This 13-minute video does a great job of chronicling the emergence, rise, and fall of the Dungeons & Dragons cartoon of 1983-86. It answers such vexing questions as "Why were there never any toy spin-offs of the show?" and "Did the kids ever find their way back to our reality?"
A study into the stigmatization of "gay-sounding" voices found that British and American men expect to be discriminated against if they sound gay and make efforts not to be gay-sounding. More broadly, the study concerns essentialist beliefs about sexuality and voice. — Read the rest
Hidden Mother: Eileen
Hidden Mother: Jenn
“I come from a long line of matriarchs and feminists,” New Mexico photographer Megan Jacobs tells me. “Both my grandmother and my mother were fearless in their times.” Now a parent herself, the artist drew inspiration from old images from the Victorian era to create Hidden Mothers.
It started with the 2013 publication of The Hidden Mother by Linda Fregni Nagler, a book of more than 1000 collected daguerreotypes, tintypes, ambrotypes, and other early photographs of babies, all of which include a mother who has been in some way erased from the picture. Usually, by a veil or shroud of some kind.
The reason for this technique was simple: people wanted photos of their babies for their albums and cabinet cards, but exposure times were long, and little ones have trouble holding still for seconds and minutes at a time. The solution was for the mother to hold the infant in place while cleverly disguising herself in the background. Sometimes, it’s hard to distinguish the women from inanimate objects like a chair or a set of heavy curtains.
Poignantly, it’s sometimes only way historians have been able to realize if a child was living or deceased. If a baby passed away, which happened frequently in the 1850s, they would be immortalized in a photograph after their death. If the mother can be seen hidden behind the child, it can usually be assumed that the baby was alive and moving.
For Jacobs, the Hidden Mothers became more than a historic quirk. They were symbols of the ways in which parents, and women in particular, are made invisible. She sees it in too-short maternity leaves. She sees it in the stigma that surrounds breastfeeding in public. And she sees it in the perceived gap between a woman’s identity as a mother and a professional.
“Mothers, many of whom work ‘second shifts,’ are left bifurcated: guilty for leaving their children while at work and longing to get back to work while in their children’s presence,” she explains.
For her own Hidden Mothers, Jacobs collaborated with friends and acquaintances from her parenting network, many of whom are in BabyMama Santa Fe group. The artist collected floral-patterned bed linens from family, friends, and thrift stores— a nod to the history of “feminine” or “domestic” motifs in art.
The shoots themselves were laid-back; often, the photographer’s kids were present, and some of the parents played peek-a-boo a bit to get their kids comfortable with the arrangement. The best part, Jacobs says, was talking with the other mothers. They all understood her intentions and her goals, and they were open with their feelings about parenthood.
Hidden Mothers was also an emotional project in some ways. There was one mother who had lost one of her children. “Before photographing her, I didn’t know her or that one of her children had passed on,” Jacobs admits. “She and I talked about how the loss of a child creates a space of uncertainty. She was a remarkable woman, and I was inspired by how she used the creation of her art as a means to begin to cope with the loss of her daughter.”
The photographer wove pieces of her own history and life into the images too. A few of the linens had once belonged to her grandmother, and her own children were often present on-set.
This practice of hiding mothers, often as they quite literally support their children, is an uncomfortable one, but in some ways, women have always been present to subvert that erasure. In the Victorian era, one of the few professions open to women was photography, and it’s been suggested that a significant number of the early photographs were made by female artists.
In covering the Hidden Mothers, Jacobs also leaves them exposed and vulnerable, and in making them invisible, she demands that they be seen. Some of the mothers who participated in the project have their portraits hanging proudly in their homes.
Hidden Mothers: D
Hidden Mother: Lisa
Hidden Mother: Lisa E.
Hidden Mother: Jessica
Hidden Mother: Sara
The post The Overlooked Value of Motherhood Revealed in Photos appeared first on Feature Shoot.
The series of Marvel movies — X-Men, Avengers, Spider-Man, etc. — is the highest grossing film series of all time but the films’ music is largely forgettable and bland in a way that it isn’t in Star Wars, James Bond, or Harry Potter. In this video, the Every Frame a Painting gang explores why that is: partially a trend toward movie music not designed to be noticed and also the use by directors of temporary music that unduly influences the final score. All the Marvel movies run together for me (aside from Guardians of the Galaxy, which had distinctive music in it, I can’t recall a single scene from any one of the more recent films) and perhaps the music is one reason.
