Wednesday, April 28, 2010

4/28 (irina)

In chapter 4, Catherine Orr discusses Robert Rhoad’s article on community service. Rhoad states, “Too often, community service is structured as a one-way activity in which those who have resources make decisions about the needs of those who lack resources” (page 51) and Orr then asked her students whether what they were doing was “simply…charity” (51). I think Orr brings up a very interesting point, a point that should be considered by all activists.

This section in the article reminds of me the fundraisers that are put together when disasters happen (or general fundraisers for causes such as homeless children or something like that). Consider the fundraisers for hurricane Katrina or for the quake in Haiti. Do you think these fundraisers are simply charities or are they more than that? Please Explain.
If they are simply charities, how do you think they can be improved to be more than that?

In Chapter 11, Simona Hill discusses her experience with a campus organization called Sisterhood. A discussion was held on campus called “IGNITE A KITCHEN FIGHT1” Some students were upset with the title of the event because it seemed to portray violence and a sexist message that women should be in the kitchen. During the discussion, the facilitators explained what the term kitchen fight means. At one point, the facilitators told the audience to develop discussion rules for the rest of the event on sensitive topics. Why do you think the facilitators did not just put together the discussion rules themselves? What is significant about allowing the participants to make up the rules?
Would you implement this practice in your own class in the future? Or would you provide your students with the rules that you come up with?

No comments:

Post a Comment