However, it is hard as an educator to constantly be changing with the times. Especially, with the many different perspectives there are regarding education. Teachers need to be flexible and open to new ideas; life-long learners. When there are differing perspectives, since I feel it is hard to be a little of all of them, that's where teamwork can benefit the students. Build off of working in teams collaboratively, accepting the best of each one of us. The number one concern should be what is best for kids.
Saturday, September 28, 2013
TE 818 History of Curriculum is still Changing...and Should Always. Theme 2 Final Thoughts
Throughout my readings of peers posts I tried to focus on the central theme of the History of Curriculum. In the Popekwitz article it is stated how curriculum began with roots from the church. I believe this was appropriate for the time period and research available. However, as the times changed, so did the curriculum. We are at a time where there is a plethora amount of research available stating that students need real life experiences and connections to their lives. Saying this, a one size fits all approach does not work for students. The information they need, needs to be up to date, using current resources and technology. This is a large change from the past. This is a large change from the past, where a one size fits all curriculum was easiest and perceived as best for the kids. In the future we may find more research and there will certainly be more technologies and focuses that may become more important with the time period. Curriculum is ever changing. As educators, we need to see that and embrace it.
Sunday, September 22, 2013
TE 818 Theme 2 - History of Curriculum in the U.S.
"There is little doubt, in short, that the field of curriculum is in a crisis of principle." (Schwab 126) This quote represents to me the fact that curriculum is always a topic of debate. Laws and policies are created with different views in mind that are often conflicting and restricting.While reading the articles of this week I found two common concepts that stuck out to me.
The first concept is that there are an endless amount of purposes and reasons that drive education. The History of Curriculum spoke of the various purposes throughout time, Perspectives on Four Curriculum Traditions speak of four views from a teachers standpoint, The Child and the Curriculum argues if schooling should be child-centered or academic focused, and finally The Practical: A Language for Curriculum speaks of the many characteristics that drive theory. In all of these articles there is argument for all sides. All of these arguments brings me back to the conversations from theme 1. What is the right principle of education? Should there be some sort of combination? Schwab says, "...a defensible curriculum or plan of curriculum must be one which somehow takes account of all these subsubjects which pertain to man. It cannot take only one and ignore the others; it cannot even take account of many of them and ignore one." It is clear that as time has passed, education has become more complex. Teaching began by experience, expanded to include civic rights, then to segmented academic disciplines. It is simple to see that as it becomes more complex it would be easy to find a time or situation that would prove each theory right in some fashion.
The second concept that stuck out to myself is that in some fashion the child should be part of the focus. It is not a new knowledge that students are able to learn more if they have some sort of real-life connection to the material. Even when the many theories are argued, they all speak towards the learner and how the information effects the learner. The question is do you start with the student or do you start with curriculum and alter it to work for the student. Dewey speaks of "continuous reconstruction." To me this meant that yes, we do have organized disciplines, but the teachers should constantly be reevaluating the information, even if unchanged, to find connections to the students own lives. With different generations there are different experiences, interests, and personal connections to the material. Dewey also stated later that a student, 'is told to think things out, or work things out for himself, without being supplied any of the environment conditions which are requisite to start and guide thought." This quote reminded me of many things that are taught in the Algebra curriculum. I am asking students to figure out problems when they can not see any real connection to why they should have to learn the information many times. And many times, even if I wanted to, it is impossible to give them real life connections because they are so extended from the students' own lives that the information still feels disconnected.
Throughout the theories I find myself to be the closest to a social behaviorist. I think students should be taught the disciplines but through investigation and critical thinking. If students are taught to be critical thinkers, they should ultimately be able to naturally find a way to succeed in the future.
Extension:
http://www.edutopia.org/blog/student-centered-learning-environments-paul-bogdan
This article speaks of change where a classroom is student centered. It also gives several resources to allow teachers to explore more into the idea of student centered learning.
