The Enormous Struggle.

"When working class children get empowering education you get literacy with an attitude" (xi).

Patrick Finn classifies the education in this country into empowering education and domesticating education--the first leading to positions of power and authority and the latter being the type of education that makes someone "productive and dependable, but not troublesome." (ix).  The working class receives domesticating education, thus perpetuating this social set up, which convinces people it is natural. Since working class children do not get "literacy with an attitude" they do not threaten the current social set up.

 Finn echoes Delpit in many ways.  He points out the maintenance of the status quo that our educational system fosters, "But the working class does not get powerful literacy, and powerful literacy is necessary for the struggle." (xi).  Delpit's assertion that some students come to school with more of the accoutrements of the culture of power than others is reiterated when Finn  explains the students in gentry schools are not empowered by their teachers, "they are already powerful."  He also places the responsibility of initiating the change on the culture of power, as Delpit did, he says the cycle exists "because the people who have the power to make changes are comfortable with the way things are." 

Finn suggests "educating working class children in their own self-interest", which matches Delpit's argument that education must involve teaching students "the codes to participate in fully in mainstream of American life...within the context of meaningful communicative endeavors" (45). Finn talks about motivating these students to want to learn by connecting curriculum to their lives.  Both Delpit and Finn agree that education needs to be connected to the lives and experiences of the students-the way it already is for those in the culture of power.

"Get ready for the 'enormous struggle'"



 In a study of  five differenct elementary schools one major difference noted between the schools delievering an empowering eduation versus those giving students a domesticating education was the amount of responsibility and freedom given to the students.   The lack of this freedom both academically and behaviorally contributed to the working class children learning to follow directions and resist authority.  

 Finn introduces Freire's idea of dialogue vs. debate.  This is a discussion I have had with my classes about how to communicate with each other.   A fellow English teacher gave me this document that further explains the difference. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1yaXw0lH3KNHjNicLS6DgqN3Qzf5IC9jTLTunu6h5DQ0/edit?authkey=CJP01rAB&hl=en_US&authkey=CJP01rAB#

 While I think it is a necessary and important distinction to make, and I completely disagree with the teacher who said, "Do it my way or it's wrong" (10) I question allowing students too much "equal dialogue" in collaborative teaching.  It is important to empower students to have a voice, and teach them to be effective communicators, but spending chunks of class time negotiating the teacher's need to deliver instruction and the students' need for a rest might not be the best use of time.  I know he uses this example in a game played by students in role of the teacher to practice dialogue, and he acknowledges teachers have objectives and cannot simply adhere to students' requests- my problem is not with Finn, I actually don't have a problem at all, but the article paints a lovely picture: Students get tired and this effects how they work.  So they engage in a respectful, equal dialogue where they voice their opinion, reflect on it, remain open to discussion, and negotiate an agreement.  I do not believe this would happen in my classroom without a lot of practice.  (I am writing this after spending last period on Friday dealing with two students who decided to fight each other in the 2 minutes they were in my classroom before the bell even rang!) I am not suggesting that these values and skills are natural and that students cannot learn to be these negotiators, but I do feel it will be an "enormous struggle".   Furthermore, some students do not always possess the maturity to make good decisions, so negotiating with them is not always be the best option.     I think at this point I'm just rambling-maybe venting a little too.

"Teachers are supposed to teach, not blame children for what they don't know how to do." When "resistance is the dominant theme, don't expect this to be easy." (175).  I don't expect it to be easy.  This resistance is not something they learned last week; it has been building for years.    The resistance, when it rears its ugly head--in the many forms it will take--is a challenge to deal with in the classroom, and it will be a challenge to turn it around.  But I think we can all attest to the fact teaching the students who are not motivated to learn is the biggest challenge of all.

One last note...

 I thought of Finn mentioning the “excuse” of this not fitting into the curriculum, and Kelly's comparison between the "silenced dialogue" and teachers when I read Obama's speech on Friday.  "We’re going to let states, schools and teachers come up with innovative ways to give our children the skills they need to compete for the jobs of the future." 

http://www.whitehouse.gov/the-press-office/2011/09/23/remarks-president-no-child-left-behind-flexibility

It is late now- at least staying up this late let me see the Red Sox finally win a game.