Monday, October 29, 2007
Reading Aid Seen to Lag in English Language Learners Focus
This article focused on the Reading First program, funded by No Child Left behind, which was created to help early English language readers only. The Reading First program was designed through scientifically based reading research to help students become successful readers early on. Now, educations systems are realizing the problem this presents to children that have English as their second language. It’s no wonder that this program is faulty when the insufficient No Child Left Behind program created it; The children that are being left behind, so to speak, are second language English students. According to the article, the Reading First program is lagging in consideration for these students. The problems with the Reading First program has recently reached legislation and will be reauthorized to be “linguistically appropriate”. This change will extend the program to meet the needs of English language learners, but it also presents some conflict with teachers who now will have to acquire certain training to teach with this program. The article also brings up the discussion of applying English only laws to the readjusted program. The question of whether or not to teach English learners in their native language is another controversial matter, which seems to pose more problems for teachers. Teaching English in the native language of students doesn’t seem to be a realistic approach to the problem because most teachers aren’t capable of this. I think the best approach would be to have specialized classrooms that can devote their attention primarily to bilingual students.
Thursday, October 25, 2007
Education on line: Bit by Bit, computers alter how we read
This article specifically dealt with students using the Internet for all their research. It also talked about how entire novels can be read on line, however, when using the Internet something is lost in the reading. When students read on line they lose the tone of the book as well as the meaning, because the Internet gives shortened versions of everything with things such as spark notes.
I would have to agree with this article. Although the Internet allows you to do work faster than searching through books at the library, the Internet is still very unreliable. Anyone can post things on line so it is difficult to separate the accurate information from the information that was simply made up. Students use this information as though it is all true and don't even consider what kind of website their on. For instance, in the article a teacher discusses how her students looked up information on Mexican immigration. The information they found was negative towards Mexicans and the information came from a neo-Nazi website. In this case, the information may be embellished but the students think it's accurate.
Personally, I do not like using the Internet for my research. I am always concerned with whether or not the information I have gathered is accurate or not. Using the Internet also helps lead to plagiarism. Nothing is stopping students from copy and pasting. When you are actually reading from a book, copy and paste is not an option. Also, I would not want to read a novel on the computer. The best part of a book is being able to sit and read it for a long period of time. When I read on the computer, I begin to get irritated and can't sit looking at the screen for a long time. Therefore I refuse to keep reading and just leave the computer. When I sit and read a book I am comfortable and don't have other things distracting me. Also, according to the article, books on line lose the tone of the book which is something that is important to the book.
There are some good things with reading on line. For instance, things are done faster and there easier to find. However, the only way your really going to have accurate information is in books.
I would have to agree with this article. Although the Internet allows you to do work faster than searching through books at the library, the Internet is still very unreliable. Anyone can post things on line so it is difficult to separate the accurate information from the information that was simply made up. Students use this information as though it is all true and don't even consider what kind of website their on. For instance, in the article a teacher discusses how her students looked up information on Mexican immigration. The information they found was negative towards Mexicans and the information came from a neo-Nazi website. In this case, the information may be embellished but the students think it's accurate.
Personally, I do not like using the Internet for my research. I am always concerned with whether or not the information I have gathered is accurate or not. Using the Internet also helps lead to plagiarism. Nothing is stopping students from copy and pasting. When you are actually reading from a book, copy and paste is not an option. Also, I would not want to read a novel on the computer. The best part of a book is being able to sit and read it for a long period of time. When I read on the computer, I begin to get irritated and can't sit looking at the screen for a long time. Therefore I refuse to keep reading and just leave the computer. When I sit and read a book I am comfortable and don't have other things distracting me. Also, according to the article, books on line lose the tone of the book which is something that is important to the book.
There are some good things with reading on line. For instance, things are done faster and there easier to find. However, the only way your really going to have accurate information is in books.
Thursday, October 18, 2007
Blurring Lines Among Both Students and Subjects
Placing honors, regular and special education students in the same rooms is a brilliant idea. Also with the combining of ELA with social studies, it too will create many positive features. From this experience, students at different learning levels will gather and share with others. With students interacting with each other more often, a major goal to be achieved is for higher standards to be met. Also from my understanding of this article, is that by combining students, it may also reduce the “cliques”. Although this is just an experiment right now, many are intrigued with the many positives it has brought thus far.
One benefit from uniting students of all learning levels is that the number of teachers students have to work with each day reduces. As a sixth grader, one of the most difficult transitions they will encounter in life is making this move up to middle school. No more having just one teacher to teach all subjects. Therefore, by combining language arts and social studies it will allow the student to move up, but a slower rate so they feel comfortable. Also another important fact that occurs at this stage is the forming of many cliques. With most of these cliques forming from the child’s lifestyle; derived from an academic, social and financial standpoint, one way to eliminate this is by uniting all students together in one classroom. With combining students to one classroom, a better understanding of how each student views another becomes clearer.
Many students adapt new learning techniques from watching others. Since reading and social studies are closely related, why not combine the two? With some students having greater reading skills than others, they can help make students who do not comprehend as well. This works vice versa for those who can not remember facts most easily. Students will begin to set higher standards for themselves. With using what they have learned from others and combining it with what they already know, the end result will be most productive. With some being able to read better than others, some may become discouraged. With uniting, each student will see what the others are reading but work much harder to achieve their set goals.
The end result is very productive, for I have experienced this when teaching down south. There students in sixth grade are given two teachers with one concentrating on math and science, as the other teachers ELA and social studies. They too combined classes. With the lower level average learners combining with the mild exceptional children, their goal is to have students be in the same as average students and the honors kids.
One benefit from uniting students of all learning levels is that the number of teachers students have to work with each day reduces. As a sixth grader, one of the most difficult transitions they will encounter in life is making this move up to middle school. No more having just one teacher to teach all subjects. Therefore, by combining language arts and social studies it will allow the student to move up, but a slower rate so they feel comfortable. Also another important fact that occurs at this stage is the forming of many cliques. With most of these cliques forming from the child’s lifestyle; derived from an academic, social and financial standpoint, one way to eliminate this is by uniting all students together in one classroom. With combining students to one classroom, a better understanding of how each student views another becomes clearer.
Many students adapt new learning techniques from watching others. Since reading and social studies are closely related, why not combine the two? With some students having greater reading skills than others, they can help make students who do not comprehend as well. This works vice versa for those who can not remember facts most easily. Students will begin to set higher standards for themselves. With using what they have learned from others and combining it with what they already know, the end result will be most productive. With some being able to read better than others, some may become discouraged. With uniting, each student will see what the others are reading but work much harder to achieve their set goals.
The end result is very productive, for I have experienced this when teaching down south. There students in sixth grade are given two teachers with one concentrating on math and science, as the other teachers ELA and social studies. They too combined classes. With the lower level average learners combining with the mild exceptional children, their goal is to have students be in the same as average students and the honors kids.
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
Bit by Bit
According to the October 16th edition of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, "The very way online information is accessed -- by jumping from one Web site to the next -- does little to encourage linear thought as is used when reading a book."
College students of this generation have grown up with the benefit of the vast reaches of the internet, and the several new search engines that tend to pop up monthly when trying to find information. We've all gotten the speeches on how the internet has 'unsafe information' or facts that have no credibility, yet.... What is the automatic resource that students turn to now when starting a research paper or project? You guessed it, the internet. Some may ask, "What's the problem in that?"
"Students over the years, I think, are losing a sense of tone," said David Miller, chairman of the English department at Allegheny College. "When you read text, one of the most important things you need to intuit is the tone of the writer's voice and the continuousness of things." Encouraging students to take a trip to the library, *gasp* what a thought! Dr. Miller also goes on however to marvel at the wide selection of what can be found on the internet and what online databases have access to.
Essentially, the article stresses what we have all heard dozens of times from professors and high school teachers alike in encouraging students to be wary of the simple solution of going to the internet for all information, and really, they have good reason to stress the point. With something as accessible and simple to use as the internet for researching any imaginable topic, it's a hard temptation to move away from for the busy student on the go. I agree completely that libraries and scholarly journals should be used more often in the student's game plan, but at the same have to say that we have to help our own students move into the future as well.
Should we as teachers incorporate a lesson plan or two devoted to teaching students how to properly use the internet for research purposes? I think for the sake of everyone involved it would be a great idea.
College students of this generation have grown up with the benefit of the vast reaches of the internet, and the several new search engines that tend to pop up monthly when trying to find information. We've all gotten the speeches on how the internet has 'unsafe information' or facts that have no credibility, yet.... What is the automatic resource that students turn to now when starting a research paper or project? You guessed it, the internet. Some may ask, "What's the problem in that?"
"Students over the years, I think, are losing a sense of tone," said David Miller, chairman of the English department at Allegheny College. "When you read text, one of the most important things you need to intuit is the tone of the writer's voice and the continuousness of things." Encouraging students to take a trip to the library, *gasp* what a thought! Dr. Miller also goes on however to marvel at the wide selection of what can be found on the internet and what online databases have access to.
Essentially, the article stresses what we have all heard dozens of times from professors and high school teachers alike in encouraging students to be wary of the simple solution of going to the internet for all information, and really, they have good reason to stress the point. With something as accessible and simple to use as the internet for researching any imaginable topic, it's a hard temptation to move away from for the busy student on the go. I agree completely that libraries and scholarly journals should be used more often in the student's game plan, but at the same have to say that we have to help our own students move into the future as well.
Should we as teachers incorporate a lesson plan or two devoted to teaching students how to properly use the internet for research purposes? I think for the sake of everyone involved it would be a great idea.
Monday, October 15, 2007
A Socratic Seminar: Emmanuel V.
Either/Or Distinctions: The Flight from Complexity
“A great deal of our discussion, as we searched for ways to define goals, seemed to depend on out setting up a series of oppositions. I’ve come to see this way of defining goals as reductive and based on false dichotomies” (Page 195, paragraph 1).
Bob Denham goes on to compare their ceaseless set up of reductive oppositions as a ‘flight from complexity.’ That statement is exactly right. As pedagogues it should be our primary concern to foster a desire to learn in our students, if this means that we should assess less, then so be it. If it means we should refrain from elucidating every single little goal, then so be it. The construction of these ineffectual dichotomies only demarcates this discipline as an antagonistic one.
The Danger of Softness
“Someone remarks, ‘I don’t teach English, I teach students.’ In a reply, a sudden explosion of clench-jawed anger; ‘Don’t give us that old line. It’s fake polarization. It’s falsely divisive. Sentimental. Anti-intellectual’” (Page 198, middle of page).
It’s a palatable, sensible argument that this proclamation is divisive or polarizing, but is sentimentality unprofessional? It seems that caring about students carries an amateurish connotation. This reflects pathology of English education. I feel the notion that it’s wrong or impeding of the educational process to become involved with students is an unprincipled and erroneous repudiation of instruction. My question is this: how are we supposed to teach when we erect walls of impersonality around ourselves? If we distance ourselves from students, as educators, how can we do our jobs?
The Education of Intelligences
“Except for those relegated to teaching the youngest children, teachers have typically commanded great respect. In the past much of the educational processes came to center on a single magnetic figure- a guru, a mullah, a rabbi, a Confucian scholar who took promising students under his wing…” (Page 348, 2nd to last par.).
I think this is the idyllic teacher. Instead of an autocratic, tyrant of a teacher, we should command respect but only for the sole purpose of educating our students. If we demand respect for supremacy or power and we fail to administer any reciprocity then our students will feel beneath us and their willingness to learn will be nonexistent.
The Child and the Curriculum
“Abandon the notion of subject-matter as something fixed and ready-made in itself, outside the child’s experience; cease thinking of the child’s experience as also something hard and fast; see it as something fluent, embryonic , vital; and we realize that child and curriculum are simply two limits which define a single process.”
I believe there is interconnectedness between students and the curriculum, the word embryonic is preeminently suggestive of that; students require an almost maternal sustenance to thrive in an academic setting. Within the microcosm that is the classroom, if we are cold and calculating about everything we will overlook individualism in students, ultimately depriving them of a literary identity. Strict adherence to a rubric will only make the classroom a homogenous pool of people. We should embrace academic dynamism, our curriculums should be an expression of our students
“A great deal of our discussion, as we searched for ways to define goals, seemed to depend on out setting up a series of oppositions. I’ve come to see this way of defining goals as reductive and based on false dichotomies” (Page 195, paragraph 1).
Bob Denham goes on to compare their ceaseless set up of reductive oppositions as a ‘flight from complexity.’ That statement is exactly right. As pedagogues it should be our primary concern to foster a desire to learn in our students, if this means that we should assess less, then so be it. If it means we should refrain from elucidating every single little goal, then so be it. The construction of these ineffectual dichotomies only demarcates this discipline as an antagonistic one.
