RE_5539

Lisa Outland-
I learned so much from this chapter. I was surprised to see the connection between the home literacy world and the school literacy world being explained so explicitly. Jake truly learned his values concerning literacy at home. What he saw a use for he didn’t have a problem learning. But, if he couldn’t find the everyday practicality in school work, then it was a waste of time. This made so much sense to me and was the missing piece to the puzzle I sometimes have concerning my male students. It also shocked me that his home was full of literature and opportunities for reading, yet this didn’t really carry over to his school world. I think this was mainly because of the attitudes he encountered in each world. His family, especially his grandmother, praised his reading abilities and other abilities. He was so smart. Yet in school, he was a typical kindergartner, then a first and second grader who was struggling. Jake’s story gave me insight concerning some of the boys I have taught in the past, one presently, and many that will come in the future. I realize now I have to find a way to tap into their interests as often as I can to help them succeed. But, this is true with any student. Yes, this will take a lot of hard work and extra planning, but we teach for the children, we owe it to them to do what is needed to help them towards success. I knew boys were different from girls, but it was not until I read Jake’s chapter that I became more aware of how their minds work, where school is concerned. Both children wanted to please their teachers to some degree, but Laurie was all about creating a fantasy world based on the future in her family. Jake also created a fantasy world, but it was based more on past events that he changed so he became the star of the fantasy. But, more importantly, their whole attitude towards school was simply different. Jake seemed a little more standoffish about learning as a whole. Laurie appeared very eager, even with all of her learning differences. Jake is typical of many of the boys I see in kindergarten. If he can touch it and manipulate it, then it has meaning and worth to him. I just wonder how can we bridge the gap between kindergarten and first grade a little better so that the two school worlds aren’t so different. Another interesting two different worlds issue that kept replaying through my head was the part of Jake’s mother wanting him to get a college degree and his father walking through the room mentioning he didn’t need a degree. In school, it has been my experience that we try to plant the seed of more education in our children’s heads. With Jake, it seemed that his mother and school were on the same page with education while his father was on another. How conflicting for a small child. How many children do we teach that also lives through this type of conflict and how can we get them to understand that you have to look at both worlds, not one or the other, or which ever one seems easier?

While I did not enjoy reading this chapter as much as the one about Laurie, I could definitely see the connections between home and school and their impact on Jake’s literacy learning very clearly. One of the biggest themes that stuck out to me in this chapter was the fact that Jake’s identity was very much defined by his family. I was upset to read about the differences between his parents’ view of Jake’s future education. I wondered as I read about the interaction between them, when Jake’s mother voiced her hope that Jake would go to college one day and his father’s response that Jake would take over the family business, whether this was an issue of argument often in their home. Either way, this had an immediate impact on Jake and how he viewed himself. I very much believe that students will reach the goals that we show them we believe they can reach. Jake respected his father and his business very much and was definitely shaped by the views of his father regarding his future. Hicks stated, “The stories voiced about us, by those whom we most love and value, shape our identities in ways more powerful than even the most authoritative instructional systems of social regulation.” Jake was very aware of what was expected of him and what his family believed he was able to accomplish.

Another idea that interested me from this chapter was Jake’s success in a program like Writer’s Workshop, in which he was given much freedom and was given resources and instruction that he was comfortable with, versus the more rigid and formal teaching that is used most often in higher elementary grades (second grade and higher). “Writing in Workshop came closer to helping Jake negotiate home and school identities.” Hicks noted, “By second grade, social spaces and practices were more bounded and constrained. Within those bounded practices, Jake’s options were more limited.” I guess I am curious how to best create an environment like the ones he experienced in Kindergarten and first grade as he moves farther up the grade levels into fourth and fifth grade and higher. This is such a difficult task because the concepts become more structured and students need to be taught the “correct” way to do things (ex: grammar, paragraph formats, etc.). I also found it interesting that Jake thought the science kits were “dumb”. My county also uses these kits and I have always found them to be very flexible and hands-on experiences and rarely have seen my students resisting the observations and experiments. In fact, my experience with the science kits has been that they tend to keep students so excited about the things they are seeing and the experiments they are doing, that they often do not realize that they are “working” when they write in their observation notebooks, or fill in charts of information, etc. ~Allison Reese

The first thing that struck me in Chapter 5 was the huge contrast in the way Jake was expected to behave and learn at home versus school. Jake’s parents believed that their children should “learn by doing”. Jake’s home was filled with many different activities that allowed him to move, create, and build. Unfortunately, I realized early in the chapter that these characteristics of home-life would eventually lead to problems in the classroom. In schools, many teachers do not believe in “hands-on” / active engagement. Therefore, I could foresee Jake having huge difficulties sitting in a classroom and working at a desk. As I think about this I definitely see the need for teachers to become more creative and “hands-on” in their classrooms. We need to realize that students have different learning styles. I am not saying that we should cater to Jake and do everything his way. However, with a student like Jake, the only way to reach him may be through hands-on activities.

As I continued to read I began to see the strong role that Jake’s dad played in his life. Jake, one can tell from the get go, truly wants to be just like his dad. This is shown by Jake’s shared interest with his father in carpentry and NASCAR. I also think Jake’s choice of centers (blocks, puzzles) reflects things that his dad would have probably enjoyed as a child. I really enjoyed reading the conversation between Hicks and Jake’s grandmother. Jake’s grandmother truly shed light on the similarities between Jake and his dad. The author states, “These words voiced about Jake echoed themes from his father’s life story: independence, giftedness, as a learner, reluctance to box himself into a single profession.” I actually have to say that I am glad that Jake shared a strong connection to his dad. Unlike Laurie, Jake truly has “good” role models to look up to and model after.

When reading about Kindergarten I was glad to see that Jake was able to start school in a centers based classroom. This classroom provided a good initial transfer form home-life into school. Jake, at times, was able to select the activities that he wanted to do. My only problem with Jake was his refusal to complete many school literacy practices in an appropriate manner. It bothered me when his teacher stated, “He’s always on task; it just might not be your task.” Although I am all for Jake having time to complete hands-on activities, there comes a time when you have to do things that you do not want to do. I did not like the fact that he would blatantly refuse to complete some tasks. As a teacher, I would have probably tried to use Jake’s centers time as an “incentive” to get him to complete his other work as well. I wonder if this is a bad idea. I’ve never taught Kindergarten, so what would be the best way to correct this behavior?

