Presumptions of the Average Me

Society Says.....

2015-08-27T20:47:00.000-04:00

Scrolling through Facebook these days is like reading through a People's Magazine -- it's full of engagement posts, marriage posts, new relationships, bridal showers, baby showers, bachelorette parties -- all of the gossip you could possibly think of pertaining to two people sharing a life together.

On rare occasions, I have a fleeting thought that maybe, just maybe, I'm doing this whole life thing wrong. The idea that dating is just the thing to do seems to seep its way into conversations people have with me.

"Are you dating anyone?"
"Do you have a boyfriend?"
"So what's new in YOUR love life?"
"Whatever happened to that cute guy you were talking to?"
"You must be kind of lonely..."

Or the most recent thing said to me by the cable guy when I moved into my new apartment,
"So do you have a boyfriend? . . . You need one."

Wait. I need one? Since when? My life manual failed to disclose this. Okay, maybe people say these things out of pity or concern. I'm 23, single for past 5 years, and the only love in my life is my 3 month old puppy; I'm the poster woman for the single life.

It seems like this is a typical reaction for anyone in college or post-grad. Once you graduate from high school, the natural thing to do is start thinking about settling down and figuring out who you're going to spend the rest of your life with. But the thing is, I'm okay with not following the traditional path of life because it's not something to rush into and when you go about your life doing your own thing, you learn more about yourself, about other people, and ultimately this leads to finding the person you were meant to be with all along.

I think lots of people try to make love happen and push for relationships, but you have to let it happen on its own course. I really started to like this guy after a year or two of being friends in college and then I guess we kinda had a thing, but then he became distant and moved on to other girls. Yeah, I was disappointed. I felt like I had been tossed aside so easily, but I think I was meant to have that journey... Which was both a spiritual journey and emotional journey. I think I truly knew all along that this guy and I were on different pages... I think he needed me to need him, and I didn't. I think I felt compelled to help him with the stuff he was going through, and I can't. It helped me see what I really want in a guy too and where my priorities are in life - that it goes far beyond the good qualities that I've always valued in men that he did (and still does) have. I realized that I want and need a guy who knows what he wants in life -- one who's not afraid to tell me how he feels about me. I need a guy who has his shit together. I realized that I want someone who's emotionally available and stable, who doesn't have a lot of baggage. Although we all have our own baggage, I know that I need someone who doesn't depend on me in that way. I need someone who can bring to the table the things that I can't already do on my own. Any guy who approaches me with the idea that he's going to provide for me and those things are things I can do on my own, is not the right person. He should be able to do those things on his own and bring his own unique contributions to the table. The people who toss others aside are probably ones who are at a point in their life where they seek immediate gratification, because they don't know what they want or need for the long term.

I don't think I would have recognized what I wanted unless I experienced this variation of unrequited love... I was convinced that the good qualities I saw were the most important and cancelled out all of the things that I was kinda weary of. But then it occurred to me that I was putting too much energy into something that wasn't going anywhere simply because I was making excuses for him. Whether or not they were valid isn't the point, because I realized that all those moments of uncertainty and him going from showing how he felt, to ghosting were basically an indication that he wasn't worth my time - not in that way at least. If you have to question whether or not someone cares, they don't. When they care, they're pretty fucking clear about it. I feel like life is telling me that I invest too much in people that only stick around because they gain something from it - whether that's attention/love/company/tokens of appreciation/etc. I need people in my life that make my time worth it - not people who stress me out.

So here's to all of you single women (and men, I guess) out there who are living your life and focusing on building your career and/or furthering your education, or wanderlusting with your dog -- keep doing you, the rest will follow.

Goodbye Book: Chapter 5

2015-02-11T16:42:00.001-05:00

Today I brought a girl from another residence over to your old residence because she was put on Intensive Supervision (IS) after returning from psychiatric hospitalization. Almost immediately, the girls in your old residence surrounded her and asked her where she was and what happened. The girl on IS explained her situation and the responses the girls gave her were so sincere and full of kindness and concern, that I really wanted to applaud them right then and there. One girl said, "Awww, I'm here if you need anyone to talk to! I don't even know you, but I know you'll get through this because you're strong and this is only temporary. I gotchu."

These little interactions tend to go unnoticed by staff I think, but they're the ones I treasure the most. I thing I admired most about almost all of you girls was that you had an undeniable concern for each other. It was a quality I was, and still am most proud of. No matter how much you all fought and argued, or how much drama you all created or how cliquey you became with each other, at the end of the day, you could count on at least 3-4 of your peers having your back and making sure you didn't give up.

I remember one night when [peer A] wanted to run and everyone could sense it. You and 3 other peers including myself ran in place with her. A few weeks later, there was an issue where [peer B] almost pounded [peer C] in the face. [Peer B] was so furious, even staff were afraid of what to do or say. Then [peer A] offered [peer B] her interventions and even her "safe spot" that we had specifically created for her to see if she would reduce her running at all. It was almost like a pay-it-forward situation -- the girls helped [peer A] before, and now she was helping them.

When I thought of it like that, it suddenly made me feel kinda sad because it made me wonder where that same type of support was when you became extremely escalated -- who was trying to help you? Of course there was a whole different group of girls back then, but the fact that you've always helped others out without really expecting anything in return says a lot about your character. And maybe you just read that and felt some sort of resentment about people not helping you when you needed it the most, but I think there has been a little light that has guided you all along and I think you'll find that good things will come back to you.

Always.

Goodbye Book: Chapter 4

2015-02-11T16:27:00.000-05:00

I can't tell you how happy I am that you finally have a place to call home and kind people to call family. With everything you've been through and the progress you have made (and continue to make), you deserve this and so much more. I'm incredibly proud of you and the person you have become. Every time someone mentions you, I get really excited and eager to share how far you've come along.

You have such a big heart and compassion for others; you pick yourself up right after people push you down; you're one of the most down to earth people I've ever met and genuine as well. You don't tolerate nonsense from anyone and you're honest about how you feel and what you think. You're stubborn and I've never seen you give up -- despite the many times you came close or probably considered it.

You have a beautiful voice -- so much musical talent that you should not hesitate to share with the world.

You are extremely intuitive. I think you're in tune with the environment around you and how people interact with you and each other. I feel like you probably read some of this and knew I was thinking some of those things. With that being said, always trust your instincts. That feeling in your gut about someone or something is almost always right.

You have many great qualities that make you the wonderful and successful person you are -- don't let anyone try to change you. The people you surround yourself with should build you up and make you a better person; a person who is truly worth keeping in your life will never bring you down or force you to be anyone other than yourself.

And when you discover what you're truly passionate about in life and have talent for, share that with the world because if there's something you want to change for the greater good, you of all people would be able to accomplish it. I'll get your autograph before you leave . . . just in case ;)

Goodbye Book: Chapter 3

2015-01-12T04:14:00.000-05:00

From the day you returned from the inpatient hospital, you were perfect. You had your moments, but so does everyone -- making "perfect" a relative term. Even when you had your moments, you handled them in a very mature manner. It was a complete transformation that showed me that the system doesn't fail kids -- people within the system fail kids. Once I realized this, it became my biggest motivation. It became the reason why I came to work every day regardless of all the things I was not looking forward to.

I came to the conclusion that even if we as staff don't "save" every kid and we get the dreaded phone call regarding a previous discharge being admitted into another placement or lockup, or even worse - reported dead, every little thing that we do to make up for the failures of the system is a change nonetheless. Because if we look at success in our jobs as a whole, most of us (and by most of us, I mean those with a working and morally sound conscience) would drive ourselves insane because it is physically not possible.

