Who is this a quote from? Genie from Disney's Aladin? Or, a classroom teacher. The Raywid article could be evidence of a comparison between the two.
The article begins by drawing our attention to the many ways in which a teacher may feel like a mere pawn in the game of educational chess. We move about the board with limited capabilities, constrained by our status and existing as the target of knights, bishops and the royal family known more commonly as principals, district curriculum coordinators, school boards and our students own families. How then can we avoid feeling “at risk” and without power ourselves.
Do educators therefore perform their daily routines with the mindset of powerless servants of others wishes or is there a means to feel our value more personally? Raywid draws attention to the fact that our real power lies in relation to the child. We are in fact a very important potential force in the present and future of each child we teach. We establish what kind of social environment we will create and tolerate in our classrooms.
I have a lot to think about as I go into my own classroom situation in regards to the use of this power. I am a big believer in demanding that everyone show respect and kindness to each person in the community. I don’t think that any form of unkindness or disrespect should be tolerated, but as Paley questions in the first half of her book, how exactly do you enforce this. This is unfortunately against the nature of some of us. I’ll be interested to read further and see how she discovers ways to make this work.
Raywid indicates that students often feel powerless in relation to the teacher. As a teacher, I want to be very approachable for the students. The article brings out the idea that students will reject learning from someone who they dislike or who they feel dislikes them. I know this is true from a high school experience I had with a teacher that seemed to dislike me. My response was to refuse to ask for help when I needed it and eventually drop the class. I think as a teacher I want to have a sense of authority, but also of camaraderie in each child’s process of learning, “We are in this thing together bud…follow me. I’ll help you find the path”. Teachers need to struggle together with their students, but they need to maintain their position as leader also.
I know we have done a lot of reading about using democratic process in the classroom as a way of teaching and training democratic thinking in the greater world. I can see having students be the designers of their constitution as being a great learning experience. I can also see how giving this power to them can help them buy in more to making it their own. It is also very positive for students to feel that they have a voice and learn to carry that voice into their adult lives and workplace.
The area that I need to sort through for my teaching, will be the balance of this concept with my belief that a respect for authority is also an important quality. In our democratic nation we have chosen by the will of the people to elect a set of leader representatives and a supreme authority to have ultimate control. I think that the pendulum has swung too far in the last 15 years towards a students feeling of too much power in the classroom. There is a significant lack of respect in the upper grades for the power of the teacher to have the right to lead and set expectations. I think this has been detrimental to the teacher student relationship and ultimately the outcome of success for all students.
We cannot crush our students with rules and regulations that seem to be arbitrary. No one responds well to leadership that seem outside of reason or just unnecessary. Maintaining order and developing a relationship where students are eager to work together to reach high expectations for group and personal goals is what I want to work toward in my classroom and sometimes this requires a leader who has the final authority.
Raywid suggests (pg.84) that teachers have an obligation to share their power. I would prefer to see this as teachers imbuing students with a sense of their own personal power and the way to use and express it in their position as learner. I don’t know of a democracy where everyone has equal authority in all things. There is a purpose for leadership in all levels of human interaction, from the family to the PTA to the Federal government of our nation and others.
That being said, I think that one of the other points of this article was a reminder that we do impact students lives in significant ways. We need to be very cautious about the ways in which we impact them for the ramifications can be far reaching. We are with our students a significant part of their waking hours. We can be a great inspiration to them as they watch our passion for reading, writing, and ‘rithmetic. We can guide to attitudes of social equity. We can be the force in their lives that lets them know that they are “OK” and someone out there really does care.
We may not labor in luxurious corner offices. The plaque on our door may be on construction paper and written in crayon. We may be under the watchful eye and direction of parents and administrators alike, but in spite of this we do have a powerful role to play in relation to the impact we have on the children we teach every day. Most of us still remember long into adulthood the teachers who had significant impact on their lives.
Sunday, February 22, 2009
Monday, February 16, 2009
The Mysterious Case of Right Vs. Wrong
In 1991 I was asked to serve on a panel researching whole language learning. I assumed the goal of this task force was to genuinely look at the available data and determine whether the facts supported whole language or phonics or some other method for that matter as the best practice for encouraging literacy. The panel was made up of several principals, a number of early grades teachers from different schools in our district, representatives from the administration as well as myself and other parent representatives. For many weeks we were given articles to read and comment on.
