Home Schooling (p. 62)

I recently read the pages in the textbook on home schooling, as I didn’t know much prior and actually haven’t thought about it too much. My friend made me start thinking about it when she brought up that she was home-schooled until Grade 9. Unlike the reasons given in the textbook for reasons of home schooling, her parents chose to do this because they were constantly moving. Her dad is a minister at a church and was always going from place to place to help those in need. She has lived in Australia, Philippines, and many other places around the world. When we were talking about being home schooled, she was very disappointed that she was home schooled, and she made that the reasoning why she felt she was so behind when she went to a high school in grade 10. Each to their own though because everyone’s experience as a home-schooled student, as well as in traditional school system, is going to vary a lot.

At the same time my one friend regretted having been home schooled, another friend brought up that she really enjoyed being home schooled. She has gone on in education and actually became a T.A. at a school. It is interesting to see the differing results that home schooling can give. This is what helped me become interested in the aspects of home schooling and allowed me to ask questions about it.

According to the text, it says that there are about 10 000 children who are being home schooled in Canada alone, but also that there may be 30 000 others who are unofficially being schooled at home. How are parents able to do this? And, does their education become recognized if it isn’t official? Unlike my first friend whose family was on the move, so she needed to be home schooled, there are other numerous reasons why parents choose to teach their kids at home. These ranged from reasons such as dissatisfaction with schools, they wanted their children to be able to communicate and not just the teacher and they wanted their curiosity and creativity to grow, both things they felt were not accomplished in traditional schools.

There are two main reasons why skeptics would not agree with home schooling which include the belief that a students social skills would not develop and they would not be able to compete with students who are in “regular” schools. Advocates would disagree and say that they become independent thinkers, and that their grades are equal to or greater than those in traditional schools.

I don’t believe that there is anything wrong with home schooling, but as it does take a lot of dedication and hard work, it is important to put the right amount of effort into it. It also makes me question the amount of time we spend in school. How are we in school for 5 years to become teachers, but still perceived as unqualified. It can be a very controversial issue though.

My Posts...

I was just notified that some of my blogs are difficult to read because of the colours. Sorry to anyone who had to strain their eyes because of my lack of judgement. I didn't even realize that it was a challenge to read some of them. For the most part, in the later part of my blogs, I changed the colours to darker ones so that they are easier to read. Hope it is better! I wish I would have realized earlier. Sorry once again, and let me know if there is anything that is hard to read that I haven't changed. Thanks!

New High-School Math Curriculum

I recently read a new article titled “New high-school math curriculum starting next fall in Alberta: Students get extra year to decide on career prospects.” It a fairly new article that was put in the Calgary Herald on November 30, 2009. At first glance of the title, I knew it would be interesting to see what this new curriculum would be and whether or not it would benefit future students or not. My first thought was that it would be a good thing because how many people honestly know what they want to do by grade 9.

This new curriculum is scheduled to start changing by next fall. Over the next three years, the curriculum will change to help students be better prepared for their careers. Students who are planning to go to college or university will take a class in Grade 10 called Mathematics 10C, and then in Grade 11 and 12, they will take math courses that are more designed towards the post-secondary program that they want to enter into. Again, how many not only don’t know if they want to continue with school, and even more, how many know exactly what program they want to enter? Then the article became clearer and addressed this question. There are two streams: 20-1, 30-1 and 31 will be taken by people who want to pursue careers in math subjects. And then 20-2 and 30-2 will be taken by students who will not need “higher-level math training” in university/college. So, as long as they know that math isn’t their main interest, which they probably will, they will be able to make their decision. I really like the idea of this because how many times have you heard in your own classes as a student or as a teacher, “when will we ever use this?”, or “what is the point of this?” where the teacher tries to desperately come up with an answer. Maybe this more directed approach will help students understand the relevance of what they are learning.

There is also another stream for “teens considering entering the trades.” They will learn specific skills that are required on the job. I find it really interesting that high schools are working with apprenticeship people in order to assist these students. This curriculum is trying to meet the need of students, which is awesome!

The article states “students who aren’t clear on what they wish to pursue after high school, or who change their career goals before graduation, will have the chance to switch streams to ensure they have the math needed to continue their studies.” What about after grad? What does the student have to do then? What are their options? This would be interesting to know.

