Wednesday, February 20, 2019

The Bottom Line



Related image

AGREE: (1) more hands-on learning than reading from books, and more real-life experiences rather than listening to teachers
(2) "Children may be about 20 percent of the population but they are 100 percent of the future!"
==> As a future educator with a concentration in Biology, I am also a student. From personal experience, sitting in a classroom Monday-Friday's from 8am-3pm and hearing the teacher go on and on about a certain topic is tiresome and boring! Speaking on my behalf, with work and school and trying to maintain a social life, I am always on the go; never a dull moment. But what about students whose "job" is to go to school and maintain good grades? They too deserve to be moving around and entertained. Therefore, students should not learn just by listening to teachers and reciting back everything the teacher says. There's no "How to" manual that teachers can use to teach every single student and prepare students for the ever-changing workplace; however, grabbing the students attention can make such a huge difference. From what I've witnessed, kids are willing to learn: if the material presented to them is made clear. Though small, children are our future!
ARGUE: (1) testing- no one knows for certain whether all the testing, all the required courses, and all the penalties and rewards get teachers to teach better and students to learn moreImage result for testing
(2) being enrolled in private schools but paying for them with public school money
==> Though testing is used as a guide to see where a student stands in certain subjects, vigorous testing can be a handful. It's one thing to view schools in producing a trained workforce that would eventually strengthen American international competitiveness, but it's another in calling for tougher academic courses and higher test scores on national and international tests for all students, not just those going on to college. By focusing solely on strengthening test scores, where does "teaching" come into the picture? By thinking that anything but public schools will produce good education, other schools arose. But why use public school money to fund those other schools? Milwaukee's public schools, for example, had fewer resources than before. And as Greg Doyle states, "Rather than supporting the public schools we are supplanting them with something else."
Image result for kids as robots in classroom cartoon
ASSUME: (1) "traditional schooling" means teachers talked most of the time, children listened, read the textbooks, and recited answers to their teachers
(2) it is poor people who typically get trapped in bad schools (i.e. public schools) and can't afford to do anything about it
==> Assuming that "traditional schooling" was feeding x-amount of information on one end and receiving x-amount of information back is preposterous. Going to school does not necessarily mean you will read from a textbook and provide "accurate" answers: children are not robots! There is nothing wrong with going to public schools, however, if all schools could come together and work on providing a better education all around, public schools will not be looked down upon as much! To be honest, I assumed I was poor when I went to a public school near my neighborhood, but was it a bad school? I don't think so. The graduation rate was high, the teachers had great ratings, and the staff was very welcoming and alert in keeping each student safe.
ASPIRE: (1) deliver the quality of education that we as educators promise to do
(2) teach my future students how to be good thinkers by providing them the freedom
==> As I work my way to my teaching certification, I can only imagine the lives I am bound to change. Within this process I have encountered multiple bumpy roads, but my students are rooting for me, so I keep moving forward. As I mentioned before, I intend to teach Biology. Unfortunately, not many students like science, but I intend on making my lessons entertaining, productive, and educational. Because those students deserve to see the beauty of Biology! Allowing students the freedom to choose to want to learn will not only deliver the quality of education, but also the power and knowledge to think on their own and extend that knowledge further.

2 comments:

  1. Hi Daysi, I really like that video you post it was very catchy especially with that song. I also enjoy reading your post. I like what you agree on, students are not robots we are human that love entertainment and being active will get us going to understanding things better than sitting around and listening to someone voice. It is always better to have hands on learning because it would keep us engage and get us to understand things better. Also, you will be an awesome biology teacher with just viewing your post you seem creative and fun and that is always the key to becoming a great biology teacher. Keep that creative personality and you will move many young minds to want to love biology.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Hey Daysi,

    I love in your aspire section of your blog how you mentioned that you yourself as a future teacher are going through bumpy roads, but still have the encouragement of your students to keep pushing you forward to improve and better your methods. Having a mutual and symbiotic relationship is why so many of us go into the field of teaching. We are not here for just the money, but rather having that gratifying opportunity to change lives while those very same lives are continuously shaping and molding us as well. I always believe that we learn from our students just as much as they do from us. I also admire your passion for your field and how you want to reflect that same drive onto your students because it is ultimately our jobs to make the subject as engaging and meaningful as possible. Great blog Daysi!

    ReplyDelete