Meditation

Fontana, David and Ingrid Slack. “Why Meditation?” Teaching Meditation to Children: A Practical Guide to the Benefits of Meditation Techniques. Great Britain: Element, pp.3-1o.

Summary:

This beginning chapter of Fontana and Slack's book explains the possible benefits of meditation for children. It begins by explaining the misconceptions of meditation and what it is not. Then moves on to explaining the benefits of meditation. Meditation means different things for different people but everyone can benefit from understand their own body. I like the point they make that “the more we can help children to be at peace with their own bodies, the better chance we have of helping them avoid these kills.” (10) If done correctly, mediation can help increase concentration, creativity, or mindfulness. In short, it allows a person to understand their mind and grow with it. I found this chapter helpful in understanding the benefits mediation can have. However, it made me wary of how to properly use meditation because, if it is not done correctly, the effects will not be beneficial.

Quotes:

-“Meditation thus touches most aspects of human experience, rendering them potentially richer, profounder and more meaningful.” (4)

-“Knowledge and thinking allow the mind to be very good at handling the outside world, but they may be of little value in helping us control what goes on inside our own heads.” (7)

The democratic classroom: Theory to inform practice, Chapter 3

Pearl, A., & Knight, T. (1999). The Democratic classroom: theory to inform practice. New Jersey: Hampton Press.

Chapter 3: Meeting the Goal of Student Participation in Decisions That Affect One’s Life: Developing the Skills for Responsible Political Empowerment

In this chapter, Pearl and Knight first begin a discussion about the current shortcomings of the public educational system. They argue that the purpose of public schools is to prepare students to lead a life of an active citizen. More specifically, schools must education students about how to vote wisely, however they caution that voting is perhaps the lease important aspect of a “competent citizen”. Pearl and Knight first outline a history of democratic citizenship, beginning with the thoughts of the Founding Fathers (Jefferson, Washington, and Adams). After a discussion of theory behind a democratic classroom, the authors provide ways in which classrooms can model the democratic values they see as good practices of citizenship. These ideas include: community building, student government, community service and cooperative learning. In reading this chapter, I can’t help but refer to an article that offers an opposing viewpoint to the idea that practicing democracy will make us better citizens. The piece is written by Mary Raywid and it is titled “The Democratic Classroom: Mistake or Misnomer. My experience with “The Democratic Classroom” is that it is written with theory as a primary defense for why public schools should become more democratic. I enjoyed this chapter because it provided practical ways for educators to incorporate these values into their classroom.

Noteworthy Quotations:

“A society can be no stronger than its least prepared citizen” (Pearl, 86).

“Only public schools have the potential of maintaining the diversity necessary for meaningful political discussion” (Pearl, 86).

“Democratic education organizes curriculum so that all students are able to devise a defensible solution to a generally recognized important problem, evaluate the logic and evidence used to support different proposals for the solution of the problem, and conceptualize the political tactics and strategy that would be required for implementation of the solution” (Pearl, 87).

“Nowhere is disrespect for democracy more consistently taught by practice and policy than in school. In a great majority of classrooms, students learn that the teacher is boss and whatever she or he says goes, that there is no available mechanism to change a perceived unfair grade, that there is not process by which a student can adequately defend him or herself against a charge of misconduct, and that it is not possible to rectify perceived unfair treatment” (Pearl, 98).

Opposing Viewpoint:

Raywid, Mary. (1976). The Democratic classroom: mistake or misnomer. Theory into Practice , 15(1), 37-46.

"Dumbing Us Down: The Hidden Curriculum of Compulsory Schooling"

Gatto,J. T 1992. Dumbing Us Down: The Hidden Curriculum of Compulsory
Schooling. Gabriola Island, B.C.: New Society Publishers.

