Yes We Teachers Can

The article "Yes We Can" brought a contrast to the article we read last week, "Unemployment Training." The main point of "Unemployment Training" was that urban schools do not adequately prepare students for the real world, in fact they prepare them to fail. "Yes We Can" raised hope for me because I am interested in teaching in urban schools, where the majority of students are minorities. The article pointed out that the schools where students of color are achieving are not doing anything extraordinary or radically different. The schools simply teach all of the students to high standards with high expectations so that even minority students are thriving. Teacher quality is what makes a difference for the students. Teacher quality is what effects how students perform in school. This means that it does not matter where you are teaching, but rather are you qualified and working for the best interest of your students. Also, it does not have to do with the students' race or low-income backgrounds. Now that I think about it, saying that students of color will inevitably fail, is like saying that they are genetically inclined to not succeed, which of course is not true. I think that many teachers have prejudices toward students of color or low-income, and therefore have lower expectations. There is such a negative connotation of urban schools (which I really hate) existing today. We talked about it in class on Monday how as teachers we should have high expectations for all of our students. We as teachers need to evaluate our own attitudes toward students of color (which is why those surveys we take are helpful).

I attended a staff meeting at the beginning of the school year and the principal said that even if you don't believe a student will succeed, "fake it till you make it." I think the principal meant that eventually you will really come to believe that your students will succeed.

The second point of the article that I wanted to comment on is the idea of using assessments and data. Just because there are assessments and data that show that some students are underachieving, teachers must use the data correctly in order to make the appropriate changes. Some teachers may just look at the data but then do nothing about it or give up on their students. In my Latinos and U.S. Education course we talked about the power of advocacy. We discussed how some Latino parents cannot be the advocates for their children because they do not know about the data or about programs available for their children. The Latino parents may not be aware of the resources available. Using assessments and data, teachers can work with parents to become advocates for their students, which result in better changes. This also ties into what we talked about in our Leadership class, that as teacher leaders we have to use data to back up our claims or our desires for certain changes.

I think it takes more than just using assessment, data, and standards. Even if high standards are set in the curriculum, it does not mean that every teacher strives for it. I think it takes teachers that strongly believe in their students, believing that their students can succeed. So Yes We Teachers Can guide our students to success!

Classifying

In Chapter Two of our Science book, there is a section entitled "Classifying and Cultural Norms," starting on page 49. The main point of that section is that some students may have cultural backgrounds that make their understanding of classifying difficult. Classifying involves organizing objects into groups. You have to be able to classify objects into opposite descriptions. However some students may come from cultures that do not have an "either-or mind set," and thus do not really get that things have to be classified in two opposite groups. For example, the book talks about how non-Western thinking does not reflect the "either-or mind set."

This section really struck me because a process skill that seems so simple to teach can actually be very difficult for students to get! I thought it would be a simple skill for students to learn because you are just looking for observable properties. However, some students may have a hard time just looking at observable properties, and want to look at the functional properties of the object. It is clear how cultural differences in thinking can even affect how students learn science. Even what students observe about something or infer may be influenced by what their culture values. For example, (this may be a stretch) a certain culture may value the sense of touch as observing, while another may value the sense of sight. That would affect what one student versus what another student observes. Another example that comes to mind is that some cultures may stifle creativity, so a student may not view science as creative, or use creative means to come up with answers to questions or designing experiments.

As a teacher I have take my students' backgrounds into consideration when teaching science, or any subject. The book suggest being explicit, which again ties back to thinking of science as culture. Students need to know the cultural norms of science to be successful learning science. So like teaching another student about Vietnamese cultural norms, like being very respectful to elders, I need to teach my students the cultural norms of classifying, like how to look for observable properties.

When we classified the beans in class on Monday, I had a really hard time grasping this concept at first. I wonder if that has to do with my cultural background or my lack of interest in science. To be honest, however, I still do not see the purpose in trying to get an object into just one group. But John was really good at explaining it to me in different ways, which is what I have to do when teaching science.