The teaching field is hardly a low stress area. Teachers are constantly being asked to increase their standards, and increase their outputs. These pressures are stressful for the teachers because sometimes it's not feasible for them to get to the standards that the teachers expect them to be at. These standards are forced upon them, and they are often threatened with monetary cuts if they do not perform to the level that the state requires of them.
Some ways that teachers can be prepared for the stress is to first of all just put them in stressful situations, or give them hypothetical stressful situations so that they can become more accustomed to working under some sorts of strains and pressures. Teachers do not always know how to cope with stresses either, so offering stress management options can be good for them too. What teachers learn in their college needs to truly prepare them for what they're going to deal with when they get out to the work force. This means that the professors that teach them need to be qualified and be able to answer questions that they may have.
Another option that would be useful for new teachers is giving them someone to go talk to when they have questions, and know that especially during the first year that someone has their back. They're not going into things all by themselves, and that people do support them. If the teachers feel like they have a support group to turn to, they will be less likely to want to discontinue in the profession, because they know they can actually keep doing what they're doing.
Finally, exposing new teachers to lots of different situations involving students helps them figure out what to do when they find themselves in new and uncomfortable places. Whether this means having them volunteer at summer camps, or just spend a lot of time student teaching, this will really provide them with a positive atmosphere to work in.
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
HEY HEY LOOK AT ME.
I am a very confident individual. I am very self aware, but I am very confident. I am that person who you want to smack in the face some days because I do not know when to shut up, and when to back down and stay in my place.
Being quite this confident is possibly not the best idea, however in a classroom, students are going to have more respect for a teacher that is able to show authority in a classroom. If someone doesn't at least demand some attention because they're confident, they aren't going to be able to demonstrate to their students that they really understand what they're doing. A big aspect of teaching is having the confidence to take risks in front of students, because by taking risks, then students will feel more comfortable and take risks themselves in their learning, which can spur more opportunities for learning.
Persistence is an important trait for a teacher to have, because then it shows students that the teacher cares about them. If a teacher ignores something that a student has done, and never addresses it, or only addresses it once, and then never checks up on them, then the students will not feel as though the teacher really cares about what the students do in the class. Teachers need to constantly be bugging students (in friendly ways) to make sure they are forced to stay accountable for their learning. An effective way to be persistent, is to at the very least remember what a teacher has said previously. Remembering this, and sticking to what you as the teacher said will help increase efficiency.
Confidence is something that teachers can develop in practice, and putting themselves in situations that maybe make them a little bit uncomfortable at first. In getting put in those situations this forces teachers to either gain confidence or crawl underneath a rock. If the teacher really makes an effort at being confident, they will get better by experience. Also, consciously deciding to be confident in what one is doing, and understanding that one is probably right, can be the most effective way of really developing the skills.
One must be careful, because too much confidence comes off as bossy.
Being quite this confident is possibly not the best idea, however in a classroom, students are going to have more respect for a teacher that is able to show authority in a classroom. If someone doesn't at least demand some attention because they're confident, they aren't going to be able to demonstrate to their students that they really understand what they're doing. A big aspect of teaching is having the confidence to take risks in front of students, because by taking risks, then students will feel more comfortable and take risks themselves in their learning, which can spur more opportunities for learning.
Persistence is an important trait for a teacher to have, because then it shows students that the teacher cares about them. If a teacher ignores something that a student has done, and never addresses it, or only addresses it once, and then never checks up on them, then the students will not feel as though the teacher really cares about what the students do in the class. Teachers need to constantly be bugging students (in friendly ways) to make sure they are forced to stay accountable for their learning. An effective way to be persistent, is to at the very least remember what a teacher has said previously. Remembering this, and sticking to what you as the teacher said will help increase efficiency.
Confidence is something that teachers can develop in practice, and putting themselves in situations that maybe make them a little bit uncomfortable at first. In getting put in those situations this forces teachers to either gain confidence or crawl underneath a rock. If the teacher really makes an effort at being confident, they will get better by experience. Also, consciously deciding to be confident in what one is doing, and understanding that one is probably right, can be the most effective way of really developing the skills.
One must be careful, because too much confidence comes off as bossy.
