Abstract of Pat Guild’s “The Culture/Learning Style Connection:
Educating for Diversity”
This article was about the correlation between diversity and learning styles. It highlighted the research done to examine the similarities and differences between cultures and learning styles. The research was done in three ways: through observation, data and discussion. This information was then simplified and presented to make educators aware of these findings and how this information impacts students in our classrooms. This article touches upon the controversy surrounding this sort of study and concludes that, although the issues facing educators are sensitive and controversial, an awareness of cultural learning styles and diversity stand to help and not hinder a student’s growth.
Educating for Diversity”
This article was about the correlation between diversity and learning styles. It highlighted the research done to examine the similarities and differences between cultures and learning styles. The research was done in three ways: through observation, data and discussion. This information was then simplified and presented to make educators aware of these findings and how this information impacts students in our classrooms. This article touches upon the controversy surrounding this sort of study and concludes that, although the issues facing educators are sensitive and controversial, an awareness of cultural learning styles and diversity stand to help and not hinder a student’s growth.
Reflection on Pat Guild’s “The Culture/Learning Style Connection:
Educating for Diversity”
To be perfectly honest, I did not really agree with much of what this article had to say. While reading I found myself hoping that the biases presented were as a result of this article’s research being conducted 15+ years ago and not a reflection of today’s standards for education. Personally, I believe that education should be about differentiating instruction for students individual learning styles, but I do not agree that learning styles are an issue of race. If I took this article at face value it tells me that, as a “mainstream whit American” I value “independence, analytical thinking, objectivity and accuracy.” (448). Apparently, if that is true, my heritage and the color of my skin also predetermine that my educational experience will be best framed by competition, testing, and linear logic. It is interesting to note that these core focal points and sweeping generalizations are exactly what drove me out of public education as a child.
If, as a “mainstream white American” I cannot identify with my supposed learning style, then what can be said for the patterns determined for African Americans, Mexican Americans, and Native Americans? These sorts of generalizations keep our schools stagnant. There is a big difference between exploring culture with students and making them aware of the world around them, versus using their cultural backgrounds to predetermine how they will learn best.
Perhaps the most disturbing part of this article for me was the suggestion that we go back in time and reinstate segregation. On page 451 the article states that “Many large city school systems are wrestling with the appropriateness of ethnically identified schools such as an African-American academy.” I may not be a social studies concentration, but I thought that the civil rights movements of the 1960’s did away with this sort of racially defined learning. If educators and schools are doing their jobs all students should be able to learn in the classroom with peers of any race, color or background. After all, if we start separating and defining education in this way then what else could we segregate? Will the Black children who “imitate the ‘hip’, ‘cool’ behavior of the culture in which they live” be deemed more suited for certain types of employment or further education (448)? What about Mexican Americans? Since they are all apparently “more comfortable with broad concepts” will they not be taught more in-depth factual data? (448).
To be perfectly honest, I did not really agree with much of what this article had to say. While reading I found myself hoping that the biases presented were as a result of this article’s research being conducted 15+ years ago and not a reflection of today’s standards for education. Personally, I believe that education should be about differentiating instruction for students individual learning styles, but I do not agree that learning styles are an issue of race. If I took this article at face value it tells me that, as a “mainstream whit American” I value “independence, analytical thinking, objectivity and accuracy.” (448). Apparently, if that is true, my heritage and the color of my skin also predetermine that my educational experience will be best framed by competition, testing, and linear logic. It is interesting to note that these core focal points and sweeping generalizations are exactly what drove me out of public education as a child.
If, as a “mainstream white American” I cannot identify with my supposed learning style, then what can be said for the patterns determined for African Americans, Mexican Americans, and Native Americans? These sorts of generalizations keep our schools stagnant. There is a big difference between exploring culture with students and making them aware of the world around them, versus using their cultural backgrounds to predetermine how they will learn best.
Perhaps the most disturbing part of this article for me was the suggestion that we go back in time and reinstate segregation. On page 451 the article states that “Many large city school systems are wrestling with the appropriateness of ethnically identified schools such as an African-American academy.” I may not be a social studies concentration, but I thought that the civil rights movements of the 1960’s did away with this sort of racially defined learning. If educators and schools are doing their jobs all students should be able to learn in the classroom with peers of any race, color or background. After all, if we start separating and defining education in this way then what else could we segregate? Will the Black children who “imitate the ‘hip’, ‘cool’ behavior of the culture in which they live” be deemed more suited for certain types of employment or further education (448)? What about Mexican Americans? Since they are all apparently “more comfortable with broad concepts” will they not be taught more in-depth factual data? (448).
This article stresses the highly sensitive nature of this study and urges educators not to focus on the shortcomings of students, whether based on cultural background or other factors. While this is stated I don’t think it’s quite enough. I found this article to be full of generalizations and, if anything, it just stressed to me that differentiation in the classroom and an awareness of all learning styles will always go further then racially motivated instruction. While this article warned against making generalizations and drawing hasty conclusions, what good is that warning when those things are present in the text itself? I hope that I’m somehow missing the greater good of this article, but from my current interpretation I do not find it terribly useful or a positive influence on the teaching profession.
No comments:
Post a Comment