Page 139 of 396
1 137 138 139 140 141 396

Eliminan directrices antidiscriminación en la educación de EEUU

América del Norte/EEUU/panorama.com.ve

La administración del presidente estadounidense Donald Trump avanzó el martes en la eliminación de directrices de la era Obama que alentaban a las escuelas a tomar en cuenta la raza y etnia de sus aspirantes para promover la diversidad.

La medida sugiere un respaldo del gobierno federal a las escuelas para adoptar procesos de admisión sin considerar la raza, y vuelve a poner en primer plano el tema controversial de la llamada acción positiva.

La Corte Suprema ha apoyado repetidamente -aunque con una visión cada vez más limitada- la práctica de considerar la raza un factor para asegurar que las minorías sean integradas a la élite de instituciones educativas de Estados Unidos.

Pero el cambio en la política de parte del gobierno de Trump y el retiro a fin de mes del magistrado de la Corte Suprema Anthony Kennedy, quien movía el fiel de la balanza en las votaciones -con un reemplazo probablemente mucho más conservador- son una señal de problemas para la acción positiva.

«Cuando dicten normativas, las agencias federales deben cumplir con los principios constitucionales y seguir las reglas fijadas por el Congreso y el presidente», dijo en un comunicado el Fiscal General Jeff Sessions, enumerando las 24 directrices eliminadas, que habían sido implementadas en su mayoría durante la presidencia de Barack Obama.

Esas normas fueron anuladas porque eran «innecesarias, anticuadas, inconsistentes con la ley existente», explicó el Departamento de Justicia en el texto.

«Las directrices no hacen la ley pero clarifican y facilitan la implementación de la ley», reaccionó Faiz Shakir, director de la política nacional en la poderosa asociación de defensa de los derechos cívicos ACLU.

«Este es un nuevo ataque de Sessiones y del presidente Trump contra las personas de color», denunció Shakir.

Fuente: https://www.panorama.com.ve/mundo/Eliminan-directrices-antidiscriminacion-en-la-educacion-de-EEUU-20180703-0131.html

Comparte este contenido:

Revierten políticas sobre diversidad racial en escuelas de EE.UU.

América del Norte/Estados Unidos/05 Julio 2018/Fuente: Prensa Latina

 La administración del presidente estadounidense, Donald Trump, rescindió hoy políticas del ejecutivo previo que alentaban a las escuelas a tomar en cuenta la raza de un estudiante para promover la diversidad en los ingresos.
Tal medida dejará a los centros de estudio con la libertad de dejar el tema racial fuera de los mecanismos de admisión.

Los departamentos de Justicia y Educación anunciaron este martes que derogaron varias cartas y memorandos que aconsejaban a las escuelas sobre cómo podrían considerar legalmente la raza en los ingresos y otras decisiones.

En administraciones anteriores las agencias a menudo trataban de imponer nuevas reglas a sin ningún aviso público o periodo de comentarios, simplemente enviando una carta o publicando un documento de orientación en un sitio web, eso está mal, expresó al hacer el anuncio el fiscal general del país, Jeff Sessions.

Los memorandos de admisión se encontraban entre 24 documentos de política revocados por el Departamento de Justicia por ser ‘innecesarios, desactualizados, inconsistentes con las leyes existentes, o de otro modo impropios’, según apuntó el titular de la agencia.

Esta nueva postura se aparta dramáticamente de la asumida por la administración de Barack Obama (2009-2017), que en un documento de política de 2011 dijo que los tribunales habían reconocido el ‘interés apremiante’ de las escuelas para garantizar poblaciones racialmente diversas.

La guía establecía que si bien la raza no debería ser el factor principal en una decisión sobre el ingreso, las escuelas podrían considerarla legalmente con el interés de lograr la diversidad.

De acuerdo con la televisora ABC News, el anuncio de la administración Trump está más en línea con la política de la época de George W. Bush (2001-2009) que desalentó la acción afirmativa y en su lugar alentó el uso de alternativas neutrales, como planes porcentuales y programas de diversidad económica.

