Critical Pedagogy Too Ambitious?

Every time I read and reflect on critical pedagogy, I feel like a terrible teacher, and that I will never be able to implement all that is necessary for critical pedagogy in my classroom. Kincheloe pointed out that many teachers encountered courses throughout their schooling that "presented the facts unproblematically as though they were true" (p. 10). As a graduate of this type of schooling, it is no wonder that the prospect of implementing a critical pedagogy seems too big. Kincheloe urged us to "relearn the arts and sciences" in a critical way (p. 10). And again, while reading this passsage, I felt overwhelmed. However, Kincheloe then wrote,
"A first-year teacher cannot accomplish such a huge task in the first year of his or her practice, but over a decade one can" (p. 10). And finally, I breathed a sigh of relief.

After reading Prof. Schmidt's and Cathy Benedict's article, I began thinking that a "critical pedagogy" classroom or a classroom for social justice--however it is or isn't defined--cannot be an ending point. In other words, when we engage in critical pedagogy, what that means is constantly changing.

I think, in ten years, I may be closer to the kind of teacher I strive to be, but I will never be quite there.

Not to complain again, but...

As I read the following quote in Freire's chapter on "The 'Banking' Concept of Education," I immediately thought of the way our principals see the teachers (especially the "specials" teachers) in my school:

"Indeed, the interests of the oppressors lie in "changing the consciousness of the oppressed, not the situation which oppresses them;"' for the more the oppressed can be let to adapt to that situation, the more easily they can be dominated."

I really wasn't going to cry about my job again this week, but the following event shows why this Freire quote struck me:

As I wrote last week, my colleague has put together some very interesting Powerpoint presentations to use in his music class this year, and so far, the children have really responded well. As I already said, our principal let him know that if math or science or reading needs the Powerpoint projector, music does not get it. However, a new low was reached when my colleague went to the main office to pick up the projector and it was not there. He had given the vice principal a copy of dates and periods he would need to use the projector, but when he went into the vice principal's office to inquire about the missing projector, she answered that it was set up two floors down for an administrators' meeting the next morning. My colleague then asked her what he should do in his class that was starting in five minutes, and she plainly told him that administrative use trumps the use for the music department. Clearly, in the administrator's mind, my colleague should just adapt to the situation he was given. My question is, what about the students?

Philosophy V. Practical

I've been thinking more and more lately about what makes a "good teacher." What abilities does a "good teacher" posses? Is he or she able to talk for hours about what music and teaching is, or is it someone that has practical abilities like handling a classroom, caring about the students, teaching lessons that students can understand and learn something from, etc. How important is it that a teacher is able to define terms (like music) in a purely philosophical manner? Is that going to make them a "good teacher?" I would like to think that the answer is a healthy combination of the two that falls more heavily on the side of practical, but from my experience in ME classes, I'm finding that others might think it's slightly heavier on the other side...

Philosophical V. Practical

I've been thinking more and more lately about what makes a "good teacher." What abilities does a "good teacher" posses? Is he or she able to talk for hours about what music and teaching is, or is it someone that has practical abilities like handling a classroom, caring about the students, teaching lessons that students can understand and learn something from, etc. How important is it that a teacher is able to define terms (like music) in a purely philosophical manner? Is that going to make them a "good teacher?" I would like to think that the answer is a healthy combination of the two that falls more heavily on the side of practical, but from my experience in ME classes, I'm finding that others might think it's slightly heavier on the other side...

The Active Non-Learner

In Prof. Schmidt’s paper, he states, “Kohl frames this process as ‘not-learning,’ of the ‘conscious decision not to learn something that you could learn’ (1994, p. xiii). He sees this particular act that one engages in to protect oneself as well as to reject the world of others who challenges ‘her or his personal and family loyalties, integrity, and identity’ (p.6). He contends that student create a very particular space in which they choose to resist so as not to become ‘socialized in ways that are sanctioned by the dominant authority’” (p. 6).

