Reflection on Community and Inclusion

I have come to understand some of the true meanings of community and inclusion throughout this quarter and particularly through reflecting upon these readings within the last week. Christenson (2007) and Lyman (2001) both taught me that sometimes the toughest topics are the most useful to creating and strengthening a classroom community. They also gave me quite a bit to reflect upon and contemplate ways I may be able to use death, violence, or other challenging topics to advance education rather than try to keep them hidden. Sapon-Shevin (2001) brought about a fuller reflection upon all-level student integration within the classroom, and how it could bring about positive environments and change in educational settings. Finally, Harris (2001) and Beaton (2001) opened my eyes to the toll traditional discipline takes on classroom communities and feelings of inclusion. I know that I still have much to continue to think about and reflect upon, but I am glad I read these articles to give me a foundation for my thoughts as I move forward.

Standardized Test

https://fbcdn-sphotos-f-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-prn1/541031_315138588608676_1869650573_n.jpg

I stumbled onto this picture quote while I was wondering around the internet today, and it immediately linked to thoughts I've had about standardized testing. The tests assess kids in such a particular way that it could be related to simply testing on their mental ability to climb a tree. Kids who do generally do well on standardized tests come from a certain demographic in which the questions are written for, and  the way in which the core subjects are tests do not correlate with the way many kids understand and think about these topics. Furthermore, the scope and methods of the tests do not cover many topics and abilities important for becoming a critically thinking, problem-solving, functional human being. Even further still, each child learns, thinks, and communicates differently than other children, yet they are tested in the exact same way as all other children.

So, if a kid thinks creatively but grows up speaking something other than proper English, how do you think they will do on a test that is written in proper English, does not take into account creativity, and has incorrect answer options which would make sense in this child's mind? It's like trying to test a fish on climbing trees, who has grown up learning how to move and communicate in a way different than squirrels. This child will not do well on the test and spend years thinking that it is somehow worth less than other due to a score that shows nothing of what they are actually capable of doing and thinking.

I think that we need to do away with standardized testing and come up with more relevant, more complete, and more human ways of assessing children.

Be Prepared

Just as the teachers of the Oklahoma tornado demonstrated, the lives of children are safely entrusted in to the hands of teachers every single day. If parents are entrusting the lives of their children to teachers, why can’t teachers be entrusted with making the decisions regarding curriculum and how they will teach? If teachers have already fully committed to making these students productive adults, why would they sabotage their own ability to teach with shotty curriculum and teaching methods? The community and nation needs to trust in the emotional connection and entrust the curriculum to the teachers just as they entrust us with the lives of the children.

How can we ensure that each teacher is prepared for this kind of responsibility? In Monday’s class, we were talking about creating a uniform, nation-wide standard for teaching certification. Rather than basing teaching performance on standardized tests after the fact, why not ensure that every teacher is fully competent and prepared to teach to a high standard before they even get to the classroom? We should funnel the money spent on standardized testing in to teacher education and enrichment. What better way to make sure teachers are up to par than actually making sure they have the tools and the education to be up to par? After they become teachers, we could have inspecting programs rather than testing; trained professionals who come into classrooms to observe and give feedback to the teacher about their ability and curriculum. Why can’t we focus on what the teacher is actually doing rather than on test scores that may of may not accurately represent what students are learning and are capable of learning? It’s time to change from unemotional paper interaction and assessment to a more appropriate, human interaction way for teachers to be held accountable and for students to be assessed.

The Equality of Public Schools

Reading Fire in the Ashes was an incredibly heart wrenching and thought provoking experience. Although we were only assigned a couple chapters to read for a class, I found myself flipping through many other the other chapters. In the discussion following the story chapters, I came across a long but all-encompassing thought that Kozol was trying to convey with most of the stories within the book. The thought is as follows:

"The point I need to emphasize again is that all these children had unusual advantages. Someone intervened in every case, and with dramatic consequences...it is not that we should celebrate exceptionality of opportunity but that the public schools themselves in neighborhoods of widespread destitution ought to have the rich resources, small classes, and well prepared and well-rewarded teachers that would enable us to give to every child the feast of learning that is now available to the children of the poor only on the basis of a careful selectivity or by catching the attention of ...another grown-up whom they meet by chance. Charity and chance and narrow selectivity are not the way to educate the children of a genuine democracy" (Kozol, 2012, p. 303-304)

This issue of Public Schools not being created equal and poor students not having nearly as many opportunities as wealthy students has bothered me quite a bit. It's quite irritating that people want to live in a better world, but they only want to provide privilege for their own kids. How does ensuring your child's school has laptops while ignoring the fact another doesn't have textbooks help build a strong country? It doesn't. It creates dropouts and ignorance within communities and states.We should be equalizing opportunities and finances for all public schools and ensuring high quality teachers are everywhere. Hold teachers accountable for their classrooms and their commitment to every child; only allow highly trained and qualified individuals to become teachers.

To make this country better, everyone needs to be educated. Education allows people to create a better life for themselves, their families, and their country. If we are to become stronger, the people need to be stronger and able to support this great democracy. Without equal education for all, this country will slowly crumble beneath the growing weight of ignorance and poverty.

Pretend Play

In week three of my courses, I came across a quote in an article that said "'pretend' play among young children is actually a rehearsal for later activities in life" (Tenorio 1994). This idea has had me thinking about some of my readings and the activities of the children I supervise in a new light. 

For example, the next week we had another reading which described a group of preschool boys pretending to have babies and care for them, and they pretend to be seahorses in order to be able to be the ones having the babies (Pelo). So what then are these young boys rehearsing for? I would think that they are trying to express their knowledge of how to raise a baby and practice for caring for younger siblings and/or even their own children, although they probably don't conscientiously think this. But the part about transforming into seahorses so they can have the babies themselves, what are they rehearsing with this? Are they expressing a want of independence, or just coming up with a creative solution for a problem at hand?

Another example in the Pelo came in the form of a young boy and an even younger girl playing daddy and baby. The teachers dislike that the boy carries the young girl around and manipulates her body as if she is a helpless newborn. They see this as more of a rehearsal in dominance where the pretend play is teaching the girl to be submissive and teaching the boy to be dominant. But what else could they be trying to rehearse or express? Could it be more of an expression by the boy to be a caring father? The children did call the game "daddy and baby," so wouldn't what they are rehearsing be more about age difference and caring for another? One of my classmates asked the question, what if telling the two children not to play that game reinforces in the boy that caring for a child in this way is not what he should be doing? It's interesting to consider that this boy may stop trying to express his paternal instincts later in life due to the negative feedback from this rehearsal.