This week brought some lively discussion in talking about morals and ethics; there is a difference between the two, as our very astute leader pointed out. Ethics are considered "written codes," while morals are considered "unwritten."
Study of ethics in education has, for some obvious reasons, been kept at a minimum for a long time. There are lots of divisive issues, many which are more related to morals than ethics. I think the main reason ethics are not put more to the forefront is that we humans, much like electricity, tend to take the path of least resistance.
A really good example of this is that even though this week's topic contains the word "morals" in it, when I brought up the moral issue of homosexuality hardly anyone wanted to get involved. I really don't blame them; we've heard so much about the issue over the years that we don't want to go there at all.
The focus stayed pretty much on ethical issues in the classroom, which is just fine; that is plenty to chew on for now. The talked focused more on the lack of teaching of ethics more than anything; many of the participants in the seminar wanted to see more of it in our curriculum.
Greg Burroughs, our seminar leader, provided us with some excellent material to ponder over and share our thoughts. One piece that comes to mind focused on the need to rethink the goals of education. Jonathan Cohen, the author of the article, Social, Emotional, Ethical, and Academic Education: Creating a Climate for Learning, Participation in Democracy, and Well-Being, argues that "the goals of education need to be reframed to prioritize not only academic learning, but also social, emotional, and ethical competencies."
Cohen goes on to say that, "parents and teachers want schooling to support children's ability to become lifelong learners who are able to love, work, and act as responsible members of the community." He also says that, "social, emotional, academic, and ethical education can help children reach the goals their parents and teachers have for them: learning to 'read' themselves and others, and learning to solve social, emotional, and ethical problems."
So you see, it is not just an adult issue; it has to start in the earlier years. We have many times heard the phrase, "it has to start in the home with parents." This is so true; but not only does it have to start in the home, it has to carry on to our schools. It can't be just about academics, with young students learning reading, writing, and arithmetic; we have to first learn how to incorporate good social, emotional, and ethical skills into our teaching/learning curriculum, and then implement it in the classroom early and often.
We have the theories: "there are two core processes that promote children's school success and healthy development: (a) promoting children's social-emotional competencies and ethical dispositions throughout their preK-12 school experience, and (b) creating safe, caring, participatory, and responsive school systems and homes."
We have the want: "parents and teachers want schooling to support children's ability to become lifelong learners who are able to love, work, and act as responsible members of the community."
We have the tools to get it done; millions of good people want to live and work in peace and prosperity. Out of those millions there are many good teachers and administrators who have to come together to put these theories into practice. We have to work together to get there.
Monday, July 16, 2007
Tuesday, July 3, 2007
GMIT 650--Week Eight--Teacher/Learner Relationships
Kathy Zabel led the seminar this week for GMIT 650; let's see how it went!
Kathy's first question:
This question addresses the political dimension (the power) of the adult teacher-student relationship. Freire distinguished between two approaches to education, the banking approach and the problem-posing approach (see p. 173). Essentially, in the banking approach, the teacher maintains all the power. In the problem-posing approach, the learners determine goals and work with the facilitator to achieve the goals. Tennant states on p. 174 that power should be distributed evenly in community education, yet poses the question: "Can power be distributed evenly where there are institutional constraints linked to accreditation practices...?"
Many of the individual programs at the community college are accredited and have to follow certain curriculum guidelines. Does your curriculum constrain the nature of the relationship between the teacher-student? How far can instructors go in relinquishing power to students and still meet the programs' state or national requirements?
Here is Greg Burroughs' reply to Kathy:
The goals for the class are set in the course syllabus and the objectives of the class, when set up to prepare a student to meet a national professsional qualification standard, are not open to interpretation. This is especially true when you know what the state organization uses for testing. The power you are able to give to students is really limited, but Jessie is correct that an alternate project could be used to meet the same objectives if you had a student who put forth the idea, or if you had developed alternative assignments and let the student choose in what way they wished to achieve the goal. Additional suppporting material could be included if one had the time or if a student had the inclination to go above and beyond the requirements. The use of independent study can also allow a student to develop a fuller understanding of the concepts of an area of study as well, but requires the student to desire such and the instructor with the willingness to support such an academic endeavor.
