Sunday, August 23, 2015

Thank you

"Your support and the knowledge throughout this semester, that we have done the RIGHTthing deciding to pursue our education. Thank you very much for your kind words, love and care you give to me through out the process. You are all incredibly important to me and I appreciate you!"



There is no perfect teacher and no teacher can ever say that he/she has reached their full potential ever. There is always room for growth and to learn new things.

Through this semester I can truly say that I have picked up some good ideas from other teachers. In our field of education, this is not called copying, but modeling. All of you have been eager to share  your experiences with me, and for that I'm truly grateful. Much success, Rachel

Sunday, August 9, 2015

Saying Good Bye


A couple of years ago, I belonged to a group for people who were unemployed. The group offered support and up to date information needed to re-enter the market place. Though I was self-employed as a freelance writer, I enjoyed the cutting edge speakers and information about the business world.
I made a special connection with the leader and we visited from time to time. I had missed a few meetings because of other commitments and one day when I came, he was gone. I was shocked and disappointed that I did not get a chance to say goodbye and to thank him for his positive impact on my life.
In another situation I belong to an online Facebook group and felt bonded to the members who had been in it for a year. Suddenly one of the members was no longer there. Again, I was shocked and disappointed. I felt a sense of loss about her absence.
Later I received an email from her that said,”I had no clue it would be so difficult to leave the group. I feel like I have lost my best friend(s) in the world. I never thought about grieving in the sense of leaving a group, but that sure is what happens.”
In the end  I  wrote the people on the group an email expressing my sentiment.

My advice is  :Do take time though to process your thoughts and feelings and to seek closure for yourself whether it’s you are the one left behind or you are the one choosing to leave. You will be emotionally healthier and you will keep your relationships strong.

Sunday, August 2, 2015

Non Violent Communicaion


Non violent communication  is a system designed to help one apply these principles in daily life.  It consists of four basic steps that one can use when attempting to communicate with others, particularly in a difficult situation.
The basic four-step process is: 
1) making a pure observation without judging,
2) identifying a feeling within yourself,   3) finding the human need behind the feeling, and 
4) formulating a request (not a demand).  I will add a fifth step as well, which is to ask for feedback.

  I find that if one actually follows these steps, it will drastically improve your communication skill with everyone.  You will find you will be far more effective and will not “turn off” people nearly as much.

Verbal Aggression


Verbal aggressiveness is a method in communication, when one is verbally attacking another in order to  express oneself or to win an argument. When using verbal aggressiveness in communication, the communicator wants to intimidate others. Most of the time one uses verbal aggressiveness when one feels that they are being attacked. After feeling attacked verbal agressors begin to attack others. This method of communication is toxic, and it is not effective.
Often times when I communicate I’m not aware, of how effectively I’m communicating. For example, there have been times when my voice gets louder, and I’m not aware. Usually the person I’m communicating with will point this out for me. As communicator we are not always  conscious of our tone and body language during conversation. There have been many times when I’m upset, and try to cover it by acting professional, and not upset. People are able to still tell by my demeanor that I’m upset. From experience my verbal aggression has led to many relationships ending, because people feel disrespected by the way I communicate. Without communication a relationship is dead.
When asking my fiancé to take the communication test with me, his answers resemble the answers that I gave.  I’m really close with my fiancé so I feel like he knows me very well. He is able to rate me the same as I rate myself. I have a tendency to be slightly biased with how I rate myself. My fiancé answers to some of the questions were slightly stronger than my answer. Since most of our relationship is rated based upon our communication , he s able to rate me stronger than the average  person.
My personal goal is to try to be less aggressive when I’m communicating. If I feel triggered by the conversation, I can walk away, or communicate non-aggressively that I feel attacked. Various times that I have become verbally aggressive have been when I personally felt like I was being attacked.  If I happened to feel attacked I can respond by  expressing my self in a healthy manner. I know personally this works with my fiance. When I tell him I getting angry we both agree to talk at another time, once emotions aren’t as high.