The first concept is that there are an endless amount of purposes and reasons that drive education. The History of Curriculum spoke of the various purposes throughout time, Perspectives on Four Curriculum Traditions speak of four views from a teachers standpoint, The Child and the Curriculum argues if schooling should be child-centered or academic focused, and finally The Practical: A Language for Curriculum speaks of the many characteristics that drive theory. In all of these articles there is argument for all sides. All of these arguments brings me back to the conversations from theme 1. What is the right principle of education? Should there be some sort of combination? Schwab says, "...a defensible curriculum or plan of curriculum must be one which somehow takes account of all these subsubjects which pertain to man. It cannot take only one and ignore the others; it cannot even take account of many of them and ignore one." It is clear that as time has passed, education has become more complex. Teaching began by experience, expanded to include civic rights, then to segmented academic disciplines. It is simple to see that as it becomes more complex it would be easy to find a time or situation that would prove each theory right in some fashion.
The second concept that stuck out to myself is that in some fashion the child should be part of the focus. It is not a new knowledge that students are able to learn more if they have some sort of real-life connection to the material. Even when the many theories are argued, they all speak towards the learner and how the information effects the learner. The question is do you start with the student or do you start with curriculum and alter it to work for the student. Dewey speaks of "continuous reconstruction." To me this meant that yes, we do have organized disciplines, but the teachers should constantly be reevaluating the information, even if unchanged, to find connections to the students own lives. With different generations there are different experiences, interests, and personal connections to the material. Dewey also stated later that a student, 'is told to think things out, or work things out for himself, without being supplied any of the environment conditions which are requisite to start and guide thought." This quote reminded me of many things that are taught in the Algebra curriculum. I am asking students to figure out problems when they can not see any real connection to why they should have to learn the information many times. And many times, even if I wanted to, it is impossible to give them real life connections because they are so extended from the students' own lives that the information still feels disconnected.
Throughout the theories I find myself to be the closest to a social behaviorist. I think students should be taught the disciplines but through investigation and critical thinking. If students are taught to be critical thinkers, they should ultimately be able to naturally find a way to succeed in the future.
Extension:
http://www.edutopia.org/blog/student-centered-learning-environments-paul-bogdan
This article speaks of change where a classroom is student centered. It also gives several resources to allow teachers to explore more into the idea of student centered learning.
Sunday, September 15, 2013
TE 818- Theme One Final Thoughts
When I
began reading these articles I was able to instantly think of connections to
each of the themes referred to by Labaree. It is clear to see a purpose that is
dominating in different timespans throughout the history of education. Throughout my reflections and the reflections
of others I was able to see that others had the same conflicting thoughts I did
about these purposes. For example, I still wonder if “equal” education is
really equal for all students. Before and after this, I still believe an equal
education is giving each student what he/she needs; not giving all of the
students the same education.
Another
theme I noticed is that all of us find that laws and policies are often
conflict due to different drives of purpose. I contemplated the idea of finding
a balance between the three, but as I read others posts I don’t know that it
would ever be possible to find a solution that all would agree upon. It was
clear that we all had different opinions in class. Schools often pick a
mission, vision, and have some sort of purpose. However, even if we tried to
localize purposes, it would never work with a system that has so many layers of
administration and lawmakers.
Maybe we
should just focus on the idea of having happy students like suggested in the
Noddings article. It is said that students that have relationships with their
students often produce better work. Maybe then would the three ideals fall into
place, creating a blend by not making any specific one the focus.
Sunday, September 8, 2013
Theme 1: Conflicting Notions of the Purpose of Schooling
Much like the teacher in the article "The Aims of Education" by Nel Noddings, when a student asks me why they have to learn the Pythagorean Theorem my answer often moves towards how they will need to know the information when they take Geometry so they will be able to finish proofs yadda yadda. Aside from standards, I have never really taken a step back to look at what the forefront of education is/was. However, as I read through the Noddings article and the article "Public Goods, Private Goods: The American Struggle Over Educational Goals" by David Labaree I instantly connected and thought of moments or times when the different purposes of education took a forefront in how I was teaching/learning.
