Take some aspect of what Kumashiro is talking about and use it to reflect on your program thus far (this will work for counselors, too!). Feel free to write about whatever you want, but one possibility is to think about whether/how you’ve seen Kumashiro’s three kinds of teachers (teacher as learned professional, as researcher, as professional) show up in your classes, practica, etc.).
Julia Katz
ReplyDeleteKumashiro's article suggests reasons why current understanding of what it means to be a teacher may dissuade teachers from engaging in anti-oppressive practices. Anti-oppression work recognizes knowledge as partial and situational. This includes not only the knowledge imparted to students but also knowledge about how to teach. In teaching anti-oppressively, teachers should not seek to determine a single correct way of teaching but should match their practices to particular contexts.
Kumashiro claims that teachers may be rewarded when they can define knowledge in a way that makes the “successful” or “effective” passage of knowledge easier to measure. Furthermore, teachers who teach in a way that disrupts repetitive and conventional ways of teaching or who question the certainty of knowledge may face negative judgments about their competence and authority from within their profession.
The article brings up a conflict many teachers will encounter. Going against the norms of ones profession involves risk but, if no one takes risk, conventional ways of teaching will just continue. It can be difficult to gauge when to take risks, especially in light of recognition that our perspectives are incomplete, the rightness of actions is situation, and the exact impact of decisions is indeterminate. At the same time, to avoid troubling current ways of doing or knowing just because we can never fully achieve an ideal would be to settle for the path of least resistance.
Stephanie Furnish
ReplyDeleteThis is only my third week in the education program, but I have witnessed what Kumashiro is talking about during my undergrad (and even some high school courses I took that are related to teaching and education) and the past few weeks. I took a childhood development course at my county’s tech center in high school, and we learned about theoretical development in infants, preschool age, and elementary aged students. My teacher for that course worked in elementary schools and preschools, and continued to be up to date with recent theories while simultaneously revisiting old theories in her own work.
As a history major at VCU, all of my professors in the history department are exemplars of teachers as researchers. While they may not research teaching and education, they are constantly researching their content area and adding to the scholarship already published. Part of the tenure track for history professors at VCU is that they have to be published or working on being published. Many of VCU’s history professors have multiple publications, or are often given grants to focus on research.
I think it would be safe to attribute the teacher as professional to the professors I am working with this semester in the education program. All of my professors work to make sure we, their students, are prepared as professionals at the end of our three semesters, and to making teaching a profession in and of itself.
I have been involved in elementary education at VCU for about five years. During my time in the education program, I have noticed that my professors closely resemble the “good teacher” model of “teachers as learned practitioners.” During undergrad, I spent a great deal of time in various psychology classes learning about theories regarding childhood development. As the program continued, I began to learn how to use theories to manage and discipline, if you will, my future classroom. Once I got a good grasp on how I should operate my classroom and communicate with my students, I then began to learn the content I would teach in my future classroom. While the content I have learned and researched at VCU is valuable, the article proposed a question to me that left me feeling a bit intrigued… If psychological models are not the only way to get to know our students, what are the other models?
ReplyDeleteBrittany Milteer
ReplyDeleteBetween my time as a LSEE student in undergrad and now in the School of Education for grad I have noticed that my professors can be described as the good teacher that models from "teachers as learned practitioners". Starting off in the program I learned a lot of about development, theories, and general knowledge of various core subjects. Progressing throughout the program it became more detailed and in depth. I learned about more about development and how that can relate to the student's academic success and overall well being as a person and a student. I learned more content knowledge about core subjects, however, in a more methods course format. Thinking back on it, the knowledge I have gained from the very first LSEE course I took until now I have used that information to gain more knowledge; which has made me a more effective teacher. Another aspect of the program in general that has model "teachers as learned practitioners" is being able to participate in practicum experiences. These experiences have the ability for students (us) to see the theories, development knowledge, and methods in a real classroom. I personally have been able to try things and work on various areas that can only be done through constant practice.
