velvetpage (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
velvetpage) wrote2010-06-06 09:06 pm
velvetpage) wrote2010-06-06 09:06 pm
Entry tags:
pedagogical theory
http://www.solidarity-us.org/node/1734
I'm caching this here to come back to later. It briefly discusses one of the items that has been bugging me subconsciously for a while now: the fact that I'm using a constructivist approach which ostensibly prioritizes the social construction of knowledge within a culture of critical thought while at the same time using and upholding a "hidden curriculum" based firmly in the perpetuation of middle-class core values, not least of which is a hierarchical authority that students must simply accept or else find themselves labeled and categorized as troublemakers.
It was a bit difficult to read because when discussing constructivism, he doesn't use that term, so I had to read between the lines to figure out which elements of my version of constructivism he was talking about, and which he was leaving out. He also used the term "hegemony" where I would have used the term "acculturation;" as far as I can tell the meaning is the same. As always, harmonizing the jargon is key to understanding the work. There are a few elements here that don't apply to me, since he's speaking specifically about the American context.
My feeling is that this dichotomy between classroom management based in the hidden curriculum and constructivist teaching methods for all knowledge and skills is the root of my struggles to create the type of classroom environment I envision. The methodological separation between behavioural expectations and academic expectations is contrived and doesn't work very well; the students I need to reach the most are the ones resisting the former out of self-defense as they perceive it, and then resisting the latter precisely because they are inseparable.
I'm caching this here to come back to later. It briefly discusses one of the items that has been bugging me subconsciously for a while now: the fact that I'm using a constructivist approach which ostensibly prioritizes the social construction of knowledge within a culture of critical thought while at the same time using and upholding a "hidden curriculum" based firmly in the perpetuation of middle-class core values, not least of which is a hierarchical authority that students must simply accept or else find themselves labeled and categorized as troublemakers.
It was a bit difficult to read because when discussing constructivism, he doesn't use that term, so I had to read between the lines to figure out which elements of my version of constructivism he was talking about, and which he was leaving out. He also used the term "hegemony" where I would have used the term "acculturation;" as far as I can tell the meaning is the same. As always, harmonizing the jargon is key to understanding the work. There are a few elements here that don't apply to me, since he's speaking specifically about the American context.
My feeling is that this dichotomy between classroom management based in the hidden curriculum and constructivist teaching methods for all knowledge and skills is the root of my struggles to create the type of classroom environment I envision. The methodological separation between behavioural expectations and academic expectations is contrived and doesn't work very well; the students I need to reach the most are the ones resisting the former out of self-defense as they perceive it, and then resisting the latter precisely because they are inseparable.
no subject
The third is the one I try to work with the most in a classroom setting... and yes, the hypocrisy of treating high school students as though they are able to think, reason, empathize in one setting and like they are recalcitrant children in another, has not escaped me.
I think authority qua authority is generally an unhealthy idea for the soul-life of teachers or students, it crushes the spirit of justice and fairness and right-behavior that students are learning the rules of at this developmental stage. The Double-standard and the hypocrisy are parts of what drives students (and other people) nuts when they are trying to figure out ethical (or their personal) standards of behavior... the sheer unfairness of a treat this person this way because I said so, but you will be treated according to your apparent deserving, well it's maddening, isn't it?
You have reached a similar conclusion on this issue to what I have reached.
the most ethical and useful phrase I ever used with a rude, rebellious student (which doesn't work well in front of a whole-classroom, but there you go) is to quietly, calmly, and politely, work with your third level of respect. To one who mouths off rudely or hurtfully to you, in a teaching context, you simply say, holding their gaze, "Have I ever (treated you/spoken to you) in that tone of voice/in that manner?" It appeals to their sense of fairness, if you have been fair, polite, and respectful to them (as it sounds like you make a big effort to do).
I only wish that would work with the manipulative, nasty-minded adults I have sometimes worked with.
(meh)
Blessed be and best of luck in your work to bring these coping skills and self-awareness skills to your students. Keep writing!~
no subject
I've used the, "I've done nothing to deserve that disrespect from you," in the past. It only works on the kids who truly believe I'm trying to be fair. That's most of them, but it's not the M's of the world. They believe the world is out to get them, and when they set out to prove it, they either find or fabricate ample evidence.
no subject
(sigh)
After four years, I really realized I had to do what I could with those who were willing, and minimise the damage from those who were not willing, doing outreach to the latter category when I had the energy. And that was all I could really do, in the end.
That experience is part of why I'm retraining to work in elementary, and specifically in the Waldorf system. I feel my management style can really do some good there, as can my knack for teaching beginners.