Thursday, June 2, 2011
Social Studies on the Radar
In the most recent Ed Week there is an article about a group that is getting together to try to focus on common standards for Social Studies. Honestly, my first thought was how sad that is. While I understand the desire to set standards that students should meet regarding a subject, I kind-of liked being under the radar of most standardized testing. It's not because I don't want to teach kids anything or because I don't think all students should know certain material, but it's primarily because I don't want the pressure of teaching to the test. It seems that the more we focus on testing, the worse the kids end up learning. Although I am not inclined to teach only the material on the test, having people focus on other subjects takes the pressure off my content area. With the eyes elsewhere, I feel like my students have the freedom to actually learn something and make a connection to it.
Attitudes About Sexual Violence
Sometimes things come together to saturate your mind on a subject...at the moment, for me that is our attitude about sexual violence.
The fact that a state (although Kansas can be a little kooky) representative likens it to getting a flat tire and that female soldiers are sexually assaulted by fellow soldiers are reprehensible. Even worse is punishing a girl for not cheering for her alleged perpetrator. What kind of role models are we if we let these attitudes prevail?! While women have come a long way, we still have a long way to go to change the attitude (and acceptance) of sexual violence. This is crazy!
- First, I heard that Kansas state Republican representative Pete DeGraff urged women to plan ahead for rape just like he has a spare tire for his car by saying "The likelihood of you being raped is the same as getting a flat tire."
- Next, I heard about a study that looked at PTSD in soldiers and that women are nearly twice as likely to suffer from PTSD upon returning from combat duty. That probably sounds right to people who think women shouldn't serve in combat. However, if you adjust for those who are sexually abused during their combat duty, it becomes almost an even level with men's rates of PTSD.
- Finally, I read in Ed Week about a case in which a cheerleader was dismissed from the squad because she refused to cheer for a baseball player who she accused of sexually assaulting her. The officials asked her to leave, because it created a "disruption in the stands."
The fact that a state (although Kansas can be a little kooky) representative likens it to getting a flat tire and that female soldiers are sexually assaulted by fellow soldiers are reprehensible. Even worse is punishing a girl for not cheering for her alleged perpetrator. What kind of role models are we if we let these attitudes prevail?! While women have come a long way, we still have a long way to go to change the attitude (and acceptance) of sexual violence. This is crazy!
Monday, May 23, 2011
Lifelong Learners - Blog Link
I found a blog post called BLAH BLAH BLAH LIFE LONG LEARNING BLAH BLAH BLAH (a friend linked recently), which makes a good point. How much easier would our job a teachers be if parents modeled the learning process they use to their kids?!
I continue to believe that I want my classroom to be a learning environment for all, not just a place for me to know and them to find out!
Friday, May 6, 2011
Teacher Distribution
There is continued talk about the fact that economically-disadvantaged areas are under-represented by highly-qualified teachers, which leads me to an honest assessment of my future career.
On one hand - professionally...
On one hand - professionally...
- Most teachers want to work with the most academically-proficient students, because it's a more interesting professional environment.
- Teaching in higher socioeconomic districts (or high-end private schools) can often bring a higher salary and more job-security.
- Many people are afraid to go into a community they do not know, and it is uncomfortable to be the minority if one isn't used to that situation.
- There is probably a preconceived notion about what an economically-disadvantaged area's schools look like (despite what might actually be going on there).
- There are some elements of working in these schools that might require extra effort and emotional involvement.
- It can be emotionally draining to have students from these areas, because so many of them need so much (and it's hard if you feel like you can't provide enough for them).
On the other hand - realistically...
- Schools in lower socioeconomic areas often come with lower salaries and less job security.
- Children do not choose the life they face. They are brought into their situations.
- These students are the ones most in need of highly-proficient teachers. Not only do they need the person who can help them the most, they also have the greatest amount of cultural capital to learn/amass in order to be successful in the wider world.
