Education is like...

Education is truly like climbing a staircase. When a student first begins school, they are at the very bottom of the staircase. As the student begins to progress through school, their education increases. As their education increases, we can think of them as taking a step in the staircase. Steps closer to the bottom of the staircase can be consider "foundational". As teachers, we always try to get our students to use previous steps as a foundation, but tell them to NEVER stop climbing. Students can move forward and backwards on the staircase, however it's up to teachers to build the student's knowledge and push them further up the staircase. We, as educators, should never allow the students to settle at a certain stair.

For example, when teaching math, its great to see a student do simple problems such as 5+4=9, but how about pushing them to the next level and trying something more challenging. A child should never be satisfied being at a certain stair. We should encourage our children to push themselves and climb the staircase of education.

As students progress into higher grade levels, they should be closer to the top of the staircase. In some cases, teachers will have students who regress down the stairs. In various cases, teachers will have students who can't make it to the next level. However, it's our job to provide the encouragement, support, and knowledge to get that child back up the stairs and to the next level. This staircase is infinite, and ultimately educators should NEVER let their students stop climbing. Just when you think you've learned it all, there's always another stair to climb.

Overall, the staircase is symbolic of a child's education. The top of the staircase represents higher education, the bottom of the staircase represents little to no education. As educators, we constantly want to build upon our students' knowledge and get them higher up on the staircase. We are the ones who allow them to further themselves. It's a process that involves climbing and pushing the limits. Teachers and students should never want to settle, because there is always another level to be reached.

This course opened my eyes to a lot of topics in education. I would say the three topics that stuck out to me the most were UDL, bilingual education and place-based education. UDL is something I never knew about until I entered this course. I think it is wonderful that schools are trying to become inclusive. At the same time, I'm apprehensive about it. I never thought about teaching special education students, and I'm scared that I won't be effective for them. Therefore, being aware of what's going on and knowing that having special education students in my classroom is possible, I'm becoming more mindful of how to suit them.

In addition, before this course, I never realized how much debate their was about bilingual education. It seems like educators are uncertain on how to best suit bilingual students. After hearing about immersion programs, and how it holds a "sink or swim" philosophy, I know I will advocate for anything BUT that in my school system. I don't think its appropriate that we ask the student to drop their native language, and learn English. I'm in favor of a two-way program where they are allowed to use their native language, and English. I wouldn't want to undermine a student's culture by having them ditch their native language all together.

Lastly, place-based education had a serious impact on me. Until that topic, I never realized how our planet was functioning. It's almost as if some of the people on this earth, have NO concern for the planet at all. I will be the first to admit that I was ignorant to things going on around us. However, as I became aware of how much damage we are doing to this planet, I will be the first to educate my students on how important it is to preserve the planet. I want them to gain an appreciation for nature, before I ask them to save nature. If I can allow my students to love the planet, I know they will fight to save the planet. Therefore, I would like the opportunity to take learning outside of the classroom and allow them to experience nature firsthand.

From my blog, I learned a lot about myself and what I valued. As I had to write about certain topics, and then share my opinion, I became aware to what I truly valued. It was important for me to identify certain values so I know what I will and won't incorporate into my classroom. In addition, it allowed me to gain knowledge into certain topics that I will be able to comment on in the future. From my classmates, I learned how differing opinions could yield to more knowledge. As I read the different responses of my classmates, I became mindful to a variety of opinions. They pointed something out that I didn't know or didn't think about. They ultimately showed me how beneficial it can be to communicate with other teachers later on. What works for one teacher, may also work for me but I will never know unless I consult him or her.

How Can Teachers Prevent Gender Inequality in the Classroom?

A person's sex is a biologically determined factor. However, a person's "gender" is a social construction. Statements such as "Tom is so confident, he will make a great leader" and "Courtney is so caring she will work so well with children" can be considered gender stereotypes. Gender stereotypes exist in a variety of social institutions and public schools are no exception. The problem with statements such as these, is that it leaves an impression on a child of what they can and can not do. Should girls be made to feel like they need to stay home and take care of kids? And should boys feel that if they aren't strong they will be looked as a "sissy"? Absolutely not, however sometimes teacher are not consciously aware of the stereotypes they are creating. Unknowingly, teachers are treating boys and girls differently and establishing things they are capable and incapable of doing. To combat gender inequality, there are a few things teachers can do to ensure girls and boys are treated alike.

