THE END....

Wow, it’s hard to believe that this is the end of another semester. Only one more semester (PSIII for me) and then I will once again be finished my post-secondary career (hopefully this time for good…unless in the future I decide to do a master’s program). I can’t wait to see what the future holds and where I might be teaching next year.

This blogging assignment was pretty interesting. It was definitely a different type of assignment than what I thought I would ever complete in university. I used a blog a few years ago to keep my family and friends up to date on my travels around New Zealand and Australia but have never written about my classes or readings so this was definitely a new experience for me. I really enjoyed writing the blog as it helped me develop my opinion regarding certain subjects and helped me to see what other people thought about the same subject. I thought it was really neat that we were able to read and respond to other classmates blogs. I tried to comment on at least one person’s blog a week and enjoyed that it led to some conversations in our class or in other classes. I really enjoyed reading everyone’s blogs and thought that I learned more about each individual as the semester went on. The blog also helped me learn about some of the current issues in education that some classmates read about in the paper or heard about in other classes.


Overall I really enjoyed writing this blog and reading everyone else’s blog too. I hope everyone enjoyed blogging as much as I did and I wish you all the best in the next semester.



Merry Christmas!

Relationships

Brandie had this quote on her blog that I thought was so great I had to steal it.

"They may forget what you said, but they will never forget how you made them feel” – Carol Buchner

In PSI, we were told to “beg, borrow and steal” from other teachers and I just couldn’t let this one slip by. I think it is fundamental part of teaching but sometimes people forget about it. We teach children, not robots and how we make them feel could impact them for the rest of their lives. I find it amazing what people remember from their early school years. I don’t remember much of what we learned but I sure do remember my teachers. I think I remember the nicer ones more than the ones I did not like too much. This semester one of my prof’s asked us to remember a teacher that made you feel bad. She said “I’m sure you’ve all had that experience” but I could not think of a teacher that said something to me that make me feel bad. I’m sure that would be one thing that would stick with someone forever. I’ve recently heard that when my dad was in school his teacher said that no question was a dumb question. So my dad asked a question because he wasn’t sure about something and that teacher made some comment about his question and basically really embarrassed my dad. This memory has stuck with him forever and impacted his life. I think for a long time he did not want to ask a question for fear that his teacher would make fun of him again. It also impacted how he treated his kids in that he made sure we knew that we could ask him anything and he would never consider it a dumb question. I know people say things sometimes that they don’t mean to be hurtful and end up hurting others but I think it is really important to consider other people’s feelings when you make comments.

I think this quote also shows how important it is to establish relationships with the students. Students that know you have an interest in them outside of the classroom walls often show more interest in you as a teacher and often show more respect as well. I think it is really important to spend the first few days of school learning about the students and finding out about their hobbies and interests. That information can be used in the classroom to make lessons more meaningful to the students.

I’d like to thank Brandie for sharing this quotation and reminding us that teaching is not only about the “stuff” but more importantly about the individuals we teach.

We can make a difference!

I was thinking about that school that a group of U of L grads went to teach together that Robert mentioned the other day in class. How great would that be? For a group of graduates that have formed a bond in university being able to teach together. I think that school would be a great place to attend as a student. Sure the teachers wouldn’t have the experience that older teachers would have and they may not know how to deal with every situation that might arise but they would be full of new ideas and an excitement of their first job and first time being on their own.

I think the students at this school would benefit enormously. There would probably be a great feeling of community in the school, I’m sure the teachers worked together and collaborated on ideas and strategies to improve their teaching and improve the school. Robert said that this school had a lot of school spirit and I can see why. I think it would be great to go to work with your friends every day. Yes, you can get that at any school. You can develop those relationships over time but in this environment you wouldn’t have to work to start those friendships. You already have the beginning and you just have to build on it. I have to say that I think that would be fantastic! There are many fellow classmates that I have gotten to know over the past year and a half and I would love to work with them. I think having someone else at the same stage as you to bounce ideas off would be very beneficial. I’m a little disappointed that I’m the only one at my school for PSIII for this very reason. I really like talking to others on my drive to and from school and discussing the school day and what classes went well and what didn’t. I guess I’ll have to pester people when I get home instead.

This also made me think about Robert’s brother who was a very eager teacher out of university and was given the class of “left behind” students. He taught those students and they learned. He gave his students the desire to learn, not only in his class but also in their other classes. I think this is an inspiring story of how one teacher can make a difference. The only problem was that the other teachers in his school did not like what he was doing. They did not like that they actually had to teach this group of students. It’s hard to think of teachers not wanting to teach but that was the case for these teachers. I would think it would be difficult to be in this type of school environment. If you let the negativity in, your desire to teach could be affected. I was inspired that he kept teaching and did not listen to the rest of the staff at the school. I’m sure it would have been difficult for him not to have support from the rest of the staff, however I also think it would be incredible to see the difference he was making in the lives of those students. I think making a difference is one of the most important roles of a teacher, however you do it. It does not have to be an academic difference at all, it could be increasing self-confidence or helping with some personal issue. Whatever it is, I think it is important that the students know that you believe in them and are there to help them in any way you can. This is why I think new teachers could make such a big difference if they are grouped together. The new teachers could feed off each other and inspire each other to make a difference in their students lives rather than been told to forget about a certain group of students. I know I don’t have years of experience behind me to know how difficult it might be or how over time you get worn down, but I just hope that I am able to keep my spirits high and remember that I can make a difference in the lives of my students. I never want to be that teacher that says there is no hope for a child to learn something. If I ever get to this point (which I hope I never do) I hope someone tells me to get out of the profession so that some new, young, eager grad can work their magic.

IQ tests and intelligence

In Tuesday’s class we discussed IQ tests and their accuracy of testing intelligence. I do not think that IQ tests can accurately test intelligence, or rather they test one form of intelligence, book smarts and that’s about it. We’ve all heard about Gardner’s multiple intelligences which shows that there are a variety of different abilities and talents that can constitute intelligence, such as bodily-kinesthetic, those that are good at sports and dance; visual-spatial, those that are good at art or solving problems; and musical, to name a few. These kinds of intelligences cannot be tested by a simple paper and pencil test, so what are IQ tests really testing? They test book smarts, people that are well read, and that’s about it.

In class, we looked at a couple examples of test questions from an IQ test from the 1920s. To begin with it appeared that the first question was related to harvest and farming, which I thought was appropriate for the time, however the question really had nothing to do with farming and was once again testing book smarts. So are IQ tests created to make those in the upper class and read literature have high IQs and those in the lower class have low IQs? Is a farmer that can grow his own food and fix machinery any less intelligent than a lawyer? I actually think the farmer is smarter because he would be able to survive on his own; grow his own food and fix things when they break. The lawyer would be able to argue that he deserves the food more than anyone else but would he actually be able to do anything to successfully acquire his food? But mostlikely the lawyer would have a higher IQ than the farmer. As mentioned in class, the IQ tests may be creating the differences that they are pretending to measure. I think it would be interesting to see an IQ test that a farmer created and to see how someone with a “high” IQ would do.