El presidente de la Asociación Nacional para el Progreso de las Personas de Color, Derrick Johnson, manifestó que con este paso Trump está socavando los beneficios de la diversidad en las escuelas y acelerando la división socioeconómica.

En 2016, la Corte Suprema confirmó el uso de las admisiones por raza en los colegios, y decidió que tales políticas no necesariamente violaban la Cláusula de Igual Protección de la Constitución, en un fallo dividido en el cual el juez Anthony Kennedy emitió el voto decisivo.

Con el anuncio del magistrado de que se retirará a partir del 31 de julio, y la posibilidad que tiene Trump de nombrar a un nuevo integrante del tribunal, analistas temen que podría haber impacto en el futuro de la acción afirmativa.

Fuente: http://www.prensa-latina.cu/index.php?o=rn&id=192390&SEO=revierten-politicas-sobre-diversidad-racial-en-escuelas-de-ee.uu.
Comparte este contenido:

Las matemáticas ayudan a comprender la inteligencia colectiva

Por: Yaiza Martínez

Una nueva herramienta revela el efecto de los sesgos individuales y de la información social en la “sabiduría de los grupos”

La inteligencia colectiva funciona y afecta a nuestra vida y comportamientos a muchos niveles, pero está condicionada por factores como el sesgo individual y la información social, según una nueva herramienta matemática creada por investigadores norteamericanos. El hallazgo puede ayudar a entender mejor los patrones que subyacen a la “sabiduría de las multitudes”.

En el año 1907, el estadista Sir Francis Galton, de 85 años, acudió a una Feria de Ganado en Plymouth, al sudeste de Inglaterra. En ella se celebraba un concurso que consistía en adivinar cuánto pesaba un buey. Unas 800 personas habían participado, y a Galton se le ocurrió ir apuntando las apuestas de todas ellas. Cuando calculó la media, el resultado fue sorprendentemente cercano a la realidad: era de 1.197 libras. El peso real del buey, de 1.198 libras.

Por tanto, aunque las conjeturas individuales variaban enormemente, la media total resultó ser sorprendentemente precisa. Cuando Galton publicó sus resultados, introdujo en la sociedad la teoría de la inteligencia colectiva, también conocida como «sabiduría de los grupos».

Desde entonces, se ha seguido profundizando en este concepto. Por ejemplo, en 2004 lo trató el periodista norteamericano James Surowiecki en un libro (Cien mejor que uno), en el que se presentaban numerosos casos estudiados en distintos campos del saber, principalmente economía y psicología, que demostraban que las decisiones colectivas son a menudo mejores que las que podrían haber sido tomadas por un solo individuo.

El efecto de la información social 

¿Qué condiciona esta inteligencia colectiva? Para tratar de averiguar este punto, recientemente, un investigador de la Universidad de Harvard llamado, Albert Kao y su colaborador del Santa Fe Institute(EEUU), Andrew Berdhal, han examinado los efectos en el resultado final de las estimaciones comunes de factores como el sesgo individual o el intercambio de información con otros. Lo han hecho con una novedosa herramienta matemática.

En la investigación participaron más de 800 voluntarios a los que se les pidió que adivinaran el número de chicles que había en un frasco. Esta cantidad variaba en diversos órdenes de magnitud de 54 a más de 27.000, informa el Santa Fe Institute en un comunicado. Además, a los participantes se les ofrecieron detalles falsos sobre las suposiciones de otras personas, y se les permitió cambiar su estimación a la luz de esa información.

Kao y Berdhal descubrieron así varias cosas interesantes. En primer lugar, que aunque las estimaciones variaban considerablemente, eran muy predecibles: la gente tendía a señalar números más pequeños que el valor real y a asignar una cantidad mayor a tarros más grandes.