The many articles we read made it clear that whole language was not only a viable means of teaching children to read, but also undoubtedly the best. It was tantamount to students developing a better overall understanding of words and a passion for the art of reading, not merely a pieced together group of sounds that they could pronounce, but held no real meaning or power for them. The curriculum allowed for kids to get excited about books and use context and sight words woven together to form understanding and comprehension. The choice seemed clear.
The findings of our panel were presented to the school board and received their approval. Our glowing report of the documented success of this type of program easily swayed them to our way of thinking. The other teachers in the district were trained accordingly and brought on board either willingly or by necessity. I was shocked to find that so many parents and teachers were not on the same page as our panel. How could they not see that the research showed this was the best for our kids? Dissention ensued at the schools and at the district level, but the program pushed ahead and was implemented district wide.
The program was used through the early education of my two older sons and by the time my daughter entered first grade, six years later, was being supplemented with phonics. By the time my fourth child reached our schools the scales had tipped back to phonics and a smattering of sight words, with teachers claiming that really it appeared that whole language didn’t work for many of the students. A mixed approach gave every child different options for learning as suited them best.
I learned several valuable lessons about education through this experience. The first lesson is that you can never please everyone. Each of us values different things in education and different approaches to achieve these goals. The next lesson for me was that there is always a faction in education that feels they have found the golden ticket, so to speak, to unlocking children’s minds and enabling them to learn. Unfortunately, these factions must, it appears, discredit the current conventional wisdom and opinions of dissenters. Thirdly, I realized that there is good in most of the ideas that teachers have and use in the classroom and there is neither a “right” way to teach in most cases just as there is no “right” way to go about learning.
Looking back at my experiences with the whole language panel I see that it was very biased to achieve the goals of its initiators. The only teachers, parents and others selected to serve on the panel were individuals that were certain to agree with their bias. The articles we read were only articles that supported the desired outcome. People with dissenting opinions were discredited as being stuck in their rut or ill informed or too lazy to want to change to what is best for the children. Fingers were pointed rather than looking at varied opinions and methods as all having value though different.
You may be asking how this relates to what we have been reading. I feel that what I read in the Kohn article was a perfect representation of this style of pushing an agenda by discrediting another opinion or faction. There was a tremendous amount of name calling, labeling, and crediting others with motives that were unsubstantiated in order to advance the bias of the author. This was not a balanced look at a concern for how to best serve the children in our schools, both the ones who learn with ease and the ones who must work more diligently. This article was designed to advance an agenda towards a style of education that the author feels passionate about, by attributing less than honorable motives to those who have a different opinion.
My thoughts on this article are that it is a shame that we can’t acknowledge that others may have different experiences, beliefs and opinions about what is effective in the classroom and respectfully disagree. Maybe there are valid points to each opinion that can be explored. Why was it OK for this article to attribute attitudes to the whole “Christian Right” or “white” community any more than it would be right to attribute attitudes to people from any particular class or race. Shameful!
People involved in education, educators, parents, and other education professionals are passionate about seeking the best for children. The reality is that there will always be differences of opinion about what that best is. Education is always in a state of flux as we seek to encourage success for every child. Constant change is a constant in education as anyone who has been in the field for a number of years can testify.
Must we forge ahead in this pursuit by planting our heels on the backs of those we’ve thrown under the cart wheels? Can we set the bar higher by realizing that through varied backgrounds and experiences we have come to varied beliefs about what is best for all children? We need to understand that we will never all agree, but we can all work side by side, laboring within our own beliefs in best practice, for the common goal of educating children to their fullest potential. The premise of this article itself was a testament to how the opinions of best practice change through time. Was it worth the finger pointing and degrading of others for an idea that itself has since come and gone?
The many articles we read made it clear that whole language was not only a viable means of teaching children to read, but also undoubtedly the best. It was tantamount to students developing a better overall understanding of words and a passion for the art of reading, not merely a pieced together group of sounds that they could pronounce, but held no real meaning or power for them. The curriculum allowed for kids to get excited about books and use context and sight words woven together to form understanding and comprehension. The choice seemed clear.
The findings of our panel were presented to the school board and received their approval. Our glowing report of the documented success of this type of program easily swayed them to our way of thinking. The other teachers in the district were trained accordingly and brought on board either willingly or by necessity. I was shocked to find that so many parents and teachers were not on the same page as our panel. How could they not see that the research showed this was the best for our kids? Dissention ensued at the schools and at the district level, but the program pushed ahead and was implemented district wide.