Summary: Gatto was a school teacher who became disillusioned with the traditional school system. There were six traits he saw emerging in a system that oftentimes silenced the voice of those who sought change. The traits are:

1. Confusion
2. Class Position
3. Indifference
4. Emotional Dependency
5. Intellectual Dependency
6. Provisional Self- Esteem

By forcing students into these dispositions schools are essentially silencing their voices, thus promulgating the current power structure. Gatto maintains a satirical voice throughout his writing. By keeping things light, he allows the reader to be open to the counterpoints he offers later on. In essence these are the exact opposites of the former six traits:

1. Clarity- Subjects should be connected and seamless to expose students to the outer workings of surrounding society
2. Equality- Power should be shared within the classroom
3. Activism/ empowerment- Students should be empowered to be change makers
4. Emotional Independence- Students develop their own voice in the classroom
5. Intellectual Freedom- Students are free to make decisions that run contrary to their classmates.
6. Self- Esteem- Students self- esteem should be based on their own experiences, not the opinion of the teacher

In sum, he blames an "un- democratic" system for raising apathetic students who are not prepared to make important decisions within their community.

Analysis: I fell in love with Gatto's writing. I love the narrative he uses to describe the current school system. I found myself laughing out loud at several points. Most of all, his writing is accessible. He allows even opponents to see his viewpoints through his amiable nature.

Quotes: "If you've ever tried to wrestle into line kids whose parents have convinced them to be loved in spite of anything, you know how impossible it is to make self- confident spirits conform."

"Surrender your will to a predestined chain of command."

Using Drawings to Interrogate Professional Identity and the Popular Culture of Teaching.

Weber, Sandra and Claudia Mitchell. “Using Drawings to Interrogate Professional Identity and the Popular Culture of Teaching.” Chapter 6 in Teacher’s Professional Lives, ed. Ivor F. Goodson and Andy Hargreaves. Falmer Press: Bristol, PA, 1996. 109-126.

(To access this chapter, you can search for the title of the book on Google Books.)

Summary

The authors explore teacher identity and image both to investigate how teachers perceive themselves, and also how students perceive teachers. They argue that the current work on teacher identity is misguided, because it treats it as an almost formulaic "outcome of pedagogical skills or as an aftermath or function of classroom experience." The authors contend that it is a much more complicated picture - literally - and through their study, they investigate that understanding through artwork.

Methods

The study relies on two essential sources of data: student drawings, and teacher drawings. For the students, they took a sample of 150 elementary school children's drawings of teachers. The students were fairly divided by gender (boys and girls are both represented by the study), and their drawings were done with crayons, colored pencils, and standard blank paper. They were asked, "please draw a teacher (any teacher)" and were then interviewed, "Tell me about your picture," were asked to write about it, or were invited to join a group discussion about who teachers are and what teachers do.

The second data source was a collection of images drawn by teachers. They came from three sets of university students enrolled in elementary education programs, two undergraduate groups of pre-service teachers and one group of graduate students, most of whom were experienced teachers. These drawings were part of a reflective log or journal, and teachers were given the instruction, “draw any teacher, or yourself as a teacher,” then write about the drawing, why they had drawn what they had. Their sample included 98% women, 2% men, based on the natural gender bias of Canadian teachers. The drawings were then displayed on a long wall in several parallel rows, and then rearranged, so as to juxtapose different sets. Analysis of the images also included the contextual field notes, interviews, and written comments, and excerpts of the comments written by teachers.

Three essential understandings of professional identity emerged: models of teaching evoked by drawings, teacher appearance, and gendered aspects of the images. Places this in the context of the culture both present and in history, and then draws specific inferences from the drawings themselves. They recognize that the drawings tend to show us not just what we want to see, but how what has been continues to influence our present culture. The authors conclude with implications about how to create change or reform in a culture that seems static, even in the midst of progressive ideals.

Reflection

The methodology is clear, and if one is interested in preparing "to grapple with the ineffable itself, and see if [one] may not eff it after all" (to quote Douglas Adams), I think the use of images makes a lot of sense. In terms of action research, I do not know that images do much more than give us something a little more interesting to explore and examine. This study becomes about inferences, explanations, and definitions. It is less about changing, and more about the phenomenon of change. I think image analysis is incredibly interesting, but I am always skeptical of the conclusions. You can, when focusing on an image, make it say pretty much anything you want. Nevertheless, this is an interesting examination of things like perception, which are hard to understand any way you look at them.

