I am going to jump in here, because I believe it was a comment I made
that started this thread that seems to have turned into a bit of
young vs old, which was NOT the original point, not really. The point
was a question about what is being taught and not taught in teacher
education programs, and what is being and has been lost over the last
decade or so regarding classroom instruction, classroom environment,
and teacher experience.
This was my original statement:
".....I am concerned that it seems that newer/younger teachers are
less and less able to rely on their own observations, and that it
seems the norm to instantly look for a program of some kind, rather
than cultivate the knowledge and observational skills necessary for
good kid-watching. And once again, this is not a criticism of newer/
younger teachers... it is a criticism of the system and their trainers."
Now, I admit there is some generalization in there, but it is an
accolade to experienced teachers with a concern about what newer/
younger/less experienced teachers may not be learning about in
teacher education programs.
This also was prompted, for me, from a question that someone asked
about DEAR and SSR. I was not criticizing the person who asked what
they were.... I was lamenting that anyone teaching elementary school
would need to ask, because "in my day" (sorry) these were standard
acronyms that everyone knew, whether they supported them or not. We
learned about them in our reading methods courses, used them in the
classroom, had whole staff meetings about how we could implement such
programs school wide, with everyone down to the custodian and
secretary dropping everything to read for 20 minutes.
It isn't a matter of "ageism" so much as a matter of good things
being lost in the tsunami of data-gathering.
Consider the words of Art Costa:
"What was once educationally significant, but difficult to measure,
has been replaced by what is insignificant and easy to measure. So
now we test how well we have taught what we do not value."
Someone said in another post that we should support each other. And
we should. And we should also ask questions and those of us who have
been around the block a few times do have something to add, having
lived through the pendulum swings. What I fear is that the current
pendulum swings are more like wrecking balls.
That's my two cents.
Renee
On Oct 11, 2011, at 8:49 PM, jeanette hayden wrote:
Well you did offend many who, regardless of age, read the research,
have strong convictions regarding reading instruction
and have been fighting the battle many years.
I won't even list my credentials, but I am over 60 and still kicking!
On Oct 11, 2011, at 4:33 PM, Felicia Barra wrote:
I didn't mean to offend anyone. My mentor taught 1st grade for 30
years and
always prided herself on going to workshops to keep abreast of best
practices. My observation was from the school I currently teach at.
"What was once educationally significant, but difficult to measure,
has been replaced by what is insignificant and easy to measure. So
now we test how well we have taught what we do not value."
— Art Costa, emeritus professor, California State University
_______________________________________________
Mosaic mailing list
[email protected]
To unsubscribe or modify your membership please go to
http://literacyworkshop.org/mailman/options/mosaic_literacyworkshop.org
Search the MOSAIC archives at http://snipurl.com/MosaicArchive
