Hooks and Class ~ Post 10

"During my college yeas, it was tacitly assumed that we all agreed that class should not be talked about" (Hooks, Google Books p110).

     This quotation from Hooks' chapter 14 is going to be the focus of my blog this week. In reality, I could focus on the entirety of the following paragraph, but I'll try to restrict it to just this statement. The primary reason for this is that I feel that this quotation really shows the dated nature of Hooks' work. I believe this statement had merit when it was written, and to a lesser extent today. But the fact of the matter is Bell Hooks' college years were around the 1970s, a vastly different educational landscape in comparison to that which we have today. As such, I believe her ideas and thoughts in this area are wrong: class is absolutely something that should, and is, talked about in classes today.

     I am a fourth year education student, moving into teacher's college very soon. As such, I've essentially been through the ringer as far as modern educational courses are concerned. I cannot count how many times we have discussed the socioeconomic background of students, as well as teachers, and how this can take a role within the classroom. Its something that I'm extremely familiar with, to the point that not discussing it goes against a classroom norm. I'd be hard pressed to find an example of a class in which it wasn't brought up at least one time. This is something I consider to be a very good thing. Through Hooks' depiction of her past experiences, a rather vivid picture of teacher's education in the past is painted; it is not a place I would have wanted to be. They were heavily encouraged to stick with the factory style of education: keep the status quo, everyone aims for the same goal and no one branches out or alters the norm. Today, I feel like that context is finally beginning to change. It seems to me that from the beginning of my education, we've consistently been told that our system is, in essence, broken and needs to be fixed. The fact of the matter is, we are the next generation of teachers, and we're bring encouraged to make change. An entire generation of learners entering the teaching force who have had the ideals of class, race, ethnicity; all of these different ideas are something that have been instilled in us as future educators, and I think this speaks well to our system.

     Is this already being done in the actual classroom? That's hard for me to say. For the past four years I've largely been restricted to the university classroom, which is a progressive environment in its nature. Will this translate into the real world? Who knows. I would certainly like it to. However, my core point is that, at least within the context of a university level classroom, the environment has changed from the way Hooks has described it. We're improving, and becoming progressive. The future looks good, and I can't wait to be a part of it.

Pedagogical Engagement ~ Post 9!

"Many professors remain unwilling to be involved with any pedagogical practices that emphasize mutual participation between teacher and student because more time and effort are required to do this work. Yet this really is the only type of teaching that truly generates excitement in the classroom, that enables students and professors to feel the joy of learning" (Hooks, 124, Google eBook edition).

Within this weeks reading, the 'new idea' which I encountered was pedagogical engagement as a teaching practice. While I enjoyed reading and learning about it throughout the chapter in Hooks' work, the above quotation stood out to me. While I've been aware as I read Hooks' work that it was written entirely from her perspective and based on her own learning, this quotation was the first I've read that truly came across as biased, and in turn essentially ignorant to teaching practices that were not her own. She is almost literally writing off any teaching professional who does not participate in her idealized form of teaching as lazy, and making the assertion that there is no more effective teaching method than her own.

I don't aim to deny that engaged pedagogy has merit. On the contrary, I believe that in practice it genuinely is one of the most effective ways for a teacher to influence and help their students learning. However, to assert that anyone who doesn't conduct that pedagogical style are unwilling to due to time and effort constraints is ignorant to the issues surrounding engaged pedagogy. As I've mentioned both this week and last within my forum postings and blog, this form of student - teacher relation is one which is heavily scrutinized within society. One misinterpreted event and a teacher's entire livelihood could be jeopardized. It is important for teachers to care about their students and care about the learning that goes on, but to assume that any who are unwilling to risk behavior that is societally taboo is to assume that teachers need to never think about themselves or their careers. As far as I'm concerned, there isn't a need for a teacher to be entirely selfish. Education is a career, not a life (in my humble opinion). If a teacher doesn't want to risk their livelihood by becoming personally involved in a student's life, they have that right - and they certainly shouldn't be labeled as lazy for it.

Getting beyond the assumptions made about the teachers, to assume that this type of teaching is the only one which generates excitement in the classroom is equally as biased and absurd. Teaching practices are constantly evolving and changing; to assume one in particular will always be above others is simply incorrect. On top of this, teachers are as unique as any other human being on the planet, and in this quotation Hooks' makes the assumption that any teacher can utilize this form of teaching effectively. The fact of the matter is this simply isn't true. A teacher who doesn't believe in what they're doing, or want to be doing what they're doing, is always going to be less effective than one who is passionate about their method of practice. To deny these outliers - fantastic teachers who simply cannot effectively utilize engaged pedagogy - the chance to be considered optimal teachers in their own right is, simply put, ignorance.