The Danger of Softness
“Someone remarks, ‘I don’t teach English, I teach students.’ In a reply, a sudden explosion of clench-jawed anger; ‘Don’t give us that old line. It’s fake polarization. It’s falsely divisive. Sentimental. Anti-intellectual’” (Page 198, middle of page).
It’s a palatable, sensible argument that this proclamation is divisive or polarizing, but is sentimentality unprofessional? It seems that caring about students carries an amateurish connotation. This reflects pathology of English education. I feel the notion that it’s wrong or impeding of the educational process to become involved with students is an unprincipled and erroneous repudiation of instruction. My question is this: how are we supposed to teach when we erect walls of impersonality around ourselves? If we distance ourselves from students, as educators, how can we do our jobs?
The Education of Intelligences
“Except for those relegated to teaching the youngest children, teachers have typically commanded great respect. In the past much of the educational processes came to center on a single magnetic figure- a guru, a mullah, a rabbi, a Confucian scholar who took promising students under his wing…” (Page 348, 2nd to last par.).
I think this is the idyllic teacher. Instead of an autocratic, tyrant of a teacher, we should command respect but only for the sole purpose of educating our students. If we demand respect for supremacy or power and we fail to administer any reciprocity then our students will feel beneath us and their willingness to learn will be nonexistent.
The Child and the Curriculum
“Abandon the notion of subject-matter as something fixed and ready-made in itself, outside the child’s experience; cease thinking of the child’s experience as also something hard and fast; see it as something fluent, embryonic , vital; and we realize that child and curriculum are simply two limits which define a single process.”
I believe there is interconnectedness between students and the curriculum, the word embryonic is preeminently suggestive of that; students require an almost maternal sustenance to thrive in an academic setting. Within the microcosm that is the classroom, if we are cold and calculating about everything we will overlook individualism in students, ultimately depriving them of a literary identity. Strict adherence to a rubric will only make the classroom a homogenous pool of people. We should embrace academic dynamism, our curriculums should be an expression of our students
Friday, October 12, 2007
Socratic Seminar
Kendra Woods
The School and Society and the Child and the Curriculum by John Dewey
“It will do harm if child-study leave in the popular mind the impression that a child of a given age has a positive equipment of purposes and interests to be cultivated just as they stand. Interests in reality are but attitudes toward possible experiences; they are not achievements; their worth is in the leverage they afford, not in the accomplishment they represent.” (Page 193)
I think this says something about the teacher student relationship because I think that a teacher needs to understand that they have to help mold children into the things they need to be. They can’t expect a child to just learn information and be great just off of that. The child needs to be interested in what they are learning so that they use it in a positive way and as an accomplishment. To be interested in something helps to have experiences with what you are interested in. This is good for teachers because a student who is interested in something will work harder and gain more experiences because they like what they are learning.
Pedagogy of the Oppressed by Paulo Freire
“Education thus becomes an act of depositing, in which the students are the depositories and the teacher is the depositor. Instead of communicating, the teacher issues communiqués and makes deposits which the students patiently receive, memorize, and repeat. This is the “banking” concept of education, in which the scope of action allowed to the students extends only as far as receiving, filing, and storing the deposits.” (Chapter 2, page 53)
I think that this has to do with the teacher student relationship because it explains how teachers and students work. Teachers deposit information into students and they take that information and receive it file it and store it into their brain. I think this is a good example of exactly what some teachers do. Instead of interacting with children they just feed them all of this information and want the child to learn it and remember it. The student needs to remember what is deposited into them so they can memorize and repeat it back to the teacher. I think to a certain extent teachers do just have to give out a whole lot of information that students need to receive, but that should not be there whole way of teaching. They should listen to students and help them understand what they are learning and make them interact with each other and with the teacher.
Frames of Mind by Howard Gardner
“Next, there are particular sites or loci where learning takes place. Much education, particularly in traditional societies, takes place on site: the learner is simply placed near the model, who is at the time doing “his thing”. On site learning can occur at home, when that is the customary locus of the activity, be it learning how to prepare a meal or coming to “identify” with a parent who is always studying. As I have already noted, when societies become more complex, they are likely to set up specialized institutions for learning.” (Page 335)
I think this has a lot to do with teacher student relationships because a teacher does not have to be a professor. A school does not have to be in a special building. Kids are taught at home all of the time and they learn just as much as the ones who go to school. I think this says a lot because students don’t believe that their parents are teachers or their siblings are teachers. Everyone teaches you in some kind of way. Yes, teachers do teach you more about the world and math and subjects but the people around you teach you a lot also. So the teacher student relationship can be with any student and any teacher.
The Danger of Softness by Peter Elbow
“Elementary teachers are in more immediate contact with the fact that students cannot learn well unless they have some fun and get some personal support. Because they work with such young students and because they are with them so many hours in a day, they can see a student right before their eyes lose the ability to learn…” (Page 204)
This passage has to do with a student teacher relationship directly. Teachers can see when their students have lost interest in what is going on. Teachers with younger students can see this more clearly because a student needs a little fun and excitement to understand things that are going on. Students can get bored in a class very easily and sometimes need the teachers help to stay focused. So class should not be all play but at certain times students may need to take a bit of a break and do something fun for a while.
Discussion Questions
1. Why is it hard for students to understand teachers? Why can they understand a student better than a teacher?
2. Why is it hard for students to respect the authority of teachers in classrooms?
3. What can teachers do to accommodate different children’s learning styles all together to teach them all at the same time?
4. What techniques can a teacher use to get their students to understand and grasp information better?
5. What can students do to help the teacher better adapt to their learning styles so that no child is left out?
The School and Society and the Child and the Curriculum by John Dewey
“It will do harm if child-study leave in the popular mind the impression that a child of a given age has a positive equipment of purposes and interests to be cultivated just as they stand. Interests in reality are but attitudes toward possible experiences; they are not achievements; their worth is in the leverage they afford, not in the accomplishment they represent.” (Page 193)
I think this says something about the teacher student relationship because I think that a teacher needs to understand that they have to help mold children into the things they need to be. They can’t expect a child to just learn information and be great just off of that. The child needs to be interested in what they are learning so that they use it in a positive way and as an accomplishment. To be interested in something helps to have experiences with what you are interested in. This is good for teachers because a student who is interested in something will work harder and gain more experiences because they like what they are learning.
Pedagogy of the Oppressed by Paulo Freire
“Education thus becomes an act of depositing, in which the students are the depositories and the teacher is the depositor. Instead of communicating, the teacher issues communiqués and makes deposits which the students patiently receive, memorize, and repeat. This is the “banking” concept of education, in which the scope of action allowed to the students extends only as far as receiving, filing, and storing the deposits.” (Chapter 2, page 53)
I think that this has to do with the teacher student relationship because it explains how teachers and students work. Teachers deposit information into students and they take that information and receive it file it and store it into their brain. I think this is a good example of exactly what some teachers do. Instead of interacting with children they just feed them all of this information and want the child to learn it and remember it. The student needs to remember what is deposited into them so they can memorize and repeat it back to the teacher. I think to a certain extent teachers do just have to give out a whole lot of information that students need to receive, but that should not be there whole way of teaching. They should listen to students and help them understand what they are learning and make them interact with each other and with the teacher.
Frames of Mind by Howard Gardner
“Next, there are particular sites or loci where learning takes place. Much education, particularly in traditional societies, takes place on site: the learner is simply placed near the model, who is at the time doing “his thing”. On site learning can occur at home, when that is the customary locus of the activity, be it learning how to prepare a meal or coming to “identify” with a parent who is always studying. As I have already noted, when societies become more complex, they are likely to set up specialized institutions for learning.” (Page 335)
I think this has a lot to do with teacher student relationships because a teacher does not have to be a professor. A school does not have to be in a special building. Kids are taught at home all of the time and they learn just as much as the ones who go to school. I think this says a lot because students don’t believe that their parents are teachers or their siblings are teachers. Everyone teaches you in some kind of way. Yes, teachers do teach you more about the world and math and subjects but the people around you teach you a lot also. So the teacher student relationship can be with any student and any teacher.
The Danger of Softness by Peter Elbow
“Elementary teachers are in more immediate contact with the fact that students cannot learn well unless they have some fun and get some personal support. Because they work with such young students and because they are with them so many hours in a day, they can see a student right before their eyes lose the ability to learn…” (Page 204)
This passage has to do with a student teacher relationship directly. Teachers can see when their students have lost interest in what is going on. Teachers with younger students can see this more clearly because a student needs a little fun and excitement to understand things that are going on. Students can get bored in a class very easily and sometimes need the teachers help to stay focused. So class should not be all play but at certain times students may need to take a bit of a break and do something fun for a while.
Discussion Questions
1. Why is it hard for students to understand teachers? Why can they understand a student better than a teacher?
2. Why is it hard for students to respect the authority of teachers in classrooms?
3. What can teachers do to accommodate different children’s learning styles all together to teach them all at the same time?
4. What techniques can a teacher use to get their students to understand and grasp information better?
5. What can students do to help the teacher better adapt to their learning styles so that no child is left out?
Socratic Seminar (Melissa Golio)
Questions:
1. Why would we want students who all think the same? Shouldn’t life experience be part of the curriculum?
2. If children are taught by both relatives and teachers, who is responsible for teaching them right and wrong? Who is to blame if they did do something wrong?
3. Should students, in some sense, become the teachers?
4. How does the “banking system” prepare students for college and the work place?
Passages:
1. “The Child and the Curriculum” pg. 186: “Then studies introduce a world arranged on the basis of eternal and general truth; a world where all is measured and defined. Hence the moral: ignore and minimize the child’s individual peculiarities, whims, and experiences. They are what we need to get away from. They are to be obscured or eliminated. As educators our work is precisely to substitute for these superficial and casual affairs stable and well-ordered realities; and these are found in studies and lessons.”
-This passage is significant, because it shows why students and teachers don’t have a close relationship. When teachers don’t care about who their students are, it is difficult for the students to respect them. By trying to eliminate student’s personalities, it is telling the student that what they think and the way they think doesn’t matter. All that matters is what the teacher is telling them.
2. “The Child and the Curriculum” pg. 187: “The child is the starting-point, the center, and the end. His development, his growth, is the ideal. It alone furnishes the standard. To the growth of the child all studies are subservient; they are instruments valued as they serve the needs of growth. Personality, character, is more than subject-matter. Not knowledge or information, but self-realization, is the goal.”
-Although the ideals portrayed in this passage are a little over the top, they should be followed to an extent in the classroom. If students feel close with their teacher, meaning they feel that they can express themselves and have a voice, they will enjoy that class that much more. No student wants to just sit and be spoken to, they want to have an opinion and they want to express who they are. This passage, which is the way some sects teach, is a little extreme; however it provides teachers and students with the closest relationship.
3. “The Education of Intelligences” pg. 334: “Related to, but separate from, the intelligences involved are actual ways of learning exploited in one or another setting. Perhaps no basic is direct or “unmediated” learning: here the learner observes adult activity in vivo, as when a Puluwat child watches an elder construct a canoe or prepare to sail. Closely related to direct observation but involving more overt participation by the learner, are various forms of imitation, where the child observes and then imitates (either immediately or subsequently) the actions performed by the model.”
-This is very common in most schools, where the teacher will simply spit out information and the students simply write down the information and eventually memorize it. There is little communication between the students and the teacher which does not help build a relationship. Also, this kind of learning prevents students from really comprehending what the teacher is talking about. If discussions were allowed and questions were voiced, there would be a different understanding of the material.
4. Pedagogy of the Oppressed pg. 53: “The raison d’ etre of libertarian education, on the other hand, lies in its drive towards reconciliation. Education must begin with the solution of the teacher student contradiction, by reconciling the poles of the contradiction so that both are simultaneously teachers and students.
-This kind of idea, that the students and teachers constantly switch positions, promotes a healthy relationship. In all the classes I have taken, where the students were required to voice their opinions and teach what they know, I had a much closer relationship with that teacher. Everything becomes much more personal, because the teacher knows how you think and what interests you.
5. What is English? pg. 204: “The elementary section. Where the story of the wholistic group is complex and slippery, the story that I want to tell about the elementary section is simple (simple to summarize if not to enact). And where the wholistic group was often adversarial in stance, the elementary teachers were not. Though they were straightforward and learned, they nevertheless displayed the highest degree of play, metaphor, imagination, and connection of the cognitive to the affective. They were willing to risk the charge of corniness. They didn’t fight or get annoyed, and they weren’t particularly pushy. But they were an example, they were good colleagues, and they got through to people.”
-The way elementary school teacher’s act is the way all teachers should act, especially in the classroom. Elementary school teachers know that they do not have a long time to get and keep their students attention. They have young children who would much rather be doing something else, so their teachers have to create activities that will keep their attention and at the same time teach them. This creates a bond between the teacher and the students because the students see the teacher as fun and interesting. All teachers should do this because although students in high school and college are older, they would also rather be doing something else than sitting in class. However, if that class was fun and interesting and the students could relate with the teacher, the relationship would be stronger and the class would seem much more interesting.
