Tag: Education

So Let’s Put Some of the Pieces Together

This is part of a longer blog series, which you can find links to the previous as well as the next blog posts at the bottom of this blog. 

I think its time I put some things into perspective and piece some of the history and blogs together.

I have complied a time line with the perspectives of the blogs but also some big events of the Chicano History.

 

1947: Mendez v. Westminster Supreme Court: This case is critical to the birth of the Chicana/o  Studies program because it is the case that desegregated  schools for Mexican and Mexican American students in Orange County California School.

1968:Chicano Blowouts: Stepping stone towards establishing a formal conversation around the development and implementation of the programs as students walked out in response to the lack of an inclusive curriculum and discrimination they felt in their classrooms.

Plan de Santa Barbara: Noted as the manifesto for implementing Chicano Studies educational programs.

United Mexican-American Students (UMAS) of Loyola-Marymount Proposes a Chicano Studies Department: In a pretty hefty document the students of UMAS began to demand a Chicano Studies Department at LMU.

1970:Chicano Moratorium: An anti-Vietnam war protest that united the Chicanos under one cause, yet it went terribly wrong.

1973: Loyola Marymount University(LMU) officially merge and changes its name to what we know it as currently.

Mexican-American Studies Program proposed at LMU: Five years after UMAS proposes an immediate implementation of a Chicano Studies Program, a proposal for a Mexican-American Studies program emerges.

1974: Chicana/o Studies Department is finally borned at LMU.

Mid 1970’s:Chicana feminist get recognized in El Movimiento thus allowing the discourse of our Chicana Feminism class to occur.

2010: Governor of Arizona signs HB2281 and Tucson Unified School District disbanded Mexican American Studies.

2012: LMU’s Centennial Celebration!

The start of my Chicana/o Studies blog series.

So although this is the end of the series, it is time to recognize this would not have been possible without the help and support of Dr. Annemarie Perez, Dr. Karen Mary Davalos, Raymundo Andrade, Mahnaz Ghaznavi, and Christine Megowan and all those who laid the foundation of the department that gave birth to my interest to its history. Gracias!

Read more:

The Birth of the Chicana/o Studies Department, Setting the Stage, Students Propose a New Program, From Chicano Studies Department to Mexican- American Studies Degree Program, Capstone Project Gone Blog

From Chicano Studies Department to Mexican-American Studies Degree Program

 

This is part of a longer blog series, which you can find links to the previous as well as the next blog posts at the bottom of this blog. 

Back in 1968 the United Mexican American Students (UMAS) of Loyola-Marymount presented a proposal for the development and implementation of a Chicano Studies Department on nothing more than white paper and a typewriter. But after looking in the Chicana/o Studies Department’s archives in the University’s Archives found in the library’s Archives and Special Collections, I found a very interesting document. I found the Mexican-American Studies Degree Program description.

Finding this document comes at a shock for many reasons. One of which is simply at just looking at this document versus the proposal presented by UMAS. One of the big visual differences include the letterhead this document has. Not only does it have an official Loyola Marymount of Los Angeles letterhead but it also has a sort of seal for the program itself. This shows us that this document although not stated anywhere is not brought up by the students.Through its presentation, we know it means business because it is a formal document  that a faculty or even staff member might of worked on.

Aside from the way it looks, the language used is sophisticated and formal. It does not present an attitude or voice like the UMAS proposal did, to the contrary it presents itself very politically and states its desire in a way that it remains neutral yet confident in what it wants. The only thing that is left unclear though is what gave rise to this and why did it take 5 years for it to appear, as this document is dated from February 14, 1973. Since for the moment those questions remained unanswered we can review it so as to share its contents and try to answer the questions.The document is comprised of 5 different areas. It starts of with the rationale behind the program, then continues into the proposed program of studies which is followed by the class list for humanities and social sciences and ends with the costs of the program.