There’s a follow-up video to the one above composed of clips of movies played with their temp music followed by the same clips with the final music, which is nearly identical.
They’ve also started a Twitter account highlighting the influence of temp music on final scores.
These videos have me wondering…was Carter Burwell’s score for Carol influenced by temp music, specifically Philip Glass’ score for The Hours? This interview in Rolling Stone and the FAQ on his site suggest not:
It’s his ability to make music that compliments a scene rather than eclipse it that has made him an invaluable creative partner to filmmakers who work in such intense melodramatic registers, and Burwell is emphatic that his scores aren’t responsible for all of the emotional heavy-lifting. “As a listener, I do not like being instructed,” he says, emphatically. “It riles me when the music tells me something before I can figure it out for myself. In fact, I enjoy the discomfort of not being sure how to take something.” It’s the reason why he loathes listening to the temp music that directors often attach to rough cuts in order to point composers in the right direction.
But the similarities are there, so who knows?
Update: I forgot to mention that Stanley Kubrick ended up ditching the original score written for 2001 and sticking with the temp music, which were the classical compositions by Strauss et al. that we’re so familiar with today.
Update: In a video response, Dan Golding shows how temp music is not a recent Hollywood obsession…even the famous Star Wars theme was greatly influenced by temp music:
He questions that the pull of temp music by contemporary directors and composers is sufficient to explain why movie music is now so uninspiring:
Film music is an embrace of rampant unoriginality, and to think about how film music works, we need to think of new ways to talk about these questions, rather than just saying, “it’s a copy”.
Golding pins the blame primarily on technology but also on composers and filmmakers drawing from fewer and less diverse sources. Interestingly, this latter point was also made by Every Frame a Painting’s Tony Zhou in a recent chat with Anil Dash, albeit about originality in video essays. A lightly edited excerpt:
My advice to people has always been: copy old shit. For instance, the style of Every Frame a Painting is NOT original at all. I am blatantly ripping off two sources: the editing style of F for Fake, and the critical work of David Bordwell/Kristin Thompson, who wrote the introductory text on filmmaking called Film Art. I’ve run into quite a few video essays that are trying to be “like Every Frame a Painting” and I always tell people, please don’t do that because I’m ripping of someone else. You should go to the source. When any art form or medium becomes primarily about people imitating the dominant form, we get stifling art.
If you look at all of the great filmmakers, they’re all ripping someone off but it was someone 50 years ago. It rejuvenated the field to be reminded of the history of our medium. And I sincerely wish more video essayists would rip off the other great film essayists: Chris Marker, Godard, Agnès Varda, Thom Andersen. Or even rip off non-video essayists. I would kill to see someone make video essays the way Pauline Kael wrote criticism. That would be my jam!
ps. Also! Hans Zimmer — composer of film scores for Gladiator, Interstellar, Inception, The Dark Knight, etc. — was the keyboard player in the Buggles’ Video Killed the Radio Star music video. WHAT?!
Tags: 2001 Carol Carter Burwell Dan Golding film school movies music Philip Glass Stanley Kubrick The Hours Tony Zhou video
Winner – 2015 “Rush Hour” © Julian Rad.
Bronze Runner-up “Nearly got it” © Oliver Dreike
Highly Commended “It’s not funny… I’ve got a cramp in my flipper!” © Julie Hunt
When asked whether animals have a sense of humor, wildlife photographers Paul Joynson-Hicks and Tom Sullam respond in one word, “Completely!!!” with three exclamation points. They’ve seen it firsthand while crawling in the grass and hiding in the bushes. They’ve watched leopard cubs romp about the terrain, and they’ve seen alpha lions soften in the presence of their young. “From the smallest antelope to the oldest silver back,” says Sullam, every creature has his own kind of wit and playfulness.
Joynson-Hicks created the Comedy Wildlife Photography Awards in order to share with the public the true playfulness of the animal kingdom. From elephants and rhinos to orangutans and sharks, animal populations are in peril. Many face critical endangerment, and still, it’s important to both Joynson-Hicks and Sullam that we also get to see positive images mixed in with the sobering facts.
Our fellow creatures are in grave danger, but that doesn’t mean they can’t have fun. The animals we stand to lose aren’t vague statistics; they are vibrant, soulful, and often humorous individuals.
