Period 3 - Leo Yang

[CALIS]

Thank you for participating in TIRP service-learning outreach!

Your reports are the basis for academic credit.  Whether or not you are seeking a credit option, reports are required as a university record of service-learning efforts and impact in local schools.

Required Format:
Session 1 materials: [The first line of your report is the session number and full title of the database item(s).]
Focus Q: [On a new line, list your focus question from your TAP form. If you changed the question then add the new version after the TAP version.]
*** For the minimum of 3 student specifics, do not refer to students by name; instead call them Student A, B or C.
*** For the minimum of 500 words, guiding questions are here: https://www.forums.usc-calis.net/showthread.php?tid=297

Use clear paragraph structure. If you include too much focus on the step-by-step process of the lesson rather than substance, you may be asked to revise your report.
*** The webboard is public. If you include names, commentary or observations, you will need to revise your post.

To Post:
1. For each report, select Post Reply.  (Do not select New Topic)
2. Copy/paste from your Word file and save a copy until after the semester is over.
3. Before pasting, confirm that you have met the minimum of at least 500 words.
4. Each report must be submitted by midnight within 3 calendar days after each session.

A CALIS staff member will review your report each week and post a message below of the scoring for your performance evaluation.
We welcome any questions or concerns you have about scoring.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Session 1: Evolution of ideas: Equality
- On time 3/3
- Substantive 6/6
- Student specific 6/6
Comments: you did a great job of including specific student questions and your own responses which contributed to the lesson! If anything, you could include the session materials and focus question at the top of the response to make it easier to follow.

Session 2: Equality is an ideal: Dimensions and Distinctions
- On time 3/3
- Substantive 6/6
- Student specific 6/6
Comments: good job at outlining the continuum used and acknowledged how the lesson was different from the initial TAP.

Session 3: Coping Multiethnic Groups at the Bargaining Table
- On time 3/3
- Substantive 6/6
- Student specific 6/6
Comments: the lesson plans were very detailed and easy to follow. You also emphasized the student engagement, which is extremely important.

Session 4: NYT: What makes us all radically equal?
- On time 3/3
- Substantive 6/6
- Student specific 6/6
Comments: great last report that detailed student details and how the lesson specifically applied to them. Even though it didn't cover everything outlined in the TAP, the chosen materials were very relatable to the students.

[Leo Yang]

[size=1][font='Times New Roman', serif]In our first TRIP session at SVAH with Ms Mejia’s APUSH Period 3 class, we introduced the students to the idea of equality and identity using the continuum. Since they were AP Students, they were fairly active and responsive to our questions, which made our session much smoother. [/font][/size]


[size=1][font='Times New Roman', serif]We started off by asking the students what word they thought of when given the word “Equality”. The students came up with a variety of concepts, including “fairness” “equal rights” etc. To enhance students’ understanding of equality, we also asked them to come up with words that associate with the opposite of equality. Similarly, students came up with “discrimination” “racist” “stereotype” etc. Having the students established basic understanding of quality, we then presented the students the list of words to put in the equality continuum. [/font][/size]


[size=1][font='Times New Roman', serif]Since they were AP students, they didn’t have too much trouble understanding the terms. That said, Student A, joint my many of her peers, asked for the meaning of “prejudiced”, to which we explained as “having a pre-determined judgment without fully understanding something/someone.” Overall, however, the students seemed to interpret these terms quite accurately, and it didn’t take long for them to place the words into the continuum.[/font][/size]


[size=1][font='Times New Roman', serif]We started the think-pair-share discussion by having each group share what word(s) they put in the most left end of the continuum. Student B picked “racist” and “domineering”, which prompted a discussion of which one should be to the most left. Other words that came up included “oppressive” “exclusive”, which we decided was not quite fascist but definitely xenophobic. Then, we asked a similar question for the right of the continuum. Student C said her group put “empathetic” to the right end of the continuum under “cultural relativism”, because empathy is the ultimate form of understanding and acceptance of other identities. Meanwhile, Student D said her group put “empathy” under “cultural awareness”, since empathizing with others doesn’t necessarily mean fully understanding their situation. [/font][/size]


[size=1][font='Times New Roman', serif]We explained that these two choices represent the two different interpretations of the word “empathetic”. Since there are different levels of empathy, the most basic level could only be having awareness of others and simply not rejecting other identities. However, the word can also be interpreted as fully understanding others and standing in their shows, which could fall into cultural relativism. Ms Mejia herself also joined the discussion and provided her opinion as well. Overall, it was a very smooth class, and the students had good dynamics understanding and participating in the activities. [/font][/size]


[size=1][font='Times New Roman', serif]Moreover, since we have a relatively small class this semester, we really get to know each and every one of the students. We started the session by introducing themselves, and had each of the 25 students introduce themselves by sharing a fun fact. This ice breaker quickly let down their guards, making it much easier for us to assign activities and give instructions. The teacher also introduced as to the different roles the students have in their groups, including “reporter” and “secretary” that we can utilize to carry out the group activities. Overall, I’m very glad to have this group of students, and I’m excited to go back in the following weeks.[/font][/size]

