The article in the NCTE's inbox, With Turnover High, Schools Fight for Teachers by Sam Dillon, made me realize the crisis that is going on throughout our nation's schools. I never knew the difficulty there was of filling teaching positions. The author of this article stated that retirement and stressed out teachers could be the cause of this.
Now that the babyboomers are retiring, a younger generation of teachers are coming in. However, some of these young teachers cannot handle the classroom stress and end up leaving the profession due to their feeling of unsatisfaction in teaching. In attempt to help this issue, schools have been offering incentives for teaching. In my opinnion to this crisis, I believe that difficulty in filling teaching positions is highly due to the pay. For the amount of work that they have and the pressure of state standards, teachers do not get paid enough. I believe that if the pay were better, than perhaps we wouldn't be facing this crisis. With the amount of stress that teachers encounter, especially in the low-performing schools, their frustrations and pay don't compare. Instead of 5,000 dollar incentives, the teaching salary should be more. Atleast if teachers were getting paid more they would be more motivated to continue on in their professions.
As it was quoted in the article, "Some educators say it is the confluence of such retirements with the departure of disillusioned young teachers that is creating the challenge. In addition, higher salaries in the business world and more opportunities for women are drawing away from the field recruits who might in another era have proved to be talented teachers with strong academic backgrounds". Now that women have paved a way for more opportunities and better pay, teaching has not been as much of a popular profession to them. If an individual knows that he or she can get paid more in another profession than teaching, then their choice usually seems to be heavily influenced by the salary.
It's upsetting to see that our nation is having a difficulty finding certified teachers to lead and guide the way for future generations. Hopefully we can come out of this teaching crisis and the areas that need teachers are filled. Perhaps with the incentives of bonuses and higher pay, we can come out of this crisis with certified teachers and hard working students.
Friday, August 31, 2007
Thursday, August 30, 2007
The deterioration of language
A recent article on NCTE's listserv describes the attitudes of educators toward text-messaging slang such as "TTYL." The article discusses the original fear of many in the ELA field when such slang became popular, fearing that expressive and effective language use will be replaced by "BRB" and "LOL." The tone of the article is one of a reformed general consensus, one that has
accepted the technological slang as part of our ever-changing English language. One language arts teacher contributed:
"We've always been [a society that bemoans] `Oh, kids these days,'" says Tarbox. "It happens with every generation, and anything that's new. ... But technology is here to stay. You can't fight it."
With this passive, relaxed consensus among ELA educators, I absolutely disagree. We should incorporate all types of media into our classrooms in order to teach our students to analyze our increasingly visual culture. We should not do this merely because our culture is so visual and so fast-moving in the realm of technology; we should not do this merely to keep up with trends. We should do this also, and perhaps more importantly, to be aware of the effects of technology. The young people of our society are more technologically savvy than ever before. They can be simultaneously text-messaging, instant-messaging, surfing the web, which flashes numerous pop-ups and simultaneous advertisements, while listening to i-tunes with the t.v. on next to them. For us English teachers, this is a new text. Shall we passively accept it onto our shelves? Or shall we analyze it for its implications? Hopefully, we choose to engage it actively and analytically. Is our lanugage use (such as TTYL, BRB, and LOL) reflective of a shift in thinking? Or vice-versa? Wherever technology may lead us in the future, I hope at least some of us do not stoop to such a passive attitude toward dramatic changes in language. At the very least, I hope we are--as all ELA people should be--ready to analyze this (technological) text.
To that general consensus of ELA teachers, please refer to M.T. Anderson's novel Feed and consider my poem, found below.
A Sestina
By Dana Lutters
the deterioration of language is, like,
not even a little bit cool.
it makes me want to ask, really?
you represent the 21st century, dude?
you can barely speak. but whatever,
you’re so brain-dead, you don’t even care what’s up.
you go up to someone these days and ask what’s up?
they roll their eyes, say “nothing” like, like
you barely exist—in person—compared to the “whatever”
they are urgently typing to the BF on AIM, so not cool.
you might try for a conversation again, about the online boyfriend: “who is this dude?”
“no one,” they spit out, and you think sarcastically, really?
Anonymity is rampant these days, really.
you try and verbalize a question and it comes out as “what’s up?”
try and describe an object, just a thing; a person, just a dude.
try and communicate something meaningful and it’s like, like
finding water in a dry, dry desert, you know? not cool.
