Printer-friendly versionImani walked down the hall with a paper cup in her hands.
She stopped and held up the cup to me. Inside of its paper walls were soil, water, and seeds—all those humble and elemental things that build a third-grader's scientific knowledge.
Imani was growing cabbage.
She was my student last year. She loved science and writing. I remember the look of wonder in her eyes when we studied weather. We learned about tornadoes. In my classroom, I had two 2-liter bottles connected by a tornado tube, a plastic piece that allows you to make a tornado by swirling the water around and around in one of the bottles. Imani held the bottles in her hands and marveled as her water formed into a giant, powerful funnel cloud. "Wow," she whispered.
I love the sound of learning.
After the experiment, my students worked on their weather journals. Imani sketched and wrote for 30 minutes, drawing her picture of cold air colliding with warm air. She wrote about how she would help her mom should there be a tornado warning.
I thought about how much Imani is like her cabbage seeds. The dangers that swirl around her come from gender stereotypes that threaten to curb her scientific interests. I worry that she will internalize the myth that boys are good in math and science and girls are not, and that she will give up interest in science by the time she gets to middle school. And as the Children's Defense Fund reminds us, she is also vulnerable because she is a child of color growing up in poverty.
A year later, my little scientist/author still loves science and writing. I visited her in her new classroom while she was working in her science journal.
Imani’s notebook was filled with sketches and descriptions of seeds being planted into soil—soil being sprinkled with water, a cup being placed in the sunshine, a cabbage plant sprouting through her little handful of dirt. On the page she was working on were the words, "I HOPE my plant grows big and tall so my mom can use it for supper." Beside those words was a self-portrait of a little third-grade girl with colorful beaded braids and a broad smile.
Like a tiny seed, Imani will continue to grow. She will learn. I will help her. So will the other teachers at her school. We, as teachers, will remind each other of Imani’s talents and interests and keep them well-watered and in good soil. We want her to remain challenged and engaged through high school and beyond.
Barton is an elementary school teacher in South Carolina.
Comments
With all due respect to Mr.
With all due respect to Mr. Barton... "gender stereotypes that threaten to curb her scientific interests"? Of the two genders, all reliable sociological studies indicate that girls have a greater likelihood than boys to achieve higher education, and he worries that the poor fragile girl will somehow learn about extremely esoteric studies about the scientific differences between male and female intelligence and thereby feel unable to pursue an interest in science? Since WHEN has the discoveries of science related to male/female differences proved to be an obstacle to the aspirations of a girl? For that matter, when has medical consensus proved an insurmountable obstacle to the blind, the crippled, or those impaired by incurable disease from doing what they want? I would say that if a British theoretical physicist can deliver lectures, write books, and advance humanity's understanding of his field, while confined to a mechanical chair and moving a single finger, there is no call to suppose that some nebulous "stereotype" can bar the way of a girl who wishes to advance science with her full physical capacities well intact.
Success is not deep dark unintelligible magic that applies to only the right gender and skin color: encouragement, a thorough liberal education, and the teaching of good habits by those who have become wise through experience are the pillars upon which any child can build a shining future full of sparkling promise. Methinks we should get away from the attitude of assuming that incidental obstacles will be fatal stumbling blocks and replace it with an attitude that incidental obstacles will be stepping stones on the path towards whatever a child wishes to be. So long as we look at children with the pitying thought "oh, innocent child, you are trapped by your gender and skin color and the naysaying of others", it's hard to move beyond those assumed limits.
Hi Keith. Thank you for your
Hi Keith. Thank you for your thoughtful response. I always appreciate the dialogue.
If I'm reading you correctly, you are arguing that we live in a meritocracy here in the United States. I don't think we do. I think there is still classism, racism, and sexism in our structures.
As a teacher, I am trying to help build a meritocracy, where it is possible for all people to reach their full potentials. I hope we get there. Do I think it's possible? Yes. Do we need children like Imani to show us the way? Yes. Do we need to continue to dismantle the 'isms' that keep that from happening? Yes. I suppose the question for me is, "How do we name them and dismantle them?"
No, we don't quite live in a
No, we don't quite live in a meritocracy although what we have is very close. On one hand, pure natural charisma is enough to propel a presidential candidate into the White House when the sum total of his perspective granted by breadth of experience was probably less than that of his competitor; in a system where promotion was founded totally on merit with a minimum appeal to other measures, the time-worn professional would always win. To some extent, we don't believe that a mechanical calculation of who has more merit should be all-controlling. At the same time, we celebrate significant quantities of merit, bestowing fantastic amounts of money on sports professionals who have endured the long grind of relentless practice to become the very best and annually selecting the greatest writers, scientists, doctors, and activists for their contribution to the betterment of the human condition.
Now, the declaration that there remains classism, racism, and sexism in our structures is troublesome to me partly because the consequence of the claim isn't really clear to me.
Our system tends to favor those with great material resources over those without and there is a general perception that lower economic status implicitly translates into a lack of merit. I believe this is partly because Americans generally regard our system as a meritocracy and unfairly attribute a lack of success to a lack of effort. However, it would seem to me that convincing people of the alternative, that our system holds few rewards for merit, would be vastly more harmful than the unfair assumptions that people presently hold.
