EDUC 615-Reflection
Bigelow, B.,& Peterson, B. (2002). Rethinking globalization: teaching for justice in an unjust
world. Milwaukee, Wis.: Rethinking Schools Press.
Edgoose, J. (2010). Hope in the unexpected: How can teachers still make a difference in the
world? Teachers College Record, 112(2), 386-406.
Kovach, J. A. (1995). Decreasing educational segregation in urban schools: the role of inclusive education and
the need for structural change. Applied Behavioral Science Review, 3(2), 165-175.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
I don’t think that there is any “magic bullet” in education. Each school district is its own organic and ever-changing entity. I think the biggest impediment to school change in a dynamic world has been, and continues to be, the public school culture. Most often this culture is reinforced and further entrenched each generation by teachers and administrators.
I don’t have enough time in the public schools. That’s too bad because I think the public school is all we have left of “the public square.” It is the great equalizer, the great emancipator, the great snooze; often. This is due to the cumbersome, ridiculous bureaucracy that is a blessing and a curse. I know that the bureaucracy has to exist to protect children and to serve their needs. However, after a 12-year break from public school I had the opportunity to substitute teach a few weeks ago.
When it came time for lunch and recess I realized how little had changed. O.K., so we are in a new century since the last time I was in a public school but the complaints, the whining, and lack of enthusiasm was still palpable. All those things that made public school a drudge were still there. The lack of effective teaching methods and incompetent attitude was depressing.
I thought, what is going on in the teacher training programs then? I have managed to push myself as an educator even as I’ve been at home supposedly “not working.” I wanted to learn a new teaching method and so I spent three years doing that. Here are these teachers with all these resources available to them, and they seem to be even less educated about special needs students, acceleration, assessment, history, science and math and reading strategies. Are they only teaching these teachers to administer tests? Is that what I am missing? Where is the creativity? The push to excel? They all seem even more demoralized. I am demoralized too. I can count on one hand, with fingers left over, the high quality teachers my children have had.
Fortunately, at my lowest point I was able to attend class on a Thursday night. It is through the interaction with other teachers that are deeply committed to their field that I was able to consider education salvageable. The exchange of ideas and desire to inspire real education and change within students and schools is a the only remedy to “burn-out.” Teachers can be demoralized for two reasons. One, each school, or district, being an entity in and of itself, is essentially a small commune. The teachers have little time to partner with other teachers in other states and even less time to be politically active to agitate for change. Two, there does seem to be little hope right now of moving past the “testing culture” that pervades everything from college admissions to home prices. I do not think tests will go away until parents themselves push back.
Poor teaching, ineffective bureaucracy, and tests are only part of the story. During this course it was refreshing to hear about teachers in Oregon protesting the “testing culture.” It was a relief to read about Byrd Community Academy (BCA) and Central Park East Secondary School (CPESS). Further reading for this class heartened me. In
the news this week there has been a tremendous amount of attention paid to a situation in Georgia where teachers were supposedly changing tests scores to show a steep rise in average yearly progress. Supposedly, the Superintendent encouraged it so that the District and the Superintendent could make money and
accolades.
This may not seem heartening. I was saddened that the news did not get to larger issue. Which is, “why do people feel it necessary to commit a crime in the name of testing?” Perhaps if the larger issue is brought up then perhaps a discussion of testing will commence. Last week the results of testing came to fruition in Chicago. I heard nothing much about it this week but in Chicago there are moves underway to close schools that are “underperforming.” What does this mean? Can these situations in Atlanta and Chicago bring the craziness of testing to the forefront? Is the news media merely focusing on these two districts and their African-American teachers and
administrators as examples of schools that just can’t “make the grade?”
What is indeed heartening is that I can know, due to social media, that there are indeed teachers that can push back against the daily slog. It can be an objectifying profession if a teacher is to remain isolated. Edgoose mentions this when he points out that as our concerns get more global, the blame becomes more localized. My personal experience of the last few years has shown me that for me the greatest challenge and hope is hope through directed action.
What we experienced in this class did the most towards my perception of myself as a change agent that was part of a learning community. These two ASTL Learning Outcomes were most addressed in this class through the readings, the grant proposal, and most of all, the class discussions. We were able to learn together as a group that if we partnered with colleagues, and maintained our relationships with other stakeholders such as parents, then we can indeed make change that will benefit the educational
process.
(Please see: http://www.infed.org/biblio/learning-organization.htm, and http://infed.org/mobi/donald-schon-learning-reflection-change)
I am concluding my studies for my Master’s. In the last year I have become more focused on systems engineering principles and the need to perhaps look at the educational process as a whole rather than a “top-down” hierarchy with many spinning parts. I am not the first person to look at education this way. Peter Senge’s Learning Organization is another. Often, teachers are treated and respond as singular units in a whole, organic, system where we are inconsequential. If we see ourselves as part of a dynamic process we are then able to see ourselves as change agents within an evolving whole.
This way of thinking can be subversive because there is dialogue between the stakeholders and isolation is the food that grows stasis. The dialogue that we engaged in within our class is the first step in educational change. It is not enough to analyze culture, or the collective learning process. The fundamental structures of the educational system need to be called into question. Reflection can be a component but more decentralized change must take place for a new system to occur.
What we need is collaboration between teachers, parents, and students that initiated such things as alternative schools and student-centered models of teaching that came to fruition in the 1970’s. Arguably that was a time when most of America was still very conservative and still change occurred. Other changes occurred at that time that show how “top down” change is contraindicated in a system such as education. For example, busing was a huge blow to public education as families ran from public schools as quickly as they could. This decline of public education is well documented by Kovach. It continues today as more “top down” initiatives such as No Child Left Behind continue to mandate change in a system without the inputs of any stakeholders. These initiatives will continue to fail without system change.
Edgoose calls for specific plans that give direction to our lives on an existential level. This is the impetus to discovery learning and constructivism. All teachers know these are the best ways for a student to learn, but we have lost our voices to advocate for that. We also live in a conservative time but Edgoose points out that real change can happen when, “…the new emerges miraculously from a world that could not have imagined it.”
So, then Bigelow would argue for a fundamental change in the thinking that human nature is always selfish. When he says that, “People can recognize and act on their connections to others around the world,” I can choose to agree. Do I think it is that easy? Absolutely not. I do believe though that connections can be made with like-minded teachers, parents, and students to agitate for hope and real change. Our children expect no less.
world. Milwaukee, Wis.: Rethinking Schools Press.
Edgoose, J. (2010). Hope in the unexpected: How can teachers still make a difference in the
world? Teachers College Record, 112(2), 386-406.
Kovach, J. A. (1995). Decreasing educational segregation in urban schools: the role of inclusive education and
the need for structural change. Applied Behavioral Science Review, 3(2), 165-175.
~~~~~~~~~~~~
I don’t think that there is any “magic bullet” in education. Each school district is its own organic and ever-changing entity. I think the biggest impediment to school change in a dynamic world has been, and continues to be, the public school culture. Most often this culture is reinforced and further entrenched each generation by teachers and administrators.
I don’t have enough time in the public schools. That’s too bad because I think the public school is all we have left of “the public square.” It is the great equalizer, the great emancipator, the great snooze; often. This is due to the cumbersome, ridiculous bureaucracy that is a blessing and a curse. I know that the bureaucracy has to exist to protect children and to serve their needs. However, after a 12-year break from public school I had the opportunity to substitute teach a few weeks ago.
When it came time for lunch and recess I realized how little had changed. O.K., so we are in a new century since the last time I was in a public school but the complaints, the whining, and lack of enthusiasm was still palpable. All those things that made public school a drudge were still there. The lack of effective teaching methods and incompetent attitude was depressing.
I thought, what is going on in the teacher training programs then? I have managed to push myself as an educator even as I’ve been at home supposedly “not working.” I wanted to learn a new teaching method and so I spent three years doing that. Here are these teachers with all these resources available to them, and they seem to be even less educated about special needs students, acceleration, assessment, history, science and math and reading strategies. Are they only teaching these teachers to administer tests? Is that what I am missing? Where is the creativity? The push to excel? They all seem even more demoralized. I am demoralized too. I can count on one hand, with fingers left over, the high quality teachers my children have had.
