HW 50 - response to set of readings

Gatto - Against School

In this article Gatto talks about different things. He talks about whether or not we need school and who's fault it is that school is so boring. He feels, as a teacher, that public schools cripple kids down because of the fact that its so boring and the teachers don't really have anything interesting to teach. when the teacher sticks to the same programs throughout 12 years of schooling, its one of the reasons why school cripples these students. This article talks about how kids could also be the reason why school is boring. Because in certain cases where the students only care about grades, or don't care about anything, they make the teacher have no reason to want to teach them and basically create boredom. He talks about how instead of making the student sit there and do things that simply give them reasons not to go to school, the teachers can start to treat the children more as competent adults. Making them take more risks in the classroom and being more adventurous with them and being more flexible with them having to take test and reading texts all the time. then Gatto asks whether or not we even really need school or not. He wasn't talking about education but he was talking about whether or not we needed school 5 times a week, 7 or 8 hours a day. he talks about how these deadly routines that these school systems have are unnecessary. He talks about how important people like Abraham Lincoln or Thomas Jefferson or somebody didn't have to go through this obnoxious schooling system to be successful. It was seen that they have this mass schooling in the united states because they wanted to make good people, or good citizens or what not. The six functions (the adjustive, the integrating, the diagnostic and directing, the differentiating, the selective, and the propaedeutic function) from Inglis is the complete break down of schooling and how these functions is what the schools go by and concur.

I agree with Gatto all the way. I feel that the school system does do a little to much with the school system. He tries to say that following and going through this 12 year school course doesn't always have to be the answer for getting an education. I agree with him. He didn't ask why we have to go to school but he asked why do we have such a suicidal course when trying to get one, and that is what he asks whether or not that is necessary. I agree with Gatto when he says that the teachers and the students are making school so boring. He explains that not being able to teach them more or do more than what the standard curriculum gives them is the main reason why they aren't able to expand with these students and I agree with him 100%. I feel Gatto understands that this type of schooling in our culture is just too much and that sometimes it doesn't work all the time. When he explains the 6 functions, he is explaining school and what its really all about. When he states the differentiating function he tries to give a viewing of school and how schools don't really push kids to their personal best. the push them to point based on the role they play. I liked the fact that Gatto talks about that because it shows how our schooling doesn't really go into each students education. No matter who you are, the schooling generalizes personal education. Whatever your role is, is what you get.

Paulo Freire - Pedagogy of oppressed

In chapter 2, Paulo discusses and analyzes the relationship that a student and a teacher have within one another. With the teacher being the "subject" and the student being the "listening objects" She talks about how the student is always the one that has to take in all of the information all the time, while on the other hand, the teacher is just throwing information at the student and expecting them to register every thing that they are processing. And that right there is the reason why education is suffering. She talks about how the teacher is never really teaching the student anything but how they are throwing information at the student, expecting them to know exactly what they are talking about. And she explains how this is one of the many reasons of why education is suffering now. She compares the the student and teacher relationship to the banking system that we have. The teacher is the one that is depositing what ever they want while the student is being forced to take in what ever they want to deposit. The teacher has one obligation and one obligation only and that is to fill the students head with their narration. They don;t give the full package of teaching them the significance of what they are actually learning or anything. She basically just shows the how the teacher can do what ever they want and teach what they want and no matter what the circumstances is the student has to take in that information and hope that they can learn from it.