Monday, July 13, 2015

Watching Interview On Mute: Body Language


I know this may seem weird but I do this all the time, but I try not to watch shows. Instead, watch the news, interviews, or speeches. My favorite one to watch on mute is the Lance Armstrong interview on Oprah's show
Watch it on mute. Pretend that you don't know that this is one of the world's supposed most elite athletes confessing to cheating, which you think would elicit shame. Just watch it and try to think of the emotional state this guy is portraying.
I watched it twice. First time was on mute; second one with audio. The first time, it was hard to get a good grip of his state. He was pretty cold and wasn't sharing much body language. As far as his facial reaction went, it had more of a calm atmosphere. Though, Oprah seemed somewhat baffled based on her face and body language.
After watching it with volume, I now realized that the short video clip was more of a Q&A for Armstrong (i.e., did you cheat? Yes. did you feel remorse? No.) In essence, it was more of a technical interview; hence, he didn't really show much emotions through his body. Conclusion, the clip was too short and only focused on yes/no questions. Hence, his body language and facial expression displayed "Yes, I'm answering a question."

Saturday, May 23, 2015

Poverty

I have subscribed to the podcast by Zero to Three, "Little Kids, Big Questions". They aren't  any podcasts about poverty as of yet. However, they do provide TONS of resources about poverty. They have everything from quick fact sheets to in depth research, emerging policy, and resources for professionals and parents.
Zero to Three focuses on the impacts of poverty on child development for children ages birth to 3 years old. There is a direct correlation between economic hardship and compromised development. There are two common measures of poverty within the USA: poverty thresholds and poverty guidelines. The poverty threshold is updated by the Census Bureau, was the original poverty measure, but is now only used for statistical purposes.
The poverty guidelines, a.k.a “federal poverty level” (FPL), are updated annually by the Department of Health and Human Services. The primary purpose is to determine eligibility for certain federal entitlement programs. Some of these programs include Head Start/ Early Head Start, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) for Women, Infants and Children (WIC) and the Children’s Health Insurance Program.
What I found most interesting is Zero to Three states that research indicates that a typical family needs an income two times the FPL to meet their most basic needs. That is pretty shocking! It makes me wonder why the minimum wage level isn't raised and why the poverty guidelines aren't raised to reflect this difference.
Some other astonishing facts are that "12 million infants and toddlers live in the United States" (www.zerotothree.org) and that the number of infants and toddlers living in low‐income families increased by 41% between 2000-2009.

Monday, September 15, 2014

Free Arts For Abused Children

How It All Began
Originally founded in 1977 as Free Arts Clinic, Free Arts for Abused Children was born out of the determination of two women who understood and appreciated the inherent therapeutic value of the arts: Carolyn Sargent, a woman who, as a child, used art to emerge from the sadness and isolation of hearing loss, and Elda Unger, an artist and aspiring art therapist. Both women recognized the need for children in foster care to have meaningful engagement with the arts. By conducting arts workshops, Carolyn and Elda gave the gift of creative self-expression to children in need of positive outlets for their experiences.
 
Free Arts Mission & Vision
Free Arts PROGRAMS inspire hope in the lives of children who have experienced abuse, neglect, poverty and homelessness through innovative creative arts programs and positive interactions with caring adult volunteers.

Free Arts envisions a society of individuals from different communities, cultures and life experiences connecting through the healing power of art to interrupt the cycle of violence, create understanding, build self-esteem and nurture better lives.
 
Growing Programs
Free Arts started with a single PROGRAM at a residential facility. As Free Arts grew, thousands of children participated in the Free Arts Day Program and soon thereafter the Weekly Volunteer Program. In 1993, the organization began coordinating arts activities in the waiting areas of the Edmund D. Edelman Children's Court in Monterey Park, a courthouse dedicated exclusively to child abuse, neglect and abandonment cases. In 2009 we expanded to the McCourtney Juvenile Justice Center in Lancaster. Free Arts also introduced the Parents and Children Together with Art (PACT) Program in 1994 to help families in crisis.
Today, Free Arts has four thriving cornerstone PROGRAMS, each of which relies heavily on the dedication of community volunteers who use art as a bridge to connect with vulnerable children.

