Welcome [sascott.weebly.com]



IntroductionPossibly one of the hardest careers anyone could choose to pursue is that of a teacher. Underpaid, often overworked, and underappreciated, teaching is a job that holds little interest for the majority of the population. For the few brave souls who shoulder the duty, a gargantuan task lies ahead. Teachers are faced with the job of creating lessons that will be engaging and understood by their students, while also keeping to a schedule and guidelines set by their school district. Guiding and shaping every new generation is no minor feat, but one they meet head on year after year. A successful teacher should be organized and firm, but personable and reserved. They deal with unruly students, irritable parents, immense workloads, all on top of their personal lives. As an English Education major, teaching holds a special interest for me. In roughly two years time, I will be joining the throng of teachers in America and I feel it is important to understand how much freedom I will have when teaching my students. Will I have to follow specific guidelines when preparing lessons? Will I be limited on how I can present resources to my students? Do I have to freedom to choose whatever supplementary materials I want? Each of these questions has been asked before by future and current teachers. Besides my interest due to my career choice, I feel that it is important to understand how the education system in America works. Our population and people are so diverse and unique that it will be interesting to see just how well or poorly students are performing. There is no such thing as a “relief system” to make teaching any easier. If anything, the guidelines set in place often make the task of schooling harder. As each and every student is unique and learns differently, teachers somehow must lead their class in a way that is understood by all. Guidelines can make creating lesson plans tricky and often frustrating for teachers who are trying to tailor lessons to meet the needs of each different class and every student. Teachers should have the freedom to teach as they choose in their classrooms to tailor each lesson to meet the needs of their students without having to work around overbearing regulations. School StructureIn order to keep an elementary or secondary school running smoothly, there are numerous behind the scenes people that work in tandem to maintain order. At the top of the pyramid is the principal and the assistant principal. Their job is to manage the overall comings and goings of the administration and keep the school safe. Second are the school secretaries, councilors, social workers, and support staff. They work alongside the principals to create a learning and comfortable community within the school. Next come the teachers, librarians, and the PTA. The teachers of course oversee making sure students are learning, while parents encourage and provide for their children from home (Harris, et al. 145). Although they may seem separate entities, each is a limb on the body called a “school.” If any part were to stop working, the entire system would fail. Everyone has a responsibility, parents, teachers, administrators, and even the students, to work together to achieve success. Every school is its own community and should be governed by the people within. In an interview with Brother John Poole, a professor here at BYU-Idaho in the English department, he stated that, “Most government officials couldn't identify what works in a classroom, so why should they be allowed to determine how well students are doing?” (Poole). Just as someone with no knowledge of football would never be asked to stand as referee during a game, outsiders should not be consulted to create curriculum for schools. Wouldn’t the best way to fashion a curriculum that works for the success of each student be for teachers to work with administrators, and base their planning off teacher experience? No one knows how best to educate their students than the teachers themselves. The Fall of the Faculty, a book by Benjamin Ginsberg, addresses this very problem. Far too frequently curriculum is heavily influenced by government officials and the whim of donors with deep pockets (Ginsberg 170). Administrators allow significant donors to push them around and request that certain information be taught. A Variety of MethodsIt seems strange that a country made up of such diversity would encourage such repetitive and monotonous teaching methods. Teach this but say it in these words, don’t teach that but don’t ignore that issue, be unique but not too much so, and don’t forget to test on it! Teachers are given a list of specific subjects they must address during the school year, and while this isn’t necessarily a bad thing, it isn’t good either. They get so caught up trying to squish everything that is required of them into the school year that it is nearly impossible to branch out or discuss in depth any one subject. Our country tends to find systems that seem to work ‘well enough’ and sticks with them for far too long. Division Head and coordinator of OECD’s PISA, Programme for International Student Assessment, Andreas Schleicher spoke on the subject of global diversity surrounding the approach to teaching in a GlobalTED talk in 2012. Over about a decade, countries such as Korea, Finland, and Germany turned their education systems around and rose in the overall global rankings. How did they do this? Through recognizing the need for change and doing something about it. For example, in Korea school days became longer, they invested in professional development so that teachers weren’t just teaching, and made class sizes larger (Schliecher). Students were given responsibilities and had expectations to meet, and they rose to the challenge. Now, the U.S has tried with mixed success to change the way education works before. In the early 2000s, President Bush signed the No Child Left Behind Act. The idea was that each student would be taught in such a way that they would be proficient in reading and math. The intentions behind the NCLB act were good, it “attempt[ed] to ensure that all children have equally good education. More than that, it [said] that all children will achieve high educational outcomes. . .” but it fell short when put into action (Hayes 16). Problems with this new law were the emphasis on standardized tests, the consequences when schools failed to produce students that met the requirements, and a new trend was to blame the teachers for the failure. It was assumed that since the law couldn’t possibly be the problem, blame had to be placed somewhere. Teachers were slapped with the label of incompetence because it was assumed that they “should be able to sustain interest while keeping alive the excitement of learning and protecting the esteem of each child” (Hafer 48). A task they cannot possibly attempt with all of the rules they must meet first to be categorized as capable. Standardized TestsThree little words that have the power to strike fear into the hearts of students and teachers alike are as follows; standardized state tests. Every year, teachers spend excessive amounts of time prepping their classes for these tests and students will spend that entire time feeling stressed and sick with nerves. The actual ordeal of test taking is a mind-numbing task that can reduce a student to tears. All the standardized tests a student will take over the course of their educational career are lengthy and challenging. Each test can last for a few hours and sometimes sections will be spread out over the course of a few days, prolonging the anxiety. So, from the standpoint of a student, standardized tests are terrifying entities that have no real purpose other than to create stress and anxiety. Why then, are standardized tests such a large part of the education system in America? Students of all grade levels are expected to take one or more state tests that will determine class placement or whether they advance to the next grade. However, using standardized tests to predict future educational performance is questionable at best. Phillip Harris, executive director for the Association for Educational Communications & Technology, alongside Bruce M. Smith, former editor-in-chief of the Phi Delta Kappan, and Joan Harris, an elementary teacher for more than twenty-five years, addressed this problem in The Myths of Standardized Tests. The trio found that “even when test scores, grades, parental education, family income, and the statewide ranks of a student’s high school are taken into account, just 27 percent of the variance in cumulative. . . grades can be predicted” (Harris, et al. 127). So, in other words, for all the emphasis that is placed on standardized test’s ability to predict a student’s success, the reality is that this method is less that fifty percent accurate. A major problem with standardized tests is the lack of recognition that each student is unique, and learns differently from their classmates. For example, a teacher can assign a book for their students to read and ask them to write about what messages they learn, but not all of the students will take away the same ideas. There will of course be main themes that are picked up by more than one student, but experience, background, personal thoughts, and many other factors will dictate who understands what. Donald H. Graves, a Professor Emeritus at the University of New Hampshire, addresses the lack of allowance for uniqueness in his book, Testing is Not Teaching. Graves writes that “testing implicitly rejects self-expression by focusing on a child’s ability to receive information. There is little time left for children to demonstrate serious thinking. . . Current testing approaches do not tell us whether students are c6apable of using information to express ideas of their own” (Graves 2). Standardized tests are not geared towards finding out which students are the most creative, who spends most of their time reading, or even simply understanding what makes them tick. All these tests are set up to do is reward the students who can regurgitate the proper information the best.Not only do standardized tests limit student creativity and uniqueness, but also that the creativity of teachers as well. Each test or section of the tests seeks out specific information. Teachers no longer have to spend time thinking about their lesson plans for the time before testing as they already know what they have to teach in order for their students to pass (Graves 41). Many of the state tests students take have rewards attached for the schools as well. With some tests, the higher percentage of students who pass means