Blog Post #6

 QUOTES:

In the intro of Troublemakers, Shalaby challenges our expectations about "bad" behavior in the classroom. Instead of looking at difficult or disruptive children as problems to be solved, Shalaby invites us to see them as signals, signs that we should be asking questions about the systems we've established as the norm in schooling. Her work is not only about specific students who are labeled as being troublemakers but also about how schools themselves create climates that often suffocate rather than foster freedom, individuality, and emotional health.

One quote that stood out to me is:

"If nearly half of our children fail to follow directions, we should question the appropriateness of the requirement.”

This quote turns something that causes frustration in all schools on its head. Instead of blaming the children for not listening or following rules, Shalaby invites us to examine the rules more closely. Maybe it's not the children who are at fault, but the requirements. If that many kids are rebelling or failing, then there's something more to the reason why. Her perspective dares us to question if our requirements are developmentally appropriate, culturally responsive, or even sane. It's a reminder that disobedience is not always defiance, it may be a learning experience.

Another quote that I liked was:

"The child who deviates, who refuses to behave like everybody else, may be telling us-loudly, visibly and memorably-that the arrangements of our schools are harmful to human beings. Something toxic is in the air, and these children refuse to inhale it"

Here, Shalaby is reframing deviance not as dysfunction but as resistance. The children we label "bad" are maybe the children most attuned to problems in our classrooms. Things like tight schedules, lack of creativity, standardized expectations, and constant control.. Rather than punishing them, we need to be hearing them out. They might be silently, or not so silently, showing us what all students feel but don’t express. This quote is one of the key things that links the canary metaphor, these kids being the signal that there is “bad air” in the school.

https://www.gse.harvard.edu/ideas/edcast/18/01/troublemakers-school

Questions for Dr. Sasha Sidorkin

How should colleges be thinking about policies for AI usage, should there be consistent rules across departments, or more flexibility? I’ve had some professors allow use and some prohibit it.

Do you think there’s a risk of AI widening the achievement gap, and if so, how should schools address that? With some students using it as a tool and some using it as a crutch.

How should teachers/professors approach grading assignments that may have been partially generated by AI? Should there be different standards?

Blog Post #4

 REFLECTION:

Reading Lisa Delpit’s The Silenced Dialogue: Power and Pedagogy in Educating Other People's Children made me reflect on my experience in a second-grade classroom and the way I communicated with students. At first, I would ask questions like, “Are we supposed to be doing that right now?”, assuming that prompting students to think about their behavior would guide them toward the right choice. But I quickly realized that this approach wasn’t effective. Some students wouldn’t respond or seemed unsure of what I was asking. Instead, I needed to clearly tell them what to do: “Please sit down and start your work.” or “We raise our hands before speaking.”

Delpit’s argument helped me understand why direct communication was necessary. She explains that not all students enter the classroom already familiar with the unwritten “codes of power” that govern academic and social success. These rules—how to participate in discussions, how to structure written responses, even how to interact with authority figures—aren’t always explicitly taught, yet they shape how students are judged in school and beyond. Simply expecting students to pick up on these expectations through indirect cues leaves some of them at a disadvantage. It reinforced what I had experienced firsthand: clarity and authority in instruction are not about control but about ensuring that all students understand what is expected of them.

This also made me think about how dominant cultural norms influence teaching. Many educators—especially those from white, middle-class backgrounds—advocate for student-centered learning that encourages discovery and self-direction. But as Delpit points out, this approach doesn’t always serve students of color, who may benefit more from direct instruction that makes expectations clear. I had always thought that asking guiding questions rather than giving direct instructions was a more respectful way to interact with students, but Delpit’s argument helped me see that withholding direct guidance can actually create barriers for some learners rather than empowering them.

Reflection/Questions/Comments to Share

One point I want to raise in class is how we can teach students the “codes of power” while also encouraging them to challenge those codes. Delpit argues that explicit instruction is necessary for students to navigate dominant systems, but how do we ensure that this doesn’t turn into simply enforcing conformity? 

 Delpit, “The Silenced Dialogue” 

Blog Post #3

 ARGUMENT:

This author, Christine Sleeter, argues that ethnic studies curricula are essential for student engagement

and academic success, particularly for students of color, because they provide a counter narrative to the

Euro-American dominated mainstream curriculum.

