilities and hopeful about what learning could look like in the future if technology is used thoughtfully and with purpose.
Reading Response 2/26
After reading this week’s articles, I found myself reflecting on the balance between innovation and tradition in teaching practices. I agree with Rosen and Smale’s idea that hybrid teaching, in which you combine both face-to-face and online elements, can provide a newly dynamic and flexible approach to learning. As an educator myself, I see the value in using technology as an aid to support diverse learning needs, allowing for more personalized and accessible experiences for students. I feel that using tools like online platforms and digital resources can help to enrich the classroom, making learning more engaging and allowing students to connect with material in ways that resonate with their individual interests and strengths.
At the same time, however, I recognize the potential harms that Rudra discusses of the metaverse and its integration into education. While I can see how virtual and immersive technologies could offer unique educational opportunities, I am concerned about the risks of over-reliance on these technologies. There is a danger that students may become disconnected from real-world experiences, or that the digital divide could further widen educational inequalities. As educators, it is crucial that we closely assess the technology we incorporate in our classrooms, ensuring that it does not replace, but it supports the vital face-to-face interactions and developmental experiences our children need.
Weekly Response 2/26
This week’s two readings focused on the introduction and use of AI technology in the classroom. In the first reading titled, “Open Digital Pedagogy= Critical Pedagogy”, I agreed with the author’s claims that learning should come from everywhere not just a teacher providing information in a lecture style to students. I think just as students can learn from teachers, teachers can learn from students. Students can also learn from their peers who bring different perspectives and experiences to a topic. I like the idea of using open digital platforms in classroom as I think it can help foster a sense of community among students. It also enables everyone to participate whereas in a traditional setting a teacher may only be able to hear from a couple of students. Furthermore, as the article states the use of open systems also gives students an opportunity to gain experience in website design. This is also useful for students given the rise of tech careers.
The second article titled, “The Metaverse is Already Here, and K-12 Schools Are Using It for Education,” brought up some points that I agree and disagree with. Firstly, the article mentions the use of the metaverse to teach students about concepts that may usually just come from a textbook or basic illustrations like the human body. I think the use of the metaverse to put students into the human body will allow them to better visualize and understand something that they otherwise could only see in pictures. Something similar could also be done for chemistry concepts that can only be seen through illustrated diagrams. I think being able to visualize and immerse oneself in a topic only enhances learning. Furthermore, the idea of using the Metaverse to allow students to go inside the human body to learn about it reminded me of the children’s tv show “The Magic School Bus” where students would travel on a school bus and be physically immersed in a specific science topic. Despite being a fictional show the students were engaged in the learning and the topics were able to be better explained. I think something similar would take place with students if the Metaverse were used in that sense. The part of the article, that I disagree with is the use of VR headsets in schools. Firstly, as mentioned in the article they are costly so not every school could afford them. Secondly, while technology is important in our modern society, I do not think we should rely so heavily on it all the time. Since most kids spend their free time using technology, I think it is important for schools to sometimes be technology free and encourage discussion and interaction with peers rather than a reliance on VR headsets that separate a person from the world around them.
week 4 response:
In the “Hybrid Pedagogy” the author assumes that traditional higher education is more often operated within a hierarchical “banking” model. Which would be the instructors “desopitting” the knowledge and students receiving it. I agree that learning is not linear and can happen through multiple avenues. This article sets high value on Freirean ideals of co-investigation and positions open digital platforms as a way to even out power structures and allow students involvement as co creators of their knowledge. The Metaverse article assumes that immersive and virtual environments are not only going to be inevitable one day but also can have potential to transform learning. Both articles have a strong underlying belief that technology, when used properly and with intention can increase not only engagement but also student agency. I can agree that with proper use it can certainly empower students, the idea that students should help build the platforms and spaces where learning happens.
However in my opinion there could be some push back to the implicit optimism on both readings. While open systems and metaverse platforms have the ability to even out hierarchies, they can also create inequalities related to accessibility, digital literacy, and privacy. The metaverse article as an example notes privacy concerns and limits of VR headsets, but still focuses expansion as mainly positive. What I found most interesting and leaned towards in both texts would be the collaboration, problem posing education and student voice aspects. The idea that students can help create work that real people will see can be really empowering for students. Ways that I was inspired and would want to act on would be creating a learning environment/ experience that students want to build, ask questions and actively contribute to. I also want to really be able to look at the tools and resources provided and make sure it allows access and equity to all. I would not want to make it another layer added to inequality within the classroom due to levels of knowledge or accessibility- so that requires thought and planning behind the incorporation of any resource or tool.
As I was reading the first article, “Open Digital Pedagogy = Critical Pedagogy”, I was relating and agreed with the meaning behind this information. Digital tools available in the education platform should be empowering students, not just having students exposed and use free accessible technology. This is an integration that has already made its way into many of our classrooms, free access to technology that has “enhanced” the way we teach. The author explains that this concept of open digital pedagogy is not just materials/assignments online, but encourage them to question and discuss leading to the development in knowledge, this will give students a voice. It made me think about this weekly responses, it gives us the opportunity to share our ideas/opinion and collaborate with others. It is stated, “”Supporting and encouraging critical digital pedagogy necessitates professional development that bolsters the innovative efforts instructors make to move away from the banking model”. The author also mentions the “banking model”, where teachers just deliver information, expecting students to listen, memorize and be able to repeat it, but with critical digital pedagogy students are encouraged to collaborate in discussions. In order to integrate this concept into the classroom, the quote suggests that teachers should be training and have support through this learning.
It was very interesting to learn about the concept, “metaverse”. There was a part of this audio, that really stood out to me, a “Finally, make learning engaging and embrace the ‘wow’ moments in everything you do. Create new ways of learning that will captivate the student and motivate the teacher. That’s how you change the system.” Although, in my personal experience it is very difficult to integrate that into classroom experiences. At my school I haven’t felt comfortable to include in into my student’s learning, mostly for the fear of time management, my school is very on top of staying on schedule.
This week’s readings explore the possibilities of virtual learning in the American education system. In “Open Digital Pedagogy = Critical Pedagogy”, Jody Rosen and Maura Smale make a case for publicly available virtual pedagogy that involves collaboration between educators, students, faculty and alumni. Rather than continuing to engage in a hierarchical chain of information delivered from teacher to student, they propose that a more balanced approach to learning would be if all involved in the education process had access to an open system of sharing knowledge. They state that “virtual environments can replicate [separation], or they can invite permeability of their spaces through openness and visibility.” Similarly, in “The Metaverse Is Already Here, and K–12 Schools Are Using It for Education”, Suchi Rudra predicts that the metaverse will play a large part in the American education system in years to come. She states that “educators and education-minded companies are already carving out a space in the metaverse and calling it the ‘eduverse.’ Educators are using resources from Labster (which provides a platform for virtual labs and science simulations) and the VR platforms ENGAGE and Mozilla Hubs (which support virtual collaboration by simulating being in the same space). Teachers can also create virtual tours for students on Driftspace.”
I agree somewhat with the perspectives these articles represent. To a degree, educators need to understand and anticipate evolving digital relevancies in curriculum. K-12 students are growing up alongside rapidly developing technology and it’s to their benefit to understand how it applies to their lives. Digital learning also has the opportunity to enhance lessons and make curriculum more accessible to students with learning disabilities. However, the proposal of creating entire virtual realities to teach lessons seems needlessly complicated and socially isolating, especially if extended to elementary grades. Before education is offered within the metaverse, children, teenagers, and, frankly, their adult teachers need to be media literate as well as sensitive to the harm digital media is capable of causing.
This weeks’ reading was about how digital tools can be used in classrooms. The article “Open Digital Pedagogy = Critical Pedagogy” explained that digital tools can give students more power in learning and help break the traditional teacher-led classroom. Students can share and work together using online tools, which helps them to learn in a more interactive way.
The article ” The Metaverse Is Already Here, and K-12 Schools Are Using It for Education” talked about what the metaverse is and how some schools are using it to teach students. Schools use the “virtual world” to represent the real world, for example using Labster to show students virtual labs.
Both articles agree that digital tools can help student learn and it’s already becoming part of schools. However, there’s still things that educators need to consider, such the harm of using digital devices. Unlike students from the past, students spent more time using digital devices at school and at home now. This raise the question of whether too much screen time could affect their physical and mental health, eye strain or difficulty focusing. Another concern is social media, students already exposed to ideas, images, or conversations that are not suitable for their age.
Thus when using technology for learning it’s important for teachers and parents to guide students so they understand what information is safe and appropriate. But there are challenges, are teachers fully trained to use digital tools effectively? Do parents know how to support their child? And do the parents have time to monitor and support their child through digital tools?
Your post raises a very good argument about how educators and parents need to think about the amount of time students and their children spend using digital devices at school and at home. Too much screen time can affect children’s physical and mental health and cause difficulty focusing in and out of class. But I do feel that if it is regulated and monitored, we as educators will be able to use digital devices to facilitate classrooms in a more Interactive way. There are many educational games that can be played where the children are able to interact with each other and learn many things from them. I do feel like you need to be monitored, but I also think that using technology to support parents, children, and teachers will effectively create children who are ready for the digital age of the future. Good post.
This week’s reading about digital pedagogy and the metaverse has given me a greater understanding of why technology is so useful in and out of the classroom. As an elementary school teacher, I know the importance of using technology to assist educators and to help me better facilitate a learning environment that will help my students learn in ways that they can relate to. The students of today are growing up with a digital footprint that we never had, and that is very good. Being able to use the technology to enhance my teaching skills is a good thing. It allows us to create different environments for students to grow and learn. In the article Open Digital Pedagogy Equals Critical Pedagogy it states, “when instructors bring technology to the classroom, it can come from industry expertise that they can share with students, who can themselves experiment with the newly acquired tools” (Rosen 2015). This shows that technology can help students increase their risk-taking skills by allowing them to use technology in a way that will help them and help the teacher. It is not easy for me, as a person who did not grow up with technology in the classroom, to utilize it as a teacher, but I agree with the author that utilizing technology will better help students and teachers, and it will allow a more advanced environment so students can learn in multiple ways.
In the article The Metaverse is already here I feel that this is the future for so many teachers and students will be able to utilize the metaverse to help facilitate learning in a way that we never saw before. It will help with homeschooling, as some students are not able to come into the classroom for multiple reasons. The Metaverse can help students stay with the flow of the class so that they can continue learning at a pace that will not leave them behind. In the article, it states, “the metaverse allows Educators to not only create a more immersive style of learning, but also model teaching best practices” (Rudra 2022). This shows that when you create a style of learning that will help students, they will be able to learn in ways that will unlock their potential, as well as incorporate the pedagogical practices that we have learned as teachers. I understand that this may not happen overnight, but as we continue to incorporate technology in our teaching practices, I feel that we will be able to do what needs to be done and help as many students as we can as they cross our path.
I really liked how honest you were about technology not feeling natural for us sometimes. That’s so real. We didn’t grow up with it the way our students have, so it makes sense that it can feel overwhelming. I agree that when we use technology the right way, it can actually help kids take risks and learn in ways that feel familiar and exciting to them.
Week 4 Response: Something I learned in this week’s readings, specifically in Rosen & Smale’s Hybrid Pedagogy piece, is that technology isn’t neutral — it actually shifts power in the classroom and changes who feels heard. I really agree with that. Even something as simple as online discussion versus speaking out loud can make a big difference. In Rudra’s article about the metaverse in K-12 schools, there’s this assumption that it’s already part of students’ lives, whether schools are ready or not — and I agree. Our kids are already living digitally, so pretending otherwise doesn’t make sense.
What I want to aspire to is being more intentional. I don’t want to use technology just because it’s cool or trendy. I want to ask: Is this actually helping my students, especially my multilingual learners? If I’m going to bring digital tools in, I want them to feel human, supportive, and actually meaningful — not just fun and flashy.
The idea that technology shifts power in the classroom really stood out to me too. It made me think about how some students feel more confident sharing online, while others prefer speaking in person. The tool we choose really does matter. I also agree that our students are already part of digital spaces. Ignoring that reality doesn’t help them. Instead, we should guide them in using technology in thoughtful and meaningful ways.
Week 4 Response
After reading these articles, I realized that technology can make learning more fun and collaborative, but it needs to be used carefully and fairly for all students. In Hybrid Pedagogy, the authors assume that technology should do more than just support lessons, it should change the way teachers and students learn together. They want students to be participants in learning, not just listeners. From my classroom experience, I agree with this idea. When I give my students choices and let them use their own digital skills, they become more engaged and confident, and are more willing to participate. At the same time, teachers still need to provide structure and make sure all students have equal access to technology. Technology should be used intentionally to support learning, not just because it’s new or flashy.
In “The Metaverse Is Already Here, and K–12 Schools Are Using It for Education,” Suchi Rudra assumes that immersive technology like VR is naturally beneficial and that students will easily adjust to it. While I agree that VR can make learning exciting and interactive, I don’t fully agree that it should be used in every classroom. VR can be distracting, expensive, and difficult for some students to access. As the article states, “Our model is not for everyone,” Romero says. “But it does work for those students who need a more personalized instructional experience.” I think VR should only be used occasionally and with clear learning goals, rather than being seen as a must-have tool for teaching.
Week 4 Response
In the “Open Digital Pedagogy= Digital Pedagogy” article, I like the OpenLab’s homepage where the facilitator prompted an online discussion about general education.The online discussion make it very convenient for teachers to share their thoughts and experiences with other teachers, especially when teachers are tired after a day of teaching. Also the website make it visible to anyone which makes anyone that goes onto this webpage, an understanding of what and why teachers are putting specific readings on the syllabus. Teachers and students can also work as critical co-investigators using the Open digital tools. Since technology is going used as an important part of our daily life, I think letting the teachers and students learn the usage of technology in education is a great way to start. But I see that students are not writing in their notebooks as much anymore.
In the “Metaverse is Already Here, and K-12 schools Are Using It For Education” article, I do agree that the kids are welling to learn from avatars of their own body rather then reading off a textbook, learning the body parts sequentially. I see that Kids are now getting addicted to electronic devices for gaming instead of playing toys. This might create another problem for kids if the Metaverse Platform. The kids’ eyesight might be affected with unlimited screen time. I think there should be a limited screen time for certain lessons. Even though electronic devices are required, it should be only part of the whole lesson.
I don’t think simply using open digital platforms or metaverse tools does not automatically make a classroom critical, democratic or inclusive. Just because students can post, comment, or build something online does not mean power has truly shifted. Teachers are still the ones controlling grading, expectations, and which voices are centered. If the structure of the class stays teacher-led in the same traditional way, then the technology is just a new layer placed on top of the same system. Critical pedagogy requires a real change in mindset and practice, not just new tools. I do think digital tools can be helpful. We are living in a very digital world, and it makes sense that education would reflect that reality. Technology can create access to information, allow collaboration beyond the classroom, and make learning feel more interactive. Because of that, it may come across as very beneficial, and in many ways, it is. However, there are certain things that just cannot be replaced. Face-to-face discussion, reading body language, spontaneous classroom conversations, and the sense of community built in a physical space are experiences that technology cannot fully recreate. I also think we need to be cautious about assuming immersive spaces like the metaverse automatically deepen learning. Engagement is important, but being impressed by visuals or avatars is not the same as thinking critically. Education should still focus on dialogue, questioning, and reflection. In addition, not every school has equal access to strong devices, internet, or funding. This does not promote equality that we would like to ensure our students. If only some students can fully participate in these digital environments, then the gap between students may grow. Overall, I would argue that technology can support learning and even strengthen critical pedagogy when used intentionally. But it should not be seen as a replacement for human connection, thoughtful teaching, and meaningful discussion.
Hi Zahra!
I do agree with you on how metaverse, hybrid pedagogy and technology cannot just replace human interactions and face-to-face discussions. I believe that humans were created in order to live in communities and I don’t think that metaverse could replace or provide these kinds of human needs. Students needs more than just visual prompts in order to achieve academic goals.
I believe the main assumption being made by the text is that the education system cannot ignore technological advancements. As someone who recently began working in a classroom, I was initially shocked by the use of modern technology, especially games like Minecraft Education. Minecraft education almost seems like an oxymoron, but it’s introdution as an educational program has created a bridge between students and teachers. It reminds me of my time in elementary school, around the rise of pc gaming, all my educational tasks in computer class were in-game. I remember it distinctly feeling different from the work I was doing in the regular classroom, as someone who grew up to love games, it was almost an escape. I’ve seen that same excitement be reflected in the students in my school. The article just reinforces the importance of having a student-centered education as opposed to an education focused on grades and test scores.
Week 4
I like the idea from “Open Digital Pedagogy=Critical Pedagogy” that learning should be something the students actively take part in, not just something controlled by the instructor. For example, the students who created #TheGuide for incoming students were not just doing an assignment for a grade, they were making something useful for their college community. That makes school feel more meaningful because their work had a readl audience. I also liked the example where a student joined a faculty discussion on the OpenLab and gave advice to professors about sharing their excitement for course readings. Moments like that show how open platforms can break the usual hierarchy and let the students’ voice matter.
I also agree with “The Metaverse Is Already Here, and K–12 Schools Are Using It for Education” that virtual spaces could make learning more engaging when used the right way. The example of the students exploring the human body by sending their avatars to different organs shows how learning could feel like an experience instead of memorizing information from a textbook. I also thought the Dallas Hybrid Prep example was interesting, where the 5th graders used avatars to complete assignments disguised as games and earn online currency. At the same time, I agree with the article that the metaverse should be a supplement to real-life learning, not a replacement, because the students still need in-person interaction and balance.
I really like the idea of open digital pedagogy because it breaks away from the usual setup where the instructor talks and the students just listen. Instead of following the traditional “banking model” that Paulo Freire critiques, this approach allows students and teachers to learn alongside each other. Platforms like the City Tech OpenLab show how students can actually help build and shape their learning spaces, instead of just using them. I also agree with Kris Shaffer that open tools give students the chance not only to access information, but to question it and create their own ideas. Overall, I think this kind of learning makes students feel more involved and responsible for their education, rather than just completing assignments because they have to.
Week 4 response:
After reading the articles and learning more about the metaverse, hybrid pedagogy and the technology behind it, I found myself impressed by its potential impact on education. It seems to be reshaping not only how students learn but also how teachers approach their practice. While I do not consider myself particularly tech-savvy, I can relate to the transformative power of technology. When I first started using the internet around 2015, it changed my life in many ways. Even though I felt I had started late, it opened new doors for learning and growth. In a similar way, I believe the metaverse and technology have the potential to expand educational opportunities for today’s students.
One example that stood out to me was the idea of students using avatars to explore the human body in a virtual environment. Imagine a student choosing to focus on the heart while another explores the brain, each navigating and interacting with these systems in an immersive way. The simple act of choosing where to go and what to explore can empower students and give them a sense of ownership over their learning. It shifts them from passive receivers of information to active participants.
I also find the idea of using digital data to personalize learning very promising. When used thoughtfully, it can help teachers better understand their students’ needs and adjust instruction accordingly. In addition, collecting student feedback through digital platforms may reduce the pressure often associated with traditional assessments. Gamified elements—such as earning points or virtual currency—can make learning more engaging and provide students with creative ways to demonstrate their understanding.
At the same time, I cannot ignore the potential challenges. One major concern is equity. Not all students have access to the same resources, and the introduction of advanced technologies could widen existing gaps. In the United States, for example, schools serve communities with very different economic backgrounds, and funding is not distributed equally. If some schools can fully implement metaverse technologies while others cannot, the inequality in educational experiences may grow.
As an educator, I see the metaverse and hybrid pedagogy as valuable tools—but not a replacement for traditional teaching. I would use it selectively and for short periods of time to enhance certain lessons. The human connection between teachers and students, along with meaningful discussion and engagement, remains essential. Technology can support learning, but it cannot replace the relationships and dialogue that lie at the heart of education.
Culturally Relevant Pedagogy is a way of teaching that helps students be successful in school while respecting who they are and where they come from. Gloria Ladson-Billing(1995) says that this type of teaching has three main points and that is helping students do well academically, the second point is helping them keep their cultural identity and the third one is helping them think critically about the unfair systems in the society. The author argues that this is not something unnecessary but is a good teaching point.
The second reading builds on the idea. It explains that culture shapes how students see the world and how they learn. When students feel heard or understood they mostly want to participate in the discussion and try their best(Zarretta Hammond, 2015). Also, teachers should use student’s cultural knowledge as a bridge to connect what they already know and what they still need to touch on the topic and the teacher could create the lesson based on that. This shows that teaching is not only about providing information to students but also about building on their knowledge. This could help students feel safe to learn and participate.
Assumption:
Both authors assume that traditional schools don’t work for students that well. Ladson Billings (1995) suggests that schools often ignore student culture instead of using it to their advantage. The second article assumes that culture affects learning so teachers must understand. When responding to student identities instead of expecting everyone to learn the same way. Some students learn differently or maybe not all.
I agree that students learn better when they feel respected and valued. Ladson-Billings(1995) makes it clear that culturally relevant teaching now lowers the expectation of teaching but it pushes students to be more successful while staying true to their identity. I also agree with Hammond (2015) that strong relationships and emotional safety help students understand and help them focus on the information and learn more.
As a future teacher I want to really know my student’s background ,and connect that to the lesson and to the real world. I want to create a classroom where students feel comfortable and share their thoughts.
Work Cited
Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). But that’s just good teaching! The case for culturally relevant pedagogy. Theory Into Practice, 34(3), 159–165.
Hammond, Z. (2015). Culturally responsive teaching and the brain.
Week 5 Response
When I went through this week’s readings, the first thing that stood out to me was how much technology has become part of our classrooms, but not always in ways that actually change how students learn. The article on open digital pedagogy pushed me to think about this differently. Instead of treating digital tools like just another place to upload materials, the author argues that technology should help students take more ownership of their thinking. That part stayed with me because it shifts the focus from the tool to the purpose behind using it.
Another thing that caught my attention was the discussion of the traditional teacher-centered model. The reading explains why simply giving students information is no longer enough. Critical digital pedagogy encourages students to talk, question, and build ideas together, which is very different from the style many of us grew up with. I kept thinking about how, in our course discussions, we get to engage with each other’s ideas instead of just posting something and moving on. It is a small example, but it shows how digital spaces can create real interaction.
The reading also made me think about what teachers need in order to make this shift. The author talks about professional development, and I agree. You cannot expect teachers to change their approach to teaching with no support. Using digital tools in a meaningful way takes time, planning, and guidance. Without that, technology becomes something we use out of routine rather than out of intention.
After reflecting on the article, I listened to the section about the metaverse. The concept was interesting because it introduced a completely different type of learning environment. At the same time, I thought about the limits teachers face in real classrooms. Schedules are tight, pacing calendars are strict, and there is not always room to experiment, even with tools that might be beneficial. It is not that teachers do not want to try new things. Sometimes the structure of the school day does not allow it.
Overall, both pieces pushed me to think about the difference between using technology and using it purposefully. Students benefit when digital spaces invite them to think, contribute, and explore ideas. And for teachers to make that happen, we need support, time, and flexibility, not just access to devices.
The text about education states “ that one of the most important things that schools can do when designing a metaverse platform is to involve teachers, parents and students, but also understand that “innovation takes time, and we make mistakes and evolve together in this process. There is a learning curve when implementing new initiatives, especially if you are the first one to try it out. Finally, make learning engaging and embrace the ‘wow’ moments in everything you do. Create new ways of learning that will captivate the student and motivate the teacher. That’s how you change the system.” I believe this means that there will be high levels of engagement since students will be more hands on and will be introduced to more technology that can further higher order thinking. This is also good because it will prepare students for high technology driven learning which is very important for them at this age because it lets them get introduced to technology that will be ahead of them. I think the overall goal is not to replace education with meatverse but compliment it or use it as an enhancement for learning.
Both texts assume that traditional schooling is not properly serving all students, because the majority of the time it ignores the cultural identities and lived experiences that students bring into the classroom. The culturally responsive teaching article puts importance on culture shaping how students see themselves and the world. Which is something I wholly agree with. When students feel validated and heard their engagement and achievements improve. This is not something that can happen when who they are as a person is essentially ignored unintentionally or intentionally. Hand in hand Ladson Billing argues that culturally relevant pedagogy requires three important outcomes: academic success, cultural competence, and critical consciousness. I agree with the notion that culturally responsive teaching is not about lowering the bar or increasing self esteem rather it is about holding high expectations while making students feel connected to their learning through their experiences and identities.
I would say that both pieces are strong and powerful examples of what culturally relevant teaching should be / is. However I would say to implement to the level discussed at some parts requires a lot of support from the people around you. As a teacher in the classroom you can meet the marks of building relationships with families and putting student voices at the forefront, based on how much time and effort you put into it. Then we have the aspect of sociopolitical awareness, which I feel like requires those around you co workers, admin, etc to all be on the same page and enforcing the same standard. These factors require time, reflection and institutional alignment. As a teacher you can do so much in the classroom to reflect culturally responsive teaching. However once that student/ family is no longer in your class then what happens. If there is a problem greater than the walls of your classroom involving people who are not all on the same page, conflict can arise. Personally speaking within the 4 walls of my classroom I aspire to create an environment where students work together, think critically and logically about the world we live in and see their culture as a positive rather than a negative. I want all my students to feel valued and that they contribute to our space regardless of their background or culture. Both pieces allowed me to think deeper about what “good teaching” truly is and how to drive instruction that is not only academically rigorous but also affirming to who they are.