1. Why would we want students who all think the same? Shouldn’t life experience be part of the curriculum?
2. If children are taught by both relatives and teachers, who is responsible for teaching them right and wrong? Who is to blame if they did do something wrong?
3. Should students, in some sense, become the teachers?
4. How does the “banking system” prepare students for college and the work place?
Passages:
1. “The Child and the Curriculum” pg. 186: “Then studies introduce a world arranged on the basis of eternal and general truth; a world where all is measured and defined. Hence the moral: ignore and minimize the child’s individual peculiarities, whims, and experiences. They are what we need to get away from. They are to be obscured or eliminated. As educators our work is precisely to substitute for these superficial and casual affairs stable and well-ordered realities; and these are found in studies and lessons.”
-This passage is significant, because it shows why students and teachers don’t have a close relationship. When teachers don’t care about who their students are, it is difficult for the students to respect them. By trying to eliminate student’s personalities, it is telling the student that what they think and the way they think doesn’t matter. All that matters is what the teacher is telling them.
2. “The Child and the Curriculum” pg. 187: “The child is the starting-point, the center, and the end. His development, his growth, is the ideal. It alone furnishes the standard. To the growth of the child all studies are subservient; they are instruments valued as they serve the needs of growth. Personality, character, is more than subject-matter. Not knowledge or information, but self-realization, is the goal.”
-Although the ideals portrayed in this passage are a little over the top, they should be followed to an extent in the classroom. If students feel close with their teacher, meaning they feel that they can express themselves and have a voice, they will enjoy that class that much more. No student wants to just sit and be spoken to, they want to have an opinion and they want to express who they are. This passage, which is the way some sects teach, is a little extreme; however it provides teachers and students with the closest relationship.
3. “The Education of Intelligences” pg. 334: “Related to, but separate from, the intelligences involved are actual ways of learning exploited in one or another setting. Perhaps no basic is direct or “unmediated” learning: here the learner observes adult activity in vivo, as when a Puluwat child watches an elder construct a canoe or prepare to sail. Closely related to direct observation but involving more overt participation by the learner, are various forms of imitation, where the child observes and then imitates (either immediately or subsequently) the actions performed by the model.”
-This is very common in most schools, where the teacher will simply spit out information and the students simply write down the information and eventually memorize it. There is little communication between the students and the teacher which does not help build a relationship. Also, this kind of learning prevents students from really comprehending what the teacher is talking about. If discussions were allowed and questions were voiced, there would be a different understanding of the material.
4. Pedagogy of the Oppressed pg. 53: “The raison d’ etre of libertarian education, on the other hand, lies in its drive towards reconciliation. Education must begin with the solution of the teacher student contradiction, by reconciling the poles of the contradiction so that both are simultaneously teachers and students.
-This kind of idea, that the students and teachers constantly switch positions, promotes a healthy relationship. In all the classes I have taken, where the students were required to voice their opinions and teach what they know, I had a much closer relationship with that teacher. Everything becomes much more personal, because the teacher knows how you think and what interests you.
5. What is English? pg. 204: “The elementary section. Where the story of the wholistic group is complex and slippery, the story that I want to tell about the elementary section is simple (simple to summarize if not to enact). And where the wholistic group was often adversarial in stance, the elementary teachers were not. Though they were straightforward and learned, they nevertheless displayed the highest degree of play, metaphor, imagination, and connection of the cognitive to the affective. They were willing to risk the charge of corniness. They didn’t fight or get annoyed, and they weren’t particularly pushy. But they were an example, they were good colleagues, and they got through to people.”
-The way elementary school teacher’s act is the way all teachers should act, especially in the classroom. Elementary school teachers know that they do not have a long time to get and keep their students attention. They have young children who would much rather be doing something else, so their teachers have to create activities that will keep their attention and at the same time teach them. This creates a bond between the teacher and the students because the students see the teacher as fun and interesting. All teachers should do this because although students in high school and college are older, they would also rather be doing something else than sitting in class. However, if that class was fun and interesting and the students could relate with the teacher, the relationship would be stronger and the class would seem much more interesting.
Socratic Seminar Preparation
From Dewey:
"Again, in school each of these subjects is classified. Facts are torn away from their original place in experience and rearranged with reference to some general principle. Classification is not a matter of child experience; things do not come to the individual pigeonholed. The vital ties of affection, the connecting bonds of activity, hold together the variety of his personal experiences. The adult mind is so familiar with the notion of logically ordered facts that it does not recognize--it cannot realize--the amount of separating and reformulating which the facts of direct experience have to undergo before they can appear as a "study" of branch of learning" (184).
Significance: In all of the educational theory we have been reading, the philosophies presented can be applied beyond the classroom. Dewey's analysis of pedagogy is grounded in an understanding of our society: everything is classified, therefore thinking is classified, and teachers--in their strict subject-matter divisions--teach categorized thinking. This brings to mind how significant teachers are to students. They do not simply transfer information, they teach children how to think in the normative way society operates.
Question: Is this role appropriate for teachers? Should we, as new teachers, question it?
From Freire:
"Education as the exercise of domination stimulates the credulity of students, with the ideological intent (often not perceived by educators) of indocrinating them to adapt to the world of oppression" (59).
Significance: Similar to my thinking about Dewey, I can see how revolutionary Freire's ideas are about pedagogy, because his philosophy applies societally. Teaching passively, what he calls "the banking concept of education," teaches students to be civically passive. How students participate in school is training for how they will function as adults in society. As acting as the oppressed in the classroom, they become familiar with a world in which the system of oppression is widely accepted and tolerated.
Question: How can we create experiential learning that challenges the intolerable ways in which society now functions?
From Gardner:
"The pre-modern or nonscientific mind has available all the same thought processes as has the scientific mind, but the system within which the former works is essentially closed: all premises have already been stated in advance, all inferences must follow from them, and the explanatory system is not altered in the light of the new information that has been procured. Rather, in the manner described in my discussion of traditional religious eduation, one's rhetorical powers are simply mobilized to provide ever more artful justifications of the conclusions, the worldviews, that were already known in advance and for all time" (362).
Significance: In Gardner's relaying of learning throughout history and across cultures, the Renaissance/the Enlightenment that changed the way we think about learning was revolutionary.
Question: Is the focus on new innovation still as important today? How can we encourage our students to formulate their own questions instead of just mimicking others?
From Elbow:
"For me, the conference ended up with an important subtheme--ended by sticking up for a side of the profession that often gets lost in high school and college English departments: play, storytelling, the personal, amateur, imaginative, affective, and informal. I'm not saying that the profession suffers from too much of what is professional, cognitive, analytic, and pragmatic; there can't be too much of those good things--only too little of the other side. Nothing need be lost, but something need be gained" (205).
Significance: This is an older book, and I can see how Elbow's thinking, perhaps echoed by others, led recent teachers to incorporate art and media and creative personal exercises to bring back the play into the classroom.
Question: How important is the personal to the study of English?
"Again, in school each of these subjects is classified. Facts are torn away from their original place in experience and rearranged with reference to some general principle. Classification is not a matter of child experience; things do not come to the individual pigeonholed. The vital ties of affection, the connecting bonds of activity, hold together the variety of his personal experiences. The adult mind is so familiar with the notion of logically ordered facts that it does not recognize--it cannot realize--the amount of separating and reformulating which the facts of direct experience have to undergo before they can appear as a "study" of branch of learning" (184).
Significance: In all of the educational theory we have been reading, the philosophies presented can be applied beyond the classroom. Dewey's analysis of pedagogy is grounded in an understanding of our society: everything is classified, therefore thinking is classified, and teachers--in their strict subject-matter divisions--teach categorized thinking. This brings to mind how significant teachers are to students. They do not simply transfer information, they teach children how to think in the normative way society operates.
Question: Is this role appropriate for teachers? Should we, as new teachers, question it?
From Freire:
"Education as the exercise of domination stimulates the credulity of students, with the ideological intent (often not perceived by educators) of indocrinating them to adapt to the world of oppression" (59).
Significance: Similar to my thinking about Dewey, I can see how revolutionary Freire's ideas are about pedagogy, because his philosophy applies societally. Teaching passively, what he calls "the banking concept of education," teaches students to be civically passive. How students participate in school is training for how they will function as adults in society. As acting as the oppressed in the classroom, they become familiar with a world in which the system of oppression is widely accepted and tolerated.
Question: How can we create experiential learning that challenges the intolerable ways in which society now functions?
From Gardner:
"The pre-modern or nonscientific mind has available all the same thought processes as has the scientific mind, but the system within which the former works is essentially closed: all premises have already been stated in advance, all inferences must follow from them, and the explanatory system is not altered in the light of the new information that has been procured. Rather, in the manner described in my discussion of traditional religious eduation, one's rhetorical powers are simply mobilized to provide ever more artful justifications of the conclusions, the worldviews, that were already known in advance and for all time" (362).
Significance: In Gardner's relaying of learning throughout history and across cultures, the Renaissance/the Enlightenment that changed the way we think about learning was revolutionary.
Question: Is the focus on new innovation still as important today? How can we encourage our students to formulate their own questions instead of just mimicking others?
From Elbow:
"For me, the conference ended up with an important subtheme--ended by sticking up for a side of the profession that often gets lost in high school and college English departments: play, storytelling, the personal, amateur, imaginative, affective, and informal. I'm not saying that the profession suffers from too much of what is professional, cognitive, analytic, and pragmatic; there can't be too much of those good things--only too little of the other side. Nothing need be lost, but something need be gained" (205).
Significance: This is an older book, and I can see how Elbow's thinking, perhaps echoed by others, led recent teachers to incorporate art and media and creative personal exercises to bring back the play into the classroom.
Question: How important is the personal to the study of English?
Socratic Seminar
The Battle between Students and Teachers
Chad Shennett
The Danger of Softness – Elbow
"X tells the story of his teaching: ‘I teach students’ – stressing that who he is and who he teaches are more important than what he teaches. Y objects, "you can’t say ‘I teach students.’ Students is only an indirect object. What do you teach students?" Nevertheless it’s a theme of the conference – with force from elementary group – that we do teach students (and teach ourselves). Teaching is a relationship." (Pg. 198)
This passage interested me because it brought up a debate that I never heard or had considered before. Some teachers believe more in who they teach than what they teach while other believe that statement is a myth and you can’t say that you teach students which are an indirect object. I personally believe you must integrate a little of both philosophies. Teachers must teach a subject, but they must teach that subject personally to the students. I think this issue needs to be explored more in detail and that it could be a major debate among teachers.
Pedagogy of the Oppressed – Freire
"The teacher talks about reality as if it were motionless, static, compartmentalized and predictable. Or else he expounds on a topic completely alien to the existential experience of the students. His task is to "fill" the students with the contents of his narration- contents which are detached from reality, disconnected from the totality that endangered them and could give them significance. Words are emptied of their concreteness and become a hollow, alienated and alienating verbosity." (Pg. 52)
I think this says something important about the teacher-student relationship as being non-existent. The fact that teachers act as fillers in the banking-concept of teaching is completely unacceptable. That is not teaching and if it is, then anyone can stand in front of a class and force the students to memorize different information. Teaching involves teaching students information or concepts they can apply in the future.
The Child and the Curriculum – Dewey
"One school fixes its attention upon the importance of the subject-matter of the curriculum as compared with the contents of the child’s own experience." (Pg. 185)
I think this effects the student-teacher relationship in a interesting manner. When the school chooses the literature or subject matter then the teacher has no input and must teach the class what the school tells them. This doesn’t allow the teacher to assess the class and decide on more specific class appropriate literature to teach. Also, the students have no input or options on what they study, instead they are told. This could affect the teacher-student relationship because neither the teacher nor class is happy with the subject material creating a negative learning environment.
Frames of Mind – Gardner
"A principal reason for developing an analytic framework is to explain why certain contemporary educational efforts have achieved success, while many other have met a less happy fate. I shall turn to this task in the concluding chapter of the book. To aid in this effort I have in the final pages of this chapter considered three components that typically occur together in the modern secular education – attendance at a school…"
(Pg. 333)
Gardner believes that the key to achieve educational success involves attendance at school, along with two other components. I do believe its important for students to attend classes as it creates a comfortable and more personal relationship with the teacher. It allows the teacher to get to know the student better. Some teachers are very encouraging regarding certain students to miss school and some students also feel that they can’t miss class for a number of reasons. I disagree with this. I personally believe more learning takes place outside of school. If a student has an opportunity to go on a 4-day road trip or go to the city to see a professional basketball game or hockey game then they should be encouraged by the teacher rather than discouraged. I think many teachers discourage missing class so much that students will pass on opportunities to explore new places and see new things.
