Finn- Literacy with an Attitude (Blog A)

 Literacy with an Attitude

Educating Working-Class Children in Their Own Self Interest

Patrick Finn

Three Talking Points:

1. Finn begins the article by explaining the two types of literacy education that is provided in our country. He says, "First, there is empowering education, which leads to powerful literacy, the kind of literacy that leads to positions of power and authority. Second, there is domesticating education, which leads

to functional literacy, literacy that makes a person productive and dependable, but not troublesome." As one might guess, the empowering education is given to children from higher socio-economic statuses, while the domesticating education is given to the middle-class/working-class children.

2. "The status quo is the status quo because people who have the power to make changes are comfortable with the way things are." (page XI) This quote reminds me of the articles from Delpit, Johnson and Armstrong & Wildman. All of the articles have mentioned that the people with power ignore, deny or argue that there's nothing wrong with society and that those not in power just aren't "doing enough". I agree with this quote because the reality is the people with power don't actually want society to change for fear of losing their power, or even sharing it.

3. Finn speaks to the different types of school settings based on socio-economic statuses of the families. Where the children of the affluent, "were developing a relationship to the economy, authority, and work," Finn states that the children of the working-class, "were learning to follow directions and do mechanical, low-paying work" (page 20). This disparity is a social construct that is used to prevent people from more easily moving up the economic hierarchy. 

Argument Statement:

The author Patrick Finn argues that we need to teach our working-class children literacy that provides the tools to challenge the current inequities that are present in the United States. This would take great reform within schools that serve our working-class families. Finn also says there would be pushback from the people with power, as it "threatens" to give others the chance to become equal to them in status.

Colorblindness is the New Racism (Assignment B)

 Colorblindness is the New Racism & All Lives Matter

Margalynne Armstrong and Stephanie Wildman & German Lopez

                         

In Armstrong and Wildman's work "Colorblindess is the New Racism: Raising Awareness about Privilege Using Color Insight" the authors promote deep analysis into the "colorblind" discourse surrounding race in the United States. The authors ask readers to think critically about the approach of "not seeing color" and to instead use an approach called color insight. Throughout the article Armstrong and Wildman make claims that colorblindness in action is actually an act of racism in itself, maintaining the privilege of some and perpetuating the discrimination of others. The work also challenges the audience to instead practice color insight, which works to explicitly think about race,  systems of privilege, white normativeness, and individualism. Color insight is said to provide, "an appropriate antidote to colorblindness, one that remedies the omission of context in racial discourse" (Armstrong and Wildman page 65). The article moves to prove that although the intention of colorblindness is usually positive, the impact is actually the opposite.

Armstrong and Wildman raise the idea that some people are so privileged that they do not acknowledge privilege exists. This idea reminds me of Lisa Delpit's The Silenced Dialogue: Power and Pedagogy in Educating Other People's Children when she says, "I believe that to act as if power does not exist is to ensure that the power status quo remains the same" (Delpit, page 292). Both articles discuss the comfortability the dominant race has in the United States and how there is a defensiveness that occurs when naming the privilege that they have. Armstrong and Wildman say that the use of colorblindness only acts as an excuse to prevent real change towards equality from happening. 

In this same vein, the Vox article "Why You Should Stop Saying 'All Lives Matter,' Explained 9 Different ways" by German Lopez, discusses the harm that the 'all lives matter' rhetoric creates in our country. Another way that the dominant culture has tried to minimize the discrimination in this country is by trying to take away from the true purpose of the BLM movement. Lopez says, "It’s also a complete misunderstanding of what the phrase “black lives matter” means. The person on the receiving end interprets the phrase as “black lives matter more than any other lives.”(Lopez) The immediate response that white people had to the Black Lives Matter movement was to deny their privilege and therefore prevent the discrimination that exists from being acknowledged and mitigated.

As a country we cannot deny that everyone has differences. To say that you "do not see color" is to take away people's individuality. Armstrong and Wildman say, "Discrimination cannot end absent an understanding of the privilege dynamic that enables discrimination to continue" (Armstrong and Wildman, page 65). In another article Allan Johnson said, "we can't talk about it if we can't use the words" (Johnson, page 11). The pieces we have studied this far have all made the same plea; we need to address privilege directly, in order to initiate the change needed to end the discrimination that is still so prevalent in this country.

Delpit - The Silenced Dialogue (Blog A)

 The Silenced Dialogue: Power and Pedagogy in Educating Other People's Children

By Lisa D. Delpit

                          

Three Talking Points:

1. "It's really hard. They just don't listen well. No, they listen, but they don't hear." (page 280) Delpit uses interview quotes to show the exhaustion of multiple Black people who have had the same experience with white people. Each person states that many white people listen but they are not actually understanding or hearing what is being said. This exhaustion is seen throughout this article and the many different people that are interviewed.

2. Delpit argues that while, "many liberal educators hold that the primary goal for education for children to become autonomous, to develop fully who they are in the classroom setting without having arbitrary, outside standards forced upon them," parents of students from groups other than the 'mainstream culture', "want to ensure that the school provides their children with discourse patterns, interactional styles, and spoken and written language codes that will allow them success in the larger society." (page 285) These different goals for education highlight the divide and misunderstandings that can occur between these two parties.

3. "If we are truly to effect societal change, we cannot do so from the bottom up, but we must push and agitate from the top down. And in the meantime we must take the responsibility to teach, to provide for students who do not already possess them, the additional codes of power" (page 293). This is a call to action from Delpit for white people to use their privilege and power to explicitly teach others how to gain success/power in our society. 

Argument Statement:

Lisa Delpit argues that students must be explicitly taught "formal conventions" as well as when it is appropriate to use this language AND should be able to practice their own linguistics. She argues that in order to both celebrate our students' diverse backgrounds and cultures, and to prepare our students for success in a white-dominant America, we should directly instruct our students about when and where it is best to use the two differing linguistic styles. She also mentions that this change must be initiated by the people in power in order to support real change in our society.