Each staff member is 1 individual . . . 1 for every 100,000,000 children who have been ignored, beaten down, and given up on for so long, that it's a miracle if we are able to get them to stand back up before they fall down for that one last time. Unfortunately, there are more children in this world who need the help than those who are employed to help. But if we can help one child in the hundreds that we come across, then we've done SOMETHING. Maybe that one kid goes on to help five more in his lifetime. Maybe the kid who we sortakinda reached takes ONE thing from us and that one thing is what keeps him alive . . . even if it's just barely. And I think that when this becomes our perspective, we realize that helping at all is something amazing -- regardless of the quantity helped. It's a reminder of why I do what I love and why I love it and that's what keeps me going. I feel like maybe too many people go into this field and change for the worse because they start to see the injustices within the system and then when they see that they're overpowered and outnumbered, they start to not give a fuck . . . because why care when no one else does, right? It takes less effort to not give a fuck.

And I think that is what creates these injustices and inconsistencies in the system and screws the kids over, in addition to the staff who never quite give up because there are less people providing that support.

I'm sorry that people treated you the way they did. I'm also sorry if you feel a certain type of way about the child welfare system that was supposed to help you. But I'm not sorry that we crossed paths because watching you grow and cultivate all of the good within you and your life while overcoming some of the things life threw your way was (and still is) truly incredible. I don't know what helped you get to where you are today and I may never find out, but I hope that it showed you that there are people out there who really do genuinely care for you and believe in you -- people who never have and never will give up on you . . . and I can only hope you find people like this after you're discharged. Once you do find them, never let go.

Goodbye Book: Chapter 2

2015-01-12T03:32:00.000-05:00

A lot of people ask me why I work overtime or why I like working at a psychiatric residential. Sometimes I want to ask why it matters to them, but really, it's hard for me to explain to people in a way that is comprehensive and concise. For me, I know that this is more than just my job because I feel a certain type of way in various situations. I never knew it was possible to genuinely love my job, but completely loathe it at the same time. Once I was moved up from overnights to working during the daytime, I began to notice a lot more things . . . things that convinced me one point that I could never ever quit my job, for fear of who would be hired to replace me.

That night I spent in the hospital with you was probably one of the most infuriating experiences I have ever had. I had never experienced an anger so intense and overwhelming as I did that night. It pained me to see you being treated the way you were by the nurses and even your own CYS worker. It was even more disheartening to see you try to brush it off too. I remembering coloring with you and listening to the nurses ignore your requests for benadryl while you tried to lighten up the mood and talked to me. You drew me a picture of a girl crying and started talking about feelings and so I later hung up the picture with the quote,

People will forget what you do,
People will forget what you say,
But people will never forget how you made them feel.

The picture was so emotionally charged, that I wanted to just hug you and never let go. It bothered me that you were treated differently than patients in the other units because I felt like it was the equivalent of kicking you while you were already down. I felt guilty because I knew people were failing you and it wasn't fair that you were given up on, hurt, and sad as a result of people supposedly employed to help you half-assing their job. I felt guilty being a part of a system that had failed you over and over again. I will probably never admit this to anyone, but I was glad that you were asleep when I left the next morning after my shift ended because I knew it would have easily been one of my hardest goodbyes . . . although honestly, I think you knew that too and pretended to be asleep which was the sweetest and most selfless gesture.

I went home and contacted people because I had actually thought you were discharged from our residential and they were sending you to another placement. I wanted to make sure that you had another chance because I knew what you were capable of.

I watched you help your peers who struggled to stay on-task by reminding them of what they had going for them and the loved ones they wanted to see . . . even though you had been struggling for quite some time with basically nothing to look forward to.

I watched you apologize to staff you physically injured or even just caused them some emotional damage, even when you felt like your actions were justified . . . because it was the right thing to do.

I watched you try to do the right thing countless times, even when it somehow never led to anything positive.

I watched you open up to more staff, even though people in the past hurt you and lost your trust.

I watched you keep boys at a safe distance, even though you may have liked them and maybe you would have gained something from the relationship (which some people would presume to be a survival instinct due to your past), because you know what you deserve and would never settle for anyone less than what you deserve who could bring you down.

I watched you grow and mature in ways some adults never do. You have so much to offer to this world and it was my biggest fear that you left our residential not knowing that because so many people failed to see this, much less had the decency to tell you.

I can't even convey how excited I was to learn that you were coming back to our residential. I felt horrible that despite your high spirits in starting fresh and intentions of working on your treatment, you still came back to people with low expectations. The night we sat on the bathroom counter when you were sick showed me how much you were really hurting inside as you ranted about healthcare always giving the same treatment for every ailment . . . stomach ache? Mylanta. Nausea? Mylanta and ginger ale. Constipation? Mylanta. You ranted about how the hospital always gave you the same sedative and you knew the reason why. You yelled that you were done with people lying to you. I desperately wanted to admit that I understood how you felt, but didn't because everything you were saying was the raw truth and the fact that you had to deal with that when the world was supposed to be helping you really got to me, so I could only imagine how much worse you felt to experience it firsthand.

It was that conversation that showed me how strong you really were, but also how easily staff could tear you down (or anyone for that matter). I found it truly amazing that someone your age could go through so much, deal with inconsistencies in placement, burnt out staff, peers on different parts of the behavior spectrum, different types of therapists, and hospitalizations, and yet still manage to stand right back up. The part that was difficult for me to swallow was how important it is for staff to be mindful of what we say and what we do. Something as simple as keeping our word when we say we will do something -- even if it's saying 'I'll be back in just a minute' and actually following through-- can make a huge difference in the child's treatment.

I think staff often get so wrapped up in the "busy work" of our job, that we forget to stop and remember why we're really here. We become so concerned with time and cramming everything into our shift so we can go home and nitpicking at the policies and procedures of this system, that we ultimately grow to be ineffective listeners and lose sight of our #1 priority -- you guys. We get tired and even if we have every intention of keeping small promises of games or putting new music on your iPod, sometimes that stuff becomes the least of our worries when we get home and we don't realize how this can impact your feelings.

So because of this little lesson I learned, a more conscious effort is made to create time for kids to talk so I can listen and to make sure I am able to follow through with the things I say before I put it out there.

Goodbye Book: Chapter 1

2015-01-12T02:15:00.000-05:00

I remember working an overtime shift as an overnight staff and you ran out of area. I knew why and did not feel mad about it, but I do remember running after you thinking, 'omg, omg, I really don't wanna have to put her into a restraint.' So there I was running behind you and trying to encourage you to talk to me and explain what you were feeling. Now that I think about it, I probably sounded pretty pathetic. To my surprise though, you sat down on a bench and processed. After processing, you informed me and the staff who came on assistance that you wanted to talk to your peers about things that were occurring that were not okay. I think it was a very mature decision on your part and you handled it well. When a peer became disrespectful and got smart with you, you ran for the second time within an hour. As I was running after you again, I tried thinking of what to say, but nothing sounded right. You suddenly stopped and sat down in the middle of the field and we processed. You agreed to go back to the residence and we went into the comfort room . . . where you started screaming and cursing out staff. It wasn't until a little later that you started crying uncontrollably while sharing with me your past and the few years you spent at this placement. I tried so hard not to start crying myself because it was one of the most heart-wrenching stories I had ever heard and in some ways, it reminded me of my own past.

Hearing your story reminded me of two things my mom told me every single day:

That no matter how hard your life is, there is always someone out there who has it 10 times worse. and that you should always treat everyone you meet with kindness, because each is fighting their own battle.

