Thursday, September 6, 2012

Post-Reading Week 1


    Horne's argument against teaching Ethnic Studies in Tucson Unified School District seems a little bit contradicting to me. He argues that teaching Ethnic Studies classes such as raza studies separates students and teaches them ethnic chauvinism. He say's that we try to teach kids that it's not about what race he/she came from that it's about his/her character and what he/she can and can't do. This point in his argument right here seems to really make me think because he mentions individualism and how they teach us to treat others as a individual, but yet taking a class that focuses on your own race is unacceptable? Isn't learning about your own ethnicity and where you came from a part of being individual? The social studies classes that I have been in throughout my years of middle school and high school have seemed to focus more on white history and barley touch on other ethnicity histories. I think having classes that focus on certain ethnicity's provide students with the opportunity to learn about where they came from and learn a little bit about who they are. There is more than one race in this world and the thought of not allowing students to learn about their own race seems absurd to me. If the classes were only meant for the people of that race to take them then that’s a different story, but these classes are open to whoever wants to take them and aren’t restricted to one race only. If an African American student learned about Chicano studies, they can learn about other cultures and find that they have similarities. I think the classes are good because it teaches you to step out of your comfort zone and also opens your mind to different cultures around the world.  Horne also kept mentioning the same thing over and over about how we shouldn’t be teaching kid’s about the downsides of history because it causes them to only focus on those things such as being oppressed. When asked a question his go-to answer was that it would cause students to start thinking about oppression. Michael, on the other hand, felt that in order to celebrate our country for all its glory, we have to also learn about the down sides too. The classes being taught in school now do not teach a well rounded curriculum where we are able to learn about the full truths of history.  I think Michael had a better developed argument on why we should allow ethnic studies classes because he had a lot of valid reasons that contradicted Horne’s argument. Horne definitely did not seem open minded to other opinions and kept on assisting that ethnic studies classes would divide students up and cause them to be in favor of their own race. 

Word Count: 466

1 comment:

  1. Hi Justina,
    Wow! Your blog post does such an insightful job of analyzing the arguments of Dyson and Horne as well as weaving in your own analysis of both. I also think that the '68 strikers would agree with your point that learning about the history and experiences of your race/cultural group is an important part of understanding your own identity- and celebrating it! It does seem that Dyson had a better arsenal of arguments prepared than Horne did, however I think a lot of that has to do with the fact that Horne's arguments are somewhat one-dimensonal to begin with ;)
    --eas

    ReplyDelete