Month: January 2019

“The greatest sign of success for a teacher…is to be able to say, ‘the children are now working as if I did not exist.’” – Maria Montessori

I believe this quote emphasizes the independence that Montessori expects schools to teach students. When the highest standard of success is the students to develop an awareness of themselves and responsibilities, I think learning is taking place and paced correctly. For myself, I think that the knowledge of independence that the education system provides is ample, and it is evident that the successful teachers are the ones who push for it within their classrooms. Montessori believed that the pace of learning is individual, and this is something I feel needs to be recognized more today. I think that this quote allows people to look deeper at the hidden curriculum that they teach in their lessons. It is easy to see if a student can follow what is expected and complete tasks, but harder to see if your influence as an educator is shaping students’ ideas surrounding independence. However, I think that it also takes away from the educational experience. If the sole purpose of education is to shape the future generations of society, I think that independence is less of a priority. For myself, I think that I would judge success by looking at the humanitarian side of student development. Not that I don’t value independence, but I think being a good person is more important. I think that for teachers, this is a quote that can be used on a personal level with how they feel and teach. Those who agree with it may strive to achieve independence within their classroom. These said teachers will structure their lesson much differently from someone who values other traits in students higher. I think that more individuality would be in the classroom of someone who agrees with this quote from Montessori, while maybe a more social atmosphere would be created in a classroom where teachers have different values. In the time of Maria Montessori, schools were centered more around the knowledge and less of the actual learning experience, so I believe that the approach to curriculum that she brought forward was a big step for the shift to student-centric education. Compared to my own understanding of curriculum, I’d like to say that I agree with the quote, but I don’t think that is the ‘greatest sign of success’. I think that independence is an important lesson to teach, but I think that the actual process of education is not reflected though independence alone. I think that curriculum is reflected through understanding and healthy development as a whole. One thing I strongly agree with however is looking towards the children to deem a teacher successful or unsuccessful. In my own experience, I have seen teachers hold themselves highly due to organizational skills or mastery of a subject area, but lack in personable skills. This leads me to believe that curriculum can be realized as more of a learning experience and interactions between students and teachers instead of sets of information to be realized. 

Curriculum development from a traditionalist perspective is widely used across schools in Canada and other countries. In my own experience of schooling, the traditionalist perspective is the one I was primarily exposed to. My understanding of curriculum is very similar to western scholars, such as Ralph W. Tyler.

a) I think this is the result of my upbringing and my own experiences in the education system. Tyler emphasizes how change must occur within students, as this is the purpose of education, and I believe that a student-based approach to learning was the way my instructors taught me as I grew up. Specifically, I recall that while some classes were solely based around information retention, others such as my math and science classes worked towards the diversity between the levels of the students in my class. The curriculum in these classes was taught in ways similar to the Tyler rationale as they looked at the educational outcomes and organized the experiences that took place in order for students to attain the information, rather than just relaying formal curriculum.

b) The limitations of the Tyler rationale are evident and detract from the actual experiences of students, even though that is what could be thought of as the opposite of the approach. Firstly, students have very little input into what they are learning and how it is being taught. As education is student-centric, the planned program of activities just isn’t logical. Students all have different needs and learning paces, so when you treat education as a regimen rather than a collective learning experience, some can be left behind in the process. Education as a whole is to be planned, but not rigid, as a lesson may have to adapted multiple times to ensure all students are learning the material. Another limitation is the interpretation that behavior can be calculated and measured. It is uncertain that the successful or unsuccessful effects of one’s teaching can be known at the exact time of a lesson or experience. Thirdly, the interaction between teachers and students when this rationale is used is objective, straying away from the actual experience of learning. The interaction between a student and teacher is incredibly influential, and if teachers look at their job as only developing competencies in students, then the experience may be less impactful than desired, or negative as a whole. Lastly, unanticipated results are inevitable. Pre-determining outcomes can cause educators and students to dismiss the informal curriculum, or hidden curriculum, that is learned through interaction and does not appear as an objective. These outcomes of learning that are not predisposed are important to the development of students and can communicate messages and ideas that may not be educationally important or negative towards growth.

c) Although there are many shortcomings of the Tyler Rationale, I do believe there are benefits from it as well. Particularly, I think the last fault given in the article can be looked at from both sides. It can possess negative consequences if the interaction between student and teacher is weak and undesirable, but with proper interface, this can allow for development and growth in the student. I know this from example, as the lessons I learned from one of my teachers is the reason I wanted to enter the faculty of education. Furthermore, the teachers who I thought were lacking when I was in school also made me want to pursue education, as I know that they detracted from me and many of my peers’ experience in our schooling. Another benefit of the Tyler Rationale is that it focuses on experience and outcomes of learning. I think that since formal curriculum is based on outcomes and the actual experiences of students, it emphasizes what it means to educate, even though it misses the point of why education is not only shaped by what is formally taught, but all the ideas that surround how students learn and the differences that occur within schooling. I think that the knowledge of this specific rationale is important to have, but maybe not enforce as an educator.

How does Kumashiro define “commonsense?”

In the article, Kumashiro defines commonsense as a collective process of thinking that is subconsciously taking place as one goes about their life. In his specific case, the difference between the schooling systems in the United States when compared to Nepal are drastically different, along with the sense of commonality for those living in either country. As the author grew up in the US, his sense of how schools are organised and the actual experience that students take away is very diverse compared to those who they are teaching. This embedded ideology that she has poses as a challenge for them to teach, as “the American way” that is familiar to them does not conform with the principles of the “Nepali way” of education. The author states that commonsense is formed through routine, and is associated with a sense of comfort, and this creates norms. Overall, his definition of commonsense is that is a normality that is formed through experience and routine and can be easily overlooked when put into a foreign environment.

Why is it so important to pay attention to the “commonsense?”

It is important to pay attention to commonsense as since it is created by routine, which in turn creates norms, it can influence societies to form an oppressive culture. Kumashiro goes into detail about how oppression in schools is a commonsense, by allowing it to happen and not realizing. Commonsense allows people to become familiar with oppression, and without looking for ways to counter the normalities that society creates, there will always be oppression within school communities. The commonsense needs to shift from the mentality of diversity being a drawback to being advantageous into development. Essentially, what makes commonsense so important is that since there is no way around its practice, it must be addressed to ensure it does not create oppression and is rather utilized to constantly break out of negative forms of repetition.