The Wake-Up Call of the American Dream

The American Dream is a dream that promotes and expands opportunities for all.  It inspires us to be achievers despite what race, gender, or class we may be. It is a dream placed in our heads when we are a little child sitting cross-legged during story time listening to the teacher recite Dr. Seuss and how “You’ll be on your way up!/ You’ll be seeing great sights! You’ll join the high fliers/ who soar to high heights” (9), from Oh the Places You Will Go.  We sit at our art table drawing pictures of what we want to be when we grow up, and besides slight variances, we all, at one point or another, have a vision of a successful career, a family and an abundance of material items that would lead us to perpetual happiness and bliss.  Everyone imagines the storyline and pictures from when we are little, but looking deeper, the dream creates an ideal that is simply unattainable by the majority of the nation.

The American Dream is something that everyone wants to attain.  This leads to a more cut-throat environment, a dog eat dog every man for yourself, an untelevised “Real-World Survivor.” America was originally founded upon the ideals of our founding fathers to become an independent country to have land, freedom of religion, and to let the people have a government that represented and satisfied their demands and dreams.  Then as time progressed, and generations passed, the Dream became more personal and people began wanting to come to America so that, as Spock from “Star Trek” said, “live long and prosper.” 

Despite it all, the want to exceed social, ethnic, or class boundaries and to live a fulfilling life, the American Dream is merely that: a dream.  The concept of the American Dream ignores factors of success such as luck, family, language and wealth one is born into.   Even if people were able to overcome the race, gender and wealth barriers, the melting pot of society would literally spill over because the dream would be attained and people would no longer be working a 12 hour shift placing caps on tubes at a toothpaste factory. 

Though many citizens have an American Dream, it really is little more than wishes and desires drawn up in their heads and occasionally strewn about at that “typical family-night dinner”.   Though the government may be in control by a minute upper-class, the core to America is the middle-class.  This class is what actually fuels the American Dream.  The middle class’ complacency with being “average” has put the American Dream at a standstill.  Yes there are the poor who struggle and have every desirable intention to make it to the top, but very few will succeed.

There will never be the ideal “sunny day and relaxing family vacation free of work and other worries,” or the idea that everyone in society will one day gain tolerance for each other and Miss America will finally be granted her dream of world peace.  Yes, the American Dream may propel us to succeed well in school and continue to put our blood and sweat into our work jobs for economic prosperity, but if the starting point is compared with the ending point, advancement may be seen, but like the great Dr. Seuss said “And will you succeed?/ 98 and ¾ percent guaranteed” (Seuss 32).  This is where we realize that no matter what we do it is not enough.  The American Dream is unattainable.  It is merely a dream we strive for but never reach; the 1 ¼ percent left is the unreachable American Dream.

Collaborative Planning

Last year at one of my high school's professional development meetings, our school showed us this clip right before we discussed prepping students for state tests and collaborative planning, and then they had us teachers take an assessment.  Satire?

I think it's a great, funny, satirical clip. 

 

Repackaging Curriculum and Instruction in America

We need educational reform in America’s educational system, but since this is such a large issue with many variables, we need to start small scale and then widen our scope.  Examining other countries and their secondary education institutions captures a comparative, critical approach of how we (America’s public education system) can adapt educational setup and policies and integrate them into our instructional approaches to engage all students.  We, as teachers, parents, and educators can promote interest in a variety of learning and teaching methods while still meeting the ever-daunting role of continuous assessment data.

I'm actually writing my paper on educational reform with the working title being "Repackaging Curriculum and Instruction in America."  To diminish any bias you may think I hold, let's expose my background regarding education:  I've attended latch-key, year-round schooling on a military base my father was stationed at on the West Coast, I graduated from a public high school, and attended undergraduate and graduate schools at both highly selective, priviatized institutions as well as a state university, leading up to now, me teaching English and Spanish (a core curriculum subject and a fine arts subject) in the same district that I graduated from.  I have siblings who attended Montessori schools, receive tutoring as well as private ACT prep, and are now at my alma mater high school, but despite all of these mixed types of schools, classes, and regions, I cringe at the thought of my future children attending a public high school in America.

I feel one of our main problems is how to deliver instruction to students because it is so complex.  To establish special classes, mentors, accelerated curriculum, enrichment models, special topics, and summer camps to be successful in creating an effective classroom in which all students, regardless of barriers, can succeed is difficult, but it can be done.

I recognize that barriers such as learning levels, styles, socioeconomic status, funding and accountability will make it difficult to do so, but to better education requires a change in society’s perceptions for identifying and educating those who we feel have talent, we need to take time to develop opportunities and programs for everyone and realizing that “giftedness” can exist among the disadvantaged groups as well. 

I know America has the ability to do better, and frankly, we deserve a better education than what our country's current level and quality provides. I've seen, studied, and have been to other countries' school systems and feel that America's current education system is just at the tip of the iceberg regarding educational reform.

