After I read Dr. Tuck's blog about the Abbott School Debate I couldn't help but think of a quote that my Teaching in the Inclusive Classroom professor said the first day "Fair isn't always equal." The reason that I bring this quote up is because the Abbott School ruling stated that "the state of NJ would provide the $5,000 difference per student to the Abbott School." (Dr. Tuck's Blog, 2011.) This quote means that it might be fair for one side, but at the same time, it might be viewed as unfair to the other side.
With the Abbott School debate, Gov. Christie has chosen not to follow through with the decision to give the $5,000 per student to make the schools districts' costs per student equal. Gov. Christie says, "school reform goes beyond dollars and cents." (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/06/11/chris-christie-schools_n_875262.html?ref=fb&src=sp) I understand that he was speaking in relation to privatizing lower performing schools, however, he is correct in saying that the schools need more reforms than money. The wealthier constituents are going to be upset with the way their money is being spent, and then the poorer constituents are going to be happy that money is being given to provide their children with the same things that the wealthier students are getting. This is tough for me to take sides on. I do believe that district's should have money for their improvements. The problem is, I can see why the other districts' constituents are getting upset too. On one hand we have to ask how anyone can deny all children the same education? Who has the right to say which students get money spent on them and which ones do not? If my children were going to the Abbott School, then of course I would want them to have this money spent on them, but only if it was being spent on legitimate reforms and would actually benefit my children. If I lived outside that area, then I honestly do not know how I would feel. I do know that my educator side, would not be able to deny children that money.
When you think of fairness, this situation with Abbott Schools may never have a resolution where people view it as fair to all sides. If we think about this inside a classroom, then this is the same idea that occurs in the inclusive classrooms. We give one student a different amount of testing time, or give another student less questions to answer on a homework, this might seem unfair, but it isn't. It's fair that each are taking the assessments that are necessary for their ability, but it might not be equal in the amount of work.
Education is a tough entity to work with. The bottom line is that we should be applauding the districts who hire teachers who actually are there for the children, and take time to get to know what works for their students. Sometimes things aren't going to be fair to all, but they can still be equal. We need more teachers like Carter who took the time to see what worked with which students. He used music with one group, but maybe he has to change that up with each group of students who come through his door. As Gladwell said in the TED talks, "we need to embrace diversity." We need to embrace the things that make our students who they are, and those other things that will make them who they will be.
I would like to say that if Gov. Christie says yes to paying the difference to the Abbott School, then what is going to stop him from giving the same amount of money to all of the school districts in the state? He will have a tough time justifying saying yes, or doing what the court wants to only one school. How can he turn his back on all of the districts in his state? Imagine what kind of debates are going to come out of this when other poor district's hear that there was a court ruling like this. I could only imagine what I would feel if I lived in one of those districts. I would want to know what the Abbott School did to get this equal amount of money and I would want to go to court for my own children. I don't like how Christie wants the privatization of the schools, however, when you look at Sameness as Fairness, I don't think that I would want to have the job that he does, and I wouldn't want to have to come up with the money in order to make the schools all have the same.
Friday, June 24, 2011
Friday, June 17, 2011
Should assessments be personalized?
As an interesting way to start this week's blog, I thought that you would enjoy the clip from You Tube that demonstrates how standardized testing is so impersonal. Enjoy! It is a fun way to show that we need to know the students that we are teaching! (or in this case testing!)
I can't help but notice that this week's topics fall right as we are all wrapping up the year and this wrap up includes many tests being given. Regents, and final exam weeks are all that we are doing at the MS and HS level right now. Dr. Tuck has asked us, "After all these years of common schooling, we still have no real way of knowing if students are learning." (Tuck, 2011, Blog.) I can't help but think of that statement when I see my son and his friends studying for their regents, and my daughter stressing over her first "real" finals. I started to wonder, what if assessments were personalized for all students? What if they could take what they have learned and were given a guideline to what the assessment must include, but they could decide what way they could show the topics that they have learned? This would be an interesting concept.
