Bio: Gretchen Sutto - I am currently in the Master’s of Education program at Michigan State University concentrating on Literacy Education and Special Education. I teach middle school Spanish in Fenton, Michigan.
Bio: Sarah Lawrence - I am also currently in the Master’s of Education program via online concentrating on Literacy Education and Post Secondary Leadership. I teach fifth grade at an American International school in Shenzhen, China.
Sarah: The main reason this article spoke to me immediately is because is was written in such a straight forward, teacher friendly matter. I don’t know about the rest of you, but as a person who is teaching full time and grappling with the “theory of the month” that my school district sends our way, I really enjoy the vignettes because they bring the theory to life and help me see how I can actually apply it to my classroom practice.
I agree with Sheets that culture and cognition are inseparable and I am pleased to see that this is being dealt with finally in academic practices. I have taught in very different, diverse settings and each time I find that the “good teaching” that worked in one setting doesn’t necessarily perfectly fit in another. When I taught in an urban setting in Phoenix, I used a lot of collaborative group work and brought music and art into the classroom as much as possible. Also, the classroom was lively and filled with debate and movement. I now use much of the same in my classroom in China, but when I started the year off with the expectation that my students would be talkative and ready to immediately share their ideas, I was wrong. It was something we had to work up to and my natural approach to teaching was not necessarily the best fit for my students. I was wondering if any of you have ever noticed this in your own teaching careers?
One part of the article that as of late has been an ongoing theme at my school is the misconceived idea that quiet classrooms equal places of learning. My students always seem to be in the midst of “organized chaos”. I tend to switch things up often so we don’t always follow the exact same schedule from day to day. Also, where assignments are concerned, I encourage a lot of discussion and movement around the room. I want students to use the bulletin boards they’ve helped to create and to use each other as collaborators in their learning.
The ongoing debate at our school is that if there is so much movement and discussion, are the kids necessarily learning. My students’ projects are reflections of fifth grade work, but it is their work. They were part of the process from the beginning to the end. However, the bulletin boards and displayed projects around the school often are teacher created and teacher directed. They look nicer and based on appearance, look as though the students have learned more but if the students had very little control in their learning and simply followed directions, how much did they actually learn? I see my students grow so much through the process of building something to demonstrate their learning. They learn to communicate with one another, especially by working through their disagreements. Sure, I could interrupt them and put them back on track immediately but how will they ever learn to effectively overcome disputes? Sometimes the end project isn’t what they or I envisioned, but usually, when the students are given more time to reflect on the process, they create something amazing with a second opportunity.
My administrator often visits my classroom and points out the “extra” discussion that takes place during lessons. It reminded me of the vignette from this piece, “Helping with Seatwork”. I know he sees this as a distraction from his perspective and that I am unable to control my class. However, I often wonder that if I do it his way- stand up and deliver a lesson with very little input from my students, if they would develop as much in their character and effective communication. I try to encourage them to practice their English as much as possible, but why should Amy suffer the inability to comprehend a math problem when a bit of translation will make it clear for her?
I feel like I’m rambling a bit. What vignettes spoke to you the most? In what ways do you feel like you are practicing the diversity theory in your own classrooms? I think what this piece best exemplifies is the idea that, to be a culturally responsive teacher, having diverse literature or posters on the walls reflecting diversity is not enough. You must incorporate this theory into every aspect of your teaching. That idea in itself is very powerful.
Gretchen - Diversity Theory is the one that “spoke” to me the most while I was reading. Culture plays such an important role in education, and the teacher needs to understand his/her audience. I did not present information in the same way when I taught high school in a mixed-culture setting as I do now in a predominantly white middle school setting. Sheets states that Diversity pedagogy “clearly recognizes the powerful, active role students play in their learning.” I remember when I was earning my teaching certificate, we had to read “The First Days of School” by Harry Wong. In the book, Wong talked about the teachers going home refreshed and the students going home tired. I thought this was backwards when I first read it. I don’t remember ever going home exhausted when I was a student. But I did remember teaching my first class for my mid-tier that I needed to take a nap after because I was so tired! Then I realized that I, the teacher, was doing all of the work. I was trying to force the information into the brains of my students. Have you ever felt like this? Like you were the ones doing all of the work while the students just took a backseat to their learning? Wong understood that this thought-process was backwards. The students should be the ones doing the work. They should not be passive in their studies, just killing time in school before it was time to go home. Instead, the should be actively learning. I have been a big fan of this ever since I really understood what it meant. Now, my classroom is full of partner work, projects to prove their understanding, and lots of conversation in the target language (for a Spanish class). Students are constantly talking in the language, writing and reading stories, and just plain communicating - all of which take a lot more work on their part than just completing a worksheet! A lot of other teachers hear that my class is louder than the others, and they think that is a bad thing. But how can I teach a language without all of the communication? I call my classroom “Controlled Chaos,” and it works well. What kinds of activities do you use in your classroom to have the students be active as opposed to passive in their education? The example of the non-Spanish speaking teacher and Pedro really struck a chord with me. This year, I have a seventh grade student from Iran who speaks Farces. She is struggling to learn English and Spanish at the same time, which is no easy task. While the other students understand what a “cat” is, they have a visual in their heads and can easily understand that in Spanish, a cat is “gato.” Well, this student does not know what the word “cat” is, so “gato” has no meaning to her. The other students in my class have really taken this student under their wings by looking through magazines and on the Internet to make picture cards for her. So now she can visually see what a cat looks like, and the word “gato” has meaning to her. The students understand that there is a Language Learning Barrier, and they have taken it upon themselves to make sure that she feels safe and important in the classroom. Do you have any experiences like this? Did any of the examples or vignettes strike a similar chord with you? Diversity Theory is so important to teachers. We must remember our audience and teach to it. Each age and culture group has its own identity. If we don’t recognize this, we will be doing all the work while students take a backseat to their education.
Sarah - What kinds of activities do you use in your classroom to have the students be active as opposed to passive in their education? This is one of my favorite questions in education. This year I am “The Team” as the only fifth grade teacher, and I miss the collaboration that happens with learning teams. I have spent the last three years focusing on strategies that help second language learners comprehend academic content. First, I am constantly using the obvious: visuals, video clips, music, and acting out. I also use a lot of sentence starters to help students frame their responses. Often this tiny step makes a big difference for the kids who aren’t sure where to begin to demonstrate what they’ve learned. I’ve also started a study buddy group in the classroom. Everyone has a partner and their job after learning the material themselves is to ensure that their partner equally understands it. This has been such an asset in the classroom because the children have begun to be concerned not only with personal gain but gains within the whole classroom. Even though our classroom is English only, I still encourage interpreting because most of my students, like your student from Iran, are learning English as a third language. Student have collaborated on every science unit to create a Mandarin/English glossary that they will be adding to moodle for next year’s fifth graders. One other activity that has helped immensely with active learning is our “Great Walls of Learning”. Throughout the year a group of three students is assigned to a wall for each content area. They decorate the bulletin boards, choose the projects they want to display, create the word wall and create a concept map that demonstrates the “Big Ideas”. The kids have really taken this project in and have ownership for it. Also, it’s build community in the room because the kids see the classroom as their own. They love showing guests “Their Wall” and they do an excellent job because they are allowed to use the walls during all quizzes, projects, etc. What do you do to promote active learning?
Dong - Hi, Sarah, I totally understand your situation in China, because I am also experiencing the different culture/idea about education here in the States. In China, educators always think we need to give the students knowledge, just like filling up a container. The much you give them, the more they should get. However, in the States, it is the opposite way. Students are always encouraged to think and share their own idea about a topic/problem. At the beginning of my teaching here, I was always frustrated that the students were always talking during my teaching. I was unhappy, feeling being unexpected. Later on, I found that they were talking about something more or less related to the language points or cultural phenomena we were learning. Sometimes, through their discussion, they get a very good way to remember a Chinese character, like a funny story, etc. I want to say that don’t be frustrated, and keep doing what your are doing. I really like your example of the student learning math through English. It is like an immersion program. We also have this kind of Chinese program in my school districts here. I know how fantastic it is.
