Here you go Justin:
1. What are some differences between Mendez v. Westminster and Brown v. Board of Education?
2. How have teachers mishandled Mendez v. Westminster?
3. How would you handle the topic of race within the classroom while dealing with topics such as Mendez v. Westminster and or Brown v. Board of Education?
4. How would you go about teaching Mendez v. Westminster?
1. What personality type are you? Describe what that means (in a paragraph or two).
According to the personality test, I was given the following letters: ENFP-A. Which translated means I am a Campaigner. “The Campaigner personality is a true free spirit. Often the life of the party, but take more pleasure in enjoying the social and emotional connections made with others. Charming, independent, energetic and compassionate, the 7% of the population that they comprise can certainly be felt in any crowd.” Craving more creativity and freedom than stability and security. Which can be a mixed blessing depending on the position the Campaigner is put in. If it’s a leadership position, then that may cause some lowering of self-esteem due to this personality not always wanting to deal with administrative or maintenance type tasks. Another trait of this personality has is that it knows how to relax. Some can almost just switch completely from problem solving work to free spirited relaxation.
2. What professional advantages does your personality type have for being a social studies teacher?
Some of the strengths that are described with my personality include (but are not limited to): curiosity, observant, energetic, enthusiastic, excellent communicators, and very popular and friendly. I’m open to trying new things with a passion that can be enthusiastically infectious for those around me. I can convey this passion, along with other big or small thoughts, clearly as well as naturally. These traits are all something excellent to have in my classroom tool shop. Enthusiasm with students rubs off and can get classes excited about different things. Communication like everything else in life is a useful thing to be proficient in. Especially when you have to be clear and concise with instruction, assignments, or lessons. Friendliness is another trait that can be useful because it makes it easier for students to talk to me as a teacher and ask questions.
3. What professional disadvantages does your personality type have for being a social studies teacher?
Some of the disadvantages include: poor practical skills, find it difficult to focus, over think things, get stressed easily, independent to a fault. While not all of these traits and qualities are abundantly clear, I have displayed them throughout my life. For example the poor practice skills is something that happens quite often. Coming up with big ideas, but the maintenance and follow through of projects is something that I have struggled with in the past. This can be problematic when it comes to follow-ups with students regarding assignments and other work that should have or need to do. Difficulty focusing is probably the most accurate trait that I still carry around with me. Like my carry on, or a friend who failed to realize what personal space is; this trait always sticks around. Which is difficult for staying on topic in class with lessons or assignments. Getting stressed easily is one that doesn’t show up often, but is still there. While I truly will not stress out about stuff concerning myself easily, I do get stressed out when it comes to stuff concerning others. I care about people. While I don’t see that necessarily as a fault, it can be something that bogs me down.
a) Mr. Appleton’s (who presents factual stuff) approach to teaching,
Mr. Appleton has a straightforward approach to teaching the materials. He uses textbooks and other reading materials for students to take notes from. He also will give lectures on the subject matter and again expects students to take notes. For his assessment, Mr. Appleton provides students with a study sheet for a quiz, which basically tells the class what is going to be on the quiz. While this approach is not differential in learning and lacks (some serious) engagement with students, it is clear and concise. In this type of classroom setup is crystal clear what is to be required of students to learn/memorize.
b) Mrs. Baker’s (whose class does different stuff) approach to teaching,
Mrs. Baker teaches with a more interpretative style for students. This different style includes more graphic organizers, visual aids, dress-up days, and read and discuss of myths. It also ends with a quiz, but the studying for the quiz is done how the students want to. Projects are varied which allows students’ choices on what one they want to do. In review of this class there is some engagement by the students because there is some fun activities to do. However, this style lacks clear understanding of what is required of students. As well as the fact, that as said above, this style is different, not differentiated.
c) Ms. Cassell’s (alternative approach) to teaching.
Ms. Cassell takes a much more student decision style of learning. She plans the whole around key concepts to help organize, retain, and relate what her students learn. Develops different items, such as lists of terms, facts, and questions, all of which are essential for student learning. Now the biggest thing that makes this classroom differentiated from the other two is that the students are involved in the decisions on what goals to set and how they are learning the material. In this class there is a strong relationship of student engagement with student understanding.
