There is too many ways to tackle the theories of why we do things and how things motivate us. Why we want love, power, family, friends, etc. But I do believe there is one thing that tops all of these, and it is the choices we make. A person can get hit by both their parents, have no friends, and live in a poor condition and can turn out fine on the other side and vise-versa. It all comes down to what we choose to do and it is the choices we make that create us as a person. We can choose what motivates us and how it motivates us.
Some of us choose to have friends because we don't want to be forgotten. For those who choose to have friends are motivated by the fear of being forgotten. If we can't be remembered by millions of people, we choose to be remembered by as many people as possible. This is the same with family and why we stick to them. We all want to be important, we all want attention because it is human nature. We are born in this world alone, and we are afraid to die alone. You can see this especially in facebook. The more friends you have the more people want to become your friend, even if they don't know you. And when having friends isn't enough, they try talking to you in hopes that you acknowledge their existence. Of course some people crave for attention and go a little too far. It becomes their life goal so they do things such as becoming a hooker, stripper, murderer, an authority of the law, suicidal people, daredevil, etc.
The roles we play are generally for attention but it can also give us power. Roles include ethics, culture, religion (if you have one), a job (if you have one) and your choices. Many other factors can empower or weaken your role but these are the largest of them. Ethics means nothing without culture to a person. You can be born in the west and have a culture similar to the east. Ethnic is only on the list because it influences the way people see you which will result to how they treat you. Culture and religion can affect a person depending on how much a person is loyal to them. What you do and what you say can be greatly influenced by your culture and religion. You do what you believe to be the way of life and you abide to them.
Roles in family are different than the roles we play outside. The roles you play usually are assigned to you at first such as the role of a good child, the cute child, etc. But as time goes on you develop your own persona and your own roles because you want to be unique not a copy-cat. By playing a different role you gain your own types of attention. Some play the role of bad child because of the attention they want. Some play the responsible one to get good attention from their parents. The list of roles can go on and on. Even adults continue to play these roles to gain attention from other people such as their love parent, siblings, and relatives. We continue these roles because we have no option but to play these roles. We participate in them even before we are born, when parents are expecting a healthy perfect child.
A job is something funny. It can change a person from their culture and religion. When you grow up, you are usually surrounded by people who teach you of their culture and religion. You right away feel accepted because these people are teaching you of their ways. A job, similar to school, introduces you to new people with new culture and religion, forcing you to see a whole new way of living. You can be a bully at first and if you hang out with pacifist, the bully will convert to a pacifist. If the bully hangs out with other bullies, he might find new ways of bullying people. A job and school provides a new environment that can change or empower someone’s role.
Choice is the most important factor. What you choose and what your choices are will affect you whether you accept or neglect things such as religion, culture, people with different interest, and so many others. Even the list of choices you provide for yourself can effect who you are. We even choose to accept or neglect things we don't notice such as advertisement, propaganda, and subliminal messages. You can break down choices to other factors such as your feelings, urges, and other human emotions. Your choices toward these things will change you as a person or these things will change the choices you provide for yourself. One way or another you will come out a differently after you choose.
All of these will effect what kind of life you want. We do things to achieve something in life. This life achievement can be our motivation, our choice, our guide, and/or our life. All of these factors in previous paragraphs can change or be change depending on your life goal. And honestly there are no good or bad life goals. It can be something similar to Charles Manson, or Bill Gates. Your life goal shouldn't have to revolve around the people close to you or people in need. Your life is your life, no one else. You can choose to be motivated positively or negatively by random people, live life or hide, etc. So many factors can change your entire perspective on how and why to live life.
Friday, April 30, 2010
Monday, April 26, 2010
Hw 51
There are a lot of people we could blame for the students limited thought process as Freire and Delpit have described. For instance, as most people do, we can blame teachers for not taking a stand against this “depositor and depository” relationship (reference to Freires' article). We can blame anyone involved with school such as parents, adults, other students, and so on. Hell, we can blame our government because they also control our school. We can blame anyone but it won’t help. Instead we should try and change school for the better. We’re the ones who have to live through school for a long period of time, so why not have the students decide what to change? I don’t know who or what grades should have that kind of authority, maybe have a representative. And no I don’t believe class president really represents anything. We should be able to change the things we have problems with. We should decrease the time we spend going to school, while creating a more meaningful curriculum to help us create a more meaningful life and change people’s view on students as objects.
First of all, if there is one thing I would keep the same, which is elementary school. Elementary school introduced us to new and exciting things while giving us the experience we need. They teach the basics of the most important subjects: math, science, english, and history. When we first arrive, they introduce us to new things we ought to learn, things we learn not just in classes but in the hallways as well. We are introduced to new people, and we develop new kinds of relationships with them that will last throughout the school years. Elementary school house many kinds of people with different cultures, and attitudes for us to meet. Even the friends we choose can bring us insights on what kind of future they might have and what kind of future you might have. With an environment that you become familiar to, it gives you more energy and keeps you interested in school. I would also have to say that elementary school was the best years of my school experiences because everything was new to me, and because of my curiosity, I never really got bored.
Some people don’t view children as people, but merely things that can be used to alter the future. From child labor, to T.V. ads or to when people say “they are fighting for our children,” people use children because it propose the best defense. Children are supposed to be the future of countries, they will live long enough to see their elders die. Some people use them for harmless ads, such as diaper commercials and movies, but that isn’t so bad because the child is earning some money for their family. Others have found better use of children. Because of their age, people assume that the child is inexperience with logical thinking. People use this advantage for their own benefits. An article written by dailymail.co.uk talks about children being used as guinea pigs to test the new wireless computer network that can potentially cause “loss of concentration, fatigue, reduced memory and headaches. There are also claims that it could increase the long-term risk of cancer.” (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-472357/Children-used-guinea-pigs-mass-Wi-Fi-experiment-warn-teachers.html) With such fatal symptoms, they still manage to install these devices in over 15,000 schools. The future adults of UK are going to become cancer patients because of this company’s selfish reason to test out a device that is already too hazardous to begin with. They took no sympathy for the possible outcome of the children, as though they treated children like animals in a laboratory. Once we are able to change the view of some adults, and convince them that children are no test subjects and should not be taken advantage of then maybe we can be treated more like the human beings we are.