With that angry tirade complete, thanks for reading this week, and I'll see you back here next week.

Cheers!

More Ideas and Reinforcement ~ Post 8!

     This week, I was presented within one particular issue which stood out; one idea that made me somewhat uncomfortable: the notion of 'eros' and eroticism in the classroom. Reading over this part of Hooks' work initially, I had a hard time understanding what purpose this kind of teaching had in the classroom. I still do. Obviously, I had many of the reactions i think one would expect from this kind of reading: I was troubled with the notion of being 'too close' to students, the concept of utilizing erotic impulses for positive classroom gains seemed insane to me. Passion is good. Passion is a great thing to bring into the classroom. But as far as I'm concerned, your passion should be about your students success; students learning. Having a passion for the students themselves simply seems inappropriate, and frankly a little scary. Everyone has heard the horror stories of teachers being put on the chopping block after being accused of inappropriate relations with their students. Even if they're found to be not guilty of whatever it is they've been accused of, they are forever marked, likely to never find steady work again.

     On my initial post, I had a brief discussion with another student and realized where my issue with this concept may come from: the fact that I'm a male.Teaching and nurturing, stereotypically, are female concepts. As such, society in general is much more comfortable with female teachers around male students than the opposite. In tandem with this, there is much more likely to be an issue surrounding a male teacher and female student than the opposite; people are simply programed to be wary of men around women in a position of power. I believe it is this inherent societal bias that has me so opposed to the entire concept. It is so easy for someone to cry wolf and tell everyone you have an inappropriate relationship with a student, I feel it is best to make sure that opportunity never arises for them in the first place.

New Ideas and Reinforcement ~ Post 7!

"What new idea did you find in either of the readings? Did it change or reinforce your prior notions?" 

     The new idea which I gained this week was one which I already addressed within one of my forum posts. Coming out of Brookfield's 1995 work, it focuses on the idea that while there is an obvious class hierarchy in society, there is also a much less blatant hierarchy even within personal relationships and every day interactions. In his seventh chapter, Brookfield quotes Tiswell 1993) in saying "so while conversation can foster values of diversity, democracy, and openness, it can also marginalize and close down certain groups and perspectives". I don't think it is necessarily a new idea, but more or less something I had simply never considered before. "Structured silences and neglect of certain voices and perspectives" (Brookfield, Kindle Location 1960) is something I found myself noticing prominently while examining my experiences with a retrospective lense. Group work, generally speaking, usually consists of one or two core people leading and doing most of the work, while the others within the group tend to essentially stay quiet and do the work that these leaders allocate them. Often these leaders are the more charismatic and confident members of the group; personal knowledge doesn't always play that large of a factor. These other group members are marginalized and largely ignored because they don't have certain traits that are seemingly 'necessary' to lead.

     I guess the next question worth asking would be "where do these traits come from"? In my experience, it tends to correlate strongly with socioeconomic background, which was a large theme in this weeks readings. It seems that most of these charismatic and leader-oriented individuals I've encountered throughout my academic career come from a privileged background - and this makes sense. Privileges breed opportunities to socialize, and through this gain social ability and an overall confidence. Individuals from homes which aren't as well off financially may be less comfortable in these social and group settings, so when push comes to shove they are more content to sit back and allow another group member to take the wheel, even if they believe their knowledge base would be beneficial. They would rather keep it to themselves than risk entering the eye of the group; they simply aren't as comfortable.

     Knowing this, I want to make sure I try and make all of my group members feel valued going forward. I'm self-aware enough to know that I often grab hold of the leadership role in a group setting. I've done numerous extracurricular throughout my life - I'm extremely confident in my ability to speak out and lead in a group setting. Without doubt, I've likely unintentionally marginalized a member of my group in one situation or another - a realization which pains me. I hope to take the lessons learned within Brookfield's chapter this week, and apply them moving forward.

Thanks for reading, 
Cheers!

Critical Workshop Construction ~ Post 6!

"Describe your experience in developing a PD Workshop related to developing critical reflection in your workshop participants"

I'll openly admit it: I really enjoyed the workshop assignment, and I'm looking forward to getting to work with it again. For once, it was really nice to have a class which allowed us to actually MAKE something, instead of simply make the same old boring, "we all know where this is going" essay. Actually being able to think like an educator and put my knowledge into some form of legitimate practice was fantastic, and something I really enjoyed getting the opportunity to do.

