What do you think is the best way to make your omoi visible? Is it possible to capture it objectively?
Although I believe that the real essence of one’s omoi is subjective, invisible and immeasurable most of the time, I think that little bits of it may eventually be slightly ‘visible’ through my actions and the choices and decisions I make. I suppose pieces of my omoi may become apparent, and therefore, more concrete, tangible and perceived by others, through my behavior, my values and what is clearly and demonstrably important for me. I don’t consider that the teaching practice is by any means neutral because the way we conduct ourselves is intimately related to our beliefs, past experiences, culture, personal convictions, preferences and many other factors. If nothing else in a sub-conscious manner. Decisions are based on innumerous variables that vary from person to person – and so does the omoi. I believe that although we may give hints of our omoi and convey specific messages through our actions, the real essence of it can never be objectively captured and totally sensed and understood by others simply because we are different human beings with different experiences that influenced and shaped our omois. We will probably never find two people who have been through the exact same experiences – and if we do, the way each one perceived and sensed these experiences will certainly differ.
STUDY QUESTION: The use of behaviorism is so popular in American society. Why do you think it is the case? What aspect of its values, history, and culture makes it popular? What is “American” about it? Behaviorism supports the view of objective thinking as logical thinking, which is a quality that is valued in American society. It is also viewed as a masculine quality, whereas women are often viewed as being too emotional and subjective to think objectively or logically. I think American culture tends to view logical thinking as synonymous with objective thinking, and therefore behaviorism is widely accepted as a way to logically make sense of human behaviors. Behaviorism also allows us to measure success in terms of rewards or accomplishments. In the U.S., success is often measured by job title or degrees earned. The “American dream” is based on the idea that anyone can be successful if they engage in the right actions—and here, again, success means having a good job and making a good living. Behaviorism supports this individualistic mindset of earning certain rewards based on actions and validates the notion that humans are motivated to act by the consequences that action produces. In his article, Kohn posits that when a small group of people apply educational standards to communities diverse from each other, they are maintaining the status quo of power and disadvantaging those people who do not fit into the needs that this curriculum addresses. Not everyone is looking to achieve the same goals or is motivated by the same rewards. Behaviorism supports the American Dream ideal and allows society to continue functioning as it is—which certainly advantages some groups while disadvantaging others. Yet behaviorism gives the advantaged groups a “scientific” basis for continuing as things are, and perhaps they truly believe this is the best method, as it worked so well for them to reach their own individual successes.
Study Question: The use of behaviorism is so popular in American society. Why do you think it is the case? What aspect of its values, history, and culture make it so popular? What is “American” about it? When looking back on American history and culture, it is evident that behaviorism is very much an intrinsic part. Starting as children, we are told to work hard so that you can be rewarded by making it to the next step. American culture has evolved into a culture that caters towards behaviorism and competition. In order for students to try and work harder they need an incentive; some sort of reward such as a good grade. In different classroom situations behaviorism does work. For example, behaviorism is used in classrooms with small children when they get stickers, reward charts or prizes at the end of the week. This behaviorism tactic is conditioning children to become the “right” type of student in the American classroom. This pattern follows for the rest of one’s life; in the work place getting a promotion, employee of the month, etc. What makes this concept of behaviorism so prevalent in American culture is that there is a tangible reward; students know exactly what they get if they work hard, an A grade or money or whatever they get with hard work. Instead of having the satisfaction of knowing that they tried their best, students need something to show for their hard work. In a lot of American culture, if there is no proof of hard work, then you’re not working hard enough.
Study Question: How could you approach your students to learn about how they perceive their homework and learning activities? What holds the key to making it successful?
I think you can approach it by advising students that it is beneficial to their learning process. That homework is practice of what was taught in class. I think if students understand the importance of homework they will want to do it or at least attempt it. They will perceive homework as something they should want to do. Homework will be perceived as beneficial to the students, especially to the ones who are having a hard time. It will be beneficial to the students who do not understand the material as much as they would like. They will want to better themselves and see homework as the way to do that. On the other hand you can also stress the weight of homework on their overall grade. This will automatically make homework as something that should be done. Homework will not be seen as an option, but as a necessity for passing. For the students that want to pass, this will provide motivation for them. I’m not exactly sure what they key to making it successful is, however I do think be understanding can help. I think this means that as an educator being aware of what your students can and cannot do. Being conscious of what you deem as important and a well rounded student, compared to what they see as important.
