I met this teacher at my job. I work at a public library in Hialeah. I always knew he was a teacher in a private high school but we never got the chance to really talk about it. I borrowed some of his time and used this assignment as an opportunity to interview him about his career. It’s easy to tell that this veteran teacher has been around for a good while.
I think that this teacher has some great ideals about the No Child Left Behind Act and he definitely is an advocate of the abolishment of standardized testing. I agree with him about this. I don’t think that this type of education focuses on general knowledge, and it completely dims student creativity.
Despite some of his anti-technology responses during the interview, I found out that this teacher is actually a fairly tech-savvy person. He uses digital cameras, computers, etc in his personal life outside of school. I believe that to continue enjoying what you’ve been doing even after 10 long years, no matter what it is that you’re doing, is a definition of success.
When I first asked him what technology he uses in his classroom he mistakes the question as a personal one at first. He quickly moves on to instructional uses, though. I suppose I could have asked it in a clearer way. This teacher has only one computer for students to use for instructional purposes in his classroom/lab. I don’t think this is enough for the students. I have to disagree with how he goes on about technology; I think technology is something that should be taken advantage of. We have so much information at the tips of our fingers, so why not use it? Although he has some lack of technological resources in his class, he does mention a graphing calculator that is a fairly new model. However, he doesn’t have enough of these for the entire class.
I noticed a recurring theme. He kept commenting on how he has been frequently burned by technological adaptation. I think this teacher feels outdates, and he has lost a lot of previous work. The fact that he has had such negative experiences with technology, he has been made very suspicious of new technology and does not trust it. The teacher shows only some mild resistance toward technology but what he does have more concern about is the students’ instant gratification to find answers quick and easily via online search engines, such as Google.
He always mentions how more use of technology in the classroom will affect him personally, but rarely mentions how it can affect his students and class as a whole.
This veteran teacher is able to realize “21st Century” skills are somewhat a necessity. He realizes that some students don’t have these skills, and some refuse to have any effort to learn and practice them. The teacher values simulations that allow his students to play with initial conditions in chemistry/physics, and other courses. He likes the fact that they can see different results without risking burning the building down.
My subject recognizes that each student is different and their most effective way of learning varies from student to student. He is able to provide different options for those who need or would benefit from them. I noticed that the subject of power points was mentioned multiple times. He used this as such a primary example of technology in class. His students would prefer more technology in his class. The use of power points in the classroom can be very debatable on whether it is a good, bad, or neutral factor.
He mentions the loss of his data, and upgraded programs not being compatible with his outdated material being a huge problem within technology. I think this is a very minor error compared to some of the flameouts that have occurred in education. I think that private schools don’t have as much money or motivation to try anything ambitious.
The set of students in his classes is self-selected and not average! As I’ve noticed in many science classes, there is an under-representation of female students.
This teacher has an active sense of humor. It’s possible that this sense of humor has helped him through 10 years of teaching. Notice the scheme for keeping students awake. This hints to me that students find his class boring.
The teacher sees huge benefits to co-location of students even if technology is implemented and I agree with him. However, he seems a bit unsure about one to one computer as an ideal form of educating students. I wonder if this anti-technology attitude is just a reflection of experience or a reflection of age. Perhaps a mixture of both, or maybe even something completely different. He wants to see some more control on how students are using technology. Towards the end, once again, he displays a concern about personal use of technology and risking losing data and material through changing technological revolutions.
