Blog 5

1) "These children are not citizens of Illinois, New York, or California. They are (most of them are, at least) the citizens of the United States; yet the flag that hangs above their classrooms and their schools does not defend their interest when it comes to preparation for adulthood in their nation, and the words of the pledge we ask them to recite can only mock their actual experience." (Kozol 262)

I chose this particular quote because I thought it conveyed a powerful message and did so in a direct manner. It is true when here it says we aren't citizens of one state that we happen to live in, rather we are citizens of the United States and should all be held to the same standards and be given equal opportunities for jobs, education, etc. However, that is unfortunately not the case, and this is where I tend to get lost when I think about the "national" standards that students are held to for example by NCLB. In order for individuals within the same country to be looked at as individuals within the same country, there can't be the double standards and I think one of the biggest impacts on these double standards/expectations that set students apart from one another is NCLB. I also agree with the idea that some are not prepared for adulthood once out of the educational environment and again, I think ever since NCLB came along this has hindered the varios opportunities that students could be provided to enrich learning through multiple ways.

2) "Responsible citizens and especially teachers, given the power they hold in relation to hundreds of future citizens, must continually consider the source of messages, the medium used to deliver the messages, and the recipients, often themselves. A teacher without the ability to think critically or to translate that thinking into a critical voice does a disservice to teaching, to learning, to students, and to our democracy." (Anthology 212)

I liked this quote mainly because of the stance it takes on critically thinking and voicing critical ideas outward rather than keeping them to ones self when that won't really help improve or change things for the better. One of the ways I interpreted the first half of the quote which talked about messages and considering all angles of them, the sender, the recipients, and the medium, was that there always has to be an open line of communication and when there is miscommunication, it needs to be clarified for everyone involved (teachers, students, parents, etc). I think teachers who have the ability to think critically and not be hesitant to use that critical voice are the teachers who will have the strongest impact on students in that they will act as a positive role model who emphasizes open-minded thinking and putting words into action. These are the kind of teachers we need more of. Teachers who may think critically but not apply it, or who don't use critical thinking at all, are the ones who will let the students down, minimize learning opportunities, and cause our current state that we are in for education to remain the same.

3) "...a national horror hidden in plain view, as he had said. If it was a national horror, whether hidden in plain view, or, as others may believe, too obvious to be concealed but clearly seen yet somehow "disallowed" at the same time, why was there no national response?" (Kozol 240)

The tone/expression that was used in this quote was what captured my attention the most, seeing as a very simple question is asked (why was there no national response?), but a very complicated answer seems to await. There are many educational issues and acts occurring now such as NCLB, merit-based pay, race to the top, and so on, that really need attention and provisions made to them, and if not provisions, then completely wiped out. It seems that in todays school systems and even just societal issues, heads are simply turned the other way even though one if fully aware of what is going on but cannot bare to face the consequences or penalties that might in reality taunt them. This idea falls under the teachers who do think critically and are trying to implement new strategies, yet perhaps they don't want to speak out against the norm in fear that their teaching job will be taken away just like that. My question is what is considered to be a national horror? Whether or not it was an obvious problem or a minor problem just leading up to a larger concern, who has the say in determining what deserves a response?

4) "Whatever damage segregation might or might not do, the premise of our case is that the state and city can provide sufficient resources so that students in a school, even if that school is segregated, can achieve a respectable level of success." ...."Although "the line is no longer a line of state-sanctioned discrimination, it is nonetheless a de facto line of color". (Kozol 258)

I agree here with the idea of there not being a visible line of discrimination based on state laws and whatnot, but in reality there is certainly a line amongst individuals that impacts our everyday lives. The idea of privilege seems to be where all the smaller elements fall into. Whether it is admitted or acted on, on each side of that line lies different privilege for each person. It is also evident that schools don't receive an equal distribution of resources or funding to provide for all the students success. If this were the case, then why is it that, as we have read and discussed from Kozol, the inner city schools such as those in NYC, lack so much that students blatantly cry out that they are in poverty but who is there to help. The privilege walk that we did in class helped me to realize the differences amongst each person and it helped me to realize not everyone was at the same level as me or was provided with the same opportunities. This is what we need to shift away from so each students level of success doesn't depend on which side of the "de facto line of color" they are on,