Teachers in school should be familiar and use the technique problem-posing to create a friendlier environment. In some school today, students and teachers have a weak relationship. The teacher acts like an authority figure, what they say goes without question. The students would only be bored and wonder how the lesson is at all important in their life. Without a reason, lessons become meaningless and time is wasted in class because the students won’t listen to what the teacher has to say. The solution is using the problem-posing technique which is basically “The teacher is no longer merely the-one-who-teaches, but one who is himself taught in dialogue with the students, who in turn while being taught also teach. They become jointly responsible for a process in which all grow. Here, no one teaches another, nor is anyone self-taught.” (http://marxists.anu.edu.au/subject/education/freire/pedagogy/ch02.htm) Teachers can only live one life, and only have so much perspective. By getting to know students, they can increase their thoughts as well as teaching students to expand theirs. Problem-posing is a way where no one person is teaching but where even the students have something to say. This way everyone is learning and experiencing new things which is what school should be.
Next is to shorten the school years or change it for better use. Back during the 1700’s, the average life span was around 35. Franklin went to school for two years because his parents didn’t have enough money, and went on teaching himself. He spent about six percent of his life in school. The average person nowadays spend about twenty two years in school when you include elementary, junior high, high school and a four year college program, the average life span is around 75. We spent about thirty percent of our life in school sitting around and having teachers tell us things we can’t really be sure of. I think we should cut high school off and move right on to college. Benjamin had an idea of what he wanted to do at the age of fifteen. We need to forget high school and move on to college where we choose majors for our future careers because going to high school for four years seems like an extra. Yes it teaches us more complex materials on subjects but nothing college can’t already teach. This will increase the amount of money earn especially when you have four years of your life back, it will also help us move on with our lives and do the things we want to do. Because time in college is short enough you can add mandatory classes such as financial aid classes and any other things that jobs can’t teach you. We would gain approximately eight percent of our life back.
There are of course drawbacks to these types of changes and I do feel like most people would prefer school as it is now because it already shows progress. School becomes a competition for most students. There is the most intelligent student, the most athletic student, and then there is the worse student. Most students would aim for recognition, such as becoming athletic, or learning everything there is to know about a hot topic. That’s the upside to the school system today, they make us fight for attention. With competition there is progress, and medals are just for recognition. The downside to this system is that the worse of students don’t get enough attention. They start to slack off in their school works and eventually stop coming to school. This could be because of the pressure the school gives off towards people who are a bit slow, or maybe because they don’t see the point in these competitions. There are many students today who don’t go to school for similar reasons. I can’t say that my ideas are any better than the school system we have today, but there is definitely something we need to change about school.
First of all, if there is one thing I would keep the same, which is elementary school. Elementary school introduced us to new and exciting things while giving us the experience we need. They teach the basics of the most important subjects: math, science, english, and history. When we first arrive, they introduce us to new things we ought to learn, things we learn not just in classes but in the hallways as well. We are introduced to new people, and we develop new kinds of relationships with them that will last throughout the school years. Elementary school house many kinds of people with different cultures, and attitudes for us to meet. Even the friends we choose can bring us insights on what kind of future they might have and what kind of future you might have. With an environment that you become familiar to, it gives you more energy and keeps you interested in school. I would also have to say that elementary school was the best years of my school experiences because everything was new to me, and because of my curiosity, I never really got bored.
Some people don’t view children as people, but merely things that can be used to alter the future. From child labor, to T.V. ads or to when people say “they are fighting for our children,” people use children because it propose the best defense. Children are supposed to be the future of countries, they will live long enough to see their elders die. Some people use them for harmless ads, such as diaper commercials and movies, but that isn’t so bad because the child is earning some money for their family. Others have found better use of children. Because of their age, people assume that the child is inexperience with logical thinking. People use this advantage for their own benefits. An article written by dailymail.co.uk talks about children being used as guinea pigs to test the new wireless computer network that can potentially cause “loss of concentration, fatigue, reduced memory and headaches. There are also claims that it could increase the long-term risk of cancer.” (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-472357/Children-used-guinea-pigs-mass-Wi-Fi-experiment-warn-teachers.html) With such fatal symptoms, they still manage to install these devices in over 15,000 schools. The future adults of UK are going to become cancer patients because of this company’s selfish reason to test out a device that is already too hazardous to begin with. They took no sympathy for the possible outcome of the children, as though they treated children like animals in a laboratory. Once we are able to change the view of some adults, and convince them that children are no test subjects and should not be taken advantage of then maybe we can be treated more like the human beings we are.
Teachers in school should be familiar and use the technique problem-posing to create a friendlier environment. In some school today, students and teachers have a weak relationship. The teacher acts like an authority figure, what they say goes without question. The students would only be bored and wonder how the lesson is at all important in their life. Without a reason, lessons become meaningless and time is wasted in class because the students won’t listen to what the teacher has to say. The solution is using the problem-posing technique which is basically “The teacher is no longer merely the-one-who-teaches, but one who is himself taught in dialogue with the students, who in turn while being taught also teach. They become jointly responsible for a process in which all grow. Here, no one teaches another, nor is anyone self-taught.” (http://marxists.anu.edu.au/subject/education/freire/pedagogy/ch02.htm) Teachers can only live one life, and only have so much perspective. By getting to know students, they can increase their thoughts as well as teaching students to expand theirs. Problem-posing is a way where no one person is teaching but where even the students have something to say. This way everyone is learning and experiencing new things which is what school should be.
Next is to shorten the school years or change it for better use. Back during the 1700’s, the average life span was around 35. Franklin went to school for two years because his parents didn’t have enough money, and went on teaching himself. He spent about six percent of his life in school. The average person nowadays spend about twenty two years in school when you include elementary, junior high, high school and a four year college program, the average life span is around 75. We spent about thirty percent of our life in school sitting around and having teachers tell us things we can’t really be sure of. I think we should cut high school off and move right on to college. Benjamin had an idea of what he wanted to do at the age of fifteen. We need to forget high school and move on to college where we choose majors for our future careers because going to high school for four years seems like an extra. Yes it teaches us more complex materials on subjects but nothing college can’t already teach. This will increase the amount of money earn especially when you have four years of your life back, it will also help us move on with our lives and do the things we want to do. Because time in college is short enough you can add mandatory classes such as financial aid classes and any other things that jobs can’t teach you. We would gain approximately eight percent of our life back.
