The Power of Opinion

So with the upcoming election and our discussions in class, Lauren and I decided to our media project on the effects of this election and politics in our classes. We have found that in many of our classes, especially Critical Ped, this current election has played a large role in the dynamics of classroom discussions. We also have observed that the opinions shared in class are usually one sided, not to say that the other side doesn't play a role in the class, but that there is little or no discussion of the more conservative opinion.
I feel, as a republican, that my opinions aren't always taken seriously or are overlooked by other classmates who feel differently. Personally, I would rather just sit and listen to others opinions, than speak up with my own different beliefs and be criticized. I usually feel uncomfortable discussing my political opinions in general, because we all are so different and because my conservative views are a minority in the class.
With our project, we are trying to see how students of both political affiliations deal with discussions in class. Through interviews and surveys, we have asked two very important questions:
1) Does the election affect the community within their classes?
2) Do they feel comfortable talking about their political and other opinions in a classroom environment?

We are still currently looking for the opinions of others to add to our project. If you want to send us your comments or other opinions, please either comment or email. Anonymous opinions can be used in our project if you feel more comfortable.

Middle Ground

The juxtaposition of the reading of our mystery article and chapter 4 of the Woodford text was one of great value to our current political standings. It got to me to thinking about just how complacent we have become in our school settings and in the ways we interact and teach, much like the sentiment that was being felt in the 60s and 70s. Judging from the less-than-surprised reactions to just who our mystery author is, Bill Ayers was a member of Weather Underground, and before that, the New Left movement and SDS. WU sought to take down the regime of the Right that was set in place by the U.S. government during the heated era of the Vietnam War, often by anarchistic and militant ways. Yet through it all, their message was to bring reality to a world caught up in unideal, empiracal tendancies. But ironically enough, in an attempt to end the war and violence that the U.S. was bringing down upon the world, Ayers and WU bombed buildings, attacked with arson and vandalism, and even expected civilian deaths as a result of their actions.

We read a great deal about the New Right that has pervaded our society and school systems since the era of the 80s (Reaganomics) and a push towards Conservatism and the creating of absolutes and truths in our political sphere. The New Right pushes for standardization in our public schools, which in turn divides students into haves and have-nots, which divides us as citizens even further into successes or failures, all based in the ideals of a group of conservatives who deem one aspect of music education to be the standard for achievement. What the New Left was trying to do was to tear down what was being built, so that no edifices and statues of our country's "successes" should be seen as accomplishments, be they physical or metaphorical manifestations.

But what happens to the concept of conversation and being able to reach a middle ground between the two extremes? Do we wait for actions to level themselves out, from the great pendulum swings from left to right, or do we take positive action, to try to come together with those who are apart from each other, to reach a common ground? Are these just ideals that we create in our safe haven of higher education? To make it in the real world, one has to have a plan, an ideal, for how they want to live their lives. The WU chose their own methods to advocating change in ways that resulted in death and chaos. But was it wrong for the group to act in the manner that they did? Was any positive change brought because of it? I would have to venture to say that without extremists, the world becomes too complacent in patting themselves on the back for a job well done. I am not an advocate of terrorism, far from it actually-maybe too deep into the pacifist realm- but radical action sometimes brings about radical change. And in this world where we let our lives by governed so completely, who will be the next in line to take a stand, even if it's by violent means?

Stereotypes

Stereotypes are everywhere and can be considered “positive” and “negative.” With stereotypes, all different kinds of groups are targeted. Within a classroom a stereotype could influence perception and behavior of both the students and the teacher. Unfortunately, even though we recognize and know when a stereotype is wrong, we still choose to label.
With this week’s mystery reading I found myself stereotyping the author immediately. Even though I do not agree with stereotypes, I could not help but make an assumption about this person. I found him to be a bit head-strong and childish in the manner in which he felt he always had to defend himself to his wife’s co-workers because they were lawyers. I also felt that he was a little too old to be teaching kindergarten. I could not help the way I assumed things throughout my reading, which proves that being stereotypical is not a choice.
We as teachers are often dealing with these difficult situations in our classrooms. Typical ways that teachers stereotype their students is through expectations we have of our students, and our perceptions and attributions of students’ behavior and motivations. As students we stereotype what people expect from us and that effects how people treat us, how we think about ourselves, and how we portray ourselves to others.
In our classrooms stereotypes can bring forth anxiety and greatly affect performance. As teachers we must not reinforce stereotypes. We can use counter-stereotypical examples (positive ones) that can compensate for the negatives in the situation. Do not single students out with certain questions and touchy subjects or ask students to speak for their “group.”

