School as domination - How do schools train us to be sheep, to be dull, to be dumb, to be absurd? Is it possible/preferable to escape, to transform, or to understand the institution? (Dead Poets Society, Freire, Sizer, Delpit, interviews, own thoughts)
Schools train us to be obedient by creating formalized and restricted institutions and it is possible to understand and transform the institution but rare to successfully escape it.
GATTO
Gatto discussed the main steps of school: school is a sorting machine, the students must be obedient, the teacher chooses the curriculum for the students, the student is only as good as the teacher determines they are, and the student is under constant surveillance. Basically, the six lessons are trying to form and mold the students to be students that are easy to teach and easy to sort into the appropriate places in society. If the student is cooperative in the classroom and treats the teacher as the authority figure who thinks for everyone, they can be easily sorted. Basically, the teacher has all the power in the classroom and the students are just there to absorb what is being taught without any individual thought or contribution. Gatto explains institutions train us to be sheep through these six steps.
Gatto does not agree with these steps, "This curriculum produces moral and intellectual paralysis" the steps do not allow for the teachers to actually learn anything but to accept the authoritive figure and be obedient. "Institutional schoolteachers are destructive to children's development. Nobody survives the Six-Lesson Curriculum unscathed, not even the instructors. The method is deeply and profoundly anti-educational" The steps create an inauthentic environment that is not natural for teacher or students. According to Gatto, it is possible to transform the institution into a more realistic learning environment where students do not all act in the same obedient manor and the teachers do not always act as the all knowing savior.
DELPIT:
Delpit discusses that traditional way of learning (the steps) are necessary but there should be opportunities for students to be aware of how they are learning and what they are learning. This can be seen as a transformation of the institution training us to be dull and dumb, "I suggest that students must be taught the codes needed to participate fully in the mainstream of American life, not by being forced to attend to hollow, inane, decontextualized subskills, but rather within the context of meaningful communicative endeavors; that they must be allowed the resource of the teacher’s expert knowledge, while being helped to acknowledge their own ‘expertness’ as well" students should take what the teachers teach as information to not just memorize and spit back out but to think about it for themselves as an alternative to being trained as a sheep.
MS. D
She says he had a good experience at her Brown, there were no core curriculums and it was a self motivated school. She specifically wanted to teach at a public school that was anti regents test prep. Ms. D discussed how difficult it was for her to find a school where her main focus in teaching was not preparing the students for the standardized tests. She purely cared about teaching students what she wanted to teach based on her own interests and allow for students to think and write independently based on their own opinions.
MR. MANLEY
When asked why Mr. Manley decided to become a teacher, he explained that teaching is a real humanistic job where you can really connect with people. He specifically wanted to shy away from the traditional way of teaching where the student teacher connection is minimal. He compared his experience teaching at SOF to a previous school he taught at where the teachers were not allowed to connect with the students at all. He had to teach grammar for a whole semester whereas at SOF he chose what to teach the students and he was able to have close relationships with the students. But a negative aspect of SOF that he mentioned was that students were more motivated to hand in homework at the previous school he taught at. The teacher is the authoritive figure in the institution training the students to be obedient and easy to sort especially in a traditional styled teaching environment. The progressive style, where the students are less obedient as witnessed by Manley, portrays a slight transformation and understanding that students have of the institution training them to be like a sheep as there seems to be more freedom in how to teach and how to learn.
