Student
from last semester: "I do wonder, though, what teaching toward freedom
might look like when the rest of the school is so opposite in their view of
students. How does this work?" What
do y'all think about the prospects for acting on some of Ayers' ideas given the
current state of public schooling?
When I think about this question my mind goes back to what we discussed about zero tolerance policies in schools yesterday, in class. When I think about "teaching toward freedom" I think about students who are free to discuss their ideas and opinions without backlash. Students who aren't afraid of administrators or rules but embrace them and want to follow them in order to have a safe and fun learning environment. I think that all we can do as teachers is bestow our ideas and opinions on what we want our classroom to be like in our actual classroom, while still abiding by the school's rules. Because although sometimes we don't agree with all the rules we still know we have to follow them because that's just what you are "suppose" to do. I agree with some of Ayers' ideas and some are just plain weird. I think that, in today's society and schools, you just have to sort of go with the flow and listen to your administrators, school board, and superintendents, etc. I know all the rules don't make sense (trust me I got in trouble quite a few times for not following what I believed to be "stupid" rules.) But now that I'm an adult and I'm going to have to be forced to enforce some of these rules that I disagree with I think the students should follow them. I'm not saying I'll go along with the punishments I'm suppose to give out for the rules I disagreement with though. :)
ReplyDeleteWhile the idea of teaching towards freedom sounds appealing, it would be a challenge in most public schools today. I know some of the higher ups that are in charge of curriculum have never even taught in a classroom. I would hope that everyone involved in our school systems would like every child to be able to reach their full potential, but I don’t know that we would all ever agree on how to achieve that. We have these people that are considered experts and dictate what is being taught and how we should teach it. How we choose to relay required information should be how we could choose to view students differently. We should not expect the same level of readiness or interest from every student. Teaching towards freedom should allow our students to share their opinions and incorporate activities and assignments that they deem useful and most importantly, meaningful. Rules, guidelines, control, and mainstreaming have a time and place. Our schools would be totally chaotic without them. Treating our students as robots that regurgitate material back to us is doing them and ourselves a disservice. Working with administrators and other staff members in order to cover the required material without limiting the students’ creative expression or squashing their viewpoint is necessary to achieve a step toward teaching towards freedom. Finding a way to keep students interested, motivated, and self thinking individuals is a goal every teacher should aim for. I believe this can be achieved if teachers are willing to admit they aren’t perfect and model appropriate behavior. We need to portray that it’s all right to make mistakes, but it’s never all right to not try. We need to encourage students to become self guided, goal setting lifelong learners by teaching them to set realistic goals and provide encouragement along the way. Working closely with team members, parents, administrators, and students finding a common goal that is most beneficial for the students’ academic and personal growth is idealistic. I think we can each take a step towards it if we are willing to contribute, cooperate, and compromise. - Rae Clune
ReplyDeleteTeaching toward freedom like Ayers would suggest sounds wonderful on paper, however I do not think that it would get us very far in today’s schools. Today, administrators are too worried about getting test scores high, so they can be a high-succeeding school, bragging rights, and money. For this reason, the true education of the students is put on the backburner. Students should be taught how to succeed in the whole, both with education and with the social aspects that school brings about, not rushed through as quickly as possible. Some of Ayers’ ideas, I believe, would help achieve that goal, but with the way things are going, it would be a struggle to get the support to incorporate it. -Julie Gottfried
ReplyDeleteI agree with Julie that teaching towards freedom looks great in print but it is extremely difficult to make it a reality. Now a days it is difficult for a teacher to take advantage of a teachable moment let alone having the student be the teacher. As teachers we want the material to truly connect with our students but how do we have time to do that when we have to cover a certain amount of material in a short period of time? The students are unable to share their thoughts and opinions. What they are learning are just facts to pass a test. What they are learning becomes dispensable once the test is over why do they need to remember the information? I love the idea of posing a question to the class everyday and basing a class discussion off the students' knowledge and experience. I feel students would get so much more out of their education if topics were introduced that way. Instead we have "standards" that must by met created by people that don't know what is like to be in a classroom. Unfortunately, as wonderful as Ayer's ideas are, I don't think they can find a way into school systems today.
