"Why School" and Remedial Education
As much as I hate to admit it, I used to look down on people who didn't take AP classes.
I always knew that not everyone had been given the same opportunities as me, but that was no excuse for them to not work all the harder and get into the same classes I had the opportunity to take. Everyone should be in AP Euro, AP Psych, and AP Biology. I couldn't believe that someone would bother wasting their time taking something as simple as college prep, or worse: remedial. That was the place of intellectual decay, where those who were behind only were content to be grades behind where they needed to be.
None of this was explicit. I would never have said any of these things, but deep down inside I know I judged people a little when they didn't take the highest level of coursework available to them. I think most people have at least a few of those feelings of superiority, especially in the mire of high school self-consciousness. We all have to grow up sometime, though, and my gradual acceptance that all levels of education are important and meaningful had its capstone when I finished reading Mike Rose's "Why School?".
The book contained numerous essays, ranging from "The Inner Life of The Poor" to a formal critique of test culture in the United States. Many things to unpack. What caught my eye, however, were his essays on creating curriculum that is engaging to all levels of skill. The local adult literacy center to Oxford University should have the same dedication to teaching skill. Woodshop and AP Calculus can have a comparable level of rigor. Remedial doesn't have to mean easy.
It seems like trying to square a circle. After all, aren't people in lower-level classes there for a reason? Of course there are going to be curriculum differences, but one example from Rose's essay caught my eye. Consider remedial writing. In schools all across the country, writing prompts for remedial students tend to have less meaningful subject matter than those who have more advanced writing skills. While some language might have to be simplified, why should some students be able to express themselves through an exploration of an issue they are passionate about, while others are made to write a thank you note at the same age?
Yes, I know that writing a thank you note is important. You have to learn sometime. But if a class is centered around writing, the same lessons can be gleaned from re-writing an essay about your life story as writing your first thank you note. The level of writing might need to be developed over time, but progress is being made regardless. Teachers making grammatical corrections on something that means more to a student mean more than a work that means nothing to them. In short, meaningful content creates meaningful results.
I believe similar examples can be found in the quality of readings done for those just beginning to obtain literacy at an older age. Vocabulary may not be developed to the point of reading War and Peace, but poetry provides an opportunity to think along with reading. Instead of having a grown man read Goodnight Moon (a personal favorite of mine, but probably not everyone's), there is an opportunity to engage the topics of longing and despair through this simple poem by Kobayashi Issa:
This dewdrop world --
Is a dewdrop world,
And yet, and yet . . .
With seven unique words, there is potential for discussion once the background is known. This poem was written after Issa's firstborn child died. Learning that literacy is a gateway to emotion and discussion can provide a more dynamic introduction than embarrassing someone.
I understand that there is a great deal of challenge inherent in teaching to begin with. Having the added challenge of catching someone up to grade level is another trial, and giving someone an engaging lesson at the same time can seem an almost insurmountable task. It is possible, however, and Mike Rose has inspired me to inspire minds no matter what level I teach.
In short, remedial does not have to be mean easy and helping a student catch up to grade level does not have to neglect meaningful instruction.
When I get my classroom, I am going to do my best to live up to these standards along with the army of amazing teachers who are already doing the right thing.
I always knew that not everyone had been given the same opportunities as me, but that was no excuse for them to not work all the harder and get into the same classes I had the opportunity to take. Everyone should be in AP Euro, AP Psych, and AP Biology. I couldn't believe that someone would bother wasting their time taking something as simple as college prep, or worse: remedial. That was the place of intellectual decay, where those who were behind only were content to be grades behind where they needed to be.
None of this was explicit. I would never have said any of these things, but deep down inside I know I judged people a little when they didn't take the highest level of coursework available to them. I think most people have at least a few of those feelings of superiority, especially in the mire of high school self-consciousness. We all have to grow up sometime, though, and my gradual acceptance that all levels of education are important and meaningful had its capstone when I finished reading Mike Rose's "Why School?".
The book contained numerous essays, ranging from "The Inner Life of The Poor" to a formal critique of test culture in the United States. Many things to unpack. What caught my eye, however, were his essays on creating curriculum that is engaging to all levels of skill. The local adult literacy center to Oxford University should have the same dedication to teaching skill. Woodshop and AP Calculus can have a comparable level of rigor. Remedial doesn't have to mean easy.
It seems like trying to square a circle. After all, aren't people in lower-level classes there for a reason? Of course there are going to be curriculum differences, but one example from Rose's essay caught my eye. Consider remedial writing. In schools all across the country, writing prompts for remedial students tend to have less meaningful subject matter than those who have more advanced writing skills. While some language might have to be simplified, why should some students be able to express themselves through an exploration of an issue they are passionate about, while others are made to write a thank you note at the same age?
Yes, I know that writing a thank you note is important. You have to learn sometime. But if a class is centered around writing, the same lessons can be gleaned from re-writing an essay about your life story as writing your first thank you note. The level of writing might need to be developed over time, but progress is being made regardless. Teachers making grammatical corrections on something that means more to a student mean more than a work that means nothing to them. In short, meaningful content creates meaningful results.
I believe similar examples can be found in the quality of readings done for those just beginning to obtain literacy at an older age. Vocabulary may not be developed to the point of reading War and Peace, but poetry provides an opportunity to think along with reading. Instead of having a grown man read Goodnight Moon (a personal favorite of mine, but probably not everyone's), there is an opportunity to engage the topics of longing and despair through this simple poem by Kobayashi Issa:
This dewdrop world --
Is a dewdrop world,
And yet, and yet . . .
With seven unique words, there is potential for discussion once the background is known. This poem was written after Issa's firstborn child died. Learning that literacy is a gateway to emotion and discussion can provide a more dynamic introduction than embarrassing someone.
I understand that there is a great deal of challenge inherent in teaching to begin with. Having the added challenge of catching someone up to grade level is another trial, and giving someone an engaging lesson at the same time can seem an almost insurmountable task. It is possible, however, and Mike Rose has inspired me to inspire minds no matter what level I teach.
In short, remedial does not have to be mean easy and helping a student catch up to grade level does not have to neglect meaningful instruction.
When I get my classroom, I am going to do my best to live up to these standards along with the army of amazing teachers who are already doing the right thing.