Sunday, November 21, 2010
Can't you just tell me how?
In schools today, students are not being challenged creatively like they perhaps should be. Previously in the United States, it was much more content based learning. Dates and facts were what were important, instead of being able to come up with new ideas. Even today, students are not very willing to think outside of the box, and are always demanding a rubric and wondering how many points it is worth. Though this skill could be considered useful in the business world, because they desire to give the teachers exactly what they want, to get the maximum possible number of points.
However, when students find themselves entering the workforce, they are going to witness a rude awakening that they will not be told exactly how to do it. By always telling students how to go about doing something, we are stifling their creativity, and preventing them from coming up with new solutions to problems. This is why it is important to encourage creativity in the schools.
One common theme in schools today for when they want students to be creative is to instead of giving them a test, give them a project instead, because that will allow them to be more creative! While this does encourage them to be slightly more creative than what they might do for a test, often time these projects are thrown together at the last possible minute, and are exactly what the rubric asks for. I fail to see how that is really being creative, when all they are doing is building their project exactly to what the rubric says. Teachers are discouraged from simply teaching to the test, therefore these students should be equally discouraged from basing exactly what the rubric says. Students are afraid to take risks that might jeopardize their grade in any way. In most cases it's not about learning the material, or developing skills, but simply getting through it with the least amount of work possible to get the greatest possible points.
It's interesting that people are developing these skills, because really that's about efficiency, which doesn't have too much of a place with creativity. Trying to encourage students to be less efficient seems almost counter-intuitive, but perhaps that is what needs to happen.
However, when students find themselves entering the workforce, they are going to witness a rude awakening that they will not be told exactly how to do it. By always telling students how to go about doing something, we are stifling their creativity, and preventing them from coming up with new solutions to problems. This is why it is important to encourage creativity in the schools.
One common theme in schools today for when they want students to be creative is to instead of giving them a test, give them a project instead, because that will allow them to be more creative! While this does encourage them to be slightly more creative than what they might do for a test, often time these projects are thrown together at the last possible minute, and are exactly what the rubric asks for. I fail to see how that is really being creative, when all they are doing is building their project exactly to what the rubric says. Teachers are discouraged from simply teaching to the test, therefore these students should be equally discouraged from basing exactly what the rubric says. Students are afraid to take risks that might jeopardize their grade in any way. In most cases it's not about learning the material, or developing skills, but simply getting through it with the least amount of work possible to get the greatest possible points.
It's interesting that people are developing these skills, because really that's about efficiency, which doesn't have too much of a place with creativity. Trying to encourage students to be less efficient seems almost counter-intuitive, but perhaps that is what needs to happen.
Saturday, November 20, 2010
Skepticism
On November 19th, the Philosophy Department gave a lecture on whether or not Skepticism is good or bad. Me, not being a particularly strong philosopher, was very lost on more than one occasion. However, one thing that I was able to discern was being a skeptic is not going to get you very far in life.
Why might this be true? When one is a skeptic, they are always believing that what they are seeing and what they are doing is false. How can we know we are really here? How can we know that what we're seeing is what really is there? Why isn't what we seem to be seeing just a dream? The lecture discussed that how people often make the assumption that if they were dreaming, they could just pinch themselves, and they would wake up. However, the flaw in this logic is why could they not simply dream that they were getting pinched. In the lecture it was stated that the way one can truly decide whether something is a dream or not is because in dreams, people are unable to give deductive reasoning, and reason through something. So by my presence at the lecture, and processing what was going on, I therefore could not have been dreaming, because that level of thinking cannot be attained in a dream state.
In my classroom, it will be important for me to keep my students engaged. If they ever reach a point where they could even start to consider whether or not they are dreaming, that means they are most likely too close to sleeping, which is not the sort of learning environment I am trying to create. In an ideal world I would like to think that my students could be always engaged enough that they would always be using those critical thinking skills. Seeing as my classroom is not in a perfect environment, I know that this will realistically not be attainable.