ReplyDeleteI think the idea of teaching toward freedom is a great idea. However, I think there are a lot of questions behind it as to how it would look in the schools today. I personally feel there has to be a good balance of teaching values and morals with the content; as well as showing students that passion for learning and finding the meaning behind things. But I realize that the balance I would want in my classroom may be a lot harder to achieve because of how schools are set up today. There is such a strong emphasis on testing and how to get students to a passing level that school has become a place memorizing and regurgitating. I don’t think teachers can actually teach very much anymore because of the pressure that is put on them to just get to information into the students head and have them tell me what you said. And even that doesn’t work all the time. So, while in essence I think teaching toward freedom would be a great idea, I too wonder how it would actually work in today’s schools and if it can be reached. Is there a balance that is achievable in a classroom or are we to a point now where the emphasis on testing is the only goal?
ReplyDeleteI would have to agree with Rae on this topic. While I personally like the idea of teaching towards freedom, I think that the public school system would make it very challenging to make such drastic changes. In my opinion, the administration and school boards are very stuck in their ways, and do not want to rock the boat with any such changes that Ayers would want to see in our classrooms. Teachers who sometimes try to allow for such free spirited lessons and discussions get in trouble or looked at like they are a bad teacher just because they do things differently.
ReplyDeleteI think that if teachers tried to “teach toward freedom” today that students would be provided with a much better education. Students would have the freedoms to explore topics that truly interest them, and would hopefully have the motivation to partake in their own education. I think that today school systems are so focused on testing and the scores that we have lost freedom in the classroom. I think that we need guidelines for what we are supposed to teach our students, but if we took a few notes from Ayers we would have a much better system for our students.
Teaching toward freedom would definitely be a more challenging task if you were the only teacher in a particular school who harbored these beliefs about teaching and learning. As with anything, I think it is much easier to accomplish a task with a group of colleagues who support your cause as well, as opposed to all on your own. It would most certainly be harder to implement Ayers’ views in your own classroom if your fellow teachers and the administrators at the school did not approve or support your beliefs and endeavors. In addition, I imagine that introducing this idea of “teaching toward freedom” in the current era of standardized testing would be quite a challenge. Teachers, administrators and students are so obsessed and distracted with achieving the appropriate test scores. Teaching toward freedom and the values and ideas expressed by Ayers seem to have taken a back seat in our public schools today. Thus, the prospect of acting on those ideas and beliefs seems particularly daunting and/or difficult to me. However, that’s not to say that it can’t be done. It just may take a little more effort and support.
ReplyDeleteThough teaching towards freedom as an ideal would be difficult to accomplish fully in today's school system, many of Ayers' ideas are important and should not be dismissed. What I got out of the book is that teaching towards freedom is more of an adjustment in attitude than a complete overhaul of the curriculum, at least if we want to incorporate it realistically in the classroom. I think it's very possible for a teacher to adopt some of Ayers' ideas into today's classrooms while maintaining standards prescribed to them by the administration. Throughout the book, Ayers talks about taking the students’ side, rather than standing above them. By simply having this mentality we can create stronger classrooms where the students don’t feel antagonized by their teacher, but empowered. If the teacher truly shows that he or she believes in potential of each one of his or her students, there will be a greater chance of success. Teaching towards freedom, as a mindset, is important to have in the classroom and even though we may never be able to meet it as an ideal, we can still teach with that goal in mind. In terms of other teachers’ view being contrary to this, we shouldn’t let others stand in the way of teaching how we believe, if teaching towards freedom is indeed something you believe in.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMost of Ayers ideas of teaching towards freedom I have seen in practice and they are successful. There is a reason why the students from the best private schools in the country often graduate and attend Ivy League schools or better, and the reason why the average student still attends the top state schools in each state. After I graduated in 2011 I began substitute teaching for Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS) ended up getting a coaching job at the St. Albans School (STA) in DC. Working between these two successful and contrasting systems allowed me to realize the differences between one of the top public schools systems in the country, and one of the top private schools on the east coast.