At the end of the article, it says that the U of C and University of Alberta have been consulted about these changes. What about t U of L or other Universities or colleges that would be affected by it? What are their views?

Does anyone have any thoughts on this?

Abductions...

An issue that I have wanted to discuss since the beginning of writing my blogs is the issue of abductions that take place within the school environment. I haven’t written about it yet because I find I get so upset and angry when I talk about it! It is important to look at it in all situations, but when a student is taken from a school (a place that is designed to be safe), this is something that we as teachers need to look at. Why do things like this happen, and if anything, what can we do to prevent situations like this from happening? We have so many codes in schools that range from fire drills to bombing situations, etc, but do we have anything that can lesser the chances of this happening.

More specifically, I am thinking of a recent abduction that took place in Woodstock, Ontario last school year. For me, I was so entrenched in listening to the news, and reading everything about this little girl (Victoria Stafford) that I drove myself crazy. It completely broke my heart and I find that I am so naïve that things like this actually happen, that people would harm someone who is so incapable of protecting themselves, and that someone could take away the most important thing in a family’s life.

If you do not already know what I’m talking about, let me explain. Victoria Stafford was taken on April 8, 2009 while she was walking home from school. Initially, there was not an amber alert because the police did not think that it was an abduction, but that is a completely other topic. The only evidence that was found was a video of a woman walking Victoria away from the school. Days and days, there were search parties looking for her, then this turned into weeks, and then into a month. Her parents were outside of their houses on a daily basis with the news trying to get the word out that she was missing. It was not until late May that two people were arrested for the murder of Victoria Stafford.

There are so many questions that run through my mind when I think of this poor little girl. How didn’t anyone notice at the school? It also should make us think as teachers that we need to know where our students are, how they are getting home, who they are going home with, etc. My PS1 teacher had a list by the door. She had each child’s name on the list and wrote down each day, how they were going to get home, whether this be walking, taking the bus, or someone coming to get them, and who they were going to be with. These types of precautions are very important, as this can mean saving someone’s life. It’s really sad that we need to do this, that kids are not safe unless we take precautions like this.

Can anyone think of anything that we as teachers, or a school community can do to enhance awareness as well as safety in our schools?

These are just a few websites with an article and videos if you wanted to learn more about the case of Victoria Stafford:

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/07/21/stafford-murder021.html

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IxaKx6rlifI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zdtt74frwnk

Presentation on the Coorelation between High Post-Secondary Grades and Successful Teachers

On Thursday, the classed watched another presentation. The presenter was Heather Toth. She presented the research that she found while writing her essay. Her topic was asking the question of whether or not high post-secondary grades are a correlation between successful teachers. This is a topic that our classed has covered before because high grades do not necessarily mean that you will be a successful teacher, and it actually can mean the opposite sometimes. If this is the case, then why do universities praise these marks and allow only those with higher marks access to education programs?

Heather went over two studies that she looked at for her research. First, she looked at a study that questioned the practical value of what first year teachers have been taught in college. In other words, do the skills learned in University/College help fully prepare teachers? They found that there were 5 major deficiencies that teachers felt they were not prepared for when they went out into the field. These consisted of:
1. Classroom Management
2. Understanding Changing Families
3. Working with Parents
4. Establishing Rapport with pupils
5. Working in an Organization

For me, I think #2 and #3 are my weakest areas. These are things that we have not really discussed in class, but at the same time, a lot it is a learning experience. I just have not personally dealt with them. My biggest fear as a teacher is working with parents, but at the same time, as we haven’t discussed it much in classes. There could be brainstorming ideas for these deficiencies to help give 1st year teachers ideas to helping students who are going through changes as well as working with parents. Other deficiencies that were not mentioned in the study that the class felt was lacking in the program was using the chalkboard/blackboard and technology. I think especially with technology because it is constantly changing and there is so much to know that this is an important area.

A difficult aspect of this study is that the word “success” is such an vague word, that there is not one clear definition. Some people view success as merely making it through their teaching career, whereas others focus more on what their students get out of their teaching. How can we clearly answer this question without a model of what success actually is?