Tuesday, April 27, 2010
EDF 1005 - Education Philosophy
Social Reconstructionism is the idea of education changing society. The belief of this philosophical theory is that schools should be agents of social change leading to a new and more valuable social order. Students under the reign of a Social Reconstructionist educator are encouraged to question traditions and traditional values, and even question the value of academic content. Society becomes the subject and the function of the student is to effect social change through skills and attitudes learned in a school setting. Curriculum can’t be separated from current events and focus of the students is outside the school setting rather than inside. (PHILOSOPHIES OF EDUCATION: Retrieved from http://www.vancouver.wsu.edu/fac/walkert/philosophies.html)
Social reconstruction is an educational philosophy that’s main emphasis is on focusing and addressing social questions. It is a journey to create a better society and worldwide democracy. Social reform is the aim of education. Theodore Brameld (1904-1987) founded Social Reconstruction. The idea came about as a reaction against the harsh realities of World War II. Theodore Bramelf was able to realize the threat of technology and the potential of it being used for negative purposes such as human annihilation and cruelty. He also saw that it can be used for beneficial purposes. Technology can benefit society by using it for human compassion and communication rather than destruction. (Philosophical Perspectives in Education, Retrieved from http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/ed416/PP3.html)
Students must resist the dominant forces of society. Teachers and students must act as if they were living in a democratic society within the classroom. (from Theory and Resistance in Education, Giroux, 1983)
Social education is “conscientization.” Students must disrupt accommodation by the dominant society. (from Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Freire, 1970) Paulo Freire (1921-1997) was a Brazilian who once lived in devastating poverty, like many people in our society today. His conditions made him realize that he can make a change by using education and literacy as a tool for social change. He believed that people must learn to resist oppression rather than accept it and not become oppression’s victim, not oppress others. To do so requires a lot of critical consciousness. In order to have some social change, people had to become aware of their surroundings and society to overcome domination and oppression. Rather than “teaching as banking,” in which the teacher ‘deposits’ information into the students’ minds, Paulo Freire saw teaching and learning as a process of inquiry in which the child must invent and reinvent the world. (Philosophical Perspectives in Education, Retrieved from http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/ed416/PP3.html)
As an attempt to make a change of modern social condition, Progressive educators have been trying to promote the reconstruction of for a very long time now. Many of the Progressive advocates believed that the school has been isolated from mainstream society due to the dualistic relationship of schools and society caused by common school practices. They believed that whatever went on beneath the auspices of the schools was unreal and did not reflect of the issues within society. (from Democracy and Education, Dewey, 1916; Dare the School Build a New Social Order?, Counts, 1932; The Confusion in Present-Day Education, Bode, 1933; The Social-Economic Situation and Education, Dewey and Childs, 1933; Traditions of American Education, Cremin, 1977). The Progressives argued that the schools’ environment was artificial because it did not educate the children of our society about the real world. This type of environment did not prepare the youth to see and understand the values and issues that they will confront as adults. (Dewey and Childs, 1933). Eventually, the idea that the schools should create a new social order had been proposed as a result of these beliefs. (from Dare the School Build a New Social Order?, Counts, 1932) Progressive educators wanted to reconstruct the schools but did not know how they were going to go about it. (from Public Education, Cremin, 1976) Ideas are usually always accompanied by an array of opinions. Counts, however, had just about the most radical opinion of all. Counts imagined restructuring America’s society and it’s economy. George Counts (1889-1974) recognized that education was the means of preparing people for creating this new social order. He said, “The times are literally crying for a new vision of American destiny. The teaching profession, or at least its progressive elements, should eagerly grasp the opportunity which the fates have placed in their hands.” Others weren’t as radical as Counts, they did agree, however, that social reconstruction should be the most important aim of a good education. Many believed that it was necessary in schools, if not, society as a whole.
Critical theorists and social reconstructionists believe that in order to overcome oppression and improve human condition then systems must first be changed. (Philosophical Perspectives in Education, Retrieved from http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/ed416/PP3.html) I agree. Social reconstructionist classrooms focuses on student experience. Instructors find fun way to get students involved with in their society. I think it’s important to promote youth activism amongst our students, and with the radical movement of this educational philosophy, education can now be used as a form of action. Social reconstructionist teachers focus on taking social action on every day issues such as violence, hunger, terrorism, inflation, and inequality. These types of curriculum are more common in social studies and literature courses. These controversial issues are usually dealt through inquiry, dialogue, and are focused on multiple perspectives. However, some strategies that I think are more fun and require some more social involvement is using community-based learning or bringing the world into the classroom.
“My upmost hope will be fulfilled if anything I have said plays any part, however small, in promoting cooperative inquiry and experimentation in this field of democratic administration of our schools.” (Max O. Hallman (2007). Defense of Democracy. In Traversing Philosophical Boundaries (pp. 474-480).
