Blog Post 10

I got sick during our writing circle meeting time, so we discussed our papers over the phone. I will say that I learned how valuable face to face interactions and meetings are. I feel as if it is impossible to truly share, connect, and discuss a paper over the phone. Authentic communication is essential to the writing circle process. This week was the week that I had to do the most self reflecting because of the lack of meeting with my group. They felt that once again, I was making process, but that I needed to consistently come back to my point of helping the reader to reflect upon their experiences and views of rapport. I realized that yet again, I need to re-visit the structure and the research side of my paper. I feel that I have done a nice job "being me" in the paper, but need to also give credit to those who have influenced my educational journey, as well as my Nani's. This has been a challenge because of my per-conceived notions of "research" and what it "must include." As I break down those barriers, I feel that I am making progress in my paper and more able to effective incorporate the beliefs and ideas of Dewey etc.
I will say that I am excited to meet this week, face to face, with my group, as I have a new appreciation for the communication that occurs in that setting. I took for granted how essential this "meeting" and collaboration has been to the writing process. This paper has been challenging, but meeting with my group has made it more bearable and kept me more accountable to myself and my group members. 

Blog Post 9

In our writing circles this week, we had an intriguing conversation about our papers and how they were so very intermixed. The underlying thread of Mike’s paper and the main idea of my paper were very much aligned. We talked about how you have to connect with the students in order to motivate them, as well as build a rapport. Somehow, we got into a conversation about how these papers and research experiences will shape and fit into our future. We discussed how these experiences have altered our view of “research” and that we feel more capable in our future endeavors because of the wide variety that we now understand to be “research.” The next changes in my paper will be based on Mike and Emily’s suggestions. They reiterated the fact that I need to bring everything back to my main idea and state my experiences, while incorporating research that either agrees with my ethnographic writing, or expands upon it to validate it on a greater level. I am looking for my paper to really make people contemplate and reflect upon their own experiences with rapport. I want to impact the readers who are in the field of education, as well as those who are not. Mike and Emily both expressed their interest and excitement to read my final essay. They feel that my research is pertinent to the field of education and will be encouraging and inspirational. Their interest and profound support has motivated me to continue editing and reworking my paper.

Blogpost8

Today, Dr. Shutkin, Emily and I met to discuss the first draft of my paper. It was very beneficial for me to present ideas and let our conversation dictate some future changes I need to make so that my paper is on topic and relaying the message that I would like it to focus upon. I feel that the nature of our conversation and communicating through experience, while letting literature and research guide our discussions has been very effective.
One thing I realized yesterday was my past and now present definition of a "research" paper and how my whole paradigm has changed. I also found many movie parallels that I will incorporate into my paper as well. They both discussed how my ideas and thoughts need to be presented in my paper in such a way that it starts from the outside and always come back to the middle. I have many "branches" that need to be incorporated, but need to always come back to and focus upon the branch.
Through our discussion and meeting, I will be researching and incorporating some John Dewey into my paper because of his philosophy and influence on my grandmother, who in turn, inspired me. I also realized that the main reason for this paper is for others to gain a greater value of rapport through my thoughtful ethnographic work, that it brings them to question and reflect upon their own relationships in and outside of the education world.
Our discussion yesterday sparked an deeper interest in my topic and helped me to narrow down the purpose behind my thoughts, words and dedicated research.

Blogpost7

BLOGPOST7

1.     When processing Torres’s work and navigation through Apples work, what do you believe to be the largest collective social and economic transformation that our educational world/system has endured in the last 5 years?

2.     What are some characteristics that schooling reproduces in our children and society today?

3.     In 20 years from now, what do you hope remains the same in the field of educational curriculum?

4.     In 20 years, what is the aspect of educational curriculum that you hope to see changed and why?

5.     In your education experience and perspective, what do you feel is the biggest broken promise in the field of public education? In private education? Is there a difference?

BlogPost5

This class, readings and intense discussions combined, has really questioned my understanding of curriculum and the history of how it has affected learning. I am actually struggling to narrow down my research concerns because as I read and as we discuss, I feel further away from my previous notions. This makes it hard to come up with a topic, because it seems ever changing. I am somewhat uneasy/disturbed with some of the historical aspects that we have read about and discussed in class. For example, how often the curriculum is different for students of different socioeconomic backgrounds and how different kids have access to different educational experiences (or lack there of) based upon where their parents or guardians chose to raise them. Education is tricky. Tricky to pin point and difficult to narrow the guidelines of what “should” be taught. As I have read Pinar’s opinion of constructivism (or what I believe is most linked to constructivism) on page 50, I feel that not every child does get to, or chooses to, actively participate in their educational journey in a way that is effective and lasting. This, to me, is most upsetting. On page 11 of Grumet’s article called Existential and phenomenological foundations of Currere: Self-report III Curriculum Inquiry, she talks about our role as educators. She states, “as educators we alone must bring into being the tradition which we elect to carry on; existential phenomenology requires action as well as theory.”I question often if our attempt at curriculum and the standards we use to design our lessons/instruction are trying to be more inclusive, but have rather excluded many types of learners. Let me explain.

