Welcome to Gaia! ::

Ratttking
Lady__Miko
Ratttking
Spidermonkey323
Ratttking

The only issue I see is your wanting to create some sort of separate system that treats black children differently than other children. I believe that is called racial segregation, and I am opposed to it and anyone who promotes it.


You just said if they disrupt the class they should be kicked out tho. Isnt that segregating? Waii so lemme get this straight ok... A bunch of black kiddies that dont conform are put in spec. ed class or thrown in some room w/o instruction a lot and it is not segregating... But...it is segregating to put em in classes capable of reducing the cultural discontinuity so they learn?


I need a facepalm smiley...or emote..thingy.
Any student should be punished for disrupting class. Show me how doing that is racial segregation..oh, you can't.


Again explain what is meant by "disruptive" behavior. As some of what you are saying is "disruptive" would probably be an example of punishing the child for behaving in a way their culture permits.

Quote:
Assuming that children cannot learn without special treatment because of their race is condescending and racist. emotion_facepalm


An educational system designed to cater particularly to subscribers of white middle class culture gives people of that cultural affiliation special treatment. What is being asked when demanding more cultural beliefs/learning styles, is not special treatment, but equal treatment in that subscribers of white middle class culture are not inherently advantaged due to the structure of the educational system giving them a few legs up. Schools should at least make the attempt to reflect pervasive beliefs and methods of learning that differ. This does not simply mean black ways of thinking/learning styles either. I mentioned that earlier as well.
Try reading my earlier post to which you did not respond.

Prove to me that education caters to white middle class, and while you are at it, tell me how if it does so it does not discriminate against whites of other classes. You seem to care little for their needs.


First of all, you keep ignoring the fact that I've already stated that I have no problems with exposure to other prevalent beliefs around the world as well as within the country. Saying it is wrong that black culture is not integrated in schools is not suggesting that it is wrong for people to only that alternative. The suggestion I care "little" under such a premise is a false statement and we were over this when you accused me of demanding blacks get special treatment over other racial groups. Same argument from you, just a slight twist. The OP attempts discuss comparisons between the mainstream culture (white middle class), and the culture that blacks practice as they have been noted by other authors. Your attempts at demanding more and more reductionism is not going unnoticed. Whatever group/class you deem the educational system to cater to, black culture is left out and it therefore overlooks the perspectives and behavioral patterns of a large ethnic group in the States.
Keltoi Samurai
do you understand the reason for removing a child from the classroom when they are engaging in disruptive behavior? a child shouting down the teacher, or distracting other students, or doing any of those things that, when a white child does it is disruptive, but when a black child does it is just "part of his culture," is not only not learning, themselves, but is becoming an obstacle to the education of the students around them.


Again it was demanded that "disruptive" be a bit more defined. Sometimes it would be seen as universally wrong, but in many cases it is not. Talking out of turn may be considered disruptive but this is not the case in black communities where it demonstrates being engaged in the conversation. One can attempt to suggest cultural relativity in the classroom (as people should learn this regardless of culture) but demonization of the behavior isn't necessary. Verve, is also the phenomenon of being used to learning under lots of stimulation like music, dance, etc. So when a black child is denied the the stimulus he has grown accustomed to, he may "disrupt" the class, but this is because the nature of the class already disrupted his ability to learn by taking from him that which his mind has been raised to utilize as a tool for learning. Another problem that aggravates this even further is that the material is not intrinsically motivated to be learned. So stimulation from the work itself cannot be argued either. The work is not stimulating, so the child attempts to find a stimulus to pay attention. Give it a few years and you've got a "disruptive" child with ADD or an emotional disability taking classes with kids that are mentally retarded. Good job USA!

Quote:
this is a problem. I don't care how much you want to downplay the effect on the entire class, the reason classrooms exist in the first place is to educate, and if one student decides they are gonna mess that up for themselves and the entire rest of the class as well, it's no longer "well, he's just expressing his culture," so much as it's "do we do something about him, so that the other students can learn, or do we throw the other 29* kids in there with him under the bus so as to avoid hurting his feelings?"