Fortunately, at my lowest point I was able to attend class on a Thursday night. It is through the interaction with other teachers that are deeply committed to their field that I was able to consider education salvageable. The exchange of ideas and desire to inspire real education and change within students and schools is a the only remedy to “burn-out.” Teachers can be demoralized for two reasons. One, each school, or district, being an entity in and of itself, is essentially a small commune. The teachers have little time to partner with other teachers in other states and even less time to be politically active to agitate for change. Two, there does seem to be little hope right now of moving past the “testing culture” that pervades everything from college admissions to home prices. I do not think tests will go away until parents themselves push back.
Poor teaching, ineffective bureaucracy, and tests are only part of the story. During this course it was refreshing to hear about teachers in Oregon protesting the “testing culture.” It was a relief to read about Byrd Community Academy (BCA) and Central Park East Secondary School (CPESS). Further reading for this class heartened me. In
the news this week there has been a tremendous amount of attention paid to a situation in Georgia where teachers were supposedly changing tests scores to show a steep rise in average yearly progress. Supposedly, the Superintendent encouraged it so that the District and the Superintendent could make money and
accolades.
This may not seem heartening. I was saddened that the news did not get to larger issue. Which is, “why do people feel it necessary to commit a crime in the name of testing?” Perhaps if the larger issue is brought up then perhaps a discussion of testing will commence. Last week the results of testing came to fruition in Chicago. I heard nothing much about it this week but in Chicago there are moves underway to close schools that are “underperforming.” What does this mean? Can these situations in Atlanta and Chicago bring the craziness of testing to the forefront? Is the news media merely focusing on these two districts and their African-American teachers and
administrators as examples of schools that just can’t “make the grade?”
What is indeed heartening is that I can know, due to social media, that there are indeed teachers that can push back against the daily slog. It can be an objectifying profession if a teacher is to remain isolated. Edgoose mentions this when he points out that as our concerns get more global, the blame becomes more localized. My personal experience of the last few years has shown me that for me the greatest challenge and hope is hope through directed action.
What we experienced in this class did the most towards my perception of myself as a change agent that was part of a learning community. These two ASTL Learning Outcomes were most addressed in this class through the readings, the grant proposal, and most of all, the class discussions. We were able to learn together as a group that if we partnered with colleagues, and maintained our relationships with other stakeholders such as parents, then we can indeed make change that will benefit the educational
process.
(Please see: http://www.infed.org/biblio/learning-organization.htm, and http://infed.org/mobi/donald-schon-learning-reflection-change)
I am concluding my studies for my Master’s. In the last year I have become more focused on systems engineering principles and the need to perhaps look at the educational process as a whole rather than a “top-down” hierarchy with many spinning parts. I am not the first person to look at education this way. Peter Senge’s Learning Organization is another. Often, teachers are treated and respond as singular units in a whole, organic, system where we are inconsequential. If we see ourselves as part of a dynamic process we are then able to see ourselves as change agents within an evolving whole.
This way of thinking can be subversive because there is dialogue between the stakeholders and isolation is the food that grows stasis. The dialogue that we engaged in within our class is the first step in educational change. It is not enough to analyze culture, or the collective learning process. The fundamental structures of the educational system need to be called into question. Reflection can be a component but more decentralized change must take place for a new system to occur.
What we need is collaboration between teachers, parents, and students that initiated such things as alternative schools and student-centered models of teaching that came to fruition in the 1970’s. Arguably that was a time when most of America was still very conservative and still change occurred. Other changes occurred at that time that show how “top down” change is contraindicated in a system such as education. For example, busing was a huge blow to public education as families ran from public schools as quickly as they could. This decline of public education is well documented by Kovach. It continues today as more “top down” initiatives such as No Child Left Behind continue to mandate change in a system without the inputs of any stakeholders. These initiatives will continue to fail without system change.
Edgoose calls for specific plans that give direction to our lives on an existential level. This is the impetus to discovery learning and constructivism. All teachers know these are the best ways for a student to learn, but we have lost our voices to advocate for that. We also live in a conservative time but Edgoose points out that real change can happen when, “…the new emerges miraculously from a world that could not have imagined it.”
So, then Bigelow would argue for a fundamental change in the thinking that human nature is always selfish. When he says that, “People can recognize and act on their connections to others around the world,” I can choose to agree. Do I think it is that easy? Absolutely not. I do believe though that connections can be made with like-minded teachers, parents, and students to agitate for hope and real change. Our children expect no less.