5) "Like democratic societies, successful schools can't be guaranteed. The merits of letting schools try to be successful schools can't be guaranteed. The merits of letting schools try to be successful are significant. But allowing them to try requires boldness and patience-not a combination that is politically easy to sustain." (Anthology 148)

In this quote it mentions one of the major downfalls individuals are faced with as a result of either not being one whose 'voice matters' or maybe simply because they don't feel fit to speak out against those in power and those making the decisions. Why is it that the combination of boldness and patience is so politically uneasy to sustain? Is this an assumption simply because the ones whose voices are heard feel they have to maintain power and dominance without facing any confrontations along the way? This reminds me of one of our class discussions where we were told to learn to accept and walk toward confrontation rather than walk away from it. People have been walking away from confrontation with officials and "power-fulfilled" individuals for far too long, but will anything really happen if we don't face it and act on it? It is a little pessimistic to say that successful schools cannot be guaranteed and unfortunately some have come to internalize that and believe that it's true under current circumstances, but it is false. Critical thinking and teaching for the students best interest should be what matters.

6) "In thriving urban schools, everyone associated with life in the school fiercely believes that each and every child can succeed at high academic levels. This is common rhetoric but is rarely enacted in practice....Successful schools embrace a strong, shared vision and commitment to the idea that there are ways to engage in school so that everyone achieves, so long as everyone is willing to find that way." (Anthology 163/164)

It is unfortunate to have to admit that it can't be perceived by all the idea of every child being able to succeed at high academic levels. Why is it that this perfect pictured desire for all children to succeed at their highest abilities is just common rhetoric? This is why it is so important to have all individuals and leaders in a given school on the same page, committed to the students and committed to finding a way in which every student can grow and acheive goals for themselves. When talking about how a child can learn to their fullest potential, I think of using a variety of approaches to teaching, through music, art, nature, hands-on experiences, and the multiple intelligences. The problem with this is teachers aren't even alotted enough time in the day to incorporate all these creative approaches because they are teaching to the test and are basically provided an agenda which is 100% revolved around what will be on the test. Collaboration amongst teachers is definitely needed if we want students to succeed given whatever the resources there are and how it is taught.

Blog 4

1) "We are becoming increasingly aware of the influence that culture and social privileges have on epistomologies and ontologies associated with education at operational levels. And yet, education as a whole field is slow to respond in using this as a primary lens for instruction and assessment. Mainstream practices are narrow in their approach largely due to a culture of high stakes testing and accountability. For many students, education remains an experience that is dehumanizing, distant, and decontextualized." (Intro to Transformative Teaching handout p 1)

I think this quote was especially relevant and noteworthy because it directly states that even though aspects of life such as culture and social privileges are present and can be associated with education in that it can be brought into the classroom, it is still being somewhat blatantly ignored. I think this is really unfortunate and certainly more of a harm to students in the community rather than a benefit because not being exposed to different perspectives and viewpoints of each individual or group of individuals within the same community only further shelters and perhaps leads to racism or bias opinions towards one another. Classroom instruction and styles used are so limited not only as a result of this blind side towards the awareness of culture and social privilege, but also as a result of the lack of opportunities of enrichment through the arts or music for example. This particular quote also reminded me of when we went outside and the privilege walk during class. I know without a doubt it opened my eyes to alot more that was around me than I would have realized just on the 'surface' of everyday life. Physically participating in this activity and looking at different characteristics of life through the eyes of an adult says alot for how much something like this can do for young children.

2)"Education in its institutional forms is about authority, power, manipulation, and agency; it is about who decides what." ("The Benefits of Active Learning p1)

I definitely disagree with this quote, seeing as to me it describes what a traditional educator might refer to education as being. Even though we still obviously have teachers whose style is definitely very traditional, I think we are beginning to see more and more of a combination of traditional with another style, if not a complete transformation for some teachers whose perspective on education has shifted during their time as an educator. What I thought was interesting about this was that it doesn't directly say 'who' has that power, who has that authority, and who can be manipulative, rather it seems more focused on education itself instead of the educators. One of my own questions that always seem to come back to me is the same as the last part of this quote; Who exactly decides what? There are so many different decisions to be made concerning education, policies, the type of content to be taught, how it is taught, and so on. I seem to be unsure as to how/why power, in a system like education itself, can be such an important part of 'the whole', especially if we as educators and all those decision makers are supposed to collaborate, share ideas, work together to address issues and solutions, etc.

