Saturday, February 9, 2013

"How Working-Class Chicas Get Working-Class Lives" Reading Response

The portion of the chapter assigned to me talked about "High School Tracks" and how this tracking helps to reinforce class and even racial lines within the school the subjects ("las chicas") attended.  The author first explains how the "chicas" get tracked into the vocational-level classes, sometimes without the student's knowledge.  Then she goes on to describe how this knowledge affects both the way the "chicas" believe about their opportunities for college acceptance and the way that they approach even finishing high school.  The author explains the differences between the college "prep" track classes and the vocational track classes in terms of what skills they teach to their respective learners, and concludes that since students of color and of the working class are predominantly the students tracked into these vocational classes, the tracking of students in high school is in fact reinforcing class- and race-based lines outside the classroom.  Still, the author makes sure to point out that the "chicas" are not so willing to believe that they're at a disadvantage when it comes to the vocational track.  Several descriptions of success are given by the "chicas" that hint that they feel their lower wage jobs make them better off than their parents The author explains how this makes the vocational track seem to be almost acceptable to the "chicas" and their parents because of the inability of both to understand that better jobs are not necessarily those that will earn a living wage.

I believe that the author does a very good job of presenting direct evidence of the "chica" viewpoint, in many cases, quoting them directly to prove her point.  I think the author assumes we know a lot about the substance of the vocational and college-prep tacks, though, and refers to it passingly in several instances, but I think a better instance would have been to give better examples of the different classes within each track so as to better understand the differences between the two.  I believe she still does a good job explaining how the lack of education for both the parents and students has a great effect on how the students perceive school, the "tracks", jobs, and social class.  Each example is very illustrative and I like the fact that the author chooses in most cases to include the "chicas" opinion verbatim.

I agree with the author's conclusion that high school tracks are indeed reinforcing racial and class lines.  This makes me think that the concept of high-school guidance has really suffered, in turn, making the students really pay the price for the poor guidance.  Stil, I don't know that schools are completely to blame--the author makes a good argument that parents and students alike are ignorant of just how insufficiently they're prepared to earn a living wage from this vocational track.  In my opinion, this means that both students and parents should strive to be more involved in their own school experience and should attempt to understand the real outcomes associated with their performance in school.

"These students are held up as models to which all should aspire, and so much attention is paid to exceptions that it is easy to forget those who make up the rule."

I really liked this line because it hints at a lot of society's negative views on those students who form the "rule" of class and race-based distinctions within school.  I myself could give several examples of friends that came from nothing--illiterate parents with bottom-rung jobs-- that are now more successful than myself. And right alongside these examples, I would have normally said how this meant that anyone could've risen up and achieved something because these people did.  After reading the assignment, I am not sure about that now. These students may be a great example of "defying the odds", but their celebrity only seems to make it clear to me (at least, after reading this article) that more should be done to help disadvantaged students understand their own potential. This would help because students, teachers, and parents could understand their child's real chances, focusing less on what could be and more on what they really could get out of school.

4 comments:

  1. After reading your second paragraph, I can see we both had a couple of the same thoughts about this author. I loved her direct evidence used with expressing her points. Her use of verbal conversations, in my part of the reading, had a big affect on my understanding of what she wanted to get across. I also agree with you when you said that you like the way the author includes the opinion of the "chicas" too. I think as a reader, you prefer opinions from different groups so it assures you that the author isn't feeding you any bias information.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I agree with you, Lynnsey, about liking the passages where the author includes the direct quotes from the "chicas". I really think this lends an air of authenticity to the argument, even when the quote expresses a dissenting, or even off-topic, observation. When hearing others' observations, I think I get a lot more out of the direct observation than a paraphrasing of the same content. Sometimes you just need to hear it from the horse's mouth!

      Delete
  2. I think I had the same reading section as you after reading what you posted and I agree with what you said. I agree that it is not just the schools fault. The students should know about what track they have been put on and where it is taking them. If they can barely pass the vocational level courses, how are they going to pass the hard college prep courses?

    ReplyDelete
  3. I'm pleased you agree with me that the students should take a more active role in where they are "tracked"; like that cartoon we responded to the other day, students clearly are not taking enough responsibility for their own futures, trusting in their teachers and parents to handle it all. I think this is a big problem, but something important to remember about this article is that it points out that the parents and "chicas" in particular, know what they're about when it comes to education. The article mentions that the "chicas" and their parents are misinformed about their potential to earn a living wage after high school, believing that even finishing high school is better than the parents did themselves in most cases. I think this is important because it shows how much people need to be educated about the real possibilities out there in the job market and how much it will really take to do well out there. It's going to take a lot of reeducation among parents and students to get everyone on the same page, unfortunately for them, few seemed to learn this in time to make a difference.

    ReplyDelete