The class discussion launched on the topic of "what would be the ideal higher education for an American Indian? And would UNC-A be fitting?" Like many people said, the question is flawed. It's primarily due to the fact that I don't think the higher education is fitting for the vast majority of White Americans. Why do I say this you ask? Well, maybe you didn't ask, but I'll tell you anyway. The way the education system is set up now, teachers lecture, students write down, teachers test, students take the tests, repeat, and hope that something sticks with. While report after report have shown that lecturing does not work, TEACHERS AND PROFESSORS CONTINUE TO CONDUCT THE CLASSROOM IN SUCH MANNER (Reason #1 why I think the Humanities department should have a major reformation).
I think it's partially due to the fact that lecturing is very comfortable. Professors don't have to relinquish some of the power in the classroom over to students and they maintain all the control of what's happening, what's said, and where the classroom is to be led. But I think another reason why lecturing is so popular amongst teachers is because it's a teaching method that blends very "nicely" with standardized testing.... and that is how 99% of the education system measures if the students have successfully "learned" the material that they were supposed to learn. But not everyone is "designed" to learn a certain way, and to force them into a system that makes them learn a certain way and then test them on it.... it's madness. I saw this on the web the other day and it is exactly right about teachers:
The last box, for those who are unaware of teaching pedagogy, are just a few of the many teaching methods, strategies, etc that a teacher must be aware of when designing a lesson plan to fit each classroom. Differentiation- meeting the needs of all types of learners. Now I know what Matt had to say today is right- is it really possible for a university to accommodate all types of cultures and learners? Realistically? I don't think so. But that doesn't mean universities aren't to at least try. I mean, how can a university make such strives to reel in diverse students but not make any attempts to change their own style of teaching? And I strongly believe that that is truly the root of all the problems- not taking into consideration the needs of all types of learners. This crosses over from not just "races" but to socioeconomic levels, too. Looking at a regular classroom, I can guarantee only a small percentage of the students can learn from simply oral lessons? What about kinesthetic learners? Bodily learners? People who learn best when talking in groups? From writing in blogs?
Someone said it best today when he said, "We have to start with education first." I couldn't agree more. Once a classroom is designed to welcome all types of learners, then that branches off to different ethnicities as well. So to say that American Indians would or would not find a good fit here at UNC-A is irrelevant. We could have all the clubs in the world, and the teachers could lecture all they want about "diversity" but until there is an environment that enables learning, nothing will change. And that is the point of higher education, right? Learning? Yes, the social aspect is huge. However, students, regardless of "race" should be able to learn their trade......
...And as much as I think about this, I still have to wonder. How much should the university or professors of particular majors bend to accommodate all learning styles? I look at the literature program and silently cry a little inside. I love reading literature. I love diving into the scene and exploring alongside characters, crying with characters, and learning a little bit more about myself through my experience with a book. But the literature department is more concerned with how well we can articulate a specific argument about a novel or poem. No longer is there much enjoyment because i'm too busy trying to wrestle a novel to the ground and beat an interpretation out of it. It honestly sickens me. I rant and moan about this, but then I stop and think about what the literature department is preparing me for..... the "academic realm" of scholarly thinkers where they do nothing but write articles and books about more literature. So when I stop and think about it, the many essays and explications that I am called to write do help me prepare for this world (a world that I have decided from the start to not enter).... I don't disagree with that at all, but I am saying that the way the professors go about teaching me is painful. Teachers should be more "guides" than anything- allowing the students to explore the material and derive what they will from the literature. And if their interpretation is different than the professors then the professors should be okay with that!
There are exceptions, though. I've had a handful of classes that have been designed around multiple intelligences.... This class being one of them (and I'm not just saying this because Dr. Hobby is reading this). Personally I learn best when I get to interact with the text..... I especially don't like standardized testing or lecturing- my attention span is way too short for that. Anyway, the point of this entire post is to say that diversity of "races" should not be the primary effort of the universities... but to make an effort to diversify the ways in which students learn. As for which university American Indians should attend, given their financial aid help and distance from close family (that is if they are close relationally-wise) then they should choose the best institution that's conducive for their specific type of learning. If they hate lecturing, then UNC-A probably shouldn't be their first choice.