As first grade began I was very interested in Jake’s desire to be “good”. Just like Laurie, Jake realized that being “good” would help his standing in the classroom. As I read about his changed behavior at home, I wondered if this was coming from the fact that he was now trying to be calm and subdued at school. Jake was a very “active” child. He had to get his activeness out somewhere and the only appropriate place for him now was at home. Continuing into first grade, I saw the same problems with Jake that I saw with Laurie. This first grade teacher also strictly adhered to the 1st grade Anthology. Due to this fact, Jake could not read stories with the rest of his peers. Just like with Laurie, I wondered why this teacher did not differentiate instruction for Jake. I also became concerned with the fact that the teacher did not try to connect Jake’s interests with his reading. I know from personal experiences that there are many great books out there related to NASCAR and things that Jake was truly interested in. Why were no connections made for Jake? Jake only responded to things that seemed important and valuable to him. Therefore, I really feel that the 1st grade teacher should have made more of an effort to connect Jake’s interests with his learning!

For all of the first grade teachers out there I am now beginning to wonder about how 1st grade is taught. I realize that 1st grade is tough because the students are for the first time truly beginning to read; however, should reading be taught with just the anthology? I truly feel that Laurie and Jake both had huge issues transitioning from K to 1st. Does this happen with most children? What do you do to make the transition easier?

Once again Jake’s second grade year proves more successful just like Laurie’s. As I had hoped, Jake’s second grade teacher provides more freedom in his book choices. However the following comments made by Hicks truly worried me: “Overall, however, I’m seeing Jake position himself outside the culture of formal schooling, both physically and emotionally unless he can connect it immediately to the worlds he most values.” Once again we see that the teacher needs to find ways to connect Jake’s interests to school. Although this can’t be done for everything, one wonders if a little effort by the teacher to include Jake’s interests might engage him more in the classroom. I truly felt sorry for Jake because he was caught between being valued as “highly gifted” at home and “below grade-level” at school. No wonder he didn’t want to participate. I wish that Jake’s teachers had allowed him to experience success at school. If he had been successful, he might have found school more valuable and worthwhile. Hick’s sums up Jake best when she states: To bring about critical change that we, as teachers, demanded of him, educational practices would have to be at least partly situated in the life worlds that Jake so strongly valued.”

Boyhood Stories and Practices (Chapter 5)- Laura Wollpert

As I read Jake’s story, I wonder how he will proceed in school. It seems that Hicks writes a prescription for his education that would allow the best possible chance for Jake to be able grow, value and interact with educational practices. She prescribes, “For Jake to engage with the kinds of literacy practices valued by school, he would have to see a space for the things he most valued. Instruction that allowed for movement between practices would for Jake require that his self-reliance, preference for three-dimensional symbolic activities, and valuing of embodied action be valued aspects of school.”

First, why weren’t Jake’s educational preferences taken into account? Another thought which of course would have been out the question is the Montessori system where the educational needs and interests of the child are considered when writing an education prescription. I guess what is frustrating about Jake’s story is it is very clear how to connect with Jake. I have a colleague that is suffering from something very similar. Her son is very gifted, but he is unwilling to engage in activities that do not interest him. He very interested in nonfiction books, history, biology, etc. In fact my colleague was tutored by her fourth grader when she took college level biology. The boy’s teacher will not allow for any alternative approaches to be used with him. It is the traditional way or no way. Why isn’t there room for different learning styles? In many cases the traditional methods work, but in the cases where they do not, and there is a clear path that will work why not go for it? In the case of Laurie, her educational prescription was not clear as it was for Jake. It sounds like he will most likely follow his father’s path.

After reading further, it becomes apparent that Jake’s father does not value education for the sake of being educated. This is fine for him because he has found what he wants to do, but he is instilling his educational believes in Jake. Jake’s mother mentions college, but Jake’s father steps in and says that Jake will take over the family business. This is fine if this is what Jake wants to do and as long there is a need for this type of business, but what happens if there is no longer a need and Jake is left with out a business. His father is not allowing Jake the opportunity to explore or develop other areas of interest. Jake's mother seemed genuinely concerned about Jake's education. What will happen to Jake?

My oldest sister is suffering right now because she was laid off and is competing for jobs with people who have college degrees. Her skills are obsolete and with no degree she unemployable at least to the degree she was prior to being laid off.

Working in a community college setting, I see students’ everyday that did not learn the necessary skills in high school to take college level courses. Many of these students are required to take many semesters of developmental courses before they can proceed. Somewhere there is a lack of connection, and I think this book pinpoints the problem, but the solution is not an easy one.

I hope more research is devoted to this problem. I am sure there were other students in Jake’s class that suffered from the same problem as he grew up in a working class community. It is apparent that Jake has great potential. Hopefully someone will reach Jake to help him engage in school.

At the beginning of the chapter, Jake appears to be a typical boy found in an elementary classroom at my school. He is eager to please his teachers and seems to enjoy learning new things. He learned to “work the system” and adheres to classroom and school rules on a regular basis. I always find it interesting to hear at parent conferences how different a child is at home than at school. Jake seems to be much more boisterous at home than school. I don’t know how you raise children to be so aware of their own surroundings and be able to follow rules in public and not as much at home. I know this is a common occurrence. It just reminds you of how smart children really are. As the chapter progressed, Jake’s frustration with school emerged. The gap between home and school is getting larger and larger.

Jake is emerging as a reader at home and is being encouraged to following in his father’s footsteps. He is eager to please his parents and seems interested in similar subject matter. It is interesting how his parents perceive him as a student. They see him as a good reader and the school is noticing his weaknesses. Jake is engaged when the subject matter deals with what he is interested in. His parents’ opinions of higher education differ greatly. Jake is hearing all of the conversations and is forming an opinion quickly about school – he dislikes it.

I really felt sorry for Jake when his NASCAR miniature was confiscated. I know all teachers have to take toys away from children and I have to do it on a regular basis, but seeing this from Jake’s point of view makes me stop and think. Jake’s entire attitude about his school work changed when his teacher took away his toy. I know why she took and it and understand that, but when you actually see how important the object is to Jake, it makes me wonder, should we as teachers at least be open to the opportunity to see why the child has to toy on their desk? Jake’s teacher could have allowed Jake to use the toy for the assignment and then had him place it in his book bag for the rest of the day. This way, her academic day was not hindered and Jake’s school work was encouraged. We as teachers have no idea how important a seemingly meaningless object is to a kid. By taking away Jake’s car, his teacher stifled Jake’s creativity and excitement for the assignment.