Remembering her words prompted me to start going through every detail in each kids' file. I tried memorizing diagnoses, trauma history, triggers, protocols, medications, everything. After going through your file, I realized that half of the stuff that you had shared that night in the comfort room wasn't even in it. I also realized that your behavior was what I felt a direct reflection of not only your past trauma, but how staff handled the crisis situation. The fact that you ran after a peer threatened you made sense because of the environment in which you grew up. The fact that you would run after getting into physical restraints made sense because of your past trauma. To top it off, staff were really loud and socializing when you were in the comfort room, which I learned from you a bit later were a few triggers. All of your behavior made sense because people and situations threatened your safety and because of everything you've been through, your natural reaction is to protect yourself and those behaviors provided you with a sense of safety.

That day, you taught me why this job is so important and why it needs to be taken seriously.

Goodbye Book: Introduction

2015-01-12T01:40:00.001-05:00

To be honest, I was a little nervous to work with you because I was warned about the types of kids I would have to work with. I was warned about kids hating me, hitting me, biting me, spitting on me, running on me, pressing false allegations against me -- everything. Despite these warnings and the stories I was told, I decided to go into [my assigned residence] with a clean slate for everyone -- both staff and kids. While this worked really well for me, I worried about not being a good fit for [assigned residence] because I'm younger than most staff and I wouldn't receive the same respect.

As the weeks went on, I realized there was so much more to this job than that. It was more than just being new or seasoned staff, more than being older or younger, and more than being educated or uneducated. Although I do not have favorites amongst you kids and love you all the same (for different reasons), getting the opportunity to work with you was one of the best things about my job.

Goodbye Book: Dedication

2015-01-12T01:19:00.000-05:00

I thought about what to do for your goodbye gift for a really long time. I know it's not much, but it's something that I hope will have more meaning and value as you get older. I decided to make this book for you -- a collection of things I've learned from you, experiences I've had with you and their meaning, and quotes that I thought were fitting. I want to show you how you made a difference in my life without meaning to; so think about the difference you can make in this world actually trying.

I want this gift to tell you what I can't tell you enough -

<3 Thank you . . .

for everything.

Goodbye Book: A Gift To The Girl Who Taught Me A Thing Or Two About Life

2015-01-11T12:24:00.001-05:00

When I found out one of the girls at the psychiatric residential facility where I work was getting discharged, I felt a tug at my heart. This girl experienced a life that no child should have and made a remarkable turnaround. It made me proud to watch her go to loving family, but sad to have such a significant person in my work life suddenly become a memory instead of a presence.

I wanted to give to her in a way that showed how much I felt that she had given to me, so I decided to write her a book. I firmly believe that people from all walks of life can teach us something and so I also decided to chronicle the book I wrote for her on my blog. I cannot deny that there is a stigma for kids with mental health diagnoses and I want to prove that despite the difficulty of my job -- the nights I cry myself to sleep, the bruises, the headaches, getting sick, the multitude of frustrations, and the many times I came dangerously close to cursing out everyone within the system -- these kids are still human just like us. Even when they run away or hurt staff with seemingly no remorse, at the end of the day they are so overwhelmed with hate, anger and sadness from the life they have experienced, it's easier to let it out on the people who may be their last hope. Because those people come back to work the very next day and it's a reminder to them that there is someone in this world that cares enough to not give up like everyone else in their life has.

The next few posts will be organized in the way the child's book is written. I have a dedication page, an introduction, and then everything else broken into chapters. I hope every reader can learn as much as I did from this child, but I understand that not everyone will be able to relate. Regardless, enjoy!

Words

2014-05-07T10:00:00.000-04:00

A Word Cloud of the Infamous Thesis

SEED Students Go to College (but do they stay?)

2014-04-29T20:47:00.000-04:00

Last blog post for Education Policy and Politics? That's a lot of pressure to really make this one count.
After reading the post by Dr. Powell on the presentations, I found an interesting point that I failed to notice over the course of our research for the SEED School. Dr. Powell points out that while the SEED School tries to stimulate the college life for at-risk students with college banners and school spirited paraphernalia literally EVERYWHERE, a "No Trespassing" sign is posted outside of the gated community -- creating a stark contrast between what the SEED school wants its students to experience, and what they actually experience. Instead of immersing these students in a "college-like" environment to prepare them for a higher education, they are instead doing them a disservice by creating a restrictive environment.
After our research on the SEED model, we focused almost entirely on the contrast between the school environment and the home/community environment. Now that I think about it, the students who attend SEED are probably thinking that that is what college is like -- test oriented, rigorous coursework, minimal contact with the outside world, very little socialization time, and an emphasis on constantly being engaged in schoolwork during allotted times and abiding by curfew.
The unfortunate thing is, college is nothing like that at all and the SEED students are likely to have a difficult time adjusting to life in college. Granted there are similarities -- such as rigorous coursework and maybe testing -- college is the milestone in life during which you actually become more socialized, have more freedom, and are not held back by anything. College is the place where students learn and grow (whether or not this is a result of good or poor decisions). Students learn how to manage time and make good use of free time to study. They meet new people and establish friendships by opening themselves up to new experiences and trying new things. Even the academic culture exposes students to more than just testing -- challenging students to think critically and learn to analyze and assimilate material and convey it through an articulate paper.
Although I can understand why the administration at SEED might be weary of allowing students the freedom that is given in college due to the instability of their home environment, I also think that they are also creating future problems for them. In some ways, students from SEED will have more freedom than they can handle in college which can result in them engaging in risky behavior -- precisely one of the things SEED tries to reduce by limiting their time at home. It would be interesting to research how many SEED students graduate and move on to college, and how many SEED students graduate from college.
This idea of structure and lack thereof posed by Dr. Powell got me thinking about the complexities of school reform. How do these reform models provide an environment that shelters at-risk students from the one that holds them back, but also prepares them for the reality ahead of them? How do they prepare students for the real world when preparing them for the real world involves exposure to risk factors that trigger their home experiences?

Nuggets of Knowledge from EDUC 377

2014-04-22T06:14:00.000-04:00

While doing work in the library this morning, I saw an overturned chair near a table of books and papers with the culprit no where to be seen in the vicinity and immediately realized that it was almost finals week. While a great deal of angst comes with meeting deadlines, the ominous approach of finals week, and what the future holds following graduation, it's also a relief to have come this far.

If I had to commend one thing about Gettysburg, I would choose the opportunity to design your own major. I often hear my peers complain about their courses and how a lot of material is irrelevant to their interests and future career goals. While I admittedly have done my share of complaining about some of my courses, the fact that I chose all of them for my major based on expectations of the courses shaping my major into something meaningful creates an immense feeling of enthusiasm and passion. Anyone who knows me could tell you that they have ceased asking how I am and started asking about my thesis because it has worked its way into almost every conversation I have had since my proposal.

>> to interject with a little humor, one of my friends shared this with me recently:

23 Signs You're In a Relationship With Your Senior Thesis

The cool thing about most of my classes, is that they each have played a part in the shaping of my thesis. I think that with the approach of a specific, yet broad major, I had the tendency to find little puzzle pieces of interesting information from each class that led to a further understanding of the topic and the shaping of my opinions. For my Education Policy and Politics class, I started off thinking that there was no way I would particularly learn anything completely relevant to major or thesis because I was not focused on education, nor do I have any interest in pursuing a career in the education field. It was an assumption I made unfairly, as I actually got more out of the course than I anticipated. The discussions we had about education reform, about the role education plays in the functioning of society as a whole and how these two ideas are interconnected sparked a revelation of the role institutions play in a child's life and how this role influences how the child interacts with the environment. Additionally, I gained insight on the concept of change. While this may be to a disadvantage in some ways, I have a slight obsession with change and why it does not occur. Learning about policy and politics and how they significantly impact education knocked me off my high horse of presumptions, for lack of a better description. While I had believed that if there was problem for which one had a solution, then the solution should clearly be to employ it prior to taking this class, I discovered that it was not that easy and that the involvement of other institutions and constituents that created a whole new dynamic of interests to be dealt with.