I think one of the most important things for us as teachers to remember is that everyone is different and is intelligent in a different way. This is very important when we create our own methods of assessment. I think most of us have been taught that we should create different types of assessment for the different types of learners in our classes, however I wonder how many of us actually know how to do this. I was thinking about this for my PSIII. I am mostly teaching math and wonder how I could differentiate the assessment methods. Traditionally for math, tests are written and students are expected to show their work for how they arrived at their answer. I suppose I could have some students explain how they would answer the question orally but it could be tough for students to create a dramatization for math…or maybe I just need to think a little more outside the box. We’ll see what I come up with. Any suggestions?

Teacher Preparedness

Last week we had a presentation on the correlation of post-secondary grades to teacher success. One of the interesting parts of the presentation was the questionnaire of preparedness felt by student teachers. I thought that for the most part I felt quite prepared to teach but there were definitely a few areas that I felt could use a little more focus in our school. I found it interesting that many of my classmates did not feel that they were prepared with technology. I did not find this to be of too big of concern for me. Before starting my Ed degree last fall I had never heard of a smartboard but both my PSI and PSII had smartboards and I simply played with the program and figured out how to use it. My PSI TA had been to a seminar on using it so she showed me how to do a variety of different things. I suppose if I had not had the opportunity to work with the smartboard, I would probably feel fairly under-prepared to use one. But I think the biggest thing with technology is not to be scared of it. Simply try different things and see what happens. In one of my classes this semester we had a brief introduction to Imovie or Windows movie maker and we were allowed to play around and create a small movie. One of my classmates mentioned that she would have liked the instructor to have provided a little more instruction about some of the features that may have been a little more obscure because what he had us doing, we probably could have figured out on our own. So I guess for technology, it all depends on how comfortable you are with playing and trying new things.

One of the areas that I thought possibly could receive more attention would be working with parents. I know it would be hard to teach such a thing but it would be nice to receive some tips or suggestions for how to approach or talk to parents. I sat in on parent-teacher interviews in my PSI and saw how my TA interacted with the parents, and how she addressed the parents with concerns she had with certain students. It was very helpful but I think until we are in that situation, it’s hard to know how we will react. So having some suggestions for terms to use could increase our confidence in this area.

Related to the topic of parents is the changing nature of families. I think it is important for us to remember that not every student will have a mother and a father at home. Some of the students will come from single parent homes or some might live with their grandparents. I think it is important to get to know your students and their backgrounds and know if certain subjects are touchy subjects.

I know the Ed program can’t teach us everything we need to know because some things have to be learned on the job. I think the U of L programs gives us a pretty good opportunity to experience the real world of teaching with all the practicums and internship. I think I will be much better prepared once I set foot in the school…..but I know I will learn more and more every day of my career.

The Homework Debate

I read this article over the weekend about a family that has created a contract between the children, parents and teachers stating that the children would no longer have to complete homework. The article stated that the family spent years struggling to get their children to complete homework and were finally fed up. Mrs. Milley joined a homework committee for the school but after no changes were made, Mr. And Mrs. Milley took matters into their own hands. This article on the same story show’s the Milley’s Differentiated Homework plan in which the children must read, practice their musical instruments and study for tests, however they are not required to complete any additional schoolwork. After I read the article I saw that Eric had also posted a blog on the issue too.

I find it very interesting that such a contract would be approved in schools. Although I agree that there shouldn’t be homework in Elementary school, other than reading and perhaps spelling words, I don’t think cutting out homework in upper grades altogether is the answer. I think that there may need to be some additional work completed outside of school. This provides opportunity for review of the material learned in class. My PS1 mentor did not assign homework to the students but did expect them to read for minimum 15 minutes and review their spelling words every night. Depending on the amount of time they read, this may only add up to 20 minutes of work each night. And there was no consequence if the students did not read, but there was a reward if the students had their agenda signed to say they had read the night before. So I agree that in young grades, children should no be given additional homework and I think there should be ample opportunity for students to complete their work in class. In elementary, the students are still young and should be able to play and release their energy after school. This should also be a time when children partake in extracurricular activities to promote social skill development and spend quality time with their families.

In older grades, however I think there should be some homework. This could be simply finishing a couple of math problems that were not completed in class or reviewing material from class. I wonder if students know they will not have homework, will they actually work efficiently in class? This contract says that the students will work efficiently and if they do not, the portion of material completed will be graded for the whole assignment. Does this encourage quality work? I also find it interesting that in the parents responsibilities is states that they will provide time to discuss class work and help prepare and study for tests and quizzes, provide opportunity to practice math concepts, assist with editing writing that may by choice be taken home. Isn’t this homework? I guess the parents just want to support reading, writing and arithmetic skills, and not all the other frills that can make school interesting. Fair enough. But I think sometimes there are just not enough hours in the class to get everything done and some things need a little extra time. I wonder about all the other students in the class? Do they still have to complete homework or is the entire class exempt from homework?

I also think that students need to develop the ability to review important material and complete assignments on their own. If they don’t learn this through high school and then go on to university, I think the students will struggle in university. Generally all assignments and readings are completed outside of class in university. I wonder how successful these students will be in university or on the job. Many jobs also require some form of work to be completed at home. It would be interesting to know how these children succeed in life.

But an interesting question, how much homework should kids be expected to complete? When should homework start?

The Up Series!

This week we started to watch a video series called “Up.” It is a documentary of the lives of thirteen British children of various social classes. The series starts when the children are 7 and then continues every seven years after that. So far there are seven videos in the series and have captured the individuals at age 49 but they are in the process of filming 56Up which shows the individuals at age 56. I think it is really neat that one director has spent the time to stay in contact with these individuals so we can see how their life progresses and how it changes depending on their circumstances.

The first video, which we watched on Tuesday, shows the lives of the children at age 7. At this age, the children were in a wide range of social classes from upper class to working class to a lower class orphanage. I found it very interesting to see the differences between the children. The boys and girls from the upper class spoke proper English and really articulated their words. In comparison, when the children from the lower class spoke, I found they were hard to understand and tended to mumble their words together. Even the manner in which they spent their free time was extremely different. The children from the upper class would come home from school and have tea with their parents, watch television or read the newspaper. Their evenings appeared to be very structured with a definite bedtime. The lower class children would play outside and watch t.v. and would go to bed much later than the upper class. I thought it was really interesting that when the children were brought together, the lower class boys were a lot rougher in the way they played than the upper class boys. The upper class children had already been taught to act proper and “civilized”.