Home-School connections need to be made in all classrooms. We as teachers need to learn what motivates our students and encourages them to learn. Our classrooms will benefit from the extra effort we put forth to see what entices our children to master new subject matter. Students need to feel a sense of belonging and comfort as soon as they enter the classroom door. Laurie and Jake both needed (as all children do) a method of instruction that allows them to accept their identity as a student, friend and community member. These children need to be encouraged. We as teachers have classrooms full of Lauries and Jakes every year. We can shift our instruction to meet their needs and reap the benefits from their enthusiasm.

Beth Rigsbee

Jake reminded me of many boys in my classroom. He was interested in the things that he could relate to and uninterested in school and literacy practices. I think this is true of boys from all different classes, but i can see where it really affects boys from working-class families. Boys, in general, seem to be less interested in reading and writing. How can we, as teachers, make literacy more appealing to boys? Like Mrs. Hicks stated at the beginning of the chapter, most teachers are women, who seem to struggle relating with boys. She definitely had more of a connection with Laurie, and i know that in the past, i've had many connections with the girls in my classes, but fewer with the boys. I think that it is actually one of the greatest challenges of teaching.....How do women teachers make a true connection with boys in their classrooms? It's necessary in order for the boys to learn to their full potential.

Jake did well in kindergarten. He was able to move around the classroom and make choices as to what he wanted to participate in. I noticed that he rarely chose the writing corner, unlike Laurie. Once moving on into first grade, Jake began to struggle with school practices. He had to learn what the teacher told him to learn, whether it interested him or not. It was almost as if the teacher implied that what he wanted to learn, was not important. Once again, the first grade teacher did not individualize reading instruction. Did the administrators at this school not notice that children were falling behind in this first grade classroom?? Why wasn't anything done about it? Obviously, the reading series was not working for all of the children. I'm just glad that the kids had a great 2nd grade teacher to move onto.

I really felt that Mrs. Williams did as much as she could to get the kids interested in learning. I was baffled that Jake didn't like the science experiment. Well, he liked the experiment but not the work to go along with it.

Soap Box: (Sorry) This happens to me all of the time. I come up with a great, engaging lesson, yet i hear small complaints when it comes down to the nitty-gritty work that goes along with it. I know that some kids, like Jake, think that some writing work is pointless and useless, but how else are they going to learn to express their feelings in writing, if they don't get the chance to try? Sometimes i feel that teachers can only do so much, then it's up to the kids to take over. I don't know, i guess i just sympathized with Mrs. Williams, a little more than Jake at that point. Like Mrs. Hicks suggests on page 134, how can teachers make this constant connecting happen in a real-life , complex situation? There are about 20 kids in a typical classroom. There is NO possible way a teacher could hit on everyone's interests all of the time. A good teacher tries to incorporate as many interests as possible into her lessons, as many times as possible a day. I've always hoped that if i atleast hit on everyone's interests atleast once a day, i was doing good. I guess i'm just frustrated. Any suggestions?

I think the best idea of the book is the writers workshop notebook. I'm going to incorporate it this coming year into my classroom. I never realized how important of a tool it could be for some kids, especially working-class children. Atleast in that one spot, they get to express their true identities and feelings, and dreams. Overall, this chapter opened my eyes to some things i hadn't thought about before. I never realized the impact of class until learning about Jake and Laurie, even though i think many kids go through issues of some kind, no matter the class. My mind is racing with thoughts of how i can improve my teaching, and become more sensitive to gender, race, and class,.....which is hopefully the point of this course.

Hmmm. Well I left very frustrated by this chapter and have somewhat of a sense of hopelessness. It seems once again we as teachers lose a battle to a student's homelife. I was confused at the portion of the chapter that said Jake learned to "do school" when it came to the point where he won the ABC student award. He was able to adhere to expectations in that school setting, so why couldn't he do that at home? This made me start to realize there were never expectations for school and education set by Jake's family at home. No one seemed to "make" him do anything due to the parenting philosophy of Jake's mother that children need to learn from their mistakes. Yes the parents read to Jake and involved literacy in their day to day tasks, but there was no standard for literacy learning at home. This is probably due to the fact that Jake does come from a working class family, but still it seems the blame was being put on the teachers and not Jake's family context.

Yes, there are things teachers can do. Jake was only interested in doing activities at school that interested him. Kindergarten somewhat worked for Jake because he was allowed to do what he wanted to do. Isn't there a lesson here that needs to be taught that the world doesn't always allow you do to what you want to? It is obvious that Jake comes from a home where the family has different ideals, but I am still just stumped by this situation. At the end of the chapter Hicks speaks that schools need to change for the Jakes and Lauries to feel they belong at school. So I would like to ask her, what more can we do? We can continue to try day in and day out to make our lessons culturally relevant. We can attempt to show children the significance of education. We can provide them a loving and caring environment and have an open mind when it comes to their histories and home lifes. But within the school setting now, what can be done?

Resistance and tuning out became a safer route for Jake. He was obviously a product of his enviornment and embraced many of the same values of his father. Hicks states that "for Jake to engage with the kinds of literacy practices valed by school, he would have to see a space for the things he most valued". She then stated that responsive school for Jake would be an acknowledgment of his identity a sa member of a blue collar family with particular expressoins of masculinity and that in his first and second grade years that did not occur. The writers notebook activities seemed to work for Jake, other activities that did not involved his interests did not work. At some point kids have to meet us halfway. What seemed missing here was that Jake was not open to valuing anything else besides want valued to him. It is then our job as teachers to only teach them about what they value? Isn't school a place for learning new ideas and having new experiences? What are we then to do?

So I am stuck at the end of this chapters. Yes Jake's behaviors make sense do to the context of his family life, but now what? I would have been interested to see if the teachers made an effort to get to know Jake personally, and perhaps have a conversation with him about the importance of school, ect, but really I am just stuck. Does anyone have any ideas of where we go from here with Jake?