While I don't think should we segregate per se (it doesn't expose people to much beyond their own bubble) the alternatives often "segregate" these kids anyway. If it ultimately came down to it, rather then stick them in a class that suggests they are mentally retarded or have some kind of other mental problem, it'd probably be better to put them in a class where their culture is better suited for learning and to take further action from there.
Ratttking's avatar

Magical Pumpkin

18,550 Points
  • Bunny Spotter 50
  • Elocutionist 200
  • Cat Fancier 100
Lady__Miko
Derp.
Beautiful job avoiding my question!
Ratttking
Lady__Miko
Derp.
Beautiful job avoiding my question!


Your question in the grand scheme of things doesn't matter. If you expect more of a response, you will need to at the very least prove the legitimacy of your question. Whatever you wish to assume or argue are the cultural affinities of the schools, they regardless contrast with black culture sharply in many ways and so black children aren't assimilated to the cultural affinities of the classroom suffer a major disadvantage. The OP already attempts to cover how this is demonstrated in numerous ways. As for the "white middle class" I use this term because that's typically what related research suggests is the cultural frame of reference. Generally schools prepare people for middle class jobs and standards of living.

Take for example this: http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/EJ839496.pdf

Which suggests blacks are disadvantaged because schools catering to "white middle class" children do not encourage vervistic learning opportunities. Still I don't want to get too hung up on this. School systems alienate participants of black culture and that isn't going to change by you nitpicking that it "may" not be "middle class" white culture.
Ratttking's avatar

Magical Pumpkin

18,550 Points
  • Bunny Spotter 50
  • Elocutionist 200
  • Cat Fancier 100
Lady__Miko
Ratttking
Lady__Miko
Derp.
Beautiful job avoiding my question!


Your question in the grand scheme of things doesn't matter. If you expect more of a response, you will need to at the very least prove the legitimacy of your question. Whatever you wish to assume or argue are the cultural affinities of the schools, they regardless contrast with black culture sharply in many ways and so black children aren't assimilated to the cultural affinities of the classroom suffer a major disadvantage. The OP already attempts to cover how this is demonstrated in numerous ways. As for the "white middle class" I use this term because that's typically what related research suggests is the cultural frame of reference. Generally schools prepare people for middle class jobs and standards of living.

Take for example this: http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/EJ839496.pdf

Which suggests blacks are disadvantaged because schools catering to "white middle class" children do not encourage vervistic learning opportunities. Still I don't want to get too hung up on this. School systems alienate participants of black culture and that isn't going to change by you nitpicking that it "may" not be "middle class" white culture.
Your OP says nothing regarding white middle class students beside that you feel they are better served. That proves nothing but that you have an opinion. Prove to me that they are better served by the, ahem, "non-vervistic" teaching style, and that all children will be better served by the "vervistic" one. If you cannot do the second, then it is obvious you are advocating a separate system for blacks only.

Why were Asian-American students not factored into the study you linked?
Ratttking's avatar

Magical Pumpkin

18,550 Points
  • Bunny Spotter 50
  • Elocutionist 200
  • Cat Fancier 100
Spidermonkey323
Keltoi Samurai
Spidermonkey323
Ratttking

The only issue I see is your wanting to create some sort of separate system that treats black children differently than other children. I believe that is called racial segregation, and I am opposed to it and anyone who promotes it.


You just said if they disrupt the class they should be kicked out tho. Isnt that segregating? Waii so lemme get this straight ok... A bunch of black kiddies that dont conform are put in spec. ed class or thrown in some room w/o instruction a lot and it is not segregating... But...it is segregating to put em in classes capable of reducing the cultural discontinuity so they learn?


I need a facepalm smiley...or emote..thingy.


do you truly see no difference between segregation based upon bad behavior and segregation based on race?