- In a place where students have the highest access to parental support, tutors, etc., those students will probably "succeed" no matter who is teaching. In a disadvantaged area, chances are that a good teacher has the ability to make the greatest individual difference with his/her students, because the students don't always have access to much support of their education.
- Being the minority in a situation (if one isn't used to it) can produce an incredibly profound perspective.
- There is a richness that can be found in learning about and embracing a different culture.
I can completely see why teachers and administrators want to work in more affluent schools/districts. For a profession that is inherently underpaid for its service, it's no crime to want to work in these areas. However, at the moment (without any experience either way) I find myself having a real commitment to those lower socioeconomic areas. The kids deserve good teachers and a chance at a decent education. However, in the current economic climate, that might even out a little as people take jobs where they can find them. I hope it evens out a little anyway!
Ditching the Textbook
I just want to recognize the good people that are digitizing so many primary source documents. For social studies teachers, having increasing access to these letters, patents, maps, photos, recordings, etc., allows us to ditch the boring textbooks (because let's face it, textbooks are inherently boring for kids...and adults) and gives us the opportunity to help make this stuff interesting for kids (and for us as teachers). Here are just a few of the fantastic resources:
On a side note, these are not all just social studies sites (esp. the NY Times site).
Sunday, April 24, 2011
Teacher Pay = Public Mindset Issue
All of the talk regarding teacher pay is really getting me down a little, not because of the standard issues (like all of the rancorous discourse) but because it emphasizes a mindset of so many people (that doesn't go away and that some of those people wouldn't admit publicly) and a flawed discourse. That became clear during a conversation I had at work. The conversation went something like this...
Customer: Bemoaning teachers and perceived problems with "schools these days" (even though his kids were long grown and he had no idea what's going on in schools)
Me: I'm in school to be a teacher. It is unfair to blame teachers for the current economic situation. Most people go into teaching because we really want to do it, not for economic benefits. We have to get a graduate degree and our ability to recover that extra expense is a lot lower than most fields that require graduate degrees (i.e. law, medicine, etc.).
Customer: I didn't know teachers need graduate degrees.
Me: Yes, that's an Oregon requirement. Do you think doctors and lawyers get paid too much?
Customer: They were entitled to get whatever they can...they put all that time and money into getting the extra schooling and they should get whatever a company is willing to pay them.
Me: Is my graduate degree a lower level than another graduate degree?
Customer: No, any extra schooling is important.
Me: If that's the case, why should I get that degree and then be looked down on for wanting to make a decent living (one that has so much less potential than the others)?
Customer: I just don't think it's fair that you get to try and take more and more of my money.
Me: Oh, I see. (Being extra nice, changing the subject, backing away slowly and trying to prevent my head from exploding in a delirious cloud of profane epithets)
Here's what I came away with...there's such a different perspective on teachers' salaries, but it is a false perspective and it all revolves around a dislike of the idea of taxes. When someone goes to see a doctor, lawyer, etc., they understand that they are paying a fee for the service. However, when the fire department comes, their kids go to school or they drive on a road, they feel entitled to those public "services", but when the tax bill comes they don't look at it as fees paid for services. Instead they look at it as though someone is trying to steal their money. How do we change that attitude and/or how do we change the dialogue we have when discussing these issues? Maybe we should just dispense with the tax code and charge the fair market value for everything the average person uses?!
Customer: Bemoaning teachers and perceived problems with "schools these days" (even though his kids were long grown and he had no idea what's going on in schools)
Me: I'm in school to be a teacher. It is unfair to blame teachers for the current economic situation. Most people go into teaching because we really want to do it, not for economic benefits. We have to get a graduate degree and our ability to recover that extra expense is a lot lower than most fields that require graduate degrees (i.e. law, medicine, etc.).
Customer: I didn't know teachers need graduate degrees.
Me: Yes, that's an Oregon requirement. Do you think doctors and lawyers get paid too much?
Customer: They were entitled to get whatever they can...they put all that time and money into getting the extra schooling and they should get whatever a company is willing to pay them.
