As I sat at the table during my cafeteria duty last week, I kept wondering why I was having so much trouble getting through the Symphony reading. I read, highlighted, then put it down only to ask myself, "what did I just read?" I finally figured out the reason I was not into this reading is because I am a very structured, organized person and everything in the article pretty much contradicts my personality.
I don't disagree with the points in the article: creativity, crossing boundries and even found the FedEX arrow pretty interesting, but the overall theme was a bit of a stretch for me. Sometimes I think that advocates for non-traditional methods could be dangerous for dummying down our society. I know I sound old fashioned, but I think our educational system has to find a balance between traditional and alternative teaching methods, and lately, it seems we are tilting to far in the direction of alternative education.
Sunday, September 28, 2008
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Letter to E.D. Hirsch
Dear E.D. Hirsch
I am a teacher of history and psychology at the secondary level and have read with interest your philosophy on education reform. I have these comments:
The main focus of your philosophy seems to be that all schools should have a uniform core curriculum across the board. The contradiction I find with your philosphy is your comment, "different schools might even have different cores" , how is that uniform?
My belief is that every school should have a core curriculum to follow. The variation has to be that depending on where the school is located and what the general graduating population's goals are after high school should influence the district administration on what the core curriculum should include. For example, a small town in the midwest that has a population of farm owners who for generations have passed the business onto family may be better suited with a curriculum geared toward educating young people on how to run a farm business. Another city in the United States whose population plans to attend college and enter the World of Corporate America may have a different core curriculum stressing workplace readiness standards along with the educational subject matter.
As I read your belief that you defend the use of memory and repeated practice, it reminded me of my high school years during the late 70s and early 80s. That was pretty much how we learned: teacher provided information, students studied and memorized the information and students were assessed by a written test. I believe students learned and I felt I retained alot of the information I learned in high school.
The philosophy of "project oriented" learning in our schools today is becoming more popular for one reason: to accommodate special education needs. You may feel that the progressive education techniques dominate schools. I think that to a degree, schools have to utilize alternative assessment methods to accommodate students who have special needs and need to explore a variety of learning methods in order for the students to succeed. I do believe that some schools are too project oriented and should find a balance in their curriculum between traditional and alternative assessment.
Your interpretation that every district allows teachers to interpret and teach subject matter at will is true to an extent. Many schools give their teachers a lot of freedom to decide on how and what to teach but there are also the districts that monitor staff, especially non-tenured, very closely. I do not believe it is such a bad thing to allow teachers to be creative if the students leave with knowledge they can use later in life.
I enjoyed reading your philosophy of cultural literacy as I agree strongly that is is important for a student to be "worldly" in order to succeed in life.
Alice Burnett
I am a teacher of history and psychology at the secondary level and have read with interest your philosophy on education reform. I have these comments:
The main focus of your philosophy seems to be that all schools should have a uniform core curriculum across the board. The contradiction I find with your philosphy is your comment, "different schools might even have different cores" , how is that uniform?
My belief is that every school should have a core curriculum to follow. The variation has to be that depending on where the school is located and what the general graduating population's goals are after high school should influence the district administration on what the core curriculum should include. For example, a small town in the midwest that has a population of farm owners who for generations have passed the business onto family may be better suited with a curriculum geared toward educating young people on how to run a farm business. Another city in the United States whose population plans to attend college and enter the World of Corporate America may have a different core curriculum stressing workplace readiness standards along with the educational subject matter.
As I read your belief that you defend the use of memory and repeated practice, it reminded me of my high school years during the late 70s and early 80s. That was pretty much how we learned: teacher provided information, students studied and memorized the information and students were assessed by a written test. I believe students learned and I felt I retained alot of the information I learned in high school.
The philosophy of "project oriented" learning in our schools today is becoming more popular for one reason: to accommodate special education needs. You may feel that the progressive education techniques dominate schools. I think that to a degree, schools have to utilize alternative assessment methods to accommodate students who have special needs and need to explore a variety of learning methods in order for the students to succeed. I do believe that some schools are too project oriented and should find a balance in their curriculum between traditional and alternative assessment.