More specifically, a whole new element to my thesis from this class has been ruminating in my head since it was discussed in class -- which is defining a child's best interest. Although I have always conceived of a child's best interest in a legal context, I never thought of it in an educational context and it has introduced this idea that not only are the education and legal systems institutions intended to provide support for a child, but that their ideas of a "child's best interest" differ. Essentially, what I initially perceived as a distinctive term was a bit more versatile across different institutions, i.e. schools were designed in the best interests of the child, but the constantly evolving policies and political differences create an ambiguity with the best interests of the child.

Of course this only adds more complexity to the understanding of the topic, but it does add an additional perspective worth considering.

Problem With Obesity, or Problem With Human Rights?

2014-04-20T09:08:00.000-04:00

The covers of People Magazine, Vogue, and Seventeen are splashed with photos of thin celebrities and models staring emptily at the reader, while social media attempts to portray them in “real life” by displaying photos of them devouring hamburgers, exposing their cellulite at the beach, or sporting no makeup and sweatpants. Although the media captures these two different sides as one, the message is ultimately the same – these are the beautiful people that grace the front pages of magazines, and those are the people that are judged. With such a pervasive obsession with weight and beauty, it is no surprise that many Americans struggle with eating disorders and distorted perceptions of body image.

Body image is defined as the “way someone perceives their body and assumes that others perceive them. This image is often influenced by family, friends, social pressure, and the media” (“11 Facts About Body Image,” n.d.). The definition itself indicates the extent of impressionability on one's bodily perception, as well as evidence of image trends and how the “ideal” body image has evolved with the changes in social and cultural norms. Even on college campuses, the obsession with thinness can be observed among the packs of sorority girls in line for small salads that they later only nibble at with no dressing, no carbs, edamame, (basically) no flavor, and a water. Substantial meal, right? As if this diet trend was not frustrating enough to witness, conversations about being “good” and only eating one small snack or meal the entire day can be overheard – as if looking for confirmation of a drastic loss in weight or reassurance that such behavior was not necessary. The race to obtain the coveted “ideal” body is a predetermined failure. Statistics show that approximately 91% of females disapprove of their bodies and try to achieve their ideal body through dieting. Unfortunately, only 5% of the female population naturally possess the ideal body shape portrayed in magazines, music videos, and other media forms (“11 Facts, n.d.). In other words, the majority of the population is racing to a finish line that is not even there.

What is the origin of this obsession with thinness though? No one is saying thinness is a requirement but sometimes it is not what goes unsaid, but what is conveyed instead that sends the strongest message. A disparaging caption in a February issue of Marie Claire that was adorned with a glossy photo of a thin Penelope Cruz read: “Why America Hates Fat Women.” In the meantime, society is engrossed in repulsive reality television shows like “The Biggest Loser,” “Nip Tuck,” or “Ugly Betty” that only contribute to the negative stigma of people who are fatter than societal norms allow (Martens, 2006). What is worse, is that this perception fat people is developing at the ripe young age of three. Children in elementary school use the term “fat” as an insult – and it is the culture that perpetuates this behavior, not just the media. Children start associating fat with “bad” and thin with “good” because they begin to learn that those around them that are on the heavier side never get chosen in gym class or recess and are socially isolated, while their most popular peers are the ones who are thin and well-liked (Hetter, 2012). The terms are no longer used as an assessment of weight, but instead as a judgment of character and predictor of quality of life. And yet despite this obsession with incredibly skinny ideals of beauty that has ultimately led to eating disorders, the percentage of Americans who are overweight and obese is actually much greater than those who are anorexic – with over 78 million adults and 12.5 million children and adolescents suffering from obesity in 2009-2010 (Ogden, C. L., Carroll, M. D., Kit, B. K., & Flegal, K. M., 2012). The contrast of what society strives to be and tries to avoid with what society actually is reveals an interesting dichotomy. How did Americans become the spitting image of everything they condemned?

The unfortunate side of obesity is that not only does it defy society's ideals of beauty, but it leads to a devalued sense of identity. Unlike those suffering from anorexia, those suffering from obesity are faced with a greater amount of reinforced biased attitudes, discrimination, or prejudice created by weight stigma (Oliver-Pratt, 2013). Weight stigma particularly comes from physicians, who often reduce patients to a stereotype and tend to provide a behavioral weight loss plan which marginalizes those with Binge Eating Disorder because their shame is heightened and they enter a hopeless-helpless paradigm as a result of their initial inability to control their behavior on their own (Oliver-Pratt, 2013). Their disorder is more than just overeating and/or not exercising, but one that involves psychological, sociocultural, and biological factors. Unfortunately, weight stigma is one of the most socially acceptable forms of prejudice with no repercussions for the biased individual as a result of societal messages and beliefs that shaming a person affected by obesity will serve as motivation to lose weight. Due to the fact that the person affected by obesity is not protected under any discrimination laws, weight stigma often leads to lower promotion prospects, wage inequalities, and a decreased chance in employment. Additionally, weight stigma cultivates a bias in education characterized by biased attitudes from teachers and administrators, peer victimization, and lower academic achievement (Obesity Action Coalition, 2014). Such biased behaviors in the schools only worsen the problem and lead to a decrease in self-confidence, self-harm, intensive bullying/cyberbullying, and suicide. Perhaps what is most alarming is the weight stigma present in the healthcare system. Research has shown that 46% of women affected by obesity did not receive proper healthcare as a result of the small gowns, narrow exam tables, and inappropriately sized medical equipment (Obesity Action Coalition, 2014). Aside from the hospital environment itself and its accommodations for those affected by obesity, patients are also stigmatized by medical professionals. A reported 69% of overweight people had been stigmatized by doctors, while one of every three in 400 doctors admittedly responded negatively to those affected by obesity and were less likely to perform preventative health screenings and provide interventions (Friedman & Puhl, 2012). Such behavior is consistent with their beliefs that the patients who are obese bring it upon themselves because of laziness and a lack of self-discipline, in addition to their palpable reluctance to have direct contact with the exposed patient.

What society fails to realize is that just as creating unrealistic ideals of an ideal body can result in eating disorders that cause significant weight loss and impair one's functioning, so can weight bias with individuals suffering from obesity. Many of those individuals already have an eating disorder and experiences of weight stigma only create a perpetuating problem in which the individual withdraws from the bias and discrimination and returns to dependence on food as a way of coping with the negative feelings from weight stigma. The consequences of weight stigma are detrimental and subject the oppressed individual to depression, anxiety, distorted body image, low self-esteem, lack of interpersonal relationships, and even more unhealthy weight control practices (Obesity Action Coalition, 2014). If we can recognize discrimination against gender, race, religion, ethnicity, or age, how is it that we have failed to recognize weight stigma as a prejudice against people who do not reflect our perceptions of an ideal appearance? Surely we want people to make healthy life choices, but to dehumanize them with a simple assessment of weight and use it to deprive them of an education, a job, medical services, or of a proper social experience, is denying them basic human rights based on appearance. This is precisely why Americans struggle with obesity – because like the rest of oppressed groups, we are averse to helping them properly, if at all.

That Time My Thesis Suddenly Seemed Relevant to All of My Classes....

2014-04-13T23:23:00.000-04:00

Oh wait.
That's almost always.

So on one of the days I was doing research for my thesis (not sure which day, they all blend together now), I found an interesting tidbit of information that I thought would be worth sharing.