Lisa Delpit delves into this concept when she states, "if we are to invite children into the language of school, we must make school inviting to them." (Delpit, 2002, p.42.) Wouldn't personalized assessments fall into this category? Wouldn't we make more authentic assessments if the students had more ownership in their learning? What if we started to give our lessons and taught what the standards dictate that the students must know, but then we let the students reflect upon their learning and get them to pull what they have learned and make the connections between their school lessons to their life lessons? To make this happen though, educators would have to take the time to learn about their students. Lisa Delpit stresses this by saying, "Furthermore, by not listening, teachers cannot know what students are concerned about, what interests them, or what is happening in their lives." (Delpit, 2002, p.43.) She continues by saying, "Without that knowledge it is difficult to connect the curriculum to anything students find meaningful." (Delpit, 2002, p.43.) If we do not take the time to learn about our students, then we won't know how much they learn about anything.
I enjoyed hearing how Patricia Carini references that "each child who comes through the door brings along his or her individuality and so inevitably makes some contribution, welcome or unwelcome, the the variety and the diversity of the class." (Carini, 2001, p. 169.) This clarified for me that here we have all of these individuals, but yet, we make them fit into one form at the end of every year, chapter, etc. We learn about multiple learning styles, which encourages teachers to teach to the style that fits each child the best, yet at the same time, we take that individual learning style and make them all take the same test.
What if we could combine their learning style with their assessments? Ken Robinson's video stated "schools kill creativity." Isn't that what those standardized tests are doing to all of us? We give up those "fun" lessons, that taught so many children, because we have a test that must be taken at the end of the year. What about the student who is musically inclined, taking what they learn in History and composing a song about those lessons? Or the student who has a talent for drawing, getting a chance to interpret the art of an era or actually being allowed to paint something that translates what they feel history has taught them? It really makes you think about the ways that children could interpret what they have learned if they get a chance to really tie this into their strengths. The students who can ponder what they are learning, and figure out a way, or think through a way to show what they have learned. As an educator, we would have to have a way of telling the students, that their interests count.
Would we have to have basic guidelines? Of course, there might be a set of essential questions that the student must answer, however, they can interpret those questions in a way that makes sense to them. Some students may even choose to take a "traditional test," but imagine the others who want to take what they have learned and show us instead of just bubble in a scantron.
Carini quotes Havel in her essay as saying, "In the context of the essay, Havel (1992) means that to do the work of understanding we must as people, as humans, create radically different ways of looking at the world and ourselves." (Carini, 2001, p. 169.) This completely backs up how I have been thinking about assessments needing to be revisited and changed. I have a deep feeling that we will start to see a better way of assessing coming soon, but these new assessments will come with many arguments, and many educators fighting to go back to the test. Will these new assessments take time to grade, and take us to places that we haven't been before? Yes, but I believe deep down, we will be doing what is the best for the kids. Good teachers venture out of their safety box when they are teaching and they try new things or new ways to present their lessons, this keeps interest and honestly, makes things fun, so why aren't we able to go outside the box when it comes to assessing?
I can't help but notice that this week's topics fall right as we are all wrapping up the year and this wrap up includes many tests being given. Regents, and final exam weeks are all that we are doing at the MS and HS level right now. Dr. Tuck has asked us, "After all these years of common schooling, we still have no real way of knowing if students are learning." (Tuck, 2011, Blog.) I can't help but think of that statement when I see my son and his friends studying for their regents, and my daughter stressing over her first "real" finals. I started to wonder, what if assessments were personalized for all students? What if they could take what they have learned and were given a guideline to what the assessment must include, but they could decide what way they could show the topics that they have learned? This would be an interesting concept.
Lisa Delpit delves into this concept when she states, "if we are to invite children into the language of school, we must make school inviting to them." (Delpit, 2002, p.42.) Wouldn't personalized assessments fall into this category? Wouldn't we make more authentic assessments if the students had more ownership in their learning? What if we started to give our lessons and taught what the standards dictate that the students must know, but then we let the students reflect upon their learning and get them to pull what they have learned and make the connections between their school lessons to their life lessons? To make this happen though, educators would have to take the time to learn about their students. Lisa Delpit stresses this by saying, "Furthermore, by not listening, teachers cannot know what students are concerned about, what interests them, or what is happening in their lives." (Delpit, 2002, p.43.) She continues by saying, "Without that knowledge it is difficult to connect the curriculum to anything students find meaningful." (Delpit, 2002, p.43.) If we do not take the time to learn about our students, then we won't know how much they learn about anything.
I enjoyed hearing how Patricia Carini references that "each child who comes through the door brings along his or her individuality and so inevitably makes some contribution, welcome or unwelcome, the the variety and the diversity of the class." (Carini, 2001, p. 169.) This clarified for me that here we have all of these individuals, but yet, we make them fit into one form at the end of every year, chapter, etc. We learn about multiple learning styles, which encourages teachers to teach to the style that fits each child the best, yet at the same time, we take that individual learning style and make them all take the same test.