Alexandra HArrell
ReplyDeleteIt was interesting to relate and compare Kumashiro’s ideas to my journey through the Elementary Education program at VCU. Much of what Kumashiro believed to be oppressive in a teacher education program is what I have experienced. That being said, I feel all of the things I have learned and experienced through VCU have been extremely valuable to me. Some of the aspects of the three kinds of teachers represented in the article are definitely present in my classes. The first kind of teacher, teacher as a learned practitioner, is evident as I have learned about the “type” of students I will be teaching and how to teach them. I have also spent much time learning about Virginia’s standards of learning. I feel that the idea of a teacher being a researcher plays a large role in many of the classes I have taken. We spend a great deal of time reflecting and assessing our own teaching. The concept of self-reflection has been rewarding for me and has gotten me into habits that I will be practicing as an in-service teacher. The last type of teacher that Kumashiro noted was a teacher as a professional. I have spent a lot of time talking with my peers and professors about certification requirements. Kumashiro argues against the idea of letting certification requirements completely define what a “good” teacher is. I agree with his argument and I feel that I have also been educated through VCU to not let the tests and scores define my teaching skills.
I think the VCU teacher education program has a strong focus on forming us into the concept of, as Kumashiro says, “teachers as learned practitioners.” I’ve noticed this the past 3 years I have been in the program. For example, Professors are constantly modeling different practices and activities that can be done with students in the classroom. From the minute we enter the program, we are also asked to visit different classrooms with different teachers in different counties. This gives us the opportunity to see teachers in practice as to be able to learn from them. It’s been really neat to see how teachers do things differently in regards to classroom management and teaching styles, all while having the same goal in mind. Having all these experiences in different classrooms will help me grow to be a better teacher for my future students as to be a teacher from as a learned practitioner.
ReplyDeleteBy Amanda Kern
Delete(Sorry! I forgot to put my name)
Since I have been in the elementary education program at VCU, I would say that my professors can be described as the good teacher that models from "teachers as learned practitioners". VCU’s program sets students up to be well rounded educators. While taking pre requisites your first couple years, students are taking psychology classes that focus on how students learn and succeed. These courses taught me that teachers need to know the physical, psychological, and emotional needs of their students in order for learning to take place. We also take a variety of core subject courses, such as European History and Physical Geography. Taking these courses provides background knowledge for the material I will teach in my future classroom. As the program goes on, the same type of model still applies. We take course that are more specific to our field (Classroom Management, Children’s Literature, methods courses) and everything is reinforced when we go out to our practicums. We are also taught to reflect in order to become better teachers.
ReplyDeleteJordan Lee
ReplyDeleteIt was interesting to read Kumashiro’s three images of teachers in our teacher education programs and compare them to my own experiences as a student in VCU’s Elementary Education program. I think the image that best fits the professors I have had is the “teachers as learned practitioners.” Kumashrio describes three main things students need to learn. First, he discusses we need to learn about young students and how they learn and develop. In the VCU program, I have studied different theories of learning and taken child development classes to help me better understand young children. Second, Kumashrio discusses that we need to learn what we will teach in our subject areas. The majority of the undergraduate classes I took at VCU were classes that taught us the content knowledge we will need to know. Lastly, Kumashrio discusses that we need to learn how to teach. Last semester, my first semester in graduate school, was really focused on this. I was in methods courses for the various content areas and instead of focusing on content knowledge, like we did for undergrad, we focused on teaching methods. We used the content knowledge we had acquired and applied it to the methods of teaching it.
Although I think VCU’s education program could primarily be described as the “teachers as practitioners,“ I do see some similarities to the other two images described too. In this program, we are constantly asked to reflect on our work and think about how it can be improved, which I believe is a quality described as the image “teachers as researchers.” Kumashrio also describes the image “teachers as professionals.” I have had to pass many tests in order to continue in this program and to meet the certification requirements. I also recall discussing in one of my classes the importance of viewing teaching as a profession rather than a career or job, which was an interesting topic to discuss.
