Je commence à travailler sur le spectacle de Fresh Voices qui va se jouer en février à Touchstone. C'est à nous, les deux apprenties, de monter un spectacle composé de trois "morceaux": le solo de Mariel, mon solo, et notre duo.
Comme j'étais apprentie l'année dernière, je connais les règles: carte blanche, vous vous débrouillez, mais c'est sous-entendu qu'il faut "come up with something good".
Pour mon solo, j'ai envie de parler de l'experience de la double-culture qui aboutit à une tierce culture, souvent innommable et subjective. Je sais qu'il y a pas mal de lecteurs de ce blog qui sont concernés, de près ou de loin, par cette problématique, et je suis toujours curieuse et intéressée d'entendre les experiences personnelles qui en découlent. Donc, partagez, si vous voulez!
J'ai toujours fait partie de deux cultures, et j'ai été bercée par deux - très belles - langues au point de les mélanger pour créer le marasme qu'est le "franglais". Mais j'essaye aussi, autant que possible, de respecter la structure de chaque langue, et j'aime écrire en chacune d'elle.
Mais c'est vrai que quand je réfléchis, les deux systèmes expressifs que sont le français et l'anglais se soudent, se font écho, se relaient dans mon esprit.
Cette notion de mélange culturel qui aboutit à une nouvelle identitée, au delà d'un territoire, a été théorisée par plusieurs penseurs. J'avais déjà entendu parler des expressions "Third cultures kid (TCK)" et "cross-cultural kid (CCK)" et j'avais même navigué sur le site dédié au sujet. Je viens d'acheter en ligne Third Culture Kids: Growing up Among Worlds by David C. Pollock and Ruth E. Van Reken. Je n'étais pas très étonnée d'apprendre que cette partie de la population avait été observée et étudiée, surtout par des sociologues américains (ou, au moins, comptant les Etats-Unis comme un de leur pays de culture).
Mais, alors que je me balladais dans Lyon (il y a de cela une semaine), je suis tombée, par pur hasard, sur un livre qui allait me parler comme peu de livres m'avaient parlé jusqu'ici : Le Tiers Instruit de Michel Serres.
Petit livre de poche posé dans une benne de livres d'occasion, payé 1euro 50 à un libraire qui était en pleine conversation avec quelqu'un, et qui ne s'est en aucune façon aperçu à quel point il avait contribué à me faire comprendre qui je suis.
J'exagère à peine mon enthousiasme et ma surprise. Je crois bien que j'en avais la bouche ouverte, et j'ai du me parler toute seule, audiblement, dans le quartier du vieux Lyon. "C'est pas possible, c'est pas possible, c'est fou...Michel Serres, ça me dit vaguement quelquechose... Michel Serres...". Oui, ça aurait pu me dire quelquechose en effet : académicien, philosophe, sociologue, collègue de Michel Foucault, etc.
J'ai commencé à lire l'essai dans un café, place Bellecour, le soir-même, en attendant qu'Amélie sorte du travail. Et, comme je le fais souvent quand l'enthousiasme me saisit à propos d'une oeuvre, j'ai commencé à recopier des passages, à en souligner d'autres, à écrire des notes dans les marges, des points d'exclamation qui disent "Oui, oui! Je comprends! Je voulais dire ça, moi aussi, mais je n'y étais pas parvenue. Merci!"
Je recopie ici le passage intitulé Naissance du Tiers, parce que mes paraphrases n'atteindraient pas la clarté de l'original :
" Il parvient à l'autre rive : autrefois gaucher, vous le trouvez droitier, maintenant; jadis gascon, vous l'entendez francophone ou anglomane aujourd'hui. Vous le croyez naturalisé, converti, inversé, bouleversé. Certes, vous avez raison. Il habite vraiment, quoique avec douleur, le second rivage. Le pensez-vous simple? Non, bien sûr, double. Devenu droitier, il demeure gaucher. Bilingue ne veut pas dire seulement qu'il parle deux langues: il passe sans cesse par le pli du dictionnaire. Bien adapté, mais fidèle à ce qu'il fut. Il a oublié, obligatoirement, mais il se souvient quand même. Le croyez-vous double?
