this is a picture of a sandwich.
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Tuesday, March 10, 2009
3.10.09
I continue thinking about culture, language, and education. We had a debate yesterday in my comparative education class about language of instruction policies. We talked about both the US and Africa and what multilingual policies would help to encourage development. As in the discussion, I will focus my remarks here on the primary level of instruction as secondary and tertiary have their own (though interconnected) challenges.
In my eyes, every child has a human right to be educated in his or her own culture and language so as to develop essential analytical and social skills. Multilingual primary school instruction policies hit closest to the mark on protecting that human right and empowering each child to be economically and culturally functional. In this respect, these policies are the most effective bridge between economic and cultural gaps in all societies. Given, the US and African countries are on different continents, have different histories, and demand separate analyses. However, these separate challenges and analyses should not be focused on whether or not multilingual policies should be implemented, but how they are to be implemented. As I have mentioned before, capitalist forces may have embarked on the road to globalization without realizing some of the social and cultural consequences. These consequences are not inherently bad, but have not been properly acknowledged to date. These roadblocks are largely the reason for the gigantic economic and social gaps that exist today in both developed and developing states. It is essential that these gaps be bridged if economic and human development is to proceed: a globalized world cannot afford the same magnitude of weights to its progress and citizens cannot afford insensitive policies that expect human rights, but do not facilitate empowerment.
So, the million-dollar question is: how do we do that? And my answer is: strong state and local leadership which ensure equal access to quality social services. And, in the context of this discussion, my answer is: we must start with education.
How can we do this in the US? I think we must ensure that immigrants receive classroom instruction in their own language for at least the first three years. Years four, five, and six should be transition years in which students transition from their native language to the administrative language of the state (in this case, English). Curriculum should also be extremely sensitive in terms of equality: cultural values (not traditions) should be taught and encouraged. Native English-speakers should receive similar cultural education: edifying, equal values to lower cultural boundaries. Ideally, English-speakers would also transition into a foreign language of choice during grades four, five, and six (such as do many Western European and Scandinavian states) to facilitate cultural equality and respect and do increase the quality of primary education in general. These programs would translate into extensive, more economically sensitive secondary programs, but that discussion is for another day.
This program would help children of all cultures and languages to be socially functional in their family and community and also economically functional in the national market through proficiency in the administrative language. Initially, I would expect a large influx of immigrants with desires to benefit from this type of program. However, whereas this influx could be too immense of a burden if the rising generation of those immigrating were almost forced to perpetuate the limited functionality of their culture and language, if that rising generation were empowered to contribute, what innovation and prosperity might be the result? But this is why I also advocate changes to the English-speaking curriculum: the empowerment of immigrants has the dreadful potential to exacerbate cultural differences. Cultural respect must be ensured through cultural-exchanging curriculum.
It may still appear to be culturally segregating from the outside, but I argue the opposite: a program along these lines stabs the fear and practice of cultural imposition and domination square in the heart. It helps to put cultures and languages on the same social level and in the same economic market. It begins to encourage them to work together and develop mutual respect. And, whereas that has been an ideal but not a necessity to human development in past years, in a global world we cannot afford current cultural boundaries. We cannot afford the conflicts and underdevelopments that are results of cultural imposition. We cannot afford the dead-weights and impossible responsibilities that are results of cultural domination. Culture, as is referenced to by Huntington, has the terrible possibility to be the battlefield of the future. It is my wish and deepest desire that it not be a battlefield, but a community. However, if we do not start to make the necessary steps now, I fear that current momentums, policies, and practices will pull culture to fulfill its most terrible potential.
In my eyes, every child has a human right to be educated in his or her own culture and language so as to develop essential analytical and social skills. Multilingual primary school instruction policies hit closest to the mark on protecting that human right and empowering each child to be economically and culturally functional. In this respect, these policies are the most effective bridge between economic and cultural gaps in all societies. Given, the US and African countries are on different continents, have different histories, and demand separate analyses. However, these separate challenges and analyses should not be focused on whether or not multilingual policies should be implemented, but how they are to be implemented. As I have mentioned before, capitalist forces may have embarked on the road to globalization without realizing some of the social and cultural consequences. These consequences are not inherently bad, but have not been properly acknowledged to date. These roadblocks are largely the reason for the gigantic economic and social gaps that exist today in both developed and developing states. It is essential that these gaps be bridged if economic and human development is to proceed: a globalized world cannot afford the same magnitude of weights to its progress and citizens cannot afford insensitive policies that expect human rights, but do not facilitate empowerment.