Yea but the OP is saying "bad behavior" and "good behavior" can be culture specific. So yea segregating cause white culture would in its own scope see some things in black culture as bad is pretty much the same as segregating on race anyway. Same with spec. ed. If you see a bunch of black kids not making the same grades as white kids or see their differences in behavior and ship their asses to the special ed bus/class you segregated them cause of their culture.
What about the black children in special ed. classes who are in primarily black schools? From whom are they being segregated? Other children from their own culture?
Ratttking
Spidermonkey323
Keltoi Samurai
Spidermonkey323
Ratttking

The only issue I see is your wanting to create some sort of separate system that treats black children differently than other children. I believe that is called racial segregation, and I am opposed to it and anyone who promotes it.


You just said if they disrupt the class they should be kicked out tho. Isnt that segregating? Waii so lemme get this straight ok... A bunch of black kiddies that dont conform are put in spec. ed class or thrown in some room w/o instruction a lot and it is not segregating... But...it is segregating to put em in classes capable of reducing the cultural discontinuity so they learn?


I need a facepalm smiley...or emote..thingy.


do you truly see no difference between segregation based upon bad behavior and segregation based on race?


Yea but the OP is saying "bad behavior" and "good behavior" can be culture specific. So yea segregating cause white culture would in its own scope see some things in black culture as bad is pretty much the same as segregating on race anyway. Same with spec. ed. If you see a bunch of black kids not making the same grades as white kids or see their differences in behavior and ship their asses to the special ed bus/class you segregated them cause of their culture.
What about the black children in special ed. classes who are in primarily black schools? From whom are they being segregated? Other children from their own culture?


1. A school with mostly black students =/= a school with mostly black teachers which are few. In a predominantly black school you are still separating children who can assimilate from those who cannot/do not.

2. Even the few teachers that are black (to acquire their social positions) will be required to assimilate to some degree to acquire their status as teachers. This means varying behavioral divergences. Additionally because the institution of school demands it on many levels, partially assimilated teachers are further encouraged to define "good" and "bad" based on terms that are not really reflective of their traditional African culture. For example, they would still be expected to provide extrinsically motivated work to learn material and provide a standardized curriculum instead of one developed on intrinsic motivation. The tests are also standardized and take intrinsic context out when measuring for knowledge.
Ratttking's avatar

Magical Pumpkin

18,550 Points
  • Bunny Spotter 50
  • Elocutionist 200
  • Cat Fancier 100
Lady__Miko
Ratttking
Spidermonkey323
Keltoi Samurai
Spidermonkey323
Ratttking

The only issue I see is your wanting to create some sort of separate system that treats black children differently than other children. I believe that is called racial segregation, and I am opposed to it and anyone who promotes it.


You just said if they disrupt the class they should be kicked out tho. Isnt that segregating? Waii so lemme get this straight ok... A bunch of black kiddies that dont conform are put in spec. ed class or thrown in some room w/o instruction a lot and it is not segregating... But...it is segregating to put em in classes capable of reducing the cultural discontinuity so they learn?


I need a facepalm smiley...or emote..thingy.


do you truly see no difference between segregation based upon bad behavior and segregation based on race?


Yea but the OP is saying "bad behavior" and "good behavior" can be culture specific. So yea segregating cause white culture would in its own scope see some things in black culture as bad is pretty much the same as segregating on race anyway. Same with spec. ed. If you see a bunch of black kids not making the same grades as white kids or see their differences in behavior and ship their asses to the special ed bus/class you segregated them cause of their culture.
What about the black children in special ed. classes who are in primarily black schools? From whom are they being segregated? Other children from their own culture?


1. A school with mostly black students =/= a school with mostly black teachers which are few. In a predominantly black school you are still separating children who can assimilate from those who cannot/do not.