I appreciate how you clearly identify the shared assumption in both readings that traditional schooling often fails to fully recognize students’ cultural identities and lived experiences. Your point about validation directly impacting engagement and achievement strongly aligns with Gloria Ladson-Billings’s framework of academic success, cultural competence, and critical consciousness, and I also value how you push back against the misconception that culturally responsive teaching lowers standards. Emphasizing high expectations while fostering meaningful connections reflects both Ladson-Billings’ argument and the work of the National Equity Project.
Week #5 (3/05/2026)
One idea that stood out to me from the readings is that good teaching is not about a special strategy or formula, but about truly understanding students and connecting learning to who they are. The article explains that culturally relevant teaching is not just about making students feel good, but about helping them succeed academically, stay connected to their culture, and develop the ability to question society. I really agree with that because it shows that real teaching is deeper than lessons and tests. It is about relationships, expectations, and respect. The other reading also emphasizes that culture shapes how students see themselves and the world, and when students feel seen and understood, they are more likely to engage and succeed. That idea connects to my own life because I am Hispanic and so is my husband, who is also a teacher. We often talk about how different it feels when working with students and parents who share our language or cultural background, or with families who intentionally teach their children their traditions and values. It really shows how powerful culture is in shaping attitudes toward learning and respect.
What I really appreciate about these readings is how they shift the focus from “fixing students” to improving teaching. One example that stayed with me was the story about a teacher who used students’ interest in rap music to teach poetry concepts like rhyme and figurative language, which helped students go beyond expected learning standards. It reminded me of something my husband recently shared during Black History Month, when his school invited performers to present traditional African music and dances. At first, some of the students did not seem very impressed or appreciative. But as the performance continued, you could see a shift. They started clapping, engaging, and eventually even joining the performers in some of the traditional dances. That moment showed how powerful it can be when culture is brought into the school space in an authentic way. Students may not always show interest right away, but when they feel the energy and connection, something changes. Experiences like that remind me that culturally responsive teaching is not just about content, but about creating moments where students feel seen, connected, and proud of cultural traditions, whether their own or someone else’s.
2/26 (Week 4): AI & Technology
This week’s readings by Jesse Stommel & Sean Michael Morris in Hybrid Pedagogy and Suchi Rudra challenged me to think more critically about technology in education. The authors of Hybrid Pedagogy assume that education is never neutral and that digital tools are not automatically innovative or transformative. They argue that pedagogy must come before technology and that educators must question issues of power, access, and participation in digital spaces. Rudra’s article assumes that the metaverse is already embedded in students’ realities and that K–12 schools should adapt to immersive technologies to remain relevant and engaging. I agree strongly that pedagogy should drive technology rather than the reverse, because tools alone do not create meaningful learning; intentional design does.
At the same time, I want to question the optimism surrounding the metaverse in K–12 education. While immersive environments can increase engagement and create powerful simulations, I worry about equity gaps, cost, excessive screen time, and the possibility that virtual experiences could replace rather than deepen human relationships. What I aspire to act upon from these readings is the commitment to use technology thoughtfully and critically. As a future educator, I want to design learning experiences that center student voice, community, and critical thinking, making sure digital tools enhance learning rather than distract from its purpose.
week 5 (03/05/2026)
This week’s readings from Gloria Ladson-Billings and the National Equity Project explain why culturally relevant and responsive teaching is essential for student success. Ladson-Billings argues that culturally relevant pedagogy is not a special strategy but simply good teaching. She assumes that many traditional classrooms center dominant cultural norms and unintentionally marginalize students of color. To address this, she outlines three key components: academic success, cultural competence, and critical consciousness. Students should achieve academically, maintain pride in their cultural identities, and develop the ability to question and analyze social inequalities. The National Equity Project builds on this idea by emphasizing that inequities are embedded in school systems, policies, and practices. They highlight the importance of educator self-reflection, strong relationships with students and families, and curriculum that reflects diverse histories and perspectives.
I agree that recognizing students’ cultural backgrounds strengthens learning rather than distracting from it. When lessons connect to students’ lived experiences, participation and understanding often increase. I also agree with the emphasis on critical consciousness, because education should help students think critically about the world around them, not just memorize information. However, I think implementing culturally responsive teaching requires consistent professional development, collaboration, and administrative support. Teachers need time to redesign curriculum, build community partnerships, and reflect on their own biases. Without systemic backing, these practices can become surface-level rather than meaningful. Moving forward, I want to apply these ideas by designing lessons that include multiple perspectives, using students’ cultural knowledge as examples in instruction, and creating space for discussions about social issues in age-appropriate ways. I also want to continue reflecting on my own assumptions to ensure that my teaching promotes equity in practice, not just in theory.
Week 5:
In the text, “But That’s Just Good Teaching! The Case for Culturally Relevant Pedagogy” I agree with the belief that culturally relevant teachers utilize students’ culture as a vehicle for learning. For teachers, it’s our job to learn about the culture of the students in our classroom and use this as a tool to drive learning. Teachers can incorporate their home language into lessons and involved parental support as well. In doing so, teachers build a community as students learn about the culture of the other students in the classroom. Real learning is done when students take charge of their learning and become active learners in the classroom. I agree that students should act like the teachers in the classroom and there should be more student voices than the teacher. Something that I want to act on is creating a space that feels safe for all students from marginalized cultures. I want to create a space where students feel comfortable being themselves and others are open to learning about their culture and respect differences.
In the text, “Culturally Responsive Teaching” I learned about the importance of bridging between home and school life. I aspire to bring parents into the classroom as they are all experts in their field and incorporating lessons based on what we can learn from parents. Something for me to think about is how culturally responsive teachers go out of their way to attend community meetings, student games, and even home visits. I struggle with not having enough time to become more culturally responsive outside the classroom.
Week 5
The article “Culturally Responsive Teaching” goes into depth about what culturally responsive teaching is and its impact in education. As a teacher, following this passion for 6 years, I completely agree with author, when it is emphasized that theory of “one-size-fits-all” in classrooms does not work for every student. It is important for teachers to foster students’ identities, experiences and traditions/cultures, as assets in the classroom. An approach I will be integrating into my lessons are as mentioned, is try to connect what the student already knows to new content. This is not just picking a diverse book from the library and reading it to students, it is getting know your students’ interests and experiences into the lesson. It is was help to see how culturally responsive teaching was broken into several core components.
In addition to my agreement with the support on the positive impact culturally responsive teaching has, the article, “But that’s just good teaching! The case for Culturally relevant pedagogy”, where it states how many educators today call “good teaching”, is basically culturally relevant pedagogy. This is again a teaching approach that not only recognizes, but celebrate by integrating students’ cultural background, experiences and identities into their learning. It is unfortunate that we have groups of students that in the past have been “unjustifiably” invisible by traditional learning styles. I also agree that with culturally relevant pedagogy, engagement in students’ increase and many students feel seen, heard and valued.
An idea that stood out to me from Ladson-Billings is the idea that culturally relevant teaching is good teaching. She assumes that students learn best when they can show their identities, culture, and life experiences as part of the classroom. I agree with this because when students see themselves in what they are learning, they are usually more engaged and willing to participate. Students love to talk about their own lives. As educators, this is a great learning moment for them because the information will always stick with them. The national Equity Project also talks about how their own beliefs and experiences affect the classroom. As a teacher, I want to be able to bring out their talents when learning.
Something I want to act on from these readings is being more intentional about who my students are when planning my lessons. During my student teaching, I was able to notice how much more interactive my students were when the lessons were more personal. One lesson that they really loved was an identity map. They were able to draw whatever they saw as special to them, which was so beneficial when talking about their social and emotional well-being. It made the classroom feel more collaborative instead of me just talking the whole time. These readings reminded me that culturally responsive teaching is not just a strategy but a mindset about respecting students and making them feel comfortable and loved in my classroom.
Week 5
One assumption that Gloria Ladson-Billings holds in her text is that culture is an important part of student learning, and effective teaching must connect to students’ experiences and cultural knowledge. Ladson Billings argues that culture shapes how students communicate, interpret information, solve problems, and engage with knowledge. This means students are always bringing in their funds of knowledge to class. What teachers have to do is to recognize and build upon what students already know, and utilize what students bring into class to facilitate deeper academic learning for the students.
I agree with Ladson Billings that students learn best when their culture is seen and their voices are accepted in the classroom. Even though I am not working in an elementary school yet, I have seen my little 3-year-olds bringing in their funds of knowledge and sharing them during read-aloud and center times. I have valued what they have brought in and built on what they already know about the topic. They seem very interested and engaged during reading and learning.
Week 5
One thing I really agreed with in the reading is the idea that students learn best when they feel connected and seen, not just when they’re given information. That really resonated with me because I feel like learning isn’t just about content — it’s about relationships and relevance. I also aspire to act on that by being more intentional about creating spaces where students feel safe to question, explore, and even mess up. The reading reminded me that good teaching isn’t about having all the answers — it’s about building trust and helping students think for themselves.
Both readings assume that culturally responsive teaching is important to equitable education. The author believes that culture is not separate from learning but deeply shapes students’ identities, engagement, and sense of belonging. Ladson-Billings, in particular, emphasizesthat teaching cannot be taught neutrally from a value. She argues that good teaching should recognize culture as a ‘powerful force’ in shaping students’ identities, leading students to become more engaged and achieve success. As educators, we should recognize and educate ourselves about cultural knowledge to connect with students when introducing new concepts and to provide relevant content that supports their understanding and processing of information. I experienced this during one of my fieldwork placements when the instructor asked students to draw their ethnic flags. This activity created a learning opportunity and opened space for discussion about students’ identities and backgrounds.
Culturally relevant teaching is framed as a way to make sure that all students can achieve high academic success while still maintaining their cultural identities and developing awareness of the social and political world around them. This framework aligns with the classroom environment I aspire to create because I believe that learning is far more valuable when students feel respected and when high academic expectations are set equally for every student.
In But That’s Just Good Teaching! The Case for Culturally Relevant Pedagogy, Gloria Ladson-Billings explains that culturally relevant teaching is simply good teaching. By “good teaching,” she means teaching that challenges students academically, connects to their culture and experiences, and helps them think critically about the world. This really connects to my experience teaching in a dual language classroom. I see every day how bilingualism strengthens students’ thinking and confidence when it is valued. If their home language were ignored or discouraged, it would send the message that part of who they are does not belong in school. I see how important it is for students to feel proud of their language and background. I agree with Ladson-Billings that good teaching means expecting a lot from students while also respecting and valuing who they are. For me, this means making lessons that are both challenging and meaningful, using students’ languages and experiences to help them learn, and helping them feel confident and capable in school.
The National Equity Project points out culturally responsive teaching as a way to build fairness and true belonging in schools. What caught my attention is that teachers need to be purposeful in addressing unfairness, particularly in how we value language and culture in our classrooms. In a dual language classroom, language can either give students confidence and a sense of belonging or make them feel excluded, depending on how it is valued. When both languages are given equal importance, students feel that their full identities are welcomed, not just part of them. I have seen that when students feel safe, respected, and proud of their bilingualism, they participate more, share their ideas with confidence, and take academic risks without fear of judgment. This reminds me that equity is not just about using certain instructional strategies, but about building a classroom community where students feel seen, heard, and valued every day. For me, this means staying aware of my own choices, forming meaningful relationships with my students, and making sure my classroom is a place where everyone can grow and feel valued.
In the article, But That’s Just Good Teaching! The Case for Culturally Relevant Pedagogy by Gloria Ladson-Billings, she discussed a scenario in a classroom that I really appreciated and agree with. Billings says “culturally relevant teachers utilize students’ culture as a vehicle for learning”, and then goes on to explain a scenario where a teacher, Patricia Hilliard, teaches her second grade students using their appreciation for rap music. She mentions that rap music is often stigmatized and considered “evil”, but her and her students found and analyzed non-offensive rap songs. I thought this was genius, because she was still able to teach literacy and reading comprehension skills to her students through something they actually cared about, and not through a “traditional” text with a main character that they probably don’t relate to. This kind of teaching is definitely something I aspire to bring into my classroom.
In this same article, Billings discusses another teacher, Gertrude Winston, who brought culture into the classroom by involving the students’ parents. Winston would have “residencies” where parents would come in for an hour or two each day, anywhere from two to four days and would share knowledge with the students about something they specialize in. One parent came in and helped the class make sweet potato pies, others were carpenters, former professional basketball players, nurse practitioners, and church musicians. I really loved this idea, it reminded me of when I was younger and my dad being a former FDNY member came to class for a fire safety demonstration. However what Winston did seemed even more involved and therefore maybe more effective. This made me wonder though, how well could this be carried out today. Many of the teachers I have observed have expressed to me how they have struggled to have enough parents sign up to be field trip chaperones, or how some parents can’t come to parent teacher night even though it is mostly virtual now, due to their busy work schedules. Would parents today be able to dedicate multiple hours over the course of a few days to come to their kids class? Additionally, the article states that Winston (for the sweet potato pie making classes) purchased the materials and ingredients herself, and I wonder today if teachers would be able to afford lessons like this, because the school probably wouldn’t be able to help with funding.
I really liked the examples you pointed out from the article. Using rap music to teach literacy is a great example of culturally relevant teaching because it connects learning to something students actually enjoy and relate to. That kind of connection can make lessons more engaging and meaningful for students.
I also thought the example about bringing parents into the classroom was powerful. As you mentioned, with your dad coming in for a fire safety demonstration, those experiences can really stay with students. You also raise a good point about how difficult it might be today with parents’ busy schedules and limited resources. Even so, teachers can still find other ways to involve families, like virtual visits or sharing videos about their careers, so students can still learn from their communities.
Week 5
In the article, “Culturally Responsive Teaching,” it talks about how teaching styles may not fit all students. As a student diagnosed with ADHD, many teachings worked/did not work for me. Being culturally responsive is such an important topic as it allows us to highlight the importance of celebrating our differences instead of being punished for it. Affirming and validating our students based on their backgrounds gives students the confidence to be proud of themselves which fosters positivity. Cognition and processing is using their culture and using it as something they can build off of which in turn helps them retain information.
One way my daycare is being culturally responsive is by asking parents questions about their culture and home life. Recently, I learned about henna, which is a tattoo-like skin decoration. This practice is from the Middle East (also other areas of the world) which is where some of my students are from. I searched online to learn that it carries significance during happy times such as weddings and festivals. I saw my student come in with henna and complimented her as it looked beautiful. She apparently did one herself which is interesting as I didn’t know students could use it as an art tool. I also related that to our colors topic since the henna was brown, it helped remind her how the henna is brown on her hands.
In the text of “But That’s Just Good Teaching! The Case for Culturally Relevant Pedagogy”,anthropologists have looked for ways to add student’s culture into the student’s lesson hoping that they will do better academically in school. ” For almost 15 years, anthropologists have looked at ways to develop a closer fit between students’ home culture and the school. This work has had a variety of labels including “culturally appropriate” (Au & Jordan, 1981), “culturally congruent” (Mohatt & Erickson, 1981), “culturally responsive” (Cazden & Leggett, 1981; Erickson & Mohatt, 1982), and “culturally compatible” (Jordan, 1985; Vogt, Jordan, & Tharp, 1987). It has attempted to locate the problem of discontinuity between what students experience at home and what they experience at school in the speech and language interactions of teachers and students. These sociolinguists have suggested that if students’ home language is
incorporated into the classroom, students are more likely to experience academic success”(ladsons-billings). I think it is a very interesting idea. But since the classroom contains students from multiple cultures, it would be exhausting for the teacher to prepare the lesson plans to include every student. The reason is the teacher has to take more time to research and learn the cultures before deciding the lesson plan. Also, the teacher have to make sure that the information included is culturally appropriate and culturally responsive.
After reading the Culturally Responsive Teaching by National Equity Project, I changed my mind about fostering cultural responsive teaching in my pedagogy. “Encourage students to care for one another and be responsible for each other inside and outside of the classroom (National Equity Project,2025).”Cultural responsive teaching will create a classroom community as it encourage students to care for one another which I think it is really important as they grown into a mature adult. It also help students think critically and engage in discussions with the class about each other’s cultural identity. Another point I wanted to add is not only the teacher should affirm the students as who they are but the whole class should respect each other even if they are different from each other. “Current, real-world examples help students connect to the curriculum, allow for deeper engagement and help students make connections with their individual, community, national, and global identities. The classroom can be a space for students to develop and explore their ‘socio-political consciousness’ (Gloria-Ladson-Billings, 1994). I think the most important purpose as it is stated in the article, is to be honest,caring and human as a teacher as it will be mirrored on to my students.
As an early childhood educator, the ideas in the reading, “But That’s Just Good Teaching! The Case for Culturally Relevant Pedagogy” really resonated with me. I love the idea that culturally relevant pedagogy isn’t something extra, it’s simply just good teaching. The article highlights how important it is to truly know our students, value where they come from, and deeply believe in their ability to succeed. What stood out to me most was the focus on building a strong classroom community and helping students stay connected to their culture while also growing academically. That feels especially important in early childhood, when children are just beginning to form their sense of identity.
The piece from the National Equity project on culturally responsive teaching also felt very practical and relatable. I agree with the emphasis on building real relationships with families and creating a classroom in which every child feels seen and valued. In my own classroom, I’d love to be more intentional about incorporating children’s home languages, family traditions, and everyday experiences into our lessons and play. I also want to keep holding high expectations for all of my students while also making sure that they feel supported and understood. For me, this work is really about creating a warm, welcoming space where every child knows they belong.
One assumption that stood out to me in the readings is the idea that good teaching is not separate from students’ cultural identities and experiences. Gloria Ladson-Billings argues that culturally relevant teaching should not be viewed as something extra teachers do, but rather as part of strong instruction. She explains that culturally relevant pedagogy supports students by helping them develop academically while also maintaining their cultural identities. As Ladson-Billings (1995) states, culturally relevant teaching focuses on “academic success, cultural competence, and critical consciousness.” This made me reflect on how teaching is not only about helping students master standards, but also about creating a classroom where students feel that their backgrounds and voices are valued.
One idea I agree with from the readings is that responsive teaching requires teachers to intentionally build relationships and understand their students beyond academics. The National Equity Project explains that responsive teaching involves recognizing students’ identities and using that understanding to guide instruction. They state that culturally responsive teaching helps educators “create learning environments where students feel seen, valued, and capable of success” (National Equity Project, 2025). In my own classroom, I have noticed that when students feel comfortable and respected, they are more willing to participate, share their thinking, and take risks with challenging problems. This reminds me that strong teaching is not just about delivering content, but about creating a learning environment where students feel safe to grow.
Something I aspire to act upon from these readings is being more intentional about connecting instruction to students’ lived experiences. As teachers, it is easy to become focused on pacing guides, curriculum, and preparing students for assessments. However, these readings reminded me that meaningful learning happens when students see themselves reflected in the classroom. Responsive teaching encourages educators to listen to students’ ideas and build instruction around their experiences. This aligns with the idea that teaching should empower students to think critically and connect their learning to the world around them.
Overall, these readings reinforced for me that good teaching goes beyond instructional strategies. It involves understanding students, valuing their identities, and creating opportunities for them to engage in learning in meaningful ways. As I continue to grow as an educator, I want to strengthen my ability to create a classroom environment where students feel respected, supported, and motivated to succeed.
References
Ladson-Billings, G. (1995). But that’s just good teaching! The case for culturally relevant pedagogy. Theory Into Practice, 34(3), 159–165.
National Equity Project. (2025). Culturally responsive teaching.
Week 5 response:
In this week’s two readings, I learned about new aspects of teaching I would like to aspire to. Just like I mentioned in my teaching philosophy as I learn more my philosophy changes and these articles have given me new things I would like to incorporate into my teaching. In the article, “Culturally Responsive Teaching” one of the strategies for creating a culturally responsive classroom was to know your students academically, socially, and emotionally. I think this is very important for teachers as we must know where kids are coming from both culturally and emotionally to better be able to meet them where they are at and teach them in ways that will best suit them. I love the idea of parents coming in to read culturally relevant books to students as students will get to interact with someone from their community while learning about a culture that may be familiar or new to them. Students do not only exist in a classroom setting and sometimes it can be hard to get to know each student in a large class but I think it is something to aspire to in my teaching in order to have a culturally responsive classroom and create a classroom environment. Furthermore, I believe culturally responsive students will become adults who are better equipped to deal with different types of people, collaborate, and become critical thinkers.
In the second article, But That’s Just Good Teaching! The Case for Culturally Relevant Pedagogy”, Billings writes, “Culturally relevant teachers utilize students’ culture as vehicle for learning”. This quote really stood out to me and I loved the example of teacher, Patricia Hilliard, sharing her love of poetry with her students and their love of rap music. Firstly, I think when teachers are teaching a topic that they have interest in, it makes the teaching more engaging for students because they can feel the love the teacher shares for the topic. Secondly, when teaching can be related to students interest and their culture it makes the teaching more relevant and engaging for students and teachers alike.
What stood out to me from the article is how culturally relevant teaching doesn’t just involve students and teachers—it can also include members of the community. When the community becomes part of the learning process, it helps students develop a broader sociopolitical awareness. This awareness allows them to question and better understand the cultural norms, values, and institutions that contribute to social inequalities. One example mentioned was Gertrude Winston, a teacher with 40 years of experience, who worked hard to bring parents into the classroom. She organized artist and craftsperson-in-residence activities where students could learn directly from their classmates’ parents and family members. These experiences helped validate and celebrate cultural knowledge that students bring from home.
Activities like these create a stronger connection between students’ home cultures and the school environment. Culturally relevant teaching is not only about improving academic achievement; it also encourages students to maintain pride in their cultural identity. I believe that experiences like these make the learning process more enjoyable and meaningful for both teachers and students. The residency programs are not only educational but also help students appreciate their backgrounds and where they come from. Overall, culturally responsive teaching focuses on students’ unique experiences and identities, helping educators build stronger learning partnerships that increase engagement and give students a greater sense of ownership over their learning.
This week’s articles about culturally responsive teaching made me think about the way that I teach in the class and how I can be able to better help my students who come from different backgrounds. As a product of Bed Stuy, I am fortunate to be able to teach in the neighborhood that I grew up in. I understand the students in a way that people who are not from my neighborhood cannot. I can be able to teach my students in a way that will be culturally responsive so that they can understand the connection we have as educators and students. It is not easy for many teachers to come to an area and teach students with whom they may not have much experience in their lives. It is still important for them to understand and reinforce a type of atmosphere where students will be able to feel welcome, love and appreciated. We as pedagogues need to understand that the experiences we lived can help students understand us more, and we understand them. In the article from Gloria Ladson Billings, it states, “For practitioners, this research reinforces the fact that the place to find out about classroom practices is the naturalistic setting of the classroom and from the lived experiences of teachers. Teachers need not shy away from conducting their own research about their practice” (Summer, 1995). This shows that teachers play an important role in creating an atmosphere where students can learn from how they live and what they know, and bring this to the classroom instead of just teaching a curriculum like a robot. Students want to connect to their teachers, and being able to have an experience that is unique will help students engage.
The article culture responsive teaching from the National Equity Project has given me ideas to inspire me to create a better culturally responsive classroom for my students. I want to make sure that all of my students understand that they have the opportunity to learn in their own way. Educating students from different backgrounds may not be easy, but if we hold our students accountable and give them access to information in many different ways, they will be able to grasp what we are trying to teach them. The article states, “Hold high academic standards and expectations for all of your students, and enthusiastically encourage all students to reach those standards and beyond. Treat all students as competent and developing-focus on fostering a growth mindset. Design lessons with your most underserved students in mind. This statement is so true because we, as educators, have to make sure that our students have a growth mindset and are willing to take chances so that they can be able to develop their young minds into something magnificent. I will continue to work towards creating a culturally responsive classroom and becoming a better pedagogue throughout my career.
Week 6: The first article, “Translanguaging to teach” by Wei and Garcia, explains that teachers can use more than one language to help students really learn. The authors show that translanguaging can make teaching more meaningful and support teacher and student learning together. It helps students understand hard ideas, connect learning to their lives and take part when it comes to discussion boards and conversation. The article also says translanguaging can support fairness and social justice because it respects student language and also their identities.
The second article, Ascenzi-Moreno(2024) explains that reading instruction is often built around monolingual student, which does fully support emergent bilingual students.The author inform that bilingual students use may resources when it comes to reading, for example language, cultures, identity, and more knowledge. Teachers should not treat bilingual students’ needs as something extra. Reading instruction should be planned around the strengths. The article mainly focuses on how this can be done with basic reading skill lessons and even small group instruction.
The Cuny NYSIEB video also supports their ideas by showing that teachers do not need to be bilingual themselves to teach different language students. What matters the most is that teachers take time to know the students, meaning learn the backgrounds, and values the knowledge and experiences that they bring to the classroom. The video shows that when the teacher really understands and cares for her students they can make the lesson more meaningful and inclusive.
Key Question: To answer the question, can we separate lived experiences from the curriculum and the answer is no because we can fully separate lived experiences from the curriculum. Students come into the classroom with their own language, cultures, identities and also all students come with their own life experiences, and this thing really is important when it comes to learning. The readings show that learning becomes stronger when teachers connect lessons to what students already know and what student experiences care. It will feel disconnected and unfair for bilingual students. Instead of separating lived experiences from the curriculum, the teachers should include them so learning feels more relatable and meaningful.
One assumption I think the authors hold is that all teachers should see bilingualism as an experience, not a problem. They assume that students learn better when their full identities and their language is used in the lesson and the resources. I think this is an important assumption because too often schools only focus on what bilingual students are missing instead of what they already know.