[Leo Yang]

[size=1][font='Times New Roman', serif]Having known us for a week, the students were way more relaxed and comfortable having us for the second session, in which we digged deaper into different forms of equality. We started the session by finishing up the reading from last class. We first went around the room and had each student read one sentence from the text. After about 10 minutes of reading, we conducted a think-pair-share activity and asked the students to place the authors on the equality continuum. We then went around the room and asked for each group’s answer. Most students put Douglas under “xenophobic” or “ethnocentric”, citing is explicit fear and exclusion of black people, denying their citizenship and “humanness”. Meanwhile, most students put Lincoln under “cultural awareness”, according to his recognition of people of color’s basic human rights. However. Student A pointed out that Lincoln should be placed in between “ethnocentric” and “cultural awareness”. She mentioned that despite lincoln recognized black people’s right to live and pursue happiness, they are still “not equal in color or intellectual endowment,” manifesting his belief in eugenism. It seemed the student A’s reasoning convinced most of the class, and many students changed their opinions after listening to her.[/font][/size]


[size=1][font='Times New Roman', serif]After that, we started by introducing the different forms of equality, including equal rights, equal treatments, equal political access, equal political influence, and equal opportunity. We again asked the students to break out in groups to 1) find an example of each form of equality and 2) place them on a continuum from 1-10 based on their prevalence in the United States. During the discussion, we walked around the room and helped students understand different form of equality. Many students were having trouble finding an example of equal political access. We first explained the definition according to the handout, then we gave the example of “rights to vote” and asked the students if everyone in the US has equal rights to vote. While most students said yes, Student B pointed out that while everyone has the right to vote, the access to election is not entirely equal to everyone, thus everyone’s political access is not completely equal. That provided us a segue to tell the students that equality isn’t just yes or no, but instead has different levels. [/font][/size]


[size=1][font='Times New Roman', serif]When then moved on to discuss equal opportunity, of which many students provided some great examples, including equal opportunity of education, medical care, and so on. Ms Mejia jumped in and provided an example of AP classes and asked the students if everyone has equal opportunity to take AP classes. It took the students a while to think about it before Ms Mejia and we jumped in and told them that AP classes are not offered in every school in the country. Even SVAH itself didn’t get a lot of AP classes until a few years ago. We then explained how AP classes have an impact on students’ college applications, which largely determine students’ further opportunities. We ended up spending the entire rest of the session discussing opportunity of education, especially college applications. Since college applications involve many different parameters, including grades, APs, SAT/ACT, extracurricular, etc, we asked the class whether college applications provided equal opportunities for everyone. Student C answered that while not everyone can get AP classes, “hollistic” college applications are largely equal because that can make up for it by extracurricular activities. We then moved on to explain that extracurricular, such as clubs and sports, are not equally accessible to everyone either. Overall, while we didn’t finish the handouts as we planned, I’m really glad we had conversation about college application, because it is a highly relevant topic to the students, allowing them to understand the inequality of opportunities around them. [/font][/size]

[Leo Yang]

[size=1][font=Arial, sans-serif]Session 1 materials: 0005g: Coping: Multiethnic Groups at the Bargaining Table[/font][/size]
[size=1][font=Arial, sans-serif]Focus Q: Does everyone have equal power?[/font][/size]


[size=1][font=Arial, sans-serif]Our third session was the most engaging session we’ve ever had. We conducted the Policymaking in Multiethnic Societies simulation and divided the students into 4 groups of different sizes. Zabos had 9 students, Abas had 6 students, Boros had 4 students, and Obos had 3 students. we instructed the students to read the different status quo in their handouts. We then gave them 5 minutes to come up with a series of needs that they wanted to take place in the country of Zabros, before giving them another 10 minutes to reach a consensus between the groups. To simplify the game, we told the students that if they cannot agree on a consensus by the end of class, there will be a civil war. [/font][/size]


[size=1][font=Arial, sans-serif]The students quickly got intrigued by the handouts, then started to discuss the initial needs for their region. Most of the students chose from the suggested options in the handout, but we also encouraged them to come up with their own needs based on their situation. During this time, the students quickly get to know their groupmates, especially in the 9-person group in Zabos. At the end of the 5 minutes, we asked each group to send up a representative to express their needs to us. [/font][/size]


[size=1][font=Arial, sans-serif]Having listened to the needs of each region, we instructed that due to limited resources, we can only fulfill four needs that have to be agreed on by the entire class (the entire country of Zabros). We then told the students that we will have a vote, and only if 12 or more people voted for yes, the bill can be passed. We then had the students break out into discussion. Student A from Zabos quickly took the lead and grouped everyone in the class together. She suggested that as the most affluent region of the country, Zabos will help establish universities across the country, but Zabos has to be the official teaching language. She also pitched that Zabos will help other regions develop industries, particularly in Obos. Meanwhile Student B from Boros suggested that there should be an equal amount of representatives from each region to vote in the government. Throughout the discussion, we constantly walked around the room and reminded students to keep in mind their voting power. We also asked the students to be as specific as possible in their needs while giving time calls. When there was only one minute left, Student A called everyone together and read out the four needs they had before turning them into us. The four needs were 1) Zabos will help construct universities in other regions of the country, but the teaching language has to be in Zabros; 2) the profit in Zabros will go to development in other regions; 3) there will be 2 representatives from each region voting in the government, and 4) build more industries. We asked the students to clarify the fourth need, particularly how and where the country could build industries. After a brief discussion, they told us that Zabros would be the one collecting taxes and distributing money for industrialization.[/font][/size]


