We were discussing the class that I'm in that I am really not enjoying. I loved my class on Learning and the Brain. Figuring out how the brain processes and stores data, how it retrieves data, and how memory works in the short-term, mid-term, or long-term. That was a fun class. Or Adult Development. GREAT class. Loved learning about how adults grow, learn, and develop,l and what we should expect from learners. This class, is not at all fun. Critical Theory . . . or Critical Race Theory. BLECH.
Do I have something to learn in it? Sure. Is it worth the detour from adult learning to take an entire class on it? Nope. Total waste. But, it has led to some interesting posts and conversations, and that's what happened the other morning.
The conversation was about the video on Wheel of Fortune. A mispronounced name leads to a loss of one million dollars. Now, as an Aggie, I'm proud of the young lady who got the right answer. I would love if that story went down the route of the lady giving the prize money to that student from Indiana who missed the solution due to mispronunciation. I don't know if that's true. But it's what I hope. Still, she didn't get 1 million dollars so it wouldn't be much. I actually think the show should have said mispronouncing it was fine. I mean what if the solution was "Qatar" . . . some people say "Gutar" while others say "Qua-tar."
So, there's that. This guy should have won.
But the argument was about is this a microaggression. Is this critical race theory in action? This is a game on Western Civ. This contestant is African American. He may not have the same grounding in Western Civ as the gal from A&M. Is that fair?
My point was that it's not supposed to be fair to everyone, it's designed to cull people out. He missed the solution. That's the point of a game show. Should we dumb down jeopardy questions to the level that everyone can become Ken Jennings? If we do that, then what's special about Ken Jennings?
Saying "dumbed down" was problematic. My sweetie tee'd off on that. She brought up Anthony (see here) our little foster guy. We had to take him in for an eye check with the doctor. The problem was that Anthony, who was 4 or 5, and from a more disadvantaged life, did not know is ABCs. So they brought out the shapes and colors and the drawings eye chart. "Can you see the sailboat, Anthony?" Sadly, Anthony's upbringing meant he didn't know his colors, shapes, and sailboat? He had no experience with that. This is a good point my roommate brought up, that questions should be designed to meet the needs of the user.
This was the crux of our issue. My point was gameshow questions are designed to weed people out who don't know a wealth of knowledge. Lawnee's point was that questions should be fair and able to be answered by all, despite their upbringing. Naturally, we both went to the extreme. I said, so if I go on to Spanish Jeopardy or Chinese Jeopardy, they should make the clues in English and about history that I know so that I can be competitive with people who have lived in that region all their lives?
We argued back and forth for a long time, we couldn't get around the who issue of the intent of game show questions vs eye chart questions. This was our binary loop. As I've written before, self-authorship means moving from a socialized mindset to one that is okay with ill-structured problems and understanding different perspectives. From a world of black and white to greys.
The actual question we should have been asking is "does wheel of fortune want to only appeal to white wester civ learners? Or to people with more diverse backgrounds?" Depending on the answer to that, you adjust your questions. Or "does the doctor want to know more about the children she serves from diverse, underprivileged backgrounds or not?" Based on that she may need to change her eye chart.
It reminded me of the question we would always bandy about in the Ranger. There were women who wanted to join the Rangers. GI Jane with Demi Moore joining the SEALs came out in the theaters about the same time. Should the Rangers have women? And if so, how do we adjust the standards so women can become Rangers.
My view? If a woman can meet all of the PT and other standards necessary to be a Ranger, I wouldn't mind working with em. Some guys didn't share this view. The real question isn't wether to change the standard, but do the Rangers need women rangers? Does the battalion benefit? If so, change the standard.
Breaking out of those binary loops is a good move away from socialized minds, towards self authorship.
No comments:
Post a Comment