I love new information. I love the ideas and structure of one expressing themselves in complete complex literary thought. My normal night tends to be watch Tavis Smiley then go to bed. My friends call me an old man b.c I do this routine every night. But I watch in hopes to learn something without having to read a book. It's not that I can't read but for years it has been labor to read. Tonight Tavis is interviewing a man named John Cochran who was illiterate until he was 48 . Now I know reading is sometimes difficult for me but 48 years without reading, WOW! Not only could he not read, but he went to college and was a high school teacher.
The more he talked the more insecure I became within myself. I felt his fustration. I felt his embarassment within. As a child reading was very hard. They thought I had a learning problem. I went to speech classes. I got better as I praticed to slow down my brain. I was smart but few tried to understand how I learned. I wasn't the best student but b.c I was nice I got second chances to do work and moved up, yet I never truly learned.
I hated reading but loved words. I couldn't pronounce them correctly. A dictionary became my friend. My teachers cared but didn't understand I was weak. I didn't understand many concepts but was smart enough to figure out patterns to give the teachers to get a grade. I was learning but learning to get over. I was good. I won spelling bee's and everything. Yet it was not until my 7th grade year that I really learned to read. My 7th grade teacher, Ms Hardin, taught me how to not just say words but understand what I'm reading. context clues. She spoke my language. She was fluent. She didn't care about the formality and structure of learning, but cared I was comprehending the information and able to apply it.
In education do we care more about the principles of how we teach and learn? Or do we care if what we are teaching is applicable to the learning? How bout no more grade levels? Radical? Exactly! How about we teach until the student gets it? Promote by subject not grade.
The idea of Applicable learning does not dismiss the fact a student shouldn't have a grasp of a concept by a certain time period. Yet the idea of Applicable learning encourages a child to grow as fast as they can in the development of known strengths. This would enable educator focus on targeted learning program. The students stays and gets help and is able to develop a foundation of strength in known weakened areas( i.e. I'm great in math and suck in reading. I'd advance faster in my math matrix. But would slowly work out the kinks in my reading matrix. I would move up in my reading matrix once I had a full grasp of the area. This would not hold me back from advancing in math.).
The idea that from fall to spring we should have learned everything is a farce. We all learn a different speeds depending on the area. We spend more time fighting our learning insecurities( which retards our strengths) while trying strengthen a strength. It takes too much energy. Moving from grade to grade intellectually is lopsided. This learning paradigm is the reason students give up on school and learning. What is really being learned? Nothing! We can help this by tag team teaching. Specialized learning with lesson plans developed around what every teacher is teaching about. For example math can talk about linear lines. They could incorporate the history teachers lesson on Roman weaponry. And the science teacher could talk about kinetic energy of shooting an arrow from a bow. Some schools and programs already do this, but it should be done in a broader measure. This enables a child to have context in his/her learning. We damage brilliant thinkers by only distributing info and say learn. But learn how they learn and then teach. We then create a foundation for a student to launch into their own galaxy.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I agree Darnell, However one of the largest problems of the school system at this current point is the very program designed to improve it. The "no child left behind act" does exactly that, it leaves children behind. Schools in an effort to secure funding, grants, governmental perks etc. teach children on the basis of learning to pass standardized tests. No one cares if you understand the concept as long as you can formulate a correct answer, because correct answers win the big prize. Students have been taught to memorize formulas, and make "educated guesses" but when a student delves deeper to go beyond the theoretical application they are often told that they can explore those details on their own. Statistically those students who enlist the help of a private tutor, or obtain and individualized learning assessment have the opportunity to become a more successful student.
ReplyDeleteThe problem is, these services and assessments are expensive and the public school system lacks the drive and the resources to offer them. Privatized learning is better but not by much, today the private system is just as much bogged down for the ever present quest of funding but also by maintaining their prestige. they court and recruit non-academics, they reward lineages not based on merit but societal stature, and in the end they produce "C" student presidents that rely so heavily on their advisors that you will never truly know what they feel their best course of actions are. (but I have digressed)
In the African- American community we as a people have got to teach our children that knowledge is power and reading is as important as breathing in a society such as ours where you can believe nothing you hear, only half of what you see, and will have to research everything that anyone presents to us in order to verify it is in our benefit.