Resolution of Dichotomies

The failure to resolve the dichotomies in Experience and Education is Dewey's explanation for why educational reforms have not succeeded. It seems we often focus on one extreme in order to fix problems while ignoring the benefits of the other extreme. Dewey argues that the reforms are not wrong, but rather the implantations. From what we discussed in class and the readings, I would conclude that Dewey was involved in the progressive movement that changed traditional schools into more child-centered establishments. The assigned reading seems to be a rationale for why some of the reforms did not work.

I found a correlation between Dewey's idea of growth and Bloom's idea of movement. Bloom states that, "Movement takes the place of progress, which has a definite direction, a good direction" (221). I think switching between the two dichotomies is a direct reflection of what Bloom is discouraging. A progression from one to the other would be a more positive growth described by Dewey.

Educating for Life

    I was struck particularly by Dewey's concept of the principal of continuity first mentioned on page 47.  This theory embraces the idea that educative experiences should have future implications for the learner.  However, this is often misconstrued as the accumulation of knowledge (facts, as in the case of traditional education) being a means of preparing students for the future.  The argument is that teaching facts does not prepare students for future situations because they are taught in such a specific manner and environment that there is no connection to real world situations for the learner.  The learner does not recognize opportunities to apply knowledge due to the lack of connection to personal experience.  While the same environment and occasion would probably re-stimulate the knowledge and perhaps bring it to surface, it is unlikely that the situation of sitting at a desk being bombarded with facts would be resurrected in the "real world" outside of the school.  Thus, the knowledge is there, but useless.     

    Dewey then goes on to write of the importance of an educator to instill in the learner the desire to continue learning.  This also lends itself to the challenge of not negatively effecting the student's desire to learn.  He writes that to do so would mean that, "The pupil is actually robbed of native capacities which otherwise would enable him to cope with the circumstances that he meets in the course of life." (p.48)   He infers that for a student to lose interest in the desire to learn is for the student a loss of meaning in future experiences.  Dewey repeatedly writes of the importance of knowing one's students in order to organize meaningful educative experiences that will both create a desire to continue learning, and provide a source from which to draw when faced with similar circumstances in the future.  The teacher is challenged with becoming a sociologists to some extent, to understand the environment a child may have been raised in, and to make educated decisions about choosing proper experiences that will aid students' in making life choices beyond the school experience itself.  So, I suppose the question is how?  How does one create lessons that have equal impact for all students in a given class, especially when the spectrum of students is likely to involve a range of students that are as individual as snowflakes?   

Cyber Schools

http://www.charlotte.com/408/story/557432.html

This is an interesting article I found about the introduction of cyber schools into the state of South Carolina. These cyber schools are providing children the luxury of learning in the convenience of their own homes via internet. South Carolina is expected to open three full time cyber schools soon to meet the demands of students wanting to take classes from home. These cyber schools must follow the same guidelines as that of normal schools, including certified teachers and curriculum standards. The hours, however, are flexible. Students do more than spend their time sitting behind a computer screen. Included in this curriculum are traditional textbooks and other materials such as microscopes and art supplies. If this is what the future holds for education, then I wonder if teachers will eventually be removed from the classroom due to popularity of cyber schools.

Class Notes

Class notes for 3/25/08

Introduction

-Hermeneutics – science of interpretation
-It is a branch of philosophy that argues that assumptions are unfounded and unconscious – something has to shine light on thought process to make us aware.
-Interpretation – has to be founded on data of some sort ….video tapes of behavior being repeated over and over.
-Hermeneutics says that there are some interpretations that are better than others. The ones that derive from evidence (texts) are better. Ex: interpret Huckleberry Finn being about Mark Twain’s fear of space aliens. This would not be a good interpretation-because it has some textual evidence. It has other things in text that would go against it. Other texts would counteract.
-Certain interpretations are more plausible than assumptions.

Background

-Dewey’s Democracy and Education (1917) is his robust book (sparked progressivism) – talks about how education is the socialism of children.
-What sort of socialization are we engaging in?
-Democracy is not just a system of judgment. Democracy is a way that we live together. It is not just a way we govern our self….we are free to associate with one another which is key to both social and individual growth.
-We have experiences together and we communicate them to one another.

- Educational Method – how the interest of the child is important – what children are interested in, what they need.
-Schools should take that into account. It embarked on letting kids do whatever they want. If they want to study math let them, if not don’t worry about it.
- Experience and Education (1934) – written 17 yrs. later.
-Dewey’s attempt to rest his ideas that ran in the wrong direction (Dewey’s followers were doing wacky stuff)
-Dewey critics said that his ideas were “silly” – not educational at all.
-He says that those people didn’t read him closely and if they had then they would know about traditional and progressive education.
- Almost every piece of Dewey’s work talks about either/or (his attempt to resolve some sort of dichotomy) against seeing things in terms of one or the other.

Chapter 1:

This chapter shows Dewey’s attempt to lay out Dualisms that are involved in debate about education and the beginning of trying to resolve them.

Dualisms:

Traditional / Progressive
External / Internal
Mature / Immature
Control / Freedom
Text / Experience
Static / Flexible
Experience / Relevant Experience
Product / Process
Past / Future
Culture / Nature
Teacher / Student
Positive / Negative (Standard / Reactionary)
Dull / Exciting
Passive / Active

Traditional: Subject matter is settled, and school is a different type of social thing than other sorts of social institutions.

Progressive: the complete opposite of the traditional school.

*Dewey is engaged in an attempt to define some principles that define these dualisms.

Experiences

-According to Dewey we must determine first and foremost what experience is and what we mean when we say it.
-We then see the distinction between educative and mis-educative experience.
-Not all experience is educational.
*Dewey is against Dogmatism – the acceptance of beliefs without critical examination of them and continuous critical examination.
-Dewey believes in Pragmatism – ideas have consequences and every idea needs to be examined and reexamined in light of its consequences.
-Dewey is steering things away from the traditional theory of education –like a good pragmatist – can’t afford to take things as given, but reexamine to make sure they still work like we want them to , if not we need to stop and fix them.

Chapter 2

-In this chapter, Dewey attempts to layout how experiences are either educated or not educated.
-Experiences are not educative when they do not help us grow or by learning to do something that is morally wrong.
-By engaging in illegal activities you are cutting off social ties (experience is social)
*Continuity is key to Dewey’s idea of educational experience.
-Idea of Relevance- one way experiences are connected is if we see them as relevant
-Experience is built on the experiences that we have already had. This leads to the Idea of Habit (Key concept for Dewey)

Habits

-We cannot function without habits. They allow us to have activity without thinking and we can’t think about everything all the time.
-This is important for Dewey because it is the ultimate expression of continuity.
-The way we arrive at habit is through reflection and repetition.
-Problems are also important for Dewey. We only think when we have a problem, otherwise we are just functioning according to habit.
-Basic habits are intellectual habits (language). “An experience we do and undergo.” We engage in an activity and undergo the consequences.
-When we have done the activity enough where we can anticipate the consequences, then it is a habit.
- Full prediction and control is never possible because the environment changes constantly.
-When we act and undergo we change the environment that we operate in.
-We transact with our environment and change our environment to suit our ends.
-As human beings we have radically changed our environment (roads, ridges)


-Civilized people record their experiences for other people to use (don’t have to reinvent the wheel)
- Continued growth is possible because we have funded experiences . People have done stuff before so we don’t have to undergo stuff for ourselves. (Role of teacher)
Teachers are sources of funded experiences for students (resource, not source) and a provider of problems

What is an experience?