The upbeat tenor of the Comedy Wildlife Photography Awards doesn’t make the completion any less of a cri de cœur than competitions seeking straight documentary photographs, and Joynson-Hicks and Sullam have partnered with the Born Free Foundation in hopes of making a significant difference in the lives of the animals they’ve come to hold dear.
Although the competition is closed for entries at the moment, check back on their website to keep up with next year’s competition. You can learn more and contribute to the Born Free Foundation here.
Silver Runner-up “You haven’t seen me…” © Liam Richardson
Highly Commended “Dancing Sifaka” © Alison Buttigieg
Highly Commended “Geronimo” © Charlie Davidson
Highly Commended “Two’s Company, Three’s a Crowd…” © Graham McGeorge
Highly Commended “Help…..mum! Driven hippo-potty-mus.” © Marc Mol
Highly Commended “Sorry…Am I in your way?!” © Megan Lorenz
Highly Commended “Last Tango” © Tony Dilger
Highly Commended “Pants! Did I really do that last night…?” © Yuzuru Masuda
Highly Commended “Kung Fu Squirrel” © Julian Rad.
Highly Commended “Be Different” © Mohammed Alnaser
The post The Hilarious Winners of the Comedy Wildlife Awards Prove that Animals Have a Sense of Humor appeared first on Feature Shoot.
A Christian exercise program from the 1980s in which a Southern lady promises to exercise your soul, as well as your behind. (more…)
The directorial debut of Alex Garland, screenwriter of Sunshine and 28 Days Later, looks interesting.
Ex Machina is an intense psychological thriller, played out in a love triangle between two men and a beautiful robot girl. It explores big ideas about the nature of consciousness, emotion, sexuality, truth and lies.
(via http://devour.com/)
Tags: Alex Garland Ex Machina movies robots trailers
A Nashville convention center figured out how to boost its revenue from selling Internet service: it illegally jammed guests' and exhibitors' Wi-Fi networks. Glenn Fleishman explains the technical scam and why it earned a six-figure smackdown. Read the rest
It's grown 6,700% since 1983, to $144.7B in 2013 -- greater than the net worth of 1,782,020 average Americans.
Read the rest
A few years ago, Arne Duncan, Bill Gates, David Coleman, and a merry band of policy wonks had a grand plan. The non-governmental groups like Achieve, the National Governors Association, the Council of Chief State School Officers, and Coleman’s own Student Achievement Partners would write the Common Core standards (paid for by the Gates Foundation); Duncan would require states to agree to adopt them as a condition of eligibility for a share of the billions of Race to the Top funds at a time when states were broke; the Feds would spend $370 million to develop tests for the standards; and within a few short years the U.S. would have a seamless system of standards and assessments that could be used to evaluate students, teachers, and schools.
The reason that the Gates Foundation had to pay for the standards is that federal law prohibits the government from controlling, directing, or supervising curriculum or instruction. Of course, it is ludicrous to imagine that the federally-funded tests do not have any direct influence on curriculum or instruction. Many years ago, I interviewed a professor at MIT about his role in the new science programs of the 1960s, and he said something I never forgot: “Let me write a nation’s tests, and I care not who writes its songs or poetry.”
So how fares the seamless system? Not so well. Critics of the standards and tests seem to gathering strength and growing bolder. The lack of any democratic process for writing, reviewing, and revising the standards is coming back to bite the architects and generals who assumed they could engineer a swift and silent coup. The claim, often made by Duncan, that the U.S. needs a way to compare the performance of students in different states ignores the fact that the Federal National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) already exists to do precisely that. In addition, critics like Carol Burris and John Murphy have pointed out that the Common Core tests agreed upon a cut score (passing mark) that is designed to fail most students.
As politico.com reports, support for the federally-funded tests is crumbling as states discover the costs, the amount of time required, and their loss of sovereignty over a basic state function. The federal government pays about 10% of the cost of education, while states and localities pay the other 90%. Why should the federal government determine what happens in the nation’s schools? What happened to the long-established tradition that states are “laboratories of democracy”? Why shouldn’t the federal government stick to its mandate to fund poor schools and to defend the civil rights of students, instead of trying to standardize curriculum, instruction, and testing?
So far, at least 17 states have backed away from using the federal tests this spring, and some are determined not to use them ever. Another half-dozen may drop out. In many, legislators are appalled at the costs of adopting a federal test. Both the NEA and the AFT, which have supported the standards, have balked at the tests because teachers are not ready, nor is curriculum, teaching resources, and professional development.
