I'm going to make a bold claim: Gallagher is biased.
I suppose I'll explain; he is an English teacher, so he relates everything back to reading. While I agree, other subjects would be more difficult, and likely impossible, without the ability to read, I don't think reading alone will fix everything. The was Gallagher talks in Chapter 5, the focus should be more on how to rebuild our entire education philosophy rather than just ending readicide.
I was placed in a middle school science classroom earlier this semester where the textbooks used were concept based. The idea was that the students would develop basic scientific thought, and a genuine interest in science with a broad understanding and firm foundation to continue in science classes. The teacher has been using this set of instructional materials for five years and has heard from the teachers in grade levels above hers that the students really do have a great conceptual understanding of the sciences. BUT (don't you hate it when something good has a big but in the middle) the teacher is constantly being reprimanded. Her test scores have significantly dropped since this curriculum has been used, because there are not a ton of facts, actually, there's very little detailed content available in the information from the book. So, to please the government and school leaders, she has a class set of the old school, fact based, boring, overwhelming, science textbooks. She will get these out a couple weeks before the test and drill facts into the student's heads... they will remember some and do alright on the tests. This fact cramming and testing is completely pointless, as the students have a great understanding of the concepts behind the class, and a general desire to continue with learning science. There is a poor form of assessing, and because the students are learning through this new curriculum, the teacher suffers. We just can't win.
Readicide or learnicide... something's got to change, and it's got to be something from the higher ups in education. As Gallagher advocates, we need to get back to our creative, risk taking, can-do spirit and encourage expanded thinking, starting in our schools!
I feel for your colleague. It is wonderful that this person teaches the deeper concepts and seems to walk the fine line between being a ggod teacher and being a martyr. Be a good support to this person because it seems that she will have to suffer in order to teach well.
ReplyDeleteIn the meanwhile advocate and pray for change. I wish you well.
I find it admirable that your host teacher continues to pursue greater conceptual understanding. It seems that too many educators today are walking on eggshells to please the 'higher ups.' It seems wrong to drill kids to death in preparation for a standardized test, but as your experience has shown not doing so can land you in the unemployment line.
ReplyDeleteAs someone who will be entering the education workforce soon, this is a matter that greatly concerns me. We are being taught all these wonderful strategies and methods for instruction in our programs, but it's all based on an assumption of the 'perfect classroom.' My main question is, will we be like your host teacher and bravely put our livelihood on the line for the benefit of our students or join rank with the drill and kill educators?
I hope we can answer that we will do all in our power to give the best possible education to our students.
I remember hearing these discussions during our time at the middle school. I want our students to have these creative learning experiences because that is what life is all about in the long run. Don't we want self-learners? Are we going to achieve that with testing? I don't think so. I am glad that you reconciled with Gallagher at the end of the book. I understand your frustration...kinda. But of course I am a Literature teacher in training.
ReplyDeleteI hope our system will change or just realize how our learners are suffering under this standards based curriculum.
Love you Meredith. :)
And we wonder why good teachers are leaving schools. It sounds like your friend is doing what is necessary, but not completely compromising what is good science teaching.
ReplyDelete