Me: Is my graduate degree a lower level than another graduate degree?
Customer: No, any extra schooling is important.
Me: If that's the case, why should I get that degree and then be looked down on for wanting to make a decent living (one that has so much less potential than the others)?
Customer: I just don't think it's fair that you get to try and take more and more of my money.
Me: Oh, I see. (Being extra nice, changing the subject, backing away slowly and trying to prevent my head from exploding in a delirious cloud of profane epithets)
Here's what I came away with...there's such a different perspective on teachers' salaries, but it is a false perspective and it all revolves around a dislike of the idea of taxes. When someone goes to see a doctor, lawyer, etc., they understand that they are paying a fee for the service. However, when the fire department comes, their kids go to school or they drive on a road, they feel entitled to those public "services", but when the tax bill comes they don't look at it as fees paid for services. Instead they look at it as though someone is trying to steal their money. How do we change that attitude and/or how do we change the dialogue we have when discussing these issues? Maybe we should just dispense with the tax code and charge the fair market value for everything the average person uses?!
Student Involvement
As I read the article Students walk out in protest over teacher layoffs it reconfirmed my belief that students (especially at the high school level) should be involved in their own educational process (and gave me hope that at least some want to be involved).
Some students in the Katy Texas school district protested staffing cuts at their schools. One student even suggested that they need their teachers more than smart boards in the classroom. Governor Perry's response to these protesting students was...
"There are better ways to send your message than walking out of the classroom," he said. "The fact of the matter is, I feel quite confident that the Texas Legislature will fund our schools appropriately. At the end of the day, being in the classroom is a lot more important to them than protesting, particularly during school hours. If they want to come here on Saturdays and Sundays or after school, have at it."
It's ironic that teenagers get accused of having attitude problems. Gov. Perry's comments remind me what's wrong with some leadership when it comes to schools, particularly high schools...attitude. Instead of seeing these students as passionate about their school and a possible resource, his take-away of this situation is that the students' actions are inappropriate and a waste of time. If they would have "sent their message in a better way," would he have taken notice? Probably not! These students are begging for the chance to be involved, and they are pushed away and put down by the leadership of the state.
At the most, these students are 3 1/2 years away from being on their own, faced with a variety of situations just like this. There is absolutely no reason that they should not be involved in the process of their education (since soon they will be asked to be involved in the process of figuring out their own way). Research has proven that the more perspectives we take into account, the clearer picture we get about the subject. Instead of doing education to students, why are they not involved in the process? My guess is that people like Gov. Perry think it would be too hard to figure out a way to make that happen...great example/model for those students!
Some students in the Katy Texas school district protested staffing cuts at their schools. One student even suggested that they need their teachers more than smart boards in the classroom. Governor Perry's response to these protesting students was...
"There are better ways to send your message than walking out of the classroom," he said. "The fact of the matter is, I feel quite confident that the Texas Legislature will fund our schools appropriately. At the end of the day, being in the classroom is a lot more important to them than protesting, particularly during school hours. If they want to come here on Saturdays and Sundays or after school, have at it."
It's ironic that teenagers get accused of having attitude problems. Gov. Perry's comments remind me what's wrong with some leadership when it comes to schools, particularly high schools...attitude. Instead of seeing these students as passionate about their school and a possible resource, his take-away of this situation is that the students' actions are inappropriate and a waste of time. If they would have "sent their message in a better way," would he have taken notice? Probably not! These students are begging for the chance to be involved, and they are pushed away and put down by the leadership of the state.
At the most, these students are 3 1/2 years away from being on their own, faced with a variety of situations just like this. There is absolutely no reason that they should not be involved in the process of their education (since soon they will be asked to be involved in the process of figuring out their own way). Research has proven that the more perspectives we take into account, the clearer picture we get about the subject. Instead of doing education to students, why are they not involved in the process? My guess is that people like Gov. Perry think it would be too hard to figure out a way to make that happen...great example/model for those students!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)