DEVELOP GENDER NEUTRAL LANGUAGE:
Unknowingly, teachers seem to favor the use of "he" and "him" when presenting examples, instead of "she" and "her". Does the teacher do this purposely? No. However, a teacher needs to alternate between male and female examples. All learning material needs to be scrutinized to ensure there is gender equality. If examples contain all males, this can lead to a type of thinking that males are dominate because they are always the ones presented doing various activities. It seems like a silly thing, however it can have a serious impact on the minds of children.

USE THE LATEST BOOKS AND MATERIALS:
There are new books/materials that have been conceptualized by the NCERT and other publishers that use positive female and male examples. In past years, textbooks have always made males out to be the doctors, and females to be the nurses. Furthermore, they have made the females out to be the ones who clean, and males the ones who work. Therefore, females have begun to feel that there are some occupations they are NOT meant to do. They develop an attitude that they are inferior to males, and are inhibited from doing various things. We don't want our children to begin questioning if girls can be pilots, bus drivers, or police officers. Also we don't want boys to ask if they can be dancers, nurses, or hair-dressers. Newer textbooks and materials present males and females in positive examples that break down stereotypes.

DO NOT SEAT BOYS AND GIRLS SEPARATELY:
Segregating boys and girls, so that they sit with the same gender is not a good idea. Especially if the teacher plans to hold and create various discussions, this could be detrimental. Girls are often shy, and teachers need to call on them to participate. Boys don't hesitate to participate, and they often spark the discussion. Therefore, incorporating boys and girls together will prevent the girls from remaining silent and letting the boys take the lead. This mixed-gender seating arrangement is meant to make the classroom feel equal. If teachers segregated the sexes, she may focus on one sex more than the other. In addition, you don't want create a tone in the classroom that boys are "different" than girls. Both girls and boys needed to be looked at and treated alike.

GIVE EQUAL ENCOURAGEMENT ABOUT EXTRACURRICULAR ACTIVITIES, ETC:
More often than not, society views that males should play sports and girls shouldn't. However, there is no law that says what girls can do and what boys can do. This attitude has been created by society, and it can easily be torn down. A boy shouldn't feel like a "wimp" or "sissy" if they want to participate in theater. Also, a girl shouldn't be seen as "masculine" or a "tom-boy" because she likes to play various sports. Teachers need to be mindful of their students interests and they need to be encouraging. If a boy expresses they want to draw and paint, there is no reason a teacher should act negatively. In addition, if a girl is interested and loves football there should be a great amount of encouragement. Teachers need to be unbiased when it comes to their students interests. They need to encourage them to follow their passions regardless of what society deems as masculine and feminine. The same goes for careers. If a boy decides he wants to become a dancer, there should be no hesitation from the teacher to encourage that.

In my opinion, I think gender inequality is a huge issue in schools. I believe our society has developed a cruel attitude towards genders. I really hate the terms "tom-boy", "wimp", "sissy", "baby" etc. I truly believe our stereotypical ways come from society's way of life in the 1930's to 1960's. In that time period, RARELY did women work. Women were meant to stay home, clean, cook and take care of the kids. Men needed to work to make a living, and they were known to be more educated. However, we are in a completely different generation today. There shouldn't be any restrictions, barriers, or stereotypes of what each gender can do. This time period is completely different. Biologically, we have different body parts, etc. That doesn't mean men can't do "feminine" things, and girls can't do "masculine" things. We need to STOP creating stereotypes for our children. Females shouldn't be made to feel inferior, just as men shouldn't feel superior. Teachers need to start treating their students as equals. I remember in my 5th grade classroom, my teacher would always call on boys to help her lift things or bring things upstairs. That just shows that she portrayed the girls in the classroom as weak and incapable. There is no reason she couldn't have chosen a girl. In the 5th grade, boys aren't insanely strong and muscular, they aren't even fully developed. Little things, such as this, is what creates various gender stereotypes.

