"Reading a report, like driving over a bridge, is an act of faith--faith that the other fellow has done his job well" (Braddock, Lloyd-Jones, Schoer 193).
I feel if my pedagogy is not well defined then those who are subject to it are learning in a foggy environment.
I wish there was an answer to my questions that have come up in the construction of my pedagogy. I look to some research from "Research in Written Composition" for a light: the discussion on the mode of discourse. There is narration, description, exposition, argument, or criticism.
My pedagogy is full of criticism of my own beliefs, sprinkled with argument (primarily over what students are capable of when trusted), and looking over the precipice of description and exposition. I'm on my way.
But something that "Research in Written Composition" says is a little disheartening for someone, like me for one, who is developing his pedagogy: "...a colleague wrote on page 196, 'What is the sense of attempting an elaborate empirical study if there is no chance of controlling the major elements in it?'" Of course, this unhappy "colleague" is referring to bodies of students and their instructors, but his/her concern can be extended to what constitutes a pedagogy.
Granted, a pedagogy isn't empirical. This is what I think I believe, after all. But I'm talking more about how I take what I believe and make it work in a class. I'm asking myself the same question that the colleague asks in a different slant: not what is the sense in applying my pedagogy but how the h-e-double toothpicks do I do it? How do I account for those "major elements?" There is, after all, no way of controlling them.
That's precisely the problem, I discovered. I can't and shouldn't control variables. I can only trust that things will work out the way they should, like, as the introductory quote tells us, crossing a bridge. I trust the students to do what they should (like pay attention and be accountable) because I can't "make" them do anything. I can ask, suggest, and they should follow through. The only things I can "make" are assignments. They make their grades.
I should clarify that this is not promoting a de-centered, student run classroom. That's impossible. And if it were possible, it's irresponsible. But how much more responsible is it if you don't know how to take what you believe and make it happen in the class? The students trust me as much, or more than, I trust them to do what they should. The students are taking a class from someone that they trust is doing his job well. My pedagogy should help me refine exactly what I mean to communicate to students while defining exactly how I feel about the whole shebang, elements, variables, and all.
It is disheartening to think about the wealth of variables we can't control. We walk into classrooms every day hardly knowing what new unknown will greet us. I think your approach is sound: focus on your responsibilities as a teacher and encourage students to hold up their end of the deal.
ReplyDeleteAndy,
ReplyDeleteI liked your blog. I felt like it was a continuation of the discussion we had in class about feeling overwhelmed at the responsibility one can have as a teacher. I am feeling that way at this very moment. I am sitting here at my computer trying to figure out my lesson plans for the week and it is harder than usual this week. Why is it harder? Because suddenly I am questioning everything I do in class.
We had a training at East on Friday that was eye-opening. The presenter, like Dr. Souder, also asked us to call into question our teaching philosophies. He systematically proved how almost everything we currently do as high school teachers is outdated and ineffective.
He said, however, that we should not blame ourselves since we are only teaching the way we were taught to teach. We trusted that those teaching us knew what they were talking about. I am disappointed. I am CURRENTLY in a teacher education program and I am being taught some very traditional methods that, at the same time, are being thrown out the door! It is like I am being taught outdated and irrelevant methods!
So, here I sit, trying to figure out what I believe and what that looks like in a classroom setting. Like you, I am struggling with the task. However, I feel that I will be invigorated after the process and feel more confident in my teaching ability.
I think by composition's vary nature there is a "foggy environment" inherent in that place where form and content and theory and practice meet. I think there is also a foggy element between application and faith. After all, as you pointed out, you can do everything in your power to teach and encourage, and yet in the end it's a leap of faith that everything will come out as it should after the dust settles. I think faith between the teacher and the students is part of what makes it work.
ReplyDeleteGiving students the opportunity to express themselves in itself is creating an environment of learning that is not foggy, but a leap of faith. Teaching is an art, as much as the act of writing and cannot be quantified. The strategies that one uses to reach students may chang constantly but also new is not necessarily better than tried and true.
ReplyDelete