In the Secondary Education program were are given more content courses rather than education courses. After performing practicum hours in school I have the fear of not being prepared to actually teach. I will know the facts and the content I need to teach, I will know how to write a goals and objectives and write lesson plans, I will know how to write and IEP and conduct screenings for RTI, but how will I become an effective teacher? At the elementary level there are multiple "methods" courses on "how to teach" certain subjects. "Teachers are not taught to teach, and most often they do not teach." This line taken from the excerpt in Tharp and Gallimore's book Rousting Minds to Life is quite frightening and true. I have had teachers who were examples of this statement and I hope to not be another example. Looking back on my school years, I remember "wide awake" teachers and teachers who were not so wide awake. With teachers who are not wide awake as Wilheim describes, I did not understand what I was doing, why I was doing it and how I could be doing it. I simply did what I was told because that's "what we did." However, I had teachers that were fully awake more in my upperclassmen years of high school where I fully enjoyed what I was doing. It was with these teachers I became the most success in learning and actually appreciated their gift of teaching. The further I pursue my career in education the deeper understanding I am receiving of what it really entails. It is not just a profession, it truly is a science.
Another aspect of teaching that I feel as though is concentrated more on elementary years are the theories of Vygotsky and Hillocks. The zone of proximal development tends to disappear in the secondary level of education. As a high school student not too long ago I worked in my zone of actual development until it was recognized and I was moved into honors classes. Teachers want their students to succeed, but as Wilheim states, the most excellent projects may not have really taught students anything new. Support is still needed as not all students have mastered all steps by this point in their education. Self-teaching is one of the higher levels of teaching, however at some point the basic tools were taught and mastered along the way.
The second chapter on reading strategies and teaching those strategies provided insight on how crucial it is to "Knowing how to teach how." Students should know how to read at the secondary level but their level of comprehension and sophistication of reading and writing at that level are not always up to par, because they were never taught how to go beyond. We must teach students to ask themselves questions when they are reading and the inquiry square is a good tool to look as an aspiring teacher. We as teachers must refer to the square ourselves when choosing passages or materials we want students to read. Creating an inquiry environment throughout the classroom will allow students to explore learning in their own realms.
I think the Wilheim reading was an effective piece to read especially as the introduction to this class. We now understand the importance of methods and reading strategies and can apply them to our own content areas.
Amanda,
ReplyDeleteI agree with what you have to say about the "wide awake" teachers. I feel like those teachers are always going to be the ones that are more successful because of how much thought has to be put into the lessons whenever they teach. I also think that this will be a great way to teach in the future.
I would like to respectfully disagree with the zone of proximal development disappearing in high school. I don't think that it disappears, I think is just looked at differently. I think that we are still looking to see what the students are able to do by themselves and if they are ready for the next skill to be taught to them.
I think that when you become a teacher, you will be ready, as we are in the early stages of the program I think you will be surprised by how much you know how to do when you get to tour student teaching.
Amanda - I interpreted the science/profession discussion a bit differently - I think science and profession are not juxtaposed, but rather go hand in hand - I think what Comer and Wilhelm are saying is that teaching should be based on science (on our understanding of child development and cognitive science - the science of how children grow and how people learn) and because it is based on science, it is a profession, in that it requires specific knowledge - the "a profession defines itself by its boundaries" is getting to the point that not just anyone can be a teacher - their are standards for entry into the profession, a certain level of knowledge and understanding of methods that are necessary to be a teacher - I had a "yes!" moment reading that because it validates all that we are working so hard on in our education courses at RIC, it denotes a high level of respect for the specific training we are receiving and the job we will be doing - as Wilhelm notes, "in the United States much of what teachers should control is controlled by outsiders who are not educators" - teachers should be controlling more about education b/c they are the professional, trained, experienced educators with the body of knowledge necessary to be making decisions about education - but this is not what happens - if the profession of teaching was more respected, maybe this would not be the case.
ReplyDeletePlease excuse the "their" that should be "there" - I was tired when I wrote this!
DeleteHi Amanda!
ReplyDeleteTeaching is a science, as you pointed out in your response. In the past, I haven't examined teaching from this angle, but like you explain, Wilhelm's text made that connection to teaching. After thinking about teaching in this light, I can understand how it's more of a science than a profession. I mean, teaching is a solid career that requires a lot of planning and passion. With the addition of multiple strategies that improve learning and thinking abilities comes the scientific element of teaching. This is kind of related to a student's zone of proximal development, because as teachers, we must conduct some type of preliminary research in order to best serve our students. I completely understand that this is a very difficult task with 100+ students, but I also think that it's 100% needed. I agree with you that the zone of proximal development is different from elementary to secondary schools. I also feel that more emphasis is placed on this zone when the children are younger, but I still believe that it exists in secondary settings; like Alix says, it is looked at differently with older students. I additionally understand your concern in relation to preparation for the teaching role in the classroom. I think that the world of a student and the world of a teacher are very much so independent of each other. By this, I'm saying that practice is different from the actual thing for many reasons. However, I believe that we will fall into place once we have our own classroom. We spend a lot of time studying content and effective teaching methods, and I think that everything will come together in the end, which is the beginning of our professional careers.
Thanks for a thoughtful response to Wilhelm's chapters- you got me thinking more about my role as a future educator. I'm also captivated by your discussion of the zone of proximal development. I'm excited to read your future posts!