Hi, Gretchen, i love your example of the girl from Iran in your class learning the word “cat” in Spanish. I am also teaching a foreign language here in the U.S., and I had the same feeling as you. However, the difference between our teaching is that your target language has more context here in the States (a lot of people speak Spanish), but my target language does not. So, it is especially important, for me to create a Chinese speaking environment in my classroom. The culture plays a very important role here.
Dong Feng - This article really works for me as a Mandarin teacher in a different country. The Diversity Pedagogy Theory links culture, cognition and schooling together, which is especially important in my class. First, it is very important to know the diversity of your students, which was a big challenge for me since we usually do not do in China. In China teachers always teaching all the students using the same strategy, and follow the same national curriculum traditionally. Traditionally educators think there are certain amount of knowledge that the students need to know, so they always give the students the knowledge, just like filling a container. Although we are actually making changes in our education, I still got a big shock when I first arrived here and teach in an American school. The students are culturally much more diverse that students in China, since there are a huge amount of immigrants in the States. Also, students’ learning styles are very different. Above all, I was really struggling at the first year of my teaching, and gradually, I get used to it. Second, learning Chinese here is very difficult for the students, because it is totally different language and there is no such a context for them to use/practice the target language outside my classroom. In this way, the culture plays an very important part. For example, when I explain the character for GOOD in Chinese, which has two parts, a symbol for female, and a symbol for son, I need to explain the traditional culture in ancient China. At that time, people always do agriculture and males played a very important role since they are stronger than women. So in ancient time, people prefer to have a son than a daughter because they think the son can help doing agriculture more than a daughter. (Just in ancient China, not modern time) When our ancestors created the characters for GOOD, they put FEMALE and SON together, meaning when a lady has a son, it is very GOOD. Another aspect for culture diversity in Chinese language class is that there is no such a context that the students can practice their language, so cultural experience like field trip to a Chinese restaurant shows great importance. Also, activities like calligraphy writing helps a lot for them to practice Chinese characters. Above all, I think this article really helped me, and I enjoyed it.
Gretchen - Dong - Thanks for sharing a bit about Chinese symbols and how you go about teaching it. I love languages and have always been curious as to how you would go about introducing symbols to students who have not had previous experience with them. It makes perfect sense to me now that two (or more?) symbols ar put together to make one word. Very cool!
Friday, February 4, 2011
Thursday, February 3, 2011
Pedagogy of Poverty
Emily Dalgleish:
One of the things that got me thinking in this article was the apparent social construction of the pedagogy of poverty. Since, according to the author, this pedagogy has largely been socially constructed, then it follows that the solution would also lie in changing the minds of what parents, community, and the general public assume teaching to be.
This can be quite difficult, as my own experience has proven. While teaching second grade several years ago, our school used a phonics based “word study” program to serve as the students’ spelling curriculum. The parents had a great deal of difficulty adopting this new method, mostly because it did not look at all like the traditional themed word list with a Friday spelling test. It took many letters home, conferences, phone calls, and proven benefits in their children’s reading and writing before the parents were even partially onboard. I think part of what was so difficult for the parents was that they were used to the traditional format; after all, this is what they grew-up with. I expect reformers in the move against the pedagogy of poverty experience this resistance on a much grander scale.
After reflecting further on this article, another growing aspect the pedagogy of poverty is its implications in the suburban classroom as the school of choice initiative spreads. A friend and colleague of mine has experienced an ever-increasing number of urban students in her classroom, and with this new influx of students, she has also experienced an accompanying rise in the number of behavior problems. The pedagogy of poverty affects suburban teachers and students as well. Suburban teachers must not assume that because they are not in urban schools, they are not subject to these harmful and erroneous pedagogical beliefs as well.
Finally, the author mentions many signs of “good teaching”. One of these was the use of heterogeneous groupings, since students will experience this type of grouping most commonly in real-life situations. My question concerning implementation is how this might be done in the most effective way. For example, when grouping students for guided reading groups, it makes the most sense to group them homogeneously for instruction purposes. How do you use heterogeneous groups? How might they be most effectively implemented?
Sarah Melling:
_Introductory Biography:_ Sarah Melling is a graduate student at
Michigan State University. She is completing her second year of
teaching in a fourth grade classroom at a private school in Monroe,
Michigan. She started out at this school last year and has since,
been the literacy specialist as well as a classroom teacher.
_Blog Entry:_
Reading the article from Martin Haberman, “The Pedagogy of Poverty Versus Good Teaching”, I was surprised and
interested in the difficulties for reform in schools. The picture I
formed while reading this article of a classroom that follows the
pedagogy of poverty was one with the teacher as a dictator demanding respect and attention from the students. The students make few decisions and as long as they follow the instruction from the teacher, then they succeed. Haberman explained that this is not successful learning because the students are not involved in genuine learning activities. I also found it interesting that within the
pedagogy of poverty, students can actually control the power by either rewarding teachers through compliance or punishing teachers by resisting. (pg. 4)
There are many concerns that arise with reform of the
pedagogy of poverty. Students are accustomed to the burden of their learning to be placed on the teachers since teachers are held
accountable for student success and conformity. With the change of student engaged lessons and activities they complete, students become accountable and responsible for what they learn. The article made it sound common that students at urban schools accept the pedagogy of poverty and provide resistance to new genuine learning activities.
I agree with Emily’s post about the change in her
spelling program and the resistance that she met with parents. It
seems that people enjoy seeing what they are familiar with, much like the students in urban schools. Activities that require students to be hands on or to construct their own knowledge often appear to
demand more effort. I could see why Emily’s students (or more likely parents) and students, previously familiar with the pedagogy of poverty instruction, would resist. As teachers, we see the benefits of these hands-on, engaging lessons and I often feel we have to sell it to rest of the world.
I was also interested in the signs of good teaching
that Haberman suggested. Many of these suggestions allowed students choices in their learning and involvement with issues of concern.(pg. 6)
I became eager to know if after these suggestions are implemented are students more likely to let go of their previous roles, under the pedagogy of poverty, as compliant students following directions.
Another sign that was suggested was the use of heterogeneous groups. I also wondered, like Emily, how this would be done in the most effective way. I tend to group my students by similar reading abilities but I do add a diversity of culture. I value the fact that my students need to read the material at their level of comprehension and I wouldn’t want a student to struggle and miss the important ideas. I am interested to see the views of others on the topic of heterogeneous groups, as well.
Siming Hu:
I am very glad that we chose this article: the pedagogy of poverty. It criticizes many of the prevailing current teaching methods as “poverty”, such as: giving information, asking questions, giving directions, making assignments, monitoring seatwork, reviewing assignments and giving tests. As a Chinese teacher in elementary school level, I should say I have used many of these and has seen these ways happening all over in my schools. Sometimes they work, sometimes not, and people never question about whether they are helpful or not, teachers do it because of others all do the same way.
I agree with Habermas in that it is not only the teachers’ responsibility to change, but also the whole school faculty, the community. I would say maybe the whole country, the council of American education, which is to blame. Under the current educating system, which classroom teachers are assigned to fixed teacher materials and frequent tests to pass, it could be really hard for teachers to help students with developing to be a good citizen, or practice those “good teachings” Habermas mentioned. I have talked to many teachers in the lounge, and many of them complained that they do not have time to do what they really want to do, because they have to do what they are asked to do first. Unless the whole nation realizes the problems for poverty pedagogy, essentials changes will not happen.
Another point I agree with Habermas is that teachers seem to be “decision makers”, tell students what to do, how to do it and allotting time and tasks, but in fact they are exhausted after one day’s teaching for the enormous energy they have to expose( voice, stares, directions) everyday. It is sarcastic but true that teachers are actually fragile as hostages: they are constantly judged by students by their compliance or non-compliance. One thing I always believe in life and teaching is that everything great must happen naturally rather than deliberately. Young people are naturally learners, they are curious about everything. What has deprived them from the interest of learning? The answer is boring, repetitive and directive learning tasks. Engaging students, establishing trusts rather than heavy disciplines, as Habermas suggests in his article, maybe one thing all the teachers need to work on.