I had somewhat of an idea on the subject of differentiated learning. I would have thought that Mrs. Baker’s style of teaching would be considered differentiated before reading this article. In spite of this, I realize that there is more to differential than just being different. As said in the beginning of the article, “We need to know where we are going to end up before we start out.” Now I believe that this article does a good job displaying a differentiated classroom and the aspects that make it so from the others mentioned; such as the tenet of combining student understanding of the material with student engagement. Yet it does very little in describing ways in which to actually try and accomplish this. Which I would be quite interested in learning how to do so because it not be for my benefit, but for the future classes of students that we future educators are going to be teaching one day.
Bahrain. capital: Manama
It’s a constitutional monarchy with a GDP of $31.82 billion
Oil comprises 86% of Bahraini budget revenues, with other major economic activities in the production of aluminum. Bahrain's second biggest export after oil - finance, and construction.
Its in the Middle East (No really!), An archipelago in the Persian Gulf, just east of central Saudi Arabia with 161 km of coastline and in total area is 3.5 times the size of Washington, DC
Population: 1,378,904 (July 2016 est.)
Note: immigrants make up approximately 50% of the total population
Bahraini 46%, Asian 45.5%, other Arab 4.7%, African 1.6%, European 1%, other 1.2%
The Story so far...
The Trump administration is approving a multi-billion dollar deal of arms, specifically Fighter Jets, to the Bahraini government. This is done without any conditions towards reform of human rights for the small country. The Obama administration would often add similar conditions when conducting deals of this nature.
Which portion of the novel was most emotional for you? How come?
On a personal level, the most emotional portion of the novel I have read so far is when Elie and his family arrive in Auschwitz. Start off with standing in the train car packed to capacity like a can of sardines that even reading it can present the reader with a case of claustrophobia. Little or no food and water or even a toilet for the several day trip from Romania to Poland. During the journey Mrs. Schächter begins to wail about the flames and smoke. Upon finally reaching their destination none of the people no what hell on earth awaits for them, but the reader does. People are optimistic about being there. Believing that they can just live out the war and this removal until the Red Army reaches them. However that belief is slowly whittled away to noting.
The train cars open and people are forced to leave what little possessions they had brought with them behind. Then the eight simple words "Men to the left! Women to the right!" that drives a wedge between family cohesion. Elie and his father being separated from Elie mother and sisters. Then the first man is heard being killed. The men are lined up and seasoned inmates give the Elie and other newcomers the hard truth of what is in store for them if they don't adhere to the standards set by the Nazi's The reality is that they point to the chimney and say "that will be your grave." Then the SS officers file through the men individually to determine if they should go left or right. The close walk up to the fiery pit until right before going in they turn. From there, the men are now relived of any distinction of their past life. Clothes and hair, and in return receive an inmate uniform and a tattoo of a number. That is their name. That is who they are.
Just this summarization of the events of when Elie arrives in Auschwitz is nothing compared to what actually happened. Even what was written by Elie himself still pales in comparison to the real event of that night. That night when some of the worst cases of humanity were shown to the world. This is why I consider this portion the most emotional. It's not the act itself that I find the most disheartening, but the realization of what will happen from the victim, or victims in this case, that breaks their spirit is what I find to be the worst.
1. Based on what he said in the Forward, why do you think Elie Wiesel wrote this book?
2. Why do you think people would not listen to Moishe the Beadle's pleas for people to leave or what he saw when he was taken away?
3. Why do you think people were optimistic about their situation in the ghettos even though people were being transported away?
4. What do you think awaits Elie and the other workers at Buna?
1. What is ‘sacrilization’ and ‘trivialization’ AND how are these realities problematic?
Trivialization is to make something seem less important than it actually is. Whereas the opposite would be sacralization: to have something sacred through devotion. Both sides are intriguing because people often trivialize the things that need to be sacralized, and vice versa. For example, people trivialize history all the time, most likely due to the constant exposure to it throughout school. Whereas on the other hand people sacralize famous celebrities, athletes, or artists, because these people are new, exciting and can be an inspiration to people.