There are of course drawbacks to these types of changes and I do feel like most people would prefer school as it is now because it already shows progress. School becomes a competition for most students. There is the most intelligent student, the most athletic student, and then there is the worse student. Most students would aim for recognition, such as becoming athletic, or learning everything there is to know about a hot topic. That’s the upside to the school system today, they make us fight for attention. With competition there is progress, and medals are just for recognition. The downside to this system is that the worse of students don’t get enough attention. They start to slack off in their school works and eventually stop coming to school. This could be because of the pressure the school gives off towards people who are a bit slow, or maybe because they don’t see the point in these competitions. There are many students today who don’t go to school for similar reasons. I can’t say that my ideas are any better than the school system we have today, but there is definitely something we need to change about school.
HW 51
There are a lot of people we could blame for the students limited thought process as Freire and Delpit have described. For instance, as most people do, we can blame teachers for not taking a stand against this “depositor and depository’s” relationship (reference to Freires' article). We can blame anyone involved with school such as parents, adults, other students, and so on. Hell, we can blame our government seeing as they are involved in many things. We can blame anyone but it won’t help. Instead we should try and change school for the better. We’re the ones who have to live through school for a long period of time, so why not have the students decide what to change? I don’t know who or what grades should have that kind of authority, maybe have a representative. And no I don’t believe class president really represents anything. We should be able to change the things we have problems with. One thing is too shorten our time in school. We should also create a more meaningful curriculum to help us create a more meaningful life and change people’s view on students as objects.
First off, if there is one thing I will keep the same, it is elementary school. They teach the basics of the most important subject, math, science, english, and history. When we first arrive, they introduce us to new things we ought to learn, not just in class but outside of class. We are introduced to new people, and we develop new kinds of relationships that will last throughout the school year. Elementary school house many kinds of people with different culture, attitude, etc. for us to meet. Even the friends we choose to have can bring us insights on what kind of future they might have and what kind of future you will have. With an environment that you become familiar to, it gives you more energy and keeps you interested in school. I also have to say that elementary school was the best years of my school experience because everything was new to me, and because of my curiosity, I never really got bored. Elementary school introduced us to new and exciting things while giving us the experience we need.
Some people don’t view children as people, but merely things that can be used to alter the future. From child labor, to T.V. ads or when people say “they are fighting for our children,” people use children because it purposes the best defense. Children are supposed to be the future of countries because they will be long enough to see their elders die. Some people use them for harmless ads, such as diaper commercials and movies, and that isn’t so bad because the child is earning some money for the family. Others have found better use of children. Because of their age, people will assume that the child is inexperience with logical thinking. People use this to their advantage for their own benefits. An article written by dailymail.co.uk talks about children being used as guinea pigs to test the new wireless computer network that can potentially cause “loss of concentration, fatigue, reduced memory and headaches. There are also claims that it could increase the long-term risk of cancer.” (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-472357/Children-used-guinea-pigs-mass-Wi-Fi-experiment-warn-teachers.html) With such fatal symptoms, they still manage to install these devices in over 15,000 schools. The future adults of UK are going to become cancer patients because of this company’s selfish reason to test out a device that is already too hazardous to begin with. They took no sympathy for the possible outcome of the children, as though they treated children like animals in a laboratory. Once we are able to change the view of some adults, and convince them that children are no test subjects and should not be taken advantage of then maybe we can be treated more like the human we are.
Teachers in school should be familiar and use the technique problem-posing to create a friendlier environment. In some school today, students and teachers have a weak relationship. The teacher acts like an authority figure, what they say goes without question. This would not only bore the students, but they can’t help but wonder how the lesson is at all important in their life. Without a reason, lessons become meaningless and time is wasted in class because the students won’t listen to what the teacher has to say. The solution is using the problem-posing technique which is basically “The teacher is no longer merely the-one-who-teaches, but one who is himself taught in dialogue with the students, who in turn while being taught also teach. They become jointly responsible for a process in which all grow. Here, no one teaches another, nor is anyone self-taught.” (http://marxists.anu.edu.au/subject/education/freire/pedagogy/ch02.htm) Teachers can only live one life, and only have so much perspective. By getting to know students, they can increase their thoughts as well as teach students to expand their thinking as well. Problem-posing is a way where no one person is teaching but where even the students have something to say. This way everyone is learning and experiencing new things which is what school ought to be.
Next is to shorten our time or change it for better use. Back during the 1700’s, the average life span was around 35. Franklin went to school for two years because his parents didn’t have enough money, and went on teaching himself. He spent about six percent of his life to school. The average person nowadays spend about twenty two years in school when you include elementary, high school and a four year college program and the average life span is around 75. We spent about thirty percent of our life in school sitting around and having teachers tell us things we can’t really be sure of. I think we should cut high school off and move right on to college. Benjamin had an idea of what he wanted to do at the age of fifteen. We need to forget high school and move right on to college where we choose majors for our future careers because going to high school for four years seems like a waste. Yes it teaches us more complex materials on subjects but nothing college can’t already teach. This will the amount of money earn especially when you have four years of your life back, this will also help us move on with our lives and do the things we want to do. And because time in college is short enough you can add mandatory classes such as financial aid classes and any other things that jobs can’t teach you. We would gain approximately eight percent of our life back.
There are of course drawbacks to these types of changes and I do feel like most people would prefer school as it is now because it already shows progress. We have more and more people educated even if some of them can expand their thinking at all. Some people say that schools are becoming worse and worse over the past few years, but when you look at it, the population has increased dramatically over the past few years. Of course we’re going to see more people failing but we will also see more people succeeding. There will always be someone on the bottom of our society, and there is always someone on top. Maybe it is a lot easier to have feelings such as sympathy for a guy living on the street which is why we noticed them more. I think, despite the poor class population, school has gotten better. We have more people attending high school, something Benjamin couldn’t get into. We have more and more people attending colleges and hopefully the majority of them becoming what they want to be. And even then, we have people succeeding even without a college degree or a high school graduation. I bet there are more people with a job today than any time in history and anywhere else on earth. So to me, school hasn’t gotten worse or better, just changed.