When one is a skeptic, they are limiting their own creative powers by ruling out that which seems to be impossible. Since much of scientific creation is based on thinking about things in more abstract philosophys, it would be reasonable to say that a lot less would have been done in science if more skeptics existed in the world. Limiting knowledge is another thing that skeptics believe that I am trying to battle in my classroom. One needs to be creative, and willing to at least listen to new ideas, if one does not want to go as far as accept them. Be a skeptic if you like, but that's what I think.
Why might this be true? When one is a skeptic, they are always believing that what they are seeing and what they are doing is false. How can we know we are really here? How can we know that what we're seeing is what really is there? Why isn't what we seem to be seeing just a dream? The lecture discussed that how people often make the assumption that if they were dreaming, they could just pinch themselves, and they would wake up. However, the flaw in this logic is why could they not simply dream that they were getting pinched. In the lecture it was stated that the way one can truly decide whether something is a dream or not is because in dreams, people are unable to give deductive reasoning, and reason through something. So by my presence at the lecture, and processing what was going on, I therefore could not have been dreaming, because that level of thinking cannot be attained in a dream state.
In my classroom, it will be important for me to keep my students engaged. If they ever reach a point where they could even start to consider whether or not they are dreaming, that means they are most likely too close to sleeping, which is not the sort of learning environment I am trying to create. In an ideal world I would like to think that my students could be always engaged enough that they would always be using those critical thinking skills. Seeing as my classroom is not in a perfect environment, I know that this will realistically not be attainable.
When one is a skeptic, they are limiting their own creative powers by ruling out that which seems to be impossible. Since much of scientific creation is based on thinking about things in more abstract philosophys, it would be reasonable to say that a lot less would have been done in science if more skeptics existed in the world. Limiting knowledge is another thing that skeptics believe that I am trying to battle in my classroom. One needs to be creative, and willing to at least listen to new ideas, if one does not want to go as far as accept them. Be a skeptic if you like, but that's what I think.
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
A Reflection
As the day draws to a close, most evenings I find myself slowing down. I'm not generally as alert as I was earlier in the day, and I find myself struggling to focus, particularly in that time right before I head to bed. However, one thing that I do find myself doing with ease, (which could explain the lack of ability to focus on what I'm actually trying to do) is reflecting. That's when I spend my time thinking over what happened in the day, and what happened to me.
Society currently functions in such a manner that we're always pushing ourselves to our limits. It's always about how much you can accomplish, how many activities you can be involved in, and how busy you can be, because that, according to some unwritten law is how one is successful in the world. You're measured by the number of things you can juggle between, even if that means you get super stressed out in the process. It makes you look more impressive when you can be involved in several music activities, be taking some ungodly amount of classes, and still have time to volunteer 5 hours a week. However, when one is this involved, they often lack the time, and atmosphere to do really accurate reflecting on the past hour, day, week, or even month of what has happened to them.
The process of reflection generally involves just thinking things over. A simple enough task in itself, not really with too many strings attached to it. In order to reflect effectively though, one needs to allow for a proper time interval that can allow one to process things. Processing is important in teaching, because people can memorize letters and numbers and words galore, but if they aren't comprehending what they're doing, then they're going to find it increasingly difficult to remember it when they need to. Reflecting brings out comprehension skills, which in turn strengthen critical thinking skills, which are vital to being a successful member of the workforce today. One of the best ways to confirm that you really know and understand material is to reflect on it, and just sit and ponder it.
On a more personal level, reflecting is not something that I typically leave enough time for. Though I am aware of this, I have not made a concious effort to change it. When I do allow myself the time to reflect, typically it is before I go to bed, or when I'm heading to bed, I will reflect on what happened to me that day. Sometimes I do it through writing, and sometimes I wish I was doing it through writing. I'm aware that writing or typing generally helps me reflect better, but that still does not mean I always do that. Like when I am studying, I reflect well in a calm peaceful environment, with perhaps some calm, classical music playing in the background, with nothing significant to distract me, as I am very easily distracted.
That's enough reflecting on reflection though..
Society currently functions in such a manner that we're always pushing ourselves to our limits. It's always about how much you can accomplish, how many activities you can be involved in, and how busy you can be, because that, according to some unwritten law is how one is successful in the world. You're measured by the number of things you can juggle between, even if that means you get super stressed out in the process. It makes you look more impressive when you can be involved in several music activities, be taking some ungodly amount of classes, and still have time to volunteer 5 hours a week. However, when one is this involved, they often lack the time, and atmosphere to do really accurate reflecting on the past hour, day, week, or even month of what has happened to them.
