Six Lessons by John Gatto is basically ideas of what teaching and school is about. In this article he critics the school curriculum and how he controls his students. He writes about six lessons which are more of guide lines to how you can expect a teacher/or being a teacher could be like. In his class, the six lessons he follows are directed towards his students to keep them in order, and that is how it should be. These six lessons are more like rules students have to abide by and if they don't, they get punished. All part of the big plan, to show that the teacher is the dominant figure, and we (the students) are like sheep's to the sheep herder. Gatto also touches upon how he creates his own curriculum which helps him figure out who the good and bad students are. The idea of how students are capable of conforming to an entirely new subject to another, are labeled as the good kids, and the ones who don't appreciate it, or don't care about it, the non-conformers are the bad. And then when it is all done for today, the teacher preforms the same six lesson step again the following day; Just like switching an on/off light switch.
This article made me feel like I was a drone being structured by the school's guiding lines. If I were to fall off these lines, I would see punishment. Which is all too true because if I were to not agree with the teacher, what would be the point of going to school in the first place? Oh yeah, to go to college, and get a job after that. It sucks to know that I'm basically a on/off light switch because when the teacher expects me, I turn on. When they don't, I just turn off.
Paulo Freire, Pedagogy of the Oppressed
In this article, Freire articulates how we the students are listening objects to the narrative subjects made by teachers. "Education is suffering from narration sickness." Brilliant. He explains how a teachers task is to "fill" students with contents of his narration and for us to find a significance in what is being taught. And even when the students are being "filled," we are not actually learning it but memorizing it without realizing the actual significance of what we are being filled with. The issue is that students then lack creativity because our roles of being a student is becoming the depositories to whatever the teacher deposits in our unfilled minds. Our consciousness is what we are being fed by are teacher.
Amazing article by Freire, only it hurts to know that students like me are conscious individuals with a lack of creativity because we are not narrating our own education. All so true because instead of actually learning what is being taught, we are unaware of our ability to know that we just memorizing and not learning. This reminds me of how I usually take tests because before the test I memorize things that should be on the test, but I do not realize that I am also no learning it, even though subconsciously I believe I am when I do well on the test. That is why I can never remember what and how I got the answers correct when I go back to it.
Delpit - Interview with Lisa Delpit
In this interview, Delpit explains how she focuses on the progression of schooling and what teachers need to do in order to achieve in bringing out a students intelligence. Most of her focuses are directed towards students of color and the struggle between middle class teachers and the African-American students. She does not believe that a test should indicate a child's intelligence because they could wrongfully be misunderstood in some circumstance. She feels that every student is brilliant, but in order for the teachers' to see that, they must teach in a specific way. One of Delpit's strategies to bring out the intelligence in each child was the usage of the Art. The Arts in her perspective opens and expands the minds of the students to a level where teachers are able to see the true brilliance behind the child. In the Arts, the form of poetry and rythem, Delpit also believes can capture the intelligent mind of child, mainly African-American students because it is what they find most comfortable. So whatever makes the student comfortable, would be in the best interest of how they can demonstrate their intelligence.
Many of Delpit's ideas I agree with and some I'm not completely sure about. I agree that some teachers do not see or do enough to capture our brilliance. Most of them are seeing it as just a job, and there main purpose to their job is to just teach. But it is deeper then that, Delpit is correct when she insist that teachers should find a way on meeting the students need, so the struggle between teacher and student is not there. I disagree though that a teacher should be able to bring out every child's intelligence because then there would be just too much to cover. Each individual child may have a different style of learning that may not work out with the other child, so trying to focus on each would be too much.
Mr. Copeland
In our class interview with our teacher Mr. Copeland, a lot of our questions varied from the style of education he liked to teach, to the super-teacher films we've watched in class. One of the main goals he sought out that all of students would understand is social justice. Many teachers have a different way about they about teaching this topic, Copeland teaches it teaching his students about different oppressed groups. By teaching his students these different oppressed groups in the past, his students won't be quick to judge oppressed groups now. He also touched upon the style of education he likes to guide his students through. A mix of transcendent and immanent education. He believes that incorporating both of these styles would only help the students, and what would be the point of teaching a student transcendent education where the students becomes prepared for the dominant future, without knowing his/her life now(immanent education). This led to our final questions about how he felt about super-teacher films, where a student or students are being saved. And he replies "from what? These super teacher films are archetypes, and archetypes are ridiculous. If I were to say I saved someone, it would be pretentious."
To hear from a teacher, and not the one's you see in TV and movies felt more realistic because a lot of his ideas, goals and teaching styles scored higher compared to the over dramatic super teacher films. He explain the reality of teaching which I found amusing because he was sort of dissing himself, but making sure that he demonstrated his adequate teaching abilities. I mean why would he go out of his to say "Yes I saved my students. Let's be realistic here, I have a few troubled students, but not to point where I need to save them, and these super teacher films do the exact thing for these "dangerous" students." I could also see why one of his goals for students to learn would be about oppressed groups, he's clearly trying to make a difference on how his students will view oppressed groups now, and to not judge them. All centered around social justice.
No comments:
Post a Comment