-People think that all learning is subjective.
-Dewey says an experience is not subjective, but objective. Every genuine experience has an active side. -An experience is a transaction between self and world in which both are changed (situation).
- Our experiences are shaped and molded by the conditions in which we act they are not just our own.
*For Dewey all experience is SOCIAL.
-Language shapes every experience that we have.
-An experience becomes an experience when it is communicated to others.
-Experiences should enable students to have other experiences in the future beyond the classroom.
-It’s not just about environment, because experience is not just about environment. The environment cannot be selected unless you know something about who you are selecting it for (students)
- You must understand to the degree that it is possible. The background that students bring into the classroom, because then you can modify the environment such that the transaction will be more fruitful for the students. (This makes the job of the teacher most difficult)

The Future of Students?

http://www.leadered.com/pdf/Preparing%20Students%20for%20Their%20Future%206-05.pdf

I found this article online the other day. Some parts I found quite interesting, others bordered on funny and scary to me. The section on student demographics is interesting because if the facts are accurate, our grandchildren and great grandchildren will be in the work force for roughly 30 years of their lives and in retirement for at least 50 years of their lives! What I also found educational about this article was the Globalization section in that in the next few decades, the majority of science and engineering degrees in the world are from China and that the United States is nowhere near dominant in that category. I was wondering if this is due to lack of American student interest, lack of good teachers in those subjects, or a combination of both? Also, I am not very technologically advanced. My nieces know more computer knowledge than I do at the ripe ages of 6 and 8. I find the technology facts amusing that, if this study is correct, some time in the upcoming generations, actually computers (or SPOT devices) will be the size of wrist watches. This may already be out there, as the article was written in 2005. Any of you guys have one?

To me, the article shows what is in store for us in our classrooms and in society in the near future. Hopefully you all will find it as informative as I did.

Responsible Freedom

I would like to briefly comment on Chapter 5 and 6 of John Dewey's Experience in Education. I found these chapters quite insightful and surprisingly easier to follow, perhaps because of its short length. Chapter 5 talks about freedom and the advantages and disadvantages of "increasing outward freedoms". Chapter 6 talks about "purpose". I was most surprised not to find the term "responsibility" in these chapters. When I think of freedom, I cannot help but to think about the responsibilities that come with freedom.

It is not that Dewey does not include the theme of responsibility in his writing. With the students in mind, the author does elude to "responsibility" by talking about "self -control" and refers to thinking as a "postponement of immediate action". We discussed in class that for Dewey, the teachers have the responsibility of providing the appropriate environment to tie the classroom experiences to the world as a whole. This is also emphasized on chapter 6. It seems that the challenge with increasing outward freedoms for students seems to lie in the responsible choices that the students and teachers should make. Transmitting to the students that their actions have repercussions should also be a fundamental function of school.

This leads us to what Dewey calls "intelligent judgments" and what I see as "responsible judgments". I noticed that these judgments are closely tied to the prior chapter(chapter 4) dealing with social control. Within this context I have to ask the following questions:

1. Where does the personal morality of the student come into play in education? It seems that all of these "intelligent judgments" and practices of "self-control" are all based around what is socially acceptable in the particular culture or society that the particular person is in.
2. Is Dewey hoping that the particular socially controlled environment would help set the grounds for the student moral opinions and personal believes?

I gathered from these chapters that in the end, a proper education would guide students in the process of "forming" their own opinions or to somewhat find themselves as individuals. However, these individuals are to be molded within the already set rules of the society as responsible and educated adults. I can easily tie Dewey's views back to Tyak and Cuban's reading at the beginning of the semester as well as Functionalism and Marxism, but this would be an entirely new blog entry.

At the end of the day, I still have chapters 7 and 8 to read, so I better get to it. I may have some more concrete answers to my questions within these chapters.

Single Genger Classrooms

I remember reading where someone had posted a blog about single gender classrooms....I ran across this and thought it was interesting.

http://ed.sc.gov/news/more.cfm?articleID=934

More on John Dewey...

I personally found the ideas of John Dewey to be interesting and to make a lot of sense. Future teachers could definitely gain something from Dewey’s ideas. He makes it clear that some of the ways of the past clearly aren’t working and instead of quick fixing the problems with ways of the past, we must learn from those older experiences and make a change; “every experience lives on in further experiences” (27). Like we mentioned in class, it is very difficult for teachers to do this so my question is how do we as teachers teach ourselves to change our ways or habits of doing things?

Old habits are hard to break and can you really teach an old dog new tricks? Maybe it is up to the future teachers to implement the ideas of Dewey, although they have been around for quite sometime haven’t they? Why haven’t we implemented more experimental learning in our classrooms? As a teacher, looking back on one’s own experiences could surely help your newer students; I think that making an effort to change what is not working is the big problem. Teachers often get into a rut of just teaching the same old thing from year to year, not even realizing what may or may not be working for his or her students. As Dewey states, “it is the business of the educator to see in what direction an experience is heading” (38). Teachers not only have the responsibility of teaching using experience, but deciphering what experiences are worth while as well.

If we as teachers can begin and continue to teach from experience, I think that our students would get more out of their education-and I think Dewey would agree, saying “the principle of continuity of experience means that every experience both takes up something and modifies in some way the quality of those which come after” (35).

Could Robert Frost be a little like Dewey?

In my ENGL 510 class, the poetry of Robert Frost, we continuously discuss his technique for writing his poems. He has been said to be a writer of ironic metaphor, basically boiling down his style of writing oftentimes to writing in ways in which a reader can grasp. Through these metaphors and simpler depictions, he writes using known experiences. These experiences are meant to educate the reader further than just rhyming lines that follow a particular meter; they are for teaching the reader something more. Frost normally tries to tie in a life lesson according to an experience that he, or possibly someone else has had. I know that it isn’t exactly like what Dewey talks about but it many ways, the concept of learning through experience is related.
For example, (I will use a short poem since I know how many people feel about poetry) the poem:

Dust of Snow
by: Robert Frost
The way a crow
Shook down on me
The dust of snow
From a hemlock tree

Has given my heart
A change of mood
And saved some part
Of a day I had rued.

Here, he is using a simple occurrence, the crow shaking snow on a man, and it making the man’s feelings change. The man’s previous bad day, one that he had rued, has now been changed simply by having snow fall on him. I know this may seem a little different than Dewey (or maybe even far fetched), but I think Frost’s point in writing poetry is somewhat like the ideas of Dewey. The depth of human experience can also be shown through poetry.

This is a good article that discusses traditional vs. progressive education:

http://www.taemag.com/issues/articleid.16209/article_detail.asp

This is an opinionated article because the author is greatly in favor of the traditional form of education. He believes that progressivism has much more potential for failure rather than actual progress.

The Charge of the Light Brigade

The full version of The Charge of the Light Brigade is available here: http://poetry.eserver.org/light-brigade.html
A brief description of the historical context of this poem is available here: http://www.uea.ac.uk/edu/learn/braysher/charge.htm

I was struck by Dewey's reference to Alfred, Lord Tennyson's poem The Charge of the Light Brigade. This poem was one of my favorites in high school. It is a poem of both sadness and bravery and, in my mind, speaks to the futility of leadership without understanding. As teachers, especially in light of the reference Dewey makes, we must be mindful of our power and authority over our student's experiences and how their future experiences might suffer if we fail to use our position wisely.