First off, if there is one thing I will keep the same, it is elementary school. They teach the basics of the most important subject, math, science, english, and history. When we first arrive, they introduce us to new things we ought to learn, not just in class but outside of class. We are introduced to new people, and we develop new kinds of relationships that will last throughout the school year. Elementary school house many kinds of people with different culture, attitude, etc. for us to meet. Even the friends we choose to have can bring us insights on what kind of future they might have and what kind of future you will have. With an environment that you become familiar to, it gives you more energy and keeps you interested in school. I also have to say that elementary school was the best years of my school experience because everything was new to me, and because of my curiosity, I never really got bored. Elementary school introduced us to new and exciting things while giving us the experience we need.
Some people don’t view children as people, but merely things that can be used to alter the future. From child labor, to T.V. ads or when people say “they are fighting for our children,” people use children because it purposes the best defense. Children are supposed to be the future of countries because they will be long enough to see their elders die. Some people use them for harmless ads, such as diaper commercials and movies, and that isn’t so bad because the child is earning some money for the family. Others have found better use of children. Because of their age, people will assume that the child is inexperience with logical thinking. People use this to their advantage for their own benefits. An article written by dailymail.co.uk talks about children being used as guinea pigs to test the new wireless computer network that can potentially cause “loss of concentration, fatigue, reduced memory and headaches. There are also claims that it could increase the long-term risk of cancer.” (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-472357/Children-used-guinea-pigs-mass-Wi-Fi-experiment-warn-teachers.html) With such fatal symptoms, they still manage to install these devices in over 15,000 schools. The future adults of UK are going to become cancer patients because of this company’s selfish reason to test out a device that is already too hazardous to begin with. They took no sympathy for the possible outcome of the children, as though they treated children like animals in a laboratory. Once we are able to change the view of some adults, and convince them that children are no test subjects and should not be taken advantage of then maybe we can be treated more like the human we are.
Teachers in school should be familiar and use the technique problem-posing to create a friendlier environment. In some school today, students and teachers have a weak relationship. The teacher acts like an authority figure, what they say goes without question. This would not only bore the students, but they can’t help but wonder how the lesson is at all important in their life. Without a reason, lessons become meaningless and time is wasted in class because the students won’t listen to what the teacher has to say. The solution is using the problem-posing technique which is basically “The teacher is no longer merely the-one-who-teaches, but one who is himself taught in dialogue with the students, who in turn while being taught also teach. They become jointly responsible for a process in which all grow. Here, no one teaches another, nor is anyone self-taught.” (http://marxists.anu.edu.au/subject/education/freire/pedagogy/ch02.htm) Teachers can only live one life, and only have so much perspective. By getting to know students, they can increase their thoughts as well as teach students to expand their thinking as well. Problem-posing is a way where no one person is teaching but where even the students have something to say. This way everyone is learning and experiencing new things which is what school ought to be.
Next is to shorten our time or change it for better use. Back during the 1700’s, the average life span was around 35. Franklin went to school for two years because his parents didn’t have enough money, and went on teaching himself. He spent about six percent of his life to school. The average person nowadays spend about twenty two years in school when you include elementary, high school and a four year college program and the average life span is around 75. We spent about thirty percent of our life in school sitting around and having teachers tell us things we can’t really be sure of. I think we should cut high school off and move right on to college. Benjamin had an idea of what he wanted to do at the age of fifteen. We need to forget high school and move right on to college where we choose majors for our future careers because going to high school for four years seems like a waste. Yes it teaches us more complex materials on subjects but nothing college can’t already teach. This will the amount of money earn especially when you have four years of your life back, this will also help us move on with our lives and do the things we want to do. And because time in college is short enough you can add mandatory classes such as financial aid classes and any other things that jobs can’t teach you. We would gain approximately eight percent of our life back.
There are of course drawbacks to these types of changes and I do feel like most people would prefer school as it is now because it already shows progress. We have more and more people educated even if some of them can expand their thinking at all. Some people say that schools are becoming worse and worse over the past few years, but when you look at it, the population has increased dramatically over the past few years. Of course we’re going to see more people failing but we will also see more people succeeding. There will always be someone on the bottom of our society, and there is always someone on top. Maybe it is a lot easier to have feelings such as sympathy for a guy living on the street which is why we noticed them more. I think, despite the poor class population, school has gotten better. We have more people attending high school, something Benjamin couldn’t get into. We have more and more people attending colleges and hopefully the majority of them becoming what they want to be. And even then, we have people succeeding even without a college degree or a high school graduation. I bet there are more people with a job today than any time in history and anywhere else on earth. So to me, school hasn’t gotten worse or better, just changed.
Friday, April 23, 2010
Hw 50
My first article I read was by Gatto, entitled Against School. He said that school originated from Prussia, and it was meant to create common thinkers that can be able to do basic things and be used without their knowledge. To eradicate independent thoughts so we must rely on others to tell us what we want to know, to remove the logical thinking and the thought process and only provide answers to questions. Basically to make slaves, people who know their place, act their place, and think their place, all this because of profit. According to the author, we are profits to the rich men, we keep the society running and we keep it going. In war, those who control the intelligence control the battle. In school, the profiteers allow students to learn just enough to run our daily course, to keep ourselves alive and healthy as long as possible so they can milk us for every pennies worth. They pay millions to keep school running, and we grow up to become consumers who spend billions of dollars on things we do not need, things that will not benefit us but only comfort us. We buy things to create a fantasy that where we are important, and with a comfy blanket over us, a nice plasma screen TV in front of us, next to paintings and portraits of random people and places, how could we not drown ourselves in this world?
