Do you really want to be in school longer?

In class yesterday we discussed ways to improve the education instead of looking at all of the problems with the education system. One group suggested to lengthen the school day. While I see the value in students having more time to gain knowledge and process information, does this really help their learning overall. This whole concept goes against Gatto's ideas in Dumbing Us Down. Gatto believes that students are in schools way too long. They don't have any time for themselves to explore the things they are personally interested in. Why would we choose to take away this time that students need to be individuals and discover the world on their own in ways that work best for them.
The group also said that with the longer school day sports and extra-curriculars would be included. Isn't this how schools already work? If students want to join an activity it is after school, an extension of the school day. Maybe they would require students to participate in an extra-curricular activity so they learn social, teamwork, and strategy skills that they don't always get in the classroom. Some kids though, don't want to participate in an activity and would rather go run around at home with their friends in the neighborhood. This is still a social setting that students are participating and they are independently learning how to work with others and the best way to play a game.
Currently, I am reading the book Teach Like Your Hair's on Fire by Rafe Esquith. Rafe is a fifth grade teacher in a very diverse school and classroom. He also believes in structured/guided learning outside of the classroom, but making it voluntary. He shows movies after school to have students learn about what a good, respectable film is and how to criticizes films so they can make these decisions on their own. This may not seem like something a teacher should be worried about when kids are telling you about how they watched Psycho or some other movie that is inappropriate for their age or just rotting their brains as they watch, as a teacher, you want to put an end to this. Some of these videos are optional and some are required. He also has a film club that is optional for the students to particpate in. He has problem solving time an hour before school starts everyday but this is optional as well. Even though this is optional almost every student is there everyday because they want to be there and have an interest in learning. Rafe is also the leader for the Shakespearan club that students can participate in. He takes this group on trips to perform and watch performances. These clubs and activities also teach students the same skills as the required extra-curriculars of other schools but the students choose to do them so they actually enjoy them as they are learning.
To me, this is the most important thing when considering lengthening the school day. Are students still going to be interested? I believe that the more you force students to do something, the less willing and interested they will be. Extended school days may result in losing students' attention and intersets, so by then what is the point? By giving students the option to do something extra but showing how interested you (the teacher) enjoys it and finds it interesting will make students more interested in the activity and willing to try it.

Why are we afraid of religion?

Yesterday in class we discussed religion in schools. Should it be allowed and to what extent? My question is why are we so afraid of discussing religion and why do we get so easily offended when someone doesn't support the same religious views as us? The reason many people came to this country was because of religious persecution in their home country. They wanted the freedom of religion. Because of this freedom of religion, we now have a variety of religions in the United States. It doesn't make sense that in a nation that has freedom of speech and expression, that we can't openly discuss religious beliefs without offending someone.
I don't think anyone has the right to force a belief onto someone else, so as far as schools supporting one religion over another, I don't think this is right. But why can't we teach children the facts about other religions from all over the world. Many of these religions exist in our country, students just don't know about them. Is it wrong to teach students about cultures? Religion is a huge part of someone's culture, so neglecting religion is neglecting a huge area that leaves a gap in cultural understanding. Teaching about religion educationally does not impose the teachers views on the students. It gives students the facts that they can decide what to do with. We also need to give students the resources and research knowledge to learn more about these religions if they want to. It doesn't have to be required but it should be available for students to learn.
Saying that religion should just not be discussed in schools in being ignorant. It is being completely oblivious to the fact that there are people out there that believe something different from you. What is wrong with that? Not everyone is ever going to agree on one thing. That is the beauty of our country. I don't think there should be prayers before a game this is forcing students to participate in religion when they may not believe that religion. A moment of silence is better because it can just be a time of reflection on the day, what needs to be done, how they feel, how they are as a person and friend, or a moment for prayer.
Sometimes, I think the schools try to take on too much responsibility and are worried about teaching students morals and values. To me, this is ultimately up to the parents. The school should worry about curricular knowledge. There can be education about different religions and their qualities but no one should be forcing someone to believe a certain religious practice.