En segundo lugar, se constató que la información social juega un papel en la sabiduría colectiva. Sobre todo, influían en las estimaciones de los participantes aquellas que eran más altas que las propias. Conjeturas inferiores en cantidad a las de cada individuo eran desechadas con mayor frecuencia.

Según los investigadores, sus hallazgos ayudan a entender mejor ciertos patrones que subyacen a la sabiduría de las multitudes.

Las mujeres como garantía 

Otro aspecto de la inteligencia colectiva que ha sido analizado estos últimos años es el de su funcionamiento en el trabajo en equipo.En 2010, un estudio del Instituto Tecnológico de Massachussets (MIT) de Estados Unidos, demostró que el rendimiento de la inteligencia colectiva en un grupo de trabajo depende de la “sensibilidad social” de los miembros del equipo, entendida como tal la capacidad de ser flexibles en la asignación de ocupaciones y de hacer partícipes a todos los miembros en la resolución de desafíos.

En la investigación se reveló, por otra parte, que la presencia de mujeres en los grupos resulta fundamental para que se dé un rendimiento colectivo óptimo: la tendencia a cooperar eficientemente está relacionada con el número de mujeres presentes en cada equipo de trabajo, porque estas normalmente muestran una mayor sensibilidad social.

En este este estudio, la inteligencia colectiva fue calculada con medidas normalmente aplicadas a la inteligencia individual mensurable.  Asimismo, los científicos equiparon a los participantes con dispositivos electrónicos portátiles que registraron los patrones de conversación de los grupos.

El análisis de todos los datos reveló que el grado de inteligencia colectiva de los equipos de trabajo supuso entre un 30 y un 40% de diferencia en la capacidad de rendimiento de éstos.

Jugadores de fútbol versus moléculas

Otro aspecto sorprendente que se ha analizado de la inteligencia colectiva es su espontaneidad en el caso de los movimientos coordinados de  grupos humanos para un fin común, como ganar un partido de fútbol.  Esta cuestión la han estudiado hace poco en la Universidad de Connecticut (UCONN, EEUU).

Más concretamente, los científicos analizaron en términos de la física la coordinación espontánea e inteligente de movimientos de los jugadores de fútbol de un equipo. Desde esta perspectiva, esta inteligencia colectiva responde a la necesidad de promover una reducción del gasto de energía del sistema (en este caso, el equipo), esto es, para aprovechar al máximo el rendimiento.

Curiosamente, esta propensión a la reducción de energía se da en sistemas no vivos (¿serán inteligentes?) Por ejemplo, cuando pequeñas moléculas de una sustancia llamada benzoquinona flotan en la superficie de un charco de agua tienden a agruparse, incluso si inicialmente se han esparcido de manera aleatoria por su superficie.  Las moléculas funcionan de este modo por la misma razón que los futbolistas en el campo: para reducir el gasto energético.

Tipos y estudio

Este último estudio estaría enmarcado en la inteligencia colectiva de coordinación del comportamiento. En el libro de James Surowiecki antes mencionado, se señalaba que este tipo de sabiduría común puede afectar –más allá del fútbol- a otros aspectos de nuestra vida, como el tráfico o el flujo de asistencia a restaurantes populares.

La investigación sobre el trabajo en equipo, entraría en el tipo de inteligencia colectiva “de cooperación”, también definida por Surowiecki, que consiste en la formación de redes sociales para fines específicos.

Pero en realidad los campos y niveles desde los que se puede analizar y tipificar la inteligencia colectiva son muchos. Desde la sociología hasta las ciencias de la computación, y desde las sociedades humanas hasta las bacterias, las plantas o los insectos (no debemos olvidar que los trabajos del entomólogo William Morton Wheeler, nacido en 1865, estarían entre las bases del concepto, pues en ellos se constató cómo los individuos independientes pueden llegar a funcionar casi como un solo organismo).