With that said, actually working critical reflection into the workshop was easy for me, because the bulk of my workshop was focused on having the participants become aware of their personal assumptions, and addressing them. The difficulty came in figuring out which activities I could use that would be effective for adult learners (as has been my struggle throughout the course - I'm a student of standard youth education). Adjusting to this served to be a challenge for me, as most of my normal resources which I normally rely on for my education assignments focus on students exclusively at the junior/ intermediate level; I needed to expand my search. 

Expanding my knowledge and resource base was something I took great pleasure in. My awareness of my own shortcomings as an adult educator allowed me to see that I needed new resources; finding them was both interesting and overwhelming. There are so many different resources online, on dozens of websites, all focused on teaching critical ideals in an adult education setting. Ultimately. my decision as to which ones I took into the workshop were ones which I felt flowed well together: a solid icebreaker activity, a good thinking activity, and a concluding activity, followed by a discussion of what had been covered. I find that within a workshop context, a natural and effective flow between the lessons is something that is as important as the lessons themselves. Building off of the activity before it can make an already good activity better. In this case, I believed I achieved that. My lessons regarding assumption making and critical thinking built off of each other effectively, and made for an effective workshop.

I'm looking forward to getting to expand on the work I've already done. My grade was good, but it wasn't where I wanted it to be. I genuinely believe I can work what I've already created into a legitimate and effective workshop, and that is exactly what I plan to do. Critical reflection is such an important skill to teach learners of all ages, and I'm really looking forward to refining my method of teaching it within the context of my workshop.

Thanks for reading,
Cheers!

Considering Critical Distance ~ Post 5!

     Generally speaking, I feel as though critical distance is something I have a fairly good grasp on. It feels very similar to critical reflection, which is something I am extremely comfortable doing. As such, I don't think I learned anything particularly "new" coming out of this weeks readings. More or less, I simply had what I was already aware of reinforced and further contextualized.

     For me as an educator though, critical distance is always something I'm aware of, though I don't believe I use it as effectively as I could. In the past, I've had a bit of a penchant for wanting to be the student favorite. Everyone had that one student teacher they really liked growing up; I always want to be that guy. In all honesty, its worked rather well for me. I've always managed to effectively build up a rapport with most of my students. A lot of this came from my utilization of critical distance. I would often deliberately try and view myself from the perspective of my students and do things that I gathered would make them appreciate me more as an authority figure; whether it be making a joke in a strenuous situation or something similar to that. While this worked most times, it often lead to issues I've made note of in weeks prior when educators try and be friends with their students: it can create a lack of respect. Often in these classes the students would get so used to me being friendly with them or making jokes, they wouldn't take me seriously when I asked them to do something, or they would simply make jokes at me expecting me to play along.

     I think scenarios such as this speak to the double edged sword that using critical distance can be. On one hand, it was effective in making students enjoy my presence in the classroom. On the other, it worked against my authority and respect in said classroom. Critical distance is a great thing, when you use it effectively. Had I spent my time trying to look less at how my students view me as a person and more how they viewed me as an educator, I could have done much more to help them while still maintaining a level of respect. It is this notion of looking through the students eyes (as in Brookfield's chapter this week) that's gotten me in trouble in the past, yet all I need to due is tweak my theory in using it (similar to what Hooks argued) in order to use it effectively. There has to be a balance, and in order to get that balance going forward I think I need to change the reasons I want students to like me. Instead of them liking me for being the goofy, joker of a student teacher, I want them to like me for being the useful, friendly student teacher who could tell when they needed help and could give it before they asked for it. To this, I need to reevaluate how I use critical distance.

Thanks for reading, cheers!
- Ken 

Thematic Commonality Thus Far ~ Post 4!

In order to better condense and organize my thoughts regarding the readings and content of this course so far, I want to break my blog down into two keywords that I believe have been integral: community and introspection. 

     I'm using community as a blanket statement to cover a lot of aspects we've looked at, particularly culture, power dynamics and interactions with students within the classroom. There are so many different opinions and ideas that focus on the classroom and the community at large, it can be overwhelming and difficult to come up with your own philosophy on the subject. A classroom should feel like a community. Particularly focusing on what we've learned this week, community-style classrooms have numerous learning benefits for both the students and teachers. Students have a much greater engagement in their own learning; it gives them a much greater access to resources than they would normally have in that they can discuss and work with their peers.