In addition to differences in the way the children spent their free time, the children also had different aspirations for their education and careers. The majority of the children in the upper class already knew which prep schools they would attend and which universities they wanted to go to. I found the children of the lower class had greater dreams and aspirations than those of the upper class, however some of them already knew that it would be too hard or that they would never get into university. For example, Paul wanted to be a policeman, however he knew it would be too hard for him. This made me wonder if he would still try or if he knew that since he was in the lower class there was no point in trying. I find it difficult to watch children with that have big dreams for their life but their dreams are squashed because of the class they were born into. I see this as a big problem with the sponsorship system. Unless children are born into the upper class or succeed on their 11+ exam, they are restricted in the careers that they can have.

In yesterday’s class we watched a portion of the 28Up video. We saw how the lives of three of the individuals, Paul, Suzy and Nick, changed from age 7. The video also showed segments from the 14Up and 21Up videos.

Paul – at age 7 he wanted to be a policeman but thought it was too hard for him. He went to a Charity boarding school and did not seem to know much about the school system. At age 28, he is a bricklayer living with his wife and two kids in Melbourne, Australia. He stated that he was able to have a better life because he left England. By moving from the sponsorship system to the contest system, he was able to use his talent and effort to move into an upper-middle class. At age 7, Paul was shown building a house at the playground and then he becomes a bricklayer. It makes you wonder if what you do at age 7 impacts where you become later in life.

Suzy – at age 7, she was in a private girls boarding school and definitely knew she was “above” other people. Although she did know say what she wanted to be when she was older, she thought she would go to university. At age 16, she left school and went to Paris where she took a secretary program. At age 28, she was a house wife but had married someone of upper class so had remained in the same class. What I thought was really interesting was hearing about all the things she did not want at 21. She did not want to marry or have a family, and then at age 28 she was married and had two children. The other thing that I thought was interesting about Suzy was that she hated prep school but would still send her children to private school around age 13.

Nick – I think Nick is a really interesting individual. At age 7, Nick went to a rural one room school and did not have much interaction with other children. In his spare time he would explore the countryside and he wanted to “learn about the moon and things” when he was older. At age 28, Nick was in America and was a nuclear physics assistant professor. He was able to succeed in the sponsorship system due to the 11+ test. He wrote the test and was found to be gifted so he went to boarding school and university. However, leaving England and entering into the top of the contest system has allowed him to further succeed. I wonder how Nick’s life will continue.

So far it seems that what the children do at age 7 or what they desire to do becomes a relatively accurate portrayal of how their lives turn out. I wonder then what I was like at age 7. I can’t remember what I wanted to do or what I was really interested in. At one of my friend’s birthday parties when we were around 6, her dad videotaped all the kids and asked us what we wanted to be when they grew up. I said I didn’t know. Apparently I didn’t have any dreams of a specific career at that age, or at least that day. I have seen the video a few times since then and I would be curious to see what the people on that video are actually doing.

Social Mobility

Last week we talked about social mobility. Social mobility refers to the movement of an individual from one class to another. It is usually defined by occupation but could also be defined by education. There are two types of social mobility: intergenerational and intragenerational. Intergenerational social mobility refers to the difference in social class of an individual in relation to their parents. Intragenerational social mobility refers to the change in social class within one’s own life.

I thought it was really interesting to learn about social mobility and link it to my own life. I would also consider my parents to be middle class. This is based on both the education and occupation that my parents have. Both of my parents went to university and had good jobs. They were able to make a good living for themselves and our family. As such I was also able to go to university and will (hopefully) get a good job. I would also consider myself middle class, therefore unless something happen I think there would be no intergenerational social mobility between my parents and I.

It is tough to say how much intragenerational social mobility I will encounter in my lifetime. At this present time I would venture to guess that I will stay middle class my whole life, unless something misfortunate happens and I drop a social class or something miraculous happens and I move up a class. I think this because of the social mobility of our society is based on contest mobility and people must compete for success and earn elite status. In contest mobility, people can always move to different social classes depending on the circumstances of their life. We allow people to go back to school at any time to increase their status, however this also opens up the possibility of movement down a social class if someone fails.

In contrast to contest mobility of our society, the social mobility in England is based on sponsored mobility. This implies that the elite give social class to the people they think are suitable. In this system there is an emphasis on early selection in which young students are selected so they can be moulded into the type of individuals the elite want. Generally there is very little intergenerational mobility and the sons are expected to take on the same type of job of their father. The people in this system seem to understand that there is little mobility and therefore they take ownership of the job they do.

I think there is something to be said for people doing the best job they can do, regardless of what the job is. I think that sometimes in the contest mobility system, people see their job as simply a stepping stone and do not put out their full effort. Although I would not want a system where there is no opportunity for movement between classes, I think people should be encouraged to work hard all the time.

Bubble Gum??

I find it interesting how this blog has influenced other people in my life, well mostly just my parents. I have told them both about having to find things to write about and how difficult it can be to come up with something interesting or original. As such, I have often received e-mails or been handed an article that might be something I could use in my blog. I think it’s great! It’s not that my parents are searching for things to help me out but if they read something that is applicable to teaching or schools, they pass it on to me. I don’t use everything they send me but some of it has made its way onto my blog. This weekend I was home visiting my parents and my dad once again handed me an article that he thought was interesting and “might be useful for your blog!” And so here it is:

Can chewing gum help people concentrate? Apparently yes! An article in the health section of Thursday’s Calgary Herald suggest that gum can have a lot more benefits than simply freshening breath. Some of these benefits include increased ability to focus, help with memory and stress relief. Not surprisingly the greatest gum use in North America is by teenagers but this large amount of gum chewing could help this age group in the classroom. “The act of chewing increases blood flow to the brain by as much as 25 percent” and increases activity of the frontoparietal brain region. I had to look up what this region of the brain is used for. This area has implications in higher-order processing like attention, decision-making and intelligence. The article stated that this is the reason some scientists believe that chewing increases cognitive skills like concentration and memory and that some schools are providing students with gum during testing periods.

I found the article quite interesting because I find that most schools have banned gum on school grounds. I definitely understand some of the concerns with the disposal of gum and the distraction that some gum chewers bring, but if gum increases concentration and memory, couldn’t we be helping students by letting them chew gum in our class? As with everything could we not teach students how to properly dispose of their gum and how to chew without causing great distractions to others? I am curious to know if there might be an increase in the allowance of gum in schools with the findings of this research. The article stated that some schools were using gum during testing situations to see if it helped students with concentration. Wouldn’t it be beneficial to allow gum in regular classrooms when the material is being taught? I have heard that having students write tests in the same space that they learned the material can help students recall the information so wouldn’t it make sense for students to chew gum while learning the material and writing tests?