Habermas discussed at the end the potential resistance of the alternatives to the pedagogy of poverty. At first, I was a little bit puzzled: why would not people change to make a better education? The author discussed about the detailed and specialized allocation of responsibilities in the whole educating system: teachers, parents, administrators and the community. It seems so true that when you are only responsible for one part of the whole system, then you could always blame others for the wrongs. Instead of teaching students to memorize things, to follow every directions and do not think for themselves, we would never start to teach students to be good citizens until each ‘part ” in the system considers themselves responsible for helping students become critical, creative and caring people.
After reading this article I feel kind of sad about the current educating system. Who is responsible for the prevalence of pedagogy of poverty? How can teachers start with the change to the alternatives of it?
Xiaochen Song:
As a teacher, I strongly believe that every child in my class can be the future president of the United States. You think it is too exaggerate? Actually, I think so too. What I want to say is that every single one of my student will become something great. Mary can be a great scientist; Sydney will turn into a doctor; John will make a good farmer; and Amanda can be a great housewife. See, they are good at different things but all of them will be great in living a life, which is what they learned from school.
School should be a place of learning, for both teacher and students. On the contrary, pedagogy of poverty holds the "logic" that "teaching is what teachers do. Learning is what student do". It considers teacher as the carrier of knowlege but neglects his role as a guide and a supporter. It did not take students' motivation and differentiation into
consideration but treat all of them as one. Without acknowledging students' interests and ability, students' learning initiative can be highly decreased which causes ineffective learning. Therefore, teachers should be reflective participator and learner too. For
example, before the class, a teacher should learn the information about the subject he teaches, and keep up with the new ideas; during the class, he needs to reflect his instruction style according to students' action in order to keep students engaged in learning; after class, he should reflect on the virtues and weakness of his class, get suggestions from experienced teachers so his pedagogy can be improved. In this way, teachers and students can grow together and together, they will build a learning-centered school.
School should be family, not military. Pedagogy of Poverty believes that "when students follow teachers' directions, appropriate behavior is being taught and learned." This statement is partially right. Let's imagine a school as a country, school rules, can be seen as country laws. There are criminals, who broke the law because their lack of morality. Therefore, rules can only teach a person to a certain extent whereas moral virtues make a good citizen. It is not wrong to teach students to follow the rules but at the same time, rules need to be explained and taught with ethics because what we want are good citizens but rule followers.
School should be a place for students to discover their passion in learning. Students' potentials and learning ability vary, so it is true that "Some students will end up at the bottom of the class while others will finish at the top." However, when I closely analyze the behavior of my "behinders" I find that there is one common thing that they are short of-passion in learning. Take my own class as an example, Ron is a boy that gives me headache all the time. No matter what activity we have, he always gives me that "I don't care" look and he loves chatting with his neighbors. Therefore I pulled his chair out from his group and told him that he needs to be sitting by himself. One day, we were learning about shapes and he happened to be very quiet and participate. I was so thrilled so I praised him in front of the whole class and gave him a "caught being good ticket." After that, I asked the whole class to give him a big hand. Ron's expression didn't change much, but I could sense his excitement and since then, he has never misbehaved in my class. Ron's example is not too bad and there are lots of at-risk students who behave hundreds of times worse than him. However, from his case, I learned that there is a "bunny" in EVERY child some of them are discovered and developed but some of them are hidden deeper and deeper then vanished. Therefore, before we teach students knowledge, we should teach them to believe in themselves. Same approach cannot work for all of them but we will never go wrong with encouragement+reason+praise, you will be surprised by what a happy child you get.
In the article "Pedagogy of Poverty" Habermas mentioned various kinds of good teaching. It is not hard to see that good teaching happens when meaningful connections are made. There are connections between students and their personal life (Whenever students are directly involved in a real-life experience, it is likely that good teaching is going on ), connections between learning and society (Whenever students are involved with applying ideals such as fairness, equity, or justice to their world, it is likely that good teaching is going on); and connections between abstract knowledge and realistic life (Whenever students are involved in reflecting on their own lives and how they have come to believe and feel as they do, good teaching is going on ).
The "Pedagogy of Poverty" article inspired me that as much as we teach knowledge, we should teach it in a way that students will find its meaning in their life, as Habermas says :"Good teaching transcends the particular grade or subject and even the need for lessons with specific purposes."
Concern: I am teaching Chinese Language and Culture. Sometimes I find it challenging to connect culture with my students' culture since Chinese people and American people think differently. Sometimes, my students will think some Chinese culture doesn't make sense. For example: they think it is weird that Chinese women do not change their maid names when they get married. However, I am also thinking that for cultures that have big contrast, are there bigger impact on students? How can I use these issues to intrigue my students' thinking?
Engaged Pedagogy: Joel Berends, Ji An, Caitlin Hanly and Lin Cheng
Bios:
CH: My name is Caitlin Hanly and I am in the Masters of Arts in Education program at MSU. My concentration area is science and math education, and I am excited to finish my MA in August! Currently, I teach 8th grade Physical Science in Fairfax County, Virginia.
JB: I’m Joel Berends, MA candidate at MSU with a concentration literacy and language. I am a teacher of grades 10 and 11 English at SPH International, which is located just outside of Jakarta Indonesia.
JA: My name is Ji An. I am in the MATC program at MSU. I’m a sencond grade Chinese immersion classroom teacher in Lansing School District, mostly teaching Chinese language and culture, math, and social study.
LC:I am Lin Cheng, I am enrolled in MATC program at MSU as well. Currently I am also teaching IB Chinese language and culture in a high school in Detroit area. The grade I am teaching is 9th, 10th and 11th.
CH:
As I read through the engaged pedagogy piece, I am caught by a couple of quotes that really get my attention, some in a good way and some that make me cringe.
First, in the opening paragraph, it is stated that “our work is not merely to share information but to share in the intellectual and spiritual growth of our students.” I found this to be an excellent “summary” of my daily classroom activities. Knowing that 8th grade (what I teach) is a year of tremendous social and personal growth, I am wondering how your age levels compare to this quote. Do you find that the growth of students is limited to intellectual, or do you feel as though your classroom is a place for this personal growth as well?
Additionally, as a science teacher, one of the major pushes (and focuses of current reform) is to “teach for understanding”. I believe that this ties in to the pedagogy discussion quite nicely, and especially with this engaged pedagogy. While I feel the focus of this document is more around the teaching of the whole student, it also mentions that it is critical to be “an active participant, not a passive consumer.” What does this mean in your classrooms? To me, it means that students are exploring and “playing” with the information as opposed to sitting, trying to digest the information being lectured to them. Is that true across disciplines? I think Joel, you are in the fine arts department, which means likely much of your work is this hands on “play”, or experimenting, or practicing. Do you feel any connection to this quote?
One part of the document which I very strongly agree with is on page 17, where the “mini-kingdom” is mentioned (about half way down the page). Growing up, I do feel as though I had some dictator type teachers, and I know it was these classes where I did not retain as much information or understanding. I also partially feel as though there many be times teachers need to exercise this “power and authority”- though not go as far as making a classroom into a “mini-kingdom”. One of my major concerns in my classroom is that some of my students do not take me seriously- I am 24 years old, I get mistaken for 8th graders (I was once asked by another faculty member for my hall pass, as she did not realize I WORKED THERE!), and I am not a loud, “scary” person. With this, sometimes I feel as though I need to ensure my students know that while I am there to support their learning, I am also there to ensure they are learning, and occasionally boundaries need to be set. What do you think about this? Is there a time and place for the “mini-kingdom”, or even just this authority? Does the authority tie into the rest of the engaged pedagogy theory? I believe that teachers can have authority while still ensuring students learn in a comfortable environment. I would love your thoughts.
Finally, I will leave you with the quote that caught me the most in this document. It states that, “While it is utterly unreasonable for students to expect classrooms to be therapy sessions, it is appropriate for them to hope that the knowledge received in these settings with enrich and enhance them.” How do you respond to this quote?
I really glad we've chosen to discuss this particular pedagogy. This piece struck many chords in me. Hooks's description of current educators terrified me, especially since I see myself augmenting the horrors. Sadly, I've teetered precariously in many a place where book knowledge trumps social interaction (p.16). The field of academia allures me in prideful ways, in ways which slight meaningful, edifying interaction. Despite my efforts, I too unknowingly hold contradictory ideals "that education should be liberatory" and yet sterile enough to give me "the luxury and privilege" of the absence of any self-actualized requirement" (pp. 19, 17).