     This also speaks to the idea of power dynamics within the class. While I believe the classroom setting should involve a community dynamic, I also believe that the teacher needs to represent a figure who commands authority. Authority and power is something we have explored in depth, and I maintain my notion that teachers need to be assertive in their authority (but not aggressively so). It ties into the notions we have looked at before regarding teachers having a 'friendship' with their students. While this has benefits, it often results in too casual a relationship with the teacher, and can create a power vacuum in which no one really listens to anyone. Personally, I believe the relationship needs to be 50/50 at the most. While you should try and be friendly with your students and make them comfortable with you, they need to be aware that you are a figure of authority to be respected.

     Introspection is the other key word I think represents this course so far, and it represents the idea of knowing yourself. I've already touched in this lightly, in that I know what I believe the power dynamic in a classroom should be. Expanding on introspection, it largely encompasses the ideas of knowing what you believe about the classroom and knowing what you believe a classroom should look like. Ultimately, there is no definitive best way to teach. There is simply a best way for you, and it is important you stay true to this. Ultimately, teaching students in a way which makes you uncomfortable is going to make them uncomfortable. Students, regardless of age, are more than capable of reading you and drawing conclusions. If you don't believe in how you are teaching, why should they? This is why I believe introspection is so important, because in order to teach you need to know who you are as a teacher.

     This is further reinforced by our discussions surrounding reflection. Being able to look back on your teaching practice (and life experience in general) in tremendously important to improving your capability as a teacher. Be able to look at your lessons objectively: why did this work? Why didn't it? Look at it from your students perspective. Know what assumptions you go into the classroom with. Address them! Examining yourself is one of the most surefire ways to improve your classroom practice, and this course has helped to reassert that notion in my mind so far.

Thanks for reading,
Cheers!

An Update Serving Two Purposes ~ Post 3!

This post is going to serve two purposes: address the session 3 journal prompt, as well as address a question we were meant to answer in the forums but I somehow managed to miss. So I'll get started with that!

What are the consequences of DELIBERATELY preventing or not preventing a nasty experience from unfolding in a learning environment?

     This question seemed obvious to me at first. "Of course we should always prevent nasty experiences! What kind of person would deliberately allow something to happen to one of their students!?" Yet as I thought on it more, I realized what exactly that entails. Ultimately, failure is one of the cornerstones of effective learning. Nothing teaches a student whats right more than them experiencing whats wrong. By allowing negative instances to occur, I would be enabling the learner an opportunity to reflect on the incident. Questioning how it happened, why it happened, and what could have been done to prevent it would be of a much greater benefit to them as learners than my simple intervention to ensure the incident never took place at all. As an educator, I would prefer to think of myself as a facilitator than an outright teacher at times. If by allowing a nasty incident to befall a student would facilitate their own development as learners, I cannot see why I would not allow it to occur.
     This is, of course, assuming the incident is within reason. The term "nasty" is fairly general, and my response takes it to mean the failing of an assignment, or doing an activity incorrectly; academic forms of "nasty". In the event of more stereotypical nasty behavior (such as physical altercations, verbal abuse, etc.) I feel I would be obligated as an educator and as an individual with some semblance of authority to intervene. Negative experiences are ones of learning, to be certain. However, I cannot justify something morally wrong affecting a student and not allowing myself to intervene in order to help them learn something from it.

What are the common thoughts and ideas you notice among all of the postings (within the "Learning and Change" section of the Session 3 Forum)

     The most prominent theme I noticed within this weeks forum posts is regarding the importance of critical reflection (and critical agency in turn). Reflection is something I believe most educators are familiar with. In order to progress as a teacher (as well as a learner) it is immensely important to be able to look back on your experiences and use them to grow. Reflection allows us to expand our boundaries and leave our comfort zones, actions which are necessary for growth as educators.
     Regarding powers structures, I saw a mix of ideas as I went through the posts, many of which were similar to my own ideas. One of the ideas I saw which I most liked was this notion of "teacher as friend" which was brought up in the post by Haylee Drew, something I believe she was entirely correct about. I had a teacher in high school who was far more interested in being my friend than being my teacher. While this made her class one which I very much looked forward to, I eventually stopped viewing her as a teacher, and in all honesty stopped learning. I couldn't take her telling me what to do seriously, assignments seemed like a waste of my time, etc. It simply reinforces the idea that even though it is important for to have a rapport with our students, we need them to respect us as authority figures in order for learning to occur. As Haylee reiterated, a 50/50 split of friendliness and authority may be an effective compromise in order to make your students respect your word, as well as have them enjoy being in your presence. 