Mais vous ne tenez pas compte du passage, de la souffrance, du courage de l'apprentissage, des affres d'un naufrage probable, de la crevasse ouverte dans le thorax par l'écartèlement des bras, des jambes et de la langue, large barre d'oubli et de mémoire qui marque l'axe longitudinal de ces rivières infernales que nos anciens nommaient amnésies. Vous le croyez double, ambidextre, dictionnaire, et le voilà triple ou tiers, habitant les deux rives et hantant le milieu où convergent les deux sens, plus le sens du fleuve coulant, plus celui du vent, plus les inclinaisons inquiètes de la nage, les intentions nombreuses produisant les décisions; dans ce fleuve dans le fleuve, ou la crevasse au milieu du corps, se forme une boussole ou rotonde d'où divergent vingt sens ou cent mille. L'avez-vous cru triple?
Vous vous méprenez encore, le voilà multiple. Source ou échangeur de sens, relativisant à jamais la gauche, la droite et la terre d'où sortent les directions, il a intégré un compas dans son corps liquide. Le pensiez-vous converti, inversé, bouleversé? Certes. Plus encore: universel. Sur l'axe mobile du fleuve et du corps frissonne, émue, la source du sens."
pp. 26-27.
Il y a pleins d'autres passages à souligner, et d'images percutantes. Je vais m'en servir, et essayer de convertir certaines de ces idées sur scène en créant des images théâtrales, des atmosphères et des personnages qui parlent du tiers, et de l'universel. On verra ce que ça donne!
jeudi 13 janvier 2011
lundi 3 janvier 2011
2011: the future.
Happy New Year!
Bonne Année!
I suppose now is the time to think about New Year's resolutions, or about the year to come and what it might bring.I've never been good at projecting myself in the future. To me, the "future" is a flimsy concept which is not tangible or reliable. It's infinite and uncertain. To us humans, there's no way of knowing when one's future will end. But we know it will, at some point, since death is at the end of our future road. So yeah, the future, to me, is problematic. However, practically, it can be good to think forward in order to move on and make plans that will help us live fuller lives. The plans may change, they may morph into something different, but they first have to be formulated in some way, or else nothing can come out of them. I need to remember that making plans can be a good thing, if I'm willing to let the plans change with time, according to what the future holds.
I'm starting to look for jobs since I will not be working at Touchstone theatre anymore after July 2011. It's a daunting prospect to search for a position (of any kind, at this point) after having been in a cocoon for two years. I know I have learned and am learning a lot by being an apprentice, but I still feel very young and inexperienced. Although I have a master's degree, I don't know how to promote it in my applications. I don't know where to look, or what to do exactly, or even where to live. I have settled on staying in the States for a little longer, but that's pretty much it. Philadelphia and DC are at the top of my list for job searches. All I know is that I need to earn some money, and all I hope is that I will work in a field that's interesting to me.
Despite all this uncertainty, I don't feel panicked yet [yet, being the operative word]. And, I have figured something out which should help me : wether it's within or outside of my job, I need to keep on creating. I need to write more, think creatively, dream up projects, more, more, more.I have no idea what's in store for me, or for anyone, in this new year. There's no way of predicting anything. But, if we can work our way to doing what we love, then, there's hope and there will be satisfaction.
samedi 25 décembre 2010
Repas de Noël
Joyeux Noël!
Je suis en France pour les fêtes, donc cela semble logique d'écrire des petits mots en français plutôt que de ne rendre ce blog qu'anglophone.
Mais revenons à nos moutons, et parlons de Noël. Retour à la normale cette année pour ma famille, puisque nous nous sommes réunis de nouveau en France, autour d'une table avec des amis. L'oie, au milieu, trônait avec (matière) grâce jusqu'à ce que nous l'eussent mangée. Les pommes cuites et les marrons faisaient bonne figure à côté de la bête, et le vin affinait les mets. Sans parler du foie gras en entrée, succulent, et du dessert, chocolaté. Des heures à manger, discuter, rire, comater... Noël, quoi. Un festin, un moment qui dure suffisamment longtemps pour qu'on s'en souvienne toute l'année.
