“When there’s nothing left to burn, you have to set yourself on fire.”

When I used to blog in college (mostly personal stuff that probably had no business being on the internet, and found very few readers because no one cared), I'd frequently start off with a title from a song that maybe five people would recognize that was only vaguely related to my post. Here, I've started off with the first line from the first song on the album Set Yourself on Fire by Stars not because it is obscure and vaguely related to this post, but because it inspired me when I heard it in my car on my way to work this morning.
“When there's nothing left to burn, you have to set yourself on fire.”
I never realized how true this was until this year. I always used to think it was a really creepy line referencing someone actually setting themselves on fire, and images of protesters and extremists doing just that would always bounce into my head. But this morning, it struck me as more metaphorical: When you have no more external motivation and energy left, you must look deeper inside yourself for fuel to your fire.
I told my fiance this week that I was doing so much work that required so much energy with very little payoff. It's that time of the year when, as a teacher (in Chicago, at least), you become so frustrated because you and the students are wishing upon wish for some sunlight or a nice day to go outside and run around. There needs to be some outlet for the energy that is being pent up inside. But there isn't, so you keep teaching your heart out, and the students keep moving around and talking out and pounding on desks because they literally have no other outlet for the energy they have. And it is frustrating. Then, there's grad school. I'm pouring energy into this paper and seeing so few results right now that it's disheartening. And the wedding! It is so much planning for one day that seems so far off in the distance that any sort of rewarding feeling must be put off for so long.
I'm not saying I need instant gratification. I don't. But having some sort of little payoff intermittently gives me the fuel to keep going, and I just haven't felt that as of late. So I whine and complain and curl up in bed and decide I don't want to try anymore because I want someone to pat me on the back and tell me I'm doing a good job, that they like my work, that I'm indespensible to a cause, that I'm doing something important.
I think, as activists, we've all felt this way at some point. We've fought so hard for something to come to fruition – for any progress at all – and when we do not win, we are defeated. We feel as if we cannot go on because, after a major defeat, what is the point of giving it all you've got only to be crushed and disappointed?
The truth is, though, that we must keep on. When things are so frustrating that we feel we cannot take on one more thing that may bust up in our faces, we must look into ourselves for what started us on this in the first place, and set ourselves on fire. Not literally, of course.
I had this amazing education professor in college who would always tell us to teach like our hair was on fire. I always thought that meant being goofy and energetic in the classroom. While I do believe that is part of it, I see now that he really meant for us to teach with an undying passion and, when that passion runs out, find it again for without it, we will feel lost. So I am vowing now to not only teach like my hair is on fire, but to live like my hair is on fire. To find that passion I started with and ignite it again. You can all keep me in check on this – when I start complaining again, remind me of this post.
And I encourage you to do the same. If you have any stories about “setting yourself on fire” (NOT LITERALLY! Please DO NOT literally light any flames because of this post!!) please share them below.
We are a strong, passionate community, and we are all doing important things.

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post Post to Yahoo Buzz Buzz This Post Post to Delicious Delicious Post to Digg Digg This Post Post to Facebook Facebook Post to StumbleUpon Stumble This Post

05
Feb
2010

Thoughts on “The Politics of Correction”

This is just a little taste of my new post on Equality 101.

“How can I help kids gain fluency in Standard English – the language of power – without obliterating the home language which is a source of pride and personal voice?” – Linda Christensen

For a recent school improvement day, the English staff at my school was asked to read “The Politics of Correction: How We Can Nurture Students in Their Writing and Help Them Learn the Language of Power” by Linda Christensen.  Now, I have read many, many articles about African American Vernacular English (AAVE) and English Language Learners and English Only legislation.  I’ve read many, many articles about how students who have grown up learning Standard English – predominantly students who are white and/or middle-to-upper class – have an unfair advantage over students learning other vernaculars when it comes to taking state tests and other state standards.  So much of these articles, however, were simply theory, and finally, after reading this article, I felt someone had finally written about what we, as teachers, can do to help these students.

Personally, with the way the state standards are at this time, I believe that there has to be a way to help students learn how to code switch – talk and write in their own vernacular with friends and family, but talk and write in Standard English when appropriate.  In her article, Christensen posits a few solutions to this issue that made sense to me.  She begins by discussing students she sees every day who are “handcuffed” by their inability to use Standard English – the language of power.  She fears they will leave school and be afraid to speak up in public meetings or write letters of outrage over policies because they “talk wrong.”  In this way, she justifies teaching her students Standard English; it is not just because of the state tests that they need to learn this vernacular, but because of future instances in which they may need to be able to use Standard English.

