Some complain that this
book is too philosophical and too full of literature, poetry, movies, etc. to
be of much use--in essence it's to abstract. I‘ve come to see it as providing great descriptions of classrooms
where kids are getting taken seriously as people. In some ways it is a
guide for how to teach in a way that overcomes Johnson’s problems of privilege
and power and even the whole standardized culture of public school today. Try
to find some evidence in the book that I am not crazy and that this is the case (or feel free to disagree and provide some critique of my use of this text).
I am probably way off, but I think Ayers is telling us do away with labels. Labels do not really tell us anything about the person, so if we do not really stress labels then we do not put so much weight on others jokes that would make Johnson livid. Ayers talks through out the book that we are works in progross, "we have not got it completely right". we are imperfect,s so we should remember that before we judge others harshly for their sexist racist comments.
ReplyDeleteJordan Lee
ReplyDelete“Our first commitment, then, is this: to recognize and call out the humanity in each of our students, we become students of our students. We take their side.”
I think that this quote is a good description of a classroom where kids are getting taken seriously as people. Ayer discusses throughout the book the importance of teachers to commit themselves to helping students reach the full measure of their humanity, to learn to embrace their differences, and realize they do have power. Ayer believes that the teacher shouldn’t just do the teaching and learning isn’t only the job of the student. He believes that both teachers and students should be teaching and learning with and from one another. He believes that teachers can learn from their students’ life experiences and the unique stories and backgrounds they bring into the classroom. This idea by Johnson highlights his humanistic approach to education.
I would argue that the problem with the Ayers text is not that it is too philosophical. I felt like the balance between examples and text was very good. In my opinion, the biggest problem is that I suspect the people who are likely to respond well to Teaching Towards Freedom are almost universally going to NOT be the people who most need to read it. Ayers sort of writes like he assumes the reader agrees with his premise.
ReplyDeleteFor instance, in my little Kindle copy of the text, I have a whole slew of highlights of passages like "become a student of your students," and "teaching as ethical action," and "teaching is for something and against something else," because those are passages that really speak to me. But I am not everybody. There aren't a lot of people who are openly going to say "yes, I teach towards control and oppression." But I'm sure there are plenty of people who read the same passages that spoke to me, snorted derisively, and said, "I don't have time to get all buddy-buddy with my students. I just have to make sure they can leave my grade knowing how to write and keep them from burning the school down." And I don't see Ayers offering a whole lot to win that type of person over. Maybe that's not his goal, but it needs to be somebody's.
Anyways, I liked the Ayers text very much. I found it very motivating and energizing, even those bits with that "literature" and "poetry" stuff in it.
To be honest, as a prospective English teacher, I liked some of Bill Ayer’s literary illustrations and analogies. The literary references reflect the recognition of authors that the word “teacher” can have many meanings, some dark and inhumane. We like to try to model ourselves after the ideal of a “good teacher,” but I suppose there is probably a bit of the “bad teacher” inside of all of us- whether we work as a teacher in a school or not! That is because “teacher” is both a professional role and a basic archetype.
ReplyDeleteSome of the content of this book seemed familiar to me from other texts I have read about becoming culturally responsive and creating inclusive, caring classrooms. Ayers seems to be writing against the “banker model” of education, which I agree with to an extent. One part of the book that I also agreed with when Ayers talked about the importance of being conscious of what messages the school environment spends to students. A school that enforces many petty rules about issues of style rather than challenging students at the level of values seems to not take students very seriously and instead to police them for aspects of their identities. A school in which students can feel more comfortable being themselves (as long as they are not hurting others or disrupting learning) may create a greater sense of trust between the students and the teacher.
I know a few teachers who have rigid ideas about what it means for students to “show respect” to teachers. I can somewhat understand where these teachers are coming from, because they fear losing control if the classroom perceives them as lacking in authority, and they know disturbances and power struggles can waste the time of the class. However, some of these teachers also seem to take offense at students simply not adhering to old-fashioned or culturally-isolated norms. I hope that during my generation, schools will redefine “respectful” codes of dress, behavior, and speech to embrace greater diversity and changing priorities of society.