Le 22 décembre, j'étais toujours aux Etats-Unis, et maintenant je suis ici, à Paris. Ce parachutage par avion me fait toujours un choc, mais le choc provient davantage du fait que je suis à l'aise - mais vraiment très à l'aise - dans les deux environnements et que c'est presque trop facile de se conformer. Comme si tout mon être se convertissait à l'entrée du pays en question. Et hop, on enfile la casquette française, et hop, la casquette américaine. Bien sûr, je suis ici, à parler de mon mal-être à ce sujet, donc clairement ce n'est pas si facile que ça de changer de nationalité. Mais aux yeux des autres, aux yeux du monde, c'est un jeu d'enfant.
Le repas de Noël, chez nous, correspond davantage à une tradition française : le déjeuner tardif, la nourriture de qualité, le vin, les vannes, et surtout, le temps qu'on passe à table : 3 heures en moyenne.
Malgré le fait que je vois certains avantages liés à l'efficacité de manger à l'américaine, jamais je ne réussirais à concevoir un repas comme un "calorie intake" (littéralement, une "prise de calories") et rien d'autre. Ca m'est arrivé de manger des bêtises à midi, mais je n'appelle pas vraiment ça "manger".
Heureusement pour moi, je viens d'une famille franco-américaine qui aime la bouffe, et qui aime passer du temps à table. Ma mère a beau être américaine, jamais elle ne se lèverait de table de son gré avant la fin règlementaire. Et elle est très souvent partante pour un petit café en fin de repas. Au contraire, je connais des Français qui ont justement émigré aux Etats-Unis en partie pour éviter les festins sans fin dans l'hexagone.
Comme toujours, les simplifications sont traitres et l'on ne peut pas faire de généralisations culturelles sans faire de contresens. Mais on peut quand même dire que la France considère sa cuisine comme un héritage, un patrimoine qu'elle se doit de conserver avec ses rites et ses coutumes. Et aux Etats-Unis, on a tendance à voir la nourriture comme une manière de... se nourrir. Debout, assis, avec couverts, sans couverts, ça n'a pas trop d'importance.
Mais plus qu'un clash culturel, il s'agit d'une différence de tempérament. La déambulation opposée à la ligne droite. Le temps passé à parler opposé au temps passé à agir.
Je pense à ma coloc, toute américaine qu'elle est. Elle prend son temps, fait des pains aux pommes, des tortellinis aux patates douces, et elle savoure. Souvent, elle me rappelle à l'ordre par sa douceur.
Je suis en France pour les fêtes, donc cela semble logique d'écrire des petits mots en français plutôt que de ne rendre ce blog qu'anglophone.
Mais revenons à nos moutons, et parlons de Noël. Retour à la normale cette année pour ma famille, puisque nous nous sommes réunis de nouveau en France, autour d'une table avec des amis. L'oie, au milieu, trônait avec (matière) grâce jusqu'à ce que nous l'eussent mangée. Les pommes cuites et les marrons faisaient bonne figure à côté de la bête, et le vin affinait les mets. Sans parler du foie gras en entrée, succulent, et du dessert, chocolaté. Des heures à manger, discuter, rire, comater... Noël, quoi. Un festin, un moment qui dure suffisamment longtemps pour qu'on s'en souvienne toute l'année.
Le 22 décembre, j'étais toujours aux Etats-Unis, et maintenant je suis ici, à Paris. Ce parachutage par avion me fait toujours un choc, mais le choc provient davantage du fait que je suis à l'aise - mais vraiment très à l'aise - dans les deux environnements et que c'est presque trop facile de se conformer. Comme si tout mon être se convertissait à l'entrée du pays en question. Et hop, on enfile la casquette française, et hop, la casquette américaine. Bien sûr, je suis ici, à parler de mon mal-être à ce sujet, donc clairement ce n'est pas si facile que ça de changer de nationalité. Mais aux yeux des autres, aux yeux du monde, c'est un jeu d'enfant.