I think it's partially due to the fact that lecturing is very comfortable. Professors don't have to relinquish some of the power in the classroom over to students and they maintain all the control of what's happening, what's said, and where the classroom is to be led. But I think another reason why lecturing is so popular amongst teachers is because it's a teaching method that blends very "nicely" with standardized testing.... and that is how 99% of the education system measures if the students have successfully "learned" the material that they were supposed to learn. But not everyone is "designed" to learn a certain way, and to force them into a system that makes them learn a certain way and then test them on it.... it's madness. I saw this on the web the other day and it is exactly right about teachers:
The last box, for those who are unaware of teaching pedagogy, are just a few of the many teaching methods, strategies, etc that a teacher must be aware of when designing a lesson plan to fit each classroom. Differentiation- meeting the needs of all types of learners. Now I know what Matt had to say today is right- is it really possible for a university to accommodate all types of cultures and learners? Realistically? I don't think so. But that doesn't mean universities aren't to at least try. I mean, how can a university make such strives to reel in diverse students but not make any attempts to change their own style of teaching? And I strongly believe that that is truly the root of all the problems- not taking into consideration the needs of all types of learners. This crosses over from not just "races" but to socioeconomic levels, too. Looking at a regular classroom, I can guarantee only a small percentage of the students can learn from simply oral lessons? What about kinesthetic learners? Bodily learners? People who learn best when talking in groups? From writing in blogs?
Someone said it best today when he said, "We have to start with education first." I couldn't agree more. Once a classroom is designed to welcome all types of learners, then that branches off to different ethnicities as well. So to say that American Indians would or would not find a good fit here at UNC-A is irrelevant. We could have all the clubs in the world, and the teachers could lecture all they want about "diversity" but until there is an environment that enables learning, nothing will change. And that is the point of higher education, right? Learning? Yes, the social aspect is huge. However, students, regardless of "race" should be able to learn their trade......
...And as much as I think about this, I still have to wonder. How much should the university or professors of particular majors bend to accommodate all learning styles? I look at the literature program and silently cry a little inside. I love reading literature. I love diving into the scene and exploring alongside characters, crying with characters, and learning a little bit more about myself through my experience with a book. But the literature department is more concerned with how well we can articulate a specific argument about a novel or poem. No longer is there much enjoyment because i'm too busy trying to wrestle a novel to the ground and beat an interpretation out of it. It honestly sickens me. I rant and moan about this, but then I stop and think about what the literature department is preparing me for..... the "academic realm" of scholarly thinkers where they do nothing but write articles and books about more literature. So when I stop and think about it, the many essays and explications that I am called to write do help me prepare for this world (a world that I have decided from the start to not enter).... I don't disagree with that at all, but I am saying that the way the professors go about teaching me is painful. Teachers should be more "guides" than anything- allowing the students to explore the material and derive what they will from the literature. And if their interpretation is different than the professors then the professors should be okay with that!
There are exceptions, though. I've had a handful of classes that have been designed around multiple intelligences.... This class being one of them (and I'm not just saying this because Dr. Hobby is reading this). Personally I learn best when I get to interact with the text..... I especially don't like standardized testing or lecturing- my attention span is way too short for that. Anyway, the point of this entire post is to say that diversity of "races" should not be the primary effort of the universities... but to make an effort to diversify the ways in which students learn. As for which university American Indians should attend, given their financial aid help and distance from close family (that is if they are close relationally-wise) then they should choose the best institution that's conducive for their specific type of learning. If they hate lecturing, then UNC-A probably shouldn't be their first choice.
No comments:
Post a Comment