Zzzzzzzzzz. . . . .

I'm sure it's much easier to critique a teacher when I'm in the audience, but since I'm 100% positive that I'm not alone in the following analysis, I'll ramble about it anyway.

Today I attempted to remain conscious & alert during class, and thankfully my classmates interjected periodically and shared anecdotes. (I can dinstinctly remember who was talking, but what they said is a curious blur.) Anyway, our discussion at one point involved the importance of using different teaching methods in order to hold students' attention. Our sagacious instructor uttered the astute advice: "Yes, no one can listen to lecture for very long," and then proceeded to warn us against lecturing for entire class periods. Always timely, my nodding head jerked forward with just the right amount of "snap" to arouse me from my imminent doze, precisely in time to catch the professor's eye. Ummm hello?? Case in point, lady. Why can't you follow your own advice? (Ok, so she did allow 15 minutes of group work, so I suppose I shouldn't be too harsh.)

I can honestly say that some of my professors in grad school thus far have truly attempted to model good teaching, and for that I am grateful. Others, however, seem to possess knowledge of theory but rarely practice it. I've discovered that the quality of one's teaching is indirectly related to the amount of glances a student gives the clock. . . 3 hours can seem like an eternity or a blur, depending on who's in charge. I checked my pulse 3 times today. . . it went from 56 to 48 over a 90-minute period. Thank goodness for J's sugary snacks ~ I'm fairly certain I may have flatlined without them.

Grade expectations

Sometimes I think I spend more time marking papers and recording scores in H's gradebook than I do observing his teaching. I wondered today, as I graded a bazillion tests on mitosis/meiosis... how much are they really learning?

I peeked at their 9 weeks' grades, which were considerably higher than the majority of their test scores. I determined that their grades are largely "padded" by the busywork, homework, notecards, etc. that they turn in for grades. Most of this work is regurgitation of textbook facts, and not really an assessment of higher-level thinking. After examining their “review notecards” which are designed to help them study for each test, I realized that if they knew the notecard material, they should do fine on the test. Yet, their grades ranged from 22 to 93, with the mean score hovering somewhere around 55-60 (out of a possible 100).

Maybe H. is just used to it, after teaching for so many years. I’m pretty sure I’d feel devastated if those were the grades on a test I’d given. I feel like the grades would probably be different if he taught Honors or AP courses, but that's just speculation. He didn't really seem too bothered when I showed him the results. I'm wondering, is there a point at which teachers relent and somewhat give up, or realize it's not worth so much of their effort if students don't reciprocate and attempt to learn? I predict I am far too stubborn and maybe prone to self-blame, and will probably try numerous teaching styles in desperation before I yield to an attitude of indifference. I guess all those readings on the importance of high teacher expectations seem convincing.

On a lighter note, the ESL kids continue to be a highlight of the day. Despite their less-than-perfect English skills, some of them have an amusing grasp of American humor. H. was teaching them about Mendel's pea experiments today, and trying to determine if they understood the definition of "characteristics." He pointed to a pumpkin on the front bench and asked them to list characteristics of it. Their answers included: small, round, orange, and (my personal favourite) sexy. Ha! If a pumpkin can be described as sexy, then there's hope for. . . hmmm. I probably shouldn't finish that sentence here. ;)

Why cats are overweight

I deliberately walked through piles of leaves today, primarily to enjoy the satisfying crunch beneath my feet. I do love autumn in NC.

Somehow that provided a mild relief after a disturbing class this morning. Kozol intrigues me, & I love reading his work, but watching a video that clearly represented the inequity he describes was even more unsettling. Maybe it's because I don't watch much tv anyway . . . so when I do actually see the harsh realities & the faces affected by the system, it seems so disheartening. And since I'm here, I might as well stash a few facts in case I ever become callous to the story:

• America spends more money on cat food per year than it does on textbooks.
• Post-traumatic stress disorder is evident in over 50% of inner-city adolescents.
• In 1995, America spent $16 billion on education, compared with $20 billion on prisons.
• If more inner-city kids didn't drop out of school, we wouldn't have the $ to educate them anyway. (!)

I suppose it's more useful to be responsive rather than reactionary. I'm not really sure what that means, since I can't exactly throw a ton of money into the education system like Bill Gates apparently does (I'd hate to see the state of education without 34% of his income!) Maybe it's kind of like the advice given at A.A. meetings: "Admitting the problem is the first step toward change." Not that I've ever been to an A.A. meeting. Wait, yes I have . . . I accompanied plenty of patients to their meetings when I worked in D.C. Anyway ~ ignoring the issues won't help, that's for sure. As for what will help. . . I think I'll sleep on it.

Voici:

read this later and this too

i wanna go !