"Low expectations create problems when teachers don't expect that young people will care about civic issues. When this occurs, some teachers may rely on lecturing, explanation, and recitation, which one scholar has conceptualized as defensive teaching strategies. This happens when teachers control knowledge and classroom interaction, summarizing texts on behalf of students in order to guarentee a particular interpretation." (p160).
Hobbs, Chapter 8, has been one of my favorite chapters to date. After reading this chapter, I remember during my undergrad days when the "www" was just created. I was a Journalism major and assigned the University President as my beat for the semester. I met with him each week to receive his glamorous updates about what he wanted me to write about. Many of the articles we wrote for class were published in the University's paper that competed with the town's local paper. On a few occassions I did not shed the positive light on the President or his chosen topic for the week. I did not change his quotes, or misreport information, I simply gave the facts. I usually received my best grades for these assignments. (haha) Eventually he began to ask to see my articles before I submitted them to class. This made the remainder of the semester less interesting. Although my professor was not happy with the arrangement, he needed a paycheck and agreed to it. One of the articles that I wrote concerned the ability to interact with other schools around the world. (Imagine!) The article did not take a positive spin in the Presidents eyes because my article pointed out that there was little purpose for University to spend the money to fund the program. Students could sign up to be part of this "amazing" experience, but again no purpose.
After reading Hobbs, I began to research some of the sites mentioned in the text. Imagine my excitment with nothing substantial to compare it too. I am in the classroom often, but have never observed a teacher using any sources similar to these. While I think that teachers are missing out on a great teaching opportunity, I also understand their hesitation of the unknown as many have had the same experience with media as I have. What I found most amazing was how easily these sites can be navigated and implemented in the classroom. Why wouldn't you want to use them? Then I came to my next realization - so many do not know about them. I have often had similar thoughts of - Can my students handle the difficult topics of global issues or other current events? Will the students be engaged? How will I handle their reactions to these topics? Will I be able to handle their reactions? Students encounter similar issues on television, but how in tune with what is really going on are they? I was excited to explore scratch.mit.edu and Ayiti: the Cost of Life because this seemed to partially answer some of my questions. It allowed students to explore these ideas in a familiar medium. Pulitzercenter.org offered many tools for teachers and students to use with their curriculum and even made connections to the standards. I am eager and excited to eventually be able to use them in my classroom, but I am just as eager to see them being used by current teachers.
I love your quote from Hobbs. I think teacher expectations in general are an issue that all teachers need to explore continuously. The number one thing that kept down student performance at the school I worked at--I'm convinced--was low teacher expectations.
ReplyDeleteAnd you'll hear it, over and over "I can't even get them to do this. I think there should be less requirements. I think we should ask for shorter papers. I think we should scale our texts back from 3 to 2." And the assumption is that the students can't do it, because they aren't doing it.
But I taught my class with *more* texts, harder texts, and I required more paper writing, because I believed that I should push my students to achieve as much as they could. And when I was observed (and I told this to Dr. Shea), I was told repeatedly that it looked like the classes I had, which were "regular" kids (we called it "Het" at my school for the mid-level) looked like an Honors classroom.
And they were in fact doing work comparable to the Honors students. And they were succeeding at it. Sure, they thought it was tough, but they simply thought that it was appropriate for their level because I said so. I deceived them to push them. And they benefited.
In effect, I was playing with *student expectations*, because they simply expected me to give them work that was "appropriate" for their level. Had they been aware that I was giving them "harder" material, no doubt they would've shut down and held back, because obviously, that material's "too hard". Expectations. Of ourselves. Of them.
It boils down to the Protean Context-World "Recognition" concept. There is a recognition of ourselves and others about what we are capable of. But this recognition contains a degree of mis-recognition and unrecognition, which is why we think we can't do something, and then a teacher or a coach comes along and gets us to actually do what we thought we couldn't. What we think we can do, versus what we can actually do--it's part of our recognition of ourselves as teachers, and our students, and what they recognize about themselves. It's our job to push them, and us, beyond what we think we can do, to what we can actually do.