So, the million-dollar question is: how do we do that? And my answer is: strong state and local leadership which ensure equal access to quality social services. And, in the context of this discussion, my answer is: we must start with education.
How can we do this in the US? I think we must ensure that immigrants receive classroom instruction in their own language for at least the first three years. Years four, five, and six should be transition years in which students transition from their native language to the administrative language of the state (in this case, English). Curriculum should also be extremely sensitive in terms of equality: cultural values (not traditions) should be taught and encouraged. Native English-speakers should receive similar cultural education: edifying, equal values to lower cultural boundaries. Ideally, English-speakers would also transition into a foreign language of choice during grades four, five, and six (such as do many Western European and Scandinavian states) to facilitate cultural equality and respect and do increase the quality of primary education in general. These programs would translate into extensive, more economically sensitive secondary programs, but that discussion is for another day.
This program would help children of all cultures and languages to be socially functional in their family and community and also economically functional in the national market through proficiency in the administrative language. Initially, I would expect a large influx of immigrants with desires to benefit from this type of program. However, whereas this influx could be too immense of a burden if the rising generation of those immigrating were almost forced to perpetuate the limited functionality of their culture and language, if that rising generation were empowered to contribute, what innovation and prosperity might be the result? But this is why I also advocate changes to the English-speaking curriculum: the empowerment of immigrants has the dreadful potential to exacerbate cultural differences. Cultural respect must be ensured through cultural-exchanging curriculum.
It may still appear to be culturally segregating from the outside, but I argue the opposite: a program along these lines stabs the fear and practice of cultural imposition and domination square in the heart. It helps to put cultures and languages on the same social level and in the same economic market. It begins to encourage them to work together and develop mutual respect. And, whereas that has been an ideal but not a necessity to human development in past years, in a global world we cannot afford current cultural boundaries. We cannot afford the conflicts and underdevelopments that are results of cultural imposition. We cannot afford the dead-weights and impossible responsibilities that are results of cultural domination. Culture, as is referenced to by Huntington, has the terrible possibility to be the battlefield of the future. It is my wish and deepest desire that it not be a battlefield, but a community. However, if we do not start to make the necessary steps now, I fear that current momentums, policies, and practices will pull culture to fulfill its most terrible potential.
Monday, March 9, 2009
Thursday, March 5, 2009
3.5.09
I learned something very important today about complaining. Sometimes complaining seems that it cannot be avoided; stress and tension cause the mind to want to vent in some way. However, after venting today, I did feel somewhat more relaxed, but not justified.
Complaining, I think, only helps us to forget that it is the Lord who will see us through our trials, challenges, and temptations. He knows us perfectly: our talents, capabilities, situations, and doubts. I do not believe that we are given opportunities in order to fail. Even if those opportunities do not turn out the way we had anticipated, personal progression is not dependent on our own expectations when it comes to opportunities. Personal progression comes in faith and faith comes in knowing and believing that the Lord can and will make us equal to the task and then acting in accordance to that knowledge and belief. When I complained today, my belief that the Lord could make me equal to the task was not affected. However, by complaining I was doubting whether He actually had or would. I was trying to justify the hardship of my own attempts to control my situation, forgetting that it is my Lord who controls the situation and that He will see me through whatever task, be it seemingly easy or impossible.
As I look back at what I was complaining about, I realize that the Lord actually did make me able; He helped me every step of the way and made me equal to the task. And not only did He help me get things done, He gave me excellent, edifying educational experiences in the process. My mind should not be lingering on complaints; I should look back with extreme gratitude and amazement. I should look back and be able to strengthen my faith because of what the Lord helped me to accomplish. My trust in Him should now grow because of the fresh example that with His divine help, I can accomplish whatever should be His will. Complaining, I think, has the opposite effect: it has caused me to doubt my abilities and talents, to call them my own, and to fear future challenges. I would not have this be my mindset; it has only the power to cause doubt and fear.
In the future I will try to remember this better. I will remember that complaining does not edify, but its cursing is twofold: not recognizing the Lord's hand and not believing in His promises. I will remember that faith is not just believing that the Lord can, but that He will make me equal to the task. Beautiful and mysterious are His ways and who am I to question even the most difficult of challenges? In the future, I will try to remember not to complain and to think of faith instead of conceding even to the temptation and thought of complaining. Glory be to our Lord and the path He has chosen for me; I know He will see me through. May He keep us in our efforts to remember; may He keep us in our efforts to see His wisdom in all things and not forget ourselves unto temptations.
