My Blogging Experience

When this semester started and I was told that I had to do a weekly blog on readings that were assigned for the week, I thought it was going to be very time consuming and to be honest, I wasn't real excited to have to do this each week. As we have gone through the semester and we continue to have our weekly blogs, I have started to like them. Having to blog on readings from the week has made me be able to reflect a lot more on what I have read and for the information to really sink in. I believe there are many positives to a blog. I know a lot of people who do it to destress or get their feelings out somewhere for others to read about them. I am not a person who does those things but I do like posting my feelings about books that I have read and so on. For me, there are a few negatives as well. I am not a fan of having to these kinds of things because I usually forget. I was able to remember throughout this semester but I really didn't see the point in doing what we were doing.

Even though these blogs have been a positive experience for me, I will more than likely not continue to blog. I don't have time and I don't really like putting things on the internet for others to see. There are a lot of positives to blogging and also some negative. These are merely my feelings about blogs and doing them throughout the semester.

American Education from No Child Left Behind to Common Core State Standards

Throughout this part of the semester we have learned a lot about No Child Left Behind and also, the new Common Core State Standards. There are many things about No Child Left Behind that were not good for the American educational system. Diane Ravitch was a huge advocate for No Child Left Behind until she found out about all the horrible things that started happening. It just wasn't fair how they were scoring schools and how they were shutting down schools. What we have now is the Common Core State Standards and they are supposed to make things better. I know some people who really like it but also some people who do not like it at all. I haven't been in it enough to really make an opinion about it.

Diane Ravitch is a great person to hear from as well considering she was all for No Child Left Behind and now she does not support it at all. She said it created mass demoralization. I really like this terminology for that. She is such an educated person in this area. I really enjoyed listening to her. She says that testing is a good thing if it is used in the right way. This is so true! NCLB was all for testing testing testing. I think that tests are good but they do need to be given in the right way. We need to start teaching our children so that they can be educated about everything when they go out in the real world. I do not feel as though modern children are not prepared for the real world and that is something that is starting to be a bad thing.

American Education: 1980-2000

Education in the years 1980-2000 was getting to the place that education is in this day. It was really interesting to read about how the government wanted education to be but how it actually was, was very different from what they wanted or imagined. The government wanted the schools to be geared more towards the vocational side of things. The education system wasn't going to change but no one was really going to do anything about it.

What was really interesting about this part in the book was all the schools that they were forming in Harlem in New York. This school district was one of the lowest scoring in the state. Someone had a great idea of making a whole bunch of different schools within the district. I really liked how they made the different schools and the children were able to choose which schools they went to, they weren't forced to go to a certain school. This made the scores at the schools go up and the district wasn't at the bottom any more. I think that if we were to do something more like this now, children would be more apt to stay in school and actually enjoy going to school.

Sometimes I wonder why our school system is how it is. What would happen if we were to change something and not go with the norm. Would the children in  the school systems be more able to succeed? Would children want to go to school and be willing to learn?

American Education 1950-1980

As I was reading Part 3 "Separate and Unequal", it really made me think about a few things. I really liked reading about this section and it really opened my eyes. I never thought that "Separate but Equal" was at all equal. How could it be equal when all the other ethnic groups were being discriminated against and being segregated from all the white people? It was not equal, not even one bit. Even though my skin color is white, I would like to think that I would have been friends with the colored people. One of my best friends is colored and I have never judged him for having a different color of skin. I find it really hard to believe that these people were discriminated against. It makes me really sad to think that the white people thought that they were dumb and didn't want to put them in certain classes because they were a different color. There were a few colored families that fought this and tries to put their children in these colored schools. The parents didn't think it was fair to make their children walk two miles to school when there was a white school just around the corner. There was a part of the book that mention something about the colored children were scared to go to the white school. Why would someone want to go somewhere where they aren't accepted or even wanted? I agree with this. When schools were desegregated, the white children didn't treat the black children well at all. The teachers that were black were let go. Even though things were being desegregated, blacks were still being discriminated against. It makes me so sad to read about how horrible they were treated. People were fighting for their American rights and they were being punished for that. I love to hear about the people who triumphed over all this evil. That, even though all the odds were against them, they were still able to succeed and make a wonderful life for themselves and their families.