Question: should teaching be a science? If there is anything that should not be a "science" in education, what is it? Why can`t science capture it? I believe that teaching is not science. Education involves a learning process that involves the students, and the teacher where the interaction is organic. In school we learn methods, and theories that are scientific, and logical. However, when you are actually teaching one does not stick to a theory, but refer to experience or intuition. Even if you have learned all of the methods and theories one is not guaranteed to succeed. This is because teaching is a human thing. The interaction comes from relating to the students getting to their level. My favorite teachers are those who were not merely experts at their subject, but the ones that were funny, caring, or inspirational. Those are not science. You are not taught those as subjects. Of course knowing the subject, and methods is important, but the human quality of education is significant. Even when I am teaching I find that what I learn at school is a part of my teaching, but my personality and what I know on my own comes out a lot. Teaching is not just what you learn in school, but also apart of who you are.
Study Question: Should teaching be a science? If there is anything that should not be a "science" in education, what is it? Why can't science capture it?
I think that teaching is unavoidably a science. Our ability and our want to teach is what makes us human, what separates us from other species. We teach in order to share knowledge to benefit our society and future societies to come. By observing educators and weeding out the beneficial techniques from others we attempt to find the perfect form of education, or how to get students to attain the most knowledge. However, the desire that humans have to teach is not purely scientific. I think that many people who are driven to educate have a passion and love for education. There is an organic element that can't be explained by the science of methods and theories, the connection that the teacher has with the students. One of the strongest characteristics a teacher must have to be successful is love for teaching, and that can't be taught.
Study Questions: What do you think is the best way to make your omoi visible? Is it possible to capture it objectively?
I think the best way to make my omoi visible is to take more teaching practice and reflect afterwards. Especially when I meet difficulties or failures, I will ask myself whether to give up or go on. If I still have the strength to carry on, for what? What is my passion about teaching? What is meaningful to me by teaching? I don’t think my omoi can be captured objectively. It is weird that I had a strong feeling towards teaching when I decided to be a teacher. But it was a strong impulse that I can not explain. I have never had the feeling again. All I do afterwards is to trying to figure out what is that feeling about. I have always heard that in Western culture, some have the sense of being called to do something, which is so magical to me. I wondered if they know the reason of such calling. For me, I tried to define the reason based on my practice. Each time, I narrowed the reason down, and I think I am getting closer.
Q: Should teaching be a science? If there is anything that should not be a "science in education, what is it? Why can't science capture it?
R: What a rich question. We are so inclined to measure teaching and education and performance that "using science" on these measurements seems like an obvious thing. But I think at it's heart, effective teaching is personal. For the subject material to matter, it needs to have some connection to the learner's life or experience or goals or whatever. This is where personal contact (empathy, sympathy, understanding) are key, and this is where measurement and "science" fall short, IMO.
But this is a "micro" level. A personal "teacher-student" level. As the numbers get larger, we see a "macro" level that almost always gets scientific/statistical scrutiny. What I see here is the difference between and effective teacher, and an effective education system. Once all those measurements -- grades, graduation rates, test scores -- are aggregated, statistics are calculated and rankings are made and these serve as a measure of the effectiveness of our educational institutions.
And maybe this isn't misguided. The "law of large numbers" can be used to measure, in a broad sense, human behaviors and endeavors. We hear all the time in "Big-R" research papers the statistics that make the research valid (e.g., how many subjects). And when we want to see how all the students in California are performing, there is a practical matter that makes standardized (and easy to score!) tests necessary, for all their drawbacks.
It is perilous, however, take results like these and map them back to the "micro" case. While for "large numbers" they can be valid (scientific), I don't think we can reliably look back at the small level, where teaching is personal, and use the broad brush conclusions to make generalized changes for the fine strokes .
STUDY QUESTION: What do you think is the best way to make your omoi visible? Is it possible to capture it objectively?
I believe the best way to make my omoi visible is creating an environment where my students feel comfortable to communicate with each other and myself. This would require creating an atmosphere that is calm and peaceful within the classroom in a number of ways. I have them clear their minds for two minutes before starting lesson. My actions can be consistent with what I say which can help establish trust between student and teacher. I also believe it is important that I talk to my students outside the classroom setting and be interested in their lives. All of these wouldn’t be able to be captures objectively because my students reactions and how I response to my students individually will vary, along with variation between classes. The only way I can see my omoi be captured is through surveys, but even that can be subjective.
What do you think is the best way to make your omoi visible? Is it possible to capture it objectively?
