Your draft seems to be not done yet, but I have two comments/questions about discussions that you make.
1. While you define the hidden curriculum of heteronormativity as "the erasure of LGBTQ identities in the curriculum through the privileging of heterosexual identities" in the very beginning, does it not happen even when the curriculum includes LGBTQ identities? As the hidden curriculum is defined, in the first sentence of its Wikipedia article, as "'[lessons] which are learned but not openly intended' such as the transmission of norms, values, and beliefs conveyed in the classroom and the social environment," your definition of the hidden curriculum of heteronormativity seems to conflict with what the Wikipedia defines the hidden curriculum as.
Addressed these concerns through a change in language.
2. In the second paragraph, you say "students and teachers alike begin to police students back in line with heteronormative expectations" but you provide only an example of policing by students, but not by teachers. I would suggest adding an example of policing by teachers.
I have recently just started learning about the hidden curriculum and appreciated learning more about it from your section. I do have a few comments for you about your section. 1. The first section I thought, was fairly balanced and I did not feel that you were being overly biased and did not seem to have much argumentation. I know that can be very difficult, especially with your topic. 2. There was a sentence that I did feel was a bit persuasive. "Cherir-Teran and Hughes say that the lack of sexual education is problematic as it is often the only place that students have the opportunity to encounter any identities (sexuality, or gender) that fall outside of the hegemonic norm [cite]". It does seem like you are trying to promote sexual education. While I agree with you, that does seem to go against a balanced stance. I wonder if it would help to move away from sexual education and focus more on what the hidden curriculum is. It may help to lay out the very basic ideas of what hidden curriculum is and avoid talking about the negative consequences, as that might get more argumentative.
I attempted to make changes to this section to make it sound less persuasive
3. For the most part, I thought you were writing at a good reading level. There was one word, interprellate, that I felt didn't meet the writing level criterion. As you continue to edit, I would keep watching for this. I know it can be challenging because we are used to a higher writing level.
4. Finally, and I know you are probably already aware of this, but just make sure to cite sources at the end.
Best of luck! CassLong ( talk) 16:31, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
Your draft seems to be not done yet, but I have two comments/questions about discussions that you make.
1. While you define the hidden curriculum of heteronormativity as "the erasure of LGBTQ identities in the curriculum through the privileging of heterosexual identities" in the very beginning, does it not happen even when the curriculum includes LGBTQ identities? As the hidden curriculum is defined, in the first sentence of its Wikipedia article, as "'[lessons] which are learned but not openly intended' such as the transmission of norms, values, and beliefs conveyed in the classroom and the social environment," your definition of the hidden curriculum of heteronormativity seems to conflict with what the Wikipedia defines the hidden curriculum as.
Addressed these concerns through a change in language.
2. In the second paragraph, you say "students and teachers alike begin to police students back in line with heteronormative expectations" but you provide only an example of policing by students, but not by teachers. I would suggest adding an example of policing by teachers.
I have recently just started learning about the hidden curriculum and appreciated learning more about it from your section. I do have a few comments for you about your section. 1. The first section I thought, was fairly balanced and I did not feel that you were being overly biased and did not seem to have much argumentation. I know that can be very difficult, especially with your topic. 2. There was a sentence that I did feel was a bit persuasive. "Cherir-Teran and Hughes say that the lack of sexual education is problematic as it is often the only place that students have the opportunity to encounter any identities (sexuality, or gender) that fall outside of the hegemonic norm [cite]". It does seem like you are trying to promote sexual education. While I agree with you, that does seem to go against a balanced stance. I wonder if it would help to move away from sexual education and focus more on what the hidden curriculum is. It may help to lay out the very basic ideas of what hidden curriculum is and avoid talking about the negative consequences, as that might get more argumentative.
I attempted to make changes to this section to make it sound less persuasive
3. For the most part, I thought you were writing at a good reading level. There was one word, interprellate, that I felt didn't meet the writing level criterion. As you continue to edit, I would keep watching for this. I know it can be challenging because we are used to a higher writing level.
4. Finally, and I know you are probably already aware of this, but just make sure to cite sources at the end.
Best of luck! CassLong ( talk) 16:31, 20 April 2018 (UTC)