So now that I'm just about done with sociology, what are my feelings about this field of academic study? What have I learned; what are my big take aways?
Well, first of all I have learned that I think I would enjoy teaching this class at a high school level. I think that a lot of these ideas--about how institutions affect our lives, about privilege and racism and sexism, about culture and how individuals behave in social situations--would be fresh and eye-opening for the high school kids I will be teaching eventually. I love the idea of facilitating the challenging discussions and questions that arise from complex sociological issues.
I was also glad that I was able to draw from my psychology background to understand many of the concepts in this course, especially those pertaining to how individuals present themselves in social situations. Sociology and social psychology are closely linked; I think the key difference is sociology tends to focus on the macro level side of things (institutions and large social trends) whereas social psychology tends to focus on small groups or individuals.
Out of anything in the textbook, I'd say the concept I was least familiar with is that of the sociological imagination. Though I think I have applied this concept instinctively before in my life--what better way to grasp the importance of large institutions than by thinking how they apply to you?--it's good to finally have a label and solid grasp of what it is and how it is used in practice by sociologists.
One observation I have about this textbook, and perhaps about the field of sociology in general, is that it comes across as being very liberal politically. I am personally a fan of this--it aligns with my own beliefs about how institutions should serve humanity--but I could see other people dismissing sociology because of this. Overall I would say that sociology is a progressive discipline that shines a light on the problems within society. Whether or not we take advantage of that illumination and put it to good use is another matter entirely.
Wednesday, June 27, 2012
Tuesday, June 26, 2012
Immigrant Song
America is a country of transplants, with most people only a few generations removed from immigrants from somewhere else in the world. I am no exception; my ancestry is mostly German and Polish. While I'm sketchy on many of the details, this is what I know of my own "immigrant story".
My mother's side is German and Polish. My great-grandmother on my mom's side was 100% Polish and arrived in the United States as an immigrant in the early 20th century. According to my mom, my great-grandmother was processed at Ellis Island and then had to wait for a relative to come to Chicago by train to pick her and her sister up to and head back to the midwest. I think they went to Illinois, as that is where most of my extended family lived. My grandfather was mostly German, and I think I remember my mom telling me there was some strife over my grandpa marrying my grandma because she was at least 50% Polish.
I'm less clear about the origin story on my dad's side. I know his ancestry is mostly German, but I believe there is also some Scottish in there as well. I've asked my dad about this and even isn't totally sure. I do know that my great-grandfather was a professor in Ohio in the early 20th century.
More recently, I can speak of my own experience of migration within the United States. It's not exactly an immigration story, but it certainly shaped who I am.
My parents both grew up in the Chicago area, went to high school together, and got married when they were in college. Dad studied geology in Colorado, and eventually got a job with an oil company. This eventually led my parents to move up to Alaska.
One quick note about Alaska. As the United States is a country of immigrants, Alaska is a state of migrants or transplants. There are very few people whose families have been in Alaska for more than generation or two; it was home to very few people until WWII, wasn't even officially a state until 1959, and didn't see a huge population boom until the discovery of oil in late 1970s. Consequently, there are few people in the state whose families have been there earlier than the 1970s or 80s when the oil economy boomed. In this sense, I feel like Alaska is a microcosm of the immigrant experience of America in the last 150 years.
Anyway, so I grew up in Alaska and was there for 9 years, then moved to Butte, Montana for 2.5 years, then Dallas, Texas for a year, then back to Alaska for another 6 years until I graduated from high school. One result of all this moving around--and being relatively isolated in Alaska and, so a lesser extent, Montana--is that I hardly know my extended family. This might be why my knowledge of my ancestry is so incomplete. I've only ever had a handful of rich, meaningful conversations with people outside of my nuclear family, especially with my grandparents (especially now that two of them are dead and the other two are tremendously old).
One potential way for to get some answers about where I come from is the DNA analysis website 23andme.com. If you send in a sample of your DNA, they will analyze it and tell you all sorts of things about genetic ancestry.
Seeing as how the United States is a nation of immigrants, the xenophobia that is so pervasive in our society is perhaps a bit confusing. I think there are two main reasons why Americans remain so rejecting of immigrants:
1. Economic fears. Many Americans, especially during these less-than-stellar economic conditions, are convinced that foreigners are flooding the country stealing their jobs. While there may be some truth to that, as the textbook points out, most of those jobs are low-wage, low-skill jobs that most Americans don't want anyway. The economic problems this country has bigger causes than immigration.