I'm also a victim of the pitfalls of compartmentalization. My life and often my belief systems are guarded as separate from the classroom. As a teacher of writing for example, I often expect students to take risks I am unwilling to prescribe to myself. I love writing, especially my writing, and I deeply care about the thoughts and feelings I put to the page, and I have never enjoyed sharing my writing with anyone. I have no doubts my sharing my writing, and even my apprehensions would serve as a great comfort to my students.
"Any classroom that employs a holistic model of learning will also be a place where teachers grow, and are empowered by the process" (p.21).
In my own pedagogy piece I mentioned that "this is where I need to be put and stay put," and "that I often find myself realizing that I’m neglecting to do the things I love and that bring me joy. I pour myself out, silently convinced that it’s selfish to replenish the vessel." Engaged pedagogy is something I deeply want and need. I think if we're honest, this is something we all desire: growth and empowerment, self-actualization.
My questions for you are:
Do you at all feel as if you compartmentalize your teaching? If so, how?
CH:
This is an interesting question, as I think “compartmentalize” can be taken in so many different ways. In the way you describe as teaching being almost like a separate portion of your life, I do not think I do- I often tell my students stories from my own school experiences, and try to make myself human to them. While I do relate to your sense of discomfort in sharing your written work with others, I think there are other ways you can take risks in merging the two separate pieces of your life. I find that putting myself out there is not reason for students to judge who I am as an adult, but rather to question (in a positive way) my challenges and see the growth that I’ve gone through. On the other hand, I do compartmentalize my teaching in terms of the difference periods throughout the day. I use our homeroom time to check in with students in more of a “whole student” way- I spend this time engaging in the conversations of life outside of school- are there family problems, do they love sports, did they just start playing the trombone, etc. That is very different from my normal class periods where I do focus on the academics and leave the personal stuff aside (perhaps why I find the quote regarding “therapy sessions” to be so intriguing). I think my students have begun to realize that classroom time is academic, but I am committed to their overall growth and well being, and if they come to me for help of any kinds I will always do my best to help. So, in answer to compartmentalization, I think we probably all do this, whether conscious or not- some just in different ways than others.
JA:
This is a great question. Well, I try to not compartmentalize in my teaching, as well as construct myself.
I totally agree with that "Any classroom that employs a holistic model of learning will also be a place where teachers grow, and are empowered by the process" (p.21).
I think it’s normal to have self-actualized problems sometimes as an adult. At least, I always feel like I am exploring myself in different ways. Thich Nhat Hanh emphasized that “the practice of a healer therapist, teacher or any helping professional should be directed toward his or herself first. Because if the helper is unhappy, he or she cannot help many people”(p.15). When I read this piece, I feel like “do we really have to require ourselves that much?” I could try, but I don’t think I could reach that level at all! It shouldn’t be limited to the emotion part only, but wholeness in teaching, I think, is and ideal condition that is hard to reach perfectly.
I like how Caitlin is trying to be a human being in front of her students. I also like the idea you separate your teaching into different periods. I agree that we’d better compartmentalize teaching from other stuff during academic time. Thanks for sharing.
What do you make of all this soul food talk? What place does developing belief frameworks and the entirety of a human being have in your classrooms?
CH:
Like I said in response to your question above, I think that the classroom, during academic classes, should be a place for primarily academic learning. In one of the other pedagogy pieces, I believe “Poverty Pedagogy”, it discussed using mistakes as learning experiences. This was a point I agree with. When going back to the Engaged Pedagogy piece, I believe it is important to establish a comfortable classroom environment more so than specifically discussing these belief, or “whole student” issues. If students know that the classroom is safe and the teacher is open, the will be that much more comfortable to make mistakes, learn from them and truly learn about themselves as well as the content.
Have either of you considered professorship? If so, would you break ranks?
CH:
Professorship...no! Well, yes. It’s tricky. I love the age group that I work with now- the 8th graders allow me to put into practice everything that I have been taught. I am not sure I would like working with older students since I really enjoy the relationship building, social aspect of my job. I have thought about teaching one class as a summer extra money gig, but again, I’m not sure it would be fair to my students to have someone not fully committed teaching them. Have you?
JB: The thought has crossed my mind on a number of occasions but for now I’m teaching high schoolers and I love what I do. I am already a bit of a head case, and, if given the opportunity to teach at the collegiate level, I truly fear I would be no better than the detached, dichotomous educators described in the piece. Passing information and pushing publishing does not appeal to me. I was, however, attracted to the sort of positive deviance in the sort of educating going on during the development with Women’s Studies, perhaps I could, in the not so near future, be a part of something like that, bringing a buzz of engaged education to college campuses.
CH:
Joel, your honest self reflection is admirable. While I do not know you, I feel as though I do after reading your questions and answers to this posting. I am surprised by your fear of being a professor. Your seeming confidence in yourself is exactly how I view professors (and I try not to stereotype!)- intelligent, confident, and wanting to pass along something in order to benefit others. In our email exchanges and here, you have provided me with positive feedback, as well as thoughtful questions to consider as I, personally, engage in the information presented- and to me, that is what engaged pedagogy is about. See more at the very bottom of this blog!
_____________________________________________________________________________
“our work is not merely to share information but to share in the intellectual and spiritual growth of our students.”
JA:
I actually tutored American college students Chinese before I came to the US. I didn’t think teaching could be so hard until I came and started to teach little children. Perhaps when you know little children better (it seems like an advantage of a mom or dad teacher:)), they are easier to “deal with” than older students. Also, it’s great to take care of them in many ways other than teaching if you’re a classroom teacher. But I would not mind if I could teach older students one day. Your communication with them can be much deeper, and you probably could learn more things from them.
CH:
I find it interesting that you mention communicating on a deeper level with older students. That was the primary reason I switched from teaching Junior Kindergarten to 8th grade. In JK, I was able to have conversations, but none of them felt real or comfortable to me. It just wasn’t a good fit. What I realized I was looking for was the ability to hold a conversation on a deeper level, whether academic or guidance based. Now that I have been in 8th grade for a while, I can honestly say the conversations I have with my students are the highlights of my day. They really seem to enjoy the conversations as well, which is perhaps the most rewarding aspect of the age level!
JB:
Right out of the gate, this quote resounded in my ears. I remember my supervising teacher from early on in my student teaching telling me: "Joel, your students will not question your intelligence. No one will ever doubt that you have the brains for this job."
I remember many things, obscure things. My wife, students, and colleagues often wonder if my mind is a bank of old Jeopardy questions and answers, but this is how I operate. I think I know now what my cooperating teacher was referring to. She's a teacher deeply committed to her students above all else, and she shares herself shamelessly. She always makes the first vulnerable moves with her students. I do not do this naturally nor willingly. I even have difficulties being vulnerable with wife and closest friends.
It's all too easy for me to bestow information; it's difficult for me to come alongside students and share my processes of growth. This isn't how I want to be as a teacher. I want to be actively involved in the growth of both my students and myself, spiritually and intellectually.
CH:
I don’t think you’re alone in that by any means. In fact, I think many science teachers are there with you in being intellectual junkies but not fully aware of the best possible ways to relay their own work to their students. I think the biggest thing I have noticed across different classrooms in my school is that while being “human” to your students is great, the most important part of this is creating a comfortable classroom environment- one where students can mess up and not be afraid, or write a really “bad” poem and rather than being afraid to sharing it, looking forward to the opportunity to gain feedback and help enhancing their work. There are so many ways to create this safe environment, I think the main goal is to find a way that suits you. If you are uncomfortable sharing yourself personally, then there are certainly other ways to create the environment you want- how, I’m not sure, but I know there are!
JA:
Joel, it’s ok if you don’t want to share personal life with your students. I didn’t know that teachers could share themselves personally before I came to the US. We rarely joked with our teachers before high school. I still loved them and respected them. They were desired to be admired sometimes because they were mysterious. It’s fun to be a mysterious and cool person.
The more I teach, the more I think teachers need to be actors. I always keep my spirit high to make students excited about learning, even when I am upset in life. I made up stories to draw the topic I was about to teach, to make them interested in the topic. You can always find other ways to build your relationships.