American Education between 1900-1950

Education between 1900-1950 was very different than that of the century before. There were many immigrants coming into the United States. They were all being able to go to school but there weren't any things in the school system that would accommodate all the immigrant children. One of the most important things for the immigrants was their holidays and the American school system wasn't doing anything that would bring the holidays from the countries of these people. The school system was "Americanizing" them. Some think this was a good idea. I don't think it is a good idea to have to make people get rid of their culture, they need something to remind them about their culture. The immigrants weren't really looked at as people who should be here. They didn't know English and they were expected to learn things in school in English. The school system should be able to accommodate all the children in their system.

When the school system was being started, there was only an Elementary school. Starting in the 1900's they were forming Middle and High schools for students who wanted to further their education. They were also changing the curriculum and all the children were having to take IQ tests to see where they would test to put them in certain places. I believe that people have the right to choose what they want to do, not let a test determine what they do for the rest of their lives. There were some kids that wanted to work in the factories than go to school. I believe that some didn't think they were good enough to go to school.

American Education in 1770-1900

The school system from 1770-1900 was very much different than what it is now. There wasn't much need for schools back then because of all the industries and the agriculture. Most of the families wanted their children to work so there wasn't much need for going to school. For those who did go to school though, there was a huge bias against gender, race, and religion. As for gender, boys were favored more. There was only one religion taught in school, it was Protestant. Many people didn't like that though because they complained and took religion out of school. That was the start of the separation of church and state. They started taking things out of the textbooks also that some people didn't like. As people started moving out west, there was a great need for more teachers and women started moving out west to fill that need. The women did not know what to expect when they went west but it was definitely a lot different from anything that they had ever seen before. The education system was starting to feminize and people were getting the education they needed. There was a man named Horace Mann who went around inspecting schools and there were many that were not safe at all for the children to be in. The seats were bad on the bodies and there were holes in the walls letting in any kind of weather. The schools we have now are much different than the "common" schools of that time period.

What is my teaching approach?

As I read the book "Approaches to Teaching" By Fenstermacher, I have been able to really get a good look at the three approaches to teaching; the Executive Approach, the Facilitator Approach, and the Liberationist Approach. I believe that I will combine these approaches when I am teaching. I do not think that one person can use only one approach to teaching and that classroom will run smoothly. There are certain activities and lessons that will be done that will need to be taught in different ways. Would you teach an art lesson using the Executive Approach? No. I think that you can start out that way when giving the instructions and directions of the lesson but I think that you will use the Facilitator Approach when doing something like this. You will be there to help the students if they need it but an art project should not be something that you tell your students how to do. This needs to be something that comes out of their brains and onto their paper. For me, I will use the Executive Approach the most but I will definitely incorporate the other two approaches periodically. I know that some of them don't really work well with others. You really wouldn't be able to be an Executive and a Liberationist. Those two are at opposite ends of the spectrum. The Executive and the Facilitator would work really well together and also the Facilitator and the Liberationsist would work good together.

The Executive Approach fits me because that is how I work. I need structure and for there to be a routine. I do not like it when things change and when things are wishy washy. Some people call me OCD or anal but it's just they way that I am. I cannot help that. I will run my classroom like this because it is how I work but I also believe that my students would really appreciate there being some sort of routine so they always know what to expect when they come into the classroom.

The Liberationist Approach

The Liberationsist Approach is an interesting one. It does a lot with giving the student the skills to think, deliberate, discern, imagine, and investigate. The Liberationist wants to liberate his/her children. This person is still a teacher but they do not necessarily "teach" their students. They give their students the skills to learn on their own. I am not a fan of this approach. I think it is too open ended and I need a lot more structure, as a student and a teacher.

For someone who wants to teach second grade, the Liberationist Approach is just not usable. I feel like the lower grades need structure and a routine. I do not see that in the Liberationist Approach. There is not structure and the students are in charge of their own learning for most things. I do not see how this could possibly make students successful considering all the material that they are required to be introduced to and to retain. I believe that there is a place for this approach but I do not believe that there is a place for it in general instruction.

Some things that I see as a good thing with this approach is the fact that teachers are giving their students the tools to be able to learn on their own. I think that is important because they will need that skill for the rest of their lives, in college especially. I think when we are looking at the big picture, the Liberationist Approach has many good aspects to it.

Over all, the Liberationist Approach is one in its own.