I have heard that students with ADHD often need to do something to help them concentrate. Some classrooms allow these students to move around at the back of the classroom. Or provide the students with small squishy balls to squeeze. One of the classrooms that I helped with had large elastic bands around the legs of the desk so the little boy could quietly move his feet to help him concentrate. I think they also allowed him to chew gum at times to see if it would help him at school. So should we be bringing gum back into the classroom?

Would you let students chew gum in your class, if it was allowed in the school?

Hidden Curriculum: Process

On Thursday we had another presentation on the hidden curriculum but this time the focus was on the process rather than the content. This basically implies how students learn the social norms and values of a society and the socialization of students. I thought the presentation was really well done and very interesting. It helped me to examine my own school experiences and evaluate how I was socialized as a student and how I am influencing the socialization of the students that I teach.

The presentation focused on early elementary students and how the hidden curriculum is used to teach and reinforce the values of our society. As soon as children start school, they are being shaped into individuals that follow the rules in our nation. We setup rules and routines in our classroom to help with the management of the class but also help students to know how they should act outside of the classroom and school. Students are told where to sit, when to eat, when to play and how to move between activities. We teach students to conform to the rules and obey authority figures.

In part of the presentation we were asked to recall our first day of school. I had a hard time remembering what it was like on my first day but I remember different areas of the kindergarten classroom. We had a labelled hook for our coat and place for our shoes right outside the classroom. Inside, the classroom was divided into different sections. One section was for dress up and to make plays. Another had tables for drawing and small lessons. Another area had a sandbox and water table. And a larger fourth area (there may have been more areas but these are the ones that I remember) was an open space where we would sit to have stories read to us. One member of our class said he remembered having a piece of tape on the carpet with his name on it and they had to sit on their name. I don’t think we had to sit on our names when we sat on the carpet but I think we had name tags for sitting at the tables. I wonder if this is why now as adults we have a hard time sitting in a different desk or chair then we normally do. As children we were told where to sit and it was always in the same place until someone changed our seats, so perhaps we have developed this nature (or socialised) to always sit in the same place. If you haven’t noticed this yet, think about where you sit when you enter a class. Chances are you typically sit in the same general area if not the same seat in every class. Or have you ever sat in someone else’s seat and watched their reaction? Often they are a little confused and don’t know what to do. It’s sort of funny to see…

I thought the use of literature was a good way to see how we try to teach children about the norms and values of our society at an early age. I have always thought that parents often try to help their children understand what the first day of school would be like and many parents use books to help illustrate the idea of school. Using these types of books in school would also be helpful to show how students should act in a certain situation, such as being a good friend, keeping secrets, listening to parents or teachers. These books could also help teachers explain rules in the classroom.

Overall, I think the hidden curriculum is helpful to teach students how they should behave in social settings. It helps students to learn the norms and values of our nation and become successful individuals. Although we may think we are simply teaching students the rules of our classroom, we often are also teaching the rules of our nation.

The Canadian Way!

In yesterday’s presentation, Robert commented on a classmate’s suggestion to have 3 arguments for and 3 arguments against a topic so that the students can see other people’s view, as being the “Canadian Way”. I thought this was so true! Or at least it has been for me. I think I have always been taught to think of all points of view. So much so that sometimes it hinders my ability to develop my opinion of what I think is right. I can see both sides of the story or issue and can see how both could make sense to different people. I remember writing essays in high school social studies classes where I had to discuss both sides of an argument and then choose the side that I agreed with most to support it. Most of the time, I could have argued either side but for the purpose of the assignment I would pick one.

I’m not sure if this is the experience of all Canadians because I definitely know some opinionated people, but shouldn’t people try to see both sides of an issue? Wouldn’t it help create more harmony than disharmony in the world? Is there something wrong with compromise? If two students are arguing over something on the playground, wouldn’t you rather help them see each other’s side and come up with a compromise rather than arguing or fighting over the issue until one finally gives in? Again, this is how I was raised so it makes the most sense to me. But I think that students should also be encouraged to develop their opinion and be able to stand up for what they believe in. I guess being able to see the other person’s side doesn’t necessarily mean you agree with it, simply that you can work with it.

Overall, I like the Canadian Way! I think compromise is the way to go on most problems so that’s how I will continue to live. Compromise is the Canadian Way….the best way!

Bill 44

Today we had a presentation on the hidden curriculum with a focus on the hidden curriculum content. The first part of the presentation discussed Bill 44. This bill was passed this summer in which parents have the right to remove their students from classes when lessons on sex, religion or sexual orientation are taught. I think this could make life for some teachers quite tricky although as Robert mentioned there may be simply a form that the parents sign when they register their children to either allow or not allow their child to sit in these classes. It sounds sort of like the FOIP forms for students that are not allowed to have their pictures taken. I guess teachers will have to be aware of which students are not to be included in these classes and should a question arise, either remove these students for the discussion or field the question for another time. Teachers will have to be on guard all the time and make sure they do not answer questions without considering who is in the class.

I think this will have the biggest impact on the teachers that teach middle and high school students. Although some students in elementary are curious, I feel that they do not tend to ask such controversial questions. Students in middle and high school are trying to figure out who they are and will probably have more questions regarding sex, sexual orientation and religion. I think it is important for the students to be able to get the knowledge they need in order to develop their own understanding and create their own opinions, which may not be the same as their parents. I thought the videos expressed an idea that I really believe….teachers should teach students to think, not what to think. Although teachers have their own opinions on certain subjects and ideas, I don’t think they should be portrayed in class. Teachers should teach students how to develop their own opinions and how to adequately express their opinions to others.

A little bit of history...

We have been talking about the education history of Canada so I figured I would read this section of the textbook to see what they discuss. I think the history of education in Canada is interesting and relevant to me as I begin my teaching career. I think knowing about some of the history may help me to understand some of the reasons behind some of the current issues facing teachers and schools. From what we discussed in class, some of the current struggles that teachers are faced with are related to something that occurred decades ago.

Canada’s education system started under the influence of Britain and the United States. Initially, there was a school system for the upper class called “grammar schools” based on the British model and “common” schools for the children of the working class. Soon the separate school system was developed for the Protestants and Catholics. By 1967, the four original provinces had their individual school systems supported by property taxes and the trend continued as the other six provinces were created….and so it has stayed. Now Canada has 13 separate systems (one for each province and territory) and a federally controlled First Nations education, controlled by the department of Indian and Northern affairs.

