I watched the "What If" video a second time to refresh my memory! (admittedly the music has started to bug me.) A three hundred year summary of statements made by so called, behind the times educators certainly causes one to pause and think what will we be saying in the next five to ten years! Our profession has been criticized for not keeping up with the times or staying on top of preparing students for the future. What are the causes? Has it been that for the past three hundred years or so teachers lack support, funding or are they inundated with more to "cover"? Has being a few steps behind been to the detriment of our students? How do we face the ongoing public criticism that teachers are not preparing students for the work place? I'd love to hear your thoughts!
Two things have popped into my mind as I've sat and pondered this video: funding and cursive handwriting. Ah, funding...the one we always wish there was more of, and cursive the one we teachers have very little time for these days! Funny how the first we long for and the latter we forget about. They are connected though: We feel badly about them both to some degree.
If we want to enhance our schools with the tools our students need for the future, we can all state with certainty that we need proper funding. It's a shame to hear and see of schools, or classrooms with more technological resources than others within our own district, let alone the country or the world for that matter. If we are to become true 21st century crusaders we need not just one or two, but all our classrooms equipped. It stands to reason that this is the equitable path to take.
Now onto the cursive handwriting. We state (in third grade anyway)there simply is no time to teach it. I often wonder how will this skill carry my students further into the 21st century? I started thinking of an antiquated quote I could add onto "What If"! Cursive has certainly been a time honored tradition and skill we teachers have been summoned to teach. After all we need to know how to sign our names don't we? But how much longer will it sustain in the 21st century? And so I leave you with this: First, how can we fund our schools in the 21st century and second, provide your best argument to keep this third grade teacher believing more time should be spent on cursive handwriting! Looking forward to hearing from you.
P.S. If you really want to read up on how cursive handwriting, read the article in the link I've attached.
Sunday, February 21, 2010
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteAs always, I enjoy reading Emily's thoughtful comments on schools' response to new societal needs over the last 300 years, as presented by the video. I did believe much of the content of the video was poignant (had to laugh at the principals' comments too.) It's easy to feel that schools' were being criticized for not being on the front end of some of these 21st century skills and may, in fact, cling to some "old school" practices that have worked pretty well for us. However, schools have been remarkably responsive to reform efforts of the last twenty years, Massachusetts especially, so I look at it that now we have the opportunity to move forward. Schools have historically been able to enact the reforms that society has asked them to. Typically, it takes 50 years to fully realize reform goals. A major emphasis of the last reform effort was to ensure equality of curriculum expectations across the board and we did that in under twenty years - Mission accomplished! So, I see it as that we are moving forward.
ReplyDelete