Week 6 – March 12,2026
The authors Li Wei and Ofelia García assume that bilingual students naturally use multiple languages together when they think, communicate, and learn. Instead of separating languages in the classroom, they argue that students benefit when they can draw on all of their linguistic resources through translanguaging. Similarly, Luciana Ascenzi-Moreno assumes that emergent bilingual students already bring important language knowledge that should be used to support reading development. I agree with the idea that students should be able to use their full linguistic abilities in school because forcing them to only use English can limit their understanding and participation. Allowing translanguaging can help students connect ideas across languages, feel more confident, and see their cultural identities respected in the classroom.
However, one part of the argument that can be questioned is how easy translanguaging is to implement in practice. While the concept is powerful, many teachers may not speak multiple languages or may not receive enough training on how to support multilingual students effectively. Without proper support, teachers may struggle to apply these ideas in their classrooms. Despite this challenge, I aspire to apply the idea of valuing students’ home languages in my own teaching by encouraging students to discuss ideas in their strongest language, collaborate with peers who share similar linguistic backgrounds, and connect academic content to their cultural experiences. Creating a classroom environment where multiple languages are welcomed can help students feel more included and engaged in their learning.
In this week’s articles and video, they emphasize that teaching effectively to multilingual or emergent bilingual students should be rooted in valuing their home languages, cultures, and identities as strengths in the classroom and using them as tools to support stronger learning and an equitable classroom environment. Author Luciana Ascenzi-Moreno argues that many classroom reading programs are designed for monolingual English speakers, ignoring the abilities of emergent Bilingual students. The authors argue that classroom instruction should acknowledge and make use of students’ diverse languages and cultural backgrounds. I agree with this idea because I believe it makes the classroom a more inclusive space that allows bilingual students to feel more embraced in their language, leading to more academic success. Learning can be more successful when different languages are incorporated to help students better understand the information. I also really appreciated the phrase the teacher used at the beginning of the video from the book, To Kill a Mockingbird, “You never really understand a person until you consider things from his point of view until you climb into his skin and walk around in it.” I felt this quote was very fitting because it reminds teachers that we must try to understand our students’ perspectives, backgrounds, and experiences in order to truly support their learning.
Additionally, Authors Li Wei and Ofelia García explain that translanguaging can be used as a teaching strategy, enabling teachers to design lessons in which students use multiple languages to understand content more deeply. I agree that translanguaging can help students connect more deeply to information when they see their languages reflected in their learning. Allowing students to express their learning through their linguistic skills can strengthen comprehension and make learning feel more relevant to their identities and experiences.
This week’s three sources emphasize how difficult it is to separate lived experiences from the taught curriculum completely. Students and teachers will always ( most likely without intention) bring their identities, cultures, and personal histories into the classroom, and I believe they should continue to do so. Research on curriculum theory often distinguishes between the planned curriculum and the “lived” or “experienced” curriculum, which is shaped by how students interpret and interact with what is taught. Even when their teachers present the same material, students experience it differently based on their backgrounds and perspectives. I agree with the text that meaningful learning often occurs when instruction connects academic content to students’ lived realities, allowing them to make deeper personal and cultural connections to the material.
Students’ experiences also shape how they understand texts, stories, and ideas in the classroom. When educators ignore students’ cultural and personal experiences, the curriculum can feel distant or irrelevant. Instead, incorporating lived experiences can make learning more engaging and equitable because students see themselves reflected in what they study. In the video, “Teaching Bilinguals (Even if You’re Not One)” Knowing Your Students, Ms. Charene uses scaffolding to connect her non-English speaking student to at home reasources and classmates that also speak their language. Rather than trying to separate lived experiences from curriculum, teachers can use them as a resource for discussion, interpretation, and critical thinking. A great example of this is Ms. Charene’s most recent written response being in English and about her hijab. As future educators, we have to understand that education is not only about delivering content but also about connecting knowledge to the real lives of learners.
In the articles Translanguaging To Teach and Toward a Multilingual Perspective on Reading, I learned the importance of not only incorporating different languages into the classroom, but introducing the foundational reading skills into the lessons. Firstly, I agree that teachers should use students’ first language to deepen their understanding of the lesson. By including the students’ language into lessons, it helps students create meaning and a better understanding of what we want them to take away. I agree that fixed instructional routines can be particularly harmful to EBs because every child is different and they need different tools to help them succeed. This really highlights the importance of teacher scaffolds. One way teachers can scaffold and help EBs is by translating parts of the reading so students can work on decoding and understand the text with some support. This is why learning about each child is essential to their growth. Teachers need to pay attention to not only spoken language, but the child’s body language as well. Being aware of the child’s body language helps teachers understand if students need a break or if they are ready to tackle the day. Our hope is for our students to become lifelong readers. In order to do this, teachers must engage students in concise and powerful foundational instruction.
In the Teaching Bilinguals video, I aspire to create a welcoming classroom environment where I understand students to a deeper level. I agree that teachers should know their students very well and build a relationship with them in order for them to feel safe and successful in the classroom. Something that I aspire to do in my classroom is to have conversations with students through their home language and provide resources in their home language so they can comprehend the reading and enjoy reading and learning.
One idea that stood out to me in the readings is the importance of recognizing students languages and cultural backgrounds in a classroom. Wei and Garcia talk about translanguaging as a way students can use all of their languages to understand and communicate ideas, instead of treating languages as if they have to stay separate or something they should out grow. I grew up speaking a 2nd language and I luckily was able to also grow up knowing English. A lot of people don’t get the chance and are isolated from it. This made sense to me because culture and identity already play a big role even in early childhood classrooms. I work as a floater in a private early childhood school, so I move between different classrooms and see how teachers approach things differently. Recently, one teacher started a committee to try to support and represent more cultures in the school. This stood out to me because the school had a full assembly for Lunar New Year, but nothing was done for Black History Month. Seeing that difference made me think about how some cultures get recognized more than others.
These readings also made me think about how schools need to be more willing to be more involved with other languages and cultures. Ascenzi-Moreno explains how emergent learners who speak another language use their language to read. Teachers should use it as a scaffolding when teaching to help these ESL students that seem to struggle. This is super helpful when making sure students are isolated. I work in an early childhood setting but being included and acknowledged as a student never changes. early childhood especially, children are already learning a lot from their families, language, and culture. Because of that, I agree that classrooms should recognize and build on those identities. When students see their language and culture valued in school, it can help them feel more comfortable and confident while learning. I know personally whenever I was in school and heard my country acknowledged I got excited. Even now as a college students I feel a connection to the lesson even more because of how familiar I am with it. Overall acknowledging cultures is super important especially as we are New Yorkers, we come from the biggest melting pot in the world and we should all respect eachother.
Week 6
In this week’s reading and articles, something that stands out to me is how we should acknowledge and celebrate everyone’s culture in the classroom. This reminded me of a class I had when we talked about how we could celebrate each culture. Our group came up with ideas that included learning/teaching about different cultures. Connecting with families so that we can ask questions to learn more about their home life and see how we are able to integrate it into our learnings/teachings.
From personal experience, schools previously would tell me not to speak Chinese and to practice only as many of my friends from elementary school did. We would be scolded and told to only speak English. Nowadays we understand the importance of speaking our home language and learning English at the same time. I have been working with 2-3 year olds who all speak different languages at home, and are learning English as their second language. To support them, I provide pictures, hand gestures, and different tones of voices to communicate my thoughts. That way I can also learn their language and help communicate with them. As we become more aware of what helps students (whether it’s personal experience or from others) we become able to adapt and support them. Especially as our classroom continues to become more diverse we need to educate ourselves so that everyone feels included.
Week 6
In the reading for Translanguaging to Teach by Garcia Ofelia and Li Wei, I found out some interesting point when bilingual students used english with a mix of spanish when he speaks of the weather outside. “The Spanish-speaking boy looks out of the window and sees that it is raining, so he says to himself:‘Está lloviendo mucho’. [It is raining a lot.] But as he looks around the table where he is snacking, he realizes that his classmates speak English, so he says: ‘Look it’s washing. There’s washing afuera’ [outside]. The bilingual girl kindly asks him, ‘¿Está lloviendo?’ [Is it raining?] And then, she
says to him, so that the other monolingual English-speaking children understand him: ‘Raining’. At which point, the boy repeats, ‘Raining’(10/19/2007, García, 2011c: 47). The boy had no word for ‘raining’, and used ‘washing’”(pg 93). The boy tries to speak to his english speaking classmates by trying to translate words into english. I know that it’s a good start but the translation of spanish and english words do not always have the same meaning. I still think that learning another language is harder than first time learning a language since the person have memories of speaking, writing and reading their primary language. There might be similarities in the way the words sound but it means different things.
There was a quote in Toward a Multilingual Perspective on Reading: Aligning Emergent Bilinguals’ Resources with Theories of Reading and Implications for Instruction by Laura Ascenzi-Moreno, that wrote about the reading process or reading instruction on multilingual students.”Knowing that providing simply the translation for civil rights in Chinese may not be enough because words are tied to experience and cultural knowledge, Jia’s teacher investigates further and learns from her colleagues that making connections to Jia’s funds of knowledge would deepen her understanding of civil rights and prepare her to fully engage with the text”(Pg 920). I agree with what the teacher did. Not only the teacher gave Jia the definition for civil rights in Chinese, she also deepened her understanding by making connections to her funds of knowledge. I feel that sometimes when teacher give the definition or when I search the definition up online, I might still not understand what the definition mean. The definition might have words that I didn’t learn yet so I really appreciate that teacher took the time to define the word by making real-life connections. Giving an example and relating it to ourselves are the best way to remember the words forever. I would use this method to teach my multilingual students in the future.
Week 6
In this week’s reading, “Toward a Multilingual Perspective on Reading: Aligning Emergent Bilinguals’ Resources with Theories of Reading and Implications for Instruction” author Laura Ascenzi-Moreno details her view that a multilingual perspective on reading would better support emergent bilinguals (EBs). She explains how traditional reading instruction is monolingual which does not help EBs become better at reading or reading comprehension. I agree with Ascenzi-Moreno’s claim that EB’s preexisting linguistic and cultural resources should be used in reading instruction for these students. Why make students start from scratch in a new language when they have a reservoir of information in their native language to call upon and use to help them learn? I loved the example of Jia a new student from China and the way her teacher connected Confucianism with Civil rights to help her understand the concept of civil rights which if only explained to her in English she may have had trouble understanding. I think connecting ideas to students own culture and lived experiences also makes the instruction more meaningful as it allows students to better connect with their learning.
At first I did not agree that it was truly practical to implement the strategies Ascenzi-Moreno described in her article as if a teacher does not speak the students’ native language they may have difficulty translanguaging for students or being able to understand work done in native languages. However, after watching the video “Teaching Bilinguals (Even if You’re Not One): Knowing Your Students” from CUNY NYSIEB I realized that my above notion was not entirely correct. In the video, the teacher, Ms. Charene Chapman-Santiago, does not speak her students native languages but is still able to support their learning. She used inferences based on students’ language practices to understand how they were progressing. Furthermore, when having a discussion she allowed students to speak in their native language to formulate their ideas before writing in English. I especially liked this practice, as it is already hard to form ideas and even harder when you first have to translate the ideas into English. I aspire to use some of the practices Ms. Chapman-Santiago used in her video especially the one detailed above.
I really agree with the idea in this week’s readings that multilingual students’ languages should not be viewed as something that needs to be fixed, but rather it should be viewed as a strength. Wei and Garcia’s concept of translanguaging shows that bilingual students naturally use all of their language knowledge together to both understand and communicate ideas. Ascenzi-Moreno also explains that bilingual students bring important linguistic and cultural knowledge into the classroom that can greatly support students’ reading development. I agree with these perspectives because it recognizes that students’ unique identities and experiences are highly valuable aspects of the learning process, rather than barriers.
In my own classroom, I would like to create more opportunities for students to use all of their language skills while learning. One way that I plan to do this is by allowing students to talk through ideas with classmates, write notes, or make connections using different languages if it helps them to better understand the material. Additionally, I want to make an effort to learn more about my students’ backgrounds and languages so that I can include more materials and activities that reflect their own personal experiences. By doing this, I hope to make my classroom a space in which students feel comfortable using their full language abilities and feel more confident participating in learning.
What I agreed with most in the reading was the idea that multilingual students bring a lot of knowledge and resources with them, and that should be seen as a strength rather than a challenge. Students who speak multiple languages are constantly drawing on different experiences, cultural knowledge, and language skills when they read. Reading is not just about decoding words or knowing vocabulary. It also involves background knowledge, language understanding, and making meaning from the text. This actually reminded me of a class I took last year where we spent a lot of time talking about this idea. Many students in the class shared experiences working with multilingual students, and hearing those examples was really eye opening for me. It made me realize how often students’ language abilities are overlooked in classrooms, even though they can actually support learning in really meaningful ways. That class helped me start thinking about multilingualism more as a resource rather than something students need to overcome.
Something I aspire to do in my future classroom is create an environment where students’ languages and identities are actually valued during learning. Instead of expecting multilingual students to separate their languages or only use English, I would want them to feel comfortable using all of their language knowledge to help them understand texts and express their ideas. I think this would help students feel more confident and engaged in reading because they would not feel like they have to leave part of their identity outside the classroom. It would also allow them to make stronger connections between what they already know and what they are learning in school. I would want to encourage students to share their languages, experiences, and perspectives during discussions and activities so that reading becomes more meaningful for everyone in the class. Creating that kind of environment could help students feel respected and included, while also helping them develop stronger comprehension and communication skills.
The readings and video show that bilingual students’ languages are helpful tools for learning. They explain that teachers should let students use both of their languages in the classroom. I agree with these ideas because I see how using both languages helps my students understand lessons better. Bilingualism is a strength because the two languages can work together to support learning. Ascenzi-Moreno explains that students can use what they know in their home language to understand English texts. Using both languages can help with reading, learning new words, and understanding what they read. Teachers should connect students’ home languages with English reading lessons so they can use all their language skills. In my classroom, I sometimes pair a student who is fluent in both languages with an ELL student. The fluent student can explain vocabulary, directions, or ideas in the home language. This helps the ELL student understand English better and feel more confident participating in class discussions, especially on English days. As a bilingual teacher, these readings remind me how important it is to let students use both of their languages to support their learning. Lastly, the video mentions that “students can show what they know by using their home language.” This resonates with me because I notice that my students understand and participate more when they can use both languages. This can sometimes be controversial in dual language classrooms because students are expected to follow the “language of the day” and only use that language. García and Wei would argue that bilingual students learn best when they are allowed to use all of their language resources through translanguaging. Similarly, Ascenzi-Moreno explains that students can use knowledge from their home language to support their understanding of English texts.
While reading Laura Ascenzi-Moreno’s article, I agree with her argument that reading instruction often comes from a monolingual perspective and does not fully support emergent bilingual students. The author explains that many literacy approaches treat bilingual students as an “add-on” instead of placing them at the center of reading instruction. I thought the example of Jia was powerful because her teacher used translanguaging by connecting the idea of civil rights to concepts Jia already understood in Chinese culture. This showed how teachers ccan use the students’ languages and cultural knowledge to help them make meaning from a text. I agree that when teachers value the students’ multilingual identities and experiences, reading becomes more accessible and meaningful for them.
I also agree with the article’s point that reading is more complex than just decoding and comprehension. The author explains that models like the Simple View of Reading are limited because bilingual students use many other resources, such as cultural knowledge, language connections, and prior experiences, when they read. The example of the student reading about pumpkin picking showed how understanding a text also depends on knowing the cultural context behind it. This made me realize that reading instruction should not rely on rigid routines or one curriculum for all students. Instead, teachers should design lessons that connect to student’s languages, identities, and experiences so that emergent bilingual students can fully engage with reading.
This week’s reading, “Translanguaging to Teach,” really made me think about how a lot of classrooms still expect bilingual students to separate their languages, even though that is not how many of them naturally think, speak, or learn. One assumption I think the authors hold is that students learn better when teachers build from the full language repertoire they already have instead of treating one language as the “right” one. García and Wei (2014) make it clear that translanguaging is not just a support for students. It is a real pedagogy that helps students understand content, express their thinking, and participate more fully in the classroom.
One thing I really agreed with in the text was the idea that translanguaging builds on students’ strengths. That stood out to me because too often emergent bilingual students are looked at from a deficit lens, like the focus is always on what they cannot do yet. This chapter pushes back on that. Instead, it shows that students can use all of their language practices to make meaning and show understanding. I really liked the math example where the teacher let students use English, Spanish, or Spanglish. That part stuck with me because it showed that the goal was real understanding, not just saying everything in one specific way. To me, that is what good teaching should be about. If a student understands the content and can explain their thinking, that should matter.
Another part I agreed with was the idea that translanguaging can make students feel less alienated in school. That really matters because when students feel like their home language is not welcome, school can start to feel like a place where they have to hide part of themselves. I appreciated that this chapter showed how translanguaging gives students more access, but also more voice. The example with Camila really stood out to me because the students were able to participate, explain their thinking, and ask questions in ways they might not have been able to if they were forced to only use English. That showed me that language can either open the door for students or shut them out.
One thing I want to argue within the text is that even though I agree with the message, this can be hard to fully carry out in real classrooms. Teachers are often working with strict curricula, pacing calendars, and testing pressure. Because of that, teaching this way may not always feel easy, even if a teacher believes in it. I also thought about the part where the authors say that the teacher gives up the authority role and becomes more of a facilitator (García & Wei, 2014). I get what they mean, but I would argue that this does not make the teacher any less important. If anything, it requires even more intentional teaching. The teacher still has to plan strong lessons, know when to step in, ask questions that push thinking, and create the conditions for students to learn deeply. So I agree with the idea overall, but I think it is more of a shift in the teacher’s role than the teacher stepping back completely.
What I aspire to from this text is the mindset of really seeing students’ language practices as strengths. I want to be more intentional about creating a classroom where students feel like all parts of who they are can show up in the learning. This reading reminded me that language should be a bridge, not a barrier. I also want to make sure my classroom is a place where students feel comfortable sharing their thinking, even if they cannot say everything perfectly in one language. Sometimes students know a lot more than what they are able to say in just English, and this chapter reminded me that part of our job as teachers is to make space for that thinking to come out.
Overall, this reading really pushed me to think more deeply about language, identity, and access in the classroom. It reminded me that strong teaching is not about forcing students into one way of speaking or learning. It is about building from the strengths they already have and using those strengths to help them grow. That is something I strongly agree with, something I want to keep thinking about, and something I definitely want to bring into my own teaching.
Reference
García, O., & Wei, L. (2014). Translanguaging to teach. In Translanguaging: Language, bilingualism and education (pp. 90–118). Palgrave Macmillan. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137385765
As I read this week’s articles I think about the time when I took over 3rd grade class where three of my students were from Yemen and Bangladesh. that was my first year teaching and I really knew nothing about teaching students who English was not there for his language. I work with the ESL teacher to draft up lessons where my students would be able to share in their home language as they are learning English. having done that allowed me to connect with chapter 6 of the book trans languaging where it states, “The translanguaging pedagogy of the teacher creates a new reality because neither English nor Spanish is seen as static or dominant, but rather operates within a dynamic network of cultural and linguistic transformations” (García and Wei 2014). I understand that it is not easy as a teacher who mainly knows English to teach students who speak different languages, but if we work to create an environment that would allow those students to feel comfortable using their home language, they will be able to open up and willing to grasp learning English in our classrooms.
As I read the second article, Toward a Multilingual Perspective on Reading, I felt a deep connection because I want to make sure that I create students who want to be lifelong readers, not only for my English-speaking readers but for my learners whose English is not their dominant language. If we, as educators, engage our students by using different techniques to have them annotate and showcase what they know in their home language, and we translate it to English, that will make those students want to engage in the learning process while teaching their classmates about their home language. In the article, it states, “Teachers should engage students in concise and powerful foundational instruction so that students can become engaged, lifelong readers. While EBs need rich foundational reading instruction, their complex identities demand an approach rooted in their resources – linguistic and otherwise” (Moreno 2024). We have to use the resources that students bring to the classroom which can be the knowledge of their native language. allowing those students to hold discussions in their language can allow them to shine and want to learn more. This practice was done in Ms. Santiago’s eighth-grade class. She allowed a dialogue between students using their native language, and students wanted to participate and became eager to learn as they grow. As she was reading To Kill a Mockingbird, students discussed it in their home language, which allowed them to understand the story more and helped their fellow classmates relate to them as they learn some words from their language.
It won’t be easy for me to use translanguaging in my classroom, but I agree with the articles that, as pedagogues, we have to try to build that connection with all of our students.
Both articles assume that traditional literacy instruction has mainly been created from a monolingual perspective. Which does not properly support emerging bilingual students. Moreno says that reading instruction many times puts multilingual learners in a position where they need additional strategies over viewing their existing language abilities as a strength and benefit. This article’s overall assumption to me was that being bilingual should be key to literacy instruction rather than looked at as an add on. Related, Carcia and Wei assume that translanguaging is a natural and productive process for bilingual students. They say that students use multiple languages to make meaning naturally. Teachers should be proactive and intentional by incorporating this into their regular instruction. This assumption here is more about that language learning and content learning happen at the same time. By allowing students to switch between the two languages it can help better and deepen their understanding of what they are learning. The video really ties these assumptions together. It shows how a teacher who may not share the same home language can still better support students by earning and being intentional with their students’ identities and experiences. One key part of the video I took note of was that effective instruction of multilingual or bilingual students starts with understanding who the student is and holding value for their backgrounds.
I whole heartily agree with the idea that emergent bilingual student languages should be viewed as a value and asset opposed to a barrier. While it may be a challenge at first, as is everything else within a classroom the benefit of viewing it this way is much greater. I have noticed these days in schools students are expected to separate their home language and what they learn in school, focusing only on English. The articles talk about the importance of students using their whole linguistic abilities to make sense and understanding of content explaining how this type of instructional practice can make instruction inclusive and effective. I also agree with the concept of translanguaging as a tool. If students were allowed to make sense of content by talking about ideas, better understanding meaning or simply just processing information using their home language it can allow for students to have the space for deeper comprehension of a topic. The classroom example in García and Wei’s work where a teacher switches between languages to help students understand vocabulary and concepts. I was in a 1st grade ICT class and there was a language para and you could really see how having that language para not only helped one student but the multiple students who spoke the same language. They were able to shift back and forth between English and Spanish and almost understand the content at the same pace as the rest of the class. I was really able to watch in real time the benefits of transplanting in a classroom.
Week #6 (3/12/2026)
One idea that stood out to me in the readings is that students who speak more than one language should be seen as bringing strengths to the classroom, not problems. The article explains that reading instruction has often been designed with only one language in mind, which can ignore the knowledge and experiences that bilingual students already have. Instead of asking students to keep their languages separate, the idea of translanguaging encourages teachers to allow students to use all of their languages to understand what they are reading and learning. Another reading explains that teachers can also use translanguaging on purpose during lessons to help students understand ideas more clearly. I agree with this because language is connected to culture, identity, and the way people think.
This topic connects to my own life because Spanish has always been part of who I am. When I work with students who also speak Spanish, I can see that sometimes they understand ideas much faster when they are allowed to move between English and Spanish. Sometimes a concept just makes more sense in the language they are most comfortable with. I have also seen students naturally help each other by switching between languages when they are trying to understand something. These readings made me realize that this should not be seen as a problem, but as something teachers can support and encourage. To me, good teaching means recognizing the whole student, including their language, culture, and experiences, and using those strengths to help them learn.
week #6
The first article demonstrates and expresses translanguaging as an empowerment of education. I completely agree with the argument made about translanguaging being significant to learning, especially to a specific diverse group of learners, giving us the opportunity as teachers to make the learning more accessible throughout the classroom. This approach of translanguing allows ENL or emergent bilingual students to become engaged with the content and become connected to the content. It is emphasized that this group of learners, including multilingual students learn best when they are able to use their full language repertoire. I completely agree with the article, when it mentioned translanauging as a tool for social justice. Thinking back to my own teaching experience, before becoming a dual language teacher, I was in a monolingual classroom, where “english only” was the right and only way, by administration. With the concept of translanauging, students will be able to use their home language to build comprehension. In my personal experience, I allow my students to use all their languages, with that I noticed that there is more participation from students who often just listen, increase in peer collaboration, more confidence and accessibility to the content.
The second article, “Toward a Multilingual Perspective on Reading” connects very much to the first article. The author Ascenzi-Moreno encourages that emergent bilinguals use all their linguistic resources when they read or connect to the learning. This proves the concept reading development should happen strictly a language at a time. Instead, bilingual students, like myself, use knowledge from both languages to make meaning, decoding and comprehension of what we are learning. It was relieving to read about how the author refers to bilingualism as an asset and enhances literacy development. With this I see that my students use their home language to make sense of critical vocabulary, connect to the new content using their background experience/knowledge. I reflected on my own experience in my monolingual classroom with assessments. They often underestimated the full potential of my ENL students, but in fact translanguaging supports comprehension.