I already believed in most of the things that Gatto has written before I read the document. We are taught by people who are educated enough to teach children just enough or maybe even less. We are spewing crap to generations after generations. I think that if most people read this article, they would think its bullshit, and that school is mainly used to help people get a life. But our lives are already designed for us, with transcript and permanent records, and social security numbers, we are branded cows ready to be turned into food. Children are ripe for the picking. One way or another we can't go back to the way things were with Ben Franklin or any of the others teaching themselves or becoming an apprentice. There is no way to go back especially with the disturbing ideas and events the news and the internet tells us. No one trusts each other anymore and that we are all looking at each other as greedy people. We are going to have to live with this school system but it doesn't mean we can’t change it to benefit the future rather than creating mindless drones. If people, more specifically parents want a resolution, than they should be one of the main contributors of school. They should be able to put changes they believe will benefit students. Actually, thinking about it now, that might be as bad as letting the profiteers handle school work. For one thing, they don’t care for religion or ethics so much, so long as they make money. Parents, on the other hand, are a large group of people, with different ideas, opinions, and beliefs. If Gatto is right, that school freezes the mind of students so that no matter how old they become, their mind still maintains the mind of children, then parents who went to school will still act like children and school will probably be no different. One way or another, if you look at it, students will learn something. But should parents or profiteers run school education, I don’t know.
In Freire's article Pedagogy of the Oppressed, second chapter, talks about the extent of our knowledge when taught in school. In most public schools we are taught one way of thinking and repeatedly study this one way of thinking until we can regurgitate it exactly. He says that it is useless information if we know that four times four is sixteen but we don’t know how to get the answer. If there is no lesson on how to solve problems, we are limited to the questions and the answers. In other words, there is no how you get the answers, just what is the answer. Freire explained two typed of ways to teach: one is banking where students are depositories while the teachers are depositors. Then there is post-problem method which is to get more involved with students. Banking is when a teacher treats students like an incomplete textbook and the teacher has to fill out all the missing pages with random facts. They cannot connect with students or explain how this related to their lives, but if they memorized the random facts, they will become successful. Post-problems take a problem and try to relate to it. They explain why it is important and how it connects to the students’ life. Treating student more than mere objects can get students more interested, more in tune with the lesson and also ask question which will increase their thinking ability and knowledge. Again, banking turns you into a person with random facts, and post-problem encourages deep thinking and the importance of a subject.
I think our school acts like a post-problem school. Even though I don't engage in conversations with teachers, from my perspective, the students and the teachers know each other unusually more than they have to. With this kind of relationship, teachers are able to gain the respect of a student while increasing the interest the students have on a subject. This relationship is also better because it helps us become human. What separates us from a robot is that we can produce our own ideas and thoughts. What also separates us from robots is our communication. As humans we need to communicate to one another, it helps us from getting bored and going crazy. It helps keep lessons more interesting if students can engage in a conversation and ask questions. And it teaches us to be more like adults. For instances, you tell a kid something, chances are they are going to accept it without asking questions. As an adult or acting like one, you wouldn't just accept it without knowing how someone concluded to this kind of thought. An adult would want to know the thought process, why and how are important. Post-problems separate us from robots that banking hopes to create.
In Delpit's Interview with N. Stanley, is a Q&A about methods of teaching in school. She does not believe that tests will expose the brilliance a student can possess if tests only expose the students weakness. Teacher must go out and learn about the student from their community or from other students. She also tested out that students can learn much faster if they learned their official or main language first before learning a foreign language. By learning their language first, they can learn much faster because they are able to communicate with the people around them in their neighborhood or outside of school. The best method to teach is with art, whether it'd be poem, drawing, dancing, etc. This will take the bore out of learning and if you are able to write a poem about it, gets students more active and motivated to learn about the subject. Art also helps people feel like they belong to a sort of "club". Just like the movie Dead Poet Society, people will feel like they belong and somehow will feel encourage to participate in lessons or even understand lessons faster than those who don't use art as a method. Last thing she said was that every student has weaknesses and strengths. If teachers knew the strengths of their students, they should work with their strengths so teaching won't become a hassle. But there are some opportunities to turn a student’s weakness into a strength.
Delpit presents a lot of solutions for teachers in need of help. Most of her methods requires a lot of enthusiasm some teachers don't have such as asking around the students’ neighborhood to uncover the students strengths and weaknesses. Some of them involve parents such as teaching their child their native language first. Most of her methods take time that I think no one really cares for. If, I think it was Gatto, was right that teachers are bored of the subject they teach, and are told that they are unable to approach their students as human beings, then there is no way that they can use these methods. And the students being depositories for these lessons without an explanation cannot use art as a way of learning because they have not been taught creative. But in school where students are treated as humans, these lessons would be great. In fact, teachers might not even have to go to their students’ neighborhood to find out their strengths, just merely asking them would be sufficed. And the best part is, if teachers and students are able to get along, teacher can teach their lessons in an artsy way if it helps to learn better.
I only remember briefly what teachers we have interviewed in our class have said. Mr. Fanning never made it to our class. I don't remember Andy saying anything about his teaching experience or even high school experience. For Ms. D, I believe I remembered her speaking something about gender as a problem in her teaching years. Not really sure, but she was, I think, pressured for being a woman teacher which is why she left that school with a name I can't recall. Mr. Manly was just a few days ago, and he said that in his high school, the English teachers’ lessons were boring so he wasn't into English until college. Then when he became a teacher, he first taught in Math and Science of something as a grammar teacher for seventh grade, I think, and was told not to engage in conversation with students in any way other than what is needed to be explained from the textbook that was assigned for the curriculum. In his experience the students were not so much motivated to learn as appose to getting good grades. He believes that school to be the "antiSOF".
I have a slight memory problem but I do remember that they, or at least Ms. D and Mr. Manly, have problems with their previous schools that they taught in. Whether it was a bunch of sexist teachers, or teaching a zombie classroom, they all enjoy teaching in SOF. I can't be sure whether they are telling the truth or not, but I will have to take their word for it that SOF is not the worse school of all, but in fact offers new ways of teaching most schools don't have. But one thing I am sure of even at an early age when I use to attend private school, it was a lot better to have a teacher who is more enthusiastic about their curriculum, expresses themselves and put themselves in the lesson with stories about their life (even if they are lying) than a teacher who only teaches and never engage in conversation with the class only when talking about the curriculum.
