What's most valued in a class?

With all the end of the year surveys being sent out to us and conversations I've had in the past few days, I have really started to wonder what are the most important things about a class. What makes a class meaningful? Rigor? Structure? Opportuity for discussion? A good professor? Content? I don't know what the answer is, but my guess is that maybe it's a combination of at least some if not all of these, plus a few more. However, I think the most important feature of class is not necessarily what it makes you think about, but how it makes you think about it. Some classes challenge students to deeply think about how they view the world and themselves, others require students to think about the applications of the taught concepts. Both are valuable (props to the liberal arts education!). If I look back at the past three years of college, my best classes were the ones that challenged me start to think in a different way. They made me think about why I had some of my opinions- why I thought what I think, why I believed what I believe. These classes had little common ground in terms of curricula or even how the curricula was taught, but they all challenged me in some way or another about my way of thinking. These are the classes I will remember. I won't always remember the grade or the exams I stayed up all night studying for or what the exam was even testing on. But why I liked the class- that I will never forget.

The Home-Schooling Option

Prior to this class I had never really thought about home-schooling much. I did not know all of the different options one has with home-schooling or how many people chose this alternative. After hearing more about it throughout the semester and from the panel I feel a little bit more informed on what home-schooling can mean. I had no idea about the dual enrollment prior to the panel, and I think this is a great option for students who are home-schooled. The alternative school and the teachers who come to the home can also be very valuable to students. I like the idea of teaching students what they want to learn and going at their pace. This reminded me of Gatto's Dumbing Us Down. But what impressed me the most, was just the sheer guts the parents had with home-schooling their children. Many people do not like everything about the school system, but not many do something about it. These parents did. I think it's essential that public/private schools take some of the benefits from home-schooling programs and implement them into their system. The problem is how. Not enough teachers and too many students obviously is the biggest challenge to this. But if we increase dialogue between the home-school system and the public/private school systems and decrease the amount of hoops home-schooled parents/children must jump through, I think there is at least a shot of integrating some of the benefits from home-schooling into the public/private systems. No, home-schooling is not the answer for everybody. But it is for some. So if I ever have children I feel like now I will at least consider it as an option.

"One of the Best"....

While reading some news online this morning, I came across an article stating that Sarah Brown Wessling accepted the teacher of the year award yesterday in Washington D.C. Reading that Wessling was an English teacher in Johnston, Iowa I couldn't help but have some Iowa pride and smile a little to myself. This led me to thinking about that little phrase I heard so much growing up...."Iowa has one of the best school systems in the country". While I still believe this to be true, I do know that many other students who reside in other states hear this same thing with their state substituted for Iowa. Who's right? What makes a school system "one of the best"? Is it improving scores? That could really be from funding and available resources. Is it the amount of funding and available resources? Could be...but many wonderful learning experiences don't even involve a funded classroom. So what is it? My conclusion: the teachers. At the beginning of the semester, I had the perspective that funding was the first to be blamed, then the parents, then the teachers. Now, I would argue that teachers are last on the list to be blamed. Yes, of course there are some not so good teachers as with anything else. But there are some great ones. Great teachers facilitate students to learn on their own and explore the world around them. These teachers are what make schools "one of the best". And they're also the ones who never get the credit. They barely get paid, rarely get thanked, and once in a blue moon get recognized with an award. So congratulations Sarah Brown Wessling. And thank you to all the wonderful teachers I have had so far in my life.

The Pledge of Allegience in Schools

The saying of the Pledge of Allegience in public schools has been a controversial topic over many years. Some say it's patriotic, some say it contradicts separation of church and state. I do support the idea of saying the pledge of allegience in public schools, but mainly because I don't see anything wrong with it. I don't think it's has big of a deal as people have made it out to be. I don't think it should be required in schools or that every school should indeed say it. I just think that there is nothing wrong with it. I think it is important for those born in the U.S. to at least learn the pledge of alliegience. That does not mean that they have to agree with it or say it. Many people don't believe in Darwin's theory of evolution but that doesn't mean it shouldn't be taught. I sya the pledge of alliegience moreso out of respect and honor for the founding fathers of this country and all involved in the birth of the U.S. I don't think it makes one more or less patriotic if they say it or not, but I do believe knowing it is important.