Week 7
In the Child and the Curriculum, John Dewy assumes that education should connect what students are learning in school with their real life experiences. He argues that learning shouldn’t just be memorizing facts or information that is demanded of the student, rather it should grow out of the child’s interests, experiences, and development. Dewey says that effective education happens when teachers can bridge the gap between the child’s world and the curriculum. He says “the child and the curriculum are simply two limits which define a single process”. This translated for me that students learn best when instruction adds on to what they already know and helps aid them in deeper understanding of the content. This connects to the Lemon Grove incident, they were excluded from the main school and told to attend a separate one. Their families protested the decision because they believed their children should have the same educational opportunities as everyone else. This reflects Dewy’s idea that education should value the experiences and identities of students instead of trying to isolate them or marginalize them.
I agree with Dewy’s argument that education should be built on students’ experiences in order to make learning meaningful and engaging. I have seen the effects of what a difference there is in students when they feel like they are relatable to what they are learning, it gives them a sense of ownership and more value to what is being taught. When students can connect their lives to what they learn they are more motivated and able to understand the material. Dewy explains that subjects or topics should grow out of the children’s experiences opposed to it being presented as disconnected unengaging facts that they MUST know. The families in Lemon Grove believed their children should be included in the same learning environment as others and not be placed in a separate or unequal school. The video shows how the community came together to challenge this decision. Their actions demonstrated the importance of equality and respect in education. Just as Dewey emphasizes valuing students’ experiences and development, the Lemon Grove families fought for an education system that recognized their children as equal members of the school community.
Week 7:
The first article “The Child and the Curriculum” by John Dewey is about how the author says that schools should not choose between the child and the curriculum and the author said both of these matter. He explains that learning should connect what children already know and feel with what the teacher is going to teach the class. If teachers only focus on the subjects and facts but learning can feel boring for students to sit through. If they only follow the child without guidance, students may not get all the important knowledge that they need to know. So Dewey believes teachers should help students grow with important knowledge by connecting lessons to their real life experiences.
The video “The Lemon Grove Incident” is about Mexican American children who were unfairly separated from white students in a California school district. Their families believed this was wrong, so they actually went to court. Also they won the case, and it became the first successful school desegregation case in U.S. history. The story shows how families stood up for fairness and equal education because parents want students to feel safe in school and get proper information. Overall it also shows that all children deserve respect and the same learning opportunities.
The key question is where do pedagogies come from what people believe about teaching, learning and children. They are shaped by teachers’ ideas, students’ experience and background, and what society thinks school should do. They also come from history, cultures, backgrounds, and fairness. This means the way we teach is not random, it should be important knowledge. It comes from values, beliefs, and also experiences.
I agree with John Dewey’s ideas that child about the curriculum should work together. I think he is right that students learn better when lessons connect to students’ lives, interests and experiences because they won’t be bored in the classroom. I also agree with “The Lemon Grove Incident” because it shows that school is not only about academics, but also about fairness and giving respect. The families fought for their kids’ education because they believe children deserve the same learning experiences.
One thing I want to take into my future teaching is making learning feel connected to students’ lives and who they are. I want my classroom to be a place where students feel respected and valued.
Work Cited
Dewey, J. (2009). The child and the curriculum. Project Gutenberg.
The Lemon Grove Incident. (2017, May 19). PBS.
week6: From the article Toward a Multilingual Perspective on Reading.
As I read the article, I started to notice that reading instruction has been shaped by monolingual perspective as teachers are often using English as the only language that matters in learning literacy. According to the article, this kind of approach doesn’t really support all students, especially emergent bilingual students. By doing so the teachers may overlook the rich linguistic and cultural resources that students may bring into the classroom.
On the other hand, the multilingual perspective on reading encourages teachers to recognize students’ language, culture knowledge, and identities as strengths rather than barriers. As a multilingual learner, I do agree that use both languages can increase the student’s comprehension and encourage student’s engaging in the classroom. As a future teacher, this made me think about how instruction should not simply treat bilingualism as an add-on or provide quick strategies for multilingual learners. Instead, reading instruction should intentionally place these students’ experiences and abilities at the center of teaching.
The second article: Translanguaging to teach, this chapter helped me understand how translanguaging can be used as powerful teaching strategy in the multilanguage classroom. It show how teachers can intentionally design lessons that allow all students to use their full linguistic resources. that’s reflect on how teachers role is very important as they create spaces for multilinguals where they feel valued and supported. the article also encourages the teachers not to see multiple languages as a problem but instead as resources, through encouraging students to use them as resources that can deepen their understanding. also after I finished the reading, It took me to my own experience years ago since English is not my first language and I started learning the language during secondary or high school. Understanding the language was very hard but with providing the text in Arabic or translation for some of the text helped me so much to understand and comprehend the text better. These experiences has shaped the way I think as a teacher. It doesn’t really matter if you are bilingual or monolingual teacher. There is always a way to create opportunities and support students to use their languages. As in the Video “Teaching Bilinguals (Even if You’re Not One), the teacher allowed the student to use her language in order to monitor her progress and help her discuss her ideas in her own language first. I definitely appreciate her as a teacher and all the efforts that she put into this practice or approach in order to help the student fully understand and develop her reading and writing skills. And I loved the quote from the book. It really shows that empathy and understanding our students is the first step in order to help them personally and academically.
Week #7 (3/19/2026)
One idea that stood out to me in the reading is that teaching should not treat the child and the curriculum as two separate things that fight against each other. Instead, good teaching connects what students already know and experience with what schools are trying to teach them. The reading explains that the child’s everyday experiences and the subjects taught in school are really part of the same learning process, just at different stages of growth. I like this idea because it reminds teachers that students do not come into the classroom empty. They already have experiences, interests, and questions about the world. When teachers connect lessons to those experiences, learning becomes more meaningful and easier for students to understand.
This also made me think about the video about the Lemon Grove Incident. In the video, Mexican American students were separated from white students and forced to attend a different school just because of their background. What stood out to me was how the parents in the community came together and fought that decision. They challenged the school in court and eventually won, which became the first successful school desegregation case in the United States. Watching that story reminded me that education is not just about subjects like math or reading. It is also about fairness, respect, and giving every student the same opportunities to learn. When schools truly recognize and respect students’ backgrounds and experiences, they create a better learning environment where all students feel that they belong.
One idea that stood out to me in the reading is that teaching should not treat the child and the curriculum like two separate things that are competing with each other. Dewey explains that a good teacher is when they connect what students already know with what the school is trying to teach them. The reading explains that students come into school with their own experiences, interests, and questions about the world. In the school I work in, many classes are built on an interest base, which has the children amazed. For example, they have been learning about trains for months, and they are still so amazed by them. I like this idea because a lot of curriculum can feel very structured. When teachers connect lessons to these experiences, it helps students understand the content better and makes it more meaningful.
This also made me think about the Lemon Grove incident. In the video, Mexican American students were separated from white students and forced to attend a different school just because of their ethnic background. What stood out to me most was how the parents in the community came together and fought against it. They were able to use their voice to make a difference in what they believed in. Watching this reminded me that education is not just about learning subjects like math or reading. It is also about fairness and making sure all students are treated equally in schools.
In “The Child and the Curriculum”, John Dewey proposes that our educative process puts its curriculum in direct opposition to the children operating within this system. Children are conceptualized as incomplete beings—underdeveloped, immature and without dimensions. The education system upholds itself as a higher power, with everything the child needs to become complete, civil and multidimensional. At the same time, children are placed on pedestals of sentiment for the same reason. Dewey states that we must “abandon the notion of subject-matter as something fixed and ready-made in itself, outside the child’s experience; cease thinking of the child’s experience as also something hard and fast; see it as something fluent, embryonic, vital; and we realize that the child and the curriculum are simply two limits which define a single process.” I completely agree with this. Children don’t exist in a vacuum from their education. A child’s experience should not be “at war” with the studies that make up their education—they are both part of the same twisting stream that make a person whole. While a child’s world is small based on their experience and time spent alive, it is growing every second. Children are also not exempt from living within history, with their own lives being informed by that history—“his little span of personal memory and tradition is overlaid with the long centuries of the history of all peoples.”
“The Lemon Grove Incident” is a documentary detailing the events of the first successful desegregation case in America. Taking place between 1930 and 1931, Mexican and Mexican-American citizens of Lemon Grove, California challenged the Lemon Grove School District Board of Trustees in court when they attempted to segregate students of Mexican origin. I thought of Dewey’s ideas on the child’s capability (or lack of capability) for depth as I was watching the documentary. White members of the Board of Trustees attempting to segregate Mexican students might have made a distinction about their own white children’s capacity for worldliness but did not see the same for Mexican children. To them, these children were narrow-minded and came from a culture of narrow-mindedness. The Board members were so certain these Mexican students were in opposition to the American educative process that they failed to recognize that many of them already spoke and read English fluently, contrary to what they presented in court. Racism, and the idolization of whiteness, undoubtedly is a way in which we pit children against their own education. Similarly, the interviews with the students many years later confirm the idea that the child’s lived experience is “overlaid with the long centuries of the history of all peoples”. The interviewees recount the memories of living through that case and can see how it falls within history, both personally and external to them.
In “The Child and the Curriculum,” by John Dewey, one idea I agree with is his argument that education should balance both the child and the curriculum rather than focusing entirely on one over the other. Dewey explains that the relationship between the two should not be treated as an opposition but as part of the same learning process. As he writes, “the child and the curriculum are simply two limits which define a single process.” This idea especially resonates with me because I also believe that effective teaching requires a balance between both. For example, even something simple like using a student’s name in a word problem can personalize the learning experience and make the content feel more connected to them. When students see themselves reflected in the lesson, they are often more engaged and motivated to understand the material. Of course, a deeper context is still necessary, but connecting learning to students’ experiences can help make the academic content come off more meaningful. In that sense, this idea also aligns with culturally responsive teaching, which encourages teachers to connect learning to students’ identities, cultures, and experiences so that it feels more relatable in the classroom. Teachers should not just present information for students to memorize, but instead, they should find ways to make the curriculum engaging and meaningful for students. Overall, I find value in Dewey’s idea that education should not be a choice between the child and the curriculum, but instead an integration of both.
After watching the video about the Lemon Grove Incident, it really showed the hardships that Mexican families had to go through when schools attempted to segregate their children simply because of their ethnicity. Mexican American students in Lemon Grove, California, were denied access to their school and told they had to attend a separate building that was created specifically for Mexican children, which was a barn. This situation was unfair and highlights the need for education to value and respect students. What stood out to me the most was the courage of the parents. Instead of accepting the segregation, the Mexican community organized together and refused to send their children to the separate school. They even took the school district to court, which was very brave given the discrimination they faced at the time. I felt inspired by seeing the parents fight back for their children’s education, even though they risked trouble for challenging the school system. It shows how strongly they believed that education should be equal and accessible for everyone. No student should feel excluded or disrespected in a learning environment because of their background or identity. This video also connects to ideas of culturally responsive teaching. The school system must recognize and respect its students’ identities and cultures rather than separating them.
Reading “The Child and the Curriculum” by John Dewey really reinforced my belief that good teaching is about finding a balance between what students are interested in and what they need to learn. I like Dewey’s idea that curriculum shouldn’t just be something we hand to students, but something that truly connects to their own lives and experiences. It made me think about how much more engaged students are when they actually see themselves in the content. In my own classroom, I want to be more intentional about building lessons off students’ interests and prior knowledge while still meeting standards. I also hope to include more inquiry-based activities where students can explore, ask questions, and take a more active role in their learning.
Watching “The Lemon Grove Incident” by Paul Espinosa was extremely eye-opening. It was so powerful to see how the families stood up against segregation and fought for equal education, and it made me reflect on how schools can sometimes unintentionally exclude students. It reminded me how important it is to create a classroom in which every student feels valued and included. Moving forward, I want to ensure that I’m building an environment that respects students’ cultures and identities, supports multilingual learners, and challenges any unfair practices. It is so important to bring in many diverse perspectives so that all students feel represented and heard.
Week 7
In the excerpt from “The Child and The Curriculum”, John Dewey argues that education should not treat children and the curriculum as separate forces, but rather use them together to further enhance a child’s education. Dewey explains that in traditional education information is forced onto children without trying to relate it to children’s experiences, in this scenario the curriculum is the most important part of education. He also details “new” education which prioritizes the child at the expense of the curriculum. Instead, Dewey offers a solution where children’s experiences are tied into the learning as the starting point that then guides them into being able to understand more complex topics. When describing “new” education Dewey wrote something that stuck out to me. He wrote, “The child is expected to ‘develop’ this or that fact or truth out of his own mind. He is told to think things out, or work things out for himself, without being supplied any of the environing conditions which are requisite to start and guide thought”. This quote made me think of a lot of the new guided curriculum, which do not outright teach students a math topic but rather provide them with activities that are suppose to guide them into understanding. In an ideal world, that should be a perfect new way to teach students math in a less confusing method, but I think this method that expects students to develop knowledge out of nowhere just further complicates math topics for students. Instead, the math topic could start by relating to student’s experiences maybe through a real-world problem and then the teacher could explain the curriculum. In this method, students wouldn’t be expected to “teach” themselves but would rather be guided by their teacher with their interest and experiences as a guide.
The video, ” The Lemon Grove Incident”, details the story of the first successful desegregation court decision in U.S history. This happened in Lemon Grove, California and involved a group of Mexican American students who were forced to attend a separate, lesser school by the local school board. In response, students and their families boycotted and legally challenged the school board until a court case was brought forward and the court ruled in the favor of the students. I, of course agree with the video in the sense that segregation in education is both damaging and unfair for students as it limits their opportunities. Furthermore, when assumptions are made of students like school board did to the students in the video, students are put into boxes and the learning process cannot take place. These assumptions were also wildly incorrect. This reminded me of the excerpt from Dewey’s book as a similar process can occur when the curriculum is prioritized over student’s experience rather than having a balance between the two.
Week 7
In the Child and the Curriculum, John Dewey assumes that there are two types of education, “old education” and “new education.” The “old education” ignores the child’s present experience, and puts each child on the same given path, while the “new education” shifts the focus entirely onto the child’s interests, activities, and experiences. “Guidance and control” are the catchwords of one school and “freedom and initiative” of the other. I agree with Dewey when he says that education is a “continuous reconstruction, moving from the child’s present experience out into that represented by the organized bodies of truth that we call studies.” Education should connect the child’s experiences and interests with organized subject knowledge. The two should be connected. Education must integrate both the child’s lived experiences and interests and academic knowledge in order for the child to grow and learn.
The Lemon Grove Incident was a community-led legal fight in 1930-1931 where Mexican American parents challenged school segregation. The Mexican-American community gathered together to go against the law to fight for their children and their rights. This video is important for educators because it allows us to see the importance of a community and going against the majority for equal rights. In my classroom, I hope to create a community where children feel safe and understand the importance of working together towards the same goals.
Week 7: Reading The Child and the Curriculum by John Dewey.
The book argues that effective education requires strong connection between child’s experience and subject-matter. He explained two types of education (‘curriculum’ as an old and conservative perspective and ‘child’ as a new and more progressive perspective).
He urged on getting rid of the gap between the child’s experience and the various forms of subject-matter. He explains that the “child” represents the student’s personal experiences, interests, and developmental stage, while the “curriculum” represents organized knowledge developed by society over time. Dewey emphasizes that these two should not be treated as separate or opposing forces, but as parts of a single, unified learning process. I do agree with him that education should begin with the child’s experiences and gradually guide them toward more organized knowledge but I also feel the challenge behind it. It sounds ideal to connect every lesson to students’ interests, but I know that in real classrooms, this can be very difficult. Still, I feel that this is the kind of teacher I want to become, someone who listens to students, values their experiences, and tries to build learning around them. This reading made me more aware of the responsibility I will have as a teacher. I don’t just want to teach subjects like math, language, or geography in isolation. I want my students to see how learning connects to their lives, their interests, and their future. Even though it may not always be easy, I want to keep reminding myself that meaningful learning starts with the child.
On the other hand, Watching the video was really painful. The whole experience of the people of lemon grove valley and how they suffered just to get valid and fair treatment as any other US citizen (any human being).
To get equal education opportunities was based on people’s skin color or where they came form. The other thing that really stood to me after watching that video that rights are not guaranteed, we have to fight for them. It impressed me how they stood till the end and how they fought back. All students should get equal chances, resources, and treatment. Equity is a must in education and no one should be neglected.
I really liked your response, especially how you explained the connection between the child and the curriculum. I agree with you that starting from students’ experiences makes learning more meaningful, but it’s definitely not easy to do in real classrooms. As you said, it sounds ideal, but with standards and time limits, it can be hard to connect everything back to students’ interests.
Weekly Response – Dewey & The Lemon Grove Incident
In The Child and the Curriculum, John Dewey assumes that education should be centered around the child’s experiences rather than strictly following a fixed curriculum. He believes that learning becomes meaningful when it connects to students’ lives, interests, and prior knowledge. This assumption challenges traditional schooling, where the curriculum is often treated as something separate from the learner. Dewey also assumes that teachers should act as guides who bridge the gap between subject matter and student experience, rather than simply delivering content.
I agree with Dewey’s idea that education should be more student-centered. When students see connections between what they are learning and their own lives, they are more engaged and motivated. This idea is also reflected in The Lemon Grove Incident, where Mexican-American students were segregated under the assumption that they needed different instruction. The film shows how harmful it is when educators make decisions without valuing students’ identities and experiences. Instead of supporting students, the school system created barriers based on language and culture.
However, I would argue that while Dewey’s vision is ideal, it can be difficult to fully implement in today’s classrooms. Teachers are often required to follow strict standards, pacing guides, and testing requirements, which can limit how much they are able to tailor instruction to individual students. This tension between curriculum demands and student-centered teaching is still very present in education today.
Overall, both Dewey’s text and The Lemon Grove Incident highlight the importance of respecting students’ backgrounds and designing instruction that is inclusive and meaningful. They push me to think about how I can create a classroom that values students’ identities while still meeting academic expectations.
Week 7:
In “The Child and the Curriculum,” one thing that I agreed with is that learning should connect to students’ real lives rather than follow a strict curriculum. It just makes sense—kids learn better when they can relate to what they’re being taught. You can see the opposite in “The Lemon Grove Incident,” where Mexican American students were separated and not treated equally. The system didn’t value who they were, and it negatively affected their education.
Something I want to do as a teacher is make sure all students feel included and seen. Both the text and the video show how important it is to respect students’ backgrounds. I want to create a classroom where students feel like they belong and where their experiences actually matter in what we’re learning.
Week 7:
This week’s reading, “The Child and the Curriculum”, and “Lemon Grove” video hit home. I strongly agree: as teachers, we should put the students first and treat them fairly. All students deserve an equal education, and separating students based on their background was wrong, as shown in “Lemon Grove”. Thanks to the efforts of the students’ families, standing up for what should be important: equal opportunities in the school. It really tells us that education should be inclusive and respectful of all students.
In “The Child and the Curriculum”, I agree with John Dewey that, as teachers, we should teach students by connecting with their own experiences. Following a strict curriculum without understanding students makes it harder on both the teacher and students, because not every student learns the same way. An interesting point Dewey made was learning to balance how a student actually learns with what they need to learn. The daily classroom goes far beyond because we experience different strengths in a variety of students. Targeting students’ strengths is far more effective than a strict curriculum alone.
In the end, it’s home because both the video and the article highlighted that education needs to be student-centered and fair. Sometimes a student becomes just a statistic because the teacher is pressured to follow the curriculum to the letter. At the end, we have to remind ourselves, as educators, that when we focus on students’ needs and treat them equally, learning will have a greater impact and be more effective.
In The Child and the Curriculum, John Dewey argues that education does not have to be focusing on the child OR focusing on the curriculum. He believes that a good education happens when there is a balance between the two, and teachers focus on the child AND the curriculum. I agree with Dewey’s argument that great learning happens when it begins with the child’s interests and experiences, but is guided by structured knowledge. I think that very often it is apparent from a young age what a child’s interests are and as teachers and adults we should help children foster these interests into something meaningful. The balance Dewey speaks of seems especially relevant in today’s classrooms, where there are debates on whether students should be measured by standardized testing or not.
week 7
Additionally, I strongly agree with Dewey’s belief that students learn best when they are genuinely interested in what is being taught. When lessons are connected to students’ lives, they will likely be more interested and retain information better. This ties back to culturally relevant pedagogy, because we must remember that students come from different backgrounds and thus will have different interests.
This article is relevant to us as teachers because it reminds us of what we need to look for in our students, and requires us to make sure we are doing our best to use students interests to guide them toward more complex ideas and skills.
oops sorry added the “week 7” at the wrong place, ignore in the middle of the response!
In the article “ The Child and the Curriculum”, Dewey argues that the curriculum does not follow students’ experiences. In the article, he writes “His little span of personal memory and tradition is overlaid with the long centuries of the history of all peoples.” Dewey is trying to convey that schools expect students to learn knowledge that has been built up over many decades or even centuries, however students have limited personal experience and knowledge to connect to and understand it.
Dewey highlighted the gap between the child and the curriculum, where students have short personal experience and the curriculum is an organized group of knowledge from all humans. According to Dewey, the curriculum is very abstract. It’s organized by adults who think in an organized, logical way, it’s difficult for young children to connect.
Overall, I agree with Dewey that education should grow out of the child’s experiences, connecting student’s knowledge to a broader concept. I believe that the recent NYC curriculum reflects many of these principles. For example, in first and second grade, students learn about families, communities and community geography, which relate to students’ personal life. Then in third grade, it builds on student’s knowledge of community and has students learn about different communities in other countries. This approach shows how curriculum can build on students’ experiences by connecting to what they already know.
Week 7
One thing I really agree with is that learning shouldn’t feel disconnected from students’ actual lives. When content is taught in a way that doesn’t connect to what students already know or care about, it just feels forced and honestly kind of meaningless. I’ve seen this a lot, especially when students are just memorizing something without really understanding it. They might be able to repeat it back, but it doesn’t really stick. But when there’s a real connection, something familiar, relevant, or tied to their experiences, you can see the difference immediately. Students are more engaged, they ask more questions, and they’re actually trying to make sense of the material instead of just completing a task. It reminds me how important it is to build lessons that start from where students are, because that’s what makes learning feel real and not just something they have to get through. I think this really ties in with having a culturally relevant pedagogy, making students actually be able to relate to what is being learned adds a lot to a classroom.
I also really agree that learning has to be active, not just something students sit and receive. The moments I’ve seen students most engaged are when they’re doing something, like talking through ideas, working with a partner, using visuals, or trying different strategies to solve a problem. It’s not just about getting the right answer, it’s about the thinking process and how they get there. At the same time, I don’t think this means there should be no structure or direction. There still needs to be guidance, but it should build off where students are starting from rather than ignoring it. That balance is what makes teaching actually work, when you’re guiding students while still valuing their ideas and giving them space to think. I think that’s something I really want to carry into my future classroom, especially in math, where it’s so easy for learning to become procedural instead of meaningful.
Week 7
John Dewey pushes back on the idea that teaching should be either strictly content-driven or entirely child-centered, but instead argues that good teaching comes from a mix of the two. I found this idea to be both shockingly unique and refreshing, as there is an emphasis put on both academic success as well as students’ personal and emotional success. Dewey explains that learning happens when teachers are able to link academic content to students’ lived experiences, which means pedagogy is something flexible and constantly evolving, and most importantly, shaped through everyday interactions in the classroom.
The Lemon Grove Incident adds another layer by showing how pedagogy is also influenced by larger social and political forces. The film highlights how Mexican American families challenged school segregation, making it clear that what happens in classrooms is tied to issues like power, race, and access. In this case, pedagogy isn’t neutral; it reflects the values of the society around it, but it can also be pushed and changed through resistance. Together, these readings show that pedagogy comes from a combination of theory, lived experience, and social struggle, and is always being reshaped over time. To ignore your students’ needs or the outside world is actively doing a disservice not only to your students but to your teaching practice.
This week’s texts really made me think about what happens when schools stop seeing children as children and start seeing them as problems. In The Lemon Grove Incident, one assumption that stood out to me was that the school board and some of the white families believed Mexican children did not deserve the same education as white children. Even though they tried to make it seem like it was about overcrowding, language, and school conditions, it was clear that prejudice was behind it. They were acting like Mexican children were the reason the school was struggling, instead of seeing them as students who deserved support, respect, and access to the same opportunities as everyone else (The Lemon Grove Incident, 2017).
When I connect that to Dewey, I see a completely different way of thinking about children and education. Dewey makes the point that education should not separate the child from the curriculum. Instead, teaching should start with the child’s actual experience and help move that child toward deeper understanding and knowledge (Dewey, 1902). That really stood out to me because in Lemon Grove, the children were not being seen as full human beings with experiences, identities, and strengths. They were being treated like they were the issue. To me, that goes against everything education should be.
One thing I really agreed with was the way the Mexican families responded. I respected how they came together and refused to accept a second-rate education for their children. What stood out to me most was that they saw exactly what was happening. They knew the separate school was not really about helping their children. It was about separation, disrespect, and giving them less. That part really stayed with me because the parents were not asking for anything extra. They were asking for fairness, dignity, and the right for their children to be treated like they mattered. I also agreed with Dewey’s idea that education cannot be meaningful if it ignores the child. If schools are only focused on rules, systems, and control, then they lose sight of the actual students in front of them (Dewey, 1902).
One thing I want to argue within these texts is that Dewey’s ideas are powerful, but the Lemon Grove story shows that we also have to be honest about race, language, and power in schools. It is not enough to just say teaching should start with the child. We also have to ask which children schools are actually willing to value. In Lemon Grove, the Mexican families had to fight just to get their children recognized as deserving of equal education. That shows me that schooling is not neutral. Schools can say they are doing what is best for children, but sometimes what they are really doing is protecting bias and low expectations.