Drinking Chocolate Milk? Might as well have a spoonful of sugar instead.

I was very surprised that Decorah High School participated in the chocolate milk challenge sponsored by the Midwest Dairy Association. I understand that it is promoting the drinking of milk to students, but CHOCOLATE, really? Chocolate milk has about 23g of sugar in 8 ounces. That is as much sugar in a 12 oz. can of your favorite pop. We might as well be promoting the drinking of pop to students. Sure milk has other nutritional values that pop doesn't have, but why drink the kind that is loaded with added sugar? White milk would have been a much healthier alternative in this challenge. It still promotes milk, but not the sugar.

I think the high school should have though about participating in this challenge a little bit more before they took it on. It makes sense that they saw the word "Milk" and immediately thought it would be a great, healthy challenge for the students of the high school. The thing that is not mentioned is that the students are most likely no enjoying the milk they are drinking, but more the sugar that is added to the chocolate milk. This challenge gets students to drink milk because they are craving, and almost addicted, to the sugar in the chocolate milk. The high school is promoting an unhealthy choice for students and is doing more harm than good by participating in this milk drinking challenge.

I find it a little ironic that the students were drinking a beverage that is not very healthy for their bodies, yet the money they won from this challenge goes to health and fitness programs. Promoting sugar to promote health. That's like taking one step forward and two steps back. The other prizes that students were awarded were also not really promoting health, which is the idea of drinking milk everyday. Some of the prizes were a pizza party with your friends and a 'prime' parking spot at school. Pizza is NOT a healthy food for anyone to eat and getting the prime parking spot just makes students walk a shorter distance into the school.

I am disappointed in the high school's decision to participate in this challenge. America already has a health problem, without participating in challenges like this. The school should really think about what they are promoting when they do things like this. They should be caring for students health and safety, but this challenge doesn't really show that they are. The high school is essentially contributing to the students' health issues.

Pledge of Allegiance

Why do we say the 'Pledge of Allegiance'? It is because we actually believe what we are saying when we recite these words, or is it just expected of us? Do we actually know what we are saying?

Some people believe that reciting the 'Pledge' shows patriotism for our country. Others believe that it is forcing beliefs onto us which goes against the constitution. The words "under God' are the usual controversy when it comes to the pledge because not everyone believes in God, or a higher power for that matter. I believe that saying the 'Pledge' should be done everyday but students should not be required to stand if they have valid reasons to not stand. I believe it is a sign of respect to our country and to what we try to stand for. It is the smallest thing we can do to show our respect for the people that fight for our rights everyday.

But what if a student didn't want to stand for the 'Pledge' because he realizes what he is saying and believes that it is not true. In this clip from CNN (in the link list above, video entitled 'Pledge of Allegiance'), a 10 year old boy doesn't recite the 'Pledge' because of the line 'with liberty and justice for all'. He believes that this is not true in our nation. Gays and lesbians don't have the right to be married, there is still racism and sexism, and other prejudices people hold against other people allowing them to have unequal opportunities in our country. Would you as the teacher let him stay seated with these reasonings? Can you really force him to stand up and say the 'Pledge' because it could be fought that he has the freedom of speech to not speak and that forcing him to recite the 'Pledge' is forcing your ideals and beliefs on him which is not to enter the classroom to be imposed on students.

The 'Pledge of Allegiance' will always be controversial until everything that is stated in it is truly reflected in our country's people. What do schools do then? I don't think anyone really knows and each situation gets handled differently. What would you do as a teacher or school official?