One thing that I did not know about the Canadian system is that there is general consensus of what children should learn in each grade between the provinces. I thought that since each province could decide their own curriculum, they would all be unique and different. The textbook suggests that things are relatively consistent between the provinces so children can move between provinces without missing or repeating too much information. I have not yet looked at the curriculums of other provinces to know to what extent this is true but I thought it was a good thing nonetheless. I know it is a different matter when you move from one country to another. Things are even quite different between Canada’s curriculum and the United States. Well there may be many similarities between the curriculum but when you learn them are different. My nieces and nephew experienced this when they moved from the U.S to Alberta. All three of them had to repeat the grade they were in because the curriculum was different and they had not learned what they were supposed to according to Alberta’s standards. I think if that had happened to me I would have been a little mad. Why would you want to repeat a grade that you had just passed? But they appeared to handle it quite well. I guess it would be different if you had to repeat a grade and all your friends were in the older grade, but they were new to these schools and had not yet made new friends. But it made me wonder how much of a difference there is between the two curriculums and would they have missed a lot if they did not have to repeat those grades. I guess someone must have decided that they were significantly different to make them repeat the grades.

Drinking and Driving

The other day I was watching Rachael Ray (which might have been a re-run) and she had Whoppi Goldberg on the show. Rachael had a couple of her guests make comments about some “hot topics” and then asked Whoppi to state what her opinion was on the topics, sort of like what they do on The View. Anyways, the topic that I thought was quite interesting was one about drinking and driving and how to get students to actually be concerned about it.

Apparently at some school in the United States, highway patrol officers came to various classrooms to tell the students that some of their friends and fellow classmates had been killed in car crashes over the weekend. The students who participated as the students that had died were asked to stay home from school that day. The patrol officers named the students who had “died” which lead many students to tears and others to hysteria. Later the students were informed that it was all a hoax, a scare straight tactic, to help students understand the consequences of drinking and driving. Many students were furious that the school would do such a thing, while others thought that the shock factor was exactly what students needed to realize the dangers of drinking and driving.

The woman on Rachael Ray that was supportive of this event said that this is the only way to get teenagers to understand. She said that teenagers need to feel the fear or hurt before they will really think about what they are doing. The other lady, however, said that students felt betrayed by their teachers and administrators. She mentioned that students are supposed to trust and feel safe with their teachers and this type of event could cause feelings of mistrust.

I was quite shocked to find out that this type of stunt was conducted. I understand that many people feel teenagers need to be scared into the realities of the consequences of drinking and driving but I think there could be other ways to do it. For students to think that some of their friends had been killed is a little too extreme for me. I think the same message could have been delivered in a different manner. I’m not sure that students need to be traumatized to get the message but then again most teenagers think they are invincible and that such a thing could never happen to them. But perhaps the school could have done it in a different manner, like not actually mentioning names? Or have firefighters and police officers come in a tell stories and bring pictures of accidents that they had been to.

I searched the internet a little bit to find out if other schools have done this type of “scare them straight” tactic. I found that this event was a twist on a program called Every 15 Minutes. In this program, a student is removed from their class by a grim reaper while the student’s obituary is read. The student then enacted a car accident at an assembly where emergency people removed the victim to transport them to the hospital or morgue. This student would spend a night at a hotel and then come back the next day for an assembly with parents and paramedics. The concern with this program was that students may simply laugh at the grim reaper and not take it seriously.

A school in New Brunswick took a different approach to informing students about drinking and driving. They setup a mock accident scene with students from their school playing injured or deceased victims of the crash. The students left their class for a routine fire drill and found this accident scene outside. Although it didn’t take long for the students to realize it was not real, it helped re-enforce the consequences of drinking and driving.

I think the less severe ways of communicating possible consequences of drinking and driving could be just as effective as the shock straight tactic. I think after the shock straight tactic, students may have difficulty believing what teachers say and if some tragedy did occur would the students believe anyone? I think programs such as the PARTY program and the mock scenes are better than the shock straight type. As a soon to be teacher, I want to establish a classroom where students feel safe and secure and can trust what I tell them. The shock straight tactic does not help to create this type of environment and I think could cause more harm than good.

Gender in the Classroom

I thought today’s presentation was great and really made me think about how I have or have not included gender neutral teaching styles and methods into my classroom. I remember in one of my grade 3 social studies classes we watched a video on Peru and the video showed a man making bread for his family. After the video I asked the students if they had noticed the man making bread and we talked about how different cultures have different roles for mothers and fathers. I guess that comment could be an example of gender stereotyping; generally mothers make bread in our society.

I was trying to think of other moments in my practicum that I have shown either use of gender stereotyping or purposefully reducing gender stereotypes. I don’t think I have purposefully avoided giving a girl and princess book or not given a boy a book on cars. But I think I try to focus more on students’ individual interests. If I girl is interested in reading a book on dolls, I’m not going to tell her that she can’t and should read a book about sports or tractors or something else boyish or gender neutral. If a child wants to read something in particular I’m going to encourage the child to read. I think we can get too hung up about gender differences and trying to make things equal. Maybe I’m too traditional but what is wrong with a girl wanting to grow up and be a mommy…it was what I wanted to do as a little girl. Is there something wrong with women wanting to stay home and raise their children? I think I’ve been trained to think that women should want more than that. We should want a career and compete for jobs that have traditionally been male dominated. But shouldn’t we encourage children to do whatever they are interested it, whether it is a traditional, stereotypical role or not?

I understand using gender neutral terms to encourage every child to think that they could do whatever they want. We want to encourage interests and abilities in all students. If a girl is interested in sports or wordworking I would encourage that student to pursue her interests even if she thought she would be the only girl in that class. Just like if I boy was really interested in cooking and sewing, I would most definitely encourage him to take classes in those subjects. I think it that way we should breakdown gender differences. But I think there may still be a place for some gender roles. Let girls be girls and boys be boys, if they want to.

Now let see what you think.

Are Teacher Colleges Turning Out Mediocrity?

I have just read an article from Time Magazine today called Are Teacher Colleges Turning Out Mediocrity? The article questions the quality of teachers graduating from teacher colleges in the United States and blames the teacher colleges for not adequately preparing the teachers for the challenges they will face in the 21st century. I found this article interesting as we have talked about teacher quality in our class and the differences of teachers from U of L, U of A, U of C, and now Concordia. Prior to coming to the U of L, I had heard that it had the reputation of being the best school in Alberta for teaching. Within my first week here, I met some individuals that asked what I was taking in school. I said teaching and they replied “Guess we should have known that. Everyone comes here for teaching.” So before I had even begun my classes I was aware that there was a common thought that most students come to U of L for the Ed program and that teachers graduating from U of L Ed program are expected to be the best in Alberta. At that time I wondered whether it was in fact true and now believe it to be. Maybe we are a little arrogant to believe that we are the best teachers but maybe this arrogance isn’t all bad. If we believe we are the best, will we continue to strive to be the best in our classrooms and schools? And wont that be beneficial to our students?