Brittany Milteer
ReplyDeleteThroughout the text, Ayers has an envision for students to become more fully human. He wants teachers to not only teach students and develop relationships with them, but to also learn from the students. By collaborating together, both teachers and students are learning from each other's experiences and backgrounds. Everyone can learn something from someone. By doing this students are becoming more engaged, and ultimately experiencing more freedom. They are being seen as students with a vision. The idea of humanization is very evident.
Teaching to the whole student is part of Ayers talks about. Meaning that you are teaching to make them better humans, not just to retain knowledge of content. This idea to teach to the whole child and collaborating with students in order to not just teach them, but to learn from them is exactly how a classroom should look in order to overcome those privilege and power that Johnson talks about.
ReplyDeleteChelsea Auernheimer
ReplyDeleteI find that Ayres is telling us to start living by what we believe. We all tend to have our own beliefs and virtues, we claim many things but we don't tend to live by them. When you compare yourself to other cultures from around the world, they have history, and that history has formed hard beliefs and their actions abide by them. We have values and beliefs too, but our actions prove to be wishy-washy at times. Like Ayres said, out country struggles with its own history. But in all, I think he really just wants us to better ourselves. Set out own biases aside to enhance and construct other individuals along the way. Don't let what may be going on in the world pass you, as you are a vital player in the system as well. He acknowledges that there are some issues with our "perfect" country and in order to fix them, we need to open our minds and shed our rose-covered glasses to the world.
Corinne Tilley
ReplyDeleteI would suspect that the reason Ayers uses so much philosophy, literature, films, poetry, etc. is because he is presenting himself as a normal person living in our society that is filled with and influenced by literature, films, poetry, etc. I would also suspect that people who criticize the book for it are the type of people who believe that school should be for education and education only. It's a valid opinion, but it's an unrealistic one in an age where it's nearly impossible to avoid the influences of the media that surrounds us. Ayers is “for” teaching the whole child, not just the part of the child that is capable of learning how to multiply fractions, and the whole child includes the parts of the child that have interests and desires.
Paige Michanco
ReplyDeleteI didn't find a specific quote from the text but I do agree with Amanda when she says that part of what Ayers is talking about is teaching the whole child. As a future teacher, I find it extremely important to get to know each and every one of your students. When we do this, we can learn from them. By doing so, we open our minds to the issues that take place within our classrooms. When our classrooms are more open, students are more engaged and free to discuss.
I enjoyed reading on the chapter of "Turning Toward the Student: Who in the World am I?". A line in the text that caught my attention was when the author described the teacher's response to questions of student identity, "she looks for opportunities to prod the questions, to agitate and awaken, to pursue them across a range of boundaries, known as well as unknown" (Ayers, 1994, p. 33). The role of a teacher will never be clearly defined for me because there are so many facets to what makes a great teacher, however I feel that teaching as a career puts us in a unique position to help students develop their sense of identity. Ayers points out that although the answers to identity lie not within us but within our students it is our job is to help students see themselves fully as a human beings (not a robot that regurgitates information), worthy of our effort and attention (not a test score number), and that they can see us as figures who are going to care and take them seriously. It's cool because in psychology we learned that one of the components of self determination theory is the need for relatedness, a sense of belonging.
ReplyDeleteJamie Whittaker
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed the book and liked how Ayers had the descriptions of classrooms where kids are getting taken seriously. I did not find it too philosophical or too full of literature, poetry, etc. I agree with Corinne’s post. Teaching the whole child and not just part of the child. “Teaching is intellectuall and ethical work; it takes a thoughtful, reflective, and caring person to do it well. It takes a brain and a heart. The first and fundamental challenge for teachers is to embrace students as three-dimensional creatures, as distinct human beings with hearts and minds and skills and dreams and capacities of their own, as people much like ourselves.”
James Biedenharn 5/3/16 at 10:29 AM
ReplyDeleteOn Page 32, there is a great quote which really made me think about the state of teaching. As Ayers explains, "A dialogue on the moral commitment to teach and ethical action in classroom draws the attention to something more the rule following or convention, classroom management or lesson planning, something more than the linear and the merely serviceable, something more than skills or even disposition of mind. It highlights the larger purposes and deepest dimensions, the difficulties and challenges, the conflicts and contradictions alive at the base of teaching. It might also help us negotiate the hard realities we face, and point to both the risks and the rewards of the teaching life (Ayers, 1999. pg 32)."