I also want to argue that the Lemon Grove story shows how harmful decisions can be made to sound reasonable. The school board tried to make segregation sound like a practical solution, but the families saw through that right away. They knew their children would be getting an inferior education. That part made me think a lot because even now, there are times when schools make decisions that sound helpful on the surface, but really push certain students further to the side. That is why I think it is important for teachers to always ask who a decision is really helping and who it is harming.
What I aspire to from these texts is the reminder that I need to truly see my students and make sure my teaching honors who they are. Dewey reminded me that strong teaching starts with the child, not just with the curriculum. The Lemon Grove story pushed me to think even more about how dignity and justice are also part of teaching. I want to be the kind of teacher who does not make students feel like they have to leave parts of themselves behind to succeed in school. I want my classroom to be a place where students feel respected, valued, and safe enough to learn.
Overall, these texts made me reflect on how education should really work. The Lemon Grove Incident showed the damage that happens when prejudice shapes schools, and Dewey reminded me that real teaching begins with understanding the child. Together, these texts pushed me to think about how teaching is not just about delivering lessons. It is also about seeing students clearly, valuing their humanity, and making sure school is a place where they have access, dignity, and opportunity.
References
Dewey, J. (1902). The child and the curriculum. The University of Chicago Press.
The Lemon Grove Incident. (2017, May 19). PBS. https://www.pbs.org/video/the-lemon-grove-incident-gcrfxv/
In The Child and the Curriculum, John Dewey believes that learning should be based on students’ experiences and not just a strict curriculum. He argues that students learn best when lessons connect to their lives, interests, and prior knowledge, rather than focusing only on rules and facts without context. I agree with Dewey’s idea that teaching should be student-centered. In my own teaching experience, I’ve noticed that students are more engaged and motivated when lessons relate to their interests or real-world situations. For example, I often ask students to share personal examples during discussions or connect a lesson to current events, which encourages participation and deeper understanding. At the same time, I would argue that Dewey’s ideas can be challenging to fully apply because schools often have strict curricula and testing requirements. While I try to keep learning student-centered, I also have to make sure students meet academic goals. Finding this balance takes planning and creativity, but it helps make lessons meaningful for them.
In The Lemon Grove Incident by P. Espinosa, the video shows how schools can be unfair and influenced by social issues such as race and language, and how students and families sometimes have to fight for equal rights. Even though the events in The Lemon Grove Incident happened many years ago, similar issues still exist today, showing that more work is needed to achieve true equity in education. I strongly agree with the video because it highlights the importance of creating an inclusive and fair classroom. I believe all students should feel respected and valued, and I try to reflect that in my teaching philosophy by being mindful of students’ cultures and backgrounds.
In “The Child and the Curriculum,” The passage argues that real learning problems come from a problems between two important things which is the child’s personal experience and the structured knowledge found in school subjects. Some educators mistake choosing one over the other. Focusing only on strict curriculum or only on the child’s interests. However, the author tells us that this creates a problem. In reality, both are necessary and are connected. A child’s experiences are not separate from academic subjects but they are a starting point that can grow into more advanced understanding. Learning should not ignore the child’s perspective, nor should it abandon organized knowledge.
Instead, education should be seen as a continued process that connects where the child is now to where they can grow intellectually. The curriculum represents the developed knowledge of society, while the child represents its beginning. Good teaching builds a strong bridge between these two by guiding the child’s natural interests toward more structured and meaningful knowledge. Rather than treating the child’s current abilities as final or the curriculum as fixed, both should be flexible. This approach allows teachers to better understand, support, and direct a child’s development over time.
Week 7
Watching the video of the Lemon Grove incident of 1930 1931 made me understand the importance of Brown versus Board of Education. Throughout America, education has been fought for by many of our ancestors. Every child wants the right to a decent education. Parents wanted as well, and that’s why the Mexican parents fought the school board of Lemon Grove to make sure that their children were educated on the same levels and in the same schools as the white children. We see that a few individuals would try to make decisions for the masses, and that’s not right. We have people who try to blame the country’s economic problems on a certain group to garner support for their base, believing that removing them from the country is the best thing. We are seeing that today, just like in Lemon Grove. But we had individuals who were willing to stand up and fight for not only their children’s rights and education, but for the future of their offspring, and also, what they may not have realized, so many people in this country. The Lemon Grove incident was a spark that showed that segregation of schools was never equal. To go from learning in a school building to learning in a barn was just despicable. This is what it means when we have school districts that get more money from the government, and their schools are built up with supplies, better teachers, better after-school activities, and a school that gets less money would have less of all those things. I am proud that the Lemon Grove incident fueled the fire under so many people to want to fight for the rights of children of all Races and for the future of America.
And the article from John Dewey, The Child and the Curriculum, I thought about the many times children are taught out of the environment in which they learned, and how it could affect them in their educational career. Many children learn differently, and we as educators have to understand or differentiate their learning styles so that they can be able to have an idea or grasp what we are trying to teach them. I know it is not easy as educators when we want the best for all of us students to have some who are not quite there as we would want them to be, but if we understand how to teach that child, we will be able to elevate him or her to a greater understanding where they can be proud of themselves and where they come from. The article states, “To possess all the world of knowledge and lose one’s own self is as awful a fate in education as in religion.” This means that a child needs to understand their learning styles and their capabilities before they can even understand what they are learning. Children want to be acknowledged, and they want to know that they can come as their authentic selves, so they can be who they are and show the world what they can bring to it. We, as educators, have to make sure that we are bringing that out of each student that crosses our path so that they can feel good about themselves, and we can know that we did the best that we can do, so that every single child knows that they are special.
Week 8:
In “Pedagogy of the Oppressed”, Paulo Freire explains that many classrooms treat students like they have no knowledge of anything and need a lot of learning and help, and the teachers just fill them with all the information. The author believes this is not a good way to teach because it really stops students from thinking for themselves. Instead the author suggests learning should be a shared process where teachers and students talk and question each other questions that help increase participation and teacher could learn something from student and student could learn from the teacher.
In “Bias in the Library”, the main idea is that liberties may seem balanced and neutral, but the way books and topics are labeled can show some biases and unfairness. The episode explains that system used to organize information that can really shape how people think about different groups. The readings show that education and knowledge are shaped by people, the power, their choices, their experiences, so they are not fully balanced in this case.
Key question:
Pedagogies are built through the beliefs and choices that shape teaching and learning in schools. The main people are teachers, school system, rules and the materials that really organize the knowledge in the schools. If school values memorization and only one right answer then that is the right way of teaching. If school values more toward students’ voice, class discussion, and thinking base questions. This reading shows that pedagogy is not just lessons but is also how to present knowledge that is important.
One of the Four As Protocol-Agree
One idea I agree with is that learning should help students think, speak and question knowledge.Memorizing facts is not effective. I agree with the author Freire because students learn better when they are in class discussion and really part of the lesson. I also agree with “Bias in the Library” because words and labels in books matter. The information is organized in categories that can affect how people see others. Overall both readings reminded me that teachers and school should try to make learning more fair, and an inclusive environment for students.
Word Cited
Freire, P. (2005). Pedagogy of the oppressed (30th anniversary ed.). Continuum International Publishing Group.
On the Media. (2021, September 3). Bias in the library. WNYC Studios.
One idea that stood out to me is Freire’s point that education is not neutral. He explains how teaching may either encourage students to speak out against unjust systems or support them. He seems to believe that many classrooms still view students as passive learners, with teachers only providing information rather than creating a community of learners. As a floater and student teacher, I have personally witnessed this, so I agree. In certain classes, students primarily sit and listen, while in others, especially during read-alouds or small group projects, students are questioned and given opportunities to express their opinions. They are more involved and confident at those times. It shows me that students contribute more when they believe their opinions are valued.
The “Bias in the Library” also made me think about this same concept. I’ve noticed that not all students’ cultures or experiences are reflected in the texts and materials used in the classroom. Some students may feel ignored as a result. This relates to Freire’s concept of power since it shows how what is included or excluded can impact basic knowledge. It helped me understand that I need to be more thoughtful about the resources I select as a future teacher. Instead of only focusing on getting the correct answer, I want to create a classroom where kids feel free to ask questions and share their thoughts. Overall, these readings made it clearer to me that teaching is about more than providing knowledge, it’s also about encouraging children to think critically and feel important.
Week #8 (3/26/2026)
One idea that stood out to me from the reading is that education is not neutral and can either help people think critically or keep them from questioning the world around them. The text explains how traditional education can treat students like empty containers, where teachers just give information and students are expected to accept it without questioning. I agree with this because I have seen how students sometimes focus only on memorizing information instead of really understanding it. The reading also suggests that education should help students become more aware of their reality and question systems that may not be fair. This made me think about how important it is for teachers to create spaces where students can speak, think, and challenge ideas instead of just staying quiet and following directions.
This also connects to the example about bias in the library system. The fact that books about certain groups, like women, immigrants, or even President Obama, were placed in different sections shows how systems can quietly send messages about what is considered “normal” and what is not. It reminded me of the reading because it shows how information can be organized in a way that influences how people think, even if they do not realize it. I think it is powerful that the librarian and students decided to move the books, because it shows that people can question systems and make changes. To me, this is what education should do. It should help students not just learn information, but also notice unfair patterns, ask questions, and feel confident enough to challenge them in order to make things better.
After listening to the podcast, “Bias in the Library,” the degrading information about the Dewey Decimal System and the Library of Congress Classification shocked me. The podcast explained that libraries may seem neutral, but the way books and topics are labeled can actually show bias and unfairness. First, when I heard that students tried to change the subject heading “illegal aliens” in the Library of Congress classification system, but the Republican Party successfully blocked it, I was shocked and angered. It just shows how people in power can have the chance to undo the wrongs, but instead continue to maintain such degrading labels instead of making changes that are more respectful. Just like in the Dewey Decimal System, LGBTQ+ topics were placed under abnormal psychology, you can see how these classifications reflect his prejudicial and harmful societal views. It shows how these systems enable corrupted social hierarchies that center the white and dominant perspective. As a future educator, this makes me realize how important it is to be aware of the biases left by these ancient systems and to ensure I use classroom materials and resources that fairly, respectfully, and inclusively represent all students
After reading Pedagogy of the Oppressed, this connects to the idea that education is not neutral. Freire’s “banking model” of education, where students are treated as if they are just there to receive and memorize information instead of thinking for themselves. If classrooms focus only on memorization, students are not treated as active members of society because they are not given the chance to think critically, question, disagree, or express themselves. I believe students should be given opportunities to challenge what they find unfair and question what they don’t agree with. These are the skills that will help them in the real world if they come in to face witg an unjust situation. This also connects back to the podcast because there are systems and ideas created by those in power that we may not even realize are biased, and we can become blind to them. If students are only taught to memorize, they may never question these systems. But if we teach them to think critically and truly grasp amd understand the information, they will be able to recognize unfairness and advocate for change.
I really liked your connection between the podcast and Freire because you showed clearly that education and information systems are not neutral. Your point about labels like “illegal aliens” and the harmful placement of LGBTQ+ topics shows how bias can be built into systems that people often trust without questioning. I also agree with your idea that students need more than memorization. When students are encouraged to think critically, they are better able to notice unfairness, question systems of power, and speak up for change. As future educators, that responsibility is really important.
In The Child and the Curriculum, John Dewey assumes that learning should be centered around the child’s experiences, not just rigid subject matter. He believes education fails when it separates what students already know from what schools try to teach. In The Lemon Grove Incident, Paul Espinosa shows how schools can reflect social inequalities, assuming that marginalized students can be separated or treated differently.
I agree with Dewey’s idea that learning is more meaningful when it connects to students’ lives. I also agree with the film’s message that education should be fair and inclusive for all students.
However, I would argue that Dewey may underestimate how difficult it is for teachers to balance student-centered learning with strict curriculum demands today. There are real constraints, like testing and standards, that limit flexibility.
What I want to aspire to is creating a classroom that values students’ backgrounds and voices. Both texts push me to think about teaching as not just delivering content, but building connections and promoting equity in real ways.
Week 8
In Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Paulo Freire assumes that traditional education operates through a “banking model,” where students are treated as passive, and teachers hold all authority, which ultimately maintains systems of oppression. Similarly, “Bias in the Library” by On the Media suggests that systems we often see as neutral, like libraries or databases, actually reflect social and cultural biases in how information is categorized and accessed.
I agree with Freire’s idea that students should be active participants in their learning and that education should promote critical thinking rather than memorization. I also agree that bias exists in places we might not immediately question, like libraries or media systems, which can shape how people understand the world. At the same time, I would argue that Freire’s approach can be difficult to fully apply in real classrooms. Completely rejecting structured teaching overlooks the reality that students often need a foundation of knowledge before they can engage in deeper critical thinking.
What I want to act on from these texts is being more intentional about creating space for student voice and discussion. I also want to be more aware of hidden biases in the materials I use, making sure that students are encouraged to question and think critically about what they are learning.
Week 8
In Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Freire states that for the oppressed, many have a “fear of freedom.” People fear freedom because they can’t see anything else. There are two roles at play, the oppressor and the oppressed. I agree with Freire’s point when he says, “As long as they live in the duality in which to be is to be like, and to be like is to be like the oppressor, this contribution is impossible.” In order to change the systems, people need to come together and take action. Action is fighting to transform the objective reality. In my classroom, I aspire to listen and teach students to think critically. As Freire stated, “They must confront reality critically, simultaneously objectifying and acting upon that reality.” It is when students are able to think critically and take actions that systems can be changed. The role of the educator is important because we have to create a safe space where students understand that everyone has a voice and their voices matter. Everyone knows things. We can all learn from one another and it is important to give space for others to be heard.
In Bias in the Library, I agree that while the Dewey Decimal Classification System has old language, we need those old systems to continue functioning because it is a space that we use to share and lend information. Though I say this, I also agree that this system isn’t capable of keeping up with the new language that now exists in the world. “Burn it down but did they ever build anything?” We can’t entirely “burn down” the old systems, but in order to build a new one, we have to continue to use and understand the old system, but change and add onto it.
Week 8
In chapter one of the Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Paulo Freire discussed his beliefs surrounding oppressed people vs their oppressors. He then relates these beliefs to the education system and posits that education is not neutral and that children should be taught in ways that encourages them to think critically. One quote from the reading stood out to me, when Freire stated, “true generosity consists precisely in fighting to destroy the causes which nourish false charity. False charity constrains the fearful and subdued, the ‘rejects of life’, to extend their trembling hands. True generosity lies in striving to that these hands- whether of individuals of entire peoples- need be extended less and less in supplication, so that more and more they become human hands which work and, working, transform the world”. This quote made me think of the classroom, where children who are guided step by step through tasks may be able to complete work in their current classroom, but will be at a disadvantage in the future when they do not have a teacher that guides them. I agree with Freire in the sense that true generosity is teaching your students to complete tasks by themselves and guide their own learning. In a real classroom, this could take place in the form of a teacher modeling or explaining the task/an example and then giving children the freedom to complete the work by themselves. Furthermore, setting up a system where students can ask peers for help also helps prepare them for the future. In my own teaching, I aspire to teach my students to be independent and think critically for themselves. For younger students this may seem difficult but the independence can even come from having to unpack their bags and bring the correct materials home for homework. Then as students get older, their independence in the classroom will grow and the guidance from their teacher will lessen.
The podcast, “Bias in the Library” details how power is entrenched in standards specifically in the library through the Dewey Decimal System. This made me think about how power dynamics are seen in other places in the education system like in standardized tests that sometimes use words and phrases that put some students at a disadvantage. I appreciated how the librarian discussed in the podcast decided with her students to “rebel” against the Dewey Decimal System and put books where they thought they belonged. While, I think that is great for the school library and a great exercise for students, I would like to argue that I think doing something similar with standards may prove difficult or impossible for classroom teachers when they are judged on how well their students can meet the standards. I wonder how a teacher can help students recognize the power dynamics entrenched in their learning while also making sure they are meeting the requirements administrators have of them.
Week 8:
Reading this chapter of Pedagogy of the Oppressed by Paulo Freire deeply impacted the way I think about oppression and education. Freire’s idea of dehumanization made me realize that oppression does not only harm those who are oppressed, but also those who hold power. While the oppressed lose their dignity and freedom, the oppressor, in a different way, loses their humanity. This idea really stayed with me, especially when he writes, “Dehumanization… marks not only those whose humanity has been stolen, but also… those who have stolen it.” It made me realize how important it is to restore humanity for everyone through true liberation.
As I think about my future role as a teacher, this chapter pushed me to connect Freire’s ideas to what is happening in the world today. I see how dehumanization continues to exist in different forms, and it made me feel that education is one of the most powerful tools we have to challenge it. Freire’s words reminded me that liberation and freedom are not optional—they are necessary. As he explains, “the solution… is born… [in] this new being: no longer oppressor nor oppressed, but human in the process of achieving freedom.” This made me realize that my goal as an educator should not only be to teach content, but to help students become more aware, critical, and empowered.
I also connected these ideas to the podcast “Bias in the Library,” which showed how systems we often see as neutral can actually reflect bias. The example of books about President Obama being categorized differently revealed how classification systems can reinforce inequality. Learning about Melvil Dewey and how his background shaped the system made me realize that education is never truly neutral. The way knowledge is organized can reflect power, privilege, and exclusion. For example, placing topics like LGBTQ history, women’s history, or immigrant history in social science rather than history shows how certain narratives are marginalized.
This connection helped me better understand Freire’s idea that justice requires breaking cycles of power, not simply reversing them. As a future teacher, I feel responsible for questioning these systems and helping my students do the same. I want to create a classroom where students are encouraged to think critically about the world and recognize injustice. As Freire reminds us, “They will not gain this liberation by chance but through the praxis of their quest for it.” This reinforces my belief that education should center on justice, freedom, and humanization, guiding students to become active participants in creating a more equitable world.
Week 8:
One idea I really agreed with from Pedagogy of the Oppressed is how Freire talks about the “banking” model of education, where teachers just deposit information into students like they’re empty containers. That really stuck with me because I’ve experienced classrooms like that when I was a student, where students weren’t asked to think or question; instead, we just had to memorize and repeat. I also connected this to the Bias in the Library episode, which shows how information itself isn’t neutral. It made me realize that if we’re just handing students information without questioning it, we might also be passing along biases without even realizing it.
Something I want to do in my own teaching practice from now on, based on these readings, is to be more intentional about helping students question what they’re learning instead of just accepting it. Freire pushes the idea that education should be about dialogue and critical thinking, and the podcast shows why that matters in real life. I want to create a classroom where students feel comfortable asking questions and being curious, rather than just assuming everything is objective or fact. Even though it seems a little intimidating as a brand new teacher, I think it will feel more meaningful to me and the students because they’ll actually be learning how to think and be inquisitive, not just what to think.
Week 8
I was really surprised when listening to the podcast episode Bias in the Library about the Dewey Decimal system. I learned about this system briefly in elementary school and really didn’t remember much about it, but I always assumed that the way the books were categorized within this system was up to the librarians. I didn’t realize, as the podcast explains, that books would arrive at libraries already assigned a classification number. I can’t understand why a book about Barack Obama would be placed in the 300s for social sciences while all the other former presidents were in the 900s for history. It made me wonder what criteria is used for categorizing the books now and how it was decided to not place a book about Barack Obama with the other former presidents.
The podcast also discussed how some books were originally classified many years ago, which I found troubling. For instance, books by Black authors were put in the slavery category even if the book was not about slavery nor written by a former slave, which clearly reflects historical bias within the system. This is not only offensive but results in books being inaccurately classified. If a system as widely accepted as the Dewey Decimal System is meant to organize knowledge, it should strive to do so as accurately and fairly as possible. The episode also highlighted a 2016 effort by students at Dartmouth to petition the Library of Congress to change the term “illegal aliens”, arguing that it is dehumanizing. The Library supported the change, however it was ultimately blocked by House Republicans which shows how this classification system is not just shaped by information but by strong social and political influences. It seems as though the Dewey Decimal System, although widely used, is outdated and unable to keep up with an evolving and more inclusive society. While it is unlikely that the system will be replaced entirely, there should be stronger efforts made to update and improve the system so that it more accurately reflects the people and subjects it is meant to represent.
Reading “Pedagogy of the Oppressed” really made me reflect and think about the kind of teacher I want to be. I agree with Freire’s critique of the “banking model” of education, where students are simply expected to take in information without really engaging with it. That approach feels extremely limiting, and I connect much more with the idea of teaching through discussion and shared learning. I want my classroom to be a space in which students feel comfortable speaking up, asking questions, and bringing in their own experiences. I also really agree with Freire’s idea that education can be empowering. Students should leave the classroom not just with knowledge, but with the ability to confidently think critically about the world around them.
The “Bias in the Library” episode also stood out to me because it highlighted how bias can show up in places we don’t always expect, like libraries or research systems. I agree that information isn’t as neutral as we sometimes assume, and that really matters in a classroom setting. It made me think about how important it is to be intentional with the materials I use and to make sure I am including a range of perspectives. I also believe that it is important to help students recognize bias on their own and question what they are reading. Overall, both of these works reminded me that teaching isn’t neutral, and that it is my job to be thoughtful and aware of how I am shaping my students’ learning experiences.
The Bias in the library gives us a classification of books using the Dewey Decimal number and Library of Congress Classification system. As times changes, there are bias on where the books should be classified. The podcast argues that these systems should be changed. I also agree that the words used for classification should be changed as society had changed over the past 2 centuries. There are new words replacing the old terms and the way people see things have changed. I think the library should use a new system to reclassify all the books into the way we now view the society as.
Freire wrote about the difference between humanization and dehumanizing. It mirrors back to the slavery in America, how the Africans were treated as oppressed and the colonizers were the oppressor who stole the humanities from the Africans. Freire explains the need for praxis, which is true liberation happens through reflection and action. In order for the oppressed to gain freedom, they must liberate to unmask the real faces of the oppressors. This reminds me of the reason to learn social studies. The purpose is to see how the past people have liberated as the oppressed and if one day we happen to become the oppressed, we need to fight back the oppressors for our humanity.
Week 8 response
Week 8
The author assumes that people need to think critically about their lives and work together to create a more fair and just world. I agree with the author’s idea that it is not enough to just recognize problems people need to take action to make change. I also agree that learning should not be passive. Students should not just sit and listen, but instead be active, ask questions, and share their ideas. This connects to my role as a teacher because I want to create a classroom where students feel comfortable speaking up and thinking for themselves. I also aspire to teach in a way that values students’ voices and experiences, helping them become more confident and aware of the world around them. This reminds me to focus on building a classroom environment where students are not just learning information, but also learning how to think, question, and grow.
The episode also showed how bias can show up in places we think are neutral, such as libraries, databases, and research systems. These places are usually seen as trustworthy sources of information, however the episode reveals that the way materials are categorized, labeled, and prioritized can reflect underlying societal biases. For example, certain voices, cultures, or perspectives may be underrepresented or harder to find, while others are more openly featured. This made me realize that even systems designed to organize knowledge are influenced by human decisions, which are not always objective. As teachers, we depend on texts and resources to shape students’ understanding of the world, but if those materials are biased or not fully true, they can limit students’ perspectives. The episode pushed me to think more critically about the resources I choose and how I present them.
An idea from this week’s reading, “Pedagogy of the Opressed” that I really want to do in my classroom is to emphasize more dialogue in teaching. The reading made me realize that teaching shouldn’t be just me, as a teacher, doing the talking and my students just listening, but rather a back-and-forth conversation that lets me hear more of my students’ thoughts. Doing this will make the classroom more real and respectful for students. Pedagogy is not just something fixed but something that strengthens when a student and a teacher interact. For the most part, school can feel one-sided, and giving a student a voice can change all of that.
Another idea that I want to take action on is moving away from passive learning. The reading tells how students are just in the classroom to receive information, which, in fact, doesn’t help when we need them to think for themselves. It strongly suggests adopting more active learning in real life. This showed me that the way we teach is not random but reflects the relationship between the roles of school and student. In the end, this approach will make learning more meaningful, not just memorizing things for a test.
The Audio “Bias in the Library” also made me think differently about information. Even as I type this, the source I’m referring to can be “Bias,” as can libraries and other sources we trust instantly. A student needs to be taught how to question what they read and not just accept everything as true. This, along with the reading, connects in ways that help both students think critically. Overall, in my teaching environment, I want to create or be part of a learning environment that makes students feel comfortable sharing ideas, questioning things, and understanding that knowledge is not always neutral.
Week 8 Response
Week 8
When I was reading the chapter Pedagogy of the Oppressed, I noticed a lot of assumptions that the author has about the oppressor and the oppressed. In the chapter, Freire states that everyone is trying to become “fully human,” but oppression stops it and it leads to dehumanization, in Freire’s word dehumanization is a result of an unfair system. Freire assumed that dehumanization is due to an unfair system, an unfair system gives certain people power to oppress others, this dehumanizes both oppressor and the oppressed. Freire also assumed that the only way to change and become fully human is for both the oppressor and oppressed to reflect on their actions and make a change.
The idea of dehumanization and oppression that Freire describes feels like a never-ending cycle, where unfair systems act like the wheels that keep it moving. If those unfair systems were removed, there would be no oppressors or oppressed. But is it really true? I would like to argue that an unfair system is not always the reason for oppression. In historical cases like slavery and colonization, dehumanization comes first, people dehumanized/oppressed colored people and then formed an unfair system to enforce it. The reason for this is because people want to get things like profits, lands, and labor. Since there’s gains and loss then it becomes a problem that’s bigger than just oppressor and oppressed.