ReplyDeleteWhile coaching at STA I was given many opportunities to sit in on some of the lower school (elementary and middle) classes and was able to observe the teaching techniques used at STA. It was my first exposure to the private school system and the first time I’ve witnessed Ayers ideas and practices. Students engaged the teachers, asked questions, participated in conversations during lecture. They were accepting of me coming into their classroom- having never seen me before and engaged me in their work and studies. They even brought up questions they had for other classes and asked if I had any input or advice. There was no talk of SOL’s, and no topic that was immune from debate. Comparing that to my time in FCPS, the same age kids were not engaging, did not question unless they didn’t understand something, and for the most part did their work and took it at face value.
Most of my time and work was spent teaching at the high school level at FCPS and coaching the upper school kids at STA. Here there were more similarities between those students. Some FCPS students would engage and question, they would participate in debate, but only a few students would engage. It was rare to get an entire class involved in a debate unless it was a hot topic of current events. Students that did participate were often rigged and uncompromising- unable to keep a debate or conversation going without frustration taking over. On the other hand- the STA upper school students were even more engaging and were more abstract in their thoughts. They seemed more open, flexible, understanding, and accepting. From my experience at VCU, they had similar characteristics that I did not reach until my sophomore year.
There’s no doubt in my mind that the main reason why the students at STA were more advanced in their studies was due to the freedom of expression in the classroom. There were multiple athletes that I coached that were in the same grade and in similar classes with different teachers. Each teacher taught a different style, presented different material, assignments, agenda, etc. Given that teacher’s style and presentation, each class may have learned different things, but they were never contrasting. I never heard one of my athletes say to another-“no, that’s wrong” it was more “huh, never thought of it that way” or “are you sure? I believe I was taught the opposite but it could just be a different meaning”
I believe the main issues with the public schools systems isn't with the teachers, the school system or parents. It’s the circle of statistics and equality. The mathematical society that we live in needs graphs to compare, contrast, and compete. The school systems are forced to make those graphs so they can get more funding, so they put pressure on the teachers to make those graphs better. Parents are handed these graphs with their kid’s results, and complain when their kids are not the best on that graph. Ayers is correct in his style of teaching towards freedom, it is the reason why some private schools are more successful than most public school systems in sending their graduates to the best colleges and universities in the world. It’s not a question of does Ayers system work, but how do you apply it to a large scale entity like the public school system.
Most of Ayers ideas of teaching towards freedom I have seen in practice and they are successful. There is a reason why the students from the best private schools in the country often graduate and attend Ivy League schools or better, and the reason why the average student still attends the top state schools in each state. After I graduated in 2011 I began substitute teaching for Fairfax County Public Schools (FCPS) ended up getting a coaching job at the St. Albans School (STA) in DC. Working between these two successful and contrasting systems allowed me to realize the differences between one of the top public schools systems in the country, and one of the top private schools on the east coast.
ReplyDeleteWhile coaching at STA I was given many opportunities to sit in on some of the lower school (elementary and middle) classes and was able to observe the teaching techniques used at STA. It was my first exposure to the private school system and the first time I’ve witnessed Ayers ideas and practices. Students engaged the teachers, asked questions, participated in conversations during lecture. They were accepting of me coming into their classroom- having never seen me before and engaged me in their work and studies. They even brought up questions they had for other classes and asked if I had any input or advice. There was no talk of SOL’s, and no topic that was immune from debate. Comparing that to my time in FCPS, the same age kids were not engaging, did not question unless they didn’t understand something, and for the most part did their work and took it at face value.
Most of my time and work was spent teaching at the high school level at FCPS and coaching the upper school kids at STA. Here there were more similarities between those students. Some FCPS students would engage and question, they would participate in debate, but only a few students would engage. It was rare to get an entire class involved in a debate unless it was a hot topic of current events. Students that did participate were often rigged and uncompromising- unable to keep a debate or conversation going without frustration taking over. On the other hand- the STA upper school students were even more engaging and were more abstract in their thoughts. They seemed more open, flexible, understanding, and accepting. From my experience at VCU, they had similar characteristics that I did not reach until my sophomore year.
