I want to say at the outset that I genuinely and entirely value the story that mIke Rose is telling us in Lives on the Boundary. At the same time, though, there are limitations to what he offers us in the early part of the 21st Century, limitations that, for white educators in particular (because Black and Brown colleagues have known it for a lot longer than that), have been more clearly articulated for us in the current political, cultural, societal moment.
Victor Villanueva's Bootstraps, then, is an excellent counterpoint to Rose because his story is, in so many ways, a similar story set roughly ten years later than Rose, but he brings to the conversation two things: a critical and theoretical framework that Rose is largely lacking, and, also his experience as, as Villanueva's calls it, a "Newyorkarican" in the largely white, middle-class landscape of school/university.
FOR THIS POST: Briefly identify the ways that that Villanueva's story mirrors Rose's story of school and then identify the ways in which Villanueva offers a useful critique of Rose--or perhaps not a critique but an opening up of Rose's story. Makes sure that I can tell that you read all of the material in your post (not that is really a problem for this class. If you post, you guys do a good job of it).
THERE IS NO NEED FOR A RESPONSE TO A CLASSMATE POST THIS TIME AROUND. We'll take time in-class to read and respond to our colleagues.