The rationale begins by first stating the demographics and then gives points as to why the program is vital to an university education. The author behind the document brings the reader’s awareness around the issue that there exist irrelevant issues to the minorities of color, which includes the nation’s second largest minority, the Mexican-Americans. A minority whose unique situation “necessitates academic attention from interdisciplinary perspectives” which would encompass analysis of their historical, social, economical, psychological, cultural and political aspects. It continues on by stating that a degree in such a program not only would develop a student but also “fulfill one of the most important goals of Loyola University” as stated by Father Merrifield in his address on the goals of liberal education which says that there must exist an understanding of social -political realities and awareness of and sensitivity to the deep social problems in America. At the core of it stood the University’s goal  to serve the community which included the presence of the largest population of Mexican descent outside of Mexico City and Guadalajara, including the presence of Mexican-American students whose presence is eluded from the 11% of Spanish surname population at Loyola. (Only to be compared to the approximate 21% currently found now at LMU.) These students need to be well prepared to pursue advanced degrees and strong foundations that a degree or double degree in Mexican-American Studies would provide them with.

The preparation would be coming from the proposed program of studies that included a focus on humanities and social sciences. The proposed program required the student to either take or test out of Spanish, a course in Race, Political Power in America, an Introduction to Mexican-American Studies and a course from one of the Research Methods list of classes. Then they would continue by pursuing one of two paths. One path required the students to take 4 courses from each section III and IV of the document course which are the list of Humanity and social science courses, respectively. Or if they preferred to develop a specialized skill in a particular area they could take any 4 courses in their area and any 4 courses in the other major section, e.i. 4 in history and 4 in social science. The student had some degree of liberty to what they wanted to take as section III and IV list of 33 classes to chose from.

The final section of the document is more at the administration level. As this section deals with the salary of the Director of the program and cost of the program as a whole.

This document seems to fit the needs of the population but still does not give us much to grasp on as to the change in the demand over the course of 5 years.

 

Sources:

Loyola University. Bellarmine College Record Group. Mexican-American Studies Degree Program, February 14, 1973. RG 12, Record Series D:  Departments and programs, Box 14. Loyola Marymount University Archives, Department of Archives and Special Collections, William H. Hannon Library, LMU, Los Angeles.

Photo:

Special Collections Entrance, Los Angeles. Personal photograph by Carmen Castañeda. 2012.

Read more:

The Birth of the Chicana/o Studies Department, Setting the Stage, Students Propose a New Program, Capstone Project Gone Blog, So You Want to Take Introduction to Chicana/o Studies?, So Let’s Put Some of the Pieces Together

The Chicana/o Studies courses at LMU have empowered me as a Feminista, Chicana y Mexicana

As I embark in a new journey I will take with me the tools I have gained through my Chicana/o Studies courses. I clearly remember the first day of my CHST 116 introductory course becoming more and more excited as the professor introduced us to the various kinds of readings we would be engaging in. We began the course with The Broken Spears: The Aztec account of the Conquest of Mexico by Miguel León-Portilla. The conquest of the indigenous people of Mexico and South America was something I had heard of before but not to the point where it became the area of study. Taking this course opened my eyes to see things from a different point of view. It invited me to become more critical and question the powers of dominance. I began to see the hidden message in commercials, adds, billboard signs, etc. How the education system in the United States continues to oppress minorities coming from working class backgrounds. I also became aware and informed about Los Angeles’ history and activism during the blowouts.

In my Chicana/o Studies literature and feminist courses I acquired the tools necessary to engage in the text through close readings. I constantly found myself in the position of the Chicana subjects in the stories we read. Reading into narratives and poetry made me eager to write because many times the word choice in the narratives described perfectly some of my experiences. In these courses I read Gloria Anzaldua‘s Borderlands: La Frontera / The New Mestiza and the idea of a third space through the new consciousness acquires as someone in between two worlds. Through Anzaldua’s work, I became empowered and no longer felt alone; it meant a lot to me to know that someone else had written about Chicana oppression within the family and culture.

Reading and analyzing the work of art of La Virgen de Guadalupe enhanced my relationship with her. As a fresh[woman] at LMU my first year I remember going to mass often, but as I began taking more and more Chicana/o Studies courses I grew apart from the Catholic Church. Patriarchy within the church is what caused the separation, and Our Lady of Guadalupe was a reminder of the conquest of the indigenous people in Mexico. I was so close to her before but all of a sudden it seemed like I had divorced myself from her presence. I lacked religion and spirituality my sophomore year, hence the reason why I had a rough year overall especially the second semester. In my junior year I took a Chicana/o Politics and Performing Arts class in which I developed my visual analysis skills and for the first time saw Guadalupe reinvented as a powerful woman. Guadalupe no longer became the submissive, virgin, and obedient goddess I grew up with; she was a hard working woman, she was young, old and beautiful, she represented the women in my family and myself, a college student with goals and dreams.

