What all of my professors and mentoring teachers have said: “You’re doing great! You’re going to be a phenomenal teacher. You have the qualities that make up master teachers. I can’t wait to see what matriculates out of the great educator you already are.”
What the system, my advisors, and every scholarship opportunity says: “You suck. You’re not doing it right. All these moronic intellectually bankrupt folks who are your colleagues are what the education world really needs.”
Hello, my name is Laura. I am an Education major. When people ask me why I want be a teacher, I reply “because I hate the Education system”. And why do I hate the Education system?
For starters, I hate that we like to blame on thing or another for the system at hand. It’s insane to believe that…
Hi Laura, I’m GWALP.
I’ve been doing this for a little while now, so I’m going to respond to your minifesto. If this were your teaching philosophy turned in with your resume, then most public schools wouldn’t hire you.
Let me break it down for you:
I like the first paragraph. It’s a little vague at first, but the general sentiment I am okay with.
Your last sentence in the third paragraph makes you sound completely incompetent. Where are you getting that we see children as one child? The entire concept of differentiated instruction (which is super hot right now), is about NOT seeing students as one child. Even standardized tests give wiggle room to accommodate IEP and ESL students, so you can’t make that blanket statement we see children as one child. My school has three ability levels of math and English WITH differentiated instruction. My students in speech pick their topics. I just graded 112 unique presentations.
This last, full paragraph will never get you hired in a public school, I think. Because you misunderstand the idea of “teaching to a test” versus “preparing them for the test.”
Teaching to the test is only teaching the content that will be covered on the test. For example: I write a test over Othello and only review and teach students the 25 multiple choice questions.
When in fact, I prepare students for all kinds of possibilities: Make inferences on character motivation, connect vocabulary to examples in the text they have to find themselves. All kinds of items that I didn’t directly point out to them in class.
But when it comes to standardized tests, I CAN’T teach to a test that I can’t SEE. Sure, I am told about 40% of the test is reading comprehension, but I don’t know what the kids will have to read.
So, then I have the freedom and the RESPONSIBILITY to PREPARE students for not just that test, but also for LIFE. Reading comprehension and writing are LIFE skills that go beyond just a test. The test is a cog in a wheel in what I would’ve been doing anyway.
I get the feeling then that you really don’t understand what it’s like to BE a teacher. Sure, you have passion and you care about the future of students and their own ability to learn, but you have to put that passion and care to work in lesson plans, curriculum plans, and IEPs.
I will not go every single step it leads me, because not all students will be able to learn that quickly or slowly.
- See that’s the differentiated instruction I was talking about. You’re okay here.
When I become a teacher, I will teach the child. I will teach them to their pace, learning style, and learning disabilities (if any).
- You will have to because IEPs must be legally observed, not because you think you’re being revolutionary.
I will teach that way, because I will not be teaching just one type of learner, with the same family background, education history, or even socio economic status. I will be teaching the individual that is made of many parts and still needs an actual education.
- And this is great! You recognize the greatest wonders and difficulties of being a teacher, but at the same time you COMPLETELY SLAP IN THE FACE WHAT THE JOB IS.
Because you don’t understand the actual work that is involved in being a teacher: Planning curriculum, adhering to standards, writing intervention plans, you think that what we do isn’t “an actual education.”
Teaching to the tests is demanding memorization, which is not learning. Learning involves being interested and actually holding on to what was taught.
I say again: I cannot make children memorize what reading comprehension is; it’s not a memorizable-teach-to-the-test-skill. And you’re RIGHT: the base level of Bloom’s Taxonomy is memorization, and it’s not the entire pyramid. BUT IT IS STILL LEARNING. You have to get the kids up the highest level of all: Synthesis. You must start at the baseline first. I get my students to synthesize everything I’ve taught them and I send them off to the world: to jobs, to college, and to tests BECAUSE I’VE PREPARED THEM FOR EVERYTHING FROM A TEST TO LIFE.
That’s where you don’t get it.
You will get it, eventually. But you don’t get it now.
Ouch, GWALP! While I agree 100%, go easy on her, my thoughts were just as impassioned and ignorant about three years ago. She’ll catch on :)
Not a ZD fan. But I’m glad to see one of these finally aimed towards male teachers.
(Source: heygirlteacher)
Pretty sure I could still be fired for articulating the thoughts that headline inspired as I picked up the paper in the office this morning.
Virginia is tossing ideas around for similar legislation, ridding the state of tenured contracts and requiring teachers to have to renew contracts every year. I’ve not been sure what to think about it. On the one hand, tenure keeps millions of inadequate public teachers employed and gives them security in a sense. Tenure, like any other employment contract is a benefit of a signed, legally binding agreement meaning that teachers are still subject to abiding by the tenets of said contract. Regardless of their seniority, teachers can be terminated if there is just cause. But nevertheless, plenty of teachers who are doing nothing to enrich the lives of their students are being protected. However, tenure also rewards those who are innovative and making progressive strides in the classroom as well and protects them just as much. My strong leaning is that the tenets of the employment contract for teachers should include standards for evaluation. No one is really questioning that there should be a more thorough and accurate method of evaluation for teachers but the magic question, of course, is how to accomplish that. No one has offered a magic bullet just yet, but getting rid of tenure and long-term contracts, I’m almost certain, is probably not the answer.
GWALP, allisonunsupervised, iamlittlei, affectedline, you all are in the thick of things and have a better idea of how tenure works, the loopholes, the pros and the cons. What do you think?
Welcome to the blog of Christopher Ryan Mathews. I, sometimes, enjoy sharing that which inhabits and intrigues my mind.
