My Possible Dream Job

So this is not really related to the article, but I feel this is a great opportunity to talk about a, well, an opportunity.

My mother works at Bay Farm Montessori academy back home in Massachusetts as a pre-K teacher. The school, as of last Wednesday, only went up to 5th grade. However, I am very pleased to announce the recent approval (i.e. last Thursday) of Bay Farm Montessori Academy Middle School! And get this, it will be a Montessori school centered abound ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE!!

The school is located near the ocean, a marsh, AND a river. Can you say outdoor classroom much?! If you are unfamiliar with Montessori teaching, it is a complete inquiry based approach to learning where each child learns as an individual. Montessori teaching fosters independent learning skills, critical thinking, and science process skills. For example, my mother as fluent readers that are 4 years old. In the past she has had 5 and 6 year olds that can multiply. And no, these are NOT gifted students. It's the way Mopntessori teaches the children - it's all hands on. The child selects a work (with teacher guidance) and the child works on it. Since all the Montessori activities are hands-on, the child learns the skills so much deeper than in traditional pencil and paper activities. And get this, the Montessori method is inherently MULTICULTURAL. That's right...multicultural. Students commonly participate in cultural fairs, learning new languages, and part of the curriculum in all grades is learning about the cultures of the world.

In short - I am slightly obssessed with Montessori teaching. Its inquiry, actually has science as part of the curriculum in all grades (can you believe it, elementary students actually having science daily?!), and is multi-cultural. In case you are interested, here is a link to some more Montessori information. http://www.montessori-namta.org/NAMTA/geninfo/whatismont.html.

I mean, my mother's pre-K kids know the words hypothesis, photosynthesis, they know the parts to a flower, learn about rocks. And when I saw know, I mean they actually know. If you ask any of those kids to make a hypothesis, they know exactly what you are talking about.

So you are probably wondering I am rambling on and on about this. Well, I am applying for a job at Bay Farm Montessori Academy Middle School. The school actually burned down last November (no one was hurt!!) and recently got renovated (because the building was gone). The new school building is gorgeous with tons of space. The headmaster is fantastic, and they are establishing a small farm for the Heifer Project (the kids will raise goats and sheep that will get shipped to third world countries for food and other uses). This school is amazing and is an up and coming premier school in the region. They are just coming out of some really bad times (called a FIRE) and are really going places. So everyone, cross your fingers that I get selected out of the 40+ job applicants!

"What's Language Got to do with it?"

Even though this article used data from a lesson about the Rock cycle, I had a difficult time getting through the article. I think the points posed by the authors are very significant and valid, but I had a very hard time understanding those points. The author's certainly were using academic language, to the point where I was very challened to understand the sentences! I also found myself confused and disagreeing with much of what the authors had to say.

However, even with my difficulty in understanding this artcile, I found this statement of partcicular interest: "Both the verbal and visual data attest to the lexicalization of Linda's rock cycle lesson (pg.49)". In my personal experience, I feel that providing students both visual and linguistic information enhances their learning. I am currently tutoring ELL students in chemistry and I always back up what I am saying with pictures. So far, it has not failed me! I had an amazing teacher moment when I was trying to get my student to understand the word "precipitate". I talked to her like I would any other high school student; there is no need to dumb down science or my vocabulary. I explained how I drink a lot of coffee and that I put sugar in my coffee. I then drew a coffee cup with a spoon of sugar. I then explained how sometimes I put too much sugar in, so I added more sugar on top of my spoon picture. I then explained to her that all that sugar can't mix in so there is some sugar on the bottom of my mug. So I drew little sugar particles on the bottom of my mug. The student went "Oooooh!" and I saw the lightbulb come on. She had not said a word before then (probably because she is shy about speaking in English) but after that moment she started to talk to me in fluent English.

Thus my confusion when the authors of this artcile seemed to describe how using visuals to help students with vocabulary "overshadows the semantic relations...". The authors then go on to say, "In doing so, it ignores and thus fails to not only model, but also simply provide for the students linguistically constructed meaning to fully realize and articulate those relations." I completely disagree with this statement. When pictures are used in teaching science, it helps students connect to the topic; otherwise the words on the board are just a bunch of jumbled letters that scientists put together to make a vocabukary word for future students to learn. When the picture is taught in the midst of a linguistically rich lesson, the students are not losing out on vocabualry or meaning. The pictures are there to enhance meaning for ALL students.