I think that if we do what Grumet and even Pinar (and Apple too, I believe) when examining our background, history and allegory, we will find that many of us “educators” teach in a way that we were taught or a way in which we can access and experience the learning opportunities. This being said, I do believe that all kids learn differently. I believe that we must first discover what motivates kids and what creates life long learning in them in order to provide the most effective education possible. However, with everything we have discussed, I wonder what grouping students with similar interests and learning styles with educators of that same style and interests would have a greater success rate. Essentially, if we group the children according to style, and not ability or disability, with an educator who would be in the same group, if our curriculum would be more fitting for actual student learning. What if these groups used these guidelines to do simply that, guide them in their course of study and not define their learning experiences? Would we “label” kids less and seeing more motivated and active children?

Grumet has a powerful quote that hits home for me and solidifies that we are educated only to the extent in which we have experienced in the past. She says, “If we must calibrate education, then we might say that we are educated to the extent that we are conscious of our experience and to the degree that we are freed by this knowledge to act through skills required to transform our world.” I interpret that as saying that basically we act in ways because of what our history and experiences have essentially let or instilled in us. This quote makes me feel that this idea/recurring research thought could have potentially very interesting results.

Another research idea/topic I have toyed with during the course of our class discussions and readings is whether rapport and relationships with educators is the “key” to a more inclusive curriculum. For instance, if a student respects and reveres his/her teacher, will a greater (more inspirational and meaningful) learning experience take place? Does it really matter what is in the “curriculum” as long as the teacher is able to express it and convey it to the students in a way that they can understand and relate to?

Blog 4

Blogpost 4

This week’s reading instigated many “blissful” moments in my mind and captivated much of my energy in days to follow. I felt that it was (the reading and my thoughts thereafter) actually rather controversial. On one hand, I truly connected and agreed with many of the statements. On the other hand, I was offended and felt that it was a biased opinion. I felt that everything is subjective because these are based on mere observations and the foundation is a non-neutral on looker. For instance, when he discussed history and how the educational system is in part to blame about our economic crisis, I didn’t completely agree… at first. Then, I read chapter 2 again and reflected upon it. Have we perpetuated the cycle of educational and catered educational opportunities to different classes and socioeconomic groups? When I am 100% honest with myself, I do see much of this hidden curriculum in my educational experience.

            For example, this year we have learned and operated (or tried to) under a new definition of fair. Fair is not that everyone has or gets or experiences the same. Fair, however, is that every individual gets what they need in order to be successful. Essentially, the starting playing field MUST be made equal. When you think of this throughout history and in the present, are we giving all kids access to the same information and the same opportunities to succeed and find their “niche?” My answer, is no. No longer do students raised in poor, failing districts have the same educational journeys or opportunities on their path. Another thing I am seeing constantly in my setting, as well as others, is in the area of special education and parent choice. Parents whom are educated and successful tend to know the “law” and make choices for their child in order to find the optimal environment for their child’s academic and social success. They know how to essentially “get what they want” and advocate for their child. However, the parents who are working extra jobs, or are not able to spend time getting educated in the ever changing world of special ed, sometimes do not have choices and do not understand/advocate for their parental rights. This too, is sad and makes me question our system. I have heard constantly that it just is the way it is and it is too hard to change. This statement and belief makes me sick to my stomach. It seems completely wrong and the antithesis of why I got into education in the first place.

I do not like to admit it, but I was in that middle-upper class growing up and I did see much of this. On page 40, Anyon discusses this kind/”type” of educational experience when she states, “work was often creative activity carried out independently. The students were continually asked to make sense of their experience-to think.” This is precisely how I was educated. And now I am realizing in my current position of leadership, it is not the “norm.” This brings about many questions and emotions. It also makes me question the field of education and the entire system that has become. How can we be proactive in the future and what needs to be done? This is the question that lingers and curriculum (hidden and academic) is at the forefront of this answer…