I already believed in most of the things that Gatto has written before I read the document. We are taught by people who are educated enough to teach children just enough or maybe even less. We are spewing crap to generations after generations. I think that if most people read this article, they would think its bullshit, and that school is mainly used to help people get a life. But our lives are already designed for us, with transcript and permanent records, and social security numbers, we are branded cows ready to be turned into food. Children are ripe for the picking. One way or another we can't go back to the way things were with Ben Franklin or any of the others teaching themselves or becoming an apprentice. There is no way to go back especially with the disturbing ideas and events the news and the internet tells us. No one trusts each other anymore and that we are all looking at each other as greedy people. We are going to have to live with this school system but it doesn't mean we can’t change it to benefit the future rather than creating mindless drones. If people, more specifically parents want a resolution, than they should be one of the main contributors of school. They should be able to put changes they believe will benefit students. Actually, thinking about it now, that might be as bad as letting the profiteers handle school work. For one thing, they don’t care for religion or ethics so much, so long as they make money. Parents, on the other hand, are a large group of people, with different ideas, opinions, and beliefs. If Gatto is right, that school freezes the mind of students so that no matter how old they become, their mind still maintains the mind of children, then parents who went to school will still act like children and school will probably be no different. One way or another, if you look at it, students will learn something. But should parents or profiteers run school education, I don’t know.
In Freire's article Pedagogy of the Oppressed, second chapter, talks about the extent of our knowledge when taught in school. In most public schools we are taught one way of thinking and repeatedly study this one way of thinking until we can regurgitate it exactly. He says that it is useless information if we know that four times four is sixteen but we don’t know how to get the answer. If there is no lesson on how to solve problems, we are limited to the questions and the answers. In other words, there is no how you get the answers, just what is the answer. Freire explained two typed of ways to teach: one is banking where students are depositories while the teachers are depositors. Then there is post-problem method which is to get more involved with students. Banking is when a teacher treats students like an incomplete textbook and the teacher has to fill out all the missing pages with random facts. They cannot connect with students or explain how this related to their lives, but if they memorized the random facts, they will become successful. Post-problems take a problem and try to relate to it. They explain why it is important and how it connects to the students’ life. Treating student more than mere objects can get students more interested, more in tune with the lesson and also ask question which will increase their thinking ability and knowledge. Again, banking turns you into a person with random facts, and post-problem encourages deep thinking and the importance of a subject.
I think our school acts like a post-problem school. Even though I don't engage in conversations with teachers, from my perspective, the students and the teachers know each other unusually more than they have to. With this kind of relationship, teachers are able to gain the respect of a student while increasing the interest the students have on a subject. This relationship is also better because it helps us become human. What separates us from a robot is that we can produce our own ideas and thoughts. What also separates us from robots is our communication. As humans we need to communicate to one another, it helps us from getting bored and going crazy. It helps keep lessons more interesting if students can engage in a conversation and ask questions. And it teaches us to be more like adults. For instances, you tell a kid something, chances are they are going to accept it without asking questions. As an adult or acting like one, you wouldn't just accept it without knowing how someone concluded to this kind of thought. An adult would want to know the thought process, why and how are important. Post-problems separate us from robots that banking hopes to create.
In Delpit's Interview with N. Stanley, is a Q&A about methods of teaching in school. She does not believe that tests will expose the brilliance a student can possess if tests only expose the students weakness. Teacher must go out and learn about the student from their community or from other students. She also tested out that students can learn much faster if they learned their official or main language first before learning a foreign language. By learning their language first, they can learn much faster because they are able to communicate with the people around them in their neighborhood or outside of school. The best method to teach is with art, whether it'd be poem, drawing, dancing, etc. This will take the bore out of learning and if you are able to write a poem about it, gets students more active and motivated to learn about the subject. Art also helps people feel like they belong to a sort of "club". Just like the movie Dead Poet Society, people will feel like they belong and somehow will feel encourage to participate in lessons or even understand lessons faster than those who don't use art as a method. Last thing she said was that every student has weaknesses and strengths. If teachers knew the strengths of their students, they should work with their strengths so teaching won't become a hassle. But there are some opportunities to turn a student’s weakness into a strength.
Delpit presents a lot of solutions for teachers in need of help. Most of her methods requires a lot of enthusiasm some teachers don't have such as asking around the students’ neighborhood to uncover the students strengths and weaknesses. Some of them involve parents such as teaching their child their native language first. Most of her methods take time that I think no one really cares for. If, I think it was Gatto, was right that teachers are bored of the subject they teach, and are told that they are unable to approach their students as human beings, then there is no way that they can use these methods. And the students being depositories for these lessons without an explanation cannot use art as a way of learning because they have not been taught creative. But in school where students are treated as humans, these lessons would be great. In fact, teachers might not even have to go to their students’ neighborhood to find out their strengths, just merely asking them would be sufficed. And the best part is, if teachers and students are able to get along, teacher can teach their lessons in an artsy way if it helps to learn better.
I only remember briefly what teachers we have interviewed in our class have said. Mr. Fanning never made it to our class. I don't remember Andy saying anything about his teaching experience or even high school experience. For Ms. D, I believe I remembered her speaking something about gender as a problem in her teaching years. Not really sure, but she was, I think, pressured for being a woman teacher which is why she left that school with a name I can't recall. Mr. Manly was just a few days ago, and he said that in his high school, the English teachers’ lessons were boring so he wasn't into English until college. Then when he became a teacher, he first taught in Math and Science of something as a grammar teacher for seventh grade, I think, and was told not to engage in conversation with students in any way other than what is needed to be explained from the textbook that was assigned for the curriculum. In his experience the students were not so much motivated to learn as appose to getting good grades. He believes that school to be the "antiSOF".
I have a slight memory problem but I do remember that they, or at least Ms. D and Mr. Manly, have problems with their previous schools that they taught in. Whether it was a bunch of sexist teachers, or teaching a zombie classroom, they all enjoy teaching in SOF. I can't be sure whether they are telling the truth or not, but I will have to take their word for it that SOF is not the worse school of all, but in fact offers new ways of teaching most schools don't have. But one thing I am sure of even at an early age when I use to attend private school, it was a lot better to have a teacher who is more enthusiastic about their curriculum, expresses themselves and put themselves in the lesson with stories about their life (even if they are lying) than a teacher who only teaches and never engage in conversation with the class only when talking about the curriculum.