Book: The End of Education by Neil Postman
Postman discusses the role of the authority and the "sin" of the student being too dependent on the authority figure. "The sin is in our unwillingness to examine our own beliefs and in believing that our authorities cannot be wrong"(128). It seems that often times in schooling (at least from my own experience), students expect the teachers to spoon feed the information to us, it is their job to give us all the information as the authority figures, “Knowledge is presented as a commodity to be acquired, never as a human struggle to understand, to overcome falsity, to stumble toward the truth."(116). It is the student's responsibility to take what the teacher says and think about it for themselves instead of relying on the teacher to spell out the answers to everything. The student must prove they are thinking about the material. Students must think for themselves and make their own decisions but take the authority figures' information into consideration. Students being able to think for themselves is a transformation to students being trained to be dumb, dull,
According to Ted Sizer, The students and teachers should have the freedom to do what they need to fit their roles, and the curriculum should be able to fit for the teacher and the student. The set up seems to be planned out there's no room for uncertainties, "How do I teach toward deep understanding-the application of knowledge to an unfamiliar situation- when the syllabus allows no time for plumbing the unfamiliar?" What I found interesting was that he also says the students and teachers should "Get the incentives right," that the teachers and students should want to be in school for the right reason. Essentially, according to Sizer, the main reason student's learn and go to school, is to learn to think and ask questions, a slight alternative to the institutions training the students to be sheep. Although the students may be thinking and questioning based on Sizer's views on education, there is still a sense of control from the teacher to get the students easier to sort.
Hirsch's Article
Sizer has an imminent view on how schools should be, Hirsch has a transcendent view. Hirsch believes school curriculums should be aimed towards what the students will face in their lives such as literature (newspapers and books) and standardized tests (SATs), "Students who possess this knowledge are prepared to participate in civic life, move up career ladders, succeed in college, converse confidently with a wide variety of Americans with whom they work or socialize, and generally have the esteem that comes with being regarded as an educated person." Basically that in order to fit in with the American culture as an adult, there are things that one must be educated about, and they are educated about this in school with the curriculum provided. This goes along with the traditional way of teaching which allows students to be trained as sheep so they can be sorted into the real world as appropriate titles.
Intellectually, Sizer and Hirsch just have different ideas on what students should know. Sizer has a view which allows students to be on different levels of knowledge as long as there is progression in their development of thinking skills whereas Hirsch's view of a student's intellect should be based on the expectations of society. I believe that generally, in both views, the emotional state of the student would be similar, regardless of the curriculum there is still pressure from parents, peers, and society that should be accounted for. Hirsch's view of school seems to be more practical than Sizer's because Hirsch's goes along with society's view whereas Sizer's is a little more independent to that. Expectations of fitting the American culture are a norm that is difficult to avoid thus, Sizer's theory less practical. I think it would be very difficult for the two theories to be adapted to work together because they have different goals. Hirsch's goal is to get to the next level whereas Sizer's goal is to learn and improve. Hirsch's views on education allow for students to be trained whereas Sizer's views do not allow as much for students to be trained.
Obama's School Speech:
Obama talks about how no matter what you want to do in life, it requires an education "And no matter what you want to do with your life – I guarantee that you’ll need an education to do it. You want to be a doctor, or a teacher, or a police officer? You want to be a nurse or an architect, a lawyer or a member of our military? You’re going to need a good education for every single one of those careers." Students are expected by society to go to school and get a good education, it is a general expectation for students to be obedient and thus successful. It is frowned upon when students drop out of school, they are looked at as delinquents who do not follow the rules and are associated with failure, "You can’t drop out of school and just drop into a good job. You’ve got to work for it and train for it and learn for it" but if in school students are only learning how to regurgitate information, does that successfully apply to going out into the real world and the work force?
Institutions:
This website talks about the benefits of institutions..."Institutions provide procedures through which human conduct is patterned, compelled to go, in grooves deemed desirable by society. And this trick is performed by making these grooves appear to the individual as the only possible ones." Basically that institutions allow for everyone to think the same way so that everyone has common knowledge. It seems to me a form of manipulation for people to understand each other and cooperate to keep society running through institutions. Institutions allow for students to be like a sheep and blend into society.