Quotations

"Drawings are a compelling source of data that has seldom been used in educational research. For adults and children alike, drawing can express that which is not easily put into words: the ineffable, the elusive, the not-yet-thought-through, the subconscious." 110-11

MacLeod, J. (2004). Ain't No Makin' It (2nd Edition ed.). Boulder: Westview Press.

An ethnographic study focused on youth in Clarendon Heights, a low-income housing development in a “northeastern city,” Ain’t No Makin’ It illuminates a culture stripped of hope and devoid of aspiration. MacLeod looks to two groups of boys in these “projects” to explain the process of social reproduction- why working-class children tend to end up in working-class jobs. Prior to his intensive look at the boys from Clarendon Heights, he looks to reproduction theorists Samuel Bowles and Herbert Gintis, Pierre Bourdieu, Basil Bernstein, Shirley Brice Heath, Paul Willis, and Henry Giroux to explain the varied schools of thought on why and how “class structure is reproduced from one generation to the next.” (11)
Bowles and Ginits, MacLeod explains, note the structural similarities between schools and capitalist economy. “In short, argue Bowles and Gintis, schools train the wealthy to take their places at the top of the economy while conditioning the poor to accept their lowly status in the class structure.” (12) Furthermore, schools themselves have structural differences depending on their location and the population that they serve. “Schools serving working-class neighborhoods are more regimented and emphasize rules and behavioral control. In contrast, suburban schools offer more open classrooms that ‘favor greater student participation, less direct supervision, more student electives, and in general, a value system stressing internalized standards of control.’” (12-13) “Even within the same school, argue Bowles and Ginits, educational tracks, which cater to different classes of students, emphasize different values.” (13). In their theory, schools are a large part of the reproduction of social classes, preparing some to be bossed, and others to be bosses.
According to MacLeod, Bordieu’s contribution to the theory of social reproduction is the idea that “general cultural background, knowledge, disposition, and skills are passed from one generation to the next,” a concept referred to as “cultural capital.” (13) Here again, one could argue, schools are structured in a way that benefits those with the most cultural capital, and punishes those with the least. “The structure of schooling, with its high regard for the cultural capital of the upper classes, promotes a belief among working-class students that they are unlikely to achieve academic success.” (15) Bordieu also points out that a person’s “habitus,” or attitudes and behavior, also pass from one generation to the next, therefore adding to the reproduction of their social status.
Building on Bordieu’s theories, Basil Bernstein and Shirley Brice Heath focus in specifically on the effects of language patterns on social reproduction. MacLeod explains that Bernstein’s theory involves the idea that there are “educational ramifications of divergent linguistic patterns among children of different social strata.” (16) Again, children of working-class families are at a disadvantage because schools tend to operate in a more “elaborated” code. Heath’s research takes race in to account when thinking about the linguistic patterns that effect social reproduction. She contends that the white children from the middle class neighborhood studied are asked more questions from their parents and learned to “label and name objects, to identify the features of the objects, and to talk about the referents out of context: precisely the skills demanded of students in school… The black working-class children are not socialized to cope with the language patterns used in schools and quickly fall into a pattern of academic failure.” MacLeod goes on to connect Bernstein and Heath’s main idea that when the language used at home does not match the language required of children at school, the children face higher rates of failure. (18)
Next, MacLeod notes the work of ethnographer Paul Willis. Willis, unlike those previously mentioned, finds that student’s choice in how they perceive schools also plays a large part in their future success. One group of boys conformed to school rules and aspired to middle-class occupations, while another group tended to “reject the school’s achievement ideology.” These boys were disruptive and disrespectful, and therefore didn’t do well in school. He “believes these boys’ class background, geographical location, local opportunity structure (job market), and educational attainment influence their job choice.” But, he explains that in addition to the structural barriers, the boys’ cultural outlook plays in to their social reproduction. They “equate manual labor with masculinity, a trait highly valued by their working-class culture.” (19) By means of their cultural attitudes and practices, they reproduce their social standing.
Finally, MacLeod looks to Giroux who stands on the opposite end of the spectrum from Bowles and Gintis. Rather than blaming social reproduction on the structures of capitalist economies and educational systems, Giroux finds that “individual autonomy “ plays a much bigger role than what is typically mentioned in studies. MacLeod explains that Giroux’s theory of resistance is an examination of “student nonconformity and opposition.” (21) He criticizes Giroux, however, for posing the questions of how the students would explain their own behavior in the context of their peer, family, and work relations, but then not going on to answer these questions. (22)
Finally, within the context of these social reproduction theories, MacLeod sets forth to determine the “relationship between structural forces and cultural innovation” by following two groups of boys who come from the same location but who have different outlooks, different aspirations, are from different races, and who will, to some small degree, prove one or more of these theories to be true. According to MacLeod, “of all the factors contributing to social reproduction (e.g., tracking, social relations of schooling, class-based differences in linguistic codes), the regulation of aspirations is perhaps the most important.” (23) The chapters that follow are the stories of the Brothers and the Hallway Hangers as told in interviews and interactions with MacLeod over the course of 12 years. The final chapter of this book gives his final conclusions after so many years with these now men. He eludes to some necessary reforms for society and education.