Sleeter explains that the traditional U.S. school curriculum is deeply rooted in Euro-American

perspectives, which marginalize the histories and contributions of people of color. While textbooks have

become more inclusive since the Civil Rights Movement, they often present a sanitized version of

history that downplays systemic oppression and reduces racial minorities to supporting roles in a

White-dominated narrative. This approach fails to engage students who do not see their own histories

and lived experiences reflected in what they learn. Ethnic studies, however, challenge this by centering

the voices, intellectual contributions, and historical struggles of marginalized communities. These

programs not only provide a more accurate account of history but also encourage critical thinking by

examining issues like colonialism, racial identity, and systemic oppression.

Beyond their social and political significance, ethnic studies courses have been shown to improve

student engagement, academic performance, and graduation rates. Research demonstrates that when

students, particularly students of color, take ethnic studies courses, they become more invested in their

education because they see themselves reflected in the curriculum. This sense of belonging and relevance

motivates them to succeed. Despite the clear benefits, ethnic studies remain controversial, with critics

arguing that they promote divisiveness or anti-American sentiment. However, as Sleeter points out,

these criticisms ignore the fact that the mainstream curriculum already centers one perspective while

minimizing others. Ethnic studies do not erase history, they expand it, offering students a fuller, more

complex understanding of the world they live in.

Reflection/Questions/Comments to Share

Sleeter’s argument raises an important question: if ethnic studies programs demonstrably improve

student outcomes, why do they continue to face resistance? Many opponents claim that these courses

are “political” or “divisive,” but isn’t the exclusion of diverse perspectives from the standard curriculum

just as political? It seems that the real controversy is not whether ethnic studies are beneficial, but

whether those in power are willing to acknowledge the full truth of history and its lasting impact on

society. Additionally, how can educators push for the implementation of ethnic studies in schools that

resist them

The Academic and Social Value of Ethnic Studies

Blog Post #2

The text criticizes the traditional system of education, but particularly the inclination to rely more on tests in measuring student competence and ability. The author affirms that though learning institutions provide essential skills, most of their structures are outdated, shaped by historical contexts that prioritized sorting students rather than guaranteeing the development of deep understanding. Tests, according to the article, don't actually gauge long-term retention, learning potential, or thinking processes, but instead serve to function as a sorting device for students that can limit their potential future prospects. The article further discusses the effects of politics and economics on the development of tests, referencing the arbitrary nature of changing standards and how these influence the assessment of student success. While the author acknowledges the diagnostic value of competent tests, they prefer a more critical approach to interpreting scores and teaching based on them.

 

 Blog Post #5

REFLECTION: 

After reading Alfie Kohn's What to Look for in a Classroom I thought about what applied to my experience volunteering in a second-grade classroom, and I noticed quite a few of the positive signs he describes. Classroom seating was organized to foster conversation, the kids sat in pods that doubled as activity centers, and a rug in front of the board was used as a meeting area for students and a place where the teacher could instruct them all. This setup fostered a sense of camaraderie and collaboration, often saw students helping other students and working well with each other on various tasks.

The walls were covered in a mix of student projects and instructional posters. Kohn listed commercial posters as “possible reasons to worry”, but they are used in a practical sense here and don’t feel too impersonal or generic. The room seems to belong to the teacher and the students, which I feel adds to the environment of enjoying their learning.

Discussion was almost constant in the class, but that is what I would expect from a second grade class. They would often chat between themselves, sometimes to ask a question to me or the teachers, but mostly they just talk. There are only a few moments of silence, either when the teacher is trying to instruct them or when they get too loud and “lose the privilege” to talk. I also noticed that students would help each other without being told by the teacher, which shows that the students feel comfortable in the class environment to freely collaborate. Some students were excited to have me in class so I could help them, but others students see me as an opportunity to socialize and not do their work. The mix of distraction and engagement is natural for their age and I feel it reflected a learning environment where students were comfortable with interaction.

The space was stocked with books, art supplies, and materials that made learning exciting. A lot of the work they do while I’m there is done in stations allowing students to walk around and have various activities, keeping them on the move and engaged. Kohn’s chart mentioned "purposeful clutter," and I saw that in practice, materials were abundant and felt very intentional, providing students with a very interactive learning environment.

My experience has been mostly limited to the classroom, but from what I’ve seen of the school, it has an inviting atmosphere. The front office staff has been warm and welcoming, and students’ projects are displayed in the hallways, reinforcing the idea that their voices and efforts are valued.