2. Even the few teachers that are black (to acquire their social positions) will be required to assimilate to some degree to acquire their status as teachers. This means varying behavioral divergences. Additionally because the institution of school demands it on many levels, partially assimilated teachers are further encouraged to define "good" and "bad" based on terms that are not really reflective of their traditional African culture. For example, they would still be expected to provide extrinsically motivated work to learn material and provide a standardized curriculum instead of one developed on intrinsic motivation. The tests are also standardized and take intrinsic context out when measuring for knowledge.
1.The same thing happens to white pupils in primarily white schools if they misbehave. Isn't equality great?
2."Few" teachers...OK, you are not even trying to prove anything now. You are just being insulting by implying that one teaches merely to acquire a social position and that a black must be an Uncle Tom to even attempt to teach. How about for the love of teaching itself? I don't care what else you have to say. Answer Catspook's questions, unlike me, she is interested in hearing you explain your verbose gibberish.
Lady__Miko
Ratttking
Spidermonkey323
Keltoi Samurai
Spidermonkey323
Ratttking

The only issue I see is your wanting to create some sort of separate system that treats black children differently than other children. I believe that is called racial segregation, and I am opposed to it and anyone who promotes it.


You just said if they disrupt the class they should be kicked out tho. Isnt that segregating? Waii so lemme get this straight ok... A bunch of black kiddies that dont conform are put in spec. ed class or thrown in some room w/o instruction a lot and it is not segregating... But...it is segregating to put em in classes capable of reducing the cultural discontinuity so they learn?


I need a facepalm smiley...or emote..thingy.


do you truly see no difference between segregation based upon bad behavior and segregation based on race?


Yea but the OP is saying "bad behavior" and "good behavior" can be culture specific. So yea segregating cause white culture would in its own scope see some things in black culture as bad is pretty much the same as segregating on race anyway. Same with spec. ed. If you see a bunch of black kids not making the same grades as white kids or see their differences in behavior and ship their asses to the special ed bus/class you segregated them cause of their culture.
What about the black children in special ed. classes who are in primarily black schools? From whom are they being segregated? Other children from their own culture?


1. A school with mostly black students =/= a school with mostly black teachers which are few. In a predominantly black school you are still separating children who can assimilate from those who cannot/do not.

2. Even the few teachers that are black (to acquire their social positions) will be required to assimilate to some degree to acquire their status as teachers. This means varying behavioral divergences. Additionally because the institution of school demands it on many levels, partially assimilated teachers are further encouraged to define "good" and "bad" based on terms that are not really reflective of their traditional African culture. For example, they would still be expected to provide extrinsically motivated work to learn material and provide a standardized curriculum instead of one developed on intrinsic motivation. The tests are also standardized and take intrinsic context out when measuring for knowledge.


Okay, I seriously don't get what your saying. How is black american culture at all African? Do they inheret this culture via skin pigment alone or something?
Memette's avatar

5,700 Points
  • Dressed Up 200
  • Forum Dabbler 200
  • Treasure Hunter 100
Jessi Danger
Lady__Miko
Ratttking
Spidermonkey323
Keltoi Samurai


do you truly see no difference between segregation based upon bad behavior and segregation based on race?


Yea but the OP is saying "bad behavior" and "good behavior" can be culture specific. So yea segregating cause white culture would in its own scope see some things in black culture as bad is pretty much the same as segregating on race anyway. Same with spec. ed. If you see a bunch of black kids not making the same grades as white kids or see their differences in behavior and ship their asses to the special ed bus/class you segregated them cause of their culture.
What about the black children in special ed. classes who are in primarily black schools? From whom are they being segregated? Other children from their own culture?


1. A school with mostly black students =/= a school with mostly black teachers which are few. In a predominantly black school you are still separating children who can assimilate from those who cannot/do not.

2. Even the few teachers that are black (to acquire their social positions) will be required to assimilate to some degree to acquire their status as teachers. This means varying behavioral divergences. Additionally because the institution of school demands it on many levels, partially assimilated teachers are further encouraged to define "good" and "bad" based on terms that are not really reflective of their traditional African culture. For example, they would still be expected to provide extrinsically motivated work to learn material and provide a standardized curriculum instead of one developed on intrinsic motivation. The tests are also standardized and take intrinsic context out when measuring for knowledge.


Okay, I seriously don't get what your saying. How is black american culture at all African? Do they inheret this culture via skin pigment alone or something?


