Why is it that all of urban kids need to have special labels and can not be taught in the same way as other kids from suburban and rural areas. Do they not think the same? Are these kids not as bright as children from different environments? I tend to think not. I think that children all no matter where they are from are just as capable to succeed in the classroom as the next.
As the article describes in most cases it is the way children are taught that determines how they learn and whether or not they are motivated to do so. From what I understand, in this reading the author describes the Poverty Pedagogy as being almost like an training camp with all this drill and skill involved, where the students are told what to do, how to do and when to do their work. Their class work is all done with the teacher walking around hovering over them making sure they are doing it all the correct and expected way.
Later on in this article it talks about how good teaching uses not one of these previously mentioned techniques. The author talks about how good teaching is related to teachers taking a step back and letting the children have some choice in the classroom. However, not a choice on what will be taught to them, but for example, how they will present what they have learned. Another one of the most important ways in which children learn is through experience and the author mentions something about this as well. Haberman says, "Firsthand experience is potentially more educational than vicarious activity, provided it is combined with reflection." The second part of this statement is probably more important then the experience itself because it actually gets the students think about why they had this experience and what are some of the reasons that it was important for them to observe it.
These are the types of practices that I feel we should be using for teaching not only in the urban school setting but everywhere where there is a student who is willing and able to learn.
2 comments:
It's really refreshing to read how hopeful you are. I had to snap myself out of my pessimistic, cynical self after I read this. Hope is one of the most important qualities to have as an educator, and it seems as if it is often so implicit in the work of a teacher that it oddly becomes a subconscious flaw. This is never the intended outcome, but it seems to naturally happen in time. Think of all the jaded and broken teachers you have had- they were probably just as excited as we are when they were young. Eternal optimists, eager to fight the stigmas of public education. But it's not really any one's fault, right? It's just a natural progression in life... There is this often a battle between reality and hope. They are constantly at war with each other. Keep hope alive, dude.
I totally agree with what you are saying. I think we are relying on the labels that we put on the students too much. When we classify a student as having some learning problem or being part of a particular group or culture our perspective will greatly influence our teaching at a subconscious level. I also agree and disagree with you… that we should all try to teach the kids in the same way. If we take the argument that different experiences will yield different learning then that means that the environment will have a great deal to add to each student’s experience. In other words, an urban student will have different experiences than a suburban or rural student. I think you are right there should be some universal pedagogy that all students should have… but I think there is an assessment for that already… S.A.T’s. Is this the direction you were going for? Just wondering.
Post a Comment