HW #52 Initial Theories of Human Relationships

To me, relationships are similar to links, chains and threads and which the three of them will never break even if the feelings in the relationship has ended or cut off. Because links, chains and threads are bonding materials between two person and even though those materials are fragile, in relationship terms, I think they are like immortals that would never die even if the bonds are forgotten. Relationship between two person is like trying to reveal to each other their existences and if that relationship creates a deeper one, then they are trying to reveal to each other their selves, their selves that is truer than when they just met.

I think humans are dummies (sorry to be rude and I admit I am one too as I am living in this world) but as to why all these complicated relationships have built to this stage of confusion is because, I think, we are living to yearn for something and as for that something, I am trying to figure that out too and what it is that I, myself, am yearning for. It might be a huge amount of things but it might be only a few. There are many things in life that we cannot choose such as choosing our gender, where we are born, why we are not born and what kind of family to be in. And I think for those things that we cannot choose, we create relationships with other people to find what we lack and want. However, with the huge amount of feelings we have and actions that we take that results in negative results like lying, jealousy, destruction, sadness, complications occurs, that creates strands of complicated relationships in this world and that only bothers us, backfiring back at us. Doesn't that look like shooting a ball in the wall and hits you back in the face?

I think we are born to do something or maybe we are not, who seriously would know that? Because if someone does know, that someone's species is not the human species. So if there is something that we need to do, a path that we have constructed ourselves, we would tend to follow it. If we get lost, we either give up or like the word "fate", someone would come to us and help us stand up on our feet. I think that is one of the yearning feelings that we have and which we need before more complicated relationships are created, which already did for many people. I think everybody needs to have complicated relationships to grow, but to grow in what ways, I'm not sure. It is also part of our motivation in what we want to search and aim for. I have grown in some ways now, with having all these friendship relationships, family relationships, stranger relationships and etc, that made me questions about what is our living for? Why am I here and for what reason? I am learning this unit to what extent can I gather the answers for these questions. What is the point of having these questions? Now you see, how these questions are created and how throughout the history, all these random, or insightful questions are created? I find that a lot of the times, when we don't have things to do, we find things to do or things to think about. And complicated relationships are one of those things.

Trust and truth are the two purest feeling and being that I believe is the cause of human relationships. I say they are the purest is because they involve in having the existence of a person to be revealed entirely to another person, where the chains of the links or threads would be tight, strong, pure or shiny-looking and a never-ending cycle between the two person. But if both are not given or balanced, well, I guess the relationship cannot be completely complete. If trust is not build correctly or the relationship becomes unstable such as if A person lies to B person and B person got mad, the relationship would not go that well. But that is only one scenario but other scenario can be that A person sincerely apologizes to B person, and if B person is willing to accept A person's apology, then their relationship are back together. However, for me, I think the relationship can either get deeper through a difficult situation but if it was from a fight between the two person, I would begin losing trust in them and backing away from telling the other person the truth. Things such as what I want to reveal to them, or what they want to know, I would stop that too, which is ridiculous. Because we say we want to create relationships is because we want to be safe and to be around the warmths of others.

But then parents, teachers, and adults would tell the little ones to be careful of strangers because they might eat you. One side tells you, or your inner self tells you when you are young that you want to be near others but then as you grow up, the trust lessen because you heard from other people that it is better to not trust others until you seen or believe if you can trust them. It is one way to grow up, getting influenced by others but it is another way to close your connection around you. Depending on the situation of what kind of family we have and how we are treated and our environment, opinions and answers are viewed and answered differently. I don't blame anyone for having the situations they are in or how they grew up but with their complicated relationships and I, having a connection with them, adds more relationships in their cases and my case. I think that is why people tell others to mind their own business such as in families so to not get themselves in a more complex web of links. However, I wonder if there is a 100% of trust and truth in a relationship but with the word, "complicated", I don't really think so. But is there? Wouldn't it be nice if there is? I guess thats why people called that almost all of the relationships are fragile?