The author of The Public Assault on America's Children, Valerie Polakow, noted how the reconditioning of how citizens think of children by law enforcement, legislators, policy makers, teachers and school administration, and the community has shifted the paradigm.

While many children are not fortunate enough to attend a private school equipped with well-educated teachers and state-of-the-art technology, they are attending the public schools in urban areas with very little resources and sit in the classrooms of burnt out teachers who want nothing but a glass of scotch by lunchtime. The consensus is that public schools obviously receives more funding than private schools.

Here's the twist though. Polakow found through research that the funding of punishment was much greater than the funding for education.

Maybe most of you already knew that, maybe you didn't, but I found it incredibly.... mind blowing, for lack of a better term.
I am thinking that the punitive approach is not working out so well for the government for various reasons and one of the biggest reasons I think, is that education can do much more for a child than a detention center or court involvement. What happens if Joe, an inner-city student goes to school and gets reprimanded by one of those teachers on the verge of ditching their class and heading to a bar or the nearest psychiatrist? He doesn't want to read the book he was assigned because the school was given old, cheap paperback books that don't need to be physically unappealing for kids to not read them. Particularly at large city schools, the administration doesn't want to deal with those kids who are getting in trouble -- they are already concerned about keeping their test scores up to par with the more notable schools. So the kid is sent to juvenile court as as a "stubborn" and "disorderly" student that is out of control. Do you think a kid who witnesses the front page news headlines every day is going to be receptive to any punitive approach? Those kids have seen everything and yet somehow make it to school. So how does it make sense to allocate more money towards punishment rather than education? What if more funding towards education actually gave students the tools they needed to get out of the environment they are in? Quite a few people believe that one is born into their social class. Others believe that they can work their way up. However, no one is 'born into their social class' (at least not in my opinion) and they can't necessarily work their way up either because of all of the extra obstacles that are placed in front of them -- this being one. If that inner-city kid could attend a generously-funded public school with teachers dedicated to working with them and helping them learn, they would be in a much different position than they are now.
I am always curious as to what must be done to change the policies that enable this to happen. . . and then I realize that a.) there are too many conflicts of interest with politics and b.) too many talk about change, but do nothing to catalyze it.

you don't know me!

2014-04-01T04:47:00.002-04:00

I don't know how it all started, but one of my friends that I work with started the phrase "you don't know me!! You don't know my life!!!!" which we jokingly exclaim on a regular basis (you have to entertain yourself at work somehow, right?). While I have always had an awareness of how prevalent judgment is in our society, I have been noticing an increase in the ignorance of children, especially over the course of my thesis research and feel compelled to address it.

It irks me when people associate intelligence/level of education or lack thereof with deviance and/or crime. While reviewing another honors thesis (I know -- a thesis as a source for a thesis is a little unorthodox) on classroom misbehavior and home environment processes with court-involved youth, the author cites supporting research to her argument regarding the correlation between IQ and deviant behavior.

"Youths with a lower IQ score have a harder time in school; this can be a predictor for frustration within the classroom leading to deviant behavior . . . As school failure prevails, inappropriate classroom behavior succeeds leading to suspension, expulsion, or dropping out. Recent court statistics found that of the current juvenile offenders in a sample of one hundred and four children, 43% were two years behind grade level, 70% were barely passing or failing, 23% were in special education, 45% had been held back, and 55% had been suspended up to twenty times" (Finn, Scott, Zarichny, 1998; as cited in Cooperkline, 2009).

Okay I know I'm a little (but actually probably incredibly) biased based on my intern experience at a juvenile courthouse and a juvenile resource center -- finding that many of them were quite intelligent and scored well on standardized testing (a stark contrast to the stigma that seems to follow juvenile delinquents), but WHY?????/ Why do people always attribute deviant behavior to lack of intelligence and/or poverty? Granted I admit that failure in school is often paired with inappropriate behavior in school, but almost all of the sources I have read use "deviance" and "low IQ" or "low socioeconomic status" in the same sentence. I feel as though research should be open to findings without underlying themes of stereotypes and stigmas. In fact, that is probably why so many people perceive juvenile delinquents as uneducated and/or poor. I can't even begin to describe all of the times adults (ADULTS..) have been condescending about the field I want to pursue (even though it encompasses juveniles.. meaning any child under the age of 18, not just delinquents). Although I don't want to elaborate on the internet, I really hope my thesis ultimately proves that there are many other factors behind juvenile delinquency that are often undermined. Aside from my thesis research, I have come to discover over the course of my college career (as you may have noticed in previous blog posts) the ignorant rationale that

poverty = bad

uneducated = bad

delinquents = bad

mediocre schools = bad

therefore, most, if not all low academic- performing students are poor, uneducated, and usually deviant.

Hmmm.... No.

And going back to my previous blog post regarding the assumption that elite private schools and pricier = better, that is most certainly not true and it has been shown that a pricier education does NOT equal smarter kids. Being smarter has everything to do with what both students, teachers and parents do with their investment in education (The Smartest Kids in the World, Ripley, 19). In other words, a hard working, intelligent student (Student A) who attends a public school that performs below an intelligent student (Student B) who attends a private school only speaks for a deficit of support and/or resources from either Student A's parents/family or specific teachers.. or both.

When people wonder why reform of the education system or the court system fails to improve anything, it's because of reasoning of this nature.

The Educated Elite

2014-03-31T00:36:00.001-04:00

There is a particular stigma with public schools . . . such a stigma, that even one of my roommates brought up the topic when discussing class the other day. It was interesting because while talking about social class and materialism and how money provides you with an identity, a privilege, she brought up how kids who go to private schools are more well-off than those who go to public schools. I could not help but think of how access to education seemingly plays a part in social mobility.

The idea of a public education being "less than" and providing "less than" later made me think of the piece Living With the School Syndrome by David Labaree. A compelling argument on education reform provokes a worthwhile discussion; while many people think that reforming the system will solve social problems, the consumers are the driving force behind its core existence -- with each class obtaining their education using their resources. Labaree argues that the approach taken in education reform is counter-effective because while people think that education is behind social issues such as crime and poverty, using education to fix these problems only creates self-perpetuating destruction. In focusing on the perceived cause of social problems, society is reducing energy and resources that could be used to address these issues themselves.

So instead of having a system that promotes equality between students and equal access, we instead have a system that provides both access and advantage which is ultimately a controversial imbalance of inequality and equality. Referring back to the comment made by my roommate, I reflected upon how it was unfair that the student who paid more for the education is essentially receiving a free pass into the world of the educated elite -- advancing from private secondary school, to an Ivy League higher education, and ultimately having more preferable employers. Naturally, one might entertain the idea of changing the divide between the private and public education in efforts to create more of a balance and open up educational opportunities to people from all socioeconomic backgrounds. Labaree's approach asserts that this is a dangerous assumption, in that we make the assumption that poverty exists because of a lack of education and resources, unequal access. However, instead of trying to solve this by fixing education, we should be focusing on fixing poverty (or whatever social issue such as race and social mobility itself). In essence, looking at the American values and core systemic issues. More specifically, education cannot be reformed if the bigger issues are not addressed first.

Late Starts = Smarter Students?

2014-03-24T00:23:00.001-04:00

In light of both Dr. Powell's latest blog post (http://edjunto.wordpress.com/2014/03/23/sleeping-in/) and finals week creating a dark cloud of impending doom over the month of May, I have decided to explore the topic of sleep . . . a foreign topic to most students and adults alike, I'm sure.