Wednesday, March 4, 2009
Tuesday, March 3, 2009
3.3.09
Culture and language have been on my mind lately: I am in a comparative education and poverty reduction class and the issue of culturally sensitive policies comes up frequently. However, even though I see the logic and importance of culturally sensitive programs and initiatives, I have a tendency to exclude myself. There is a fear there, deep under the skin, of cultural division. And so, I understand culturally empowering motives, but there is a part of me that fears them; a part of me that I hope will continue to recede in coming years.
To illustrate: yesterday we discussed language of instruction issues which is one of my education policy passions. Basically, the argument is this: children should be instructed, at least for their first few schooling years, in their native language in order to ease understanding and preserve cultural roots. The effects of these initiatives are both economic and social and, I believe, are among the most effective in ensuring income and cultural equality. But what of the US? Yesterday, as we were discussing, our own education policies came into question. I was asked: are you saying that the US should adopt multilingual language of instruction policies? A few months ago, my answer would undoubtedly have been no. But not yesterday. Yesterday, and today, my answer was and is: absolutely.
I would not have intended to say no out of a conscious intolerance for other cultures, but most likely out of a certain brand of patriotism that lingers with the scent of Cold War suspicions. However, I believe my yes answer is truly patriotic in other ways; transformative ways; progressive ways. Imagine with me: all cultures within the US receiving equal opportunities and rights to education in their own languages. Does it stir you? It most certainly has me.
English is obviously the administrative language of the states that I do not believe this should change. But what is the US? Did we think that, in our dive into globalization, we could still preserve the same types of borders? Maybe we so thought, but the consequences are clear: today's world is increasingly a world of cultures and not of geographical boundaries. And, like the boundaries with which we are so familiar, this new development has been and will continue to be both beautiful and terrible as the years progress.
But we are so afraid, at least I was, to start to let go of those boundaries. Wouldn't I be doing a disservice to those who gave their lives for our independence? Isn't the US ours; haven't we defended it; haven't we nourished it; haven't we helped it grow? Fascinating questions; so incredibly fascinating!
I'll tell you what I believe: I think we would do more of a disservice to our predecessors by forgetting the edifying values of our culture in an attempt to secure a piece of land. In the slow, unstoppable progression of time, all will change anyway. Everything except the edifying truth of values. I believe that cultures are a way to preserve those values across time; from generation to generation.
That is why, to me, language is one of the greatest empowerment tools. That is why, to me, one of the greatest things we can do to be leaders is ensure the preservation and perpetuation of the edifying values of each culture in whatsoever place they reside; be it post-colonial Africa or the US.
To illustrate: yesterday we discussed language of instruction issues which is one of my education policy passions. Basically, the argument is this: children should be instructed, at least for their first few schooling years, in their native language in order to ease understanding and preserve cultural roots. The effects of these initiatives are both economic and social and, I believe, are among the most effective in ensuring income and cultural equality. But what of the US? Yesterday, as we were discussing, our own education policies came into question. I was asked: are you saying that the US should adopt multilingual language of instruction policies? A few months ago, my answer would undoubtedly have been no. But not yesterday. Yesterday, and today, my answer was and is: absolutely.
I would not have intended to say no out of a conscious intolerance for other cultures, but most likely out of a certain brand of patriotism that lingers with the scent of Cold War suspicions. However, I believe my yes answer is truly patriotic in other ways; transformative ways; progressive ways. Imagine with me: all cultures within the US receiving equal opportunities and rights to education in their own languages. Does it stir you? It most certainly has me.
English is obviously the administrative language of the states that I do not believe this should change. But what is the US? Did we think that, in our dive into globalization, we could still preserve the same types of borders? Maybe we so thought, but the consequences are clear: today's world is increasingly a world of cultures and not of geographical boundaries. And, like the boundaries with which we are so familiar, this new development has been and will continue to be both beautiful and terrible as the years progress.
But we are so afraid, at least I was, to start to let go of those boundaries. Wouldn't I be doing a disservice to those who gave their lives for our independence? Isn't the US ours; haven't we defended it; haven't we nourished it; haven't we helped it grow? Fascinating questions; so incredibly fascinating!
I'll tell you what I believe: I think we would do more of a disservice to our predecessors by forgetting the edifying values of our culture in an attempt to secure a piece of land. In the slow, unstoppable progression of time, all will change anyway. Everything except the edifying truth of values. I believe that cultures are a way to preserve those values across time; from generation to generation.
That is why, to me, language is one of the greatest empowerment tools. That is why, to me, one of the greatest things we can do to be leaders is ensure the preservation and perpetuation of the edifying values of each culture in whatsoever place they reside; be it post-colonial Africa or the US.
Monday, March 2, 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)