Our vocational programs are often limited in their flexibility by the constraints of the professional standards and due to the fact that they are a practice-based program. Theoretically-based programs, or ones that work to expand the ability to practice, are more open to the student directing the goals. My own bachelors degree had the option for six specializations and one generalist option, which allowed for a degree focused on practice to allow the student to set their own goals for what they wanted the degree to do. At the community college level we are often limited by the time and the focused goal of our students to get the skills that they can use next Monday. Our students are practice-oriented and research is not what generally interests them.
My reflection:
Greg makes the point that vocational programs are practice-based, or focused on a specific career with needed technical skills. He says that there are constraints by professional standards, and also time constraints that limit the flexibility for research and power given to the students to create their own goals and objectives for learning.
I think this is a big problem because we limit the students' learning experience if we don't give them the chance to do more critical thinking and problem solving that prepare them for life experiences. We must do more than give them practical knowledge. We have to find ways to get them more involved, more interaction with their coursework to advance the field to levels much more productive.
I would suggest that Greg try to find a way to get students to work in groups that collaborate in their coursework to build upon the practical information they are provided. They should work together to go beyond practical knowledge to more theoretical learning. He could design exercises that have a blend of both practical and theoretical learning.
Kathy's question #2:
The author of our text, Tennant, developed a class exercise which asked adult educators to identify aspects of students/trainee/participant behavior that annoy or irritate you and to identify aspects of your role (as an educator), which you fear and or feel guilty about? See pp. 182-183 for results.
Since we're getting close to the end of our program and many of you will soon be out there as adult educators, I thought it was time to address what annoys us, and what our fears or guilts are. We all have a big fear or guilt whether we teach now or as we anticipate our role as a teacher. What is your biggest fear, or guilt when it comes to your students? Let’s hear about yours. Feel free to really express yourself here.
Then, I’d like you to tell us what your plan is if your big fear, annoyance, or guilt actually comes true. Perhaps if you’ve recognized your fears/guilts and have an advance plan to deal with it, then it will resolve itself quicker in real life. As you discuss your classmates’ fears, etc., please offer any suggestions to alleviate their concerns based on your teaching experiences.
Gina Ewing's reply to Kathy:
My biggest fear/guilt/annoyance: I have a preceved fear that I would run into a brilliant student who would embarrase me in front of the class by asking me questions that they already know the answers to and prove me to be an inadequate instructor to the other student. And even though I stick to my, "I'll have to get back to you with that answer", the student is persistant in making me look ridiculous in front of the class.
I wonder if any of my cohorts have experienced anything like this?
Plan: I plan on being knowledgeable about the topic that I teach and not become an instructor "just for the money". Perhaps in time and with gained experience I will know how to handle the know it all students and be able to instruct in any topic area that I feel comfortable, but perhaps not an expert in.
My reflection:
Gina is expressing a fear that most new instructors or teachers have, that of a student making fun of them for not knowing the course material to its fullest. That is a very disrespectful thing for a student to do and should not be tolerated. If Gina were to make it clear upfront that she expects the students to respect her while she shows constant respect for them, this disrespectful action should not occur.
I replied to Gina, suggesting to her that she had the right to excuse the student from class if he or she did not relent. There is enough pressure in delivering learning to students without having to deal with this type of nonsense.
I think Gina will find that if she starts right away with ice breaker exercises that get students to know one another and find trust with each other, as well as with her, she probably won't have this problem.
Kathy did a great job again leading this seminar; she kept the discussions going with good questions building on previous thoughts and ideas. There was good participation and sharing by the cohorts. I did a good job participating myself, commenting and sharing my own experiences in the classroom. We all continue to learn from our experiences; if we didn't have that mindset we wouldn't be improving and giving our students the best learning experience possible.
Kathy's first question:
This question addresses the political dimension (the power) of the adult teacher-student relationship. Freire distinguished between two approaches to education, the banking approach and the problem-posing approach (see p. 173). Essentially, in the banking approach, the teacher maintains all the power. In the problem-posing approach, the learners determine goals and work with the facilitator to achieve the goals. Tennant states on p. 174 that power should be distributed evenly in community education, yet poses the question: "Can power be distributed evenly where there are institutional constraints linked to accreditation practices...?"
Many of the individual programs at the community college are accredited and have to follow certain curriculum guidelines. Does your curriculum constrain the nature of the relationship between the teacher-student? How far can instructors go in relinquishing power to students and still meet the programs' state or national requirements?