Reaching Out Around the Country
Free Arts for Abused Children is the legacy organization for a network of affiliates across the United States. After experiencing success in delivering our program models for more than 15 years, an expansion effort was launched in 1993 when an AFFILIATE AGENCY was founded in Arizona. Since that time, several Free Arts affiliates have been established including Free Arts Minnesota and Free Arts NYC. Please contact them directly for information about their local PROGRAMS.

Sunday, August 24, 2014

Thank you

"Your support and the knowledge throughout this semester, that we have done the RIGHTthing deciding to pursue our education. Thank you very much for your kind words, love and care you give to me through out the process. You are all incredibly important to me and I appreciate you!"



There is no perfect teacher and no teacher can ever say that he/she has reached their full potential ever. There is always room for growth and to learn new things.
Through this semester I can truly say that I have picked up some good ideas from other teachers. In our field of education, this is not called copying, but modeling. All of you have been eager to share  your experiences with me, and for that I'm truly grateful. Much success, Rachel

Wednesday, August 20, 2014

Welcoming Families From Around the World

African Americans often seem cut off from the economic mainstream. They face higher risks of poverty, joblessness and incarceration than their fellow citizens do. Community organizing, civil rights legislation, landmark court decisions and rising education have advanced the cause of racial equality. Overt bigotry has been banished from public places, and polls show that whites harbor fewer prejudices than they used to. But these improvements have not been enough.
How can disadvantage persist so long after most laws, minds and practices have changed? Thomas M. Shapiro argues in this sober and authoritative book that we should look to disparities of wealth for the answer. Whites are wealthier than African Americans, and whites' wealth advantage is much bigger than their advantages in either income or education (the point of Shapiro's earlier study, Black Wealth/White Wealth, co-authored with Melvin Oliver). Whites start out ahead because they inherit more from their parents, and America's racially segregated housing markets boost whites' home equities, while depressing those of African-American families. Shapiro, a professor of sociology at Brandeis, takes readers through the implications of these inequities and concludes that African Americans will not gain significant ground in the wealth divide until inheritance and housing policies change.
Wealth is the sum of the important assets a person or family owns -- home equity, pension funds,saving accounts and investments. Wealth is better than income because it is durable. People use income to meet daily expenses, whereas wealth accumulates. People who have wealth tap it only to deal with emergencies or to take advantage of opportunities -- opportunities that usually build more wealth.
Wealth passes down from generation to generation. The main reason African Americans are currently worse off than whites, according to Shapiro, is that today's African Americans inherited less wealth from their parents than today's whites did. It is not hard to see why: The generation of African Americans now passed away accumulated less wealth because discrimination in their day kept most of them poor and denied them opportunities other Americans enjoyed.
The disparity in wealth not only persists, it mushrooms. Without a cushion of inherited wealth, emergencies hit harder, and people who have no nest egg have to let opportunities pass by. Because of the wealth deficit, African Americans find themselves more vulnerable to shocks and less able to capitalize on breaks than whites with the same income. So the next generation will inherit less, too. The wealth gap will not close anytime soon.
Shapiro blends statistical analysis and case studies of selected families in Boston, St. Louis and Los Angeles, showing the relative importance of wealth and the disparities in inheritance by class and race. He also supplies some individual case studies, which give depth and humanity to the numbers.
Wealth begins at home. A home-equity loan can see a family through a spell of unemployment or leverage an investment. Millions of middle-class Americans use tax-deductible home-equity loans to pay for their children's educations. Others buy rental property.
Because neighborhoods are racially segregated, African Americans' homes do not grow in value as fast as whites' homes do. Shapiro calculates that housing segregation costs African Americans tens of thousands of dollars in home equity. Homebuyers look for amenities commonly found in predominantly white neighborhoods. They pay extra for parks, convenient shopping and attractive views. Parents pay huge premiums for what they perceive to be good schools. Few parents can judge schools objectively. Instead, they use easy-to-observe markers, including the race of the students. These preferences raise the costs that first-time homebuyers face when they attempt to buy houses in those mostly white neighborhoods. Economic theory implies that if whites continue to waste money on irrational prejudices like this, market forces will eventually undo the racial disparity in wealth. But the experience of the last 50 years suggests otherwise. Inequality has grown because each new generation has been willing to pay a higher premium for these amenities. The market doesn't punish discrimination; it rewards it.
Whites fail to see any injustice in these differences. Shapiro's interviews convinced him that whites hide their privilege from themselves and, accordingly, feel no guilt for the hidden costs they impose on African Americans. People who inherited tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars nonetheless told Shapiro that they were self-made and self-reliant. They proudly told him how the assets they inherited grew under their stewardship. White parents use wealth to send their children to private schools or to give their adult children down payments for homes. They do not see how such practices hand today's inequalities on to the next generation.
Shapiro argues convincingly that these private matters spill over into public investment, too. He interviewed one upper-middle-class woman who told him that she was unconcerned with troubles in the local public school because she never intended to send her children there. Shapiro points out that her indifference -- and that of others like her -- is just one more obstacle in the path of people trying to improve local public education.
Families and generations are at the core of Shapiro's analysis. So I was surprised that he did not directly address how marriage and family structure fit into the cycles of accumulation, inheritance and investment. Married couples accumulate more than single parents do, according to other researchers. That suggests to me that African-American family issues must play a role in the wealth gap.