JB: Caitlin, I think your spot on with the importance of environment, but I think I could establish comfort much more readily if and when I’m willing to connect with students on a more holistic level. And, Ji An, I definitely tend to be an actor in the classroom. As far as my students know, I spend every waking hour of my life reading, viewing, and talking about Shakespeare and running marathons. Is this an accurate or even a healthy depiction of who I am? Probably not so much, but it sure is fun to go along with.
It is critical to be “an active participant, not a passive consumer.” What does this mean in your classrooms?
JB:
It means: making poetry instead of teaching about poetry, reading books empathetically instead of rationally, learning the power structures of grammar rather than solely for the sake of correctness, learning a work contextually instead of in a vacuum, doing as opposed to talking about how something is done, finding meaning rather than literary rigmarole.
CH:
Joel, I love your specific, detailed answer to this question. It really allows me to envision your teaching and classroom rather than give vague, uninterested answers. I think the “doing as opposed to talking about how something is done” is the key for me in my classroom. In fact, in my other course, we are talking about the meaning of the word “understanding” and what can be done to achieve understanding. I think this action (and know why you’re doing this) is critical in the students understanding of the content being learned.
Is there a time and place for the “mini-kingdom”, or even just this authority?
“While it is utterly unreasonable for students to expect classrooms to be therapy sessions, it is appropriate for them to hope that the knowledge received in these settings with enrich and enhance them.” How do you respond to this quote?
JB:
Personally, I find any sort of "mini-kingdom" to be a sad a lonely place. This is not to say that I don't try to make my own kingdom come on a daily basis, but I think I'd much rather seek a student-centered kingdom because although it's nice to be in control, it's much nicer to not have to listen to the barking of my own voice. Any sort of kingdom I create will be of very little benefit if not created with the help of my students. Working together to create a class culture binds teacher and students alike in mutual respect for one another, making the classroom a harbor for productivity and meaning. Students are seeking something, and what they seek is much more akin to a meaningful relationship than it is the content I often try to push. I can cram content into my small little world but such a world has no meaning, no benefit until I make a space where students feel they can freely step in and stay a while.
CH: Joel, I think the only response to this I have is “agreed”! You were able to expand on this topic much more clearly than I was- thanks!
JA:
“To teach in a manner that respects and cares for the souls of our students is essential if we are to provide the necessary conditions where learning can most deeply and intimately begin.” (p.13). Unfortunately, I did not realize that when I began to teach. There used to be a lot of classroom management problems in my class. I focused on building up my authority by emphasizing the rules, being strict to the disciplines. Once I focus on one thing too much, I cannot spare my mind to other things, such as knowing more about the children, and loving them, especially when I am not a mother yet. As a classroom teacher, the more I know my students, the more empathy and love I have for them. I share my feeling more, and try to figure out their feelings too. In this way, I notice that they are doing better in many ways. I think children at 6 or 7 are very kind innocent. They mostly have empathy to sadness. However, they are not very good at judging people’s feelings as adults. What I usually do is to talk with them with heart, and show my feelings through my expressions and tones exaggeratedly. Once they know my feeling, they usually show that they are caring.
Since part of engaged pedagogy is about the communication between souls with students, I come up with a question:
What do you mean by “professional”? How to be professional when you teach?
CH:
I think the word “professional” can have a variety of meanings. To a businessman, it might mean to speak with proper grammar, dress appropriately and carry ones’ self with “class”. To a plumbing, it might mean being on time, being honest in diagnosing problems and being courteous. To a teacher, I believe being professional means engaging with students in an appropriate way to enhance their learning. A “professional” teacher would not sit back, hand out work sheets or lecture all day. Rather they would, as the engaged pedagogy piece implies, get to know their students unique needs and teach in a way that suits the students, ensuring that the classroom is a place for learning for all, students and teachers alike. This professionalism in teaching, unfortunately does not stop with the daily classroom learning however. Professionalism as a teacher includes building relationships within the school communities, willingness to share ideas with other teachers and communicating respectfully with parents. I think the best way to be professional as a teacher is to treat everyone- students, colleagues, administrators, parents, etc, with respect but also to treat them as the individuals they are.
JA:
Yes, there are academical professionalism, attitude professionalism, social professionalism, etc. I was just confused about the social part. Many teachers had told me “take it easy”, “don’t take it personal”, “stay out of teaching after school” and so on. The truth is, when teaching is part of your life, it’s hard to just “get out of it”. It sometimes makes me feel proud or frustrated. I don’t know if this kind of problems belong to the professionalism part.
JB:
Teaching is a profession. I think I often forget this notion and often wrap myself up in feeling under-appreciated along with my colleagues. I like what Caitlin refers to with regard to relationship. I think my professional role, as the adult world sees it, has to do with the sort of relationships I establish with colleagues, the administration, parents, and the greater community; however, I think my profession by and large concerns the way I conduct myself in the classroom and this could look like any number of things but should look like a few key elements. To me, the profession of teaching demands: I know my stuff and know how to share it in palatable and meaningful ways; I’m sensitive-- culturally and otherwise; I’m a facilitator (especially at the high school level where independence should, in my opinion, reign supreme); I’m accessible, and I’m willing to challenge and be challenged. The list goes on, but I think few people understand what teaching really is and should be in a professional sense because in the end we’re advocates for the growth of children and young people, demographics often without means or understanding for self-advocacy. Too often our role is defined by policy or communities in ways which indirectly support young people; however, I believe that our profession should be determined with students established as the source for our understanding our roles. So to gauge whether I’m professional when I teach, I think you’d have to check with my students, but please do not give them stuffy criteria for judging what is or is not professional.
_____________________________________________
CH:
I think this blog has not only been a discussion of engaged pedagogy, but also allowed me to experience this engagement myself. Through thoughtful questions and answers with classmates, I have been engaged with the content and able to express my thoughts, opinions and interpretations of the content at hand. To me, this is what the engaged pedagogy is all about; not the reading of the article or the passive reflection writing, but the ability to engage in conversation with others and create meaningful discussions to enhance my own learning. I also see this blog as a “safe place”, as I have mentioned before, where I can speak freely on the topics, ask questions for clarity and not be afraid to be corrected. In this sense, I believe my group members to be creating a space (through their feedback and comments to my questions) where I feel comfortable enough to engage in learning. To me, this blog is a perfect example of engaged pedagogy. How do you all feel about the conversation we’re having and it’s practical application to the material we’re discussing? Is it realistic to expect our students to engage of this sort of conversation? Are they motivated to do so on their own? If not, what can we as teachers do to help get them engaged?
JA
To be honest, I did not understand the engaged pedagogy at first. After reading through all your conversations, I got to know more about it. Besides, the way that we are discussing with examples in real teaching makes the pedagogy beyond the theoretical level. This is exactly the way I’d like to learn. I didn’t know that this activity could be so helpful! Thanks to Cathleen.
I agree with Caitlin that this blog is an example of the pedagogy we’ve been talking about. I think it could be a great way for students to develop their discussions on a certain topic (not the 2nd graders though:).
JB:
I think I’m really sold on this engaged stuff! I too have been honored by the things you both have shared. Your reflections on the piece, your thoughtful wisdom, and your experiences have brought a lot to our discussion of this piece. I think this has served as a valuable and formative means for communication and, consequently, has heightened our awareness of engaged pedagogy. In order for this sort of thing to work with our students, I think we must set the bar high.
Just as we have done, our students need to process through dialogue and learn to respond sincerely to one another. This sort of thing has proven to be meaningful for us and was relatively straightforward in its implementation, which means I have no excuses for not using it. I think with a bit of monitoring our students will be able to engage in discussions similar to this but the task cannot seem in the least bit contrived because students can smell that from miles away. When we do not carefully monitor our expectations, our students simply barf out cookie-cut answers, prompting nothing but a cycle of similar vomitted responses. In this case, perhaps an example would be appropriate.
CH: My name is Caitlin Hanly and I am in the Masters of Arts in Education program at MSU. My concentration area is science and math education, and I am excited to finish my MA in August! Currently, I teach 8th grade Physical Science in Fairfax County, Virginia.