There’s no doubt in my mind that the main reason why the students at STA were more advanced in their studies was due to the freedom of expression in the classroom. There were multiple athletes that I coached that were in the same grade and in similar classes with different teachers. Each teacher taught a different style, presented different material, assignments, agenda, etc. Given that teacher’s style and presentation, each class may have learned different things, but they were never contrasting. I never heard one of my athletes say to another-“no, that’s wrong” it was more “huh, never thought of it that way” or “are you sure? I believe I was taught the opposite but it could just be a different meaning”
I believe the main issues with the public schools systems isn't with the teachers, the school system or parents. It’s the circle of statistics and equality. The mathematical society that we live in needs graphs to compare, contrast, and compete. The school systems are forced to make those graphs so they can get more funding, so they put pressure on the teachers to make those graphs better. Parents are handed these graphs with their kid’s results, and complain when their kids are not the best on that graph. Ayers is correct in his style of teaching towards freedom, it is the reason why some private schools are more successful than most public school systems in sending their graduates to the best colleges and universities in the world. It’s not a question of does Ayers system work, but how do you apply it to a large scale entity like the public school system.
I think Ayers’ ideas on teaching toward freedom are important to think about regardless of what official “standards” are set in place in the educational system today. I think one of the main things he is trying to get at is the objective of teaching and what you wish to accomplish through it. If you have the mind set that you are just going into the classroom to teach the students ‘facts’ on a particular subject then that is the impact that you are going to leave with those students…facts. If you however have the mindset of teaching toward freedom you are going to approach that same class with a different attitude. An attitude that conveys the students are important, are capable of thinking and developing ideas on their own, that they are more than just a test score, and that their participation in the educational setting will benefit them (if not immediately then in the future).
ReplyDeleteYes teachers are held to set standards and yes part of their job is to make sure the students are able to pass a standardized test...so yes they may not be able to teach everything exactly how they wish; however if they have the mindset of teaching toward freedom I bet they will in some way leave a greater impact on the students than teachers who do not. By this I mean teachers who wish to teach toward freedom are going to find ways to communicate with students differently. These may not be huge, elaborate techniques that completely change the curriculum but I think they will still make a difference. An example of a small change may be simply figuring out what the students are really interested in at the time and writing up problems or scenarios that relate to that topic. Or simply stating how the information they will be learning will be able to benefit them. Or just simply form a relationship with them so they feel valued and important. I love his quote on pg 93 “Loving our students requires us to help them nourish their own self-love and self trust”. We can still teach them the skills and information that is required by the set standards and still make a greater impact on their lives through other skills like self-love.
So is this form of teaching going to be easy? Uh no. It’s going to require more planning and more reflection. Is it possible to achieve “teaching toward freedom” techniques in our school systems today? Uh yea. Teaching is something that heavily relies on that individual’s philosophy. Ayers describes this further, “the teacher builds the context; the teacher’s values, instincts, and experiences are visible in the learning environment. It is essential to reflect on our values, our expectations, and our standards, bearing in mind that the dimensions we work with are measured not just in feet and inches, but also in hopes and dreams realized, in moral reflection and ethical possibilities enacted” (pg 70). So in my opinion teaching toward freedom can still be done in our school systems today despite all the standards, policies, regulations, and examinations. It all starts with the mindset of the teacher and how hard and reflective they aim to be.
Brittany Strimple
Eric Says: I totally agree with Ayers and his thoughts on teaching towards freedom, but I don’t see that happening in todays’ school systems. Everything is so focused on standardized test and accreditation, that students really don’t get the opportunity to express themselves and their ideas. There are many students that are very intelligent but horrible test takers, and then they become labeled because of how they performed on a test. Standardized tests are crippling the learning experience of students. School regulations and the attitudes of most teachers make it almost impossible to teach towards freedom.
ReplyDeleteI think Ayers is asking us to do our best as individuals. When he felt alone in his beliefs and actions (protesting a death sentence) Ayers said "I didn't change the world, but I was changed by choosing to go. That, too, is part of the point." (p. 134) Even though it's difficult and sometimes alienating we must act with our own conscience guiding us. That is part of reaching our own full humanity. I think that in order to guide students to do the same, we must lead by example.
ReplyDeleteHowever, as people above have said, there are some limitations when practicing this in reality. If we want to hold our jobs we must abide by certain rules. But, the world is ever changing and the great struggles are slow. Small acts over time, within the system, can be done and make a difference.
Opening our own eyes and others' eyes to the injustices of the world, or holding the lantern up as Ayers puts it, is our job as humans and especially as educators. Could this be similar to paying it forward? Hopefully lighting sparks for our students and our colleagues will continue the movement. I think we can teach toward freedom, maybe not to the extent of Ayers, but at least small steps.
-Caitlin Mewborn
I feel that the ideas the Ayers discusses in the text are perfect for an ideal world, without standardized testing, and mandated curriculum. If feel like with the current state of our school systems and the ways in which we are prepared to become teachers makes this a relatively farfetched idea. However, that being said I feel that it is possible a teacher to create the environment that Ayers talks about when referring to the “teaching toward freedom.” We often times get wrapped up in what others are doing, personally and professionally, and I feel with this notion of the current status of our schools we can learn that maybe what others are doing isn’t the best all the time, and we should really stand our ground, daring to be different and really teach toward freedom. When teaching toward freedom we would be allowing our children the chance to share their thoughts and opinions, and do so by planning and teaching lessons that incorporate their interest and knowledge base. I think it is important to still have an effective classroom management with rules, guidelines, and other behavior systems, but doing so in a way that would be more constructive than let’s say moving your clip to a different color, a child could care less what color their clip is on at the end of the day. While the teaching toward freedom idea is great on paper and within the text I would just be concerned with the implementation even within one single classroom in a school. I think we are currently in a place where our school systems mandate far too much of what’s going on in each individual classroom across the county, so I feel to even begin with the notion of teaching toward freedom it would have to start small, eventually spreading and becoming a larger teaching phenomenon. I feel that we as teachers have the potential to make a change, but we need to be conscious of the fact that it’s a long road ahead, but if we can manage to do our best day in and day out, we will be the change we wish to see.
ReplyDeleteRyan D. - I found this question very difficult to answer since it is very hard to do in todays environment where high stakes testing pedagogy is the norm. Looking forward, I think what makes this even more difficult to do is knowing that we are moving towards an environment where not only are schools held accountable for test scores, but so will teachers as our jobs become tied to what the students in our classrooms score each year.
ReplyDeleteAfter I finished the book and started to think more about what I had read, I did find a lot of comfort in Ayer’s optimism. Ayer’s is very careful to point out that there is a difference between blind idealism and having a vision going forward. He points out that there will never exactly be a perfect future as there is always something to be working towards and that we can work towards constructing a more ideal teaching environment.
A couple months ago, I remember looking at Finland’s education standards and was surprised to find out that Finland does not have any standardized testing. The countries education standards compromise a short list because the expectation is that teachers should be entrusted to design their own curriculum and because there are no standardized test, the teachers can form their curriculum around their students and are not on a timeline to teach certain material by a set date like with benchmarks here. That to me is what we should want to strive for if we want to be able to teach towards freedom
What I think makes Ayer’s idea of teaching toward freedom seem daunting or impossible is that it requires us to step outside of our comfort zones into “exile” as Ayer’s calls it. Going into teaching, I think it’s going to be extremely easy to fall into the trap of trying to appease the administration instead of standing up for what is right or gossiping in the teachers lounge. One of my favorite parts of the book are found on pages 155-156 where Ayer’s differentiates humanistic education as something that humanizes and causes students to question their world in contrast to school where the name of the game is conformity, obedience, and following the orthodoxy.