2. Racism. Immigration in the late 19th/early 20th century was mostly white people from Europe. While these groups certainly faced discrimination--because of their religion, because of language differences, because they were a different shade of white--they never had to deal with the hate that non-white immigrants have faced in this country. From the reprehensible laws of the late 19th/early 20th century banning immigration from China to the US building a massive fence on the border with Mexico, non-white immigrants have always faced more personal and institutional discrimination than white immigrants. I think that's especially so today, because the vast majority of immigrants in the last 30 years are from Latin America, Asia, or Africa: almost all non-white. This has brought out some racist animosity from xenophobic people who feel that the power structure of White Euro-Americans is being threatened by non-white people with different languages, different cultural traditions, and who, frankly, look different. The thing that xenophobic white Americans fail to understand is that this country has ALWAYS been a country of transplants and immigrants...and we have succeeded and thrived BECAUSE of that diversity. Adding more diversity America's cultural makeup can strengthen us.
Monday, June 25, 2012
Sexist language
One aspect of institutional sexism that I wish the textbook had touched more on in chapter 12 is sexist language. At the high school I work at, I've discussed this topic at length with some of the English teachers I work with. Several of them have entire units based on recognizing and analyzing the meaning of sexist language and how to avoid using it. Phrases like "fight like a man", "you throw like a girl", and "grow a pair" are examples of this kind of sexist language; in each case, the masculine quality is seen as strong, resolute, and desirable and the feminine trait is weak, defective, or submissive.
There is a humorous inversion of this kind of sexist language popularized by sex advice columnist Dan Savage. He has mentioned a few times on his podcast and column at www.thestranger.com that insulting someone's toughness by calling them a "pussy" is not only sexist, it doesn't make logical sense either. Savage points out that vaginas are actually very tough especially when compared to male genitalia: they are self-cleaning, stretch to allow childbirth, and take a considerable pounding during male/female intercourse. Scrotums, on the other hand, are overly-sensitive, fragile, and weak; the slightest hit on a man's scrotum can incapacitate him as he keels over in pain. Therefore, Savage proposes that people should insult people's toughness by calling them "scrotum" instead of "pussy". In doing so, he has subverted the sexist patriarchal norm by making the masculine term synonymous with weak and the feminine term strong.
On a broader level, I think overcoming sexist language in our own daily use--and calling out when others around us use it--can go a long way in combating institutional sexism. Language is not only how we communicate to others, it helps form how we perceive the world in our minds. By eliminating insidiously sexist language from our everyday speech and thoughts, we'll create a new, more egalitarian way of perceiving the world.
There is a humorous inversion of this kind of sexist language popularized by sex advice columnist Dan Savage. He has mentioned a few times on his podcast and column at www.thestranger.com that insulting someone's toughness by calling them a "pussy" is not only sexist, it doesn't make logical sense either. Savage points out that vaginas are actually very tough especially when compared to male genitalia: they are self-cleaning, stretch to allow childbirth, and take a considerable pounding during male/female intercourse. Scrotums, on the other hand, are overly-sensitive, fragile, and weak; the slightest hit on a man's scrotum can incapacitate him as he keels over in pain. Therefore, Savage proposes that people should insult people's toughness by calling them "scrotum" instead of "pussy". In doing so, he has subverted the sexist patriarchal norm by making the masculine term synonymous with weak and the feminine term strong.
On a broader level, I think overcoming sexist language in our own daily use--and calling out when others around us use it--can go a long way in combating institutional sexism. Language is not only how we communicate to others, it helps form how we perceive the world in our minds. By eliminating insidiously sexist language from our everyday speech and thoughts, we'll create a new, more egalitarian way of perceiving the world.
Thursday, June 21, 2012
The Negro Motorist Green Book
I was really looking forward to reading this chapter, as I find pointing out the realities of racial inequality in this country is often very challenging for college students. Last summer I took an Education and Cultural Diversity course as part of the MAT program, and it was extremely eye-opening (that and reading "Why Are All the Black Kids Sitting Together in the Lunch Room?" Spring of 2011). I had always considered myself non-racist, tolerant, and understanding of the plight of non-white people in this country. After taking those two classes, I realized my perception of these issues was woefully naive.
