Students From Disadvantaged and Marginalized Communities Succeed in School - Book Report/Review Example

 The author has a dual purpose in writing this article. Initially, new philosophical insight is offered into the existing problem of how to help students from disadvantaged and marginalized communities succeed in school. This new thinking centers on the recently advanced sociological concept of social justice and how it can help students be successful in school. The second purpose of the paper is to report on research conducted at a disadvantaged primary school in South Australia. The problem addressed in this paper is the poor academic and social performance of children living in poverty and marginalized communities. The author believes that creating a socially just school is the best way to help these students to reach their educational and life goals. The real issue according to the author is that children from these diverse backgrounds are not able to "decode" school. He sees the schools as cultural institutions that fail to match the lives, histories and circumstances of disadvantaged children. The author believes that schools need to reinvent themselves as institutions that build social capital for disadvantaged children, primarily through interaction with their classroom teachers. Two theorists are featured prominently in this author's work. The first is Bourdeiu’s idea of social capital. In short, social capital as visualized by Bourdieu is the network of relationships that give individuals access to institutional resources. These networks are constantly reaffirming, often unconscious and are utilized by the dominant class to replicate uniformity and maintain social dominance. The second theorist is Satnton-Salazar, who developed ideas about teacher based social capital. Stanton-Salazar theorizes that the relationship between student and teacher is an optimal way for disadvantaged students to build social capital. Teachers energized by helping students negotiate unfamiliar social worlds by extending their web of social connections are preparing students to bridge the gap between heterogeneous groups. The key points of the paper are presented in context of the research conducted at a primary school in South Australia. The first point the author establishes is that there is a disconnect between the policy driven, numbers obsessed, business model type school and what students coming from disadvantaged communities need to learn. His call for a major reform to reinvent school based upon the concepts of social capital building is hampered by several realities. First, he found that teachers did not have a good understanding of the concept of social capital. The term was used interchangeably with several other terms with a decidedly psychological slant. He applauded the teacher's commitment to these children, but found that a lack of cohesive understanding of social capital resulted in uncoordinated efforts to address social ills. The author then lists three themes teachers identified that they could address in order to help students learn better, namely participating in social learning, "hanging in" or not giving up on kids and valuing and developing real relationships with the students. As I reflected on this reading, my greatest question was what the socially just school would look like? I agree with the idea of building social capital to allow disadvantaged kids to feel as though they have a legitimate place in society, regardless of ethnicity or economic status. But the author seemed put out that the teachers in this school didn't understand social capital the same way he did. These teachers, many of them teaching for 15+ years in disadvantaged school are, in their own ways, establishing the relationships that lead to social capital. I believe firmly in the author's assertions about the data driven school being detrimental to real learning for these students, but I ended the reading wondering how he thought the socially just school would work. Apple, M. (2005). Doing things the 'right' way: legitimating educational inequalities in conservative times. Educational Review, 271-293. The aim of this author's paper is to provide a comprehensive overview of the conservative coalition that is pushing education in America to the right of the political spectrum. The paper breaks the coalition into four distinct groups, states their basic ideology and then gives concrete examples showing how these groups work to shape education in America. The author also uses the paper as a platform to highlight how he perceives each ideology is detrimental to education and learning. The author addresses the problem of American education being strongly pushed to the right by a coalition of groups. The essential problem outlined by the author is how these groups work to alter what is termed common sense. This common sense deals with answers to big issues such as how we view democracy, how we see ourselves fitting into markets as consumers and how we feel markets should work. The real purpose of this agenda, the author claims, is to legitimize discrimination and inequalities within the American educational system. He argues that the four identified groups in the conservative coalition are dangerous to egalitarian ideals because of their high levels of integration, unity and financial backing. The main body of the paper consists of the author highlighting the ideologies of the four elements of the conservative coalition. These groups are identified as neo-liberalism, neo-conservatism, authoritarian populism and the professional and managerial new middle class. The neo-liberal ideology consists of converting everything in the educational system (including the students) to a market-based model. Students are no longer students in this ideology. They are viewed as human capital that must be invested properly for the good of the economy, or broader market. Schools are viewed as "black holes" which consume capital but produce nothing in return unless the students are fit for the employment the current economy demands. This ideology is especially dangerous because it creates the illusion of consumers (students) operating freely within a market (school). The implicit message is that those who end up poor must have made poor choices as a consumer. The neo-conservative