She means that we inherited much of our cultural values from Africa. A lot of us just don't know they're African, including some Africans themselves. I've been mostly backed up trying to respond to people. I think I can clarify this when other people are being responded to, so I'll make a note to myself to quote you again so that you'll be able to see it.
Lady__Miko

Additionally because the institution of school demands it on many levels, partially assimilated teachers are further encouraged to define "good" and "bad" based on terms that are not really reflective of their traditional African culture.


African-Americans don't have traditional African culture, unless you meant traditional African-American culture. Just saying.

But anyway I quoted this because I want to hear examples of what you mean by good/bad in either case. What way is it defined in middle class WASP culture, and what way are they defined in African-American culture.

Quote:
For example, they would still be expected to provide extrinsically motivated work to learn material and provide a standardized curriculum instead of one developed on intrinsic motivation. The tests are also standardized and take intrinsic context out when measuring for knowledge.


I want examples of this too so I can get a good hard material version of what we're discussing.

Also you do realize one of the highest achieving educational groups in the country is....Africans right? As in immigrants from Africa? Last I checked they do better even than whites of any sort.
Memette

She means that we inherited much of our cultural values from Africa. A lot of us just don't know they're African, including some Africans themselves.


Like uhh......what exactly.

Also be careful to simplify Africa as having some monolithic culture in of itself.
Ratttking
Lady__Miko
Ratttking
Lady__Miko
Derp.
Beautiful job avoiding my question!


Your question in the grand scheme of things doesn't matter. If you expect more of a response, you will need to at the very least prove the legitimacy of your question. Whatever you wish to assume or argue are the cultural affinities of the schools, they regardless contrast with black culture sharply in many ways and so black children aren't assimilated to the cultural affinities of the classroom suffer a major disadvantage. The OP already attempts to cover how this is demonstrated in numerous ways. As for the "white middle class" I use this term because that's typically what related research suggests is the cultural frame of reference. Generally schools prepare people for middle class jobs and standards of living.

Take for example this: http://www.eric.ed.gov/PDFS/EJ839496.pdf

Which suggests blacks are disadvantaged because schools catering to "white middle class" children do not encourage vervistic learning opportunities. Still I don't want to get too hung up on this. School systems alienate participants of black culture and that isn't going to change by you nitpicking that it "may" not be "middle class" white culture.
Your OP says nothing regarding white middle class students beside that you feel they are better served.


Again your squabbling over something pointless:


Whatever you wish to assume or argue are the cultural affinities of the schools, they regardless contrast with black culture sharply in many ways and so black children aren't assimilated to the cultural affinities of the classroom suffer a major disadvantage.


Quote:

That proves nothing but that you have an opinion. Prove to me that they are better served by the, ahem, "non-vervistic" teaching style, and that all children will be better served by the "vervistic" one.



1. I never said everyone should have the same methodology of education. Expose people to how other cultures view the world, and if they demonstrate an affinity to a particular learning style assist them. This doesn't mean force children into an environment with a lot of verve.

2. Did you read the link? Again mentions previous studies where white middle class children have less verve than black children and its study's conclusion suggests more verve and ultimately concludes black children have a higher tendency for verve. Classrooms structure is typically a room with a bunch of seats, and where students are expected to sit in place and look at the front for instruction. Verve isn't really encouraged.


Quote:
If you cannot do the second, then it is obvious you are advocating a separate system for blacks only.


To deny blacks the ability to have classes that cater to their styles of learning is to suggest a "white only" style of education. All other groups that benefit in the system are not benefiting because they were considered, but because they conformed/agreed with the beliefs of those who actually WERE being considered. I think there should be classrooms that vary in the degree of learning style integration, particular classes for those who cannot respond well a partially assimilated class. This would be the case for white children as well, who again could not handle a classroom that assimilated some black learning styles in it.


Quote:

Why were Asian-American students not factored into the study you linked?


Why does this matter? First of all it was not claiming verve to be universally beneficial. Just how a class with a lack of verve is not universally beneficial. Many Asian Americans lacking the issue of cultural discontinuity (in school anyway), doesn't prove other groups cannot have that problem within this context. It doesn't prove that the present style is a universal way to look at learning. It just means that a number of Asian within the context of school share similar cultural opinions so they do better.