While this realization was depressing in some ways, I am fortunate to be in a position where I can hopefully DO something directly to change the racist culture we live in as a teacher. It's my hope that I can work to counteract some of the racist elements of today's culture, especially within the education system.
Anyway, the part of this chapter that caught my attention was the mention of "The Negro Motorist Green Book", a guidebook published in the early/mid 20th century (I'm still getting used to referring to the 20th century as this era in the distant past) that gave advice and guidance to African-American travelers on which places were accepting and accommodating to black travelers. I decided to look up this handbook and sure enough I found a full text PDF of it online. http://www.autolife.umd.umich.edu/Race/R_Casestudy/87_135_1736_GreenBk.pdf
In it, a found a remarkable and touching statement in the introduction:
"There will be a day sometime in the near future when this guide will not have to be published. That is when we as a race will have equal opportunities and privileges in the United States. It will be a great day for us to suspend this publication for then we can go wherever we please, and without embarrassment. But until that times comes we shall continue to publish this information for your convenience each year." (Green 1)
As I discovered in my diversity class last summer, it's easy to say "Look at how far we've come!" when looking at examples of blatant racism in the past and simply dismiss the insidious racism that still plagues our society. And while today the Green Book isn't published anymore, there are undoubtedly still places in this country where non-white Americans aren't welcomed.
While this realization was depressing in some ways, I am fortunate to be in a position where I can hopefully DO something directly to change the racist culture we live in as a teacher. It's my hope that I can work to counteract some of the racist elements of today's culture, especially within the education system.
Anyway, the part of this chapter that caught my attention was the mention of "The Negro Motorist Green Book", a guidebook published in the early/mid 20th century (I'm still getting used to referring to the 20th century as this era in the distant past) that gave advice and guidance to African-American travelers on which places were accepting and accommodating to black travelers. I decided to look up this handbook and sure enough I found a full text PDF of it online. http://www.autolife.umd.umich.edu/Race/R_Casestudy/87_135_1736_GreenBk.pdf
In it, a found a remarkable and touching statement in the introduction:
"There will be a day sometime in the near future when this guide will not have to be published. That is when we as a race will have equal opportunities and privileges in the United States. It will be a great day for us to suspend this publication for then we can go wherever we please, and without embarrassment. But until that times comes we shall continue to publish this information for your convenience each year." (Green 1)
As I discovered in my diversity class last summer, it's easy to say "Look at how far we've come!" when looking at examples of blatant racism in the past and simply dismiss the insidious racism that still plagues our society. And while today the Green Book isn't published anymore, there are undoubtedly still places in this country where non-white Americans aren't welcomed.
Life on a budget
It's difficult to think of how a poor family struggles and what kinds of things middle class people take for granted that poor families have to do without until you stop and add up monthly expenses. In this situation, I'm going to imagine a family of four and what their monthly expenses might be.
Food: For myself, I spend maybe $500 a month on food between groceries and eating out. So that's $2000/month
Shelter/Bills: I live in a modest sized house in a working class neighborhood in St. Paul, there are two of us in the house; I believe the mortgage is around $700/month, and other bills are usually around $400-500/month. Property tax is added on to that, but I'm not sure how much. Let's say bills and shelter are a total of $1500/month for a family of four.
Daycare: I visited http://www.mnchildcare.org/families/pay.php to see how much day care costs... Uh, like $1000/month for a toddler!? Jesus.
Transportation: I usually have to fill up once a week for my usual job, and that's about $40/week, so $160/month. Let's assume we have two cars (since both father and mother drive) and that they have older, less fuel-efficient cars (I have an '05 Corolla that gets close to 35mpg), So let's go with $400/month.
Uh, that's like 58,800/year.
So maybe my estimations are a little (or a lot) off...I mean, I haven't even factored things like tuition or recreational activities or travel into this little off-the-cuff budget of mine. Things that might reduce this:
1. Spending less on food. Maybe I don't have to buy quite so much food for children, but more likely I would just have to buy less food and less expensive food. So, lots of ramen, lots of mcdonald's, lots of mac and cheese, carby staples rather than proteins. A lot of my food budget goes to buying proteins, which are expensive.
