The Very Hungry Caterpillar...but what does it eat in a different biome?

 The danger of a single story is that the reader is limited because not all perspectives are included, just the perspective of one single person. If the readers begin to identify with characteristics of the story and understand one person's perspective they form their own understanding, they perceive their own conceptions. These personal conceptions and understandings structure the foundation upon which our prejudices are built. This foundation is made stronger each time our conceptions are confirmed. Therefore our prejudice becomes greater than before and we become confident and defensive; we feel the need to defend and stand up for what we believe.

This idea relates to self-justification, once one person makes a decision and there is no turning back the person has to justify their decision. The person may buy a new and expensive running shoe on a whim and afterwords encourage all of their friends to buy the shoe. The person may convince their friends with such expressions: “these Five Finger shoes have great Vibram soles,” “I think it’s time you got a new pair of shoes,” “running feels so great in these shoes, you should get a pair too,” etc. The person wants their friends to buy the shoes to justify that they made a good investment and inevitably a good decision. This person is only sharing their bias with their friends to encourage them to buy the same shoes, but what about other perspectives or reviews on the shoes. Did the person who bought the shoes on a whim do research before making payment? Did the person look into other perspectives before making the decision? If the answer to these questions are no, then the person will become much stronger in their claims and bias because the person feels the need to defend their decision. Self-justification becomes stronger when an irrational decision is made involving money because that decision can most likely not be taken back. Since the decision was irrational, the person did not justify their reasons for purchasing the shoes before investing their money. The person should have taken into account different perspectives and weighed their options before their decision was made—like one story by one author can only tell one self-perspective.

In order to have a greater understanding of a concept you must read more books by a variety of different authors. Forming one understanding from one story is the same has making a justification after an irrational decision and being ignorant to the fact that your decision has flaws. These flaws to ones’ ignorance can be defined as cognitive dissonance- when one knows the good and the bad of a topic but justifies why it is okay to be bad. For example, smoking is bad for your health but I smoke 2 packs a day. The person knows smoking is harmful to their health but does it anyway. The children reading The Very Hungry Caterpillar by Eric Carle, would read about all different types of food and the transformation of a caterpillar to a butterfly. The book would include many common foods such as apples, blueberries, pears, etc. This book by Eric Carle reminded me about the book Ms. Adichie talked about referring to apples, winter, and grapes. The Very Hungry Caterpillar is educational to a student because it informs the student of how a caterpillar turns into a butterfly and also is intriguing to the student because of all the food it ate. The book Ms. Adichie talked about informed the student about an every day life which would be beneficial to the student because the reader would be able to identify with the character in the book. But what about the students who are not raised in a culture where apples and winter and grapes are an everyday childhood experience? The author knows apples and winter is something experienced in America but not in Africa, yet these books are supposed to educate all children. Ms. Adichie explains that the books she read as a child were Americanized and not applicable to her understanding because of the differences between the two cultures. Ms. Adichie explained that the fruit she ate were mangoes and that she only experienced wet and dry seasons, not snow during the winter season. The flaws in the American story are clear to Ms. Adichie but not to the American author who wrote a story from their perspective. This one single story is not true for all children, this story has flaws which the author could admit to the readers or the author could justify the story written. It is important for a one person to not close their mind to one perspective, to one decision, to one short story.

Knock-Knock, "It's your child's teacher at the door"

After reading the article, No, Seriously: No Excuses, I agree with the statement, “supplementing classroom strategies with targeted, evidence-based interventions outside the classroom: working intensively with the most disadvantaged families to improve home environments for young children; providing high-quality early-childhood education to children from the neediest families; and, once school begins, providing low-income students with a robust system of emotional and psychological support, as well as academic support.” I agree that in order to reform the education of low-income students it will require more attention from the teachers. Although this statement suggests for the teachers to become very involved with the disadvantaged student and their family, how can we require teachers to work intensively with not just the disadvantaged students but their families? Are teachers the right people to be approaching these families in need? 

I understand that if no one gives a student support then the student will not be motivated or supported, but it is another thing to ask a teacher to be an educator in the classroom and outside of it. If teachers are expected to become involved with the student and their family, then the teacher is directly stepping into the student’s life and taking on that responsibility of raising that student correctly and also taking on the responsibility of helping a family. I do not believe that a teacher should be expected to raise a family so a student can succeed in school, that is the job of our government welfare programs. I see the teacher as a resource or ally, but not as the activist, stepping in the homes taking care of students and their families. How can a teacher be prepared with the resources and education needed to help disadvantaged families live a better life?

However, I do believe that teachers are amazing and must do what they preach. If a teacher tells a student they can do anything as long as they put their mind to it, then the teacher should be able to do the same. I think anyone can make a difference and I believe that teachers could have a great impact to bring change to these student’s attitudes. In the classroom I expect a teacher to be responsible for the education of his/her students and the success of their students. I believe that the teacher needs to provide support to the students in the best way possible for specific students. If the student needs the extra support or encouragement then the teacher should provide it for that student. Since the teacher is able to support his/her students I think the teacher could also have a great impact by approaching the families. Although it is not part of a teacher’s expectations to become involved with disadvantaged families, because what if a teacher has 27 students, all in poverty. Is the teacher expected to go visit 27 families and fix their problems? How could one person give that much support or maintain that responsibility?