The process of reflection generally involves just thinking things over. A simple enough task in itself, not really with too many strings attached to it. In order to reflect effectively though, one needs to allow for a proper time interval that can allow one to process things. Processing is important in teaching, because people can memorize letters and numbers and words galore, but if they aren't comprehending what they're doing, then they're going to find it increasingly difficult to remember it when they need to. Reflecting brings out comprehension skills, which in turn strengthen critical thinking skills, which are vital to being a successful member of the workforce today. One of the best ways to confirm that you really know and understand material is to reflect on it, and just sit and ponder it.
On a more personal level, reflecting is not something that I typically leave enough time for. Though I am aware of this, I have not made a concious effort to change it. When I do allow myself the time to reflect, typically it is before I go to bed, or when I'm heading to bed, I will reflect on what happened to me that day. Sometimes I do it through writing, and sometimes I wish I was doing it through writing. I'm aware that writing or typing generally helps me reflect better, but that still does not mean I always do that. Like when I am studying, I reflect well in a calm peaceful environment, with perhaps some calm, classical music playing in the background, with nothing significant to distract me, as I am very easily distracted.
That's enough reflecting on reflection though..
Sunday, October 10, 2010
Like it or not?
All my life, from a very young age, I have been absolutely terrible at spelling. Completely dreadful at it. And along with spelling, I've really never been a fan of any of the english classes where we were supposed to read a string of books and then write reports on them. I like reading for fun, and have never really enjoyed being forced to read anything. However, an English teacher (who seems to have been perhaps unfortunate enough to become significant in several of these entries), that I had in high school was so enthusiastic about teaching English. I tried to tell myself that I didn't like her class, and I didn't like what she did, but that would be lying. She really drove me forward and not only improved my English skills, but made me at least tolerate it.
Part of the reason behind her successful teaching of the subject was because she was good at doing things in non-conventional ways. We were always moving around the classroom, either making posters, or sculptures, or presentations. Very rarely in the classroom were we sitting there and listening to someone talk. We had some group discussions, but she was very good at keeping them interesting and insightful. I really appreciated the enthusiasm she brought to class just about every day, even though often the class was early in the morning, or right after lunch, both times when I often find myself nodding off. This made me appreciate the subject more, though I could not honestly say it is one of my favorite subjects.
Part of the reason behind her successful teaching of the subject was because she was good at doing things in non-conventional ways. We were always moving around the classroom, either making posters, or sculptures, or presentations. Very rarely in the classroom were we sitting there and listening to someone talk. We had some group discussions, but she was very good at keeping them interesting and insightful. I really appreciated the enthusiasm she brought to class just about every day, even though often the class was early in the morning, or right after lunch, both times when I often find myself nodding off. This made me appreciate the subject more, though I could not honestly say it is one of my favorite subjects.
Thursday, September 23, 2010
Truth in Lying: Is it okay?
When is lying appropriate in a classroom? When is it okay to tell people things that just blatantly isn't true? Should a teacher admit when they don't know something, or is that just going to make them look stupid?
In a classroom setting, a teacher is viewed as the higher power, the larger order. Because of this, this gives them a certain degree of authority over students. By showing that one is weak and not all-knowing, this could cause a teacher to worry about that they don't know what they're talking about, or they don't understand what they're doing. This doesn't help establish respect however, and doesn't allow students to think of the teacher any higher.
A large aspect of being authentic is the idea that someone, a teacher for example is keeping it real. If a student can't trust their teacher to keep it real, and stick to the truth, why should they ever bother listening to them? Even if the truth maybe be tough and hard to handle, lying to them isn't going to create a sense of respect between the teacher and the student. The only way that sense of respect is going to be established is if a mutual trust, and understanding is reached. If a teacher is not authentic and accurate with a student, why should the student feel any motivation to be authentic with the teacher?