Reading Dr. Powell's recount of high school brought me back to my days of high school. I remember waking up at 6am every day to catch the bus or drive to school and having school start at 7:45am, sharp. While our school was quite liberal in many aspects (in MA, go figure), they still never caught on to the whole "sleep is important" concept. Between my freshman and senior year, we went through at least three different types of scheduling . . . from eight classes a day, to seven classes and dropping one, to a rotation of classes. So while we were allowed to go outside for lunch, the smokers were never reprimanded for smoking on the "smoke-free campus," and it was easy for seniors to just leave school, it was still expected that our attention spans withstood the grueling 7:45am-2:45pm school day.

There was always talk about switching the schedule so classes started at 9am and ended at 4pm. However, they were convinced that the plan would not be feasible due to transportation and the availability of coaches for sports (pushing the schedule would make practice end at 6pm-7pm and games end at 8pm-9pm). But that was the problem...
At least 85% of the students at my high school were athletes. I remember getting out of soccer or track practice at 5:30pm, going home to eat dinner, and then working on homework for a while if I did not have work that night. When we had games/meets, particularly away, we were getting back at 8-9pm (sometimes 10pm). Our course work was quite rigorous as well, especially for Honors and AP level courses. As you can probably imagine, people were often tardy to school - with the absentee/tardy list totaling up to twenty pages on a good day. It was amusing actually to see how this played out (for students at least). By the time I was a senior, they implemented an attendance policy that allowed for three tardies a semester and after that, you had to serve after school detention. A week into the implementation of the new policy, there was a line from the front office where you check in that extended outside of the building. Needless to say, the administration still tried to keep over eighty students (including over half of the senior class that could drive) after school.

Back to the concept of sleep, I found an article recently published on Forbes called "Lack of Sleep Kills Brain Cells, Study Shows" by Melanie Haiken (http://www.forbes.com/sites/melaniehaiken/2014/03/20/lack-of-sleep-kills-brain-cells-new-study-suggests/). I actually stumbled upon this article by chance because of the barrage of teasing I get from my coworkers who have the privilege of hearing me talk about all of the homework or studying I have to do after my closing shift. "You need sleep!! It's not good to stay up until your 9am class..." But surely if lack of sleep was THAT bad for you, it would not always be so commonly associated with school . . . right? So I looked it up.

The article notes that after a study done by researchers at UPenn on lab mice, it was shown that sleep deprivation actually damages the brain cells involved in keeping us alert and awake. Researchers also found that when subjecting mice to sleep conditions similar to late night or shift work, it resulted in the degeneration of particular brain cells. Haiken also included data provided by the Center for Disease Control (CDC) which showed that out of 75,000 adults, more than a third got less than seven hours of sleep, and an even higher percentage were tired enough to unintentionally doze off in the middle of the day at least once in the past month (Haiken, 2014).

I find both the blog post by Dr. Powell and the article by Haiken interesting because it brings us back to the question of whether allowing for students to get more sleep will help them achieve more or will it have no effect at all. I mean, I don't know about the rest of you, but I would think that less detentions in high school, less points off a final grade in college from every absence/tardy, and higher exam grades or academic performance sounds a little closer to achievement than having an early start to the day. Not to mention teachers and professors are always talking about how important sleep is... But I guess finding a way to budget this late start to accommodate teacher/professor salaries and transportation and essentially reorganizing a system all too familiar is not worth it. I'm just a biased student -- what do I know?

"Choose." -said practically no education constituent ever

2014-03-07T06:10:00.000-05:00

You know what really gets under my skin?
People who make absolutely no sense.
You know who makes absolutely no sense?
People who are all about school reform and drafting policies to further the education of the youth.
I use "the youth" loosely because it certainly can't be referring to ALL of the youth in our society . . .

I may not fully understand the idea of charter schools, but what I do understand is that they are publicly funded schools open to all that were initially established to provide an exceptional education for the families who are less privileged. Granted charter schools cannot be regarded as monolithic, it is noted that one of the four fundamental values of public education is equity (Keeping the Promise? The Debate Over Public Charter Schools, Hammond & Montgomery). It is later noted that "equity involves examining the school's admission policies and the access granted to students once they enter the school . . . equity may not mean 'equal,' but rather that each child should have access to the educational resources he or she needs to be successful" (98). The poor excuse of a 'definition' for equity speaks for itself. Equity may not mean 'equal, but basically each child should have access to an education. Aka, "we know what equity SHOULD be and what everyone will expect it to be, but we have to throw in that subtle clause in case we f#%@ up and change our minds."

..... which leads me to my next point. If charter schools were initially created to provide opportunities for under privileged families, how does one explain the zoning of these charter schools in middle-upper class neighborhoods? A charter school is not serving EACH child if it can't even claim an integrated student population. How is that child who is already under privileged going to attend the charter school (that is supposedly available to them) if their family can't even afford to live in that neighborhood? And commuting?? You might as well ask them to donate money to the school.
Oh, and don't forget the application process -- ranging from academic prerequisites, assessment exams, and applications printed solely in English to mandated volunteer hours from parents and in extreme cases, mandated investments in the school from the parents (Class Struggle -- How charter schools get students they want, Simon).

I realize that equality is a pretty consistent theme/argument in a majority of my posts regarding education, but it's difficult for me to fathom how a system that proposes "choices" for students can so easily conceal these supposed "choices" by creating all of these obstacles guaranteed to deter a particular population from enrolling. I understand charter schools are essentially a marketable entity, very much like private schools. Each school (a product) has to compete for funding in addition to selling their school to students (customers) to increase high performance in return for funding. And while I see how this approach could not only be economically beneficial, but a contribution to public education reform, I am not buying the spiel of "equity" and "access" and "public access" when the majority of these charter schools are "choosing" students who are well-supported at home or high achieving. Did these fundamental values suddenly take on new definitions of which I am not aware? The choice ultimately becomes that of the school, not the student. And what does that mean for the under privileged children? It really irks me when people complain about this population being uneducated when the option of receiving a decent education or additional resources is hardly ever made available to them. Without the education that their more privileged counterparts are receiving, how do they ever move up? Who is actually benefiting the most from this education? The children for which the education is intended? Or the stakeholders and policy constituents? I just want to point out that if we can conceive of education as an economic investment with a monetary gain, then we should be able to see education as an investment in our society's youth with a much greater gain.

Amada, the Math Atheist

2014-03-07T04:23:00.000-05:00

One thing I have always found interesting is the debate between achievement and aptitude and the subcategory of the standard curriculum. What happens to that kid who falls through the cracks and just "doesn't get it?" There is a tendency for teachers to eventually give up on that kid. I mean, can you blame them? Depending on the size of the school, teachers have at least three to six classes with up to 25 students. Teaching to the test forces teachers into very rigid schedules with very little time for slowing down the pace for the one or two students who can't keep up. These students are ultimately perceived as having something wrong with them, but it is hardly ever questioned why the student can't grasp the concept but simply recognized that they can't.

This debate resonated with me because it brought me back to my kindergarten through eighth grade years. I absolutely HATED math. I remember getting my schedule in the mail every year with my teacher's name glaring at me in bold letters. Each year, it never failed that I had the worst math teacher. My hatred eventually became frustration and I would resent learning new concepts because I was still trying to figure out past concepts. I would resent doing my math homework from the textbooks that probably equated to a quarter of my weight and led to a semi-permanent, hunched over stature. My problem with learning math in elementary and middle school was that I was always just given problem sets in a textbooks and that never worked for me. I needed an interactive way to learn math and none of my teachers seemed to consider that as a possibility.