It’s too hard. It makes you want to give up and just say whatever.
but the frustration is still there. I’m mad or whatever.
It makes me want to go to the mall and shout “Hey! Come on! Really!”
but the shoppers won’t know what I’m so upset about, they’ll roll their eyes and think, not cool.
I’ll get angrier still, but I’ll try to keep my cool, I’ll smile if someone asks what’s up.
with me? well, what’s up is that this all makes me so mad, like,
the mall, the shoppers, the empty words, all of it, dude.
maybe some kind mall security guard will say “listen, dude,”
“there’s a sale at Abercrombie, why don’t you try on some new jeans or whatever.”
I give up trying to talk above the, like,
blaring music at A&F and look at some good deals, really.
the people here are seriously shopping, not even time for a “what’s up?”
I buy a graphic tee that just says “Dude.”
maybe in the future we’ll have to wear shirts from Abercrombie, not just to be cool,
but to explain who we are. mine will say “Dude.”
because we can’t use, like, our words, to explain what’s up,
to explain who we are. our purchases will explain, or whatever.
but even if the shirt says “blondes have more fun,” that’s not the person, really.
I guess the malls will decide who we are, what we’re like.
we can’t decide. what will we say? “like, cool…”
or maybe we’ll start with “really, dude…”
or maybe just “whatever. what’s up?”
accepted the technological slang as part of our ever-changing English language. One language arts teacher contributed:
"We've always been [a society that bemoans] `Oh, kids these days,'" says Tarbox. "It happens with every generation, and anything that's new. ... But technology is here to stay. You can't fight it."
With this passive, relaxed consensus among ELA educators, I absolutely disagree. We should incorporate all types of media into our classrooms in order to teach our students to analyze our increasingly visual culture. We should not do this merely because our culture is so visual and so fast-moving in the realm of technology; we should not do this merely to keep up with trends. We should do this also, and perhaps more importantly, to be aware of the effects of technology. The young people of our society are more technologically savvy than ever before. They can be simultaneously text-messaging, instant-messaging, surfing the web, which flashes numerous pop-ups and simultaneous advertisements, while listening to i-tunes with the t.v. on next to them. For us English teachers, this is a new text. Shall we passively accept it onto our shelves? Or shall we analyze it for its implications? Hopefully, we choose to engage it actively and analytically. Is our lanugage use (such as TTYL, BRB, and LOL) reflective of a shift in thinking? Or vice-versa? Wherever technology may lead us in the future, I hope at least some of us do not stoop to such a passive attitude toward dramatic changes in language. At the very least, I hope we are--as all ELA people should be--ready to analyze this (technological) text.
To that general consensus of ELA teachers, please refer to M.T. Anderson's novel Feed and consider my poem, found below.
A Sestina
By Dana Lutters
the deterioration of language is, like,
not even a little bit cool.
it makes me want to ask, really?
you represent the 21st century, dude?
you can barely speak. but whatever,
you’re so brain-dead, you don’t even care what’s up.
you go up to someone these days and ask what’s up?
they roll their eyes, say “nothing” like, like
you barely exist—in person—compared to the “whatever”
they are urgently typing to the BF on AIM, so not cool.
you might try for a conversation again, about the online boyfriend: “who is this dude?”
“no one,” they spit out, and you think sarcastically, really?
Anonymity is rampant these days, really.
you try and verbalize a question and it comes out as “what’s up?”
try and describe an object, just a thing; a person, just a dude.
try and communicate something meaningful and it’s like, like
finding water in a dry, dry desert, you know? not cool.
It’s too hard. It makes you want to give up and just say whatever.
but the frustration is still there. I’m mad or whatever.
It makes me want to go to the mall and shout “Hey! Come on! Really!”
but the shoppers won’t know what I’m so upset about, they’ll roll their eyes and think, not cool.
I’ll get angrier still, but I’ll try to keep my cool, I’ll smile if someone asks what’s up.
with me? well, what’s up is that this all makes me so mad, like,
the mall, the shoppers, the empty words, all of it, dude.
maybe some kind mall security guard will say “listen, dude,”
“there’s a sale at Abercrombie, why don’t you try on some new jeans or whatever.”
I give up trying to talk above the, like,
blaring music at A&F and look at some good deals, really.
the people here are seriously shopping, not even time for a “what’s up?”