Political Activism

In chapter four, Woodford explains the revolutionary activism of music teachers in the 1960's. During this time, many educators in music recognized and understood the political connections between education, society, and government. Today many educators are unaware of this correlation or worse yet are more concerned with their own career than their students' needs. The activism of music teachers during thet 1960's has a lot to do with the political movements of that time. Much change occurred during that decade and the one that followed because people were willing to challenge certain ways of life. Teachers have so much power in their positions that they often do not recognize. Not only do they influence the young and future generations but they have a say in education as a whole if they would only make their voices heard. How can we as future teachers plan to influence our future collegues by being politically active? What if teachers were required to have longer periods of training and were offered a higher sallary? If education were truly respected, I feel that the job of teacher would be highly regarded. When we begin teaching, can we reignite that passion for political activism from educators?

Assuming and Labeling

In our society, we tend to make many assumptions. Assumptions about almost everything. I feel that we have become less open minded, and many citizens in our country have become extremely narrow minded. When reading the "mystery reading" for the week, I was shocked that people would think that there was something "wrong" with the author, Bill Ayers, because HE was a kindergarten teacher. I found it so frustrating that he had to justify himself to his wife's colleagues. What is so wrong about a middle aged man being a kindergarten teacher? The ultimate goal in my personal life is just to be happy. By the way Bill Ayers writes, he sounds to be extremely happy and content within the profession of a kindergarten teacher. 

Assumptions are made in the classroom as well. We assume what students can't do based upon their "disabilities". Why don't we ever focus on what children with "disabilities" CAN do? I have friends and family members who are "disabled". In certain areas they perform better then the "gifted" friends and family members that I have. As teachers we need to realize the strengths and weaknesses of all our students. We need to recognize what our students can do. 

Assuming and labeling really hinders our society and our classrooms. If we can become more optimistic, it will make for a better world. We need to look for the good in all people, I believe that there is good within everyone. 

A Personal Connection

I want to share some more thoughts on the subject of personal connections. We were talking about whether those personal connections with people or in this case authors either helped or hindered us in our learning. If we have met the author of a certain book, and they have made a good impression on us, are we more open to reading their material? Do we try a couple more times to read and comprehend the subject matter? Personally for me, if I know about the author, or have met them I am definitely more open and excited to read what they have written. When we read Bernice McCarthy's book in Critical Pedagogy II, I was so excited to begin learning about her ideas because I had heard so much information about her. That's not to say that I can't pick up a book and read it without knowing the intimate details of an author. I do that in most of my other classes, and I did it with Peter Block's book. I knew nothing and actually still know nothing personal about Peter Block. I really like and admire his ideas and because I was able to get so into what he was writing about, the personal details are not something I really even care about anymore. I definitely think the mindset we have laid onto Paul Woodford's limits us from learning as much as we can from his book. I look at his book as a resource I need to read, but not something I particularly am excited to read. I realize that this is a problem and one I need to personally fix. I want to get the most out of what I read, and if I need to Google search Paul Woodford to feel a deeper connection to him, maybe that is what I need to do.

I found an article that talks about online courses and whether learning suffers because of the lack of face-to-face contact. This was really interesting to me because of the things I've heard about the online course that we are required to take. Does our learning suffer because we are not experiencing the information first hand in a personal teacher/student connection? Or does it matter that a class only has limited discussion and interaction. Personally I find that I learn more if there is dialogue going on between other students and the teacher at the same time. Some people say that we need to keep with the times and progress toward learning through technology. I find online courses a valuable resource for people who work full time jobs or that cannot get the information anywhere in their area. However I wonder if we are not willing to try as hard because that personal connection hasn't been made. It's possible to learn about people through email but does that really give a good full impression? Can you really make a good judgment call based on correspondence? Personally I prefer face-to-face encounters.

I'm Sorry, I Don't Comprehend.

In school we are constantly led by the teacher, and told what to do. We are given tasks, assignments, and deadlines. For the most part, we are also given guidelines on how to go about accomplishing these goals. We are given so much direction to the point that there is no room for creativity; there is no room for independent learning.

During the majority of my school years this follow-the-leader method of learning was all I was used to, which made it harder for me to learn as time progressed. I had no idea how to independently learn, because I had never done it before. Everything had to be explained in-depth, or else I could not manage to accomplish my work properly. I couldn't even do part of my assignments because I didn't know every single thing that I needed to.