Psychology, sociology, philosophy and politics, the four connect with one another when thinking about human relationships but I think that is how all these still unanswered questions come from and complicated relationships form. I kind of blame us for this but glad for it because with seeing people each day, its like a subconscious handbook since we know some from each of the four categories to help us understand, or try to understand others. I guess we may never understand each other well if we just go buy the science facts and what people found through experiments because that is, this might sound sad but betraying in a way, to figure out people through using instruments rather than talking, without any recording device or machines, to understand others. But in another way, if we don't do all these tests, I don't think we feel safe enough, to actually have something to proof to us that that is how we are.

Politics, its all about the "leader", "power" and "control" words. We pick a leader because we feel safe and feel that he is going to be a good father that protects all the underlings. I think that is how the structure of the world, the countries and tinier places are build, that there needs to be a leader or IF we can all trust each other, all of the people can be leaders (?). Power and control are two desires that we want but once we have some, we always want more. But to have those, we need other people under us to complete the structure. To have power and control are what leaders need but the word "rely" appears when I think about it. Those under the leaders rely on the leaders but those who are leaders rely on those who are under them. If not, why have leaders? Both relationships connect to one another and both rely on each other to get the outcome. But I wonder why we want and need these desires and needs? I ask not in a way that the answer is that we want peace and safety, we want to have people besides us, in our side but the extent to why we got to have these feelings, desires and needs? If God does exist, like really appearing in front of us, and God and other gods gave us these things, why are they giving us these things that can be named, such as the seven deadly sins (greed, lust, wrath, envy, gluttony, sloth, and pride)? Are they playing a game involving humans? Maybe I'm thinking too much but aren't we all thinking too much?

Communication comes from language, and English comes from words, letters that we made up to suit our own purposes. Even though it is to communicate with each other, to tell each other about things such as secrets, to express the truth, we are told to be aware of what words we use when speaking to others. I think words such as respect, polite, and the way we speak the words have an effect in how we present ourselves. If we are "rude", either people would not bother to come near us or we might get beaten up. But if we are strong, we can protect ourselves but that does not mean we can get others to come near us, to have the relationships such as friends and which then, we become the outcasts (and I think that is still a relationship, thought a sad one). There are so many scenarios, situations, problems that can occur with just language that we have to make rules up on how to treat others that I find it silly. True, I think if we speak politely or nicely, we might get what we want but it only affects those who are similar to us, an equal exchange of information.

Human are selfish and in a way that if we say something, we might not mean it or that we don't do what we say. I want respect from others and I will show it to show who show me respects. If they treat me how, I'll treat them back the same is something, or ethic that I follow. If I have people who is close to me, I rather say the truth in a confusing way than not say the truth. If I have to lie, I'll lie and if they found out, and don't like it, they can leave me. I find that links, threads of relationships are important to how we construct our lives but in a non-predictable way. I'll be sad if I lose them even though they are there, just in invisible mode and relationships are indeed fragile because it is harder to fix it up than create one.

I have many questions but in the form of feelings right now so I am not that sure as to what I want to ask so I will leave it here for now...

HW #51 School As Salvation

Introduction:

Salvation is the act of saving or protecting someone from harm or danger. Salvation in school is where the teachers and adults teach students things they need to learn to go to the next grade and advices for when they get into society. Salvation is when the teachers help the students through difficult times that relates to school and better help them in increasing their education. However, students are being oppressed as the administrators and teachers have more power and control. The relationship between the teachers, adults in school and the students are in need to be balance in order to create equality, meaningful, mutual conversation and sharing of experiences. Therefore, more salvation is needed in school to increase the students' freedom in how they can control their school life to create meaningful period of schooling and that the culture/race and power in schools need be more balanced.

Argument 1:

Teachers should not fill the minds of students' with just "contents" that are "detached from reality, disconnected from the totality that engendered them and could give them significance" (Paulo Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed). Engage the students in meaningful conversations with each other rather than the teachers "depositing" information into the students, who are the "containers". With the "banking" concept of education as Freire calls it, which is "the scope of action allowed to the students extends only as far as receiving, filing, and storing the deposits", the students are similar to an empty containers that need to be filled, which reduces their ability to think critically and creatively. Similar to that banking system, E.D. Hirsch believes it is better that the students should learn about the background knowledge to increase their comprehension skills (E.D. Hirsch's Curriculum for democracy). However, with the students receiving and memorizing the information given by the teachers, the students are being seen as machines rather than productive learners.

