Hw - 51 The School Paper

School is an institution. We come here to educate ourselves about the topics and common knowledge's we should know entering our adulthood. It is built to structure the youth into future model citizens. School is made to prepare us for a type of job we find a lot of interest in. School all together is one great big guiding line we can choose to follow to make us who we are later. Why is it failing?

Well lets' start off with the contradictions school has provided amongst what it has promised to why those promises are not working. Generally speaking, school has been a place where students go to learn, build their intellectual minds, and excel in topics decided by the school curriculum. But are we really learning? Paulo Freire, wrote in his book, "Pedagogy of the Oppressed" that the relationship between teacher and students "[are] fundamentally narrative...a narrating subject(the teacher) and patient, listening objects(the students)."(Freire, Chapter 2) In classes majority of the time, students sit down behind their desk, watching and listening to what the teacher is teaching them. The teacher narrates what is going to be taught today, and he/she makes them listen to what they have to say. We just listen. But are we listening to learn it, or are we memorizing it with actually understanding its significance. From my own experience, I agree with Freire that most of what is taught in school I do not realize the true understanding of the topic, because all I am doing in recording, memorizing and preparing myself for the next test. That is why I usually forget what I "apparently" learned because all I did was memorize it. I mean think about it, you learn ride a bike, or swim and you never forget it, even when you go back to it. If we were to memorize and not completely understand how to do these things, we would keep forgetting each time we go back to it.

Another reason why school is failing to structure good students is the conflict between teacher and student. In cases there are teachers who just teach because it is just a job and nothing more than that, and students who are not motivated about what is being taught. Lisa Delpit, a internationally known scholar and writer, has focused on this area of the struggle between teacher and students, especially students of color. She believes that every student can be motivated and brilliant, but teachers do not do enough to capture/bring out this hidden intelligence. One of her strategies to bring out the intelligence in each child is the usage of the Arts. 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 rhythm, 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. The only problem I have with Delpit's theory is that it would be too much to cover in the class because 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.

A similar issue that students and teachers face is the fact that both of them want they want out of the other. Teachers expect us to be these drones that will just sit and listen, and for students we expect teachers to really see who we are. Both want respect from each other, but one wants more respect then the other. It is sad to see it though because both the teacher and student minds' are clouded and unable to see how both of them could get what they want if they were to cooperate with each other on the same level. This idea will barely ever happen because the teacher will always be labeled as the dominant figure in the class, and the students will have to be the good followers. A role students just can't appreciate, and I agree, who would want to be in a following role. John Gatto, a New York State teacher wrote an article of what typically happens in a classroom structured by Six-Lessons. 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. 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. Gatto metaphorically explains that he controls his students like an on/off light switch because when he demands his students, they turn on, and when he does not, we turn off. A unequal balance of power.

Another reason why you find a lot of students failing is the type of education style that is presented on to them. E.D. Hirsch, a U.S. educator and academic literary critic theorized that you must begin with knowing enough facts and a full understanding of common knowledge's before becoming a better thinker. His idea was that if you knew enough about these common knowledge's and facts, that it would further you in the future dominant culture. "Transcendent education." Which is a type of education style that teaches students how to be successful in the dominant culture. Ted Sizer, a education-reform advocate believed that students must be given the skills and tools first to become a better learner/thinker, basically the opposite of Hirsch's theory. Sizer described the "transcendent" education as "machines that they designed and operated," which is true because Hirsch's theory was to fill students with common knowledge's and facts which Freire explained was the reason why we were not really learning. But there is a trade off between Sizer and Hirsch's theory because Hirsch's theory will supposedly helps you in the dominant culture, and Sizer's is built around how students could be helped now by learning certain skills about the now; "Immanent" education. The split between these two styles of education could either help or fail the student depending on the individual capability to adjust to either one they felt most comfortable in.

In conclusion there are many variables as to why school may be failing. The topic of individuality which complicates a school's curriculum because one individual may learn a different way then the other. The power struggle between teacher and student. All too much and not enough time, but at the end of the day it is our own responsibility to make sure we are selves learn something. Something Obama would like all students to understand.