Erica Sudduth
ReplyDeleteThroughout the education program we've learned about how children develop and what their needs are and how to meet these needs in order to teach them. We've taken courses that focus on content in order to know what to teach our students and we've learned how to teach it to reach the needs of every student. This focuses on the model of teachers as learned practitioners. We are then able to use this knowledge during our field experiences.
Colleen Barry
ReplyDeleteThroughout the education program I have learned about different teaching strategies and different teachers. I have also learned about how students develop their knowledge and that each classroom is different. The one type of teacher I have recently seen was actually one of my math teachers and he was definitely a “teacher as a researcher.” He would tell us every class how he is constantly researching and learning new ways to teach us information because the education system is constantly changing. When I grew up, we had to know the standard algorithms in math and now it has moved towards non-standard methods of solving math problems. This can be applied to any subject area. He really expressed how important it is to keep up with new information and to constantly be learning and trying new things with the classroom to learn what works best for both your students and your classrooms and because you want to keep up with the latest developments in education.
In the VCU Education program thus far, it has been set and stone to follow the guide of being teachers as learned practitioners. We are to know our students by understanding the psychological view of the children and exploring how this plays a role in their behavior and learning. We are to take courses and major in elementary education, in which we must take content classes and pass praxis tests to prove our knowledge of the subjects. Lastly, we must learn how to teach. We learn all about classroom management and as we go into our practicum classes we are given tasks to observe how other educators display what they’ve learned. I can honestly say that I view knowledge as political and partial, but I was never taught to know that. We weren’t given the anti-oppressive view that focuses on difference, equity, power, and oppression. We were given a set of rules to follow and possibly expand on in similar ways that you already have. It is a bit of a shame. Though I’m afraid that I won’t understand the anti-oppressive methods now, even if they were to slap me in the face because it is a bit too late and I was never exposed to it beforehand.
ReplyDeleteSavannah Crowder
ReplyDeleteThroughout my time at VCU, I have had many experiences that I can relate to Kumashiro's three kinds of teachers. I have seen all three in my practicum classrooms and my classes at VCU. In relation to teachers as learned practioners, I have been exposed to many aspects of the "good teacher." In a lot of our classes, we have learned how important it is to be a reflective practitioner and learn from personal reflection from the classroom experiences. I have taken a few psychology classes that focus on student's educational development and stages--which is important in learning how to teach individual students. We learn how students can best learn, how to be culturally responsive, and how to teach using differentiation. We use our field placement experiences to learn from them. We also have taken classes based on all of the core subjects and learning teaching methods. Many of the classes have focused on being a "lifelong learner." In my practicum classes I have seen teachers change and modify their lessons to best fit their class and students. Some aspects of a "teacher as a researcher" that I have seen are, learning how to use evidence-based practices and using "research" from our reflections of lessons and activities. We use evidence (of assessments, how lessons went, how students responded, etc.) to build and create lessons for our individual students and specific classrooms. Lastly, Kumashiro discussed teachers as professionals. Throughout this program at VCU, we have had to take many tests, we have to join a professional organization, receive a degree, and then apply for our teaching licenses. We go through so many loopholes to become teachers, and I do agree that a "good" teacher isn't necessarily defined by how well we have done on tests, in classes, and how far we have come (ex: graduate school). We have gained so much helpful knowledge and been exposed to the classroom setting, but we will really test our teaching skills once we are teaching. Our classes at VCU have prepared us very well, but it is up to us to be "good teachers."
Maureen Boster
ReplyDeleteThrough out the program here at VCU I have learned how we as teachers have to always continue to learn. If that is through taking more classes or getting a new certification or just simply reflecting on your lesson you just taught. VCU emphasis reflective thinking and using this practice to become better well-rounded teachers. Being reflective means taking the good and the bad and making it better for the next lesson or activity with the students. The VCU program also touches on Kumashiro’s Teacher as learned professionals through all of the in the classroom Practicum experiences. I believe wholehearted that some of the things I have learned in the classroom from the hands on experiences with the students couldn’t be learned in the classroom. We can talk about as many different situations in the classroom but doing them and seeing them is a totally different learning experience.
