Blog Post 2: Common Core State Standards

                Right away I'm comparing the current standards with what I think I was taught around that age and I'm not quite so sure that the standards were as high. When was the last time these standards were revised? How often are they revised? Tangentially, is there a separate set of standards for children who seem much more advanced than their grade level? Or, is that up to the teacher to provide the extra curriculum or challenge for these students? It seems like in general--though this may have little to do with the reading portion of the requirements--that there isn't much room for student creative writing.

                I don't really agree with the Duncan & Morrell excerpt cited by the author, it says "without [standards in education]...school personnel would be comfortable with the same mediocre results." Without any further definition of the phrase "mediocre results," I can't help but disagree. A handful of teachers may be satisfied with "mediocre results," but I do not feel that this is the case for many of the people who become teachers, who work tirelessly to try and help their students improve and succeed. While I agree that standards can be a helpful tool, I do not think that this is an appropriate reason for having them as it is not quite true.

                The best classes I've had have been taught by very excited/passionate teachers.  In fact, my passion for reading and writing is one of the reasons that I want to be a teacher and I want to share this passion with my students. As such, I very much agree with the author's statement that, to paraphrase, an excited and passionate teacher creates willing and excited students. I also agree with the idea that teaching things relevant (subject, issues, etc.) is a good way to help students stay engaged and interested in what they're learning. For example, when I was in college I wrote a paper comparing Disney princesses and women from a text we had been reading in class.

Blog Post 1: Discussion in a Democratic Society

                Right away, I'm a little bit bothered about this topic, and a few protestations come to mind. Verbal discussions have the power to keep shy/introverted/socially-anxious people from speaking up and thus a potentially illuminating perspective could be lost. Even worst, making participation mandatory can give these students added stress about what they should say, possibly leading to feelings of resentment and dread toward the class. This is of course conjecture, but some of it is based on my own experiences as well. For example, if most of the class shared one perspective, especially if the issue is controversial, then the environment to express a dissenting or unpopular opinion sometimes becomes a hostile one. As the author says, the environment has to make participants feel "valued and welcomed" in order for people to feel comfortable enough to even give their opinions. Another possible problem with the discussion method is that if the participants haven't studied the material sufficiently or lack understanding of it, then the discussion might not have as much depth or only a select few will participate in the discussion. On page four of the article, the article states that " we practice [the discussion method] eagerly simply because it's so enjoyable and exciting"--I cannot think of anything so blatantly wrong. Sure, there may be some people who feel this way, but I can think of many others would vehemently disagree with this statement, myself included. Discussion does not give me "so much pleasure" and at times I would say I learn better simply from hearing my professor lecture. James Dillon argues that conversation is "aimless, carefree, and effortless" but anyone with social anxiety would probably disagree with this. I've also seen conversation turn into "discussion" (as Bridges defines it). For instance, I don't necessarily talk to my boyfriend with the intention of having a serious dialogue about pressing issues, but sometimes a conversation can turn that way.  I've noticed that the article does not cite anyone post-2000s, which makes me think that the author isn't or hasn't considered alternative forums for discussion such as those found on the internet--a setting where many feel comfortable expressing their opinions using a mask of anonymity. The author mentions that deliberation is important, but often there is not enough time for the full exploration that a topic demands--a classroom is only reserved for a certain amount of time, a quarter is only 10 weeks long, etc.