Le repas de Noël, chez nous, correspond davantage à une tradition française : le déjeuner tardif, la nourriture de qualité, le vin, les vannes, et surtout, le temps qu'on passe à table : 3 heures en moyenne.
Malgré le fait que je vois certains avantages liés à l'efficacité de manger à l'américaine, jamais je ne réussirais à concevoir un repas comme un "calorie intake" (littéralement, une "prise de calories") et rien d'autre. Ca m'est arrivé de manger des bêtises à midi, mais je n'appelle pas vraiment ça "manger".
Heureusement pour moi, je viens d'une famille franco-américaine qui aime la bouffe, et qui aime passer du temps à table. Ma mère a beau être américaine, jamais elle ne se lèverait de table de son gré avant la fin règlementaire. Et elle est très souvent partante pour un petit café en fin de repas. Au contraire, je connais des Français qui ont justement émigré aux Etats-Unis en partie pour éviter les festins sans fin dans l'hexagone.
Comme toujours, les simplifications sont traitres et l'on ne peut pas faire de généralisations culturelles sans faire de contresens. Mais on peut quand même dire que la France considère sa cuisine comme un héritage, un patrimoine qu'elle se doit de conserver avec ses rites et ses coutumes. Et aux Etats-Unis, on a tendance à voir la nourriture comme une manière de... se nourrir. Debout, assis, avec couverts, sans couverts, ça n'a pas trop d'importance.
Mais plus qu'un clash culturel, il s'agit d'une différence de tempérament. La déambulation opposée à la ligne droite. Le temps passé à parler opposé au temps passé à agir.
Je pense à ma coloc, toute américaine qu'elle est. Elle prend son temps, fait des pains aux pommes, des tortellinis aux patates douces, et elle savoure. Souvent, elle me rappelle à l'ordre par sa douceur.
Calme-toi, Anne. Assieds-toi, mange avec moi et arrête de bouger.
Alors je m'asseois, et je me rappelle qu'il faut que je prenne mon temps car sinon, tôt ou tard, je finirais par exploser.
Alors je m'asseois, et je me rappelle qu'il faut que je prenne mon temps car sinon, tôt ou tard, je finirais par exploser.
jeudi 16 décembre 2010
The peace
Not always recognized.
When you see it, whatever.
When you hear it, yes and?
When you smell it, what's this?
It, perhaps - mildly - catches your attention. For a second, then...
There are other things to think about.
A patch of snow,
A bunch of dust caught swirling in a ray of sun
Light as the air, brisk, playful.
The motion of a hand petting a dog's back
The response, a gentle grunt.
That's the peace.
That, and other things too.
In the breath, and in the stillness and in the balance.
Before the eeriness of an approaching war -
Before the tilt into panic.
Before.
To be sustained, the peace must be noticed.
When you see it, whatever.
When you hear it, yes and?
When you smell it, what's this?
It, perhaps - mildly - catches your attention. For a second, then...
There are other things to think about.
A patch of snow,
A bunch of dust caught swirling in a ray of sun
Light as the air, brisk, playful.
The motion of a hand petting a dog's back
The response, a gentle grunt.
That's the peace.
That, and other things too.
In the breath, and in the stillness and in the balance.
Before the eeriness of an approaching war -
Before the tilt into panic.
Before.
To be sustained, the peace must be noticed.
mercredi 8 décembre 2010
A tough one - surrogacy
I just read a very thoughtful article written by a French judge, blogging here (en français). He is against surrogacy, and argues that legislating for this practice threatens women's rights, mainly because they become objectified, reduced to their biological capacity as baby carriers.
Surrogacy sounds very appealing, when you think about it from an engineering point of view. Woman A is fertile, couple BC isn't, so let's do some biological engineering and get it over with. But it will all inevitably lead to injustice. The more widespread surrogacy becomes, especially because it involves money, the more poor women will suffer to service the needs of richer couples, heterosexual or gay. Suffering which can include physical damage, mental strain, emotional disturbance, hormone levels through the roof, and ultimately, giving away a part of one's self.
