Feb 09 2008
Oakes & Lipton Chapter 4: The Subject Matters
As I read this chapter, one major theme stands out. I think there will always be the battle between skills instruction and those who feel that math must be taught in a meaningful context. As an elementary teacher, I believe that it should all be taught within a meaningful context. This is what is going to excite the students to want to go on and learn more. I know that for me, by the time I got to high school, things had definitely shift towards a more skills approach. That really didn’t bother me. I guess that’s why I think that the meaningful context at an early age was so important.
Each year, we would always have a career day. Each year, I would choose something different. I would always choose something based on people that I encountered in my life. As a third grader, I was going to be a landscaper. I had my overalls, my shovel, etc. I had learned this from a guy that worked on people’s yards in my neighborhood. By the time I was in sixth grade, I was going to be a stock broker. I loved the idea of money and I wanted to make a lot of it. I understood that all the birthday money I had gotten from my relatives had been put into mutual funds and that excited my interest. All that time, I would flip-flop about what occupation I was going to have. But, then, in college, I could sit through a boring Economics class, thinking about the stock broker and knowing this would be something that he would have to do. I think it is very important to have learning occur within a meaningful context to start that imagination going at an early age.
However, I do agree that the curriculum was created for the dominant culture at times. I realized this when I married my husband. I grew up in Alabama. I learned about Alabama history and as I read the section about Social Studies I thought I was reading the Alabama history book. I learned how the white man helped the Indians so much. Then, when my husband and I started dating, we had many discussions about how things were quite different from what was portrayed. My husband comes from a Native American background. He lacks a trust of the government that I can’t understand. However, when I consider his family heritage, I understand why. Many Native Americans had their land taken from the “government” at the time. These stories were verbally passed on for generations. Regardless of what the textbooks said, my husband’s understanding was very different. Do I think that both sides need to be better represented in our curriculum? Yes! But, I also understand Mrs. Cheney’s point that it can’t be by taking out other important elements of our history. If we add information about famous Native Americans, it doesn’t mean that we take out Ulysses S. Grant or Robert E. Lee. Both sides of every argument must be presented. I think this is the only way to prevent some of those mistakes in history from happening again. I hope that I have made sense. I do think our country has some fine moments. However, probably ALL of those moments have a dark side to them as well. Both sides need to be presented so that our students know they have a choice. They have a choice to work for good and justice, or they can work for a side that can be deceptive and corrupt. When they see both sides of the coins throughout history, they will know that these decisions that our country faces every day must be made with care!
Create a free edublog to get your own comment avatar (and more!)