What's racist is that they are not benefiting because when they started coming, the school system said "quick evaluate their needs and all the other major groups!" They're doing well because they already carried similar attitudes about learning. And even if they had considered Asians it'd still reflect racism. Considering some major groups and not others suggests that some groups are worth more than others. Alienating blacks and not Asians suggests blacks are worth less and don't need to be considered like Asians and whites.
Ratttking's avatar

Magical Pumpkin

18,550 Points
  • Bunny Spotter 50
  • Elocutionist 200
  • Cat Fancier 100
Lady__Miko
blah blah
Why do Asian American students matter? Because they come from a non-European culture and yet manage to excel in what you claim is a system prejudiced in favor of Eurocentricity. Why is that? Perhaps we should adopt an Asian-style model of teaching both to better accommodate them and to allow other children the benefits of intensive learning.

Explain how dancing helps one learn math and how singing teaches science etc., otherwise I will consider "verve" a factor in physical education and nothing else. Yes, I read the link and laughed at its very premise.

When are you going to respond to someone who is actually interested in hearing back from you? She's been waiting for days now.
Memette
1) In the traditional African worldview, the universe is as a spiritual whole, where everything "interexists" with one another. So what is emphasized is connectedness, and we experience ourselves AS nature (since humans are comprised of "non-human" elements). This connects us to the forces of nature, and to each other. Physical reality is simply how that connectedness manifests itself. So, the concept of "self" has a much less structured meaning than in European cultures, because interaction with others and the environment affects personal thinking and vitality.


For starters that sort of pagan type belief system is endemic to every part of the world, Europe included. It's just that Abrahamic Religion rolled in and forced it from influence. And the further problem here is that a good half of Africa was Muslim for long before the Atlantic Slave Trade, and in the case of Ethiopia, Christian. In fact Ethiopia was Christian when parts of Europe were as pagan as can be.

Also call me unenleightened but how does this ...

1. Have any reflection in actual people.
2. Still allegedly exist in African-Americans who were indoctrinated with their owner's Christianity as soon as they got off the boats. Introducing the same element into the mix that altered Europe's own more nature oriented religions.

And your description is so vague as to not really sound any different at all from the way most people of any culture go about life.

Quote:
2) The European concept of the universe is that human beings are distinct and separate individuals. Nature is comprised of individualistic elements. Man is separate from nature, and the only way to know about the universe to isolate and analyze individualistic components to see how they work.


You're confusing the Religious aspect that introduced ideas of people standing outside of nature with the sort of Renaissance though that actually clashed with that same religious thing.
Which isn't really European either. Greek sure, but the Arabs and Persians were the ones advancing that analytical thought for ages before it came back into Europe. And the Arabs were the ones who influenced the Northern half of Africa for a looong looong time. Aside from Ethiopia any major African empire you could name was part of larger Islamic world that was very in tune with the sciences.

Also China and India you know...had all of this same stuff. Which is even more interesting when you consider their dominant philosophies are not "analytical" as you describe it. Same with Japan.
And I'm not read on it but I'd bet a fair amount of money that Timbuktu had science up the wazoo in it's heyday. I could probably link to pictures of old books showing astronomy and s**t, in a major city in a major sub-saharan African empire.

Quote:
This takes interexistence out of things, and thereby creates "objects" to study. Therefore, Europeans are more likely to "analyze" things. In order for analysis to occur, there must be an "analyzer" and the "analyzed". So analyzing requires assumptions that things are already separate and distinct from one another. This concept, "analyzing", is the backbone of scientific thought, academia, and the European concept of "intellectual thought".


Science does not and never has belonged to Europe. I'm sorry this is just silly. I fail to see the evidence of this sort of culture in either white or black Americans.
In fact I'd venture saying science has nothing to do with culture. It's a process universal.

Quote:
3) Teachers generally are reinforcers of the European worldview.