Now when it comes to the intensity of these two actions, this can potentially lead to bad situations. Like most everything in life too much of anything is bad for people and these two actions are no exception. If you take a traumatic event that is horrible, like the Holacaust and trivialize it, then that not only takes away from the importance and understanding of that one event, but also from the other events connected to it. Whereas on the flip side with sacralization, if you have something that is too sacred it wont be easy to openly talk about it. As Schweber said in his article “the idea that the Holocaust had become so sacred that it could only be talked about in hushed tones or with prayerful appropriateness.” That too much of sanctifying a subject can quell the learning of the subject.
2. What does is mean to say the role of Israel is “vexed” in public opinion? AND why is Israel’s political role vexed in public opinion?
It would mean to say that the role of Israel is annoyed, crossed, frustrated or angry in public opinion. Why would public opinion be vexed by Israel’s political role? The largest reason is the current relationship Israel has with its current neighbors. For example Palestine and Israel have a strenuous and hostile relationship. (Rather peculiar when you think about how today people are so disinterested with news on the Middle East that it almost has become trivializing.)
3. How is teaching on the Holocaust linked to current Middle Eastern conflict?
With the status quo on Middle East relations being what it is, that feeling has spread to other populations of the world. Not on a global scale, but in communities. Educators believe that teaching the Holocaust that teachers are supporting Israel. This is due to the fact that the nation of Israel was a result of the Holocaust.
In a paragraph or two; what are the strengths of using textbooks to generate lesson plans?
The most useful reason for using textbooks to generate lesson plans is that the book already provides an organized setup of the information. This helps the teacher in structuring their lesson plans around the way in which the students see the material themselves. Another reason, as stated in the Roberts article, is that textbooks offer a baseline of information within the text itself. This can allow the teacher to use the textbook with the simplified information, and then proceed to build upon it with additional sources. These additional sources may come from textbooks themselves because they also present readers with pictures, graphs, maps, charts, and primary and secondary documents. Allowing for students to learn from different visual and textual sources.
a) Select a (state or national) standard you find interesting:
b) Develop an interesting question around that standard.
How many ways can you interpret the follow phrase: “When you come to a fork in the road, take it!”
How can reading be a form of citizenship?
If a person can read, then that person can make his or her own inferences and conclusions on the text. That person would not have to rely on anyone else to be informed, and possibly have the text be skewed by another person’s perspective. Also, reading teaches people things and in doing so, that makes them a better person and better citizen.
How does Werner's piece make you question your own reading habits and perceptions of "history"?
While reading Werner’s piece, I had moments of reflection back to my AP world history class. Like any other history textbook, it had the usual materials of text, timelines, pictures, maps, primary documents, and end of chapter questions to go along with those materials. Looking back, I realized I never did question the content or the authorship of the book. I just read along, (Some of the time) and answered the questions required of me. Now looking at myself almost 8 years later, I have found that my perception on reading historical text has changed. I read from a primary source or a textbook and a take a look at the ways in which the text is formatted, and if the text involves more than one perspective, then I look to see how each perspective is represented. I also don’t just read anything anymore and take it at face value. I read something and then fact-check it from multiple different sources.
You are a clear thinker. You have an inner need to be objective and analytical. You like to pursue a definite course of action. You respond to logic rather than emotion.
You are likely to be particularly good at handling challenging technical assignments.
You have a strong inner motivation to attain personal goals. You like to become 'the expert' in your chosen field.
My results from a Disc personality test, and while I agree with most of the results, the one that came close, but no cigar, is that I respond to logic rather than emotion. Sorry I disagree with this result. I'm not really the Vulcan type. While I hold logic quite highly, I hold emotion even higher. This is something that I would like to provide evidence for, but this is a difference in opinion about how much higher I hold emotion. How do I give a definitive example to support my argument? Nonetheless, the rest of the results are within a level of accpetance. So I am not overly surprised by the results.