Monday, April 16, 2012
Tuesday, April 10, 2012
Democracy in Education
Through my observations I have been able to see the way education functions within society in a greater sphere than just through traditional formal schooling. I have also been able to observe how through informal or nontraditional forms of education democracy is utilized in order to allow individuals and participants to really take on the learning process in new and different ways. Democracy was explored in unique ways throughout all of my observations, but it was not always practiced in extremely successful ways that could make a real change in the system of education. This is not to say it wasn’t ever successful however, because I feel there were times that democracy was evident and successful, and that was a very powerful thing. Even though the use of democracy in nontraditional forms of education is not always utilized in the most beneficial way, for the most part, educational democracy seems to be considered when structuring an informal program. Participants actively engaged in the process of learning because they had goals and expectations for spending time learning. Through many of these programs ideas of equity, equality, and accessibility were consistently considered and this structured much of the learning. Through this exercise in looking at democratic education I observed themes that re-occured within many of my observations. The two themes that seemed to thread their way through all of the programs and events in which I documented and profiled the democratic process were power and community. The themes were exemplified in all of my observations in different ways. Through reflecting after the observation I have been able to work through these issues and the way they operate in education.When I observed the Chicago Public Schools board meeting, this idea of power was evident. Who has the power? the board. Who wants and needs the power? the teachers, administrators, parents, and students. That was echoed in many of the presentations given by speakers that participated and argued for their rights and ideas to be heard. This is a problem because the power is only coming from the top, and the source of power is not distributing the resources for the education of Chicago area students equitably. There are gaps in the standards of education between the schools on the north side of the city and the south and west sides of the city. Schools in areas that have less are given less in terms of supplies and means for education, and more and more schools are closing and forcing students into new schools that are becoming over crowded. The speakers were obviously furious over the forces of power in the CPS board, but it was hard to take them seriously in many ways when they refused to follow the rules of the board meeting, did not listen to the woman telling them time was up (a short amount of time was allotted to the participants, but that was so every voice was heard that registered, and people were not bumped out), and they spoke out of turn, spoke when they were not registered, and booed speakers they did not agree with. For a democratic system to work I feel that all of the forces need to work together and create an order so that it all works together. This involves listening to all parties and respectfully arguing your opinions and not booing people that you disagree with and speaking out of turn or over people. The ideas that we read in the Foucaultion notions segment of class have to do with power coming from all levels and everyone. This is a theory that I think should be applied to democratic societies. We all should have power and we all should respect other opinions and people. This lack of respect is mimicked by and taught to children, and often times they do not learn to think critically about a situation and respect people with ideas that differ. This creates all sorts of societal problems as one shuts down and refuses to listen to opposing viewpoints.
One of the educational programs that I observed where a Foucaultion idea of power seemed to be applied, and worked incredibly well was in the Louder Than a Bomb workshop held at the Art Institute of Chicago. In this program every member whether they were a youth member or an adult “supervisor” had some sort of power to create their own experiences while learning. The program allowed the participants to explore the museum in their own way and choose their own art works that inspired them. No one told them what the work “meant”, what to look at, or what artworks were most esteemed, instead they were free to make their own meanings and respond to art in new and creative ways. Not one student or facilitator held more power than the other, and all of the students’ choices was regarded as just as important as the next. In the second half of the program the group engaged in a writing exercise that was facilitated by youth members. Every member whether adult or youth participated in writing a poem based on what inspired them. They then shared in an open forum that was supportive and gave weight to every poet in equal ways.
This type of facilitation of a program was also seen in the teaching artist workshop that I observed. In this program the “tween-aged’ students were given a great amount of power to experiment with art, and the teaching artist took on a facilitator and learner role where she kept things in order, but also allowed for experimentation and art experiences, while also learning herself about new ways to discover line and drawing in looking at art and making art. This democratic idea of facilitation is one that is very interesting, and one that I explore in my teaching. As a museum educator I allow my students to have a choice in what they learn, and to experience art in new ways through independent meaning making and interpretation. I am interested in the idea of choice in terms of experimenting with art and allowing my students to explore making. I work primarily with early childhood education, and allowing them to see education in different and democratic ways is always interesting. At times it is hard for a 6 year old to understand that they have a choice in the way they create and what they explore (or sometimes the parents are concerned that we are not instructing them on a step by step “craft”), but when they understand their role as artist and creator the learning is truly unique and interesting. This idea of choice and exploration is incredibly poignant in art education and exploration.