My Chicana/o studies courses have provided me the tools to utilize them as I begin my career in the field of primary and secondary education. One specific example i which I can utilize these tools is in fourth grade, under the California State standards students are to learn about the missions in California. The way this unit is taught is usually by glorifying the Spanish for establishing the mission system and providing work for the indigenous people in the area. Unless a teacher is conscious of the horrors of the Spanish conquest and how much indigenous women, children and even men suffered from this system, this is not taught in schools. My Chicana/o Studies History course provided me the opportunity to learn the depths of the mission system and the violence indigenous women suffered. I argue this unit can be taught in the elementary (fourth grade) level in a way that does not glorify the missions. This other way will provide the tools for children to question what the dominant narrative describes and what the response to that through counternarration.

I consider myself una Feminista, Chicana, y Mexicana and am proud of who I am! I know I will make a difference in the lives of people whom I come in contact with. I have learned the power of language and the power I have as a mujer. I want to thank the Chicana/o Studies department at Loyola Marymount University for existing and for being such a welcoming and loving space.

Reflection and Rethinking Retention

Last week I participated in the 2012 Annual California Association for Bilingual Education (CABE) conference in Sacramento, CA. CABE, a non-profit organization, was first realized in 1976 to promote bilingual education and provide meaningful educational schooling. It is composed of 5,000 members and 60 chapters who advocate for qualitative education experiences for students who come from a variety of cultural, multi-lingual backgrounds. The conference was composed of keynote speakers, workshops, student art contest, student essay writing contest, CABE store exhibit, and special events. The majority of participants are educators, administrative educators, parents (and maybe a few undergraduate students, although I did not meet any). The workshop that spoke to me the most was about the problem with retention at schools and the damage it does to children as young students and older students. Although it rarely happens, there are a few cases where students who are retain do great in consecutive years, but these are very minimal since there has to be a tremendous amount of support from the teacher, administration, and parents.

I had been waiting impatiently for this moment to come since last semester when I found out I was attending it. I began Thursday as a volunteer, distributing and collecting evaluation forms for a few workshops. In between this distributing and collecting I made sure to attend workshops that seemed interesting. The first workshop I went to addressed the issue of retention, and how many students, whether they are English Language Learners or not continue to be retained. This issue is prevalent in low-income, non-English speaking communities where parents do not necessarily question the teachers because they believe the teacher is always right. Unfortunately, because of pre-conceived misconceptions that some teachers may have about a particular race it is easy for them to give up on the student and retain them. What they don’t know is that when a teacher retains a student, the teacher and other administrative educators involve in the process do not take into consideration the amount of baggage the student will carry with this.

The presenter stated that research demonstrates that when a student is retained, that student is less likely to succeed not because they can’t but because they believe they can’t since they were already retained once. These are also the students that teachers tend to send to the office more often and who are labeled with behavioral problems and with learning disabilities. It is easy for a teacher to subject the student to a label than to work with the student and treat him or her as a human being who may have a slightly different way of learning than the rest of the students.

One of my two sisters’ kindergarten teacher was considering in having her retake kindergarten. I am unsure of the reason why her teacher was considering this. Her teacher spoke only English and could not communicate very well in Spanish with my mom, who cannot carry out a conversation in English. My mom was also unsure of the reason why her teacher was considering in retaining my sister half way through her kindergarten year. My little sister is intelligent and self-disciplined; participating in the Head Start Program (Pre-School) helped to be well prepared for kindergarten. I think what might have occurred was that she probably felt a little shy and didn’t speak much to the teacher. I’m not sure. Now she is in first grade, and she loves to read and write. When school is over her and my little brother participate in an after school program; once she is home she picks up a book to read or she goes straight into writing her own stories. She loves to write. Her current first grade teacher cannot understand why her kindergarten teacher would have wanted her to re-do kindergarten if she is a brilliant student. Had her kindergarten teacher retained her, I don’t think she would have grown as a student as much as she has now.

As a future education, I will continue to be reflective of my family experiences, and my very own experiences throughout the educational system to promote qualitative educational experiences for my students. Becoming aware of the many issues that continue to deprive student’s development as learners helps me to know what are some prevalent issues affecting our communities, especially those that are most vulnerable in fighting the injustices. The conference was composed of the majority women, which is a representation of the lack of representation within educators. There is a great need for representative role models in the education system.

Additional Resources: