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.
Friday, April 23, 2010
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.
Friday, March 26, 2010
HW 46
I read a book about the biggest institution in America, the military. The book is called Jarhead, and if your talking institution wise, the military wanted well trained soldiers that doesn't mind being kept in the dark. For instance the soldiers in the book knew how to calculate the distance a bullet can travel, and work together, but without a reason other than fighting for America. If we look at how the military works, discipline is one of the main skills they want soldiers to learn. After discipline, they teach other skills along with loyalty, and how to act. But in the end, they don't just teach you how to act like a soldier but a decent civilian.
My topic was about how schools want to form their children into civilized adults. This is no different then what the military is trying to accomplish. For instant, they both teach about respect, and disipline while educating students the skills they need to "achieve" in life. Look at the "go-army" commercials, they make people believe that they teach people skills and knowlegde to help them better themselves, nothing more than what school is already doing. Every institution is trying to teach their people their way in acting in life, military and schools happen to be the same. They teach you the "proper" ways to act like a civilian and have people believe that thei progras can change people.
In Jarhead the soldiers in the beginning act like children. They are immature, play harsh pranks while showing they cannot complete a simple command. Though once they are in a battle, they all act as a unit, trying to keep each other alive while remaining calm in the most dangerous of task. The military has taught them the basic needs to survive in a fight, how to act in a fight, what to do and how to do it. Same goes for schools. In the beginning were suppose to arrive at this institution all gullible and stupid, and come out intellectual people with a college degree, dress well, eat well, and maintain a health body day after day. That is the goal of both these institution and their answer to maintain a number of health mentally stabled individuals
My topic was about how schools want to form their children into civilized adults. This is no different then what the military is trying to accomplish. For instant, they both teach about respect, and disipline while educating students the skills they need to "achieve" in life. Look at the "go-army" commercials, they make people believe that they teach people skills and knowlegde to help them better themselves, nothing more than what school is already doing. Every institution is trying to teach their people their way in acting in life, military and schools happen to be the same. They teach you the "proper" ways to act like a civilian and have people believe that thei progras can change people.
In Jarhead the soldiers in the beginning act like children. They are immature, play harsh pranks while showing they cannot complete a simple command. Though once they are in a battle, they all act as a unit, trying to keep each other alive while remaining calm in the most dangerous of task. The military has taught them the basic needs to survive in a fight, how to act in a fight, what to do and how to do it. Same goes for schools. In the beginning were suppose to arrive at this institution all gullible and stupid, and come out intellectual people with a college degree, dress well, eat well, and maintain a health body day after day. That is the goal of both these institution and their answer to maintain a number of health mentally stabled individuals
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
HW 47
Ideas for the film:
1. You have a person who is down on their luck and fake their resume to get a job as a teacher. Then throughout the year the students somehow helped the teacher get back on their feet and on with their life.
2. You can do the usual teacher teaching immanent rather then transcendent.
3. An add-on to the last one, you cane have two teachers in a competition to see whether immanent or transcendent is better.
4. You can have a teacher not only teaching but going through extreme lengths to help their students with their home problems or any other problems.
5. I really liked that movie with the dead poet society, where the teacher doesn't only teach but teach with enthusiasm and pride. I thought this is the most interesting because the teacher manages to make everything alright and fill the classroom with excitement and mystery. This kind of film would be interesting to make rather than the usual teacher saving student thing.
1. You have a person who is down on their luck and fake their resume to get a job as a teacher. Then throughout the year the students somehow helped the teacher get back on their feet and on with their life.
2. You can do the usual teacher teaching immanent rather then transcendent.
3. An add-on to the last one, you cane have two teachers in a competition to see whether immanent or transcendent is better.
4. You can have a teacher not only teaching but going through extreme lengths to help their students with their home problems or any other problems.
5. I really liked that movie with the dead poet society, where the teacher doesn't only teach but teach with enthusiasm and pride. I thought this is the most interesting because the teacher manages to make everything alright and fill the classroom with excitement and mystery. This kind of film would be interesting to make rather than the usual teacher saving student thing.
Monday, March 15, 2010
Hw 45
In most movies that we recently watched, all the teachers started out teaching like E.D. Hirsch, who teaches transcendent, or a step by step lesson. Eventually the teachers end up teaching like Ted Sizer, who teaches immanent, which basically is work with what works. I feel as though E.D. Hirsch is the kind of teacher society wants. People believe that the more someone knows about something, the smarter they are. Filling a person with information seems like something our parents what as well. As long as kids come home with some new knowledge, it keeps the parents happy that their child learns something even if it is not necessary. Though this technique is good because it separates the fast learners from the slow learners. Not because one class is dumb, this will help the teachers come up with new techniques that will maybe improve students to learn. Life is a competition and this technique is too.