Corinne Tilley
ReplyDeleteAs I was reading the chapter, I was putting the professors I've had in my three years in the education department into the categories. Or, at least I was trying to. The second I read the concept of “teachers as researchers” one particularly negative experience with a professor I had in the program would not leave my brain. This professor had very little classroom experience and didn't seem to care even a little bit about teaching. They made it very clear that their goal first and foremost was research, and all of the problematic aspects of that type of teacher discussed in the chapter were present. Still, though, the worst part of that class was being made to feel like a research subject rather than a student (or even a person). This isn't to say that “teachers as researchers” are bad teachers. Some of my favorite professors fit that category best. I guess what I'm saying is that I have had a lot of good professors and a lot of bad ones, and the worst of the bad ones generally fall under that category.
Anyway, within VCUs education program, most of my professors definitely fall under “teachers as professionals”, though I do wish we had more practitioners to at least set examples. This isn't super relevant to the chapter, but I'm still disturbed by how many of my (mostly former) peers were open and honest about how they did not care even a little bit about learning the actual content that they were going to be expected to teach. I am talking about adults who cannot do basic math and refuse to even try to learn because they assume they're going to teach kindergarten. I've never had a professor that I clearly knew more than, but I have had teachers like that and it was frustrating.
Paige Michanco
ReplyDeleteI have been a part of VCU’s elementary education program for about 4 years now. During this time, I have noticed all three images as teachers. Out of the three, I have noticed more of the ‘good teacher’ model of ‘teachers as learned practitioners’. I have seen this in my classes because we learn about what kind of students we will be teaching and the best ways to teach them. We focus on the Standards in Virginia, or the SOLs. We also take a ton of classes that make us well-rounded teachers. As far as ‘teacher as researcher’ goes, we spend a lot of time here at VCU reflecting on lessons that we have taught as well as assessing how our teaching went during the lesson. For ‘teacher as professional’, us pre-service teachers often share our requirements for certification here in the state of Virginia. Even though some are more apparent than others, I do notice all three models in the Elementary Education program here at VCU.
Allie Bryan
ReplyDeleteWhile reading Kumashiro's depiction of teachers as learned practitioners, I couldn’t help but compare it to my experiences at VCU. The truth is the majority of my course have focused on the psychology of teaching. In undergrad, we were required to take EDUS 301 which was essentially child development according to psychological theories and models. Now, I am currently enrolled in educational psychology as a graduate student. In addition to those examples, many of our pedagogical models are based upon psychological frameworks of student learning. Another aspect that really stuck out was when Kumashiro mentioned that many programs allotted attention to specific student differences such as race, class, and gender, but ignored others. Multicultural education has been an underlying theme throughout many of my courses. Gender and class have been mentioned, but rarely elaborated on. For example we talked about the idea of social justice in our math course, but it was a one-time conversation that barely scratched the surface. Conversations about effectively including children with different sexual orientations or even gender identity issues has never been elaborated on, even with its growing relevance implying that we need to address it. As for religion, it is largely ignored. Even though separation of church and state exists, children come into the classroom with that as part of their background and it has implications for their learning as they make connections between themselves and new knowledge. I notice these things and it occurs to me that Kumashiro’s point are extremely relevant. I believe VCU does a lot to create well-informed and well-prepared teachers that are responsive and sensitive to the needs of their students and the community at large. That being said, I think there is still, as there will always be, room for improvement, especially in a society that is eradicating and revolutionizing its norms daily.