Here is Greg Burroughs' reply to Kathy:
The goals for the class are set in the course syllabus and the objectives of the class, when set up to prepare a student to meet a national professsional qualification standard, are not open to interpretation. This is especially true when you know what the state organization uses for testing. The power you are able to give to students is really limited, but Jessie is correct that an alternate project could be used to meet the same objectives if you had a student who put forth the idea, or if you had developed alternative assignments and let the student choose in what way they wished to achieve the goal. Additional suppporting material could be included if one had the time or if a student had the inclination to go above and beyond the requirements. The use of independent study can also allow a student to develop a fuller understanding of the concepts of an area of study as well, but requires the student to desire such and the instructor with the willingness to support such an academic endeavor.
Our vocational programs are often limited in their flexibility by the constraints of the professional standards and due to the fact that they are a practice-based program. Theoretically-based programs, or ones that work to expand the ability to practice, are more open to the student directing the goals. My own bachelors degree had the option for six specializations and one generalist option, which allowed for a degree focused on practice to allow the student to set their own goals for what they wanted the degree to do. At the community college level we are often limited by the time and the focused goal of our students to get the skills that they can use next Monday. Our students are practice-oriented and research is not what generally interests them.
My reflection:
Greg makes the point that vocational programs are practice-based, or focused on a specific career with needed technical skills. He says that there are constraints by professional standards, and also time constraints that limit the flexibility for research and power given to the students to create their own goals and objectives for learning.
I think this is a big problem because we limit the students' learning experience if we don't give them the chance to do more critical thinking and problem solving that prepare them for life experiences. We must do more than give them practical knowledge. We have to find ways to get them more involved, more interaction with their coursework to advance the field to levels much more productive.
I would suggest that Greg try to find a way to get students to work in groups that collaborate in their coursework to build upon the practical information they are provided. They should work together to go beyond practical knowledge to more theoretical learning. He could design exercises that have a blend of both practical and theoretical learning.
Kathy's question #2:
The author of our text, Tennant, developed a class exercise which asked adult educators to identify aspects of students/trainee/participant behavior that annoy or irritate you and to identify aspects of your role (as an educator), which you fear and or feel guilty about? See pp. 182-183 for results.
Since we're getting close to the end of our program and many of you will soon be out there as adult educators, I thought it was time to address what annoys us, and what our fears or guilts are. We all have a big fear or guilt whether we teach now or as we anticipate our role as a teacher. What is your biggest fear, or guilt when it comes to your students? Let’s hear about yours. Feel free to really express yourself here.
Then, I’d like you to tell us what your plan is if your big fear, annoyance, or guilt actually comes true. Perhaps if you’ve recognized your fears/guilts and have an advance plan to deal with it, then it will resolve itself quicker in real life. As you discuss your classmates’ fears, etc., please offer any suggestions to alleviate their concerns based on your teaching experiences.
Gina Ewing's reply to Kathy:
My biggest fear/guilt/annoyance: I have a preceved fear that I would run into a brilliant student who would embarrase me in front of the class by asking me questions that they already know the answers to and prove me to be an inadequate instructor to the other student. And even though I stick to my, "I'll have to get back to you with that answer", the student is persistant in making me look ridiculous in front of the class.
I wonder if any of my cohorts have experienced anything like this?
Plan: I plan on being knowledgeable about the topic that I teach and not become an instructor "just for the money". Perhaps in time and with gained experience I will know how to handle the know it all students and be able to instruct in any topic area that I feel comfortable, but perhaps not an expert in.
My reflection:
Gina is expressing a fear that most new instructors or teachers have, that of a student making fun of them for not knowing the course material to its fullest. That is a very disrespectful thing for a student to do and should not be tolerated. If Gina were to make it clear upfront that she expects the students to respect her while she shows constant respect for them, this disrespectful action should not occur.
I replied to Gina, suggesting to her that she had the right to excuse the student from class if he or she did not relent. There is enough pressure in delivering learning to students without having to deal with this type of nonsense.
I think Gina will find that if she starts right away with ice breaker exercises that get students to know one another and find trust with each other, as well as with her, she probably won't have this problem.
Kathy did a great job again leading this seminar; she kept the discussions going with good questions building on previous thoughts and ideas. There was good participation and sharing by the cohorts. I did a good job participating myself, commenting and sharing my own experiences in the classroom. We all continue to learn from our experiences; if we didn't have that mindset we wouldn't be improving and giving our students the best learning experience possible.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