I'm sure that there are many examples of happy families, and happy surrogate mothers who found great satisfaction from the exchange. By reading the agency blurbs, that's all it is: selfless happiness, blissful martyrdom. And, after having read some of the litterature, everyone involved in the process is given adequate care.
But, when considering the greater good,allowing this to happen on a national - even international - level will lead to oppression. And didn't women fight, not so long ago, for their right to be considered human, instead of simply serving the needs of men? So what, now, women should service the needs of rich couples?
And what is so wrong with adoption?
Are we objectifying the world so much that we see no value in a child that is not, technically, our own?
For some reason, the story of baby Moses keeps on coming to my mind:
Pharaoh's daughter came down to bathe at the river. Her maidens walked along by the riverside. She saw the basket among the reeds, and sent her handmaid to get it. She opened it, and saw the child, and behold, the baby cried. She had compassion on him, and said, "This is one of the Hebrews' children.
Exodus 2: 1-6
Compassion being the operative word in this passage.
I know adoption can also be complicated and corrupt, and poses ethical questions too. But adopting seems far more involved an action towards having a child than the passive ordering of a baby through surrogacy. Especially since today, adoptive parents don't ask their handmaids to fetch the baby, but go instead through gruelling months of applications, visits, tests.
Although biological technology today is hyper-modern, the mentality behind surrogacy seems... archaic and self-serving, an example of individualism aided by scientific progress. And I'm not sure I like where that's headed...
vendredi 26 novembre 2010
Thanks
I am so glad I am static right now. Sure, my fingers are tapping on a keyboard, but that's about it. Every other part of my body is relaxed, I do not need to be anywhere in the next 20 minutes, I did not go to work yesterday, I am not going to work today. My sister is here, I'm in Coatesville with family, and some of us fell aslep last night in front of Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets. Happy Thanksgiving!
As Eric's car was cruising away from Bethlehem towards Coatesville on Wednesday evening, I realized I had not left the gentle steel town since I had come back in September.
It felt good, a relief, to be moving away. Coming back soon enough, and gladly, too. But it is necessary, sometimes, to leave.
To rest. To pause.
I've come to realize that I don't have a very high tolerance for stress when I'm not using the appropriate coping strategies. One of the strategies I used to reduce stress while I was stage-managing in October was to listen to a podcast while I was walking to the theatre. I knew that if I simply walked, I would churn information in my head, I would worry, I would make lists that would instantly evaporate, and reappear again, and evaporate again. The podcast allowed me to focus on something exterior. It told stories of people to whom I could relate, but whom I didn't know. I could feel, for the span of 20 minutes, like I was not on my way to work. I was hanging on to the illusion of free time.
Now, although I'm still working a lot, my stress levels are fine, generally speaking. But that's partly because I make a point of taking time for myself. I have been cooking as much as possible. Nothing fancy, but the ritual of preparing food has made me relax. I even almost enjoy washing the dishes!
I am thankful for so much, and particularly happy to have such optimal living conditions this year. When I come home from work, I come into a warm, handsome, appartment. My housemate is delightful. And having a safe place like this is so damn important. Shouldn't that be a priority in public policy?
We sometimes forget about quality of life, because we're so busy doing stuff. And while some of us can come home and breathe, others come home, still holding their breath.
As Eric's car was cruising away from Bethlehem towards Coatesville on Wednesday evening, I realized I had not left the gentle steel town since I had come back in September.
It felt good, a relief, to be moving away. Coming back soon enough, and gladly, too. But it is necessary, sometimes, to leave.
To rest. To pause.
I've come to realize that I don't have a very high tolerance for stress when I'm not using the appropriate coping strategies. One of the strategies I used to reduce stress while I was stage-managing in October was to listen to a podcast while I was walking to the theatre. I knew that if I simply walked, I would churn information in my head, I would worry, I would make lists that would instantly evaporate, and reappear again, and evaporate again. The podcast allowed me to focus on something exterior. It told stories of people to whom I could relate, but whom I didn't know. I could feel, for the span of 20 minutes, like I was not on my way to work. I was hanging on to the illusion of free time.