ideology seeks to return to an imagined past where people knew their place and where sable communities were guided by a Darwinian natural order. They stress a return to traditional teaching of subjects such as patriotism and character as a means of accomplishing their social agenda. This altering of common sense shows up most forcefully in the push for charter schools by neo-conservatives. While charter schools have a good record of providing outstanding educational opportunities when implemented correctly, the charter schools envisioned by neo-conservatives are established to accomplish their social agenda, not to produce educational excellence. They espouse a return to the traditional curriculum, even if that curriculum was exclusive and racist. The authoritarianism populist element in the conservative coalition focuses on issues relating to gender, the family and social morals. This movement is most closely associated with the "Christian Right". The authoritarian populists have influence over nation issues by placing pressure on the publishers of educational materials such as textbooks to produce materials that conform to their beliefs. The final and least influential group is the professional and managerial middle class. These are the experts now called upon to produce standardized test and to make school more efficient. They see job security in the initiatives of the conservative coalition and perhaps upward mobility for them and their children as this social agenda advances. I fully agree with the author's assertion that these forces are a threat to broad, liberal education in America. I also agree with his statement that this coalition is not a juggernaut that cannot be stopped. The opposition is not as well funded, or as well organized. But I would note that even though the ideas expressed here are only four years old, they sound somehow dated considering the current global financial crisis. I don't think anyone is suggesting markets without controls are the best way to do anything anymore. There also has been a change in the White House, but it is worth noting that many in President Obama's new cabinet are taken from the ranks of the last group identified by the author, so the future course of American education is still in doubt. Robinson, K. (2005). Reinforcing Hegemonic masculinities through sexual harassment: issues of identity, power and popularity in secondary schools. Gender and Education, 19-37. The purpose of the author writing this paper was to introduce a new concept concerning sexual harassment in secondary schools. The author reviewed many of the existing theories on sexual harassment and expressed confidence in their validity. However, the stated goal of this paper was to introduce new ideas about how sexual harassment is about male power within male groups. The author did this by evaluating the data collected from interviews conducted over the past decade. The author argues in this paper that sexual harassment is more than a way for one gender to assert superiority over another. It is in fact a way of gaining power and acceptance within one’s own gender group. The author seeks to use data from interviews to show how sexual harassment is utilized effectively as a means of oppressing the “other” beyond heterosexual binary gender relationships. Investigations into how ethnicity, race and class affect utilization of sexual harassment as a means of gaining power and acceptance is also presented. The author concludes that males use sexual harassment as a means of validating the hegemony of their masculinity and to prove their masculinity to peers in order to gain acceptance. The paper is written within a feminist post-constructionalist framework. This framework is holds that individuals are shifting subjects that are constantly changing. They are volatile and contradictory rather than rational, static beings. This theory is used to explain the obvious double standards regarding sexual harassment expressed by many of the boys during their interviews. The author calls for more research in the conclusion to understand the shifting nature of humanity boys can learn more positive ways to express their masculinity without sexual harassment. The author clearly makes the case connecting sexual harassment to establishing hegemony. It was pointed out that boys, especially those in the early grades of secondary school do not recognize sexual harassment as being harmful. They feel that they are just joking around with girls or teasing them. They feel that sexual harassment always involves some sort of physical contact. Sexist remarks, jokes and expressions are not deemed to be harmful by these young boys. Older boys recognize that what they are doing is on some level is wrong, but justify their actions by saying that girls actually enjoy the attention or that they deserve to be treated that way because they are “cheap”. Finally, the author explored attitudes and stereotypes across ethnic boundaries. Teachers reported that Asian and Arabic boys were more likely to sexually harass girls of European descent because they were viewed in these cultures as being sexually available. They resisted harassing females of their own ethnic group because the chastity of these girls was important to them culturally because they were more likely to marry one of these girls. I agree with the assertions present in the paper. Sexual harassment is a means of acceptance and gaining power within male peer groups. As I reflected on the paper however, I found myself wondering if this is the norm. I cannot recall these types of behaviors being pervasive in my own adolescent years. I understand the paper is focusing on a specific means boys use to define their masculinity within their gender group. My lingering question is how pervasive is this in society? At times I felt as if the author was accusing nearly all boys of participating in these behaviors. I would need to see more evidence to support this in order for me to believe sexual harassment is as pervasive a formative rite as presented in this paper. Sue Saltmarsh, D. Y. (2004). "Special Sport" for misfits and losers: educational triage and the constitution of schooled subjectivities. International Journal of Inclusive Education, 353-371. The author’s objective in this paper is to draw attention to as set