En resumidas cuentas, parece que la inteligencia humana individual sí marca una diferencia con respecto a los individuos de otras especies, pero que nuestra inteligencia colectiva responde a patrones compartidos con otros organismos, e incluso con sistemas no vivos, como las moléculas.  De nuevo la ciencia nos da una lección de humildad.

Referencia bibliográfica:

Albert B. Kao, Andrew M. Berdahl, Andrew T. Hartnett, Matthew J. Lutz, Joseph B. Bak-Coleman, Christos C. Ioannou, Xingli Giam, Iain D. Couzin. Counteracting estimation bias and social influence to improve the wisdom of crowdsJournal of the Royal Society Interface (2018). DOI: 10.1098/rsif.2018.0130.
Fuente: https://www.tendencias21.net/Las-matematicas-ayudan-a-comprender-la-inteligencia-colectiva_a44535.html
Comparte este contenido:

The case for restricting hate speech

For: Laura Beth Nielse

As a sociologist and legal scholar, I struggle to explain the boundaries of free speech to undergraduates. Despite the 1st Amendment—I tell my students—local, state, and federal laws limit all kinds of speech. We regulate advertising, obscenity, slander, libel, and inciting lawless action to name just a few. My students nod along until we get to racist and sexist speech. Some can’t grasp why, if we restrict so many forms of speech, we don’t also restrict hate speech. Why, for example, did the Supreme Court on Monday rule that the trademark office cannot reject “disparaging” applications—like a request from an Oregon band to trademark “the Slants” as in Asian “slant eyes.”

The typical answer is that judges must balance benefits and harms. If judges are asked to compare the harm of restricting speech – a cherished core constitutional value – to the harm of hurt feelings, judges will rightly choose to protect free expression. But perhaps it’s nonsense to characterize the nature of the harm as nothing more than an emotional scratch; that’s a reflection of the deep inequalities in our society, and one that demonstrates a profound misunderstanding of how hate speech affects its targets.

Legally, we tell members of traditionally disadvantaged groups that they must live with hate speech except under very limited circumstances. The KKK can parade down Main Street. People can’t falsely yell fire in a theater but can yell the N-word at a person of color. College women are told that a crowd of frat boys chanting “no means yes and yes means anal” is something they must tolerate in the name of (someone else’s) freedom.

Consider also the protections afforded to soldiers’ families in the case of Westboro Baptist anti-gay demonstrations. When the Supreme Court in 2011 upheld that church’s right to stage offensive protetsts at veterans’ funerals, Congress passed the Honoring America’s Veterans’ Act, which prohibits any protests 300 to 500 feet around such funerals. (The statute made no mention of protecting LGBTQ funeral attendees from hate speech, just soldiers’ families).

So soldiers’ families, shoppers and workers are protected from troubling speech. People of color, women walking down public streets or just living in their dorm on a college campus are not. The only way to justify this disparity is to argue that commuters asked for money on the way to work experience a tangible harm, while women catcalled and worse on the way to work do not — as if being the target of a request for change is worse than being racially disparaged by a stranger.

In fact, empirical data suggest that frequent verbal harassment can lead to various negative consequences. Racist hate speech has been linked to cigarette smoking, high blood pressure, anxiety, depression and post-traumatic stress disorder, and requires complex coping strategies. Exposure to racial slurs also diminishes academic performance. Women subjected to sexualized speech may develop a phenomenon of “self-objectification,” which is associated with eating disorders.

These negative physical and mental health outcomes — which embody the historical roots of race and gender oppression — mean that hate speech is not “just speech.” Hate speech is doing something. It results in tangible harms that are serious in and of themselves and that collectively amount to the harm of subordination. The harm of perpetuating discrimination. The harm of creating inequality.

Many readers will find this line of thinking repellent. They will insist that protecting hate speech is consistent with and even central to our founding principles. They will argue that regulating hate speech would amount to a serious break from our tradition. They will trivialize the harms that social science research undeniably associates with being the target of hate speech, and call people seeking recognition of these affronts “snowflakes.”

