"Educational Foundations" by Alan S. Canestrari and Bruce A. Marlowe Chapters 9and 11

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?    

Quotes from "American Education" by Joel Spring Chapter 6 and 8

Page 206

“The compromises required in teaching not only shatter ideals but also cheat students of opportunities to learn.”

Horace makes his compromises in shortcuts; for example, assigning two paragraph essays instead of one to two page essays because he simply doesn’t have the time to grade them all.  He also has 120 students, whereas if he were working in an urban area he’d have over 170 students.  This is a scary comparison because if Horace is making all of these shortcuts with his students making his students not being able to learn as much as they could, what’s going on in the urban schools?  I wonder if the same shortcuts are happening in elementary schools.  Usually, a teacher would have roughly 30 students there verses over 100 as a secondary school teacher.  Maybe there needs to be larger school building with more classrooms and teachers so that class sizes can be smaller.  Maybe having a smaller class will lessen the load of work a teacher has to do.  A teacher will most likely be more willing to teach more to their students in a case like that.  What else can be done to perhaps lessen a teacher’s workload besides cutting corners?

Page 209

“One striking statistic is that teachers teaching in high-poverty schools are most likely to leave teaching.”

This is such a sad statistic because this is where the best teachers are needed.  High-poverty schools already don’t have as much as low-poverty schools and schools in high-class suburban areas, the teachers are what practically makes or breaks the school at this point.  I wonder what kind of teachers the high-poverty schools are hiring; well-educated teachers, first-year teachers?  When I say well-educated, I mean is as they’ve been in the teaching profession for many, many years.  I feel as though these schools are hiring first-year teachers or whatever they can get.  Which would be fine in any of school, yet there’s more pressure in a high-poverty school for a teacher.  There’s already an immense amount of pressure on a teacher in their first-year teaching let alone.  Could that be one of the reasons why teachers are leaving the profession? 

Page 220

“The profession of teaching has changed greatly since the nineteenth century model of teachers as paragons or morality.”

While looking at a timeline of what school used to be and what it is today, it’s slightly horrifying.  Teachers used to be teaching morals way in the beginning and now today, it’s all business run.  We’re basically teaching our students to become fabulous in the corporate world.  In a sense, it fits with the times right?  It makes sense to teach children these things because when they get older, that’s what they’re going to have access to.  That’s only setting our nation up to continue to be the same: business, business, business.  These children need to learn morals, need to be individuals, they need to be creative and they need to be learning so much more in school than they actually have access to nowadays.  Unfortunately, it doesn’t sound like any of this is going to change any time soon.  Is there anything that can even be done about it at this point in time?

Page 205

“Teachers’ salaries might compare favorably to occupations that do not require a college diploma.  However, they do not compare favorably with other occupations requiring a college education.”

My dad is actually the head manager of two Mobil On The Run gas stations and he’s making more money than I could ever imagine ever making, let alone making after becoming a teacher.  My dad didn’t go to college either, yet he’s a very successful man.  Times have changed and what you used to be able to get without a college degree back in the day, you need to have a college degree now for them to even look at you.  It’s silly to think that one of the most difficult professions in the nation gets the least amount of money.  No one goes into teaching for the money, in fact, money should be last on one’s mind if they are doing to be a teacher.  Being a teacher is so much more than money, but at the same time, it really wouldn’t hurt if teachers were paid more.  Don’t teachers usually put half of their paycheck into supplies for the classroom anyways?    

Page 162

“In 2006, supporters of charter schools in the U.S. Department of Education were surprised by a report issued by the National Center for Education Statistics that found that the achievement in reading and math of students in public charter schools was lower than that of students in public noncharter schools.”

If charter schools are scientifically being researched as no better than noncharter public schools, than why do parents constantly think that these schools are so much better?  Yes, there are charter schools out there that are significantly proven far superior to public schools, but I’m sure it’s the same vice versa.  Is it because charter schools are under less government control that people just assume these schools are better?  Charter schools are getting schools LOWER than that of noncharter public schools, not even the same, but usually lower scores.  These schools are able to explore different methods of almost anything, so could it be that these schools just need to be established for more time to show any decent results?  If you think about it, a school can’t be built one day and then a year later, have sky rocketing results from the students. 

Page 170

“Home schooling is one answer for parents who want to take charge of their children’s education.”

49% of children that are being home schooled are due to religious convictions.  There are a lot of parents out there that really want their children to get the religious experience they grew up on and they hate the way public schools are ran, so what better way than to home school?  There are a lot of other reasons why children are home schooled, but religious reasons was ranked number one followed by a positive social environment at 15%.  Home schooling sounds great as long as the parents really are able to put forth a great education to their children.  If parents don’t have the time or energy to do so, then what’s the difference then putting them back into public school?  At least in a public school they will be surrounded by peers and other children their age to make friends.  Home schooled students, I used to think, would grow up a bit socially awkward unless they had a lot of neighbors to play with.  It’s good to know they usually children that are home schooled tend to do things like community service and other such field trips with other home schooling groups. 