I think one of the biggest takeaways from these readings is that pedagogy isn’t just about how we teach, it’s shaped by power, beliefs, and the systems we’re part of. Freire’s idea of the “banking model” really stood out to me because it’s something we still see a lot in schools today. Teachers are often positioned as the ones who have the knowledge, and students are expected to just absorb it. But Freire challenges that by pushing for a more interactive, discussion-based approach where students and teachers learn from each other. It made me think about how different classrooms would feel if students had more voice and were encouraged to question and reflect instead of just memorize.
The “Bias in the Library” piece added another layer by showing that even the resources we use in education aren’t neutral. Libraries seem like objective spaces, but they’re actually shaped by decisions about what gets included, how things are categorized, and whose stories are prioritized. That connects back to pedagogy because it means teaching isn’t just about instruction, it’s also about the materials and systems we rely on. Overall, these readings made me realize that pedagogy is constantly being constructed, whether we’re aware of it or not, and as educators, we have a role in questioning those structures and making learning spaces more inclusive and equitable.
Week 8:
One assumption I think the author is making is that systems we usually see as neutral, like libraries or even education, are actually shaped by bias. In the library text, the classification system isn’t just organizing books, it’s also grouping topics in ways that reflect certain values, especially when books about LGBTQ history, immigrant experiences, or even President Obama are placed in the same category instead of being recognized as history. It assumes that knowledge is not neutral, and I think that connects a lot to Freire too, which is something we focused on a lot last semester, where education is never just about learning content but is tied to power and control. I agree with this because it made me think about how students interact with information, and how even something as simple as where a book is placed can shape what feels important or legitimate. At the same time, I think there is more room for movements than the text fully explores, because while these systems are biased, individuals like the librarian show that people can challenge and change them from within.
What really stood out to me and what I aspire to is that idea of actually doing something about it, not just recognizing the problem. I do not want to just accept the system, I want to actively changed it with my students. That also connects back to Freire’s ideas that we spent time on last semester, especially how education should help people question and transform the world rather than just accept it. As a future teacher, I want to create a classroom where students feel comfortable questioning what they are taught and thinking critically about systems around them. I also want to be intentional about how I present information so that all students feel seen and represented, because even small decisions in a classroom can impact how students understand themselves and the world.
In Pedagogy of the Oppressed, something interesting the author is saying something simple, sometimes people who are treated unfairly start to copy the people who are being mean to them. Instead of wanting everyone to be kind and free, they might just want to be the one “in charge” instead. This happens because they are used to that way of thinking. They may also feel scared to be truly free, because being free means making their own choices and taking responsibility, which can feel hard and unfamiliar.
For teachers, this means we have to be very gentle and patient with students. Some kids might feel unsure, scared, or think they are not good enough because of what they’ve experienced in their life and as teachers, we should help them feel safe and important. We can do this by letting them share their ideas, and encouraging them. Little by little, this helps students grow into confident learners who believe in themselves.
Week 8
Paulo Freire argues that traditional education is unfair because it treats students like they are empty and need to be filled with information. He calls this the “banking model,” where teachers give knowledge and students just receive it without asking questions. Freire believes education should be different. He says students and teachers should learn from each other through discussion and dialogue. He also believes students should think critically and understand the world so they can make changes. I agree with Freire because I see in my bilingual classroom that students learn better when they are active and involved. When students are only listening, they may feel shy, especially if they are still learning English. But when I let them speak, ask questions, and use both languages, they feel more confident and participate more. I believe learning should include students’ voices and experiences.
The episode “Bias in the Library” explains that libraries are not always neutral because sometimes they only show certain perspectives and leave others out. It also says that even if information is available, it is not always fair for everyone, especially because of language and culture differences. In my view, teachers need to be intentional. I try to include books in both languages and materials that reflect my students’ cultures. I also encourage students to share their own experiences and perspectives. I agree that education and information are not neutral, so it is important to make my classroom more inclusive and fair for all students.
Week 9: Reading
In the first article “Children, Myth, and Storytelling: An Indigenous Perspective” by Gregory Cajete, the author informs the reader that storytelling is an important way for children to learn about their background, culture, lives and also connect all of the experience to the world around them. On the other hand in “The School Days of an Indian Girl” by Zitkala-Sa, she describes her painful experience in a boarding school where her culture and traditions were being ignored. Both the readings show that it is important to incorporate culture in addition because it helps students learn and stay connected to their culture and also other students’ culture as well.
One idea I agree with from the readings is that the stories are a powerful way of teaching. In the Cajete’s article it talks about how storytelling is shown as an important part of learning because it helps teach children about values, culture, identity and how it all connects to their community. It helps kids be more aware of their environment. In Zitkala-Sa’s reading I read how important culture and identity are because when the school tried to take those things away it caused pain to her. Reading it made me see that education is not only books and lessons, but is about respecting who students are and where they come from.
One thing I would argue is that schools should never force students to give up on their tradition, identity and their language. Zitkala-Sa’s experience shows how painful and effective in a negative way. Schools should create spaces where different cultures are respected and included in the school environment.
I want to be the teacher who values student’s voices and their culture. I want to make sure my classroom feels safe and welcoming for all students that can learn without feeling that they have to hide who they are. These readings show that teaching should support students not focus only on academics.
Week 9:
What stood out to me most was the emotional and cultural loss that Zitikala-Sa experienced when she was a child.
She lived as an alien where she was alienated from everything familiar to her, her language, culture, identity and traditions.
One of the most painful moments was the day they cut her long hair. It was part of her identity as an Indian girl. This situation made me think if it was something that happens for all kids from different backgrounds or only towards Indian kids.
This act of control inside educational institutions or schools won’t align with any of the cultural responsiveness that education should seek for.
As someone who experienced similar feelings when I first moved to the USA. I can relate to her saying ‘ the little taste of victory didn’t satisfy a hunger in my heart. In my mind I saw my mother far away on the western plains, and she was holding a charge against me’.
I don’t think that she meant her mom here, I feel it is more about her identity, her deep self that was torn apart when they violated her dignity throughout her years at school.
As a future teacher, I would carry those feelings as a reminder that education should respect students’ culture, identities and backgrounds. Overall, teaching is not only about contents, rules and classroom management, it is more about respecting and uplifting students’ confidence through respecting their identities.
From the essay of children, myth and storytelling: An indigenous perspective.
The reading made me think about how myths are not just stories, it is more as a deep knowledge system or a knowledge bank where communities save and keep their heritage, traditions and identities. They pass it to future generations, through them, they learn about life, relationships and human existence. Stories would make education and learning very flexible, diverse, and inclusive. It teaches students, especially indigenous students about their identities, their history and makes them connected to their natural environments and community.
As a person who came from a small village who didn’t have access to books at a young age, I still remember my grandmother’s stories and songs, they were authentic, pure and full of wisdom.
I learned a lot about life from these stories. There was some kind of rhythm in them. Some were funny and very genuine. Those stories increased word banks even before going to school. Stories can tell a lot about people’s motives, perspectives and their knowledge background.
As a future teacher, I would do my best to bring stories to life in my classroom and I will make sure to connect it to students’ lived experiences to make learning more meaningful and full of life.
Reading Response – Week #9 (4/16/2026)
One idea that really stood out to me from the reading is how school was used to change who the students were instead of helping them grow as themselves. In The School Days of an Indian Girl, the main character goes through painful experiences, like having her hair cut against her will. In her culture, long hair had meaning, so cutting it felt like losing part of who she was. The school also had strict rules and routines that did not respect the students’ culture, language, or identity. Many of the students could not even understand what was being said to them, which led to confusion and punishment. It felt like the goal was to make everyone act the same instead of accepting differences. This shows how education can be harmful when it forces students to give up who they are instead of supporting them.
This connects to the reading about storytelling and Indigenous perspectives because it shows a very different way of learning. Storytelling helps pass down culture, values, and identity in a way that feels natural and meaningful, instead of forcing students into one way of thinking. It made me realize that learning does not always have to come from strict rules or textbooks. It can come from stories, experiences, and connections to culture. As someone who is currently a substitute teacher working toward becoming a teacher, I see this in real life. In the school where I work, many students are bilingual and speak both Spanish and English. I also get to learn from their parents, which has been a really valuable experience. Even though many of them speak Spanish, they come from different countries, and each one brings their own customs, foods, music, and life experiences. I have also learned about some of the struggles they go through, which has helped me better understand them. It has really opened my perspective and shown me how valuable and important these cultures are. This is something that should be appreciated and respected in schools, not ignored or replaced.
Week 9: According to the text “Children, myth and storytelling: An Indigenous perspective,” I agree that storytelling makes learning more valuable. Stories are so enriching because they use elements like characters, plot, and theme to grab children’s attention, allowing them to see deeper connections and meanings that will stay with them in life. Stories make learning feel more lively and meaningful, rather than just memorizing plain information. I also feel like stories are a big part of learning and staying connected to a child’s identity. Like the text says, “To remember is a way to re-know and re-claim a part of our life”, which I think is really powerful because it shows how stories reunite us to our culture and our roots. Through storytelling, children not only learn content, but also begin to understand why things are the way they are, and how everything in the world is connected in its own way.
After reading “The School Days of an Indian Girl”, I was shocked by how cruel they were towards the main character’s ethnicity and identity. Starting off as early as the train ride, where instead of correcting their child’s rude behavior, the white mother actually joins in on staring and making her feel uncomfortable, which is really upsetting. It shows how normalized that behavior was at the time, which is infuriating because no one deserves to feel like they’re being stared at judgmentally. Another moment that stood out to me was when they cut the children’s hair without understanding its cultural purpose. It wasn’t just about the hair and its appearance, but it was taking away a part of who they were, a part of their identities. I also found it frustrating how they were scolding and punishing the children without properly explaining things to them. If the students don’t even speak the English language or just fragmented parts of it, how are they supposed to understand what they are doing wrong? It was very unfair. As a future educator, this makes me realize how important it is to be respectful of my students’ feelings, especially when language barriers may be present. I want to make sure I am communicating in ways that all students can understand. I also want to celebrate different cultures and use them as learning opportunities so students can learn about each other and grow to be more respectful of different cultures later in life. I want to create a classroom where students feel respected and safe.
Week 4 AI & Technology
In the article it says “ Teachers can also create virtual tours for students on Driftspace. Movement and exercise are also areas with strong metaverse potential in educational settings.” I agree with this because during the snow days when schools were closed our school had to look for ways where we could make learning possible through remote. We worked as a grade team to think of ideas where we could take students on virtual tours or create slideshows where students could have remote learning. In the text it also says “For every school, the metaverse will likely look different. Dallas Hybrid Prep, which opened at the start of the 2021-2022 school year and uses a hybrid model of virtual and in-person learning, is one of the first schools in the country to implement a metaverse platform.” I believe this is a great way to approach learning because with technology taking over students should be given access to both online and book material to enhance their learning.
Week 5 Module 2. Foundational Elements of Curriculum & Pedagogy
In the text it says “Linking Schooling and Culture Native American educator Cornel Pewewardy (1993) asserts that one of the reasons Indian chil-dren experience difficulty in schools is that educa-tors traditionally have attempted to insert culture into the education, instead of inserting education into the culture.” I disagree and believe that students should have access to learning but diversity is also an important aspect that should be implemented in the classroom in a positive way. Students may feel they belong when their culture or their identity is accepted in the classroom. I believe academic success is through being in a classroom where the teacher has created an environment where students may feel they belong. Only then will the students feel they have succeeded.
Week 6 Multilingual Learners and Translanguaging
In the text it says “While inserting translanguaging into reading instruction as a scaffold is valuable and a step in the right direction, a translanguaging approach to reading insists on changes that shift instruction that is responsive to EBs’ varied repertoires and identities.” These are the parts of the text that I would like to act on. For example, in the classroom if students are not able to comprehend or understand because they are not aware of the language. The teacher should provide opportunities to scaffold and shift instruction so it is more reachable to students. I believe the teacher can also create visuals and resources that might also help the students understand the instruction.
Week 7 Experience and Education
In the text it says “the child’s life is an integral, a total one. He passes quickly and readily from one topic to another, as from one spot to another, but is not conscious of transition or break. There is no conscious isolation, hardly conscious distinction. The things that occupy him are held together by the unity of the personal and social interests which his life carries along.” I agree with this because I believe students show more interest in learning when it is something they are interested in. For example, If it’s a topic that relates to their interest the students will pay attention and also engage more. The participation levels in the classroom will also be higher.
Week 8 Technologies of power
In the text it says “When it came to the LGBTQ books, and the women’s history books, and books on immigrant history, all of those were in the 300s as well,” says Hinds. So she and her students decided to rebel, to put books about President Obama into the history section: “we just started moving them.”” I agree with this because history doesn’t just stop on the topics that the library limited them to. History can be many topics that are from the past and students are still learning about them in present day. For example, there can be many genres in the library but to have only these specific areas in one place of the library shows a different message to the audience. I also want to argue that many times we as educators see things that may not be appropriate but we don’t rebel. It takes a lot of courage to stand up and say this is not right.
One idea I really agreed with from the readings is how both Cajete and Zitkala-Sa show that culture and identity are deeply connected to learning. Cajete explains that storytelling is not just entertainment, but a way children learn values, identity, and their place in the world. This made me think about my own experiences in the classroom at PS 006, where I see how much students connect when lessons relate to their lives. When students are able to share their own stories or experiences, they participate more and seem more confident. It reminds me that learning is not just about academics, but also about helping students feel seen and valued. I also connected this to Zitkala-Sa’s story, where her identity was ignored in school, which made learning feel uncomfortable and forced.
What I would argue is that schools still sometimes repeat the same mistakes described in Zitkala-Sa’s experience, even if it looks different today. While students are not forced to cut their hair or give up their names, there are still moments where their culture or language is not fully valued. I’ve noticed that some students hesitate to share parts of their identity unless they feel it is “acceptable” in school. Because of this, what I want to take from these readings is the importance of creating a classroom where students’ identities are part of everyday learning. I want to make space for storytelling, student voice, and cultural connections so students feel safe being themselves. These readings pushed me to think about how I can be more intentional in making my classroom inclusive and respectful of all students backgrounds.
In the article An Indigenous Perspective, I realized that we as humans have forgotten the ability of storytelling. When we were children, we were excited to learn different things and to tell stories about our lives and the things that happened to us. We learned certain things from my ancestors that made us smarter as we navigated the world around us. Our ancestors told different stories of things that they went through or learned, and we were able to utilize their knowledge to help us. Every culture has things that our ancestors taught us that are beneficial to each one of us. I agree with the author of the text when he stated that modern education moves away from Mythic storytelling to learning their way of teaching. I feel that if we, as educators, look at different cultures and incorporate what we learn from them, we will be able to become Great educators. This is one of the key factors in using culturally relevant teaching for our benefit. We can learn so much from people of different cultures, their ways of life, and the resources they can bring to our classrooms. I will make sure that I utilize storytelling in my classroom so that I can connect with all of my students in multiple ways that will benefit them and me.
In the chapter of the school days of a little Indian girl, I felt saddened because of the way many Native American / indigenous people were treated in the past and sometimes still are. During the chapter, we heard from an Indian girl who went through hardships and kept pulling through. from having to have her long hair cut short to being pulled away from my mother and seeing one of her Indian friends pass away is a terrible thing. The young Indian girl, even with all the turmoil she has been through, shows the strength of a future leader and shows me why it is important that we understand people’s cultures so that we can understand how to live on this Earth. I agreed with the author when she felt that losing her hair would make her seem like a coward, because in the Indigenous or Native American culture, having long hair is a show of strength and shows that you are a warrior. I wonder if the people at those schools knew that and decided to cut their hair low as a form of disrespect or to make them think that they are no longer in control? I know that as an educator, I will do my best to understand the culture of all of my students and help as much as I can to make them feel comfortable, wanted, and appreciated in my classroom.
One assumption I noticed in Cajete’s work is that storytelling isn’t just something extra in childhood, it’s actually central to how kids learn, especially in Indigenous communities. He really pushes the idea that stories, myths, and cultural teachings are how children understand the world, their identity, and their place in it. I agree with this because it makes learning feel more meaningful and connected, instead of just memorizing facts. In Zitkala-Sa’s “The School Days of an Indian Girl,” you can see the opposite happening when her culture and identity are being stripped away through schooling. It shows what happens when education ignores students’ backgrounds instead of building on them.
What I would argue is that schools today still sometimes lean more toward that same kind of disconnect, even if unintentionally. We talk about being inclusive, but not all classrooms truly value students’ cultural ways of learning, like storytelling or community knowledge. What I really take away and want to act on is the idea of making space for students’ voices and experiences in the classroom. Whether it’s through storytelling, sharing personal experiences, or connecting lessons to their lives, it feels like a more human and respectful way to teach—and honestly, a more effective one too.
Something that is emphasized in both readings this week is the importance of recognizing students’ culture and identity in the classroom. This is something I strongly agree with in both Cajete’s work and Zitkala-Sa’s The School Days of an Indian Girl. In this reading, it is clear that the continuous erasure of her culture had deeply detrimental effects on her school experience. Reading this piece was upsetting, as it highlights how aware children are of differences at such a young age and how those differences can create significant challenges when they are not respected or valued.
Cajete’s opening quote, which explains that in Indigenous communities “all children were considered special, sacred gifts from the creator”, particularly stood out to me. It emphasizes how difficult and disorienting it must have been for students like Zitkala-Sa to suddenly be treated in ways that contradicted this belief upon entering white schools. This contrast highlights the importance of culturally responsive teaching. As educators, we must actively honor our students’ cultures and identities and ensure that they feel special and like valued human beings in the classroom.
Week 9:
In the first article, “Children, Myth and Storytelling: An Indigenous Perspective” Cajete explains how storytelling and myths are central to the lives of Indigenous children allowing them to learn and understand themselves and the world around them. Cajete then argues that Western educations should incorporate Indigenous traditions to help develop their identities, creativity, and critical thinking skills. I agree with Cajete that children should be given different avenues to learn through and that not everything should come from one perspective like a Western education perspective that is more rigid in structure. I have noticed in school that children love listening to stories and writing their own stories. Many writing prompts children are given in school are disconnected from their lives and do not allow them to express themselves and develop their identity. For this reason, many children dislike the act of writing and see it as a chore. I think if storytelling was incorporated into our current education curriculum, children would be given opportunities to express themselves and further develop their own imaginations and identities. Furthermore, in traditional classrooms, children are not given many opportunities to express themselves and their identities as Cajete said incorporating indigenous storytelling traditions can help solve this issue.
In the second reading, “The School Days of an Indian Girl” we see how Zitikala-Sa experienced a loss of identity when she was a child in school. Her hair, which was important to her identity as a Native American was cut off without her consent. Children in the school were often punished for their behavior. While, this does not happen in American today to such an extreme extent, children’s identities are not always embraced and included into the curriculum that children are learning. After reading this text, I aspire to always make sure I incorporated children’s identities and cultures into my teaching. I want children to feel comfortable to embrace themselves in the classroom. Also, elementary school years are where children begin to develop their own individual identities and they spend much of their time in school. Thus, if they cannot embrace and be given way to discover themselves in the classroom, valuable identity formation will be lost.
As I was reading the article” Children, Myth and storytelling: An Indigenous Perspective,” I agree with the idea that “…listening to stories is a way to know how things have come into being and how they are related to everything in the world— plants, animals, places, the stars, and we as human beings”(114). Using myself as an example, I grew up in a traditional Chinese family and know many myths and tales from Chinese culture. After I moved to America, I watched Norse myths videos. Both of them use mythological narratives to explain the origin of human beings and people’s responsibility in the world. Through these stories, I not only learn about how people in the past lived but also what people should or should not do.
In modern days, we use less myth stories, instead parents tend to show cartoons to young children that teach them about things around them. It becomes more visual and more intentional compared to using myths. Similar to our education today, books and novels are picked by the teachers to intentionally teach students a certain skill and topic. These books may lack the cultural parts that myths and storytellings have.
In the article,”Children, myth and storytelling: An Indigenous perspective” the author mentions that “Parenting was actively undertaken by all the adult members of a child’s extended family, clan, and tribe. All adults were considered teachers and any adult member of a group could guide, discipline, or otherwise play a direct role in “educating” a child “(Cajete, Paragraph 2). I want to say that this is similar to what teachers and parents do in nurturing and educating a child. Another quote express the origins of stories.”Story is the way humans context information and experience to make it meaningful. Even in modern times, we are one and all “storied and storying beings.” At almost every moment of our lives, from birth to death and even in sleep, we are engaged with stories of every form and variation” (Cajete, paragraph 7). The way that indigenous people tell stories is by their personal experience. I agree with this quote because it is how we as humans share information and our own experience to others. I think it is very meaningful if these our stories are told to children, and they can learn somethings from our generation.
In “Atlantic monthly v.85 (Jan-June 1900)”, the school days of an Indian girl, I see the story telling in this article that is mentioned from Cajete’s article. The structure is like a diary, filled with personal experience. If each of us has a diary recorded in some part of our lives, it would be interesting to look back to and share it with children.
Reading Cajete caused me to pause and really think about how powerful storytelling is in learning. I found myself reflecting on how stories shouldn’t just be “add-on” to a lesson, but they are actually essential to how children make sense of the world, their identity, and their place in a community. As an educator, it made me question how often I prioritize structured, curriculum based instruction over meaningful and culturally grounded experiences. Cajete’s perspective pushed me to see storytelling as a way of building knowledge for students that is relatable and authentic. It made me want to be more intentional about bringing in stories that truly connect to students’ lives, rather than sticking to one single approach.
Zitkala-Sa’s narrative was an extremely powerful piece of work. Reading about her experiences in boarding school was very upsetting, especially seeing how her identity and culture were stripped away in the name of “education”. It made me think about the ways schooling can do harm when it ignores or devalues who students are. As an educator, it reminded me how important it is to create a space where students feel seen, respected, and safe to be their true selves. I never want my classroom to feel like a place in which students have to leave parts of themselves behind in order to succeed. Instead, I intend to actively work against that by valuing students’ cultures, voices, and experiences as strengths, not obstacles.
What I take from both readings this week is that stories are not just “stories.” Cajete assumes that storytelling is a very important way of learning, not just something for entertainment. It is a way to connect to culture, identity, and community. It also shows that knowledge is not only something written in books, but something that is passed down through experiences, relationships, and tradition. That stood out to me because I have known that schooling has mostly been about memorizing information, not really connecting it to students on a deeper level. We rarely used stories in a meaningful way; if we did, it felt more like an example than something essential to learning. I agree with Cajete because learning feels more real when it connects to people’s lives, not just textbooks.
In Zitkala-Sa’s writng, “The school of days of an Indian girl,” her experiences shows how school forced students to give up parts of who they were. One moment that stayed with me is when she describes how her hair was cut: “I cried aloud, shaking my head all the while until I felt the cold blades of the scissors against my neck.” That scene made me realize how school, which is supposed to be a safe place, became a place where she lost a part of herself. Even though schools today are not the same, I can still relate in a different way. For example, many students feel pressure to act a certain way, follow strict rules, or think in one “correct” way to succeed. Students who learn differently or come from different backgrounds might feel like they don’t fully belong unless they adjust themselves.
I agree that education should not take away someone’s identity. Both readings made me think about how schools can still unintentionally pressure students to fit into one standard way of learning and behaving. At the same time, I wonder how realistic it is to fully change this, since schools are still built around structure, rules, and testing that are hard to avoid.
Week 9:
One assumption I noticed in Cajete’s text is that storytelling is not just something extra in education, but actually the foundation of how people learn. He makes it seem like learning is naturally tied to stories, relationships, and lived experiences, not just facts or structured lessons. He also challenges the idea that Western education is the standard, and instead shows how it often ignores other ways of knowing that are just as important. I really agree with this, especially thinking about my own experience growing up. I never really saw myself in literacy in a positive way. As a brown woman, the representations I did see were usually negative, either oppressed or portrayed as a terrorist, never anything good or empowering. Even when there were stories about people of color, they often felt sugarcoated, like they avoided the real experiences and complexities and just presented a watered down version that didn’t feel honest. That made it really hard to connect to what I was reading, and it honestly made literacy feel distant from me instead of something I could see myself in. Cajete’s point about stories being connected to identity and community really stood out to me because it made me think about how different things could have felt if I had seen stories that reflected me in a real and meaningful way.
At the same time, while I agree with him, I do think there needs to be some balance. We still have standards and expectations in classrooms today, so it’s not always realistic to base everything fully on storytelling. But I do think the bigger takeaway is that storytelling shouldn’t be treated like something extra or only for younger students. It should be part of how we teach in general. What I want to take from this moving forward is making learning feel more connected and meaningful for my students. I want them to actually see themselves in what they’re learning in ways I didn’t get to. Even in my current work, I’ve seen students who can do the work but don’t really connect to it, and I think that disconnect matters. This reading reminded me how important it is to build a classroom where students feel seen, not just academically but personally too, and where what they’re learning actually feels like it belongs to them.
Week 9
An idea that I can agree is that storytelling is a really important part of learning, even in indigenous education. Cajete’s reading tells us that a story is not just for entertainment but also teaches values, identity, and how to live in a community. Even highlighting how children learn through stories from family and elders, and that learning is something shared by everyone, not just teachers in a classroom. This made me realize that education is more meaningful when it can connect to culture and real life.
