registering for classes

I asked Brian to help me narrow down my list of classes to register for. After we looked at a few and read some descriptions, he said something to the effect of, "So, are all the classes about how minorities? I mean, that's really valuable so you won't be a racist teacher, but they're not teaching you how to be a teacher!"

Although I really appreciate how liberal and progressive U of I is, I do wish that there were more practical courses. From my perspective, I'm pretty good at not being racist and recognizing the advantages I have as a white, middle-class, raised-Christian female. I want some strategies and discussions with other teachers about why this might work and the flaws in that. I suppose that's why I think I'd rather teach at a community college or PDS instead of a university.

and now, for something a bit lighter...

My writing studies teacher, on the gift of technology:

And what about the overhead projector? When that first came out, it was so amazing: this piece of technology that allowed you to face the class and simultaneously totally destroy your eyesight.

how we talk about racism

As I was reading an article this morning about social justice in curriculum evaluation, I considered how I usually discuss racism (often in the context of immigration). My argument is typically that we cannot stereotype people as a whole, and I often mention the model, hardworking immigrant.

That argument doesn't address what I believe actually causes prejudice: institutionalized racism. However, the argument about institutionalized racism is a lot harder for people to hear, because it requires whites to admit that we are oppressors. Another problem with the argument of institutionalized racism is that it makes the speaker seem more distant from their audience -- if you (and by 'you,' I mean a white person discussing racism) acknowledge that institutionalized racism is an overwhelming force in america, you probably place yourself within the (small) population of people working to resist it. That will create a divide between speaker and listener if the listener is not also down with the cause; and arguments tend to be more persuasive and more easily 'won' if the speaker can forge a connection with the listener and make it less threatening for the listener to alter their point of view.

Anywho, I don't have any answers to this quandary, just some observations. I'd like to move towards the more radical way of arguing, but I feel that doing so would just alienate my sparring partners -- I predict that they would listen to me less, placing me in a "radical crazies who talk about stuff I'll never agree with" category.

Edit: I think I'd like to do a research project on this at some point, exploring people's opinions of institutionalized racism (and their motivations for thinking the ways that they do) and perhaps trying to create a curriculum/unit that investigates institutionalized racism.