INTERVIEW
The female sophomore said "it is what it is" about the application process and it made me think about schools as a sorting machine. How we have to adapt to what society asks of us to be considered successful if that means going through a rigorous application process for the risk of denial or the relief of approval. Even though she does not agree with test taking she believes it is necessary. Her perspective seems to be that this is how society is and there is nothing we can do about it, we adapt to the level of work we think is suitable for ourselves. But what if expectations get so high that even the moderate levels are frowned upon? Should we push ourselves to risk stress and money? Or accept that we are not accepted? This point of view seems to be the dominant perspective of students about school, "It is what it is" and there's not much we can do about it, this is what the institutions train us to think so students do not question the authority and become harder to mold and sort into society. Going against the institutions and society is a way to escape the absurdity of students being trained as sheep.
Relating the concept of obedience and students being trained as sheep to the film, Dead Poets Society, The main characters go to a very traditional styled school where all their classes follow generally the same format. This entails reading out of the textbook; listening to the teacher lecture and having them determine the student's intelligence. But there is one teacher that teaches different from the rest. He teaches the students to think freely and hold their own opinions and ideas. I believe this is a fairly successful way of escaping obedience in students. The students in the film were able to live their life on their own standards.
An important aspect of education is the student's input and motivation to learn out of their own personal interest. "Nietzsche’s famous aphorism is relevant here: 'He who has a why to live can bear with almost any how.' This applies as much to learning as to living"(Postman 4). If the student has a good reason for them to educate themselves, they will deal with many possible ways of doing so. If the student is motivated enough, they have the potential to learn in almost any situation. Additionally, the motivation should be for the right reason, relating to Manley's comparison between traditional and progressive learning environments, the traditional environment entailed motivation to get the work done, but is simply getting the work done allowing for the student to learn?
Monday, April 26, 2010
Thursday, April 22, 2010
HW 49- Savior/Teacher Film
My personal contribution to the film was pretty small, I was just another student. My interpretation of the overall message in our class film was that, what they teach you in school is not directly relevant to the every day life of high school students in particular. We are so tied down to our high school routine and roles of the smart students, the chatty girls, or the rebels, it becomes our main focus in school and the curicculum is irrelevant to the students and in this case, the teacher as well.
I think this film emphasizes in contrast how schools are very mechanic and everything has to be done a certain way. They are robotic in the schedules and curriculums, social/human problems are not allowed get in the way of academic growth. Students and teachers are expected to keep their personal problems outside of the classroom. Whereas in this film, the teacher's actions relfect on his personal problems and he seems to be taking out his anger on the students.
Contrasting with the films we watched in class, all of them have the teacher being some sort of inspiration to the students. The students all grow to respect the new teacher as they come in for their first time teaching (Dangerous Minds). Which realistically, newer teachers are not as respected as the teachers who have been teaching for a couple years (at least from my own experience). Which is like in the class video, the students do not take him seriously. Even when he lashes out at them, once he leaves, all the students go back to their business. Contrasting with the films we watched in class, the students are changed by the teacher (Freedom Writers).
I think possibly because school is treated as a place students dread because of the mechanic and robotic routine of school, students fall into the traps of high school drama and conflicts which require a savior such as a teacher who is at the scene of the crime. Students feel that they have their lives planned out for them so there is this need to step out of bounds to be original, do your own thing, or to just want something that might not fit into the schedule or the routine (like Neil from Dead Poet's Society) but this going against the grain causes problems where the student needs somewhere to go to vent out these problems so they go to a teacher who is sort of the by stander in the situation who can give a valid input.
I think this film emphasizes in contrast how schools are very mechanic and everything has to be done a certain way. They are robotic in the schedules and curriculums, social/human problems are not allowed get in the way of academic growth. Students and teachers are expected to keep their personal problems outside of the classroom. Whereas in this film, the teacher's actions relfect on his personal problems and he seems to be taking out his anger on the students.
Contrasting with the films we watched in class, all of them have the teacher being some sort of inspiration to the students. The students all grow to respect the new teacher as they come in for their first time teaching (Dangerous Minds). Which realistically, newer teachers are not as respected as the teachers who have been teaching for a couple years (at least from my own experience). Which is like in the class video, the students do not take him seriously. Even when he lashes out at them, once he leaves, all the students go back to their business. Contrasting with the films we watched in class, the students are changed by the teacher (Freedom Writers).
I think possibly because school is treated as a place students dread because of the mechanic and robotic routine of school, students fall into the traps of high school drama and conflicts which require a savior such as a teacher who is at the scene of the crime. Students feel that they have their lives planned out for them so there is this need to step out of bounds to be original, do your own thing, or to just want something that might not fit into the schedule or the routine (like Neil from Dead Poet's Society) but this going against the grain causes problems where the student needs somewhere to go to vent out these problems so they go to a teacher who is sort of the by stander in the situation who can give a valid input.
Monday, April 19, 2010
HW 50
GATTO
Gatto discussed the main steps of school: school is a sorting machine, the students must be obdeient, the teacher chooses the curriculum for the students, the student is only as good as the teacher detrmines they are, and the student is under constant surveilance. Basically, the six lessons are trying to form and mold the students to be students that are easy to teach and easy to sort into the appropriate places in society. If the student is cooperative in the classroom and treats the teacher as the authority figure who thinks for everyone, they can be easily sorted. Basically, the teacher has all the power in the classroom and the students are just there to absorb what is being taught without any individual thought or contribution.
Gatto does not agree with these steps, "This curriculum produces moral and intellectual paralysis" the steps do not allow for the teachers to actually learn anything but to accept the authoritive figure and be obedient. "Institutional schoolteachers are destructive to children's development. Nobody survives the Six-Lesson Curriculum unscathed, not even the instructors. The method is deeply and profoundly anti-educational" The steps create an inauthentic environment that is not natural for teacher or students.
FREIRE
Freire talks about the banking concept of education where learning is similar to a commodity, the teacher offers the information and the student takes it, "the students are the depositories and the teacher is the depositor. Instead of communicating, the teacher issues communiques and makes deposits which the students patiently receive, memorize, and repeat." The student only regurgitates the information provided by the teacher rather than thinking about it, "the scope of action allowed to the students extends only as far as receiving, filing, and storing the deposits."
DELPIT:
Delpit believes that test taking does not accurately determine the intellegence of a student, "If teachers make judgments only according to the tests being inflicted on the children by the schools, then they can misunderstand their children's brilliance... these children carry a brilliance that you have little access to. You have to figure out how to bring that brilliance out." The main focus in looking at the brilliance of a student is looking at their strengths and weaknesses as a learner.
Delpit discusses that traditional way of learning (the steps) are necessary but there should be opportunities for students to be aware of how they are learning and what they are learning."I suggest that students must be taught the codes needed to participate fully in the mainstream of American life, not by being forced to attend to hollow, inane, decontextualized subskills, but rather within the context of meaningful communicative endeavors; that they must be allowed the resource of the teacher’s expert knowledge, while being helped to acknowledge their own ‘expertness’ as well" students should take what the teachers teach as information to not just memorize and spit back out but to think about it for themselves.
MS. D
She says he had a good experience at her Brown, there were no core curriculums and it was a self motivated school. She specifically wanted to teach at a public school that was anti regents test prep. Ms. D discussed how difficult it was for her to find a school where her main focus in teaching was not preparing the students for the standardized tests. She went by the phrase "breath no depth" and she had researched Ted Sizer were she had found a very specific interest in his way of teaching. She seems to be very pleased with her job at school of the future, she loves the exhibitions that we do, the freedom in the curriculum, and that the teachers are able to get to know the students.
MR. MANLEY
When asked why Mr. Manley decided to beome a teacer, he explained that teaching is a real humanistic job where you can really connect with people. He compared his experience teaching at SOF to a previous school he taught at where the teachers were not allowed to connect with the students at all. He had to teach grammar for a whole semester whereas at SOF he chose what to teach the students and he was able to have close realtionships with the students. But a negative aspect of SOF that he mentioned was that students were more motivated to hand in homeowork at the previous school he taught at.
Manley also discussed the difference between a progressive groovy style of teaching and traditional style of teaching. This lead into his experiences teaching with these two different styles of teaching. Relating to the issue of motivation, at the more traditional school, the students wwere more obdeient and did the work to get the grade whereas at SOF as a progressive style, the environment is more laidback I think especially at SOF because the majority of the students are so comfortable in the school, being there through middle school in addition to having close relationships with the teachers, students are less motivated to do the work. Manley also compares how in the traditional way of teaching, the students just get the work done where in a more progressive style, the students think about why and they have their own opinion on what they are learning.
Gatto discussed the main steps of school: school is a sorting machine, the students must be obdeient, the teacher chooses the curriculum for the students, the student is only as good as the teacher detrmines they are, and the student is under constant surveilance. Basically, the six lessons are trying to form and mold the students to be students that are easy to teach and easy to sort into the appropriate places in society. If the student is cooperative in the classroom and treats the teacher as the authority figure who thinks for everyone, they can be easily sorted. Basically, the teacher has all the power in the classroom and the students are just there to absorb what is being taught without any individual thought or contribution.
Gatto does not agree with these steps, "This curriculum produces moral and intellectual paralysis" the steps do not allow for the teachers to actually learn anything but to accept the authoritive figure and be obedient. "Institutional schoolteachers are destructive to children's development. Nobody survives the Six-Lesson Curriculum unscathed, not even the instructors. The method is deeply and profoundly anti-educational" The steps create an inauthentic environment that is not natural for teacher or students.
FREIRE
Freire talks about the banking concept of education where learning is similar to a commodity, the teacher offers the information and the student takes it, "the students are the depositories and the teacher is the depositor. Instead of communicating, the teacher issues communiques and makes deposits which the students patiently receive, memorize, and repeat." The student only regurgitates the information provided by the teacher rather than thinking about it, "the scope of action allowed to the students extends only as far as receiving, filing, and storing the deposits."
DELPIT:
Delpit believes that test taking does not accurately determine the intellegence of a student, "If teachers make judgments only according to the tests being inflicted on the children by the schools, then they can misunderstand their children's brilliance... these children carry a brilliance that you have little access to. You have to figure out how to bring that brilliance out." The main focus in looking at the brilliance of a student is looking at their strengths and weaknesses as a learner.
Delpit discusses that traditional way of learning (the steps) are necessary but there should be opportunities for students to be aware of how they are learning and what they are learning."I suggest that students must be taught the codes needed to participate fully in the mainstream of American life, not by being forced to attend to hollow, inane, decontextualized subskills, but rather within the context of meaningful communicative endeavors; that they must be allowed the resource of the teacher’s expert knowledge, while being helped to acknowledge their own ‘expertness’ as well" students should take what the teachers teach as information to not just memorize and spit back out but to think about it for themselves.
MS. D
She says he had a good experience at her Brown, there were no core curriculums and it was a self motivated school. She specifically wanted to teach at a public school that was anti regents test prep. Ms. D discussed how difficult it was for her to find a school where her main focus in teaching was not preparing the students for the standardized tests. She went by the phrase "breath no depth" and she had researched Ted Sizer were she had found a very specific interest in his way of teaching. She seems to be very pleased with her job at school of the future, she loves the exhibitions that we do, the freedom in the curriculum, and that the teachers are able to get to know the students.
MR. MANLEY
When asked why Mr. Manley decided to beome a teacer, he explained that teaching is a real humanistic job where you can really connect with people. He compared his experience teaching at SOF to a previous school he taught at where the teachers were not allowed to connect with the students at all. He had to teach grammar for a whole semester whereas at SOF he chose what to teach the students and he was able to have close realtionships with the students. But a negative aspect of SOF that he mentioned was that students were more motivated to hand in homeowork at the previous school he taught at.
Manley also discussed the difference between a progressive groovy style of teaching and traditional style of teaching. This lead into his experiences teaching with these two different styles of teaching. Relating to the issue of motivation, at the more traditional school, the students wwere more obdeient and did the work to get the grade whereas at SOF as a progressive style, the environment is more laidback I think especially at SOF because the majority of the students are so comfortable in the school, being there through middle school in addition to having close relationships with the teachers, students are less motivated to do the work. Manley also compares how in the traditional way of teaching, the students just get the work done where in a more progressive style, the students think about why and they have their own opinion on what they are learning.
Monday, April 12, 2010
Treatment for Savior/Teacher Move- HW 48
The film begins from the perspective of select 2 students from a humanities class and the perspective of the teacher. The first perspective is from the teacher, Benjamin Brooks, he walks into the school building anxious and prepared. Next is the nerdy girl, Anna Robertson she walks into the school building, shoulders slumped and avoiding eye contact with anyone and a book in hand. The next perspective is the popular cool guy, Jimmy Kendall he walks in with his head held high and his ipod blasting an edgy but popular song.
These two students go to their seperate advisories, Anna is sitting in the science lab studying. Jimmy is in the next room talking to his friends and being told to be quiet by Mr. Morrison, the health teacher just as it was time to go to first period. All while Mr. Brooks is preparing for the humanities lesson today.
Anna and Jimmy check their schedules and find their way to their humanities class. Once they arrive, Mr. Brooks is writing a question on the board and all the students form several clusters, Jimmy and Anna go to their seperate clusters of friends who happen to have the same class. Most of the kids are mumbling and snickering at the new teacher, wondering what he is going to be like. Mr. Brooks finishes writing the question and the students immediately are put off by the question and do not want to answer it, "What would you do if you only had one day to live?"
Most of the student's immediate responses are, "How am I supposed to answer that?" or "Nah, I've got time, I don't need to worry about it" and the funny guy says "I gotta live for more than one day, I've got a date on Friday" the class responds, "ayeeee" and there is a circle of high fives with the cool kids. Jimmy, as one of the cool kids, chimes in with the rest of that cluster. While the rest of the class quietly laughs to themselves and wait for the teacher to start the class.
Mr. Brooks is kind of nervous so now there's an awkward silence while he gets his thoughts together as the students look around questioningly, wondering if the teacher knows what he is doing. He says "Oh right...this is where I'm supposed to teach..." another awkward silence. "I'm Mr. Brooks and I will be your humanities teacher for the next semester, now let's go around and everyone say your name and something about yourself." Everyone says their name and something like, their hobbies, or favorite foods, etc, but the protagonists say things about themselves pertaining to the question Mr. Brooks wrote on the board eariler. This catches Mr. Brook's attention and class ends just as Mr. Brooks wants to discuss what the two students said. All the students make their way out of class and disperse to their next class.
The next day starts off similar to the previous but Anna, Jimmy and Mr. Brooks enter the school angrily. As soon as it is time for first period, the three main characters are in the same room. Mr. Brooks looked at his lesson plan just as all the students sat down and decides to go on a walking trip to the park. The class has mixed reactions, Anna and Jimmy particularly are satisfied with the park trip. The three main characters are trying to get their mind off of what was bothering them. The class gets to the park and Mr. Brooks has the class do an activity that the majority of the class enjoys.
The class, now more comfortable with each other while merging clusters, Mr. Brooks has everyone sit in a circle on the grass and he asks that everyone goes around and says the first thing that comes to mind, anything. Then he asks that everyone think about the one thing they want at that very moment. Mr. Brooks then asks everyone to go around and say at least one thing that is preventing them from getting what they want. The class opens up, mainly focusing in Anna and Jimmy. Mr. Brooks becomes the savior/teacher who shows the students how to express themselves.