The program was used through the early education of my two older sons and by the time my daughter entered first grade, six years later, was being supplemented with phonics. By the time my fourth child reached our schools the scales had tipped back to phonics and a smattering of sight words, with teachers claiming that really it appeared that whole language didn’t work for many of the students. A mixed approach gave every child different options for learning as suited them best.
I learned several valuable lessons about education through this experience. The first lesson is that you can never please everyone. Each of us values different things in education and different approaches to achieve these goals. The next lesson for me was that there is always a faction in education that feels they have found the golden ticket, so to speak, to unlocking children’s minds and enabling them to learn. Unfortunately, these factions must, it appears, discredit the current conventional wisdom and opinions of dissenters. Thirdly, I realized that there is good in most of the ideas that teachers have and use in the classroom and there is neither a “right” way to teach in most cases just as there is no “right” way to go about learning.
Looking back at my experiences with the whole language panel I see that it was very biased to achieve the goals of its initiators. The only teachers, parents and others selected to serve on the panel were individuals that were certain to agree with their bias. The articles we read were only articles that supported the desired outcome. People with dissenting opinions were discredited as being stuck in their rut or ill informed or too lazy to want to change to what is best for the children. Fingers were pointed rather than looking at varied opinions and methods as all having value though different.
You may be asking how this relates to what we have been reading. I feel that what I read in the Kohn article was a perfect representation of this style of pushing an agenda by discrediting another opinion or faction. There was a tremendous amount of name calling, labeling, and crediting others with motives that were unsubstantiated in order to advance the bias of the author. This was not a balanced look at a concern for how to best serve the children in our schools, both the ones who learn with ease and the ones who must work more diligently. This article was designed to advance an agenda towards a style of education that the author feels passionate about, by attributing less than honorable motives to those who have a different opinion.
My thoughts on this article are that it is a shame that we can’t acknowledge that others may have different experiences, beliefs and opinions about what is effective in the classroom and respectfully disagree. Maybe there are valid points to each opinion that can be explored. Why was it OK for this article to attribute attitudes to the whole “Christian Right” or “white” community any more than it would be right to attribute attitudes to people from any particular class or race. Shameful!
People involved in education, educators, parents, and other education professionals are passionate about seeking the best for children. The reality is that there will always be differences of opinion about what that best is. Education is always in a state of flux as we seek to encourage success for every child. Constant change is a constant in education as anyone who has been in the field for a number of years can testify.
Must we forge ahead in this pursuit by planting our heels on the backs of those we’ve thrown under the cart wheels? Can we set the bar higher by realizing that through varied backgrounds and experiences we have come to varied beliefs about what is best for all children? We need to understand that we will never all agree, but we can all work side by side, laboring within our own beliefs in best practice, for the common goal of educating children to their fullest potential. The premise of this article itself was a testament to how the opinions of best practice change through time. Was it worth the finger pointing and degrading of others for an idea that itself has since come and gone?
Monday, February 9, 2009
It's A Small World After All...
Sorry to get that old refrain started, it's eternal loop going in your brain, but I couldn't help myself! I was pondering a title that would reflect the concept of community in the classroom and decided that this age old (well actually only 44 years old!) lyric is exactly what we are trying to say to our students. We all laugh. We all cry. We all have hopes and we all have fears. There is so much to be shared that it's time we're aware, it's a small world after all. So let's get to know each other and see the ways we are alike and the ways we are different. Our classroom can be a small scale model version of the world at large and how we should treat each other with kindness and respect.
I really thought that the article by Sapon-Shevin was the best thing we have read. It offered us a feast of solutions and I like that. I appreciated the positive slant it put on the many possibilities we have as teachers to shape our learning communities into caring supportive partners in education. After all, in the classroom we are the final word on how our room will run. Just as in parenting, we have control over setting the tone in our home as a positive loving environment or a harsh series of expectations and demands. We can have lax standards, being satisfied with behavior that is less than conducive to a pleasant experience. We can set the bar high for each child encouraging them to reach new heights.
Our students come in with vastly different expectations at home. They arrive on our doorstep with vastly different life experiences. But, as the teacher, we can set our expectations for them while they are at school interacting with us. We need to set parameters for the goal of supporting each other and treating everyone in the class with consideration. The community needs to interact in a way that allows for everyone to achieve personal success. It must be a priority for every one to be psychologically safe while in class. There may be a learning curve for this attitude, but I believe that if we set the tone that each student is valuable and expect the same attitude from our students we will be able to settle the issues that do pop up.
