I'm new at this social media stuff. Reading through blogs on the web, for our class at CNM, and now participating by writing one has brought up some interesting revelations. I don't twitter (tweet I think)-not really interested in finding out someone's on the toilet, eating a Burger King Whopper (really good-umm!) or someone just saw their significant other at the mall with their BFF (oh my god-I'm going to kill myself/him/her or all of the above). Give me a break-get a life! Reading a large number of these blogs just reinforces that the format has changed to be a 250-400 word tweet.
There are blogs for everything. We are interested in readings blogs about education. What used to done in seminars, in-service days, and subject matter communities of practice, which presented the latest fad(s) du jour about Education, now find their way for all to read and write about, this time on line. Have you noticed that once they get a following, an Limited Liability Corporation, video series (maybe even movie) and a book deal soon follow? Readers get to exercise their democratic experience and learning by commenting about aspects or thoughts that they find important in this format.
In this light, and issued for whatever it is worth, I recommend several education related blogs for your review.
First, please see learning.now (http://www.pbs.org/teachers/learning.now), which is a series of varied types of Web Blogs brought to us by the Liberal Motivated Public Broadcasting Corporation folks. I was especially interested in those (albeit carefully selected, some even award winning) in the Math ones (all cutesy named) which described lesson plans and means to teach specific topics. These cutesy names remind me of teaching pre-school children Soccer Skills by doing "Sharks and Minnows" or "Escape the Land Crabs", effective, but still following a social style thought to be effective (We are all going to play a fun game!). PBS likes to focus on technology innovation areas which is on all of our minds today. Second, look at http://www.openeducation.net, a blog by Thomas J. Hanson (school district resource officer. Thomas looks at the processes in changing education today "providing an objective and subjective look at the issues affecting/fragmenting modern education". I like that Thomas tries to avoid the flavor du jour approach and speaks a lot about integration of technology to basic education issues and why they technology is impacting important social issues.
Last, I really like and recommend that you look at the work of Esther J. Cepeda, staff writer for the Washington Post. She is what we called a social activist in the 60's and is a Hispanic living in Chicago. She has written extensively about education issues, especially poverty and class issues, social media snobbery, and the failure to deal with students of color and students at risk. Esther writes two columns and one blog per week. Please look fro her "Change to E-Textbooks Neither Easy Nor Cheap", which addresses the move to e-learning (materials and processes), which should strike home to all us at CNMCC. My textbooks meet her criticism of being functionally useless and written to avoid making student be bored not to teach meaningful information. I contend that going paperless has added a whole new layer of frustration and will lead to lower graduation rates and successes. Your thoughts on this will be appreciated.
Friday, January 27, 2012
Friday, January 20, 2012
Wow-education and learning. Very timely with education being at the forefront of the New Mexico 30 day legislative session in Santa Fe, NM.
To me, education's purpose is to expose an individual in a society to a body of concepts, ideas and subject matter (a curriculum) to prepare them for their role in society, if you will, to participate in the order of that society. Conversely, the vehicle of choice, for education in industrial societies, has been the "school". Schools have been with us since at least Greek and Roman times and permeate all ancient and modern societies. Their purpose has always been to provide the setting in which education, if you will, the curriculum is being delivered. We all thing of this school to be a building, but why can't it be open air or in a 'Kiva" in our village? What makes a school a societal vehicle is the people in it, not the setting.
This logically begs the question of how the curriculum may be delivered. The person or persons who is tasked with delivering our curriculum has many names among them "master", "sensei" , "teacher", "elder", "leader", "mother/father" or "chief". By analogy, it is said that "God has 1000 names". Their task remains the same, as John Dewey states to be the "social servant" of the society, to present and guide individuals in the prescribed curriculum. Clearly, a great and varied, number of approaches have been tried. Our class has a textbook which discusses 49 techniques. An approach, which I liked in the past for science subject matter was to make the textbook available, other reference texts and materials, photos, videos, and visual materials like slides-making the school setting available and the teacher was just in the room to guide the students to answer their own questions not answer specific subject matter experts. So, what is teaching and what is learning, do they have any similarities.
To me, teaching is underlying process of presenting the curriculum of the society, The teacher purpose is to employ techniques, learned from their experience, to prepare/prsent the curriculum subject matter, for students, who then can process, analyze, and synthesize concepts and ideas which will lead over time to understand/ their role in society and participate as a member in that society. I suggest, that "teaching" material also educates the teacher, who likewise is a student of how to teach this curriculum more effectively. Learning, therefore has not explicit purpose, but rather is an implicit process. Learning is a product of a student's exposure to subject matter and their cognitive processing of that input, thereby synthesizing a new understanding of their environment and how to react with it.
To me, education's purpose is to expose an individual in a society to a body of concepts, ideas and subject matter (a curriculum) to prepare them for their role in society, if you will, to participate in the order of that society. Conversely, the vehicle of choice, for education in industrial societies, has been the "school". Schools have been with us since at least Greek and Roman times and permeate all ancient and modern societies. Their purpose has always been to provide the setting in which education, if you will, the curriculum is being delivered. We all thing of this school to be a building, but why can't it be open air or in a 'Kiva" in our village? What makes a school a societal vehicle is the people in it, not the setting.
This logically begs the question of how the curriculum may be delivered. The person or persons who is tasked with delivering our curriculum has many names among them "master", "sensei" , "teacher", "elder", "leader", "mother/father" or "chief". By analogy, it is said that "God has 1000 names". Their task remains the same, as John Dewey states to be the "social servant" of the society, to present and guide individuals in the prescribed curriculum. Clearly, a great and varied, number of approaches have been tried. Our class has a textbook which discusses 49 techniques. An approach, which I liked in the past for science subject matter was to make the textbook available, other reference texts and materials, photos, videos, and visual materials like slides-making the school setting available and the teacher was just in the room to guide the students to answer their own questions not answer specific subject matter experts. So, what is teaching and what is learning, do they have any similarities.
To me, teaching is underlying process of presenting the curriculum of the society, The teacher purpose is to employ techniques, learned from their experience, to prepare/prsent the curriculum subject matter, for students, who then can process, analyze, and synthesize concepts and ideas which will lead over time to understand/ their role in society and participate as a member in that society. I suggest, that "teaching" material also educates the teacher, who likewise is a student of how to teach this curriculum more effectively. Learning, therefore has not explicit purpose, but rather is an implicit process. Learning is a product of a student's exposure to subject matter and their cognitive processing of that input, thereby synthesizing a new understanding of their environment and how to react with it.
Monday, January 16, 2012
What is Democratic Education?
The words by definition, imply, some sort of education (learning a set of values or facts) for the people who live in a country or geographical location which uses the political system of democracy.
In general, it seems, that a people who considers themselves democratic, usually decides to teach core values to their populace, to develop general use societal concepts. These at the very minimum, include values like being able to read written material, albeit religious at least early in history as well as language skills/writing and doing basic mathematics which are required for record keeping and basic technology for people. Other core values include teaching of a peoples history, concepts of religious education, social and ethical societal expectations, rules and procedures. These values are required for the citizens to become productive members of their society or culture.
Reviewing two rather divergent education theory essays, one from 1897 and the other from 1994, demonstrates the diversity and evolution of thought over a period of rapid changes in the American culture.
Prior to 1897, education was primarily based in the person's home or cultural/extended family/religious context. Public Education was a societal approach to standardizing basic education for the growth of the nation.
In this context, John Dewey wrote in 1897, his thoughts about his thoughts on public education. His "Pedagogic Creed", describes principles employed at the start of the 20th century. We see that Dewey felt that the goal of education to prepare the individual to serve society to the best of their abilities, Dewey develops the idea that teachers are facilitators and much like the English educational system today, are tasked with a "sorting of students" aspect of their employment. Dewey relies heavily on basic education, reading, writing, mathematics as well as philosophical aspects of education such as morals, ethics, and religious education as cornerstones of effective education. These teaching of basics over time cause the student to seek additional information on more specialized course or topics. Dewey uses tests as a primary metric for assessing progress/student fitness and sorting students. He notes that the teacher must "continually and sympathetically" observe student progress. What is so interesting is that we know today that everyone develops at a different rate, boys versus girls, and puberty related development.
The CNM-ATL program emphasizes teacher "passion" in a system which compensates poorly and overworks regularly. Dewey muses that "teachers realize the dignity of their calling", that they are the social servants to shape society. Dewey condemns Sentimentalism. They are the "prophets of a true god" and "usherers in of the true kingdom of god". Give me a break!
Kohn's 1994 polemic on educational assessments reflects a fundamental shift in philosophy. Missing are religious references (supreme court)and the prophecy of the profession. Testing is still employed, but, now as a necessary evil. Sentimentalism is rampant and rigid education is now condemned. Sorting of students is condemned as well as society preparation now individual preparation for an unknown cause and "no child is left behind" philosophy. Teachers are now tasked to become assessors (albeit not overdone) and coaches. School is safe, curriculum has quality and student actively aid in their education (to a point). No more sorting for excellence. What have been smoking?
My meager analysis of all this is that we went from minimal testing/evaluation/expectations, if any to a great deal to limited, a full circle! We went from a rigid system which produced graduates to a sentimental liberalized system today, replete with GED's, Charter Schools, Public Schools, and Alternative School which doesn't produce graduates or produces graduates with poor skills requiring, remedial education as adults. We are struggling in 2012 to address this Graduates issue while we still try to make the flawed system work. There is an old saying: "Repeating the same errors of your predecessor's" dooms you to "Failure". I suggest here that we need to return to a rigid system of education with modern societal constructs included.
In general, it seems, that a people who considers themselves democratic, usually decides to teach core values to their populace, to develop general use societal concepts. These at the very minimum, include values like being able to read written material, albeit religious at least early in history as well as language skills/writing and doing basic mathematics which are required for record keeping and basic technology for people. Other core values include teaching of a peoples history, concepts of religious education, social and ethical societal expectations, rules and procedures. These values are required for the citizens to become productive members of their society or culture.
Reviewing two rather divergent education theory essays, one from 1897 and the other from 1994, demonstrates the diversity and evolution of thought over a period of rapid changes in the American culture.
Prior to 1897, education was primarily based in the person's home or cultural/extended family/religious context. Public Education was a societal approach to standardizing basic education for the growth of the nation.
In this context, John Dewey wrote in 1897, his thoughts about his thoughts on public education. His "Pedagogic Creed", describes principles employed at the start of the 20th century. We see that Dewey felt that the goal of education to prepare the individual to serve society to the best of their abilities, Dewey develops the idea that teachers are facilitators and much like the English educational system today, are tasked with a "sorting of students" aspect of their employment. Dewey relies heavily on basic education, reading, writing, mathematics as well as philosophical aspects of education such as morals, ethics, and religious education as cornerstones of effective education. These teaching of basics over time cause the student to seek additional information on more specialized course or topics. Dewey uses tests as a primary metric for assessing progress/student fitness and sorting students. He notes that the teacher must "continually and sympathetically" observe student progress. What is so interesting is that we know today that everyone develops at a different rate, boys versus girls, and puberty related development.
The CNM-ATL program emphasizes teacher "passion" in a system which compensates poorly and overworks regularly. Dewey muses that "teachers realize the dignity of their calling", that they are the social servants to shape society. Dewey condemns Sentimentalism. They are the "prophets of a true god" and "usherers in of the true kingdom of god". Give me a break!
Kohn's 1994 polemic on educational assessments reflects a fundamental shift in philosophy. Missing are religious references (supreme court)and the prophecy of the profession. Testing is still employed, but, now as a necessary evil. Sentimentalism is rampant and rigid education is now condemned. Sorting of students is condemned as well as society preparation now individual preparation for an unknown cause and "no child is left behind" philosophy. Teachers are now tasked to become assessors (albeit not overdone) and coaches. School is safe, curriculum has quality and student actively aid in their education (to a point). No more sorting for excellence. What have been smoking?
My meager analysis of all this is that we went from minimal testing/evaluation/expectations, if any to a great deal to limited, a full circle! We went from a rigid system which produced graduates to a sentimental liberalized system today, replete with GED's, Charter Schools, Public Schools, and Alternative School which doesn't produce graduates or produces graduates with poor skills requiring, remedial education as adults. We are struggling in 2012 to address this Graduates issue while we still try to make the flawed system work. There is an old saying: "Repeating the same errors of your predecessor's" dooms you to "Failure". I suggest here that we need to return to a rigid system of education with modern societal constructs included.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)