The second intertwined theme that I came across in my observations was community. The School of the Art Institute of Chicago student government open forum was an interesting way to see community in higher education. I attended a large university during my undergraduate career, and community was something that was stressed amongst groups at the school. People were always wearing orange, and students attempted a sense of belonging in the university community. This is not to say that individuals were not left out of the community, but community was an important aspect of the education. At SAIC I do not feel that same urgency for a sense of community, and to me that is okay. As an adult graduate student I am not looking for the same school spirit that I did during my time pursuing my Bachelors degree, but it was interesting to hear the students, especially the younger undergraduate students, express their interest in creating community at SAIC. I thought of the Foucaultion notion of community and how with community there is always someone left outside of the group. If SAIC has a community, I am definitely not a part of it. It was interesting to watch the students think of ways to create community and talk through their ideas of power within the school. They all seemed to want to make SAIC a more democratic institution for the students.
I used Foucaultion notions and democracy to think through many of the issues that I came across while observing education outside of the classroom. Ideas of democracy were discussed regularly and attempted in unique ways, but for me I agree with the idea that power comes from everyone, not just one source, whether it is the top or the bottom. When we give power to one source it just seems to become cyclical where the bottom rises to the top and so on. I was intrigued by the open forums that many of the informal programs used to allow students to have power, and this is where I think democracy was really evident.
Monday, April 9, 2012
Creating a democratic classroom at the early childhood level
What is going on with education when preschool aged children are being expelled? To me, that signals that something is not going right with the education system in play in the school. Often times instructors focus on this idea that "challenging" students need to be punished for being "bad" without considering their life circumstances and the stress that they are under.
This was the focus of the talk radio shows that I listened to from NAEYC the national association for the education of young children.
The first segment that I listened to was about challenging students in the classroom and how to build relationships with them. The man who called in wanted to make it clear that children are not "challenging" and that we need to consider that they may be coming from unstable homes and stressful situations and coming into a classroom creates a great amount of stress especially when their emotional and social needs are not met at home. Instead of focusing on this discipline and punish model of education that is in play with the teacher as the discipliner, we as educators need to build relationships with the students and allow for them to come to us with problems and work through them because those problems are the reason that they are acting out in the classroom. We need to be trained as educators to understand and see signs of stress in children and allow them to develop socially in the classroom and understand how to act instead of expulsion and sending them to special education classrooms. All children deserve the opportunity to learn from a supportive teacher who creates a relationship and helps them develop emotionally and socially and to deal with their daily stresses of life at such an early age.
The second segment was on emotional literacy in students in early childhood. We as educators should be teaching emotional literacy so that students can deal with stress better and understand their emotions as natural. This type of education can help students feel supported and understood by their teachers so that they can learn properly as one can not learn well when they are not emotionally literate. Emotional illiteracy can make school hard to understand and can take focus away from education at an early stage in life. teachers need to be trained to teach this type of learning side by side with academics so that children can learn best, and that no child feels like they are not given an appropriate chance in education.
This was the focus of the talk radio shows that I listened to from NAEYC the national association for the education of young children.
The first segment that I listened to was about challenging students in the classroom and how to build relationships with them. The man who called in wanted to make it clear that children are not "challenging" and that we need to consider that they may be coming from unstable homes and stressful situations and coming into a classroom creates a great amount of stress especially when their emotional and social needs are not met at home. Instead of focusing on this discipline and punish model of education that is in play with the teacher as the discipliner, we as educators need to build relationships with the students and allow for them to come to us with problems and work through them because those problems are the reason that they are acting out in the classroom. We need to be trained as educators to understand and see signs of stress in children and allow them to develop socially in the classroom and understand how to act instead of expulsion and sending them to special education classrooms. All children deserve the opportunity to learn from a supportive teacher who creates a relationship and helps them develop emotionally and socially and to deal with their daily stresses of life at such an early age.
The second segment was on emotional literacy in students in early childhood. We as educators should be teaching emotional literacy so that students can deal with stress better and understand their emotions as natural. This type of education can help students feel supported and understood by their teachers so that they can learn properly as one can not learn well when they are not emotionally literate. Emotional illiteracy can make school hard to understand and can take focus away from education at an early stage in life. teachers need to be trained to teach this type of learning side by side with academics so that children can learn best, and that no child feels like they are not given an appropriate chance in education.