Monday, August 11, 2014

The Personal Side of Bias, Prejudice, and Oppression

Throughout the greater half of the twentieth century, African Americans were stereotyped as dirty and contaminated. Although it is easy to imagine that lower income individuals may not have had sufficient money for cleaning supplies,and might be less concerned about cleanliness, this was simply never true about African Americans. Rather, this stereotype festered to justify laws segregating Black and White Americans under the false notion of cleanliness and disease prevention. Segregation statutes prevented Blacks and Whites from utilizing the same restrooms, drinking fountains, and swimming facilities under the assumption that Whites would be contaminated by shared use. Back in the day, Jim Crow was "just common sense." The medical establishment agreed, proclaiming that African Americans were carriers of disease, "a social menace whose collective superstitions, ignorance, and carefree demeanour stood as a stubborn affront to modern notions of hygiene..." (Wailoo, 2006).
Meanwhile, Blacks Americans were commonly employed as cleaning ladies in White establishments, and nannies and maids for White families, illustrating the paradoxical nature of pathological stereotypes. Black people could cook food for White people, but could not sit at the same dinner table. Blacks could enter homes in White neighborhoods to clean them but not to buy them.
Even today, despite lower per capita incomes, Black Americans spend more on laundry  than their White counterparts, even after adjusting for differences in average annual spending. African American women engage in increased hygiene practices and report more cleaning and grooming behaviors. In fact, a greater emphasis on cleaning behaviors appears to be a cultural norm for African Americans. When taking in these facts and our history as a whole, it's not difficult to see how the stereotype was wrong, and distortion of reality was used to justify the disenfranchisement of a disadvantaged population.

Current Example

So, that was history, what about today? If I ask you what a "typical drug user" looks like, who do you see — a Black person? Most people are surprised to learn that African American youth are significantly less likely to use tobacco, alcohol or drugs than White or Hispanic Americans. Large-scale national surveys like the National Comorbidity Survey Replication (NCS-R) find that African Americans are significantly less likely to have substance use disorders than their White counterparts. Given that African Americans are a statistical minority in the US, the overwhelming majority of drug abusers will therefore be White. Nonetheless, African Americans are disproportionately targeted, arrested, and jailed for drug related crimes. People use the pathological stereotype of the Black junkie or drug dealer to rationalize the imbalanced scales of justice. We stuff our prisons with "those people" to propagate an illusion of safety. We like to think the world is fair, so if Black people are overrepresented in jails for drug-related crimes, we think they must be locked up because deserve it, perpetuating the pathological stereotype.