Quotes from "American Education" by Joel Spring Chapter 7 and "Educational Foundations" by Alan S. Canestrari and Bruce A. Marlowe Chapters 10,19, and 20

Spring Chapter 7 Page 180

“Theoretically, all of this test data is to spur school improvement by identifying low-performing schools and motivating teachers and school administrators to achieve state standards.”

Is “motivating” really the word in the case of having the teachers and school administrators achieve state standards?  I think it’s more like “forcing” because the teachers and school administrators don’t have much of a choice but to reach state standards; no school wants to be deemed a failing school.  Everyone is trying to the best of their ability to get their students to pass these tests, to teach them good test-taking skills.  Teachers are fired and schools are being closed down due to bad test scores, so essentially teachers don’t have much of a choice.  Would you want your child graduating high school knowing how to take tests well or would you rather them graduate with knowledge they can actually use, maybe even a passion?

Spring Chapter 7 Page 181

“Some people worry that testing is taking away from instructional time.”

Cindy Mulvey then goes on to explain her experience with test taking, listing the many tests she must give her students and how often they occur.  Testing today is completely getting out of hand and it’s most definitely taking away from instructional time.  Teachers are giving students tests to make sure they understand what was just taught and making sure if the high-stakes test was just given to them, they can get a good score.  There are tons of practice tests given to the students before the real test.  It seems crazy to make elementary students take so many tests and sit quiet doing so for so many hours.  When my children are in school, I want them to learn as much as possible, not take tests as much as possible.  Wouldn’t you want the same for your child?

Spring Chapter 7 Page 186

“Does high-stakes testing, which often leads to teachers teaching to the test, reduce students’ creativity and their willingness to take risks?"

I feel as though the answer is in the question, yes.  If teachers are teaching to the test, where is the room for creativity or even allowing the students to take risks?  As far as the tests go, it’s either a wrong answer or a right answer; there’s no choice or room for opinions.  Students cannot be artistic even if they wanted to because there is no room to do so and being artistic is not on the test.  Teachers are so overwhelmed with testing that they feel as though they have to room to allow their students’ creativity to come alive.  I can’t imagine how difficult it must be to allow ones students to be creative and take risks; yet still learn what they need to for the tests.  Is that the reason though; are teachers not making lessons to allow for creativity because it’s too difficult to integrate in with preparing for the tests?  Or are they just too far sucked into the system to realize they aren’t?

Anthology Chapter 10 Page 105

“Instead, these people demand, “What are their test scores?” as if those numbers, though they passeth understanding, will somehow prove that we’re doing a good job.”

A teacher can teach her fifth grade student to read from a first grade reading level to a third grade reading level.  Wouldn’t you agree, that sounds like a fantastic teacher?  Yet, once that fifth grade student takes his fifth grade high-stakes test, he’s of course going to fail because it’s testing him on fifth grade reading and he’s only at a third grade reading level.  How much does that test score matter now?  Does this really tell a person how well a teacher teaches?  “Are they happy? Are they creative? Are they helpful, sensitive, loving? Will they want to read a book next year?”  Do these questions not matter anymore and just “how are their test scores?” the main question in conversation?  I’d be a different person than I am today if I grew up as a great test taking rather than learning what was more important that test taking.  Students should be learning a lot more in school than what’s on the test, unfortunately, that’s all being thrown out the window because it’s not on the test. 

Anthology Chapter 19 Page 184

“And yet Illinois in effect has created two parallel systems—one privileged, adequate, successful, and largely white; the other disadvantaged in countless ways, disabled, starving, failing, and African-American.  Some schools succeed brilliantly while others stumble and fall.  Clearly something more is at work here.”

How can a school that’s practically falling down both emotionally and physically live up to the standards of a school in pristine condition?  It makes no sense whatsoever, so then why do we expect this question to be a reality?  The schools in urban areas cannot reach the schools of the suburban areas because they don’t have what the suburban schools have.  Educated teachers, supplies, a well-built school, just to name a few.  Yet, these schools get the same tests and have to do the same things, no wonder why they’re deemed as failing schools.  Then, the test results come back with horrible marks, and it’s all the teachers’ faults.  Is it really the teachers who are at fault here or is it the school or the tests or the entire school district?

 Anthology Chapter 20 Page 188

“I simply “played school” in the same way that young children “play house”—by mimicking what we think the adults around us do."

This is a really strong quote and it seems to apply to a lot of people.  Teachers just seem to do what they know they should do or feel like they have to do.  There is so much to being a teacher, so much to the word “education”, and to a school system, and just in general, it really is a lot.  It’s hard to grasp ones brain around everything that a teacher should know and should teach.  It’s easy when you watch movies or tv shows and even remember your own past experiences in school when you were the student.  It’s seems so much easier then, until you take the education classes to become a teacher.  Even without the education classes, just simply talking to a teacher about what is needed is quite complex.  How does one get out of the rut of simply “playing school” or is this something that teachers tend to do because it seems easier.  Are the students learning in these classrooms or just coasting through to the next grade?      