of circumstances that exists in physical education classes. The author uses this paper to highlight how student subjectivities are formed by discourses within the school setting. The author aims to shed light on these discourses and the effect they have on students placed in exclusive physical education settings. The argument in the paper states that a combination of discourses within the school setting, socially acceptable constructs relative to masculinity and physicality are coupled with practices such as educational triage to produce negative subjectivities for the students involved in Special Sport classes. The class featured in the paper was formed to give students that did not excel at traditional valorized sports in the school setting a place to go where they could not be bullied by other students. The author argues that segregating the students in this class labels them as misfits and losers (terms used by actual faculty members during interviews) and does nothing to prevent the real issues of bullying and intolerance by the other students. Important theories related in the article begin with neo-liberalism and the marketization of the educational system. Treating schools as a marketplace require them to make decisions designed to maximize profit (learning) with minimal resources. Gilborn and Youdell’s concept of “educational triage” is introduced as one way schools respond to marketization. In short, “educational triage” is the process of allocating scarce resources where they can do the most good. This requires schools to write off some students as “hopeless cases”. Students falling into this category received less funding for classes and programs. They are marginalized by the terminology used to describe their classes (the use of the term “special”, for example) and for failing to measure up to the prevailing societal norms for masculinity or femininity. A final important theory is that of Foucault, who viewed schools as institutions of punishment and therefore had the ability to influence the subjectivities formed by students through implicit and explicit discourse. The author uses data from interviews to form ethnography of students in a Special Sport class in New South Wales. This ethnography exposed discourses within the school that served to marginalize the students, resulting in a feeling of alienation. The author establishes that the trouble for these students begins with the fact that they are not proficient at valorized sports such as football or surfing. They fail to conform to accepted norms of masculinity and are bullied as a result. Skipping physical education class is one way of avoiding the bullying, but the school penalizes such behavior. The students are placed in Special Sport, a term when considered in an intextualized construct denotes a lack of ability in more areas than physical prowess. Lack of equipment, playing fields and funds serves to reinforce the discourse of the school that says these students are “hopeless cases”. The telling of the original intent of the Special Sports class fascinated me. It was intended to be a safe haven for certain students. While this sounds appropriate in some circumstances, this paper I feel shows why exclusive education almost always fails. They quickly became the marginalized “other” which resulted in a multiplicity of new negative messages from teachers, peers and the institution of school itself. I fully agree with the author and I can see how something as simple as having a no truancy policy for a class can be a discursive message that affects subjectivities formed by students within the school. Julie Matthews, R. S. (2005). Desperately seeking the global subject: international education, citizenship and cosmopolitanism. Globalisation, Societies and Education, 49-66. The authors of this paper state that their claim is primarily reviewing existing theories pertaining to globalisation and cosmopolitanism in the context of international education. A review of several theorists’ work is conducted for each subject, focusing on neo-liberal influences on each. The authors seek to identify the potential within the broad definitions of globalisation and cosmopolitanism for positively affecting egalitarian change on a global scale. These reviews are conducted in response to surprising findings from earlier quantitative studies designed to measure how secondary school students use technology to become “global citizens”. The argument within the paper consists of the authors showing the potential for positive affective change on societies through globalisation, cosmopolitanism and international education. The authors see the influence of neo-liberal thoughts and the marketization of these three movements as a threat to egalitarianism. The authors believe that if we are to gain the most benefits from these evolutionary systems, then we must not assume that their very existence will always produce positive change. Concerning globalisation, the authors argue that already the movement has been captured by neo-liberal views of marketization. Globalisation to many means economic interconnectivity and nothing more. The depiction of flows of people from one place to another without regard to state boundaries is often viewed in economic terms as a positive. It is viewed as increased opportunity. What are often not considered are the social stressors behind those flows, namely war, poverty, failed states and inequitable global trade. The authors stress that the broadest sense of globalisation must be viewed if we are to equitably benefit from this evolution. One of these necessary changes is the development of globally minded citizens, or “grounded” cosmopolitans. The authors introduce the idea of a cosmopolitan. Often the individual is viewed as living life beyond the typical bounds of nationalism, patriotism and economic need. Some view the banal cosmopolitan as little more than an international gadfly. The authors argue for the development of “grounded” cosmopolitans. These are individuals that posses a global worldview, while still maintaining a connection, affiliation or even feelings of patriotism for their home state. The authors argue that this “grounding” of the individual allows them a greater capacity for empathy, so long as these feelings towards locality do not obscure their