Now, although I'm still working a lot, my stress levels are fine, generally speaking. But that's partly because I make a point of taking time for myself. I have been cooking as much as possible. Nothing fancy, but the ritual of preparing food has made me relax. I even almost enjoy washing the dishes!
I am thankful for so much, and particularly happy to have such optimal living conditions this year. When I come home from work, I come into a warm, handsome, appartment. My housemate is delightful. And having a safe place like this is so damn important. Shouldn't that be a priority in public policy?
We sometimes forget about quality of life, because we're so busy doing stuff. And while some of us can come home and breathe, others come home, still holding their breath.
mardi 16 novembre 2010
Teaching content
American education question:
Is teaching content to kids going out of style?
I don't know much about this, and I might be completely wrong, but I have the impression that students are being taught a lot of learning strategies and "ways of doing things", but don't always learn actual facts. Do they learn fewer facts because facts are so available everywhere now and what matters is how you find them?
I'm very tempted to go into a - say, Math, or English - classroom and see how and what kids are taught in school here, because I have no idea. Do high school students still read Shakespeare or is that over? Are computers always used to teach Math now? What does your average 7th grader know about volcanoes?
Having not been in the American school system as a student and working at the margins of the system now as a teaching artist, I have a very narrow and warped view of what kids do and learn all day. It's bugging me. If I were teaching in France, I would have a mental chronology of the overall curriculum as I know it, and how it's been evolving since I was a student. Changes in curriculum are discussed by the ministry of Education, and are often the centerpoint of debate among the teacher's union and the government.
This year, especially in one of the Touchstone programs, we're trying to integrate some material that introduces students to culture, by ways of a visual mood board and using classical music for some activities. I have no idea if any of what the material we introduce is redundant, but I have a feeling it's not.
I have a feeling the students are craving for knowledge, and we're not giving it to them.
-----------------------------------------
Below is the basics of how the education system works in the US. Good to remember. Since I am so used to the French, centralized, State heavy education framework, I need to remind myself regularly that it's not how it works here, at all.
From
The International Student's guide to the USA :
The American Education System
International students who come to the United States may wonder about their American classmates' prior education. Due to its local variations, the American education system appears confusing. In addition, the structure and procedures at American universities differ somewhat from other systems, such as the British model. This is a brief overview of the American school and university systems.
To begin, because the country has a federal system of government that has historically valued local governance, no country-level education system or curriculum exists in the United States. The federal government does not operate public schools. Each of the fifty states has its own Department of Education that sets guidelines for the schools of that state. Public schools also receive funding from the individual state, and also from local property taxes. Public colleges and universities receive funding from the state in which they are located. Each state's legislative body decides how many tax dollars will be given to public colleges and universities. Students in grades 1-12 do not pay tuition. College and university students do pay tuition, but many earn scholarships or receive loans.
Much of the control of American public schools lies in the hands of each local school district. Each school district is governed by a school board; a small committee of people elected by the local community or appointed by the local government. The school board sets general policies for the school district and insures that state guidelines are met.
Generally, school districts are divided into elementary schools, middle schools, and high schools. Elementary schools are composed of students in kindergarten and grades 1-5. Most children attend kindergarten when they are five-years-old. Children begin 1st grade at age six. Middle school is composed of students in grades 6-8 and high school contains grades 9-12.
High school students are required to take a wide variety of courses in English, mathematics, science, and social science. They may also be required to take foreign language or physical education, and they may elect to take music, art, or theatre courses. Many high schools also offer vocational training courses. A course can be one semester or two semesters in length. The academic year generally begins in mid August and ends in early June.
In the United States, education is compulsory for all students until ages sixteen to eighteen depending on the individual state. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 89% of people ages 18 to 24 were high school graduates in 2006. Most high school students graduate at the age of seventeen or eighteen-years-old. A student graduates after he or she has successfully passed all of the required courses. Grades are given to students for each course at the end of each semester. The grading scale is A (excellent), B (above average), C (average), D (below average), and F (failing). A student who fails a required course must repeat the course.