Discussion Questions
How do you teach students facts such as capitals and multiplication tables without using the banking-concept?
Or instead of teaching specifics, teach the generalized meaning of capitals and mathematics and let the students explore the specifics if interested?
Why do some teachers, still today, insist on forcing students to memorize specific information?
Do we teach students? Or do we teach a subject?
Should the student have some input into the material they must study and learn from? Or should the teacher and school board solely decide?
Chad Shennett
The Danger of Softness – Elbow
"X tells the story of his teaching: ‘I teach students’ – stressing that who he is and who he teaches are more important than what he teaches. Y objects, "you can’t say ‘I teach students.’ Students is only an indirect object. What do you teach students?" Nevertheless it’s a theme of the conference – with force from elementary group – that we do teach students (and teach ourselves). Teaching is a relationship." (Pg. 198)
This passage interested me because it brought up a debate that I never heard or had considered before. Some teachers believe more in who they teach than what they teach while other believe that statement is a myth and you can’t say that you teach students which are an indirect object. I personally believe you must integrate a little of both philosophies. Teachers must teach a subject, but they must teach that subject personally to the students. I think this issue needs to be explored more in detail and that it could be a major debate among teachers.
Pedagogy of the Oppressed – Freire
"The teacher talks about reality as if it were motionless, static, compartmentalized and predictable. Or else he expounds on a topic completely alien to the existential experience of the students. His task is to "fill" the students with the contents of his narration- contents which are detached from reality, disconnected from the totality that endangered them and could give them significance. Words are emptied of their concreteness and become a hollow, alienated and alienating verbosity." (Pg. 52)
I think this says something important about the teacher-student relationship as being non-existent. The fact that teachers act as fillers in the banking-concept of teaching is completely unacceptable. That is not teaching and if it is, then anyone can stand in front of a class and force the students to memorize different information. Teaching involves teaching students information or concepts they can apply in the future.
The Child and the Curriculum – Dewey
"One school fixes its attention upon the importance of the subject-matter of the curriculum as compared with the contents of the child’s own experience." (Pg. 185)
I think this effects the student-teacher relationship in a interesting manner. When the school chooses the literature or subject matter then the teacher has no input and must teach the class what the school tells them. This doesn’t allow the teacher to assess the class and decide on more specific class appropriate literature to teach. Also, the students have no input or options on what they study, instead they are told. This could affect the teacher-student relationship because neither the teacher nor class is happy with the subject material creating a negative learning environment.
Frames of Mind – Gardner
"A principal reason for developing an analytic framework is to explain why certain contemporary educational efforts have achieved success, while many other have met a less happy fate. I shall turn to this task in the concluding chapter of the book. To aid in this effort I have in the final pages of this chapter considered three components that typically occur together in the modern secular education – attendance at a school…"
(Pg. 333)
Gardner believes that the key to achieve educational success involves attendance at school, along with two other components. I do believe its important for students to attend classes as it creates a comfortable and more personal relationship with the teacher. It allows the teacher to get to know the student better. Some teachers are very encouraging regarding certain students to miss school and some students also feel that they can’t miss class for a number of reasons. I disagree with this. I personally believe more learning takes place outside of school. If a student has an opportunity to go on a 4-day road trip or go to the city to see a professional basketball game or hockey game then they should be encouraged by the teacher rather than discouraged. I think many teachers discourage missing class so much that students will pass on opportunities to explore new places and see new things.
Discussion Questions
How do you teach students facts such as capitals and multiplication tables without using the banking-concept?
Or instead of teaching specifics, teach the generalized meaning of capitals and mathematics and let the students explore the specifics if interested?
Why do some teachers, still today, insist on forcing students to memorize specific information?
Do we teach students? Or do we teach a subject?
Should the student have some input into the material they must study and learn from? Or should the teacher and school board solely decide?
Socratic Seminar
Courtney Hayes
ENG297-Socratic Seminar Assignment
1. The Theory of Multiple Intelligences- Gardner. “The invention of various technological aids, may, paradoxically, leave an individual less well prepared to rely on his own abilities. And the sequence witnessed in the Western world is certainly not the only conceivable one and, quite possible, not the optimal one.” (p.365) I think that this passage is an important one because it rings true in our society today. Although technological advances have been made and put into use in many schools throughout the Western world, perhaps technology has begun to take over the thinking process. The easier things become for students to do with the help of technology, it is less likely they are going to do them on their own without the help of a computer or some other technological device.
2. Pedagogy of the Oppressed-Freire. “Narration (with the teacher as narrator) leads the students to memorize mechanically the narrated content. Worse yet, it turns them into “containers”, into “receptacles” to be “filled” by the teacher. The more completely she fills the receptacles, the better a teacher she is.” (Ch. 2, p.53) I think that this passage is extremely important because it shows an interesting relationship between the student and teacher, an unacceptable one at best. The teacher should not be a narrator; a teacher needs to get involved completely in the world of the classroom, not treating students as containers that need to be filled to the brim. Overloading the student with too much information will lesson the amount they actually learn. Also, simply memorizing facts and not knowing what it is that they are actually memorizing or learning is eliminating the thinking process all together.
3. The School and Society and The Child and the Curriculum-Dewey. “To learn the lesson is more interesting than to take a scolding, be held up to general ridicule, stay after school, receive degradingly low marks, or fail to be promoted.” (p.207) This is an important idea because Dewey is saying that students would rather just learn the lesson than get into trouble or risk getting a bad grade. He is ultimately saying that education and lessons need to be made interesting so that the student actually wants to engage in the classroom and learn the activity or lesson for that day. Without the interest of the teacher, why would any student want to be interested in the lesson or what they are being taught/told to learn?
4. Either/Or Distinctions: The Flight from Complexity-Denham. “The source for my first freshman essay was an experience that had been quite painful to me-the death of my father… At the time I thought this piece of writing was much more important than the freshman paper I wrote for my Western Civilization class...In retrospect, however, I’m not so sure. While my freshman essay was student-centered and came directly from my own experience, an experience from which I was trying to construct a meaning, I now recognize the experience of writing that freshman essay as extraordinarily limited and as simply another version of the late Romantic cult of the ego.” (p.195) I think this is an important idea because I can relate to it. In freshman writing courses, students are often told to write about what they know, thus a personal narrative. These pieces of writing are basic and minimal in content. Teachers need to give more complex and in depth assignments that really encourage the student to “construct” their own meaning and not simply re-tell a personal story or memory.
5. The Dangers of Softness-Elbow. “Thus, when participants used a term like child-centered, they meant something substantive, concrete and pragmatic: that learning must connect inward personally and focus outward socially-as opposed to only being organized conceptually.” (p.207) I think that this is an interesting idea because Elbow is saying that the term child-centered has new meaning, he believes that you cannot give every student the same material in the very same order. People are beginning to see that students should not only be able to but want to connect with the material they are learning on a more personal level.
Questions for Discussion:
Elbow believes that you shouldn’t give every student the same information in the very same order if you want them to connect with the material personally, how does he suggest you direct an entire classroom of students using this pedagogy?
Why is memorization still such a key element in most schools, Western included?
How can we get students more involved in the thinking process without limiting the technological advances we have at our disposal?
Is there a way to integrate technology in the classroom in a productive but non-limiting way?
Is there any way that lessons can be moved off-site to encourage a more open and unique learning atmosphere?
ENG297-Socratic Seminar Assignment
1. The Theory of Multiple Intelligences- Gardner. “The invention of various technological aids, may, paradoxically, leave an individual less well prepared to rely on his own abilities. And the sequence witnessed in the Western world is certainly not the only conceivable one and, quite possible, not the optimal one.” (p.365) I think that this passage is an important one because it rings true in our society today. Although technological advances have been made and put into use in many schools throughout the Western world, perhaps technology has begun to take over the thinking process. The easier things become for students to do with the help of technology, it is less likely they are going to do them on their own without the help of a computer or some other technological device.
2. Pedagogy of the Oppressed-Freire. “Narration (with the teacher as narrator) leads the students to memorize mechanically the narrated content. Worse yet, it turns them into “containers”, into “receptacles” to be “filled” by the teacher. The more completely she fills the receptacles, the better a teacher she is.” (Ch. 2, p.53) I think that this passage is extremely important because it shows an interesting relationship between the student and teacher, an unacceptable one at best. The teacher should not be a narrator; a teacher needs to get involved completely in the world of the classroom, not treating students as containers that need to be filled to the brim. Overloading the student with too much information will lesson the amount they actually learn. Also, simply memorizing facts and not knowing what it is that they are actually memorizing or learning is eliminating the thinking process all together.
3. The School and Society and The Child and the Curriculum-Dewey. “To learn the lesson is more interesting than to take a scolding, be held up to general ridicule, stay after school, receive degradingly low marks, or fail to be promoted.” (p.207) This is an important idea because Dewey is saying that students would rather just learn the lesson than get into trouble or risk getting a bad grade. He is ultimately saying that education and lessons need to be made interesting so that the student actually wants to engage in the classroom and learn the activity or lesson for that day. Without the interest of the teacher, why would any student want to be interested in the lesson or what they are being taught/told to learn?
4. Either/Or Distinctions: The Flight from Complexity-Denham. “The source for my first freshman essay was an experience that had been quite painful to me-the death of my father… At the time I thought this piece of writing was much more important than the freshman paper I wrote for my Western Civilization class...In retrospect, however, I’m not so sure. While my freshman essay was student-centered and came directly from my own experience, an experience from which I was trying to construct a meaning, I now recognize the experience of writing that freshman essay as extraordinarily limited and as simply another version of the late Romantic cult of the ego.” (p.195) I think this is an important idea because I can relate to it. In freshman writing courses, students are often told to write about what they know, thus a personal narrative. These pieces of writing are basic and minimal in content. Teachers need to give more complex and in depth assignments that really encourage the student to “construct” their own meaning and not simply re-tell a personal story or memory.
5. The Dangers of Softness-Elbow. “Thus, when participants used a term like child-centered, they meant something substantive, concrete and pragmatic: that learning must connect inward personally and focus outward socially-as opposed to only being organized conceptually.” (p.207) I think that this is an interesting idea because Elbow is saying that the term child-centered has new meaning, he believes that you cannot give every student the same material in the very same order. People are beginning to see that students should not only be able to but want to connect with the material they are learning on a more personal level.
Questions for Discussion:
Elbow believes that you shouldn’t give every student the same information in the very same order if you want them to connect with the material personally, how does he suggest you direct an entire classroom of students using this pedagogy?
Why is memorization still such a key element in most schools, Western included?
How can we get students more involved in the thinking process without limiting the technological advances we have at our disposal?
Is there a way to integrate technology in the classroom in a productive but non-limiting way?
Is there any way that lessons can be moved off-site to encourage a more open and unique learning atmosphere?
Socratic Seminar Ticket
Heidi Hanover
ENG 297
Dr. Mueller
Socratic Forum Entry-Ticket
12 October 2007
1. “The Child and the Curriculum” by John Dewey
2. “Frames of Mind” by Howard Gardner
- Passage: “Life consists of more than the deployment of particular combinations of intelligence for specific educational purposes. I must also point out that these intelligences are not mutually exclusive of one another. Cultivation of one intelligence does not imply that others cannot be acquired: some individuals (and some cultures) may develop several intelligences to a keen extent, while others may highlight only one or two” (Gardner 365).
- Passage: “Thus when participants used a term like 'child-centered,' they meant something substantive, concrete, and pragmatic: that learning must connect inward personally and focus outward socially—as opposed to being only organized conceptually...This emphasis on the personal and social connects with one of the dominant premises at the conference: that students learn in different ways and often benefit from different kinds of teaching and learning activities” (Elbow 207).
- Explanation: Although addressing the same topic discussed by Dewey, Gardner, and Freire, Elbow's article demonstrates how substantive the divide is between teachers who focus on content versus teachers who focus on their students. The fact that this argument has not been settled demonstrates positively how education is constantly evolving, yet it also causes concern for the students because it is difficult to succeed when there is such a wide variety of teaching practices to learn and adapt to.
- Question: At the conference, the majority of members viewed those who believed in child-centered teaching as unprofessional and naïve. While this may sometimes be the case, should the theory behind child-centered teaching be abandoned in an effort to focus more on content?
4. “Pedagogy of the Oppressed” by Paulo Freire
- Passage: “The students are not called upon to know, but to memorize the contents narrated by the teacher. Nor do the students practice any act of cognition, since the object towards which that act should be directed is the property of the teacher rather than a medium evoking the critical reflection of both teacher and students. Hence in the name of the 'preservation of culture and knowledge' we have a system which achieves neither true knowledge nor true culture” (Freire 61).
- Explanation: I feel Freire is concerned about the validity of content specific methods of teaching. While I agree that rote memorization is a poor and often unreliable method of teaching, I am confused about how it became such a widely accepted practice. I feel the sparse handouts of content knowledge that teachers provide for students are typically unsatisfying and do little to encourage individual thought and development.