Just as we have been talking about knowing our students as teachers, I think it is important to encourage the kids to get to know each student in class. We are more likely to feel compassion, to imagine what others struggles and strengths are if we spend time really getting to know them. I am amazed when working with older grades that students who have been in class together for six or seven months still don't know all the kids in there class. I often know more kids names and something about them after a few random days of substituting than the kids know about each other. I think more community building exercises in all classes would make the classrooms more successful for all the learners.
Sapon-Shevin had quite a few ideas that I really liked. I don't know about the singing at the start of class, but actually letting our hair down and being a little goofy together can be a bonding experience. I think the idea of a grid with students names posted in the room was an effective tool. The students over the course of time need to find something in common with each of the other students in class and mark it at the intersection of their names on the chart.We have something in common with anyone else we meet. It's a small world after all....
I also liked the idea of the want ads where students can advertise for help with their weaknesses or offer their strengths. What a great way to develop our own sense of worth by using our talents to help another.
I have seen several versions of the treasure hunt mentioned by Sapon-Shevin used in classes. I liked the fact that her sample touched on areas that could make students feel like outsiders. To know that we are not alone in our fears or things we feel awkward about is very comforting. There is a lot of positve power in knowing there are others like me.
The first step in creating community is deciding that community is a worthwhile goal. Then we must set up our expectations and goals for achieving it. We must make it clear that the goal is to have everyone succeed and feel accepted and that we will not accept anything less. We can create activities that encourage our students to get to know each other which will naturally enable them to feel more compassion and respond in appropriately supportive ways to other students problems. I think that this safe place, the "small world" we create will allow our students, whatever their life outside our walls, to gain the most possible from the educational opportunities we offer them.
I really thought that the article by Sapon-Shevin was the best thing we have read. It offered us a feast of solutions and I like that. I appreciated the positive slant it put on the many possibilities we have as teachers to shape our learning communities into caring supportive partners in education. After all, in the classroom we are the final word on how our room will run. Just as in parenting, we have control over setting the tone in our home as a positive loving environment or a harsh series of expectations and demands. We can have lax standards, being satisfied with behavior that is less than conducive to a pleasant experience. We can set the bar high for each child encouraging them to reach new heights.
Our students come in with vastly different expectations at home. They arrive on our doorstep with vastly different life experiences. But, as the teacher, we can set our expectations for them while they are at school interacting with us. We need to set parameters for the goal of supporting each other and treating everyone in the class with consideration. The community needs to interact in a way that allows for everyone to achieve personal success. It must be a priority for every one to be psychologically safe while in class. There may be a learning curve for this attitude, but I believe that if we set the tone that each student is valuable and expect the same attitude from our students we will be able to settle the issues that do pop up.
Just as we have been talking about knowing our students as teachers, I think it is important to encourage the kids to get to know each student in class. We are more likely to feel compassion, to imagine what others struggles and strengths are if we spend time really getting to know them. I am amazed when working with older grades that students who have been in class together for six or seven months still don't know all the kids in there class. I often know more kids names and something about them after a few random days of substituting than the kids know about each other. I think more community building exercises in all classes would make the classrooms more successful for all the learners.
Sapon-Shevin had quite a few ideas that I really liked. I don't know about the singing at the start of class, but actually letting our hair down and being a little goofy together can be a bonding experience. I think the idea of a grid with students names posted in the room was an effective tool. The students over the course of time need to find something in common with each of the other students in class and mark it at the intersection of their names on the chart.We have something in common with anyone else we meet. It's a small world after all....
I also liked the idea of the want ads where students can advertise for help with their weaknesses or offer their strengths. What a great way to develop our own sense of worth by using our talents to help another.
I have seen several versions of the treasure hunt mentioned by Sapon-Shevin used in classes. I liked the fact that her sample touched on areas that could make students feel like outsiders. To know that we are not alone in our fears or things we feel awkward about is very comforting. There is a lot of positve power in knowing there are others like me.
The first step in creating community is deciding that community is a worthwhile goal. Then we must set up our expectations and goals for achieving it. We must make it clear that the goal is to have everyone succeed and feel accepted and that we will not accept anything less. We can create activities that encourage our students to get to know each other which will naturally enable them to feel more compassion and respond in appropriately supportive ways to other students problems. I think that this safe place, the "small world" we create will allow our students, whatever their life outside our walls, to gain the most possible from the educational opportunities we offer them.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
