Human Beings Are Not Mascots

I read the chapter beginning on page 149 entitled "Human Beings Are Not Mascots" by Barbara Munson.  It is disturbing to me that there remains any debate over the use of "Indian" logos and nicknames for sports teams but indeed there is.  The author of this chapter is Native American and she simply and effectively uses a question and answer format to explain why such mascots and logos constitute institutional racism.  She presents the most common queries and statements she hears as a way to educate the reader about the issue.  Essentially, it is a FAQ sheet for readers who may be wondering how such longtime and often beloved symbols "separate, marginalize, confuse, intimidate and harm Native American children and create barriers to their learning....In addition, the logos teach non-Indian children that it's alright to participate in culturally abusive behavior."

I see connections between this issue and our classroom discussions about depictions of females and gender stereotypes in general.  Supporters of the status quo try to trivialize the issue to dismiss advocates of change and they are often emotionally attached to established norms, however outdated or harmful.  It also connects to the idea of thinking critically about the lens through which we view American culture and how that is reflected in the media.

http://www.indianmascots.com

The author's thesis is that when cultural abuse is supported by society institutions, it constitutes institutional racism.  Some of the statements she gently but pointedly counters:

"We have always been proud of our 'Indians.'"

"We are honoring Indians; you should feel honored."

"We never intended the logo to cause harm."

"This is not an important issue."

"This logo issue is just about political correctness."

Munson contends that fans are proud of athletic teams even where the team's name and logo don't stereotype a race of people; native people feel mocked, not honored, when sacred symbols are used in another culture's game; that while there may have been no intention of harm, in fact the logos are harmful to a culture and especially to children; that the issue is an important one from a legal perspective (pupil harassment and equal access to education) and to the positive identity and self-esteem development of Native American children; and that calling this an issue of political correctness trivializes the stereotypes and ignorance that have destroyed lives and whole cultures.

  

http://www.tolerance.org/author/barbara-munson

The author worked with other advocates in Wisconsin for nearly two decades to pass the first "Indian Mascot Bill" barring the use of race-based team names in public school settings.  In educating Americans about the logo issue, she often hears questions like these:

"Why is the term 'Indian'as a mascot name offensive?"

"Why is an attractive depiction of an Indian warrior just as offensive as an ugly caricature?"

"Aren't you proud of your warriors?"

Munson answers by noting that "Indian" is not the name that indigenous people prefer to be called; that both a caricature and an attractive depiction are stereotypes that place Native Americans in the past and keep them marginalized; and it is because they are proud of their warriors that they don't want them demeaned in a sport on a playing field.

The author concludes by acknowledging that it may be difficult to respect a culture different than the one in which you were raised and expresses gratitude to everyone who stands with Native Americans in protest of "Indian"logos and mascots.  When we come together in the spirit of tolerance and justice, Munson writes, we model for all children thoughtfulness, courage, and respect.  By following the link below, you will see that she found allies in former President Obama and the company Adidas.

/us-news/2015/nov/05/obama-supports-effort-native-american-mascots-redskins

Walt and Me

Oh, how I lived for Sunday evenings! With a tap of her wand, Tinkerbell transported me from my modest home in western Massachusetts to the wonderful world of Disney. That was back in the late 1960s and early 1970s yet to this day, my husband and I can wax nostalgic about the anticipation we felt waiting for that castle, the fireworks, and the tiny blonde fairy that signaled the launch of a magical hour. It's funny, but I remember the open more than I remember the television shows that followed.

What I can vividly recall is watching the annual television broadcast of Cinderella and a rare trip to the cinema to see Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs. These were magical experiences for a little girl who would only begin to question the content and messages of these films as a teenager growing jaded about societal norms, particularly sexism, and beginning to think critically about...well, everything.

When I was a child, the equation was simple: Disney = GOOD. Christensen's article resonates with me because as a young adult, I began to scorn the messages telegraphed through the "innocent"fairy tales: that a man can save you from your ordinary life, that your purpose could be found in the home (typically cleaning in between waiting on men or women in higher positions), dark people are scary or bad, and that you should be, above all, nice. Hard work and good character are rewarded by the arrival of a knight in shining armor. And yes, Cinderella, a makeover (complete with high heels, of course) will change your life.

 In terms of Princess culture, Elsa is a step up, I suppose. From a feminist perspective, I see that the creators resisted the Knight in Shining Armor reward but Elsa does pay a price for her power before she embraces it. The transformation into heels and a tight, beautiful, princess-worthy gown was a bit of an eye-roller for me. Based on everything I had heard about this movie, I had actually expected a stronger Princess. I found the "modern girl" qualities I expected in Elsa in her younger sister, Anna. She is the resilient, buoyant, feisty, independent go-getter in this film. I like Anna, but there was something about her that bothered me. I could almost sense a bunch of Disney guys trying too hard to get the strong female character right, particularly when she stops Christoph from punching the villain Hans and does it herself.  A female adopting the physically violent behavior more commonly seen from males to signal her strength: why would we want to send that message to our children?

 

I would love to discuss the Elsa character more in class because I'm wondering if anyone else finds her...disappointing. I did absolutely love that the writers gave us the bond between siblings as the surprising, lovely example of true love in this fairy tale. Nice twist.

Boyd vs. Prensky

While I find Marc Prensky's categorization of Digital Natives and Digital Immigrants valuable as a way to consider a potential generational divide around technology, I tend to agree with Dana Boyd's assessment that it's too pat and perhaps dangerously oversimplified.  When we create neat pockets to explain a thing, the pockets are often too shallow.