There needs to be a change in the banking system because it is oppressing the students into thinking that the information the teachers are giving are mostly true and the teachers are more the important role than the students. Changes that can be salvation towards the students are to awake their consciousness and tell them to think outside the boxes so they can try to become "fully human" as Freire thinks that the banking system is neglecting the critical thinking for the students. Students need to be critically thinking in order to widen their horizons at many aspects and point of views to help them achieve the reality that is going to be in front of them when entering society. When the students are able to think beyond what the teachers are telling them, then they would leap out of the cage of boxes and be able to stand for their own purposes.

Not only the students need to be aware of the oppression, the teachers need to be aware as well. Students might be easily influenced but it is the teachers job to help save them from the illusions that the society is showing the students. Teachers should use their experiences and inviting outside activities, which works for any subjects, and would be more fun for the students instead of sitting in the classrooms. This also give the students more chances to enjoy the good things about the world but also the bad aspects of the world and thus, that can create a meaningful period for the students to enjoy school if in their personal lives, they are in a bad mood. Additionally, the relationship between the students and the teachers can increase in trust, and the students can begin to think critically.

Argument 2:

Students should tried to understand the teachers' situation and the teachers' should tried to understand the students' situations too to create a balance relationship. If there is a lack of communication between the teacher and the student, then the connection between the two would lessen and creates an uncomfortable conversation when they both talk to each other. Additionally, if the teacher-student relationship became balance, then there would not be a need for the teachers being the oppressors. For example, in "Freedom Writers", the new English teacher, Mrs. Erin Gruwell comes into the class ready to teach her new students but when she sees the situations that her students are at, the way they sit with their own groups left her feeling not connected. The students have problems with Mrs. Gruwell because of her lack of understanding in the environment they live in. Then, Mrs. Gruwell teaches the students Homer and Odysseus even though the students did not have the provided education to learn that level of reading yet. So Mrs. Gruwell started to learn about the students' situations by visiting their houses to get a better understanding in her students' lives. Then in return, towards the end of the movie, Mrs. Gruwell and her students were able to share and have a good relationship through that the teachers were able to be courageous and wanting to care about her students.

Rather than learning about mechanical information, students should also learn "how to" skills from teachers and adults in their lives. Even though Hirsch believes that basic knowledge are need to be learned and used to provide them a good comprehension level but there needs to be more salvation towards the students to have a deeper understanding about the world as I had said in the above argument. Besides Hirsch, there is professor Pub Ted Sizer who thinks that students should "use their minds", to have the adults "provoke young people to grow up intellectually, to think hard and resourcefully and imaginatively about important things" (Pub Ted Sizer Speech). This is a way to break out the boxes and the machines that the school system is providing to the students and let the students have a mind of their own, to produce intellectual or creative thoughts in where they can debate for their own judgments and for their own truth.

Students should be immerse more in finding their own interests and to be aware of their surroundings to better educate and protect themselves. All of us want to find the truth and be smart about things so they would not fall into traps. This is similar to Weller Embler's "Language and Truth" (or the Use and Misuse of Language), where he talks about the abuse or distortion of language and how it is use to cover up or hide the truth to deceive people. He said, "It is the purpose of higher education, and the purpose of the humane studies especially, to help all students to learn to distinguish between that which is good and that which is not so good, so that they may participate in the universal judging of the best" (Embler 229). If the students are able to learn to judge and evaluate between the good and bad, they are going to be more attentive to what they are concentrating on and at their environment in return. There are a lot of ways for the students to receive and dissect the knowledge but if the adults are tempting to reduce and oppress the students for the high authoritative society's control, I believe it is up to the students, the teachers and others who are willingly to care about it to fight for it. The students would be able to begin having interesting conversation as they learn about the truth and in a lot of way, as well as the teachers to encourage them to change the educational system that the students are in. With learning the truth, the students can break out their minds emotionally and physically if they are able to control themselves in handling the rules that they want to change and if changed, it would prove that the students are intellectual beings rather than mindless sheeps.

Argument 3:

School should provide the equal "power" to all students with different cultures to ensure a balance and fulfilling education for the students. For Lisa Delpit, the "culture of power" is what is affecting the students' chances for education, because the dominant race in America is mostly White and they have better education than the other races such as Black, and Hispanic (Snyder). Delpit suggests that "students must be taught the codes needed to participate fully in the mainstream of American life" and the resources that the students learned from the "teacher's expert knowledge", the students are able to create their "own 'expertness'" (Lisa Delpit on Power and Pedagogy). If the expertness is created, then the students are able to learn about the codes given in what they are learning and the "power relationships they present" and have a fair chance to decrease the culture of power.

Lack of resources and consultations are some reasons that different student cultures are not getting the full education that are needed. Delpit thinks that school should ensure that "each classroom incorporate strtegies appropriate for all the children in its confines" and that for the poor communities and for parents, they should "participate fully in the discussion of what kind of instruction is in their children's best interest" (Lisa Delpit on power and pedagogy). Parents are busy with work and that causes the parents to neglect the children, leaving the responsibilities to the teachers. However, as more parents are willing to participate to talk about the interests of the students (mainly) then their own, and with the teachers placing their hands together to combine the parents into a closer, diverse community, then there would be hope for the students to get a better education. I do not think it is only the students who need to do the work, but also the adults that surrounds and shapes the students. If the parents and the school are able to come up with a way that students with different level of power can learn equally, the same with the people in the culture of power, then there is a chance that a "positive vision of the future" can occur for the poor communities and the students (For Better or Worse: Building Inclusive Schools in Poor Communities).

Alternative:

"Dead Poets Society"

Would limiting the students' freedom and having them abide to the number of rules allow the students to listen to the controllers better? In the movie the "Dead Poets Society" is about an all boys Christian school where the students there are being oppressed and listen to the teachers' words and rules of the schools. It is a very strict school with a lot of mechanical old teachers. Each day, they have a lot of homework and there is a time limit in what they can do and what they can choose to do; the teachers are always watching them and if they get into trouble, they get punished by having a spatula-like instrument smack on their behinds. With the enormous amount of work that the boys have to do, stress builds up and the movie focuses on this group of boys who revives the Dead Poets Society club from this new English teacher who is different and tells the boys to express their thoughts and be outside the box. The bad thing is, the boys began smoking, drinking and with the discovery of the club, the boy named Charley was punished as that club was not a good thing... and the good English teacher who is trying to free the students' minds gets fired. Isn't that a bad thing? To fired a good teacher over a mechanical teacher. And lastly, with the parents constantly forcing one of the students, named Neal to follow the path of the smart and rich people even though Neal is interested in acting, that pressure had made him suicide.

Students are still ignorant children and by applying too many rules on them, it will only backfire them but if there is not enough fun in what they are learning, they would only back out. I find that schools are build for the students and parents sake as well as jobs for the teachers who want to pass their knowledge and experiences onto the students. However, to have school as salvation, it needs to think better of the students, to make priority of the students better instead of fame or whatever reputation there is. Because if the adults and that school are able to connect and understand the students well, then the students would not be as ignorant as they are seen. Then the students are able to willingly follow and have their own thoughts. Therefore, the school need to go by the students' lives and their rules in a way to fully develop the students into fully humans.

Significance/connection:

I find that S.O.F. develops the students into critical thinkers and is one of the example of school as salvation. My class got to interview the principle, Mr. Fanning and one of the classmates ask him what are his goals for this school? Goals that he said was "to develop the students into critical thinkers", to have the seniors graduate, and for the students to learn in their owns ways plus become life long learners. I am not sure about other schools but I think in this school, we are learning and sharing ideas about our opinions; to reveal the truths that lies between literatures and of course, the teachers' knowledge and experiences. Like writing this paper let me think about school in many ways that I have not really think about. I come to school because I was taught conditionally that school is what benefits me the most and to get a college diploma is the complete target of what I need to get a good job in society. In that case, school can be a salvation for whoever wants an education that can get them the goals they need. I believe if the teachers have the dedication and the students have the purpose in finding their own interests and path through education and from school, then it is a good combination.