a larger allowance for the school. Therefore, superintendents and principals discourage teachers from straying away from the set information tests look for. Good Enough?From the back of the room comes a cry of, “What’s the point? Students are learning well enough with the current system.” This is partially true, students are still learning. The United States is by no means at the bottom of the educational heap in terms of rankings for areas such as math and science (see fig. 1). We could continue to putter along using the same methods and stay solidly in the middle of world rankings, and students would be doing adequately. However, the problem is that there is so much room for improvement, yet it appears as though education in America is stagnant, if not moving backwards. Ken Robinson, a British author and Professor Emeritus at the University of Warwick, addresses this reality of backwards moving education in a TED talk he gave October 2010. He claims that the problem with the current education system is that it tries to meet the future without changing anything from the past. So how then, should this be addressed and fixed so that students can move forward with the times?Figure 1 – Global Education Rankings A simplified table to show how countries rank against each other in reading, science and math.Robinson answers the question simply. “We need to encourage divergent thinking,” he said, “as an essential capacity for creativity, to enourage people to think laterally instead of linearly” (Robinson). In other words, stop trying to force every student into the same box, let them explore their abilities and guide them in using those abilities. Encourage the natural diversity that can create a unique learning environment. Students learn best with challenges and when more than one angle is addressed. A second speed bump that creates hesitation for people from encouraging teachers to have autonomy in their teaching is the recognition that not all teachers are equal. We live in fearful anticipation of the idea that there are teachers who will teach misinformation, push their own personal morals and beliefs on students, and would take any freedom to teach in the wrong direction. Yes, there are those few who would abuse their abilities, but that is the same in any profession, not just teaching. Instead of letting this fear control how the education system works, it should fuel changes within it. So, Mr. Anonymous wants to become a teacher? Fantastic, let him teach but train him in the best way to do so, and make sure he understands that there are boundaries that outline his place. From first grade all the way up until high school, students spend roughly seven hours at school with their peers are teachers. Eventually they fall into a routine that teaches them to trust their teachers. So why not let Mr. Anonymous address touchy subjects? As long as he understands delicacy and knows how to read whether his classes are mature enough and ready, there should be no problem. Trusting teachers needs to become a part of everyone’s mentality, not just students. Anyone who is crazy and brave enough to enter the education system are not doing so to preach bizarre material, they are doing it with a genuine desire to help and guide young people.ConclusionTo conclude, it is clear that something in the educational system in America needs to change. Past attempts to reform the school system have failed or had minimal results, such as the No Child Left Behind Act and the overuse of standardized tests. Students are doing the best they can with what they have and are being penalized when they fail. With the distractions around them and methods used to teach, it is understandable that most students struggle to reach set standards. There is simply too much going on, too many trial and error runs of different programs, for them to succeed. Teachers are not being given the freedom to teach their students in the way they perceive to be most effective. Rules and laws and standards to be met and specific material that must be taught all congeal together to create a fence that bars the way to success. We need to start trusting our teachers to do what they know best and let them exercise their own judgement to recognize how best to teach each unique class. Works CitedGinsberg Benjamin. The Fall of the Faculty: The Rise of the All-Administrative University and Why It Matters. Oxford University Press, 2011, New York.Graves, Donald H. Testing Is Not Teaching: What Should Count in Education. Heinemann, 2002, New Hampshire.Hafer, Alan. Prisoners of the Paradigm: What School Board Members, Legislators, and Community Leaders Must Know to Reform American Public Education. FalCo Books, 2000, Colorado. Hayes, William. No Child Left Behind: Past, Present, and Future. Rowman & Littlefield Education, 2008, Maryland. Harris, Phillip, Bruce M. Smith, and Joan Harris. The Myths of Standardized Tests: Why They Don’t Tell You What You Think They Do. Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, 2011, Maryland. Poole, John. Personal Interview. 19 October 2016. Robinson, Ken. “Changing Education Paradigms.” RSA Animate, TED Talk, December 2010. Guest Lecture. Schleicher, Andreas. “Use Data to Build Better Schools.” TED Talk, February 2013. Guest Lecture.Image 1 1 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download