Monday, April 19, 2010
HW 49A
Our class film so far has been about an alcoholic teacher who is sick of school. Reasons are unclear or maybe there's too much reasons, but judging from the dialogues, the teacher is sick of everything about school, the curriculums, the students, and even his own lesson. It seems like his girlfriend had something to do with his circumstance, since the first scene is him moping with a picture of her in his cellphone but some of us haven't seen it yet. The scene after takes place where the teacher is sleeping and is woken by one student who is worried about his condition. Eventually he got up and taught the class that life isn't so simple. Curses a bunch of students and then leaves.
The first scene takes place in a dark room, with the only source of light could be the computer screen and the cellular phone. If you picture that, because the light from the phone contradicts with the dark in the room, whatever the teacher is looking at on the phone is important, which is his girlfriend. Because he is all alone in an empty room with only a picture of his girlfriend, something must have happen to his otherwise he could've just called her. So this makes him a man who has lost something he is not ready to lose and tries to drown the pain by drinking. The next day, the class arrives in the room with the teachers head on the table which tells me he has been drinking all night and has not left the building. This also tells me he did not want to go, whether he has one or not. The way he approach the student in the class he also acted like he blamed them for his state of being. He attacks the students strength (i.e. the smart students), and weakness (i.e. the rebels) while disregarding his intentional lesson. Then leaving the class with a "fuck you" attitude, leaving the students confused and eventually resuming their chat.
This would be the only film, compared to all the teacher/savior films we have watched that didn't end predictably. For instance, the mood of the other films in the beginning is a carnival, where the students go crazy and have a party (though some of the films don't exaggerate that far). Each student living like they are going to die tonight so they ignore the lessons and chat like everything happened that day. And when the teacher tried to do their job, they all fail to grab their attention. In our class film, the first scene was a drunk teacher who misses his girlfriend. The scene with the class starts out with the students wondering why the teacher is drunk. our film completely contradicts the other films right from the start with a drunk teacher. At the very beginning you don't see him as a savior but a saboteur. But we did do something the other films have done with is to show the misery the teachers endure. Our film didn't have much of an plot where the problem was resolved in the end. In other films, no matter how bad the students got, the teachers never caved in and gave up. Even in Hamlet 2 where the teacher was a hopeless slob and maybe mentally crazy, he never gave up. Even when the the veteran teacher who came back from a war, where people shot at her, complained that her students are terrible, she never gave up. In all these films the teacher kept going. Other film is the opposite. In my opinion, our film is what happens to a teacher who works for too long, trying hard each year to get their students attention and determination to learn lessons that may or may not help them in the future. I believe that our film is the end all to the teachers of the savior/teacher films.
I don't get why people have to go to school to become successful, many people have done it. I guess because more people have become successful with education, so they immediately assume that the more people who attend school, the more people will do well in life. I think this idea is ridiculous in every way possible but I guess it can't be helped. People learn more in school definitely, I won't say important things (except the basics) but definitely something. Why there are so many teacher/savior films is because of the amount of students dropping out, or not paying attention. Maybe this is a generation of ignorance and that more and more students believe they can achieve without schooling. Parents get mad and blames the school for their child's hatred for school. They all cried out for a teacher who goes the extra mile to hep students learn and make them interested in learning. Maybe thats why there is so many teacher/savior films that predictably end the same way because it would be too realistic if it ended the other way. I mean how many teacher have we had that acted like a savior and made us interested in learning more? I honestly couldn't tell if I ever met one. Besides movies are suppose to be fantasy, that's why they are movies and not documentaries.
The first scene takes place in a dark room, with the only source of light could be the computer screen and the cellular phone. If you picture that, because the light from the phone contradicts with the dark in the room, whatever the teacher is looking at on the phone is important, which is his girlfriend. Because he is all alone in an empty room with only a picture of his girlfriend, something must have happen to his otherwise he could've just called her. So this makes him a man who has lost something he is not ready to lose and tries to drown the pain by drinking. The next day, the class arrives in the room with the teachers head on the table which tells me he has been drinking all night and has not left the building. This also tells me he did not want to go, whether he has one or not. The way he approach the student in the class he also acted like he blamed them for his state of being. He attacks the students strength (i.e. the smart students), and weakness (i.e. the rebels) while disregarding his intentional lesson. Then leaving the class with a "fuck you" attitude, leaving the students confused and eventually resuming their chat.
This would be the only film, compared to all the teacher/savior films we have watched that didn't end predictably. For instance, the mood of the other films in the beginning is a carnival, where the students go crazy and have a party (though some of the films don't exaggerate that far). Each student living like they are going to die tonight so they ignore the lessons and chat like everything happened that day. And when the teacher tried to do their job, they all fail to grab their attention. In our class film, the first scene was a drunk teacher who misses his girlfriend. The scene with the class starts out with the students wondering why the teacher is drunk. our film completely contradicts the other films right from the start with a drunk teacher. At the very beginning you don't see him as a savior but a saboteur. But we did do something the other films have done with is to show the misery the teachers endure. Our film didn't have much of an plot where the problem was resolved in the end. In other films, no matter how bad the students got, the teachers never caved in and gave up. Even in Hamlet 2 where the teacher was a hopeless slob and maybe mentally crazy, he never gave up. Even when the the veteran teacher who came back from a war, where people shot at her, complained that her students are terrible, she never gave up. In all these films the teacher kept going. Other film is the opposite. In my opinion, our film is what happens to a teacher who works for too long, trying hard each year to get their students attention and determination to learn lessons that may or may not help them in the future. I believe that our film is the end all to the teachers of the savior/teacher films.
I don't get why people have to go to school to become successful, many people have done it. I guess because more people have become successful with education, so they immediately assume that the more people who attend school, the more people will do well in life. I think this idea is ridiculous in every way possible but I guess it can't be helped. People learn more in school definitely, I won't say important things (except the basics) but definitely something. Why there are so many teacher/savior films is because of the amount of students dropping out, or not paying attention. Maybe this is a generation of ignorance and that more and more students believe they can achieve without schooling. Parents get mad and blames the school for their child's hatred for school. They all cried out for a teacher who goes the extra mile to hep students learn and make them interested in learning. Maybe thats why there is so many teacher/savior films that predictably end the same way because it would be too realistic if it ended the other way. I mean how many teacher have we had that acted like a savior and made us interested in learning more? I honestly couldn't tell if I ever met one. Besides movies are suppose to be fantasy, that's why they are movies and not documentaries.