I find it inspiring that there are many things going on that will someday allow us to teach towards freedom such as parents opting their children out of testing by not letting them go to school on test day and the teachers in Washington openly boycotting testing by refusing to administer the test. That people are not apathetic(which I think is the worst) or afraid of the repercussions and are willing to act in unison for a cause gives me hope going forward. I agree with Sarah who said that it’s easier to work with like minded colleagues who support the same ideals and Brittany when she said that our attitude towards humanistic education that we approach teaching with is very important.
I do believe that teaching toward freedom can be difficult to do in our current public school system, but I agree with Jake Guralnik in that I believe Ayers’ ideas require more of a positive, appropriately challenging classroom environment that is relevant to students’ lives. Keeping this in mind, teaching toward freedom can be possible in today’s classroom, although would be more easily implement in the, hopefully, future classroom. As others in this blog have mentioned, teaching toward freedom is easier done when working with like-minded colleagues and administrators.
ReplyDeleteSince I am all about science, I could possibly discuss inequality in real world situations that could then lead to discussions on school policies that turn out to be unfair to students in certain situations such as zero tolerance and relate that to how we could use the nature of science to make arguments for or against policies through data. I know standardized tests are not the best measure of students’ abilities, but I could still use project based learning and other forms of assessment while still preparing students for the SOLs with warm-up test questions at the beginning of class each day or every other class day.
For science especially, I believe that inquiry-based learning through asking questions as a basis for the day’s lesson like Skyler mentions is very important, not just because it helps students learn better but because it really develops the students’ understanding of the nature of science and practice being scientists while learning science. I love the idea of letting students experience the freedom of science in a positive, supportive environment that capitalizes on students’ self-education and curiosity.
It’s great hearing from Chris Shores how a school used many of Ayers’ ideas and was successful in effectively engaging students in learning. I believe this can be done in the public school system by individual teachers becoming reflective practitioners who aim to teach toward freedom, encourage their colleagues while modeling effective pedagogy, and advocate with organizations for better policies and measures in our school system.
Ayers' views towards teaching do seem largely idealistic especially in the current teaching climate where it seems teaching in the larger spectrum is run by administrative policies. This climate could be helped if the ideas of teaching towards freedom were not just instilled in the teacher in all the peripheral levels that influence the child's learning such as the administration and the parents. The budgets currently don't trickle down to the teachers or students and with strong teacher's unions and the inability to fire and replace bad teachers who are tenured, it is hard to change the current teaching climate. The teaching ideology inherently starts with the teacher and must not be shaped outside factors such as the administration. Teachers being bogged down by standardized test that do not fit the student's educational needs along with discipline polices that at time seems arbitrary points to a need for change in how teachers affect the lives of their students. Becoming a more reflective and engaging teacher can help to change the current teaching culture and allow for a more dynamic and helpful way at getting at a child's needs. What teaching for freedom allows especially in a public school climate is the opportunity for teachers to personalize the learning experience and make it important and necessary function in a student's life. Schools are so caught up in rules and regulations that it takes out the humanistic part of education that we are developing these students to be effective members of our society. Teaching for freedom is revolutionary in its ideas and will need a whole new generation of teachers to change the current teaching culture. -- David Vanderford
ReplyDeleteI think Ayes ideas are very noble attempts to help our students focus on more than just content. In his mind schools are places where we learn far more than individual subjects but learn how to be better thinkers, learners, and citizens. However, in an age so focused on standards, I don’t think Ayes goals are totally unreachable. Instead I would argue it is slightly harder for new teachers to teach both the social curriculum and their content simultaneous but adventurous and committed teachers can still find ways to accomplish these goals. Assessments do check students’ content knowledge but in my opinion they always have been designed to do this. It is instead what happens between each assessment that teaches equality, freedom, curiosity, inquiry, etc. In conclusion I would argue the over reliance on standardized tests may make teaching scarier for new teachers but over all will not affects Ayers hopes for our students.
