This teacher actually has three different classes -- French, Dance, and English. I won't use the full "A Day in the Life" format, but I will say something about the three classes. Notice that Dance is the only class which isn't primarily freshmen.
The French students are learning how to count numbers 70 and above. Anyone who's taken French in high school -- including yours truly -- knows how weird French numbers get in this range. Here are some multiples of ten in the language:
- 10: dix
- 20: vingt
- 30: trente
- 40: quarante
- 50: cinquante
- 60: soixante
- 70: soixante-dix
- 80: quatre-vingts
- 90: quatre-vingt-dix
- 100: cent
Thus apparently, seventy is "sixty-ten," eighty is "fourscore," and ninety is "fourscore-ten." Here's a link to a theory on why the French count like this:
The theory is that it's the remnant of a pre-Roman numbering system based on 20 (vigesimal).
I decide that this is a great time to sing "Nine, Nine, Nine" for the second day in a row, except that this time I'd sing part of it in French. What's great is that I get to use four multiples of nine. (By the way, "nine" itself is translated as neuf.)
1st Verse:
Deux fois neuf font dix-huit, huit et un font neuf.
Trois fois neuf font vingt-sept, sept et deux font neuf.
Quatre fois neuf font trente-six, six et trois font neuf.
Cinq fois neuf font quarante-cinq, cinq et quatre font neuf.
Six fois neuf font cinquante-quatre, cinq et quatre font neuf.
Sept fois neuf font soixante-trois, six et trois font neuf.
Huit fois neuf font soixante-douze, sept et deux font neuf.
Neuf fois neuf font quatre-vingt-un, huit et un font neuf.
2nd Verse:
Dix fois neuf font quatre-vingt-dix, je depose le zero signe.
Onze fois neuf font quatre-vingt-dix-neuf, je rime avec un autre ligne.
Neuf et neuf font dix-huit, et huit et un font neuf.
Neuf fois tous les numeros qu'on trouve,
La somme est toujours neuf!
I did take some liberties in the second verse here. The words "sign" and "line" rhyme in both English and French (signe and ligne), but "the zero sign" (from the song in English) sounds better in French as "le signe zero" rather than "le zero signe." But I retain "le zero signe" in order to keep the rhyme at the end of the line.
In the English classes, the students have a "quiz" on parts of speech (nouns, verbs, and so on). This assessment is more like a pretest or diagnostic exam, yet it worries the students anyway. Thus it's a great time for me to sing my own song about a similar type of test -- the Benchmark Test song. I use this song to whet the students' appetites for music, then return to "Nine, Nine, Nine" (in English only) after they finish the pretests.
(Hmm, in yesterday's post I mentioned giving a grammar lesson as a form of reverse psychology in order to get the students to take out their reading books. It's too bad that I couldn't just use today's grammar Benchmark Test and save it for a future class similar to yesterday's -- but today's tests are numbered and counted, so I can't remove a copy from the classroom.)
Meanwhile, the Dance class is watching a documentary called First Position. It's all about a New York ballet competition for hundreds of dancers -- many the same age as our students.
It's interesting to note that many countries are represented in the competition -- and many of the ballerinas are male. In fact, the titular dance move "first position" is demonstrated by a Colombian youth who is introducing ballet to his younger brother. Despite the existence of male ballerinas, the students in my actual class are 100% female.
In the video, it's mentioned that at the time of this competition, many companies weren't hiring dancers, likely due to the Great Recession. Notice that this is actually an ROP class (job-training classes here in California), and so I assume that the goal of each girl in this class is to become a professional ballerina. With the Great Recession now over, I hope these girls will have a brighter future in their desired field.
As I watched this video, it was nice to see the actual smiling faces of the ballerinas, as opposed to the dancers in that short film 2081 whose faces were covered. And of course, now I segue to that discussion of 2081 that I was saving for my next traditionalists' post -- today's traditionalists' post.
Because it's also a dystopian story whose title mentions a single year, Kurt Vonnegut's 2081 definitely reminds me of George Orwell's 1984. Of course, Orwell, writing in the 1940's feared that the world was heading towards the scenario described in his book.
On one hand, Orwell's predictions were false in that the actual 1980's were nothing like his novel. On the other, many developments since the eighties have been compared to Orwell's novel. For example, the Patriot Act of 2001 has been described as Orwellian, as has censorship in China (consider the current Hong Kong protests). Some technological developments after the 1980's have also been described as making the world seem more like that of Orwell's book.
Vonnegut's 2081 is less well-known than Orwell's 1984, which is why we don't have an adjective "Vonnegutian" akin to "Orwellian." But many traditionalists fear that we're heading towards a world of forced equality -- especially with regards to education. They feel that many decisions made by current educational leaders can put us on a 62-year slippery slope to Vonnegut's dystopian world.
For example, we consider the situation with New York magnet schools. Actually, there are two links at the Joanne Jacobs website discussing this situation:
https://www.joannejacobs.com/2019/09/seeking-equity-without-excellence/
For example, we consider the situation with New York magnet schools. Actually, there are two links at the Joanne Jacobs website discussing this situation:
https://www.joannejacobs.com/2019/09/seeking-equity-without-excellence/
Just look at those article titles. "Equity Without Excellence" -- this sounds exactly like the Vonnegut's world of 2081. The position of "Handicapper-General" goes to the New York mayor and the admins who wish to eliminate the tests and gifted programs.
Last year, I wrote the following in my Day 30 traditionalists' post:
Suppose we divided everyone into two groups -- say those with an odd number of letters in their full name and those with an even number of letters. We'd be surprised if most of the even-numbered people found themselves on the lowest track.