What if we could combine their learning style with their assessments? Ken Robinson's video stated "schools kill creativity." Isn't that what those standardized tests are doing to all of us? We give up those "fun" lessons, that taught so many children, because we have a test that must be taken at the end of the year. What about the student who is musically inclined, taking what they learn in History and composing a song about those lessons? Or the student who has a talent for drawing, getting a chance to interpret the art of an era or actually being allowed to paint something that translates what they feel history has taught them? It really makes you think about the ways that children could interpret what they have learned if they get a chance to really tie this into their strengths. The students who can ponder what they are learning, and figure out a way, or think through a way to show what they have learned. As an educator, we would have to have a way of telling the students, that their interests count.
Would we have to have basic guidelines? Of course, there might be a set of essential questions that the student must answer, however, they can interpret those questions in a way that makes sense to them. Some students may even choose to take a "traditional test," but imagine the others who want to take what they have learned and show us instead of just bubble in a scantron.
Carini quotes Havel in her essay as saying, "In the context of the essay, Havel (1992) means that to do the work of understanding we must as people, as humans, create radically different ways of looking at the world and ourselves." (Carini, 2001, p. 169.) This completely backs up how I have been thinking about assessments needing to be revisited and changed. I have a deep feeling that we will start to see a better way of assessing coming soon, but these new assessments will come with many arguments, and many educators fighting to go back to the test. Will these new assessments take time to grade, and take us to places that we haven't been before? Yes, but I believe deep down, we will be doing what is the best for the kids. Good teachers venture out of their safety box when they are teaching and they try new things or new ways to present their lessons, this keeps interest and honestly, makes things fun, so why aren't we able to go outside the box when it comes to assessing?
Saturday, June 11, 2011
"It Must be Nice to be a Teacher..."
"It must be nice to have summers off, and have all of those vacations and to get paid for it all." This statement is one that I hear a lot when I tell people about my chosen profession. It is also the one statement that infuriates me so much because they have no clue what it means to be a teacher! Why shouldn't they view the profession like that though, when even the government views teachers as "failures." This week's readings have been about Neoliberalism and their view that "what is private is necessarily good, and what is public is necessarily bad."(Apple, pg. 38 ). This statement is so far from the truth, that I don't even know where to begin.
I want to ask the government officials who are promoting neoliberalism, to come to our schools for a week. Not a day, because things can be made to look good in a day, but over a week they will get to see what their "policies" have done to great teachers. Due to the NCLB Act we have amazing teachers who used to do creative, thought provoking lessons, which weren't always, "curriculum driven" but were a valuable part of a child's learning process, now afraid to "let go" of their curriculum. Teachers who were allowed to be individuals in how they could teach, and still get the needed curriculum out to the students, afraid that they will be let go or reprimanded if their students do not pass a test with a "4" or a high "3". In fact, I know that there are some teachers in our school systems who actually do "working snacktime" instead of letting the kids have 10-15 minutes without instruction in their day! Can you even imagine the impact on these children? With the way that some families are functioning lately, school can be their only time to have positive social interactions with peers and adults, and we are now so obsessed with "teaching to the test, or having to get our curriculum in" that we are forgetting that these students, are children. For the teachers who give the students working snacks, what about the valuable lessons we could be giving them on life during that time? Such as, "you are important to me, and I want to know what you did last night for fun? " or "what do you think about ....?" Just getting the students to talk to each other in a less restrictive environment, is such a vital concept to develop, that we lose those lessons, when we are forced to "teach to the test." Perhaps in spending their week with a school, they would get to see that their policies are partly enabling the destruction of our society, more so than they believed that they are aiding in our society with their ridiculous standards.
The fact that the neoliberalists are stating that, "nearly all public institutions are sucking the financial life out of this society,"(Apple, pg. 38) infuriates me even more. They are lumping so much into that statement when they say this. What about the parks, and museums that people can go to to engage in learning? Some are free, or at least affordable so that everyone can benefit from them. Looking at and studying artwork from a well-known artist, can inspire someone to do something with their life, or just to enjoy looking at something of beauty. How about the transportation system? This system helps people get from place to place, whether it is work, or pleasure. I do recall hearing somewhere that we should be using public transportation more and using less resources to drive our cars everywhere. If private companies took over all of the public sphere, then I honestly do not think that the neoliberalists realize that they will be taking away the very essence of America. "The Land of the Free..." would mean nothing if everything begins to be sold to the highest bidder.
