Off track in ed school
Joanne Jacobs
On Oh, snap!, the invaluable Newoldschoolteacher reports on a 45-minute discussion in an education class on students' definitions of liberal, radical and progressive. She asked the professor what it had to do with teaching.
The instructor responds that he didn't just want to tell us the definitions of these words, because then he would be making the mistake of placing himself as the expert, thus invalidating any ideas that we had. Right.
I explained that what I had meant was, "why are these definitions important right now? How will this make me a better teacher?" Some kids raise their hands to respond. They pretty much say that these conversations are helping them to think about and formulate their political beliefs. First of all, where were they in college? Second, do you care about their political beliefs?
The class finally moved on to the cultural advantages of middle-class students.
I pointed out that, if what people were saying was correct, then that would mean that urban kids should have more time in the classroom, longer school days, and longer school years. This would allow them to catch up and give their teachers the chance to cover everything they wanted. I provided the KIPP schools as an example of a school system that does this, and gets amazing results. It works. More time in school and good instruction works.
My instructor was not pleased with this, though. He thought the idea was too "militaristic." He said, "I mean, what's the end goal?" I was flabbergasted, once again. Doesn't anyone get it? The goal is to give kids the skills and knowledge they need to choose the kind of lives they want to live. Period, end of story, I no longer want to talk to you, stupid idiot.
The instructor wanted to make students "good citizens" who can "think critically" about the world. Surely, they'd think better and be better citizens if they can read, write and calculate -- and organize themselves to complete assignments.
The fact is that schools like KIPP are vaulting kids OUT OF POVERTY. They're giving them a fighting chance. And the concept of the schools is not that complex. Their motto is: Work hard. Be nice. And everything boils down to that in the end. There's no magic curriculum bullet. It's just hard work. This guy, this instructor, he so decries poverty and "keeping poor kids poor" and "the pedagogy of poverty" but it is HIS reluctance to accept WHAT WORKS FOR KIDS that keeps them where they are.
Newoldschoolteacher also wonders why the 11th graders she's student teaching are assigned to read a book written for third through sixth graders.
In the comments, Lenie, also in education school, shares a class discussion on an e-mail from a former student, now teaching in an inner-city school, who complains ed school didn't prepare him to control his class:
He ended by sharing, “the other day a girl got up on a desk and began stripping.” So my professor in that annoying, nonjudgmental, come-to-your-own conclusion voice asked, “How would we resolve this situation.” I quickly responded, “This is anarchy and strict order had to be restored. Furthermore that girl and her patrons needed to be thrown out of class.” One of my fellow classmates looked aghast at me and said, “Strict discipline never works with inner-city students and as a teacher we must get those students on our side.” However another student quickly countered, “What are we suppose to do? Go with it and start throwing dollar bills at her.”
Well, it's the only way she'll be able to earn a living if her teachers don't even try to teach her to control her behavior.
joannejacobs.com |
