WeBlog 5

             After reading Pinar’s Chapter 2 this week, one of his quotes keeps reoccurring in my thoughts.  His statement of, “Standardization makes everyone stupid” (55).  This statement precedes, “Because intellectual labor is also an emotional undertaking, the individual teacher’s judgment is necessary to rebalance and restructure these various elements each day, in each class” (55).  When I read this, I immediately underlined and starred the page.  I have blogged previously about how Everyday Math hinders students’ ability to learn and makes it impossible for teachers to teach to their specific students.  Programs like Everyday Math standardize not only the math curriculum, but also the presentation of mathematical concepts.   These programs create robots as teachers and students; the teacher read the scripts to the students, and the students regurgitate the information back to the teachers.

                 This reading proposed a question in my mind, “What are the pros and cons of standardization?”  Both Pinar and Apple would agree that standardization removes the teaching out of teaching, but what do the advocates of standardization believe?  What do the results of standardized tests really show about a school or teacher?  Many of these questions could be answered through much research.

                  Another question that rose while reading Apple’s work last week was, “How can teachers be trained differently at the university level to be more successful in the classroom?”  In Arnot’s piece, she states, “In the United Kingdom… responsibility for the school curriculum and its teaching had been devolved to the teaching profession, and teachers who were represented as experts in curriculum delivery to the diverse needs of local school communities” (18).  I do not believe that the public agrees that teachers are experts of curriculum.  Furthermore, when we discussed teaching in inner city schools, many of us in class did not feel qualified or ready to teach students in these settings.  Can teachers be trained differently in college for these situations, or must one learn by doing?

               Finally, the last question that has always boggled my mind is, “What motivates the unmotivated students?”  Jean Anyon’s work discussed the class system found within education.  I too found this to be true, but what is the cause of this segregation?  Is the cause offered opportunity, motivation of the students, money, or something else?  In class, we also discussed what made students strive for their best.  Is it their family, their upbringing, a teacher, or biologically their make-up?  Students who just seem to not care have always mystified me.  I want to know if there is a trend among these students; be it economic status, location, race, academic promise, or gender.  All schools have the students who succeed and those who do not.  I want to know what makes those unsuccessful students unmotivated to try.

                    Even though my questions have risen from reading Pinar and Apple and also from class discussion, I feel that they are of all different topics of education and curriculum.  Classroom standardization, teacher preparation, and student motivation are all topics across the board.  I am interested to discuss these questions in class to discover if others have asked themselves the same questions or if I can narrow down any of my ideas into a specific research topic.  The topic I find the most interesting would be student motivation, but I am unsure about the research performed in this area.

WeBlog 4

         While reading Madeleine Arnot’s piece, the first statement that first caught my attention was, “In the United Kingdom… responsibility for the school curriculum and its teaching had been devolved to the teaching profession, and teachers who were represented as experts in curriculum delivery to the diverse needs of local school communities” (18).  This statement struck me, because I feel that this is how education should be run today.  Instead, the government makes the decisions about curriculum and what ‘should’ be taught in schools.  It always surprises me that teachers are not considered to be professionals or experts at their trade.  A teacher is just as much as an expert in curriculum as an accountant is with taxes or a sales person is with their product. 

This same idea was revisited again when Arnot wrote, “The pacing of knowledge established by the government took over the time in which teachers and the professional subject networks might fruitfully reflect on the messages transmitted though the curriculum” (31).  This statement reminded me of when we discussed the Everyday Math Program during class.  As I can remember from our discussion in class, the government is pushing the use of this program.  Programs like these take make the country believe that anyone can create a curriculum and simply teach it if they can follow the script.  These programs take away the ability of the teacher to move at the pace of his/her students.  For me, I am the only teacher who teaches College Algebra, and I love it.  I do not have to keep up or wait for anyone else, and this type of curriculum is what these students need.  If I find the students to be particularly interested in a certain concept, I can delve deeper into the section rather than quickly move on to the next section.
               I wanted to become a teacher, because I want to teach the future minds of America.  I believe that the curriculum for these minds is constantly changing.  Because of this constant change, no one, other than the teacher in his/her own classroom, should restrict what should be taught.  The teacher knows his/her students best and is an expert in the content curriculum.  If the government or public disagrees, then maybe something should be changed at the university level to better prepare teachers rather than restrict them once they get in the classroom.
              I also found Jean Anyon’s piece to be very interesting.  When she described how the working class students simply learned rote behavior; the middle class students learned how to do the work to get the right answer; and, the affluent professional students were asked to interpret and apply their knowledge (40-41).  From my experience, I find this to be true as well.  I completed some of my student teaching in an inner city school in Toledo, Ohio.  I found that the students were given workbooks that follow a day to day script.  The school community was much different as well.  The teachers did not work together, and the students were not allowed in the building other than while school was in process.  I felt that many of the teachers were simply trying to push the students through rather than challenge them.  I do not blame the teachers, because I could sympathize with them.  Many teachers and students have worries other than their school work.  Some students may be worried about when their next meal would be, or if they would have to take care of their brothers and sisters at night rather than complete their homework. 
                  On the other hand, I now teach at a school in an affluent professional area.  I am able to teach completely differently compared to my student teaching experience.  Most of the students are present daily, and many of their main concerns are about school.  Many of them do not have the home concerns that many of the working class students deal with daily.  Furthermore, as a teacher, I do not have a scripted math book in which I have to teach.  I create my own lessons and work with my department to do what is best of our students.  I notice that I have more flexibility within my position compared to the teachers as the inner city schools.  Many of those teachers have the same teaching abilities as I do, but they do not have the same flexibility as I, which greatly restricts them.   After reading this section, I do not agree that there should be class differences in schools, but I can understand how the separation gradually occurred.