But these free-speech absolutists must at least acknowledge two facts. First, the right to speak already is far from absolute. Second, they are asking disadvantaged members of our society to shoulder a heavy burden with serious consequences. Because we are “free” to be hateful, members of traditionally marginalized groups suffer.

Fuente: http://www.hoylosangeles.com/g00/latimesespanol/hoyla-el-argumento-para-restringir-el-discurso-de-odio-20170621-story.html?i10c.referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.google.co.ve%2F

 

Comparte este contenido:

EEUU: Trump ‘to scrap’ college racial bias policy

By: bbc.com/04-07-2018

The Trump administration is set to roll back the Obama-era policies promoting diversity in universities, known as affirmative action, US media report.

US Attorney General Jeff Sessions revoked 24 guidance documents on Tuesday, many involving race in schools and affirmative action recommendations.

It comes as Harvard University faces a discrimination lawsuit alleging it limits admissions for Asian-Americans.

In 2016, the US Supreme Court had ruled in favour of affirmative action.

Supreme Court Justice Anthony Kennedy, who wrote the 2016 opinion, announced his retirement from the top US court last month.

His departure gives President Donald Trump a chance to appoint a justice who more closely matches the administration’s views on taking race into account in college admissions.

The Trump administration is expected to tell schools not to consider race in the admissions process, discontinuing the policy former President Barack Obama adopted to promote more diversity at colleges and high schools.

What does rescinding the policy mean?

Academic affirmative action – known as positive action in the UK- which involves favouring minorities during the admissions process in order to promote campus diversity, has long proved controversial in the US.

The lawsuit against Harvard currently filed by the Students for Fair Admissions alleges that the college holds Asian-American applicants to an unfairly high admissions standard.

The Justice Department is also currently investigating Harvard over racial discrimination allegations.

In April, it called for the public disclosure of the Ivy League college’s admissions practices.

Harvard argues it «does not discriminate against applicants from any group, including Asian-Americans».

Asian-Americans currently make up 22.2% of students admitted to Harvard,according to the university website.

Jeff Sessions
Image copyrightREUTERS
Image captionThe US attorney general revoked several affirmative action guidances

Under President Barack Obama, the Departments of Justice and Education issued guidelines for universities to promote diversity on campuses.

«Learning environments comprised of students from diverse backgrounds provide an enhanced educational experience for individual students,» the guidance reads.

«By choosing to create this kind of rich academic environment, educational institutions help students sharpen their critical thinking and analytical skills.»

The guidance features ways to encourage diversity, including granting admission preferences to students from certain schools based on demographics and considering a student’s race «among other factors in its admissions procedures».

The Obama-era policy replaced the Bush-era view that discouraged affirmative action.

The Bush-era guidance had been removed from the government website during the Obama administration, but it has since reappeared.

Education Secretary Betsy DeVos told the Associated Press she would not debate or discuss the matter of race and college admissions.

«I think this has been a question before the courts and the courts have opined,» Ms DeVos said.

But according to a Pew Research Center study, 71% of Americans surveyed in October 2017 have a positive view of affirmative action.

Gate at Harvard UniversityImage copyrightREUTERS
Image captionHarvard University has one of the lowest admissions rates, accepting less than 6% of applicants

What is affirmative action in US colleges?

Affirmative action, or the idea that disadvantaged groups should receive preferential treatment, first appeared in President John F Kennedy’s 1961 executive order on federal contractor hiring.

It took shape during the height of the civil rights movement, when President Lyndon Johnson signed a similar executive order in 1965 requiring government contractors to take steps to hire more minorities.

Colleges and universities began using those same guidelines in their admissions process, but affirmative action soon prompted intense debate in the decades following, with several cases appearing before the US Supreme Court.

The high court has outlawed using racial quotas, but has allowed colleges and universities to continue considering race in admitting students.

Critics rail against it as «reverse discrimination», but proponents contend it is necessary to ensure diversity in education and employment.