Another idea I can concur with is that stories can help people understand themselves and their place in the world. Cajete talks about how myths and storytelling are connected to nature, community, and even personal identity. Contrary to memorizing information, students learn through experiences, imagination, and reflection.
In “The School Days of an Indian Girl”, it was clear how the main character felt forced to change who she was when she went to the boarding school. Things like cutting her hair and being separated from her culture showed how the school didn’t respect her identity. It made me think about how damaging it can be when education ignores a student’s background.
Overall, both readings highlight that education should respect and include students’ cultures rather than ignore them. When a student feels connected to what they are learning and who they are, education becomes more meaningful. In the end, both readings support my view that schools should focus more on inclusion and understanding, not just rules and structure.
Week 9
The author of “Children, Myth and Storytelling: An Indigenous Perspective” assumes that storytelling is not only a teaching tool rather a foundational way of understanding and knowing the world. Cajete believes that knowledge is rooted and connected to community, culture, and lived experiences. Opposed to single facts or systems. He also assumes that Western education many times can undervalue or misunderstand the true purpose of storytelling, viewing it as a form of objective knowledge. I can agree with this because stories have deeper meaning behind them and are so important and memorable for students. Even more so when they are able to connect a story to their own personal experiences or identities. Storytelling can give students the space where their learning can feel personal and purposeful only enhancing that emotional and social connection to what they are learning. I view it as a positive opposed to a negative.
While I find strong value I do believe it should not be the only form of instruction students receive. There should be a healthy balance of standard structured academics and storytelling. Especially with the times we are in and there being such a heavy push and emphasis on meeting standards. I do believe that Cajete’s idea that education should be more connected to students’ experiences is a valid and strong statement. This is especially important when thinking about texts like “The School Days of an Indian Girl,” where the lack of cultural understanding and forced assimilation caused harm and disconnection for students. As a future teacher I want my classroom to be a place where students feel not only seen but heard and valued for their experiences they bring into our class.
The author of “Children, Myth and Storytelling: An Indigenous Perspective” assumes that storytelling is not only a teaching tool rather a foundational way of understanding and knowing the world. Cajete believes that knowledge is rooted and connected to community, culture, and lived experiences. Opposed to single facts or systems. He also assumes that Western education many times can undervalue or misunderstand the true purpose of storytelling, viewing it as a form of objective knowledge. I can agree with this because stories have deeper meaning behind them and are so important and memorable for students. Even more so when they are able to connect a story to their own personal experiences or identities. Storytelling can give students the space where their learning can feel personal and purposeful only enhancing that emotional and social connection to what they are learning. I view it as a positive opposed to a negative.
While I find strong value I do believe it should not be the only form of instruction students receive. There should be a healthy balance of standard structured academics and storytelling. Especially with the times we are in and there being such a heavy push and emphasis on meeting standards. I do believe that Cajete’s idea that education should be more connected to students’ experiences is a valid and strong statement. This is especially important when thinking about texts like “The School Days of an Indian Girl,” where the lack of cultural understanding and forced assimilation caused harm and disconnection for students. As a future teacher I want my classroom to be a place where students feel not only seen but heard and valued for their experiences they bring into our class.
Week 9
Reading this passage reminds me of times when I’ve wanted to move ahead faster than what was expected of me. Like the student who pushed himself beyond the usual path, I’ve also felt impatient when I knew I could handle more, even if the situation wasn’t perfect. There have been moments where I took on challenges I wasn’t fully prepared for similar to being tested on Juvenal but I still tried my best and learned everything along the way. It shows how growth sometimes can come from stepping into uncomfortable situations and trusting your ability to figure things out.
I also relate to the balance between responsibility and everyday life shown in the passage. Just like students at Union College had to work hard while still finding time to enjoy themselves, I’ve had to manage school, responsibilities, and personal time. It’s not always easy to stay focused while also wanting to have fun, but those experiences help build independence. This connection makes me see that challenges and effort are a normal part of growing and reaching goals.
Reading The School Days of an Indian Girl connected strongly to the article by Gregory Cajete because both texts show how important culture, identity, and storytelling are in learning. Cajete explains that Indigenous communities viewed children as “special, sacred gifts from the creator” (p. 114, Cajete). However, Zitkala-Ša shows what happened when Native children were taken away from those beliefs and forced into boarding schools. Right away, the narrator is made to feel like who she is and where she comes from are wrong. She says that people “pointed at my moccasined feet” (p. 186, Zitkala-Ša). This stood out to me because it shows how isolated and embarrassed she felt just for being herself.
One assumption Zitkala-Ša seems to hold is that the boarding school was meant to erase Native culture and identity. The clearest example is when the narrator’s hair is cut. She explains, “Among our people, short hair was worn by mourners, and shingled hair by cowards!” (p. 187, Zitkala-Ša). This was not just about cutting her hair. It was about taking away something that was important to her identity and culture. When she says, “Then I lost my spirit. Since the day I was taken from my mother I had suffered extreme indignities” (p. 187, Zitkala-Ša), it shows how much pain and anger she carried.
I agree with Zitkala-Ša’s idea that students cannot fully learn when they are made to feel ashamed of who they are. Throughout the reading, the students are expected to give up their language, clothing, and traditions in order to fit into the school. The narrator describes being forced to wear “stiff shoes and closely clinging dresses” (p. 186, Zitkala-Ša). The students are also punished harshly, even when they do not understand what is happening. One student is hit after not understanding English, and the teacher says, “Are you going to obey my word the next time?” (p. 188, Zitkala-Ša). As a middle school teacher, this made me think about how important it is for students to feel safe and respected in the classroom. If students feel like they have to hide parts of themselves, they are not going to fully participate or take risks in their learning.
One thing I want to argue is that even though schools today are different, there are still times when students may feel pressure to leave parts of themselves outside of the classroom. Some students may feel like their language, culture, or experiences do not belong in school. Cajete argues that storytelling and community are the foundation of learning, while Zitkala-Ša shows what happens when those things are taken away. I think schools need to do more to make students feel that who they are matters. Storytelling should not be seen as extra or unimportant. It should be an important part of the way we teach because it helps students make connections, feel seen, and understand that their experiences matter.
The part of the text that I want to aspire to is the reminder that students need classrooms where they can hold on to their identities instead of feeling like they need to change in order to fit in. The line that stayed with me most was when Zitkala-Ša says that her “spirit tore itself in struggling for its lost freedom, all was useless” (p. 186, Zitkala-Ša). That line made me think about how students may come into school carrying feelings that we do not always see. I want to make sure my classroom is a place where students feel comfortable being themselves and where their culture, language, and experiences are treated as strengths rather than something they need to hide.
Week 11:
In the article , Leigh Patel explains that education should not be all about teaching and giving the information but she believes learning should also help students recognize the unfair systems and are able to point these out and make changes according to the system. A word that stood out to me is “marronage”. It means to describe moving away from oppression and really looking for freedom according to the author(Patel, 2016). I totally agree with this because we all have the right to freedom. Connecting these ideas to the education system it states that school and teachers should help students think deeper and critically, to protect their identities and really think about future generations(Patel, 2016). She also mentioned survival which means more than just surviving. I was a bit confused but continuing reading basically means that keeping culture alive, and staying strong about your opinion and belief(Patel, 2016). Overall the article mentioned that teacher education and lessons should support students and give them knowledge that will help students think deeper about the world and environment around them to help them create changes.
We can improve teacher education by helping future teachers understand their students communities, struggles and lives outside of school. Teachers should learn about unfair systems such as inequality and they should be trained to create a more respectful and caring classroom environment. Teachers should see student voices and their opinions and support them to help build their confidence.
I agree that education should help students speak up against unfairness. School should not only be about passing tests but it should help students feel proud of who they are and where they come from. Overall the article shows that teaching can be a way to support justice and bring awareness. Where students feel valued and respected.
Work Cited
Patel, L. (2016). Pedagogies of resistance and survivance: Learning as marronage. Equity & Excellence in Education, 49(4), 397–401.
This week, one thing that really stood out to me was how both readings show that school can either support a student’s identity or take it away. In Gregory A. Cajete’s article, I agree with the idea that storytelling is a powerful way for kids to learn because it connects them to their culture and who they are. It made me realize that learning is not just about information, it is also about meaning and identity. Then, in Zitkala-Sa’s The School Days of an Indian Girl, you see the opposite. Her experience shows how the school tried to erase her culture and force her to change, which honestly made the reading feel more real and emotional.
I would argue that even today, schools can still push students to fit into one way of learning or acting, even if it is not as extreme as what Zitkala-Sa went through. That is why what I take away from this is something I want to actually use in my future classroom. I want to make sure students feel like their background and stories matter, not something they have to hide. Instead of just focusing on memorizing, I want to create a space where students can talk, share, and connect learning to their own lives so it actually sticks with them.
Reading Response – Week #10 (4/23/2026)
One idea that stood out to me from the reading is that learning is not the same as school, even though people treat it like it is. The article explains that schools often focus on grades, test scores, and achievement, but real learning is not always that simple. Real learning can be messy, uncomfortable, and sometimes even frustrating, but that is part of growing. I agree with this because I have seen how students can memorize things just to pass a test, but that does not mean they actually understand it. The reading also talks about how learning can be a form of resistance, especially for people dealing with unfair situations. That really stood out to me because it shows that learning is not just about doing well in school, but also about understanding the world and finding ways to move forward.
The second reading made me think about how schools try to support all students, even though it is not always realistic in practice. It talks about how schools are often designed around a “normal” student, and everyone else has to adjust to that. From my own experience as a substitute teacher, and from what my husband tells me as a full-time teacher in a NYC public school, I do think the system tries to support all students. The problem is that so much of that responsibility is placed on the teacher. In one class period, teachers are expected to do so many things at once that it becomes overwhelming and unrealistic. Even with training, it can feel like too much. When teachers ask for help, they are sometimes given a coach who observes them and tells them what to change, but many times those coaches do not have the same real classroom experience. That can be frustrating. These readings made me realize that while the goal of supporting all students is important, there also needs to be more realistic support for teachers, because they are the ones trying to make all of this work every day.
Reading Patel’s piece caused me to rethink what it means for students to learn in school spaces that do not always feel built for them. The idea of marronage, which defines learning as a form of escape, resistance, and self-making, really stood out to me. Marronage pushes against the deeply-rooted idea that learning should always be neat, structured, and confined to a curriculum. It made me realize that students are constantly navigating systems that may limit them, and that their ways of questioning or even pushing back can actually be powerful forms of learning for them. Instead of seeing those moments as disruptive, Patel helped me to see them as meaningful and intentional, rooted in students’ efforts to make space for themselves in their own education.
As an educator, this aspires me to think more critically about the kind of classroom environment that I am creating. I want to ensure that I am allowing space for students to bring their full selves into their learning, rather than reinforcing rigid structures that silence them. Patel’s discussion of resistance reminds me that teaching isn’t simply about delivering content, but it is about recognizing and honoring the ways in which students resist and persist within oppressive systems. Moving forward, I want to be more mindful about creating opportunities for student voice, choice, and agency. Overall, this reading serves as a powerful reminder that sometimes the most meaningful learning happens when students are given the freedom to navigate, question, and even reshape the space around them.
One assumption Patel makes in Pedagogies of Resistance and Survivance is that schools aren’t really neutral spaces. The author is showing that the way schools are set up can ignore or limit students’ identities, especially for students from low income backgrounds. Because of this, learning isn’t always just about academics—it can also be about survival and resistance. The idea of marronage stood out to me because it shows how students find ways to learn and exist within systems that don’t always support them. I agreed with the idea that learning can be a form of resistance. From my own experience in a kindergarten classroom, I’ve seen how students act differently depending on how comfortable they feel. When lessons connect to their lives or when they’re given space to share, they open up more and participate more. But when they don’t feel seen, some of them stay quiet or hold back. That made me think about how important it is for students to feel like they belong in order to fully engage. One thing I would question is how realistic this is in actual schools. I agree with Patel, but at the same time, there are a lot of rules, pacing guides, and expectations teachers have to follow. It makes me wonder how teachers can really support this kind of learning while still meeting all those requirements. What I took from this is that I want my classroom to be a space where students feel comfortable being themselves. I don’t want them to feel like they have to hide parts of who they are to fit in. I want to create an environment where they can speak, share, and think freely, not just focus on getting the “right” answer.
After reading the text, I agree with Patel’s argument that learning should be more intentional, persistent, and transformative rather than focusing only on achievement. Patel explains that learning is not always neat and that, instead, it involves the unpredictable, discomfort, and even confusion. However, these are all part of the productive struggle. I believe learning requires students to struggle, question, and work through challenges to grow. Patel critiques the idea of schooling by showing how it is tied to systems of inequality, where success is measured by grades and performance rather than improvement. I agree with this critique because students may focus more on getting a good grade than on genuinely understanding the content. I think one way to improve this is by giving students more opportunities to figure things out for themselves instead of being told the answers. When students are solving problems, making mistakes, and working through the confusion, the learning might feel intense, but it becomes more intentional and memorable. This can help students because, without knowledge and the ability to think critically, students won’t be able to experience freedom or navigate oppressive systems. In my future classroom, I would want to implement problem-based learning by giving students activities that challenge them to actively figure things out through trial and error. Instead of simply being given answers, students would be encouraged to engage in the learning process by making mistakes and working through the challenges. This connects to Leigh Patel’s mother, who had to adapt to life in the United States on her own to survive. Students may face challenges in their own lives that require them to think critically and adapt to survive. Because of this, I want to create a classroom environment that prepares students to build confidence in their ability to overcome challenges and adapt.
Week 4/20
In the reading from this week titled, “Pedagogies of Resistance and Survivance: Learning as Marronage” author Leigh Patel discusses her beliefs around the differences between learning and formal education. As well as how formal education is often connected to social mobility, success, and wealth which it does not always provide for people. Leigh also describes the stories of her parents who had opposite educations; her father who was formally educated and her mother who learned in a more informal way as she states from watching soap operas and venturing out into the world. I found this text interesting as I agree with Patel in her belief that formal education should not be the only way children learn. Furthermore, behaviors that are valued in the classroom may not always lead to future success as students get older and begin their careers. For instance, quietness and not questioning teachers. It also seems that a lot of classroom learning is centered around state tests which will only encompass small parts of children’s lives and may not even help them in their futures. It does seem like a lie when state tests are valued so highly in elementary school and if you asked any adult now they could probably not even remember the scores they received.
One quote that stood out to me was when Patel wrote, “Formal education demands mastery for the promised purpose
of success, but more regularly delivers on the implicit purpose of stratification. Learning demands a transformation of oneself for impacts and consequences that are fundamentally unpredictable”. As a future educator I aspire to provide my students both a formal education as well as a learning that can positively impact their futures like social emotional learning. I do think this can pose a challenge though, as in grades that take state tests, schools are so focused on teaching children how to take those tests that there is no room for the type of learning, Patel mentions. Going back to my point on state tests, I think they are valued for the wrong reasons not for the benefits they can have on children but on how schools and administrators with good tests scores are valued. These tests which I think would encompass formal education are posed to students as promises of success like Patel writes but they cannot deliver on that promise as students’ further develop in their lives.
Week 10: 4/22
In Pedagogies of Resistance and Survivance: Learning as Marronage by Leigh Patel, I agree that learning and schooling are entirely different structures. Schooling is about student achievements and test results while learning is transformative. Learning is about empowerment and making mistakes along the way. Learning is continuous and can occur outside of school. True learning occurs when there are deep personal changes. The author argues that society often wrongly equates achievement with learning which hides how schools reproduce inequality rather than foster transformation. Learning is an act of Marronage, where resistance against inequality and unfair structures occur. This reading aligned with the week of State Testing for my students. It was truly eye opening as I reflect on my teaching practices and how important schools make state tests out to be. Many teachers become stressed during testing time because we are accountable for state test results and their grades are often a direct reflection of our teaching. I agree that the role of teachers is to understand the oppressive structures that occur in society between groups of people. I hope to inspire my students by helping them understand the difference between achievement and learning. While achievement is often measured by grades or outcomes, learning is a personal and ongoing process that looks different for every individual. I want my students to recognize that there is no single “right” way to learn, and that their unique strengths and approaches are valuable. As a teacher, I strive to create an inclusive classroom that supports diverse learning styles and ensures every student has meaningful opportunities to grow.
Week 11
Reading Patel, I think one big assumption being made is that schools aren’t actually designed for real learning; they’re more about control, structure, and putting students into categories. Patel is basically saying that what we call “success” in school, like good grades or test scores, doesn’t always mean someone is truly learning or growing. I actually agree with this a lot. It made me think about how many students can follow directions and do well on paper but still don’t feel connected to what they’re learning. Patel’s idea that real learning is kind of messy, uncomfortable, and even rebellious really stood out to me because it feels true because the moments where you’re confused or questioning things are usually when the most growth is happening.
What I really connected to, and honestly want to act on, is the idea of learning as resistance, or “marronage.” It made me think about how students, especially those from marginalized backgrounds, are constantly navigating systems that weren’t built for them, and just showing up and making meaning is already powerful. I want to bring that into my teaching by creating more space for students to think freely, question things, and not just focus on getting the “right” answer. At the same time, I wonder if there’s a balance, because schools still exist within systems that require structure and assessment. But overall, Patel pushes me to rethink what I value in a classroom, not just achievement, but real, meaningful learning that actually sticks with students.
The article “Pedagogies of Resistance and Survivance: Learning as Marronage”, justifies a difference between schooling and learning. In the article, “Because schooling is undeniably a site of social reproduction and socialization, it is not a consistent site of learning. Learning involves departing from known automatic practices, venturing into experiences that aren’t wholly predictable, and experiencing temporary, productive failure. The goal of social stratification is incommensurate with the unpredictable and transformative reality of learning. This disjoint between schooling and learning echoes into gaps in scholarship about education”(Patel, paragraph 1). From what I read, school often stresses achievement for success while learning is trail and error. When I was doing field work, I often felt a stressed environment. The science teacher have to do assessments required for science state exam and the students must complete the assessment or else they won’t pass science. To me, I see the importance of the science subject, but I don’t see students doing the work. The teacher told me the same observation too. I wonder if it’s the state exam that are stressing them out. I don’t see any motivation in student doing the work. I know the importance of formative assessments but students aren’t learning.
Patel suggests that learning is marronage. In the article, “Marronage is a practice of freedom that must, necessarily, start from the condition and category of enslavement in order to transgress it. Working through connective conceptualizations of enslavement, disavowal, freedom, and agency, Roberts argues that historical and theoretical nuance has been absent in theorizing freedom as marronage from slavery”(Patel, paragraph 14). I agree that as a future teacher, I should fight for the pedagogical practices of resistance and survivance ,against the oppressive, formal schooling. We need to transform some of the pedagogical practices in order to fit for our students’ learning. The importance is that they are willing to learn.
The author Leigh Patel, assumes that formal schooling and real learning are two fundamentally different things. Schooling can many times function as a social sorting opposed to a transformation. She says that many people believe the norm that getting an education will automatically lead to being successful such as moving up in society or getting a good job. She argues that this isn’t always the case, rather this is a myth believed by people; that everyone has an equal chance to become successful when the realities of the world and society are not always equal. Factors such as race or socioeconomic status play a role that can make it harder for some people to have the same access and education compared to others. Patel suggests that schooling operates within systems of what she calls “racist capitalism,” where outcomes are unequal by design, not by chance. This assumption is evident when she explains how education “sort[s] people into their respective societal positions” and sustains inequity rather than disrupts it. This reframing pushes us to question long-held beliefs about what it means to be “successful” in school versus what it means to truly learn.
I agree with Patel’s idea that true learning can change who you are, not just what you know and it isn’t always measured in test scores. I thought of multiple of my students who if viewed as just a test score would be an injustice to them. Even though their scores may not show progress or change, being with them in the classroom everyday and watching them grow as the year goes on says otherwise. Her example of her mother shows that learning can be personal and powerful, especially when someone chooses to learn on their own. This holds true to what we see in classrooms when students are truly engaged, they grow in deeper ways than just getting the “right answer.” Teachers can make a difference by creating spaces where students can think freely, take risks, and learn in meaningful ways. As a teacher, this means focusing more on helping students think, grow, and express themselves, instead of just focusing on grades or performance.
Week 11
In “Pedagogies of Resistance and Survivance: Learning and Marronage”, Leigh Patel challenges the idea that schooling and learning are the same thing. One of the biggest points in the article is that formal schooling often focuses more on achievement, sorting, and social reproduction than on real learning. She argues that learning is actually unpredictable, transformative, and sometimes uncomfortable, while schooling in the U.S is often tied to larger systems of racism, capitalism, and settler colonialism. Because of this, schools end up reinforcing inequality while presenting themselves as places of opportunity and progress. I thought it was especially powerful when Patel explained that achievement has become so normalized in education that people often treat test scores, academic success, and upward mobility as if they automatically reflect meaningful learning, when in reality they do not.
Patel strengthens this argument by sharing the different experiences of her parents, showing how education and learning can lead to different outcomes. Her father followed the path that formal education promises, but that path didn’t protect him from the realities of racialized inequality. Her mother, on the other hand, experienced learning in a much more personal and transformative way as she taught herself English, sewing, and later, t’ai chi. Patel connects this idea to the idea of marronage, to show that learning can be a form of survival and defiance within oppressive systems. One point I agree with is her argument that schools too often confuse achievement with learning. I think this is still very true today because students can earn good grades or pass exams without truly growing, questioning, or changing in meaningful ways. Persoanlly, this article was a reminder that as an educator, I should not only focus on performance, but also on creating spaces where students can experience deeper learning that helps them develop as thinkers and as people.
Week 11:
Reading Pedagogies of Resistance and Survivance: Learning as Marronage by Leigh Patel made me rethink how I understand education. Before engaging with this article, I often viewed schooling and learning as one thing. However, the reading helped me see that they can be very different. Schooling, as I have known it, is structured and controlled, often placing pressure on students to demonstrate achievement through grades and test scores. I realized that much of my focus in those environments was not on what I was truly learning or why it mattered, but rather on performing well and meeting expectations, such as earning high grades or securing a good job after graduation.
In contrast, the author presents learning as something far more complex and meaningful. Her mother’s experience stood out to me because it reflects a form of learning that is unpredictable, deeply personal, and driven by necessity and curiosity. It is not confined to a classroom or measured by formal assessments. Instead, it is challenging and transformative, shaping not only what a person knows but who they become. This idea resonated with me on a personal level. After living abroad in a country where I did not speak the language, I found myself in a similar position. I had to navigate unfamiliar situations, learn through experience, and adapt in ways that went beyond traditional schooling. That experience helped me understand how powerful learning outside the classroom can be.
The article pushed me to see learning as more than just gaining knowledge or achieving high scores. It is a process that can be uncomfortable, transformative, and even resistant. On the other hand, schools still operate within systems that require structure, accountability, and assessment, which makes me wonder how to balance these demands with the need for deeper, more meaningful learning.
Reading Patel’s article made me think about how the school system works and how it impacts our diverse culture. One of my main takeaways is that doing well in school—like getting good grades or high test scores—doesn’t always mean real learning is happening. Patel explains that schools often focus on achievement, while true learning can be deeper, more personal, and sometimes challenging. I agree that students from different backgrounds don’t experience school the same way, since things like culture, race, and resources can shape their experiences. This made me think about how some students feel supported in school, while others may feel left out. At the same time, I don’t fully agree that schools are only negative, because I’ve seen how teachers and classrooms can create positive learning experiences. The main idea I’m taking away is that real learning is more than just passing tests—it’s about thinking, asking questions, and growing. Moving forward, I want to focus more on truly understanding what I learn and recognizing that education can be different for everyone.
I really agree with the idea that learning is not the same as achievement, and that schools constantly blur that line. Patel explains how achievement has become this dominant goal, to the point where people treat test scores and grades as if they are proof of real learning, when they really are not. That stood out to me because I’ve seen how easy it is for students to succeed in school without actually understanding or connecting to what they are learning. It made me think about how often learning is reduced to something measurable, when in reality it is messy, uncomfortable, and takes time. I also agree with the idea that learning involves transformation. The way Patel describes learning as something that changes who you are, not just what you know, felt very real. Her example of her mother learning English and new skills, and how that completely shifted her life, showed that learning is deeply personal and not limited to classrooms. That kind of learning feels much more meaningful than just memorizing information for a test.
What I want to take from this and actually act on is creating a classroom where learning is allowed to be that kind of process. I want my students to feel like they are allowed to struggle, take risks, and not always get things right the first time. Instead of just focusing on whether they completed an assignment correctly, I want to pay attention to how they are thinking and what they are actually understanding. I also want to be more intentional about creating moments where students can connect learning to their own lives, because that is where real transformation happens. At the same time, I know that the school system is still very structured and focused on outcomes, so part of what I want to work on is finding ways to balance those expectations with creating space for deeper learning. Even small shifts, like asking more open-ended questions or allowing multiple ways to solve a problem, can make a difference. Overall, I want to hold onto the idea that learning should change students in some way, not just prepare them to pass something, and try to build that into my teaching as much as I can.
Week 11
Patel discusses the concept of marronage in the context of a school setting, arguing that traditional education can constrain students and educators. However, learning should be an active, liberatory process rather than something confined to institutional norms. In the article Patel explains the differences between learning and school, although many people think these two concepts are the same. School is more focused on grades and testing as a measure of achievement whereas learning should be much more than that and there should be more ways for students to learn outside what is just traditionally thought to be the correct wat.