These two students go to their seperate advisories, Anna is sitting in the science lab studying. Jimmy is in the next room talking to his friends and being told to be quiet by Mr. Morrison, the health teacher just as it was time to go to first period. All while Mr. Brooks is preparing for the humanities lesson today.
Anna and Jimmy check their schedules and find their way to their humanities class. Once they arrive, Mr. Brooks is writing a question on the board and all the students form several clusters, Jimmy and Anna go to their seperate clusters of friends who happen to have the same class. Most of the kids are mumbling and snickering at the new teacher, wondering what he is going to be like. Mr. Brooks finishes writing the question and the students immediately are put off by the question and do not want to answer it, "What would you do if you only had one day to live?"
Most of the student's immediate responses are, "How am I supposed to answer that?" or "Nah, I've got time, I don't need to worry about it" and the funny guy says "I gotta live for more than one day, I've got a date on Friday" the class responds, "ayeeee" and there is a circle of high fives with the cool kids. Jimmy, as one of the cool kids, chimes in with the rest of that cluster. While the rest of the class quietly laughs to themselves and wait for the teacher to start the class.
Mr. Brooks is kind of nervous so now there's an awkward silence while he gets his thoughts together as the students look around questioningly, wondering if the teacher knows what he is doing. He says "Oh right...this is where I'm supposed to teach..." another awkward silence. "I'm Mr. Brooks and I will be your humanities teacher for the next semester, now let's go around and everyone say your name and something about yourself." Everyone says their name and something like, their hobbies, or favorite foods, etc, but the protagonists say things about themselves pertaining to the question Mr. Brooks wrote on the board eariler. This catches Mr. Brook's attention and class ends just as Mr. Brooks wants to discuss what the two students said. All the students make their way out of class and disperse to their next class.
The next day starts off similar to the previous but Anna, Jimmy and Mr. Brooks enter the school angrily. As soon as it is time for first period, the three main characters are in the same room. Mr. Brooks looked at his lesson plan just as all the students sat down and decides to go on a walking trip to the park. The class has mixed reactions, Anna and Jimmy particularly are satisfied with the park trip. The three main characters are trying to get their mind off of what was bothering them. The class gets to the park and Mr. Brooks has the class do an activity that the majority of the class enjoys.
The class, now more comfortable with each other while merging clusters, Mr. Brooks has everyone sit in a circle on the grass and he asks that everyone goes around and says the first thing that comes to mind, anything. Then he asks that everyone think about the one thing they want at that very moment. Mr. Brooks then asks everyone to go around and say at least one thing that is preventing them from getting what they want. The class opens up, mainly focusing in Anna and Jimmy. Mr. Brooks becomes the savior/teacher who shows the students how to express themselves.
Tuesday, April 6, 2010
Class Film Preparation 1- Hw 47
-The students should have the "lovable" tone in their community similar to Dangerous Minds, it would make it realistic in relation to SOF.
-Students are unmotivated due to self consciousness similar to Dead Poet's Society this can be realistic in certain cases, maybe not for everyone and this can be shown in the film.
-Students are unmotivated because they do not believe school holds any significance in their life, there are more important things, also very realistic.
-Teacher uses analogies that relate specifically to the student's lives.
-Teacher has a quirky personality that the students at first find annoying but come to relate to.
-The trope of the dramatic change of how the students feel about the teacher from disapproval to approval.
- Along with the trope of change in student's attitude towards the teacher, should be a change in setting/tone to emphasize this change.
-Students are unmotivated due to self consciousness similar to Dead Poet's Society this can be realistic in certain cases, maybe not for everyone and this can be shown in the film.
-Students are unmotivated because they do not believe school holds any significance in their life, there are more important things, also very realistic.
-Teacher uses analogies that relate specifically to the student's lives.
-Teacher has a quirky personality that the students at first find annoying but come to relate to.
-The trope of the dramatic change of how the students feel about the teacher from disapproval to approval.
