Getting kids to discuss using academic language and protocols
Discussion Protocols and resources: I sat down this morning, and I haven’t written a new blog post in months, and I have no idea what’s going on with WordPress. I don’t have time to figure it out, so please bear with me while I post these clunky links.
These are a few of the discussion protocols and resources I’ve created, gathered, and borrowed along the way:
I asked the question: was there a scholar who wrote about the 1917 pandemic with wisdom and guidance? I am ashamed that I looked in the wrong place, and should have been looking for a poet.
It’s a hard thing to acknowledge, that the country’s current administration (executive branch) is killing us. This is not hyperbole. At every turn, the executive branch failed and exacerbated the crisis. We could be so much better. We could do so much better. My hope is hanging on by a thread. We need to fight this on so many fronts: the media must do better. We must rethink capitalism. We need to strengthen our communities and love for one another. I do not share Ms. O’Meara’s optimism at this writing, but you might:
In the Time of Pandemic
And the people stayed home.
And they read books, and listened, and rested, and exercised, and made art, and played games, and learned new ways of being, and were still.
And they listened more deeply. Some meditated, some prayed, some danced.
Some met their shadows. And the people began to think differently.
And the people healed.
And, in the absence of people living in ignorant, dangerous, mindless, and heartless ways, the earth began to heal.
And when the danger passed, and the people joined together again, they grieved their losses, and made new choices, and dreamed new images, and created new ways to live and heal the earth fully, as they had been healed.
@ArtDecider is a sharp Twitter user who built their reputation on deciding what is art or not art on tweets. And I have yet to disagree with their decision. And wouldn’t life be simple if we could just look to one Twitter user to determine these things? Well, simple, but boring, and disengaging. Which is why I am grateful to Alison M. Collins @AliMCollins for her thoughts and bringing this to my attention:
Jumping in on this thread to ask for help. BIPOC Ss and Ps have been asking for removal of a school mural with a “Dead Indian”for decades. We unanimously voted to remove it and now are being demonized by politicos and members of the art establishment. https://t.co/hzteqPPK9R
They can’t be moved. This has been fully researched. And received a unanimous vote from the Board. Why is it when Black and Native American Students & Parents self-advocate, their requests are always second-guessed? https://t.co/2KTuHl5EqH
The murals in question are the work of the Russian-born communist painter Victor Arnautoff. Arnautoff, who lived for a time in Mexico while working as an assistant to Diego Rivera, was one of the most prolific muralists of the Depression era. He is most famous for supervising the Coit Tower mural project that showed workers of all races being exploited by the capitalist class. For the George Washington High School murals, the leftist Arnautoff wanted to show Washington for who he really was; pushing back against what was then a silence on the founding father’s complicity in slavery and Native American genocide, Arnautoff painted the slaves who worked the fields at Washington’s Mt. Vernon home and one of Washington’s soldier’s standing on top of a dead Native American. When they were unveiled in 1937, these murals were upheld by the left as radical examples of social justice through art. Concerned parties now see Arnautoff’s work as exploitative and traumatic for the school’s minority students who have to encounter these striking scenes on a daily basis.
My question is, art to whom? For what purpose and context?
Perhaps every student who walked through the doors of that high school needed a month-long study session of the history, context, and purpose of the art. Never make assumptions about what anyone knows or doesn’t know about historical context.
When it comes to the question of whether collecting those racist images is right, I often encounter two strong and diametrically opposed reactions from African Americans. Some can’t seem to amass enough examples of these “collectibles” or “memorabilia” (as we euphemistically call these hideous images today). Others think the whole lot should be assembled into one gigantic bonfire, incinerated, and the ashes buried in an impenetrable vault, or strewn over the broadest reach of the deepest ocean never to be displayed again. It’s as if these artifacts’ complete and total obliteration could wipe the slate clean or erase the painful memory and palpably harmful effects of seeing ourselves reflected over and over through the murky mirror of the anti-black subconscious as deracinated, gluttonous, lascivious non-reflective sub-human beasts — thieves, rapists, liars — a species apart from all other human beings, dominated and ruled like other animals by our instincts and passions and not by our (sub-standard) brains.
It is not for white people to decide what is or is not racist and it is not for them to decide what we people of colour are called. I think statues, plaques and awards paying tribute to racist men should be removed, and in their place should be a little notice naming and shaming them, and naming their prejudice. I think original racist titles can be altered and an introductory essay, as so many “classic” works have, putting that original title and content in context, can be included. None of this is difficult to do or hard to swallow.
As for the students, no surprise, they have a better grasp of things than their liberal minders. As one ninth-grader wrote, “The fresco shows us exactly how brutal colonization and genocide really were and are. The fresco is a warning and reminder of the fallibility of our hallowed leaders.’”
So when should art be painted over, removed, or destroyed? When does its removal cross the line from context to censorship? I don’t know except that it can never be a single decision or point, and that includes the singularity of the white community. Voices from other perspectives in the community must be given weighted consideration.
Examples, from the big public spaces to educational spaces:
Confederate statues of generals, military, etc. must be taken down. Its flag must not be flown.
School mascots should not be indigenous peoples or representative of human stereotypes/archetypes, or historical figures (I wouldn’t want to be on a football team that fights for George Washington)
Thinking about Arnautoff’s mentor, Diego Rivera, one can see the similarities of their works. But the impact is wide and deep.
