Teachers and the Curricula

I think that the standardization of the school curricula has disempowered teachers to some extent. The standardization of the curricula has taken away a lot of the creativity that teachers can bring to the classroom, which is what an all encompassing education should exhibit. Teachers worry so much about teaching so that students will pass the tests that they create a narrow knowledge base, which is something that they don’t want to do. It’s hard for teachers to balance educating for the test and education for knowing and thinking; it can’t be mindless test drills and repetition all the time. Students need to learn how to think creatively and critically in order to lead successful and productive lives.

These skills of thinking and reasoning should be taught and practiced by everyone in every content area. Moreover, although teachers may feel that they are disempowered in their practices as professionals they need to try and incorporate the creativity even though they have an outlined set of information that they need to teach in order for their students to pass standardized tests; ultimately re-empowering themselves. I am willing to push myself to make science meaningful for my students and to teach them a new literacy to include within the repertoire of literacies that they carry; this will teach them to be thoughtful, critical, and reflective individuals.

Neoliberalism

Neoliberalism is a term that I was wholly unaware of; I had no idea what it meant or what it possibly meant in the context of U.S. society. Interestingly, like the culture of power, neoliberalism gives a name to what happens and is happening in American society. Neoliberalism, according to Pauline Lipman (2008) in her work “Education Policy, Race, and Neoliberal Urbanism”, is “… an ensemble of economic and social policies that promote the primacy of the market and individual self-interest….” In other words, in our capitalistic thought, the only way to solve societal problems (i.e. economic, public spheres, schools, anything) runs along the idea of either increasing or decreasing government control in order to solve problems. Furthermore, to the detriment of public schools, using market logic to find a solution to every problem including the problems with public schools.

A prime example of this market logic is the NCLB (No Child Left Behind) Act, according to NCLB if a school is failing standardized testing they lose government funding as a punishment to do better next time otherwise they will have to close the school. Let’s think about this, why is this ridiculous logic for improving learning in American schools? Schools get funds from the community in which they are serving, thus if it is a poor community then the school will be poor as well and will not have the money to give students access to full educational opportunities – which is not the schools nor anyone else’s in the community’s fault. Wealthier neighborhoods, which in turn have wealthier schools, are able to afford the resources needed to successfully prepare for the standardized exams; thus they pass and are rewarded with government funding. Resources are very important and they include; teachers, computers, staff, facility maintenance, new texts and books, a library, among others and because the poorer schools do not have access to these resources their students perform poorly on the exams.

This is a vicious cycle that continues to increase the gap between the poor and wealthy. Because the people in poor communities continue to get substandard educations forcing them into compliant minimum wage labor jobs, while wealthier communities thrive in the “knowledge is power” age acquiring high paying knowledge-based jobs. Students in the poor communities essentially are unable to compete with students from wealthier communities. Interestingly, mainly minorities and poor White people make up the poor communities further increasing the achievement gap – something the NCLB was enacted to eliminate. It is imperative to remember that there are many other ways to solve societal problem, not just the binary of market logic. I find myself that when I reflect on this idea of “other solutions” it is really hard and that I am so stuck in the “market logic” and I had no idea. I know that NCLB doesn’t work and is making the situation worse but what are the other solutions and what, as teachers, can we do about it.

Epistemological diversity

Epistemology or theory of knowledge is a branch of philosophy that deals with the scope and nature of knowledge. However, people and populations of people hold varying beliefs about what constitutes the theory of knowledge; this is called epistemological diversity. For example the Indigenous educational system and their epistemological beliefs are different from U.S. schooling. Indigenous societies have traditionally practiced forms of “informal” education; however, “informal” doesn’t make the education any less as functional or important. It just means that their education isn’t confined to institutionalized places and times, which makes it more fully encompassing and connected. The epistemology of indigenous societies is eloquently explained in the book To Remain an Indian by K. Lomawaima and T. McCarty (which will the text that I draw my understandings about indigenous education from in the rest of this blog). They discuss the history on indigenous schooling including colonial education and its harmful impact on the education of indigenous children.

In traditional indigenous educational systems the teachers are the parents, elders and the relatives; there isn’t a classroom in a building with a teacher with written exams and other “formal” assessments. Students are educated on being physically strong, being good mothers and fathers, being leaders, and being doctors; they are taught how to “pass” survival, which is higher stake then the SAT exam. Students are also taught based on age, level of knowledge and according to clan and rank; importantly is the practice of teaching according to the student’s level of knowledge. Unfortunately, in the institutionalization of the educational system in the U.S. students are being confined to a one-dimensional education and they aren’t being taught according to their levels of knowledge but instead to the defined level of knowledge that they should be at. This, again, corresponds to epistemological diversity because the educational system in the U.S. believes that students all learn in a certain set of ways not in multiple ways, while indigenous educational systems believe that students learn in various complex and multidimensional ways which is reflected in their “informal” style of schooling.

How will understanding epistemological diversity better improve my teaching philosophies? I think that understanding and recognizing that there is epistemological diversity is important in effectively teaching a diversity student population. In the sciences, mu content area, it will be important for me to remember although students need to pass the high stakes exam they need to learn as well. Further, “formal” education isn’t the only way that people learn; students have high quality learning experiences all the time not just confined to the classroom. This kind of education needs to be incorporated into the classroom experience, for example, in science education field trips and hands-on learning activities are important in students being able to fully assimilate the information and to be able to incorporate the new knowledge into their lives.