Time and costs are big issues for the federal exams:
“PARCC estimates its exams will take eight hours for an average third-grader and nearly 10 hours for high school students — not counting optional midyear assessments to make sure students and teachers are on track.
“PARCC also plans to develop tests for kindergarten, first- and second- graders, instead of starting with third grade as is typical now. And it aims to test older students in 9th, 10th and 11th grades instead of just once during high school.
“Cost is also an issue. Many states need to spend heavily on computers and broadband so schools can deliver the exams online as planned. And the tests themselves cost more than many states currently spend — an estimated $19 to $24 per student if they’re administered online and up to $33 per student for paper-and-pencil versions.
“That adds up to big money for testing companies. Pearson, which won the right to deliver PARCC tests, could earn more than $1 billion over the next eight years if enough states sign on.”
One of the two federally-funded testing consortia, PARCC, is now entangled in a legal battle in New Mexico, which was sued by AIR for failing to take competitive bids for the lucrative testing contract. This could lead to copycat suits in other states whose laws require competitive bidding but ignored the law to award the contract to Pearson.
Frankly, the idea of subjecting third graders to an eight-hour exam is repugnant, as is the prospect of a 10-hour exam for high school students, as is the absurd idea of testing children in kindergarten, first, and second grades. All of these tests will be accompanied by test prep and interim exams and periodic exams. This is testing run amok, and the biggest beneficiary will be the testing industry, certainly not students.
Students don’t become smarter or wiser or more creative because of testing. Instead, all this testing will deduct as much as a month of instruction for testing and preparation for testing. In addition, states will spend tens of millions, hundreds of millions, or even more, to buy the technology and bandwidth necessary for the Common Core testing (Los Angeles–just one district–plans to spend a cool $1 billion to buy the technology for the Common Core tests). The money spent for Common Core testing means there will be less money to reduce class sizes, to hire arts teachers, to repair crumbling buildings, to hire school nurses, to keep libraries open and staffed, and to meet other basic needs). States are cutting the budget for schools at the same time that the Common Core is diverting huge sums for new technology, new textbooks, new professional development, and other requirements to prepare for the Common Core.
Common Core testing will turn out to be the money pit that consumed American education. The sooner it dies, the sooner schools and teachers will be freed of the Giant Federal Accountability Plan hatched in secret and foisted upon our nation’s schools. And when it does die, teachers will have more time to do their job and to use their professional judgment to do what is best for each student..
Here are several reasons we do not have for homeschooling:
• We are religious “nuts” who want to shield our children from the theory of evolution, etc.? Nope. I’m a nonbelieving rationalist.
• We are social climbers? Nope. I don’t especially care if my boys go to the best colleges. I am not preparing them for Harvard (or even Reed, where I went). I want them to succeed, of course, but by their own lights, not according to society’s common notions of success, or even mine.
• We are just generally competitive and want to be ahead of other kids? Nope. Already, there are plenty of kids who are ahead of H. But I’m not going to push him. He’ll find his level and I’m sure I’ll be proud of him regardless. I just want him to learn all he can, while still having a happy, reasonably relaxed childhood.
• We want to shelter our boys from the bad influences at public schools? Nope. H. actually attends “specials” twice a week (art, music, P.E., and computers).
• We can’t afford private school? Nope. We probably could, if we sacrificed. But no, there isn’t any private school in the area that would help our boys achieve the goals we have for them.
Here is the main reason, far and away the single most important reason, we do have for homeschooling:
• We want our children to get a solid liberal arts education, which means:
In literature, I want them to know, appreciate, and understand the classics, and to be morally improved for having wrestled with them. I want them to be able to write persuasively, creatively, and thoughtfully, with flawless grammar and spelling, so that they could enter any writing-oriented profession. They should also be able to speak well. In math, I want them not only to study math through calculus and statistics, but to understand it; they will also study logic and, probably, mathematical logic. I want them thoroughly familiar with history, both U.S. and the rest of the world; I want them to know about the world itself, so geography and foreign languages are a must; so in general, I want their understanding of human society to be filled with facts and nuance. I want them to be able not only to do scientific calculations with facility, but actually to understand scientific concepts—well enough to succeed as science majors, or at engineering, if they so desire. I want them to be able to become excellent scholars, and to be able to understand their own language and the roots and nature of western civilization, so we’ll probably study Latin and Greek for several years at least. They’ll learn philosophy with me, reading and digesting a half-dozen of the main classics, such as the Plato’s Republic, Descartes’ Meditations, Locke’s second treatise, and a few others. I want them familiar with music and other fine arts.