ReplyDeleteAlthough I believe that the real essence of one’s omoi is subjective, invisible and immeasurable most of the time, I think that little bits of it may eventually be slightly ‘visible’ through my actions and the choices and decisions I make. I suppose pieces of my omoi may become apparent, and therefore, more concrete, tangible and perceived by others, through my behavior, my values and what is clearly and demonstrably important for me. I don’t consider that the teaching practice is by any means neutral because the way we conduct ourselves is intimately related to our beliefs, past experiences, culture, personal convictions, preferences and many other factors. If nothing else in a sub-conscious manner. Decisions are based on innumerous variables that vary from person to person – and so does the omoi. I believe that although we may give hints of our omoi and convey specific messages through our actions, the real essence of it can never be objectively captured and totally sensed and understood by others simply because we are different human beings with different experiences that influenced and shaped our omois. We will probably never find two people who have been through the exact same experiences – and if we do, the way each one perceived and sensed these experiences will certainly differ.
STUDY QUESTION: The use of behaviorism is so popular in American society. Why do you think it is the case? What aspect of its values, history, and culture makes it popular? What is “American” about it?
ReplyDeleteBehaviorism supports the view of objective thinking as logical thinking, which is a quality that is valued in American society. It is also viewed as a masculine quality, whereas women are often viewed as being too emotional and subjective to think objectively or logically. I think American culture tends to view logical thinking as synonymous with objective thinking, and therefore behaviorism is widely accepted as a way to logically make sense of human behaviors. Behaviorism also allows us to measure success in terms of rewards or accomplishments. In the U.S., success is often measured by job title or degrees earned. The “American dream” is based on the idea that anyone can be successful if they engage in the right actions—and here, again, success means having a good job and making a good living. Behaviorism supports this individualistic mindset of earning certain rewards based on actions and validates the notion that humans are motivated to act by the consequences that action produces.
In his article, Kohn posits that when a small group of people apply educational standards to communities diverse from each other, they are maintaining the status quo of power and disadvantaging those people who do not fit into the needs that this curriculum addresses. Not everyone is looking to achieve the same goals or is motivated by the same rewards. Behaviorism supports the American Dream ideal and allows society to continue functioning as it is—which certainly advantages some groups while disadvantaging others. Yet behaviorism gives the advantaged groups a “scientific” basis for continuing as things are, and perhaps they truly believe this is the best method, as it worked so well for them to reach their own individual successes.
Study Question: The use of behaviorism is so popular in American society. Why do you think it is the case? What aspect of its values, history, and culture make it so popular? What is “American” about it?
ReplyDeleteWhen looking back on American history and culture, it is evident that behaviorism is very much an intrinsic part. Starting as children, we are told to work hard so that you can be rewarded by making it to the next step. American culture has evolved into a culture that caters towards behaviorism and competition. In order for students to try and work harder they need an incentive; some sort of reward such as a good grade. In different classroom situations behaviorism does work. For example, behaviorism is used in classrooms with small children when they get stickers, reward charts or prizes at the end of the week. This behaviorism tactic is conditioning children to become the “right” type of student in the American classroom. This pattern follows for the rest of one’s life; in the work place getting a promotion, employee of the month, etc. What makes this concept of behaviorism so prevalent in American culture is that there is a tangible reward; students know exactly what they get if they work hard, an A grade or money or whatever they get with hard work. Instead of having the satisfaction of knowing that they tried their best, students need something to show for their hard work. In a lot of American culture, if there is no proof of hard work, then you’re not working hard enough.
Study Question: How could you approach your students to learn about how they perceive their homework and learning activities? What holds the key to making it successful?
ReplyDeleteI think you can approach it by advising students that it is beneficial to their learning process. That homework is practice of what was taught in class. I think if students understand the importance of homework they will want to do it or at least attempt it. They will perceive homework as something they should want to do. Homework will be perceived as beneficial to the students, especially to the ones who are having a hard time. It will be beneficial to the students who do not understand the material as much as they would like. They will want to better themselves and see homework as the way to do that. On the other hand you can also stress the weight of homework on their overall grade. This will automatically make homework as something that should be done. Homework will not be seen as an option, but as a necessity for passing. For the students that want to pass, this will provide motivation for them. I’m not exactly sure what they key to making it successful is, however I do think be understanding can help. I think this means that as an educator being aware of what your students can and cannot do. Being conscious of what you deem as important and a well rounded student, compared to what they see as important.