LTAB workshop
Louder than a bomb is a group for teens around the country to explore beat poetry and express themselves through it. I observed their ekphrastic writing workshop that took place at the Art Institute of Chicago. The rules were simple students went in groups to explore the museum on their own and to get inspired. They had choice over what they wanted to look at, and they were open to explore what they felt was most interesting and inspiring to them creatively. During this part of the workshop I explored with a teen from Oklahoma and a teacher from Mississippi. The teen was able to tell us a bit about the program at her school and what it meant to her, in this way none of us were the "teacher" the teen facilitated with the writing and inspiration, the english teacher and I observed and discussed with our group the art that we were looking at. It was an interesting approach to museum education as no one was the "leader" of the group, we were all in it together to become inspired on our own. I observed other discussions with the groups and it seemed to be the same way, everyone was interested in what anyone else had to say, and they were just looking for open discussion to explore their thoughts with others. It was not a teacher tell me kind of educational experience.
The second half of the workshop was a more structured yet not overly structured writing exploration where the teens led the group in the ekphrastic writing prompt. They explained to their peers to write about what inspired you, respond, to a painting, put yourself in the artwork. there was no right or wrong answer here, just freely exploring a new side of being creative through writing. They were given free time to think through their thoughts and write a poem down. When the group was finished the poets went around in a circle and shared what they had written. It was a supportive circle of sharing. Nothing was off limits, they wrote about reactions, social issues, feelings, hatred, love, disgust or whatever they felt. Everyone was supportive after someone shared snapping for them and not commenting or criticizing. it was a forum to share openly. i thought this would be an intimidating process, but there was nothing but support among the poets.
I found their approaches interesting and loved how everyone had power in the group. There was not just one facilitator, but everyone facilitated their own experiences. They all learned in different ways and understood that in this type of creative excercise there is no right or wrong answer you can respond to art however you like. this is something that i am increasingly interested in as i develop my practice as a museum educator. I like the idea of students coming to their own knowledge and creating their own meaning for artwork. It allows them to teach and learn at the same time and understand that they are in control of the situation. The program was very democratic in nature and allowed students to learn in ways that they might not have the opportunity in schools.
The second half of the workshop was a more structured yet not overly structured writing exploration where the teens led the group in the ekphrastic writing prompt. They explained to their peers to write about what inspired you, respond, to a painting, put yourself in the artwork. there was no right or wrong answer here, just freely exploring a new side of being creative through writing. They were given free time to think through their thoughts and write a poem down. When the group was finished the poets went around in a circle and shared what they had written. It was a supportive circle of sharing. Nothing was off limits, they wrote about reactions, social issues, feelings, hatred, love, disgust or whatever they felt. Everyone was supportive after someone shared snapping for them and not commenting or criticizing. it was a forum to share openly. i thought this would be an intimidating process, but there was nothing but support among the poets.
I found their approaches interesting and loved how everyone had power in the group. There was not just one facilitator, but everyone facilitated their own experiences. They all learned in different ways and understood that in this type of creative excercise there is no right or wrong answer you can respond to art however you like. this is something that i am increasingly interested in as i develop my practice as a museum educator. I like the idea of students coming to their own knowledge and creating their own meaning for artwork. It allows them to teach and learn at the same time and understand that they are in control of the situation. The program was very democratic in nature and allowed students to learn in ways that they might not have the opportunity in schools.
a conversation with a 6 year old while making art
I held art activities at the AIC for spring break, but I was also observing how the activities worked, the way the children engaged with them, if they were understandable and clear in their directions as this was all part of a project of activity sheets that will be sent to the new children's hospital upon completetion for the kids to use during their hospital visits and time waiting to see the doctor.
I wasn't preparing to document this observation here, but a conversation with a 6 year old became my catalyst to documenting this observation and conversation.
In our doing democracy class we discussed race one week, and discussed the issue within small groups. One of the readings discussed how minority groups identify as their racial background such as Hi I'm ________ and I'm Chinese American. This is something that we discussed in our group as most of us were white, and agreed that white individuals don't introduce themselves with race. our group discussed reasons why white bodied individuals don't think of race as an identifying trait and perhaps it is the "shame" that comes with our history, or that we are constantly reminded of our whiteness in society and the history that comes with that. We also discussed how for a "minority group' or nonwhite body race becomes a reason to be proud of your accomplishments and to introduce that. one group member remarked I'm mexican and look where I am now at this school, I am proud, but I don't know why I introduce myself as Mexican and not just as American as a white body may introduce themselves.
