Electricity and the Classroom
Medium Post 1
In my education classes, I have found that one idea that constantly pops up is: How do I teach students about something without creating a project that belittles it? This idea came up again when I was reading the article “Flicking the Switch and Making Connections” by Manuel Pulgar-Vidal. Pulgar-Vidal’s article discusses the benefits bringing power to poorer parts of Africa has on those communities. He discusses hospitals not being able to treat women in labor at night because they cannot see and how communication cannot evolve. Despite having cell phones, there is no way for people to charge them, halting communication with people far away. However, bringing electricity to these poorer areas allows them to prosper, especially economically, because they can expand their communication in ways like mobile banking.
Teaching this article to students connects with the idea of valuing world cultures that can be seen in ERC’s Grand Challenges. Besides teaching students about a different culture, it also shows how different cultures interconnect. Outside groups, like WWF, help fund initiatives like the one discussed in Pulgar-Vidal’s article to help better that community. These initiatives reach thousands of people that may be able to donate or tell someone else that can donate. Eventually, communities across the world are helping raise money for electricity in the other communities, showing how cultures can impact one another.
That, however, is an oversimplification of the problems facing these communities, leading back to the problem of needing a project that does not belittle someone else’s plight. The project, if the article already does not, should lead students to wonder countries and areas of those countries are thought to be in need for this program, why are they considered more in need than others, and how does gaining electricity change the everyday household in these places? These questions are designed to teach students critical thinking and empathy. By looking into the first two questions, students will begin to subconsciously decide what areas they think need the electricity program next, or any participant for a program like this one. By looking at the last question, students should be contemplating the hardships of every day life, and connecting with the cause because it is about helping people. Technically, there should be no reason for WWF to include anecdotes to hospitals because people should be willing to help people.
That empathy, though, is where project decisions become belittling. Sometimes, teachers say not to use any electricity for 24 hours to see what other people suffer through. Despite that task being completely unrealistic, it teaches students a fake empathy. After doing the assignment, they will “understand” the program recipients’ hardships, but students always have the option for more electricity and they have never had to go their entire lives without any of it. On the other hand, students who actually do not have electricity are having their true experiences turned into quirky assignments.
Instead, focusing on the first two questions and decision making allows students to build empathy. Instead of a belittling assignment, students could work in pairs to do more research on these electricity projects and decide for themselves what area should be selected next. This research is also good because the seventh Essential Understanding of IEFA in Montana is that Native American history and the image of Native American people is now created by the people that oppressed them. Because of the history European settled nations have with Africa and the intense colonization of it, Africa as a continent is looked at as poor. Doing the research can teach students the actualities of some areas being prosperous while others are not, similar to every other continent and, on a smaller scale, country. Next, students can debate why they think their area should receive the funding for the program next. Doing the debate in pairs also allows students that may not feel comfortable talking to have support, or they can quietly discuss with their partner and then their partner can articulate the idea to the class. Also, hopefully the debate will show biases students put on picking their area. Because of values they hold, students will find some arguments more thought provoking than others, and they need to make those connections in order to flesh out better arguments.
Despite covering multiple content standards, this lesson would primarily focus on Montana OPI’s standards for freshmen and sophomores:
SL.9–10.1.a Come to discussions prepared, having read and researched material under study; explicitly draw on that preparation by referring to evidence from texts and other research on the topic or issue to stimulate a thoughtful, well-reasoned exchange of ideas.
RI.9–10.8 Delineate and evaluate the argument and specific claims in a text, assessing whether the reasoning is valid and the evidence is relevant and sufficient; identify false statements and fallacious reasoning.
Overall, allowing students to do more research on WWF’s programs to install electricity in poorer areas of Africa could help students become better critical thinkers and more empathetic.