I tend to see the accusation of "sexism" as problematic because there are wholly valid and unprejudiced reasons to favor one gender or the other in certain segments of society. Science has established that the female brain is optimized for the nurturing and empathy that are critical in child-rearing and that the nature of the female intelligence is optimized for certain tasks that the male intelligence cannot work on with the same level of effectiveness... and vice versa. Perhaps this is sexism in the structure of the society but again, I don't see how it can be corrected and frankly, it seems odd to claim that it it harmful to recognize the unique merits of a woman and guide her towards areas where she can find the greatest level of success.
Racism in the structure, however, is a wholly different beast because unlike the other two, race itself has become so gnarled in the inexcusable behavior of the white majority towards the non-white minority in ages passed that it's hard to look at the question fairly. Is it a natural human tendency to be most comfortable with those who look like us? Of course. Is there any way, short of punishment, to prevent people from thinking this way? No, and external punishment can only scar the body, not "repair" the mind. All of that being said, however, it seems grossly immoral to remain fixed on a notion of a society that will always regard non-whites as "the other", as second-class people to be fed crumbs and pay little attention to the degree to which increasing amounts of merit among these minorities are fulfilling Booker T. Washington's observation that "the world wants the best and will not be denied the best for long." In our modern age, the inescapable fact of life is a United States brimming over with non-whites enjoying immense success, even up to being elected to lead the nation by a country that is still mostly white. It is my belief that the continued focus on the steadily-weaker forces feebly, and ineffectually, attempting to arrest this trend diverts valuable time and resources away from a full-throttle effort to push even more minorities into the realm of greatness.
We get out of the system what we put the most effort into: divert effort into assuming racism/sexism/classism, informing children of such, and preparing them to be aware of these obstacles and how they are oppressed by them will yield more children oppressed by the forces they are educated to see, feel, and be stymied by. Diverting effort into preparing children for a wide open world where no one can stop them but them, however, will yield more children who stop only when they feel like stopping and not when nattering and irrelevant voices in the background insist that they stop. Sociological science has consistently demonstrated a strong link between an attitude of optimism, of "I can correct any deficiency by work and discipline", and fantastic success; quite simply, greatness begins in the mind and grows from there, nurtured by the supply of intellectual tools that education provides.
My answer to your question, Mr. Barton, is that we name and dismantle the 'isms' by focusing our charges on their unlimited potential and treating the 'isms' as distractions from more important things. Like bullies, high school cliques, and the general whims of life, 'isms' will present a temporary challenge and then will be consigned to a ditch along life's road. A child raised up to believe that these challenges will forever block them will permit themselves to be blocked when the inevitable challenge comes, just in the way that a child rendered blind and taught that the blindness cripples their ability to succeed will resign themselves to sightless failure. A child raised up to believe that temporary challenges are temporary and can be turned to their personal betterment will skin a knee but will dust themselves off and keep going, treating their setback the way that Louis Braille treated the loss of his vision to accident: a crippling injury only if it is permitted to be.
Perhaps my view is simplistic and unrealistic but I much prefer to believe in the success of a black girl than to believe that she will be barred from being all she can be by some antiquated prejudices with no discernible societal power.
I see we disagree, but I hope
I see we disagree, but I hope we can encourage and help Imani become the next great scientist in our world :-)
Well, yes, it appears that we
Well, yes, it appears that we do although I'd be very interested to hear how YOU answer the question of how to dismantle isms. Naturally, "I disagree" is a perfectly fair response and appealingly polite but it is somewhat lacking in specifics; it tends to leave the impression that we disagree on every point where our disagreement may actually be more limited.
I try to dismantle them in
I try to dismantle them in four ways.
First, I choose to teach in a Title I school, where over 90% of our students are from families who qualify for free and reduced lunch and Medicaid. I try to follow the advice of my old friend Albert Scweitzer, who left the debates of Europe and founded a hospital in Gabon, West Africa. "I want to make my life my argument," he said as he sailed away. I think my students (and those similarly situated) are the most vulnerable in our society, so I am there to be with them and use best practices to help them become all that they can become.
Second, I support the Southern Poverty Law Center. It is sad to me, but our courts seem to be the place of last resort for those affected by the 'isms. I trust my friends there to seek out injustice and confront it in the courts so we can name it, see it, and defeat it.
Third, I try to be a good example in both word and deed to my two boys as we try to build the beloved community in our home, schools, work places, and church. We look at the world around us and say, "Yes, we think that's it," and "No, we don't think that's it." When we say, "No," we ask, "What could we do to change it?"
Last, I try to put a human face and heart on my students by writing about them in this blog. I believe in the power of words, their power to build and heal, but, as I said above, I ultimately believe that actions are more important than they are.
I would be interested to know - Do others who read the TT blog think there are 'isms built into our structure? If they do, how do they think those 'isms should be dismantled? If they don't, how does that affect their actions in the world? ( I am really interested in the last question...does it lead to a social Darwinism where the strong will survive and the weak will die away and that will make for a better society?)
Thanks again for the dialogue. Take care.
It has been a rare pleasure,
It has been a rare pleasure, Mr. Barton. :)