Page 91 Chapter 9
“The student records, memorizes, and repeats these phrases without perceiving what four times four really means, or realizing the true significance of “capital” in the affirmation “the capital of Para is Belem,” that is, what Belem means for Para and what Para means for Brazil.”
The next paragraph begins to talking about teachers “filling” the students as they are “containers” and the more filled, the better the teacher is. Yet, are our students in this nation really learning? It seems to be all memorization, even some classes in college. I will admit that in some of my math classes not too long ago I’ve thought something along the lines of “I don’t care how it works, just show me how to do it.” Maybe that’s because that’s how I’ve gone through education my whole life; just show me what I need to know how to do, not why we do it. Students need to really learn and teachers need to really teach. But, how can we push ourselves out of this trend that seems to be most teachers are following?
Page 92 Chapter 9
“Education must begin with the solution of the teacher-student contradiction, by reconciling the poles of the contradiction so that both are simultaneously teachers and students.”
It would be a lie to say that I’ve never learned anything from my students and they’ve only learned from me. Truth be told, I learned a lot more from my students than I ever thought I could. The way my elementary schools students think is far different from the way I think in any given situation. They aren’t afraid to speak their mind and to give creative feedback and even be creative when asked a simple question. Teachers can learn so much from their students and it’s sad to think that there are teachers out there that believe they know everything so their students cannot teach them anything. Everyone is learning something every day, no matter how old they are.
Page 98 Chapter 9
“The banking concept (with its tendency to dichotomize everything) distinguishes two stages in the action of the educator. During the first he cognizes a cognizable object while he prepares his lessons in his study or his laboratory; during the second, he expounds to his students about that object. The students are not called upon to know, but to memorize the contents narrated by the teacher.”
That sounds like the majority of everyone’s schooling experience. The teacher learns about an object, and then basically tells the students to memorize what he’s learned. Why can’t the students learn along with the teacher? Why can’t the teacher teach in such a way where the students can actually learn instead of memorize? Learning is so much more fun compared to memorize. Sure, memorizing seems easier for both the teacher and the students, but after the student is tested on what they memorized, it goes right out the window. When a great teacher teaches, his/her students should be able to recall said information learned days, months, maybe even years after the testing process.
Page 113 Chapter 11
“A common form of data—students’ standardized test scores, now all the rage—provide little guidance for teachers, and are among the most useless (and harmful) pieces of data, in terms of helping teachers and future teachers, to say nothing of useless in helping students actually be successful.”
These tests shouldn’t be nearly as intense as they are and shouldn’t be deeming schools failing or passing. They should be doing the one thing they’re not doing: be helping the teachers. Testing should be helpful for teachers, not against them. It should be used to show teachers how their students are performing in certain areas; what their strong points are and what their weak points are. This way, the teachers can focus more with certain students on things they need to know. Teachers have their own tests for this, yes, but why can’t these tests just be what they were originally for? Clearly, these tests are doing nothing and research evens shows that they aren’t helping things, so why do we still have them as they are?
Page 113 Chapter 11
“Along with the New York State and City teacher licensing boards, Al Shanker and the teachers’ union defined good teaching in terms of qualifications, years teaching, seniority, number of advanced degrees, and so on. But my firsthand observation of some great teachers contradicted that—I saw no connection between these paper qualifications and how excellent teacher actually were in the classroom.”
To be a good teacher seems to mean whatever a piece of paper says; if you follow steps one through ten then you’re a good teacher! It’s like a recipe, how to make a good teacher. Well, then what’s a GREAT teacher? A great teacher must be someone who actually makes his/her students learn, is creative and out-of-the-box, and teaches his/her students to be the same way, whoever they want to be. A great teacher must use what she’s learned about being a teacher as a guide or like an introduction to her teacher methods. If a good teacher is what’s above, then what’s a great teacher?
Page 117 Chapter 11
“Every classroom should have not merely a qualified teacher, but a great teacher.”
It needs to be more about quality than quantity. Teachers need to be knowledgeable in both knowledge that they are to teach their students and how to be a teacher. Teachers need to not only have their students memorize information, but understand it and practice using it. They should be able to do all of these things, yet, is it that easy with all of these tests in place? It should be easier for the students to take tests if you think about it like that. If the students actually know information verses memorize information, they should think the tests are easy as pie. Also, they will still have this information years down the road to be able to use in their future instead of just simply learning it for the test. Would you rather be in a class to learn about things you will actually know or to memorize things for a test and just to forget them?
Katrina, in response to your 3rd quote, i think memorization is just a quick fix for teachers to "teach" something without having to put alot of extra time and effort into it, especially if their time is short to begin with. Is that a good excuse though, I don't think it is. In this banking educational system, the teacher is the actor and the children are the audience. In the pages following your quote, Marlowe talks about how a "great" teacher today is a "hoghly qualified" teacher, or one that can produce the greatest number of students to pass the AYP for the standardized tests. Our schools systems need teachers that care about the students and their well-being, and not about a test score that needs to be received in order to hit AYP for that year. Our students will never learn anything on their own, and will never learn how to think for themselves if these are the kinds of teachers we continue to value. I wonder if the goal of our government/ political leaders is for this very thing to happen: stop the ability to critically think for one's self, be imaginative, etc. Why else would our government be ok with this happening? Why would RTTT have been put into law as a side-note to NCLB, instead of a law that would have changed all of this about the current system?
ReplyDeleteI think schools are hiring great teachers in the beginning, but these great teachers are slowly being brainwashed into the system that's in place today. They realize that it is far too difficult to follow through with the things they learned in their schooling, so they fall into the trap of the test. Hence the word "teachers" teachers are supposed to TEACH students and not help them MEMORIZE. A parent can have their children memorize things, if that was all their was to it, why have schools? The government question is beyond me and it's a question I'm sure everyone to this day is trying to figure out. Why? Why would they continue doing something that is just going to diminish our hopes for the future?
ReplyDeleteKatrina,
ReplyDeleteMarlowe brings up a good point in chapter 23, page 211. He talks about a teacher needing to have a grounded philosophy of what they believe in as they are teaching, or else they will fall victim to today's mandates and politics. Seeing the chaos in today's education system makes me wonder how many of our teachers are actually grounded in a philosophy of their own if so many have silently obeyed what they are being told to do. We need critical teachers so that our students can become critically thinking individuals. How can our society survive without that?
In response to your question, my only guess is that they are more worried about our fiscal future than they are anything else. I personally don't think they are worrying too much about what will happen to the students in our schools, but are more worried about what will happen to our country if we don't get our of the debt we are in. That is something I have been thinking about while we have been talking about our market-based education system in class. Am I off track in my thoughts?
A teacher most definitely needs to have a very strong grounded philosophy and I do remember reading and thinking how much I agreed with it. If a teacher is unsure in what they believe in, they just fall into the trap of the given curriculum. If a teacher knows what he/she believes, then they can follow both the give curriculum and teach the way they believe works.
ReplyDelete