I buy a graphic tee that just says “Dude.”
maybe in the future we’ll have to wear shirts from Abercrombie, not just to be cool,
but to explain who we are. mine will say “Dude.”
because we can’t use, like, our words, to explain what’s up,
to explain who we are. our purchases will explain, or whatever.
but even if the shirt says “blondes have more fun,” that’s not the person, really.
I guess the malls will decide who we are, what we’re like.
we can’t decide. what will we say? “like, cool…”
or maybe we’ll start with “really, dude…”
or maybe just “whatever. what’s up?”
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
Welcome to Fundamental Fulminations!
I am very happy to welcome you to the online space where we will fulminate over the fundamentals of English Language Arts. Hopefully you will find this forum a helpful addition to class activities where you can explore questions, challenges, and philosophies regarding ELA. In case you forgot, the protocol for using this blog is an follows:
You are required to post at least three entries and three comments on the course blog (http://fundamentalfulminations.blogspot.com/) in response to the NCTE Inbox (on the NCTE listserv; also found here) and the course readings. Due dates will be assigned on the second day of class. Each of you will be expected to read at least one item from the weekly Inbox that is of the most interest to you. When you are assigned to post an entry, your entry (of about a screen’s length) should directly address this item of interest. When you are assigned to comment on an entry, your comment (of about a half a screen’s length) should respond both the entry and the item in the Inbox it addresses. You are encouraged to incorporate course readings in your entries and participate more than the specified minimum since frequent online interaction will certainly enrich class discussion and written work.
The schedule is as follows:
Blog Schedule
Entries are due on the date listed. Comments (C) are due the day following. Commenters must address the entry posted by the person listed above their name (e.g. Carrie must comment on Keita’s entry by September 1st). Please note that only two entries and two comments have been scheduled. To meet the three entry/three comment requirement, you must contribute a third entry and a third comment on days (only those listed below) for which you are not scheduled.
August
31 Keita Abe
C: Carrie Douglas
Dana Lutters
C: Shawn Berger
Melissa Golio
C: Kellie Bolles
Vanessa Assis
C: Abby Gajewski
September
7 Cory Burton
C: Tim Robbins
Heather Siddle
C: Carissa Case
Kari Carelli
C: Steevi DiBernardo
Amanda Miller
C: Courtney Hayes
14 Carrie Douglas
C: Virginia Siskavich-Bosley
Abby Gajewski
C: Heidi Hanover
Chad Shennett
C: Anthony Smith
Emmanuel Veras
C: Melissa Golio
21 Courtney Hayes
C: Dana Lutters
Kaitlyn Lewis
C: Amanda Miller
Andrea Townsend
C: Travis Williamson
Kendra Woods
28 Tim Robbins
C: Heather Siddle
Chad Shennett
C: Virginia Siskavich-Bosley
Shawn Berger
C: Vanessa Assis
Heidi Hanover
C: Kaitlyn Lewis
October
5 Anthony Smith
C: Emmanuel Veras
Andrea Townsend
C: Cory Burton
Kellie Bolles
C: Travis Williamson
12 Kendra Woods
C: Keita Abe
Shawn Berger
C: Chad Shennett
Virginia Siskavich-Bosley
C: Amanda Miller
Kaitlyn Lewis
C: Vanessa Assis
19 Kellie Bolles
C: Andrea Townsend
Travis Williamson
C: Kari Carelli
Carissa Case
C: Dana Lutters
Courtney Hayes
C: Cory Burton
26 Steevi DiBernardo
C: Heather Siddle
Melissa Golio
C: Abby Gajewski
Tim Robbins
C: Carrie Douglas
November
2 Heidi Hanover
C: Emmanuel Veras
Dana Lutters
C: Kaitlyn Lewis
Anthony Smith
C: Courtney Hayes
9 Amanda Miller
C: Tim Robbins
Heather Siddle
C: Keita Abe
Kendra Woods
C: Chad Shennett
16 Virginia Siskavich-Bosley
C: Kari Carelli
Emmanuel Veras
C: Andrea Townsend
Abby Gajewski
C: Anthony Smith
Carissa Case
C: Heidi Hanover
Steevi DiBernardo
C: Shawn Berger
23 Travis Williamson
C: Kendra Woods
Keita Abe
C: Kellie Bolles
Carrie Douglas
C: Melissa Golio
30 Vanessa Assis
C: Steevi DiBernardo
Cory Burton
C: Shawn Berger
Kari Carelli
C: Carissa Case
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)