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.
No comments:
Post a Comment