Ted Sizer influenced our school to teach the habits of mind. Unlike Hirsch, people will learn new ways of looking at things, develop new points of view and come up with their own inferences. I like this technique better then Hirsch because with the other technique, they teach you what is right and wrong and with history you can never be sure if the textbooks are accurate. Sizer teaches us to question things, to teach us that nothing is absolutely true if we can question it. The thing about these two techniques is that Hirsch doesn't feel confident when using his techniques with elementary students and Sizer does feel comfortable with high school students. Yet most people in our school, I bet, were taught Hirsch's technique in elementary and Sizer's technique in high school and we turned out fine. Frankly, I feel like Sizer's technique is more important when living your life but Hirsch's technique is more important when getting a job or sorts.
Ted Sizer influenced our school to teach the habits of mind. Unlike Hirsch, people will learn new ways of looking at things, develop new points of view and come up with their own inferences. I like this technique better then Hirsch because with the other technique, they teach you what is right and wrong and with history you can never be sure if the textbooks are accurate. Sizer teaches us to question things, to teach us that nothing is absolutely true if we can question it. The thing about these two techniques is that Hirsch doesn't feel confident when using his techniques with elementary students and Sizer does feel comfortable with high school students. Yet most people in our school, I bet, were taught Hirsch's technique in elementary and Sizer's technique in high school and we turned out fine. Frankly, I feel like Sizer's technique is more important when living your life but Hirsch's technique is more important when getting a job or sorts.
Monday, March 8, 2010
hw 44
I have watched the Obama school speech, and read two of the articles about school and although each one talks about the "war" or most important battle is school, they each brought up their own points of view. For instance, Obama said we must try and try if we want to accomplish something because the best things in life aren't free. He also said that if we drop out of school that goes against America. Also no one who drops out of school lands on a good job. I would disagree with most of the things he said. Other than the best things in life, or at least some, kids dropping out of school has been a part of the U.S.A. and isn't freedom what this country was suppose to stand for? And the other thing, there are a lot of people that dropped out of high school and still land on a good job, even better than most. One of the articles i read was about liberal arts and how it can expand out thinking. Yes an open minded person is caring, but the article seem to suggest that it is the most important of classes. They seem to believe that it is so important, years from now important people got where they are because of it. I do think that a class that increases your thinking is important but isn't really the most important of classes. Lastly, the second article i read was about school needing two system, one employee and one entrepreneur. An entrepreneur is basically a person who creates his own company, therefore more jobs are available and more people will be employed. Although this is a nice idea, i do not think it is a solution to the number of employees. First off, there are a lot of unemployed person not because of the limited job offers. Second this won't solve our problem but merely delay it and in the end making it worse. Like shoving trash into an already filled trash can. If there are numerous companies, there is going to be competition. Competition means winners and losers. Losing team will lose company and everyone working for it will lose their job. none of these solution present is even doable or a solution at all. All these people believe that school is the most important because of how gullible children are. That's why we are important, because we're new.
Although none of these are solutions to school or even the future, i do believe that school does offer things to children. For instance, with the amount of people around, they teach you what other people can be like, other then your parents or neighbors. They give you a glimpse of what life as a normal adult would look like; who to talk to, who is your superior, your superior's superior, etc. work life. The best thing they can do for students, and i believe this myself, if introduce you to new things. Subjects, ideas, authors, techniques, points of view, and many other things. Although the school itself might not teach you things, but that's why school is made up of different minds, so students can share thoughts with each other. That, i believe is the purpose of school, to introduce you to new things, and its your choice whether to take an interest towards it, or ignore it.
Although none of these are solutions to school or even the future, i do believe that school does offer things to children. For instance, with the amount of people around, they teach you what other people can be like, other then your parents or neighbors. They give you a glimpse of what life as a normal adult would look like; who to talk to, who is your superior, your superior's superior, etc. work life. The best thing they can do for students, and i believe this myself, if introduce you to new things. Subjects, ideas, authors, techniques, points of view, and many other things. Although the school itself might not teach you things, but that's why school is made up of different minds, so students can share thoughts with each other. That, i believe is the purpose of school, to introduce you to new things, and its your choice whether to take an interest towards it, or ignore it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)