As a Kindergarten teacher I have had the experience of teaching children like Jake. First of all, I would like to mention that if Jake were in my class he and I could discuss all of the NASCAR drivers and the interest that we both have in the sport! Many of my current students have family who work for NASCAR teams. I have tried to make a conscious effort to find a personal connection with each child and their parents. It could be a shared interest, a common friend, etc. This is important to me. I understand that it becomes a problem when teachers want to be "good buddies" with their students and not the role of teacher more seriously.
Jake came from an honest hard-working family. In the eyes of his parents and grandparents he was reading well because the context that was set for reading at home was agreeable for Jake. As an example, Jake was able to read the decals and words on his racecar models, just as some children can read restaurant signs or other familiar types of environmental print.
When Jake began to feel somewhat frustrated by first grade, it was of no surprise to me. I have tried many times to explain to parents of first graders (I taught first grade for six years) that reading can have several purposes and the classroom reading practices are most often very different from reading casually at home. Both are very important in a child's literacy development. Children should encounter parents reading at home and should also understand that there is more to reading than just decoding. That is only the beginning!
Parents should begin to understand that teachers in K-2 have a responsibility to teach concepts of print, phonemic awareness, decoding skills, comprehension strategies, literary genres and much much more. So when a parent describes their child as a competent reader at home, or shares that their child is reading at a certain grade level, or that their child is most definetly "gifted" I have tried to tactfully explain that reading instruction is not just reading a story and answering a few questions.
Children like Jake may resist some activities in first or second grade when the stakes are higher and expectations are different than Kindergarten where there is often more freedom of choice and a sense of independent learning. Reading which was once view as an enjoyable low risk, non-stressful task when adult help and guidance is nearby, may evolve into an activity where the child feels anxiety and confusion about the reading experience. In the case of Jake, he must be carefully nurtured and taught to understand that reading and language practices at home are most certainly different than reading and writing at school. Direct instruction should reflect the differences among our students. Again, we must keep in mind that we teach children using the SCOS as our guide.

Initially in reading this chapter I started to compare Jake and Laurie. I began to wonder what it was about first grade for both of these kids that caused them such struggle? As a first grade teacher I thought about the structure and agenda of a first grade classroom The L.A. curriculum is extremely heavy in comparison to other grades. This is the year when the foundation for spelling, reading and writing is laid. This is also the year that expectations for reading progress is greatest and that is our primary focus making it difficult to allow for more freedom.
I noticed that in neither the case of Laurie or Jake did we have evidence of class make-up (i.e. size, gender ratio, ethnicity or special needs). So we are missing part of the total picture.
I believe that as teachers we encounter Jakes and Lauries every year. While it is true that our politics drive the hope for middle class conformity we know that our classes are filled with all types of children and learning styles. I noted that this book was published in 2002 with the research having taken place prior to that. Today's hot educational topic of differentiated instruction and its benefits appear to be more supported by the everchanging students we encounter.
I agree to an extent with the author's push for instruction more suited to Jake and I believe that a more flexible classroom and differentiated instructional tasks that he could choose from would have helped him (and others) to merge their two conflicting worlds. However, I believe that without some "buy in" from Jake regarding the need and use of these tasks he would continue to consider them "stupid" and use his stall tactics. This being due to the heavy influence of his male role models who appear successful in their own world which we cannot change.
What I get from this is that as teachers we must strive to fine tune our instruction to accomodate all students and their learning styles. But most of all we need to set a purpose for these tasks and connect them to their lives (world) to generate that "buy in" so they make the choice to conform.
n no way is this going to be easy, but I would hope that in doing so we can instill a sense of belonging for those students and begin to create that hybrid space Ms. Hicks wrote about.

Although Jake's story had its share of disappointment, I didn't find this chapter to be as discouraging as the 4th chapter (Laurie's story). I was encouraged by the caring, nurturing aspects of Jake's home life. Although his mother and father didn't adhere to a strict definition of formal education, they did value reading and learning. I've had much interaction with parents, working class AND middle class, who insist to me (usually at the beginning of the school year) how well their child reads or how clever their child is. Often these parents are correct in assessing their child's eagerness to learn or love of reading; these parents want the best education for their child. Perhaps they are unaware of the institutional aspects of literacy learning. They are focused on the practical aspects of learning, much like Jake's father. Jake was becoming the learner that his father envisioned, a practical learner. Unlike the traditional literacy education experts who view literacy education as a process of moving children FROM their home practices TO more formal textual practices, Jake's father merely hoped that Jake would be academically succesful enough to assume the family business. Is that an insignificant or insufficient goal for Jake? Do we, as a society, believe that all students must attain a certain level of formal education that includes what we once described as "college bound"? I do not mean to suggest that we label students or lower our expectations. Many students mature late and excel beyond their parents' expectations as they enter/complete high school. I merely suggest that we, educators, humbly respect the parents' insight regarding their student. Jake's successes and failures were related to his strong connection to his father and to the values (class and gender) values that father embodied.

How sad that Jake's worlds (school and home) became more and more disparate as he progressed to 2nd and 3rd grade. Yes, he excelled when he was allowed the freedom to choose and when the classroom teacher's practices more closely mirrored the freedom of home. Does this suggest that a classroom teacher must adjust her practices to "suit" her students? Or does this suggest that the classroom teacher must be aware of her student's home lives and be open to modifications where certain students are concerned? How do we as educators help broach that divide between "institutional practices of schooling and working-class values" (p. 99)? Hicks certainly attempted unsuccessfully to do just that. Can a sole practitioner (educator) accomplish such a task without the support of the entire body (of educators)? Hicks did manage to open up a dialogue with Jake and his family. How do we further that sort of dialogue into active practices that benefit the working-class (or even poverty-level) student? I don't have answers; I just have questions, even more than when I first began this class! I do believe, however, that the answer does lie in dialogue! My personal experience is that a willingness to LISTEN to parents and to students often allows for improved trust and an improved learning environment for student and teacher. I especially liked the statement Hicks made at the very end of the chapter (p.135) in support of courageous educators who brave the status quo to find alternative ("creative") means of "helping students negotiate boundaries of race, class, ethnicity, and gender." She points to schools that have attempted to become what she calls "hybrid" spaces. Hicks points out that the most important, most effective, way to begin to bridge the cultural, gender, class divide has nothing to do with methods of instruction but with the ability to initiate a dialogue with the community members (parents, grandparents, students, etc.).