Social reconstruction is an educational philosophy that’s main emphasis is on focusing and addressing social questions. It is a journey to create a better society and worldwide democracy. Social reform is the aim of education. Theodore Brameld (1904-1987) founded Social Reconstruction. The idea came about as a reaction against the harsh realities of World War II. Theodore Bramelf was able to realize the threat of technology and the potential of it being used for negative purposes such as human annihilation and cruelty. He also saw that it can be used for beneficial purposes. Technology can benefit society by using it for human compassion and communication rather than destruction. (Philosophical Perspectives in Education, Retrieved from http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/ed416/PP3.html)
Students must resist the dominant forces of society. Teachers and students must act as if they were living in a democratic society within the classroom. (from Theory and Resistance in Education, Giroux, 1983)
Social education is “conscientization.” Students must disrupt accommodation by the dominant society. (from Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Freire, 1970) Paulo Freire (1921-1997) was a Brazilian who once lived in devastating poverty, like many people in our society today. His conditions made him realize that he can make a change by using education and literacy as a tool for social change. He believed that people must learn to resist oppression rather than accept it and not become oppression’s victim, not oppress others. To do so requires a lot of critical consciousness. In order to have some social change, people had to become aware of their surroundings and society to overcome domination and oppression. Rather than “teaching as banking,” in which the teacher ‘deposits’ information into the students’ minds, Paulo Freire saw teaching and learning as a process of inquiry in which the child must invent and reinvent the world. (Philosophical Perspectives in Education, Retrieved from http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/ed416/PP3.html)
As an attempt to make a change of modern social condition, Progressive educators have been trying to promote the reconstruction of for a very long time now. Many of the Progressive advocates believed that the school has been isolated from mainstream society due to the dualistic relationship of schools and society caused by common school practices. They believed that whatever went on beneath the auspices of the schools was unreal and did not reflect of the issues within society. (from Democracy and Education, Dewey, 1916; Dare the School Build a New Social Order?, Counts, 1932; The Confusion in Present-Day Education, Bode, 1933; The Social-Economic Situation and Education, Dewey and Childs, 1933; Traditions of American Education, Cremin, 1977). The Progressives argued that the schools’ environment was artificial because it did not educate the children of our society about the real world. This type of environment did not prepare the youth to see and understand the values and issues that they will confront as adults. (Dewey and Childs, 1933). Eventually, the idea that the schools should create a new social order had been proposed as a result of these beliefs. (from Dare the School Build a New Social Order?, Counts, 1932) Progressive educators wanted to reconstruct the schools but did not know how they were going to go about it. (from Public Education, Cremin, 1976) Ideas are usually always accompanied by an array of opinions. Counts, however, had just about the most radical opinion of all. Counts imagined restructuring America’s society and it’s economy. George Counts (1889-1974) recognized that education was the means of preparing people for creating this new social order. He said, “The times are literally crying for a new vision of American destiny. The teaching profession, or at least its progressive elements, should eagerly grasp the opportunity which the fates have placed in their hands.” Others weren’t as radical as Counts, they did agree, however, that social reconstruction should be the most important aim of a good education. Many believed that it was necessary in schools, if not, society as a whole.
Critical theorists and social reconstructionists believe that in order to overcome oppression and improve human condition then systems must first be changed. (Philosophical Perspectives in Education, Retrieved from http://oregonstate.edu/instruct/ed416/PP3.html) I agree. Social reconstructionist classrooms focuses on student experience. Instructors find fun way to get students involved with in their society. I think it’s important to promote youth activism amongst our students, and with the radical movement of this educational philosophy, education can now be used as a form of action. Social reconstructionist teachers focus on taking social action on every day issues such as violence, hunger, terrorism, inflation, and inequality. These types of curriculum are more common in social studies and literature courses. These controversial issues are usually dealt through inquiry, dialogue, and are focused on multiple perspectives. However, some strategies that I think are more fun and require some more social involvement is using community-based learning or bringing the world into the classroom.
“My upmost hope will be fulfilled if anything I have said plays any part, however small, in promoting cooperative inquiry and experimentation in this field of democratic administration of our schools.” (Max O. Hallman (2007). Defense of Democracy. In Traversing Philosophical Boundaries (pp. 474-480).