This poem outlines a famous charge made by approximately 600 men of the British Light Cavalry Brigade who were ordered to ride dead on into heavy cannon. One can only imagine that the 600 were shocked to receive what can only be construed of as a suicide mission. However, relying on their commander's expertise, they bravely rode and many died. What went wrong was, "In a nutshell, a commander failing to take account of the fact that he was on a hill and could see what was going on and his troops could not!" according to http://www.uea.ac.uk/edu/learn/braysher/charge.htm. We can think of a teacher, having maturity, as standing on a hill and able to see what is going on from a certain perspective. The students, who are in the process of growing in maturity, have a different perspective and perhaps can see things we cannot. Perhaps, if teachers and students participate in transacting with one another, we can win the battle and even the war. The Light Brigade believed "Their's not to make reply,Their's not to reason why,Their's but to do and die". Imagine if one of these men had said, "Sir you are sending us to our deaths. There must be another way!", and then imagine that the commander listened. Through this transaction, many lives could have been spared and another battle tactic might have been devised.

John Dewey -- ideal system of education

I am writing this in regard to our class discussion on Tuesday. As we discussed, John Dewey is neither a proponent of traditionalism or progressivism. He is against total dichotomies; he doesn't believe in a "black or white" system of education, so to speak. He doesn't see it as one extreme or another. I have found that the system of education he sees as ideal is one in which certain traits of traditionalism are upheld as well as certain traits of progressivism. From what we discussed in class, Dewey thinks that there should be a harmonious coexistence between certain differing traits in which neither is in conflict. I am referring to those such as maturity/ immaturity of teachers and students; lessons of the past being taught in order to prevent the same mistakes being made in the future; being static with some rules while more flexible with others, and the list goes on. In short, he doesn't believe in one concrete "either/or" method in which to run an educational system.

Whereas traditionalists may view change from what they previously had thought was fair or sufficient as going against their values and ideals, Dewey views changing the environment to suit our needs as a good thing. However, he does not believe in changing so much that there is no structure to the classroom. Dewey goes against the students having information forced upon them; he believes the learning environment should be conducive to enhancing learning as well as personal growth. If it is forced upon them, the students will be less likely to accept it rather than if they are encouraged to think and express themselves. One thing we mentioned is how we maturity vs. immaturity works. We have programmed to think strictly that maturity is good and immaturity is bad. Dewey says not necessarily. If a student is immature, they may have a way of looking at something in a way that a mature student or teacher may not have thought of before. For example we might be looking at one way to solve a problem from a mature perspective and tell the immature student to solve the problem in that particular way. The immature student may question that and say "why that way? Why can't I solve it this way?" which also enables the student to solve the problem. This proves that teachers can learn a lot from their students if we let them open up and develop without us forcing them to learn it our way all the time. That would be finding a healthy medium between traditionalism and progressivism, which according to Dewey is the ideal way of constructing an environment conducive to growth.

Our Experiences

As I read this text several different points jumped out at me and I’ll try to briefly address each while still retaining some semblance of continuity.

While reading Experience and Education I was struck by the relevance to educational arguments today. This book could very well have been published in the past few years. That fact makes me wonder what progress have we made? Have we improved our educational system or just replaced the old problems with new ones? How have we gone seventy years and we are still struggling with the practice of rote memorization versus experiential learning? Looking at the history of education it is obvious we have made huge strides in who has access to schooling but have we really made that many changes in the way information is taught.

Dewey begins by criticizing “isms” and their inability to do more than react to the “ism” that came before them. I see the vicious cycles and flip-flop in movements this creates; it is evident to anyone studying history or art. My question is even without the labels of a specific “ism” aren’t we always just reacting to what came before? I don’t believe Dewey is suggesting we completely ignore the past, just that we do not jump on the initial reaction to do the complete opposite when something is not working. How do we accomplish that if according to Dewey it is human nature to assume things are “either-or”?

The practice of teaching ultimately comes down to individual classrooms and how each teacher chooses to teach. So, why is it that teachers have not more effectively integrated experiential learning into their classrooms? I think it comes down to the adage “you teach how you were taught”. Our lives are built on a string of experiences each person’s unique, but most of our school experiences share the common thread of lectures and unit tests. If our thinking is confined by the experiences we have had and the way we have been taught in the past what can we do to initiate positive change? How do we overcome the way of thinking that has been instilled in us for the past twenty or thirty years?

Dewey’s theories on education are based on the idea that they have to be practical. These ideas have to be put into action; they cannot just be inspirational words sitting idly in a book. You would think that such stirring words would be instantly put into practice but I think Dewey put it best when he said, “To discover what is really simple and to act upon the discovery is an exceedingly difficult task” (30). It is a challenge to resist doing the complete opposite in hopes it will be more successful. It is a challenge to truly analyze the problem and come up with a solution. It is a challenge to constantly reflect on what is working, what is not, and why; but I think as teachers it is our job to do these things and it should also be our passion to find the most effective way to teach.

The crux of this book is Dewey seems to think the answer to our educational problems is experiential learning, an idea I agree with although not to the extreme to which Dewey may have taken it. Beyond that, I think this text drives home the idea that whatever approach you take to teaching it should be arrived at through careful thought and analysis, considering your own life experiences and those of your students. Basing your teaching methods on a current movement or complete rejection of a movement ignores the true goal of education.

Alliance for Excellent Education

The Alliance for Excellent Education website, http://www.all4ed.org./ , "promotes high school transformation to make it possible for every child to graduate prepared for post secondary education and success in life." It encourages input and involvement among all educators and the public to "make every child a graduate."

There is a wealth of information on this site about education, including the State information card for S.C. that includes high school graduation rates as reported by the state, (78%), the U.S. Dept. of Education (60.6%), and an independent estimate (53.8%). The achievement gap between different demographic groups is presented along with estimates of the negative impact that high school dropouts have on the economy. The numbers quoted are staggering.

Another item of interest is a brief on Measuring and Improving the Effectiveness of High School Teachers, that defines teacher effectiveness in terms of growth in student learning that ensures students are successful after high school. Different methods for measuring teacher effectiveness are considered and ways to improve teacher effectiveness are discussed. Continuing education for teachers at university and at regularly scheduled meetings at the school of employment have proven successful in improving teacher effectiveness. In addition, well constructed teacher evaluations, performed by a principal or administrator and based on classroom observations can set a course for improving teacher effectiveness and for advancing a teacher's career. Each of these options requires the support of administration and the allocation of resources for the time and materials necessary for teacher and consequently student success. One can hope to be a future teacher in a district where this administrative support is the rule.

Experiential Learning

http://www.wilderdom.com/experiential/

Provides some helpful information for understanding experiential learning and education.
Also, the article under "What's New?" about what makes an excellent teacher is interesting.

Experiences and Growth

While reading this week’s assignment, the discussion about how people may react to different experiences (Chapter 2) caught my attention. It is hard for us to relate our experiences to one another when they may be completely disconnected from one another, as Dewey states. As a teacher, we may begin our careers in a very wealthy school district that has state-of-the-art technology and facilities, and then be transferred to a poorer school district that struggles with the funding for the students to have the books they may need. Although each of these experiences involves the teaching of students, could we really relate what we have done at one school to the other with the students having such different backgrounds and resources? Each school district would be different just as each class we teach will be comprised of different students with different backgrounds, creating a new experience for us. Although we may be able to relate past experiences to new ones, they will not always be just alike.

Another idea that struck me was with growth through situations and interaction with one another (p. 42). The analogy to the infant was useful to me in that a baby crying does not mean just one thing. Through interactions with the infant, the mother can figure out what the child may need at that time. Likewise, as teachers, through each interaction and situation with students, we can deduce what each student’s different needs may be. Also Dewey mentions that the environment plays a role in the situation and interaction at that time. As I mentioned earlier with different experiences, these environments play a role in how we, as teachers, will react to different situations. One question that I had out of all of this is how can we not let our past experiences determine how we react to new ones?