I believe that part of that belief that U of L grad are the best stems from the additional practicum that we get. Most of the other Ed programs only have two teaching practica and we get another whole semester to practice and improve our teaching. I think this extra practice is extremely helpful to increase confidence and learn from another teacher mentor. Why wouldn’t other universities see how the extra teaching time is beneficial to the student teachers and adopt that into their programs too?

When I was deciding on where to apply for Ed programs, I only really looked into the U of C program and the U of L program. Since I am from Calgary, my family, friends and at that time boyfriend (now husband) were all in Calgary and I was trying to decide if I wanted to head to another city to pursue my degree, or stay in Calgary. I started to look into each program and found that there was no question, Lethbridge was the better choice. To top it off, I talked to my sister-in-law who completed her teaching degree at the U of C and she said that their program was mostly theory based and they would sit around and talk about the theory of teaching methods where as it appeared that the U of L program was more practical based. Sure, theory has its place but I think teaching is more practical than theory based and I wanted a program where I could try out various teaching methods and see what worked best for me. I wonder sometime if I had gone to U of C, would I become a different teacher or would everything have turned out the same in the end?

The article suggests that the quality of the teachers may be able to be traced back to the school that they graduated from. Apparently in Louisiana, student test scores in grades 4-9 are traced back to their teachers and then traced back to where the teachers were educated to compare the quality of teaching colleges. Wow, that puts a lot of onus on the teaching colleges! I guess the point is that teaching colleges can look at where their graduates aren’t performing adequately and look to improve this part of their teaching programs. Sounds like a good idea in theory but I think there could be other factors associated with student test scores than simply where the teacher graduated from. How much influence does the university or college have on the quality of their graduates?

Quantitative vs. Qualitative

Last week we talked about quantitative versus qualitative research in terms of social sciences. As a science major, I have always thought that to do research well you need to collect quantifiable data. I know see how this does not work so well for social sciences.

Quantitative research stems from the positive system, which is defined as “a system of philosophy that excludes everything from consideration except natural phenomenon and their interrelationships.” It implies cause and effect. Quantitative research obtains numerical data. In this form of research you generally need a control group and an experimental group, and everything else must remain equal. An example outlined in the textbook looks at how instructional time affects the results of a test. One class receives a constant amount of instructional time and the other class receives an altered amount of instructional time. Then the results of the tests are compared to determine if the amount of instructional time affects how students perform on a test. There are large problems with this …Humans are too complex, and have too many differences to compare in this way. How would you know if the differences observed were due to the amount of instructional time received, the quality of instruction, the specific students in each class or any other factors that could influence test scores. There are too many variables when humans are the subject of research. Also, how could you replicate this experiment? The students in each class will only ever be in that class once. The next year there will be different students. Or if you attempt the experiment at another time of year, there may be different seasonal effects. How would you know that the results you obtained were associated with instructional time and not some other variable.

So quantitative research may not work too well when considering humans as the subject matter, what about qualitative research? Qualitative research is a descriptive form of research and the design of research emerges as the research progresses. We discussed Ethnography as a type of qualitative research. In this type of research, the researcher often takes on the role of a participant to understand what happens in that type of setting. For example, a researcher wanting to find out what happens in a gang would actually become a member of a gang. This type of research allows the researcher to get the whole picture, not simply small segments of information. However, it is extremely difficult research because the observer must be alert and observing the entire time, and the observer may create a bias as he or she decides what to include and what not to include as they observe.

So both quantitative and qualitative research has pros and cons and maybe the way to go for educational studies is a combined method. This “mixed-method approach” includes using the best of both research methods. The first step is creating a hypothesis about an issue which leads to observing the subjects to determine how complex the issue is and eventually attempt to narrow to a specific area of interest. The researcher then develops a specific hypothesis that would require a controlled experiment. This controlled experiment would allow the researcher to obtain data that could be statistically analyzed. The researcher would then return to the classroom for more observation or discussion with the teacher or students and the results of the discussion would also be used in the final understanding of the study.

I think this mixed method makes most sense to me. It combines the best of both worlds and probably provides the best data. One of the major downsides, however, is the amount of time this type of study would take, so I think I’ll let the experts do the research!

Shocked and Appalled!

Last night I heard on the news that a 15 year old boy in the United States has burns to 65% of his body after he was doused with rubbing alcohol and set on fire by 5 of his classmates in a bullying incident. Apparently the whole ordeal started because the boy, Michael Brewer, owed one of the boys $40 for a video game. When Michael didn’t pay, the boy tried to steal a bicycle that belonged to Michael’s father. Michael called the police on him and that’s when the other boy wanted revenge.

I was sickened, shocked and outraged by this news! I don’t understand how someone could light someone else on fire. And over $40 dollars‼

I just don’t understand but it scares me to think about how bullying has increased to such extremes. As a beginning teacher I wonder what I’ll be faced with in my school. I believe that students should feel safe when they come to school and that schools and classrooms should be free from any form of bullying whether physical, verbal, or emotional. I will not tolerate any form of bullying in my classroom and will strive to help the students understand what bullying is and what they can do to prevent it.

In my PS1 practicum, there was an anti-bullying lady that came around and spoke to all the classes about forms of bullying and what they could do if they saw bullying happening in the school or on the playground. I thought it was a great way to introduce the topic to younger children and try to stop any bullying before it starts. The students had a number of questions after the lady left and it opened up into a great discussion. I think these types of discussions need to continue as the students move through the grades. Isn’t there a big anti-bullying movement occurring throughout North America? Or maybe it’s mostly in Canada. But there are lots of great anti-bullying things out there, we just need to make sure it gets to the schools. Trista wrote a great blog on bullying and has a number of great websites at the end of her post that could be useful for teachers looking for information.

We need to stop the violence and bullying now before another child becomes the victim of violence!

Research!

Over the last three classes I had had some research techniques reviewed for me and some others introduced for the first time. I would like to spend a small amount of time reviewing the ones that really interested me.

Firstly, Credo reference! This is an excellent reference tool that can be used to help you search terms you don’t understand. Credo reference provides dictionary definitions and encyclopedia information to help you obtain more information about your topic. Rather than using multiple sources to obtain different definitions they are available all in one location. The downside to this reference is it can only be used by members, so either your university library must have a subscription or you must create your own.