Of course, they’ll have plenty of opportunity to pursue interests of their own choosing. H. is really into programming and I’ll continue to support that.
Public schools can’t provide this sort of education, because:
I’ve looked for private and charter schools in the area that I thought might be able to support these goals; I couldn’t find any, except maybe St. Charles Prep for high school, and that’s Catholic…
_____________________
So many good people are trying to fix/change/improve the world. Education reform alone is spending quadrillions of dollars/hours/joules. We are busy people.
But what if we’re not being careful/watchful/mindful - and we are missing it.
What if, by not questioning the very essence of this 100 ish year old tradition/mandate, we currently call school, we are missing us.
What if the biggest culprit in all this is that we assume/accept compulsion/coercion. [for perhaps 90% of all people, giving up 7 hours a day, for 12 + years]
What if John Holt is spot on..
Children do not need to be made to learn to be better, told what to do or shown how. If they are given access to enough of the world, they will see clearly enough what things are truly important to themselves and to others, and they will make for themselves a better path into that world then anyone else could make for them.
The requirement that a child go to school for about 6 hours a day, 180 days a year, for about 10 years, whether or not he learns anything there, whether or not he already knows it or could learn it faster or better somewhere else, is such a gross violation of civil liberties that few adults would stand for it. But the child who resists is treated as a criminal.
What if we simply realize/acknowledge/question the compulsory piece of public education.
Perhaps compulsory ed/school is:
1\ holding up our most brilliant minds/resources in these spaces we call school (for 7 hrs a day)
[ie: imagine all the people connected to public ed today, this day/month/year, being freed up to find/do/be what matters to them. perhaps we would end up with 7 billion meredith/jack/et al's creating betterness.]
2\ perpetuating #1
[ie: imagine a turtle. perhaps we keep drugging/numbing/missing ourselves enough today, to perpetuate/keep-on drugging/numbing/missing ourselves tomorrow.]
_____________________
script following clip:
Moira Banning: [after throwing Peter's cell phone out the window] I’m sorry about your deal.
Peter Banning: You hated the deal.
Moira Banning: I hated the deal, but I’m sorry you feel so badly about it. Your children love you, they want to play with you. How long do you think that lasts? Soon Jack may not even want you to come to his games. We have a few special years with our children, when they’re the ones that want us around. After that you’re going to be running after them for a bit of attention. It’s so fast Peter. It’s a few years, and it’s over. And you are not being careful. And you are missing it.
(image obtained from Oxfamblogs)
There’s a lot of growing resistance to the Common Core State Standards (CCSS). And there are a lot of reasons for this opposition: invasion of privacy of information, shoddy confusing content, federal and corporate intrusion, questionable standards in terms of content or developmental appropriateness, costs/expenditures being funneled to private corporations, and its indelible and damaging attachment to high stakes testing. What’s also concerns me is the way in which CCSS is directly intertwined with other education reforms as a multi-pronged effort toward one goal: privatizing public education. Federal over- reach through this nationalized imposition of these reforms allows corporations to manage and control (and own) every facet of public education including what children learn, how they will learn it, and who serves as the beneficiaries of their efforts (spoiler alert here-it’s not children).
The good news: We will eventually erase this blight from the landscape of public education and it will become yet another stain in the pages of education reform history alongside the other reform debacles.
The challenge: We need to have a strong and clear vision for what will happen after CCSS and other reform policies are gone. Are you opposed to public education because of what it’s doing to your/our children, or are you opposed to what reformers doing to public education? I am a supporter of public education who is opposed to what is happening in them as well as what is happening to them. These are very central questions for all of us because, while the first is one which may affect only my children, or my community schools, the second demands I focus on the bigger question: What do we want for all of our children?
I believe that whatever our solution may be, it must include the opportunity for all children to attend sustainable, equitably funded, meaningful, engaging, and accessible public schools. I am not opposed to “choice”-it is the fundamental right of every parent to choose to homeschool their child or send them to private school (or charter) if they so choose-but the availability of those options should not come at the expense of our public education system.
Is the system broken? Yes…. And no.
Public schools are not failing (as Ravitch reminds us ) in the ways which reformers would have us believe. Rather, as a society we are failing public schools.