Blog 3

 Grumet’s piece, for me, was inspirational. It was empowering to hear someone’s voice, reflect upon it, and then in turn, find your own. She helped me become more in touch with the words on the page and encouraged me to find meaning and strength in them. After reading her article I was more connected and engaged during the readings thereafter. It caused me to read and reflect and agree or disagree. It was truly an interesting experience. I used to write, when I had (or made) the time. I used to find it peaceful and cathartic. But, I have stopped in the past couple of years, and coincidently have had a hard time understanding the true meaning and reason behind events, situations and relationships in my life. This is why her work and her words helped me so much. I have become very conditioned to read and “reflect” and then proceed ahead. Not to react, feel and let those feelings dictate the next educational or emotional journey. I am very glad that I took the time to really read Grumet’s work and let it move me to genuine and real reflection. Her words and the way it affected me truly stayed with me all week and let the inner voice inside me have more legitimacy and standing. This, I believe, is a really good thing. The list of quotes and words of Grumet’s are those that hit me the most and impacted the way in which I think, feel, and reflect on readings and educational experiences. I want the list of her words attached to this, so that I am always reminded of those that had such an impact on my educational and personal outlook.      

GRUMET- So you see, it is both things: inner and outer, personal and public, spontaneous and considered, mind and body.

To reread the journal is to see oneself seeing.

Teaching must also reverse the process of generalization by returning the world to the specificity of lived experience.

Nevertheless, autobiographical method invites us to struggle with all those determinations. It is that struggle and its resolve to develop ourselves in ways that transcend the identities that others have constructed for us that bonds the projects of autobiography and education.

In summary, any writing and reading of our lives presents us with the challenge that is at the heart of every educational experience: making sense of our lives in the world.

for we read to recreate meaning not repeat it.

                                                                                                                                                                         Pinar’s work, again, struck a cord with me. I felt like, “yea, you’re right.” Our entire educational system has been rocked because of this notion of assessments and testing. Teachers have lost their authenticity and many times, their passion and reason for beginning a career in education. Pinar reminds us that curriculum is always academic, but highly social and subjective as well (Pinar, 43). He references that we, as an American people and education system, have become consumers of “educational services,” not active members of participating and creating our own educational experiences. We have seen education as something to acquire when presented to us. Not something we help create as we experience real, in-depth, authentic, conversations and lived life experiences. When he discusses allegory, I believe he really discusses constructivism and how critical this is to educational experiences for all learners. He talks about how these intense conversations can dictate and help us navigate the next path or educational journey. Essentially, curriculum should be open and able to change as the conversation and experiences occur. We should not be bound by standards and tests, but instead, lead discussions that bring us to the next meaningful conversation and/or life experience. Together, you experience, learn and grow as time and experience allows. Not by standards or time constraints and forced experience that you script and hope a child understands and internalizes. On page 54, he talks about the “guidelines” or education and states, “This is why school curriculum guidelines must never be more than guidelines, inviting reformation according to the professional judgment of the individual educator.” He goes on to say that “teachers must be free to follow wherever their imagination and instincts lead them, acutely aware that knowledge structures both instinct and imagination” (Pinar, 54). I feel like we are doing education such a disservice because of this swing towards grades grades grades and tests tests tests! We have taken the creativity and basics of education away from schools and teachers. We have ruined much of the foundation of education. Pinar ends the chapter with a strong statement. He says, “we have school reform. To deny the past and force the future, we teach to the test” (Pinar, 66). I believe this statement is powerful and must be reflected upon. The original building blocks of education and our educational system has been lost. We are not using the past to encourage the future; instead we are forgetting the past and creating the future out of our own standards.

Chapter 1, from revisiting Michael Apple’s work Ideology, Curriculum, and the New Sociology of Education, was interesting to me. It took all that Grumet and Pinar references and dove deeper to look at the sociology behind curriculum and how different people of different socioeconomic backgrounds, culture, family dynamic/status, historical standing etc. perceive and receive education completely differently. Apple references that “curriculum was expected to bring about the same behavior in all students (25). This notion/thought process believes and perpetuates the cycle that all children get the same thing from the curriculum and that all students have the same access to it. This view forgets that children need to create their own meanings and live in a world that greatly impacts what and how they learn. Apple looked at society and who children were and how they were raised in order to understand where they are as learners. In the 1970’s there was a shift from students failing out of school to schools failing the students. This is interesting because our education system used to be set up to cater to the needs of the privileged and high society folk, but took an important turn to look at all kids and all learners. However, this outlook and new swing made education more concerned with those under privileged or less capable/disabled and focused on helping those children become successful. However, in my opinion, none of this really encompassed all kids and all learners. Good intentions, with little critical reflection and monitoring of what was being lost during this educational shift. Apple refocuses the reader at the end of the chapter by referencing the politics of knowledge and education and how it impacts all of us. Personally reflecting upon chapter one makes me think that we have never truly dealt with the political aspects of education and that it’s not considered when creating a statewide standard based education system. I also think that this is and will continue to be a major issue in education until we start letting the past navigate and influence the future.