2. Live somewhere cheaper. I doubt a family with this low level of income could afford a mortgage and tax payments on a house, even a relatively modest one with a low monthly mortgage like this one. If we were able to find a really cheap apartment or duplex, or live with our parents or something, that would help a lot.
3. If I could either rope my parents or convince some friends in the neighborhood who are stay at home moms to care for my 3-year-old during the day instead of sending them to day care, that would eliminate that prohibitively expensive cost. I'm just baffled that day care is like $12,000 a year. Could that really be true?
4. Not much I can do about the transportation costs except maybe looking into taking public transit...and even that's not exactly free.
And again, we haven't even touched on recreational activities or clothes or pets or car and house repairs and upkeep. All of that stuff would have to be secondary to everything I listed above. Solutions to these challenges: shop at thrift stores for clothes, get hand-me-down clothes and toys from shelters or extended family, don't have pets, keep using old/damaged/broken appliances/cars/etc without repairing them.
Maybe considering what a four-person family needs to live at the standard I do as an individual doesn't just come down to simply multiplication, but still. I'm way overbudget if this family is only making $22000.
The effect these limitations would have on the children would be profound. They wouldn't grow as strong physically or mentally because of their diet, they might not be treated to the same level of health care, their busy working parents wouldn't have time to spend with them to help develop their mental and emotional capabilities so they probably wouldn't do as well in school or socially, they wouldn't have access to learning opportunities outside of their school and daily life because of their inability to travel or visit museums and so on, and they wouldn't learn how to access higher levels of society. More importantly though, I think growing up in poverty like that would instill a sense of learned helplessness and despondence that would permeate their entire outlook on life. Their expectations for themselves would be lower, their outlook on what the world has to offer them would be limited, and their view of how social institutions (like school) serve them would be one of pessimism.
Food: For myself, I spend maybe $500 a month on food between groceries and eating out. So that's $2000/month
Shelter/Bills: I live in a modest sized house in a working class neighborhood in St. Paul, there are two of us in the house; I believe the mortgage is around $700/month, and other bills are usually around $400-500/month. Property tax is added on to that, but I'm not sure how much. Let's say bills and shelter are a total of $1500/month for a family of four.
Daycare: I visited http://www.mnchildcare.org/families/pay.php to see how much day care costs... Uh, like $1000/month for a toddler!? Jesus.
Transportation: I usually have to fill up once a week for my usual job, and that's about $40/week, so $160/month. Let's assume we have two cars (since both father and mother drive) and that they have older, less fuel-efficient cars (I have an '05 Corolla that gets close to 35mpg), So let's go with $400/month.
Uh, that's like 58,800/year.
So maybe my estimations are a little (or a lot) off...I mean, I haven't even factored things like tuition or recreational activities or travel into this little off-the-cuff budget of mine. Things that might reduce this:
1. Spending less on food. Maybe I don't have to buy quite so much food for children, but more likely I would just have to buy less food and less expensive food. So, lots of ramen, lots of mcdonald's, lots of mac and cheese, carby staples rather than proteins. A lot of my food budget goes to buying proteins, which are expensive.
2. Live somewhere cheaper. I doubt a family with this low level of income could afford a mortgage and tax payments on a house, even a relatively modest one with a low monthly mortgage like this one. If we were able to find a really cheap apartment or duplex, or live with our parents or something, that would help a lot.
3. If I could either rope my parents or convince some friends in the neighborhood who are stay at home moms to care for my 3-year-old during the day instead of sending them to day care, that would eliminate that prohibitively expensive cost. I'm just baffled that day care is like $12,000 a year. Could that really be true?
4. Not much I can do about the transportation costs except maybe looking into taking public transit...and even that's not exactly free.
And again, we haven't even touched on recreational activities or clothes or pets or car and house repairs and upkeep. All of that stuff would have to be secondary to everything I listed above. Solutions to these challenges: shop at thrift stores for clothes, get hand-me-down clothes and toys from shelters or extended family, don't have pets, keep using old/damaged/broken appliances/cars/etc without repairing them.
Maybe considering what a four-person family needs to live at the standard I do as an individual doesn't just come down to simply multiplication, but still. I'm way overbudget if this family is only making $22000.