Furthermore, I STRONGLY disagree with uni-sex schools and classrooms. Women need to work alongside men and gain the confidence. If we segregate males and females for education, we aren't preparing students for the real world. I think this type of schooling would further the gender stereotypes rather than reduce them. Men need to be able to recognize the abilities of women, just as much as women need to realize they can work alongside men. If women are segregated into one classroom, then what happens to their confidence when they need to work with men? They may be confident and strong in front of other women, but would this carry over when working with men? The same goes for men, would they be so confident and used to working strictly with men, that anything a women says is irrelevant? Segregation of the sexes is not the answer, we can't run away from the problem to solve it.

Gender Equality in the Classroom

Gender Inequalities in the Classroom

Place-Based Education and it's Benefits

What is Place-Based Education? 
Place-Based Education is an approach to education that immerses students in their communities/surroundings for the study of math, language arts, social studies, science and more. In other words, this type of education encourages teachers to get students out of the classroom and into their communities to learn. This type of education fosters student's connections to various places and makes "the wall between school and the community become much more permeable".

The Benefits of Place-Based Education:
Some may ask, why turn to this type of education? Why not keep the kids in the classroom and stick to a textbook? Is it really necessary to have the kids go out into the community to learn? To answer these types of questions, let's look at the benefits of place-based education.

(1) Place-Based Education Energizes Teachers: 
A second grade teacher in Hanover, New Hampshire took a year long program on how to use place-based education. Through her experience, she gained confidence in her leadership skills. In addition she was inspired and energized to use the 32 acre-forest behind the school as a learning ground for her students. The teacher has become inspired by place-based education and has encouraged other teachers in her school to turn to this practice. Currently, her school has re-arranged their curriculum to use the forest as the ground for learning. This type of education gave her the push to strive for change and continue to grow her knowledge as an educator.

(2) Place-Based Education Transforms School Culture:
Dennis C. Haley Elementary School in Roslindale, MA has become a whole new place due to place-based education. Students have utilized the school-yard and a local nature center. Through this, they have created gardens, analyzed insects, studied weather patterns and more. The teachers see the students becoming more motivated and thinking critically. They are truly becoming scientists and observers.  Students and teachers have developed a new passion for learning science. This school has become a top choice for students in the Boston area. The school is beginning to flourish due to place-based education.

(3) Place-Based Education Helps Students Learn:
Through research, students in place-based education seem to be outperforming their non-place-based peers. In other words, those who have been exposed to place-based education are consistently out-performing peers who have NOT been exposed to place-based education. Students that have been exposed to place-based education have become increasingly engaged and enthusiastic about learning. As place-based education exposes them to more experiences and more places, they are becoming enthusiastic for the material they are learning. There is a correlation between place-based education and academic achievement.

(4) Place-Based Education Connects Schools and Communities:
This type of education allows students to go out into the community and explore. By doing this, students are becoming active members in the community. Therefore, the wall between school and the community is broken down. Students bring up issues to community leaders that have been ignored. Therefore, students are helping make the community a better place.

(5) Place-Based Education Encourages Students to become Environmental Stewards: 
Allowing the students to go outdoors and explore issues in their local environments, makes them more environmentally aware. By doing research and studying various environmental issues, students become more mindful of the environment. In today's society, we are deeply involved in consumerism. We are destroying the Earth and using all of our natural resources. Therefore, this type of education can produce the change that this planet needs. We need people who are aware of the importance of the environment and who will protect it. This type of education allows students to have a deeper understanding of nature and the environment.

(6) Place-Based Education Invites Students to become Active Citizens: 
Young generations are the future of our society and our country. Therefore, it's important to allow children to assert that they are citizens as well. Place-based education allows students to have the opportunity to "share their knowledge, perspectives and insights with regard to important community issues". It is training them to become good citizens in the future, and to voice their opinions and contribute to the greater good of society.