So how do we effectively help students feel comfortable about their writing and proud of their heritages while teaching them the “language of power?” …

Want to read more? (You know you do!) Click here!

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post Post to Yahoo Buzz Buzz This Post Post to Delicious Delicious Post to Digg Digg This Post Post to Facebook Facebook Post to StumbleUpon Stumble This Post

03
Feb
2010

Equality 101

I’d like to introduce to you a brand new blog for teachers and activists!  It’s called Equality 101, and yours truly is a contributing writer in the company of some seriously awesome teacher-writer-researchers!

Of course, I will still be posting education-related posts here, but I will include much of what you find here over there.  So if you’re a teacher or if you’re interested in education at all, head on over and check it out!

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post Post to Yahoo Buzz Buzz This Post Post to Delicious Delicious Post to Digg Digg This Post Post to Facebook Facebook Post to StumbleUpon Stumble This Post

16
Jan
2010

Racism, Sexism, & Classism in Standardized Testing

Today’s guest post on teaching feminism comes from Emily Heroy. You can catch her on the Gender Across Borders Blog, or on twitter.

I took the GRE back in November after two months of studying. It was a gruesome two months of hard work, but it had to be done in order for me to apply for graduate school. I actually didn’t do so bad on the GRE—in fact, I’m going to take the GRE again in a week, for personal and professional reasons. Unfortunately that won’t be the end of standardized testing for me, given that I’ve chosen to get a master of education where testing will be key in order to be certified as a teacher.

Now that I’m in school, I have some more thoughts about the politics behind standardized testing. I first wrote about standardized testing about two months back on my blog here and also posted the same post on Feministing’s Community blog which received a ton of comments. I addressed blatant racism and sexism on the GRE and in test preparation material I used to study with. But I forgot to address something very important.

The last paragraph of my first post stated that “test prep courses cost a ton of money.” I did not delve into the class issue of standardized testing. The title of my first post was “Racism and Sexism in Standardized Testing,” but in reading the comments from the post, I realized that I completely overlooked class as an issue in standardized testing (a faux-pas in Intersectionality 101). One commenter pmsrhino stated that:

…because prep classes (and prep books which are often more expensive than the classes themselves) are so vital to achieving a high score on those tests (as you mentioned yourself, though sometimes it is less learning the material and more learning test taking strategies it still requires being taught to you somehow) it is an EXTREME disadvantage to anyone who is unable to do any preparation. So I think standardized tests are geared much more towards the upper class, with emphasis on opera music and sailing and other such upper class activities and a bigger advantage going to those people who have the resources to put into preparation for those tests. So it’s a nice triple whammy there, sexism, racism, AND classism. Woot.

Therefore, students have a better chance of receiving a higher score on any standardized test if they have the resources to pay for test prep books and take those expensive test prep classes, then someone who cannot afford those valuable resources.

I’m not going to get into whether or not there should be standardized testing, or more specifically, graduate school standardized testing (which was brought up in the comments of the Feministing Community post). However, it’s important to point out that especially young adults, who are preparing to take the SAT and ACT to go to college, are especially disadvantaged in taking these tests. Even more so, those students seeking the first college degree in her/his family must jump over many hurdles to get to the point where they can apply for college. Taking the SAT and/or ACT is another hurdle (which is an application requirement for many colleges) and if their family cannot pay for test prep material and/or a test prep course, their upper class counterpart (who has the same grades and teacher recommendations but a higher SAT/ACT score because they were able to afford test prep material) will have a higher chance of getting into a better college.

Humph, that’s frustrating. Some people want to see the SAT/ACT requirement dropped altogether from college admissions. Not surprisingly, if this requirement was dropped, the number of minority college admits and the number of admits from lower to middle classes would rise (see this interesting article about dropping the SAT).

Unfortunately, I do not think that would happen in the next ten years at least. I suggest that, if the SAT and/or ACT cannot be completely demolished, or revised to best suit all races, classes, and sexes; high schools should not only provide support for students seeking to take these standardized tests for admittance to college, but also provide test preparation material as well as free test prep courses for all students.