Question: should teaching be a science? If there is anything that should not be a "science" in education, what is it? Why can`t science capture it? I believe that teaching is not science. Education involves a learning process that involves the students, and the teacher where the interaction is organic. In school we learn methods, and theories that are scientific, and logical. However, when you are actually teaching one does not stick to a theory, but refer to experience or intuition. Even if you have learned all of the methods and theories one is not guaranteed to succeed. This is because teaching is a human thing. The interaction comes from relating to the students getting to their level. My favorite teachers are those who were not merely experts at their subject, but the ones that were funny, caring, or inspirational. Those are not science. You are not taught those as subjects. Of course knowing the subject, and methods is important, but the human quality of education is significant. Even when I am teaching I find that what I learn at school is a part of my teaching, but my personality and what I know on my own comes out a lot. Teaching is not just what you learn in school, but also apart of who you are.
ReplyDeleteStudy Question: Should teaching be a science? If there is anything that should not be a "science" in education, what is it? Why can't science capture it?
ReplyDeleteI think that teaching is unavoidably a science. Our ability and our want to teach is what makes us human, what separates us from other species. We teach in order to share knowledge to benefit our society and future societies to come. By observing educators and weeding out the beneficial techniques from others we attempt to find the perfect form of education, or how to get students to attain the most knowledge. However, the desire that humans have to teach is not purely scientific. I think that many people who are driven to educate have a passion and love for education. There is an organic element that can't be explained by the science of methods and theories, the connection that the teacher has with the students. One of the strongest characteristics a teacher must have to be successful is love for teaching, and that can't be taught.
Study Questions: What do you think is the best way to make your omoi visible? Is it possible to capture it objectively?
ReplyDeleteI think the best way to make my omoi visible is to take more teaching practice and reflect afterwards. Especially when I meet difficulties or failures, I will ask myself whether to give up or go on. If I still have the strength to carry on, for what? What is my passion about teaching? What is meaningful to me by teaching? I don’t think my omoi can be captured objectively. It is weird that I had a strong feeling towards teaching when I decided to be a teacher. But it was a strong impulse that I can not explain. I have never had the feeling again. All I do afterwards is to trying to figure out what is that feeling about. I have always heard that in Western culture, some have the sense of being called to do something, which is so magical to me. I wondered if they know the reason of such calling. For me, I tried to define the reason based on my practice. Each time, I narrowed the reason down, and I think I am getting closer.
Q: Should teaching be a science? If there is anything that should not be a "science in education, what is it? Why can't science capture it?
ReplyDeleteR: What a rich question. We are so inclined to measure teaching and education and performance that "using science" on these measurements seems like an obvious thing. But I think at it's heart, effective teaching is personal. For the subject material to matter, it needs to have some connection to the learner's life or experience or goals or whatever. This is where personal contact (empathy, sympathy, understanding) are key, and this is where measurement and "science" fall short, IMO.
But this is a "micro" level. A personal "teacher-student" level. As the numbers get larger, we see a "macro" level that almost always gets scientific/statistical scrutiny. What I see here is the difference between and effective teacher, and an effective education system. Once all those measurements -- grades, graduation rates, test scores -- are aggregated, statistics are calculated and rankings are made and these serve as a measure of the effectiveness of our educational institutions.
And maybe this isn't misguided. The "law of large numbers" can be used to measure, in a broad sense, human behaviors and endeavors. We hear all the time in "Big-R" research papers the statistics that make the research valid (e.g., how many subjects). And when we want to see how all the students in California are performing, there is a practical matter that makes standardized (and easy to score!) tests necessary, for all their drawbacks.
It is perilous, however, take results like these and map them back to the "micro" case. While for "large numbers" they can be valid (scientific), I don't think we can reliably look back at the small level, where teaching is personal, and use the broad brush conclusions to make generalized changes for the fine strokes .
KAT
STUDY QUESTION: What do you think is the best way to make your omoi visible? Is it possible to capture it objectively?
ReplyDeleteI believe the best way to make my omoi visible is creating an environment where my students feel comfortable to communicate with each other and myself. This would require creating an atmosphere that is calm and peaceful within the classroom in a number of ways. I have them clear their minds for two minutes before starting lesson. My actions can be consistent with what I say which can help establish trust between student and teacher. I also believe it is important that I talk to my students outside the classroom setting and be interested in their lives. All of these wouldn’t be able to be captures objectively because my students reactions and how I response to my students individually will vary, along with variation between classes. The only way I can see my omoi be captured is through surveys, but even that can be subjective.