EDF 1005 - Article Reflection
The Seed of Education - Truth by Stephen T. McClard
The author of the article gives an in-depth and deep description of what truth means to him. When you seek truth for noble and humble purposes you can use this knowledge to make a difference within society. In the article Stephen T. McClard says, “We arrogantly boast that we possess truth, yet truth patiently waits for us to humble our souls.” He’s speaking the truth. Have you ever noticed someone showing off their degrees, and knowledge? Many people try their best to educate themselves, gain this knowledge and use it for nothing but to make themselves seem better, and smarter than others.
The seed of education is truth because truth is what most of us naturally seek. We do this through educating ourselves. When we want to know something, we go through the well known ‘process of inquiry’ in order to seek this truth and knowledge.
Emily Brooker was a student in Missouri State University. She was not an advocate of gay rights, however, the University tried to use coercion and intimidation to force her into signing a gay right advocacy statement that was contrary to her beliefs. She sued the university for doing so. (Stephen T. McClard (2010). The American Marketplace of Ideas - The Right to Free Thought and Expression. Retrieved from http://superiored.blogspot.com/2010/04/american-marketplace-of-ideas-right-to.html) In a previous article, educator and author, Stephen T. McClard stated, "An important part of our democracy includes the concepts of free discourse and freedom of expression. These two ideas are inexorably tied to our framework of what it means to be an educated citizen. Free access to thought is what defines us as individuals living in a free land. Limiting this access can only weaken our educational institutions." (Stephen T. McClard (2010). Education – A Marketplace for Sticky Thoughts That Stretch the Mind. Retrieved from http://superiored.blogspot.com/2010/02/education-marketplace-for-sticky.html) The author states that believes that the young girl, Emily Brooker is the “shining testament to the truth” of what he wrote in The Seed of Education-Truth. (Stephen T. McClard (2010). The American Marketplace of Ideas - The Right to Free Thought and Expression. Retrieved from http://superiored.blogspot.com/2010/04/american-marketplace-of-ideas-right-to.html)
Although, I personally don’t agree with Emily Brooker’s view on gay rights, I do agree with what McClard says. It is important to use your beliefs and knowledge to make a difference in society. The fact is, no one should ever try and force you into agreeing or supporting something that in all actuality, you don’t. If Emily Brooker would have agreed to signing that gay right advocacy statement, not only would she have lost the opportunity to show the system what they were doing was wrong, but it would have made her a hypocrite as well.
All-in-all, even though I agree with Stephen T. McClard’s ideals and his view on truth, the title of this article is a somewhat misleading. I thought it would have to do more with education and schooling but it sounded more to me like a self-help article.
The author of the article gives an in-depth and deep description of what truth means to him. When you seek truth for noble and humble purposes you can use this knowledge to make a difference within society. In the article Stephen T. McClard says, “We arrogantly boast that we possess truth, yet truth patiently waits for us to humble our souls.” He’s speaking the truth. Have you ever noticed someone showing off their degrees, and knowledge? Many people try their best to educate themselves, gain this knowledge and use it for nothing but to make themselves seem better, and smarter than others.
The seed of education is truth because truth is what most of us naturally seek. We do this through educating ourselves. When we want to know something, we go through the well known ‘process of inquiry’ in order to seek this truth and knowledge.
Emily Brooker was a student in Missouri State University. She was not an advocate of gay rights, however, the University tried to use coercion and intimidation to force her into signing a gay right advocacy statement that was contrary to her beliefs. She sued the university for doing so. (Stephen T. McClard (2010). The American Marketplace of Ideas - The Right to Free Thought and Expression. Retrieved from http://superiored.blogspot.com/2010/04/american-marketplace-of-ideas-right-to.html) In a previous article, educator and author, Stephen T. McClard stated, "An important part of our democracy includes the concepts of free discourse and freedom of expression. These two ideas are inexorably tied to our framework of what it means to be an educated citizen. Free access to thought is what defines us as individuals living in a free land. Limiting this access can only weaken our educational institutions." (Stephen T. McClard (2010). Education – A Marketplace for Sticky Thoughts That Stretch the Mind. Retrieved from http://superiored.blogspot.com/2010/02/education-marketplace-for-sticky.html) The author states that believes that the young girl, Emily Brooker is the “shining testament to the truth” of what he wrote in The Seed of Education-Truth. (Stephen T. McClard (2010). The American Marketplace of Ideas - The Right to Free Thought and Expression. Retrieved from http://superiored.blogspot.com/2010/04/american-marketplace-of-ideas-right-to.html)
Although, I personally don’t agree with Emily Brooker’s view on gay rights, I do agree with what McClard says. It is important to use your beliefs and knowledge to make a difference in society. The fact is, no one should ever try and force you into agreeing or supporting something that in all actuality, you don’t. If Emily Brooker would have agreed to signing that gay right advocacy statement, not only would she have lost the opportunity to show the system what they were doing was wrong, but it would have made her a hypocrite as well.