Next, Web of Science. I thought this was a really cool search tool. If you type in the title of a particular journal article or book, it will tell you how many references are in that article and it can also show you how many times this particular article has been referenced. This could be useful in determining how credible the article is. If many other people have referenced the article, chances are it had lots of good and credible information in it.


Today, I was informed of other search engines over and above Google. I know, what’s better than Google?” Turns out there are a lot! First off Clusty.com. The search results are returned based on relevance, rather than popularity like Google. So you might be able to find more of the information you want rather than what others have found interesting. In a quick topic search for my term paper, I have already found a few references that I want to explore that I did not find with a Google search.


Next, Kartoo.com. I think the coolest thing for this search engine is the visualization. Instead of returning the typical list of search results, Kartoo has this option to return in a web form. Once you are in this web, you can further refine your search by selecting the topics you are interested in and removing the topics you do not want. For visual learners, this option is fantastic!


One more thing about almost all search engines is you can specify the file type in the advanced search. So if you are looking mainly for journal articles you can select pdf files, or if you want powerpoint presentations from recent conferences, you can select ppt as a file type.

So thanks to Runte for the info on search engines‼

Boys lagging behind girls??

This morning I read an article in the October 2009 issue of Canadian Living magazine which states that boys are lagging behind girls in the classroom and more women than men are graduating from university. The article states that around grade 4, both sexes are relatively even in math and sciences, however girls are better in literacy. And in high school, the boys have a slight edge in science and math but are significantly behind the girls in reading. I didn’t find those statistics too surprising. Traditionally haven’t girls been better at reading and writing than boys, and the boys have traditionally been better at math and sciences. Wasn’t that the reason for the big push for girls to get into science and math when we were growing up?

What I found interesting were the reasons they suggested for the lag. One study found that right from birth, boys generally have fewer physical, cognitive and emotional dimensions than girls. Is this suggesting that boys don’t have the same capacity to develop that girls do? I don’t agree with this. I think boys are generally less complex than girls, though. Have you ever heard the analogy that a male brain is filled with boxes and a female brain is filled with wires?? Males are able to compartmentalize; they take out whatever box they need, use it and then put it back before taking out the next box. Whereas for women, everything is interconnected, so she goes to access one thing and thinks about how it is connected to something else or gets side tracked by something else and never actually completes what she started out to complete. So I don’t think it’s necessarily that boys don’t have the capacity, I think they do things in a simpler way. Possibly growing up with three brothers has lead me to defend the male gender :)

Anyways, the article suggested another reason for this lag is what’s called “feminization of education.” In the 1970s, boys were ahead of girls in school and approximately 70% of university grads were men. So, teachers changed instructional methods to better suit the learning styles of girls. For example, teachers focused on teamwork and cooperative tasks rather than individual contests and competitions (such as spelling bees). Apparently these changes worked as in 1991 half of the students in Canadian universities were women. So now have we swung too far the other way and are teacher neglecting the boys and which teaching methods work best for boys? Or is there anything to this gender study? Shouldn’t teachers be using a variety of teaching methods to assist all students in learning? I wonder if it is that simple to say that girls work better in teamwork type of situations. I don’t necessarily agree that that’s the best way for me to succeed. I definitely can work well in a group, years of group work forces you to be able to develop those types of skills, but I don’t necessarily think it’s always the best way for me to learn.

The article goes on to suggest methods “to help your son succeed” which I think are some good techniques for all students, not simply for boys. But an interesting article to read and to see how things have shifted over the years. Let me know what you think!

Fluency vs. Comprehension

In one of my other education classes we are reading this article on a fluency and comprehension. The article examines a study conducted in Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Delaware in which 171 children from grade 2 to grade 10 were tested for reading fluency and comprehension. All of the children selected were deemed to be strong readers according to their teachers and parents. The children were first tested for fluency to ensure the students were fluent readers. The children were then test at his or her grade level on two narrative passages, on read orally and the other read silently. The passages were selected from a program that is designed to test reading comprehension. The results of the study found that approximately one third of the readers were advanced comprehenders, another third were proficient comprehenders and one third were struggling comprehenders. Therefore, even though these students were determined to be strong readers, one third of them struggled to understand the passage they read. Why? Well it turns out that there has been a large push in the United States to focus on reading fluency. Many theorists believe that “fluency is a facilitator of comprehension and precedes its development” so basically if a child is reading fluently then you can work on developing comprehension. Other theorists believe that “fluency is an outcome of comprehension” so when you understand what you are reading your reading become more fluent.

I think the first theory makes more sense. If you are struggling to read a passage, then the meaning of that passage becomes lost in the words. I found this simulation that I think helps illustrate how fluency affects comprehension. So I agree that we need to develop fluency first BUT we can’t forget about comprehension. When students are reading fluently, teachers need to help develop comprehension. Part of the problem with the results of this study is that 30% of the struggling comprehenders were already in middle school or high school. In these upper grades, I don’t think teachers spend that much time helping students with reading comprehension. Sure we spent time going reading passages and answering multiple choice questions on them (similar to what you would find on the diploma exam) but the teachers never really taught us how to critically examine the passages we read. It seemed like you got it or you didn’t. (Or at least it seemed like this for my class)

So how will the results of this study impact us as teachers? Well, I think we need to continue to develop fluency with students, as this is probably the first step in developing comprehension, but we also need to help students understand what they are reading at an early age. Get the students to think about and reflect on what they are reading and have them write or draw or somehow show you what they understand from what they read. I don’t want to say the dreaded word, journals, but it could be a great way for students to express what they know…just don’t make them write in their journals all the time.

To relate this to our sociology class, it makes me think about the conflict theory and how the people at the top determine what is important to focus on and study. The items that the dominant group are interested in get all the attention and everything else gets pushed by the wayside. So perhaps in the United States someone said that we should focus on fluency in reading, and so all the teachers started focusing on fluency and all but ignored comprehension. And now a group of researchers are saying “hey, what about understanding what you are reading? Isn’t that important too?” Perhaps we will see a shift towards an emphasis in reading comprehension in the future.

Reference:

Applegate, M. D., Applegate, A. J., & Modla, V. B. (2009). "She's My Best Reader; She Just Can't Comprehend": Studying the Relationship Between Fluency and Comprehension. The Reading Teacher , 512-521.