I have done research into the foreign language acquisition of adults as compared to home language development of infants.  What has been transformative to my teaching is to learn that newer research shows no innate advantage for young learners, but simply a difference of exposure.  Motivation is also critical.  I find myself applying this information to the discussion of digital natives and digital immigrants.  While I want to learn more about the brain changes occurring because of digital exposure, I agree with Boyd that there is no magical relationship between skills and age.  To assume otherwise is to run the risk of passivity, similar to the defeated passivity of adult learners who believe that children have an innate edge when it comes to learning a second language.  It is just too easy and I believe it to be untrue.  

If anything, an adult has a built-in "sound system", the circuitry she used to develop (however unconsciously) her first language and that should, by all logic, create an advantage should it be tapped.  Thus, Boyd's point about valuing the experiences and knowledge of the earlier "settlers" resonates with me, particularly when it comes to critical thinking about the content consumers encounter.  She makes that point beautifully (although not briefly!) in her examination of young learners' perceptions of Wikipedia versus Google.

I also feel strongly, as does Boyd, that there is inequality in this equation in the digital divide created by the privilege required to be "native".  No matter when they are born, young learners have different experiences, background, and economic circumstances that tend to dictate their exposure to technology.  If I were a young student today in the blue collar world of my childhood, I would be at a distinct disadvantage to a wealthy, private school kid.  That is a simple economic truth.  Again, this goes back to exposure (not date of birth) as key.

The Boyd chapter is rich with topics to discuss and I look forward to that.  But to wrap up here, there can be no arguing with its assertion that "we all need opportunities to develop the skills and knowledge to engage with contemporary technology effectively and meaningfully."

http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/04/business/digital-native-prensky/index.html

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0k-Rx4sht8

Going native?

     Given that my first exposure to computers came as an undergrad at Mount Holyoke College (which I tried desperately to avoid, hoping this computer 'trend' would pass), I am hardly a digital native.  I came late to the digital world, making the switch to a computerized newsroom as a producer in 1990 when I started a new job in Albany, New York.  It was a big learning curve and one I had to master very quickly or my newscasts wouldn't make air!  I missed the trusty old typewriters for quite a while before I began to see the advantages of working on computers. 

http://home.bt.com/tech-gadgets/computing/accessories/from-the-writing-machine-to-the-computer-keyboard-the-evolution-of-the-typewriter-11363991455145

 I also remember my first experience sending emails in a Providence newsroom in the early 90s.  I kept answering emailed questions orally before a colleague told me I was kind of missing the point and could just privately email my answers!  Embarrassing.

https://thenextweb.com/insider/2011/10/08/the-first-email-was-sent-40-years-ago-this-month/#.tnw_IFDEvXgZ
I wish I could say I embraced computer technology but I think I was a bit afraid of it, worried about being slow or incompetent.  I learned enough to do my job well but didn't explore technological possibilities beyond that.  As we would say in the field of ESL, I was a perfectionist learner with a high affective filter. Thus, I was the reluctant immigrant resisting integration as I acquired enough of the new 'language' to survive but did not immerse myself in order to become fluent.

http://www.fluentu.com/blog/educator-english/affective-filter/






     Because today I am an ESL teacher of adults, I see many similarities to the mature language learners who come to my classrooms.  Some are so eager to dive in, while others become anxious and fear embarrassment.  Many believe that adults simply can't learn a new lingo with the ease and speed of a child.  I coach them, as I would coach my younger self, to put aside their fears and have fun with this new tool, trusting that they already have the skills they need  to unlock its potential.  Importantly, I believe their most valuable resource is their home language.
http://www.colorincolorado.org/article/home-language-english-language-learners-most-valuable-resource

     Currently, I use digital technology whenever possible in my classrooms.  It breaks up the monotony of worksheets and lectures in a vibrant way and because of my background, I am drawn to video, visual imagery, and story.  Unfortunately, some community classrooms are extremely low tech and poorly funded.  In those classrooms, I bring my own laptop to inject images, video, music, and language learning apps like Duolingo throughout the lessons.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Duolingo
     It's important (but not always easy!) when teaching adults to find videos and other materials that are appropriate to their maturity, funds of knowledge, and practical needs.  Authentic instruction, such as preparing for a job interview in the United States, can be frontloaded with any number of online videos.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q5oC06Kz1X8

     Although many of my students are also digital immigrants, they are often younger and therefore more technically savvy than I.  Thankfully, they are usually quick to extend a hand when I stumble around the digital universe.  I am hopeful that my natural propensities, my media background, and this class will help me reduce my heavy "accent" as I navigate this new terrain.

My Second Act

I decided on SteeleAct2 as a blog address because earning an M.Ed. in TESL is part of a professional Act II for me.  I spent nearly 30 years working in broadcast television as a news and documentary director, writer, and producer. In that time, I had the good fortune to shoot in more than a dozen countries and to work with amazing people.

However, as far back as my college days, I knew I wanted to teach in higher education and decided that I would make that switch at about 50 years old as a sort of "retirement career".  I anticipated even back then that I might need to work well into my golden years and also that I might want to step off the media train at some point.  That turned out to be an accurate prediction because the time came when I found I had lost interest in keeping up with the rapid-fire pace of technological/digital changes in media.   Still, my 50th birthday came and went...it took me a while to land on just what I wanted to teach! Ultimately, the many roads of my interests, background, and disposition converged and I decided that teaching ESL to adults would be a way to be of service, to thrive in the vibrant multi-cultural environments I love, and to have the potential of working internationally again.

http://www.maryksteele.com