Great Educator

The immediate cultural context of children and youth includes family, neighborhood, and youth culture, including media influences.  Dewey argued that social influences are the “great educator” and that schools are only a secondary agency.  What educational problems and possibilities are presented to teachers by these cultural contexts, and why do you see these as problems and possibilities?  What difference can and should teachers make to learners if schools are secondary to the wider society in their influence?  By what means should teachers seek to make the difference, and why?  In your response, consider more than one kind of neighborhood and family context.

   

      Society is constantly evolving and 2012 is no different.  Cultural context brought on to children through family, neighborhoods, and youth cultures are "great educators" as Dewey suggested.  Many things learned in a child's everyday life are not things that can be taught in schools.  Media influences, especially today, play such an important role in the culture of the world's youth.  Access to popular social networking sites, such as Facebook or Twitter, puts instant connectivity in the hands of many adolescents.  Ten to fifteen years ago it would take a day for news to spread around a small community.  Today that juicy bit of gossip is instantly 'tweeted' and everyone is made aware.  If as educators we don't think this influences a child's thinking and learning we are kidding ourselves.

      There are many problems associated with the evolution of society and its impact on the youth of our country.  Speaking from an educational standpoint, teachers fall into two categories.  Those that disregard cultural contexts and those that embrace it.  In order to reach a child in today's digital times teachers should be able to relate to their students in more ways than the pulpit in front of the classroom.  Using the very things that kids use in their daily lives can open an enormous amount of opportunities for teachers to have at their disposal.  Using the internet, whether through the social networking sites or even student friendly blogs, could help catch interest and classroom discussion could take place outside the school building.  Students love listening to their MP3 players and what better way to present a lesson than in the form of a podcast?  Many different aspects could benefit children if teachers are so inclined.

      If schools truly are secondary to the outside world then what impact do teachers have on children anyway?  This statement presents a fallacy to the educational system as a whole.  Educators may not be able to grab the attention of every single child for every single minute of instruction.  The attentions that they do obtain for however long are the ones that make schooling worthwhile.  Students learn a lot from their environment.  Much like a baby learns to speak in its native language, children learn from the world around them.  When they are in school, learning is taking place in one form or another.  Educators are in a position to really have an impact (hopefully positive) on the minds and attitudes of today's youth.  What they teach and how they teach it is the 'what' students gain from attending school.

      To really make a difference, every educator owes it to their students to provide learning by any means necessary.  If a teacher is located in a lower income school, and another is in a higher income neighborhood, those educators will teach the material differently.  Which way is better becomes the real question.  The answer is that neither is wrong, as long as the material being taught is same.  Delivery is just that, a way for one to present material to another.  Take as an example, a salad bar at your local restaurant.  If two people go to the bar and make a salad, chances are that they will have two completely different products by the time they sit down to eat.  The end product is a salad.  Did both people accomplish that task?  Did they make the exact same salad?  The answers of course bring back the point that the 'how' didn't really matter, as long as the end was the same.  Teachers need to get creative with the 'how' today to really grab student interest and challenge them to think critically.

      Society is still evolving and will continue to evolve forever.  Students who live in the society will immediately change to have their needs met.  Teachers and educators too must change and evolve with them in order for learning to take place and not take a backseat as Dewey suggests.  Will this be challenging for some?  Of course it will, but things have always been this way.  Nothing today is different than yesterday.  Education evolves much as society does and it is the duty of those involved to be aware and open about evolving with it.

Teacher Intimidation...

Many teachers feel alienated from the school reform movement and prefer to remain uninvolved in these issues such as school governance, yet it is argued that true reform will not occur without the investment of teachers, the people charged with actually implementing change.  Why might some teachers choose not to be involved?  What reasons might you offer to encourage greater participation?  What would it take for you to see yourself as a change agent for school reform?

I think that many teachers are intimidated when it comes to school reform.  For many years, we have sat behind our desks and taught to the test just as our administrators indirectly asked us to.  When the budget was cut so drastically in the last legislative session, many teachers watched as their peers were forced to leave the profession.  The realization set in rather quickly that we should all be thankful to even have jobs in education.  This was an interesting feeling, especially since a few years prior the state was practically begging for teachers and calling a shortage. 

For true reform to take place, teachers will have to rise up and stand up to big government.  If we do not, then the changes taking place most likely will not represent our way of thinking concerning the education of today's youth.  I feel as an instructional leader the first place I would encourage my staff to get involved is locally.  By volunteering to be a part of the campus and/or district improvement committee(s), teachers might have a better understanding of the changes that are actually taking place.  If they do not agree with some of the ideas being tossed around it is a perfect place for them to speak up and be heard.  I encourage all to become involved at this level, but often teachers already have a lot on their plate and do not feel compelled to heap on any more.

For me to see myself as a change agent for school reform is something that will take time.  I have my ideas, just like anyone else, but really want to be an educated and prepared individual to address any major issues.  This program is my first step in becoming the person who will have a say in our student's education.  My own children are just entering the public school system and I want to ensure they receive the best as well.

Schooling as I have known it...