The U.S. Census Bureau reports that 58% of high school graduates enrolled in colleges or universities in 2006. Students have the option of attending a two-year community college (also known as a junior college) before applying to a four-year university. Admission to community college is easier, tuition is lower, and class sizes are often smaller than in a university. Community college students can earn an Associate's degree and transfer up to two years of course credits to a university.
Is teaching content to kids going out of style?
I don't know much about this, and I might be completely wrong, but I have the impression that students are being taught a lot of learning strategies and "ways of doing things", but don't always learn actual facts. Do they learn fewer facts because facts are so available everywhere now and what matters is how you find them?
I'm very tempted to go into a - say, Math, or English - classroom and see how and what kids are taught in school here, because I have no idea. Do high school students still read Shakespeare or is that over? Are computers always used to teach Math now? What does your average 7th grader know about volcanoes?
Having not been in the American school system as a student and working at the margins of the system now as a teaching artist, I have a very narrow and warped view of what kids do and learn all day. It's bugging me. If I were teaching in France, I would have a mental chronology of the overall curriculum as I know it, and how it's been evolving since I was a student. Changes in curriculum are discussed by the ministry of Education, and are often the centerpoint of debate among the teacher's union and the government.
This year, especially in one of the Touchstone programs, we're trying to integrate some material that introduces students to culture, by ways of a visual mood board and using classical music for some activities. I have no idea if any of what the material we introduce is redundant, but I have a feeling it's not.
I have a feeling the students are craving for knowledge, and we're not giving it to them.
-----------------------------------------
Below is the basics of how the education system works in the US. Good to remember. Since I am so used to the French, centralized, State heavy education framework, I need to remind myself regularly that it's not how it works here, at all.
From
The International Student's guide to the USA :
The American Education System
International students who come to the United States may wonder about their American classmates' prior education. Due to its local variations, the American education system appears confusing. In addition, the structure and procedures at American universities differ somewhat from other systems, such as the British model. This is a brief overview of the American school and university systems.
To begin, because the country has a federal system of government that has historically valued local governance, no country-level education system or curriculum exists in the United States. The federal government does not operate public schools. Each of the fifty states has its own Department of Education that sets guidelines for the schools of that state. Public schools also receive funding from the individual state, and also from local property taxes. Public colleges and universities receive funding from the state in which they are located. Each state's legislative body decides how many tax dollars will be given to public colleges and universities. Students in grades 1-12 do not pay tuition. College and university students do pay tuition, but many earn scholarships or receive loans.
Much of the control of American public schools lies in the hands of each local school district. Each school district is governed by a school board; a small committee of people elected by the local community or appointed by the local government. The school board sets general policies for the school district and insures that state guidelines are met.
Generally, school districts are divided into elementary schools, middle schools, and high schools. Elementary schools are composed of students in kindergarten and grades 1-5. Most children attend kindergarten when they are five-years-old. Children begin 1st grade at age six. Middle school is composed of students in grades 6-8 and high school contains grades 9-12.
High school students are required to take a wide variety of courses in English, mathematics, science, and social science. They may also be required to take foreign language or physical education, and they may elect to take music, art, or theatre courses. Many high schools also offer vocational training courses. A course can be one semester or two semesters in length. The academic year generally begins in mid August and ends in early June.
In the United States, education is compulsory for all students until ages sixteen to eighteen depending on the individual state. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 89% of people ages 18 to 24 were high school graduates in 2006. Most high school students graduate at the age of seventeen or eighteen-years-old. A student graduates after he or she has successfully passed all of the required courses. Grades are given to students for each course at the end of each semester. The grading scale is A (excellent), B (above average), C (average), D (below average), and F (failing). A student who fails a required course must repeat the course.
The U.S. Census Bureau reports that 58% of high school graduates enrolled in colleges or universities in 2006. Students have the option of attending a two-year community college (also known as a junior college) before applying to a four-year university. Admission to community college is easier, tuition is lower, and class sizes are often smaller than in a university. Community college students can earn an Associate's degree and transfer up to two years of course credits to a university.
Inscription à :
Articles (Atom)
