As I read about Jake I can’t help but think how fortunate he is to have such a loving family and supportive family. They seemed to be extremely involved and in tune with his interest and needs. Not only did they embrace his natural interest but they also embraced the importance of literacy. I loved that they had so much literature in their home and that Jake was getting those pre-reading skills that so many children do not. There are so many kids that are not so fortunate, not just in working class families but also in middle and upper class families, to have parents that have an invested interest in their child and take the time to do so much with their children.
What ever happened to recognizing that children have different learning styles? Every child can not fit into a one size fits all approach and typically boys are the ones that work outside of the box. They need engaging, hands on, purposeful lessons to keep them motivated and interested in learning. Otherwise, what can we expect to happen to them as they go through what they feel is mundane activities year after year. No wonder Jake’s dad dropped out of school in ninth grade. I know that just like kids having different learning styles that teachers also have different teaching styles. That is why it is our responsibility to match up kids with the right teacher and to higher teachers that are wiling to teach in a variety of ways, to meet every child’s needs. It was obvious that Jake’s first grade teacher was exactly the opposite of what he needed and then in second grade she was a much better fit. It sounded to me that they were somewhat displeased that Jake did not catch up with his peers in second grade. Whose fault was that though? He didn’t choose to be placed in a traditional first grade classroom.
I was just having a conversation the other day about how high school strives to prepare all kids for college, but what if this isn’t your track or your desire in life. Not everyone desires to go to college and there are plenty of jobs out there that require more hands on training versus a degree to get the job. So why aren’t we preparing those kids for the track that they feel drawn to? Why isn’t the guidance counselor meeting with them like he/she does with the college track kids to help prepare them for life?
Amy Spade
Comments (6)
I struggle with what you mention about how all kids are not on the college track. I know that college is usually a good thing and leads to a higher paying job. But you are right that there are kids who are not going. I have a student who loves the animals and crops his family has. He had rather talk about chickens than nouns and verbs. He would make a great farmer. He will not make it to college. How can we help him be literate yet not push him toward the "21st century goals" our schools have set?
Ashley Catlett
Posted by Ashley Catlett | April 19, 2009 11:50 AM
Posted on April 19, 2009 11:50
Hi Amy. I agree with you on this one too. I had so many students that were bright and hard working but college wasn't something that they really wanted. I talked about it and they listened but it wasn't something that they really saw for themselves - at least in the way that I saw college at their age. Many of them saw themselves attending a two-year collge, possibly getting a certificate in a trade. One of my students helped him grandfather on his farm year round and that was what it hoped to do as an adult. Now there are some things that I feel students must have regardless of their future goals - they have to learn to read to understand,they have to be able to write to communicate and they must be able to complete simple computations. I also believe that they need to be able to reason through common life situations and learn how to think critically about the world around them. If we focused and dedicated time to these areas, then I think we would create citizens capable of making informed choices of what they hope to do with their lives. All of our students deserve to see the possibilities available but teachers need to be prepared to help each of them follow the path that seems to fit what they hope to be.
Posted by Amie Snow | April 19, 2009 4:52 PM
Posted on April 19, 2009 16:52
Well, not ALL high schools have the goal to prepare ALL students for college. As a high school teacher, I know that this is a very real issue for me and my colleagues. We have 3 levels of English classes, for example: basic/vocational, college/technical prep, and honors/AP. All 3 of these levels are geared toward a different post-high school outcome. In my honors senior classes, for example, 99.9% of them ARE going to college, so we do our best to prepare them for that. In CTP senior classes, we work on more technical aspects and everyday english, with a little bit of job and/or college prep thrown in. Basic senior English classes are focused on how to use English in the real world. We talk about resumes, cover letters, job interviewing, etc.
So know that not all high schools are focused on sending kids to college. It is not realistic to say that ALL kids should go. College is not for everyone, and I'd say that most high school teachers and administrators realize this. The counselors at my school are EXTREMELY good at helping students along a vocational track. We have a wonderful program here that helps students graduate with nursing certificates, auto body training, masonry experience, etc.
Sorry for the novel but I just had to defend high schools :)
Posted by Christy Rivers | April 20, 2009 10:36 AM
Posted on April 20, 2009 10:36
Amy,
I do agree that schools need to prepare students more individually for their future job prospects. But President Obama has challenged each and every American to take a college level course whether it is in their field or not. We are competing in a technological world. Even though some students may choose a job that is more specialized than any college could prepare them for, I think it is crucial that they attend a university. This will put them at a better advantage than someone who does not have a higher education.
Posted by Sarah feinman | April 20, 2009 12:19 PM
Posted on April 20, 2009 12:19
Amy, what did happen to every child is different? It seemed like in college, we were taught to appreciate each child as an individual and now, we have to classify them into a tier or a score. The problem is that public schools are not practicing what they preach. We are pushed and pushed to prepare children for tests that we don't make learning interesting to everyone. A good example of this was the other week, I was showing a clip from united streaming on dinosaurs. I had incorporated it into our leveled reading to engauge the students. I invited another teacher to come and she remarked "I haven't covered dinosaurs because it isn't on the NCSCOS." This is the worst thing she could say. Students in second grade LOVE dinosaurs. And by using this topic, I had them interested in reading, exploring science, writing, and even making fossils. The thing that we need to remember, is that we have to find out what is going to drive the children in order to teach them what they need to learn. If we can keep them interested, then more and more will complete and finish school.
Posted by Whitney Gilbert | April 20, 2009 10:31 PM
Posted on April 20, 2009 22:31
I'm so glad that you commented on the importance of "fit." My parents moved me from one 2nd grade classroom to another after just one week of school. I remember sitting in a desk the ENTIRE DAY doing worksheets. There was no hands-on, exploratory learning -- in second grade! And I remember too that there were a lot of boys in the class -- it seems that they were put in there because they needed to learn to sit still. But what we get from Hicks is the importance of movement, exploration, relevance, and how that leads to motivation and achievement.
Posted by Alecia Jackson | April 23, 2009 8:42 PM
Posted on April 23, 2009 20:42