To be a good student means that the student learns in the particular way the teacher teaches the information the teacher needs to get across. The student also does not question what the teacher says but instead absorbs the information willingly. Or as They state in chapter 2
“ A good student is one that learns the required material and does what is required to show that they have learned it efficiently.”
The only one who really benefits from this common sense style of teaching are the students who have proficiently been able to adapt to these methods of teaching are the ones who will be privileged by this common sense way of teaching students. This usually includes students who have already been taught by this method. The students who question what they are learning or have difficulty learning in this structured manner, tend to dislike school and become seen as the problem students. When teachers fall into this Common sense way of teaching it makes it impossible for the teacher to understand why the student is failing or misbehaving.
For Assignment one, I’ve decided to write about Jen Gilbert and their theory on sexuality in the classroom. Jen has actually written an entire book about her experiences and thoughts on the subject, the book is called Sexuality in School:The limits of education
For my essay I base most of my information from Chaper 5 which really dives deep into the discussion about where sexuality belongs in the classroom, outside of just sex-ed. I find it interesting how Jen ties in her own life experiences into her writing. One of the quotes from her that I found thought provoking was this “In opening the doors of education to what is foreign, we are also making space for what is foreign or strange in the self” talking about LGBTQ and sexuality in the classroom is something that is not always a comfortable subject and not something I myself don’t know much about as I am a cisgender heterosexual. But that does not mean that I shouldn’t be educating myself by having deeper discussions to become less ignorant about sexuality different than my own. By talking about more than just the hereto normative we can help students identify with themselves instead of trying to make all students identify with the normative narrative that usually surrounds us.
While the Saskatchewan government is making strides by providing materials for educators such as Deepening the Discussion: Gender and Sexual Diversity. It’s only a start,we need to talk about sexuality and the fluidity around it and embrace it instead of shying away and changing the subject when children ask questions. If we are not able to provide information and feel comfortable talking about sexuality, our students are going to learn about it in other forms that might not be more harmful.
For my next steps towards writing my essay I plan on researching the Saskatchewan Health curriculum for a couple of grades to see what is talked about in health class. I will also look for other scholars who agree or disagree with what Jen Gilbert Has to say, I think Lee Airton might have a slightly different view and it might be neat to compare what they both have to say.
One of the first questions in the Tyler Rational is “What educational purposes should the school seek to obtain?” I can relate this very much to my highschool experience, going to Catholic highschool one of the main purposes were to instill the Catholic faith into each and every student. First off they did this by requiring the lord’s prayer at the beginning of each day. Also they made it mandatory that each student who wanted to graduate from their institution be forced to take Christian Ethics, a class on the Catholic religion that was required for all four years. While making us take these classes we were assigned homework and then given tests on it to make sure we were in fact learning about it.
The Tyler Rationale has limits because it does not give the students a choice in what they want to learn or how they go about learning it or as the article states “ The learners end up with little to no voice”. It becomes a cookie cutter way of learning, that ends up not working for most students. As for the Christian Ethics class forced upon us in highschool it was very much text book based and any one questioning what it said was shut down and not allowed to express their opinions.
While the Tyler rationale has it flaws it’s also beneficial in helping provide teachers with a guideline on what should be taught. As the article states “providing a clear notion of outcome so that content and method can be organized and the results evaluated.” By having what is supposed to be taught in a well organized manner and being able to see the results of what we are teaching, helps us as teachers rethink the way we are teaching and provide new methods in order to get the information across in a more efficient manner.
Kumashiro defines common sense as a typical way of thinking about certain things. Whether it’s from the way we are supposed to be teaching, or everyday tasks that are supposed to be common knowledge usually leading to continued oppression of one or more groups of people.
Being aware of the role of common sense is very important not only in everyday life but in the role of a teacher because it means we are doing more than we “should” be doing. By being aware of common sense knowledge we can learn to expand our knowledge beyond the common sense and try to help expand our students knowledge further as well. By doing this we are taking our selves out of our comfort zone and giving us even a bit of empathy and understanding toward those who might lack the common knowledge. Being aware also helps break the oppressive ways we learn and teach.