I know the next counter is going to be "everyone defines the problem but fails to provide an adequate solution."   I am well aware of the facors including cost, socioeconomic status, state and federal goals and mandates, etc. One aspect of Bad Teacher that I did like was that the author points out you can't make a change with the whole world at once.  Using world hunger as an example: it's impossible and impractical to start a campaign titled "Eliminate World Hunger," but we (society) do have the ability to implement small scale changes--i.e. donating to your local food bank, organizing small food drives, etc.  Small steps mean not being able to get somewhere as quickly, but you're still moving in the right direction, creating progress, and you'll get there eventually.

The Negative Effects of Trying to be Diverse

This past Wednesday, the Supreme Court heard one of the biggest cases dealing with the issue of race in the preceding 6 years: Abigail Fisher vs. University of Texas. 

In summation, Fisher, a white woman, applied to UT in 2008, but was denied admission to the university, while other people who were "lesser qualified" than Fisher gained admittance.

“There were people in my class with lower grades, who weren't in all the activities I was in, who were accepted into UT. And the only difference between us was the color of our skin," Fisher remarks.

Fisher is challenging UT, claiming they use the issue of racial classification to admit less qualified students to the university, while students like herself, are then turned down, all because they didn't have the acceptable skin color to help the university reach a statistic for diversity, also known as "racial balancing" which was banned by the Supreme Court.

The verdict is still out, but those at home following the issue may inquire how this case was elevated to the Supreme Court.  In 2003, the University of Michigan had a similar case, but won, even though heavily cautioned about their "narrow tailored" criteria regarding race and diversity.  Primary schools in Seattle and Kentucky using race as a "tiebreaker" for admission to their schools had their decisions nullified.

So how can the same concept of using race to gain diversity, and consequently admission (or in Fisher's case, denial) have so many different rulings?  I believe it's because we're still walking the fine line of being accused of discrimination.  Society feels the need to almost overcompensate when dealing with a situation that contains race, and while I concede that we do need to factor in our sensitivity to this civil rights issue, I can't help but compare it with a person who has a disability and struggles with society treating them as an equal.  I feel society often tries to create an advantage for the disadvantaged, even though all the disadvantaged want is to be seen as equal.

Fear and Terror Provide Better Safety

Terror. Fright. Panic. Worry. Apprehension. Phobia.

The Patriot Act. Increased Racial Profiling. Detainments. Watchlists. Warrantless Searches.

All of these are synonyms for fear, and then follows a list of acts that have originated from these fears.

Remember back in 2010 when Jon Stuart created “The Rally To Restore Sanity” and Stephen Colbert followed, when he created “The March to Keep Fear Alive”? If not, Stuart'scan be found here and Colbert's, here.

Posner would in no way consider Stuart or Colbert public intellectuals, but there’s no denying that the two have a big political presence, especially within the media and public sphere. The two use humor, satire, and other elements to appeal to their audiences, but behind all of that lies truth (albeit, their version or take on it) and like their activities mentioned above, appeal to the masses and try to engage the nation in current events. I believe Colbert does a great job of this, especially when he ran for President in 2008, the South Carolina Primary for GOP in early January of this year, and then a few weeks later when he confirmed Stuart would be the official head of his fundraising committee, and then he released the statement "I am proud to announce that I am forming an exploratory committee to lay the groundwork for my possible candidacy for the President of the United States of South Carolina!"

Colbert elevated his humor to the next level: he integrated it not only with truth, but also infused it with action. Why would two well-established people such as Stuart and Colbert cross-over into full-fledged politics? I’d like to think part of it was their fear of the current presidential happenings, and turning that fear into a sense of safety. After all, what Stuart and Colbert’s “stint” did was increase awareness of the politics, increase voter turnout, and even increase people to convert their fears into actions that could help indirectly alleviate some of those fears.

In this instance, I it worked to use the tools of fear and mass-media and then challenging us (the public, Americans, the people) to take action.

Accountability on the Interwebz

Accountability on the internet.

Who's responsible for it?
Simple answer would be everyone.

Unfortunately, we can't just say someone's accountable and then they will be, we (the public sphere) need to hold them accountable, and I think a start to learning accountability is developing an understanding of media literacy.

Media literacy is commonly defined as the ability to access, analyze, evaluate and produce media. It is the process of becoming active, rather than passive, consumers of media. The importance of media literacy is that it helps bridge the gap between everyday media use and applying it to another context.

Our society uses media on an everyday basis, so we have the capability to use it, but it's using it properly and effectively that's the trick.  All too often I've seen people post "So many posts about [insert here current political response or response to a major current event]" and leave their response criticizing other media users for sharing, evaluating, and communicating about important events, albeit, sometimes comments that are misinformed, biased, and/or targeted towards a group, but at least their attempting to display a form of media literacy. Whether it's leaving a comment, status, or update on Blogger, Facebook, or Twitter, integrating it into our curriculum as a teacher, or even using the tools it provides to apply it to our jobs, we have an accountability to be effective, responsible media users.