But neither can you teach an entire lesson in pictures; that dumbs down the lesson (at least in the upper grades!!). That is where it is important to continue speaking English to ELL students - it will help them understand pronounciations and meanings. The pictures are there for when students need help understanding meanings. For example, in children's books, the pictures are there to enhance the meaning of the story because young children have most likely not developed advanced enough reading fluency to have the story "play in their mind". So why not use pictures in science lessons to enhance the meaning until the ELL students become fluent in English?

As I said before, I had a difficult understanding this article so perhaps I misinterpretted the authors. However, I found their statements about visuals in vocabularly lessons distrubring. Vocabulary is vital to science - if you cannot speak in "science" you will have a difficult time. If I didn't speak "geologist", for example, I would muyself floating around in the ether in my upper level geology classes. That is why it is so important to push our students to expand their vocabularies, no matter if they are ELL or not. I personally believe that when pictures are coupled with a rich verbal and written language it enhances meaning for ALL students of ALL ages and abilities.

"On Listening to What the Children Say"

I really enjoyed this article; I thought is posed a view of looking at what children in a different way. In particular, I really like this statement, "The key is curiosity, and it is curiosity, not answers, that we model... When we are curious about a child's words and our responses to those words, the child feels respected."

I think that modeling curiosity is one of the most difficult things to do in a classroom. At least, thats what I have seen in high school classrooms. High school kids have been trained by there peers that it is not "ok" to be curious in science. Its uncool. I believe that younger elementary and pre-school kids have completely uninhibited curiosity. They have natural curoisity that needs no inspiring; that is where the teacher needs to become masterful in directing the students' energies and curiosity. That can be a handful, in and of itself!

During my student teaching, I had one class that was so curious about everything, that they asked so many questions that it was difficult to get my lessons done. They asked the most wonderful questions! However, I did find it difficult to relax and listen to what they were asking at first. I was so stressed out about covering the curriculum, that I often asked the kids to hold their questions until after class (where the student never asked the question) or I half -heartedly listened while I quietly panicked that I was not covering the curriculum. (FYI: This is why general science or physical science classes are HORRIBLE! You can not cover an entire unit on earth history in 4 weeks. Just to let you know. Oh, and the kids learn nothing. I have heard this straight from many students! And that's my soap box for the day...)I slowly started to realize that little by little my students were becoming disengaged with the material and stopped asking questions. I was so bummed! I loved the fact that they asked questions, even though it stressed me out.

Thats when I started to learn how to balance curiosity and the curriculum and the importance of listening. I started truly listening to my students and you could see their confidence and interest grow exponentially. My curriculum got covered and my students were engaged in the material.

So here's my dilemma...when students are not naturally engaged and curious, how do you get them to be curious? Especially at the high school level when curiosity is bad? I am certainly not afraid of revealing my inner dork in front of my kids (oh yeah, I am THAT science teacher that tells the bad science jokes) and I had foolishly hoped that that would be enough to get my kids curious. Maybe this is where I can apply the 5E learning model and better inquiry activities and get my kids thinking and working hands on, not just re-affirming principles they already saw in the book. How indeed does one get their students curious?

Reaction to "The Campfire Effect"

To begin, I thought this was a good article with profound positive results. However, it left me feeling slightly disheartened. Unlike the preservice teacher students in Arizona, I do not feel adequately prepared to teach ELL students. In many of the courses I have had, we have discussed the ideaology behind ELL and Bilingual programs, the characteristics of ELL students, and the importance of recognizing and respecting other cultures. I do not disagree that this all important information, but I feel unprepared in how to assess and provide activities for ELL students. I have heard textbook fulls of multiculturalism, but I still do not feel ready to actually teach ELL students.

On pg. 1 of the article, the authors stated, "For this paper, we contend that changing beliefs is the first step in improving the instructional environment and educational achievement for this undeserved population." I think this is a great statement. Teachers and non-teachers a like need to understand what it is like to be an ELL student. However, I feel that we have been working in this "first step" for far too long. Academic reform needs to actually happen. And, as a preservice teacher, I would like greater instruction in how to assess and help ELL students acquire English.

Now here is another question: are there effective methods to teach ELL students content and English? Fail proof, tried and true lessons, assessments, and activities? Is it then even possible for teacher education programs to fully prepare teachers for ELL students, or is this something we need to learn by doing?