What I found most important in this article and what I would act upon as a teacher, is the idea that educators can participate in small, everyday forms of resistance that prioritize students’ identities and lived experiences. This connects to the broader theme of survivance, where learning is not just about enduring oppressive systems but actively reshaping them. At the same time, I think there is concerns with how feasible this is within standardized school setting, where teachers might have limited autonomy. Still, Patel’s argument pushes me to think more critically about how I might create moments like these in my own classroom, even within those constraints.
In the reading “Responding to Cross-Pollinating Culturally Sustaining Pedagogy and Universal Design for Learning,” the author argues that combining these two instructional approaches is not enough to create true inclusion and that educators must also address deeper systems such as racism and ableism. I noticed that the simple act of combining these two approaches makes a classroom more inclusive. The authors push back on that and show that inclusion is deeper than just strategies. It has to address things like racism and ableism that are already built into the system. They make it clear that inclusion has to account for “the intersection of culture, language, and dis/ability.” This stood out to me because in schools, we focus a lot on programs and frameworks, but not always on what’s really behind them.
I agree that inclusion is not just about giving students different ways to access the lesson. In my classroom, I can scaffold and differentiate, but that doesn’t always mean I’m actually valuing students’ identities and experiences. The idea that Universal Design for Learning can be seen as “neutral” really resonated with me because teaching is not neutral. Every decision we make impacts students differently. I see this a lot when I’m supporting my students with Individualized Education Programs, especially during math.
At the same time, I would argue that even though I agree with the message, it’s hard to fully apply this every day. There are pacing guides, testing, and curriculum expectations that make it difficult to go as deep as the authors are suggesting. I also think the article could have included more real classroom examples, especially for elementary, to show what this actually looks like in practice.
What I want to take from this reading is being more intentional when I plan. Not just thinking about access, but also thinking about whose voices are being included and who might still be left out. I want to keep pushing myself to make my lessons reflect my students more, especially in math.
In the reading “Responding to Cross-Pollinating Culturally Sustaining Pedagogy and Universal Design for Learning,” the author makes a strong case that just blending these two frameworks isn’t enough for true inclusion. They argue that we have to go deeper and actually tackle the systemic racism and ableism built into our schools. This really hit for me because it’s easy to think that just using UDL strategies makes a classroom inclusive, but the authors show that inclusion is way more than just a set of strategies—it has to account for how culture, language, and dis/ability all intersect.
I definitely agree that inclusion isn’t just about giving students different ways to access a lesson. I can differentiate all day, but that doesn’t mean I’m truly valuing who my students are. The idea that UDL can be seen as “neutral” really stuck with me because, in reality, teaching is never neutral. Every choice we make affects students differently, which I see constantly when supporting my students with IEPs in math. However, I’ll admit it’s tough to put this into practice every single day with the pressure of pacing guides and standardized testing. I also wish the article gave more concrete examples for elementary classrooms so I could see what this looks like in action. Moving forward, I want to be more intentional in my planning—not just focusing on “access,” but asking myself whose voices are being centered and who is still being left out.
After reading “Cross-Pollinating Culturally Sustaining Pedagogy and Universal Design for Learning: Toward an Inclusive Pedagogy That Accounts for Dis/Ability”, I felt really pushed to think more deeply about what it actually means to be inclusive in my classroom. I have always tried my best to be responsive to my students’ cultural and linguistic backgrounds, but this piece made me realize that I can’t think about culture without also thinking about ability. The idea of “cross-pollinating” culturally sustaining pedagogy with Universal Design for Learning stood out to me because it challenges the common tendency to treat these as separate approaches. It made me reflect on how often schools unintentionally create “normalcy”, whether that’s in language use, behavior, or ways of learning, and how that can truly marginalize students who do not fit that mold. As an educator, it reminded me that inclusion isn’t just about access, but it is about truly valuing who students are in all aspects of their identities.
I also appreciated how the authors emphasized the importance of disrupting deficit thinking. It made me reflect on my own practice and how easy it can be to unintentionally frame differences as challenges to “fix” rather than strengths to build upon. This reading pushed me to think about how I design lessons, the choices I give students, and whose voices are being centered. Moving forward, I want to be more intentional about creating flexible, student-centered learning experiences that honor both cultural diversity and different ways of learning. Overall, this article reinforced for me that being an inclusive educator is ongoing work. It requires constant reflection, a willingness to shift your mindset, and a commitment to seeing your students as whole, complex individuals.
Week 13: One thing that really stood out to me is that the authors seem to assume schools usually separate culture and ability, like they’re two different conversations, when they really shouldn’t be. They’re basically saying you can’t fully support students unless you’re thinking about both at the same time—who they are, where they come from, and how they learn. I honestly agree with this so much. In real life, kids don’t walk into a classroom as just one thing—they bring their language, their culture, their strengths, and their needs all together. It made me realize that even when we think we’re being inclusive, we might still be missing parts of who our students actually are if we’re not looking at the whole picture.
At the same time, I feel like the ideas sound really powerful in theory, but a little overwhelming in practice. Like yes, we should be blending culturally sustaining teaching with flexible, accessible learning for everyone—but how do we realistically do that every single day? That’s where I kind of question things. Still, what I really want to take from this and actually act on is being more intentional with my teaching. Not just adding in diverse examples here and there, but really thinking about how I can make learning feel accessible and meaningful for all my students. Even small things—like giving students choices, explaining concepts in different ways, or making sure they feel seen in the curriculum—feel like a step in the right direction, and that’s something I can actually see myself doing.
After reading “Responding to Cross-Pollinating Culturally Sustaining Pedagogy and Universal Design for Learning,” I agree that Culturally Sustaining Pedagogy and Universal Design for Learning should work together rather than separately. Students should not be defined by just one identity because each student brings multiple identities, including race, language, culture, and ability. Because of this, I believe that it is unfair to think that teaching can be truly “universal” if it does not shed light on this complexity. I agree that teaching should be designed with these differences in mind from the very beginning.
In my future classroom, I want to move away from the idea of adjusting lessons after learning about students’ identities and instead design lessons that already include all learners. This means creating multiple pathways for success, such as using videos, visuals, gestures, drawings, and incorporating students’ prior experiences and cultural backgrounds. It also includes creating space for discussions about identity so students feel seen and valued in the classroom. By combining CSP and UDL, educators can create more inclusive, equitable learning environments that support all students rather than forcing them to fit into a slimming definition of success.
I really agreed with the idea that teaching isn’t just about including students but actually supporting who they are. Whether it’s their culture, language, or identity, anything about them should always be special. Learning should always be accessible. In my kindergarten student teaching, I was really able to see this, especially with multilingual students. When we had a morning meeting, we would use a different language every day when greeting. The new English speakers would get so excited. When lessons were just one way, some students wouldn’t really participate, but when I added visuals, turn-and-talks, or connected it to their lives, they opened up more and were way more engaged.
This reading honestly just put into words what I’ve already been noticing. It’s not just about academic differentiation. It’s also about making students feel comfortable and seen. I’ve noticed during read-alouds or discussions, when I connect questions to their experiences, more students want to share and take risks. It made me realize even more that classrooms aren’t neutral, and as the teacher, I have to be intentional about both access and making sure every student feels like they belong.
In the reading “Responding to Cross-Pollinating Culturally Sustaining Pedagogy and Universal Design for Learning,” the authors assume that schools do not fully support students’ cultural identities and abilities, and that inclusion requires more than just giving students access to the classroom. I agree with this because I’ve seen how students participate more when they feel represented and understood. For example, if a teacher includes books, examples, or discussions that reflect students’ cultures or communities, students are more likely to connect to the lesson because they are already familiar with the topic and can relate it to their own experiences. Also, allowing students to use their home language at times or relate assignments to their own experiences can make learning feel more meaningful. I also agree that teachers should think about both culture and ability at the same time, since students learn in different ways. Some students may understand better with visuals, group work, or having extra time, so it’s important to be flexible and support those different needs.
Although this may be challenging to do in real classrooms, these ideas are still important. For example, a teacher with a large class might struggle to meet every student’s needs, or may not have enough training on how to include different cultures and learning styles in their lessons. Schools may also lack resources, like diverse materials or support staff. Because of this, even if teachers want to be inclusive, it may not always happen fully. Overall, I want to keep working toward a classroom where all students feel respected and supported. I would include different perspectives and give students different ways to learn and show what they know, and make sure everyone feels comfortable speaking.
In Responding to Cross-Pollinating Culturally Sustaining Pedagogy and Universal Design for Learning: Toward an Inclusive Pedagogy That Accounts for Dis/Ability, I agree that schooling and the curriculum is based on a eugenics premise. Everyone should work together to dismantle the idea that there is one end goal for all students, that all students are the same, and if they’re not, teachers can simply differentiate to meet their needs. Students are all different and their differences should be welcomed and appreciated. They are all whole as they are. I agree that students aren’t the problem, the problem is more so our oppressive systems that limit our students and force them into the same boxes. I resonated with the idea of the Gifted and Talented Program being an example of eugenics because I currently work at a Gifted and Talented school. This idea that there are a select few students who are smarter or have more desirable traits than others should be removed. Schools are often a place of trauma for students. There is this idea of the generic student and when students don’t meet this mold, they feel a sense of otherness. This is the “mainstream” approach to teaching. This approach sets teachers up for failure because teachers fail to realize that all students are different and have different needs. I certainly became frustrated when on paper, I did everything I was told to do to help students excel, but the outcome wasn’t what I had hoped for.
Something that stood out to me was, “when it is no longer okay to segregate kids by race, we segregate by disability.” This definitely is true in our schools because we have different classes that justify these exclusions. We should all strive to have liberty for all and not at the expense of others. My questions now are, yes we’re all discussing it and reading to learn more, but is that truly enough? What can we do to change the system that has been in place for so long? How do we make schools work for the broadest range of kids? How do we think differently about the individual student and the individual grade?
I agree with the argument being made in Responding to Cross-Polinating Culturally Sustaining Pedagogy and Universal Design for Learning, that traditional schooling promotes inequality by trying to fix students instead of trying to fix the systems that create barriers in the first place. This idea reminded me of several of our class readings, specifically The School Days of an Indian Girl, where the author and other students who did not speak English were forbid from speaking their native language at school, even though they didn’t know any other language. This shows a system that views differences as problems rather than assets. Rather than questioning why the school environment is so rigid and exclusionary, it is up to the child to figure it out for themselves and assimilate. In another class, I recently read Inside Out by Francisco Jimenez, where the author discusses a similar experience he had assimilating into American schools. The student/author is young and only knows how to speak Spanish, and when he tries to speak to the one other Spanish speaking student in his class, they are yelled at
The School Days of an Indian Girl was written in 1900 and Inside Out was written in 1997, so what stands out to me is how relevant this still feels today. So many years later and we still have seen no changed in our schools. We continue to hear stories of students being discouraged or even disciplined for using their home languages in school. This shows that many classrooms are still operating in a way that views students’ linguistic and cultural identities as obstacles that they need to overcome, rather than skills. Instead of trying to “fix” students, schools should be spaces where those identities are valued and sustained.
“Cross-Pollinating Culturally Sustaining Pedagogy and Universal Design for Learning: Toward an Inclusive Pedagogy That Accounts for Dis/Ability“ focuses on the connection between culturally sustaining pedagogy and a universal design for learning. The article argues that schools need to move away from he idea of a “normal” or “generic” student. Instead of expecting all the students to learn in the same way, the discussion explains that classrooms should recognize and value differences in race, language, disability, culture, gender, and identity. A major point throughout the article is that racism and ableism is deeply connected, and schools often continue systems of exclusion even when they claim to be inclusive. The article explains that many school structures are built around narrow expectations of success, which can marginalize the students who do not fit traditional academic standards. Rather than forcing students to adapt to these systems, the discussion argues that schools themselves should change to better support diverse learners and experiences.
I agreed most with the idea that inclusion is not just about placing the students in existing classrooms and considering the job finished. True inclusion means creating learning environments where the students feel valued, represented, and able to participate meaningfully. I also agreed with the argument that schools can sometimes become places of trauma instead of support when students are constantly labeled as “at risk” or different. The article made an important point that diversity should not just be accepted but sustained, meaning the students’ cultures, languages, identities, and experiences should actively shape the classroom and curriculum. I also found it meaningful that the discussion challenged the focus on “grit and “resilience” because those ideas can ignore the larger systems of inequality the students face. Schools should strive to have a more human and justice-centered vision where it’s redesigned to support all the students rather than expecting them to fit into one rigid model of learning.
I agree with the cross pollination of CSP(Culturally Sustaining Pedagogy) and UDL(Universal Design for Learning). UDL follows a “cultural-neutral” or focus on primary cognitive/physical access.with the addition to CSP, it made sure the access also include cultural and linguistic belonging and the taking apart of racial and power structures. This framework can help students and educators feel better physically and mentally in school. Schools can brings up the idea that we come from different parts of the world, with different cultures but we are all humans. Teachers should allow students to bring in their own artifacts, to do a show and tell. That way, students can learn from each other and supports each other cultures. The teacher that creates this environment will surely bring up mature students.
David Rose and Joseph Michael Valent discuss about “debunking the normative center instead of “including the students in a exclusionary system. I think in this article, it is for educators to make students being recognized no matter of their race or abilities. As a future teacher, I will make sure that every student’s question gets answered and have them participate during class no matter of their ability or race.
The article, “Cross-Pollinating Culturally Sustaining Pedagogy and Universal Design for Learning: Toward an Inclusive Pedagogy That Accounts for Dis/Ability“ shows the connection between culturally sustaining pedagogy and universal design for learning. Universal design learning allows the delivery of content to be more accessible for all students, not using their learning standards, knowledge of language level or disability as a barrier. This can both support the increase of engagement, participation and inclusivity. With Culturally Sustaining Pedagogy, students are guided to feel a strong sense of belongingness and self-worth.This approach would also include their cultureThese frameworks promote a more fair classroom and reduce the achievement gaps. Together they create powerful classroom transformations. I completely agree and resonate with this article, its not about just differentiation, but how to foster and value their strengths and identify. When the author presented the term “disrupting deficit thinking”, is why the integration of CSP and UDL play a crucial role in todays’ classrooms.
As I read this week’s article, it gives me encouragement to continue doing what I’m doing in my first-grade classroom. I teach with a co-teacher in an ICT classroom where we integrate our teaching styles to be able to pollinate the students in the room. We have 21 students in our classroom, and none of them have IEPs. We utilize many different teaching styles to be able to help our students learn in an environment that is inclusive, where they don’t feel that they are placed in a setting that is specifically limiting their ability to learn. I feel that with the way classrooms are being incorporated, having classes where students can get that small group instruction or differentiation without feeling like they are picked on or labeled will cause them to want to do more and showcase what they actually know. I know this firsthand because this week I am working with my students on a citywide first-grade writing test, and I’m seeing just how much my students have progressed throughout the year.
What I’m going to do in my classroom shows that if we as educators allow ourselves to cross-pollinate the students, they can learn a lot from each other. I know that there are schools that don’t really reach our students who need more help than others, but if we do it, it needs to be done, and we will be able to help them. I agree with the article that we must sustain the children’s identities, and instead of just including the student, we need to be able to transform the system so that the students’ culture and way of life can be an asset to them and to us so that we can learn from them as they try to learn from us. I look forward to trying to implement what I learned from this article in my classroom, and I hope that I can become a better teacher because of it.
What I agreed with most in the text was the idea that schools are often built around this image of a “normal” or “mainstream” student, and everyone else is expected to adjust themselves to fit into that system. I feel like this happens all the time in classrooms, especially with multilingual learners, students with disabilities, or students from different cultural backgrounds. Instead of changing teaching methods to actually support students, schools sometimes just expect students to adapt on their own. For example, a student may understand content perfectly through discussion, visuals, or hands-on activities, but struggle on a traditional written test and suddenly be viewed as “behind.” I agreed with the authors that the problem is often the system itself, not the student.
Throughout my observation hours I have seen some schools that adjust very well to student needs and then there are other schools that immediately label children as difficult, disruptive, or low performing when they do not fit into one specific way of learning. In some classrooms I noticed teachers offering multiple ways for students to participate, asking questions, using visuals, or giving students extra support without making them feel singled out. But in other classrooms it felt like students were expected to just “keep up” no matter their background or needs. I also agreed with the discussion about how racism and ableism are connected because schools often decide who is seen as “smart,” “well-behaved,” or “capable” based on narrow expectations. Stereotypes are always present even if they are unintentional.
Based on the reading “[Responding to Cross-Pollinating Culturally Sustaining Pedagogy and Universal Design for Learning]” by Waitoller and King Thorius (2016), I see that my classroom experience echoes their assertion that traditional schooling often fails to fully support students’ cultural identities and complex abilities. I have observed that when I move beyond simply providing physical access to a classroom and instead foster a space where students feel deeply understood, their engagement increase. However, sometimes without the correct support it becomes difficult for students to feel like they are truly benefiting. For example, the school as a whole should also have programs implemented to include the many cultures in the classroom which will allow students to feel they belong in the community of the school.
Week 7
The Child and the Curriculum by John Dewey and The Lemon Grove Incident, answers the question “Where do pedagogies come from?” by showing reader/watcher that teaching methods come from more than just textbooks or schools. They come from students’ experiences, communities, culture, and (surprisingly) even social conflicts. Dewey seems to believe that education works best when teachers connect learning to the child’s real life and interests. He argues that curriculum should not just be a fixed set of subjects that students memorize, but a continuation of students own learned experiences. I agree with this because I’ve seen in my own observation classrooms that students are usually more engaged when they can relate to what they are learning. For students education becomes something meaningful instead of just something you have to get through. Though, In The Lemon Grove Incident, I noticed a slightly different but connected idea. The film shows how schools can reflect racism and inequality, especially through segregation. It also shows how families and communities can fight back and shape education themselves. I think this connects to the key question because it shows that pedagogy can also come from struggles for justice and equal treatment.
One thing I would argue is that Dewey’s ideas feel a little idealistic on their own. He focuses a lot on the relationship between the child and the curriculum, but the film reminds us that social issues like race and discrimination also affect education. Even if a curriculum is student-centered, students still may not have equal experiences if the system itself is unfair. Education cannot be neutral. We as future educators have a responsibility to creat environments where students feel both included and respected.
Week 8
After reading Pedagogy of the Oppressed by Paulo Freire and listening to Bias in the Library from On the Media, I think both texts prove that pedagogies are shaped by power, values, and the ways institutions decide what knowledge is important. As mentioned in my last response,schools and educational spaces are not neutral, and the way people teach is connected to larger social and political systems. Freire argues that traditional education often treats students like they are empty containers waiting to be filled with information. He calls this the “banking model” of education. He believes this kind of teaching limits critical thinking because students are expected to memorize instead of question or engage with ideas. Freire supports a more collaborative form of learning where teachers and students learn from each other through dialogue. I agree with this because students tend to learn more deeply when they are active participants instead of just listening and repeating information.
The podcast “Bias in the Library” also connects to this idea by showing how systems that organize information can still reflect bias. Libraries are usually seen as neutral places, but the episode explains how classification systems and cataloging can reinforce stereotypes or exclude certain perspectives. This made me realize that pedagogy is constructed not only through teachers and curriculum, but also through the materials, systems, and institutions that decide whose knowledge is valued. One thing I would argue is that while Freire’s ideas are powerful, it can be difficult to fully apply them in modern schools that rely heavily on testing, standardized curriculum, and strict classroom structures. Many schools still prioritize memorization and performance over discussion and critical thinking. Even teachers who want to create more open and student-centered classrooms may struggle within those systems. Regardless, the text serves as a reminder to both future and current educators that we need to question and current institutional expectations to create a better learning environment for both students and teachers.
Week 9
After reading Gregory Cajete’s “Children, Myth and Storytelling: An Indigenous Perspective” and Zitkala-Sa’s “The School Days of an Indian Girl,” I think both texts challenge the way traditional Western education is often structured and make us rethink what meaningful learning can look like. They suggest that we can reframe pedagogy by valuing storytelling, culture, identity, and relationships instead of focusing only on rigid academic systems.Cajete argues that storytelling is not just entertainment in Indigenous cultures, but a way of teaching values, identity, history, and connection to community. He assumes that learning is deeply connected to culture and lived experience, rather than separated into isolated subjects. I really liked this idea because it shows that education can happen in more personal and meaningful ways. Stories help people connect emotionally to knowledge, which can make learning feel more human and memorable.
There are serious dangers when the needs of students are ignored for traditional western educational expectations. Zitkala-Sa, The way her hair was cut and her culture was ignored demonstrates how education can become harmful when it refuses to respect students’ backgrounds. Education can either support student identities or try to erase them. Educators must make the right choice, the choice that best supports their students.Too often, schools act like there is only one “right” way to learn or behave, which can leave students feeling disconnected from who they are. At the same time, I would argue that schools today still struggle with this issue. Even though diversity is discussed more now, many educational systems still center dominant perspectives and leave out Indigenous and other marginalized voices. These, texts made me think about how pedagogy could become more inclusive, culturally responsive, and centered on human connection.
Week 11
“Pedagogies of Resistance and Survivance: Learning as Marronage,” pushes us to rethink teacher education as something more than training teachers to follow curriculum standards or classroom rules. Patel argues that education, especially in urban schools, should help teachers and students challenge systems of oppression and imagine new ways of learning and living. One idea that stood out to me was Patel’s use of “marronage,” which refers to enslaved people escaping and creating spaces of freedom outside oppressive systems. Patel uses this concept to describe learning as a form of resistance and survival. Instead of seeing education as simply preparing students to fit into existing systems, she encourages educators to think about how schools can help students question injustice and create new possibilities. I thought this was a really powerful way to rethink teacher education because it focuses on liberation and community rather than just achievement and discipline. I completely agree with Patel’s argument. As someone who works in an urban school, urban education is often shaped by systems of inequality, including racism, poverty, and standardized policies that do not always support students’ actual needs. Teacher education programs sometimes focus too much on classroom management or test scores without preparing teachers to understand the larger social conditions affecting students’ lives. This creates teachers who might lack sympathy and understanding when it comes to students needs and goals. Teaching is both political and relational. I like to believe that many teachers want to create more liberating and student center classrooms but they still face pressure from testing requirements, district policies, and limited resources. I think it’s unfortunate to position teachers as the only one who cares about students needs. I think schools and teacher preparation programs would also need structural changes to fully support this kind of pedagogy.
Patel made me think about how teacher education could better prepare educators to build relationships, support communities, and challenge inequities instead of just maintaining the status quo. Overall, the article suggests that improving urban education requires teachers who are willing to see education as a space for resistance, healing, and transformation.
Week 13
After reading H. Samy Alim, Susan Baglieri, Gloria Ladson-Billings, Django Paris, David H. Rose, and Joseph M. Valente’s article on culturally sustaining pedagogy and Universal Design for Learning (UDL), I think the reading taught us that curriculum and pedagogy in childhood education should be inclusive, flexible, and centered around students’ diverse identities and abilities. The article argues that teaching should not expect all students to learn in the same way, but instead should recognize cultural, linguistic, and ability differences as strengths. One idea that stood out to me was the connection between culturally sustaining pedagogy and UDL. The authors suggest that good teaching should both support students’ cultural identities and create multiple ways for students to access learning.
I believe this idea has been heavily honed in by other authors, and this article has done nothing but reaffirm to me that children’s different experiences, languages, learning styles, and abilities, and education needs to be respected. This made me think about how curriculum is often designed around what is considered “normal,” which can leave many students feeling excluded. I also liked the article’s emphasis on sustaining students’ identities rather than trying to change them. Instead of expecting students to leave their cultures or ways of communicating behind, the authors argue that schools should value and build upon them. I think this is especially important in childhood education because early school experiences can shape how children view themselves as learners.What I want to take away from this reading is the importance of designing classrooms where all children feel included, represented, and capable of learning. The article reinforced the idea that curriculum and pedagogy should not just focus on academic success, but also on helping children feel valued and connected to their identities and communities.
Week 14
Our readings have taught me that curriculum and pedagogy in childhood education should be centered around students’ identities, experiences, and different ways of learning rather than relying on one standard approach for everyone. Across the course, many of the authors challenged the idea that education is neutral or that all children learn the same way. Instead, they emphasized the importance of culturally responsive, inclusive, and student-centered teaching. One major theme I noticed is that children learn best when they feel seen and valued. Readings from John Dewey, Paulo Freire, and Gregory Cajete all highlight the importance of connecting learning to students’ lived experiences, cultures, and communities. Rather than treating students as passive learners, these authors encourage educators to create spaces where children actively participate, question ideas, and build knowledge through relationships and experience.
The readings also taught me that curriculum is shaped by power. Texts like The Lemon Grove Incident and Zitkala-Sa’s “The School Days of an Indian Girl” show how schools have historically excluded or erased certain identities and cultures. This made me realize that pedagogy is not just about teaching content, it is also about whose voices and histories are included or ignored in education.Another important lesson from the readings, especially the article on culturally sustaining pedagogy and Universal Design for Learning, is that classrooms should be flexible and inclusive of all learners. Children have different cultural backgrounds, languages, and abilities, so teaching should provide multiple ways for students to participate and succeed. Instead of trying to make students fit into one system, educators should adapt learning environments to meet students where they are. Overall, the readings taught me that childhood education should focus not only on academic achievement but also on equity, inclusion, and human connection. Good pedagogy values students’ identities, encourages critical thinking, and creates learning spaces where all children feel respected and capable of learning.