If a teacher is seen as being fake, then they are going to lose some of the authority in the classroom. Not that a teacher needs to be a supreme dictator over everything that happens, but they do need to maintain certain aspects of authority, particularly in the realm of trust. I mean honestly, if you know your teacher isn't being straight with you, it's not going to motivate you to do anything, it's not going to inspire you to want to find out more about a subject, it's just going to turn into that dull class that no one wants to here about or cares about.
In a classroom setting, a teacher is viewed as the higher power, the larger order. Because of this, this gives them a certain degree of authority over students. By showing that one is weak and not all-knowing, this could cause a teacher to worry about that they don't know what they're talking about, or they don't understand what they're doing. This doesn't help establish respect however, and doesn't allow students to think of the teacher any higher.
A large aspect of being authentic is the idea that someone, a teacher for example is keeping it real. If a student can't trust their teacher to keep it real, and stick to the truth, why should they ever bother listening to them? Even if the truth maybe be tough and hard to handle, lying to them isn't going to create a sense of respect between the teacher and the student. The only way that sense of respect is going to be established is if a mutual trust, and understanding is reached. If a teacher is not authentic and accurate with a student, why should the student feel any motivation to be authentic with the teacher?
If a teacher is seen as being fake, then they are going to lose some of the authority in the classroom. Not that a teacher needs to be a supreme dictator over everything that happens, but they do need to maintain certain aspects of authority, particularly in the realm of trust. I mean honestly, if you know your teacher isn't being straight with you, it's not going to motivate you to do anything, it's not going to inspire you to want to find out more about a subject, it's just going to turn into that dull class that no one wants to here about or cares about.
Thursday, September 16, 2010
English Class, Three times around.
In high school I was hardly a stellar student. Actually I was a somewhat nightmare of a student. I was a reasonably smart kid who just refused to do the work. I never saw the point of it. If I could get 95% on the tests having never opened the textbook, I figured I should never waste my time and actually open it. This skill of mine got me by until about 10th grade. And when I say getting by, it was much more by the skin of my teeth than, looking back on it, I should have allowed. The way I'm setting this up, it's starting to sound like I did all these things, and then suddenly out of the blue, this external influence came into my life and I sorted everything out. Not exactly.
The teacher that probably had one of the most profound effects on my life was the english teacher I had for three years in high school. She was someone who I very much had a love hate relationship with. I would be lying if I said she wasn't a good teacher. She very much was, I just wasn't always willing to accept that. The first class I had her for, my freshman year of high school I hated. Not because of her though. The students in that class were mostly the over-achieving crowd, the ones who always want to know how many points it's going to be worth, how it's going to be graded, and what they can do to get extra credit. Frankly, those people disgust me. I understand that they have been forced into this mindset, but many of them couldn't care less about what they learned in high school. Most of them probably don't remember most of it, at least not the details. I digress. In summary, I didn't like that class because of my peers, and didn't do very well in it.
Sophmore year, I took what was considered to be a slacker english class, that just happened to be taught by the same teacher. I hadn't really intended for that to happen, it just did. I enjoyed her class more having her an additional time, however I didn't work any harder in it. I skidded by, barely in it, doing slightly more than the bare minimum (though that point could be argued). It wasn't that I didn't like the teacher particularly. Well okay, I had days where I didn't like her. But I can't say it was entirely her fault.
One thing that you should be aware of about me is that I love attention. I love to be a part of what's going on. I hate the idea of sitting by watching. In high school, one of the easiest ways to get attention was to not do your work, particularly if you were "smart." It drove many a teacher completely bonkers
when they get a really smart kid that just has no motivation to do anything. So they give that student more and more attention. Which causes said student (me as the case may be) to just continue doing it, because they get the attention they want, and the satisfaction that they have the power to drive someone nuts. I would be lying if I said it wasn't fun to have that sort of power.