Andrew Cramer
DeleteKumashiro states that there are three kinds or images of teachers, this is very much true. I think the teaching profession today has become more difficult and complex. Today’s teachers cannot be just one kind, or one-dimensional, they must have the characteristics of all three kinds of teachers. A teacher has to be a learned professional, researcher, and a professional.
Teachers must be a “learned professional” by learning and becoming proficient in methods of learning, classroom management, classroom content, child development, time management, classroom transitions, and parent relations and communications.
They need to be a “researcher” by exploring and developing the most effective lesson plans. All teachers must be lifelong learners, they are required to complete necessary continuing education credits, write reflective essays, and experiment with different teaching techniques and pedagogies.
Lastly, today’s teachers must be the consummate “professional.” I do believe that the certification requirements and standards have been raised to an all-time high. A Master’s in teaching was at one time highly regarded, now it has become the standard.
Too bad the view on our chosen profession has not been as elevated as the requirements. I sincerely hope that someday soon the view of the teaching profession will be not only respected, and appreciated but also greatly valued…hey its possible.
Emily Meade
ReplyDeleteThroughout undergraduate and graduate school thus far, I’ve experiences qualities of Kumashiro’s 3 kinds of teachers through my professors and cooperating teachers I’ve worked with along the way. When thinking about teachers as learned practitioners, my professors at VCU and practicum teachers have always made a point of getting to know students not just academically but often times personally as well. They’ve always demonstrated their understanding of concepts and gone the extra mile to create an effective learning environment. As researchers, my professors have continued to support my education while continuing to learn and research concepts of the material they teach. Lastly as professionals, I think about my cooperating teachers and how they have completed the certification and licensure I’m currently working on. It’s a profession where you’re constantly learning new methods and ways to improve education.
Amanda Matthews
ReplyDeleteI have seen the 3 kinds of teachers that Kumashiro describes in my cooperating teachers, and even my professors. In the classroom that I have been to it has always been a goal of the teachers/ professors to get to know me personally. It is important for them to be learned practitioners in order to make their classroom a comfortable and safe environment to promote learning. Teachers and professors are also always learning. They are constantly having to keep up with the times whether it is new research in a content area or new technology they have to adapt to. I have seen my cooperating teachers learn how to use a smart board or Ipads for the first time in order to promote their students learning. This, I believe, would also classify them as researchers. Last, but not least, I have seen my cooperating teachers as professionals by having to get recertification's and make copies of various documents to ensure that can happen. Not just anyone can become a teacher anymore. There is much more to it now, and a higher level of education is required in order to get licensure in most states.
The three types of teachers that Kumashiro describes have all shown up in my experience here at VCU as an undergrad and grad student. My EDUS 301 class was all about the teacher as learned practitioner. We learned all about the different psychological theories that explained how to understand students. The teacher as researcher has come up mainly in discussion, but in some of my classes we have had to look into different research on strategies that we could use and how they have worked in classrooms in the past. The teacher as professional has mostly come up outside of VCU classes, but has come up when someone talks to me about my schooling. Teachers have a bad rep to some of the people that I talk to. They think that teaching is an easy job; that you just have to know the content area and then you can teach kids. Others think that teachers are only effective in certain schools because to work in schools in impoverished areas is to not be a good teacher. This frustrates me and I do think that teachers need to be recognized as important contributors to society (seeing as teachers teach the future generations), but I can see where Kumashiro is coming from when it comes to labeling teaching as a profession. It would make the standards of what makes an effective teacher too cut and dry. There are many different types of effective teachers and to try and group/label them into tiny boxes undermines the great amount of work that has been put into their practices.
ReplyDeleteBecky Griffith
ReplyDeleteLSEE is advertised as a reflective practitioner program.
On another note, I agree when Kumashiro says that, "An anti-oppressive teacher is not that someone is. Rather, it is something that someone is always becoming." Just like our students come with the own background experiences, so do teachers. We have experiences that will make us partial in one way or another. We can strive to understand our own biases, but I think there are some we are not even aware of. To combat that we try to understand, and be reflective of how we affect our students.