Playing the Game

We have recently been studying learning strategies in my special education class. I thought this correlated quite nicely with talks of "playing the school game." Many strategies have been developed to help children absorb information better, but most interesting to me were the strategies that help children with behavior. They are tactics to make the teacher think you are paying attention, and hopefully by doing so the student will become somewhat engaged. This speaks volumes, to me at least, of the awareness that there is a game to be played. One of these strategies is SLANT.

S-Sit up.

L-Lean forward.

A-Activate your thinking.

N-Name key information.

T-Track the talker.

Basically, the strategy was designed as a sort of how to for students who lack focus to at least appear as though they are participating. This reminded me of the little girl in our book who raises her just in time to look as if she is participating, but not so quickly that she is in any danger of being called on. She has to be aware enough of what is going on in the class to know when she has to raise her hand, but she may not actually be learning much of anything. No harm, no foul?

The New "ism" in Teaching

I have read 2 of the required chapters in John Dewey's Experience & Education and the writing is so relevant that it is difficult to believe the text was written 70 years ago. It makes me recall Tyack and Cuban's grammar of schooling. Are we so set in our ways as educators that improvement becomes very difficult?

While the author is addressing traditionalism vs. progressive-ism, it seems equally applicable to the new ism in teaching, constructivism. The new math standards, and I assume other disciplines as well, draw heavily from the constructivist learning theory. Summarized, this learning theory states that students "construct" new knowledge from their experiences, rather than being told information from a teacher.

I agree with the author that as a future teacher I want the experiences my students have to be agreeable and have a positive effect on further experiences. The challenge I see is how to do that in a strictly constructivist atmosphere. A constructivist classroom is one that moves at a very slow pace as students develop basic theories and understand them. Students develop a deep understanding of material in this atmosphere. The vex is the larger amount of material that is included in any one classroom standard and the associated pace a classroom must keep, to include the required material. This is compounded by standard end of course testing, that is used to judge students and teachers.

Here are my questions for the class to consider:

1. Is there a philosophy of experience and education - how do new teachers develop one?

2. How can we follow the author's advice to take the best of each 'ism' and develop it into a teaching style?

3. Who decides what the best of each 'ism' is?

4. As future teachers, will we have time, resources, and support from administration to develop changes to our instruction based on the interests and feedback from each group of new students in our classes?

5. As future teachers, how do we try to keep grounded and not abandon our current work and jump on the next 'ism' band wagon. How can we work to try to determine what is worth adopting from the new theories? How often are new theories put forward?

6. How many years does it take to 'perfect' a classroom plan so that only minor changes are needed from year to year?

7. Is a teacher's work ever done?

Interpret or Assume...I Just Don't Know

I can't tell you how many times a teacher called me out based my glazed/confused/bored look during class. I always wondered why the teacher noticed me at such an inopportune time and more importantly what about the rest of the class (some interested others not so much). I guess this was Interpretivism at its best!

I may be completely off base here (baseball pun intended:-)) but my interpretation of Interpretivism was that it was based on assumption. Whether the interpretation of a large group of people differs from the norm and whether its based on cultural, environmental, economic reasons I assumed that it was based on misguided assumption. Take into account that I as a first generation American have had more than my share of misunderstandings, gaffes and social miscues (most of which I credit my parents for) that I will now write off as misinterpretations.

I thought the examples about the baseball game and the girl that always raised her hand last and never knew the answer were all assumptions. But was it misinterpretation? The book and the class agreed it was part of interpretation. Maybe I just don't know the difference between the two words. I just looked them up and I still don't know the difference (I don't think I'm a moron).

Before reading the text I thought that Interpretivism was teachers teaching content based on their own interpretation of that content and then unintentionally influencing the views of their students. Doesn't this fall into the category of interpretivism too? For example, a Jewish History teacher interprets the Holocaust differently than lets say Mel Gibson (I know he's not a teacher, but go with it). Doesn't this mean that what is being taught and learned is based on Interpretivism? Or how about a Science teacher that teaches Evolution (regardless of his/her own beliefs) isn't the delivery of the instruction based on interpretation? I assume, yes, assume that this is a part of Interpretivism. Am I right?

Can y'all help a girl out?

Maybe Math classes have a good thing going...its all in black and white....right and wrong, there is no room for interpretation....or assumption for that matter!

Misinterpreted

During our last class, Dr. Pope established the point that when looking at interpretivist theory from a school perspective, we should not limit the theory to just the ability of teachers to interpret students. It seemed from mine and other's comments in class, that we agreed in the fact that teachers are constantly faced with moments where interpretation is key to make a certain decision in the classroom. When we began discussing interpretivist theory in relation to school, my mind went immediately to the teacher's perspective and ignored the fact that the theory includes everything else in the classroom. Once this point was established in my mind, I couldn't help but to think back to when I first moved to the States and my 7th grade English as a Second Language class.

I thought of how much fun a interpretivist researcher would have observing this type of class. I remember that in our particular class, there were students from mainly Central and South American countries and I was the only European. Luckily for all of us and the teacher's sake, all of our native languages were Spanish. However, this is not to say that we all did not have different cultural backgrounds. The first couple of weeks, the class seemed like a constant trial-and-error game for students and teacher. Us students had to get acquainted with each other as we were spending all day, every day of the week together. I can recall being misinterpreted as my choice of words meant something totally different to my Latin counterparts. It was something to the equivalence of the meanings of the word "shagging" in South Carolina vs. its meaning in England. This can get you in a lot of trouble! Fortunately, our teacher understood the good intentions of my message and was able to clarify to the rest of the class. Although we all became acostumed to the new ways of doing things very quickly, this simple instance of misinterpretation set the tone for the rest of the school year and made me overly cautious in class and hesitate to speak out loud. Even though the teacher made a point to make sure that I was properly understood by everyone in the class, she did not catch on to the fact that I was not a comfortable student when it came to interacting with other students or the class as a whole.

I guess my point in class last Tuesday and the one I am trying to make now is that I sympathize with teachers in the sense that they hold an essential responsibility in providing a classroom environment that allows for the students to be comfortable and express themselves without fear. This has become an even greater challenge with the diversity of children who attend American Schools. I know now that this is only one element to take into consideration in interpretivist theory and its view of schools, but I believe is an important one.

Legos Banned

On January 7, 2008 the following blurb was published in Newsweek. I think this relates to our previous class discussions on Marxism vs. Functionalism.

A Seattle day-care center banned Lego building blocks because the beastly children "were building their assumptions about ownership and the social power it conveys, assumptions that mirrored those of a class-based, capitalist society." The center reinstated Legos but allowed the children to build only "public structures" dedicated to "collectivity and consensus."

I wonder how each "ism" would respond to this situation.

Law Presentation

http://www.firstamendmentschools.org/freedoms/freedomsindex.aspx

This is a great sight I found. Thought you guys might want to check it out. There are all kinds of court cases posted in an easy format.