3) "Advocates of academic standards argue that standards are necessary to ensure that teachers instruct students in what the state educational agency considers the important parts of each subject. In addition, high stakes state tests linked to state standards ensure that students have learned the subject matter prescribed by the state. It is also argued that academic standards can be used to force teachers to teach more material. In turn, this will require the students to learn more". (Spring p 232)

I chose this quote not only because it further discusses high stake testing and state standards, but moreso because of the word choices used throughout. For instance, here are some of the words or phrases that stuck out to me; "prescribed" by the state, "force teachers", and "require students" to learn more. Advocates of such standards and tests apparently feel that the type of enforcement needed and support needed would call for forcing teachers to teach more and requiring students to learn more. These academic standards might be framed in a way where what is taught is extremely limited but what's worse is sometimes certain things such as art or creative approaches to learning are completely wiped from the curriculum because they aren't on the test. Another question which again seems recurring is how are we supposed to know that the high stake tests, linked to state standards, will indeed "ensure the students have learned the subject matter prescribed by the state?". Students can do well on the test but after a week of taking it forget not only content but even the skills learned or acquired to be able to successfully take the test. It could be such memorization just as well as it could be actually learning and synthezing the information.

4) "The fact that high stakes testing exerts so much control over classroom practice is evidence of the existance of hierarchies of institutional power. Indeed, high stakes tests hold so much power, because the results are tied, by policy, to rewards or sanctions, that can deeply affect the lives of students', teachers, principals, and communities. ("Critical Education-High Stakes Testing by Wayne Au p4)

So this is really what high stakes tests and standardized tests has caused education to come down to? Closing schools when students scores aren't high enough, firing teachers when their students don't pass or improve on scores from the past, providing merit pay for ONLY those teachers whose students excel on the test, and so on. I thought the quote itself sums up where education/educators currently stand and in doing so also reminds us how these tests have so much power over everything else, which further means it has a greater impact on society, students, teachers, and parents. Isn't it safe to assume that being aware of the amount of weight these tests carry and knowing/seeing first hand what is has started and continues to do to schools/communities, that we would start to think about ways to immediately try alternatives to help save communities and schools rather than destroy them? As a future teacher if I were to walk into my classroom knowing that how I taught and what I taught was going to be driven by tests and more tests, then I would automatically be not only discouraged to teach to my own beliefs but I would feel like I was the one letting my students down and automatically depriving them of a variety of different strategies and ways of learning.

5) ""The e-learning revolution has created the promise of new methods of learning and greater access to knowledge along with a whole host of problems associated with teacher training, costs, and censorship." (Spring p 237).

I thought just the idea of including technology in learning was interesting and definitely a relevant aspect of our lives today seeing as so much of our everyday life falls right into the computer! Like any other 'new/different way' of learning may do, it is expected that some faults would come along with it, which again really effect the teachers, their time, and what can be used to be taught as a result of censorship and censorship laws. Technology is important not only because it is part of our everyday lives, but also because just as this quote tell us "it has greater access to knowledge" and new methods of learning. There is so much that students can benefit from by using the computer to enhance learning, whether it be through a software program, games, the internet, etc. As far as the problems associated with this e-learning revolution, I think if it is proven to help improve at least some part of learning in the classroom then it is well worth the time to put into it.

6) "Efforts at censorship of books and methods of instruction raise important issues regarding the role of public schools in a democratic society. Democracy depends on the free exchange of ideas and the diversity of ideas. On the other hand, education is compulsory..." (Spring p 228)

I thought this was an interesting part to discuss because it reminds me even of when I was in highschool or middle school and we either needed parents to give permission to watch a particular movie or even sometimes read a particular book for instance. I can see where censorship addresses the question of public schools and what they have to do in the society we live in to not take advantage of books or way to teach based on censorship. If we are encouraged and asked to share ideas in order to gather a variety of different opinions on one matter for example, then which idea are we supposed to be following? The idea of living in a democratic society and having the right to share and voice ideas, or the idea that one must consider carefully the censorship behind their teaching practices or what they use to implement these practices. Before reading the rest of chapter 9, I never realized or stopped to think about the wide range of topics or matters that censorship laws relate to and I thought it was really interesting and useful seeing as future teachers we will need to be aware of such restrictions or liabilities.

