So...I'm not quite positive about all of these appositives, but I'll give it a go!

Okay, so here's a bit of a paper that I recently wrote for my T&L 465 course...

---

Oppression, as defined by society, expands far beyond what are considered unalienable equalities and into the realm of what one assumes is an automatic right. When considering how members of society face oppression, education seldom presents itself as a main issue because the “ability” for someone to be educated has always been seen as a need and unchangeable right. However, digging deeper into the issue of educating the population, it is vital to consider the level at which it is taught [PRESENT PARTICIPLE]. In his novel, Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Paulo Freire reveals some of the major issues with modern education.

Pointed out in the second chapter of his novel, students are rarely taught anything that expands past “receiving, filing, and storing the deposits” of whatever information is sent their way (Freire, p. 53) [PAST PARTICIPLE]. While there are many creative techniques that can be used within a classroom to promote long-term comprehension and use of information, students are often only expected to regurgitate information without applying it or finding a deeper meaning, relying far too heavily on this ‘banking’ system. In his piece, Freire further explains the assumptions of the banking system: that the “teachers know everything and the students know nothing” to “the teacher acts and the students have the illusion of acting through the action of the teacher” (Freire, p. 54) [APPOSITIVE]. Understanding that the oppressive assumptions of the banking system do not allow for room for student-discovery emphasizes the point that the system is flawed. In more forward teaching methods, students are able to explore information, young minds experiencing what they are being taught, whereas the banking system simply allows for surface-deep absorption of knowledge [NOUN ABSOLUTE].

According to the authors of Social Justice, Peace, and Environmental Education, “human rights are standards…that outline the conditions necessary for people to live full of dignity” (Andrzejewski, 66). With this mindset, standards can be described as the laws (governing what an individual is free to do) that function within the bearing of society [APPOSITIVE]. However, when dealing with education, standards take on a vastly different meaning. They no longer describe the rights that individuals have, but rather the goal that everyone is expected to live up to. As found in problem-posing education, educators and students become “[subjects] of the educational process” (Freire, 67). Standardized education strives for a common goal, sometimes disregarding varied methods of learning in order to get there. Fortunately, the need for “high” scores - "real" evidence of learning - does not always beat out the need for students to come to an understanding within education [APPOSITIVE]. The No Child Left Behind Act greatly emphasizes the need for students to reach a commonly established standard, placing responsibility on the schools and communities to do so (NCLB Act). While it does set a standard that the schools have to achieve, the act leaves room for schools, the hub of learning, to go about reaching the goal in their own ways [APPOSITIVE]. Within Washington state, the Washington Assessment of Student Learning, or WASL, test was used for many years in order to gauge student learning and overall success. Using a single exam that all students would be taking presents schools with an idea of how to go about rating student learning, but its limitations do not accommodate for varied styles of learning, unique and diverse [ADJ. OUT OF ORDER].