Both authors speak of the democratic purposes of schooling. Throughout my classes for teaching social studies I remember most of the instruction being focused on how to create lessons to create a responsible citizen. In fact, it is stated the GLCE's, "balance disciplinary content and processes and skills that contribute to responsible citizenship and form a foundation for high school social studies coursework." So you can see that from the very beginning I was trained to give explanations as to why on the basis of responsible citizens and future coursework.
The statement that stuck out the most to me was "the U.S. promotes general education at even the high levels of the system, in comparison with other countries, where specialized instruction begins much earlier." (Labaree 44) While reading this I instantly thought of my experience in London and how the students took a test at the end of year 5 that began tracking students into different schools and different career paths. I agreed with Labaree when he said this limits opportunities for some students. Middle school students mature and grow so much and I think of how some of the students that I have had in 6th grade that are now top achievers. However, I am unsure that I believe that NCLB or even the idea of equality is any better.
The next purpose Labaree speaks of is Social Efficiency. While reading this section all I could think of is consistently hearing that students need to learn Science and Mathematics because we do not have enough educated workforce for the jobs available in the current day.
Social Mobility reminded me of school while I was in school. School was competitive. School was what the student took out of it. There were opportunities to become successful at all levels. Some students went to career centers and some students were able to take college classes while still in school.
Noddings also speaks of the purpose of schooling to interests and happiness. If a student is happy and interested they are more likely to succeed.
I was able to connect to all of these purposes and can think of policies and situations that conflict the purposes in schooling today. The real question would be what is the best policy? IF politicians agreed (which is improbable) would any specific purpose be better than the others. Or is a blend of these purposes the best option? We are moving towards pushing careers that are for the workforce, competition is coming back to school systems in a small measure, and equality still plays an overwhelming importance with NCLB and frameworks like the Common Core.
http://www.parenting.com/blogs/mom-congress/melissa-taylor/what-purpose-education
This article shows parents quotes of what the purpose of school is. Each parent has different opinions that show support of the various purposes explained above.
Both authors speak of the democratic purposes of schooling. Throughout my classes for teaching social studies I remember most of the instruction being focused on how to create lessons to create a responsible citizen. In fact, it is stated the GLCE's, "balance disciplinary content and processes and skills that contribute to responsible citizenship and form a foundation for high school social studies coursework." So you can see that from the very beginning I was trained to give explanations as to why on the basis of responsible citizens and future coursework.
The statement that stuck out the most to me was "the U.S. promotes general education at even the high levels of the system, in comparison with other countries, where specialized instruction begins much earlier." (Labaree 44) While reading this I instantly thought of my experience in London and how the students took a test at the end of year 5 that began tracking students into different schools and different career paths. I agreed with Labaree when he said this limits opportunities for some students. Middle school students mature and grow so much and I think of how some of the students that I have had in 6th grade that are now top achievers. However, I am unsure that I believe that NCLB or even the idea of equality is any better.
The next purpose Labaree speaks of is Social Efficiency. While reading this section all I could think of is consistently hearing that students need to learn Science and Mathematics because we do not have enough educated workforce for the jobs available in the current day.
Social Mobility reminded me of school while I was in school. School was competitive. School was what the student took out of it. There were opportunities to become successful at all levels. Some students went to career centers and some students were able to take college classes while still in school.
Noddings also speaks of the purpose of schooling to interests and happiness. If a student is happy and interested they are more likely to succeed.
I was able to connect to all of these purposes and can think of policies and situations that conflict the purposes in schooling today. The real question would be what is the best policy? IF politicians agreed (which is improbable) would any specific purpose be better than the others. Or is a blend of these purposes the best option? We are moving towards pushing careers that are for the workforce, competition is coming back to school systems in a small measure, and equality still plays an overwhelming importance with NCLB and frameworks like the Common Core.
http://www.parenting.com/blogs/mom-congress/melissa-taylor/what-purpose-education
This article shows parents quotes of what the purpose of school is. Each parent has different opinions that show support of the various purposes explained above.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)