Interpretation of Interpretivism

3_11_08 Class Notes By Merrissa Ritch and Angie Clark

Field Trip
When we got to class Dr. Pope told us that we were going to be taking a field trip. A few of us were hoping for Discovery Place but alas we ended up outside of Withers.
Dr. Pope told us that we would have ten minutes to describe Withers. After about ten minutes we returned to the classroom. Upon our gleeful return to class a few of us were asked to read our descriptions. Each proved very different as some were more architectural, some more emotional and each pointed out different features that others may have excluded or overlooked.
What is the point?
Dr. Pope says….The key point of Interpretivism that all description is interpretation. This was an objective assignment designed to get objective results. All of which had a significant amount of variation. Interpretivism is built on the idea that interpretation is the constant. When we describe something, we are interpreting our experience. It is a contrast of Functionalism and Marxism which is based on the metaphysical assumption that there is no objective reality.
It was interesting that when we were outside once we got the assignment everyone went to work individually. A lot of people didn’t move but just looked straight in front of them. Others didn’t even look up or walk around the building. A few people moved and only a few people talked to each other. Dr. Pope didn’t specifically say that he didn’t want us to not communicate or move but we didn’t. It was funny too that most of us chose to describe the building with words while only two of us drew a picture.

Interpretivism
Review of Functionalist, Marxist and Interpretivism views:
· Functionalist View: To sort students as accurately as possible according to ability and achievement for their social roles.
· Marxist View: Schools serve to serve the interest of the status quo and to perpetuate legitimate class distinction. Ultimately, the law governs schooling.
· Interpretivism View: A true description of social phenomena is impossible. Social Science and physical science is very different. The way people interact is very different, for example, from the neutrons an electrons interaction.
Social phenomena are radically different from natural phenomena. Choices were made in how we described the school. To highlight some areas and downplay others
Personal accounts of instances (descriptions of events) are due to their various levels of accuracy. For example, those who missed a small detail in describing Withers missed something. Therefore, all of the details that would make the description accurate are not there. Human descriptions are good according to their accuracy. Thus, an accurate description of school depends on how accurate the school is for society. Interpretivism suggests the best way to understand what schools are requires a different model of research then that of the physical sciences.
In Interpretivism there is no way it is but various ways it may be.
Interpretivism is based on the idea that research is done to understand social and natural phenomena. They should not be treated the same. Natural scientist analyze, they do a lot of experiments. The research depends on the represented observations of the same phenomena. Using the data, they can predict what happens in the future. What counts as social phenomena cannot be judged by the context of what is physically observable. Peter Winch points out that events and social interactions have different meanings depending on the accepted social norms. Social science is nothing like actual science. Winch says what natural science is determined by is doing experiments repeatedly to get the same results. Social science cannot be truly determined by what is only observed. The action having different meanings in different cultures and context, for example, raising your hand are all very similar but the meaning is different in what the context the hand is being raised is in. Meaning is different. Different words meaning different things.
The Interpretivist says social science’s job in educational research is to uncover the rules and frameworks that give physical actions their meaning. Within a classroom there is a certain set of meanings see as normal and right.
Playing the Game:
Another key point of Interpretivism is the idea of the game. (The full story is in the book on pgs. 87-93 and pgs. 105-106.) she makes decisions based on her data and physical observations and still misinterprets the game because she doesn’t understand the context. Therefore, correlations alone cannot describe an event or its context. The same is true in the context of schools. There are many possible reasons for the same event, but the actual meaning depends on the intent. Example: A child may give an incorrect answer because he doesn’t know the answer or because he doesn’t want to be seen as a nerd.
Everything that she says is accurate but completely wrong because she doesn’t know anything of the game. Doesn’t know rules, roles, terminology, point of the game, she completely misunderstands what it means to play baseball. The intent is important but it is not enough, you also need to know the context. Baseball is a great example, because it is a complex game. There is a whole lot going on within the context of the game that we do not see, especially in the majors.

Dr. Pope is a Red Sox fan. In baseball the situation changes with every pitch. Intricate game, the more you understand the rules and the context the more you can understand and enjoy the game.
Dr. Pope read the quote on pg. 90-91:
“In other words, the intention behind an individual’s behavior receives meaning in the context of a set of shared rules and goals that allows that behavior to be the activity that the individual intend it to be.”
If you are going to strike someone out, it only makes sense in the context of a baseball game. Fundamentally, social interaction is like a game.
Interaction is the key to Interpretivism. In school the interactions between:
· Teacher to Teacher
· Teacher to Student
· Student to Teacher
The teacher and student are in constant negotiation and construction of a social situation. Interpretivists are trying to understand the rules of the school classroom game which are not always explicit. The explicit rules both govern and constitute an activity. (Govern-have to play by certain rules/ Constitute-if you go by the rules you are in fact “playing the game”)
The Interpretivist believes classrooms have rules and the rules govern and constitute what a classroom is. Example: Little girl raising hand late. She gives the appearance of participating without the fear of being called on. It is an unspoken agreement between the teacher and the student.
In Interpretivism meaning merges from interactions between individuals not from individual characteristics. Functionalism and Marxism depend on individual characteristics such as ability and status. In schools the Interpretivist looks at the meaning that arises from interactions between students and teachers.

Games
Game: Life
To further illustrate Interpretivism there is an activity: four people called to play the game of Life. They were given all of the pieces but they were not given the rules. This game was familiar to the four participants. The other students were to be interpreters and could not help out initially. There was a great deal of discussion as to where pieces went, how the order of play should be chosen, clockwise vs. counterclockwise, how much money should be given and much, much more. The second round Dr. Pope allowed everyone in class to help. A couple of people knew the rules and pointed out where things may have gone wrong. The comments that followed play were:
· The game was chaotic without knowing the rules.
· Everyone seemed to recognize the logistics of playing a game such as how to determine who goes first, follow the path and there is money therefore a banker is needed. The players used the knowledge of past game playing to try to determine how to play the new game.
· Dave violated the rules of money and everyone followed along because they benefited.
· Started out as a team then separated.
· They constantly changed the rules, negotiated.
Game: Carcassonne (German Game, Dr. Pope’s favorite)
Four new contestants were called on for this game. Everyone worked quietly at first to figure out the meanings of the pieces and then some discussion took place. This game was not familiar to anyone but Dr. Pope. The class was invited to help but no one could figure out how the game was to be played. Though everyone tried to apply prior knowledge of gaming nothing really worked because it was a different kind of game altogether.
Without the rules that governed or constituted the game, it could not be played. The meaning was lost.
Three Types of Meaning
Pg.99 in the book
1. Propositional: The truth claim; “It’s late.” The meaning is given by the actual words themselves and what they refer to; the meaning is conveyed contextually.
2. Relational: the relationship is implied by the giver and the receiver of the message. (The message conveyed says something about the relationship of the people involved.) The message is conveyed by: the action that follows, tone of voice, words used, the way the person(s) is addressed, modes of address, changes used. Example: A parent might ask their child “Don’t you think it’s time to go to bed?” (There really is no option or choice for the child. It is really more of a command from the parent who “reigns” over the child. The parent has power over the child. There is really no choice for the child.)
3. Attitudinal: How the message is suppose to be taken; this is conveyed by tone of voice (sarcasm), context, who the message is for, body language and emotion behind the words.

Relevance to Interpretivism: It is about figuring out meaning within the social context. When figuring out meaning one should consider the three types and look for multiple modes of meaning.
Interpretivists engage in qualitative research allowing people to respond in their own words to generate a view of what schools are and what they are for. There is some measure of choice and control over meaning because it is a mere objective approach. One can have knowledge of a structure without being a participant. (There is the matter of knowing or learning the rules and making the choice to play.) The better a student understands the rules, the better he/she will do in schools.