Overall, Heather’s presentation was really interesting. I think it is very interesting the way the system works to become a teacher. I also think that a lot of what we learn in University needs to be looked over to help us become better teachers, but once again, at the same time, the more hands-on-learning we receive (such as our professional semesters), will help us that much more.

Age 28: Up Series ((John, Andrew and Charles), Tony, and Simon)

We also watched another group of students at the age of 28 on Tuesday. Once again, they showed how the children had evolved into young adults, some with very interesting results. We watched the group of boys (John, Andrew and Charles), Tony and Simon.

First were the group of boys named John, Andrew and Charles. These three were part of the upper class. When they were 7, they made fun of poor people, as they saw them as dirty. Charles knew that he wanted to go to a series of prep schools and then to Trinity Hall and John had a very similar answer. When Andrew was asked, he was able to remember a few schools, but was unable to remember them all. Charles didn’t end up going to Oxford, but was still happy with where he was in life. He broke away from his class. Two of the three refused to do the Up 28 documentary. Andrew decided that he did not what to be a part of it because he created documentaries and he felt that they did not represent people properly. This also says something about the effects of documentaries on people and their representation. He feels guilty that he had advantages in life.

Second was Tony. He was from the inner city and the lower working class. When he was younger, he said that he wanted to be a jockey. He left school at the age of 15 and tried to become a jockey. He had three races, and wasn’t placed, so he decided to give up. Instead, he became a taxi driver. He claims that he felt he was better than anyone on film. His ambitions are completed and he is happy with the way his life turned out.

Last is Simon. He was an orphanage who attended a Charity Boarding School. He thinks that all that rich people do is get those who don’t have money to do things for them. He said that he would just “walk around” when he grew up. He ended up having 5 kids. He claims that he encourages and praises education in his children’s lives.

Compared to the last set of kids that we watched, these kids were less predictable. It wasn’t as obvious what they were doing. It was still very interesting to watch the way that their lives panned out and how there life as a child affected their life as an adult.

Age 28: Up Series (Paul, Suzy and Nicholas)

We had our first day of watching age 28 of the UP series. We watched Paul, Suzy and Nicholas. Even though this section focused on age 28, it showed clips of them when they were 14 and 21. It was very interesting to see how much of there age at 7 determined what they would be when they were older.

First we watched Paul. When Paul was young, he went to a Charity Boarding School and his parents were missionaries. When asked about higher education, he claimed that he didn’t know what University was. He also realized his expectations of his class, as he said he wanted to be a police officer, but knew that it would be too hard. Paul got married and became a brick layer. He stated that he was in the working-class suburbs, but he owns a house and two cars. He said that his only regrets of education were that he was lazy. He thinks that if people have money, they should go to private school. When he was 8, he moved from England to Australia. He was able to become successful because he went towards the contest system. The 7-year old Paul is reflected when he is older, as he was building a house at the park. This is what he decided to do when he was at the park and now he is a brick layer. His aspirations for his kids are for them to go further than him, which is a thought generated from the contest system.

Next was Suzy. Suzy attended a Private Girls Boarding School and was part of the upper class. In the movie, at 7, she stated that she didn’t know anyone of colour, and didn’t want to. When she speaks of her University plans, she doesn’t seem interested in school, as she says her mom has it all planned for her and she can’t remember. She got married at the age of 22. She left school at age 16 and went to Paris and later on got a secretarial job. She claims that she did not like school. She doesn’t want her kids to go into the private sector right away. At 21, she was very rebellious. In terms of comparing Suzy to herself at 7, it is easy to see that she is not interested in school and that she does not want to seek higher education.

The last was Nicholas. He went to a rural one room school. At 7, he said he wanted to learn about the moon. He ended up studying Physics at Oxford. At 28, he was currently a professor in the U.S. as a nuclear Physicist. He got married to a fellow student. As he grew up in England, he was part of the sponsorship system. As he was a gifted child, he was able to become part of the elite, but then he cheats the system and moves to the U.S. His comparison to when he was 7 is that he wanted to learn about that moon and that is exactly what he did.

All three of these students were able to accomplish what they wanted by the time they were 7. It is neat to see how they evolved into what was predicted in the film. One question that I have is: do the researcher effects have any influence on this? It is interesting as well as sad that, so far, with these three students, there life was determined by the time they were 7.