I agree with Paulo 100%. I feel that at times the student can't really stand up for their selves. there is a slim to none chance that a student would be smarter than a teacher in the subject they teach which gives the teacher an advantage over them. I agree with Paulo when she says that we students have to take in what ever the teacher teaches no matter what. i agree because it happens in my our school. Whether we like what the teacher teaches or not we have to take it in and try to learn it because they are of higher authority and because of the fact that we are younger which makes us not no any better and basically more dum than the teachers. When she relates the schooling system to the Banking system, I agree with her on the concept but then I also disagree with what she says based on the reality of the banking system. I agree with her because what ever you are depositing into the bank (information the teacher is giving you) the bank has no choice but to put that deposited money into the bank for you (the student has no choice but to take the notes down and learn what the teacher is narrating). On the other hand, I disagree with the banking system she compares the teacher/student relationship to. With banking what ever amount you put in, is the amount that is put in no matter what. But that isn't so much the case between the student and the teacher. Even though the student has to take in what ever the teacher teaches him, he doesn't have to do it. Even though the student wont succeed by doing that, he isn't 100% obligated to do that. In addition, the student can always ask question to deepen what they are learning. Can the people or machine depositing somebodies money in the bank not obligated to put the money in? No they must follow what they are told and put the money into the bank no matter what. I agree with her about the unequal relationship between the teacher and the student, but no so much the banking system comparison.


Delpit - Interview with Lisa Delpit

In this interview she explains her focus of schooling and what teachers lack in, in order to bring out each students intelligence. She states that her focus of school is providing excellent education for low-income students, predominately colored students. She talks about how teachers tend to refer to what is on the test and how that can make them interpret the child in a wrong way and not really see the brilliance that the student actually has. She feels that every student has a brilliance, it's just that you have to find a way or a method in bringing it out from each student. She doesn't think that the teachers don't really try hard enough to bring out the strengths and great qualities of each student. A strategy that Delpit tries to use is Art. She feels it opens and widely expands the students mind and at the same time help them interact with one another more than usual. she feels that the teacher can see a new "light" in the students, rather than before where they can only see the flaws that the students had. She feels that poetry and the way it rhymes and flows connects to students (mostly children of color) in a positive way and brings the best out of them. She feels that if the student is able to learn and work better with material they are more comfortable with. The teacher must find a way to meet the students needs so they can learn more and be more successful. That's why she insists that the school's curriculum should be based on what the student is comfortable with and their particular needs.

I agree with what she says but then again I don't for many different reasons. I agree with her when she says that teachers don't do enough to see every students brilliance. I agree because knowing what the each student is good at best gives the teacher a good idea of what kind of student they are and to know that they kid actually has a brain. I think finding out each students brilliance can make the teachers job a lot more easy and expand on their lessons a little more because a students brilliance is also material that they are comfortable at. And material that a student is comfortable at means less learn and more deepened conversations on that material. I also disagree with what the fact that the teacher should bring out every body's brilliance. I disagree with that demand because if the teacher was to bring out the brilliance in EVERY student they have, then it would be to much material to cover and no one wouldn't learn as much as they need to and every body would be behind. Bringing out everybody's Brilliance would be a good thing but making sure that the students have the basic curriculum understood, at least a little bit, will make every body in most cases be on the same page.

Mr.Fanning interview

During Mr.Fannings interview he basically gives us the breakdown of him being a social studies teacher, to how he became a principal, what his goals for his students is, and how he wants to get higher in the department of education. His main purpose of joining the department of education was for one reason, to help kids learn and be successful. he talks about how kids have to have an education no matter what it is. when he states that "an education is the greatest thing you can get" he was saying that all the fame he has got and all the good he got in his life, the best thing that has happened to him was getting his degree. As he states that he wants to get higher in position, his one goal was for everybody to go to college.

I agree with with Mr.Fanning on everything he says. When he states that him getting his degree was the best thing that happened to him, I could really relate to that with my own personal experiences. I have been through a lot. I have did a lot of successful things in my life, but walking across that stage to know that I am ready to take it to the next level and getting my diploma has a feeling like no other. I agree with Fannings goal that everybody should go to college. I agree because college isn't just about school work but its also about responsibility. It's teaching you the next step in life which is being independent and knowing how to use your time wisely and making decisions on your own. So I agree with the fact that Mr.Fanning wants every body to go to college and get their degree and that getting his education was the best thing that's happened to him.