Click on this link if you are interested in purchasing Carcassonne!!!

http://www.funagain.com/control/product/~product_id=011110

It's not easy to be an Interpretivist

Allan Bloom’s writing, like a deep breath of cold air, was aggravating yet surprisingly refreshing. While disagreeing with most of what he thought and wrote, it was refreshing to read an absolutist who vigorously and intelligently sought after universal truths. I agree with Bloom’s observation of apathy, which seems to have plagued both our generation and those which have followed. The inspiration to seek the light at the end of the cave seems lost. Universal truths found in religious texts, or told to the masses from positions of authority, seem only loosely accepted and not fiercely sought out. I am not saying that the truths found in these contexts are wrong, only the motivation to find and to adhere to these truths seems lacking. (I am not on a soapbox as I am guilty of such apathy.) Bloom blames the relativist for the spreading of indifference. Although I would identify myself, and my future teaching practices, most closely with interpretivism, which in practice has relativistic properties, I regretfully agree with Bloom.
Bloom would have been very upset with our interpretivist centered class discussion. Having to rely on interpretation and not a universal law, in his opinion, (sorry if I am putting words in your mouth Mr. Bloom) would deteriorate into apathy. While I believe that an interpretivist may have a tendency to fall prey to apathy, it is not a necessity. I believe if interpretivism is strongly adhered to, apathy will not be an outcome. The interpretivst acknowledges the uniqueness of every situation, striving to attain the “greater good” of specific circumstance. Interpretivists’ must not lose vigor, and strive for the highest degree of truths and rights in every given circumstance. Not striving to attain the best and most moral practice in every circumstance will lead to an apathetic lifestyle. Attributing a universal law to every given circumstance would also lead to apathy. Hard-sought interpretivism, while it accepts that the world is not black and white, still strives to attain the “white” in every situation and leads to a wide awakening of the once apathetic.

How students are victimized by standardized testing

This article offers a radical perspective on how standardized tests administered today have become too much of a burden and measuring stick for today's students.

http://www.alfiekohn.org/teaching/edweek/staiv.htm

Explained here are why standardized tests are such a burden with so many being used to evaluate students, as well as how preparing students for these tests undermine instruction on the subject being taught. According to this article, there are many so-called "indisputable" facts about the effects of standardized tests. One that I found disturbing is that many teachers are getting out of teaching due to "accountability" and "tougher standards". These tests place high demands on schools, administrators and teachers to perform and their measuring stick for high-level performance is primarily test results. Many of those getting out of it, which are among the best according to this article, are fed up with the frustration brought on by test performance pressure. They just do not feel that it is fair to the students to have so much pressure to perform on these tests given once in a school year; the scores do not account for any other factors than how a student performs on that given day. However, the author does go on to mention that even though test scores tend to be the lowest in low-income schools in urban and rural areas, those schools were in bad shape to begin with. You can only teach and prepare your students the best you can with the resources you are given, which is determined by how much money the school can allocate for those resources. This is where the concept of instructional quality declining the most for those having least factors in. The more resources you are given to teach with and prepare your students, the better they will be prepared for the tests. So naturally, those in affluent to middle class schools will inevitably perform better than those in low-income schools. Unfortunately we live in a society where the government is willing to allocate more funding for high to middle-income schools than to low-income schools where it should be the other way around.

Baseball_Hit or Miss

The story of the social scientific observer and the baseball game in chapter 6 (starting on pg. 87), led me to wonder about how we can interpret this story into our school. This story was interesting to me because she was going in and gathering data on an activity that she really knew nothing about. I think that we can be guilty of this kind of thinking when we are entering a school. This scientist wanted to understand Americans by learning about baseball but that would be like interpreting students by what they eat. Not all Americans watch baseball and not all students eat the same things. I would think as a scientist and an interpreter she would have wanted to know all she could about something before analyzing it. That would be like us as teachers wanting to interpret our students in our class and not knowing the demographics of where are students come from. Why would anyone want to go into any situation without knowing what they are getting themselves into? I would not want to go to another culture without researching it before I left. Is that the way interpreters do their research?

This is an article I found this past week while I was searching for some supplemental information on Marxism and education. It is a really good and in depth look at our educational system through a Marxist lens, which I found to be personally valuable for our discussion this past Tuesday. The author (Chris Livesey) does a great job of succinctly illustrating Marxist thought, its application to the educational system and potential problems or issues the theory may face in both its analysis and application in “real world” settings.

http://www.sociology.org.uk/marxism.doc

Contentment and the Value of Learning

I feel there are two variables that conflict theory is not addressing. These are the individual's level of contentment and value of learning.

I understand that there are some biased rules in the world, but not everyone that is in the working class is there because of unfair rules in the school system. Some people are just content with less and are not consumed by the race to secure a high paying job. I also believe that if a student is discontent with his situation and he is determined to get an education and make a change then no unfair rules are going to stop him. Some of histories most admired people are those who rose above the odds set against them.

I also feel that the value of learning is not necessarily defined by the financial value an education will provide. I keep thinking of the Willis's case study with the lads and how they chose not to accept the teacher's bargain of respect for knowledge that would lead to a rewarding job. I have seen and heard this in school and have been guilty of using this bargain myself. However, I have realized there is a danger of defining the value of education by the rewarding, high paying job you will receive from it. Sometimes this is just not the case especially if the economy is in a recession and not many jobs are available. When this is the result it is tempting to believe our education was all for not and no longer have the desire to challenge ourselves and continue learning. I feel instead we should choose to emphasize learning for personal growth and better understanding of oneself and the world around us. I feel students will be able to see these benefits sooner and regardless of economic circumstances.

Home schooling?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20080308/us_time/criminalizinghomeschoolers

In Los Angeles, CA a Judge ruled that children must be taught by credentialed teachers in public or private schools or can be home schooled by parents if they have a teaching degree. The law that indicates this has been in place since the early 1950's but was never really enforced, until now.

This ruling is causing a stir in CA. Advocates of home schooling believe that parents have the right to do what they want with their children in terms of education options.

I think its fair since teachers in schools have to have the proper credentials in order to teach. Therefore shouldn't parents who home school have to adhere to similar rules and standards? I had to come back to school in order to get licensed therefore I agree with this ruling even though they are teaching their own kids (maybe it's spite on my part). It's interesting that CA considers a degree and not a teaching certificate or license as the "credential" of choice.

The Smurfs and Marxism?

This is an article I found that I thought was very interesting; its writer claims that the cartoon "The Smurfs" is an example of Marxism. Who would have thought after all this time, I grew up watching this cartoon and had never ever thought about the smurfs like this!

http://www.geocities.com/Hollywood/Cinema/3117/sociosmurf2.htm

Thoughts on Functionalism and Conflict Theory

After class on Tuesday, I found myself thinking about the differences between workers and owners as the Conflict Theorist would see it and how this relates to my own life.

Back when we discussed functionalism, we learned how the functionalist believes that schools “sort” students according to achievement and ability. Those that achieve more in school attain better and higher paying jobs according to this viewpoint. My life is a contradiction to the functionalist viewpoint. I was always a ‘pleaser’ growing up. I stayed out of trouble, brought home straight A’s, and did well in college. However, I have never had a job that would enable me to support myself, let alone a family. I have always had to rely on the second income of my spouse and would be in a sticky position without it. This has always been a discouragement to me, especially since I have rarely held a job that truly gave me ‘fulfillment’. Despite my lack of income, I have always felt the need to work myself as hard as I can at whatever my work is. I was brought up not to ask for things as money was always tight. However, this makes it extremely difficult to ask for anything from an employer, such as a raise. Raises always feel like a gift, not something deserved (no matter how hard it was worked for!)

Tuesday’s discussion helped me to see that I am definitely a Conflict Theorist’s idea of a worker walking around with a false consciousness. As workers, we strut around happy that we are barely able to make ends meet. Every now and then we get a raise or make a big purchase and we think, “Wow, owner-hood here I come!” I find this sad, humorous, and enlightening all at once. As teachers we will never be monetarily rich, but hopefully we will find richness in our experiences and fulfillment of our jobs.