I truly believe that inclusion usully breeds success; classrooms seem to work most efficiently when teachers are empowered (respected and allowed to be creative) and students are empowered (respected and allowed to be authentic). Sadly, my experiences this year can not be described by the above statement. I honestly believe that the strict compliance that was required of me and my students to specific and very narrow, test-driven (formal) instructional methods and strategies actually had a detrimental effect on the learning that was experienced in my classroom. I think that my students, like Jake, couldn't see the relevance of those learning strategies. Like Jake, they thought it was "stupid." I take hope in the encouragement Hicks offers us (educators) if we will bravely follow our hearts and seek alternative practices that speak to us and to our students.
Betsy Baldwin

Jake reminds me of so many children we encounter in schools today. The conflict between school and home life can create conflict for any child. As I began reading, Jake appears to be a typical child from a typical working-class family who wanted the best for their child. The way in which they raised Jake was the way they felt was best based on their understanding and values; however, this sometimes is in contrast to what schools perceive as appropriate or correct. The way in which Jake’s family raised him was good for their family, but it made schooling a little difficult for Jake because what was valued at school was not valued at home and vice versa in his opinion. In order for Jake to value what was being taught at school he had to see its relevance to his life. Hicks’ states on page 104, “Sustaining interest in an activity also required that the task make sense. A task had to be something that needed to get done.” It was hard for Jake to see the relevance in many literacy activities he was asked to complete and this caused some gaps in his learning. Honestly, we can try many different strategies and tactics to get children to see the relevance in activities and lessons, but they will not always see how the knowledge will help them in the future. Yes, we still must try to make connections with children so they can see the relevance and learn what we are teaching, but we have to remember that not everyone will connect to everything. I am not saying that we should not try to get children to see the connections. We must make them aware that not everything may connect to their lives now, but somewhere down the road, the skills may be needed and there are things we just have to know and learn. I think we need to try to do activities based on students’ interest to engage them in what we are teaching. In earlier grades, it is much easier to do, but in all grades it is needed.

Although Jake did not always participate, as he should in kindergarten he was relatively successful because of the structure of kindergarten. He is a child that needs to move around and manipulate objects to learn. Reading the observations Hicks made of her work with him made me think a little more about the difference learning styles. Jake appears to be a kinesthic learner which means he learns best through movement and hands on activities. However, if teachers are not aware of this or not willing to allow for those differences it may cause conflict between the teacher and child. There is a big difference between the structure of kindergarten and first grade that I do not feel parents are fully aware. This is where children who are borderline began to become at risk of becoming a struggling reader. I found it interesting how the author spoke about Jake knowing how to “do school”. Many children have learned this and unfortunately, this will not always sustain them. Most will eventually get tired of “doing school” and begin to express their true feelings. I think Jake’s family could have made of difference in how he valued school and literacy practices at school. If I am not mistaken when Hicks or Jake’s teacher explained to his family what was going on with him at school I do not recall his family speaking with him or trying to show him the importance of participating in the activities at school. I believe that if they would have, Jake may have been more willing to change his attitude and work harder. This may not have happened, but this is just my opinion. Jake valued his family and what they thought and what his parents say about school or learning can influence their decisions at school. Many children feel this way. On page 123, it says “The stories voiced about us, by those whom we most love and value, shape our identities in ways more powerful than even the most authoritative institutional systems of social regulation.” I feel also the stories voiced to us by those we love shape who we are and how we perform. Jake’s family felt he was very intelligent because of the things he was able to do at home. I have no doubt that he is very intelligent and possibly has high nonverbal or perceptual reasoning skills, but what children do at home is not like the literacy practices children receive at school. When parents are told their children are struggling or at risk, they cannot understand why because at home they see that their child is developing well in their opinion.

I thought it was good how Jake’s family were avid readers and provided him with many literacy experiences and books at home. Most of the children that attend the school were I work do not have much print at home and only own a few books. I was glad to read that his family valued reading. You would think with them being avid readers and with the resources available at home that Jake would have performed better in school as it relates to literacy, but Jake did not see the value of what he was reading at school and therefore was unable to make the connection and continue to develop his literacy skills.

As with Laurie I wonder how Jake is doing. Will he finish school or follow in his father and leave school? Will he take over the family business or go to college? Will his views of school change early enough for him to get the help he needs before it is too late? It would be interesting to find out.

There are a lot of children in our schools who are just like Jake. The educatonal needs of these children are being neglected, and as a result, they are falling through the cracks and falling further and further behind. I think teachers are placed in an unfair predicament in which they are expected to produce students who are able to achieve the exact same goals regardless of whether or not all of the children are ready to achieve those goals. Everything I've read in this chapter highlights the fact that all children are not the same. They come from different backgrounds, have different interests and values, and learn at a rate and in a style that is unique and dependent on their developmental readiness for a given concept or skill. Children are not robots that can be programmed to think the same, learn the same, and respond the same whan faced with an educational objective. I wish the government would demonstrate an understanding of this truth and stop forcing curriculums on the primary grade student population that in many cases are more harmful than helpful.

The primary grades are a critical time in shaping children's attitudes about literacy and their feelings about themselves as learners in a school setting. Teachers need to respect and carefully handle the values from home that children bring to school with them, tie these values to school literacy practices, and help children realize school literacy practices are valuable tools they will need in life. For example in Jake's case, "Sustaining interest in an activity also required that the task make sense. A task had to be something that needed to be done. Otherwise, as Jake would sometimes later voice about school activities, it was just plain 'stupid'."

I agree that most children I have encountered in the classroom comply with what I expect them to do in class. However, every year I have at least one student (sometimes more) who, like Jake, resists the instructional goals that I try to achieve with him/her. After reading Jake's story, I feel that I will have the knowledge of what to do to try to reach children like this. Whatever I do, I need to make sure that I do not dismiss the values the child brings from home, but find ways to use the values of home as a bridge to connect, in a meaningful way, the child with the skills I want him to acquire in school.

Also, every year I have chldren, like Jake, who can't keep up with the pace of learning. "I approached him and asked whether or not he could find a book that he could read from the classroom collection of books. He responded, 'I don't know how to read any of them'...Many of the midyear selections in the school's first grade anthology series were beyond Jake's reading abilities." No wonder Jake is described as being "disengaged and frustrated" in school and looks forward to the time he can go home again and feel like he is king of the hill.

Our system of educating children needs to change. It works for some but not for all. I think the problem is that we are pushing too much too fast on our kids. Many children are able to float and swim in such a system, but on the other hand, there are also too many who are drowning.

Vickie Howell

Wow! What a chapter! I thought of many situations from my teaching experience as I read this research.

As I read about Jake in kindergarten, I could see how he would do well. Jake had the opportunity to move freely. I teach kindergarten and that's one nice thing about teaching kindergarten. Kindergarten has movement and children are learning social skills through work and play. It is a good transition from home to school because children can experience practices that are similar to home. For example, some of the centers I have in my classroom are homeliving, blocks, writing and art. When I taught preschool one year, I had a girl carrying on a conversation on the play telephone in the homeliving center. She was engaged in meaningful conversation. I learned so much from listening to her, especially, about her home life. She experienced talking on the telephone at home or either listening to her mom talk on the telephone and I believe this made her feel comfortable in her school setting. We are fortunate as kindergarten and preschool teachers to have this type of environment for these children. In kindergarten, "text is connected to the three-dimensional objects" (p.99) for the most part. I could see how it would be difficult for a child like Jake moving up through grades. In our schools today, you don't always find this type of environment as you move through upper grades. It seems that children in first grade and higher are often seated and doing paper and pencil. I'm not saying that all teachers run their classrooms like this because I have seen the exception. We have a second grade teacher at our school, for example, who sings or chants something they've learned at the end of the day.