I do think it's pretty wrong that history is so incredibly focused on Europe, and more specifically Western Europe. There's so much rest of the world that lies neglected, let alone Africa. Hell not even Eastern Europe gets a fair shake past the Ancient Greeks.

And I do think this leads to lots of assumptions by people, to assume the rest of the world contributed little or did little or what have you.
It would be good for folks to even hear of Timbuktu like I was referencing above.

Quote:
Academia is dominated by analytical-minded people,


Well...depending on the discipline....good.
Math? Science? Social Studies? Are analytical by nature.
English of course touches on different things, though analytical thought applies there too. Come to think of it where DOESN'T analytical thought apply?
Maybe you need to better define what you mean by analytical.

Quote:
- African Americans are generally considered more "street smart." That's because they consider "learning" as taking knowledge, and being able to apply it to real life. Interconnecting themselves with the material is HOW they learn.


Hey that sounds like me. As in, can you actually show where your definitions of analytical and the uh....African thing you allege to exist are in real life? I don't mean pointing at things resembling them because any theory could be proven that way. I mean something solid real I can look at or whatever.

Which more to the point I don't follow that this is even a separate mindset. In fact it's part of science. And all education.
By this vague a description then....this is experiments in science right? Putting on the gloves and goggles and holding a nickel over a bunsen burner to show something I would know if I were a science major.

Or to use my field of specialty. The "black" part of History/Geography/Political Science would be like taking an abroad trip to Cyprus and researching the ethnic conflict in the field.
Or....a more visual excercise or...

Well I dunno lemme wipe away a lot of what you're claiming this comes from, all the silly ethnic origin motherland talk. Because that really doesn't even matter.
It is what it (maybe) is. And so would you say that for whatever reason, wherever it comes from, African-Americans would do better to have hands on active visual exercises then lectures with writing on the chalkboard? And that this isn't common?

If so, ******** race, how could I get into THAT school. That would be my dream for real.

Quote:
Because the African worldview emphasizes interrelatedness, learning they believe, should have an intrinsic relationship to "real life". "Context" therefore, is very important in African American learning styles, because the child needs to know how material can be applied in the "context" of "their" personal lives. To become "one" with it, if you will. Therefore, African Americans often idealize "mentorship" qualities in teachers. Because in order for the teacher to know HOW to teach the African American child, the teacher needs to have an intimate understanding of where that child is coming from, and how they think--- because to black people, learning is about synthesizing the material with themselves.


Hmm, none of this stuff matters. Real or no.
Instead of these sort of...psuedo-anthropology things can you get some actual hard data from teachers and professionals (no not critical theory professors god) on sort of experimental alternative teaching methods with more hands on stuff. Again it really really doesn't matter where or why that preset exists, if it does is all. And if it does how can that be explored in schools.
Because it could potentially benefit a helluva lot more than African-Americans. Boys in general in fact, white or black, are said to be learners of that type. And uh me.

Quote:
- Unfortunately in Europeanized societies, many teachers don't think having an intimate understanding of their students is a NECESSARY component of teaching.


Most teachers can't have intimate mentor relationships with students as fact of...reality. Class size and curriculum limits that. I assure you the part of the job teachers like best is making connections to kids.

Quote:
Simply being "nice" to children is sufficient and politically correct. This is because Europeanized cultures don't think that learning requires a whole lot of personal context.


I really strongly question that as being true.
Also what is "Europeanized" anyway.
Are we talking Germanic Europe? Presumably.
Because other parts are very different. Southern Europe in particular in many ways resembles African-American culture in regards to family life and so forth.
If you spent any amount of time with a particularly old world Italian or Greek family you'd definitely feel it more similar to the African-American one than if you were hanging with some WASPs or Germans.
I just think that sort of nuance is important to acknowledge.

Quick Reply

Submit
Manage Your Items
Other Stuff
Get GCash
Offers
Get Items
More Items
Where Everyone Hangs Out
Other Community Areas
Virtual Spaces
Fun Stuff
Gaia's Games