Alas, back to English class. My first year, she gave me a moderate amount of attention when I didn't do work. The class was large enough, and their were more than a few students that had my tendencies. I was one in a group, the slacker group. Now sophmore year comes along, and she'd had me before. She knew what I was like, she knew my habits. We both knew I wasn't about to do any work for her. And yet, she didn't go crazy when I missed that first assignment, (or if she did, she didn't let me know it). She passively ignored it. No, perhaps ignore isn't quite the right word. She didn't give me any extra attention, just more acknowledging that I hadn't done it. This, whether either of us was aware of it, I don't know, was a subtle act of compassion. I would have loved to get that attention, get chewed out at (which often brought good moments to talk back, another one of my "strengths"), and not encourage me to ever do anything. She didn't do that though. She didn't give me what I wanted, she gave me what I needed. I needed someone to show me that I wasn't some special smart kid that was too good for work. That if I wanted to do stuff ever, I had better at least try to somewhat conform to the system. It was a tough lesson of life that I needed to learn.
This teacher did even get to reap the rewards of her work, (though again, she may not even have been aware she was doing it - it took me years to figure out that the reason I didn't want to do my work was an attention based thing). I had her again my senior year of high school, where I did better. My grades were by no means perfect, but at least I was applying myself, and have continued to improve since those days in 10th grade. Still, the talking back issue is something I have yet to be cured of. Perhaps another day.
The teacher that probably had one of the most profound effects on my life was the english teacher I had for three years in high school. She was someone who I very much had a love hate relationship with. I would be lying if I said she wasn't a good teacher. She very much was, I just wasn't always willing to accept that. The first class I had her for, my freshman year of high school I hated. Not because of her though. The students in that class were mostly the over-achieving crowd, the ones who always want to know how many points it's going to be worth, how it's going to be graded, and what they can do to get extra credit. Frankly, those people disgust me. I understand that they have been forced into this mindset, but many of them couldn't care less about what they learned in high school. Most of them probably don't remember most of it, at least not the details. I digress. In summary, I didn't like that class because of my peers, and didn't do very well in it.
Sophmore year, I took what was considered to be a slacker english class, that just happened to be taught by the same teacher. I hadn't really intended for that to happen, it just did. I enjoyed her class more having her an additional time, however I didn't work any harder in it. I skidded by, barely in it, doing slightly more than the bare minimum (though that point could be argued). It wasn't that I didn't like the teacher particularly. Well okay, I had days where I didn't like her. But I can't say it was entirely her fault.
One thing that you should be aware of about me is that I love attention. I love to be a part of what's going on. I hate the idea of sitting by watching. In high school, one of the easiest ways to get attention was to not do your work, particularly if you were "smart." It drove many a teacher completely bonkers
when they get a really smart kid that just has no motivation to do anything. So they give that student more and more attention. Which causes said student (me as the case may be) to just continue doing it, because they get the attention they want, and the satisfaction that they have the power to drive someone nuts. I would be lying if I said it wasn't fun to have that sort of power.
Alas, back to English class. My first year, she gave me a moderate amount of attention when I didn't do work. The class was large enough, and their were more than a few students that had my tendencies. I was one in a group, the slacker group. Now sophmore year comes along, and she'd had me before. She knew what I was like, she knew my habits. We both knew I wasn't about to do any work for her. And yet, she didn't go crazy when I missed that first assignment, (or if she did, she didn't let me know it). She passively ignored it. No, perhaps ignore isn't quite the right word. She didn't give me any extra attention, just more acknowledging that I hadn't done it. This, whether either of us was aware of it, I don't know, was a subtle act of compassion. I would have loved to get that attention, get chewed out at (which often brought good moments to talk back, another one of my "strengths"), and not encourage me to ever do anything. She didn't do that though. She didn't give me what I wanted, she gave me what I needed. I needed someone to show me that I wasn't some special smart kid that was too good for work. That if I wanted to do stuff ever, I had better at least try to somewhat conform to the system. It was a tough lesson of life that I needed to learn.
This teacher did even get to reap the rewards of her work, (though again, she may not even have been aware she was doing it - it took me years to figure out that the reason I didn't want to do my work was an attention based thing). I had her again my senior year of high school, where I did better. My grades were by no means perfect, but at least I was applying myself, and have continued to improve since those days in 10th grade. Still, the talking back issue is something I have yet to be cured of. Perhaps another day.
Thursday, September 9, 2010
Ain't got no respect?
In society today, often a lack of respect is present. This lack of respect could be for material objects, ideas, or other people. The world in many areas is turning things into a giant free for all, without even the courtesy to let other people believe what they want to.
