Teaching Style

1) Classroom Organization
I want to have my classroom arranged in the most discussion-friendly design I can muster with what I have available. It is important to me that students can see one another - looking at the back of someone's head is no way to get to know them.


2) Motivation
I can see myself having some trouble with motivation because of my wish that students will be intrinsically motivated by my own excitement about lessons. I recognize that motivation is probably going to have to have a trial-and-error focus until I find a system that motivates my students without relying on excessively authoritative measures.


3) Discipline
Discipline is one topic that I feel that I differ from my classmates upon. I am a very laissez-faire leader - the chief disciplinary topics that I feel compelled to intervene on are those dealing with respect. This is why respect will be the main lens of my disciplinary action. I truly believe that each student deserves respect, both from themselves, myself, and their peers. 


4) Assessment
The assessment format that I would like to use in my classroom is one that tracks progress rather than assessing aptitude at one particular time. Not only can a "final" come on a bad day for a student, dooming them, a snapshot assessment doesn't take into account growth. One of the worst tests that I ever took was a grammar-based test, containing the entire grammar curriculum for the year. We took it at the beginning of the year, and the rule was that if you aced it, you wouldn't have to take it again at the end of the year. I aced it, but it gave me the feeling that I didn't even have to bother anymore with any of the grammar content. 


5) Classroom Climate
My preferred classroom climate is influenced a lot by my own personality and past experience. I want to have the classroom that people come to eat their lunch in if they're uncomfortable in the cafeteria. I want to have a friendly, personable, and approachable classroom where students can express themselves freely without fear of social consequences. Obviously, this won't be easy and is going to require fine tuning. I just need to be ready at the get-go to start up that climate from day one.


6) Technology Integration
Technology integration is really something that I'm going to need to figure out based on the school that I'm in. The dream, of course is to have an abundance of learning technology that enhances and facilitates learning, while at the same time not being a distraction or impeding learning through the format.  


7) Learning Focus
My learning focus is that while the content and curriculum elements of school are very important, the largest focus should be on the students themselves. I have had several friends who studied very hard in school, got great grades, did all the right extracurriculars, and ended up going to very good colleges. None of them had any idea what they wanted to do, or had an idea of something that they'd be happy doing. All they learned was how to play the "school game." I think that self-knowledge is just as worthy a "hidden curriculum" item as regular student socialization.


8) Teacher and Leadership Style.
My teaching and leadership style has already been covered slightly in a few other sections, but in general I want to be accepting, friendly, respected, and respecting of all of my students. I think that the fastest way to lose students focus and respect is to come across too strong - a lot of them are  already getting that from all sides anyway, either from parents, other teachers, or other authority figures. By no means do I mean that I want to be soft for soft's sake, but being a tough guy just isn't my style. I also want students to take a leadership role in the classroom. This is something that I've explored a bit as a camp counselor, and I'd love to see how it works in a school classroom. 

Voices

Quintilian

I like that Quintilian is one of the first philosophers in the packet who are said to respect the child. With a focus on developmental levels of the students, it seems to me as if Quintilian is one of the first pedagogues. Many predecessors seemed to focus on education for adults, but Quintllian aims specifically at education at an age of physical, emotional, and intellectual growth.

Jesus

One of the things that influences me about the teachings of Jesus Christ is that He believed in universal salvation and worth. I’m particularly interested in the “curriculum and methodology” that the packet describes – a new world order of peace. Pacifism is such a large part of my moral belief structure that I feel this aligns nicely. Also, the note about storytelling as a teaching method is favorable to me, as it provided a universal instruction technique.

Martin Luther

Although certain chronological traits set me apart from Luther (the focus on scripture as an unparalleled tool in universal education), I chiefly agree with a vast majority of his philosophy. The promotion of a universal school for children, girls included, and a focus on literacy is an important part of my philosophy as well. It also struck me that Luther viewed the role of the teacher as essential to the education of the student.

Montessori

This is possibly the educationist whose philosophy I most agree with – the focus on the “discovery of the child” and child development is incredibly important, especially in early childhood education. A lot of the things that the packet prescribes to children in their “sensitive periods,” which it implies are limited to early childhood, I feel could equally apply to all of young adulthood. The role of the educator as a facilitator creating an environment in which students can teach themselves is something that I feel strongly about. The term “spontaneous learning” in particular strikes me as a particularly admirable goal. Although I recognize that it is a necessary evil in the society that will probably exist the duration of my life, I feel like mechanized education is a terrible impediment to what our world could be. That we let students stop holistically developing physically, morally, and mentally is a sad fact, and it is my dream that this becomes a primary means of education.

Educational Theories

Perennialism is an educational theory similar to the philosophy of idealism, in that it focuses on wide truths that are universal to everybody and unchanging. Some of the traits of perennial theory is that is has less focus on facts than other theories, as facts can change while the underlying truths do not.

