Although the article written by Kyriakou is a few years old, much of what the author talks about still resonates in our society today. The idea that immigrants should have rights is an issue that is still at the forefront of much of the political debates going on today (Arizona comes to mind). I wouldn’t say I’m passionate about this issue, but I guess I have an opinion on it. My dad is very much of the notion that all illegal immigrants should be shipped back to their respective countries, no questions asked. His opinion now is not unlike his opinion when I was groing up. To say I grew up with a bit of a racist parent would not be entirely inaccurate. Fortunately for me (especially since I’m a teacher), I have not developed those same notions as an adult. I do feel that it’s the responsibility of all who live in this great country to pay their taxes, first and foremost. I don’t like paying them either, but guess what happens to me if I don’t … the government comes knocking wanting their money! I think immigrants deserve the same opportunity to get a visit from the IRS if they choose to live here and not pay taxes. That’s pretty much the extent of it for me. Beyond the taxes issue, I don’t have any problem with immigrants moving here and living here.
Mr. Waxler, in his article, gives some really nice examples for any social studies teacher that might need a little guidance as to how to incorporate multiculturalism into their classroom. According to his writing, it sounds as though he’s a very successful teacher, and he’s able to get A LOT out of his middle school kids. With that said, there were some points that he made that caught my eye a little quicker than his social studies class examples. At one point in the article, Mr. Waxler talks about how we shouldn’t be forced to “pull out each culture and teach it as a separate entity such as Black History Month or Women’s History Month.” He goes on to say that “having separate months for different cultures is exactly the opposite of what true multicultural education should be trying to achieve.” I couldn’t agree more. As I’ve said before, I’m often ignorant when it comes to multicultural education. I guess that’s mostly because I’ve been a math teacher for the past 12 years. Math, for one, is a pretty universal language. Other than the way word problems are written, there’s not much opportunity for incorporating multicultural education in a math classroom. Well, at least there are not as many opportunities to do so. My point is, even I know that designating a month for Women and a month for African-Americans, and so on, is not multicultural education. Multicultural education has to be nurtured through the curriculum in the classroom on a daily basis, not a month at a time!
Now to Mr. Hirsch. If I’m being honest, I found this article particularly difficult to read. I’m not sure if it was the articles inability to draw me in and grab my attention, or if it was the fact that I had a hard time processing the rhetoric. All the talk about Ethnic Loyalism and Cosmopolitianism was just a bit wordy for me. Either way, I had a hard time with this one. With that said, I did find a couple of points in the article particularly intriguing. First, when Mr. Hirsch talks about how, for an ethnic loyalist, “the very idea of ethnicity defines the essence of a person.” Once again, I’ve never really thought about this, or the fact that the term “African-American” or “Jewish-American” or “Asian-American” could be dubbed a sort of “stigma.” I always thought that all black people wanted to be called African-American, when in fact (according to Mr. Hirsch), there may actually be some black people who don’t have the same ideals as other black people, so they would choose not to be called “African-American” due to their differences in attitudes and values. This was very interesting to me.
The second point that caught my attention was Mr. Hirsch’s discussion on multiculturalism in schools. I found his comparison between the “haves and have-nots” in this country and other developed countries interesting. I had to let this one sink in for a moment. I guess, because I have been in the education system here for so many years, I assumed we were doing it right, but it’s pretty easy to argue that we’re not. His theory about the nation having a set curriculum for each grade is nice in theory, but a little unrealistic. He says that, “More than any other circumstance, the American vagueness about what children need to learn in each grade causes the learning gap to widen between the haves and the have-nots.” I agree with this … to a degree. Theoretically, it’s a great idea, but realistically, it’s a bit deranged. To think that a third grader in Woodbury, TN, could learn at the same rate as a third grader in New York, NY, or as a third grader in Dallas, TX, is crazy! There are so many extenuating circumstances surrounding kids from these three cities (not to mention the other zillion cities in the US), there’s no way to assume they could all learn at the same rate. Things important to kids in Woodbury, TN, are not the same things that are important to kids in New York, NY. Same goes for kids in Dallas, TX. There are factors outside school that drive the students to succeed or fail in school.
I think we are all in agreement in that every kid deserves the very best education they can get. What we have to remember, however, is that not all kids need the same education. As long as we, as educators, are giving the kids we have all the tools to be able to, at some point in their lives, make their own decisions about their education, we are doing the best we can. Ultimately, it’s up to the student, and the parents of that student, to be responsible for taking ownership of their learning. We need to encourage, be charismatic, and nurture as much as we can to aid them in their quest to do so.