Something we're taught from very early on in the education system is respect. But what is it? When thinking back to my elementary years, what immediately comes to mind is "the Golden Rule: Treat others how you'd like to be treated." Not really that hard of a concept. But then you also need to consider treating other peoples things how you'd like people to treat your things, or your ideas. Then things start getting trickier because what some people view as being acceptable, others think crosses lines. In my own words, I think of respect as attempting to understand all parties involved, and then treating other people based on how the common interest group wants to be treated, not just how one (potentially self-centered or biased) person thinks.
In the classroom, this starts at a very early age, in understanding that it's not okay to simply rip your neighbor's color crayons out of their hands. If someone else is talking, don't interrupt because you wouldn't like it if they interrupted you. As one progresses throughout school, and the writing implements advance beyond the more colorful stage (generally), interrupting other people or talking their ideas down becomes a lot more prominent. Telling someone else that their idea is stupid is rude, and has no place in the classroom. Allowing that sort of rude interruptions take place in the classroom can quickly degenerate the order of the class, and chaos can ensue.
When a classroom is a respectful atmosphere, in general everyone is going to feel more comfortable, and more confident. If someone is constantly getting shot down for anything they do or say by everyone else in the class, that person is going to bring a more negative attitude to the class, which in turn will make everyone else more unhappy. However, if everyone in the class is able to have a positive attitude, then it will be a more enjoyable experience, and a more creative experience.
Now their isn't one way to create respect in a classroom. It definitely needs to happen at the very beginning, starting perhaps with the teacher catering to the specific age group of the students (and remembering how old they are - treating 10th grades like 6 year olds isn't going to earn the teacher any respect, nor would doing the reverse, treating 6 year olds like 10th graders). If the teacher doesn't show some respect for the students, then the students will likely not show any respect back to them. Respect is something that is really only successful when it goes both directions. The teacher won't respect students who have no respect for them either. Always being angry is not a way to earn respect, it is useful to smile, and seem like you're enjoying what you're doing, though that isn't necessarily to earn respect, but simply so the students don't all think you're a prick.
That's all for now.
Something we're taught from very early on in the education system is respect. But what is it? When thinking back to my elementary years, what immediately comes to mind is "the Golden Rule: Treat others how you'd like to be treated." Not really that hard of a concept. But then you also need to consider treating other peoples things how you'd like people to treat your things, or your ideas. Then things start getting trickier because what some people view as being acceptable, others think crosses lines. In my own words, I think of respect as attempting to understand all parties involved, and then treating other people based on how the common interest group wants to be treated, not just how one (potentially self-centered or biased) person thinks.
In the classroom, this starts at a very early age, in understanding that it's not okay to simply rip your neighbor's color crayons out of their hands. If someone else is talking, don't interrupt because you wouldn't like it if they interrupted you. As one progresses throughout school, and the writing implements advance beyond the more colorful stage (generally), interrupting other people or talking their ideas down becomes a lot more prominent. Telling someone else that their idea is stupid is rude, and has no place in the classroom. Allowing that sort of rude interruptions take place in the classroom can quickly degenerate the order of the class, and chaos can ensue.
When a classroom is a respectful atmosphere, in general everyone is going to feel more comfortable, and more confident. If someone is constantly getting shot down for anything they do or say by everyone else in the class, that person is going to bring a more negative attitude to the class, which in turn will make everyone else more unhappy. However, if everyone in the class is able to have a positive attitude, then it will be a more enjoyable experience, and a more creative experience.
Now their isn't one way to create respect in a classroom. It definitely needs to happen at the very beginning, starting perhaps with the teacher catering to the specific age group of the students (and remembering how old they are - treating 10th grades like 6 year olds isn't going to earn the teacher any respect, nor would doing the reverse, treating 6 year olds like 10th graders). If the teacher doesn't show some respect for the students, then the students will likely not show any respect back to them. Respect is something that is really only successful when it goes both directions. The teacher won't respect students who have no respect for them either. Always being angry is not a way to earn respect, it is useful to smile, and seem like you're enjoying what you're doing, though that isn't necessarily to earn respect, but simply so the students don't all think you're a prick.
That's all for now.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)