Place-based education allows students to create their own knowledge. Students become more engaged, motivated and begin to think critically. It gets students out of the classroom and exposed to relatable, real-world problems.

The Benefits of Place-Based Education

Place-Based Education

Paulo Freire vs. Montessori

Paulo Freire, has the "Banking Concept of Education". This concept of education emphasizes narration and memorization. The teacher is the narrator, who speaks to the students. The students are the memorizers, who need to retain and repeat the information given. Therefore, the students become "containers" that are "to be filled by the teacher" (Freire 1). In terms of banking, the students are "depositories" and teachers are the "depositors". The teacher "makes deposits" which the student receives, memorizes, and repeats (Freire 1).

The job of the student is nothing more than to receive and fill their depository. The students lack creativity, and become robotic. They are allowed to learn what is given to them verbally. This concept of education insists that the teacher is superior to the student. The students come in knowing "nothing" and the teacher knows "everything" (Freire 2). The teacher is key to the learning process. Without the teacher, the students would be unable to gain an education. The students will never be required to think critically and consider reality.

Overall, this concept of education views the students as "passive". They learn what is presented and given to them. The educator's role, "is to regulate the way the world 'enters into' the students" (Freire 4). They will continuously present information to try to "fill" their students.

Montessori, has a very unique and different approach to education. Maria Montessori, believes that children have an "inner guide" that makes them naturally eager to learn. The teacher, child and environment create a learning triangle. The room is designed to promote independence, "freedom within limits" and a sense of choice. The child, through individual choice, makes use of environment to develop him or herself, with the teacher there as a guide.

The Montessori philosophy also promotes multi-age grouping. This approach allows older students to teach and guide younger students. In addition, the room is designed so that students can move from subject area to subject area. They are not constrained to a desk and they can take as much time as they want with a particular material.

Overall, in the Montessori philosophy, the child works at their own optimum level. The child is given the freedom to make their own choices regarding their learning. The teacher is always there to guide and to assist, "their purpose is to stimulate the child's enthusiasm for learning and to guide it, without interfering with the child's natural desire to teach themselves and become independent". The child takes learning into their own hands by manipulating what is given to them.

The Montessori and Paulo Freire philosophies are very different. Montessori would strongly reject Freire's banking concept. Freire sees the child as passive in the learning process, they retain what is narrated to them. However, Montessori disagrees with this. She sees children as very active in their learning process. They have an "inner guide" to learn, and with this natural eagerness, they will manipulate their environment in ways to encourage learning. Freire puts a lot of emphasis on the teacher. "The teacher knows everything and the student knows nothing" (Freire 2). However, Montessori believes that teachers are just guides in the learning process. Their job is to stimulate the enthusiasm to learn and to guide it. Overall, their main difference is based on their philosophy about how learning happens. Freire thinks children are containers that are filled with information narrated to them. Montessori views children as active and naturally eager to learn. She doesn't see the teacher as the crucial component to learning.

I personally agree with Montessori over Freire. I don't like how Freire makes students seem so robotic and lethargic. I don't believe Freire gives students enough credit. He puts too much emphasis on the teacher and not enough faith in the students to learn by themselves. I can't imagine how boring and demeaning this philosophy is for students. I envision students drooping in their seats, bored out of their minds, just starring at the teacher in front of them. Montessori allows students the freedom to make choices and learn for themselves. She has faith in the idea that they have a natural eagerness to learn. She wants to make them independent and prepare them to function in society. Freire makes students dependent on the teacher, as they are the source of all information. Freire doesn't allow students to think for themselves or make decisions. Montessori is more student-centered. The environment is created to facilitate learning and provide as much assistant to the students as possible. I like to believe that students don't NEED me to learn. They can use me as a guide, but I am not the source of all their information. I want them to feel that they can be independent and learn without my voice. I couldn't imagine just viewing them as containers that I am "filling" with information.

Introduction to Montessori

What is Montessori Style?

Teaching Montessori

 freire_the_banking_concept_of_education.pdf