     Another important aspect I noted in many of my fellow students posts regarded the importance of examining how our students will see us. Caitlinn Mccman summarized my personal feelings pretty well: "Being from a white middle class background I was never really exposed to being at the disadvantage". This is something I am entirely aware of, and somewhat paranoid about, as I have said in other posts. I want my students to be able to feel comfortable and relatable to be, but I am also aware of how difficult that can be for someone of my background. How my students see me is immensely important to me, as I believe respect is necessary for an effective classroom environment. Being able to reflect on their experiences, as well as my own, is what I believe could be the key to making this happen.

Describe a time when it was important to you to resist a change and why ~ Post 2

     One of the most prominent (and luckily education related) times it has been important for me to resist a change actually occurred in my first legitimate placement in an educational setting, in my second year of university. I was placed at a middle school in St. Catharines, working with an extremely diverse class of grade eight students. My primary role within the class varied based on the subject we were looking at that day. This incident occurred in their math class.

     My job in the math class was to take a select group of students who were not doing their work at a grade eight level and work with them in a small group to try and improve their performance. It was tedious work, as many of these students were largely disinterested in math or believed they were too far behind/ demoralized, etc. The student who was most far behind, Samantha (fake name, before anyone gets concerned) was working at a grade 2 level. After class midway through my semester, the math teacher approached me and told me that I would not be taking Samantha in my group anymore. When I asked him why, his answer revolved around her being a "lost cause", who would "never get it" and he wasn't sure "why her parents even bothered sending her", among more colorful things. Now, in my few weeks I had gotten to know my students fairly well. Samantha was a bright girl, and I knew it. However, she was quiet and reserved, and simply struggled to come out of her shell and make a legitimate effort. Naturally, when I was informed of this pending change, I was upset. I went back to the math teacher next week and requested to keep working with Samantha, as I believed that I could get through to her. After an absurd amount of badgering on my part, I got what I wanted and my group stayed the same.

     Now, I had something to prove. I worked as hard as I could with all of my students. I did math problems with them, I got answers wrong with them. I did everything I could to make them comfortable with me, comfortable enough to try things for themselves. Eventually, that started happening. Students would ask me to leave them alone while they tried to work out a problem. Even Samantha, my "lost cause" was beginning to do higher level math. She was still behind, but she was gaining traction at an alarming rate. By the time I was finished with my placement, Samantha was doing grade 6 level math, and attempting a little of the grade eight math every night. She was never dumb. She never didn't "get it". She just needed someone to believe in her, like a lot of those students did. And they certainly weren't getting that from their math teacher.

~~

     The reason this story came to mind as the one to share this week is simply because of how much it resonated with the first chapter of Hooks (1994) reading. I was able to show my vulnerability to the students, show that that it was okay to get an answer wrong, and this helped them open up to me. It was this openness that allowed me to succeed where their other teachers had failed. I felt like I made a legitimate connection to the students. I didn't feel like they were doing math because I was making them. I felt like they were doing it because they wanted to, or at least wanted to prove to me they could. This marked one of the first times in my life I felt like I was a legitimate teacher, and this week in ADED I was able to better understand and contextualize the moment; I am very grateful for this.

Thanks for reading guys,
Cheers!
   

Post 1!

       Well, as this is my introductory Blog I don't think I can say much I didn't cover in my introductory posts on the Sakai forums (which, if you're reading this, you undoubtedly have access to. Go look!). My name is Ken, I'm a fourth year student at the wonderful BrockU looking to expand his thinking and general perception of education and power dynamics.

       As for course concerns, I will reiterate here what I stated on the forum:I think my biggest concern regarding this class is the nature of an online course. I've never taken one before and the whole thing just has me strangely on edge. I feel like I'm going to miss something important- the whole feel is just different than what I'm used to. With that said, though, the idea of running a blog and contributing to a wiki is something I'm optimistic about. As a future educator I looked into ADED in order to try to expand and build upon my thinking the way my normal courses did not, and the utilization of these different resources seem to be a pretty good start. The idea of examining group dynamics is something I find markedly interesting, and I'm really curious to see where the class is going to take us. Even having the introductary posts on the forums, I feel like I know people in an online class better than I know some students who I sit in a seminar room with but never legitimately interact with - its kind of remarkable.

       All in all, I have a lot of optimism regarding this class. While the online aspects make me nervous, I think I'm going to really enjoy my experience.

Thanks for reading,
Cheers!