The effect these limitations would have on the children would be profound. They wouldn't grow as strong physically or mentally because of their diet, they might not be treated to the same level of health care, their busy working parents wouldn't have time to spend with them to help develop their mental and emotional capabilities so they probably wouldn't do as well in school or socially, they wouldn't have access to learning opportunities outside of their school and daily life because of their inability to travel or visit museums and so on, and they wouldn't learn how to access higher levels of society. More importantly though, I think growing up in poverty like that would instill a sense of learned helplessness and despondence that would permeate their entire outlook on life. Their expectations for themselves would be lower, their outlook on what the world has to offer them would be limited, and their view of how social institutions (like school) serve them would be one of pessimism.
Wednesday, June 20, 2012
From Student to Teacher: How Standardized Testing Affects Me
It's funny that the blog question for chapter 9 should be about education and how grades and standardized tests dictate how students and teachers behave in relation to school. It's a subject I've talked about and studied to some extent in my master of arts in teaching classes here at Hamline. As idealistic young teachers-to-be, my classmates and I regularly bemoan the importance and primacy of grades and standardized tests. We would rather focus on learning for learning's sake and focus on real educational progress in our students rather than teach to the test or focus on some faceless standardized test.
The reality of the situation is that we all need to assign grades and give final assessments of our students in a standardized way that everyone understands; we need to make sure our students are prepared for the mandatory high school graduation tests and college prep tests they will be taking; and we have to make sure students do well on national benchmark tests so we maintain federal funding. For as much as we would like to abolish the use of standardized tests, what other systematic way do we have of assessing student performance? Yes, looking at a combination of standardized test scores, class grades, in-class performance, creativity in projects, effectiveness in group work would be ideal, but it's simply not practical to take into account all of these factors sometimes.
As for me... I'm in a bit of strange situation caught in transition from one role in the educational institute to another. Save for the awkward 2.5 year dead zone after I graduated undergrad in 08, I've been a student since I was 3 years old. In many ways, being involved in the education process has defined who I am, and will continue to define me when I become a high school teacher. Fortunately, it's an institution I am comfortable and successful in, and one that I feel passionate and excited about being a part of as an adult from the teacher side of things.
The reality of the situation is that we all need to assign grades and give final assessments of our students in a standardized way that everyone understands; we need to make sure our students are prepared for the mandatory high school graduation tests and college prep tests they will be taking; and we have to make sure students do well on national benchmark tests so we maintain federal funding. For as much as we would like to abolish the use of standardized tests, what other systematic way do we have of assessing student performance? Yes, looking at a combination of standardized test scores, class grades, in-class performance, creativity in projects, effectiveness in group work would be ideal, but it's simply not practical to take into account all of these factors sometimes.
As for me... I'm in a bit of strange situation caught in transition from one role in the educational institute to another. Save for the awkward 2.5 year dead zone after I graduated undergrad in 08, I've been a student since I was 3 years old. In many ways, being involved in the education process has defined who I am, and will continue to define me when I become a high school teacher. Fortunately, it's an institution I am comfortable and successful in, and one that I feel passionate and excited about being a part of as an adult from the teacher side of things.
Ubiquity of Institutions
Today I went to a Pearson professional testing center to take the first of a series of standardized tests I have to complete in order to get my Minnesota teaching license. I didn't really think much of it until I read this most recent chapter and realized that this testing center was yet another part of the macro-level social structure that we live in. Specifically, it's another one of those big organizations that affect our lives every day in profound ways. There was obviously some sort of need for a company dedicated just for organizing and running various professional tests, and a location (or locations) to hold these tests. I know of Pearson, and I know that they do big business in testing.
Obviously there was a need for this because so many people were taking these tests. But where did all these adults taking tests come from? It gets back to something the book mentioned: one of our major cultural beliefs in the West is that getting a good education is the best path to economic prosperity, and thus personal fulfillment, purpose, and creature comforts. So, it is this cultural belief that eventually led this professional testing facility in an office building in Eagan to spring up.
Obviously there was a need for this because so many people were taking these tests. But where did all these adults taking tests come from? It gets back to something the book mentioned: one of our major cultural beliefs in the West is that getting a good education is the best path to economic prosperity, and thus personal fulfillment, purpose, and creature comforts. So, it is this cultural belief that eventually led this professional testing facility in an office building in Eagan to spring up.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)