View unanswered posts | View active topics It is currently Thu Mar 28, 2024 7:47 pm



Reply to topic  [ 2 posts ] 
 Making school interesting 
Author Message
Semi-pro
Semi-pro
User avatar

Joined: Thu Jan 11, 2007 12:11 pm
Posts: 24
I talked in another one of my classses about the importance of making what you teach interesting. In the Kliebard and Shapiro they both mentioned the attempt and desire that some are trying to make on topic. When you think about a child learning to read...what makes them want to learn to read? If they find a book to be interesting, then they want to read. If teachers force them to read books that are of no interest to them, then the will create a negative reaction to reading. When it comes to school we must try to make the things that we are teaching as exciting as possible. Even if the subject that we are teaching is not that interesting, it is our job to make it interesting. If we can make what we are teaching interesting then maybe more students will be excited to learn and create positive emotions towards these subjects.

".....capitalize on children's interests and elminated much of the monotonous drill and teacher imposition that they felt dominated American schools." Kliebard believes that we have to focus on "a curriculum attuned to human development. This curriculum has to be made up of subjects and ideas that will create drive and interest.

What is valuable to some, may not be valuable to all. How can one agree on what is valuable to learn, when each person has a mind of their own?

_________________
Meredith Kemper


Thu Jan 25, 2007 3:04 pm
Profile
All-star
All-star
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2007 5:01 pm
Posts: 30
Location: probably @ the library
Post 
I think this is a really important point, Meredith. We all seem to agree on the importance of making school interesting and relevant so that students will become self-motivated learners, but the question is HOW? If we had to appeal to the individual interests of every single student, how in the world would you be able to have a "curriculum?" And if we do have to impose a certain curriculum, with a determined set of subjects, activities, goals, etc., how do we go about deciding what that curriculum should look like?

Many people have pointed out that knowledge does not simply fall into the categories of English, Math, Social Studies, and Science naturally or on its own. The world itself fails to neatly correspond to these divisions. In fact, each of the traditional subjects can (and should, I believe) be used to explore the nature of each of the other subjects. History and sociology can be used to look at how "English" actually became a subject in the 19th century, and how the rising popularity of the novel accompanied and helped to drive this development; "social studies" usually means history in public school, but could be made more interesting by noting how the historical emergence of Science, during the Enlightenment, came to exert the force of its methods on all other areas of thought, eventually leading to the attempt to Science-ify various fields in the humanities and social sciences (literary criticism, philosophy...). So now we have a divide between "hard" sciences, like physics and chemistry, and "soft" sciences, like sociology and anthropology.

I know it helped motivate me to learn that there is a history behind the way we break up "knowledge" in schools, making the study of any subject infinitely more interesting because it wasn't just about learning facts or memorizing lists; I started to feel like I was actually a part of the material I was learning, or maybe more that I was involving myself in the community of people who had brought this field into existence in the first place. "English" wasn't static, wasn't objectively real anymore...it was the result of human beings interacting over hundreds of years, and it had CHANGED in the process! I just think that's really cool.

I think this also helps us think about how we might organize a new curriculum, if we can see how our own currently dominant model came to exist as such. I mean, Plato suggested in The Republic that education should focus on gymnastics and music...try to imagine what middle school would be like with those as your classes! What if, instead of English, Social Studies, Math and Science, we broke classes into categories such as Arts, Technical Skills, The Organization of Human Societies, History of Knowledge, and How To Live Well?

Of course, there's no gurantee that students would automatically find these subjects more interesting than the ones they're already familiar with...but at what point do you draw a line between appealing to students' present interests and determining what they should have to know? Every curriculum is going to have to approach that question, and where the line gets drawn will inevitably reflect the values of those who draw it. I think it MUST be better to be aware of that fact when drawing the line than not to be, so at least we have to think intentionally about what we want the line to reflect.


Thu Jan 25, 2007 6:46 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Reply to topic   [ 2 posts ] 

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Designed by ST Software for PTF.