All-in-all, even though I agree with Stephen T. McClard’s ideals and his view on truth, the title of this article is a somewhat misleading. I thought it would have to do more with education and schooling but it sounded more to me like a self-help article.
Saturday, April 17, 2010
EDF 1005- Reflection 9
Schools began developing once writing was invented. Cuneiform is believed to be the first writing. The students were mostly taught about their way of life and how to take care of their family and live. Studying and practicing can be traced back as far as 3000 BCE. With time schools began to establish and progress to have more subjects, such as math and grammar. It was usually children who come from families of a higher socioeconomic status that were given the privilege to attend school. This Ancient Egyptian Education was much different than the schools we see today. Today all children, no matter what their demographics may be have the right to attend free public schools. The schools of Ancient Egypt only had students of higher class. Many of them were sons of priests and other elders. The less fortunate children had to mostly learn from their parents. Instead of having the free will to choose what they want to be as adults were forced to follow their parents’ footsteps because they were limited on their knowledge and education. Everything they learned was learned at home from their parents. In addition to being trained in whatever work they were pursuing, they were also shown about their culture. They learned about their beliefs and values. I’m glad to be able to say that education has made an enormous change since then. In the United States it is necessary for children to go to school. In fact, not attending will bring consequences to the parents of the child. This change has been a good one. I believe that all children deserve the right to educate themselves, not only children of richer families. I wish that we could make the kids of our society realize how important it is for them to appreciate and take advantage of the luxury of education and schooling that has been freely given to them. Many children in other poor countries where education is limited due to lack of resources are wishing to be handed the opportunities that our given to the kids here. And yet many of them don’t appreciate or realize what they have. Many students attend school without caring to even pay attention. I think it’s obvious to see that today’s education is much more effective than it was in Ancient Egypt. Students are now divided into classes with their peers and progress through grade levels. We have resources and technology and so many tools for children to learn. Schools give a lot of general information to help children today figure out what interests them the most so when the time comes to pick a major and career they are prepared for it instead of being forced to follow their parents’ path. It is no longer the case that everything they know was learned at home only. I hope that as time continues and the future approaches education only continues to better.
Friday, April 16, 2010
EDF 1005- Reflection 10
“The teacher is the gatekeeper,” a term created by Philip Jackson. What makes this statement true? Well, for as long as I can remember, in my classes the teacher is always the one who is in charge. The teacher is the one who chooses a student when all those hands go up. The teacher decides whether their answer was wrong or right. The teacher is also the one with the power to limit the length of that response or ask for an extended, detailed version. The teacher is who decides what direction the class discussion will go. In a classroom, the teacher usually decides what is fair as long as they stay within their boundaries, of course. Communication between teacher and student happens almost throughout the entire class time. Since it is the teacher who is lecturing the classroom it is only natural that the teacher is who initiates communication and manage the topic and what is being said. It is expected for the teacher to always be the first to open their mouth in that class room and because of these students are automatically ready to listen quietly and be dependent on the teacher. Although they are quiet their brains should be causing up a storm as they rely on their teachers for knowledge and truth. They should be thinking quickly and trying to memorize the information that is being given to them. A common tactic for teachers to check their students understanding is by asking questions. Time to ask students questions is always prepared but students have barely, if any time to ask any of their own questions. It is easy to see why many students are afraid to admit they simply don’t get something. They may be embarrassed to ask for help. I believe teachers should use their authority in the classroom to make the learning experience more positive for students. If they are more comfortable asking their own questions then maybe they will have an easier time understanding. After all, how can a child be able to get something that is confusing for them when they don’t have the time or courage to ask? I remember in high school seeing students raise their hands to ask questions about something the teacher just mentioned in the lecture and many of the times they respond, “Not now, put your hand down.” Seeing this happened would discourage me, myself to ever dare put my own hand up. Many students sit in their seats pretending to understand something they don’t. If districts didn’t tell their staff how they should teach then maybe those who allow their students to speak will do a better job at giving them the education they want and allowing them to explore their question and curiosities. What is the point of these higher-authority-given rubrics? Teachers went to school and studied for the job they have already, we shouldn’t be given a pre-written, recycled (probably out-dated) lesson plan. With this new trend of standardized testing in public schools there is much less time for lectures and real learning. Instead of the exchange of creative ideas and other important topics schools are more interested in focusing on math and reading only. I am not saying those topics aren’t important but there is so much more for the students to learn as well that will help the student gain a larger variety knowledge and education.