I found it it interesting that Jake's mother's philosophy was that children need to learn from their mistakes. That would have not been my mother's philosophy. My mother would have agreed that you learn from mistakes but would have taught me or warned me that if I did certain thing that something could happen. She wouldn't have let me stand there and get hit by a bat, for example. It is very helpful to read this research to know that just because my philosophy of teaching and learning may be one way that it doesn't mean that the parents in my classroom have the same philosophy.

As I read about Jake needing to have a task that made sense or a task that needed to be done, it made me reflect on the boys that I've had in my classrooms. Have I not had these boys participating in tasks that made sense to them? Maybe not because I have had boys call things stupid or dumb. I will be more aware of this in the future. My question is, "If you're a first or second grade teacher, how do you make the curriculum to where these boys have tasks that make sense and help them progress in academics?" I know hands-on activities and learning centers can be incorporated into these grades, also. Would this be enough for Jake?

I feel like some of my students this year wil be like Jake because "there was space for Jake to interact with school literacy practices on his own terms" (p.113) in kindergarten. When he got to first and second grade the curriculum was more formal and demanding. I believe my children got along fine in kindergarten since they could move freely and felt comfortable with the environment. When they get to first grade they may not have that type of environment. Even in kindergarten, there are times that are more structured with teaching and at times my students could not sit still for long.

I really felt for Jake as he went on to first grade and began to struggle academically. What was the answer for Jake? It seemed when he was interested in something, he would participate. For example, when Mrs. Williams talked about the construction of heating and air conditioning systems he participated.

The tiny car incident makes sense. Hicks said that she believed that the tiny car was a connect point. I strongly believe that, too. I went to a workshop once that the presenter's background was in the area of exceptional children. She was talking about some children have a difficult time when they don't have something in their hand. For example, she said they could hold a ball,etc. I don't have a problem with this but when I've tried something like this it is so difficult to explain to the other students why this child is holding an object. This reminded me of Jake with the car in front of him. I know Jake's teacher took it because she felt like it didn't lead him toward writing. What about if it disrupts the other students? Any suggestions of ideas?

I would hope that teachers wouldn't want their students to feel like outsiders. We as teachers need to make every effort that this does not happen. As Jake's dad said, we need to find ways to connect our students' interests to their academics. We still have to teach the SCOS but I believe we can be creative in some areas to make this connection.

Boyhood Stories
Written by Heather Holland

Jake’s learning style is definitely body- kinesthetic. He loves to engage in meaningful tasks that require using mainly his gross-motor skills, along with some fine-motor skills. He reminds me of one of my students from years ago. My student, I’ll call him Mark, was just like him! His learning styles, favorite centers, and after school activities were so similar to Jake’s. Mark was not very interested in reading or writing. He liked doing things that required movement, working with his hands, making things, and even story telling. His interests outside of school were all “boy things”; similar to how Deborah Hicks explained it. He was talented and gifted in many areas. His favorite activity at school in the second grade was creating symmetric and congruent shapes from pattern blocks during free choice center time. He never ceased to amaze me with his creativity and designs. Like Jake, he spent many hours, evenings, and weekends with his dad. They had a farm, not as an occupation but, as a hobby. They had horses, cows, chickens, hens, etc. One summer, they spent thee-fourths of their free time putting up fencing around their fields for their cows and horses. This was an activity that even mom helped out with. Their family valued working with their hands and getting dirty. Mark’s father did not attend college, but acquired a specific trade. From speaking with his family, his Mom and Dad never really expected Mark to attend college because they believed he could make something out of himself by using one of his many talents. As the years passed, I thought about their comments about Mark’s education and future. The more I have thought about it, the more I think he would probably be very successful finding a trade or an art, and using his hands. He is very talented and college may not be “his thing”. Jake’s family’s values were more geared towards “doing” rather than “learning”, too. I think they valued learning, but they more so valued skill and manual labor/work. They supported Jake, gave him a stable home-life, and encouraged him to succeed, but because Jake was from a working-class family, his parents did not push academics. They admitted that Jake’s father did very well because he read and taught himself many skills. They did not attribute his success to an institution’s education. He was merely self-educated. Because of this, his family valued literacy and learning, but they also thought it was something that could be self-taught. Does Jake think the same things? –Probably. I think in working-class families, children tend to place more value on learning to “do” rather than a formal education. They often believe that learning a skill or trade will help them succeed. While this is true, it is not the only way. Finishing high school and going to college is also very important, especially in today’s society, since so many jobs require a “formal education”.

Now I would like to comment about Jake’s “Star of the Week” award in first grade. This scenario reminds me of an article that I read in my undergraduate work about social classes. Here is an excerpt from chapter 5:

“At the close of Jake’s Star of the Week session, Jake’s first-grade teacher, Mrs. Rhodes, articulated the behaviors that would lead to getting the award: somebody who follows the ABC rules, does a good job, and always does his or her work nicely.”

Is it true that schools in different socio-economic settings expect different things from their students? Here is what I read about at Baldwin-Wallace College: (I am sorry that I cannot recall the source. If it was during the school year, I could have looked the article up in my college notebook that is in my classroom). Schools that are from a working class economic setting often require their students to complete tasks, follow directions, complete worksheets, and do not regularly question why, and be a “good girl or boy”. School from higher-socio-economic settings, generally teach their students how to collaborate, work together, discuss topics, question things, infer and add their opinions. Not much emphasis is placed on completing menial tasks or worksheets. More emphasis is placed on discovery.

In a nut shell, the article points out that often times “working-class” schools teach the children how to be working-class: follow orders, be a good kid/worker, do the tasks at hand to completion and do them well. Does this make you think of the job settings their “working-class” parents are working in? In “upper-class” schools, children are taught to think for themselves, be leaders, forge ahead, discover, and create new ideas. Does this remind you of the job settings their “upper-class” parents are working in?

My point is… society sometimes inadvertently tracks children. Keeping them or sustaining them where they are. How can we, as teachers, be sure that this does not happen in our classrooms? I must challenge all teachers, to treat all children the same, regardless of their socio-economic level. Let’s create “thinkers”, not “doers”.