Fostering creativity among the classroom desperately needs a comeback. I find that the more people are spoon-fed classroom material, the more that people can't think for themselves; this is a scary situation. Since I have been at Westminster, I have been given more opportunities to think for myself and to put my own ideas to use. I have become a better learn in a way that I understand what is going on, for the most part. WCC has made me more independent, therefore, better at comprehension and better at self-sufficient work.

The Empty Vessel

I have been thinking a lot about a certain phrase that pervades much of the way people think in education. This saying has been around since the Ancient Greeks and it still holds much weight in today's society. The phrase I'm thinking of is "empty vessel." We as educators try to fight against this notion of the teacher being the one with all the knowledge and the students are the ones who must be filled with the knowledge and tools that enable them to be successful. But how can a vessel full of knowledge, whether it was teacher-filled or student-filled, be any use to others in a community or society? A vessel is a place to store knowledge, but once it is filled, what happens? It sits for a while, stagnant, not progressing or evolving, until it is carried to a place to be emptied, dumped out, waiting to be filled again.
We are on this constant quest for the acquisition of knowledge, to read as many books and wrestle with as many ideas as we can, but unless we do something with this knowledge, it stays stagnant with us and does us little good except for the use of quotations.
That's why unless we are active in our thinking and action, it does little good to anyone to just be full of knowledge, no matter how brilliant it may be. Woodford comes back to the notion that democracy is headed by the educated few, but I think it is more apt to say that democratic institutions are led by the educated few who are willing to be the agents of change, to make a difference in the way that we think and act. It is so dangerous to be blindly governed; it should be everyone's personal responsibility to become as educated and active as possible in our daily lives. It is the only way to really foster growth in a helathy way where we all have the tools to become better citizens.

Bipartisanship

Woodford was endearing towards the word “liberal”, giving it a strong positive connotation, which is contrary to its usual reputation. In recent years, the word liberal has come to be an insult, often referred to as “the ‘l’ word”. I took Woodford’s definition of the liberal as an advocate for the minority and the misrepresented. In this way, the “liberal” takes on a Robin Hood like role by speaking for the groups who would otherwise go unnoticed.
Regardless of whether the liberal is portrayed in an extremely bright or somber light, the liberal still is usually associated with the Democratic Party or the left side of the spectrum. If one agrees with Democratic ideals, one might be a self-proclaimed liberal, but Republicans frown upon the very idea of liberalism. The United States is so divided by party lines. We are not as “united” as we may play off. The media is constantly force-feeding us our viewpoints. Many Republicans claim that CNN is a socialist network while Democrats consider Fox News to be the enemy. I personally wouldn’t be caught dead watching Fox News, but that gets me thinking. If it is so automatic for me to immediately put down and disbelieve any view that is Republican or right-sided, then there are certainly Americans who would do the same to my beliefs.

Who is right? Is there one side that will prevail over the other, having been the one, true stance all this time? Certainly not, it is not black and white. Many things are relative and have differing variables, affecting the result. It’s ironic that many believe that their viewpoints are more valid and reliable when they live in a country where one of the main doctrines is that all people are created equal. Is it at all possible for us to have the goal of valuing each citizen’s opinion without undermining our own?

Flexibility and Tradition

Woodford states “any notion of progress depends upon individuals having faith in the past. Students should be encouraged to question and challenge tradition and the status quo… they must have faith in the past and in the possibility of progress (pg 44).”

I agree that although tradition is important, things must change with time. My entire worldview transforms every single day; this makes me increasingly aware of the fact that what I believe now, the way I learn and perceive people and ideas, and my amount of knowledge is subject to change drastically as soon as I step foot inside the classroom. As a young teacher, I have no choice but to be flexible and use every experience as a teachable moment for myself. I feel that having this kind of attitude increases the capacity of a teacher.

I feel that it is important to be open to change as a teacher, regardless of how long one has been teaching, because our world and culture is always changing. Without this ability to be versatile, a teacher will lose his or her ability to relate with students and will not be able to reach them.

My experiences in the classroom thus far have led me to the conclusion that at some point, things will not go directly as planned. An exciting aspect of teaching is that anything can happen, therefore, a teacher should be ready for anything and everything. However, this can be unnerving, especially for someone who is extremely organized, regimented, and relies on tradition and past practice. As teachers we must learn how to be confident and relaxed enough to respond positively to unexpected circumstances and change; if one is too uptight and structured, the amount of knowledge retained in the classroom could be compromised.

"The School in the Plastic Bubble"

Sometimes I feel that at Westminster Choir College, we are trapped in a plastic bubble. Stuck in our everyday routines, with our own opinions. We all have been taught Critical Pedagogy throughout our college career, with little or no practical application. Personally, I feel that I am naive when it comes to teaching in a classroom. As great as our music education program is, being sheltered in our own small environment, almost does more harm then good. We are molded into teachers who fit well in the "John Witherspoon Middle Schools" of America. Rarely, are we challenged to deal with issues that make us uncomfortable or question our ways of teaching.
In my evaluation, I mentioned that before I am placed in teaching position, I want to travel and experience how music and education are dealt with all around the world. I want to witness how different individuals in communities, that I may not have experienced myself, intertwine and work together to better education. I believe that in order to do MY best in teaching, I need to see the world we live in and observe how others live, and then combine what I have learned from my own schooling and these experiences into my own classroom.
With this, I hope to be able to connect better with all of my students and find different ways to relate their lives with my own, especially in our journey together in music. I feel that too often enough, teachers right out of college, get placed in a school and stay there for the rest of their career. While this may be the perfect plan for them, I still feel that I need to discover who I am as a person and a musician by getting completely out of my own comfort zone and the "bubble" we have been in throughout college.

The value of tangents

We must be prepared, in the classroom, to "think on our feet". One can have the most detailed, specific, well-planned lesson, only to have a student's comment divert the plan's course to an entirely different topic. This flexibility must be respected. All too often, teachers listen to a comment or contribution, and then quickly get the class "back on track". While we must have some objectives, it is my belief that the music classroom is very much about experiential learning. Students learn about music primarily through making and listening to music, and secondarily through dialoguing about it. There can't be a wrong answer.
This is especially applicable to the arts, because art can be viewed in so many ways...some of the most beautiful, insightful, sociologically telling works of art can be considered "obscene" during their artists' lifetimes, but can grow to describe their era and inspire future artists. Since each of our students will come from a unique background, it is essential that we open ourselves to a variety of interpretations.
Not only is each student unique in his or her talents and interests, but in his or her perspective on a subject. Individual experiences play a huge role in creating context for a concept...therefore, as teachers, we must not only strive to accept the student's musical contributions but the whole student.

"The challenge for democracy as the expression and attempted realization of this common faith is to find ways to harmonize the development of each individual with the maintenance of a social state in which the activities of one will contribute to the good of all the others." (Pg. 36)

No matter how hard we try to "all get along" there will be people and circumstances that will not allow this to happen. Trying to please everybody is virtually impossible. In a democracy we strive to create a society where everyone is equal, politically socially and economically. Communities try so hard with to do this with events they have and even though a community may take a few more steps forward, there are those who would still selfishly keep us back because of their biased thoughts and pride. That is not to say that these things we do are in vain. They most assuredly open eyes and get people thinking. Its still a goal we have, and as long as we don't stop reaching for our goals, we will succeed.

Respect is not something that can be demanded, it is something that needs to be earned.

Feminism in Education

"Women have their own ways off thinking and knowing, their own modes of reasoning, they being historically situated in the home which traditionally has been governed less by rules of justice as by instinct and sympathy." (Woodford p. 40)

This quote is taken from the radical feminist, Carol Gilligan. I believe that it's not so much that women "think" differently then men, but women have different qualities then men. I believe that the majority of women possess a motherly way of acting. I don't think it's fair to say that women actually "think" differently then men do. 

Women in education need to make sure that they don't "govern" their classroom by instinct and sympathy alone. It's more important for students to respect their teacher, rather then actually like them. There is an overwhelming amount of female educators in elementary schools in our country. How would students turn out differently if they were taught by male teachers at a younger age? Do we think that students would act differently based on the sex of their teacher? I personally believe that if students had more of a male influence in their elementary education experience, they would mature faster. I feel as if most male elementary school teachers wont be as nurturing as female elementary school teachers. I believe that women are just naturally more nurturing and sympathetic then men are. 

I however, don't agree with the statement that women have their own way of thinking and knowing and reasoning. I think that is an extremely bold statement. I don't think that there are any two individuals in this world that would think, and reason in the same way. Therefore, I don't think that men and women "think" differently, I believe that all people think differently. We will never truly understand what another person is thinking. 

Overall, I believe that women are generally more nurturing and sympathetic then most men. Not all men however, just most. I don't believe that men and women necessarily think differently, but I believe that ALL people think differently. 