JB: I’m Joel Berends, MA candidate at MSU with a concentration literacy and language. I am a teacher of grades 10 and 11 English at SPH International, which is located just outside of Jakarta Indonesia.
JA: My name is Ji An. I am in the MATC program at MSU. I’m a sencond grade Chinese immersion classroom teacher in Lansing School District, mostly teaching Chinese language and culture, math, and social study.
LC:I am Lin Cheng, I am enrolled in MATC program at MSU as well. Currently I am also teaching IB Chinese language and culture in a high school in Detroit area. The grade I am teaching is 9th, 10th and 11th.
CH:
As I read through the engaged pedagogy piece, I am caught by a couple of quotes that really get my attention, some in a good way and some that make me cringe.
First, in the opening paragraph, it is stated that “our work is not merely to share information but to share in the intellectual and spiritual growth of our students.” I found this to be an excellent “summary” of my daily classroom activities. Knowing that 8th grade (what I teach) is a year of tremendous social and personal growth, I am wondering how your age levels compare to this quote. Do you find that the growth of students is limited to intellectual, or do you feel as though your classroom is a place for this personal growth as well?
Additionally, as a science teacher, one of the major pushes (and focuses of current reform) is to “teach for understanding”. I believe that this ties in to the pedagogy discussion quite nicely, and especially with this engaged pedagogy. While I feel the focus of this document is more around the teaching of the whole student, it also mentions that it is critical to be “an active participant, not a passive consumer.” What does this mean in your classrooms? To me, it means that students are exploring and “playing” with the information as opposed to sitting, trying to digest the information being lectured to them. Is that true across disciplines? I think Joel, you are in the fine arts department, which means likely much of your work is this hands on “play”, or experimenting, or practicing. Do you feel any connection to this quote?
One part of the document which I very strongly agree with is on page 17, where the “mini-kingdom” is mentioned (about half way down the page). Growing up, I do feel as though I had some dictator type teachers, and I know it was these classes where I did not retain as much information or understanding. I also partially feel as though there many be times teachers need to exercise this “power and authority”- though not go as far as making a classroom into a “mini-kingdom”. One of my major concerns in my classroom is that some of my students do not take me seriously- I am 24 years old, I get mistaken for 8th graders (I was once asked by another faculty member for my hall pass, as she did not realize I WORKED THERE!), and I am not a loud, “scary” person. With this, sometimes I feel as though I need to ensure my students know that while I am there to support their learning, I am also there to ensure they are learning, and occasionally boundaries need to be set. What do you think about this? Is there a time and place for the “mini-kingdom”, or even just this authority? Does the authority tie into the rest of the engaged pedagogy theory? I believe that teachers can have authority while still ensuring students learn in a comfortable environment. I would love your thoughts.
Finally, I will leave you with the quote that caught me the most in this document. It states that, “While it is utterly unreasonable for students to expect classrooms to be therapy sessions, it is appropriate for them to hope that the knowledge received in these settings with enrich and enhance them.” How do you respond to this quote?
I really glad we've chosen to discuss this particular pedagogy. This piece struck many chords in me. Hooks's description of current educators terrified me, especially since I see myself augmenting the horrors. Sadly, I've teetered precariously in many a place where book knowledge trumps social interaction (p.16). The field of academia allures me in prideful ways, in ways which slight meaningful, edifying interaction. Despite my efforts, I too unknowingly hold contradictory ideals "that education should be liberatory" and yet sterile enough to give me "the luxury and privilege" of the absence of any self-actualized requirement" (pp. 19, 17).
I'm also a victim of the pitfalls of compartmentalization. My life and often my belief systems are guarded as separate from the classroom. As a teacher of writing for example, I often expect students to take risks I am unwilling to prescribe to myself. I love writing, especially my writing, and I deeply care about the thoughts and feelings I put to the page, and I have never enjoyed sharing my writing with anyone. I have no doubts my sharing my writing, and even my apprehensions would serve as a great comfort to my students.
"Any classroom that employs a holistic model of learning will also be a place where teachers grow, and are empowered by the process" (p.21).
In my own pedagogy piece I mentioned that "this is where I need to be put and stay put," and "that I often find myself realizing that I’m neglecting to do the things I love and that bring me joy. I pour myself out, silently convinced that it’s selfish to replenish the vessel." Engaged pedagogy is something I deeply want and need. I think if we're honest, this is something we all desire: growth and empowerment, self-actualization.
My questions for you are:
Do you at all feel as if you compartmentalize your teaching? If so, how?
CH:
This is an interesting question, as I think “compartmentalize” can be taken in so many different ways. In the way you describe as teaching being almost like a separate portion of your life, I do not think I do- I often tell my students stories from my own school experiences, and try to make myself human to them. While I do relate to your sense of discomfort in sharing your written work with others, I think there are other ways you can take risks in merging the two separate pieces of your life. I find that putting myself out there is not reason for students to judge who I am as an adult, but rather to question (in a positive way) my challenges and see the growth that I’ve gone through. On the other hand, I do compartmentalize my teaching in terms of the difference periods throughout the day. I use our homeroom time to check in with students in more of a “whole student” way- I spend this time engaging in the conversations of life outside of school- are there family problems, do they love sports, did they just start playing the trombone, etc. That is very different from my normal class periods where I do focus on the academics and leave the personal stuff aside (perhaps why I find the quote regarding “therapy sessions” to be so intriguing). I think my students have begun to realize that classroom time is academic, but I am committed to their overall growth and well being, and if they come to me for help of any kinds I will always do my best to help. So, in answer to compartmentalization, I think we probably all do this, whether conscious or not- some just in different ways than others.
JA:
This is a great question. Well, I try to not compartmentalize in my teaching, as well as construct myself.
I totally agree with that "Any classroom that employs a holistic model of learning will also be a place where teachers grow, and are empowered by the process" (p.21).
I think it’s normal to have self-actualized problems sometimes as an adult. At least, I always feel like I am exploring myself in different ways. Thich Nhat Hanh emphasized that “the practice of a healer therapist, teacher or any helping professional should be directed toward his or herself first. Because if the helper is unhappy, he or she cannot help many people”(p.15). When I read this piece, I feel like “do we really have to require ourselves that much?” I could try, but I don’t think I could reach that level at all! It shouldn’t be limited to the emotion part only, but wholeness in teaching, I think, is and ideal condition that is hard to reach perfectly.
I like how Caitlin is trying to be a human being in front of her students. I also like the idea you separate your teaching into different periods. I agree that we’d better compartmentalize teaching from other stuff during academic time. Thanks for sharing.
What do you make of all this soul food talk? What place does developing belief frameworks and the entirety of a human being have in your classrooms?
CH:
Like I said in response to your question above, I think that the classroom, during academic classes, should be a place for primarily academic learning. In one of the other pedagogy pieces, I believe “Poverty Pedagogy”, it discussed using mistakes as learning experiences. This was a point I agree with. When going back to the Engaged Pedagogy piece, I believe it is important to establish a comfortable classroom environment more so than specifically discussing these belief, or “whole student” issues. If students know that the classroom is safe and the teacher is open, the will be that much more comfortable to make mistakes, learn from them and truly learn about themselves as well as the content.
Have either of you considered professorship? If so, would you break ranks?
CH:
Professorship...no! Well, yes. It’s tricky. I love the age group that I work with now- the 8th graders allow me to put into practice everything that I have been taught. I am not sure I would like working with older students since I really enjoy the relationship building, social aspect of my job. I have thought about teaching one class as a summer extra money gig, but again, I’m not sure it would be fair to my students to have someone not fully committed teaching them. Have you?
JB: The thought has crossed my mind on a number of occasions but for now I’m teaching high schoolers and I love what I do. I am already a bit of a head case, and, if given the opportunity to teach at the collegiate level, I truly fear I would be no better than the detached, dichotomous educators described in the piece. Passing information and pushing publishing does not appeal to me. I was, however, attracted to the sort of positive deviance in the sort of educating going on during the development with Women’s Studies, perhaps I could, in the not so near future, be a part of something like that, bringing a buzz of engaged education to college campuses.