My husband said, “Art is an opinion.” He also said it’s like the ice core testing in terms of testing the layers of our culture–it also shows whose in power, whose voices are heard and seen. We are getting someone’s opinion from that moment in time. Arnautoff seems to be saying American history is ugly, painful, and filled with people of color who were abused by the white colonists. And that makes it heartbreaking that we can’t at least save this artwork somewhere…but it can’t be moved. For students to say “meet you under the dead Indian” shows how his message became warped and complicit to indifference. As Ms. Collins said, ‘it normalizes violence.”
You can’t tell me this isn’t SERIOUS normalization of violence against Indigenous people. If you really care about “not repeating history” you don’t normalize violence of Black Brown and Indigenous people. And you DEFINITELY don’t do it in a school. #paintitdownpic.twitter.com/ZqoIjZhpND
Considering other art that’s used in schools, what kinds of imagery do you bring to your classroom, and moreover, what context do you provide? This image is used by many teachers when “celebrating” Thanksgiving. I have used it as a launch point to talk about racism in art via composition. It’s not the only conversation, and plenty of context is provided. Lies in art, and mythologizing white colonialism, are addressed, as with any conversation about propaganda.
Ultimately, it is up to the community. Something that began as ‘look at these atrocities’ ending up in a public high school warped into normalization and complicity. I’m going to have an internal dialogue about this for a long time, and any thoughts you have about this are welcome.
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.
Here is a chart I put together. It’s only a start, and I’m wondering what is missing:
The different spaces and places for the First Amendment
Consider providing this question to students, with a chart similar to mine: how would they discern and analyze various laws and where and when they fail or work?
Oh, no. It’s too early for this level of heavy-duty self-reflection. Oh. No. I could predict with sharp accuracy, which side of the line my mindset would sit: I mean, who has huge binders full of teaching ideas, ideas and handout from almost every PD session, curriculum maps created and abandoned, ledgers of standards and learning targets? This girl. And I would bet most teachers worth their salt do, too.
But what excellent timing: cleaning out my binders and virtual digital works is daunting. I’ve been on break for almost two weeks, and it’s one chore I have completed.
However– protective and proactive may not be a fair case when it comes to educational “wheels.” We are constantly told not to ‘recreate the wheel’ but I strongly encourage to make better wheels.
Taking the wheel cliche too far: we still need the wheels–how to make them better?
The Westenberg article made me think: what do students need to build strong foundations, and what can be trashed or treasured in this process?
One area the 8th grade PLC decided to focus on for next year, and I’m saving this so I won’t forget, are the ‘grand discussion’ techniques and tools.
Whole Class Discussion Types of Talkers Smartnotebook in a PDF form:
In addition to short films, commercials can be another valuable asset. Many commercials live on multiple places on Bloom’s Taxonomy, and certainly any argumentative reading and writing unit worth its salt contains at least one or two commercials to support a conversation about pathos, ethos, and logos.
I just found this site this morning. This first ad can bring up so many relatable conversation points. To quote John Spencer,
“What’s so odd is that people have been creating art, writing letters, and talking about their food for years. Museums are filled with foodies and selfie shots. We just call them “still lifes” and “self-portraits.” The whole, “don’t miss the moment” mindset fails to recognize that it’s a deeply human need to capture and create precisely because we don’t want to forget it.”
So perhaps a contrast discussion — show a selfie and a self portrait, and ask students to discuss the possible purposes of the artist, or artistic intent. A conversation about pace, too — the speed of creation and its perceived value (in the moment and over time). I can honestly say that my photo albums are my life. One project this summer is to scan everything and save it to multiple places. (But I still have time…right?!)
A word of caution: advertisements intended for European markets do not have the same ratings codes as in the States. Seriously — watch everything first if you think it looks like something you want to use in the classroom.
The intent of “Talk Tuesdays” was twofold: to use the readings/texts in a purposeful way, and invite students to think about discussion, and practice.
Well, that is the intent, and we all know about roads paved, etc. But I think I became too distracted or mired in the concept of ‘accountable talk.’ I’m not sure if you know my connotative negative bias toward the word ‘accountable’ when it comes to students. Accountable talk is a buzzkill idea. There. I said it. However, sometimes students think it’s going to be a free-for-all talk fest, and, well, sometimes it is. And that’s okay. I would rather have things turn more raucous than censored.
But somehow, and I’m speaking purely for myself, putting the descriptor ‘accountable’ on anything makes it taste like educational cardboard. If we start thinking about what are real purpose is, what we want students to be engaged, and even enchanted by, is sharing ideas in a passionate, “oh oh oh!!” way–and it’s okay if not everyone is excited about every topic. I know I’m not, and that honesty with students helps them know that sometimes they are not as emotionally invested in a topic as others.
Key ingredients exist in any interesting conversation:
An emotional stake (personal connection and empathy)
Ambiguous, essential questions that have kaleidoscope viewpoints
Allowances to shift or pivot with new information (see my substantive form)
Metacognition: understanding one self in order to monitor and assess how important the topic or theme is to one personally; extrapolate to a larger scale
There are multiple pathways for discussion, too:
Socratic Seminars
Town Hall meetings
Turn and Talk
Writing Workshop (next post)
Think, Pair, Share
About a thousand others (dang my hyperbole!)
The trick is to make sure students are listening, and having a chance with their say. It can come in the form of real talk, or on a class discussion board, etc. Two strategies I use are what I call the “ambassador of the table” idea. Whether or not I choose or they choose, there is an ambassador from each group who shares out what the group has said. Also, if it’s a small partner group of 2 to 3, each person has to share what the other said, and it’s always paraphrased. The person who is not speaking can then agree or repudiate what their partner interpreted.