ReplyDeleteFrom Katherine Forbes
I think “teaching toward freedom” is a lot easier said than done. It is unfortunate, but all the school systems/schools/administrators/teachers care about is making sure they get high scores on their testing. I have always been an advocate for students learning manners, proper etiquette, as well as social skills. I want to adopt some of Ayers’ ideas into my classrooms. My mother has always said you have to be an advocate for yourself because if you are not, then no one else will be either. So I truly believe we should be advocates for what we believe. There needs to be time for “teachable moments” in the classroom again. Teaching towards freedom is what the schools need, but at this time I do not think it would happen.
ReplyDeleteThe story you discussed in class about the boy bringing a gun to school on accident was interesting. I never thought about something like that happening in the schools and with their zero tolerance policy the student would get suspended. After that story, I want to get to know my students on a personal level. I want to know what their home lives are like and what interests them the most. I really believe one teacher can make a huge difference to just one student’s perception of school. I want my students to feel that they can come to me with any issues they are experiencing and I want teachable moments.
I feel like Ayers is really overly emphasizing for students to be themselves and it is important for the teacher to get to know their students. He stresses the points that the teacher is supposed to get to know their students and find their strengths, so they can share it with the other students. As the teacher it is your job to individually find these strengths in each student to help them succeed. If Malcolm X’s teacher would have paid attention to his needs and strengths maybe he would have taken a different path. Though he realized his strengths later in life, he probably could have avoided jail and helped more people than he did.
ReplyDeleteThough teaching through freedom would be nice to use interest and individualism it is not a reality. If that is what you are looking for a private school or charter school is probably more of the atmosphere you are looking for. In the past couple years they have started specialty schools within the public school system which I think gears towards the teaching toward freedom and allows the interest along with the requirements. I feel like this system somewhat works because the student apply and choose if they would like to attend the specialty center. A downfall to this system is that it is an application process so all students are not accepted, which can kill the motivation if not accepted, and there is probably parent pressure to attend, when it is not really a student’s interest.
I think allowing the students to have input in the classroom and options, instead of the teacher teaching and having orders towards the students would make for a more successful and less threatening environment. This type of teaching requires students and teachers to know themselves and know what they stand for along with trying to communicate ideas with others. Being reflective of curriculum and individualism is an important factor to make this work in today’s classroom.
From my perspective, the main overarching problem with public schools is that they are public schools with no incentive to be competitive with other schools. I equate it to fixing an old Volkswagen Rabbit; why spend so much time and effort fixing it when the problem is the faulty design and there are so many better cars. If we are to have a real and honest discussion on what teaching TOWARDS FREEDOM means and looks like, then the first conversation needs to be about FREEDOM of CHOICE. The conversation needs to address the thousands of students who live in shitty neighborhoods with even shittier schools and have NO CHOICE but to go to that school. Of course, the administration at a shitty school in the shitty neighborhood knows it is shitty school but has no incentive to be a better school. They will still get their "customers" showing up everyday and those tax dollars will still go to that school.
ReplyDeleteIn summary, teaching towards freedom is a novel idea that would help liberate many young minds. Unfortunately, it is a worthless and futile goal if the foundation of education in our nation stems from a lack of freedom in terms of school choice. If the foundation of education in our country starts with a removal of choice for the individual and where they can send their child for a 100% subsidized education, then any attempt to incorporate freedom in the classroom is built on a foundation of hypocrisy. Hypocrisy breeds contempt and resentment, which leads to our current state of education in our nation. Without freedom, how can we have individualism in the classrooms?
Ryan Goulet
I think teaching towards Ayers' idealism would be tough in most school settings. Hitting the numbers has become the goal with most, and especially the lower performing schools. With state and federal funding tied to school performance, teaching the students has taken a backseat to teaching to the test.
ReplyDeleteThe advent and proliferation of charter schools is offering motivated teachers an option outside of what is becoming scripted teaching. As an individual in a school that focuses on the numbers and teaching to the test, you can still offer meaningful instruction. In between the benchmarks, practice SOL's, and other test prep material mandated by your school, plan engaging lessons.