    

Quotes from "The Shame of the Nation" by Jonathon Kozol Chapter 7 and "American Education" by Joel Spring Chapters 1 and 6

Kozol page 165

“He told me that the high-stakes standardized exams his students had to take were “starting to control the teaching—much more that I’d like.”  There was, as a consequence, no recess at the school.  The sacrifice of recess was intended to permit the teachers to increase “their time on task,” he said.”

With or without recess, this school sounds like complete hell for all the teachers and students in it.  As I was reading this entire description of this school, I felt like I was picturing some kind of horror film.  How anyone ever let a school get as bad as this one?  It’s so disturbing to read let alone have to actually go to that school and attempt to learn.  I would say the only salvation for a school like this would be incredible teachers, but the principal is even saying that they now just teach to the tests.  What can the principal of this school even do to make things better and is there anything he can do?  I would love to know why and how this school was deemed an “effective school.”  Who would ever send a child to a school like this?  How can anyone learn or teach at such a place? 

Kozol page 184

“One of the most proficient pieces, with the fewest syntax errors and the most coherent sentences, was by Fortino.  “I don’t have to go all into detail,” he began.  “I think it’s a school that is in deep shit overall….The biggest problem with Fremont is over population.  Teachers are pushed so far that they just give up on their students.  Others trie to keep up the fight,” he wrote, “but they are losing slowly.””

This was a response from a student when asked what his various dilemmas were that he faced at school.  I don’t know what else has to be said in order to make changes in schools like this when the students are even writing about how awful it is.  Over population is a big problem in a lot of schools and yet, schools are still shutting down and being combined with others due to poor test scores.  Is this supposed to magical make the schools better by shoving all the students into one spot?  If anything, more schools need to be built and stop being closed down so there can be a normal amount of students per building per classroom.  Teachers are trying, even this student can tell, but a person can only try so hard before they get burnt out or sucked into the never-ending system. 

Spring chapter 1 page 5

“The original goals of public schools centered on citizenship training, equality of economic opportunity, and reduction of crime.”

While looking on the timeline that Spring had made on page 5 it goes from “teaching common moral and political values, equality of opportunity” to “community service, preparation for a global economy, control of learning through testing” and it’s rather disturbing.  Whatever happened to the original goals of public schools and why did we take those away?  I, and I’m sure many, many others, still feel that these are all very important; in fact, far more important than that last bullet on the timeline.  Why are our public schools centered on such meaningless things?  Don’t get me wrong, community service is very important, but why should the school system be centered on it?  Teachers used to be able to teach from the heart and to teach what matters, not they’re all teaching to the tests and trying so hard to make a difference, but failing. 

Spring chapter 1 page 25

“Education for the global economy links schooling to the interests of the business community and international corporations.  In fact, by the twenty-first century, most Americans seemed to accept business as a natural partner in the control of schools.”

This nation is far too involved into the market industry and it’s completely unnecessary.  I’m sure the businesses love the fact that they are partnered with schools so they get better workers for the future.  Would the head executives or the most powerful people in these businesses want their child to go to a school where they can be all ready for the business world?  Wouldn’t they want their children to have a choice and to learn more than business?  Honestly, what do these businesses even do for the schools and would they be far better off without them?  So many questions run through my mind with a statement like this, more questions than can be answered.  It’s just disturbing to see this is what we’ve come to today and even worse to see how our schools used to be. 

Spring chapter 6 page 155

“Both Friedman’s proposal and this recent legislation provide parents with children in low-performing schools the opportunity to send their children to another public school.”

I remember reading another story about how a mother was trying to get her son into another school, but she was unable to until his current school actually shut down.  If a parent wants to move their child into a new school they should be able to.  I guess I can understand if a school is overpopulated and students are moving into that school how they can cause a problem for everyone.  If a school has the space then they should be more than willing to accept others students into their schools.  I’m glad to hear that something like this in place; it’s like a tiny light in a room of darkness.  I wish something like this didn’t have to be in place and all the schools were equal, but at least students still have the opportunity to move schools for a better education need be. 

Spring chapter 6 page 170

“Home schooling is rapidly expanding worldwide as families abroad search for options to guide their children’s education amid growing concerns over lax educational standards and increasing violence in government-run schools.”

Home schooling seems the most logical way to educate children to real way these days.  Simply pick them up out of the crazy world of testing and violence and stick them in that safe environment they call home.  Students that are home schooled usually fly through their academic years faster and with flying colors because it’s one-on-one teaching rather than one-on-thirty.  In fact, there are two students that go to our school now and live on campus in their second year old college ages 16 or 17.  Yet, not everyone can home school their child of course because it does still take time and effort.  Some parents work constantly and simply don’t have the time.  Home schooling seems great in a sense, but what does it do for the children in terms of a social life?  Unless they live in a neighborhood with tons and tons of other children, what happens to them when they grew up verses when they were to grow up in a public school?  Home schooling as always been interesting to me and I remembering wanting to do it when I was little, it just seemed like more fun and easier when seeing it in movies.  But, I wouldn’t have the friends I have now and I wouldn’t be who I am today if I was home schooled.