I had an interesting conversation with my wife the other night. Since she and I are both high school English teachers we usually have a lot to talk about, if we care to indulge. Our discussion meandered through the topics of curriculum, collaboration with fellow teachers, and student motivation. It is this last topic that I would like to explore further in connection to our study of Marxism and literary theory.
My wife is used to teaching smaller sized classrooms of highly-motivated and talented ninth and tenth grade students, and is concerned about teaching a larger sized group – about 35 – junior-level “CP” students next year. There is quite a difference between a fourteen year old freshman who takes Honors courses, and a 16 year old junior who see’s community college in his future. When you increase the number of students in the room, there is also the potential for a classroom management disaster. We got to talking about the expectations for students in the 11CP classroom, in comparison with a 9 Honors class, for example.
I created an analogy that I thought might help her to understand the difference. I asked her to imagine a Jiffy Lube. I told her that the Honors student will own the Jiffy Lube, the CP student will manage the Jiffy Lube, and the Standard/ Basic student will work the Jiffy Lube (i.e. change the oil). So, when planning her lessons, she should imagine herself teaching “owners,” “managers,” or “workers.” Of course we teach English Language Arts, which simultaneously has everything and nothing to do with the oil industry.
I suddenly realized what a pig-headed capitalistic analogy I had made! I had a realization that this analogy is very “Marxist.” What has happened to the “American Dream”? Of course a Basic/ Standard student can one day rise up to own his own Jiffy Lube, if that is his dream. He can defy his “basic” education, defy his current socioeconomic status and transcend the class-system. This is America! The reality of the system in the 21st Century, however, is that this type of experience is statistically very small (though not impossible).
The “tracking” system of students in public schools is an interesting idea to consider. What makes an Honors student? What makes a CP student? What makes a Basic student? How do the three comingle in the hallways and courtyards? How will they fare in the “real world,” or in college? Much of these questions might be answered through psychology, and the fundamental nature vs. nurture question.
In this “tracking” system, the high school becomes a microcosm for a capitalistic society, and many of the students sense this. It’s interesting to note how difficult it is to get into the Honors/ IB program, if a student is already classified as CP. It’s quite a process, and many parents/ students are determined that their child must be in an Honors class. This has become truer in recent years, as our school has seen Honors applications and appeals sky-rocket, without a coinciding rise in literary talent or ability. Many of the students are inappropriately placed into the Honors track, end up miserable, and drop. Or worse yet, the teacher lowers his/ her standards to accommodate to a student of less talent and ability.
My wife is used to teaching smaller sized classrooms of highly-motivated and talented ninth and tenth grade students, and is concerned about teaching a larger sized group – about 35 – junior-level “CP” students next year. There is quite a difference between a fourteen year old freshman who takes Honors courses, and a 16 year old junior who see’s community college in his future. When you increase the number of students in the room, there is also the potential for a classroom management disaster. We got to talking about the expectations for students in the 11CP classroom, in comparison with a 9 Honors class, for example.
I created an analogy that I thought might help her to understand the difference. I asked her to imagine a Jiffy Lube. I told her that the Honors student will own the Jiffy Lube, the CP student will manage the Jiffy Lube, and the Standard/ Basic student will work the Jiffy Lube (i.e. change the oil). So, when planning her lessons, she should imagine herself teaching “owners,” “managers,” or “workers.” Of course we teach English Language Arts, which simultaneously has everything and nothing to do with the oil industry.
I suddenly realized what a pig-headed capitalistic analogy I had made! I had a realization that this analogy is very “Marxist.” What has happened to the “American Dream”? Of course a Basic/ Standard student can one day rise up to own his own Jiffy Lube, if that is his dream. He can defy his “basic” education, defy his current socioeconomic status and transcend the class-system. This is America! The reality of the system in the 21st Century, however, is that this type of experience is statistically very small (though not impossible).
The “tracking” system of students in public schools is an interesting idea to consider. What makes an Honors student? What makes a CP student? What makes a Basic student? How do the three comingle in the hallways and courtyards? How will they fare in the “real world,” or in college? Much of these questions might be answered through psychology, and the fundamental nature vs. nurture question.
In this “tracking” system, the high school becomes a microcosm for a capitalistic society, and many of the students sense this. It’s interesting to note how difficult it is to get into the Honors/ IB program, if a student is already classified as CP. It’s quite a process, and many parents/ students are determined that their child must be in an Honors class. This has become truer in recent years, as our school has seen Honors applications and appeals sky-rocket, without a coinciding rise in literary talent or ability. Many of the students are inappropriately placed into the Honors track, end up miserable, and drop. Or worse yet, the teacher lowers his/ her standards to accommodate to a student of less talent and ability.
No comments:
Post a Comment