I was reminded of this discussion when i conversed with a 6 year old girl while making art. I engage with the children by making art side by side with them and discussing the art and their world with them to make them comfortable to discuss and share with me. I asked the girl if she was from chicago or if she was on vacation here and she replied I'm from chicago, but I'm half mexican and half american, my parents are from mexico and don't speak english. I found this so fascinating as even at 6 race is being identified as part of identity. She thought of herself as only half american even though she was just as "american" as the girl sitting next to her who was white. I was left with all sorts of questions about race and identity, at what age do children start to "see" race as their identity? Was it a sense of pride in her background and parents birth countries or did she see herself as "outside" of the "community" and as only half the american as the other kids who were white because of her "differences". Is this pride or problematic and feeling like an outsider?
I wasn't preparing to document this observation here, but a conversation with a 6 year old became my catalyst to documenting this observation and conversation.
In our doing democracy class we discussed race one week, and discussed the issue within small groups. One of the readings discussed how minority groups identify as their racial background such as Hi I'm ________ and I'm Chinese American. This is something that we discussed in our group as most of us were white, and agreed that white individuals don't introduce themselves with race. our group discussed reasons why white bodied individuals don't think of race as an identifying trait and perhaps it is the "shame" that comes with our history, or that we are constantly reminded of our whiteness in society and the history that comes with that. We also discussed how for a "minority group' or nonwhite body race becomes a reason to be proud of your accomplishments and to introduce that. one group member remarked I'm mexican and look where I am now at this school, I am proud, but I don't know why I introduce myself as Mexican and not just as American as a white body may introduce themselves.
I was reminded of this discussion when i conversed with a 6 year old girl while making art. I engage with the children by making art side by side with them and discussing the art and their world with them to make them comfortable to discuss and share with me. I asked the girl if she was from chicago or if she was on vacation here and she replied I'm from chicago, but I'm half mexican and half american, my parents are from mexico and don't speak english. I found this so fascinating as even at 6 race is being identified as part of identity. She thought of herself as only half american even though she was just as "american" as the girl sitting next to her who was white. I was left with all sorts of questions about race and identity, at what age do children start to "see" race as their identity? Was it a sense of pride in her background and parents birth countries or did she see herself as "outside" of the "community" and as only half the american as the other kids who were white because of her "differences". Is this pride or problematic and feeling like an outsider?
Public reading with Bonnie Jo Campbell at the library
"a literate and informed public is the keystone to democracy" -Randy Albers
This idea was reflected in the introduction to the reading of Bonnie Jo Campbell's novel and question and answer session. With all of our freedoms being taken away, literacy is what we have to keep a democratic society. Interesting to think about as literacy is most definitely an important way to gain knowledge, but what if an individual doesn't have access to literacy?
The program started out with an introduction to the writer, Bonnie Jo Campbell by a noted literature critic, Donna Seamen. Donna was the moderator of the evening and started the reading and discussion for the audience with a history of th authors work and a review of sorts
Bonnie Jo Campbell came out and read her first chapter of Once Upon a River
this was an interesting approach to education as it was a free and public reading of her book at the public library. There was a man signing vividly. I am not an auditory learner, so I often found myself drifting off or watching the man signing, which led me back into the story as he almost acted out what she was saying.
Following the reading Bonnie and Donna engaged in a discussion about the story this was about recurring characters, interests of readers in the characters, the landscape, and the research to understand and write a story.
Bonnie Jo Campbell was interested in writing more books about this character because men really took to the female character and she was interested in playing with that more to get men interested in her writing.
The main character is a tough and strong woman who lives off of the land in Michigan. The character is in touch with the land and what went on before she was there.
She introduced the idea of the tribe as people around you, we all have our own tribes (like a community)
She says the theme of the story is the american dream, but it is not like the typical dream, it is the older american dream of living off the land and being independent
She says this is an American book it is about empty space and the freedom to have a different kind of life, not the mainstream life that everyone else has. This makes me think of everyone having choice in every situation with Foulcault, we choose to engage in a mainstream life, but we don't have to, we have other options, we do have power to decide.
Finally after the discussion they open up the floor to questions and allow the audience to get the information that they really want. For the most part these questions are about her writing and drafts as they are asked by students and young writers. It becomes a forum for education from a prominent published writer to a group of young and aspiring authors. Anyone can jump in and ask her a question, it was not just coming from one source.
This idea was reflected in the introduction to the reading of Bonnie Jo Campbell's novel and question and answer session. With all of our freedoms being taken away, literacy is what we have to keep a democratic society. Interesting to think about as literacy is most definitely an important way to gain knowledge, but what if an individual doesn't have access to literacy?
The program started out with an introduction to the writer, Bonnie Jo Campbell by a noted literature critic, Donna Seamen. Donna was the moderator of the evening and started the reading and discussion for the audience with a history of th authors work and a review of sorts
Bonnie Jo Campbell came out and read her first chapter of Once Upon a River
this was an interesting approach to education as it was a free and public reading of her book at the public library. There was a man signing vividly. I am not an auditory learner, so I often found myself drifting off or watching the man signing, which led me back into the story as he almost acted out what she was saying.
