Author and Text: Patrick Finn, Literacy with an Attitude
Reflection:
The story Finn shares in this chapter felt eerily familiar to my own experience as a student. About halfway through my 5th grade year, my family moved from Vancouver, WA (a suburb of Portland, OR) to Edmond, OK (a suburb of Oklahoma City, OK). That move showed me firsthand the truth of Finn's argument that schools are not "great equalizers", but instead providing an education prioritizing obedience. In Vancouver, I was in a full-day gifted cohort -- a model of "powerful literacy" where intellectual agency was the daily norm. Textbooks were an occasional tool we used at school, but most of our time was spent doing examples together, working on small projects, and exploring extensions of the material. At my new school in Oklahoma, that agency was relegated to a "pull-out" program for just one hour a week. For the other 29 hours, I was stuck in a rigid, textbook-driven curriculum that was almost entirely a repeat of what I had already mastered.
I was curious to see what story the demographic data would show me about the schools I attended in that school year. I had a good idea of what was going on as a 5th grader, but now as an adult, I wanted to see if there's more to be discovered.
 |
|
This data was really jarring for me to see as an adult. At my school in Washington I was among the almost 60% of students identified as economically disadvantaged, however, the district's attitude towards growth-mindset and the future potential of each student made this statistic virtually invisible at school. Arriving in Oklahoma, it became clear that I was in the minority when it came to finances. There's more to the story though. I arrived in Oklahoma in February 2010 when the beginning of severe budget cuts were being implemented statewide. These cuts eliminated student field trips and made instruction rote. The transition was incredibly difficult for me; I had lost my friends, my teacher, and my beloved cohort. I was immediately bullied in the new environment, and felt a profound lack of support while falling through the cracks of a system more focused on "managing" my boredom than engaging my mind.
The "hidden curriculum" Finn discusses was on full display for me in this experience. The Oklahoma system quickly taught me my "place" in social circles and how best to behave to adapt to the new environment. Because the system didn't know how to challenge me, I was "managed" rather than taught. I was required to go to the middle school across town for first period math every morning and have my parents drive me back to elementary school for the rest of the day. During my elementary class' math block, I was sent to a Pre-K classroom just to "keep me busy." It became very clear that I was seen as a problem that needed to be hidden away. The combination of a repetitive curriculum, my teacher viewing my boredom as defiance, and an exclusionary social climate made school a place where I dreaded. I was socially and academically isolated in a system that valued compliance over the collaborative learning and growth I had previously known.
I found
this research article that dives deeper into some of the effects social exclusion/peer rejection has amongst students. Hopefully the insight will help us pull students in instead of push them out!
Question for the ClassIn my experience, being sent to the middle school and then relocated into Pre-K room for part of the day was a clear act of management -- my teacher was simply removing a potential disruption. However, Finn's work highlights that true education requires mentorship, which focuses on a student's long-term growth and potential. This is often ignored due to the common myth that gifted students don't need help and will "be fine on their own." I want to ask the class: As future educators, how do we balance the logistical need to "manage" a classroom with the moral obligation to "mentor" every student? If we only manage performance and ignore potential, are we unintentionally participating in the hidden curriculum that domesticates students rather than empowering them?
Hi Adriana! Your blog was extremely interesting to read! I think the question you have for the class is really interesting. One of my friends growing up skipped a grade and we were really close, always put in the same groups and doing assignments together, by ourselves. The teachers would focus on the rest of the class and give us assignments to focus on that would normally not take up too much of our time, allowing us to chat with each other. I believe that if we had closer mentorship, we would have been able to learn more at a faster rate. I think that balancing how to manage a classroom with how to mentor every student will be a challenging task, but we could start by allowing students to work in groups at their own rates while we travel from group to group, helping with questions. This would be a lot like the classroom Kohn describes.
ReplyDeleteI am so sorry for your experience. It sounds like they misunderstood you. It had to be such a shock to experience two very different environments. I hope to have a classroom where it is mostly hands on and engaging. That is my hope. I hate learning from a textbook. We learn so much more through collaboration. Plus if you are actively engaged, it should (hopefully) minimize the disruption.
ReplyDeleteAdrianna, hearing about your perspectives in the 5th grade was very interesting! It made me so sad to read about you being sent to a Pre-K class. I moved right before 7th grade from a higher-middle class area to a VERY high middle class much smaller, and noticeably more wealthy. I immediately realized I was very behind my peers. Their curriculum was so much more advanced than mine and much more accelerated. My peers were already talking about which Ivy leagues they were applying to and they dealt with "failure" much worse than anyone I had ever seen. Perfection was the goal here. I felt that we were all expected to learn and stay caught up with no real extra assistance from many teachers. I felt that there was little growth mindset at this wealthier school, many peers felt that they were all born smart and that was just it, I often left school feeling very "dumb" and that I would never be as smart as the other students. I think it was just the way knowledge was presented here as if it was something that couldn't be created and the children were just expected to have it! I often wonder how many of the children at this school went on to become doctors or how many of them became super burnt out from all of the pressure.
ReplyDelete