Essentialism is an educational theory that seems to be one of the more widely utilized in the public eye. Essentialism focuses on the idea that there are many truths and subjects that should be learned by everybody. This seems like a fairly straightforward, if more complex, rendition of the “reading, writing, and arithmetic” system. One important note about essentialism is that it is also backed by cultural literacy, the idea that functioning members of society have certain universally shared cultural knowledge.

Behaviorism is an educational theory, based in large part on the writings of B.F. Skinner. Rather than perennialism, which argues that smaller facts are misleading and larger ideas are key, behaviorism posits that what really matters is not the overarching ideas, but rather the behavior, or acted manifestations of those ideas. Without each individual action or behavior, there are no larger principles.

Positivism is an educational theory focused on scientific knowledge, discovered and verified by empiricism. While perennialism may teach scientific method and veer from facts, positivism focuses on both, not discrediting facts until they are scientifically disproven. This constructs a sort of “knowledge pool.” There is an emphasis in this theory on sense verification.

Progressivism is an educational theory, again based in science, which argues that students learn best from experiential situations, specifically in solving problems. Progressivism has a focus on the “social animal” aspect of learning, using schools as a system of socializing students to function in society.

Reconstructionism is a socially based educational theory that focuses on social issues and how they can be solved. This educational theory was based in opposition to ugly realities about the world we live in over the past several decades, and has been gaining momentum.

Humanism is another educational theory based on the goal of social development. Rather than creating a science-based world, however, humanism is grounded in the humanities, seeking to develop a society of eloquent thinkers and writers. This sort of grounding, according to humanism, is the basis for a society geared towards civil service.

Constructivism is a theory of learning similar to the educational philosophy of pragmatism in that it focuses on the students’ abilities to construct their own knowledge. The instructor’s role in constructivism is to facilitate learning, while the student’s progress and learning process are the really important parts.

The two theories that I feel I relate the most with are humanism and constructivism. I feel strongly about the value of language and developing a complex understanding of literature. Lots of art is intended to reflect life, and learning to interact with a variety of literary characters can definitely build social understanding. Reading and responding to texts that are portrayed from different perspectives can also help learners step outside their own minds, putting them in a position to feel more sympathy and relate with other individuals more. As for constructivism, I think the things that we learn the most are the things we learn ourselves. One of the best things we can due for a student’s learning is to give him or her the satisfaction of successful learning. Too often is learning and teaching portrayed as an act that an instructor does to a student, while in reality the learning occurs in the student’s mind, completely independently of the instructor. Therefore, it should be the instructor’s job to help stimulate students, not to “fill them” with learning. 

Philosophy Abstracts and Reflections

Idealism

Idealism is a philosophy based on the idea that ideas are the main reality in the world, and that the physical world can be misleading if it is overly focused on, rather than the underlying spiritual world. One epistemological function of idealism is that the human reasoning must be the source of knowledge, as physical exterior would-be-sources do not actually contain truth. It is based or rooted in the writings of the Greek thinker Plato, and frequently utilizes Socratic method to discern knowledge.

Realism

Realism is a philosophy that stands almost precisely counter to idealism. Realism puts its focus on the idea that truth does not exist within the human mind, and that all knowledge and reality exists solely on the exterior. The epistemological function of realism is based on scientific method and observation of the natural world. The works of Aristotle, and much later, John Locke, served heavily to form modern realism.

Pragmatism

Pragmatism is a philosophy that dismisses idealism and realism as inconsistent with a natural world and internal world that are changing and evolving. This has an epistemological nature that requires an interaction between the self and the universe, but not necessarily from a scientific observation standpoint. While both idealism and realism state that there are universal truths that must be discerned in some way, pragmatism focuses more on the process of obtaining knowledge than the knowledge itself. It is centered on becoming rather than being.

Existentialism

Existentialism is a philosophy that is contrary to the other three philosophies we’ve studied. Rather than finding meaning in the mind, in the natural world, or in the process of change and evolution, existentialism claims that there is no absolute meaning or principle to live by. The chief principle of existentialism is that because there are no absolute values, humans are free to make their own choices. Existentialism is based heavily in the writings of Jean-Paul Sartre.

The two educational philosophies I’ve chosen to focus on are idealism and existentialism, mostly because these are the two ideas that I tend to alternate between in my own views. I have been deceived enough by and seen enough negative works come from the hands of the scientific process and observation of the natural world and natural laws to believe that there is any kind of absolute meaning found in the observable universe. I have also always felt deeply that if there is some kind of absolute meaning, it must be found internally. The Socratic method and use of questions to learn are things that I have always felt strongly about.

As for existentialism, I also have long periods in which I dismiss the idea of internal meaning as well. I agree with the somewhat pragmatic idea that the search for meaning may be the largest source of actual meaning in life, but I still feel that even this is not enough, as it can be by no means described as a universal truth.