...or in the case of New York, if all the people with an even number of letters in their names qualified for the magnets and everyone with an odd number of letters didn't. If we were to count the number of letters in the names of the students in the magnets and the students in other schools, we'd almost certainly find no correlation between parity of letters in the name and admission to the magnets. In other words, "having an even numbers of letters in the name" and "being admitted to the magnet" are independent events.
On the other hand, here's something that does correlate with magnet admission -- race. Yes, this is a traditionalist post about tracking, and so race inevitably rears its head again, as we can see in the title of the second Jacobs article above. Again, what's annoying is not the fact that some students are far ahead, pass the tests, and enter the magnets while others are well behind, fail the tests, and enter regular schools. What's annoying is the correlation between race and entry into the schools.
If we consider the set of students with an even number of letters in their names, we'd find some students who test well enough to get into the schools and others who don't. Likewise, if we consider the set of students with an odd number of letters, the distribution will be the same. On the other hand, the distribution of students getting into magnet and non-magnet programs varies if the groups of students we consider are racial groups.
We want a system where students aren't divided into tracks based on race. But the traditionalists fear that this will lead us on a slippery slope to 2081 (despite race not being mentioned in the short film).
I don't want to live in the dystopian world of 2081. On the other hand, I don't want to live in the world of 1881 either -- after Reconstruction failed, and the Gilded Age of Jim Crow began, with opportunities being highly race-dependent. There must be some sort of middle ground between the worlds of 1881 and 2081.
A quote by "Jean" in one of the threads is illuminating:
Jean @ the Howling Frog:
When will people figure out that not teaching the skills directly hurts the marginalized kids they claim to want to help?
Here the "people" Jean mentions are "anti-traditionalists" or "tracking opponents," while the "marginalized kids" are of races that don't pass the tests (for example, blacks). Thus this is the common traditionalist claim that placing blacks on the lower track actually helps blacks (since it's obvious that placing whites/Asians on the higher track helps them). And so black parents should actually be cheering when their children are placed on the lower track (since doing so "helps" them), rather than complaining that the system is against them.
Here's an idea. Consider opening a school where tracking is completely based on test scores, one where if all whites wind up on the high track and all blacks on the low track, then so be it -- let the chips fall where they may. But there's one condition -- if even one black parent (not the mayor, not the principal, but an actual parent of a student at the school) complains that their child is being tracked unfairly due to their race, then the tracks immediately disappear and the school reverts to being a non-tracked school.
Thus the challenge for the traditionalists is to create a complaint-free tracking system that challenges the top students and teaches meaningful lessons to the lower students. (Once again, only complaints from parents count against the tracking.) I genuinely want to see what such a school would look like, since such a system would lead to equity and excellence.
Last year, I wrote the following in my Day 30 traditionalists' post:
Suppose we divided everyone into two groups -- say those with an odd number of letters in their full name and those with an even number of letters. We'd be surprised if most of the even-numbered people found themselves on the lowest track.
...or in the case of New York, if all the people with an even number of letters in their names qualified for the magnets and everyone with an odd number of letters didn't. If we were to count the number of letters in the names of the students in the magnets and the students in other schools, we'd almost certainly find no correlation between parity of letters in the name and admission to the magnets. In other words, "having an even numbers of letters in the name" and "being admitted to the magnet" are independent events.
On the other hand, here's something that does correlate with magnet admission -- race. Yes, this is a traditionalist post about tracking, and so race inevitably rears its head again, as we can see in the title of the second Jacobs article above. Again, what's annoying is not the fact that some students are far ahead, pass the tests, and enter the magnets while others are well behind, fail the tests, and enter regular schools. What's annoying is the correlation between race and entry into the schools.
If we consider the set of students with an even number of letters in their names, we'd find some students who test well enough to get into the schools and others who don't. Likewise, if we consider the set of students with an odd number of letters, the distribution will be the same. On the other hand, the distribution of students getting into magnet and non-magnet programs varies if the groups of students we consider are racial groups.
We want a system where students aren't divided into tracks based on race. But the traditionalists fear that this will lead us on a slippery slope to 2081 (despite race not being mentioned in the short film).
I don't want to live in the dystopian world of 2081. On the other hand, I don't want to live in the world of 1881 either -- after Reconstruction failed, and the Gilded Age of Jim Crow began, with opportunities being highly race-dependent. There must be some sort of middle ground between the worlds of 1881 and 2081.
A quote by "Jean" in one of the threads is illuminating:
Jean @ the Howling Frog:
When will people figure out that not teaching the skills directly hurts the marginalized kids they claim to want to help?
Here the "people" Jean mentions are "anti-traditionalists" or "tracking opponents," while the "marginalized kids" are of races that don't pass the tests (for example, blacks). Thus this is the common traditionalist claim that placing blacks on the lower track actually helps blacks (since it's obvious that placing whites/Asians on the higher track helps them). And so black parents should actually be cheering when their children are placed on the lower track (since doing so "helps" them), rather than complaining that the system is against them.
Here's an idea. Consider opening a school where tracking is completely based on test scores, one where if all whites wind up on the high track and all blacks on the low track, then so be it -- let the chips fall where they may. But there's one condition -- if even one black parent (not the mayor, not the principal, but an actual parent of a student at the school) complains that their child is being tracked unfairly due to their race, then the tracks immediately disappear and the school reverts to being a non-tracked school.
Thus the challenge for the traditionalists is to create a complaint-free tracking system that challenges the top students and teaches meaningful lessons to the lower students. (Once again, only complaints from parents count against the tracking.) I genuinely want to see what such a school would look like, since such a system would lead to equity and excellence.
Here is the Chapter 2 Test:
No comments:
Post a Comment