HW 50

Gatto's discuses idea of school and boredom. It talked about how students may that school is boring because they have no interest in what their learning. They have no interest or stake in what their learning. But the new take this article takes is the idea that teachers may also be bored . The article links the teacher's boredom from the student's lack of care in the work their teaching.Gatto also writes about his six rules on what he expects from teaching and being a teacher. Gatto also talks about how with all the schooling one is forced to have they our still in fact learning nothing.

I think Gatto has some free keen insights, for example when he states "we could encourage the best qualities of youthfulness - curiosity, adventure, resilience, the capacity for surprising insight - simply by being more flexible about time, texts, and tests, by introducing kids to truly competent adults, and by giving each student what autonomy he or she needs in order to take a risk every now and then." I think if we fellowed this idea and kept students on the same playing field as teachers they truly be molding students to help prepare them for life as functioning adults.

It seems Freire was arguing the point that their is no real learning taking place at school , that their is no authentic education,just a institution were students our constantly being "forced" fed information but not really gaining any intelligence. Freire discuses how teachers give their students a constant stream of information that they have deemed necessary to acquire"real knowledge "and if the student can attain this knowledge and discuss it their considered "intelligent" but that in fact they our no better off or worse off the anybody else.Freire loves to argue about the inequality that the educational system creates, known as the "banking system". This system is all about the teacher and the student relationship being unequal and unbalanced. The teacher is set in a authoritative position or "master" position while the student is made to be subordinate or the "slave". The banking system is a clear attempt to dumb down the student, making them think less and less , at every point making them feel less like a individual.It is a type of oppressive education to keep them in the dark, ignorant and lost, so they can be utilized, creating the ultimate submissive individual , who will work more and ask questions less .

For the most part I agree with Freire idea's, school is place to make you the "citizen" your society wants you to be, whether that communist china or the "land of freedom" we know as a America.School is place to shape us in the "young men and women of tomorrow". Where we learn to take orders good or bad and not question them, were we become the "not what your country can do for you what you can do for your country" take shit puppets.School is a place to weed out people and fit them into classes and characters. I do disagree on the notion of school being completely useless I think in fact their a lot we can take from our twelve years "locked up" if we try.

Delpit's idea about school is all based around how the educational system we claim to equal or fare is not, that in fact by trying to teach in this new "groovy" way their our children being alienated.Her idea is the the way in which one student talks make work for some, their is still nearly just as much failing.That learning to teach the individual actually harms the whole. Delpit other main focus is on what she has coined the "culture of power". The culture of power contains five principles, that try to explain how our educational system lets students from one culture exceed well another false.The first principle is that students lack power to improve their education because teachers have the power, the power to pick textbooks which controls what they see. Delpit also maneges to links our lack of power in school to lack of power one grows to have in he or she's own life. The second principle is that students have to fellow a strict set of codes and rules to be accepted in school and in overall life, because these rules are meant to match and fellow with every culture accordingly, to conform students to the ideal of a specific culture. The third principle states to truly succeed in school is to be part of the culture that has the power because logically those who have the power make the rules that decide how and what even makes one successful in school in the first place. The fourth principle explains how it is easier for the students from the culture in power to learn form students from the other cultures who our not. The fifth and final principle disuses that the members of the culture with the prominent power don't acknowledge the fact they hold the power because to want to appear as the villain.

I thought Delpit's argument had some interesting points. One cant help but acknowledge that one's background or culture affects their interested in learning and how well they can discuss or understand something else. And it more then obvious that a majority of schools are somewhat culturally bias.

Mr.Copeland felt his job as teacher was to make students aware of "social justice". He felt while his style might be somewhat different from Andy they both had the same goal of "social justice". Cope said he enjoyed teaching his students about different oppressed groups, hoping that maybe by teaching students about oppressed groups in the past they won't think to judge groups that hey see being oppressed now, that they would grow some kind of empathy. What struck me was Cope's blunts honesty , he also ways kept it real. When ask if he felt like he was a "savior" and he said almost immediately " what am I saving them from?" . In my opinion Cope is the idea of a savior because he's not doing it to for the praise but simply because he cares. For Cope, its seems like he doesn't just see number, but he sees a name, a face on a seat, a story. Cope teaches to make change and to me that a beautiful thing.