Emily's Question

Emily's Question: How should students be treated, if not like workers?

In my experience, I have always adopted the idea that as a student, I am less like a worker and more like an apprentice. I am a worker-in-training. Education prepares students for future jobs and careers, and until they have mastered the skills needed to join the work-force, then they are not yet workers. They may work hard in school, but they are working in an effort to become something greater than just a student. For example, I am studying education. I go to the high schools and I teach lessons and observe students in their classrooms. I am not, however, a teacher. I am a teacher-in-training; an apprentice. I think most students gain a sense of entitlement when they believe they are workers. They think they are too good for school and that they already know everything they need to know. If they adopted the idea that they are apprentices, then they might be able to change their perceptions to incorporate new goals and perhaps even humility.

Although the students are partially responsibile for adjusting their mindsets, their teachers are equally responsible for treating them more like apprentices than workers. In my pre-practicum classrooms, the high school teachers treat me like a teacher-in-training, almost like a co-worker on whom they wish to bestow their words of wisdom. I am treated with respect and taken seriously, instead of being treated as though I am subordinant who must obey their rules. When students are treated like workers, then they will feel like workers.

Do you learn differently in classrooms where your professors treat you with respect and maturity than in classrooms where you are treated like student workers?

Education and Parents

In class we touched upon the idea that the financial security of the parents often determines the educational success/opportunities of the student. The example we used in class was that of becoming a successful actor or actress, and the importance of knowing the right people and receiving the right training at an early age. Should a parent not have the money or resources to put their children into top acting classes, then the possibility of that child becoming successful in the movie industry is slim.

How does this idea apply to schooling? Well, let's say that a first grader struggles with reading. If the child's school is ill-equiped to meet the needs of that student because of poor funding, then the parents might be expected to find help elsewhere. Although one can usually find a tutor in the area, if these parents can not afford to pay for one, then their child will not be receiving the help that he/she needs. If reading skills are not addressed early on, then that student will most likely never develop the skills needed, and will inevitably fall behind his peers. These children are the ones in the classroom who lack enthusiasm for reading, who may have behavioral issues, and who might even drop out of school. Could these issues have been avoided had the schools provided the resources that child needed at age six? If the parents are not in a postion to afford these services, then shouldn't the school and the state take responsibility, rather than make the child suffer for being born into poverty?

How do you think the state and the school systems can better address the needs of all students?

Mary's Question

Mary's Question: Can shock value, in a comedic sense, benefit a classroom?

To me, shock value in a comedic sense can be highly beneficial in a classroom. As I posted previously, the use of humor in the classroom can be very engaging and students often become more involved in the material. This same notion can be applied to comedy that shocks. For example, if students are preparing to sit through a lesson they may find boring, shocking them with comedy when they are not expecting it can change the mood of the classroom and keep the students awake and on their toes.

I once witnessed shock-comedy in a high school classroom when I was taking AP Psychology in my senior year. At first glance, the textbook was thick and boring, and the syllabus was full and demanding. I was expecting to be taking a course that could cure insomnia, and was not prepared for the humorous approach the teacher was going to take. After the first week in this class, I had laughed so hard that I may have even shed a few tears, and I looked forward to going everyday. Each day was new and exciting, and we could never predict just what the teacher would do next.

As I observe students in my pre-practicum, I notice that many students are bored with the mundane tasks they are asked to complete. I think we owe the students the opportunity for enjoyable learning, even if the lessons exceed the conventional. By incorporating shock, surprise, and humor in the classroom, students are allowed the chance to find learning fun - which may boost the success rates of many students. Considering many students are turned off by the idea of learning because of their monotonous experiences in the classroom, teachers may be able to reach out to students before learning becomes unappealing.

My question: Do you think students would find learning enjoyable if their teachers discovered fun ways of engaging them?

Education and the Work Force

In class, we discussed the role of education in creating and maintaining the work force through its means of instilling in students a sense of obedience and respect for authority. To me, the systems appears to start priming students for their given class-based work-force as early as kindergarten. In kindergarten, student learn to follow the leader, listen to their teachers, and obey the rules. Questioning rules and ideas can often be considered "talking back", which is a punishable offense. Students are taught to follow these rules, never questioning them, and never doubting their validity.