Class Notes 3.4.2008

Class Notes by Kristen Rogers

Functionalism

• Driving force is progressive

• Society becomes more technologically advanced/ sophisticated

Key Assumptions of Functionalism

• Social Level-

  • Skills and attitudes necessary for success will be maintained

• Individual Level-

  • The way those achievements are met will be fair

Notes on Functionalism

• While functionalism claims universality, in fact it is a prescription for what society “ought” to be (follows along the lines of capitalism)

• According to functionalism, schools should be where people are sorted based on talent. Those who achieve in school lead society, and those who don’t achieve, go to lower end paying jobs.

• Functionalism is VERY CONSERVATIVE- “The way things are now is the way things ought to be for everyone”

Conflict Theory

for more on Conflict theory

• Sees conflict/ struggle for power & status as what causes society to move/ change/ grow.

• Says that those who currently have power seek to maintain it through rules/ systems that cater to their own needs, while appearing to be objective & neutral. (ex: the game Monopoly-the rules cater to those in power)

• Conflict theorists says rules are hardly ever objective; the people in power are made to stay in power.

• A newer way of looking at conflict theory isn’t just through social class but through gender, race and sexual orientation as well.

• Conflict theory seems to be more CRITICAL than PRODUCTIVE!

Marxism

for more on Marxism

• Ideal Consciousness- basic understanding of self, world & our place in the world.

• Our consciousness is formed because of how we see our relationship with society & formed by our social class.

Marxism is based on the idea of 2 social classes for means of production:

• owners/ bourgeoisie

• workers/ proletarian

• Owners have to work with agencies of the state to keep control (ex: police).

• Workers are made to feel like they are partially in power/ partial owners to keep them happy, which is an example of false consciousness (members of the subordinate class who express the point of view and share the values of the dominant class).

• Schools are said to be the primary way that false consciousness is constructed; schools do this by setting up the myth that schools are a meritocracy, where everything is fair & everyone will be treated fairly/ everyone is equal. (THIS IS NOT THE CASE AT ALL ACCORDING TO CONFLICT THEORY.)

• The schools make students believe that if they fail, it is his/ her own fault & they can’t be owners, which is also their own fault.

• The media plays into the idea that workers can be owners.

(ex: anyone can own a house/ then APR goes up)

It dupes people into thinking they can be owners

(ex: Wii being rent-to-own and it will end up costing customer $940)

Office Space Movie Clips

Owners-

• Boss/ “Memo Reminder”

Workers-

• Peter

False Consciousness-

• Guy who is afraid of losing his job & doesn’t want to stand in unemployment line with the other “scum.” He doesn’t realize that he is a part of this same group/ class.

• Other guy who has “radio privileges” to keep him happy and believing that he is part of “privileged” group.

• Million dollar idea- thought that anyone is just an idea away from being an owner.

Interview with Consultants-

• Is an example of role reversal in a way: Peter takes control by withdrawing from “the game” (the workforce). He becomes free & in return, the Bob’s offer to give him part of the “ownership” (management position).

*In the end, Peter ends up happy working outside, ironically cleaning up the burned mess from his old job, still part of the working class.

Marxism & Schools

Schools do 2 things:

• Sort people; prepare them for their place in society.

• Set up myth of meritocracy; appear to be fair.

• Example of how schools do the 2 at the same time: tell students “you can be whatever they want to be” but “your skills are better in this/ that track, like repairing cars” and lead them in particular direction.

• Conflict theorists say there just isn’t that much choice & when there is, there is often someone (ex: guidance counselor) to “guide” students in a certain direction, to see to it that some students end up in certain places.

Bourdieu & Passeron

• Bourdieu- says knowledge holds its own power among classes. (ex: reading Moby Dick symbolizes what middle to upper class people do)

• Habitus- shared understandings of cultural groups/ social classes.

Reactions to Habitus-

• You can try really hard to get there.

• Distain all of it through attitude & behavior.

This can be thought of as a vicious cycle:

• If you are poor, you will more than likely end up going to a poor school, having a rebellious attitude toward changing your situation, and ending up poor.

Conflict Theorists ultimately say:

• Schools as state institutions perpetuate the idea that people can escape these lower cultural/ social class groups & become successful, which again is only false consciousness.

A Victim of False Consciousness?!

Now that I am safely home, braving the torrential rain to do so,  and American Idol is over, I have had a revelation.  (Take that Allen Bloom; music, t.v., and enlightenment all in the same sentence!)  I jokingly said that I am never going to school again, and was immediately told that I could not do that because I had worked so hard already.  Then I considered what it is that I am working so hard for.

I am going in great debt to the government, of all people, to get an education that will allow me to teach.  When I do become a teacher, I will make little more than I make now.  The job itself will be an improvement, I think. It will be less physically labor intensive than the job I have been working in for the last sixteen years, and I will have benefits, I hope.  I will be abused and tormented by pubescent teenagers on a daily bases, some of whom will be armed with x-acto knives, one of the dangers of teaching art.  All of this in hopes of reaching a kid or two, who just needed that little extra push to make it over the wall that we all hit at some time or the other.  I am okay with all of this, however, I cannot help but hear, "I told you so." via the imaginary voice I have given to Karl Marx ringing in the back of my head.

I feel that Karl Marx would say that believing that going back to school to receive a higher education in hopes of a better life is the epitome of the conflict theorist's machine.  False consciousness at its most high.  My status is not going to improve due to this exchange of profession.  I am still going to be poor , and further in debt than ever before!  I had my student loans paid off!  The job is not going to be easy by any means either.  So why bother?  Why not quit now and succumb to being a part of the labor force in the role that I play now?  If your in it, your in it right?

I think part of it is that maybe we as teacher hopefuls are somewhat of idealists.  We believe in the greater good.  Are we sacrificing ourselves for the benefit of the future?  I can  not say that I am totally selfless, it will be nice to have insurance again, and a retirement plan.  These too are part of that false consciousness, leading me to believe that the job is more important, and my status a little higher.  Am I right?  Regardless, I would not be telling the truth if I did not say that I am always in search of my own "pet rock" idea, but in the meantime I'm going to mold some minds!   

Karl Marx and His Theory

While reading about Marxist theory and education, I became intrigued about Karl Marx and Marxist theory as a whole. I found the attached article that gives a brief background on the theorist that I thought would be helpful for those of you in class that may have as little knowledge as I do about this guy.
http://www.infed.org/thinkers/et-marx.htm

The article briefly touches on his life, his thoughts on social classes and their struggle, his ideas behind the communist manifesto, but most importantly for us his "Relevance to Knowledge and Education".

The last section of this article makes the point that the educational system in Marxist Theory is not a "sinister plot by the ruling class" but instead it is a product and part of the infrastructure of a "superstructure" based on the ideas and ways of the class in power. My initial thoughts and the ones that led me to search for more information on Marxist Theory were that it was not clear to me whether Marxists really supported Marxist Theory or that they simply saw society in this way; whether it was good or bad. It seemed to me that to be a Marxist and to support this theory, you would have to be a member of the upper classes in power. In the initial Marxist society that I had envisioned , the members of the lower classes or those suppressed by the upper classes, see everything as a conspiracy for the upper classes to keep their power. The article clarified to me under the "Relevance to Knowledge and Education" section, that I may have been wrong in my thinking: "institutions of society like education were reflections of the world created by human activities and that ideas arose from and reflected the material conditions and circumstances in which they were generated". There is a possibility for the lower classes to become the dominant one but for this process to take effect, circumstances have to change and the new class in power will have to make their values and ideas the dominant ones in society.

