Seeing Lots of Teachers!

Wow! Only 3 weeks into keeping this blog, and I'm already playing catch up for last week! I'll put up two posts today to cover my last two days at my placement, and, from now on, I'll be sure to stay on schedule as much as humanly possible!

So, for my observation on 14 September 2011:

This observation was a really nice opportunity for me to observe a range of teachers. When I say "a range," I mean I was able to observe teachers with a wide variety of teaching styles and pedagogies, teaching to a wide variety of grade- and presumed ability-levels. This experience really got me thinking about how we define "good" teachers--and "good" students, for that matter.

What was interesting to me was that, regardless of grade level, teacher, or students' perceived ability level, instructional strategies didn't vary greatly. True, teachers had severe or mild strategies for behavior/classroom management, spoke with varying tones of voices, referred to students in different ways, covered different activities and different texts. But, for all of that, the dominant pedagogy remained, at least from my vantage point, roughly the same. Perhaps the subtle differences I saw were more significant, and reflected really significant philosophical differences. I'm not saying by any means that my perception is perfect. But, it seemed to me that the school culture is one that I've yet to fully understand. I want to preface this by saying that not every single teacher I observed today fits this characterization equally, or to a great degree at all. But it seems to be a trend that I'm trying to understand.

To me, students are meaning makers, and they should be working really hard in school--maybe close to as hard as the teachers--to understand their readings on a really deep level, to understand how composing helps them to make meaning out of texts in their lives, etc. But it seemed to me that the teachers at my placement think a little bit differently. I haven't interviewed them about their pedagogies--perhaps that would be a good project to undertake--so I hope I'm not mischaracterizing them here. But it seems that they perceive English to be a static subject that one can obtain knowledge of through an understanding of literary devices and prescribed composition structures such as the five paragraph essay. And this could be a valid pedagogy--it's not one that I find very useful for me, and it's not one that my graduate program seems to promote, but it's certainly--again, as I perceive things--a dominant model in many schools, perhaps due in part to NCLB and policies emphasizing standards and accountability.

But this leads me, too, to question my perception. My placement has a curriculum that was decided upon at the beginning of the school year, and all teachers in the specific grade level must follow the curriculum. Perhaps this accounts for the prescriptiveness of many teachers methods.

My question, then, is what am I doing? What I envisioned today to be about, for me, is finding where I fit in a spectrum of teacher identities. I don't think I found it. I did find people whose demeanors are similar to mine, but none who I could tell from the lessons I observed thought like I do.

Does this mean that all the stuff I'm learning, that I find so compelling right now, is unattainable pie-in-the-sky ivory tower theory that has no practical applications? I've read studies that seem to say that this isn't the case, but that seems to be what I'm seeing, so what do I trust? The empirical observations I'm making and the things I hear teachers saying at my placement--and at the placements where my peers are student-teaching as well? Or the data and research I'm getting from my classes, that I want to believe in but that, based on what I'm actually seeing in the "real world" seems like there has to be something they're not telling us. For example, in a school where the curriculum is prescribed, is there any teacher autonomy? If not, why am I learning how to make choices about unit planning and text choices? On the off chance that I get into one of these "magic schools" that people write about these strategies working in?

I'm not trying to be cynical or pessimistic here. Quite the contrary! I'm super hopeful about developing my "praxis." But I'm struggling about how I'm supposed to be doing that in a classroom that's not my own, with a curriculum that some text book developer made up in an office somewhere, with no knowledge of my school district or my mentor teacher or my students or me.

And what about teachers who have lost hope? I've seen them, and I've heard of them, too. They look at the work we're doing at Pitt and call it "the new educational trend that will be replaced in five years by something else." They stick with the material they've been teaching and the materials they've been using because they feel its proven itself. Should I believe that to be true? That a "tried and true" approach/curriculum/writing format can exist? Should I be challenging that? How? When? Now, as a student-teacher? When I get my own classroom? Not until I have tenure? And what if I do find out, in five years, that I've been doing it "wrong" all along, even though I feel its been working for my students?

The teachers I'm talking about care about their students, and their students' test scores, college prospects, futures. I get the sense that they worry that experimenting with new strategies that they're not familiar with, and might not be good at, is a detriment to their students education, because students become guinea pigs, in a sense, having the effectiveness of a new strategy tested on them. And what if the theory WAS wrong on this one, for this student/class/school? So I understand their adherence to standard, test-prep focused curriculum, even if I'm learning alternatives that make much more sense to me, and I think will be more effective and help students more.

How do I negotiate this? And re: all the questions I just asked about when it's okay to try and shake things up a bit? Do I just hope for a job at a progressive school? Or does that defeat the purpose entirely, because then MY particular knowledge/training won't be required to help those students?

I hope it doesn't seem like I'm putting other teachers, with other pedagogies, down in any way. Like I said, I totally understand the pressures on them from all directions to do things in a certain way. But I'm afraid. I think I'm afraid that there's no place in my placement, and perhaps in today's US education system, for the teacher I think I'm becoming. What should I do?

I'd really REALLY love some feedback on this question from anyone with ideas, or anyone who is feeling some of the same things. Thanks so much for reading this one!