Functionalism

In yesterday’s class we continued to learn about the history of sociology and education. In particular we examined the theory of functionalism and how functionalists view society as a machine or living organism. This type of view means that society works together to fulfill the societal needs in order for society to function. You are always working for the needs of society and although individuals have needs they are always in line with all the other individuals and society as a whole. In this way, if society is functioning then the system as a whole must work otherwise the system would fall apart. Let’s see if I can use the analogy of a machine to illustrate functionalism….one machine is made up of multiple parts. Each part has an individual function but all of the parts work together to make the machine run. Along with individual functions, all of the individual parts have their own needs. For example one small part may need grease to work properly but the grease this one part receives is not only for this one specific part but also for the entire machine to function properly. Therefore, every part has a specific function and all of the parts are working together to make the machine run.

Perhaps it is just the scientist in me thinking but this sort of makes sense! Just like a machine needs all of its parts to function, society needs all the individuals to work together so the system does not fall apart. A downside of this theory is inequality. For functionalists, inequality is functional. It serves a purpose for society in that the most talented and hard working individuals get the better jobs and those that are less talented get the jobs that are not as prestigious. Does this not make sense?? Don’t we want those that are most qualified and talented to be our doctors and lawyers? I personally would not want a lazy, untalented doctor. I want a doctor that will use their knowledge to determine the best way to make me well. In terms of education, I don’t think anyone would question that we want talented and hard working teachers to teach our students. We want the teacher that is best suited to instruct the students to be in the front of the class. And talent and hard work have a lot to do with that but I think the class you are born into still has a lot to do with where you end up in life. To become one of the most prestigious individuals in society often requires more education than the initial 12 years of public school and unless your family or you have the money to send you to college or university, your talent and hard work will not take you beyond a high school diploma. So perhaps in a perfect society, functionalism would work and the most talented and hard working individuals would be at the top of the pyramid, however in today’s society this does not work too well. There are other factors involved.

I am looking forward to tomorrow’s class to find out more about functionalism and investigate the problems associated with the theory!

The first eight pages….

I have to admit that this is the second time I read these first eight pages. The first time I read them, nothing really stuck. I came to class last Tuesday thinking “what were in those eight pages that I remember” and the answer was “not much!” so I determined that before I attempted to blog about my reading I would have to re-read those pages to fully understand what I read.

The first couple of pages focus on defining sociology, sociology of education and many other terms that I believe will help to further my understanding of the course material. The remainder of the first eight pages is dedicated to defining the function of school, both intended functions and unintended functions. While defining the intended functions of school, Barakett and Cleghorn (2008) outline common myths associated with popular beliefs associated with the school system. For example, “one myth states that those who achieve well in school have done so through hard work and by being evaluated according to objective and “fair” (universalistic) principles. (Barakett and Cleghorn, 2008)” This means that an individual’s effort will lead to higher academic success and ultimately a higher social status (Barakett and Cleghorn, 2008). I believe this can be true, however it can also be very false. I personally have worked hard and in turn received a high grade on an assignment or test. However, I have also experienced times in my school career when I have heard someone say “I barely studied at all”, or “I didn’t even look at the material” and those students have received very high marks on their tests, whereas other students that had spent hours looking over the material barely scraped by with a passing grade or did not even pass the test. Therefore, there must be other underlying issues. There is not simply one thing that dictates academic success, but a multitude of items that contribute to one’s success. Race, gender and social class all have an influence on the success or failure of a student.

I also enjoyed the discussion of the unintended functions of schools. I think it is important to be aware of the activities that occur in a school that are not directly linked to the formal purpose of the school. These unintended functions include social control, custodial, establishment of social relations, and promotion of critical analysis. The first three of these functions occur regularly. Teachers establish rules and procedures to help mould students into functioning members of society (social control and establishment of social relations). The custodial function means that students are looked after while they are at school; they have a safe environment where they can learn and grow. The fourth unintended function, critical analysis, may not be as common of a function as the other three. Although I think most teachers have a desire for their students to think critically about what they are learning, I would doubt that many students enter into this type of analysis. I would argue that not too many students think about what they are learning and how it might impact their lives or the lives of others or the environment. I wonder how many teachers strive to engage their students into higher level of Bloom’s taxonomy or whether teachers are more focused on completing the knowledge and comprehension components of Bloom’s to fulfill the curriculum components. One of my goals as a student teacher is to increase my students’ ability to think beyond the knowledge and be able to analyse, synthesize and evaluate what they are learning.

Reference: Barakett, J. & Cleghorn, A. (2008) Sociology of Education: an Introductory View from Canada. Toronto: Pearson Education Canada

Welcome!

Welcome! This blog is for my education & society class and it will provide an outlet for my thoughts and opinions on education-related item from a sociological perspective. My blog entries will include items discussed in class, assigned readings, student presentations, current education-related news items, and comments on my classmates’ blogs.

To briefly introduce myself, my name is Sheri and I am in my second year of a two year after degree program in Education at the University of Lethbridge. I received my first degree in Environmental Science from the University of Calgary and worked in that field for three years before I discovered that that was not the career for me and returned to school to pursue my education degree. As far as sociology is concerned, I have only taken one introductory course in sociology and found the course material quite interesting. I am taking this course to fulfil my foundations requirements and I thought this course would increase my understanding of important issues for teachers, students, parents and society in general and would help in future years as I delve into the world of teaching. I also hope that this course will help me to develop my own opinions on educational issues, however continue to be open to other points of view.

In this first week of class, we discussed what sociology can do for you as an educator. The sociological perspective (these four bullets were taken directly from Runte’s slides):

1. helps you to see the ‘big picture’ – place one’s classroom within a larger social context
2. counteracts the over-emphasis on the individual when analyzing social phenomenon
3. helps educators to see beyond immediate consequences of policy decisions to question their unintended consequences
4. helps educators to anticipate trends and so formulate a response before the issue comes crashing into their classroom

For the ‘big picture’ we talked about the big push for math and science in the schools and what impact that has on the arts. I remember experiencing this push when I was in school. When I was in middle school we had a large band program, home economics program, metal and wood shop and art program. However, just before I got to the high school, the school board had decided that our high school would focus on academics rather than the arts. I was crushed that they had removed the shop from the high school as it was one of my favourite options and I was looking forward to continuing with it in high school. We still had a small band and choir program, drama and art program but the focus was definitely on completing the academic courses and the funding for the options had been greatly reduced. I have wondered if the lack of arts forced me to complete all my sciences or if I would have completed it that way regardless of the options available to me. But I do know that I would have enjoyed having more art options throughout my high school years. And I also know that those students that had a definite interest in arts or trades or anything that was not considered the ‘core’ academic areas left our high school to find a high school that would encourage their interests. I also wonder if the academic focus has changed the way I view the arts. I find that I am not too interested in going to plays or seeing concerts (I suppose, this could also be from the lack of funds associated with being a student). As was mentioned in class, could this focus away from the arts change the way society feels about going to the theatre and seeing concerts? I definitely think so!