Annotated Bibliography

I finally finished my annotated bibliography!!!!!!!!!!  I thought it was going to be a pain in the rear... and it was.  But I have to say, I actually found some pretty good references.  I did a combination of articles about things we discussed in class (e.g. anti-oppressive education, multi-cultural education) and websites that will be good classroom tools for me in the future, like www. pbs.org.  I also used some resources that I gained in other classes.  Many of you who are in Randy Goree's class with me will know what I'm talking about.  He stresses the use of technology and and websites like the Library of Congress.  These are all things I wasn't really aware of before this semester.  On that note, I feel like I've gained a lot this semester.  

Social Class and Knowledge

I just read some of the chapter on social class and knowledge and found it to be interesting. I can agree that some of the lower social and economic class districts are taught somewhat differently. I don't think that is always a negative, but just how it is in some areas. For example, when you live in a mining community in West Virginia, a lot of your curriculum may have to do with that way of life, because that is your community and what it knows. It is still possible and positive to encourage alternate ways of thinking. I just did a lesson for my seventh graders that Randy Goree thought was a little advanced. It was a lesson on comparing the economics of the Great Depression to today. The students did very well and understood a lot of complex terminology. I felt that it was important not only to challenge them, but also to begin to familiarize them with some of these concepts that are critical to their civic adulthood. They were very receptive. Moral of the story: DON'T UNDERESTIMATE YOUR STUDENTS BECAUSE OF THEIR SOCIAL CLASS...THEY ARE SMARTER THAN YOU THINK!

Well, after reading the chapter on Bi-lingual education, I find it a very difficult topic. I thought that the author used some good examples. The example in the beginning with the college commencement speech in Russian was bad because Now you are starting to get into this argument that everybody should know every language, which is silly. Do we really all need to speak russian to accomodate .2% (which is probably still a stretch that it's that many) of the population? Am I a bad person because I don't speak Uzbeki or Tagalog? No. However, I did like how the author made sure to say "the bilingual goal should never be to restrict students to their own vernacular." I would go a step further and say it would be irresponsible to not try and get these kids to speak English as fluently as possible. Much of the world speaks English, especially the business world, and our job as teachers is to best accomodate these students to be successful in that world. Trying to have a seperate bilingual program for every language is expensive, unfortunately it might be something that has to be done.

Group Projects

I read another blog from someone else that was talking about the group projects and how silly they are. I agree with that. I understand the philosophy behind it but it has gotten so mundane and ridiculous that I am not learning anything from them. Don't get me wrong, I like the group I'm in for this project, they're a good bunch of guys. But, I have 3 group projects right now in 3 different classes (soon to be 4 projects) and I can't keep them straight because they are all so similar. In fact, that's how I feel about all of my final classes here at UWM. Is it possible for this school to keep me here any longer?...Oh yeah, I still have one more semester of student teaching. Anyways, I guess I will gladly do my projects but it is getting ever more difficult to do them with a decent level of effort and care.

good and bad points

One part of these chapters that really stood out to me is that on page 161 in Chapter 9. It read: "The decision as to what grades and ages, if any, are to be assigned to specific levels must be, we believe, a decision to be reached within each school district on the basis of local data and experience as to developmental levels of children, existing graded school organizations, and school facilities." The problem with this is that it allows for lower standards in urban settings. Having increasingly variable standards from district to district will lead to a lowering of the bar. It will not have the effective amount of oversight. Perhaps in the last 30 years we have focused to much on adjusting the structure of middle schhols, junior highs or whatever you want to call them and not reflected enough on content and how much the kids are learning. Allowing districts to decide their structure and curriculum based on students that are behind other districts is completely regressive. That does not mean that there shouldn't be a community and local influence on the education system, but it has to be a collaboration.
This brings me to a point that I agreed with in chapter 10 (pages 170 - 171). Some of the transformations that could be positive were bullet points on these pages. One was, teach a core academic program that involves CRITICAL THINKING. Second, reengage families in the education of adolescents. In many districts this could be the biggest challenge of them all. However, when successful, it would reap the greatest benefits. A sense of family and values is missing in many districts and a re-urging of that sense will encourage people to care about their child's development and show immediate response.

Statistics make me CRAZY!!!!

I belive somebody in our class already used the old witticism "70% of all statistics are made up", but I thought it was worth repeating. Chapter 7 in this book was completely hypocritical because it spent this first half of the chapter blasting how people misuse statistics, but then it turned around and completely did the same thing. It threw out numerous statistics on violence, pregnancy, etc. The one that got me the most was that they made a comment about teenage mothers being poor, but they seem to claim that the statistic was irrelavent because they were poor before they were pregnant. WHAT!!?? THAT IS EXACTLY THE POINT OF THE STATISTIC!! They shouldn't be having children because they do not have the means to support them. So, we need to concentrate on that group (dare I say the word teenagers...oh my god, I said it!) and educate them on safe sex. Is that singling them out? YES, it's supposed to!
Look, we can sit here and argue statisics all day long, but the point is that they are skewed to help the person or group presenting them. This was one thing that the book said right, the problem is that they turned around and did it themselves. It doesn't take a genius to turn on the TV and see some of the absolute filth that is played to young people. "Reality TV" that is so far from reality that it should be called something else. Violence, sex, drug use and other degradations are prevelant in our entertainment. You don't need statistics to see that these things are more prevelant in our teenager's societal lives. Does this mean that adults aren't doing it? Of course not, it means that they were teenagers once absorbing these things and now SOME of them are doing them. Kids bringing guns to school and shooting up teachers and other students. This happened fifty years ago, maybe once or twice, but not frequently. If you believe that these things can be a regular part of our teens everyday viewing and lifestyle without some negative effects. then you are probably the ones guilty of promoting such behavior. It is true that statistics drive me crazy, but I also am reasonable and can judge the odds and relativity on this subject.

Don't remember much curriculum

At the end of class last week, I had a brief conversation with Amy about Middle School. It was in regards to the changes people go through during that time. The reason I was thinking about it was because of the personal narrative project she had assigned that week. It made me realize something about my childhood education. I can remember the curriculum from grade school and high school, but not really too much from middle school. Meaning, I can tell you pretty much what I learned in specific classes in high school and grade school, but I don't recall what exactly was taught in my middle school classes. Of course, I remember going to classes and that I did learn things, but it seems relatively less important than the self-learning (if that is a concept) that occurred. What I DO remember from junior high is things relating to my personal life, my friends and emotional changes. I think it speaks volumes to what people go through in middle school. It is more of a time of creating a self-awareness than academic learning. Am I crazy or does anyone else have this sort of recollection?