Another thing: I wonder about those high school students who have good grades and great teacher recommendations but do poorly on standardized tests—especially those who cannot afford to do better on those tests. In those many cases, I’d hope that their discouragement from the SAT/ACT does not deter them from applying to and attending college. After all, a test is just a test, but a college degree is forever.

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post Post to Yahoo Buzz Buzz This Post Post to Delicious Delicious Post to Digg Digg This Post Post to Facebook Facebook Post to StumbleUpon Stumble This Post

15
Jan
2010

Haiti

I’m blogging quickly from my phone as I’m watching images and videos from Haiti. This is absolutely heartbreaking to watch.

I’ve been hearing that the best way to help right now is to donate money or clothes to organizations that are already there. A comprehensive list of charities can be found here: http://blog.charitynavigator.org/2010/01/70-earthquake-hits-haiti.html and I’ve been pointed to http://www.care.org a few times.

Please find it in your hearts to make a donation. We cannot even imagine the extent of the devastation right now.

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post Post to Yahoo Buzz Buzz This Post Post to Delicious Delicious Post to Digg Digg This Post Post to Facebook Facebook Post to StumbleUpon Stumble This Post

13
Jan
2010

Privilege

I just need to say something. Just to vent.

Privilege (white privilege, class privelige, male privilage, what have you) is not necessarily a bad thing. You don’t choose how or where or in what situatuon you’re born. I have privilege by accident of birth, and I do try to explore that privilege and what it means within the greater picture of society.

So, I don’t see being privileged as being a bad thing. What IS a bad thing, though, is entitlement. To expect certain things to be handed to you because of your privilege is wrong. To deny someone something that you expect to be handed to you just because they are less privileged than you is wrong. To pretend that privilege doesn’t exist is wrong.

I just read an article – of course, I can’t find it now, but will post it if I do – that said that the pay gap between women and men is a myth. And that is just one example, but I’m sure you can think of others. I’ll spare you from a list of them all here. And it just struck me then that we have such a long way to go. If people can’t even admit their privilege and admit that discrepancies exist, we have farther to go than I thought.

That is all. Thanks for letting me vent.

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post Post to Yahoo Buzz Buzz This Post Post to Delicious Delicious Post to Digg Digg This Post Post to Facebook Facebook Post to StumbleUpon Stumble This Post

19
Nov
2009

“I’m not a feminst, but…” Continued

Woman's suffrage parade in New York City, 1912

Image via Wikipedia

To follow up on my previous post on this subject, here’s something interesting from a more recent (2003) study by Pamela Aronson called “Feminists or ‘Postfeminists’?: Young Women’s Attitudes toward Feminism and Gender Relations”:

I have shown that the feminist identification without qualification and the “I’m not a feminist, but…” approach are associated with more privileged racial and class backgrounds.  The feminists were more likely to be college educated, and most had taken women’s studies courses.  Those who qualified their feminist identities and those who had never thought about feminism were disproportionately from less privileged racial and class backgrounds, but their life experience differentiates them from the other  groups as well.  The “qualified” feminists ["I'm a feminist but..." feminists] were college-educated, working0class women and/or women of color who came to feminism as a result of assumptions of equality when growing up.  Among the women who had never thought about feminism, two-thirds had become parents early in life, and none had pursued a college degree…

This study also suggests that having the space to think about political issues such as feminism may be a luxury that some young women, especially single mothers, cannot afford…

Most important, whether or not young women call themselves feminists, they support feminist goals.  In fact, the young women I interviewed were more supportive of feminism than had been found in past research, and none expressed antifeminist sentiments.

Well, it looks like some of the commenters on the last post were right on!  How do you feel about the excerpts from this study?  Are they closer tho what you would expect to find now, in 2009?

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post Post to Yahoo Buzz Buzz This Post Post to Delicious Delicious Post to Digg Digg This Post Post to Facebook Facebook Post to StumbleUpon Stumble This Post

09
Nov
2009

Small Strokes

Cover of "Manifesta: Young Women, Feminis...

