Response paper

Running Head: RESPONSE PAPER 1

RESPONSE PAPER 2

Response Paper 2

October 27, 2020

Introduction

I decided to carry an analysis of the previous readings on African- American student’s apprehension on culturally relevant teaching, cCulturally sSustaining pPedagogy, and the change required to enable good teaching and break down boredom associated with learning.

Summary of the key points from the readings . Comment by Gamble-Lomax, Wyletta: What readings? This is not explicitly shared.

The authors have pointed out the concepts very clearly while illustrating each article. The key points in the readings are; tThe African American understandings of culturally pertinent training and culturally sustaining pedagogy. The study was conducted to evaluate the perception of educators and learners the relevancy of good teaching in urban background. In these readings, the learner’s responses showed that culturally suitable teaching approaches had a positively impacted on learner’s willpower and commitment in lecture content and remained consistent through the academic merits of culturally significant teaching. The subsequent article on second week reading which is ‘culturally sustaining pedagogy’, suggests that CSP trails to carry on then embraces language, knowledge, and collective diversity as one of the independent plans of teaching besides the obligated response to analytical and collective revolution (Edwards & Edick, 2013). Comment by Gamble-Lomax, Wyletta: What authors? Comment by Gamble-Lomax, Wyletta: This article should be the focus because it is from Weeks 5-8.

The aArticle on the “banking” perception of teaching, shows the interaction between teachers and students at different levels of education. How educators view students as listening objects that they deposit knowledge into them. Professors assume that student does no’t know anything, and, in most cases, they are not allowed to give their views. Students should be taught what they don’t know and what they should know. The article further claims that the education sector has been suffering from narration conditions. A “Case for Culturally Relevant Pedagogy” offers collectively significant coaching, and approachable training stands to be a pedagogy which is established in tutors indicating ethnical ability: experts on training in ethnic inclusiveness besides diverse background. Also, this appraisal demonstrated that the educators implementing this approach motivate each researcher towards linking the session content to their common background. Comment by Gamble-Lomax, Wyletta: Do not use contractions in academic writing. Comment by Gamble-Lomax, Wyletta: ? Comment by Gamble-Lomax, Wyletta: What article is this? It is not listed in the references. If this is “But That’s Just Good Teaching” this article is from week 1 and should not be the focus in the response paper.

The unclear points which should be illustrated upon

The article “A Case for Culturally Relevant Pedagogy” although it provides the significance and implications of an ethnically pertinent education, I personally believe that it does not involve the learners and educators to give their views on the best and applicable ways to achieve the culturally pertinent pedagogy. It encourages tutors to teach what they know. Learning that differentiates and shows their personalities existed events and values. This teaching cultivates their inherent intelligence and iInfinite potential. This article also does not offer an approach on in what way to attain all these principles. The author should have illustrated the most appropriate ways of attaining an ethnically pertinent education (Micheletti, 2010).

Statement which assisted me to change, expand and confirm my understanding.

The concept of “banking concept” has assisted me to expand my understanding of why this kind of teaching only allowed the student to receive, store and file what has been deposited on their minds by the educators. Its limited learners to think on their own and this made them rely on what they are being taught only because they thought it was unquestionable facts. This teaching concept does not allow students to use their skills to evaluate what they have been taught in class. They take every word as it is. I strongly concur with the author Paulo Freire as he recounts and critiques the cultural teaching method.

References

Edwards, S., & Edick Ph.D., N. A. (2013). Culturally responsive teaching for significant relationships. Journal of Praxis in Multicultural Education, 7(1), 4.

Micheletti, G. (2010). Re-Envisioning Paulo Freire's" Banking Concept of Education". Inquiries Journal, 2(02).

	Exemplary	Satisfactory	Needs Improvement
The quality of the summary (5 points) 4	Effectively summarizes main issues/content of the readings. Summary connects ideas across sources in relevant and insightful ways. Exemplary identification of main arguments within the reading and relation to ideas raised during class discussions and/or experiences in schools. Excellent connections between text and issues of early childhood education. [4-5 points]	Summarizes main issues/content of the readings. Summary connects ideas across sources in somewhat relevant and insightful ways. Good identification of main arguments within the reading and relation to ideas raised during class discussions and/or experiences in schools. Sufficient connections between text and issues of early childhood education. [2-3 points]	Summary of main issues/content of the readings is lacking. Summary barely or does not connect ideas across sources. Poor or some identification of main arguments within the reading and relation to ideas raised during class discussions and/or experiences in schools. Lacks connections between text and issues of early childhood education. [0-1 point]
The quality of the critique (10 points) 8	Offers a well-reasoned critique of the article. Excellent discussion of how your reading and reflecting expanded, changed or confirmed your thinking about the issues within the text, or the topics relating to the texts. Excellent engagement with the text, argumentation or refutation of points, or agreement with ideas. Exemplary use of evidence to support critique. [8-10 points]	Offers a critique of the article. Good discussion of how your reading and reflecting expanded, changed or confirmed your thinking about the issues within the text, or the topics relating to the texts. Good engagement with the text, argumentation or refutation of points, or agreement with ideas. Uses evidence to support critique. [4-7 points]	Poor critique of the article. Some to little discussion of how your reading and reflecting expanded, changed or confirmed your thinking about the issues within the text, or the topics relating to the texts. Some to little engagement with the text, argumentation or refutation of points, or agreement with ideas. Lack of evidence to support critique. [0-3 points]
The quality of writing mechanics and style/journal information (3 points) 2	Uses descriptive language that skillfully communicates meaning to readers with clarity and fluency, and is virtually error free. [3 points]	Uses straightforward language that generally conveys meaning to readers. The language in the paper has few errors. [2 points]	Uses language that generally conveys meaning to readers with some clarity. Writing includes many usage and spelling errors. [0-1 point]
APA Formatting (2 points) 1.5	APA citations are correct for both in-text citations and bibliography. Paper includes 3-5 quotes/citations from the text. [2 points]	APA citations have a few errors. Paper includes only 1-2 quotes/citations from the text. [1 point]	APA citations are missing or incorrect. Paper lacks quotes/citations from the text or citations are irrelevant to argument. [0 points]

Grade: 15.5/20

In this response paper, you are focusing on readings that are not within weeks 5-8. It is important that the response papers align with readings from particular weeks, as stated in the syllabus. Also, there are too many articles included here and it makes the critique of one particular focus muffled. Please keep this in mind for the final response paper.