One of the books I am using to write my literature review about the history of education in Hawaii is Culture, Behavior and Education. So far this is an interesting text and although written in 1974, provides valuable insight into the education and culture of some students within the Leeward District on O’ahu. The authors completed a case study of one particular group located within this district and what can be learned from this community can be implied on larger scale in terms of problems faced by American ethnic minorities. The Leeward District is actually where I will be teaching come summer!
The premise of their writing is that Hawaiian-American youth were too often perceived and labeled retarded or deviant, when in reality this is more of a cultural misunderstanding. The home life of these students is described as generally favorable, while their behavior at school includes a lack of motivation, discipline and self-control.
Although quite long, this quote really stood out to me:
“The reputation of the school and the students is such that many teachers will not work at the school. If asked why it is a ‘hard’ place to teach, most teachers mention lack of attention span, motivation, and self-control, gambling, smoking, glue sniffing (substance abuse), theft, fighting, truancy, and physical attacks (on teachers). All of these also are mentioned as reasons for transfers, resignations, and poor staff morale. Some teachers feel that the problems are caused by an irrelevant curriculum; others believe that they children are ‘culturally deprived,’ and that the parents are to blame. One school principal said that the problems are caused by a ‘lack of values, or bad values—they don’t have a culture.’ In recent years, much time, money, and staff effort has been devoted by the state of Hawaii to correcting the difficulties” (59-60).
Sunday, March 09, 2008
Education in Hawaii
Wednesday, March 05, 2008
Cultural Globalization- Personal Reflections
Cultural Globalization
We now live in a new global world that is connected through global trade, international businesses, and instant cyber communication. These new global connections expose people to ideas and cultures of the world. Wasserstrom reminds us that “Cultural globalization is never about one way flows, though Americans often forget this, conveniently ignoring the fact that the world’s cities are now cluttered not just with KFC franchises but also karaoke bars.”1 Wasserstrom suggests these connections do not necessarily mean that the world will become more “American”. In reality, Americans will be equally affected by this new global connection. My own experiences and travels in China have taught me that technology and access to the internet will not make the Chinese necessarily more “American” culturally or politically.
Last summer I spent three weeks in China and traveled from Beijing, to Xian, and Kunming on my way across the country. I was amazed by how many KFC’s I encountered on my trip and was told that KFC reached China before McDonald’s and the people felt loyalty to international companies that reached China first. Don’t get me wrong, I saw plenty of McDonalds during my travels. So the question Wasserstrom poses, is can the internet “do for information what the Big Mac has done for cuisine…?”2 Can technology infiltrate other cultures at a mass level and change culture, namely information?
When traveling, I also went to internet cafes in every city. While in Kunming, the internet café I found was having a grand opening and this particular café was the nicest I saw on my travels. In a large warehouse, computer stations lined all available space and I was ushered to the VIP section where each computer was paired with a comfy arm chair. When I looked around I was struck that most people using the internets were young and this was typical of the cafes I encountered. Looking around, most young adults were playing video games or watching movies. When talking to others that could speak English, I was told that computers were mostly used for entertainment and that they preferred Japanese games over American games.
I then conducted my own experiment. I knew that the Chinese government censored the internet with the help of google, so I did my own research. I looked up Tiananmen Square on google pictures. Then I added “tank” to the search and nothing popped up beside family vacation pictures, not the famous tank picture from the student protest in 1989. In China, people are not free to search the internet as we are in the United States. In addition emails are censored before they are delivered. I talked to a few Chinese that had been interrogated over questionable email communications.
The idea that being able to use the internet to change China politically does not have much clout, when its citizens are not able to freely surf the internet and communicate without censorship. I do agree, the growing connections between the Chinese and the outside world will effect its culture and politics, but I do not think this will necessarily make the Chinese more “American”; it will help the Chinese to become global citizens in a world were cultural globalization will flow throughout the cyber world. In the same respect, I feel that the internet will also make americans be better global citizens.
Reference:
1. China: Beyond the Matrix by: Jeffrey N. Wasserstrom From The Nation May 7th, 2001 issue
2. China: Beyond the Matrix by: Jeffrey N. Wasserstrom From The Nation May 7th, 2001 issue
http://http//www.thenation.com/docprem.mhtml?i=20010507&s=wasserstrom
Sunday, March 02, 2008
New Article
To whom it might concern --Ashley and Krista this kind of goes along with your points...
I was reading USA Today on February 26, 2008 in the Life section. On page 5D if you are interested, there is an article called "Dummy 'drumbeat' goes on: For educators, debate over what teens know has no easy answer." This article is kinda going over much of the material that we have read this semester. There are many people in the article who make great comments, but quite the opposite of the video online, the article focuses on what students are losing with the use of technology in school. One Author mentioned, that the "k-12 education system values, 'critical thinking' above content." ---Just thought it was a great article to add if you are interested in looking it up.
Balance Between Imagination and Technology
Interestingly and timely, a discussion with a friend of mine ensued over the weekend regarding this issue of technology and children’s imagination. My friend and her boyfriend both have strong and different opinions about this. She works in early childhood education and he is in a technological/entrepreneurial field. While he advocates for technology and the importance of twenty-first century skills, she emphasizes the importance for children to foster their imagination. Furthermore, she is overwhelmed by the technological toys available in toy stores and thinks of technology and young children in terms of sitting in front of a Game Boy or television screen.
Although others’ perspectives vary and all points are certainly valid. After all, we do not want our students and children to rot their minds and bodies away. Yet I find myself somewhere in the middle of this spectrum, learning more toward technological implementation. As an educator I am aware that technology is a tool for learning and not an add-on to the already comprehensive curriculum. Creativity, imagination, and twenty-first century skills are all important. But we must certainly use the right tools to develop students' metacognition and prepare them for life in our modern society. This issue is not so black and white, also, as often times creativity and technology overlap.
Saturday, March 01, 2008
Democracy and Education
Democracy and Education:
Immediately following the Revolutionary War, the founders of this nation were faced with the grave decision of how to create their new nation and what this government would look like. Some suggested George Washington be made king, and others were wary of a monarch after just fighting long and hard to rid themselves of King George. Instead of mimicking any European power, the newly formed United States looked back to the Roman Republic for inspiration. A government based on democratic ideals; in which men would be equal and would strive to protect the natural rights of life, liberty, and property (or pursuit of happiness).
Many questioned whether this form of government could sustain itself. In the Federalist Papers No. 51 this fear was echoed; “In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this: you must first enable the government to control the governed; and in the next place oblige it to control itself.” People feared a government would run rampant and control their lives. So in a democracy, when many people, both educated and uneducated, are allowed to vote, what could be the outcome? This critical question worried the founders of this country and citizens alike.
Could a democracy work if its citizens were uneducated and could not read a ballot, newspaper articles, or write a letter of complaint? An active citizen stays informed on the issues and accesses the government through reading and writing. Therefore it is critical for citizens to be educated, but who is responsible for providing education? Should individual citizens be required to provide their own education or should the state provide an education? Furthermore, should non-voting citizens be provided an education? Reading equals access, and American history is littered with restrictions on who can access the educational system in an attempt to disenfranchise these citizens.