Heather Holland

Even in my limited two years of teaching I have seen a few Jakes. Watching these children fall through the cracks is not my idea of a happy time. Why can’t we help these kids? Because we are expected to help them learn no matter what the circumstances. They have no food to eat when they get home, no warm clothes for the winter, no heat when it’s cold, and who knows what else these kids have to go through on a daily basis that we couldn’t even imagine. I have heard and read in some different reliable sources that when the “No Child Left Behind Act” was being created it was a group of politicians, political leaders, and others that created it. Very few if any real educators were involved in creating this very important legislation. No child is the same so why does the government insist on trying to make us teach them all the same way?
Bringing in the Special Education side of the story here I would like to say that I can relate my experiences with students not caring about meeting their goals that we set for them. Each year new goals are set and we expect to see more than a year’s growth in a year’s time for students who have learning disabilities. Now I am not a math teacher but that equation doesn’t add up. My students get tired of trying to reach their goals when they are so far out of reach. I am not saying it can’t or hasn’t been done but in most cases there isn’t the amount of one on one time, resources, or funds to help a child with a learning disability who is already a year or more behind, catch up to his or her peers in a years time. But many of the students do try to live up to standards expected of them and I would hate to think that I pushed my own valued expectations onto them. One example from the rural area that I live in would be the students who live on farms and have a good job lined up once they are out of high school on that farm. When they ask why they should further their education when they can make a good living doing what they already know and love, what am I supposed to say. Why does a student like that need to know why Shakespeare wrote sonnets? I keep saying this but I think I will say it again because I still don’t know what to do about it. There are so many flaws in the education system; can anyone see us ever pulling out with something we can be satisfied with? I don’t know. I just think that the Jakes in the world deserve better.
~Kristen Billings

In this chapter of boyhood stories, Hicks researches the social discources between home and school in the life of a boy named Jake. Her research begin with a study of Jake in Kindergarten and ended at the end of second grade. Unlike Laurie's family, I was very proud of Jake's family for using Hicks research to discover why he was having difficulities in school. Jake, a boy that sits in the back and doesn't want to participate in class activities, is so typical of many of the students in our classrooms. They want it their way. Students who are active, as Jake is, seem to excell when the classroom presents a feeling of openness to choose and move to different activities.

Jake's identity with a boyhood just like his fathers, reminds me of my son. Jake's dad was a gifted carpenter as my husband is, but not professional, just for home jobs. My son sees his dad trimming bushes, cutting trees down, mowing, weeding, fixing a ceiling on our screened in porch, and rebuilding the walls at our new lake house that had molded and become extremely rotten. Like Jake, my son has power tools, a weed eater, lawnmower, and a workbench with all the tools he need for building, which are all toys by the way. My son, Jacob, is only two but plays will all of these things. When we were at the lake this past weekend, he heard a chain saw and said, "Daddy's here". Daddy wan't at the lake , but Jacob has learned to identify the chainsaw sound with his dad since he has uses his chainsaw at the lake to remodel our lake house. Jacob loves to play at his workbench and carry his drill around drilling everthing. "I'm building", he says.

Just like Jake's dad, my husband has a collection of NASCAR and John Deere tracotors. This is Jacob's other love. He loves playing with cars and putting trailers on tractors. I use toy cars in many of my Kindergarten lessons. My students have had games where they drive the car to the number I call out, allowing them to learn to identify numbers. I also had a syllable game this year where the students had to drive the cars down the road to the correct number of syllables on the race track board. My students love these kinds of games and I see in depth more now "why" the students are so engaged since they are identifying with what they know. Even little girls love cars. They see their mom driving them. Hicks writes:

"Schooling in the primary grades should ideally become a set of opportunities for children to experience new identities connected with textual practices."

It was obvious from Jake's stories about NASCAR and his dog Max that he was experiencing success with writing and retelling. His ability to act out a race car experience using NASCAR diriver names such as Labonte and Earnhardt, just goes to show how a child's story telling and writing experiences are results of their identity and the things they know. By allowing students to read, write, and act out stories that identify with who they are and what they like, we are setting the stage in the classroom that says we value their language and culture that make them who they are. Hicks sums it up well by saying, "The instructional movement toward such cultural and class pluralism, however, requires first that the learner's primary values, language practices, and identities be valued in the classroom.

Reading about how Jake and Laurie both struggleed in first grade within the school adopted anthology series, really frustrates me. These children were expected to read on the same level without consideration into their developmental learning style and independent learning level. Yes, a child is going to struggle if they are not reading on their insturctional level. I wonder if Jake would have gotten behind in school if he had been in a classroom where students were grouped and taught on their individual level of learning? I definately feel that all teachers need workshops on how to teach guided reading groups that meet each student's individual needs.

I have never thought about how the types of genres from the various books that we are exposed to, shapes our literacy learning. Jake's family loved to read realistic informative books. This helped to shape Jake's knowledge about history. His family loved to read and so did he, but in first grade during DEAR time he didn't want to read. As teachers, we have to be certain that we have books available that meet each child's level of reading. I have tubs of books in my classroom that are leveled. I train my students on which tub of books to choose their books. My students do enjoy DEAR time because they can successfully read the books they select. During DEAR time I have them select books that are a level lower than their intructional level. During read aloud I select books that are slightly above my students instructional level.

Unlike Jake, I like to read fiction books the best, and still do. History has never been a favorite subject of mine, but I love the fantasy word and immagination that fiction brings. I have created a classroom library, by going to many yard sales, and have stocked my shelves with books from all generes. What I have noticed is that the boys in my room most of the time select the expository texts off the shelf where there are real pictures with facts about real people, places, or animals.

In second grade Jake made tremendous gains in his reading ability, but as Hicks tells us, "his accomplishments as a reader that year though impressive, did not match up with an expected sequence of achievements. Jake was to enter third grade as a fragile reader and the expectations and practices that constituted reading in an instutional sense". Impressive gains is just the kind of thing that No Child Left Behind does not pay attention to. Our society has become a testing world where children, no matter their circumstances are all expected to be at the same level with no regards to the fact that every learner is unique and therefore not every child develops at the same rate or age.

When I read the part about Jake, who is normally distant and disengaged, raising his hand and being engaged in a read aloud of a book Up Goes the Skycraper, it really made me think more about paying attention to the things my students say. By listening to what Jake has to say about his father working as a heating and air conditioning repairman, one can learn important information about his identity. Listening to our students also helps us to know the types of books to select during read aloud. After reflecting and reading about Jake's boyhood stories I am going to do a much better job of letting my students talk and listen to what they say. I confess that I get very focused on time and making sure I get every subject in. In consequence, I often cut students off and suggest students put their hands down. I realize now that I was missing out on an important opportuntiy to learn who my students are so that I can imcorporate literacy experience that match with their identity.