What does it mean to be a political leader? Does being a political leader mean that one is a politician? What is the role of a teacher in politics?  In many instance community members are fearful of the politically active teacher.  As a result, teachers who become involved in politics are often viewed as indoctrinators, antagonists of democracy, and conflicts of community interest.  The recent election has certainly reignited teachers activity in politics due to the potential reinstatement of the federal policies outlined in No Child Left Behind (NCLB).  Unfortunately, many community members believe that the teachers and their unions are involved in lobbying efforts strictly as a special interest group and not as a plausible stakeholder in a child's education.  One may argue that such a fear and misunderstanding evolved from our countries broken conception of democracy.  Since our countries conception the mainstream political scene has been dominated by a neodarwinian mindset, born from the struggle of civic representation and the ideal of individualism.  In order to achieve a more perfect union however, we must break away from the conventional though that influences our politics and move towards a concept that will help restore equality and justice in our democracy.   Politics occurs in almost every aspect of life, during work, school, family life, civic duty, and recreation.  Politics' is a natural ramification when people gather to discuss and act out solutions to challenges.  Often times one may attempt to divorce politics from the trials of everyday life, and restrict it to the government platform.  One may use the argument that "politics serves no purpose on this stage" or that "engaging in politics is divisive and counterproductive".  The belief that ones endeavors are above and beyond politics is not only arrogant, naive, and narcissist, but it threatens the foundations of a democratic society.  Woodford suggests that politics is the way in which people gather to engage in collective problem solving.  Therefore, if one were to remove politics from everyday life their voice in addition to their neighbors would be lost fro the sake on unity and peace.  In addition, the community accepts the tyranny and oppression of the mainstream, leaving their community stripped from the democratic ideals once cherished by its citizens.  Fear of politics is not only born from the struggle for representation but also from the mistrust and the inadequacy of bureaucracy. 

Political leaders are important in any society, profession, or organization.  The role of a political leader is to navigate through the fractured community and create an environment where all separate centers can flow and create a sense of wholeness (Block).  The responsibility of a political leader is to help create a gathering that fosters open communication between each center.  Open lines of communication are the best remedy  for a broken community.  it is through communication, expression, and support that a healthy pluralistic community is born and it is the role of a political leader to help lay the foundation and facilitate the conversation.  This requires that the leader understand to the best of their ability each center, so that every individuals voice is heard.  One may agree that when members of a community have a comprehensive understanding of one another than breakdowns in community become less.  the ultimate responsibility of a political leader is to explore and navigate the fractures of society, much like how a geologist studies fractures of the earth's plates.  They understand that they cannot solve all the problems of a society just as a geologist cannot prevent earthquakes.  However, they seek to understand why the fractures occur and help predict and expose potential threats. When such a threat becomes detectable they facilitate a conversation that will bring about understanding, reconciliation, and safety, while facilitating a resolution.  Fractures in society will never disappear unless there is a push towards homogenization and those fractures contribute to the benefits of a free and democratic society.

The Brain Is a Muscle Too

Over the last few years a big issue that has always been a topic of conversation among Critical Pedagogy students has been the issue of fostering creativity within students. Presently, many studies have shown that over the years, students are losing their creativity; their active imaginations. These imaginations which at one time, were running rampant with ideas, now stifled by the subconciously over-bearing affects of today's media.

There was once a time in our country, where you could place a sheet of paper and a pencil in front of a student and they could create one of the most beautiful works of art. Children had to keep themselves entertained; build their concentration level merely on the little resources accessible to them. Not anymore. Students and some adults alike, have become nothing but walking vegetables; people waiting for the next task that is to be laid before them, guidlines and spoon-feeding in all.

Turning on the television, and watching the news, reading the paper, all you hear about are new-found learning disorders and attention-deficit disorders. In reality I recognize that these disorders are real, but for the most part these disorders are brought to people in part by a parent/guardian's laziness in their upbringing, and not enough time spent on building the person's concentration level when they were a younger child. The brain is a muscle, just as we have in our arms and legs, and it needs to be worked out too. It needs to have the opportunity to allow it's owner brainpower.

All in all, I understand that there are learning disorders that really do exist, and that some people actually do have them. I only bring this up because as time progresses, children are slowly losing their sparks. Instead of being vessels, waiting to get filled with knowledge, children are becoming nothing but walking vegetables; mindless and free of the creativity that their minds unknowingly, and greatly crave.