We have all been in situations in the classroom where a student is not learning because the student has actively chosen to do so. In my elementary practicum experience, I had a fifth grade student who would sit in the back of the room and refuse to participate in any of the activities. One of the other students in my practicum team asked the student why he did not want to participate in class. The student answered, “I love computers. I’m not interested in music or music class. I don’t think you can teach me anything.” I often think about that student and how I can make music class worthwhile for him, instead of thirty minutes of a waste of time. I was never able to connect to that student because of the restraints of the practicum experience. However, I still agonize over how I could connect to him. Or, should I even try to connect to him at all? He is a happy intelligent child. Would music change his life? I believe it would, but I was not able to figure out a way to make him connect to my subject. I know he has the ability to learn music, he simply actively chose not to.

Prof. Schmidt discusses the process of actively not learning as an act against society and the dominant authority. I do not believe that the student in my elementary practicum was oppressed. However, I do believe that due to his identity, he found music worthless. How do I make it worthwhile for him? How do we, as teachers, avoid the active non-learner?

Love of Death

In the reading, “The Banking Concept of Education” Freire states, “Oppression – overwhelming control – is necrophilic; it is nourished by love of death, not life. The banking concept of education, which serves the interests of oppression, is also necrophilic.” I do not believe that teachers use the banking method of education in their classroom because those teachers love death. Teachers that use the banking method use it because it is all they know. It is what has been taught to them and what is easy for them. I do not believe that teachers in schools actively try to create oppression in schools. They do it because it is what they know. Therefore, the key to changing education could be the education of teachers in better teaching practices that promote liberation in the classroom.

Why does administration always seem to think that Standardization is the solution to every problem? Over the centuries we have found that the only way to live harmoniously together is to realize that we are different, and to accept and cultivate those differences. In tribes everyone has a job that relates to a certain skill they exhibit exemplarily, and by using those individual gifts they help the rest of the tribe to survive. Why then, do we think the answer to proper schooling is treating everyone as if we are the same?! We are NOT the same! I don't want to be treated like I'm anyone else but me, and I don't intend on treating my students as if they are all one cookie cutter person that need the same thing said the same way over and over again so they can take the same standardized test and all do differently on it anyway. Now, that's not to say that students in Camden shouldn't be given the same opportunities as students in Beverly Hills. Opportunities should be ready and waiting for all, but I believe each student has a different path to take to them. For example, Baxter from Beverly Hills wants to go to Harvard medical school, and Cory from Camden wants to do the same. To do that, they both need to get an A in Chemistry. Baxter writes a fabulous paper after doing interviews with several of his fathers' professional friends. Cory does not have that benefit, but he does have more hands on experience and presents an incredible presentation on the same thing, proving it in person, instead of with words on a paper. This shows their separate learning styles, as well as their strengths and the benefits both their backgrounds gave them. I think if Baxter and Cory have the same type of support system and expectations from others and for themselves, they can both make it to Harvard.

Oppression or Liberation?

In Curriculum Development and Evaluation, we have been discussing critical pedagogy, especially the writings of Henry Giroux, Paulo Freire, Peter McLaren, and Maxine Greene. Paulo Freire often refers to the oppressed masses in Brazil because of their illiteracy. By teaching the Brazilian peasants to read, they are no longer oppressed. This has caused me to think about what constitutes oppression. Maxine Greene (1986) says, “his (Freire’s) social vision is not that of our particular democracy. This is not intended as criticism, but as a reminder that a critical pedagogy relevant to the United States today must go beyond – calling on different memories, repossessing another history.” Oppression because of a lack of literacy does not occur in the United States. However, are students oppressed because they do not know calculus or chemistry? How about music? Am I oppressed because I do not know everything? Where is the line drawn between oppression and liberation?

Higher Education for Minorities?

The article "How Wealth Differences Limit the Educational Progress of African Americans," examines the issue today of wealth differences between white and black Americans and how that effects their ability to attend college. The article states that the typical black family has a new worth that is only about one fifth that of American families in general and attributes the problem to this. In the opinion of the author, more must be done to allow African-Americans access to universities. It leaves me to wonder though, that if racially earmarked scholarships, preferential admissions policies, remedial education, and aggressive recruitment of black students aren't enough, what else is there left to do?