This quote is want I want teaching to be. I am an equal to my students. I am not special because I am teacher. I am here to help the students grow as individuals so they can maximize their potential and be contributing members to their communities. I believe Ayers wants some of the same things that I want for my students. I do not believe that Ayers cares if his students grasp everything academically. Rather, I believe Ayers wants his students to learn the way of the world and not become so wrapped up in academics. I liked this quote a lot.
There are many areas of the book that I though was beneficial to teachers. It might have been a little philosophical but I do not see that as a negative. Early in the book it coved how the Australian government was educating aboriginal children and they were “civilizing the beast”. They were going to help them by striping them of their identity and culture to make them better citizens. The book does provoke thought. It makes you think, have an opinion, and decide for yourself what is right. I do not think it is possible to read this book and have no opinion or thought somewhere through the process. It is not possible to sit on the fence while you are reading this book. You will either think left or think right, and for that reason it does serve a purpose for this class.
ReplyDeleteIt explains how authoritarian schools in Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia turned out brilliant doctors and scientist. They also produce rebels and free thinkers. What is the purpose of education?
It states that all students come to school seeking the answer to only two questions. The first is “who in the world am I or who am I in the world?” The other is “what in the world are my chances and my choices?” The next question I ask myself is how am I supposed to help them find the answers to those questions? Heck, I am not Plato, or Dewey. I do not have all the answers, I am not sure if I have any answers. I guess I will just have to draw from Dewey’s words “The teacher is a learner, and the learner is, without knowing it, a teacher.”
Andrew Cramer
DeleteI posted at 1031 but left my name off
Emily Meade
ReplyDeleteIn the book, Ayers talks about how education “enables teachers and students alike to become more powerfully self-consciously alive and embraces the aspiration of people to become more fully human.” This quote from the very beginning of the book sets the stage for Ayers idea of taking our future generation seriously and working alongside them to better them as human beings. Similar to your beliefs, I don’t see this as too philosophical; it’s a guide for how to teach that influences educators to collaborate with students to overcome the problems of privilege and power that Johnson talks about.
When it comes to this book, I see it more as a perspective-like lens, in which people (especially teachers) should be more aware of. Ayers describes the idea that the so-called "democratic education" system really isn't democratic at all. He explains how politicians and bureaucrats have created these discrete policies that "abandon the idea that every child and youth is entitled to a free and high-quality public education" (p. 24). For example, centralized tests and zero-tolerance policies are dehumanizing the entire scope of education. Children are thrust into a market based educational society, where they are forced into this continuum of winners and losers, in which success is determined by profit. Thus, teachers need to keep this in mind when they are viewing their goals of education versus the nation’s goal of education. Ayers mandates that we must incorporate a moral literacy foundation, in which we link moral stance to ethical conduct – especially our own (p. 26).
ReplyDelete"The first and fundamental challenge for teachers is to embrace students as three-dimensional creatures, as distinct human beings with hearts and minds and skills and dreams and capacities of their own, as people much like ourselves.” This quote summarizes your point on whow Ayers thinks students should be viewed as. I like how Ayers talks about how we are teaching to the "whole" child. Teachers need to be aware of what goes into the child's attitude toward school, realizing that there are outside factors that affect the child's success in school.
ReplyDeleteI can understand how people find this text philosophical and abstract, but I think that is exactly the point he is trying to make. Throughout the text, Ayers continually draws on the idea of educating the whole child to create a "human." Teaching a child as though they are an equal human to you is what sets the tone that every student in the class can be taken seriously. On page 97, Ayers states that, "Dialogue also creates community, even if the community formed is sometimes filled with contention and conflict." As simple as this statement is, I think it speaks volume. Having a classroom full of "real" people creates conflict and confusion among unlike ideas. In my opinion, that is what's so great about teaching the whole child. When children are taken seriously, they are able to speak their minds and learn from others.
