Ban on Ethnic Studies

If the inequalities in the United States were never exposed until this documentary came out, I would argue that it should have been one of the most eye-opening and challenging documentary any pair of eyes has seen. Apparently in Arizona, they like to be racist. I mean why not? They stole the state from Mexico--isn't that what always happens... colonizers like to complain about immigrants when really, they're the ones who immigrated. So what is the argument against ethnic studies?

• It's anti-American (anti-white)
• It's racist (against whites)
• It segregates (as if segregation wasn't already occurring)
• It teaches communist ideals (watch out everyone, Marx and Che are taking over!)
• It's unfair (to whites)

Ironically enough, these arguments prove that White Privilege exists in this country. Those who banned ethnic studies were 1) white and 2) male. Surprising! They are trying to convince themselves that ethnic studies doesn't educate; rather it segregates. It doesn't improve the lives of Latinos; rather it teaches them the wrong "morals". It doesn't give them freedom; rather it's anti-America. These arguments are purely from those who are subconsciously and consciously attempting to maintain the status quo. It makes little to no sense to ban a REFORM movement. These ethnic studies empowers Latinos. They are learning about their history, their culture, their way of life and it has been taken from them (like it wasn't enough to take away their land). Latinos are of the highest minority group to drop out of college after their sophomore year yet these ethnic studies graduates almost all of the students who took the class and they send 80 percent of those students to college. That is a feat. Why doesn't Arizona recognize that dramatic change? If these classes were offered at the 9th grade level, we can only imagine how it would affect the students. It gives them their freedom back and liberates them from the false and romanticized history they have been learning their entire lives in this education system. Give them a fair chance at positive reform instead of taking it away. You've already done enough, Arizona.

Discrepancy in the Occupational Realm: Gender

Evidence shows that girls are outperforming boys in our schools. This is a huge shift especially from the time when women couldn't even attend school. Unfortunately, women are still underrepresented in the occupational realm especially in areas of power. We are made aware of this discrepancy yet women still remain in school, why is that?

1. Women actually believe that men and women are equally rewarded based on merit
2. Differential reference group where women compare themselves to other women--they base their future on other women's achievement
3. Social powerlessness hypothesis which is where the young expect to attain rewards from their husbands therefore better educated women will have better educated men
4. Gender-role socialization where women respond to external validation as opposed to internal
5. Women are more likely to evaluate education as a means to enhance all aspects of life--a way of developing a more holistic sense of self

The fact that women still believe that men and women are equally rewarded based on merit is surprising, considering the amount of movements in our country that emphasizes the equal rights for all women--especially in the occupational field. I wish we made as much as men even in our current day but we are still making 75 cents to a man's dollar which is absolutely absurd. We obviously work just as hard if not harder to even achieve higher education. There is clear sexism occurring in our occupational realm which is clearly unfair to those who are rewarded in school for the hard work but not in their career. Yes, there are some women in power like Hillary Clinton and Condoleezza Rice but again, they are the minority. It's hard to find women CEOs, we've never seen a women president, and we rarely see women in high ranking positions. Somehow, even though men don't work as hard in school and are bothersome, they still find a way to reach higher positions than women. There is an obvious bias in our country.

My Problem With Tracking

The Tracking system furthers oppression in America's education system. White children all over the nation are consistently being tracked into the higher level-learning classes at a quicker rate than that of minorities. Typically minorities, especially Blacks and Hispanics, are tracked into the lower level performing classes simply because of the color of their skin. Where is the equality in that system? No where to be found, quite honestly. Even tracking students who they know will be able to perform at a high level is dangerous because the school system only perpetuates the status-quo. This holds truth because as mentioned above, white students are more likely going to be taking AP, IB, and Honors classes than their minority counterpart. Why is that? Why does society believe that minorities are not capable of achieving at high levels? We all know how much media plays a role in portraying minorities as the "underdog."