Additionally, Mr. Fanning said goals are very important as it shows the students progress but he created this goal plan to have the teachers and students connect with each other more, where the teachers can help with the students' goals. Mr. Fanning wanted to produce "individuals than old factory producing clones" so it showed that he is not siding with the banking system that much, which I think is a good thinking for a school. However, there still needs more improvement in school but as for what kind of improvements, it is hard for me to say because there can be improvement for everything. One improvement that can be made is if students can made their own curriculum plan and their own rules, with the exception that the teachers are there to keep at least minimal control over the students (because we are still ignorant and want to be free). To be free is like a fish being bigger than a pond and finding their own created space, rather than a "pond" to exist in is a salvation for one self and in school. (:p A rather bad simile but it was what I was thinking about.)

Fish cartoons:

http://www.offthemark.com/send.php?pdate=1999-08-12

http://www.offthemark.com/send.php?pdate=1999-04-02

Conclusion:

Improvements can be made to make school as salvation. Reducing the inequality, anti-intellectualism and meaninglessness in society, which also infects the schools helps retain back the freedom the students get to have and the change for equality of the "culture of power". Relationship between students, teachers and adults are important to have an efficient, balance, respectable and meaningful conversation and understanding of each others' situations/environments. I believe school is not a place for rules and regulations to be bought to oppress the learners but it is for the learners to come together to learn from each other, to derive the truth from the world and to combine powers to help each other plus understanding each others' cultures.

Sources:

- Paulo Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed

- E.D. Hirsch's Curriculum for democracy

- Lisa Delpit on Power and Pedagogy

- Pub Ted Sizer Speech (this link was taken off, I'm sorry)

- For Better or Worse: Building Inclusive Schools in Poor Communities

- Wellers Embler, "The Use and Misuse of Language" - "Language and Truth"

- "Freedom Writers"

- "Dead Poets Society"

- J. Fanning

- A. Snyder

HW #50 Response at Gatto, Freire, Delpit and Mr. Fanning

Six Lessons - Gatto
Gatto gives the six lessons that are common in school teaching and expresses with his own experiences through these six lessons of how schools and teachers control the students. Expressing how the students are trapped inside boxes and that they should listen to the people higher than them. Two of the lessons are how the students are constantly being watch and the grades that the teachers give are saying what the students are worth. School is a place to build up subordinates for the society to build and the students become like machines, to listen and obey. He thinks that school does not give as much development as it would to the students if the students could have been home school or in "de-institutionalized schools" to give better "learning" to the students. The curriculum is not helping the students much, the students are stuck in the institutions without becoming "fully human" and the students are learning "bad habits" from the 12 years of schooling.

Through the article, I agree with Gatto a lot and how the students are not growing that much through the 12 years of schooling. I do not find it weird that he had won the teacher's award because of the way he wrote the six lessons. Even though (I think) he disagreed with the lessons, he still does it and tries to make it better for the students. Like how to teach the students and what kind of lessons he would give them are his choices and his power over the students. But then for one of the lessons about the bell-ringing that its lesson is that "no work is worth finishing", which I find it interesting. If the bell causes the work to be not worth finishing, then how can the students think deeply from the teacher's lessons or are the students even thinking deeply? I find the power lies within the school, curriculum and teachers and less about the students so that is why the students are unable to grow and develop as they should. In many of the lessons Gatto gave and with his own experiences, the power on what and how the students can do anything in school or outside are from the teachers and the work given to them. I agree with his last few paragraphs that school is like a prison, that the students lose a lot of time or waste of time and they could have been spending time with their families or building their or to become self-sufficient.

Second Chapter of Pedagogy of the Oppressed - Freire

Paulo Freire critics the "banking" model of education and "problem-posing education" and how it affects the the relationship between the teacher ("narrating - subject") and the students ("patients - listening objects") and the authority power in school. The banking model is where the teachers talk and the students just listen and memorize. Then there's the "Problem-posing education" where the students can solve the problems so that will help them solve when they leave school. Then Freire talks about the dialogical relations and if there is more talking between the teacher and students, the teachers and students can learn and develop from each other. But similar to Gatto's lessons, the oppressors (the teachers) are taking over the students knowledge and their minds, shifting and changing the information learned, and adding their own perspective but with Freire, it is more equal between the teachers and students. The way that Freire says that the teachers use to control the students is the "banking" concept where the teachers have the students "receive, memorize, and repeat" what they had said and by doing that, the students become machine-like and unable to develop their own. However, the "banking" system have contradictions about reality, that it is a necrophilic development where the students are being taken control, and having their creative power to be suppressed. However, if the teacher can learn from the students, then the balance of the relationship between teachers and students are equal, where the teachers are students and students are teachers. Then with the problem-posing education, the students and teachers are able to "become" and making a process of the world and humanization.