Response to "Unemployment Training"

I found this article particularly relevant to my current placement at EHHS, an urban school. I found the article startling, and also agreed with most things the author said.

Urban schools are truly preparing most of their students, at least the ones pre-determined as "unsuccessful" or "trouble", for unemployment. Yes, not everyone will go to college. But it is still vital for those individuals to find a place in the work force. I agree that many urban teachers accomodate students because it is so much easier to say to the student "thank you for showing up" than it is to demand work/learning out of that student when they show up once every few weeks or so.

It will be very difficult for urban teachers to enact the changes stated in the article, but I believe they need to be done. And, honestly, I think suburban and rural schools could use these changes as well. I see many of these issues as a generational problem, not just isolated to urban schools. For example, at E.O. Smith students were allowed to have iPods. The EO Smith fashion statement is to wear one ear phone during class. This is completely unacceptable and I put an immediate stop to it during my student teaching. I had some pretty decent "battles" with a few resistant students because they were so used to being accomodated. iPods and cell phones have NO place in schools.

Teachers need to be stronger, I suppose. We can no longer just live to survive the day, as the author stated. By doing that, we are preparing the future generations for laziness and unemployment. I know I decided to become a teacher so I could change the world. I wanted to influence young people to make the world a better place. But accomodating students poor attitudes and excuses will help the world not at all.

Another important point I found in the article was the outlook you needed to provide urban students. As the teacher, you need to make them feel important and needed. I agree; getting in the kids face about doing work and showing up is not going to help. The students ideals of "respect" and street ideology will kick in and it will be a never ending battle. But working with the student as a team will be a far more supportive environment and will hopefully encourage the student to learn.

In the end, I think this article should be posted in every urban, suburban, and rural school across the country. I see the same type of accomodation the author spoke of at EHHS. Yes, some accomodations from the teachers are done for survival. As a teacher, you would burn out so fast if you had a battle of idealogy with students everyday. But start with small things first, and then move on to bigger issues. But whatever changes enacted need to be enacted district wide so the the middle and high school students never have the chance to learn how to squeeze out of the rules and to be accomodated. With any luck, these changes will create a stronger generation years down the road.

EHHS vs. E.O. Smith Culture

After two weeks at East Hartford High I have seen major cultural differences between EHHS and E.O. Smith, where I student taught.

For starters, EHHS has a much greater diversity in its students and staff. Just listening to the teachers and the students, there are so many "dialects" spoken. To me, each "dialect" is a representation of each culture in the school. The thing I admire about the students and staff is that all the languages and the cultures seems to mix together, at least to a greater extent than at E.O. Smith. It makes the culture of EHHS so much richer and vibrant.

E.O. Smith is a typical rural school. It is predominantly white with very little cultural diversity. When I student taught, I could tell the students had little to no exposure to cultures other than their own. Some comments the students made were border line racist. The students themselves were not KKK card carrying members, but it was obvious they had never been in a school system where saying certain words or certain jokes would end with a punch in the face.

The other major difference I see between EHHS and E.O. Smith, is the pride and personality of the students and teachers at EHHS. I attribute this pride to the fact that the teachers and students at EHHS have to work so much harder for what they get. They are a poorer school district and the test scores are not the best. I was pleasantly surprised when in the first staff meeting the principal put up a power point slide saying that the scores on the CAPT test had gone up 2% and all the teachers in the auditorium clapped. I can see the pride in how everyone in EHHS walks around the school. They have to fight to earn what they have, and they are proud of it.

E.O. Smith, though a good school, lacked personality and spirit. It was disheartening! E.O. Smith is a well supplied school and the students have little respect for the school property. Spirit Week came around during my student teaching and out of my 80+ students, only one student dressed up to show his school pride. That one student got teased by his peers in my class because he was showing pride in his school! As if that is something to be teased about! Even at the staff meetings, it was obvious that the some of the teachers would be more content to complain about little details than show some pride and fix it.

These differences illustrate how important it is to embrace cultural diversity and expose all students to diversity. Many students in rural schools act and say the things they do because they have had no exposure to outside cultures and haven't developed a sense of respect for other peoples. It is also just as important to develop a school culture and pride. Developing true school spirit will make school that much more energetic and exciting for both students and teachers.