A Need for Realism and Humanism in Our Schools

How does philosophy affect a classroom?  This is a question I have found quite interesting this past week, as we have been studying the roots of educational philosophies through the given readings.  While reading, it has become quite apparent that teachers all have their own reasons for wanting to teach, and the manner by which they morally strive to teach often lines up with a philosophical group.  In my opinion, the most important philosophies to abide by while teaching at the elementary age are the philosophies of realism and humanism.

Realism was founded by Aristotle, who sought to investigate the real world around him.  He was taught by Plato (an Idealist), and believed it was more important to see the world one was living in than to strive for an ideal world.  I agree with Aristotle because it is important to teach kids about their surroundings, and if they are taught that an ideal world exists, they will constantly find themselves being disappointed when the world does not turn out to be such a Utopia as they were taught to believe.  Within the Philosophical Perspectives of Education, the author explains that realism introduced a lot of science and math as a means to explain the world, and uses the example of a rose to explain the philosophy.

Teaching students about the world they live in is incredibly important, but as a teacher of elementary aged students, it is also important to advocate respect and kindness toward everyone, as a Humanist would.  The Humanists support classes in the liberal arts that help you develop psychologically.  These classes are supposed to help "mold your mind" and help you grow as a person; to develop your morals. As an elementary aged teacher, it is equally as important to teach the kids how to be good people as it is to teach them the subject matter on the curriculum.  They are at such an impressionable age it is essential to use a combination of the educational philosophies of realism as well as humanism to help them grow.

Teaching the Gifted

There has been a lot of controversy on the news lately pertaining to how a given school system should handle situations within the classroom where students are unable to keep up academically with their fellow classmates.  In an elementary school system, it is a question of whether to keep the kids in the classroom if they do not understand what is going on, or whether they should be placed in a different classroom.  But what about the kids who are at a much higher academic level than their peers?  They are in a similar situation, as the classroom is not moving at the proper speed for those children either.  They will find themselves growing bored as will find that they are not challenged enough.  What should a teacher do in this type of situation?

Within the website for the United Federation of Teachers, the article mentions that most schools do not have enough funding to give students the options of taking accelerated classes within an elementary school.  Of course once students get to high school, honors and AP courses are offered at most schools, but this is not usually an option in an elementary school setting, so it is extremely important that the teacher is aware that students are at different academic levels, and to make sure that each student is sufficiently challenged while still understanding the material.  Often times, teachers may try too hard to teach lessons as a whole group, but this is difficult when students learn at such different paces.  Perhaps it would help after a lesson was given to split the students up into smaller groups of kids with the same learning type as each other, so that the teacher can move from group to group and help students at a more individual level at the proper pace.  This way the students who are gifted can move at a faster pace, and those who have learning difficulties can learn at a slower pace.  We did this for reading groups in my elementary school and the system seemed to work very well, as each group read books that were at the perfect reading level for them.  It is also important to remember that students can learn from one another as well as the teacher, so it may also help to switch the groups occasionally so students can work with different people and share their opinions and findings.  It is certainly not easy to teach a classroom full of kids who are at different academic levels, but there are definitely strategies a teacher can use to make sure that each child is learning at the rate that is right for them.

Is mainstreaming the proper approach?

Schools and teachers have continuously struggled throughout time with the idea of how to best assimilate special needs students, as well as students of different nationalities, races and income levels into a single classroom.  The preferred approach for multicultural education, according to McNergney, for years has been mainstreaming.  In context with the idea of a multicultural education, the approach of mainstreaming aims to assimilate new immigrants into the regular classroom, with the implication that they should learn as they go.  But is this strategy really working?

Of course a student who is a recent immigrant and does not know English would most likely be taken out of class for intervals of the day to help them learn the language, but it is my belief that initial mainstreaming for even half the day is not the right approach to take with a child who speaks so little English that they would not benefit from being in the classroom at all.  It really depends on the individuals situation, but I witnessed a few cases in which mainstreaming did not seem to help the child while I was in Elementary and Middle school.  When I was in third grade, there were two boys who came into our class sometime in the middle of the school year.  One boy had come from Russia, the other from Portugal, and neither one of the students knew even a little English.  They were each taken out of the class for an hour or so throughout the day, but for the most part, they were with the class for the whole day.  The poor kids sat there and looked confused for months on end, and the teacher was unable to communicate with them at all without drawing pictures, and that became very time consuming.  I don't think she knew how to handle the situation either.  Clearly, for these boys, mainstreaming did not help at all, and they probably should have been learning English with a different teacher before getting thrown into the classroom.  Socially, the concept of mainstreaming for immigrants is a positive one because it is supposed to help them meet people sooner, but it is difficult to make friends in the first place if you can't talk to anyone.  I am sure that it made them feel left out, and probably didn't help their confidence either, as I am sure they became frustrated and felt like they didn't know anything. In a situation where a child knows at least a minimal amount of English, this approach may work better if they are able to learn through observation, but it is my opinion that each case should be looked upon in an individual basis.  Mainstreaming is not always the best option.