Following the reading Bonnie and Donna engaged in a discussion about the story this was about recurring characters, interests of readers in the characters, the landscape, and the research to understand and write a story.
Bonnie Jo Campbell was interested in writing more books about this character because men really took to the female character and she was interested in playing with that more to get men interested in her writing.
The main character is a tough and strong woman who lives off of the land in Michigan. The character is in touch with the land and what went on before she was there.
She introduced the idea of the tribe as people around you, we all have our own tribes (like a community)
She says the theme of the story is the american dream, but it is not like the typical dream, it is the older american dream of living off the land and being independent
She says this is an American book it is about empty space and the freedom to have a different kind of life, not the mainstream life that everyone else has. This makes me think of everyone having choice in every situation with Foulcault, we choose to engage in a mainstream life, but we don't have to, we have other options, we do have power to decide.
SAIC SGA open forum
is there a community within SAIC?
This is an interesting thing to think about considering our recent reading on community and foucaultion notions. Personally I don't know if there is a community that exists within the school, but if there is I am not a part of it. As a graduate student I don't feel like a part of the school like I did in undergrad. Sure there is a feeling of community in the art education department, but with the school as a whole, I don't feel like I am a part of that. Maybe there is one, but I'm just not part of it like we discussed with the readings community leaves individuals out.
this thinking about the community at SAIC stems from my observations at the SGA forums
SAIC has not had a SGA in several years, 05 was the last year that it was in place, and it ended because of declining interests in the school as a whole. Apparently students were not interested in being part of the student government or forming a formal community of leaders in the school. This seems to make sense as i don't feel like there is a community here, and I'm not sure I mind it being an adult graduate student.
Community was a point that many of the prospective SGA leaders presented as their platform. Many of the students felt the need to create more of a community within the school and to represent that within chicago academic community as a whole.
Many students were interested in a more democratic way of running the school, and that is why they were campaigning
some of the top campaign platforms were
transparency of school administration and decisions
access to knowledge of those decisions being made by higher ups
Better communication between people, faculty, students, departments, administration
More power to the students than the faculty
visibility
wanting to make decisions that make sense, as the student noted, "the decisions don't make sense"
more strength for the students- the faculty can't say waht students want to say and what they need
Many of these points are things we have discussed through our class and deal with power being at the top. Many students were interested in allowing the power to be held by them. I wonder what they would think about Foucault and the idea of everyone having power.
This forum proved the point that SAIC doesn't have much of a community as there was not a great showing of students meeting their candidates, but that didn't keep the candidates from voicing their oppinions on making SAIC more democratic and fair for all students in their own ways.
This is an interesting thing to think about considering our recent reading on community and foucaultion notions. Personally I don't know if there is a community that exists within the school, but if there is I am not a part of it. As a graduate student I don't feel like a part of the school like I did in undergrad. Sure there is a feeling of community in the art education department, but with the school as a whole, I don't feel like I am a part of that. Maybe there is one, but I'm just not part of it like we discussed with the readings community leaves individuals out.
this thinking about the community at SAIC stems from my observations at the SGA forums
SAIC has not had a SGA in several years, 05 was the last year that it was in place, and it ended because of declining interests in the school as a whole. Apparently students were not interested in being part of the student government or forming a formal community of leaders in the school. This seems to make sense as i don't feel like there is a community here, and I'm not sure I mind it being an adult graduate student.
Community was a point that many of the prospective SGA leaders presented as their platform. Many of the students felt the need to create more of a community within the school and to represent that within chicago academic community as a whole.
Many students were interested in a more democratic way of running the school, and that is why they were campaigning
some of the top campaign platforms were
transparency of school administration and decisions
access to knowledge of those decisions being made by higher ups
Better communication between people, faculty, students, departments, administration
More power to the students than the faculty
visibility
wanting to make decisions that make sense, as the student noted, "the decisions don't make sense"
more strength for the students- the faculty can't say waht students want to say and what they need
Many of these points are things we have discussed through our class and deal with power being at the top. Many students were interested in allowing the power to be held by them. I wonder what they would think about Foucault and the idea of everyone having power.
This forum proved the point that SAIC doesn't have much of a community as there was not a great showing of students meeting their candidates, but that didn't keep the candidates from voicing their oppinions on making SAIC more democratic and fair for all students in their own ways.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)