We squander the opportunity to embrace children and communities as sites of strength and (sometimes painful) beauty, by labelling them “failing.” For many children, public schools are the place where they feel safest, where they can grasp at opportunities otherwise unavailable in their homes or communities because of the generations of systematized institutionalized oppression, and state and federal laws which created the profoundly impoverished and racially segregated neighborhoods which we are forced to now confront and will continue to confront until we face full responsibility for their creation. For many children around this country, schools is their place to learn how to problem solve, to empathize, to connect, and to create. It may be the only place in their lives where such opportunities exist. And we must embrace public education as one facet of a set of solutions to address these concerns. Schools cannot single handedly remediate for the effects of poverty. They cannot be expected to resolve our social ills.
But without high quality public education as a foundation of our democracy, we are dead in the water.
A glance at the history of modern public schooling reveals how power has been a front and central agenda for determining who, what, and how schools shall educate “the masses” (the elite have always have private education as the option of choice). Public education has largely been manipulated by those in power, assigning to schools their purpose and meaning according to their own image. And these policies have mostly been intended for urban centers populated by people of color and immigrants. They’re constructed for people with little financial or professional means to fight back, while suburban schools remained safe havens protected from the ravages of these policies intended for the “Other.”
Going back to the early 1900’s, even though newly emancipated black people could now receive a public education, institutional powers ensured that their education was still “separate and unequal.” Following Brown v Board, state and federally sanctioned laws (and unchecked racism in general) including block busting and redlining ensured that even if schools could no longer segregate, housing and employment practices would make sure they remained separate … an unequal. In the height of the industrial era we introduced factory models of schooling to prepare children for a factory model way of thinking and producing. We’ve used testing to sort and track children like widgets on a conveyer belt. Throughout the 1900’s into today, dominant cultural influences often determine that public education would (will) be the place to “Americanize” immigrants, white-washing their history and their cultural identity. In the 1950’s politics demanded we push for more math and science to keep up the “Space Race” with the Russians. And we introduced PE during WWII so we could physically condition young men going to war. And now we live in the age of multinational corporate domination and efforts to privatize every public good or human right from education to clean drinking water. The agenda for what, and who, and how to teach within a public education system has been crafted by the interests of everyone it seems except the most important and fragile of all stakeholders: children.
Of course within each of these eras there have remained great schools, great teachers, and great learning experiences. Again, in spite of all of this, I believe it’s not the idea of public education that is failing. It’s not our children or our teachers who are failing. What is failing is our promise to our children and our commitment to this grand democratic experiment which requires an informed, compassionate, critically minded, and healthy citizenry to survive.
Any curriculum that would become successful at transformation schools and education must be grounded first and foremost in the needs of the students and the communities-not the needs of corporations. If schools became sites of engagement, meaning, purpose –of creativity and inspiration-for children…provided with the resources needed to embody those dreams and desires –it is then that the other woes corporate reformers claim to address, such as dropout rates, creating an employable workforce, and a democratically engaged citizenry would remediate themselves- Schools would be solutions defined by those who will live it, and not by those who would live off of the backs of those they pretend to “educate.”
What kinds of public schools can we imagine? What kinds of public education should we demand?
First of all, (as the teacher shouted down by Chris Christie, in her letter to him says) our investments in public school are supposed to be an investment in our children’s future, not using children as investments in the future for corporations.
I envision a commitment to our promise to children through a re-imaging of public education that is built upon three basic and interdependent democratic values: Freedom, Equity, and Possibility.
Freedom: It’s a word we love in United States. But what precisely do we mean? True freedom cannot exist without equity. How so? Freedom for me cannot come at the expense of providing for the right to those same freedoms for others. In the words of authors Tony and Slade Morrison in The Big Box “If freedom is handled only your way, it’s not my freedom or free.”
In Tucson AZ, the students of the Ethnic Studies program were exploring their own understandings of freedom, and engaging in learning experiences that brought forward their voices, their cultural identity, and new avenues of possibility. They were becoming more successful in school. But the state legislature banned the program because they found it offensive. So the state imposed it’s freedoms to destroy the freedoms of the children whose lives were most greatly affected by the existence of this program. Freedom means a life unfettered by barriers and impositions to one’s own becoming. It means openness to question, to explore, to find ways from “here to there” through not one pathway but through many. Freedom is power. Schools can create spaces for free thinking, for questioning, for challenging, so that no one ideology or form of indoctrination imposes itself, because through the freedom of critical thinking, whatever the reigning ideology is, students will have the power to examine it for themselves.