- Question: If Freire is suggesting that students can commit information to memory through active engagement instead of teacher narration, why do the majority of educational facilities support lecture based classrooms?
Overarching Question: In light of the multiple school shootings at the hands of students that have occurred in the past few years, do you feel we should focus on our content area to better equip students with the knowledge to succeed in life, or should we focus on the individual and encourage their role as a member in society?
The article in this week's Inbox called "Written Off?" caught my attention immediately after I read the description. A decline in book reading? Well, ok, so that's kind of a "duh" idea. But the article brought up some issues that made me think. The writer focuses a lot on how they think the world of electronics is taking people, especially children, away from the world of books. At one point it mentions the biggest decline in reading is in the age groups of teens and twenty-somethings. They also place this on the increased use of technology, but I am reluctant to accept that. They mention specifically video gamers, but I know a lot of video gamers who still manage to read a heck of a lot more books than me. And personally, my lack of reading is more stemmed from school work than other "after school" activities.
I agree that students need to learn to appreciate reading at a young age, but teachers and everyone else in society need to stop blaming technology for all of this problem. It is just as much the fault of people who ask for the time of young people that we do not have the time to read for pleasure any more.
I agree that students need to learn to appreciate reading at a young age, but teachers and everyone else in society need to stop blaming technology for all of this problem. It is just as much the fault of people who ask for the time of young people that we do not have the time to read for pleasure any more.
Socratic Seminar
Amanda Miller
The Child and the Curriculum (Dewey) Page 201
As a teacher he is not concerned with adding new facts to the science he teaches; in propounding new hypotheses or in verifying then. He is concerned with the subject-matter of the science representing a given stage and phase of the development of experience. His problem is that of inducing a vital and personal experiencing. Hence, what concerns him, as teacher, is the ways in which that subject may become a part of experience; what there is in the child’s present that is usable with reference to it; how such elements are to be used; how his own knowledge of the subject-matter may assist in interpreting the child’s needs and doings, and determine the medium in which the child should be placed in order that his growth may be properly directed.
I thought this was an interesting and well thought out example of how a teacher should be concerned about his/her own teaching, and the students learning. It is very straightforward and it is recognizable as something not only employed teacher, but anyone trying to teach something to another person tries to think about while they are explaining or teaching.
Should it be the job of the teacher and ONLY the teacher to interpret the child’s learning needs?
Pedagogy of the Oppressed (Friere) Page 53
This is the “banking” concept of education, in which the scope of action allowed to the students extends only as far as the receiving, filing, and storing of deposits. They do, it is true, have the opportunity to become collectors and cataloguers of the things they store. But in the last analysis, it is the people themselves who are filed away through lack of creativity, transformation, and knowledge in this (at best) misguided system. For apart from inquiry, apart from the praxis, individuals cannot be truly human. Knowledge emerges only through invention and reinvention, through the restless, impatient, continuing, hopeful inquiry human beings pursue in the world, with the world, and with each other.
It is a good idea to consider that simply giving the students information is not enough, that it does not really spark their creativity. You have to provide them with a way to experience the learning, not just listen to the information.
Do you think there is a way to stop “banking concept” teaching in our country’s schools?
Page 58
Yet only through communication can human life hold meaning. The teacher’s thinking is authenticated only by the authenticity of the students thinking. The teacher cannot think for her students, nor can she impose her thought on them. Authentic thinking, thinking that is concerned with reality, does not take place in ivory tower isolation, but only in communication. If it is true that thought has meaning only when generated by an action upon the world, the subordination of students to teachers becomes impossible.
You cannot make a student take your way of thinking as the only way, you need to show them your way, and tell them to come up with their own version, or own way of thinking about it. It is again about not stomping out the creativity of the students.
Will it be hard for you to NOT impose your thoughts on your students at times?
Do you feel that you communicate well enough to get students to take ideas from you to create something themselves?
The Education of Intelligences (Gardner) page 336
Finally, in certain societies, there emerges a wholly separate class of teachers and leaders – initially religious, later secular in orientation – whose job it is to teach some, or perhaps even all, the youngsters in the community a given body of knowledge. Sometimes the teacher is expected to have an exemplary moral character; though in secular settings, technical expertise has become a key requirement.
Teaching has not always been a career, though that is often overlooked. And in this career you have not always had to have been certified. This is a very good thing to think about as we go in to our careers.
Have you ever thought about teachers as a “separate class?”
Which do you think is more important in a modern, moral character or technical expertise?
The Danger of Softness (Elbow) page 197
Janet Emig: “What are the conditions that all teacher need?” These mentioned: smaller classes, fewer students, more time, support, workshops, leadership.
I hear about this all the time, all teachers think and talk about these “needs” but it is unlikely that most of us will get them.
If you could absolutely have one of the above “needs,” but no others, which one would you rather have?
Socrates say
Cory Burton
Eng 297
Dr. Mueller
10/12/07
For me, then, the conference ended with an important subtheme—ended by sticking up for a side of the profession that often gets lost in high school and college English deparments: play, storytelling, the personal, amateur, imaginative, affective, and informal. I’m not saying that the profession suffers from too much of what is professional, cognitive, analytic, and pragmatic; there cant be too much of those good things—only too little of the other side. Nothing need be lost, but something need to be gained. (Elbow 205)
This passage illustrates the delicate balance that every teacher and professor has to control in the classroom; the balance between keeping things fun and interesting while maintaining a sense of order and not losing the analytical portion of the class.
Education as the practice of freedom—as opposed to education as the practice of domination—denies that man is abstract, isolated, independent, and unattached to the world; it also denies that the world exists as a reality apart from people. Authentic reflection considers neither abstract man nor the world without people, but people in their relations with the world. In these relations consciousness and world are simultaneous; consciousness neither precedes the world nor follows it. (Friere 62)
This passage, however abstract it may be, plays the same dichotomy card in the education world. Prior to this segment, Freire talks of the struggles of students to relate themselves in the world and with the world. Along these same lines here, he tries to put the classroom on a grand scale while still invoking the challenges.
It may well be that, at least in certain contexts, the ability to read and write encourages a more abstract form of thinking, for one can now define terms with precision, refer back to facts and definitions that were presented some time before, and weigh the logical and persuasive elements of an argument. The capacity to employ various symbolized notations enables one to supplement one’s memory, organize one’s future activities, and communicate at one time with an indefinite number of individuals (the set of all potential readers). (Gardner 359)
This may not apply directly to the student-teacher relationship, but it does have a profound effect on teachers helping kids to understand the concept. The process of reading and writing must be taught as a process to help formulate better thinking processes and enhance even more benefits.
Human nature being what it is, however, it tends to seek its motivation in the agreeable rather than in the disagreeable, in direct pleasure rather than in alternative pain. And so has come up the modern theory and practice of the “interesting,” in the false sense of that term. The material is still left; so far as its own characteristics are concerned, just material externally selected and formulated. (Dewey 205-206)
Students and teachers may both try to take the easy way out. Dewey goes on to say that it is easier to leave the information as it is, but sugar coat it to arouse interest and to make it seem interesting. What should really be done however is to apply it to something the student actually cares about, so they can develop and formulate their own thoughts on the process and think for themselves.
Eng 297
Dr. Mueller
10/12/07
For me, then, the conference ended with an important subtheme—ended by sticking up for a side of the profession that often gets lost in high school and college English deparments: play, storytelling, the personal, amateur, imaginative, affective, and informal. I’m not saying that the profession suffers from too much of what is professional, cognitive, analytic, and pragmatic; there cant be too much of those good things—only too little of the other side. Nothing need be lost, but something need to be gained. (Elbow 205)
This passage illustrates the delicate balance that every teacher and professor has to control in the classroom; the balance between keeping things fun and interesting while maintaining a sense of order and not losing the analytical portion of the class.
Education as the practice of freedom—as opposed to education as the practice of domination—denies that man is abstract, isolated, independent, and unattached to the world; it also denies that the world exists as a reality apart from people. Authentic reflection considers neither abstract man nor the world without people, but people in their relations with the world. In these relations consciousness and world are simultaneous; consciousness neither precedes the world nor follows it. (Friere 62)
This passage, however abstract it may be, plays the same dichotomy card in the education world. Prior to this segment, Freire talks of the struggles of students to relate themselves in the world and with the world. Along these same lines here, he tries to put the classroom on a grand scale while still invoking the challenges.
It may well be that, at least in certain contexts, the ability to read and write encourages a more abstract form of thinking, for one can now define terms with precision, refer back to facts and definitions that were presented some time before, and weigh the logical and persuasive elements of an argument. The capacity to employ various symbolized notations enables one to supplement one’s memory, organize one’s future activities, and communicate at one time with an indefinite number of individuals (the set of all potential readers). (Gardner 359)
This may not apply directly to the student-teacher relationship, but it does have a profound effect on teachers helping kids to understand the concept. The process of reading and writing must be taught as a process to help formulate better thinking processes and enhance even more benefits.
Human nature being what it is, however, it tends to seek its motivation in the agreeable rather than in the disagreeable, in direct pleasure rather than in alternative pain. And so has come up the modern theory and practice of the “interesting,” in the false sense of that term. The material is still left; so far as its own characteristics are concerned, just material externally selected and formulated. (Dewey 205-206)
Students and teachers may both try to take the easy way out. Dewey goes on to say that it is easier to leave the information as it is, but sugar coat it to arouse interest and to make it seem interesting. What should really be done however is to apply it to something the student actually cares about, so they can develop and formulate their own thoughts on the process and think for themselves.
Thursday, October 11, 2007
Carrie Douglas' Socratic Seminar Preparation
Carrie Douglas
ENG 297A
Dr. Mueller
Socratic Seminar Preparation
October 12, 2007
Passages:
1. Paulo Freire’s “The ‘Banking’ Concept of Education”: "Through dialogue, the teacher-of-students and the students-of-the-teacher cease to exist and a new term emerges: teacher-student with students-teachers. The teacher is no longer merely the-one-who-teaches, but one who is himself taught in dialogue with the students, who in turn while being taught also teach. They become jointly responsible for a process in which all grow." Page 61
I feel that this passage is important to teacher-student relationships as it erases the titles “teacher” and “students” that sustain the distance between all those involved in the classroom experience. These titles merely assist in maintaining “banking education.” I also like the idea that everyone is “jointly responsible” in education. After all, I do not think it should be solely the educator’s job to instill knowledge; students have a role in their knowledge attainment, too. Lastly, I love the concept of a “give-and-take” classroom. With open minds, both “teachers” and “students” can instill knowledge and gather knowledge freely from one another.
2. Paulo Freire’s “The ‘Banking’ Concept of Education”: "The students -- no longer docile listeners -- are now critical co-investigators in dialogue with the teacher. The teacher presents the material to the students for their consideration, and re-considers her earlier considerations as the students express their own." Page 62
Personally, my favorite professors are the ones who accept all student opinions as options. The worst, most dull professors are those who present a specific text and preach their interpretation, accepting no others. By being open-minded to student opinions, teachers can not only learn from their students but foster a wonderful relationship with students as well. Students will view their teachers as flexible, approachable human beings, which only makes learning all the better.
3. Howard Gardner’s “The Education of Intelligences”: "Authorities generally agree that, outside of schooled settings, children acquire skills through observation and participation in the contexts in which these skills are customarily invoked. In contrast, in the standard classroom, teachers talk, often presenting material in abstract symbolic form and relying on inanimate media such as books and diagrams in order to convey information. Schooling generally treats subject matter that one cannot readily see or touch, even as those sensory modes of taking in information seem singularly inappropriate for most school tasks." Page 357
This passage explicitly states that most of the material teachers present to students is useless. It is in their “presentation” that teachers go wrong. Kids need stimulation, hands-on experience, not charts conveying figures and facts. The role between teachers and students would be more beneficiary if teachers focused on interactive lessons. Don’t teach a student what a plant needs to grow out of a science textbook; let the student grow the plant himself. Teachers gain admiration from their students when they enable such gratifying educational experiences.
4. John Dewey’s “The Child and the Curriculum”: "Every study or subject thus far has two aspects: one for the scientist as a scientist; the other for the teacher as a teacher. These two aspects are in no sense opposed or conflicting. But neither are they identical." Page 200
This passage interests me as I can directly relate it to teacher-student relationships that I have had part in. Of course I understand that my professors are enchanted with and passionate about their subject matter. I know that they delve into the subject for personal reasons (and not just to prepare for teaching the subject). However, it is most detrimental to my learning experience when professors spend class time not conveying information to the class but basking in their own enjoyment of the subject. Don’t get me wrong, I think it is absolutely necessary for professors to love their subject matter, but they must be just as passionate about teaching their area of expertise as they are about learning it. Otherwise, the teacher-student relationship is lacking, and content is not as effectively communicated.