My only experience with any of this through watching my wife teach at a Title 1 RPS school. As a 6th and 7th grade English teacher, we estimated that on 40 percent of the days she saw her students, they would be taking some form of standardized test or practice test.
Insane.
The less instructional time the less the students will learn, the less they learn.
The less they learn, the worse they score.
The worse they score, the more practice tests and benchmarks they have to take.
The more tests, is less instructional time.
Bentley out.
There will be no change to American public schools anytime soon. It is very easy to see this because American society sees schools to be a place where students ‘learn’ and are tested to see if they understand it. That is it. If students do not fair very well under standardized schooling they are labeled to be unfit for work inside the ‘economic machine’ of America. It would be good to change the aspects of public schools away from giving blatant facts to be learned and expand it to widening horizons for students to strive after. But it does not matter. Feeling quite cynical right now and I know that government is not going to learn how to help teachers or students because they just make things harder for schools to do. Instead of helping teachers apply lessons to help students develop, they simply make more demands from students and teachers, while providing minimal help (if lucky) and constantly blaming the schools about it. Instead of thinking about what they should say for reelection, politicians should think about what to do to help schools. There are only two types of people in this world, you got your talkers and you got your doers. The doers are the people that change the world, while the talkers are simply filled with coffee house bull****. Interesting article if I have not told you about it before: http://www.cracked.com/article_20321_5-things-it-turns-out-you-were-right-to-hate-about-school.html
ReplyDeleteMaria says- As with any kind of reform or new idea, it must be implemented school-wide, county-wide, etc., in order to have real success. It must be something that everyone is in agreement with and comfortable enough to put into practice at any level. Contrary from scripted teaching, like seen in many schools, having everyone in agreement does not mean they must all follow the exact same styles or techniques but rather that they are all on the same page as to what it most important and effective when it comes to actually teaching the children. Ayer’s principles focus on students as individuals, and yet sadly, in today’s public education, students are part of a system of numbers that are expected to compete with and excel beyond other nations. Ayer’s makes great argument on how fundamental and crucial it is for us to provide students opportunities to share their point-of-views while at the same time expanding their minds to new ideas. When it comes to actually putting Ayer’s ideas into practice in the classroom, it is not as far-fetched as it may seem. There are challenges, undoubtedly, but this is true in any situation where new ideas are trying to become a norm. Those challenges should not shy us away from putting such ideas into practice in our classrooms. Recently, there has been a push for differentiation in classrooms. In whatever type of phrase you put the word differentiation in, the ultimate understanding is that each child is provided an adequate and meaningful learning experience. Part of this push for differentiation involves creating opportunities for students to be individuals. In other words, we are taught to embrace and encourage the uniqueness of our students yet we get so wrapped in the new curriculums, standards, and tests that we forget such important foundations our profession so strongly promotes and stands for. As someone stated in an earlier post, “you must be an advocate for yourself.” This means going beyond the scripted or expected form of teaching. This means actually putting what you learned into practice. It will be hard work but I plan on implementing a lot of Ayer’s ideas into my classroom.
ReplyDeleteI like Ayer’s idea of teaching toward freedom. Like most people on here though, I realize that in reality it’s a lot easier said than done. With schools the way they are today, I really don’t know how teaching toward freedom would fit in. This kind of makes me sad because I really do think that it’s important. I think it’s going to be the job of teachers to really make an effort to personally incorporate this kind of teaching in their classrooms, and hopefully one day it will be the norm. Unfortunately I don’t think this day will come soon, but until it does I believe there are things teachers can do in their own classrooms to teach toward freedom. Mandy
ReplyDeleteI agree that teaching toward freedom is difficult during the current school climate. Many teachers and many people in administration don't believe in such an idea, which makes it difficult for teachers to do so. For future teachers like ourselves, it's important that we try to spread the idea of teaching toward freedom to other teachers as well as the administrations we will soon work for. Many may say that it's a difficult task, but I think our generation is capable of great change in the education world.
ReplyDelete