Importance of Classical Music in the Classroom

After reading the article "Learning the Score" by Alex Ross, I was inspired by the stories of the music teachers that were having such a positive impact on students' lives. While examining their methods that proved to be working, I started to wonder about the importance that classical music had in their teaching. Both teachers spoke of the importance of teaching classical music to the students, but I feel that the main impact the teachers had on the students had nothing to do with classical music, but rather that they were acting as mentors. It is said that most of the problems kids in urban areas face are a result of not having enough positive parental involvement. By acting as mentors and role models for the students, the teachers were able to communicate and teach, and what would have otherwise been "meaningless material" gained new importance and goals were set and achieved. I think that this is why it is so important to not just teach, but rather get to know our students and use the relationship we establish with them as a way to communicate the knowledge we are trying to get across.

Technology Not for Music Class

A colleague of mine, the other vocal music teacher in my school, took a class this past summer on technology in the music classroom. He developed many thoughtful lesson plans that utilized Microsoft Powerpoint, and borrowed the school's projector for his classes on Friday. The students were very receptive to the lesson, and he was very excited. Later that day, during a discussion with the principal, he shared with her what a success the lesson was, and told her that he would like to continue to use Powerpoint in the future. Her response was very blunt: that he should realize that other subjects, like math and science, will obviously have precedence over him when it comes to using the projector.

To me, this quote is such a blatant admission to the back seat music takes in my school. Is it just my school, or is this the attitude of public school administration everywhere? What can we, as music educators, do to change this attitude?

Musical heritage

I had the opportunity to see ContraCantos in Ed lab on Friday, and that experience stuck with me throughout the weekend. It was obvious, even from the short performance that I saw, that every single member of this group has music ingrained as a part of their everyday life. Not just in Brazilian culture, but in many other cultures throughout the world, music is not just used aesthetically, or as background noise, or just for "fun". It is a part of their life from the day they are born until the day that they die. They inherit a musical heritage from their families and communities. All weekend, I thought about my own musical heritage, and its importance in my life. The more I thought about it, the more I realized that I had no real connection to my heritage through music. In the case of my own heritage, I have no connection to Maltese music. I don't even know if it sounds any different than any other kind of European music. I have no connection to Italian music, outside of art song. This made me wonder, do you think it is ever going to be possible for Americans to have this kind of musical connection to their heritage? Or is our country too diverse to try? In the spectre of education, are we really helping students understand their own cultural heritage by playing "cultural" music, or are we desparately grasping onto a way to "honor their world" by doing so? I'd love to hear your thoughts.

The McDonaldization of Curriculum

In sociology, there is a term called “McDonaldization” which describes a process “’by which the principles of the fast-food restaurant are coming to dominate more and more sectors of American society as well as of the rest of the world’” (Ritzer, 1993:1 in Keel, The McDonaldization of Society).

At a popular fast food chain (take your pick, but we’ll use McDonald’s, since it is in my title), one can get a burger in Maine, and the exact same burger in California. A large fry is a large fry, in Princeton, or in Miami. McNuggets are McNuggets, whether in Montreal, or Alaska. There is standardization: portion control, quality control… basically, lots of control.

Carr and Kemmis (1986) discuss curriculum “as a field… transformed… to [a field] concerned with making” (16). They further discuss curriculum as written by only those who are “qualified” to do so, who write curriculum in a vacuum, void of any classroom. It is only written by those who understand the shibboleth. In reality, curriculum has become not a guideline for teachers, but the teacher’s “Ideal Situation Handbook: The When, Where, and How.” It has become standardized. It has become controlled. There is a definite McDonaldization of curriculum, and, dare I say it, education.

What can we do about this? I guess there could be new curricular policy, but that could backfire, if sabotaged by those opposed (see my previous post). I don’t know… maybe it’s the only way…

Is Policy Problematic?