I think we are in a banking education but we are also the problem-posing education and there are some good things with it even though Freire thinks we do not develop as much to "fully" human, it is like saying we should be perfect-ish. In S.O.F, I think the teachers are making the students think a lot and develop our own independence in thinking through the problems given to us. I think the problem-pose education can possibly work in the schools so that the students can think by themselves more and to know more of what the society is planning to use them for. Because right now, I think with the subjects we are learning, many kids need directions from the teachers and textbooks rather than thinking how they can solve with what knowledge they already have. Many of the students are creative but I think its kind of depressing when we go into the society, the talents used are just a tool and might not be enjoying. I think schools are how it is now, just students memorizing and repeating are because from the society and economic issues.

Additionally, the need to dominate the students thinking which turns education "into practice for domination" than "practice for freedom". Restrictions that made the relationship between the teacher and students are the higher ups and the curriculum and making it unbalance. There are always these sets of rules applying to the school, teachers and students that made the whole equality different. Even though the teachers are the ones who are giving us the knowledge, the students are also teaching the teachers how to make their teaching lives better. Well, it depends on what schools the students are in because different schools have different standards and thus, creating a group of machine-like teens. Additionally, like Freire said to have the everybody become fully human, the students, teachers and everybody need to be aware and awake of the situations. I agree with what he is saying because a lot of students do not listen to what is happening in the world and instead learn and listen through the teachers a lot. And I feel that the students need to be better empower in finding awareness about anything and if the teachers would be able to tell the students to make a difference, even if it is little. If the students want to change what is happening with education, then there is a chance that the models of education, the banking and problem-posing can be changed to make the both better or combine both of them.

Lisa Delpit on Power and Pedagogy

"Culture of power" is Delpit's main point in how this affects the education, schools, the power class levels, and the students' minds. America is diverse and if the kids are able to learn about the code of living in the American mainstream, then they can learn about the "power relationship" of the culture of power to help themselves to become expert (and from learning through the teachers). Different social class levels: poor, medium and rich, have different kinds of schools and the different cultures produce unfairness/inequality in how the students are educated differently. And the power that are use to develop the kids need to be change, to change to more equal and for the kids to share about the diversity they have. Additionally, Delpit suggests that school need to think more about the parent's situations depending on the class level and that there needs to be more parents voices included for the children's best interests in schools. At the end, she leaves five issues addressing about the culture of power and sort of a way to tell people what to do to erase these issues.

I think with the diversities and cultures in America and the social class levels affect how the education are placed in the children because different cultures have different standards and with the parents working (poor and medium-class), they might not be available to help the children. The teachers need to extract and share their experiences and "expertness" to the children so the children can create their own expertness and able to decode the codes and rules in playing these culture of power games. And reading her opinions, the political and economic parties play in the effects of education because money (economic) seems to be a problem and the students have to be smart to be able to survive with politics or just surviving in the society. The word "power" has been repeated many times to show that education is trying to produce power for the students to have. Even thought she said she wants the students to think critically for themselves...but her point on culture and power makes sense because I think education is for when moving into society, they can play the rules and games easier but also for all the students to have equal standing on learning as much as they could/should.

Mr. Fanning

The goals that Mr. Fanning tries to put in S.O.F. are to develop "critical thinkers", have the seniors graduate and helped the students to create goals for themselves even if it is personal goals (and the teachers will help the students in achieving those goals). He said that in S.O.F., there are have and have-not students that blends and are friendly with each other but for some other schools, it is different. Education is very important to him as it can help you learn, and "education will allow you to buy your own car". And having the students to become critical thinkers, they can learn more on their own and become "life long learners". And having the student to create goals help in making their own decisions and . He wants to help change the students but he knows he only have this much power and control. He wants to rather than "having the old factory producing clones" - students, he wants to "produce individuals" - students.