Children and teachers being forced to work under constant surveillance in the name of accountability is not freedom. Freedom means freedom for teachers to meet children where they are and take them where they want to go. Race to the Top and its various iterations are a gross overstep of the federal government and must be stopped. But freedom does not mean the total absence of legislation or oversight either. Government oversight was necessary to legislate desegregation, to promote funding for Title I schools, funding for Title 9 to ensure equality in men’s and women’s sports programs, and laws to protect the rights of children with special needs. While there may be those who bemoan any and all government as intrusion, especially in the name of equality, I wonder at how so few were concerned when these same governmental powers were robbing minority groups of their rights, and instituting legal forms of oppression. Jim Crow laws for example ensured that true freedom for all would not be manifest. If government can take the liberty of robbing people of their rights, perhaps it has the obligation to restore those rights as well. State and federal government’s jobs are to ensure the freedom of its citizens. If all public schools are to become sites for free thinking and learning, to be places of student empowerment, as determined by our newest stake holders- children themselves- we cannot rely on big business or the “kindness of strangers” to make it happen. We must demand that our government make good on its promise to us: to serve the people. And demand that such rights and freedoms are protected through legislation that ensures the access to these freedoms for all students.
Equity:
A one-size-fits-all “trudging all children toward a same nationalized curriculum of mediocrity” is a piss- poorest excuse for equity.
We equalize opportunity not by imposing a one-size-fit- all mediocre curriculum on all children and call that fair, or tell them to master the same test material and pretend this is the equivalent of equal opportunity. We equalize education by treating all children with equal amounts of respect, voice, vision, and freedom-by empowering them with all of the resources we have at our disposal and with the myriad of ways in which they can engage as the co-creators of meaning and knowledge. We create equity by alleviating implicit and explicit systems of oppression so that all children have the freedom to invest knowledge and meaning in their own lives as they so choose.
Why should we care about equality in education? Because concern for merely me and mine will no longer suffice. And not everybody has access to the privileges I am able to provide for my children, whether it be to choose to homeschool them, send them to a private school, or move to a neighborhood with a tax bracket that guarantees quality public schools. “Let them eat cake” cannot sustain the future of a democratic society. Other people’s children are the future citizens who will share the next generation of decision making with my children. What kind of world I envision for my children must include the kind of world I envision for others. Public education must remain a part of that vision.
Freedom cannot outweigh equity, nor can top down impositions in the name of equity (but service corporate profits) outweigh our freedoms. The balance is messy, complicated, and always as Maxine Greene says “unfinished.” But we never stop trying. In the balance between the two children can see schools as sites for possibility, not places to be stuck reciting “what is” but sites to explore what “can be” if we give them the chance.
Possibility:
Public schools are not places to indoctrinate but places to liberate-to imagine, to empower, to transform ourselves and the world. It astounds me that while people fighting for greater democracy in other countries risk their lives to create public education for all its citizens, we have used the system to abuse children, perpetuate less democracy, and now in our worst moment, sell it off to the highest bidder. In our own history, education has been used as both a tool of oppression and liberation: both an unparalleled opportunity and a right denied to those we wished to hold down. But it doesn’t have to be this way.
Public education is not boil to be burned off the body of our social foundation. It is not a burden. It is not legislation we must endure. It is a human right to be protected. It is a fundamental need of democracy that we must claim for its powerful potential. Let’s stop lending it out to those in power (whether it be governmental or corporate) whose agenda is and always has been, to manage the rest of us according to their own desires. If we miss this chance. If we sell pout. Or give up. We will lose something tremendous that we may never have the chance to reclaim.
But the possibility remains-it’s what we do with the framework that matters.
Schools are not failing for the reason reformers would have us believe. They are failing, because we are failing them. Are we willing to give up any hope of their value as part of this democratic experiment? Do we take our toys and go home? Do we abandon the project either in favor of privatization? Do we allow them to be sold at auction to corporations while those with the privilege of being able to seek asylum do so elsewhere? But just because I have the privilege of protecting my own children from the most profound ravages of reform doesn’t preclude me from fighting for other people’s children. And let’s face it, few of us have anywhere left to hide no matter where we go.
When did it stop being patriotic to support my own country by caring for and taking action on behalf my all my country’s children? There is something far greater at stake here and illustrating this will help other people who do not have children in public schools to join the fight.