At the end of eighth grade, we had course scheduling for high school. After all of the stories I heard about high school and how it was "so much harder," getting stuffed in a locker was the least of my worries. What about math?? What if I couldn't keep up and didn't get into college? I was terrified. After I looked at the course offerings for math, I skimmed over calculus, algebra I, algebra II, trigonometry, geometry, IMP.... WAIT. IMP? What the hell is "IMP???" It was then that I discovered the "Interactive Mathematics Program." IMP was a four-year math program that was taught at the same pace as the traditional math program, but in a more interactive and comprehensible manner. The textbook was broken into units, with a math "project" or game for each unit that brought the concepts of that unit to a level of understanding more applicable to the "real world." Essentially, we learned how each concept was used in a real life situation (i.e. learning trigonometry through a word problem about building a tree house that fit certain requirements). Although IMP had a relatively negative stigma associated and was often referred to as "too easy," or for "dumb kids," we all scored higher on the math section of the MCAS (Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System) than our peers in traditional math classes. Participating in IMP completely made up for my past teachers who essentially gave up on having me understand. This experience led me to conclude that traditional teaching practices are not always best for students. If a student has no incentive to do well in a certain subject because they only see their failure which leads to a loss of interest, they are never going to learn.

In my case, my inability to do math was inevitable and couldn't be "fixed." None of my teachers stopped to question why I wasn't understanding the lessons or homework. "The book explains it...." was the response I often received when I came to the teacher in despair after being unable to complete the classwork or homework. So the question I pose to policy makers and supporters of a standard curriculum challenges the importance of having a standard curriculum and traditional practices that essentially adhere to this. What's more important? Making sure everyone is ready for the tests and approaching it traditionally? Or preparing students for the tests for job security, but incorporating ways for the students to actually LEARN and stepping outside of the box of tradition to accomplish this? Is it so bad to try an approach different from what is expected?

Filling the Bubbles

2014-02-27T02:25:00.000-05:00

No more Scantrons!!!!!!.... I thought after elementary school.

No more Scantrons!..... I hoped after finishing middle school.

No more Scantrons..... I was convinced after finishing the SATs.

Psyche! *enter the LSATs*

No more Scantrons!!!!!!!! I celebrated after finishing the LSATs.

and just when I thought life could no longer throw standardized testing at me...

One of my post-grad job applications for a civil service job indicated, TESTING, 100 multiple choice questions,

Are you serious? You're giving me premature gray hairs, DOE.

What I don't understand is how it became a consensus that standardized testing was a sole indicator of academic achievement. In Diane Ravitch's book, The Death and Life of the Great American School System: How Testing and Choice are Undermining Education, the debate focuses on what students are learning versus how well students are learning and the means to an end aspect of it.
She states,

"We can immediately see that the kind of student who is 'learning-oriented' -- the student whose goal is to understand and who is thinking about what she is doing -- is likely to enjoy school. But the flip side is that her classmate, who is mostly concerned with being a top performer, is probably a lot less eager. . . . But a genuine interest in the task -- or excitement about the whole idea of learning -- often begins to evaporate as soon as achievement becomes the main point" (Ravitch, 28).

Going back to the civil service exam, it's disconcerting that one's employment for a position that serves the public good virtually rests entirely on the score received on the exam . . . forget about more redeeming qualities that one would think take precedence for a job that requires a genuine interaction with the public. While the exam theoretically ensures that individuals receive job offers based on merit, I want to know why merit is only being measured solely with an assessment. Going through the list of current job openings in PA, I see public safety specialists, education specialists, civil engineers, criminal justice system planners, social workers, pharmacists... the list goes on with positions requiring a great deal of competency.

Applying Ravitch's point regarding learning-oriented versus performance-oriented individuals, I can't help but wonder how this phenomenon that has made its way into the professional world, long after those years of competing with the teacher's/professor's pet, affects our society. I personally have a very specific interest in being a catalyst of social change within the child welfare/juvenile justice sector. This passion is what constantly has me yearning for more knowledge (do I really have to graduate?...) and I think that while a learning-oriented individual would also be performance-oriented to an extent, I feel as though it is unfair that I am up against hundreds to thousands of applicants for a position that I KNOW I would excel at and with one higher score, some person from who-knows-where that simply needs a job could take that away from me. I'm not arguing that I am the most qualified simply because it is something I enjoy, nor am I arguing that competency is not as important, but I am arguing that once achievement becomes an isolated goal, it changes ones' performance entirely.

My past internship with the Department of Social Services involved a handful of workers who obviously had the competency for the job, but nothing else -- no apparent desire to be there, no "oompf" to anything they did/said. I don't know about anyone else, but I wasn't buying what they were putting down (does anyone want a refund?...). The dynamic was very one-dimensional to say the least. It is my opinion (and I'm sure of most other people) that any position that provides services for the public should also have an equally balanced level of passion and desire to learn more in addition to competence. If you are a social worker working with a child, they KNOW if you really don't want to be there. They KNOW if you're simply "doing your job." People as a general rule, are more perceptive to these things than we're willing to admit and any progress a professional has made with a client can be instantly nullified if there is no genuine interest behind it.

With that being said (and for the sake of not dragging this out even more), how do we measure merit that incorporates the learning process? Not only in the classrooms, but in the real world? Anyone can ace a test, but whether or not they aced it with the sole purpose of achievement versus acing it with the purpose of learning it makes all of the difference.

Operation Better Schools and Teachers?

2014-02-23T02:33:00.000-05:00

I will try to make this short and sweet (we'll see how well I fare...), but I wanted to address an issue relative to school operation and delegation and responsibilities. In our class discussion, we talked about curriculum standards and the debate about imposing standards upon public schools, and not private. One of my peers brought up the issue of staff size and responsibilities. In some cases, public school administration does not have time to set down and design their own curriculum and set their own standards because they have so many other additional responsibilities (due in part to limited funding) and their time is spread very thinly. She pointed out that at the school her mom worked at as a principal, the greater portion of her time was spent running around trying to help teachers control misbehaving students and mediate behavioral crises because there was no Dean of Students due in part to a lack of funding.

This sort of got my brain thinking about yet another issue.

Being that one of my primary focuses in my studies/thesis is how different support systems (the family, school, or legal system) are failing and/or supporting students struggling with truancy or substance abuse problems, I am interested in how the education system intervenes in behavioral crises. During my three years of experience working at juvenile courthouse, I had the great privilege of overseeing a case in a different school district with one of the probation officers in which a student (I do not recall what grade he was in, but it either elementary or middle school) got involved with the court due to misbehavior. I should also mention that this was a fairly decent school in comparison to the schools that our court typically came into with, and it was a little surprising. Halfway through the CHINS (Child In Need of Services) report filed by the school (articulated in a very.... dramatic and intense manner), we learned that the child often talked back to the teacher, refused to do any work, and the last straw that led to the report, was caught chewing gum in class and refused to spit it out (chewing gum is against their rules). My initial reaction was to laugh hysterically. This kid is probably like "Why the hell am I going to court for this.... " The way the report was written, one would have thought he committed first degree murder before finishing the report. Nope, just chewing gum....
My second reaction was to wonder how the hell this teacher was hired. As soon as you become a teacher, I feel like you need to be prepared for all types of students with different backgrounds -- different attitudes, different learning styles, and different upbringings. If a teacher cannot handle a student who is simply disobeying or god forbid, chewing gum, then maybe they picked the wrong career out of the sorting hat because that does not require legal intervention. What concerns me more, aside from this excessive fear of chewing gum, is that from a smaller picture, one would say that funding should go to a larger staff (as somewhat implied in class) because larger schools have bigger crises and even they tend to try to deal with it for a bit before resorting to legal intervention. So does that say something about this anti-chewing gum, small town school and their population of possibly overwhelmed staff? Maybe.
But I think the more crucial question is not whether the number of staff influences improvement in schools, but the quality of the staff and whether these teachers should be equipped to be knowledgeable about these different backgrounds. Is that their responsibility? Should they have to teach x amount of students AND make sure they can address the needs of each individual student and investigate every possible factor that could potentially be influencing their academic performance or behavior? And what about after some factors are identified? What if this child comes from a neglectful family? Should the teacher be inclined to intervene? And if not, then who?