I think developing critical thinkers is what education is about because we are trying to learn about knowledge and on the highest level of that is the truth about anything. And I thought the goals were a "thing" that can connect the teachers and students better. It is like Freire's chapter that teachers become students and students become teachers, where the relationship need to be balance in order for there to be mutual trust. Similar to Lisa Deplit's article, if the teachers and students does not connect well, the students are going to back away from education and that will be bad. I think that all the schools should start considering in putting "education" first priority and developing critical thinkers and learning about the codes to help the students in being aware of the world. Even though schools are not just education, I think Mr. Fanning's goal of having critical thinkers are a must for the students to grow instead of reading from textbooks and memorizing or using the banking model of education too much. It might be bad for the higher power people because they cannot use the student "clones" if the students are developing as critical thinkers.

HW #49 Analysis of Savior/Teacher film

April 20, 2010 [Sorry, I did this assignment before Esther's class

video was post up..]

Our class did not finish filming but for the two filming sections we did was fun. Our class film is about a mean teacher who has favoritism on the smart kids and then there are the antagonist who is called Alex who does not like the teacher as the teacher picks on her a lot. The teacher embarrasses Alex in front of the whole class and praises his favorite kids and one of those kids are called Casey, the protagonist. During lunch, Alex and her friends complain about the teacher and Casey comes up to them to tell them that they should work hard themselves if they want anything out of their lives and to get a better life. Therefore Alex chooses to make herself better by studying and tells her friends to do the same. When the test day came, they both aced the test and aced it again when the teacher thought they were cheating. The principle comes to praise the teacher and Alex and her friends just left while laughing/shaking their heads at the situation. That's the whole story but we only got to the first few scenes.

In the film, I was an extra and acting like a student who does work in the math class but dislikes the teacher for his meanness and favoritism. I think the message of the film is that students become their own saviors instead of the teachers becoming the saviors for the students. It is to tell the students to not rely on the teachers that much or go for favoritism. If you want to make a better self, then you have to set the standards for yourself. Similar to Alex and her friends, it was because of their decision to study for the test that they aced it, which shows how the students have save themselves from the humiliation from the teacher, and able to give themselves positive feelings on what they had accomplished. The tone of the film was set in an angry-ish and fighting expression between the teacher + his favorite kids and the protagonist and her friends. Then during in the end, its a humor/happy ending and a whatever tone because Alex and her friends just walk off without saying that its not the teacher's encouragement that got them to ace the tests.

The class film is different from the savior/teacher films because it is not the teacher that is saving the students but the students saving themselves. In the film, the teachers are only nice to his favorite students but as for the other students, he does not treat them as nicely as he does to the favorites and treats/humiliates Alex and her friends. Like the other savior/teacher films, the teacher treats everybody with respect and tries to help them in many things but in our class film, it is the opposite. The teacher in our class film did not tell the students to strive for their own and to think deeply unlike the other films that tell the students to find themselves and let themselves get the education they should get like the "Freedom Writers" and the "Dead Poets Society".

Salvation and education/schooling in our culture does connect with each other in many ways but sometimes salvation does not work for all the education/schooling. I think when we are looking at the super teacher/savior films, we look at it as if the teachers are trying to conform the students or how repetitive the ways of teaching are but I think the teachers, like in our school, does want to make change for students and help the students to realize and be aware of the world. It may not be a big change like the super teacher films but the teachers would give the students a boost. Schools that are strict and have discipline as their top priority is a school that, I think, does not have as much salvation as other schools that have other priorities. I think it is hard for the teacher who is motivated and caring to save the students who have a big rebellion feeling against school. And I think it is depends on how the students decisions and how they want school to help them with because in our class film, the situation is similar. The students have to decide for themselves if they want to get a better life even if by studying for the test is to show off to the mean teacher that they are not going to be trash or anything when they graduate.