Monday, April 12, 2010
HW 48
Something about something: Teacher goes to a school and find that their classroom is filled with high school students who has phobias. The teacher finds that they all have a common phobia, paper cuts. The though of being cut by the edge of a paper made them so afraid that they cannot read books or even own a notebook. The simple solution of using computers was negated by a simple problem, the school didn't have enough fund to buy each student a laptop. The challenge the teacher faces is teaching the students without any materials and discovers that the teacher will have to resort to need techniques and ways to teach the class. There are several students that are worth mentioning. One student, A, wants to learn but is unable to. A tries to go to the library to use the computer but doesn't trust the books stacked behind them. A really wants to learn and hopes that the teach will be able to help them overcome their fear or at least try. Student B is having trouble at home. B goes to a home where the parents yell at each other all the time. B overheard one of their conversation about getting a divorce and continues to argue up to this day who should take care of B. They want B to decide who should take care of B but because they both love B, they started to bribe B. This only causes emotion out burst, and hatred for the parents. Student C, has no problem with the phobia, even though C has it worse. C is not only afraid of paper, but any form of tree; wood, paper, etc.
With no way of learning, C goes through the motion of school, proud of his phobia and uses it as an excuse whenever someone questions his intelligence.
First thing the teacher does is help the students get over their fear of papers. He gets the book Perks of Being a Wallflower (only because its the only book I know with laminated sheets and somewhat educational). As soon as the students got use to the laminated paper, except for C, they began to gain hopes for their education and future. Soon enough the teach knew what to do, and so began laminated pages of a textbook for every subject (since he's the only one teaching them) so he may bring them in class for like a show and tell. But the teacher still had nothing to show because the teacher had nothing to show to the principal if the students don't have any homework and the students can't do homework because they are afraid of paper.
One day Teacher (i don't know what gender the teachers going to be so i can't really give the teacher a name, so I'm just going to cal him "Teacher")was carrying books he brought from a bookstore, and bumps into someone when turning the corner. The books fell no top of both of them. When the teacher got up, he realize that the books fell on top of one of his student, C. C did not scream nor shout but merely pushed the books off of him. Teacher was confused and decided to test C's "phobia" by tossing a pencil he had in his chest pocket at him. C picked it up, not realizing that he had bumped into his teacher. They had a whole talk and apparently C faked his phobia so he can get an excuse to not do homework. The teacher made a long speech about life and doing good in school etc. and C got mad and left. Over the course of the week, Teacher had a plan to get rid of the students phobia but he needed C's help. (I don't know how Teacher would get C on his side, maybe telling on his parents and showing him what C can accomplish through singing and dancing. I don't know, so I'm going to skip to the part where Teacher did get C on his side.)
Teachers plan is this: with C on Teacher's side, Teacher can work on C's "phobia" while also transforming the worse of students into a better student. Once Teacher gets rid of C's phobia (not all at once, maybe in a few days), by giving him a pencil to hold, making him read a book made of paper, the students got use to the idea of paper and soon some of the students lost their fear. Teacher began transforming the students one by one.
(If you want to make it longer, you can add the idea of the teacher going into B's house and trying to get his parents to love B. When that doesn't work, Teacher invites mother and father to join B's mother and father in order to create a resolution that will help both B and his parents situation. Once that's all cleared up, B was more attentive in school. The final obstacle the teacher has to face is during their first parent teacher conference, C's parents told everyone that their child does not have a phobia whatsoever. Then C revealed that the teacher was lying to the students etc. The students felt betrayed and join together to hate the teacher. Of course eventually the teacher earns their trust by showing them how much they have accomplished after they got over their phobias and accept the Teacher back.)
If you got a better conclusion be my guest.
With no way of learning, C goes through the motion of school, proud of his phobia and uses it as an excuse whenever someone questions his intelligence.
First thing the teacher does is help the students get over their fear of papers. He gets the book Perks of Being a Wallflower (only because its the only book I know with laminated sheets and somewhat educational). As soon as the students got use to the laminated paper, except for C, they began to gain hopes for their education and future. Soon enough the teach knew what to do, and so began laminated pages of a textbook for every subject (since he's the only one teaching them) so he may bring them in class for like a show and tell. But the teacher still had nothing to show because the teacher had nothing to show to the principal if the students don't have any homework and the students can't do homework because they are afraid of paper.
One day Teacher (i don't know what gender the teachers going to be so i can't really give the teacher a name, so I'm just going to cal him "Teacher")was carrying books he brought from a bookstore, and bumps into someone when turning the corner. The books fell no top of both of them. When the teacher got up, he realize that the books fell on top of one of his student, C. C did not scream nor shout but merely pushed the books off of him. Teacher was confused and decided to test C's "phobia" by tossing a pencil he had in his chest pocket at him. C picked it up, not realizing that he had bumped into his teacher. They had a whole talk and apparently C faked his phobia so he can get an excuse to not do homework. The teacher made a long speech about life and doing good in school etc. and C got mad and left. Over the course of the week, Teacher had a plan to get rid of the students phobia but he needed C's help. (I don't know how Teacher would get C on his side, maybe telling on his parents and showing him what C can accomplish through singing and dancing. I don't know, so I'm going to skip to the part where Teacher did get C on his side.)
Teachers plan is this: with C on Teacher's side, Teacher can work on C's "phobia" while also transforming the worse of students into a better student. Once Teacher gets rid of C's phobia (not all at once, maybe in a few days), by giving him a pencil to hold, making him read a book made of paper, the students got use to the idea of paper and soon some of the students lost their fear. Teacher began transforming the students one by one.
(If you want to make it longer, you can add the idea of the teacher going into B's house and trying to get his parents to love B. When that doesn't work, Teacher invites mother and father to join B's mother and father in order to create a resolution that will help both B and his parents situation. Once that's all cleared up, B was more attentive in school. The final obstacle the teacher has to face is during their first parent teacher conference, C's parents told everyone that their child does not have a phobia whatsoever. Then C revealed that the teacher was lying to the students etc. The students felt betrayed and join together to hate the teacher. Of course eventually the teacher earns their trust by showing them how much they have accomplished after they got over their phobias and accept the Teacher back.)
If you got a better conclusion be my guest.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)