Your interpretation that every district allows teachers to interpret and teach subject matter at will is true to an extent. Many schools give their teachers a lot of freedom to decide on how and what to teach but there are also the districts that monitor staff, especially non-tenured, very closely. I do not believe it is such a bad thing to allow teachers to be creative if the students leave with knowledge they can use later in life.
I enjoyed reading your philosophy of cultural literacy as I agree strongly that is is important for a student to be "worldly" in order to succeed in life.
Alice Burnett
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
This I Believe
This I Believe
It seems most people in class use this opportunity to state that an important philosophy is that every student is entitled to an education. I agree, ofcourse, with that statement, but I think administrators and educational leaders should consider this:
I believe that everyone is entitled to an education, but in light of the budget crisis in New Jersey, the cutbacks in funding that districts face, I ask the question, when does the obligation to provide a public education to teenagers end?
I teach high school and witness what happens when students that have been given every opportunity to succeed do not take advantage of this right and become a "nuisance" to all the other students around them trying to learn. I believe elementary students, middle school students and students entering high school must be given every possible opportunity to take advantage of what their district has to offer. My gripe is that a teenager who is now 17 or 18, who cuts classes, continuously is suspended for violating school rules, and does not perform in class is still treated as a normal everyday student with rights.
I think educational leaders should explore how, legally, a solution to this problem could be implemented. For example, in Europe students are able to leave school at 16 and seek alternative ways to better themselves if the class setting does not work for them. In this county, the cost to taxpayers for public education is so high that I believe a system should be put in place to give 17 year olds and older an opportunity to sign out of public school and be trained in some other type of trade where they may be more successful. I realize that there are vocational schools for this purpose, but students that are not motivated will not sign up for a vocational school. A good idea would be to make a law that evaulates these non performing students and allow them the option of either going into a training program, or leaving school and getting a job. This may sound harsh, but I believe this type of program would deter borderline students from becoming a nuisance in school and giving them the extra push to graduate in a timely manner.
It seems most people in class use this opportunity to state that an important philosophy is that every student is entitled to an education. I agree, ofcourse, with that statement, but I think administrators and educational leaders should consider this:
I believe that everyone is entitled to an education, but in light of the budget crisis in New Jersey, the cutbacks in funding that districts face, I ask the question, when does the obligation to provide a public education to teenagers end?
I teach high school and witness what happens when students that have been given every opportunity to succeed do not take advantage of this right and become a "nuisance" to all the other students around them trying to learn. I believe elementary students, middle school students and students entering high school must be given every possible opportunity to take advantage of what their district has to offer. My gripe is that a teenager who is now 17 or 18, who cuts classes, continuously is suspended for violating school rules, and does not perform in class is still treated as a normal everyday student with rights.
I think educational leaders should explore how, legally, a solution to this problem could be implemented. For example, in Europe students are able to leave school at 16 and seek alternative ways to better themselves if the class setting does not work for them. In this county, the cost to taxpayers for public education is so high that I believe a system should be put in place to give 17 year olds and older an opportunity to sign out of public school and be trained in some other type of trade where they may be more successful. I realize that there are vocational schools for this purpose, but students that are not motivated will not sign up for a vocational school. A good idea would be to make a law that evaulates these non performing students and allow them the option of either going into a training program, or leaving school and getting a job. This may sound harsh, but I believe this type of program would deter borderline students from becoming a nuisance in school and giving them the extra push to graduate in a timely manner.
US History Curriculum Standards
I teach high school US History 2, I have also taught US 1, and World History. I am very familiar with the state standards as I have had the task of evaluating the standards in the past.
The standards are very thorough, involved and cover every area possible that a US history student would need to be educated on the United States of America. Recently, state standards were also put in place where teachers now have to try and find time to explore the state that we live in.
The problem is there is too much information to cover and not enough time to cover it. We have had numerous department meetings to explore ways to restructure our school curriculum to align better with the state standards.
In our district, 9th grade have World History (which was just changed from Ancient Civilizations to 1775 - present, the Ancient moved down to 8th grade), then 10th Grade have US1 which is Colonization to Reconstruction, then US 2 is After REconstruction to the present. The problem is that not all teachers of US 1 make it to Reconstruction, then when the US2 teachers pick up some kids get lost between the end of the Civil War and Industrialization, and depending on how much backtracking a teacher has to do, most only make it to Vietnam.