Reflection:
Prior to reading this book, I was naïve to think that the few mile separation between my school in a working-class neighborhood and a school just four miles away in a middle-class neighborhood was nothing more than geographical. I was sure that with a few quick fixes I could easily resolve the disparity in expectations that have been striking to me over my 10 year term as a teacher here. I was, and still am to a point, indignant that the children I teach should have any less of a chance at future success than someone else because of four miles! Clearly, if we set the expectations high, and teach them the skills they need to be competitive, then nothing should stop them from climbing just as high as anyone else. Higher! These social theorists have pointed out some very eye opening issues that I had not considered before.
Truly, my students come from generation after generation of working -class families. Just four miles away, the neighborhood is full of million dollar homes and a highly educated populace. In the neighborhood where my school resides, most of the parents never graduated from high school, many don’t speak English, several have many other issues weighing on them that are far heavier than my homework. Is it our capitalistic society that aims to keep them down and keep the kids across town on top? Are we, the education system, promulgating this discrepancy? Do my students bring less cultural capital to the table than the kids over there, and is that why the schools seem so different? Have my students been asked fewer questions by their parents, or not been prompted to label and analyze things, and is that why they aren’t as successful on standardized tests? Do these students have free will in deciding whether to go with the program or buck the system? And if so, will those who so choose become successful middle-class Americans someday, while the rebels stay in the hamster wheel?
I have a new lens with which to look at my student’s aspirations, access, and achievement. MacLeod’s research in to the current schools of thought on social reproduction will most definitely guide me on my journey.

Blogging to Learn

Bartlett-Bragg, Anne (2003). Blogging to learn, retrieved May 3, 2008 at www.flexiblelearning.net.au/knowledgetree/.../pdf/Blogging_to_Learn.pdf.

Summary
In the article Blogging to Learn, Ann Bartlett-Bragg explains what blogging is, how she integrated blogging into her instruction, and the effects blogging had on some students writing. Bartlett-Bragg's main premise is that blogging "appears to enrich the learning experience and provide an opportunity for learners to shift from surface to deeper levels of learning." She defines surface learning as "the approach of the learner to complete only the minimum content necessary to meet assessment requirements, whether that is learning only what may be presented in a test of simply attending and completing activities." Deep learning involves reflection, making connections between ideas and concepts and synthesizing information. In her experience, Bartlett-Bragg found blogging allowed students to write for a real audience and give and receive feedback in a collaborative setting. This feedback even prompted some to reflect and revise their writing. She states, "Critical reflection from reviews of their blogs then leads to deeper levels of learning, where the students draw on their experiences to inform future professional practice."

Reflection
I was drawn, once again, to this article, because of its title. Although it is not a recent publication, I appreciated this teacher-researchers explanation and reflection of her journey blogging with students. The idea that blogs offer a 1.) real audience, 2.)place for feedback and 3.)propel reflection and revision is what I am interested in. I really need to find out more about blogs versus forums. What are the advantages and disadvantages of each? How do I go about setting up blogs or a forum for my classroom? If my students all have their own blog, how do I create a website where all can access one another's? What is Google sites? What do the HTH teachers do? Is the digital portfolio a site or a blog? What is the difference between a site and a blog? Where can I get this questions answered?