CH:
Joel, your honest self reflection is admirable. While I do not know you, I feel as though I do after reading your questions and answers to this posting. I am surprised by your fear of being a professor. Your seeming confidence in yourself is exactly how I view professors (and I try not to stereotype!)- intelligent, confident, and wanting to pass along something in order to benefit others. In our email exchanges and here, you have provided me with positive feedback, as well as thoughtful questions to consider as I, personally, engage in the information presented- and to me, that is what engaged pedagogy is about. See more at the very bottom of this blog!
_____________________________________________________________________________
“our work is not merely to share information but to share in the intellectual and spiritual growth of our students.”
JA:
I actually tutored American college students Chinese before I came to the US. I didn’t think teaching could be so hard until I came and started to teach little children. Perhaps when you know little children better (it seems like an advantage of a mom or dad teacher:)), they are easier to “deal with” than older students. Also, it’s great to take care of them in many ways other than teaching if you’re a classroom teacher. But I would not mind if I could teach older students one day. Your communication with them can be much deeper, and you probably could learn more things from them.
CH:
I find it interesting that you mention communicating on a deeper level with older students. That was the primary reason I switched from teaching Junior Kindergarten to 8th grade. In JK, I was able to have conversations, but none of them felt real or comfortable to me. It just wasn’t a good fit. What I realized I was looking for was the ability to hold a conversation on a deeper level, whether academic or guidance based. Now that I have been in 8th grade for a while, I can honestly say the conversations I have with my students are the highlights of my day. They really seem to enjoy the conversations as well, which is perhaps the most rewarding aspect of the age level!
JB:
Right out of the gate, this quote resounded in my ears. I remember my supervising teacher from early on in my student teaching telling me: "Joel, your students will not question your intelligence. No one will ever doubt that you have the brains for this job."
I remember many things, obscure things. My wife, students, and colleagues often wonder if my mind is a bank of old Jeopardy questions and answers, but this is how I operate. I think I know now what my cooperating teacher was referring to. She's a teacher deeply committed to her students above all else, and she shares herself shamelessly. She always makes the first vulnerable moves with her students. I do not do this naturally nor willingly. I even have difficulties being vulnerable with wife and closest friends.
It's all too easy for me to bestow information; it's difficult for me to come alongside students and share my processes of growth. This isn't how I want to be as a teacher. I want to be actively involved in the growth of both my students and myself, spiritually and intellectually.
CH:
I don’t think you’re alone in that by any means. In fact, I think many science teachers are there with you in being intellectual junkies but not fully aware of the best possible ways to relay their own work to their students. I think the biggest thing I have noticed across different classrooms in my school is that while being “human” to your students is great, the most important part of this is creating a comfortable classroom environment- one where students can mess up and not be afraid, or write a really “bad” poem and rather than being afraid to sharing it, looking forward to the opportunity to gain feedback and help enhancing their work. There are so many ways to create this safe environment, I think the main goal is to find a way that suits you. If you are uncomfortable sharing yourself personally, then there are certainly other ways to create the environment you want- how, I’m not sure, but I know there are!
JA:
Joel, it’s ok if you don’t want to share personal life with your students. I didn’t know that teachers could share themselves personally before I came to the US. We rarely joked with our teachers before high school. I still loved them and respected them. They were desired to be admired sometimes because they were mysterious. It’s fun to be a mysterious and cool person.
The more I teach, the more I think teachers need to be actors. I always keep my spirit high to make students excited about learning, even when I am upset in life. I made up stories to draw the topic I was about to teach, to make them interested in the topic. You can always find other ways to build your relationships.
JB: Caitlin, I think your spot on with the importance of environment, but I think I could establish comfort much more readily if and when I’m willing to connect with students on a more holistic level. And, Ji An, I definitely tend to be an actor in the classroom. As far as my students know, I spend every waking hour of my life reading, viewing, and talking about Shakespeare and running marathons. Is this an accurate or even a healthy depiction of who I am? Probably not so much, but it sure is fun to go along with.
It is critical to be “an active participant, not a passive consumer.” What does this mean in your classrooms?
JB:
It means: making poetry instead of teaching about poetry, reading books empathetically instead of rationally, learning the power structures of grammar rather than solely for the sake of correctness, learning a work contextually instead of in a vacuum, doing as opposed to talking about how something is done, finding meaning rather than literary rigmarole.
CH:
Joel, I love your specific, detailed answer to this question. It really allows me to envision your teaching and classroom rather than give vague, uninterested answers. I think the “doing as opposed to talking about how something is done” is the key for me in my classroom. In fact, in my other course, we are talking about the meaning of the word “understanding” and what can be done to achieve understanding. I think this action (and know why you’re doing this) is critical in the students understanding of the content being learned.
Is there a time and place for the “mini-kingdom”, or even just this authority?
“While it is utterly unreasonable for students to expect classrooms to be therapy sessions, it is appropriate for them to hope that the knowledge received in these settings with enrich and enhance them.” How do you respond to this quote?
JB:
Personally, I find any sort of "mini-kingdom" to be a sad a lonely place. This is not to say that I don't try to make my own kingdom come on a daily basis, but I think I'd much rather seek a student-centered kingdom because although it's nice to be in control, it's much nicer to not have to listen to the barking of my own voice. Any sort of kingdom I create will be of very little benefit if not created with the help of my students. Working together to create a class culture binds teacher and students alike in mutual respect for one another, making the classroom a harbor for productivity and meaning. Students are seeking something, and what they seek is much more akin to a meaningful relationship than it is the content I often try to push. I can cram content into my small little world but such a world has no meaning, no benefit until I make a space where students feel they can freely step in and stay a while.
CH: Joel, I think the only response to this I have is “agreed”! You were able to expand on this topic much more clearly than I was- thanks!
JA:
“To teach in a manner that respects and cares for the souls of our students is essential if we are to provide the necessary conditions where learning can most deeply and intimately begin.” (p.13). Unfortunately, I did not realize that when I began to teach. There used to be a lot of classroom management problems in my class. I focused on building up my authority by emphasizing the rules, being strict to the disciplines. Once I focus on one thing too much, I cannot spare my mind to other things, such as knowing more about the children, and loving them, especially when I am not a mother yet. As a classroom teacher, the more I know my students, the more empathy and love I have for them. I share my feeling more, and try to figure out their feelings too. In this way, I notice that they are doing better in many ways. I think children at 6 or 7 are very kind innocent. They mostly have empathy to sadness. However, they are not very good at judging people’s feelings as adults. What I usually do is to talk with them with heart, and show my feelings through my expressions and tones exaggeratedly. Once they know my feeling, they usually show that they are caring.
Since part of engaged pedagogy is about the communication between souls with students, I come up with a question:
What do you mean by “professional”? How to be professional when you teach?
CH:
I think the word “professional” can have a variety of meanings. To a businessman, it might mean to speak with proper grammar, dress appropriately and carry ones’ self with “class”. To a plumbing, it might mean being on time, being honest in diagnosing problems and being courteous. To a teacher, I believe being professional means engaging with students in an appropriate way to enhance their learning. A “professional” teacher would not sit back, hand out work sheets or lecture all day. Rather they would, as the engaged pedagogy piece implies, get to know their students unique needs and teach in a way that suits the students, ensuring that the classroom is a place for learning for all, students and teachers alike. This professionalism in teaching, unfortunately does not stop with the daily classroom learning however. Professionalism as a teacher includes building relationships within the school communities, willingness to share ideas with other teachers and communicating respectfully with parents. I think the best way to be professional as a teacher is to treat everyone- students, colleagues, administrators, parents, etc, with respect but also to treat them as the individuals they are.
JA:
Yes, there are academical professionalism, attitude professionalism, social professionalism, etc. I was just confused about the social part. Many teachers had told me “take it easy”, “don’t take it personal”, “stay out of teaching after school” and so on. The truth is, when teaching is part of your life, it’s hard to just “get out of it”. It sometimes makes me feel proud or frustrated. I don’t know if this kind of problems belong to the professionalism part.