*Fuente: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-44703874

Comparte este contenido:

United States: ‘Vilified too long’: Teachers’ unions fight back after supreme court ruling

North America/United States/03.07.18/Source: www.theguardian.com.

In Pennsylvania, organizers go door-to-door to make a personal case for educators as a court decision threatens union funding

Gunshots ring out from the nearby hunting range across the railroad tracks in Westmoreland City, Pennsylvania, but Jason Davis is not easily deterred.

“You never know what’s going to happen when you knock on someone’s door,” says Davis as we get out of his car to start walking the hills of this blue-collar, Trump-supporting community in the foothills of the mountains of south-western Pennsylvania.

Davis is going door-to-door to rally support for a teacher’s union after a historic supreme court decision – Janus vs AFSCME – that threatens its funding and that of all other US public sector unions.

Following last Wednesday’s ruling, non-union members will no longer have to pay “fair share” fees to be represented by unions in collective bargaining negotiations. The move could cost unions millions and lead some union members to make the decision to stop paying their dues.

For Davis, this is vital work. Over the past 15 years, the Republican-leaning school district where Davis teaches has seen the number of teachers reduced through attrition and layoffs from 320 to 270 today. He sees unions as the best way to fight back against those cuts.

While anti-union organizations have launched a broad effort to get public sector union members to stop paying dues, unions like Davis’s are going into high gear to not only retain their members, but to build on public support for teachers felt in the wake of this year’s teachers’ strikes.

McKinney had played in the band, which is nationally ranked. But after he graduated in 2012, the then governor, Republican Tom Corbett, cut more than $1bn from the state’s education funds, and the school started instituting fees for kids who wanted to play. Now, Norwin high school parents like Davis pay $620 a year for each of their kids to play in the band.

“The band was so important to me. It taught me discipline,” says McKinney as we stand on the front porch of his parent’s house.

Davis and McKinney begin to discuss how statewide funding cuts have devastated education and how the current Democratic governor, Tom Wolf, is fighting the narrowly Republican-controlled Pennsylvania state legislature to increase funding. Davis quickly wins over McKinney as a convert to the teachers’ union cause.

“Funding education is important. We gotta support our teachers,” says McKinney as we leave his doorstep.

Davis, who canvasses the area regularly, says that conversations force people who never think about education funding to consider why unionized teachers like himself are seeking more funding.

“I just reminded him of the greatest moments of his life,” says Davis. “Now, he is going to have a conversation with his parents about what we talked about and they are probably going to talk to two or three people, which means that I helped facilitate not one conversation, but multiple conversations about education.”

A few doors down, we encounter a woman wearing a shirt depicting Joe Paterno, the controversial hero and legendary Penn State football coach. She appears a little nervous to talk to Davis. She starts to complain about how local property taxes are too high and at the same time, the school seems to be letting staff go and the quality of teaching is going down.

Davis explains to her that local property taxes have gone up as state funding of education has gone down. Davis talks for a few brief minutes, but as the reception seems less warm than at the previous home, he doesn’t stick around.

Even though the conversation isn’t quite what Davis expected, he still sees it as a victory in the fight to humanize teachers’ unions.

“For too long, we have been vilified and the only way to stop that is to put a human face on it,” says Davis. “If we want to exist, we have to sell ourselves as unions about why are we valuable. This is intensive, but it does make a difference and it will help.”

Davis and his colleagues have their work cut out for them. The Janus case was backed by some of the richest rightwing activists in the US, including the Koch brothers. As the Guardian revealed earlier this year, those groups have been planning an all-out assault on public sector unions following the Janus decision. They too will be going door-to-door and buying ads to encourage union members to rip up their membership cards and drop out now that they no longer have to pay “fair share” fees.

