Connections, chaos, and cohort.

I am looking forward to the upcoming summer holidays with my family, but I am surprised at how much I am missing going to school. People who know me see that my life is usually in constant chaos, with a million things on the go. The thing most people may not realize is that I prefer it this way!

I had such a great time over the last three weeks! Maybe it is because being on maternity leave, I crave adult conversation, but I think it was a lot more than that. Many people in the cohort have said it and I agree, this truly is a group of inspiring people. 28 different educators offers an interesting mix and all of us come from different backgrounds and with different views. It has opened my eyes to how important all the views are. I am so amazed by all the profound things that people think, they way they view things and how convincing their arguments are. I don’t know what I think about anything anymore because the minute I think I have it figured it out, someone offers a perspective that challenges what I thought I knew. Is technology a tool, a way, a knowledge, a skill? You tell me!

Thank you to the “cohort” for opening my eyes to all sides of any topic…..I think I will remain clearly on the fence so I don’t have to keep jumping back and forth.

Kumashiro in ONE page!

Assignment : Summarize the first three Chapters of Kumashiro in a page.

Here is my attempt at meeting the requirements of the assignment.  The hand is meant to symbolize me as the teacher.  I am reaching towards anti-oppressive education but “common sense” and “societal norms” are pulling it out of my reach.  It is an unreachable goal, but one that I must continually seek out.  On my hand are my personal biases that I must be aware of if I plan to move forward as a teacher; these biases include things such as “non-disabled”, “caucasian”, “female” and “heterosexual”.  Written along my arm are the words “learning through crisis”.  This phrase symbolizes the motivational force behind me reaching toward anti-oppressive education.  In the background is a chain-link fence.  The fence represents the things that I say and do, the curriculum that I teach, and the intended learning outcomes I have for my students.  The gaps in the fence provide me with the opportunity to “look beyond” by examining “troubling knowledge”.  They also represent the things that I do not do, say or teach.  The student lens at the top shows how the students see what I teach as well as what I don’t .  Along the bottom of the fence the quote “know the limits of your knowledge” is written.  As teachers we must recognize the limits of our knowledge and the implications that this has for our students.   

A little more symbolism than I am used to, but I enjoyed the challenge!  Hope you were able to follow my reasoning.

Kumashiro, K. (2009). Against common sense: Teaching and learning toward social justice. New York: Routledge Falmer.

Can we or should we?

Technology has been a theme the past year of my master’s program. We have had presenters spouting the advantages of technology, professors who encourage the use of technology, and a program that requires each student to come equipped with their own technology. Many teachers have discussed the amazing learning opportunities they were able to provide to their students by using technology as a tool. Without a doubt, technology is amazing and useful and all the rest. The question I have is when do we draw the line? I once heard that NASA spent an obscene amount of money creating a pen that would work in space without the necessary gravity that our earthly pens require. I heard the Russian Space Program used a pencil! (whether the story is true or not, the point is the same). Are we using technology merely because we need to demonstrate just how able we are? Is the “look what I can do?” mentality outweighing our “what should I do?” mentality. Interactive WhiteBoards are an amazing tool, but if you are only using them to do essentially the same thing as a standard whiteboard then what is the point? An antigravity pen is cool, but a pencil can accomplish the same goal. I think before we jump onboard and purchase the next big thing, I think we need to ask ourselves why? and what can it do that pencil, chalkboard, human or other device can’t do?

P.S. I am writing this blog sitting in a campsite, using my iphone as a hot spot, my wireless keyboard, and my ipad…….what does this assortment of technology provide that a human, pencil, or chalkboard can’t? They can take away my ability to relax, unplug, and enjoy camping!

Never Getting There…

Strive to be something that you know you will never become. Not a very optimistic approach to life, but one that Dr. Kevin Kumashiro feels in necessary when dealing with anti-oppressive education. As I read the first few chapters of Against Common Sense, I was surprised at how compelling the idea of working toward a goal you can never achieve became. I think it is because that is the way most things in life truly are. I will never be a perfect parent, teacher, wife or friend however the moment I stop trying to attain that perfection, I believe I will be completely lost. I have an idea of what a perfect parent looks like, what a perfect wife should act like, and how a perfect friend behaves, however these ideas are very situational and ever-changing. This is similar to the idea Kumashiro presents in his book. In order to work toward anti-oppressive education you must continually examine your practice and make adjustments based on the students, the situation, and your own experience. Thinking that you have achieved an anti-oppressive educational practice all but guarantees oppression. You must be constantly reflective to continue to move toward the ideal. Ask questions, look within yourself, and examine what you do and say, but more importantly what you do not do or say. I remember a milk campaign that had a similar message “Always Grow. Grow All Ways.” A great theme for all aspects of life, not just anti-oppressive education.

Kumashiro, K. (2009). Against common sense: Teaching and learning toward social justice. New York: Routledge Falmer.

Who is in my Pocket?

Today in class we were given a rock to hold in our hand and place in our pocket. The assignment was to think of who you carry in your pocket. The student that has stuck with you, that made a difference, and that you will never forget.

I knew what student that was immediately! He was a student I worked with once a day while he was in Grade 5. He was rough around the edges (much like the rock I was holding in my hand) but I had a soft spot for him. We worked together everyday so that he could get some one on one attention. It was a break that both he and his homeroom teacher appreciated. During our scheduled “resource time” he learned to walk on stilts, mastered juggling, I dyed his hair purple, we built a fort out of cardboard boxes, learned to play crib, we went shopping for winter clothes, talked about life, and fit in a little bit of school work. He opened my eyes to the “baggage” that many students bring to school every day. He was brutally honest and disrupted my knowledge of what a Grade 5 student should be like. He smoked, swore, yelled and got into fights. That is what most people saw when they looked at this student. He taught me that underneath all that, he was still just a little boy.