JB:
Teaching is a profession. I think I often forget this notion and often wrap myself up in feeling under-appreciated along with my colleagues. I like what Caitlin refers to with regard to relationship. I think my professional role, as the adult world sees it, has to do with the sort of relationships I establish with colleagues, the administration, parents, and the greater community; however, I think my profession by and large concerns the way I conduct myself in the classroom and this could look like any number of things but should look like a few key elements. To me, the profession of teaching demands: I know my stuff and know how to share it in palatable and meaningful ways; I’m sensitive-- culturally and otherwise; I’m a facilitator (especially at the high school level where independence should, in my opinion, reign supreme); I’m accessible, and I’m willing to challenge and be challenged. The list goes on, but I think few people understand what teaching really is and should be in a professional sense because in the end we’re advocates for the growth of children and young people, demographics often without means or understanding for self-advocacy. Too often our role is defined by policy or communities in ways which indirectly support young people; however, I believe that our profession should be determined with students established as the source for our understanding our roles. So to gauge whether I’m professional when I teach, I think you’d have to check with my students, but please do not give them stuffy criteria for judging what is or is not professional.
_____________________________________________
CH:
I think this blog has not only been a discussion of engaged pedagogy, but also allowed me to experience this engagement myself. Through thoughtful questions and answers with classmates, I have been engaged with the content and able to express my thoughts, opinions and interpretations of the content at hand. To me, this is what the engaged pedagogy is all about; not the reading of the article or the passive reflection writing, but the ability to engage in conversation with others and create meaningful discussions to enhance my own learning. I also see this blog as a “safe place”, as I have mentioned before, where I can speak freely on the topics, ask questions for clarity and not be afraid to be corrected. In this sense, I believe my group members to be creating a space (through their feedback and comments to my questions) where I feel comfortable enough to engage in learning. To me, this blog is a perfect example of engaged pedagogy. How do you all feel about the conversation we’re having and it’s practical application to the material we’re discussing? Is it realistic to expect our students to engage of this sort of conversation? Are they motivated to do so on their own? If not, what can we as teachers do to help get them engaged?
JA
To be honest, I did not understand the engaged pedagogy at first. After reading through all your conversations, I got to know more about it. Besides, the way that we are discussing with examples in real teaching makes the pedagogy beyond the theoretical level. This is exactly the way I’d like to learn. I didn’t know that this activity could be so helpful! Thanks to Cathleen.
I agree with Caitlin that this blog is an example of the pedagogy we’ve been talking about. I think it could be a great way for students to develop their discussions on a certain topic (not the 2nd graders though:).
JB:
I think I’m really sold on this engaged stuff! I too have been honored by the things you both have shared. Your reflections on the piece, your thoughtful wisdom, and your experiences have brought a lot to our discussion of this piece. I think this has served as a valuable and formative means for communication and, consequently, has heightened our awareness of engaged pedagogy. In order for this sort of thing to work with our students, I think we must set the bar high.
Just as we have done, our students need to process through dialogue and learn to respond sincerely to one another. This sort of thing has proven to be meaningful for us and was relatively straightforward in its implementation, which means I have no excuses for not using it. I think with a bit of monitoring our students will be able to engage in discussions similar to this but the task cannot seem in the least bit contrived because students can smell that from miles away. When we do not carefully monitor our expectations, our students simply barf out cookie-cut answers, prompting nothing but a cycle of similar vomitted responses. In this case, perhaps an example would be appropriate.
Wednesday, February 2, 2011
Critical Pedagogy: A Look at the Major Concepts - Peter McLaren
Cara Swanson, Megan Bigalke, Yun He
Megan Bigalke:
Megan is a Speech Language Pathologist who works in a public school that services students 0-6 years of age. This is her third year in the field and she loves it. She is taking the course TE 843 in order to finish her teaching certification and to support her love of being a lifelong learner.
Blog Entry:
Upon reading the article Critical Pedagogy: A Look at the Major Concepts, I was forced to look at the theories behind what we do as educators and how it impacts our students. It also examines the complex relationship between an individual and society. The author indicates that it is the general idea of critical educators that theories of schooling and lesson plans should be fundamentally based on providing a better life for all. Some of the aspects they consider are not only what academic subjects to focus on but also what aspects of class and culture to embrace in our teaching.
One concept that I found particularly interesting was the one of Hegemony. Hegemony generally means the conflict in which the group considered more powerful is able to persuade the group considered weak or oppressed to agree to terms that the powerful sets forth whether or not it is actually beneficial too. Therefore, the weak group is enforcing the authority of the powerful group over themselves. This can be seen in many classrooms where students are expected to blindly follow the teachings of the teacher and they do so, not necessarily realizing that they have a choice to question why and what they are being taught. As teachers, it is “easier” to lead our classrooms this way because we can at times be afraid of conflict. However, allowing students to question (within reason) the purposes of the material they are learning forces us to examine why we chose that subject material and to explain how it really is beneficial to their lives.
Cara Swanson:
Cara was a computer and English teacher for five years before moving to New York to pursue a career in corporate America. She is currently pursuing her Masters in Education in the hopes of getting back to her roots in teaching.
Blog Entry:
While reading this article, I found the author arguing that Critical theorists don’t see school just as somewhere students gather a bunch of facts and socialize but also where they become empowered and self-aware. This is a cultural setting, not social or strictly educational. It involves many aspects and characteristics or ingredients if you will that work with each other to create something. It is similar to the recycle sign or yin/yang where one thing becomes enveloped into the other so that there is no more blue and red, there is only purple.
Critical theorists also feel that education is bias based on certain similar factors which influence the teaching as well as the learning. Therefore, even though we are affected by governments, corporations, economics and politics, we then influence (as individuals) our students and their political and social viewpoints. An example is the idea that Christopher Columbus discovered America which was taught for centuries. Only recently is it being taught that actually he only discovered it for Spain as the Native American were in fact living here and the Vikings were here long before Columbus. When more focus was put on learning the history of Native Americans, and people started to look at the story from a different point of view, the argument for Columbus was finally questioned. Prior, there was no push for individual histories so the majority history (aka European discoveries) overtook the popular vote. Even though people are now beginning to engage thought into the history of the Native Americans and their involvement in this “discovery”, little is still told about the arrival (and eventual departure) of the Vikings and probably countless other individuals
He Yun
He Yun is a Chinese language and culture teacher in a public elementary school at Lansing Michigan. This is her second year of teaching and second year of teaching.
Blog Entry
Why? Why? Why?
While reading Critical Pedagogy: A Look at the Major Concept (by Peter Mclaren), I decided to name my article "why? why? why?" Critical pedagogy asks tons of questions. Why does knowledge get constructed the way it does?
While reading Critical Pedagogy: A Look at the Major Concept (by Peter Mclaren), I decided to name my article "why? why? why?" Critical pedagogy asks tons of questions. Why does knowledge get constructed the way it does?
why are some constructions of reality legitimated and celebrated by the dominant culture while others clearly are not? Why do our everyday commonsense understandings- our social constructions or "subjectives"- get produced and lived out? Why do some forms of knowledge have more power and legitimacy than others?
Critical educational theorists view school knowledge as historically and socially rooted and interest bound. Knowledge acquired in school- or anywhere, is never neutral or objective but is ordered and structured in particular ways. Therefore, critical pedagogy encourages teachers and students to reflect on school knowledge. Why do we learn this instead of that? How does students from minority groups and from mainstream society perceive this content?
This pedagogy speaks significantly to me as a Chinese. Grown up under Chinese education system, I never ask why we learn this knowledge instead of that knowledge. We just learn whatever appears in the national-standardized textbooks. Teachers are asked to teach whatever appears in the textbooks. We never discuss why this knowledge has to be on the textbooks. I agree with critical pedagogy that school knowledge are not objective. They are constructed in a certain way according to the mainstream culture. In China, every students has to learn about Political science from elementary schools to universities.Basically, it is about theories from Marxism and communism. This subject is always compulsory, no matter what background you are from. It is assumed that this subject is related to everyone. Most of the knowledge we learn is concerned of Han, the largest race in China. We seldom learn the cultures about the other 55 minority groups.
As a teacher in the US now, I am facing a more diverse situation. American society has many minority groups, including African Americans or any other migration families. When teachers teach, teachers should take all the students into consideration. Teachers should understand curriculum is to prepare students for dominant or subordinate positions in the existing society.
.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)