5. Peter Elbow’s “The Danger of Softness”: "And where the wholistic group was often adversarial in stance, the elementary teachers were not. Though they were straightforward and learned, they nevertheless displayed the highest degree of play, metaphor, imagination, and connection of the cognitive to the imaginative. They were willing to risk the charge of corniness. They didn’t fight or get annoyed, and they weren’t particularly pushy…I don’t know why the members of the elementary section were so good in this respect, but perhaps it’s because their job is to work with creatures who so naturally highlight play, metaphor, corniness, imagination, and the connection of the cognitive with the affective and indeed even with the body." Page 204
The previous sentences truly highlight the effects of a teacher-student relationship. The passage above embodies the life lessons that a group of teachers have learned from their innocent, imaginative children. It’s so refreshing to read of the patience and creativity teachers derive from elementary-aged kids. Teacher-student relationships not only play a role inside the walls of schools, but they can also travel with teachers in their interactions with other adults.
Discussion Questions:
1. As teachers, what are some methods that we can use in our future practices to make our role a less “narrative” one (as Freire says)? In other words, how can we create an interactive English classroom?
2. Freire’s article suggests that he practice of simply “filling” or “depositing” is quite obviously not the best teaching method. However, it has been used as an effective method for “teaching to the test.” How do we then, as teachers, manage the pressures of helping our students to pass standardized tests versus helping them to become learned individuals overall?
3. Many of these articles bring to light the idea of students and teachers becoming “equals.” Might we have a problem with maintaining a stable, chaos-free, disciplined classroom if teachers and students are “equals” (and the teacher doesn’t have ultimate control)?
4. Dewey’s article poses two conflicting view pints about ways to view education. One side deems “personality and character” as more important than “subject-matter,” and the other side does just the opposite. Can we ever teach both areas simultaneously?
5. In Elbow’s article, someone remarks, “I don’t teach English, I teach students.” This statement infuriates some at the Coalition Conference. How might we respond to this controversial statement?
ENG 297A
Dr. Mueller
Socratic Seminar Preparation
October 12, 2007
Passages:
1. Paulo Freire’s “The ‘Banking’ Concept of Education”: "Through dialogue, the teacher-of-students and the students-of-the-teacher cease to exist and a new term emerges: teacher-student with students-teachers. The teacher is no longer merely the-one-who-teaches, but one who is himself taught in dialogue with the students, who in turn while being taught also teach. They become jointly responsible for a process in which all grow." Page 61
I feel that this passage is important to teacher-student relationships as it erases the titles “teacher” and “students” that sustain the distance between all those involved in the classroom experience. These titles merely assist in maintaining “banking education.” I also like the idea that everyone is “jointly responsible” in education. After all, I do not think it should be solely the educator’s job to instill knowledge; students have a role in their knowledge attainment, too. Lastly, I love the concept of a “give-and-take” classroom. With open minds, both “teachers” and “students” can instill knowledge and gather knowledge freely from one another.
2. Paulo Freire’s “The ‘Banking’ Concept of Education”: "The students -- no longer docile listeners -- are now critical co-investigators in dialogue with the teacher. The teacher presents the material to the students for their consideration, and re-considers her earlier considerations as the students express their own." Page 62
Personally, my favorite professors are the ones who accept all student opinions as options. The worst, most dull professors are those who present a specific text and preach their interpretation, accepting no others. By being open-minded to student opinions, teachers can not only learn from their students but foster a wonderful relationship with students as well. Students will view their teachers as flexible, approachable human beings, which only makes learning all the better.
3. Howard Gardner’s “The Education of Intelligences”: "Authorities generally agree that, outside of schooled settings, children acquire skills through observation and participation in the contexts in which these skills are customarily invoked. In contrast, in the standard classroom, teachers talk, often presenting material in abstract symbolic form and relying on inanimate media such as books and diagrams in order to convey information. Schooling generally treats subject matter that one cannot readily see or touch, even as those sensory modes of taking in information seem singularly inappropriate for most school tasks." Page 357
This passage explicitly states that most of the material teachers present to students is useless. It is in their “presentation” that teachers go wrong. Kids need stimulation, hands-on experience, not charts conveying figures and facts. The role between teachers and students would be more beneficiary if teachers focused on interactive lessons. Don’t teach a student what a plant needs to grow out of a science textbook; let the student grow the plant himself. Teachers gain admiration from their students when they enable such gratifying educational experiences.
4. John Dewey’s “The Child and the Curriculum”: "Every study or subject thus far has two aspects: one for the scientist as a scientist; the other for the teacher as a teacher. These two aspects are in no sense opposed or conflicting. But neither are they identical." Page 200
This passage interests me as I can directly relate it to teacher-student relationships that I have had part in. Of course I understand that my professors are enchanted with and passionate about their subject matter. I know that they delve into the subject for personal reasons (and not just to prepare for teaching the subject). However, it is most detrimental to my learning experience when professors spend class time not conveying information to the class but basking in their own enjoyment of the subject. Don’t get me wrong, I think it is absolutely necessary for professors to love their subject matter, but they must be just as passionate about teaching their area of expertise as they are about learning it. Otherwise, the teacher-student relationship is lacking, and content is not as effectively communicated.
5. Peter Elbow’s “The Danger of Softness”: "And where the wholistic group was often adversarial in stance, the elementary teachers were not. Though they were straightforward and learned, they nevertheless displayed the highest degree of play, metaphor, imagination, and connection of the cognitive to the imaginative. They were willing to risk the charge of corniness. They didn’t fight or get annoyed, and they weren’t particularly pushy…I don’t know why the members of the elementary section were so good in this respect, but perhaps it’s because their job is to work with creatures who so naturally highlight play, metaphor, corniness, imagination, and the connection of the cognitive with the affective and indeed even with the body." Page 204
The previous sentences truly highlight the effects of a teacher-student relationship. The passage above embodies the life lessons that a group of teachers have learned from their innocent, imaginative children. It’s so refreshing to read of the patience and creativity teachers derive from elementary-aged kids. Teacher-student relationships not only play a role inside the walls of schools, but they can also travel with teachers in their interactions with other adults.
Discussion Questions:
1. As teachers, what are some methods that we can use in our future practices to make our role a less “narrative” one (as Freire says)? In other words, how can we create an interactive English classroom?
2. Freire’s article suggests that he practice of simply “filling” or “depositing” is quite obviously not the best teaching method. However, it has been used as an effective method for “teaching to the test.” How do we then, as teachers, manage the pressures of helping our students to pass standardized tests versus helping them to become learned individuals overall?
3. Many of these articles bring to light the idea of students and teachers becoming “equals.” Might we have a problem with maintaining a stable, chaos-free, disciplined classroom if teachers and students are “equals” (and the teacher doesn’t have ultimate control)?
4. Dewey’s article poses two conflicting view pints about ways to view education. One side deems “personality and character” as more important than “subject-matter,” and the other side does just the opposite. Can we ever teach both areas simultaneously?
5. In Elbow’s article, someone remarks, “I don’t teach English, I teach students.” This statement infuriates some at the Coalition Conference. How might we respond to this controversial statement?
Socratic Seminar
Shawn Berger
ENG297 - Socratic Seminar
October 12, 2007
Dr. Mueller
Passage 1:
“Those who use the banking approach, knowingly or unknowingly (for there are innumerable well-intentioned bank-clerk teachers who do not realize that they are serving only to dehumanize), fail to perceive the the deposits themselves contain contradictions about reality. But, sooner or later, these contradictions may lead formerly passive students to turn against their domestication and the attempt to domesticate reality. They may discover through existential experience that their present way of life is irreconcilable with their vocation to become fully human. They may perceive through their relations with reality that reality is really a process, undergoing constant transformation. If men and women are searchers and their ontological vocation is humanization, sooner or later they may perceive the contradiction in which banking education seeks to maintain them, and then engage themselves in the struggle for liberation.”
-Paulo Freire
Pedagogy of the Oppressed, p.56
Explanation:
Freire reads very philosophically but does not leave me with a blank contradicting after taste. I chose this passage because it is here that he begins to explain that the “bank-clerk” teaching method does not enforce what the teacher hopes to achieve, rather it does the opposite. Instead of domesticating the student, this method forces the student to fight the domestication because it is forcing them to just be another number in a desk rather than to be who they are. This is a very important part because it shows that the banking method is totally flawed and that sooner or later students will realize what is going on and try to break free. The problem is that students should not feel as though they are being over powered when learning and be concerned with how to break away from being dehumanized, they should just feel like they are learning without being distracted by conflicts irrelevant to the actual class.
Passage 2:
“‘Throughout his historical course, Homo sapiens has been a “status seeker”; and the way he has had to follow, by compulsion, has been education. Furthermore he has always had to rely on those superior to him in knowing and social status to enable him to raise his own status....instructing the young in the tribal ways is as natural as breathing; [adults] have a vital interest in the children they teach, and they often seem to have even a broader interest in the tribal existence as a whole.’”
-Jules Henry
Howard Gardner’s The Education of Intelligences, p332
Explanation:
This quote stood out to me because in a way it is countering Freire’s stand. Henry is viewing people not as individuals but as a whole; Homo sapiens. He is also regarding teachers as “superior” to students. At the same time this passage does not counter Freire’s because it is saying that the teacher, in this tribal sense, not only has a deep interest in the individual he or she is teaching, but with their existence and interactions as well.
Passage 3:
After explaining the malpractice sect of teachers...
“Not so, says the other sect. The child is the starting-point, the center, and the end. His development, his growth, is the ideal. It alone furnishes the standard. To the growth of the child all studies are subservient; they are instruments valued as they serve the needs of growth. Personality, character, is more than subject-matter. Not knowledge or information, but self -realization, is the goal. To possess all the world of knowledge and lose one’s own self is as awful a fate in education as in religion. Moreover, subject-matter never can be got into the child from without. Learning is active. It involves reaching out of the mind. It involves organic assimilation starting from within. Literally, we must take our stand with the child and our departure from him. It is he and not the subject-matter which determines both quality and quantity of learning.”
-John Dewey
The Child and the Curriculum, p187
Explanation:
Dewey’s point of view is clear and undoubtably correct. Without the student, teaching is nothing. Teaching is not meant to force students to memorize and playback it is meant to serve the child’s growth and development. Learning is part of personality character development. I especially like the line “To possess all the world of knowledge and lose one’s own self is as awful as a fate in education as in religion”. Dewey is saying “What is the point of being smart if you are not well rounded as a person. He also makes the point that learning involves reaching out of the mind. It is not just something in a text book, it is an experience.
Passage 4:
“What I needed in college was not, or at least not just, to bore into my own experience, which, however rich, was nevertheless parochial. What I needed was not self but society...I realized in short that my experience as a student needed to be enlarged by secondary-source knowledge.”
-Bob Denham
The Flight from Complexity, p.196
Explanation:
This quote is relevant to the other passages I chose because it is also about learning that comes from outside the teacher and student. Learning won’t be taken solely from the teacher, it will come from films, photographs, experiences, etc., and most importantly the ones who are around you at any given time. When conversing with others not only do you have your own experiences, views, and ideas to learn from but you also have all of theirs.
Discussion Questions:
1. Why aren’t teacher’s using the “bank-clerk” method corrected?
2. Why do most class room structures make the student out as a number who is not to step out of line?
3. Is it possible for students to run a classroom without a teacher? Not just without a teacher present but without a teacher at all?
4. If students of a class do not have an average that would be considered suit shouldn’t the teacher be to blame? And if found at fault fair measures should be taken, tenured or not.
5. A teacher who is arrogant and pompous obviously distracts students from the importance of the actual class and creates hostility. He or she most likely enjoys this. It is not fair that he or she can not be told of this without stirring up confrontations. How can one get around this? How can his superiors be notified but feel as though it is a significant problem, not just a complaint?
ENG297 - Socratic Seminar
October 12, 2007
Dr. Mueller
Passage 1:
“Those who use the banking approach, knowingly or unknowingly (for there are innumerable well-intentioned bank-clerk teachers who do not realize that they are serving only to dehumanize), fail to perceive the the deposits themselves contain contradictions about reality. But, sooner or later, these contradictions may lead formerly passive students to turn against their domestication and the attempt to domesticate reality. They may discover through existential experience that their present way of life is irreconcilable with their vocation to become fully human. They may perceive through their relations with reality that reality is really a process, undergoing constant transformation. If men and women are searchers and their ontological vocation is humanization, sooner or later they may perceive the contradiction in which banking education seeks to maintain them, and then engage themselves in the struggle for liberation.”
