In reading the articles I agree with Christy and Kim as to the intention by the teacher to gather the students to focus into their cultural identity. The articles show that it may have been too much intention on the part of the teacher with a "forcing". The students and the parents may have responded better to an "invitation" for discussion on a voluntary basis.
I guess I could get wrapped up on my personal reasons why I felt this was not an appropriate thing to do, but I will stay the course as to the purspose of writing the articles. I really like the information that was shared within both articles. It was a lens into the passion the teacher had for the students and the students' and parents' passion they had for their culture, their diversity, and their own narratives. These articles offered me a lens into their motives and reactions to a sensitive topic. I am grateful to this.
In regards to the creation of a diversity curriculum assignments, that's another thing. I feel it is inapporpriate to force discussions on topic that can fuel emotion. This sort of topic needs to be voluntary. I several of my past classes in the graduate school, the classes were to delve into uprooting feelings about diversity. It was a forced agenda which I felt did not go well at all in both situatins. Yes, we need to talk and to think, but not to report and lay it on the table. It is to be internal work.
In regards to Johnny, Danielle, and Marissa, and the rest of the class: This juggling between two cultural worlds. How much human energy is involved with this? How much human energy is involved with just living in this chaotic world? How much time is left over to delve deep inside of ourselves and get in touch with our diversified struggles?