Title and Author:
Citizenship in School: Reconceptualizing Down Syndrome- Christopher Kliewer

Argument:
Kliewer argues that children with down syndrome should not be "segragated from the opportunities afforded [to] nondisabled peers." That everyone in your community should be included and feel well represented, seen for who they are, instead of not involving them. This web of community can not happen if people aren't open and accepting of others.

Quotes:
"How absurd to be judged by others at all, especially by those who have never experienced a disability or who are unwillingly providing us with support or who don't listen to the voices we have."
This quote popped out to me because 1- it explains, first hand, how a child with disabilities really feels, and 2- it makes all of those people who have unwillingly provided their support and judged them realize that these children do know whats fake and whats not and what is going on around them. Having a disability does not mean you don't/ can't comprehend what is taking place around you. These children still have emotions and opinions. I will admit that when I was younger I would joke about children with disabilities to my friends. I figured if they were doing it I should too. I was so wrong.....doing what I did not only made me feel like a jerk, but proved that who I hung out with was not the people I wanted to be friends with anymore. How could I judge or make fun of someone when I had no idea what they were going through...what their day-to-day stuggles were when I had not one.This was a turning point for me because I knew from way back that I wanted to teach children with disabilities, so what kind of teacher would I be, really, if I made fun of my peers with them? Durning middle school one of my close friends had Down Syndrome and she did not need people unwillingly helping her. She was one of the smartest people I have ever met in my life. I now look up to people with disabilities because they are some of the strongest people you will ever meet.

"'It's not like they come here to be labeled, or to believe the label. We're all here--kids, teachers, parents, whoever--it's about all of us working together, playinmg together, being together, and that's what learning is. Don't tell me any of these kids are being set up to fail.'"
This quote really amazed me. Not only did it send a good message, but this teacher is speaking from her heart. She understands what she has to do in her classroom to ensure that everyone is learning and will not have people tell her otherwise. This quote reminds me of my service learning because the teacher I am with had a classroom that had what she called "typicals" mixed with children with disabilities. She had told me that it was her best class in a long time. She had said that the autistic children who had begun the year with few words were ending the year reading stories to her and this was because the "typicals" would help them as well. She told me that the autistic children would mimic what the others were doing, which helped with their fine motor skills as well as their language. This year, her classroom is not separated and it is harder for the children to latch on to what she is doing because there are no examples. I believe all children have the ability to learn and teachers should not be put down or told that what they are attempting is far out of reach. Anything is possible. Children are children no matter what they can and can not do.


"Along with recognizing an individual's ability to think, Bogdan and Tatlor (1989) suggest that respect and citizenship require a realization of the person's indviduality. This is as true in school relationships asit is in our community relationships."

"School citizenship requires that students not be categorized and separated based on presumed defect. The phenomenon of categorization at the expense of individual value has been described as a "disibility spread" in which we 'extrapolate the characteristics we associate with the notion of disability to the particular individuals we meet. These perceptions are often based on stereotypes and what we think we know about a particular disibility. They are expressed in predictable ways. For example, 'All people with Down Syndrome are happy." (Van Der Klift & Kunc, 1994,p. 398.)"
It is soooo common to have stereotypes such as the one in the quote. People don't understand that whether it is a nice stereotype or a mean stereotype it's still a stereotype and it may not be true at all. This quote got me fired up, so I researched some stereotypes:
MYTH: A person with a disability is sick, or has something wrong with them.

FACT: Disability is a natural part of the human experience, and it is not the same as being sick. Individuals with disabilities have varying degrees of need, and are sometimes sick, just as non-disabled are sometimes sick. Mistaking a disability for sickness not only fails to sometimes sick. Mistaking a disability for sickness not only fails to respond to a person's needs, it perpetuates a negative stereotype and an assumption that the person can and should be cured.

MYTH: People with disabilities have a poor quality of life.