Carr and Kemmis briefly discuss policy in our packet (1986, p.44). Policy is an overview, or guide, that a governing body (people in power) decides upon and all those subordinate must follow. A common problem with policy is that it, typically, does not give a specific procedure to fix any given problem. It merely recognizes that a problem exists, says that it must be fixed, and then give a basic plan or solution to this problem. From there, it is the job of those under the policy’s jurisdiction to create the course of action to be taken that is based on the policy. However, it is not uncommon that the course of action becomes convoluted over time and the problems that existed before the policy either return, new problems arise, and, often, the new problems are bigger and worse.

Is policy a solution to problems, or is it a problematic solution?

Just Music History?

I have been reflecting over the last few weeks about the curriculum in place at the middle school in which I teach. Because of strange scheduling quirks, I teach two periods of seventh grade music every day in the middle school and then travel to the intermediate school to teach fifth and sixth grade chorus and general music. My role at the middle school is to "fill in" because the other seventh grade teacher's schedule has become too full to teach all periods of seventh grade. The middle school has a 30-day "cycle" program, so I see the same students for that period of time until the next 30-day cycle. The curriculum is supposed to cover 20th century music, specifically jazz, R&B, classical, rock n' roll, rap, etc.. I have been given basic lesson plans with material I am expected to proclaim to the students each day. Basically, the class has become a music history lesson, where I tell the students about music and they listen to it. I have been trying to incorporate activities into the lessons that will help the students to be more involved in learning and to make it more meaningful to them, but I know that if I were in my class, I would be bored out of my mind. While there have been some students who have told me that they have enjoyed learning about jazz, and now they are interested in listening to it more often, I can't help but wonder how many more students cannot wait to run out the door when the bell rings. It is very difficult to put any of "me" or the students into the lessons, because it is so necessary that I get through all the material on the right days so that the students have "learned" everything at the end of the cycle and therefore can complete the prescribed final project. I realize that there is no music making going on in my class; just listening to music and the history behind the music. There aren't even any instruments in the room (or in any room in the building for that matter)! Is this what happens when students get to middle school--that they no longer make music in music class? Is this okay?

Thoughts? Help?!

Classical Music?

After our class tonight, I was thinking. Why is it that we teach classical art music? What is it that is so important about the music of the Western tradition that so many music teachers insist on teaching it to their students. If the goal of music education is to empower students to become musicians, is classical music the answer? So many students are opposed to classical music. We play it in the classroom and they immediately roll their eyes or dismiss the music. They do not even give it a change. We as teachers constantly search for ways to make the students enjoy and appreciate classical music. However, could our efforts be in vain? Maybe we should give up trying to teach music of the Western world and teach the student their music.
I believe the answer is in the significance of classical music. The music has lasted for such a long period of time. Music of the Western art tradition has influenced and evolved and essentially became popular music over time. Tonight the question of, "Why do we teach the Civil War?" came up. I believe we teach the Civil War because it is in the history of how our society evolved. History can only be useful if it is applicable to today. I believe that is the reason we teach classical music. It must be taught in a context that makes it applicable to the students' lives and society today. What do you think?

Philosodialogue

Philosodialogue

An important issue seems to stem from the politics, to economics, to the learning possibilities from styles to a larger vision of what is educational viable and valuable.

It seems to me that all and any of these issues is still very much connected to how to we envision education as a practice of democracy or a democratic practice. What does it mean to see music education as a vehicle for democratic ideals?
I think we have consider democracy and its implications as ideals that are separate from the day-to-day realities of our lives...how do we see ourselves and how do we ask our students to see that Democracy is not a distant concept but is in fact the fabric of education, of learning, of interactions inside our classrooms?!

New Thought for Advocacy

In Charles Fowler's (1991) article, Finding the Way to Be Basic, the following paragraph caused me to reflect:

In many of today's schools, there is too little opportunity for certain students to explore the
world through other forms of intelligence--musical, spatial, bodily/kinesthetic, and the
personal intelligences of knowling oneself and others--as Howard Gardner framed them.
This is one of the reasons that students rebel and drop out. Were Edison and Ford great
readers? Was Beethoven good at addition? Was Picasso a great speller? Was Balanchine a
master of English? These humans changed the world, but not from minds based on
linguistic or mathematical intelligence. (p. 11)

Ever since I read this article on Wednesday, I have been thinking about how many students have been shortchanged through an educational system that does not value the contribution of artists to society. By giving students only 30-40 minutes per week of music instruction, we are not giving future musicians a fair shot at expanding upon their musical intelligence and seeing it through to its potential. I wonder, how many future Mozarts or Beethovens has society missed out on because of this? Fowler makes an excellent case for advocating "music for music's sake."

