Historicizing cultural struggles around education focuses on the deculturalizing effect a dominant culture’s education process can have on minority cultures. I find the arguments to be repetitive and often with an editorial flavor hinting at an underlying agenda. Because of my skeptical nature, I hesitate to accept such arguments at face value and look for other possible explanations. I’m not one to follow the crowd unless I am convinced the crowd has a firm basis on which to act. I also look at history with a critical eye, realizing that opposing interpretations generally are designed to serve the motives of the respective proponents rather than offer objective facts for learning. Therefore, this topical study did not change my thinking but did afford new opportunities to evaluate the ‘why’ behind the arguments on both sides.

I am bothered by the simple regurgitation of arguments from my classmates, based on the text. I would prefer to read some critical thought offering more insight to both sides of the issues as well as raising other possible explanations that, if true, make the two historical sides of the arguments irrelevant. For example, the arguments surrounding White European dominant culture disenfranchising minority cultures is a reactionary response. Its appearance is fairly recent in the past century but it is not new to human relations throughout history. Two thousand years ago, Socrates expressed concern over the generation gap in clear terms. Yet modern Psychologists trace it to the industrialization of America and explain its fruition in the ‘40s with the advent of the teeny boppers. Another example is seen in the field of vocational guidance whose roots can be traced back to 5th century B.C. China. Follow the trends and changes throughout the centuries and even with all the new theories presented in the 20th century, you will eventually come full circle to arrive at the 5th century origins. My point is, there’s nothing new under the Sun. Forget the box. We need to think outside of it.