MCAS Testing

MCAS testing is not only used in Massachusetts as a way to see what abilities a student may possess--but is also seen as a reflection on the student's teachers, as well as the school itself.  Is MCAS testing really an accurate reflection of the students, teachers, and the school?  I do not think that it is.

According to a recent article on wbur, teachers in Hingham mass have come to a general consensus that the "MCAS is misguided in evaluating teachers," as well as students.  Testing can be viewed as a high stress situation to many students, so even if you were to have straight A's in a class, and be an amazing writer, neither of those would necessarily translate into a passing MCAS score.  It is also highly stressful since it is a graduation requirement to pass the test.  In my opinion, testing in general is not always an accurate reflection of a students abilities, and the MCAS is definitely one of those kind of tests.  It is extremely unfair that the test scores also reflect back on a school.  My elementary, middle, and high school had very low MCAS scores in general, but there was never any mention of our test scores in relation to the percentage of students we had that spoke English as a second language.  The same goes for a teacher--if a particular teacher has a lot of students who speak English as a second language, and they receive lower test scores, this should not be seen as a negative reflection of the teachers abilities at all.  According to the Orange and Black article from Wayland Middle School, some believe that the testing is good because it allows a teacher to be more structured and know when certain material should be studied, but isn't that what a school board does for the teachers anyway?  From that same newspaper, others are quoted saying that it is more stressful than anything, and that it is much too long of a test to be accurate, since the students are exhausted by the end of it.  I understand that it provides a way to make sure that schools are on track, but there should definitely be a more accurate way to do it.  MCAS testing seems to be an unfair and somewhat biased test, which I do not think should reflect on the teachers or the schools, and that it should not be seen as a graduation requirement for students to fulfill.

Why Teach?

Why is it that people decide to teach?

Is it the prospect of working with kids in general? Of teaching them new things, and learning new things in return?  Is it simply for the paycheck, and the 10 week vacation time?  Or is it to be the teacher you never had--to help kids through what could possibly be the hardest time of their lives?  The reasons are endless.  The more important question at hand is whether these motivations for teaching are for good or bad reasons.

According to the WorksheetLibrary (http://www.worksheetlibrary.com/teachingtips/becomingelementary.html), there are ten reasons why a person should choose to be a teacher.  They are all very positive reasons that range from having a broad appreciation of the subject matter, to being a creative and a good communicator, to simply enjoying the company of children.  There is no doubt that these are all great reasons to go into the field, but Canestrari proposes that there are people who do go into teaching for the wrong reasons within his book, Education Foundations.  He proposes that if one had a negative experience in school, they might subconsciously use teaching as a way to "get back at" the offense made to them so long ago.  For instance, if boys were particularly nasty to them, one might treat the girls more fairly, or if one has a prejudiced opinion of some sort, that the teacher must be sure that this prejudice does not follow the individual into the classroom.  He states that an aspiring teacher may try to redo their mistakes through the kids-- which of course is impossible.

After reading several articles on the matter, it is clear to me that teaching certainly is still a wonderful profession, but that one should be careful to evaluate themselves and make sure that they are deciding to go into the field of education for the right reasons.  I originally was trying to decide whether to specialize in elementary education or middle school education.  I had a fantastic time in elementary school, and aspired to be the same type of teacher that I had in elementary school.  But at the same time, I had a horrendous time in middle school, and felt like I might have wanted to teach that age group to show those kids what I felt like I never had at their age, and to make sure that they didn't make the same mistakes that I did.  I feel like I made the right decision deciding to specialize in elementary education because I have so many reasons for loving children at that age, but my one reason for wanting to teach kids in middle school was for a more negative reason that had much more to do with myself than the actual kids.  Whether choosing to teach simply for the love of the children, or any other reasons one may possess, it is extremely important to thoroughly examine these reasons and make sure that you are choosing the profession for the right ones.  You must be able to understand the students, and be patient and able to adapt your teaching style to suit their needs.  Make it about the students, and not just about you.