TPA Lesson Template

I will say that the TPA lesson plan layout is pretty thorough, even if completing it becomes rather dull after a few times.  I mean, the TPA format really makes sure that the planner goes through all the steps necessary to create a lesson that is tied to an objective and has achievable, measurable assessment. Don’t get me wrong; I couldn’t imagine sitting down and making up a TPA lesson plan for every single lesson I’d ever teach. However, the TPA lesson plan format does have some good characteristics that would make it useful to reference occasionally. For example, it makes planners think about how to engage as many students as possible by making them address different learning styles and whatnot. I would say that the largest negative aspect of the TPA lesson plan is that it takes a significantly longer time to write than what most teachers take to plan their lessons. On the opposite side, I’d say that the most positive aspect of the TPA lesson plan is that it requires planners to think about how their lesson fits into the larger scheme of things (such as whether it’s tied to an objective, how the lesson relates to previous lessons, and so on and so forth). I will say that I think the TPA lesson plan should have some sort of place to note anything else that’s worthwhile. I mean, it has the “management and safety issues” area, but that’s the only place that really seems to be suitable to list anything that seems noteworthy but that isn’t specifically listed in the rest of the plan. For example, if a class generally gets done with their tasks pretty early, it would seem pertinent to mention somewhere that this is so and maybe have a backup plan. 

Differentiated Instruction

For my research, I chose to look at the study “Efficacy Beliefs, Background Variables, and Differentiated Instruction of Israeli Prospective Teachers” by Cheruta Wertheim and Yona Leyser. This article discussed the relationship between teachers’ self-efficacy and how well they perceived the effectiveness of differentiated instruction and individualized instruction to be. I found this article to be interesting because it demonstrated the connection between teachers’ attitudes towards learning and their instructional techniques and conceptions. Essentially, this article found that the greater degree of self-efficacy that teachers had, the more those teachers were willing to offer differentiated instruction and personalize lessons to help individual students who need it. I thought this was a great reminded that a teacher’s attitude really affects the learning done in a class – teachers who have a more positive outlook about how much they can influence students will probably have larger impacts upon their students.

Providing instruction that allows a greater amount of students to learn is a wonderful way to ensure that you are helping students to the best of your abilities. Whether this instruction encompasses using simply a variety of different types of lessons (discussions, things to help different learning styles, etc) or tailoring lessons so that individual students in the class can relate well (which would require knowing one’s class and adapting one’s lesson plan content accordingly), differentiated instruction allows teachers to reach out to as large of percentage of their class as is possible. Also, I think it is necessary to remember that pretty much all students can benefit from differentiated instruction; students who need more help with a concept may benefit from a different type of instruction, and students who oftentimes exceed expectations can benefit from having more challenging tasks. Therefore, I believe it is necessary for teachers to maintain attitudes that remind them that all students are different, so types of instruction should be as varied as their students are. 

I Read It, But I Don't Get It

     While reading these chapters, I was reminded that it is very important for teachers of all grades to reinforce quality reading; that is, teachers should continually seek to improve students’ ability to read rather than just assume students have adequate skills. I also think it is important for teachers to gauge where the class is and provide a variety of different options. By this, I mean that when I was in school, I remember having to do the “divide the paper in half and write quotes on one side and notes on the other” technique. At the time, I was already a pretty great reader, so I found such activities tedious and boring (not to mention a waste of half a sheet of paper); however, an activity that was better suited to my ability might have allowed me to develop my skills further (such as one focused more on making claims rather than just adding commentary). Therefore, I think it is necessary for teachers to not just use the one-size-fits-all technique in things such as this, but rather to offer several methods to students.

                I will say that Tovani has some pretty decent ideas about getting students more motivated to read. I found her discussion about inner voices particularly engaging because it seems to me that a great deal of wasted reading could be attributed to the “distracting voice,” as she calls it. I know that when I am reading a particularly uninteresting piece of material, my mind tends to wander off, and I know that’s when I tend to lose the gist of what I’ve read. I also know that if I absolutely have to get through the material, I have to focus more instead of thinking of other things, so I am able to see where Tovani has a valid point in saying that students need to eliminate that “distracting voice” when they read in order to be good readers.  

A Response Based Approach to Reading Literature

     I thought that the idea that literature needs to be taught in a manner that allows students to interpret texts in their own way is a very valid point. Personally, I view the English Language Arts as having the purpose of ensuring that students will be able to analyze information, create an opinion or perspective about that information, and then be able to cite evidence to support their claim. Therefore, I feel that Langer was correct in saying that literature differs from other textual materials in that having a single right answer is most oftentimes not possible for many questions regarding literature (well, at least questions that don't ask only basic, rudimentary information). Obviously some interpretations are incorrect (such as saying that a text is about a historical event that happened after the text was written), but, really, ones that contain sufficient evidence to support their claims can be considered "correct" even if they differ from other people's ideas.
     Another concept Langer discussed which I found interesting was that the purpose of questions involving subjects such as science most often seek to narrow the scope of what an answer can be, whereas with literature, the purpose is more in the discussion about the texts rather than in finding a single answer (or even attempting to narrow the scope of what an answer could be). I thought that evidence for this could be seen with texts (especially within poetry) where the author has given readers the perspective he intended, but people still debate about the text because they do not view the author's intentions as cannon. Looking at any database of articles about literature will show that there are absolutely just tons of different ideas about various texts, and none of them are quite the same! Of course, these discussions that can be had is what makes literature enjoyable - without them, reading literature would be more like reading a historical account of something rather than like reading a story.

