Comments on: Teaching is Consequential

By: The World (of English) According to Me - Pt. 1 | Sicheii Yazhi

The World (of English) According to Me - Pt. 1 | Sicheii Yazhi — Tue, 17 Jun 2008 22:19:34 +0000

[...] Project: the best teachers of writing are teachers who write. Also, I wrote about this in “Teaching is Consequential“ [back] Tags: affective, assessment, curriculum, learning, nwp, popculture, reform, [...]

By: When the hurly-burly’s done » Getting electric

When the hurly-burly’s done » Getting electric — Tue, 09 Jan 2007 23:14:19 +0000

[...] This all brings me back to John Zorn. He’s someone who is not afraid to explore; in fact, he’s a great metaphor for how I think learners should act. Within some parameters, which he establishes for himself at the outset of a project, he tries his ideas again and again, in different permutations, never content to settle on a final product. Can’t we, as students and teachers (and we’re all learners, or we better be, or else we’re all sunk), try to use John Zorn as a model? [...]

By: Sarah Anne Sumpolec

Sarah Anne Sumpolec — Wed, 03 Jan 2007 21:25:53 +0000

Methinks your waters are being stirred. I wonder if the answer is in the doing or the being - after all, our ideals should not be completely unattainable but should be difficult enough to make us stretch. Perhaps beyond the reach of the natural man… If you pursued even half your list, I think you would lose that time of reflection that is so vital to assimilating all that you are trying to take in.

By: What we should be doing, IMHO » When the hurly-burly’s done

What we should be doing, IMHO » When the hurly-burly’s done — Wed, 03 Jan 2007 12:24:07 +0000

[...] Eric: Teaching should be logically consistent with what we do. I find that many teachers ask their students to do things that they themselves would never want to do or would never have any need to do. The system drives us to this level of stupidity, I think. If we are writers, then our teaching about writing should follow from that, and our methods of instruction should be logically consistent with how we write … or how we learn, how we art, how we do whatever it is we do… [...]

By: Jeff

Jeff — Wed, 03 Jan 2007 12:20:04 +0000

I can’t agree more, Eric. There’s a debate around these parts about what constitutes an Honors class–Is it more work, or is it more engaging/challenging work? Is it reading two more novels than the non-Honors sections, or is it helping students explore what really interests them? Is it okay to take an Honors class just for the GPA boost, or should the weighting system go the way of all other ill-conceived ideas?

It’s naive to think that we can make students into learners and enthusiasts, but it’s equally naive to think that we shouldn’t be what we want our students to be. I can’t count how many times I’ve been told, by otherwise-jaded students, that it’s a teacher’s perceived enthusiasm for his or her subject that makes the difference. It’s not knowing everything; it’s being willing to find out about new things.

I don’t know how this is going to fit in with standardized testing, decreased funding for perceived non-essential programs, reductions in team-teaching assignments, &c. Keep writing on this, though–a lot of us are reading.

By: Eric Hoefler

Eric Hoefler — Wed, 03 Jan 2007 00:43:16 +0000

Something like that, yes. And I’m definitely not asking for any outside agency to enforce or monitor this. This is all thinking out loud, of course, but it relates to this quote from Roger Schank:

“This is how you figure out what should be taught in school: Ask successful adults what they do all day and check how often different skills show up.” (source)

The other part of this ideas seems somewhat common-sense … Who would you rather have as a physical fitness teacher: a regular participant in triathalons or a 300lb. guy with greasy hair?

Before I make people angry, I’m not suggesting that any teacher not “doing” in his/her field is like the greasy-haired guy, I’m just suggesting that the best teachers are those who are actively engaged in their field(s) … and in as many aspects of their field(s) as possible … and in as professional a capacity as possible.

Because I’m an English teacher: I should be reading all kinds of things (including criticism and reviews, classical to pop); I should be writing both reflectively and for publication; I should be giving presentations to other professionals; I should be learning incessantly and joyfully about anything that catches my interest. Because I’m a creative writing and humanities teacher: I should be involved in and aware of local and international politics; I should travel when possible and be actively engaged in learning about other cultures (in the widest sense of that word); I should be writing fiction and poetry for publication, acting, making movies, playing music, etc.; I should attend readings and gallery exhibits and museum lectures. Because I’m a teacher of the future (all students are the future, so all teachers are teachers of the future), I should be mastering the best tools for improving learning and reflecting on their value and best uses.

I’m sure there are lots of other things I should be doing, too. (And I’m not claiming that I always do all those things I’ve just listed, but we must have ideals, yes?)

Or am I just crazy … ?

By: Thomas

Thomas — Tue, 02 Jan 2007 07:19:23 +0000

So, by your statement 1, you’d prefer a system more like most college/university institutions were the teachers pursue their work in a field at the same time as teaching? I guess you’d just prefer no strict requirements like requiring published works and such?