After a quick conversation with my roommate, and my explaining to her why her comment bothered be, I can understand better where she's coming from. Her perspective mirrors pretty much what I believe in, which is to be casual and yourself in the classroom. But to also throw in a little humor, or "a dash of humor" as she said. By "boring" she meant that the instructor will go "by the book" without innovations. This kind of instructor is not comfortable in front of the classroom and is very stiff, again, according to my roommate.
Her explanation put me at ease because it told me that she was not making judgments on the professor that were completely superficial (although, they still are to a degree). Her comment reflected a critique of an instructor's approach and delivery of pedagogy. It also suggests and confirms my own understanding that reaching students is very challenging to achieve and maintain if the curriculum is not made palatable.
Thursday, July 26, 2007
ReVenting (Reflecting and Venting)
I recently did a reading efficiency workshop for my school and I've been carrying the frustration with me from that day. Not many things went right. I was frustrated with my lack of preparation and with the students' lack of attention. They were excessively talkative. I didn't expect that much talking. It was like these students had not left high school yet. But these are exactly the kind of students I'll be teaching very very soon. Not very encouraging.
What made this frustration worse was when I talked to my roommate (a couple days after my workshop mishap) about her memories of college classes. One of the last things she said was that she would drop a class after the first day if she thought the teacher was too boring. And I thought, "That's a hell of a "reason" to drop a class. We usually drop classes in the very beginning if we registered for the wrong class or if there's too much work. But dropping because the teacher is more interested in the things s/he says rather than how they are said might be the silliest reasons to drop. I told my roommate that school was for education not entertainment. She replied, "Well, I want the best of both worlds." She has a good point here. I've always advocated making education fun and entertaining. But I took great offense to it because it was her defense for dropping a class.
She was not looking at what else the professor could offer besides a non-boring delivery; she was not appreciating the education and knowledge professors hold and wish to endow their students with. No, she solely measures value in a classroom by how entertaining it is. And I can't help but think that this is how half, if not most students think. That bothers the hell out of me.
What made this frustration worse was when I talked to my roommate (a couple days after my workshop mishap) about her memories of college classes. One of the last things she said was that she would drop a class after the first day if she thought the teacher was too boring. And I thought, "That's a hell of a "reason" to drop a class. We usually drop classes in the very beginning if we registered for the wrong class or if there's too much work. But dropping because the teacher is more interested in the things s/he says rather than how they are said might be the silliest reasons to drop. I told my roommate that school was for education not entertainment. She replied, "Well, I want the best of both worlds." She has a good point here. I've always advocated making education fun and entertaining. But I took great offense to it because it was her defense for dropping a class.
She was not looking at what else the professor could offer besides a non-boring delivery; she was not appreciating the education and knowledge professors hold and wish to endow their students with. No, she solely measures value in a classroom by how entertaining it is. And I can't help but think that this is how half, if not most students think. That bothers the hell out of me.
Wednesday, July 11, 2007
Graffiti
I've been looking at this image on my computer desktop for a few days and started noticing more things the more I looked at it (like we all do). I was wondering how it all worked as a whole. And then I wondered when and where the photo was taken, and if these paintings are still on this wall today. Just as long as graffiti was considered a threat to clean public property, it's been a way to express through art. What does this wall/image express? Who might have the artists been? What did they each want to say?
In the far right, in the archway is a faceless and hairless child in a red unitard and yellow cape making loop-de-loops around the snow-topped and -bottomed skyscrapers of New York. In his hand is what looks like a beer or wine bottle. Is this superhero kid drunk or is he making a delivery, in which he took a few sips just to make sure he got the right one? Is this painting a protest against drunk flying? If it is, huccum super kid hasn't splatted on the side of a building in a super bloody mess?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)