ReplyDeleteIn Teaching Toward Freedom, my favorite example of children being taken seriously is how students were treated regarding 9/11. Ayers states, “In the weeks following the attacks, each of us feeling raw and aggrieved, I argued that we should strive even harder to be kinder, more caring, and we should resists as best we could any gesture toward self-righteousness, replacing with it with compassion, generosity, and imagination.” (p.113) Students were then asked to draw freehand maps of the world, which led to the realization that students in America lack a great deal of knowledge regarding the world around them as far as geography is concerned. Ayers posed the questions: “Who are we?” “What are our choices?” “Can we feel the weight of the world?” These questions are geared toward students, in my opinion, to help them realize that they can be an active and real part of society.
ReplyDeleteFrom Ayers text, I understood that he wants students to develop as "people" and to be taken seriously and not see as children who can't comprehend or understand things. As teachers we need to embrace this and see our students as successful human beings that are capable of learning in the same way as everyone else in society. We don't need to dumb it down for our students because this does not help them intellectually at all. We need to see everyone as equal like we try to teach our students about race, culture, ethnicity, etc. This is very essential!
ReplyDeleteI really appreciated Ayer's thoughts on "zero tolerance". I hadn't thought about what the full implications were, and how taking that hard line approach may not be the most helpful or beneficial, despite having good intentions. He suggested looking at these situations with the lens of them being your child, and removing some of the objectivity. I think this is valid, it reminded me of the scenario of gang violence from "Holler If You Hear Me" where the teacher was firmly against gangs, but still supported and respected each student as an individual. It is important to remember that you are dealing with the student when confronting these situations, and they need to be treated as such not as their action.
ReplyDeleteStephanie Furnish
ReplyDeleteI can see how this book SEEMS philosophical. A lot of the language seems superfluous and unnecessary, however it DOES make a good point. Or points. While some of it is philosophical, there is just as much or more evidence of Ayers giving downright genius advice. My favorite begins on page 86, where he talks about the poetry stem activity to talk about race and stereotypes. This is such a great activity for the students to reflect on themselves and their place in the world, as well as how they view them self and how others view them. These activities fit into the curriculum and are so much more beneficial to students.
I often think teachers fear doing activities like these because of pacing guides and the kids talking about things too mature for their age, but I say screw all of that. Let the kids talk about what they have heard, seen, or experienced. Engage that discussion. That's when and where they will learn the most. Students don't graduate high school remembering the area of a triangle or that the Korean War began in 1950. They leave remembering the valuable lessons that mattered to them, that pressured their preconceived notions, that made them THINK. That's teaching.
Amanda Kern
ReplyDeleteI definitely think that Ayers wants students to be taken seriously so that they can develop as people who will one day be members of society. I definitely agree with Alicia. This also made me think about the book our group read for our presentation, "Holler if You Hear Me." It reminded me of the part where the teacher took time out get to know students by picking the book, "The House on Mango Street" that would relate to their lives of being mexican-americans living in Chicago. He took his students seriously just as he wanted them to do to him.
I think the point of the text is for educators to see students as people with their own ideas and to get educators to understand that we should allow students their freedom to grow individually into the people they want to be and should be. Going back to the discussion on dehumanization, I believe that most schools and classrooms are dehumanizing. Children have a natural desire to learn, but schooling has somehow made "learning" a forced job and is now something that most children feel pressured to do and have lost the desire to learn in this environment. A question about pacing guides was brought up in class and I had too many thoughts on the matter to get them out. Pacing guides are time constraints in an environment where we hope to see students engaged in their own learning and making connections. When students make connections, there is no telling what might come next, and it may not be what is next on the teacher's schedule because of a pacing guide. We as teachers should allow for these connections to be made. We should guide our teaching by our students learning and interests. This is the best way to build on knowledge; interests and making connections. Schools are taking away this freedom. Students are being conditioned to learn. Children want to learn. Why is school seen as a chore to so many? Maybe because this freedom that Ayers speaks of has been taken from educators and students.
ReplyDeletekurt here....dfasg
ReplyDelete