Assimilating Home

It is an experience that many people go through- the first time moving away from home. The universality of this life experience of course has its differences between cultures, such as age, why one is moving, etc. But in the end, most people move out of their parents home at one point or another. I remember my first year at Luther, I would be careful with my wording around my parents when talking about school- I wouldn't reference it as home. Towards the end of my first year and beginning of my sophmore year Luther became home as well, and when I said "I'm going home" I really meant to the location I was currently not at. However, another transition took place after J-term sophmore year. "Home" became Luther, and Luther only. My parents' home became just that- my parents' home. Not mine. This transition was catalyzed by the minor changes I noticed during weekends or school breaks. It wasn't necessarily difficult to go back to my childhood home, but it was different. I no longer lived there permanently, and I probably never will again. There were little things around the community that changed that I was not aware about. There use to be things I would know as a resident in my community- insider information if you will- and that no longer stands. I no longer can assimilate to my life before Luther. Is this how it should be? Personally, I believe yes. I'm not paying big bucks to go to a college that will not change my life in one way or another. But I think it goes deeper than the money. Yes- if I planned on returning to my original hometown someday, I think I would be able to assimilate back into it. People are adaptive- it's human nature. If I had to, I could. But I won't ever have to again. And that means that I probably never will. Over the next few years, my home will change again. And again. And again several more times. That's what I wanted. For me, it's part of growing up. But does this mean I will no longer fit in with all my past homes? Will my home really become an in between?

Globalization in Education

I usually find myself getting a little frustrated when I hear people talk about how our education system is not progressing with the world. Yes, I do think that this is an important aspect of education in today's world. However, I think it is not the only aspect in education. If we consistently look to see what the rest of the world is doing in their education system, we are not being proactive ourselves. Instead, we are being reactive. How are we going to compete with the world if all we talk about is about what they are doing? I think it is important to be aware of happenings outside of the U.S. and I think this awareness is not taught in U.S. schools very well. However, I think we put too much emphasis on the competition aspect with the rest of the world. Should we try to better ourselves to say we scored higher than this coutry on an exam or that we have a higher percentage of students complete a formal education than that country? Or should we instead teach students that we should better ourselves for the sake of bettering ourselves? The U.S. school system is missing the fundamental aspect of teaching students how to like school and appreciate an education. Instead, students learn to dislike school from their peers at a young age because they feel they are suppose to hate homework and not like school. Don't get me wrong- I like competition. I'm a competitive person and I see the value in it. It motivates people to do better. But do we lose something when all we focus on is the competition aspect? I would argue yes. There will always be someone from Timbuktu to compete with, but they shouldn't be our only focus.

Widening the Gap

First of all- thank you to Kim Marshall for the the saracastic sense of humor embedded in the article "A How-to Plan for Widening the Gap". Not only did this make for a refreshing read, but it blatantly pointed out how ineffective the U.S. education system is currently. Out of the 15 "How-tos" listed, 11 were familiar to my past educational experiences. Congratulations American Public Schools- some of you are passing with a mere 27%!

I thought Marshall did a good job of not only stating what the problem was, but also of stating possible solutions to overcome these problems. The one that stuck out to me the most was the suggestion of reteaching a subject or topic if not successful the first time around. Well, this may seem obvious but unfortunately it is not done very often in schools. Sometimes it's not the teachers fault either- but rather an arguably impossible timed curricula to cover over the course of the academic year. How do students benefit if they don't really learn a subject but instead can say that at one point in their education they were taught it? Simple answer: they don't. How does one actually learn if their misunderstandings on a certain subject matter are skipped over? Now the tricky part is "finding the balance" (if I had a nickle for everytime I heard that phrase...) of moving the class at a pace that the students who are understanding the material do not get bored but also so the students who do not get it the first time explained have a chance at getting it when explained another way. I liked how Kim Marshall pointed out that in order to reach those students who didn't learn it originally a teacher does not necessarily have to go slower. Instead it means more of a teach the same thing in different ways approach to reach students who learn differently. In my opinion this would be one of the most difficult skills to acquire but is also what separates the bad teachers from the good teachers from the great teachers.