Before we place expectations on students I think we need to look at what they deal with in a day! I admit that the “baggage” they bring does not need to be a barrier to learning, but we may want to consider what battles we pick with students who may have fought several battles before arriving at our door.

The student I carry in my pocket taught me that fair and equal are not the same thing, that empathy is understanding, not fixing, and that caring really does matter. Thank you D!

What is your “trying face?”

As I continue on this learning journey, I find it difficult to shut my “student brain” off. The class discussion before the weekend centered around engagement. Now I see it everywhere! Part of our discussion focussed on recognizing engagement and knowing when someone is engaged or not. While playing with my seven month old daughter I noticed how she was studying my hand as I moved it in front of her face. Rather than thinking “oh isn’t that cute”, my first thought was “now that is engagement!”. I am looking for it everywhere…in myself (what do I do when I am truly engage?) and in others. I remember sitting on the sidelines of a volleyball game and laughing with a friend at everyone’s “trying face”. Did they open their mouth, bite their lip, stick out their tongue or something else equally funny when they were truly “engaged” in the volleyball game? Wouldn’t it be wonderful (and slightly humorous) if our student put on “trying faces” when they were engaged in the topics I taught them? It sure would make my job easier!

http://www.flickr.com/photos/afsilva/430725936/
CC:afsilva

Things I don’t know!

Once again I have discovered that the more you learn the more you realize how much you don’t know! Today’s discussion on engagement created more questions than answers. What does engagement look like? How do we measure it? Why would we measure it? Should we measure engagement?

CC:Leo Reynolds

As I sat through the fishbowl exercise I found it more useful to be on the outside looking in, than being a fish in the bowl. Being an observer allowed me to only think about what others were saying rather than thinking about what I might say in response. I found the conversation relating to what we do about students who are not engaged quite interesting. Once we all agreed that engagement looks different for everyone, there are still students who are sometimes not engaged. What do we do about them? I think everyone knows students who are not successful in school, but you know that they will be successful in life. How do measure those skills? Should success in school relate to success in life? How do we change the structure of school to address the needs of the “non-academic”? Should we? Like I said at the beginning….see how much I don’t know now!

Conclusions and Concerns

Today, as I sat with my group and discussed the article by Parker Palmer we came to many conclusions. We focussed on what the heart of a teacher is really like and how this makes them good at what they do. Integrity and caring about students is not something that can be taught, it is something that you have or you don’t. Technique can be taught, and even perfected, but if you do not make connections, feel connect and value what you do, then either will the students that sit through your lessons.

We discussed concerns about ensuring good teaching, while still valuing the individuality and “heart of the teacher”. Addressing concerns of individuality without creating isolation was a challenge that many teachers experience. How do you do things your own way, value your own “teacher within”, but not isolate, or at least “compete” with other teachers in your building. Because you cannot separate the person from profession in the teaching it is difficult not to take offense to outside instruction and mandate imposed upon you.

I feel that through discussion like this we are truly honoring the “teacher within” and providing answers to our own concerns. I am hopeful that these conversations can go back into the building we teach in and help other teachers to also honor and grow their own “teacher within”

The Heart of a Teacher…The Personalized Craft

As I read The Heart of a Teacher by Parker J. Palmer, (1997) I felt supported through my journey as a teacher.  I am very protective of my teaching style and over the last year I have been given the opportunity to examine myself as a teacher and look at some of the whys behind my teaching style.  By looking at Curriculum as my lived experience, I think I have learned to identify and connect with who I am as a teacher.  The individuality which I am able to bring to my teaching inspires me to work harder at my craft.

I am a Grade 5 classroom teacher as well as a Special Education teacher.  As a Special Education teacher, I have been afforded the opportunity to watch great teachers in action.  I go to various classrooms to work inclusively with students and am always amazed at how differently each teacher teaches, and interacts with their students.  As I watch these “great teachers,” I find it interesting that many administrators, and central office personal feel it is their responsibility to provide strict guidelines and rules for teaching practices.  The teachers I have watched are great for different reasons and their teaching style varies accordingly.  It would not be realistic, or even effective to force these teachers to adopt the practices of others.  Teaching standards must not be prescriptive, but rather general guidelines.  Individuality of teachers must be balanced with uniform standards.

As teaching standards tend to be prescriptive, so to are many assessment tools.  There is an increased emphasis on test scores and improving measurable learning outcomes.  I understand the importance of measuring student learning, but standardized test may not be the most effective measure of student learning and indirectly of teacher effectiveness.  Schlechty (2009) points out that “the problem is that the type of instruction that is adequate to ensure that students can write on a standardized form a brief descriptive paragraph about a poem may not be the same type of instruction that will inspire students to write a poem – or to create a novel experiment” (p.6).  Standardized testing must not be considered the only method of assessment or even the most valuable.  The individual ability of the professional classroom teacher to assess should be weighed at least as much as the standardized test.

As teachers, administrators, and school boards look to ensure student learning, I belive it is necessary to look to the teachers themselves and support their individual strengths.  Just as I shape the curriculum I teach by my lived experiences, each student shapes my instruction by their lived experiences.  It is through this reciprocal interaction that true learning is achieved.  The interaction between the teacher within and the inner learner can not be mandated by an outside individual if the expectation is for a meaningful experience.