-Paulo Freire
Pedagogy of the Oppressed, p.56
Explanation:
Freire reads very philosophically but does not leave me with a blank contradicting after taste. I chose this passage because it is here that he begins to explain that the “bank-clerk” teaching method does not enforce what the teacher hopes to achieve, rather it does the opposite. Instead of domesticating the student, this method forces the student to fight the domestication because it is forcing them to just be another number in a desk rather than to be who they are. This is a very important part because it shows that the banking method is totally flawed and that sooner or later students will realize what is going on and try to break free. The problem is that students should not feel as though they are being over powered when learning and be concerned with how to break away from being dehumanized, they should just feel like they are learning without being distracted by conflicts irrelevant to the actual class.
Passage 2:
“‘Throughout his historical course, Homo sapiens has been a “status seeker”; and the way he has had to follow, by compulsion, has been education. Furthermore he has always had to rely on those superior to him in knowing and social status to enable him to raise his own status....instructing the young in the tribal ways is as natural as breathing; [adults] have a vital interest in the children they teach, and they often seem to have even a broader interest in the tribal existence as a whole.’”
-Jules Henry
Howard Gardner’s The Education of Intelligences, p332
Explanation:
This quote stood out to me because in a way it is countering Freire’s stand. Henry is viewing people not as individuals but as a whole; Homo sapiens. He is also regarding teachers as “superior” to students. At the same time this passage does not counter Freire’s because it is saying that the teacher, in this tribal sense, not only has a deep interest in the individual he or she is teaching, but with their existence and interactions as well.
Passage 3:
After explaining the malpractice sect of teachers...
“Not so, says the other sect. The child is the starting-point, the center, and the end. His development, his growth, is the ideal. It alone furnishes the standard. To the growth of the child all studies are subservient; they are instruments valued as they serve the needs of growth. Personality, character, is more than subject-matter. Not knowledge or information, but self -realization, is the goal. To possess all the world of knowledge and lose one’s own self is as awful a fate in education as in religion. Moreover, subject-matter never can be got into the child from without. Learning is active. It involves reaching out of the mind. It involves organic assimilation starting from within. Literally, we must take our stand with the child and our departure from him. It is he and not the subject-matter which determines both quality and quantity of learning.”
-John Dewey
The Child and the Curriculum, p187
Explanation:
Dewey’s point of view is clear and undoubtably correct. Without the student, teaching is nothing. Teaching is not meant to force students to memorize and playback it is meant to serve the child’s growth and development. Learning is part of personality character development. I especially like the line “To possess all the world of knowledge and lose one’s own self is as awful as a fate in education as in religion”. Dewey is saying “What is the point of being smart if you are not well rounded as a person. He also makes the point that learning involves reaching out of the mind. It is not just something in a text book, it is an experience.
Passage 4:
“What I needed in college was not, or at least not just, to bore into my own experience, which, however rich, was nevertheless parochial. What I needed was not self but society...I realized in short that my experience as a student needed to be enlarged by secondary-source knowledge.”
-Bob Denham
The Flight from Complexity, p.196
Explanation:
This quote is relevant to the other passages I chose because it is also about learning that comes from outside the teacher and student. Learning won’t be taken solely from the teacher, it will come from films, photographs, experiences, etc., and most importantly the ones who are around you at any given time. When conversing with others not only do you have your own experiences, views, and ideas to learn from but you also have all of theirs.
Discussion Questions:
1. Why aren’t teacher’s using the “bank-clerk” method corrected?
2. Why do most class room structures make the student out as a number who is not to step out of line?
3. Is it possible for students to run a classroom without a teacher? Not just without a teacher present but without a teacher at all?
4. If students of a class do not have an average that would be considered suit shouldn’t the teacher be to blame? And if found at fault fair measures should be taken, tenured or not.
5. A teacher who is arrogant and pompous obviously distracts students from the importance of the actual class and creates hostility. He or she most likely enjoys this. It is not fair that he or she can not be told of this without stirring up confrontations. How can one get around this? How can his superiors be notified but feel as though it is a significant problem, not just a complaint?
One in five students a minority
In this Sioux Falls public school more than 20 percent of its students are of a racial minority; 1 in 5 students. The school is pleased with this number in comparison to its 5.6% of racial minority in 1991. It is believed by the school and the community that this minority is necessary to provide the students with well rounded learning and keep the class room balanced. "It's good for all people to be aware of other cultures and experience different ways of looking at life" said a local woman. But is she in turn saying that the only way to learn about other cultures is by being in a class with Black, Asian, Indian, and Mexican students? I'm all for natural diversity but it seems as though this school, as well as others, are boosting there diversity for the sake of how it looks and sounds. And just because it looks and sounds well does not mean it is beneficial. If these new students cannot speak English or come to the class with no prior education does that not take away from how the local students learn (not white students, local students)?
Not only is the school trying to boost their student minority but it is also trying to boost its teacher minority. "The district continues its struggle to find teachers of minority races. It has 16 such teachers now, up from 11 last year. But that still leaves the teaching ranks at 1 percent diverse against a district goal of 10 percent by 2010." If the district already has a goal, they will strive to meet these numbers. That seems like affirmative action. Teachers should be hired based on their knowledge and qualification for the job not their skin color. Just because the teacher with the "x" nationality is different from the more common teacher with the "y" nationality he or she should not get the job unless he or she is better qualified.
Again, I am all for "natural" diversity. Natural in the sense that a family moved to the town and their children now are going to that school. I am not for this recruitment of minorities to make a school look better or seem better. I also do not agree with hiring a teacher just because he or she would make the staff look more diverse. If a predominantly Indian fire department hired a Mexican just because they wanted to have a Mexican on the team, but that Mexican knew nothing of firefighting and in turn some one died would it be fair? That is somewhat of an exaggeration, no one will die (hopefully) from a bad teacher, but this is the point I am stressing. Be diverse, be cultured, be well rounded, but not at others expense.
Not only is the school trying to boost their student minority but it is also trying to boost its teacher minority. "The district continues its struggle to find teachers of minority races. It has 16 such teachers now, up from 11 last year. But that still leaves the teaching ranks at 1 percent diverse against a district goal of 10 percent by 2010." If the district already has a goal, they will strive to meet these numbers. That seems like affirmative action. Teachers should be hired based on their knowledge and qualification for the job not their skin color. Just because the teacher with the "x" nationality is different from the more common teacher with the "y" nationality he or she should not get the job unless he or she is better qualified.
Again, I am all for "natural" diversity. Natural in the sense that a family moved to the town and their children now are going to that school. I am not for this recruitment of minorities to make a school look better or seem better. I also do not agree with hiring a teacher just because he or she would make the staff look more diverse. If a predominantly Indian fire department hired a Mexican just because they wanted to have a Mexican on the team, but that Mexican knew nothing of firefighting and in turn some one died would it be fair? That is somewhat of an exaggeration, no one will die (hopefully) from a bad teacher, but this is the point I am stressing. Be diverse, be cultured, be well rounded, but not at others expense.
Socratic Seminar, 10/12
For the seminar, I felt these were some of the more interesting selections from the reading.
1) Freire, The Banking Concept of Education (paragraph 35)
“Education as the practice of freedom—as opposed to education as the practice of domination—denies that man is abstract, isolated, independent, and unattached to the world; it also denies that the world exists as a reality apart from men. Authentic reflection considers neither abstract man nor the world without men, but men in their relations with the world. In these relations consciousness and word are simultaneous: consciousness neither precedes the world nor follows it.”
This should be one of the key focuses when putting together not only lesson plans but in the creation of your teaching method, if we are to build students toward becoming well-balanced socially-minded community members we must show them that they are in fact a part of a greater “machine” as it were, and that they in their own right are responsible for not only themselves but also that their actions will make a difference regarding their surroundings.
Question on the reading: In paragraph 19 Freire states, “Verbalistic lessons, reading requirements, the methods for evaluating ‘knowledge,’ the distance between the teacher and the taught, the criteria for promotion: everything in this ready-to-wear approach serves to obviate thinking.” In your experience, is this statement true about the kinds of education you have had, and if so, is it more true of any specific level?
2) Gardner, The Theory of Multiple Intelligences (paragraph 16)
“Having sketched the characteristics and criteria of an intelligence, we turn now to a brief consideration of each of the seven intelligences. We begin each sketch with a thumbnail biography of a person who demonstrates an unusual facility with that intelligence. These biographies illustrate some of the abilities that are central to the fluent operation of a given intelligence. Although each biography illustrates a particular intelligence, we do not wish to imply that in adulthood intelligences operate in isolation. Indeed, except for abnormal individuals, intelligences always work in concert, and any sophisticated adult role will involve a melding of several of them. Following each biography we survey the various sources of data that support each candidate as an “intelligence.”
Under this theory, we as teachers must not assume that all children will have the same concept of learning, or have the same level of understanding when using any one teaching technique. He goes on to explain that where there may be those that those children that may thrive in learning from linguistic methods, another may find spatial or interpersonal methods of learning to be more conducive to them. We must always have several different ways of teaching to accommodate all of the students in class.
Question on the reading: Gardner asks “What Constitutes an Intelligence?” After reading this essay, how would you answer that question?
3) Elbow, The Danger of Softness (page 205)
“For me, then, the conference ended with an important subtheme—ended by sticking up for a side of the profession that often gets lost in high school and college English departments: play, storytelling, the personal, amateur, imaginative, affective, and informal. I’m not saying that the profession suffers from too much of what is professional, cognitive, analytic, and pragmatic; there can’t be too much of those good things—only too little of the other side. Nothing need be lost, but something needs to be gained.”
This is what I’ve always feared going into teaching, where the content becomes so rigid and strict that all the fun of literature is leeched out of it for the students. This explains that you don’t have to go fully to the inane, ridiculous side of teaching where you become corny or amateur in your teaching, but there really should be more of a balance between that of professionalism and fun in the classroom.
Questions on the reading: How could you take a lesson (say, on The Scarlet Letter) and while trying to format a day’s class activity on symbolism and vocabulary, create a balance between the professional act of teaching the material and make it fun for the students at the same time?
If in what Elbow has observed is true about the Elementary teachers in this portion of the seminar is true, and that the teachers, because of their students, are more open-minded regarding play and imagination in the classroom, where does this usually begin to decline in the school system? Do the students in both middle and high school become less needy for imagination and play when learning or is it due to the perception of the teachers that they should just learn what they need to?
4) Dewey, The Child and the Curriculum (pages 181-82)
“Solution comes only by getting away from the meaning of terms that is already fixed upon and coming to see the conditions from another point of view, and hence in a fresh light.”
This is something that we as teachers must take into consideration not only when having an in-class discussion but also in evaluating papers, the way in which we interpret something may not coincide with what our students think of something, and we must be willing to not necessarily throw away what we believe to be the correct version of the interpretation but to be open-minded enough to try and see it from the student’s point of view. If not, we run the chance of being stuck in an education rut and possibly stunting the views of our students with our own.
Question on the reading: On page 186 at the top, Dewey writes, “ …Hence the moral: ignore and minimize the child’s individual peculiarities, whims, and experiences. They are what we need to get away from. They are to be obscured or eliminated. As educators our work is precisely to substitute for these superficial and casual affairs stable and well-ordered realities; and these are found in studies and lessons.” What does everyone think about that statement?
1) Freire, The Banking Concept of Education (paragraph 35)
“Education as the practice of freedom—as opposed to education as the practice of domination—denies that man is abstract, isolated, independent, and unattached to the world; it also denies that the world exists as a reality apart from men. Authentic reflection considers neither abstract man nor the world without men, but men in their relations with the world. In these relations consciousness and word are simultaneous: consciousness neither precedes the world nor follows it.”
This should be one of the key focuses when putting together not only lesson plans but in the creation of your teaching method, if we are to build students toward becoming well-balanced socially-minded community members we must show them that they are in fact a part of a greater “machine” as it were, and that they in their own right are responsible for not only themselves but also that their actions will make a difference regarding their surroundings.
Question on the reading: In paragraph 19 Freire states, “Verbalistic lessons, reading requirements, the methods for evaluating ‘knowledge,’ the distance between the teacher and the taught, the criteria for promotion: everything in this ready-to-wear approach serves to obviate thinking.” In your experience, is this statement true about the kinds of education you have had, and if so, is it more true of any specific level?
2) Gardner, The Theory of Multiple Intelligences (paragraph 16)
“Having sketched the characteristics and criteria of an intelligence, we turn now to a brief consideration of each of the seven intelligences. We begin each sketch with a thumbnail biography of a person who demonstrates an unusual facility with that intelligence. These biographies illustrate some of the abilities that are central to the fluent operation of a given intelligence. Although each biography illustrates a particular intelligence, we do not wish to imply that in adulthood intelligences operate in isolation. Indeed, except for abnormal individuals, intelligences always work in concert, and any sophisticated adult role will involve a melding of several of them. Following each biography we survey the various sources of data that support each candidate as an “intelligence.”