Cover via Amazon

I love it when research about feminist activism and feminism points you to a quote that explains exactly what you’re trying to do with your own activism. This is from ManifestA: young women, feminism, and the future by Jennifer Baumgardner and Amy Richards, and I feel it describes exactly how I feel about feminist activism:

Though activism can be grand or all-consuming, it is also as common and short-term as saying “That’s not funny” to a racist joke, “No” to the boss who asks only the “girls” in the office to make coffee, or calling your senator to protest… (282)

Also important to remember:

The first myth is that activism will bring an immediate and decisive victory.  In reality, the journey to justice is usually [darn] long.  So while the click of consciousness brings immediate gratification in itself, social change, even on a small scale, is slow and arduous work. (283)

The second myth about activism is that it has to be huge… (285)

The third myth is the importance of the superleader… It is a myth that effective activism is the result of one person, or even a few. (285)

Although we may not yet have a critical mass of Third Wave activists, we need to dispel the fourth and final myth: that our generation is politically, um, impotent.  Our purported lack of activism is usually chalked up to vague notions of apathy.  We were reared by the boob tube, and made cynical by the cold-war politics and consumerism of the Reagan-Bush era.  For a while, ad executives and media pundits conjectured that Generation X was simply lazy and irresponsible – fulfilling the slacker persona of the early nineties.  The apathy rap has some truth when it comes to feminism.  Some people do believe that everything is fine now, and that there is no need for feminism, either because they have low expectations or because they haven’t been in the outside world long enough to experience the limitations brought on by sexism… But history tells us that for each big leap, for each crystal-clear moment in which people refused to give up their seats on the bus or at the lunch counter, there is a time collecting energy and stating new visions – a time of pre-emergence.  Understanding that change takes time will lead us to a redefinition of our generation politically. (286-7)

How do you feel about feminist activism right now?  How do you define it?  How do you participate in it?  I’d be interested to read your comments!

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post Post to Yahoo Buzz Buzz This Post Post to Delicious Delicious Post to Digg Digg This Post Post to Facebook Facebook Post to StumbleUpon Stumble This Post

01
Nov
2009

On Abelist Language and Feministing

With all of the discussions about language and breast cancer ads yesterday, I want to just reiterate how

Poster in my classroom urging students not to use "That's so gay!"

Poster in my classroom urging students not to use "That's so gay!"

important language is in our society.  Really, it’s all we have when we relate to each other, especially when all of our communications are online and completely centered around words.  If we make writing our trade, even if we just blog as a part-time thing, we need to watch our language.  And as someone interested in literacy practices and language in this feminist community, it disturbs me to see abelist language in popular community sites like Feministing.com.

The Open Letter to Feministing on this ain’t livin’ has drawn attention to this important issue, and you should all read it and cosign it.  Consider me cosigned.

And this goes for all abelist language.  This is my big deal in my classroom: I don’t want my students using phrases like “That’s so gay!” or “That’s retarded.”  I have very personal reasons behind those two, but I believe it is my job as a teacher to promote tolerance, especially in language, by explaining to them why these phrases and ones like them are offensive and why we shouldn’t use them.

So, please, be a good example.  Cosign the letter and don’t use that kind of language.  Please.

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post Post to Yahoo Buzz Buzz This Post Post to Delicious Delicious Post to Digg Digg This Post Post to Facebook Facebook Post to StumbleUpon Stumble This Post

03
Oct
2009

Wedding Dresses, Magazines, and White, oh my!

A Bride in a White Wedding dress

Image via Wikipedia

For those of you who are getting married or who have gotten married, have you been looking through many bridal magazines and catalogs?  I have, mostly because I’ve received many of them for free from various vendors, and because I’m the type of person who likes to gather a lot of ideas before I decide on anything.

So, I’m flipping through the pages and I was shocked at what I saw – or didn’t see.  There were almost no people of color (Is that a good term to use?  I will correct this term if this is offensive in any way, just let me know.)  on the pages of any of the magazines.  In a sea of white dresses were white faces, and I was really surprised that the wedding industry hasn’t yet incorporated racial diversity into their pages.

Does anyone have any insights into this?  It seems to me that there are beautiful brides of all races and ethnicities and beautiful weddings that aren’t Christian or Jewish or Secular (those are the three I read about most often in these magazines) that should be featured, as well as beautiful models of all races and ethnicities to show off the couture gowns (the ones that no one can possibly afford) in the bajillion adds that appear.  Why don’t the pages and pictures in these magazines reflect that?

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]
Related Posts with Thumbnails

Post to Twitter Tweet This Post Post to Yahoo Buzz Buzz This Post Post to Delicious Delicious Post to Digg Digg This Post Post to Facebook Facebook Post to StumbleUpon Stumble This Post

21
Sep
2009