Refuse the vocabulary mascot The idea of using a vocabulary mascot in the classroom is one that has gained popularity in recent years. Many teachers believe that having a cute and cuddly character can help to engage students in the learning process and make it more fun. However, I believe that using a vocabulary mascot can actually have a negative impact on learning, and I would argue that it should be avoided. One of the main reasons why I am against the use of a vocabulary mascot is that it can create a dependency on external resources for language learning. When students rely too heavily on a mascot to help them remember words and phrases, they are not developing their own memory and recall skills. This can be detrimental in the long run, as these skills are essential in becoming a proficient language learner.
Official University of Minnesota Morris athletic teams will be held to the higher level of compliance. Student clubs and organizations, who have a more peripheral affiliation with UMN Morris, are strongly encouraged to refuse to schedule competition with teams that use symbols, images, mascots, logos, or nicknames reflecting the historical use of stereotypical representations which dehumanize and oppress marginalized peoples.
The UMN Morris athletic department, and student clubs and organizations will no longer intentionally schedule competition with teams that use symbols, images, mascots, logos, or nicknames reflecting the historical use of stereotypical representations which dehumanize and oppress marginalized peoples. In the 1970s American Indian activists spoke out against both Chief Illiniwek of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign and Chief Wahoo, the mascot of the Cleveland Indians.
This can be detrimental in the long run, as these skills are essential in becoming a proficient language learner. By refusing the use of a vocabulary mascot, teachers encourage students to rely on their own abilities, fostering independence and self-reliance. Furthermore, a vocabulary mascot can also lead to a lack of focus on the actual words and phrases being taught.
UMN Morris Athletic Competition: Team Mascots
The University of Minnesota Morris takes pride in providing a learning environment that acknowledges and values diversity of all kinds, including, but not limited to, race and ethnicity, religion and spirituality, gender, sexual orientation, ability, and class. Eliminating discrimination and ensuring the civil rights of all of our students, faculty and staff is a continuing effort and this policy intends to reflect progress in these efforts.
Policy
The UMN Morris athletic department, and student clubs and organizations will no longer intentionally schedule competition with teams that use symbols, images, mascots, logos, or nicknames reflecting the historical use of stereotypical representations which dehumanize and oppress marginalized peoples. The athletic director will review team symbols, images, mascots, logos, and nicknames of other teams before finalizing competition schedules for intercollegiate athletic competitions.
In the event that a team with an objectionable symbol, image, mascot, logo, or nickname joins any conference with University of Minnesota Morris, the director of athletics will notify the team in question that UMN Morris will not publicly display the symbol, image or logo, and that they will not be permitted to use their mascot when engaging in competition at the University of Minnesota Morris. If an opposing team does agree to abide by these requirements, the athletic director will refer the matter to the Student Affairs Committee for consultation.
Objectionable nicknames will not be announced during competitive play and the objectionable logo, slogan, image, or nickname will not be printed on programs or other materials by the University of Minnesota Morris.
Official University of Minnesota Morris athletic teams will be held to the higher level of compliance. Student clubs and organizations, who have a more peripheral affiliation with UMN Morris, are strongly encouraged to refuse to schedule competition with teams that use symbols, images, mascots, logos, or nicknames reflecting the historical use of stereotypical representations which dehumanize and oppress marginalized peoples.
Members of the campus community may refer questions or concerns to the director of intercollegiate athletics.
In the event that a team with an objectionable symbol, image, mascot, logo, or nickname joins any conference with University of Minnesota Morris, the director of athletics will notify the team in question that UMN Morris will not publicly display the symbol, image or logo, and that they will not be permitted to use their mascot when engaging in competition at the University of Minnesota Morris. If an opposing team does agree to abide by these requirements, the athletic director will refer the matter to the Student Affairs Committee for consultation.
When students are more focused on the mascot itself than on the vocabulary they are supposed to be learning, the effectiveness of the lesson is diminished. The purpose of teaching vocabulary is to expand students' lexicon and improve their ability to express themselves in the language. By introducing a distraction like a mascot, this purpose is undermined, and students may not fully grasp the concepts being taught. In addition, the use of a vocabulary mascot can inadvertently create a sense of competition or comparison among students. If one student has a stronger association with the mascot and therefore demonstrates better recall of vocabulary, it can lead to feelings of inadequacy in other students. This can negatively impact the classroom dynamic and hinder overall learning progress. In conclusion, while the use of a vocabulary mascot may seem like a fun and engaging teaching tool, it is ultimately counterproductive to the goal of language learning. By refusing to rely on a mascot, teachers can promote independence, focus, and equality in the classroom. Language learning should be an individual journey where students take ownership of their own learning rather than relying on external aids..
Reviews for "Taking a culturally sensitive approach to vocabulary instruction without a mascot"
1. John - 1/5 stars - I found "Refuse the vocabulary mascot" to be incredibly boring and unengaging. The storyline lacks depth and the characters are one-dimensional. I was constantly waiting for something exciting to happen, but unfortunately, it never did. The writing style is also quite dull, with repetitive phrases and a lack of creativity. Overall, I was highly disappointed with this book and would not recommend it to others.
2. Sarah - 2/5 stars - I had high hopes for "Refuse the vocabulary mascot" as I had heard good things about it, but unfortunately, it did not live up to my expectations. The plot was confusing and disjointed, making it hard to follow the story. Additionally, the main character was not relatable and I struggled to connect with their journey. The writing style was also a letdown, lacking descriptive language and fluidity. Overall, I found this book to be a disappointment and would not read it again.
3. Emily - 2/5 stars - "Refuse the vocabulary mascot" was not my cup of tea. The writing style was hard to follow and the frequent use of cliches and repetitive phrases made it feel unoriginal and uninspiring. The storyline was predictable and lacked any significant depth or complexity. I was hoping for a thought-provoking read, but instead, I found myself disinterested and ready to move on to something else. Unfortunately, this book did not meet my expectations.
4. Mark - 1/5 stars - "Refuse the vocabulary mascot" was a complete waste of my time. The plot was convoluted and confusing, with no clear direction. The characters were bland and lacked any depth or development. The writing style was also unimpressive, with choppy sentences and a lack of coherence. I struggled to find any redeeming qualities in this book and would not recommend it to anyone. Save yourself the disappointment and pick up something else.