Social Justice

For my individual exploration, I read an article entitled “Social Justice, Education and Schooling: Some Philosophical Issues” by John A. Clark. This article explored to concept of “social justice” and what the implementation of social justice within schools would possibly look like.

One aspect of the article addressed how differences do not equal social inequality. Clark argues that some differences, such as hair color, are not indicators of inequality, but that other differences that affect the lives of people on a more expansive scale are more indicative of social inequality. “Where differences and inequalities in society have a significant, serious and negative impact on the good of those constitutive of such a society, such that their material, psychological and interpersonal welfare are placed at a disadvantage, then social justice comes into contention as a guiding principle” (276). I thought that defining where social inequality begins was a good way of starting to determine the role social justice should play in classrooms because doing so does not limit people to thinking in terms of “equality of opportunity, equality of treatment, [and] equality of outcome” (279), which, as Clark points out, are all fraught with complications and problems. In other words, saying that people should be equal is wonderful and all, but rather idealistic, whereas the realistic implementation of equality is much more difficult because of differences of opinion of what equality means (Should all people be treated the same regardless of individual factors? Should they all arrive at the same position in life?), the manner in which equality should be enforced (redistribution of educational resources, forced busing, etc.), and any other factors that affect social justice within classrooms.

Clark goes on to examine how social inequalities are largely a product of many factors outside of the field of education (such as socioeconomic class), and ultimately concludes that, in order to bring more social justice to the realm of education, citizens needs to pursue social justice “more widely across the full spectrum of economic and social policy”(286). Overall, I found Clark’s perspective interesting in that he addresses the fact that “social justice” is a broader concept than can be promoted solely within classrooms and expected to carry out into society. Indeed, it is the other way around; increased social justice should be sought in all aspects of society, and that will ultimately lead to a greater degree of it entering classrooms.  

Work Cited

Clark, John A. "Social Justice, Education and Schooling: Some Philosophical Issues." British Journal of Educational Studies. 54.3 (2006): 272-287. Web. 14 Oct. 2013.

Critical Pedagogy and Popular Culture in an Urban Secondary English Classroom

                One aspect of this article that I found particularly useful was the concept of using more modern material (such as films, books, or music) to create a bridge of understanding back to older texts (such as anything written more than a hundred years ago). I thought this idea of the authors’ was quite ingenious because it allowed students to not only gain a better understanding of modern material, but also to use that deeper understanding to root out and analyze aspects of more traditional literature. In particular, I thought that the poem paring activity the authors performed was a good way to foster more student interest and to delve deeper into classic pieces without the class finding such activities dull. For example, from my own time in high school, I know that when we read The Scarlet Letter, most of my peers and I did not truly pay attention to it because it was written in a drier tone and didn’t appear to have any great amount of relevance to today. Perhaps if our teacher had taken a different approach, student engagement would have risen.

                Another part of the article that drew my attention was when the authors pointed out the amount of student participation when they viewed A Time to Kill. I thought that their teaching strategy for that unit allowed them to really get the students involved and to explore a greater degree of topics than a drier lesson would have allowed them to. The authors indicated that “more contemporary films…have a greater chance of being perceived as relevant” (195). This was a great observation because, in all honesty, it seems that a great deal of people (not just students) discard older material as being outdated and not related to current issues; therefore, it would seem to using newer material as well as less contemporary pieces would be the best way to illustrate the similarities (and differences) between current and past situations or predicaments.

Critical Pedagogy: A Look at the Major Concepts

                As I read this article, I thought that something that is important to remember while teaching is to try and be as unbiased as possible. The author’s reflection about how he favored some students over others, despite not intending to, illustrated to me how one can allow factors to affect their teaching that really shouldn't do so. For example, McLaren tells of how he connected with students whose “cultural capital” was similar to his and how these students received better instruction from him (81). Obviously, teachers should remember that students all should receive proper instruction, regardless of their situations (such as class, gender, etc.).  

                Another point I thought was intriguing was when McLaren discussed dialectal understanding of schools and how it “permits us to see schools as sites of both domination and liberation” (62). I primarily found this interesting because of Freire’s ideas about how instruction is either oppressive or not, whereas this dialectal understanding offers less of a black-and-white approach to the situation. In my opinion, it would seem that certain practices would perpetuate current relations more so than others, but having some such practices does not mean that the institution or instruction is wholly oppressive or founded in domination.