EDF 1005- Reflection 2
I believe that as human beings we naturally have this urge to create and invent. It's only natural that with time many well-thought out inventions have arose and progressed and will continue to. These inventions have the capability to change society, and paradigms of individuals. Earlier hominid species used sticks and rocks to make tools. Being limited to these types of prehistoric tools made early humans see life from the paradigm of a hunter. Although you kill as a hunter, you also develop a sense of compassion for other animals. With time, tools began to advance. Since humans were able to get a hold of these more sophisticated tools the hunting game began to get larger. As situations came up through time, the more complicated and advanced they were the more the thinking process of humans progressed. Anyone's paradigm can be altered with experience. Changing of paradigm can effect how you see your world and understand how other people see it too. Throughout life we hit milestones where we find that some things we have believed our entire lives don't really have a reasonable explanation. When an argument or situation proposes a reason to disprove your usual beliefs a shit will occur. As we come across new experiences and knowledge we become open to new ideas,theories, and inventions. Sometimes we change our old beliefs and habits and adapt to a new way of living but this is only possible if we are well aware of our surroundings and keep our minds conscious. It is true, however, that although some beliefs have no explanation and maybe someone disputes a good argument to disprove it that some people will continue to believe their original belief with no intentions in adapting to any new ones. Many people don't need logical explanations and will go on depending on faith. I can only imagine, however, that if that person has been able to shift another's paradigm by using convincing arguments then the person who has been shifted will always remember the person who changed their life forever. Accepting change can be a difficult thing to do sometimes. Imagine living your life believing something and one day it is all gone... It could be altered in a matter of just minutes. I know it is impossible to happen every time but I would like to hope that these changes in paradigm for every individual only changes their lives in positive ways.
Thursday, April 15, 2010
EDF 1005- Reflection 20
Horace Mann's success made Elementary schools become more popular, however, there was a large gap between them and the uprising establishment of Universities around the nation. They had not preparation between these elementary schools and universities. I can imagine all the information they may have forgotten by the time they got to the university level. The English Classical school was the first free secondary school in the U.S. It was located in Boston and established in 1821. This school had 176 boys. Girls did not attend all the way up until 1852. The purpose of these schools were not clear. They became privatized and did not have the same curriculum as other schools did. Unlike today, anyone can send their children to public schools for free, however, because secondary schools were supported by a higher elementary school tax at first, if you wanted your kids to move forward to a higher education, you would have to pay for it. Thankfully, this is not the case today. The United States tried using the same tracking system that is used in Europe In fact, United States and Europe's school systems used to be very alike. Instead of just graduating from secondary schools and entering into universities, in order to attend universities you had to figure out a way to bridge the time gap between university and elementary school. Either that or just begin working very early in life to help support the family. Secondary schools have given this "bridge" between elementary and university to us and has been able to prepare students for college. Abandoning this older system of education has made American education a great thing. With a high school diploma, graduates are able to attend college and have a higher chance of getting a good job. Freedom, career, success and money is the "American Dream" and introducing secondary schools into our lives has given us a better reflection of the hard work that has to happen to make this dream happen. Secondary schools can be publicly attended by anyone for free, no matter what gender, race, or economic status you are. A democracy such as our's should offer fair and equal opportunities for kids to educate themselves and decide what they want to do with their lives and secondary schools has given us this.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
