Gorski and Anyon

   I think the Anyon and Gorski articles work hand in hand. While Anyon presents the symptoms and side effects of having an education system damaged by class issues, Gorski looks into what could be done to save the education systems. 

However, while I think Gorski's attempt is fantastic, it is simplifying a problem that runs much deeper than the educators themselves.

    Gorski's suggestion that we have a broader understanding of class beyond the one-sided experience offered, is a solid first step. However, this is largely easier said than done. While programs and educational courses have been implemented for the newer generations of educators, what about educators who have been in the field? Anyon, while offering a look into how classist ideals and values were being enacted through schools, does not offer a look at which is at the heart of this. Is it the the educators own biases and possible privilege? Is it the education systems, as decided by executive boards and directors, that is locking the teachers into the expectations that is held for both them and their students? While it is acknowledged in the conclusion, I wish this had been delved into deeper - knowing the symptoms doesn't necessarily help as much as knowing what is at the heart of the issue. Due to the misconceptions and biases surrounding class, more damage can be done than good through programs that ultimately shame the working-class students and families.

     I think this Gorski quote sums up why the process of a stronger education system needs to go beyond simple awareness programs: 

"It's all too easy, for even the most well-meaning of us, to help perpetuate classism by buying into that mindset, implementing activities and strategies for "working with parents in poverty" or "teaching students in poverty that however subtly suggest we mix fix the poor people instead of eliminating the inequities that oppress them." - Gorski, P. 1

To truly help the students, as well as the educators, there needs to be a lot of open, honest discussion between all levels of education - the school boards, the educators, the parents and the students. 

Matsios

      Reading Matsios' "Media Magic" was incredibly eyeopening for me, in a way that it probably shouldn't have been. I assumed it would look at the issues of class as presented through media such as television, film and literature - such as my beloved Roseanne. I didn't expect for the article to cover the news media. As economy is such a huge part of our political stream of consciousness, and so often discussed, that the inclusion of the working-class would be a given. I would surprised by the statistics offered:

"…yet less than one in five hundred articles in the New York Times and one in one thousand articles listed in the Reader's Guide to Periodic Literature are on poverty" (100).

      Even Inclusion, of course, does not equal out to be fair and valid representation, which I think ultimately ends up being Matsios' argument. I recently did a literature review on the ways that the News Media represents (or doesn't, as is often the case) gender and feminism in their reports. One section from one of the texts I included jumped back to me while reading Matsios':

"Even a concept as basic as "woman" is riddled with cultural codes coveted and interpreted in the various media texts we encounter on a daily basis. There is no objective "feminine," Fiske would argue, only a culturally-defined concept created and perpetuated in part by media texts."

 - Debra Baker Beck, "The 'F' Word: How the Media Frame Feminism"

 I think the same can be applied to class - the values we have regarding class are so ingrained into our society's identity, it seems almost impossible to separate them from the realities of the situation. Objectivity towards class is nearly impossible, especially from an outside position. This is so important in the news media because while fiction reflects back caricatures of our society, the news influences nearly every  public event and happening - it helps we shape our political leanings and how we feel about a public figure or event. Professional Journalism has slowly been built around a world of elitism, academia, and big word using - and it's those voices that largely end up shaping the news media as it is presented today.

     I think my sense of betrayal - as naive as that sounds, because I should have known better - at the statistics that Matsios offered is based on the fact that I hold the news accountable for what it presents. While I know it fails that accountability often, fueling a large distrust of the news for many, I didn't expect that numbers to be quite so low when it is such a large, dominating issue in society. Why are so few voices and experiences valued? Would objectivity be a greater possibility if the news was influenced more greatly by citizens voices? Or is it our skewed sense of class and equality that enables the lack of objectivity?