When the students who have been successful in such classrooms attempt college, they often experience a rude-awakening. These students have not learned to be critical thinkers and they can feel out-of-place in discussion based courses. They may feel uncomfortable addressing their professors by their first names, and may not know how to analyze a concept past its surface meaning. Should these students drop out of college because they lack the skill-set required to succeed, the educational system has accomplished its goal by pushing the students back into the work-force they belonged in. How can such students change their class or status if they are only taught how to succeed in their given work-force.

Are the fates of these students determined for them before they even enter the educational system?

Education and Economy

Educational claims state that schools offer an equal opportunity for education to all students. Often, however, this claim is proven invalid. Many factors contribute to the falsehood of the idea of equal education, and one of those factors is the economy.

In many lower income areas, the quality of education is poor, due to lower property taxes. With minimal funding, these schools are less than satisfactory and the drop-out rate is skyrocketing. Geoffrey Canada, founder of the Harlem Children's Zone, developed his system of charter schools in the Harlem area to address this concern.

Despite government funding, many students from lower-income families struggle staying in school because of the priorities they may have. Many students are forced to work to help their families, which leaves them little time for schoolwork, and can often affect their sleep patterns. Some students are expected to take care of younger siblings while their parents work, making schooling difficult for them as well. In a local school, I once overheard a class discussing that a student was going to be late to school that day because he had to take his mom to work.  How do we meet the needs of these students? If the conventional school schedule is not compromising to meet their needs, then how do they receive a quality education? Are these students swept under the rug, passed along, or simply convinced to leave?

Can you think of ways the conventional school-schedule model can be adjusted to help these students receive a quality education?

Mary's Question

Mary's Question: Do we have enough opportunities for self-motivated learning?

I believe we do not have or offer enough opportunities for self-motivated learning. Practically every subject is composed of a carefully constructed curriculum that incorporates many idea, material, and concepts, that have been determined required learning. How often do students have the opportunity to explore topics of their own choosing and interest? Rarely are students consulted about what interests them, and interest is a key component to motivation.

A good example of student self-motivated expression occurred in my sister's eighth grade class. In a unit on Oral Presentations, the teacher asked the class to present a persuasive argument to the class about a topic that he/she finds interesting. My sister, Heather, chose to present an argument about why the Celtics are the best team in the NBA. Not only was she meeting the requirements of the unit and practising oral presentation skills, but she also had fun working on the project because she was able to talk about something she is really interested in. Her motivation to complete the assignment did not come from her desire to get a good grade or hand in her work on time; she was motivated to complete the project because she was excited to learn more about the Celtics, show her classmates what she learned, and convince them of her stance. Students do not get these opportunities often.

Do you think that student interest in the subject matter is connected to their motivation to learn?

Education and Humor

In class today we discussed the topic of motivation and its importance to learning. In Bridges to Autonomy, the three characters have a discussion regarding this topic and the fact that learning must include a degree of volition. The question then becomes: How do educators increase students' willingness and desire to learn if they are not interested in the subject at hand? As a class, we discussed the popular use of swearing and humor to engage students, and while I do believe that swearing is often a last desperate attempt to connect with a class, I think humor in the classroom holds real merit.

When a teacher introduces humor in the classroom, the first effect is often a lightening of the mood. When the atmosphere becomes more casual and laid back, students become more comfortable and more likely to tune into the lesson. The use of humor also reveals the teacher's personality. In high school, I had a teacher named Ms. Murphy. She was very funny and she had a strong personality that the students loved. When trying to explain important concepts, she would use humorous examples that were both relatable and memorable. While the material she taught was often dry and scientific, she made the lessons engaging by using her sense of humor to increase our interest. Students may have difficulty mastering a concept, and sometimes using humor can help simplify the material and make it more accessible. I think humor is a very valuable tool that many teachers often fail to employ. Humor can also help deal with day-to-day behavioral situations in the class. In a conversation with the English Department Chair of a local high school, I was told that humor was a key qualifier for any candidate applying for a job in her school. To me, humor in the classroom hold more merit than acknowledged.

Do you remember any teachers who made their classes/lessons memorable by using humor in their teaching?