"For the neoliberals, the world is a vast supermarket." (Apple, pg. 39) This statement proves that they would like to sell everything to the people willing to pay for them, but they are forgetting that they are then going to be aiding in "a massive transfer of social wealth from middle-class, working-class,and low-income people to the extremely rich" (Lipman, pg. 47.) Do we want this philosophy in our school systems, and other public spheres? Can you imagine what a school system would look like if teachers have to conform to whatever the company owners want them to teach? How would colleges accept students who come from so many diverse education systems? They would not be able to judge how a curriculum prepped these students, without a system in which there was some control over, or some kind of standards.
I ask the neoliberals to go back into their memories and pull out what made some of their favorite teachers stand out in their lives. I bet that they would name the teachers who were kind, caring, had fun with what they were teaching, were creative, made them feel like they were special, etc. Wait? Aren't I describing what the majority of teachers are nowadays too? Teachers battle so many small things, that I want to know why these neoliberals want to throw more into the daily battles with these policies? Let us teach, and let us do this to the best of our abilities. We are educated individuals who went into teaching to help children, and we do this in a time that isn't always easy. Do not impose even more ridiculous standards like 100% of our students passing a test. I also want to ask these neoliberalists if they could handle a high bar set like that in their profession? I think that deep down these people know that this is an impossible goal to make people obtain, so that they can then say that we "failed". This way they can't take ownership for what they created, or for the fact that we are dealing with human beings, and as far as I know, human beings are never 100% perfect.
I want to ask the government officials who are promoting neoliberalism, to come to our schools for a week. Not a day, because things can be made to look good in a day, but over a week they will get to see what their "policies" have done to great teachers. Due to the NCLB Act we have amazing teachers who used to do creative, thought provoking lessons, which weren't always, "curriculum driven" but were a valuable part of a child's learning process, now afraid to "let go" of their curriculum. Teachers who were allowed to be individuals in how they could teach, and still get the needed curriculum out to the students, afraid that they will be let go or reprimanded if their students do not pass a test with a "4" or a high "3". In fact, I know that there are some teachers in our school systems who actually do "working snacktime" instead of letting the kids have 10-15 minutes without instruction in their day! Can you even imagine the impact on these children? With the way that some families are functioning lately, school can be their only time to have positive social interactions with peers and adults, and we are now so obsessed with "teaching to the test, or having to get our curriculum in" that we are forgetting that these students, are children. For the teachers who give the students working snacks, what about the valuable lessons we could be giving them on life during that time? Such as, "you are important to me, and I want to know what you did last night for fun? " or "what do you think about ....?" Just getting the students to talk to each other in a less restrictive environment, is such a vital concept to develop, that we lose those lessons, when we are forced to "teach to the test." Perhaps in spending their week with a school, they would get to see that their policies are partly enabling the destruction of our society, more so than they believed that they are aiding in our society with their ridiculous standards.
The fact that the neoliberalists are stating that, "nearly all public institutions are sucking the financial life out of this society,"(Apple, pg. 38) infuriates me even more. They are lumping so much into that statement when they say this. What about the parks, and museums that people can go to to engage in learning? Some are free, or at least affordable so that everyone can benefit from them. Looking at and studying artwork from a well-known artist, can inspire someone to do something with their life, or just to enjoy looking at something of beauty. How about the transportation system? This system helps people get from place to place, whether it is work, or pleasure. I do recall hearing somewhere that we should be using public transportation more and using less resources to drive our cars everywhere. If private companies took over all of the public sphere, then I honestly do not think that the neoliberalists realize that they will be taking away the very essence of America. "The Land of the Free..." would mean nothing if everything begins to be sold to the highest bidder.
"For the neoliberals, the world is a vast supermarket." (Apple, pg. 39) This statement proves that they would like to sell everything to the people willing to pay for them, but they are forgetting that they are then going to be aiding in "a massive transfer of social wealth from middle-class, working-class,and low-income people to the extremely rich" (Lipman, pg. 47.) Do we want this philosophy in our school systems, and other public spheres? Can you imagine what a school system would look like if teachers have to conform to whatever the company owners want them to teach? How would colleges accept students who come from so many diverse education systems? They would not be able to judge how a curriculum prepped these students, without a system in which there was some control over, or some kind of standards.