I think you hit it right on the nail, being aware is half the battle. Teaching is such a multi faceted job that demands a wide range of skills but I think and as you mentioned that being reflective in the way we teach is vital to the development of our students.
DeleteIn Kumashiro’s article the author defines teachers as learned professional by taking psychology courses that teach teachers theories of learning and focus on how we can meet the learning needs of a diverse population of students. I think the LSEE undergraduate portion of our master’s program does a pretty good job of fulfilling this requirement. As a basis we took psychology 101 and then human development otherwise known as EDUS 301. I remember learning about multiple intelligences through Gardner’s theory as well as Kohlberg’s theory of moral development. I found it interesting the Kumashiro brought out that we needed to add course work in areas that have been redefined such as multicultural critiques of mathematics, feminist histories of the natural sciences, postcolonial perspectives on English literature and queer re-readings. I would be curious to know more about why these specific classes. Lastly a point is made that good teacher prep programs use a blending of theory with practical experience. In deed we have done a lot of observing in our earlier coursework and have moved to implementing lessons with our practicum classes and then reflecting on how we could improve in the future.
ReplyDeleteJamie Whittaker
ReplyDeleteVCU’s program incorporates all of Kumashiro’s images of ‘good teachers’ into our courses. Since I have been in the education program here at VCU, most of my professors have been ‘teachers as learned practitioners’ and ‘teacher as professionals’. I have enjoyed those teachers and how they discussed with us what they did when they taught elementary school (some still in elementary schools either teaching or doing other work). This really helped me hearing about their experiences and how they used certain behavior management theories.
Travis Luck
ReplyDeleteThe aspects that Kumashiro writes on are interesting considering we are all (for the most part) close to a point in which we have been in a profession, or are about to go into a profession most likely based on what we have pursued degrees in. In many ways we are taught based on experience, theory, research and more. I have heard from individuals within professions that there is a big difference between learning and doing. I have also been around professionals who consider themselves “old-school” and a little outdated because of how they practice work and they are not even old! Professions at times change so quickly; especially in today’s day in age. For some this means as the passage describes that theory is sometimes thrown out the window when it comes to getting work done. Practice is just sometimes different that what we read in a textbook. But with that being said the research, and education side of counseling or teaching moves the profession forward even if it is met with pushback from members of the field. The passage would not be talking about non-oppressive techniques of working with others if there weren’t oppressive techniques in the first place. Fields are always changing (hopefully for the better) and combined aspects of learning, research and professional work drive this change.
In education it seems like a virtue not to get stuck in a single one of these roles. You cannot strictly learn, research, or do. A well rounded professional would be ideally a mix of the three in same way.
DeleteMaddy Kilgore
ReplyDeleteIn almost every class, especially since beginning Teacher Prep, VCU’s curriculum framework is discussed talking about how their goal is to make us “Reflective Practitioners”. To me they have the goal of us becoming “good” teachers and trying to meet the different types that Kumashiro mentioned but they fall short and only seem to focus on the practitioner. The reflective part of the label now almost seems misleading because the article talked about the reflection piece being so important when talking about teachers as researchers, which is something I have yet to really partake in. Yes we talk about social justice and that you must include it in your lessons but that’s about as far as the program has taken us, not showing us ways to research the problems, or encouraging us to research on our way different teaching styles or thoughts. In our classes we mainly discuss the 3 categories laid out in the practitioner part: the way student’s learn/think, the content knowledge, and methodology focusing on classroom management. While I don’t think these things are necessarily bad at all and found value in those classes. I almost just feel the program tells us this is what will prepare us for the real world and make us well-rounded, good teachers but that’s not quite the truth. I have been lucky though to have had great professors that have tried to go beyond that and talk about the importance of teachers also being researchers and professionals by sharing their own personal stories and advice. I think there is value in each type of “good teacher” model but a really good teacher in my book would be all 3 things but also recognize that they’re not done, that there is more learning, more reflection, more changes to be done. In the article it talked about how the “anti-oppressive” teacher is obviously the goal but once you label yourself as that or claim to have reached that then you’re still being oppressive by not changing and being too comfortable. I found that perspective so true and something that needs to be talked about, that we are never going to be the perfect teacher doing everything right and not oppressing our students and we need to be okay with that but always striving to be better. I believe some of the professors in the program do try to import that knowledge on us but it would be nice to see that sort of thinking more embedded in the curriculum and program model at VCU.