                The section on hegemony was particularly interesting because it seemed like it would be a difficult situation to alter, particularly when the majority of people are working for it, despite whether the situation benefits them or not. Overall, I thought that, while I read this section, people should pay greater attention to the practices they support, idealize, or participate in. Also, when McLaren discussed oppositional ideologies that have been manipulated by the dominant culture, I could not help but think of the “false generosity” that Freire spoke of because both seem to be providing the populace with a sort of false sense of goodwill. 

Pedagogy of the Oppessed - Chapter 2

From what I gathered, Freire advocates for teaching methods that contain a large portion of discussion and allow students to question the information they are being presented with, rather than merely having to accept that knowledge. Freire argues against using “banking education” – that is, he does not view students as empty receptacles for knowledge and teachers as the sole holders of information. Instead, he recognizes the importance of students’ ideas.

My main concern with Friere’s viewpoint is about how much lecture he would see fit for a classroom. By this, I mean that I would assume that a basic level of knowledge about a topic is needed in order to properly discuss that topic. In my own experience, when teachers ask groups to discuss what they think about a subject prior to receiving much information about it, the discussions are often bland and without debate or questioning. Friere says that teachers should give material to the students and listen to students’ considerations about the material, and finally the teacher should reevaluate his own ideas. While this is fine and dandy for a great deal of material, I would think that some basic knowledge could be presented more effectively in a less discussion-based format. For example, it would hardly be beneficial to discuss the differences between written and spoken communication if one was illiterate and had no conception of how writing differed from speech. Instead, to me, it would seem better to present basic information in a more factual manner, and then proceed to question and discuss the hell out of a subject once a foundation of knowledge was established.

Overall, I thought this chapter presented some very valid points, such as how education should be more about learning to process, analyze, and question information presented, rather than merely learning to repeat previously presented knowledge.

PAULO FREIRE: CHAPTER 1 OF PEDAGOGY OF THE OPPRESSED

The main point that I gathered from this chapter was that the oppressed (either an individual or a group) have the ability to eliminate oppression and become more “fully human.” The oppressors do not have this ability because they are not seeking reformation, and their attempts at balancing power are merely “false generosity.” I found this to be an interesting conclusion, although I have to question whether the ability of oppressors to engage in liberation of the oppressed is merely improbable and not impossible, as the chapter would suggest. To me, it would seem feasible that an enlightenment of the situation between and oppressor and oppressed on behalf of the oppressors could eventually cause oppressors to reevaluate their position and strive for equality and not simply offer “false generosity.” The probability of this could be questionable, although I do not see where it would be wholly impossible. Freire indicates that once the oppressed overcome their former oppressors, the former oppressors feel that they are the new oppressed, even if they are not, because of the new position they find themselves in. To me, this deduction of Freire’s seems plausible. Freire also indicates that some of the oppressors will change sides to the oppressed side in order to advocate for a better humanity, but that such converts often do not have full trust in their new allies. Therefore, to me, it would seem that advocating for equality by the converts would help the oppressors to view the oppressed more as people, and not “objects,” as they are often viewed as, and could come to change the relationship between the two parties. 

Anyways, I’m not fully certain that I grasped Freire’s connection between education (teachers and students) and his main argument (unless it was simply that teachers and students need to work together as humans in order to examine and critique knowledge), but it was an interesting read, nonetheless.  

Common Core Standards

Having already spent a good amount of time looking at and working with the Common Core Standards, I have two predominant opinions about them. First, the sequential steps of each tier would appear to be an effective means of having students progress in their knowledge from one grade level to the next without teachers having to worry about whether all students in a class acquired similar levels of instruction in previous years. In other words, the Common Core Standards seem to be a good way to track where students should be at academically without having to wonder at what students learned in previous years (or should have, anyways). 

My second major opinion about the Common Core standards is that I am not wholly sure that they will allow adequate time for teachers to rectify any gaps in student knowledge. By this, I mean that if several students were performing at a level below what they should be (say, two years younger than where they should be at), the teacher would obviously have to take time to remedy the situation, and this could detract from the amount of time that would otherwise have been spent nurturing other skills. I’m not saying this is a bad thing or anything because those gaps in knowledge should certainly be fixed, but I do feel that the first few years of having the Common Core standards implemented will be about readjusting curriculum to match the grade levels. Granted, if all teachers adhere adequately to the standards, this shouldn’t be a much of a problem in a few years, but until all teachers have ensured that their students’ performances match the standards, I feel that there will probably be a bit of adjusting to do. 

On a few occasions, I have heard the Common Core Standards being equated to building blocks. Personally, I feel that they are more like setting up a game of Jenga; if all the blocks are properly laid out each year, everything should fit together pretty well. However, if pieces are missing, then making a stable layer the next year is going to be more difficult unless time is taken to go back and fill in the spaces from previous layers.