In Jake's second grade class with Mrs. Williams, she brought science into reading and writing. I think this is very important for teachers to cross disciplines in order for students to succeed. I also like that she brought in Writers Workshop. Writers Workshop gave Jake a chance to write about the things that interested him. He was used to choice at home and that is what Writers Workshop allowed him the opportunity to do. After reading Jake's stories in his notebook, it is obvious how home experiences play important roles in a child's literacy. In his notebook, Jake wrote about experiences of playing at home with his brother Brad.

I don't share the same philosophy as Jake's mom who believed that it didn't matter if Jake was reading differently from some of his classmates. However, I do agree with his dad who believed that schools could be engaging enviroments for learning. "All they had to do was find ways to connect students' interest with academic tasks." I agree with Hicks that Jake probably will lead a happy and productive life because of the support he recieves at home. My question is what can we do about the students who don't have support at home to help them become successful? Maybe we can make a difference the year we are with them, but what happens after that? Is one year of a caring supportive school setting enough? Will they continue to be in loving situations that nurture their learning styles and values of who they are? What happens when they are not in a supporative situation? How do we keep these students from falling through the cracks?

Linda Younts

It is only predictive Hicks next study or observation would be a male. In reading Chapter 5, I noticed that there were several similarities of Jake and Laurie. Both stories depicted the impact that home had on their literacy experiences at school. Of course, their home life would have a greater impact on them on account of their initial instruction of learning originates from home. In our children lives, the little boys want to be like their fathers just as the little girls want to be like their mother. They would walk around their house imitating these adults until later; the children will probably find something else more interesting. More than likely, they would continue with this persona of being like their idol, the mother or the father.

In the perspective of Jake’s mother and father expectations of his future, obviously it was not discussed. It was verbalized, however, not discussed. Jake’s mother could foresee him going to college, however, Jake’s father envisioned Jake taking over the business. It appears that Jake’s mother and grandmother attempted to peak Jake’s interest in school by incorporating more literacy materials through reading and social studies at home. I was surprised that this literary framework did not transfer into the classroom. My assumption is that Jake was empowered by his father’s masculinity than the female counterparts.

I could not believe his teacher took his toy car away from him. This could have been the very thing that could have given him that edge to encourage him to write. By making Jake angry, only delayed his desire to perform and learn. Students will do their best when they can make a connection with their learning. I wish this teacher had taken the time to find out what Jake’s interest were and to not be so goal oriented.

There are many Jake’s and Laurie’s in our classroom. It is our responsibility to find a way to be in tune to their interest, be flexible, and adapt, not adopt the curriculum to fit their lives. This is when we will be able to make that inevitable difference.

When reading this chapter, I couldn't help but think of aanother book I read a few months ago called "Why Gender Matters: What Parents and Teachers Need to Know About the Emerging Science of Sex Differences." (I HIGHLY recommend this book. It provides excellent insight into the thought processes of males and females. It has really changed the way I interact with the boys in my first grade classroom.) Jake was simply thinking like a BOY. Our schools run on middle class norms and are geared toward females in the way their function is carried out. (Can you imagine how frustrating this can be for these boys?) And the fact that the majority of teachers are female further supports this idea. Females think like females. That is a given. We don't understand the "why" behind the things boys (and later on in life, men) do. Jake NEEDED hand-on interaction to learn, as do most males. It's girls who are comfortable sitting at a traditional desk in the classroom doing traditional classroom assignments and carrying them out in the traditional way they've always been carried out. For boys, this is a challenge. I'm not saying all children don't benefit from discovery learning or inquiry, I'm simply saying that boys need this sort of stimulation more often.

I've taught Jake several times over in my classroom. It's challenging, exciting, and frustrating, all at the same time. The challenge is finding ways to keep these boys engaged and active participants in the task at hand. The excitement is watching them become excited about what I'm teaching and what they're learning. (This is most evident when we're working in the organisms unit and we have millipedes in the classroom. Uggh.) The frustration comes when they are more focused on what they'd rather do than the task at hand, which really gives me gray hair.

Children relate strongly to the same-sex parent. Sometimes I think parents don't realize the impact they have on their child(ren) and their outlook and viewpoint in the world. A little boy heartily embraces everything that is his dad. It's only natural that Jake would love NASCAR, carpentry, etc. Children also embrace the expectations of life from these parents. When a formal education isn't an expectation for a "good" life, it becomes something abstract and unnecessary. Jake's dad is one of the people in the world who view higher education in this manner. Unfortunately, when those who are "working class" don't look outside of the box, they limit their children to the same parameters of the lives they created for themselves. This can have an extremely negative impact when this kind of thinking reaching the far end of the spectrum. I had a student in my class in this school year which (mercifully) ended. His home life was, by my own standards, terrible. His father was a self-proclaimed high school dropout. (He bragged about this at open house and said it "never hurt" him.) He informed me that he wouldn't be reading to his child because he "didn't like to read." (I question his own literacy skills and wonder if this was a way hide his own struggle with reading.) This man couldn't keep a job, changing jobs seven times throughout the school year. Life at home was very uncertain. The boy, I'll call Jim, didn't care about school. He wasn't motivated at all, regardless of the activity. The only thing he wanted to do was create things with his hands (like Jake). Eventually Jim became a behavior problem, showing an incredible amount of defiance in every school setting. The parenting skills at home, in my opinion, were extremely lacking. The father was a terrible role model for the future of this child. Jim talked nonstop about growing up to be a mechanic "just like" his dad. Unfortunately he was also doing many other things "just like" his dad (ie: cursing, having a bad attitude toward females, apathy toward school and learning in general, etc). This is obviously the extreme end of the spectrum when it comes to parental role modeling (and an example of the negative depths it can reach). Jake's dad wasn't anything like the father I'm speaking of from my class, but he did exert a large influence on Jake. Jake wanted to be like his dad. He embraced the things his dad did. He enjoyed the things his dad enjoyed. His outlook on life was the same as his dad's outlook on life. He also gained a lack of appreciation for the importance of a higher education. His dad, through no malicious thought, didn't see the value in higher education. He wanted his son to succeed and saw a different way to the goal of success. Isn't this how it is in life for some? Not everyone is created for college. For many it's not interesting and simply not what they want from life. For some a technical school or learning a trade is their choice (sometimes only choice, for whatever reason). Is this only a working class issue? Do upper class families face this same challenge? And how can we better educate parents about their influence, both positive and negative, they exert over their children?