Assimilation

As I watched to video about assimilation in preparation for Wednesday's lecture, one topic in the video really caught my eye. He was talking about the standards in schools. He showed an example of a script that every teacher for that grade level in the school district follows exactly on the same day. I didn't know there was this extreme of a strictly followed curriculum in some schools and it appalled me! Yes we have standards that we assimilate to for what knowledge teachers should be presenting to their students but does no one trust teachers enough to let them make their own decisions about how to teach a topic to their group of students. Using a script is a horrible way to teach kids because they all learn in different ways so a script will definitely not work for everyone.
I find it amazing that society is willing to trust doctors to tell us that we have cancer, need surgery, need a medication for the rest of our lives, but we can't even trust a teacher (who went to college for their career) to teach our children. Why is this? It just really bothers me that everyone blames the teachers for what is wrong with our education system. Maybe if the system actually gave teachers a chance, society would be proven wrong.
As far as assimilation, I think we need it to some degree. It provides structure and controls chaos in our society. I don't think we should force people conforming to a culture that isn't theirs so they 'fit in' better in our country. Yes people need to conform to some things in our society so they will not break a law or get in trouble but we do not need to take away their culture from them. This is what I think of when we assimilate but as Jim pointed out there are many things that we assimilate to. The example of us being late to class is one. But if we all just showed up to class whenever we wanted isn't that our fault and not the professors. We are responsible for our education and I think that if we care enough about our education we would show up to class on time. I don't know how many students would then actually show up to class but the only person they are really hurting is themselves. I think in school we have these standards that we assimilate to because people want us to do well so they set these expectations. The only question is how far do we assimilate?

Liberal Arts education

Watching the video today in class about changing Liberal Arts education made me think about why I chose Liberal Arts education. To me, the point of Liberal Arts education is to provide opportunities for students to be exposed to all kinds of subjects and materials that don't always pertain to their core studies. Some people see this as a waste of time because why do you need to know more about religion, history, science, and math? But to me, why not know more. More knowledge never hurt anyone. Why wouldn't someone want to be more knowledgeable in certain areas because this allows one to have a variety of conversations with a variety of people and have some idea of what you are talking about. You have information to back up what you believe and think. I think this is a very valuable thing to have as a human being. Being exposed to a variety of topics can also help you because you never know what might come up at your job.

I agree with the video that Liberal Arts education needs to step away from the segmented education students are receiving and move to a more broader education of subjects. We are learning too much about too little, and it needs to be a learning a little about a lot of topics. If a student finds something interesting then they can focus more on that topic if they want to but the school should only require a broad knowledge of a variety of subjects, or enough knowledge that someone would be able to have an educated conversation with someone about the topic.

There is a reason that the US has a variety of colleges and universities because people want different things from their education. I chose to be required to take classes in a variety of topics so I can have a general knowledge because I believe that is important to being a citizen of this country and the world. Others just want to go to college to get their specific degree so they choose less liberal colleges and universities. There is nothing wrong with this, it's just what someone prefers and wants out of their education.

Liberal Arts education should be a little broader but I also think it can vary a lot from school to school because what people want out of education varies greatly.

Obama Appeals Higher Education Standards

The video clip I posted is from Feb. 22nd 2010. Obama is changing how we 'do' education in America. I like a few things about his proposal and some other things I am unsure of. I like the fact that he realizes something is very wrong with our education system and he wants to find what actually works. I also like that he wants teachers to learn how to teach to a higher standard. Expectations of students are not only relevant in primary and secondary school but also in post-secondary education. Professors of Education need to hold their pre-service teachers to a high standard of what qualifies as quality teaching. The thing that I really didn't like about this new plan is the money issue. Obama wants competition to still be the way schools, districts, and states get money for education. This has not proven to work in the past because some schools just end up so far in the deep that they can't get out. Why does it have to be based on competition? Why can't there be an average amount of money that each school gets in each state. If someone could figure out the average cost to send a student to school in each state, then the government could give a predetermined amount to all of the schools in the state. I know we probably don't have enough money in our government to support this but I just feel like test scores and recognizing 'quality' teaching are not the fairest way to decide who gets money and who doesn't. It brings up the whole issue of equality in schools and what is equality and how can we guarantee equality across all schools in the U.S. I almost think that complete equality across all of the schools in the country will never happen. Someone will always complain about something because as a society we are never happy with what we have.
This clip is only a short description of Obama's plan for improving education so I look forward to hearing more about it in the future since it will affect me as a teacher.