Government Contradictions (part 2)

2014-02-23T01:22:00.002-05:00

I attend a college that is $60,000 a year... not even including the amount you have to come up with for textbooks. My freshman year, I wanted to transfer for a few reasons and had met with the Dean to discuss my concerns. To my surprise, one of the things she mentioned pertained to my financial aid, the financial aid that covers my entire tuition plus room and board, was a partial contribution from the alum who give endowments and the students who pay full price to attend because they do not have financial hardships. What about that situation? This is a private school and I am essentially attending for free. Being financially independent since I was in middle school, my situation is almost completely analogous to those who see education as a private entity. I could be going to a state school and getting an okay education because I did really well throughout high school, but instead, I was given the opportunity to have a private education and I have the school, alum, and random people who do not know they just indirectly paid for my education to thank for that. Because of this private education, I have better opportunities post-graduation that I may not have had otherwise and I can go into this world and make my contribution to the field I want to pursue.

The argument I pose to those who are against education as a public good is simple. How is it that our education system has become one in which those who can afford a great education have access and those who do not are to some extent, deprived? I do feel that your education is what you make of it, but there are still more opportunities for those who are a little higher up in social class. In an urban education class I took last year, we visited some urban schools and it is INCREDIBLY apparent which schools had decent funding and which did not. And while there are public schools that get less funding that private schools and still provide a decent education, that does not change the fact that society consistently values a private education over public education. There is sociological research (Preparing for Power: America's Elite Boarding Schools, Cookson Jr. and Persell) that has been done comparing private schools to public schools and it has revealed that a student from a private school getting some A's, B's and maybe one or two C's has a better chance of getting into an Ivy League than a well-rounded, A student from a public school -- simply because of the connections and the power that the private school has. Of course this is not applicable to all private schools (and that book was published in 1987 and may or may not be written from a biased perspective), but the general idea that I am trying to emphasize is that a great education should not be limited to those who can afford it. And the saddest part about that is that I think there is somewhat of a stigma with "lower-class" families (particularly in urban areas) regarding the level of ambition to even pursue an education, but when our urban education class visited these schools and talked with the students, many of them dreamed of going to college and had goals and ambitions to be a doctor or a lawyer or a pediatrician (and their reasoning was primarily to help their family out once they achieved this... imagine that), but their biggest concern was that they were not going to achieve that because of the cost. The thing that bothers me most about this is that there are a great deal of people who have careers in the medical and legal field with their own financially-driven motives or simply because of the prestige and here we were talking to little elementary school kids who talked about going to college and pursuing these careers with such an admirable and selfless attitude. So remind me again why we have such a hard time accepting education as a public good . . .

Government Contradictions (part 1)

2014-02-23T00:50:00.001-05:00

Although I have fallen behind on my entries for education politics and policy, a few topics have amassed since my last post and are itching to be discussed.

In light of the conversation regarding government involvement in education, I wanted to address the idea of education as public good vs. private debate. I find it interesting that as a society, we want the best education for the youth so they can essentially "give back" after they finish school and become educated and intelligent individuals in the professional world (Or I suppose we would LIKE to believe that this is the consensus). However, when it comes to discussing the economic aspect of education, there is a debate about where tax dollars go and why those who pay taxes cannot decide what is being taught in schools, yet private schools have the luxury of not having a set "standard" curriculum. Some argue that it is unfair to put such a hefty price on a private education, while those with less money are forced into sending their kids to public schools where in comparison, the education is sometimes considered "mediocre." Others argue (particularly with respect to higher education) that one is paying for the education from which they benefit.

While I will admit that both sides make valid points, I support those who view education as a public good and see it as something that affects much larger issues in our society. I am a firm believer that each of us is a catalyst for the change we want to see and I do not think that anyone can argue that they are losing faith in humanity and that there is too much crime, or too much delinquency because you know what is behind that??? Education. Sometimes I go on Facebook and those really annoying people who abuse the status posting privilege by complaining are fuming about how it is not fair that prisoners and convicted criminals can get a free education while our generation is thousands of dollar in debt. Yes, it is unfortunate that a price tag is placed on education, but you know what? I am willing to pay money if that means someone who probably would not pursue an education otherwise can have that opportunity to better themselves. I mean, how else do you want a person to learn how to contribute to society? By sitting in a cell? By going to schools with very little funding? I am not saying that it is necessarily "fair" if you look at it in black and white, but just like most other things in life, this is not black and white. If you want the world to be a better place to live in, then it should make sense that opportunities to better oneself are provided for those who may not have it otherwise.

Choosing Sides

2014-01-29T18:58:00.000-05:00

Andrew Delbanco, author of "Two Faces of American Education" reveals two opinions on American education from Michelle Rhee and Diane Ravitch. While I did read all thirteen pages, I was particularly interested in Michelle Rhee's perspective on how to reform our education system. Delbanco writes about Rhee condoning a "culture in which teachers rank their students and families prod their children to raise the ranking" (Delbanco, 2013). I found it interesting that just as the subject is glossed over in debates in education, it seemed that the discussion in class primarily focused on competition as a general concept.

Although I support a competitive edge in the classroom and think it promotes a great learning environment, I do not believe that this is universally applicable to all schools. For instance, this works in college and suburb high schools where most students come from middle to upper-middle class families and have families who encourage their children to be successful. So if Rhee is saying it is the family's responsibility to raise their child's ranking, where does that leave the children coming from families that do not promote academic success? In a perfect world, okay. Except this is not a perfect world and college students are poor and we still don't get snowdays at Gettysburg. In the real world, particularly in urban areas, many students come from uneducated families with very little support from anyone.

I remember a girl in one of my classes last year came from a Korean family and shared that in her culture, families push the child to succeed academically. The majority of their savings go towards sending their children to the best schools and providing all of the resources needed to succeed. So kids with families with that mentality are set! Except there are at least four million other children unaccounted for (90% of all statistics are false). Seriously though. How is it even remotely feasible to rely on every family to raise the child up the academic ladder of success? This raises another interesting point. Is it the school's responsibility to give the child the tools he or she needs to surpass the level of achievement of their peers on top of teaching the curriculum?

I mean . . . I don't want to choose a side, but . . .

Confessions of a Non-Ed Student

2014-01-28T13:02:00.000-05:00

Alright, so I am not an education minor nor someone who wants to teach in the near future, yet I am taking EDUC 377: Education Policy and Politics. I also took an Urban Education class as well as Teaching Students with Diverse Needs. I designed my own major, so I had to choose relevant classes . . . education classes were initially not my first choice. However, after taking Urban Education, I learned that there was so much to juvenile law that intertwined with a variety of other disciplines (that's the beauty of being an IDS major!). Even as an intern at my district's juvenile court for three years, I saw a lot (or lack thereof) of communication between the schools and the legal system. I think it is intriguing that the majority of the adolescents who are in the legal system have so much difficulty in school and nothing seems to improve for them. Why? Why is there so much truancy, disrespect, and substance abuse in school? Why do straight A students end up getting in trouble with the law and let their grades plummet? You can't have senioritis for all four years of high school (just don't ask me when I started getting it). With that being said, I think my pursuit of having an education background is driven by academic interests, especially considering the focus of my thesis -- which investigates how the family/home environment, the school, and the legal system are all theoretically a support system for each child. If each child has these support systems, then why is there such a high recidivism rate in the court system? How are the people who should be accessible to these children supporting or failing them and to what extent is the education system involved?