Blog 3

1) "For lack of a better term, we refer to it simply as sham inquiry-that is, teaching practices that look like inquiry, sound like inquiry, but on closer inspection are revealed to be just as unhealthy to student learning as a steady, uniform diet of teacher telling. In its various guises, sham inquiry gives no one solace but the teacher, who, thinking she has refined her practice, continues to ignore, discount, or put aside the questions students ask in favor of those she believes are more valuable. (Canestrari & Marlowe pg 72)

Not that the reason why I chose this quote is a 'good reason', but I thought it was interesting that it seemed to put into writing the practices that I sometimes see in classrooms. I have unfortunately been in a classroom where students needs are simply ignored and not considered while instructions were given or even while students were working on certain tasks. Seeing teachers just turn their head the other way to some students, for me, explains why specific students have behavioral problems, are unmotivated to do their work, and disturb their other classmates for attention that they aren't getting from the classroom teacher. Wouldn't a "great teacher" who doesn't lose their character and sense of self when they enter their classroom, want to refine the strategies and methods they use to be able to give undivided attention to students they know need that extra help and direction? Sometimes I wonder if teachers are aware of their actions and are aware of the impacts it has on the students, or if they are not aware and conscious of the impacts as they are simply going day to day doing what they do because it's their routine and they don't like to modify/don't see the need to modify their ways.

2) "I mean, I'm going to teach junior high school."
"When you see your mother next, tell her she raised a moron. Christ! Are you going to be sorry!"
"In New York City, we don't have schools; we have pens for lost souls. Teaching is a scam, a welfare project for those who can't do anything else!". (Canestrari & Marlowe pgs. 10-11)

Reading this quote was very disturbing to me seeing as it completely bashes not only the teaching profession itself but also those who pursue careers in this field as well. I felt this quote almost tops the belief off that teachers simply aren't successful at what they do, no matter how much they time and effort they put in for their students, especially if standardized test scores are not at or perhaps even above proficiency level. I don't understand how people, and especially those who have no educational background or work in education, can have little to no respect for teachers who at some points know they are on the brinks of losing their job but that still doesn't even cause them to give up or fail their students! Given everything that teachers are faced with, from having to follow strict schedules to allot for enough test preparation time, to worrying about waking up the next day and still having their job(based on students test results), to struggling to fulfill other criteria and standards on top of test preparation, wouldn't one have a little bit of respect and praise for the teachers we have today? I know that some teachers teaching styles and beliefs may effect how they manage their classroom and what goes on inside, but even differences such as those shouldn't effect the students' ability to have the best eduaction possible with those who genuinely care about them and want them to succeed.

3) "Now, assessment is integral to learning. Good teachers give a wide variety of tests and assignments, make judgements about student work, and probe students' thinking when their answers miss the mark. Standardized tests can well be part of this constellation of assessment, but should not overwhelm it. It's important to remember how far removed standardized tests are from the cognitive give-and-take of the classroom. That's one reason why there is a debate among testing specialists as to whether a test score is really an accurate measure of learning. Yet the scores on standardized tests have become the gold standard for excellance. (Rose ch. 3 pg. 48)

This particular quote seemed to sum up most of my personal feelings on standardized tests and how they appear to be the only way students are assessed these days, regardless of any other special talents or abilities they may have. I completely agree with the fact that a variety of assessments should be given and that differentiation is key to being able to meet every students individual needs based on what/how much the teacher really knows about their students. To me, standardized tests should simply be ONE way of assessing students, but they shouldn't be the ONLY strategy and certainly shouldn't label schools, teachers, and students as failing or "at risk" if a particular score isn't met. I personally am not the greatest paper-pencil test taker and that has always been one of my weaknesses, so this is why I couldn't agree more with the question of whether or not A test score is an accurate measure of learning. These tests do not even cover a variety of topics or even subject areas, so how can they possibly be looked at as an overall definite answer to students certain abilities and level of knowledge they have? As a future teacher, I really feel that the importance of finding out levels of acheivement in specific areas of study will depend on the different ways students are assessed, both written and orally, seeing as I am not 100% again these tests, but in today's educational system these tests out-beat all other forms of assessments. Unfortunately, they are looked at as the one and only way of assessing and the standards are high for all students at all different levels, yet are expected to meet the same level of proficiency!