FACT: This is one of the most common and damaging stereotypes, because it discourages social interactions and the development of mature relationships. People with disabilities have needs just like those who are non-disabled, and they strive for a high degree of quality of life as other individuals. Society handicaps individuals by building inaccessible schools, theaters, homes, buses, etc. The attitude that disability is a bad thing and that disability means a poor quality of life is often viewed as more disabling than the disability itself.

MYTH: People with disabilities are inspirational, brave, and courageous for living successfully with their disability.

FACT: A person with a disability a simply carrying out normal activities of living when they drive to work, go shopping, pay their bills, or compete in athletic events. Access to community based, long term service such as attendant care, access to buildings, public transportation, sidewalks, etc, access to quality health care, and necessary equipment enables them to carry on the same as non-disabled necessary equipment enables them to carry on the same as non-disabled people.

MYTH: People with disability always need expensive and high-tech assistive devices or services.

FACT: Simple inexpensive devices are often the most critical in helping people with a disability live independently. Assistive devices can be as affordable as an eating utensil or Velcro strap.

MYTH: People with severe disabilities need to live in nursing home or rehabilitation hospitals or under constant supervision so that they do not hurt themselves.

FACT: Unfortunately, this myth has created a system of long term care in our nation that relies on institutions such as nursing homes and other facilities. Even those with the most severe disabilities could live in their own home given adequate community based service, and at the very least, they should be given that choice.
(The Access Center)

Others say Autism coincides with being a genius.

This is something I found really interesting from the http://whatsortsofpeople.wordpress.com/2008/10/15/saturday-night-live-snl-parody-of-lennon-sisters-mocking-disabled-people/ website. Check it out.
Saturday Night Live (SNL) parody of Lennon sisters mocking disabled people
October 15, 2008 — stremain
A discussion on the Disability Studies in the Humanities listserv has centred around a skit recently performed on this American-produced late-night variety show. While SNL prides itself on being an alternative to mainstream television which pushes the limits of conventional cultural attitudes and mores, the skit serves to bolster deeply-entrenched biases, stereotypes, and ideas about disabled people (and disabled women in particular) as revolting, sexually disqualified, and so on. Check it out at the link below (uncaptioned of course):

http://www.nbc.com/Saturday_Night_Live/video/clips/the-lawrence-welk-show/727501/



Questions, Comments:

I'vesaid way too much already, for me to talk here would be babbling. =]


Title and Author:
Charles Lawrence- "One More River to Cross" - Recognizing the Real Injury in Brown: A Prerequisite to Shaping New Remedies

Author's Argument:

Lawrence argues that basically the Court failed to recognize the real nature of segregation in Brown. He says that all we are doing is taking steps, but in reality if something huge is not done to change all that has been going on for years, then our nation will never be one.

Quotes:

"Each step foward was just that, a step. There would always be "one more river to cross".
This quote was the first thing that stuck in my head that I just had to write down. This was the perfect way to start because it caught my attention. This makes me think back to high school. Learning about the Civil Rights and how things are going to change and black history month and all that jazz. I just remember everything blacks faught for not being enough. Blacks have made some of the most honorable, memorable and moving speeches and movements ever in history and it seems like although they made a great impact, it was not enough to change the world. They kept fighting and keep fighting to this day....just one more river to cross.....but how many "one more rivers" will there have to be?

Jim Crow laws- ""public symbols and constant reminder" of the inferior position of blacks."

"The Court said: "to separate [negro children] from others of similar age and qualifications solely because of their race generates a feeling of inferiority as to their status in the community in ways unlikely ever to be undone."
Separating children because of their race is a terrible thing to do. This can result in many different ways of handling such separation. Some kids can end up disgusted with their race and color because they feel like white is superior and in order to get anywhere in life you need to be white. This can cause depression in children of color because they may not get the proper education or best materials to work with. Their school may be far from home resulting in that child dropping out due to lack of money to bus them to school. This feeling may or may not change over time and blacks may hold grudges against whites for making them feel inferior.