Reformers are aren’t afraid that schools are failing. They’re afraid that schools will succeed in their ultimate purpose. Why else do they close programs that work? Why else rob children of the joy of learning? Why else deny the poorest children opportunities for a love of art, dance, PE, and a meaningful well-rounded curriculum? Why else increase rather than decrease class size? Why else starve communities and schools of their resources? Why? They’re afraid that one day we will wake up and discover precisely how powerful this right to a public education is in forging our own destinies.
And that we realize that we can take it from them. And we will.
DE BlackI'm doing research on school choice.
This came to my personal email. The writer requested anonymity:
“Hello, Ms. Ravitch,
“My name is —- ——-, and I am a big fan of your scholarship, specifically that around charter school efficacy.
“I spent my first 2 years in education as an ELA teacher at a KIPP school in New Orleans while also taking classes as part of a post-bac teacher certification program at one of the best universities in the Crescent City.
“I have read, and used as a source for a presentation on charter school efficacy, the original CREDO report, and I am in full agreement with your assertion that charter schools are, at best, at par with TPSs in terms of efficacy – not better. It is not only your research that has supported this assertion, and as you know, there is, in fact, a wide body of research that suggests the exact same thing. And, as a formally-educated educator, I am well versed in research study methodology, and always look at the methodology prior to considering the veracity of the findings of a study. Faulty methodology = faulty findings. And the methodology of the CREDO report is nothing short of air-tight as study methodology can be.
“I am writing because I would love to find out from you any resources that might be of assistance as I research charter schools.
“In my opinion, as someone who has worked at KIPP and another CMO (charter management organization) in New Orleans, I can say, based upon years of experience, I am deeply concerned about:
a) their lack of real accountability
b) the lack of compliance with Federal laws pertaining to education, including IDEA
c) the inhumane conditions (including excessive hours, no breaks, etc) to which teachers, at many charters, are subjected
d) a lack of real-world experience, and formal education education (i.e. graduate work, or even undergraduate work, and practicum hours, through a nationally accredited school of education) had by the majority of the teachers, and administrators, at many charter schools
“For years, I endured the inhumane working conditions, and turned a blind eye to ridiculous violations and inefficiencies, but I am finished being a follower.
“As an African-American who completed my elementary and secondary educational work in an affluent public school district, I can say with certainty that the students at each and every charter school with which I am familiar in the city of New Orleans, and I am familiar with many schools within many CMOs, these schools are not at all preparing their students for success in college. Most of the schools do not include computer education as part of their curriculum, special education students frequently do not receive the services they are, by law, entitled to, teachers are under-assigning homework, many of the instructors are not at all masters of the content areas, etc. etc.
“And then there is the KIPP/TFA connection. KIPP and Teach for America are literally in bed with each other, due to the fact that KIPP Foundation CEO, Richard Barth, and Wendy Kopp, CEO and Co-Founder of Teach for America, are married with children. Boy, I see a serious issue with the number of folks who are KIPP employees who are TFA Corps members or alumni, especially given this fact. Were some similar arrangement to be the case in the private sector, it would most definitely be seen as a conflict of interest. Were either of them politicians and there was a similar arrangement, there would be major ethical issues. And the same is the case with the education of the children of America, especially the black and brown, and impoverished, of whatever color.
“I know you are incredibly busy, but I would love, even if I cannot speak directly to you, to be put into contact with someone with your organization who can point me in the proper direction of some resources. The general public is completely ill-informed, and/or ignorant, when it comes to what is really going on in terms of educational reform, and it is, in my mind, an ethical issue, and a matter of national security, that our children are being mis-educated, their parents lied to. Not to mention all of the wonderful teachers who have been demonized, laid off, and stripped of their financial independence as a result of the latest, greatest wave of educational reform.
“Humbly yours,
—- ——-
“former charter school teacher, life-long educator & activist”
"It's really about the Call of Duty Franchise and not specifically tying it to a game per say," said Bisma Ansari, Mega Brands vice president of marketing. "The idea is that it is the biggest franchise in the world so we wanted to take the fan base of the franchise itself and convert what they love into toys."
Currently there are ten sets available for the Call of Duty collector series with prices ranging from $10 to $60. Mega Brands announced two more sets for the the collection at New York Comic Con this week, both inspired by the zombie mode found in some Call of Duty games. One of those sets is based on the farm in Black Ops 2's Tanzit zombie map and the other is a zombie horde figure pack. The zombie packs are hitting in December.
...