Sunday, November 1, 2009
Dang It! I am the Man
I was particularly taken by Bourdieu’s thoughts on the role of the education system, and by extension, the roles of teachers in the development of “legitimate” language. I have never seen myself in this role before. According to Bourdieu, I am just another cog in the machine of the dominant culture. The problem is, I don’t know if I can argue with that. While I do strive to teach my students how to think for themselves and try to give them the skills to see the world for themselves, I limit them in the ways that they can express these thoughts and views. I expect them all to write, and speak about their ideas in standard English. By doing this, I limit the ways that they can truly understand the world. I have become, without being fully aware of the transition, a “teacher of thinking” (49). In my attempts to create a standard for my student’s communication, I have pushed them to, “see and feel things in the same way” (49). The only justification that I can offer is that these students will need to be able to speak, read and write in the dominant language in order to succeed in the world. In my attempt to prepare my students to gain an advantage in the world, I have actually done my part to continue a system set against the majority of them. I am not helping them grow up and change the world, I am programming them to accept the world as it is. Every time I dismiss their most comfortable modes of communication as, “slang and gibberish, “ (49) I push them one step closer to conforming with the rest of the culture. Suck!
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Nic,you are the man :P
ReplyDeleteSeriously though, you are absolutely right. We, as teachers, are try to teach them how to think so they can survive in the dominant culture and succeed in the world. I think we are assimilating them into a culture that can't be changed, or can it? If we teach them how to think, we can teach them how to manipulate situations.
Manipulation is not always a bad word with negative connotation; I think of manipulatives in math (Shaynee math that is). Students move things around to try to find the best solution. Isn't that what we are doing when we teach them how to think? I don't think you are pushing them one step colser to conforming. I think you can, as can we all, push them closer to changing - even with their slang and gibberish.
They will have the knowledge to determine when to conform and when to change and how to do both to survive and succeed. I hope this wasn't a lot of nothing said in a lot of words (stupid Derrida)!
I think it's true that we have to give our students the power and authority helping them to be competent in the "dominant" language - but does that mean that we also can't show them the puppet strings?
ReplyDeleteThen, maybe as they go on in their education they will no longer choose to be complicit (50) in their own subjegation.
If "we show them the puppet strings" are we not in danger of being subjegated? I work well with the current legitimate language; I don't want to change.
ReplyDeleteTeachers must give students the tools they need to negotiate our environment as it currently exists (and how we expect it to exist in the future). If we fail to do that, what is the value of our "help"?
ReplyDeleteNick you're absolutely right. And it does suck. I wish I could think of a response less cynical than Johanna's, but she's right too. The only thing we can do is put enough people who are not "naturally" part of the dominant linguist competence in that position and hope for the best.
ReplyDelete