James Biedenharn 2/2/16 9:57 (Just in Time!)
ReplyDeleteWorking and teaching students with high functioning autism allows me to experience the three kind of teachers Kumashiro refers too and then some. The Special Education with Severe Disabilities graduate degree that VCU offers has definitely prepared me for the teaching world. Additionally, since I retained my current employment Independently (without the help from VCU), I feel like have experienced many of the different nuances that Kumashiro’s discusses in his pages. The learned practitioner aspect of Kuamshrio’s writings really hit home with me. On page 7, Kumashrio states that, “Third, students need to learn about how to teach, from classroom management to instruction in disciplines.” After reading this portion of the required readings, I reflected on what Kumashrio was trying to exude to his readers. I think he was trying to discuss the importance of students being interested in teaching as a career, need to learn the appropriate measures on how to effectively teach students which in turn, will maximize their potential. My program within the Oliver Hall School Education, has allowed me to learn new special education techniques that will allow me to help my students for the better. When teaching special education, one has to be aware of numerous social issues, emotions, abilities, inabilities, and willingness to work. Kumashiro hits the nail on the head when referring to teachings being “learned practitioners.” The other facets of Kumashrio’s first part of his chapter was something that I definitely agreed with and observe/practice in my teaching career almost everyday.
VCU's Education program has established a framework that compliments what Kumashiro lists in this article. I have to admit that it was hard for me to be interested in that article, because I was annoyed... While I believe that some educational programs focus on making wholesome pre-service teachers, it still truly depends on the individuals that go through these programs. There are a ton of paradoxes. It is true that practitioners can never be fully learned, but it is also true that when pre-service educators go through these programs not to be fully learned, but instead to receive a good amount of experiences and knowledge to prepare us for what we may encounter once we get into the field. As for being a researcher, sure, educators do not need to learn how to do research, but it is important that we do know how to conduct research, because let's face it... the whole classroom experience is an experiment. Also, from what I have learned from the program, reflecting on how you teach is SO IMPORTANT. As for educators as professionals, I skimmed through that section, because I could no longer take the article anymore. But I can say that VCU's program develops us into proper professionals hence the evaluations and code of conducts.
ReplyDeleteChelsea Auernheimer
ReplyDeleteI like to think that the three types of teachers (professional, researcher, and practitioner---especially teachers as researchers) do show up in our classes. It comes from professors putting their input into things, but also defining the construct of what schools as an institution want as well. To step away from the norm or any function is good, but many seem to either fear or steer clear from t because it is foreign, or in some type of way, dangerous. You’re not only dealing with yourself, but also parents, principals, systems. A network that probably likes to stay intact and follow the norm if not deviate by what the head is defining. I think that we encourage teachers to step out of their comfort zone and think outside the box, yet, when it happens, we punish them, so in a way it almost seems as if the training is in utter contradiction of what is actually occurring.
Throughout the Kumashiro chapter, I particularly noticed how often he discussed how anti-oppressive practices, when they are present, are often sort of the last step, something that is added onto the existing framework of how to research or how to teach. Similarly, throughout my experiences in the teacher prep program, I have noticed that while there is an effort made to be inclusive and socially aware, it's something that often happens a little bit off to the side. We're conscious of racial differences for the duration of a discussion about representation in classroom literature. Don't get me wrong, that's definitely necessary and important. But when we're discussing history standards later, where did that racial awareness go?
ReplyDelete