From: adri0001@student.tc.umn.edu ()
Subject: Responding to Sheila King
Organization: University of Minnesota
Date: Fri, 29 Jan 1993 01:49:50 GMT

Apparently, my posts did not make it...I am going to post them again and
hope that I am not posting them for a second time.  Let's hope this works
and Thank goodness I saved the messages...though Sheila may not think so :)

Sheila King writes:
 
>To: Amarit, posting from University of Minnesota
 
The name is not Amarit.  It's Amrit...no big deal; just letting you know ;)
 
>First of all, I am in a position of authority, no matter what my teenage
>students think that means. And whether I have a friendly easy-going
>relationship with them (which _happens_ to be the type of relationship
>we have) or a strict tyrranical relationship, I am the authority in the
>classroom. Each teacher is. How we choose to interpret that, or if we
>choose to act on it or ignore it, is up to each one of us
>individually.
 
Well, you see, I have a problem with this attitude.  I do not believe it is
necessary to promote the "natural" position of authority that a teacher is
proclaimed to have in order to _educate_ which seems to be our common goal.  I
am not willing to submit and simply say that we can all teach in our own ways.
The current methods being employed on students are not working for a vast
number of them.  Many are being turned away disheartened by the educational
system that seems to abandon them.
 
The idea of slavery (intellectual slavery, not legal slavery) comes to mind as
stated by John Dewey with regard to education:
 
"[Slavery] is found wherever men are engaged in activity which is socially
 serviceable, but whose service they do not understand and have no personal
 interest in." -- John Dewey, Democracy and Education, 1944 p. 85
 
Can't you see that the way education is today, not every student takes an
active role in what he/she is learning?
 
>I agree with you, that we should, as teachers, try to keep the students
>interested in learning. Make it fun for them, when possible. And try
>to instill a love of knowledge in them.
 
...doing so by making them feel as though they _have to_ attend class, that
they _have to_ be on time, that they _have to_ do their assignments does not
instill a love of learning...it instills a blind acceptance of social pressure
to submit to the rules that are set up long before they get thown into this
system we call education.  If you say this is inevitable, I must disagree.
 
>Well, as a parent with a 7 year old and a 4 year old, I find that I need
>to teach them certain standards of behavior. And I try talking to
>them, reasoning with them, etc..., but eventually if they choose to do
>something that I, as parent, feel is not acceptable, and if after
>talking to them, etc. they still repeat these things, eventually there
>has to come a punishment.
 
You are not the students' parents.  You really should not have a right to
determine what the "rules" are.  Now, I am not opposed to _all_ rules, only
the rules that stand in the way of a student realizing the potential of
learning on his/her own.  Sure, we can't have fights, or abusive behavior, but
conditioning such as being on time to class, getting assignments done, etc.
simply serve as convenient tools that give the illusion of real learning.
 
These are the rules I am addressing.  What you consider disruptive to the rest
of the class might very well be an instruction to the rest of the class...these
are not robots and we should hardly perceive them as such.  I am not saying
that you should make your lessons fun; I'm saying that you should make your
plans based on the desires and passions that the students have, not that _you_,
the board of education, or the state have.  This is what I am trying to change.
 
>I wouldn't say I "never" expect to do in class what I had planned on the
>day before. As a matter of fact, I'd say that 85% or more of the time we
>DO do what I had planned. But I am comfortable with occassionally doing
>something different. And if I sense that the class is not at all ready
>to move on with what I had planned, I act on that.
 
This isn't what I'm saying you should act on...I'm saying that you should not
feel as though you are there to cover a certain aspect of a particular subject
just because you "need to" in order to meet the requirements set up for that
particular class.  I'm saying the requirements need to be abolished and the
needs of the student, as an individual and not as a part of a collection, be
addressed.
 
>If you think what I'm trying to do is have "control" over the students,
>that is not how *I* view it. I view it as having a classroom where
>learning is going on (this does not necessarily mean I'm standing at
>the front of the room telling the students what they are supposed to learn),
 
But that is in fact what you _are_ doing!  What say do the students have into
what you are going to teach them?  Who is the state to identify what a student
_needs_ to know.  It appears to me that the state has failed miserably in its
mission because most of the real experience I have had has come from my ability
to think on my own.  The greatest lessons I have had in my life did not come in
the context of a classroom...this is true in most if not all cases.  I may have
facts crammed in my head, but that's not important to me as a functioning
member of this society unless it was _I_ who put those facts there willingly.
How many students do you know actually retain the information you continually
dish out day in and day out after say one year?  I'm willing to bet that
the students will not be able to tell you much about what he/she learned in
general, but seems to retain the things that he/she LOVED to learn about much
better.  Have you ever talked to a student that went through your class and
asked that person what he/she remembers about it? learned from it?  Now, do
you see that I am addressing the educational _system_ and NOT the system
you chose to employ in _your_ classroom?
 
>and student behavior that disrupts this environment and makes it
>difficult for learning to continue
 
My argument is that no _real_ learning is going on in your classroom, or any
other classroom in the country, unless the needs of the students are being
addressed directly.  Refer to my comments above for clarification on what the
needs of the student are...
 
>other students. I have overheard other students talk about my class as
>compared to other teachers on campus, and they say they LIKE it that
>there is some sort of order established and that they can learn. In some
>classrooms there is a sort of controlled choas, with noise, and the
>teacher not maintaining any type of order. The kids don't like this.
 
This is an illusory evaluation of your classroom.  Sure, they may like the
order, but I am not talking about the order...I'm talking about the passion
and the desire to _learn_ which I cannot say is happening in this country's
classrooms, or yours for that matter.
 
>Anyway, as regards your
>informal, loose conversations with students, I have had many of them
>with mine. They can tell me whatever they want, and I will listen. As a
>matter of fact, I've told them just that. However, I usually can't do
>that listening during class time. But after class, at lunch, or after
>school, I'm all ears.
 
...listening with a closed mind.  The superficial excuses a student gives to
being late to class are not what I am addressing.  I am addressing the
fundamental problem here, not ONLY in your class, but many others across the
country.  I don't think you are understanding what exactly it is that I am
saying...I'm trying to clarify as best I can.
 
>continued, next message
 
ditto...
 

-- 
   -=-=-=  Amrit Chauhan --- Conciousness can be Demystified  -=-=-=-
 -=-=-=  achauhan@math.macalstr.edu - #AppleIIgs forever        -=-=-=-
-=-=-=   Conciousness depends on its associated concepts.         =-=-=-
-=-=-=   Cartesian Duelism is giving up on science.   -->--<@     =-=-=-
Newsgroups: k12.chat.teacher