Attitude Adjustment

Although I found most of the ideas in School and Society justifible, I have a serious problem with the Conflict Theorist's perspective on equal opportunity. The case studies made interesting points, but I feel there is an attitude present that prohibits learning. When a child comes in with the perspective presented in the Social Studies case, they are baracading in all of their potential. The idea that students stop trying because they think education will not garantee them a job seems more like an excuse for laziness. Often the result is that these children unsuspectantly play into the hegemony of society. By rejecting school they are limiting their ability to progress. As teachers, how can we accept this attitude as an arguement?

I think that we as teachers have criteria that has to be taught, but we are also responsible for helping students reach their potential. Some kids may be drawn to science and others to the arts. The monetary value that we place on subjects and careers may serve as a motivator but from my experience people usually are attracted to fields that they excel in. If a student stops participating due to their belief that benefits are impossible, their potential in any field is inconcevible.

Watering-Up Curriculum

In my SPED class, we are discussing learning strategies and how they are used to help children with disabilities. We recently read an article about watering-up the curriculum. This idea emphasises that although students may lack certain skills, they may be able to think on higher levels. The article stresses that schools need to teach students how to "be smart" by exposing them to core ideas and relations rather than a vast amount of unrelated facts.

There are mixed feelings about the inclusion of disabled children in content classes. Some teachers find them as a distraction, like the child in the Mainstream or Not case, and others feel that they are incapable of keeping up like the Separate but Equal case.

I feel that a great deal of what is taught in secondary education is irrelevant to us as adults unless there is a connection between the ideas in the curriculum and life in general. But how is it possible to elaborate on ideas when the standards require us to move on?

Internet - Friend or Foe?

I just noticed that the blog archive is blocking part of the comic strip. This is the link to view it in its entirety. Sorry for the extra work!http://www.comics.com/webmail/ViewStrip?key=59750587-48e3661bfe-FF
This comic was published in the March 2, 2008 edition of the Charlotte Observer. I am pretty certain that Allen Bloom would love this statement about the relevance or irrelevance of information found on the internet. Well, if he would stoop to reading the Sunday comics that is! Education in a democracy is a tricky business when we have to sift through the information so readily available on the internet to separate fact from fiction. Then, of course, we have the good fortune of having to explain why it is untrue to our students, and why they have to check information like Halloween candy!!! Some of that stuff is just bad and dangerous!!! The battle for truth continues!!!

Rethinking the American High School

Rethinking the American High School. By: Lewis, Anne C.. Tech Directions, Aug2004, Vol. 64 Issue 1, p5-6, 2p; (AN 14247423)HTML Full Text PDF Full Text(477K) Check for full text Check Dacus Library holdings
http://0-web.ebscohost.com.library.winthrop.edu/ehost/pdf?vid=5&hid=116&sid=9218947c-469f-4301-872b-6be861093c25%40sessionmgr102
This article summarizes six conferences held in 2003 on educational reform. There were several comments in the article that mirror the topics we have been discussing in class this semester. I found it somewhat scary that in today’s technology focused world, the conference attendees neglected to include vocational and career/technology education as one of their topics. Apparently, two of the panelists discussing these conferences felt similarly. One of the seven main themes discussed in the article incorporated a suggestion to “reform” high schools with the purpose of college preparation in mind. We have heard this before since the theme of high school serving as primarily college preparation was an idea advocated by the Committee of Ten as well. Lastly, Lewis points out that there were several statements advocating high school reform, but the conversations lacked productive suggestions about how to do so.

Still at Risk

Somewhere up in the great beyond, Allan Bloom is nodding his head emphatically and sending down a great big "I told you so" to those in charge of educational reform.

Common Core, a group whose mission statement says, "We're working to bring exciting, comprehensive, content-rich instruction to every classroom in America," has released a report entitled "Still at Risk: What Student's Don't Know, Even Now." The report deals with the continuing appearance of weaknesses in students' knowledge of history and literature, although the author firmly believes that were the survey they conducted opened up to include more of the liberal arts and sciences, definite problems would also show up there. The survey the report refers to is a telephone survey (which I'm not exactly sure is the best way to acquire this sort of information) given to 1200 seventeen-year-olds that asked thirty-three multiple choice questions about literature and history. The survey, while not necessarily comparable to a 1986 study conducted by the NAEP in response to the publication of A Nation at Risk, provides the authors of the report with enough information to say that things haven't exactly been picking up since 1986. All in all, the report provides not exactly startling statistics about what today's seventeen-year-olds know and don't know regarding history and literature. Sure, only 43% know when the Civil War took place. And maybe only 67% know that the Bill of Rights guaranteed freedom of speech and religion. Isn't it enough that 97% know that Martin Luther King Jr. gave the "I Have a Dream speech"? Or that 88% saw the movie Pearl Harbor and were able to correctly identify the bombing of Pearl Harbor by the Japanese as the reason the U.S. entered WWII? The more mortifying statistics come from the literature side of things, so future English teachers like myself should be considering alternative employment. Do you know that Oedipus is a tragic Greek figure who killed his father and married his mother? Only 43% of these seventeen-year-olds do. What about The Canterbury Tales? Can you join the 38% who know it's a Middle English poem written by Geoffrey Chaucer about pilgrims making their way to Canterbury? On the bigger and better side of things, 79% remember To Kill a Mockingbird and what its plot is, although I'm sure their memories are enhanced by the movie version they watched in class as a reward for successfully completing the novel.

My pessimistic ramblings aside, the report makes some of the same points Bloom makes, mainly "The first mission of public schooling in a democratic nation is to equip every young person for the responsibilities and privileges of citizenship. This requires that students have the knowledge they need to be prepared for civic responsibilities, further education, or the workforce, in addition to mastering basic skills such as reading and mathematics. To do this well, it is vital that schools familiarize students with the history and culture that form the shared bonds of their national community." Citing the current educational reforms, such as No Child Left Behind, that require teachers to focus on the required standardized tests as the basis for their classroom content and, in a larger context, the school districts' curriculum, the report explains a lot of important, interesting, and well-rounding information is being left out of students' studies. While the fall of society probably isn't going to be the result of these educational "gaps," this may very well mean future students will be exposed to these ideas even less, until they eventually fall out of schools all together, labeled unnecessary to the goals of public education as a whole.

Obviously any report of this type is going to attempt a little fear mongering, and rightly so. I don't want future generations to not know who Oedipus is or have no idea when the Civil War took place. What I find interesting about the report is that it takes into account the parents and their educational background. Not surprisingly, it makes a difference what you read and what you get the chance to experience depending on whether or not your parents went to college or didn't go to college. For example, if you have at least one college educated parent, you are 16% more likely to have read a work of literature outside of school than if your parents aren't college educated. To return to my old friend Oedipus, 59% of respondents who had a college educated parent know who he is, while only 38% of respondents who didn't have college educated parents know who he is. Just as Feinberg and Soltis explain that conflict theorists see raised college standards as something that will indirectly benefit children of the wealthy, it seems that parents with a strong educational background demand greater educational achievement of their children, which would explain why these students had either greater retention of history and literature or greater exposure to it outside of class. As future public educators, we need to be aware of these discrepancies, as well as the limited knowledge students are leaving high school with. Maybe one of us will even be able to figure out a fix to these problems, and then we'll all be able to say we knew so-and-so back when they were first exposed to the scary ideas of educational reform.

Common Core's website.
Slate's article on the report, which features some of the actual survey.
"Still at Risk: What Students Don't Know, Even Now" (.pdf)