As I was reading Chapter Five, I couldn’t help but think about all the Jake’s I have had over the years. They have supportive parents and they are very intelligent, it is just that they do not want to participate in certain literacy activities. I have to say for Laurie and Jake’s sake, they are lucky that they had Mrs. Williams in second grade, to allow them more freedom in reading and writing workshops. If they would have had more whole-group literacy in second grade, like they did in first, I feel they would have been further behind then they were. In the beginning of this chapter, I found if harder to relate to Jake’s boyhood and needs because I am a female teacher. It was easier to relate to Laurie, since I was raised a middle class female. I agree with Jake’s dad, when he mentioned that school should be centered on his son’s interests. The only problem is when you have a classroom of 24+ students, and everyone has a different learning style, on different levels, and with many different interests, it is not realistic to do this in my classroom with every child. I have pulled students, like Jake, and worked with them using things that might hold their interest. Once I get them focused on the activity, I may offer incentives to them, allowing them to choose centers that they want to participate in. I also do reading/writing workshops, but ultimately it is difficult to tie in values of school (curriculum) and home discourse for those students needing it, which in my case is many. Jake’s calm nature at school and anger at home also made me think of many students I have had. In most cases though, it is because there are consequences at school (in Jake’s case- no recess), and when they are at home their parent(s) allow them to do whatever they want. I guess you could say their parents let them do whatever they want as long as they are not in their way. I don’t believe this was the problem in Jake’s case, but the difference between school and home behavior is obvious.
I like how they noted that you can not center every child’s interest in real complex situations. They need to find a better instructional method, but with different learning styles, since just making a new method will not fix it. Hicks said with politics and curriculum the way it is, it would be hard to come by the focus that Jake needs, an institutional system of middle class practices with the life Jake embraces as a boy.
Rose’s insight in Chapter Six allowed for me to have some understanding of growing up middle class, from a boy’s point of view. Rose had also mentioned, “The longer I stay in education, the clearer it becomes to me that some of our basic orientations toward the teaching and testing of literacy contribute to our inability to see.” I agree with this statement. I hope when he used the word “our” that he was including our politicians and public administration, who control most of our educational funding/programming, and allow for our students to suffer because of larger class sizes, fewer resources, little support, and caps on fieldtrips, funding, and local programs. I know, as Hicks said, “Teachers can be moved by action, by the particulars of context - of what they see in others, with others.” We need this support as teachers, but rarely find it. I am glad Hicks struggled with this concept too, and can see this as a struggle for both sides.
When visiting my students’ home for my home visits, I can see their world, and can better understand where they are coming from. As Murdoch said, “We can only change the world that we see.” If we do not know what is going on with our students discourse, it not only hurts the child but may also cause more work on our part because we guess what might help them, instead of seeing what is going on outside of school, and incorporate it into the classroom.
Barbara Terauds
Comments (5)
I agree, we have to do more with fewer resources. In my classroom, most of the things I use to teach are things I have purchased with my own money.
Thewre is a disconnect in Jake's home about the importance of education -- as far as whether Jake needs to go to college or not. He is getting mixed messages.
He sees that is father is respected and successful and not only didn't attend college bt didn't finish high school. Most of us realize that is the exception not the rule, especially today.
Jake's father's business might not even be open now. Years have passed since this research was conducted and the book written.In this economy bsuinesses are shutting down daily. What was successful 10 years ago may not be up and running now.
Jake only wanting to do what he likes and is interested in is not unusual or that surprising. I think most people are like that to some extent. There are some things we do because we HAVE to do them, not because we like to or it makes us happy, or peaks our interest.
Our students and their parents have to undeerstand that in education there is not always a choice.
Posted by Caroline Walker | June 30, 2009 3:23 PM
Posted on June 30, 2009 15:23
I think it is important that parents try to send the same messages to their children as teachers do on the topic of education. As far as discipline and educational experiences go, children need to have high expectations and be held to them. I think that one of the problems we see in society today is that parent's do not really care what their children are doing, just as long as they're not being bothered. I am also aware of the fact that like in this article, some people make a very decent living without having gone to college. I think students like Jake need to know that this is not always the case and that education will generally ensure you a safe lifestyle. I agree with Caroline's comment in the fact that we don't always get to do what we WANT to do. There are some situations in life that we have to live through even if we do so kicking and screaming. I think this is a valuable lesson for children to learn.
Posted by Erica Spicer | June 30, 2009 4:23 PM
Posted on June 30, 2009 16:23
It isn't only that some people make a decent living nowadays without an education; those days are long gone. But we live in the information age -- if you can't read, you are handicapped to a degree that the mainstream of population will pass you by. There will be someone else more able to do the job than you. You will be hampered by a lack of information, because you can't use the resources society has out there for the public. More and more jobs are becoming techinally oriented due to the vast use of computers and automaticity. Computers are no longer superfluous; they are necessary and accepted worldwide. It becomes increasingly apparent that parenting style is an important topic that should be discussed before a couple decides to pair off. A disagreement in Jake's household was definitely sending mixed messages to the child.
Differentiated instruction is not a choice; it is a fact of teaching. Only the teacher can decide how far she / he wants to go to meet the needs of her students. Many, many, many children are needing instruction that engages, inspires, queries, and excites. All children can learn. Children will learn when we engage them in useful information, presented in ways they can understand, use, and appreciate the value of.
Posted by Annie Croon | June 30, 2009 4:52 PM
Posted on June 30, 2009 16:52
You know, Barbara, as you said, it is hard to help our students if we don't know what's going on with their discourse. This why we've got to get to the heart of creation--this is something we share in common no matter what our homelife is like: we have all been created for relationship. We also ALL have the innate desire to create. So, we should start with these two truths and seriously consider a shift in our paradigm. I'm SO NOT kidding. I'm talking about a thing called "relational education." So far, the only educator I know whose philosophy is built around it is the late Charlotte Mason. You ought to check her out--google her name and see what you can find out. Her philosophy is absolutely a breath of fresh air!
Posted by erin farrington | June 30, 2009 11:04 PM
Posted on June 30, 2009 23:04
You know, Barbara, as you said, it is hard to help our students if we don't know what's going on with their discourse. This why we've got to get to the heart of creation--this is something we share in common no matter what our homelife is like: we have all been created for relationship. We also ALL have the innate desire to create. So, we should start with these two truths and seriously consider a shift in our paradigm. I'm SO NOT kidding. I'm talking about a thing called "relational education." So far, the only educator I know whose philosophy is built around it is the late Charlotte Mason. You ought to check her out--google her name and see what you can find out. Her philosophy is absolutely a breath of fresh air!
Posted by erin farrington | June 30, 2009 11:04 PM
Posted on June 30, 2009 23:04