I ask the neoliberals to go back into their memories and pull out what made some of their favorite teachers stand out in their lives. I bet that they would name the teachers who were kind, caring, had fun with what they were teaching, were creative, made them feel like they were special, etc. Wait? Aren't I describing what the majority of teachers are nowadays too? Teachers battle so many small things, that I want to know why these neoliberals want to throw more into the daily battles with these policies? Let us teach, and let us do this to the best of our abilities. We are educated individuals who went into teaching to help children, and we do this in a time that isn't always easy. Do not impose even more ridiculous standards like 100% of our students passing a test. I also want to ask these neoliberalists if they could handle a high bar set like that in their profession? I think that deep down these people know that this is an impossible goal to make people obtain, so that they can then say that we "failed". This way they can't take ownership for what they created, or for the fact that we are dealing with human beings, and as far as I know, human beings are never 100% perfect.
Friday, June 3, 2011
"It takes a village to raise a child."
As an educator, you hope that you connect with your students enough that they want to continue the learning process while they are outside the classroom. Hopefully, this doesn't have anything to do with homework! This would be the ideal situation. We forget that we have students in our classroom who go home and speak fluently in languages other than English. These are the students who may not receive help on their homework from parents or older siblings, not because the parents are disinterested, but because they do not know the English language well enough to engage in that aspect of their child's life. The example of "Nan, a Cambodian elementary school ELL whose parents were not literate in any language." was very touching because she could handle projects and work that she could do at home, because, "[she] was able to draw on her existing artistic and performance skills to compensate for her limited English, whereas at school she was not able to access them fully." (Hanenda, p. 338). I find this story so compelling because it just touches on the creativity, and resourcefulness that these children have to use to learn the English language or to just be good students. In Nan's case I wonder, if her classroom teacher could help combine her artistic skills to help enhance her classroom work and help her to become more fluent in English. If her teacher did this for her, then perhaps she would connect with the part of Nan's learning style that would enable her to become a better English learner or even just a better student who looks forward to learning.
In my title I mention "It takes a Village to raise a child." I think some of our schools forget what a resource we have sitting outside of the schools just waiting to be tapped into! When I took Curriculum Development for the Administrator last summer, Professor Hammond would mention how the Indian culture uses their communities to help with educating their students. Everyone takes part in the schooling of the students. They have a vested interest in all of the children, not just their own. What a wonderful experience it must be for those children to know that so many people care and how exciting it must be to learn, when you know so many people are pulling for you. Hanenda touches on a similar concept when she mentions that " working class Latino families have similarly pointed to the existence of an extended network of support, noting that Latino families often engage in collaborative literacy activities in public spaces, such as the kitchen or the living room, and involve parents, siblings, cousins, and extended family members" (e.g., Volk, 1997;Volk & De Acosta, 2001). What an amazing resource for the children and also for the members of the whole family to be able to learn from each other. They are able to practice literacy in their language and I wouldn't be surprised if they also get the chance to practice speaking and using the English language too.
Other cultures or communities do similar things, such as the "Bangladeshi community in London's East End" (Hanenda, p.339). In these families "outside the school, the children spent an average of 10-18 hours per week attending formal literacy classes. Some of this time was spent in Bengali classes that were offered either in the community centers or in neighbors' homes so that they could learn to speak, read, and write Bengali." (Hanenda, p. 339). These students were now learning literacy in another language, not just English. I wonder if these students are taking some of the skills that they are using to learn this other language back with them when they get into their classrooms? In some Korean and Chinese communities they offer classes and schooling to "not only help children to learn their heritage language and cultural values but they also provide a forum for sharing core experiences of being a Chinese or Korean American." (Hanenda, p. 339). These classes are a great way for people in these communities to gather and learn and keep their culture alive. They get to talk to one another and keep their cultural values from disappearing. Another point to make about the Korean and Chinese communities is that they have "formed a sophisticated system of supplementary education, including literacy in heritage languages and English." (Hanenda, p.339).