Tracking has too many repercussions that outweigh the argued benefits. It doesn't give students to prove that they are truly capable of performing at the same or higher level as their white counterpart. We diminish the minority students chances of entering into the academically challenging classes that push you. They are deemed as incapable thus they are placed in classes that don't push them to their fullest potential. That is what they need--they need high expectations. We need to stop instilling false notions of incapability in their heads because once they internalize those false truths, they will look at themselves in the mirror and say "I'm not good enough because society tells me so." How incredibly disheartening is that? I have witnessed in my school career the negative impact tracking has on a student. My brother was tracked in school therefore he felt indifferent about school. He didn't really care about his grades nor did he care about his teachers or what he was learning. The system told him that he might as well give up because he will not be able to succeed in high-achieving schools. Luckily he did have a teacher who pushed him. She cared enough about his success that she would ingrain a seed of hope.

High achieving classrooms are seen as "white property." Only the whites can attend those classes and be successful. This isn't just the belief of the system--minorities are fully aware of this issue yet they have twisted it against them. Because of this idea that high-level classrooms only have white students in them, minorities start hassling and mocking minorities who are in those classrooms. "Oh, you're acting white" has been a common phrase I have heard my entire life--even coming to Whitworth. "You're conforming to the ideals of everyone else, Ticcia... you better watch out." It's a sad reality.

Who am I? A cultural straddler

There are three main ideological profiles that explains how racial identity interacts with school.
1. Main-streamers: expected members to assimilate into American culture and institutions
2. Non-compliant believers: aware of norms but they favor-embrace own class/ethnicities
3. Cultural Straddlers: maintain strong cultural identity but achieve academically, they are also capable of critiquing the system.

After reflecting on the three profiles, I realized that I very much fall under the "cultural straddlers." This is in part because I am constantly empowered to pursue all that I believe in--even if it's against the dominant culture's beliefs. I have not always maintained a strong cultural identity because I was so assimilated into the dominant culture. So I guess someone could argue that I haven't always been a cultural straddler. I know the reason why I was a main-streamer was because of my Dad who decided to assimilate into the United States after being born and raised in Puerto Rico thus I didn't know any different because I was surrounded by people who were forced to believe that they too needed to assimilate in order to succeed in this society. I wasn't aware that I could be proud of my identity, what I looked like, and where I come from until high school. I started to understand that everyone's cultural identity looks different and that it was okay for me to own mine. I truly believe that once I was able to dig deeper into my multi-racial identity, I cared more about school. It was the inner-anger in me that pushed me to prove statistics wrong: I was going to succeed no matter the barriers put in front of me.

As I entered into my college career I was even more exposed to identity development. Questions like: Who are you outside of what people think you are? Why are you pursuing a higher education? What makes you stand apart from others? What makes you, you? What are your passions and what is your goal in life? These are obviously probing questions that undergraduate college students struggle with daily but I finally came to a point of contentment with who I was made to be. My story, my experiences, my relationships with others are what make me, me. I am a Latina and also very proud of my Korean descent. Because my ethnicity is so different, I do my best to simply give minorities in general, hope. I know each racial group has their differences but as a whole, minorities are the most marginalized in our society. I want to show people that we are capable of defying statistics by achieving higher education, challenging the system while maintaining our cultural identity.

Excuse me, supreme court?

Milliken Case 1974: Detroit implemented an inter-district solution which transferred students across district lines to create racially integrated schools--declared unconstitutional because you could only do this if you could prove that the date was creating policies to segregate schools


Keyes Case 1973: Forced desegregation within a district--the court said no, unless they could prove that the school board was doing things to segregate schools


Dowell 1992: Desegregation decree should end if the board complied in good faith

There are other court cases in which desegregation and/or equality in school districts was addressed. YET the courts deemed these cases as irrelevant and completely disregarded the importance of equal access to good education. All of this happened after the important Brown vs. Board case which integrated schools. Unfortunately after B vs. B white flight occurred, de facto segregation in the North was prevalent, and there was inadequate funding across districts. I think the United States does a really good job at taking a step forward but two steps back. It seems as if any time we try to make progress, we're held back by other reoccurring problems. The Supreme Court has made unorthodox decisions and it makes me wonder how they can morally declare desegregation as unconstitutional. Well, we can easily look to see who controlled the Supreme Courth--upper-middle class, white men who clearly do not want any kind of upward mobilization for anyone except their own race. How did the Supreme Court get away with declaring all of these cases as unconstitutional when the Brown vs. Board case went in the favor of integration? How ignorant are we in this country? Fortunately we have made progress in the Supreme Court but there still seems to be a hidden system that continues to segregate schools.