"The "secret education," as Chilean writer Ariel Dorfman dubs it, delivered by children's books and movies, instructs young people to accept the world as it is portrayed in these social blueprints. And often that world depicts the domination of one sex, one race, one class, or one country over a weaker counterpart. After studying cartoons and children's literature, my student Omar wrote: "When we read children's books, we aren't just reading cute little stories, we are discovering the tools with which a young society is manipulated."
Christensen speaks of a "secret education." What is her argument? What is the "secret education?" How are you familiar with it?
"Students keep track of their responses in a dialogue journal. I pose the question: "Do you agree with Dorfman's position that children receive a 'secret education' in the media" Do you remember any incidents that support his allegations?" This is difficult for some students. The dialogue journal spurs them to argue, to talk back, and create a conversation with the writer. Dorfman is controversial. He gets under their skin...Many students don't want to believe that they have been manipulated."
What is the risk of admitting to influence by the media/secret education? Is it possible to still enjoy these childhood texts while critiquing them? How?
"The possibility of publishing their pieces changed the level of students' intensity for the project. Anne, who turned in hastily written drafts last year, said: "Five drafts and I'm not finished vet!" But more importantly, students saw themselves as actors in the world."
Can "secret education" provide individuals with a sense of agency/empowerment? Can the "secret education" be resisted, challenged or redefined? How?
note that this post has a picture, and a link, is clearly labeled, and holds questions to talk about in class, all components of a successful blog-though format is varied.