Peter Sipe Response Paper

One does not go into the field of education to make money or become famous. A person goes into teaching or education because they have an altruistic strain in their DNA. I usually avoid saying the reason why I have decided to enter the field of education is to help others and change lives. I try to come up with a more insightful and sarcastic ways of putting things because I believe it is a given or it should be, that people who are teachers are caregivers and want to change the world, one person at a time. When looking at the article "Newjack: Teaching in a Failing Middle School" by Peter Sipe, one has to wonder about his DNA before even discussing what he said in his article. In my personal philosophy of education one of my goals is to encourage students to seek their own happiness and become empowered. After reading Sipe's article I wonder if he is an eternal victim who will never be happy or became wounded over time because of his naiveté to the world that his teaching experience put him in a severe depression. I have concluded that Sipes is in fact a person who will always blame the "other," never be happy, never be fulfilled, and always view the world as gray and dull.

There are many legitimate points that Peter Sipes makes in his article, which should be taken into consideration. The education system of many underprivileged, under funded schools are dysfunctional institutions of learning; places where learning is tough. Sipes makes a very interesting point when he compares the school where he taught to an underdeveloped African country. The country has received no assistance money to get on its feet economically despite the fact that its people work very hard. I believe that it is true that good intention is not truly good if there is no action behind it. This good intention often takes the form of high standard testing and standards set in place in order to raise the bar with no example of how to reach the bar. Sipes then goes on to connect the poor success of his students to the lack of funding accompanying No Child Left Behind.

After reading the article though, I believe that the tone of the article is defeat. During out anticipation group work in class we (the class) came to the conclusion that the goal of schools is to teach children. Sipes believes the goal of his school is to keep the children under control and contained like prisoners. The very fact that Sipes connects the school with a prison is a poor judgment by an educator. Despite the fact that his school exhibited many of the conditions of a prison he read about in a book that does not mean that those same connections should be made to children. One of the very important facts that the article failed to address is the fact that the people in question are not felons, they are children who are entitled to an education despite the poor school they go to. The very opposite of this defeatist type of ideology is Esme Raji Codell in her book Educating Esme: Diary of a Teacher's First Year. Esme faces a similar situation where she feels fear in her school because of violence but she never marginalizes the students by calling them explanatives or dehumanizing them. Esme bit her tongue in one situation and realized that the bad behavior of one student had a significant connection to his home life. Sipe never looks past his students behavior and addresses his student's socioeconomic situation.

There is an education theory of immersing oneself into the school district where one is teaching in order to understand students and student's way of life. This theory is advocated for in many African American communities so that the teacher understands the culture and attitudes. This idea can be applied to any school district rurual, suburban or urban. In the Sipes article he is teaching in Brooklyn, NY which is urban and probably very ethnically mixed. Under the subheading "Get our or go under" Sipes states a number of things one can do to maintain mental stability including becoming inhumane, wait out the experience of a troubled school and wait to be transferred, or just go mad with stress. The last thing Sipe mentions is a fourth possibility which would be to change the culture of the school from the inside out and make the educational experience of students and teacher positive and successful. Sipes says that this is too daunting and tiresome. I ask why? Why would a teacher not try to change the school? Why not try and understand the children who have no choice to transfer and change jobs like the teachers. This school in Brooklyn is where students will come for many years to come. I don't understand why a teacher wouldn't want to change the school for the better. I believe that Peter Sipe decided not to look at the multilayer complex situation of his school and try and understand it.