How do you establish when a student is mature enough to deal with certain texts?

I think that teachers must slowely bring in texts and their maturity level. Starting out a certain level and working there way up, perhaps to build a students maturity. I also think it is important that teachers address the issue before assigning it and talking about it openly with the class. I feel that way the teacher can gauge the maturity level based on the students responses how they might handle the book or topic. Perhaps if the students dont handle the discussion in mature manner then maybe the students aren't ready to handle that particular subject. Maybe even before having an open discussion , the teacher could have the students write about a paritcular subject, expressing their ideas thoughts or beliefs which might give insight as to if they are mature enough or not. In my opinion, I feel after the ninth grade most students are capable of handling most topics. I say ninth grade because it seems that the transition from eighth to ninth grade is a pretty big one and in ninth grade students are keeping those immature values while learning to be a high schooler. They still can't handle some issues but are simultaneously learning how to deal with others. Yet, I also feel that some tenth graders can't handle some mature topics but that is also based on their background and what they have been taught growing up.

Gee vs. Deplit

Gee and Deplit are talking to each other and feuding about how discourses can effect people. Gee believes that people are stuck in a particular discourse and that is how they are suppose to live and act. Whereas Delpit disagrees with Gee, stating that discourses can be changed and overcome. Gee sees discourses and the things encompassed with that discourse as unfixable, not transferable.
In Delpits article she directly refers to Gee and the faults that she finds in his viewpoints. The two main areas that Delpit disagrees with are how discourses cant be taught in a classroom setting, but can only be taught in a home setting. And people must have access to certain discourses to get ahead in life and if they dont they shouldnt plan on moving ahead; essentially what a person is born into is what they'll be forever. The second point Delpit disagrees with Gee on is how he thinks that some discourses may come into conflict with other discourses with other values when trying to become apart of that discourse.

I agree with Delpit disagreeing on Gee's views. I think that it is possible for other discourses to be taught in the classroom. If students want to become apart of another discourse, they just need the resources to do so and generally those resources are taught or introduced in a classroom. Gee sees the situation as being stuck or set, but as Delpit proves in her argument that people can learn to be apart of another discourse. I also disagree with the whole conflict of values between discourses. There will always be a conflict of values between any group of people but I think people can overcome those problems if they wanted to or they could come to a mutual agreement between the two diverse values.

I dont think there should be set boundaries to things like particular discourses. It bothers me that Gee thinks there are. I think people can grow up a certain way, learning from there family and surroundings but can change that in the future if they choose to do so. I mean we have all heard stories of people being the first generation college student, and that in a way is learning a new discourse because the student is breaking away from the norm of the family and learning about a new way of life, and knowledge.

I think it is important as I plan on becoming an English teacher that we dont set boundaries for students but let them explore as they choose to do so. To give them the resources, if they want, to become whoever they want to be regardless of its out of their discourse.