I also wonder if these students are then making connections and using their language skills that they are learning in these supplementary classes to continue speaking to their friends who they are meeting in the classes. Maybe they are texting to them by phone, or emailing on the computer, or even talking to them on the phone. They might even be doing this in their own language, or in English. If they are communicating and being able to do so with their friends and community members, then isn't that a great way of opening up the mind of a student being a continuing learner? If these students are comfortable practicing literacy in their own language, then I wonder how we can tap into this energy? What a wonderful learning community we could establish if we could embrace the community based literacy learning. Hanenda mentions "it is equally important for teachers to reflect what it means to help students to become literate and, on this basis, to create learning environments where students feel safe to express their ideas in a developmentally appropriate manner and to engage in critical discussion of substantive issues by using reading and writing as told for thinking." (Haneda, p. 343). If these students are comfortable enough or feel safe enough to practice literacy learning outside the classroom, then we really need to look at what makes them feel this safe and comfortable. As educators our goal is to make our students lifelong learners, so if we could tap into this excitement of learning and being literate in a comfortable situation, even if it's in "another language", then isn't this when we have done our job correctly? Getting students and their families to be involved with each other and to learn skills that could help them learn other languages is an amazing concept! If we could make these students feel as safe and comfortable inside the classroom, then think about how much more effectively we can teach them. Having a "village raise the child" might be the perfect solution to making the entire community literate and help everyone learn from each other.
In my title I mention "It takes a Village to raise a child." I think some of our schools forget what a resource we have sitting outside of the schools just waiting to be tapped into! When I took Curriculum Development for the Administrator last summer, Professor Hammond would mention how the Indian culture uses their communities to help with educating their students. Everyone takes part in the schooling of the students. They have a vested interest in all of the children, not just their own. What a wonderful experience it must be for those children to know that so many people care and how exciting it must be to learn, when you know so many people are pulling for you. Hanenda touches on a similar concept when she mentions that " working class Latino families have similarly pointed to the existence of an extended network of support, noting that Latino families often engage in collaborative literacy activities in public spaces, such as the kitchen or the living room, and involve parents, siblings, cousins, and extended family members" (e.g., Volk, 1997;Volk & De Acosta, 2001). What an amazing resource for the children and also for the members of the whole family to be able to learn from each other. They are able to practice literacy in their language and I wouldn't be surprised if they also get the chance to practice speaking and using the English language too.
Other cultures or communities do similar things, such as the "Bangladeshi community in London's East End" (Hanenda, p.339). In these families "outside the school, the children spent an average of 10-18 hours per week attending formal literacy classes. Some of this time was spent in Bengali classes that were offered either in the community centers or in neighbors' homes so that they could learn to speak, read, and write Bengali." (Hanenda, p. 339). These students were now learning literacy in another language, not just English. I wonder if these students are taking some of the skills that they are using to learn this other language back with them when they get into their classrooms? In some Korean and Chinese communities they offer classes and schooling to "not only help children to learn their heritage language and cultural values but they also provide a forum for sharing core experiences of being a Chinese or Korean American." (Hanenda, p. 339). These classes are a great way for people in these communities to gather and learn and keep their culture alive. They get to talk to one another and keep their cultural values from disappearing. Another point to make about the Korean and Chinese communities is that they have "formed a sophisticated system of supplementary education, including literacy in heritage languages and English." (Hanenda, p.339).
I also wonder if these students are then making connections and using their language skills that they are learning in these supplementary classes to continue speaking to their friends who they are meeting in the classes. Maybe they are texting to them by phone, or emailing on the computer, or even talking to them on the phone. They might even be doing this in their own language, or in English. If they are communicating and being able to do so with their friends and community members, then isn't that a great way of opening up the mind of a student being a continuing learner? If these students are comfortable practicing literacy in their own language, then I wonder how we can tap into this energy? What a wonderful learning community we could establish if we could embrace the community based literacy learning. Hanenda mentions "it is equally important for teachers to reflect what it means to help students to become literate and, on this basis, to create learning environments where students feel safe to express their ideas in a developmentally appropriate manner and to engage in critical discussion of substantive issues by using reading and writing as told for thinking." (Haneda, p. 343). If these students are comfortable enough or feel safe enough to practice literacy learning outside the classroom, then we really need to look at what makes them feel this safe and comfortable. As educators our goal is to make our students lifelong learners, so if we could tap into this excitement of learning and being literate in a comfortable situation, even if it's in "another language", then isn't this when we have done our job correctly? Getting students and their families to be involved with each other and to learn skills that could help them learn other languages is an amazing concept! If we could make these students feel as safe and comfortable inside the classroom, then think about how much more effectively we can teach them. Having a "village raise the child" might be the perfect solution to making the entire community literate and help everyone learn from each other.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)