[size=1][font=Arial, sans-serif]We then conducted the vote. Surprisingly, only the 9 students of Zabros voted for the bill while everyone else voted against it. That means unfortunately the country of Zabros would have to go into civil war. We then had the students put their tables back and discussed why the bill didn’t pass. Student C from Boros pointed out that while each region participated in the discussion, Student A and others in Zabos had the most say, thus only making suggestions that met their demands. Also, the suggestion that Zabos would be in charge of taxation and finances wasn’t agreed on by other regions. [/font][/size]


[size=1][font=Arial, sans-serif]We finally asked the students whether this game is applicable to real life, and everyone agreed. I think our simulation was a great success because the students were truly interested in the game and trying their best to reach a bill while maximizing the interests of their group. It was a vivid example of how governance works and the inequality in it, which students now have a first hand understanding of.[/font][/size]

[Leo Yang]

Session 4


Session 4 materials: 0414: What Makes Us All Radically Equal
Focus Q: what are the positive and negative effects of gentrification


Our fourth and last session with the APUSH students in Ms. Mejia’s Period 3 class was mostly reading heavy. Following the discussion about different forms of equality and the simulation, we wanted to have a more serious discussion about how inequality, specifically the inequality of opportunities, plays a role in our daily lives. The topic of the session surrounds the concept of gentrification, which epitomizes how even different people in the same city have unequal access to resources and opportunities.


Taking the NYTimes article “What Makes Us All Radically Equal: It’s not our brains and it’s not our bodies,” we explored how gentrification happens when people don’t get equal access to resources, and the challenges and obstacles that hinder the reconstruction efforts of communities. Since the class would mostly be readings, we wanted to make it as engaging as possible. We first reintroduced the different forms of equality, but focusing specifically on the equality of opportunities. We listed the different opportunities that could impact people’s lives, such as education, jobs, housing, medical care…before we introduced gentrification. We explained that gentrification is “the process whereby the character of a poor urban area is changed by wealthier people moving in, improving housing, and attracting new businesses, typically displacing current inhabitants in the process.” At that point, Ms Mejia jumped in and pointed at the high rise apartments out of the window and asked the students “can your families afford to live there?”


[size=1][font=Arial, sans-serif]That introduced a lively discussion. Student A shared that her family had to move to another area of the city because the rents rose due to the construction of luxury apartments in her neighborhood. We went on and asked “is it nice to have apartments like this in your neighborhood?” The students’s answers varied. Some said it’s nice to see nice and more luxury  facilities in the area, while others pointed out that these luxury facilities are not accessible to everyone, and they will take over the already limited resources that the local community has. [/font][/size]


[size=1][font=Arial, sans-serif]That discussion allowed the students to understand gentrification better. We then explained to the students that gentrification is a very complicated issue, and there is no right answer or solution to it. It can have a positive impact on one community while having negative effects on others, and it is important for us to look at the issue comprehensively. At that point, Student B jumped in and mentioned that gentrification might be beneficial in some areas while detrimental in others, which we also concurred with.[/font][/size]


[size=1][font=Arial, sans-serif]Having the students understood gentrification better, we played a video about the Life Modeled project that aimed to help the underresourced communities in Detroit, a prime example of gentrification. We then handed out the NYTimes reading about the project. We had students pop-corn and read the article sentence by sentence. After the class finished reading the first paragraph, we asked the students: based on the video and the introductory paragraph, do you think Life Remodeled is a good initiative?[/font][/size]


[size=1][font=Arial, sans-serif]The students hesitated. Then Student C pointed out in Line 35 that “miscommunication, resentment and embrace” between the local community and people who come in promising to rebuild the communities. It was a wonderful point which segued into our message that bridging the gap of inequality takes a lot of time and understanding to heal the historical mistakes for centuries. We then led a discussion of what are the “historical mistakes” in our society, to which the students pointed out “racism” “segregation” “marriage law” etc. [/font][/size]


[size=1][font=Arial, sans-serif]We didn’t read the part of the reading about Frederick Douglass. Instead, we spent the last 10 minutes answering the student’s questions about ourselves and our school, as well as college application. Since gentrification is a very difficult topic, and the class had some dense reading, the students weren’t as engaged as they were in some of our previous sessions. That said, I think the students still learned a lot, especially in looking at social issues such as gentrification through a more comprehensive and less binary lens. The teacher also advised us to provide examples that the students can relate to more, such as housing and districting in LA. That said, we were really glad to meet the students in Ms Mejia’s class, and wished them all the best in the future.[/font][/size]