The Facilitator Approach

The characteristics of the teacher who uses the Facilitator Approach is one that the teacher is very concerned about her students lives. He/she wants to know everything about the child's life and then incorporate that into his/her teaching. The teacher wants to know the backgrounds of the students so that there can be material to teach about each of the children's backgrounds. All things will be incorporated into the lessons that the teacher teaches.

A classroom that uses this approach would be one kind of like a family. The teacher knows and is concerned about the backgrounds of all the students but the students also know about their peers. They treat everyone with respect and understand that we all come from a different place, whether that be somewhere desirable or not.

I believe there are some aspects of this approach that are difficult for me. For instance, how would one take all the information he/she has about all the students and incorporate all of that into the lessons. I think that you can do that throughout the year, but you will never be able to take everything from all students and put it into a lesson plan. I think that teaching something per week about each one of the students would make this successful.

Something that is effortless about this approach is the getting to know your students. I believe that is something that is extremely important when it comes to teaching. If you don't know your students, how are you supposed to help them?  

Over all I believe this approach has some flaws but to me, it is one of the best ones out there!

The Executive Approach

Most of the experiences I've had with the Executive Approach have been positive. As a student, I have enjoyed the teachers who used this approach. I do really well with in a classroom setting that has a lot of structure and routine. I don't really like things to change and when I was in a classroom with a lot of structure, I really liked it. I don't remember much of my elementary and middle school classes but I know in high school in my history class, I would know exactly what to expect and there was no question as to what material would be on the test. It was one of my favorite classes and history is now one of my favorite subjects. The classes that I attended in high school that didn't have as much structure weren't that bad but it was still harder for me to be in that class because of the lack of structure. There have been some classes that I have taken in college that the professor didn't use the executive approach and I found that I really liked it. I never really knew what to expect from the class except that we would always be having a discussion and they would be great discussions.

As a teacher, I think I would gear my teaching more towards the Executive Approach but I would also like to add in the other approaches when necessary. I don't think there can be a good teacher with out incorporating in all of the approaches. I am a person who needs structure, like I said. I also think that elementary aged children need that structure and those routines.

I think that it just depends on what kind of person you for what approach you use. I don't think that there is more of one in a school then the others. The benefits of this approach, to me, would be the structure part. I really think it is an important part of the school day and it is necessary for most students.

Three Approaches to Teaching

The three approaches to teaching are the Executive Approach, the Facilitator Approach, and the Liberationist Approach. When using these different approaches, you will find that they are all very different from each other.

The Executive Approach is one that the teacher is more of a dictator. The teachers classroom is very structured and the students know the expectations of the class. The rules are set at the very beginning of school and the students know what their expectations are and what the rules are. The teacher is quite strict all throughout the school year.

The Facilitator Approach is one where the teacher focuses on the backgrounds of all the students and uses that knowledge to make the lesson plans and to gear the lessons towards. This teacher has all of his/her students feelings in mind when doing things and there will always be something that ties to one of the students.

The Liberationist Approach is one which the teacher puts the information out for the students to learn and then has the students do what they want to learn that material. The teacher is there when the student needs help but the learning is based on what the students want to learn. The teacher is also there as a guide to his/her students.

I believe that the three approaches are all great and that some people may use one more than the other but I don't think that you can be a good teacher if you don't use all three of these approaches. There needs to be some sort of combination when it comes to being a great teacher.

Why do I want to be a teacher?

Throughout my years growing up, I knew I wanted to be a teacher. I was always playing house with my babies and barbies and I was always trying to teach them things. My mother is a teacher and she is the reason that I am going into teaching.

I want to be a teacher because I love working with children and I have a huge passion to make a difference in children's lives. I want the impact that I have on their lives to last a lifetime. I want to make my classroom a place where these children can go and know that it is a safe place. I my classroom to be a place of learning and success, not drudgery and failure. I want my students to have fun learning and to teach me as well. I have always been passionate about the future of children and I want to be part of the reason why my students succeed in life!

I'm really interested in Elementary Education. I would love to teach first to third grade. These children are still willing to learn and (most) are shorter than me. This age group of children haven't had the ideas instilled in them that going to school is boring and that they don't want to learn. They still have open minds and are willing to learn if you can teach them in the right way.

I am also interested in teaching Special Education. It intrigues me to watch these children as they go about their everyday life and what makes them tick. I would really like to learn more about the Special Education programs and how I would be able to be a part in those. That is why I am getting my minor in Special Education.