- Along with the trope of change in student's attitude towards the teacher, should be a change in setting/tone to emphasize this change.
Research and Writing- HW 46
Book: The End of Education by Neil Postman
Topic: College
The End of Education by Neil Postman is about the critique of American education and possible alternatives to education in the United States. Postman talks about some of the major aspects of education including, authority, media and views of knowledge and education, and why and how students can be motivated to go to school and learn.
This relates to my topic of college and how the expectation of education had changed over the years. College is becoming more and more of a requirement in the work force. This makes me wonder the real reasons students go to college. The reasons may have to do with authority figures in the student's lives such as parents and teachers. Specific to education, the teacher/faculty of school seem to be the main authority figures but in the lives of the students, the parents in addition to teachers play an authority figure role that affects the decisions the student makes. In addition, media and expectations from society affect whether a student decides to go to college or not. Since more and more people are going to college, it has become an expectation in society. Finally, the student themself, the motivation they have to continue learning in college.
Postman discusses the role of the authority and the "sin" of the student being too dependent on the authority figure. "The sin is in our unwillingness to examine our own beliefs, and in believing that our authorities cannot be wrong"(128). It seems tha often times in schooling (at least from my own experience), students expect the teachers to spoon feed the information to us, it is their job to give us all the information as the authority figures,"Knowledge is presented as a commodity to be acquired, never as a human struggle to understand, to overcome falsity, to stumble toward the truth."(116). It is the studnet's responsibility to take what the teacher says and think about it for themself instead of relying on the teacher to spell out the answers to everything. The student must prove they are thinking about the material. Students must think for themselves and make their own decisions but take the authority figures' information into consideration specifically when it comes to deciding whether or not to go to college after high school.
An important aspect of education, is the student's imput and motivation to learn.
"Neitzsche's famous aphorism is relevant here: 'He who has a why to live can bear with almost any how.' This applies as much to learning as to living"(4). If the student has a good reason for them to educate themself, they will deal with many possible ways of doing so. If the student is motivated enough, they have the potential to learn in almost any situation.
Topic: College
The End of Education by Neil Postman is about the critique of American education and possible alternatives to education in the United States. Postman talks about some of the major aspects of education including, authority, media and views of knowledge and education, and why and how students can be motivated to go to school and learn.
This relates to my topic of college and how the expectation of education had changed over the years. College is becoming more and more of a requirement in the work force. This makes me wonder the real reasons students go to college. The reasons may have to do with authority figures in the student's lives such as parents and teachers. Specific to education, the teacher/faculty of school seem to be the main authority figures but in the lives of the students, the parents in addition to teachers play an authority figure role that affects the decisions the student makes. In addition, media and expectations from society affect whether a student decides to go to college or not. Since more and more people are going to college, it has become an expectation in society. Finally, the student themself, the motivation they have to continue learning in college.
Postman discusses the role of the authority and the "sin" of the student being too dependent on the authority figure. "The sin is in our unwillingness to examine our own beliefs, and in believing that our authorities cannot be wrong"(128). It seems tha often times in schooling (at least from my own experience), students expect the teachers to spoon feed the information to us, it is their job to give us all the information as the authority figures,"Knowledge is presented as a commodity to be acquired, never as a human struggle to understand, to overcome falsity, to stumble toward the truth."(116). It is the studnet's responsibility to take what the teacher says and think about it for themself instead of relying on the teacher to spell out the answers to everything. The student must prove they are thinking about the material. Students must think for themselves and make their own decisions but take the authority figures' information into consideration specifically when it comes to deciding whether or not to go to college after high school.
An important aspect of education, is the student's imput and motivation to learn.
"Neitzsche's famous aphorism is relevant here: 'He who has a why to live can bear with almost any how.' This applies as much to learning as to living"(4). If the student has a good reason for them to educate themself, they will deal with many possible ways of doing so. If the student is motivated enough, they have the potential to learn in almost any situation.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)