Blog Juu (+)

Do you Teach or Do you Educate?
Before watching this video, I had never really thought about the difference between teaching and educating. Truthfully, I had assumed that "teaching" was going to be the better of the two options they presented. But, I guess the dictionary knows best. After watching the video, I still do not really see the flaws in "teaching." The definitions the video presented use the words explain, encourage, induce, and cause learning and understanding. Although they are not as eccentric or action driven as "illuminate, inspire, enlighten, or empower," I believe that the qualities of teaching are an essential basis for educating.

I really liked the quote in the video, "Education makes a people easy to lead, but difficult to drive; easy to govern, but impossible to enslave." Although, truthfully, I do not really understand it. So, maybe just because it is thought provoking. As a result of my own thought and experience, I would argue that education makes a people easy to drive, but the rest extremely difficult. I was talking to a friend yesterday about a documentary she had seen involving prostitution and the sex slave trade all over Asia and Europe. She told me about the organizations trying to save these girls, and give them an education, but their current lives have led them to believe that education will not help them or bring them more money or honor. They are easier to lead and govern because they do not know any different.

According to the video, I intend to educate AND teach because I believe that my role is to lead the way for my students to create and be creative ("educate"), but first I must give them the tools to understand and learn how to get there ("teaching").

Don't Let Them Take Pencils Home
Mr. Spencer's blog is incredibly, fascinatingly metaphorical. It would prove very difficult to interpret his postings and deem another's analysis wrong. In that context, rather than technology, I believe Mr. Spencer's direction is towards the attitude of learning. In "Don't let them take the pencils home," Gertrude's argument of education is that it should be solely informationally based. After all, better test scores get the schools more funding and the children a better chance of receiving scholarships and getting in to college- the image and indicator of success, right?

I appreciate how Tom emphasizes low-income areas and parents. If the opportunities are not readily available in an area, and classrooms don't have Smartboards and Macs for every student to take home, let alone textbooks from the century, libraries, or science labs, they don't know any different. Tom notes how these students in low-income areas think pencils are for entertainment. If someone has never been shown an effective way to approach learning or use a computer for educational purposes, I do not think a school system could expect any different. I pointed out in an earlier blog post for the iSchool Initiative the likeliness that students would use their iTouches to play games and for entertainment while the teacher is teaching- this is what Tom is talking about.

The parent aspect Tom points out, I believe, is the most important target to changing attitudes about education. If school systems do not teach the parents as well as the students about new initiatives and programs, they are of no help to their students. I remember time again where I would ask my mother for help on a school project, and she would help!, but it would not be on the track the teacher wanted us to take, therefore, it was wrong. Also, if parents were never interested in school, attended college, or were engaged in the idea of learning at all, it is most difficult to pass those traits, in a positive sense, down to their children. I think Tom realizes this.

The passage from Spencer's post, "Are Pencils Making Us Narcissistic?" stood out to me in particular:
""Look, I see your point. Maybe we have that conversation with kids. Maybe we ask them if they feel the pressure to perform when they have a larger audience. And maybe that's the issue. Maybe we keep saying 'audience' rather than 'community,' and so our words are framing our mindset," Mr. Brown adds.

Narcissists aren't always the loudest ones out there and loud people aren't always narcissists. My father had a strong voice. He spoke up loudly in defense of the one-room schoolhouse when the town considered closing it down and letting students walk a few more mile to go the opposite direction. When we moved to the city, he wrote letters to the editor regarding worker's rights and factory conditions. He wrote letters to friends throughout his informal social network, sharing stories about our family. But his voice was humble. It was earthy.

The issue isn't the technology we use, but the tone of voice that matters."

It's all about addressing the children and why they think a certain way, not about what the school is or isn't doing wrong. The people that are going to make change about attitudes towards learning are not necessarily the principals or faculty as a whole. It could take someone as simple as a single teacher, one person from the community, or another student for other students to change themselves. The last line of the passage seems to emphasize my interpretation of Tom addressing attitudes toward learning rather than solely technology. It is not what is being taught, "but the tone of voice that matters."