“In the wake of Janus, that one-on-one direct form of communication is extremely important,” says Annie Briscoe, a union organizer with the Pennsylvania State Education Association. “The ability to connect with one another is something that unions have unfortunately struggled with in recent decades. So, from an organizing standpoint, it’s very much back to basics with the canvassing effort to talk to members of the community about the nuts and bolts of public schools and why education funding works.”

Source of the notice: https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/jul/01/teachers-unions-supreme-court-janus-ruling

Comparte este contenido:

Book Reviews: Teaching about the Border

By Kelly Moser

Written in 2006 and published by the teacher-led Rethinking Schools organization, The Line Between Uscontinues to be an excellent resource for teachers who address border issues in the classroom.

Beginning with a personal narrative, author Bill Bigelow provides us with a teacher-friendly book to assist students in understanding complex issues related to immigration and globalization. He offers teachers concrete strategies, lesson ideas, and resources that force students to engage in critical debate and to reconceptualize the unnecessary ‘us’ and ‘them’ dichotomy.

Unlike many teacher-oriented texts, the author chronicles his successes and failures as a teacher who strives to challenge learners’ preexisting beliefs about Mexico, the border, and immigration.

Although I am not a teacher of social studies, as a language teacher and teacher educator, I can easily identify the strengths of this particular book. Since students often hold preconceived notions about other cultures, peoples, and nations, it is my opinion that this book can be used effectively in the social studies classroom to promote empathy and social action, and to encourage an ongoing, critical dialogue.

Further, teachers in other content areas, such as foreign languages, will be able to incorporate several of these firsthand accounts and other resources to provide students with a glimpse into how other peoples live, the challenges they face, and the variety of reasons that they choose (or are forced) to come to the United States.

Teacher-friendly

First and foremost, the author allows all readers to visualize how the lesson unfolds in its entirety. Lesson examples begin with a hook, often in the form of questions intended to identify students’ background knowledge and beliefs. These opening sets are then followed by detailed step-by-step procedures to guide the teacher from beginning to end. All accompanying materials such as role play cards, external readings (political speeches, poems, personal narratives), and others are included as well.

Strategies Independent of Content Area

As an experienced teacher, I was most impressed with the numerous strategies to motivate and engage students. The author included opportunities for collaborative learning, problem solving, and debate. Among the ideas that stand out from the text are the following:

Tea Party — The tea party event is used to introduce students to a variety of historical and imaginative (yet historically appropriate) characters. At the party students receive a character card, and they become the character in order to answer classmates’ questions about a variety of issues.

Role Play — One of the role plays in this text allows students to consider four policy proposals: Proposition 187, the Extension of the Wall Between Mexico and the United States, the Legalization of Immigration from Mexico, and the Abolishment of NAFTA. Students are provided with resources to assist them in considering the implications of each policy with regard to the government, its citizens, the economy, and the environment.

Interior Monologue — The interior monologue requires learners to write from another’s perspective from the first person. Through this activity, students assume the role of another which may foster empathy and a greater understanding of the issues that impact that particular literary or historical figure.

Us and Them

Bigelow includes a variety of tasks that require students to think outside of the box. Through these activities, students begin to recognize the interconnectedness of all beings and to “regard themselves as part of a broader human family” (p. 84). They also begin to understand how politics contribute to several pervasive problems such as poverty, a widening gap between the haves and the have-nots, strict immigration laws, and environmental issues.

Most important, the lessons in The Line Between Us provide students with a more nuanced perspective, one built on a crucial balance between historical inquiry and personal anecdotes. It is perhaps this fundamental component that facilitates the connection of such complex issues to students’ unique lives.

Kelly Moser is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Curriculum, Instruction, and Special Education at Mississippi State University. Kelly coordinates the undergraduate foreign language education program, which prepares prospective teachers of Spanish, French, and German. She teaches courses related to foreign language methodology, secondary education, curriculum development, and technology integration. Her research focuses on foreign language teacher preparation and certification, using literature to promote empathy and technology in the world language classroom.

Comparte este contenido:
Page 139 of 396
1 137 138 139 140 141 396