What if pathological stereotypes are true?

Certainly in some cases, it would seem that the stereotype must represent real differences between groups. For example, African Americans are pathologically stereotyped as poor, and indeed on average Black Americans are poorer than their White counterparts, though not in numbers nearly as high as estimated by the average American (29% reality versus 50% believed). Wouldn't this amount to a 'kernel of truth,' about group members?
Although some pathological stereotypes may represent measurable differences between groups, there will be many members of the group that possess some or none of the stereotypical traits. If we pathologically stereotype Blacks as 'poor,' and two out of three Black people are not poor, we'll be wrong most of the time. Despite what you might see on the nightly news, most Black people are in the middle class and many are upper class as well.
So, when you are standing in line at the supermarket next to a random Black woman in a hoodie and jogging pants, don't make assumptions about class or income. That woman may have a Ph.D. in neurobiology, speak fluent German and French, and earn more than you as a clinical director at a European pharmaceutical company. And if you do bump her, give her a hearty "Guten Tag!" from me, because you've probably run into my younger sister.

Wednesday, July 30, 2014

Racial Microaggressions In Everyday Life

Recently I went on a trip on a with my family, and we took a train early in the  morning. There were only a few passengers,and the attendant told us to sit anywhere, so we choose seats near the front of the train and across the aisle from one another.
At the last minute, three White men entered the train and took seats in front of us. Just before takeoff, the flight attendant, who is White, asked if we would mind moving to the back of the train to better accommodate everyone . We grudgingly complied but felt singled out as passengers of color in being told to "move to the back of the bus." When we expressed these feelings to the attendant, she indignantly denied the charge, became defensive, stated that her intent was to ensure the trains safety, and wanted to give us some privacy.
Since we had entered the train first, I asked why she did not ask the White men to move instead of us. She became indignant, stated that we had misunderstood her intentions, claimed she did not see "color," suggested that we were being "oversensitive," and refused to talk about the matter any further.

Sunday, July 20, 2014

Perspectives on Diversity and Culture

Cultural perspectives impact the way children participate in education.  The table below describes different expectations about "normal" school behavior for students from individualist and collectivist cultures.

Individualist and Collectivist Cultural Perspectives on Education

Individualist PerspectiveCollectivist Perspective
Students work independently; helping others may be cheating.Students work with peers and provide assistance when needed.
Students engage in discussion and argument to learn to think critically.Students are quiet and respectful in class in order to learn more efficiently.
Property belongs to individuals, and others must ask to borrow it.Property is communal.
Teacher manages the school environment indirectly and encourages student self - control.Teacher is the primary authority, but peers guide each other's behavior.
Parents are integral to child's academic progress and participate actively.Parents yield to teacher's expertise to provide academic instruction and guidance.
Source: Adapted from Individualist and Collectivist Perspectives on Education, from the Diversity Kit (2002) Providence, R.I.: The Education Alliance.
The influence of culture on beliefs about education, the value of education, and participation styles cannot be overestimated. With Asian students, for example, tend to be quiet in class, and making eye contact with teachers is considered inappropriate for many of these children. In contrast, most European American children are taught to value active classroom discussion and to look teachers directly in the eye to show respect, while their teachers view students' participation as a sign of engagement and competence.
Another contrast involves the role of Hispanic parents in education. Parents from some Hispanic cultures tend to regard teachers as experts and will often defer educational decision making to them. In contrast, European American parents are often more actively involved in their children's classrooms, are visible in the classrooms, or volunteer and assist teachers .These cultural differences in value and belief may cause educators to make inaccurate judgments regarding the value that non–European American families place on education. While it is important to keep in mind that different cultural groups tend to follow particular language and interaction styles, there is tremendous variability within cultural groups.