I find that not all power goes to the teacher through this class film or how the scriptwriter, Carrie, had written it because it was the protagonists' who bought themselves their own power and was able to pass the tests. I think that's one of the aspect in education is to have the students bring out the courage to fight against the bad teachers or to prove they are not who they really showing and what the teachers are saying about them. Also, to be self-sufficient and to grow with their friends and learning from each other. The learning does not always have to be from teachers and I think that is why we have many class discussions and those discussions were to bring the students together to discuss with one another about the problem/situation in front of them.

HW #48 Treatment for Savior/Teacher Movie

Monday

Mint Stellar is a serious teacher who teaches a serious history class. But outside the classroom, she is a friendly teacher who gets along well with all the students. She tries to help students who are in trouble and save students who are in danger of being beaten up. Those who got beaten up was able to stand up by themselves when they face the bullies again due to Stellar's encouragement and some defense skills. However, there is one students who is constantly bullied, who Stellar constantly go to save him, but Stellar was not able to help him.

Noah Nix is that one student that Stellar is having a hard time dealing with. Almost everyday, Noah gets called out to get beaten by the other boys and almost every time, Stellar comes to rescue him. Stellar don't mind rescuing him but she has been trying to find a way to help Noah. Stellar thinks that Noah is just a easy kid to be bully by but if Noah can "stand up on his own", and stand up to the bullies, then at least, he would earn some confidence. Stellar have been trying to find a way but hasn't found any that works on Noah. So she start to observe Noah...

Tuesday

She finds that Noah always eat lunch by himself and is always gloomy. But when Stellar talks to him, it's different because his whole personality changes, he's more bright than gloomy. Stellar thinks he's a good kid and he's always nice and helps Stellar out with her work, even though he is bony and has scars and bruises around him. Stellar thinks that if Noah has friends, then he wouldn't be such a bright target and the friends can protect him. So Stellar told the plan to Noah but Noah refuses, thinking it's impossible even though deep down he wants friends.

Wednesday.

Stellar begins to help Noah in building his social skills, or to at least help him in saying something but Noah still gets shaken up or becomes embarrass in front of others, making Noah's confidence to lessen. Stellar knows that he is trying hard and tells him not to give up like any teacher would say. But because she is a serious teacher, she tells him that he shouldn't worry about so much and just straightforwardly tell the person he wants to be friends with, that he wants to be friends. Simple as that. Noah thinks it is not that simple. He thinks he has no talent or a way to attract people but Stellar told him that that is not friends are for. Even if the attracting is correct, friends attract each other because they "click". That's what Stellar thinks friends meet.

Thursday.

Noah knows he has bad luck, that's why he gets bullied. On the way back to home, he accidentally dropped his books and the bullies was there waiting for him. Noah got scared because Stellar has already went home so that left him to getting beat up by the bullies.

Then someone comes in the scene and rescued Noah. His hero was a girl, her name is Lana. After the rescue, Lana starts to yell at Noah for his incompetence and how weak he is. But after a while, Lana becomes friends with Noah and she helps him get the bullies away. Stellar was happy that Noah has made a friend though it seems that Noah himself still don't believe. He's happy but he's confuse as to why Lana would be friends with him. Lana has been very nice and helpful to Noah and Stellar told Noah that Lana is a nice girl. He should be happy about it.

Friday.

Lana introduces her friends to Noah and all of them got along well. Stellar likes how it is going with Noah and Noah's "gloominess" is disappearing slowly. The process is going well is what Stellar thinks. Noah is still a bit uncomfortable around people like Lana but since Stellar has been helping him so much, he has been trying to communicate more with Lana and her friends each day. He's doing well, he guess but he is trying to make his own friends, by himself.

The next morning... Saturday.

Noah was on his way to rent a DVD when he saw a boy, about his age, crouching in front of his bike. Noah wants to help him and then makes himself go out to help him. As he walks to him, he takes in what Stellar had told him, to be confident and speak out. The boy and Noah starts talking for a while and Noah helps him to bring his bike to a shop. The boy introduce himself as Mike and the both of them got along well. And in the end, Noah got his first male friend and he finds that the both of them go to the same cram school. Stellar was proud of him when she saw him and Lana and her friends was proud of Noah too.

All ends happy~