"The Court then went on to quote the federal district court in Kansas the found "a sense of inferiority" engendered by segregated schools "has a tendency to [retard] the educational and mental development of negro children."


"In Keyes v. School District No.1 the Court found that there must be evidence that the racial imbalance in the schools was brought about by discriminatory actions of state authorities."

"They argue that blacks should not be granted so-called "preferential" treatment at the expense of whites who have played no part in denying them their rights."
This quote seriously made me laugh. For whites to say that they did not deny blacks from their rights is a joke. If whites didn't deny them do you think there would be separate schools, neighborhoods, restaraunts, buses etc.? And if blacks were granted equal rights it wouldn't be preferentail treatment. So what this is saying is that whites get preferential treatment and don't want to share their rights and wealth with people who are just as worthy as they are to have it.


Questions, Comments:
This piece was alright. I mean it was very long, but the content was incredible. I learned more about cases that I hadn't even heard of before. This piece really got me thinking about life and the struggle that so many have gone through that I will never have to experience. I guess its just one of those white privileges that are not asked for....the ability to not have to fight for rights and equality.....oh that Peggy McIntosh.....


Author and Title:
JEANNIE OAKES- TRACKING: WHY SCHOOLS NEED TO TAKE ANOTHER ROUTE

Argument:
This author argues that dividing students into groups based on their learning ability should not be done. This does not help the students who need the extra attention, but hurts their educational experience. Tracking does not have a place in the school system and is not logicalical.

Quotes:
"One fact about tracking is unequivocal: tracking leads to substantial differences in day-to-day learning experiences students have at school."

This quote means that separating students effects how they learn. By putting the "smart" students with the "smart" students what is that saying to the other group of students? That they are dumb? Now if I were in a classroom where I was shunned from sitting with the "smart" group I wouldn't want to learn. Tracking leads to certain groups feeling superior and as though they have the upper hand. But this can also be a problem because more is expected out of them which can "dumb-down" a once "smart" student. The bottom line is tracking should not be done.

"Start by providing the best teachers, a concentration of the most successful students and sometimes even the lowest class size. Add special resources, a sense of superior academic "mission," perhaps a parent support group, and these students will get the best education in town."

This quote really gets to me. So basically this quote says that only if you are smart do you get SPECIAL resorces to work with, and only if you are smart do you get the BEST education. Well I think that no matter how smart or how stupid some teachers may think a student is, they should get an equal education. What student is going to want to work hard if they have crappy old books while the "gifted" kids get brandnew books and computers to use in class? Not one. Oh and what makes me laugh is that these smart kids need a parent support group? Is this an AA meeting or school? I'm not quite sure....I just remember in my middle school being in regular classes while all of my cousins and friends were in the "gifted" program. It got me angry because I always felt inferior to them and that is how any other kid is going to feel if they see "smarter" kids getting special attention. In this quote they even add a "superior academic 'mission'" as though these students are secret agents and have a secret agenda that they live by. I don't know....maybe I'm just frustrated because I have walked in the shoes of the "not so smart" group.

"In classrooms where the curriculum consists of a sequence of topics and skills that require prerequisite knowledge and skill mastery, mixing students who have different skills is difficult."

I can clearly see where this would be difficult. All students learn at different pases and some hardly remember what they did 3 hours ago (like me) nevermind prior knowledge from years ago. In order for me to remember something for a long time it needs to be drilled into my brain with pictures and words and examples. Math is not one of my strong points so coming to college and being expected to remember algebra when I did that in the 9th grade was a joke. I worked hard for the B+ I received because I had to get retaught all of the information. It would be tough to split up students based on prior knowledge because you don't know what they do and don't know.




Questions, Comments?:
I pretty much said how I felt in response to the quote I mean I was one of those kids who would just stop caring. I had writings in my books, they were ripped and bent and old, while all these "smarter" kids walked around with the best of the best. Its hard getting split up because how you are in class could effect your friendships outside of the classroom. Tracking is bad........bad bad bad!