Legislation and Language

This is a newspaper talking about Florida and new legislation.
I think it connects to both what Jenn (comment to my posting) and Jodi wrote.
Take a look at the outradgeous language that is used!!!
How do we as teachers change these situations??
Can we become a source of influence?
Should education always be involved in the politico/economic/cultural aspects of life and learning? Can we not? What are/would be the implications???



Florida Legislation Mandates How to Teach History

Leigh A. Neithardt


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
In June, Florida governor Jeb Bush signed legislation declaring that history teachers “shall teach efficiently and faithfully, using the books and materials required that meet the highest standards for professionalism and historical accuracy, following the prescribed courses of study, and employing approved methods of instruction.” The bill lists the required areas of study as “the period of discovery, early colonies, the War for Independence, the Civil War, the expansion of the United States to its present boundaries, the world wars, and the civil rights movement to the present.”
“Special provisions mandate the teaching of the history of the Holocaust, the history of African Americans, and Hispanic ‘contributions’ to the United States. The role that Native Americans played in American history escapes mention,” notes National Coalition for History director R. Bruce Craig in the newsletter NCH Washington Update. In [the bill’s] highly prescriptive language students are to be taught ‘the arguments in support of adopting our republican form of government’ as embodied in the Federalist Papers. This language causes thoughtful teachers to wonder whether they are permitted to teach the line of reasoning advanced by the antifederalists.”

The most controversial passage of the bill states that “American history shall be viewed as factual, not as constructed, shall be viewed as knowable, teachable, and testable, and shall be defined as the creation of a new nation based largely on the universal principles stated in the Declaration of Independence.”

Faculty, administrators, and others have criticized the bill, which took effect on July 1, as simplistic. In 2007, the Florida Department of Education will review textbooks
and standards in accordance with the new provisions.

Teaching Without Passion

On Monday's class, Professor Schmidt raised an interesting issue when he noted his frustration with young people who are not passionate about what they are doing. In my mind, it brought to the forefront the feelings I've been having in my current teaching position from the end of last year into the beginning of this year. I am concerned and at times have questioned my career choice because of my inability to enjoy what I'm doing, or feel that what I'm doing has a purpose, and I have only been teaching for a year. I began the MME program this summer and came away from the experience rejuvenated and full of ideas and passion. These feelings quickly ended when I came back to work to find that many decisions about the vocal music program at my school had been made without my input, apparently because as a non-administrator, my opinions are not important or valid. As my program continues to be cut down, I feel more and more helpless and wonder when and if I will ever be able to teach music the way it should be taught.

Will my passion ever be appreciated, or will the fire inside me to teach music be extinguished? I am worried that my frustration will effect my teaching. Is anyone else feeling this way? I do not want to be a 25-year-old burnt out music teacher.

Thinking about Reflection

After our conversation on Monday the issue of how reflection is used and how it is conceived became salient to me. Is that we pretend to engage in reflective practices and do so only nominally, that is through "naming" it but without considering if these reflective practices are indeed critical?
Have we done this in class on Monday since not everyone was really willing to engage with the issue? Or through my "monopolizing" of the discourse for what?? 4 hours?!?!

Thoughts????

Welcome to the Philosophy Blog

Dear Folks,

This blog will serve as an alternative source of conversation and dialogue for our class. The ideal is that we find the space for a communal exchange of ideas, questions, doubts, suggestions, critiques, etc.

This is a space for thoughtful comtemplation of all issues concerning (or even slightly related) to our discussions and readings in class. It should work in a slef propelled manner and hopefully will become a important source for our discussions in class.