Evaluate the quality of schooling as you have known it.  Was it marked by the weaknesses identified by reformers in this chapter, or did you largely attend schools other than those that are being identified as deficient?  Do you have criticisms that school reformers have not identified?  How might schools in different neighborhoods fare in the reformers’ views of what counts as a school in need of reform?  How might the David School fare?  What ideological and political-economic insights might be drawn from this student assessment of the quality of their schools?

      As I have known it, schooling was much better than I really thought.  I went to a smaller school district growing up and did very well.  Once in college, I felt that my teachers did not care too much for students and scraped by doing the bare minimum to earn a paycheck in my little 'podunk' town.  The reality looking back now that I am an educator, is that the teachers in that small school worked their tails off.  We were held to very high standards and a lot was expected of us as students.  The biggest area we lacked was funding.  Some of the much larger schools in the area often did better then us academically (and athletically), but this was primarily due to money.  We could not afford the newest and latest gadgets.  I have not been out of school for that long, and we had five computers in the high school where I graduated from.  Working in a smaller district today, I see the students through the eyes that most of my own teachers looked through.  We make the best of whatever situation we are in.  We don't accept anything less than excellence from students, and they may not realize it today, but they will down the road. 

Too much, not enough...

Jane Roland Martin believes that schooling focuses on “productive processes” (rational, objective, generalizable knowledge) to the exclusion of “reproductive processes” (caring, subjectivity, emotional expression) and argues that the concepts of a liberal education and an “educated person” must change to reflect both these qualities.  What you do think of her assertion? How could you successfully incorporate both these ways of knowing and experiencing into the classroom? 

       Jane Roland Martin's belief that schools focus too much on the productive processes and not enough on the reproductive processes is right on point.  Today's schools are so much more than students learning the three r's.  Unfortunately we as educators still tend to look only at test scores or AEIS reports as a measure of our success.  Subjects like art and music are taking a backseat because of budgetary concerns and this (Martin would argue) is unacceptable.  Teaching the whole child should be our goal and as any "educated person" would tell you includes many other areas than just the core subjects.  We have spoken about hidden curriculum and I feel that this is one way to incorporate more reproductive processes into schools.  Other areas include higher order thinking skills specifically through the use of writing.  Writing in itself is often an underused tool that educators should incorporate into every area of academics.  The thought processes that go into writing spill over into every area of a well rounded student.  Also, mentioned in an earlier post is the balance between the two.  There cannot be too much of one or not enough of the other.  For students to truly be "educated" they should be able to incorporate both.

Teaching Implications and Groups

The authors of your Tozer book contended that individuals succeed or fail in our society not simply due to their native abilities and applied efforts, but importantly on the basis of their membership in one or more ethnic, gender, or economic groups.  If this is true, what are the implications for teaching, learning and schooling?  Support your position with evidence and reasoned argument. 

      I feel that a student's ethnic, gender, or economic group does play a part in their success.  The opposite is also true in my opinion; a student's 'group' does not play a part in their failure.  The problem that any student has in whether they learn or not is through the teaching they receive.  The other major player is parental support, or family support.  No matter what 'group' a student falls into, the expectations for him or her should not be changed.  They should remain high and challenge the student.  Teachers should be sensitive to differences without being biased by group differences (Tozer, Senese, &Violas, 2009).  The family of a student can and should play a very supportive role in their education.  We know that this isn't always the case.  The reality is, that students with parents who are educated themselves typically support their children more.  The 'groups' we are discussing here probably lack parents with education.  Of course this isn't the rule by any means, but a valid point none the less.

       The implications for teaching, learning, and schooling is awareness.  Everyone involved in the schooling process needs to be aware of individual student makeup.  Anyone who has ever given a standardized test and studied the results knows that the 'groups' we speak of are important markers to judge overall teaching and learning.  If only the Anglo students do well, the teacher better change the way they are presenting material!  Many educators understand this dilemma, but few I feel really put into practice.  It is easy to get 'comfortable' doing what we do and unfortunately students fall through the cracks.

Tozer, S. E., Senese, G., & Violas, P. C. (2009).  School and Society.  New York, NY:

Blue or Brown?

Consider Jane Elliot’s famous classroom experiment, the Discrimination Day exercise, and discuss what sense can be made of it today.  Was she taking unjustifiable risks with the minds and characters of her students? 

       The Discrimination Day exercise was a very interesting experiment.  Watching the videos and listening to the teacher/children really made me think how something like this could be used today.  I think that this exercise could be used in various formats in an effort to express to chidren tolerance as well as compassion.  When Jane Elliot placed students in this environment they had no true idea what was going on.  I feel that this was what made the lesson so successful.  These kids weren't thinking about why brown eyed students were worse or better, just that they had the power.  Being a white male, it puts a lot of today's racial profiling and discrimination into perspective.  Because I do not receive any type of discrimination, I could possibly not even realize the 'power' I have.  So the saying goes, "walk a mile in another man's shoes".

       I do not feel that Mrs. Elliot was taking unjustifiable risks with the minds and characters of her students.  The experiment she performed on them was nothing more than a truth concerning human nature.  The students played into her game perfectly and the lesson that was ultimately learned was worth far more than the students feelings getting hurt for a day or two.  Those that were upset I assure you were more tolerant in the future than they would have been without.