4) "Standards, in many places, have proven nebulous and low," he writes in a coming essay. "Accountability has turned to test-cramming and bean-counting, often limited to basic reading and math skills." ("Leading Scholar's U-Turn on School Reform Shakes up Debate" NY Times p. 2)

I chose this quote because I felt it went long with my ideas and feelings on the previously discussed quote above. I agree with the idea posed here especially because it is so specific and directly expresses that these tests ultimately only measure reading and math skills. These limitations are further proof that areas such as art and music have been completely disregarded and pretty much considered irrevelant or not important for kids development. Since schools are 'cramming' to study and prepare for these tests, time for art, music, and creativity are becoming more and more nonexistant and it is such an unfortunate sight especially for kids in elementary schools to have to lose these opportunities of enrichment through art and music, simply because it's not on the test. Schools seem to also "dumb down" their own standards simply to 'meet' state standards/national standards (NCLB). I think with all the drilling and main focus on these tests, students are really just losing motivation and their desire to do their absolute best because they are not being provided alternatives to learning that are beneficial and of interest to them.

5) Every classroom should have not merely a qualified teacher, but a great teacher. But for this to happen, we must move the definition of "qualified" back from quantity indicators and onto quality, by teaching teachers about efficacy and caring, about the ways one can empower and engage students, while allowing teachers to retain their "distinctive character". What matters at every turn is the teacher, and all the kids deserve great teachers. This need has never been so pressing." (Canestrari & Marlowe pg 117)

I liked this quote simply because it reemphasizes the importance of what kind of a classroom teacher kids deserve and how this can be mastered through teaching teachers to basically care, support, and engage students in learning on a daily basis. I really thought the last sentence of the quote was powerful because it a given fact that in today's schools there are so many teachers who look at their job as simply a job. This outlook distant's them from their students and forms a relatively big gap which doesn't allow for any form of relationship to be established nor does it build on trust and feelings of belongingness for the kids either, which is crucial for them to feel like they are cared for and have the supports they need to do well. I strongly disagree with the notion that a teacher of 25 years (quantity) has all the characteristics of a "great teacher" just because they have been in the profession for 25 years. At an individual level they may have created their beliefs on teaching and how they manage the students, but the amount of time a teacher teaches, to me, remains an unimportant fact that doesn't really accurately measure just how well of a teacher they are (based on what they provide for their students and how students feel being in the classroom everyday). This may sound like a clichee, but from past experience, teachers have their way of getting to students and those teachers who show they care and are there for the benefit of the students are the ones that leave imprints and positive motivational memories in the future for the kids.

6) "The capability of banking education to minimize or annul the students' creative power and to stimulate their credulity serves the interest of the oppressors, who care neither to have the world revealed or to see it transformed. The oppressors use their "humanitarianism" to preserve a profitable situation. Thus they react almost instinctively against any experiment in education which stimulates the critical faculties and is not content with a partial view of reality but always seeks out the ties which link one point to another and one problem to another." (Paul Friere The Banking Concept")

I didn't fully understand this quote but I knew it was making important/interesting points and that is a reason why I chose it. It reminded me of a traditional education/education system because it talks about not wanting to see any kinds of transformations and being 'against any experiments' that might foster or stimulate critical 'faculties'. Looking at education as "banking education" suggests a very clear cut and simple way of suggesting how the educational system really works. In reality, there certainly is not ONE problem or ONE solution to a problem, and I think to be able to solve problems that education faces in today's world then it is critical to have an open mind while allowing ideas from all different perspectives to flow in. This quote, along with the entire article for that matter, put education into the business realm and used comparisons that for me, don't justify how things really work now. The best interest of students and teachers even seem to be disregarded.