WeBlog 3

Grumet

I found that reading Grumet's piece very interesting and inviting.  I enjoyed how she described her journal and why she did or did not like it.  She did not want her journal to be too big or too small.  It made the reader be able to relate to her writing in a journal.  I even pictured in my mind what I would want my journal to look like.  Grumet told us through her stories that everyone writes differently and about different things.  No one is going to write at the same time or about the same types of things.  Everyone must find what works for him/her because it will make the most impact for that person.

I definitely related to this article, because I realized that it is okay that I am one to write short notes about what happened each day.  I am not a flowery writer, but I just like to jot things down.  Short, quick statements that will help me remember what happened each day.  For me, writing a page a day would be torture.  I do like writing, because it is a place to put all of my thoughts. After writing, I noticed I was more relaxed.  If I needed to simply complain, I could without judgment.  Finally, just like Grumet, even though I have only been journaling for a couple weeks, I enjoy reading about and ‘remembering how it felt’ during a certain, special time in the classroom.

Pinar

One of Pinar's lines that really struck me was when he stated, "Undertaking the education of the public requires academic and self-knowledge, themselves reciprocally related" (47).  He further states, "... it matters very much who you are, how you are, with yourself and with others" (p. 48). I felt that these quotes tied in completely with my journal writing.  I noticed that I wrote about the lessons, but I mainly wrote about my students.  I would write about questions they asked me, their attitudes towards the new material, or if something one of them said struck me.  Sometimes I would write about things that bothered me, but I would always try to end with a positive comment.  These positive comments always came from my students.  Yes, I agree that curriculum is of academic content, but the way the teacher presents the curriculum is the measure of what sticks with the student and what does not.

Pinar described what some teachers are doing in their classrooms as 'scripted lessons' (44).  This made me ask myself, "If this is what schools are moving towards, what is the point in earning a teaching degree?"  Anyone can read from scripted notes, but not anyone can teach.  Each day I analyze my students and what they know.  These observations create the plan for what I plan to do the next day.  I will not move onto a new lesson without all the students moving with me.  If I had a scripted lesson plan, I would not be an effective teacher for my students.

Apple

When first reading the introduction to Apple's work, I found it very difficult to read.  I remember Dr. Shutkin saying it would be difficult to process, and I completely agree.  I am interested to read about how the authors of the book use Apple's previous work and relate his thoughts to the present time.  I am eager to discover which of his theories still hold true now compared to the 1970's.

I am excited to read about the 'hidden curriculum' section in Chapter 1, because I believe it will be interesting to read Arnot's thoughts about how "the 'hidden curriculum' encouraged feminists" (10).  I believe that I will relate it to my own school and think about what the 'hidden curriculum' is.  I am sure to question myself about buying into the 'hidden curriculum,' and if I agree with it.

I believe Chapter 2 will be interesting since it discusses how "knowledge is distributed to students differently positioned in the class structure" (10).  I am anticipating the class discussions about the present day beliefs and how public school teachers will soon be paid by value added.  Do we, as a class, believe that this huge change in education will change how the knowledge is distributed to students?  Will this change still separate the upper, middle, and lower classes, or will the gap decrease?  I think we will have many opinions to discuss after reading this chapter.

Finally, I think Allan Luke's chapter will be the most interesting to me since it "explores the deskilling of teachers" (11).  With so many standardized tests, teachers are losing their creativity and passion for teaching.  Now, with the new income system, even more teachers will become deskilled.  I am interested to read about how to keep the creativity alive in the classroom and, most importantly, in the curriculum.

Even though it took me a while to read this chapter, I know I will grow more comfortable with the language and style of the text.  I am anxious to find out what is different between Apple's ideas from the 1970's compared to today.  Did he have all the right answers back then?  If so, why have we not listened to him yet?  Finally, what can I do in my own school and classroom to keep the curriculum alive for my students?