revisiting an older post

While I've put the brakes on publishing reflections on student-teaching, I am still writing them. The brakes had to be slammed down.

I went back and read some of my previous posts - and the Y2K kids came up in conversation with some educators recently. I think this in combination with the 'pedagogy of the impoverished' theory are coming in to play in some situations I have seen. According to whomever explained it to me - academic, yes? - pedagogy of the impoverished is a book that discusses how students in 'impoverished' areas train the teachers, and essentially rob themselves of an education - whether they know it or not.

First of all, I hate the tags impoverished, under-priveleged, etc when discussing education. It implies that people who struggle more economically than others are ill-equipped to think. That is absolutely not true.

Second of all, these students know exactly what's going on. They know when they're being treated differently, though (as with every teenager) they may not have the best success in communicating it.

What I have noticed is that there are students who will do whatever they can to wear down a teacher. (This is my personal observation from my overall experience, not only from my recent assignments). More distractions in class = less time to work/read/discuss ideas = less homework overall (because a teacher will stop assigning it if only 10% turn in their work) = less learning. The teacher decreases expectations, the students follow suit - whether they are aware of it or not.

I have also noticed that in some schools, there is a stigma attached to academic acheivement. It's not that students don't want each other to succeed, it's that the ones who don't shine feel that they are placed in comparison to the students that do. Because you did a good job, and got good attention, I look stupid, and I get bad attention. It's the old "why can't you be more like your sister?" attitude that students feel they get from their teachers. Maybe they do. It's only a matter of time before the sister gets beat up, and learns to keep her mouth shut. Compound the issue with a higher competition for resources (including attention from teachers), a higher population, more challenges to overcome in just getting to school, and soon everyone is trained to expect less. High acheivers have to try extra-hard to end up still under-prepared. It saps a lot of energy - from teachers, staff, and from students.

Now, I'm an outside observer, and still new to the field. I don't claim to have any answer or magic-wand solution. There are some ideas that other countries and areas use that I support. HS Teachers in Japan only teach 4 classes per day. Translated to my immediate environment, teaching only 4 classes could still mean teaching 180 students. I support small-learning communities, and students taking responsibility for their own learning - and for keeping their school well maintained. Why can't the shop-classes do the school building and equipment repairs (in cooperation with facilities management)? That would be a great oppotunity for project and inquiry based learning. I think there should be one tech-support person for every 200 students at each school. Teachers should be well equipped, well-trained, and well-supported to use technology in the classroom.

I also think that local businesses should get bigger tax breaks and incentives for donating time, equipment, and materials to schools. If the school is where we draw our labor force from, businesses should be more involved in the preparation of the future labor force.

However, I'm still new, naive, and idealsitic, and there are no insant solutions. I still believe that if you are clear in your expectations, you are prepared to support student efforts in acheiving them, and the learning content relates to the world, students will rise to the challenge.

As with neighborhoods, schools that have a bad reputation can change the reputation. I have seen it. Whining about it will not bring about the change. It takes work, and optimism, and supporting each other instead of holding each other back.