The advantage to the standards is that for new teachers, or for a very organized teacher, the guidelines are so thorough and the resources are plentiful that it becomes very easy to teach the information, but when you get into a topic that kids really get involved with, it is so easy to fall behind and then rush through to try and catch up.
I don't think that is what education should be about; the goal should not be to be on a time schedule, the goal should be to explore topics that spark discussions that kids will remember.
So my criticism of the current standards is that we need to have some flexibility to modify the standards as we go along, which I suppose would be frowned upon in Trenton.
The alternative may be to require to have seniors take an elective course in some type of history: ie, Contemporary Issues, American Govt and Politics and that way they would be exposed to a more present day contemporary issues curriculum as well as the mandated US History.
The standards are very thorough, involved and cover every area possible that a US history student would need to be educated on the United States of America. Recently, state standards were also put in place where teachers now have to try and find time to explore the state that we live in.
The problem is there is too much information to cover and not enough time to cover it. We have had numerous department meetings to explore ways to restructure our school curriculum to align better with the state standards.
In our district, 9th grade have World History (which was just changed from Ancient Civilizations to 1775 - present, the Ancient moved down to 8th grade), then 10th Grade have US1 which is Colonization to Reconstruction, then US 2 is After REconstruction to the present. The problem is that not all teachers of US 1 make it to Reconstruction, then when the US2 teachers pick up some kids get lost between the end of the Civil War and Industrialization, and depending on how much backtracking a teacher has to do, most only make it to Vietnam.
The advantage to the standards is that for new teachers, or for a very organized teacher, the guidelines are so thorough and the resources are plentiful that it becomes very easy to teach the information, but when you get into a topic that kids really get involved with, it is so easy to fall behind and then rush through to try and catch up.
I don't think that is what education should be about; the goal should not be to be on a time schedule, the goal should be to explore topics that spark discussions that kids will remember.
So my criticism of the current standards is that we need to have some flexibility to modify the standards as we go along, which I suppose would be frowned upon in Trenton.
The alternative may be to require to have seniors take an elective course in some type of history: ie, Contemporary Issues, American Govt and Politics and that way they would be exposed to a more present day contemporary issues curriculum as well as the mandated US History.
Monday, September 8, 2008
Intro to class
Hi, my name is Alice Burnett, (Montclair still has my last name as Zvaleuskas), I got remarried on 2/16/08 and changed my name.
I work as a history/psychology teacher at Ridgewood High School which is enjoyable most of the time. I have a masters degree is History, and am now in the admin program to obtain further credentials in Educational Leadership. I currently teach US 2 Honors and Psychology Honors and I am the most knowledgeable in the area of slavery and racism throughout the 19th and 20th centuries.
I live in Ridgewood from Monday to Friday and then commute to my house in Surf City every weekend and also live there all summer, so travel can be hectic. My husband lives in Surf City. I have three daughters from my first marriage and one goes to Montclair (she is 20) and the other two are in the Ridgewood schools, 17 and 13.
I enjoy bowling, I bowl on Wednesday nights in a mixed league. My goal is to bowl a 300 this season, I have come close so many times but always choke down the stretch. I average 170 -180 range.
I enjoy the beach, spending time with family and friends and meeting new people. I look forward to interacting with everyone in the class and sharing school experiences as well as learning more about administration.
Alice Burnett
I work as a history/psychology teacher at Ridgewood High School which is enjoyable most of the time. I have a masters degree is History, and am now in the admin program to obtain further credentials in Educational Leadership. I currently teach US 2 Honors and Psychology Honors and I am the most knowledgeable in the area of slavery and racism throughout the 19th and 20th centuries.
I live in Ridgewood from Monday to Friday and then commute to my house in Surf City every weekend and also live there all summer, so travel can be hectic. My husband lives in Surf City. I have three daughters from my first marriage and one goes to Montclair (she is 20) and the other two are in the Ridgewood schools, 17 and 13.
I enjoy bowling, I bowl on Wednesday nights in a mixed league. My goal is to bowl a 300 this season, I have come close so many times but always choke down the stretch. I average 170 -180 range.
I enjoy the beach, spending time with family and friends and meeting new people. I look forward to interacting with everyone in the class and sharing school experiences as well as learning more about administration.
Alice Burnett
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