worldview. An important way students can become “grounded” cosmopolitans is though international education. The authors warn, however that simply by having students study internationally is not enough to reach this goal. They point out that the nations hosting the most international students are the United States, Great Britain and Australia. Most of the international students are from east and south Asia. There is almost no reciprocity between these nations in regards relative to the exchange of international students. This lack of reciprocity represents a threat to extending the reaches of neo-liberal, market centered thought. In fact, the industry of international education is now a significant source of revenue for schools in these leading host nations. I agree with the position taken by the authors in this paper. The fact that globalization and cosmopolitanism exist and are apparently expanding is no guarantee of a more harmonious world. First world ideologies and biases are more likely to be spread by these phenomenon than by them than they are mediated unless first world societies develop the means to help citizens develop a more global regard for humanity. I am skeptical, as are the authors, that we are headed for a united world order, replete with international laws and bureaucracy. As they stated, such a system would be bureaucratically crippling and culturally bland. We do indeed need individuals that want to be part of a world society based on egalitarian principles, but this needs to be accomplished by individuals working from a base of self that includes their national identity. Martens, L. (2005). Learning to consume-consuming to learn: children at the interface between consumption and education. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 343-357. The purpose of this paper is to first present a review of current literature concerning how the market teaches older and younger children. Two books and several articles are referenced. The author goes into depth in exploring the first book but then uses the second book to expand on the ideas of the first. The article concludes with a call for more research concerning the affect of the market on the learning of children from a sociological perspective. The author argues for this approach because more institutions that appear to be formative for children are involved in this sort of research than other approaches. The author argues that using an approach following the theories that guide the sociology of consumption, researchers and theorists can have a better understanding of the relationship nexus that exists between children, the market and education. The author states that the traditional means of teaching and learning are in decline. Instead, the marked is being viewed as a more effective pedagogue. This is the view held by many neo-liberal educational entrepreneurs that seek to market their wares to schools and children based on their “educational value”. Traditional views of childhood constructed during modernity shielded children from the market. Marketers seeking to reach children first convinced parents of the educational nature of some toys. They then progressed to creating the fantasy/series toy that skipped parental involvement and marketed directly to the child. Even these touted their educational value. The result was an alienated teacher/parent group that no longer “understood” the toys of their children. This disconnection is the source of conflict and expressed disinterest in children relative to formal schooling. The review of the writing by Kenway and Bullen called Consuming Children expresses the view that the market is doing a much better job educating and “reaching” children than parents and teachers. They call for formal education to utilize the methods of the markets to fight back and restore the primacy of formal education. This theory says that markets have transformed the way children expect information to be delivered. They also have an expectation, informed by the market, as to quality and style of information presented. By studying marketing, teachers and parents can learn where today’s children “are at” and be more successful in reaching them in a formal educational setting. The author only partly agrees with Kenway and Bullen. She feels that children are not only informed by the market, but that parents and others in a child’s social network also teach children about material expectations. The author references a study by Chin titled Purchasing Power: black kids and American consumer culture. Chin found that kids in low-income families learned restraint and moderation because of the financial constraints felt in the family. Chin conduced an experiment where children from low-income families were given $20 to spend on anything they want. She found that their purchases focused on needs that would alleviate stress on the family budget, such as the purchase of shoes or food. The author uses these two pieces of literature to construct two differing models displaying the nexus between education, children and the market. One stresses the connectivity of children to the market and followed the discourse of Kenway and Bullen. The other showed parents and the child’s social structure acting as a buffer between the child and the market, not by isolating the child, but by being a source of information that mitigated the information coming from the market. I found the models presented by the author to be enlightening. Far from viewing the market as an all-powerful monolith that forces all of our decisions, the second model shows that the teaching of parents and close communities can resist the influence of the market. On the other hand, personal experience with the stresses created by the teaching of the market and the demands children place upon parents to heed the call of the market shows me that the writings of Kenway and Bullen have a great amount of personal validity. Gabrielle O'Flynn, E. B. (2007). The 'good life' and the 'rich portfolio'; young women, schooling and neo-liberal subjectification. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 459-472. The authors of this article intend to provide an overview of existing circumstances relative to the influence schools have on how students view themselves and what they believe they can be. Two case studies of girls from different schools were used to illustrate how schools affected the girl’s understandings of self. The point the authors were trying to make was that schools send many messages to students, both explicit and implicit, that influence what students feel they can achieve. Of particular interest to the authors is how the concepts of neo-liberalism affected these two girls of different economic status. The authors argued that the different schools played a major role for each girl in defining what it meant to be successful, productive and happy. Major theories mentioned in this article were the theories of neo-liberalism and Foucault’s ideas about the constitution of the self. Foucault believed that individuals followed cultural models in defining and creating their idea of self. This was done in relation to discursive institutions, such as schools and governments. Neo-liberalism is the thought that everything is measured by its value as determined by the market. Choices and decisions of individuals need to be tailored to the existing conditions of the market if they are to be “successful”. The two case studies were derived from a series of ten interviews taken over the span of three years with each girl. The pseudonyms given to the girls were Faye and Felicia. Faye was attending a private school during the interviews. This schools discourse focused on adding “value” to students by encouraging them to keep busy with worthwhile activities that had a clearly marketable outcome. In other words, they encouraged activities that could end up on a resume. Faye reported being stressed by her busy schedule that kept her running from one sports practice to another, studying late for academic classes and participating in the Duke of Edinburgh’s Scheme, which is a program that includes a multi-faceted approach to education. Awards of the bronze, silver and gold variety is awarded for the numbers of hours spend accomplishing the scheme over three years. Faye was articulate in her answers and expressed herself in a manner as if her life consisted of building a portfolio for later use. Felicia attended a government school with many low-income families. Her schools discourse encouraged student to be “good” students by “doing their best”. There was no mention of excellence or striving to achieve greatness. She too was busy, but most of her activities such as organizing a dance troupe to participate in a talent show and being the captain of her house swim team were done just to have fun. She spent time each day caring for younger siblings after school, cooking, cleaning and studying with them in an effort to support her parents that worked long hours. The authors note that both girls lead busy, active lives, but that Felicia seemed to be living more in the now with little regard for how her actions would affect her future choices. Faye on the other hand, was building a portfolio that would help her achieve success as defined by neo-liberal thought. I agree with the authors that schools have a great influence over how students view and form their concepts of self. I can also see how this fact works in regards to the thought that a major purpose of neo-liberal systems is to (re)create the existing social matrix again and again for generations. Using data gathered in interviews for these two case studies was a particularly effective way to show how schools help perpetuate social and economic stats quo. Department of Education, S. a. (2005). National Framework for Values Education. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia. This publication is intended to offer a framework for the teaching of values education in Australia. The framework as offered includes a context for values education, a vision for values education in Australia, a set of values to be taught, guiding principles to support schools in implementing values education and practical guidance for schools on how to start values education programs. The goals of values education in Australia are that students will, after their training have high self-esteem and a commitment to personal excellence. They are to be able to make good decisions concerning morality, ethics and social justice. A major part of this is to be accomplished by schools introducing these values into their discourse. Australian schools are to develop a vision of values education that follows established best practices of instruction. This vision should become part of the school’s mission statement. The nine values for Australian Schooling are: care and compassion, doing your best, fair go, freedom, honesty and Trustworthiness, integrity, respect, responsibility and understanding, tolerance and inclusion. The guiding principles attached to the teaching of these values are designed to give flexibility in teaching and implementation. The values should be taught in a manner that allows students to explore their own values, the values present in their school, community and nation first. The final aspect of the document is a list of six ways to most effectively implement values education. Effective teaching, utilization of community resources and establishing a safe and comfortable learning environment are all mentioned. My reaction to this document is one of concern. While it could have been much more heavy-handed in some ways, my real concern is the way the values that are to be taught are presented. This document seems to express that these values are regarded in the same degree and in the same ways uniformly throughout all of Australian society. They are clearly intended to encourage students not to develop these attributes for themselves or for the benefit of others, but instead to help keep the democratically supported market of Australia running smoothly without protest or concern. While I fully support the development of positive social values, my concern with this document centers around two questions that remain unanswered. First, who will teach these values within the social context if that context places that community’s practice outside of mainstream Australian thought? Second, who will judge if the goals as outlined in the document are being met? In other words, what will Australia look like if this educational initiative is successful, and will we like the new Australia that has emerged? Read More