Under this theory, we as teachers must not assume that all children will have the same concept of learning, or have the same level of understanding when using any one teaching technique. He goes on to explain that where there may be those that those children that may thrive in learning from linguistic methods, another may find spatial or interpersonal methods of learning to be more conducive to them. We must always have several different ways of teaching to accommodate all of the students in class.
Question on the reading: Gardner asks “What Constitutes an Intelligence?” After reading this essay, how would you answer that question?
3) Elbow, The Danger of Softness (page 205)
“For me, then, the conference ended with an important subtheme—ended by sticking up for a side of the profession that often gets lost in high school and college English departments: play, storytelling, the personal, amateur, imaginative, affective, and informal. I’m not saying that the profession suffers from too much of what is professional, cognitive, analytic, and pragmatic; there can’t be too much of those good things—only too little of the other side. Nothing need be lost, but something needs to be gained.”
This is what I’ve always feared going into teaching, where the content becomes so rigid and strict that all the fun of literature is leeched out of it for the students. This explains that you don’t have to go fully to the inane, ridiculous side of teaching where you become corny or amateur in your teaching, but there really should be more of a balance between that of professionalism and fun in the classroom.
Questions on the reading: How could you take a lesson (say, on The Scarlet Letter) and while trying to format a day’s class activity on symbolism and vocabulary, create a balance between the professional act of teaching the material and make it fun for the students at the same time?
If in what Elbow has observed is true about the Elementary teachers in this portion of the seminar is true, and that the teachers, because of their students, are more open-minded regarding play and imagination in the classroom, where does this usually begin to decline in the school system? Do the students in both middle and high school become less needy for imagination and play when learning or is it due to the perception of the teachers that they should just learn what they need to?
4) Dewey, The Child and the Curriculum (pages 181-82)
“Solution comes only by getting away from the meaning of terms that is already fixed upon and coming to see the conditions from another point of view, and hence in a fresh light.”
This is something that we as teachers must take into consideration not only when having an in-class discussion but also in evaluating papers, the way in which we interpret something may not coincide with what our students think of something, and we must be willing to not necessarily throw away what we believe to be the correct version of the interpretation but to be open-minded enough to try and see it from the student’s point of view. If not, we run the chance of being stuck in an education rut and possibly stunting the views of our students with our own.
Question on the reading: On page 186 at the top, Dewey writes, “ …Hence the moral: ignore and minimize the child’s individual peculiarities, whims, and experiences. They are what we need to get away from. They are to be obscured or eliminated. As educators our work is precisely to substitute for these superficial and casual affairs stable and well-ordered realities; and these are found in studies and lessons.” What does everyone think about that statement?
Spreading Homework Out So Even Parents Have Some.
After reading the article, I think that this is a very sucessful way for students, parents and teachers to form a strong relationship. The idea of having parents post onto a blog every night portrays parent involvement. They are not only getting to help their child out with their studies, but they too are even given a refresher course in literature. Here, the parent gets to see what goes on in the classroom, and what material their child is learning. If there is a concern, the parent can easily post their concern on the blog, and the teacher can quickly respond to it. This will eliminate the long process it usually takes when trying to schedule a parent teacher confrence. Also, when report cards and midterm marks go out, it will eliminate many of the " Why is'' and "How comes" in accordance to their grades. However, in order for this to be completely successful, we must look at its flaws for operating such a system. For as we all know, many high schoolers, especially ninth graders, can be sneaky. In some cases, parents may not be aware that this blog takes place, for their child has already posted for them. Another factor we must understand is that in some cases, there are parents who really do not care how their child does in school.
Overall, this effort that Damion Frye has conducted has been successful. Parents can now easily become involved with their kids studies. Although, I don't agree with the part where he lowers the child's grade if parents do not participate because of the previous suggestions, this has been a very useful technique. When I return to teaching, I too may use this tool to bring parents more involved with what their child is doing.
Overall, this effort that Damion Frye has conducted has been successful. Parents can now easily become involved with their kids studies. Although, I don't agree with the part where he lowers the child's grade if parents do not participate because of the previous suggestions, this has been a very useful technique. When I return to teaching, I too may use this tool to bring parents more involved with what their child is doing.
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
Socratic Seminar 10/12 Williamson
The selected passages and questions I have chosen:
Elbow- pg. 207 middle- "Thus, when participants used...
I chose this passage because it mentions that the teacher's goal is to connect with the student inward personally and focus outward socially. It amuses me because this is very hard to make possible. Some students fail to reach out when something is bothering them so you can not always get to them personally. Sometimes you must go the opposite route; go socially to find out personal info.
1. How do you make this child-centered idea work if children work at different levels?
2. Learning different ways can be sucessful can it not?
3. What outcomes result when using different learning activities?
Dewey- pg. 209 the quote that reads "determine the environment of the child"
Choosing this reminded me when I taught EC (Exceptional Children). It is difficult to determine the environment for a student. Although some may be excused for certain classes in need for assistance, a student can not be singled out and ordered to learn different material for their disabilities.
1. Is this similar to what Elbow mentions about child centered curriculum?
2. How do we determine the environment for a child if they are notorious for changing?
3. How difficult can it be to determine goals for students who learn at different levels?
Freire- pg.59 3rd and 4th paragraphs
It is important to find the students niche when teaching. Since all students learn at different levels and by variety of ways, teachers have to understand how each student works.
1. Is memorization the best way to learn if we do not know the background of "why it is so"?
2. Instead of depositing the unuseful information, should we elimnate and concentrate on more of the life lessons material? (eg. How to balance a checkbook etc.)
3. What can we learn if we allow the students to share their insight of the material?
Gardner pg. 335 1st full paragraph "But instruction..."
pg. 358 1/3 of features of modern education "Literacy"
Using observational learning is important becasue it gives the students a heads up in the real world. It will allow them to collect information on to what to expect the working field will be like. For the literacy half, it shows the importance of how the use of our language reflects in the literary world.
1. During highschool, would it be productive to have internship classes for students? If so why? What will this produce?
2. Can a poor reader show strong use of their language? What factors cause this to happen?
Elbow- pg. 207 middle- "Thus, when participants used...
I chose this passage because it mentions that the teacher's goal is to connect with the student inward personally and focus outward socially. It amuses me because this is very hard to make possible. Some students fail to reach out when something is bothering them so you can not always get to them personally. Sometimes you must go the opposite route; go socially to find out personal info.
1. How do you make this child-centered idea work if children work at different levels?
2. Learning different ways can be sucessful can it not?
3. What outcomes result when using different learning activities?
Dewey- pg. 209 the quote that reads "determine the environment of the child"
Choosing this reminded me when I taught EC (Exceptional Children). It is difficult to determine the environment for a student. Although some may be excused for certain classes in need for assistance, a student can not be singled out and ordered to learn different material for their disabilities.
1. Is this similar to what Elbow mentions about child centered curriculum?
2. How do we determine the environment for a child if they are notorious for changing?
3. How difficult can it be to determine goals for students who learn at different levels?
Freire- pg.59 3rd and 4th paragraphs
It is important to find the students niche when teaching. Since all students learn at different levels and by variety of ways, teachers have to understand how each student works.
1. Is memorization the best way to learn if we do not know the background of "why it is so"?
2. Instead of depositing the unuseful information, should we elimnate and concentrate on more of the life lessons material? (eg. How to balance a checkbook etc.)
3. What can we learn if we allow the students to share their insight of the material?
Gardner pg. 335 1st full paragraph "But instruction..."
pg. 358 1/3 of features of modern education "Literacy"
Using observational learning is important becasue it gives the students a heads up in the real world. It will allow them to collect information on to what to expect the working field will be like. For the literacy half, it shows the importance of how the use of our language reflects in the literary world.
1. During highschool, would it be productive to have internship classes for students? If so why? What will this produce?
2. Can a poor reader show strong use of their language? What factors cause this to happen?
Thursday, October 4, 2007
University at Columbia Missouri AIms to Help Non-English Speaking Students
The Columbia Tribune reported in late September that the University of Missouri-Columbia has set up a new ELL or English Language Learner's Program to help non-English speaking students across the state in public classrooms. The program intends to train 100 teachers across the state within the next five years. After completing the courses, the teacher will then be able to teach non-English speaking students who speak a different native language. Roy Fox who is the chairman of the Missouri-Columbia Education Department and also head of this project, feels this will help students immensely as he complies with the non-English speaking students, "It is much more complicated because students are thinking in their native language and trying to translate."Regularly the students in the course will have 45 minute-to hour long lessons helping better their English speaking skills. Judy Trujillo who is currently a teacher enlisted in the program agrees with Fox stating that," it will help students learn instructional techniques that enable them to reach students at the beginning, when the student has no English-speaking skills."
Although there is no definite language in the United States, I wonder if it will benefit the students to have specialized English classes because they have a different native tongue. Regardless that English is the standard language, living in this country shouldn't the students already have a pretty good understadning of the language already since they will be enrolling in other classes such as math, science, social studies, etc? I do think the program could benefit the learning for students, but I think that it should be done on elementary levels when linguistics and comprehension are extremely important. Also, the students will ultimately need to learn English if they want to succeed in a nation where the standard language is English.
Although there is no definite language in the United States, I wonder if it will benefit the students to have specialized English classes because they have a different native tongue. Regardless that English is the standard language, living in this country shouldn't the students already have a pretty good understadning of the language already since they will be enrolling in other classes such as math, science, social studies, etc? I do think the program could benefit the learning for students, but I think that it should be done on elementary levels when linguistics and comprehension are extremely important. Also, the students will ultimately need to learn English if they want to succeed in a nation where the standard language is English.
Tuesday, October 2, 2007
Instant Messaging
The article Tapping Instant Messaging by Pamela Martineau is about how some teachers have been using instant messaging (IM) as a learning tool. Martineau interviews William Kist, an assistant professor at Kent State University, who describes how he uses IM in his classroom. Kist believes that instant messaging is an untapped resource and that literacy involves understanding of all types of digital media. Kist feels that some teachers are old fashioned and untrustworthy of IM in general. In a 6-8 grade classroom, a teacher in Texas uses IM abbreviations as part of a lesson plan. They discuss tone, audience and appropriate Internet abbreviations. Another example of IM being brought into the classroom is during lectures. The teacher allows students to IM each other questions they have about the lecture while it is taking place. Overall Kist believes that IM is an important literary skill to understand and be able to process.
I completely disagree with William Kist. I do not think IM should be allowed in the classroom. I do agree with Kist that understanding electronic media is a form of literacy, but I disagree that IM (as a form of electronic media) needs to be taught. When email first came around, I was never personally taught how to write an email. Then why should students be taught to write a text message? In short stories and essays students are taught about audience, tone and expression. Students should be able to relay this information into their personal lives when talking on the phone or writing a text message. I do not think IM should be allowed during lectures either. I’m going to be nieve and actually pretend those students do indeed IM questions about the lecture. By letting that occur it almost lets the teachers off the hook with teaching. The teacher would simply just have to do his lecture, leave and let the students discuss and solve problems among themselves. This restricts personal contact between students and teachers. However, I’m not nieve and in all honestly what student will IM another during the lecture about a question they have? If I had a question I’d raise my hand and ask it. If I IM someone I’d miss the next 3 minutes and have more questions. Also, no student is going to IM other students in the classroom about the lecture, likely they will be IM their girlfriend, boyfriend, friends, parents, etc. Finally, some students can’t afford cellphones. So teaching a class to use text messaging when not all students owe a cellphone can make those students feel very underprivileged.
However IM can be a benefit to students interacting with their teachers outside of the classroom. If there is questions about the homework a student can IM the teacher and ask, and it allows an instant reply.
I completely disagree with William Kist. I do not think IM should be allowed in the classroom. I do agree with Kist that understanding electronic media is a form of literacy, but I disagree that IM (as a form of electronic media) needs to be taught. When email first came around, I was never personally taught how to write an email. Then why should students be taught to write a text message? In short stories and essays students are taught about audience, tone and expression. Students should be able to relay this information into their personal lives when talking on the phone or writing a text message. I do not think IM should be allowed during lectures either. I’m going to be nieve and actually pretend those students do indeed IM questions about the lecture. By letting that occur it almost lets the teachers off the hook with teaching. The teacher would simply just have to do his lecture, leave and let the students discuss and solve problems among themselves. This restricts personal contact between students and teachers. However, I’m not nieve and in all honestly what student will IM another during the lecture about a question they have? If I had a question I’d raise my hand and ask it. If I IM someone I’d miss the next 3 minutes and have more questions. Also, no student is going to IM other students in the classroom about the lecture, likely they will be IM their girlfriend, boyfriend, friends, parents, etc. Finally, some students can’t afford cellphones. So teaching a class to use text messaging when not all students owe a cellphone can make those students feel very underprivileged.
However IM can be a benefit to students interacting with their teachers outside of the classroom. If there is questions about the homework a student can IM the teacher and ask, and it allows an instant reply.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)