Culture

“Music Education involves helping children explore and imaginatively identify with other people and their music.” This week I started my elementary praxis work at Sunnymead Elementary School and found I was really able to relate to this statement made by Woodford. It is apparent that in the world today, families come in all shapes, sizes, and colors. At Sunnymead Elementary, everyone is from a different background. When I say background I am not talking just cultural. Experiences and talent vary as well. Each student has a favorite subject or class. Some relate to math, while others relate to spelling or english. What I have found throughout my first week of observing is that the music classroom brings all of these interests together and everyone is equal. The atmosphere that the teacher has created is safe, colorful, and tons of fun. No child can deny that or keep from participating.

Even the students who were hesitant at first joined in when the teacher asked all of them to play the air guitar or beat on a hand drum. There were smiles and laughs of excitement. The children could not help but enjoy themselves and express their enthusiasm to the other classmates and the teacher. Despite that these children have all had completely different experiences and lives, in the music classroom, their culture and differences are put aside.

Multiculturalism should not be confined to “Class, today we are going to talk about what a Native American tribal chant is. Sarah, why don’t you demonstrate how it is done in your culture?” It should be approached with a “Class, everyone sing and move like this!” No student should be singled out at any time because of their background. The music classroom is the perfect place to demonstrate that we are one community.

Woodford states that some believe “all musical cultures and subcultures are essentially different and independent rather than overlapping and interdependent.” At one time I found this to be true but now I realize that musical cultures are something we all have in common. Whether it is an African drumming piece or a patriotic song, we can all learn something from everyone else’s interests in music. The basis for ALL musical culture, no matter what type, is making music in some capacity. Our cultures have more in common than we think, and it is up to us as music educators to prove it.

Education & Economics

Woodford heavily defends the need for democracy in music education. In doing so, he brings light to what truly goes on in public schools across the nation. If one had to choose a governmental system that would parallel the structure of the current educational system, it would not be democracy. Public schools around the country give unequal advantages and privileges to their students. Academic possibility is often defined by the economic status of the area in which students live, not their intelligence level or drive to succeed. The amount of funding that schools receive is relative to the amount of capital that has been accumulated within their communities. Surely, this is not democratic. A true democracy equally represents all citizens, enabling their rights to be fulfilled. Should it not be that all American citizens receive the same opportunities in education? It seems that economics plays a larger role than politics in education.

Education today is a specialized system in that it molds students into capable people, ready to contribute to the current workforce. Students are taught trades and skills that will lead them directly to a specific job that supports the business field today. Supporters of the system would claim that young adults learn a task that will ensure them a job, preparing them for the real world. Also, business continues to run smoothly since new generations are able to fit into old ways. On the other hand, this system does not allow students to grow into who they really are, able to create a new field or position that would suit them, changing the entire work industry. I believe that each generation should be able to reinvent itself, taking positive concepts from older generations while adding new ones that compliment the changes society has made. There is little or no originality when systems circulate year after year.

Block discussed accountability on the part of the citizen. When people feel as if their individual outlook and input makes a difference on a large scale, they are accountable. Accountability is something people take ownership for, on a deep, personal level while a responsibility is more of an obligation. Block suggested that citizens are either consumers or clients within their environments. If they are consumers, then they believe on some level that their needs can be satisfied by others. However, clients make their own decisions and are served by the public.

When students feel accountable for their actions, they become clients of the educational system, choosing what they wish to know and explore. When education serves the public, it is becomes a democratic system. The trick is to provide equal opportunity for students from all areas, of different economic levels, genders, and races. If the ideal educational system were to be represented by an economic system, it would be socialism. All students would be provided with the same academic opportunities but have to work of their own free will in order to achieve success. This is like socialism in that everyone starts off with the same, basic requirements met and can then work harder to gain more, if they so choose. Many institutions are socialistic in nature. The police department gives all citizens equal rights. If someone’s home is being threatened by another, they can receive protection regardless of their economic status. The educational system should act in the same way.

The Assumptions of Paul Woodford

There are several quotes that I read while reading the Woodford text, that bothered me. I believe that Woodford has made alot of assumptions about people, as well as about music education. I decided to reflect on some of the quotes that I have found while reading through chapter two. 

"Today's composers and classically trained performers speak a private language that for the most part is only understood by, or of interest to, fellow composers, musicians, and academics, and not by the remote and distant public. Composers and classically trained performers have a serious communication problem" (Woodford 26)

It is accusations like the above quote that lead to no support for music education in our children's schools. People make assumptions that classical music is non-accessible for the average American citizen. It is my belief that music is accessible to everyone. Human beings have an innate need for music in their lives. Music is a large part of everyone's life. I have been really interested lately in speech patterns of children and adults. Why is it that all children have similar "sing-song" phrases that they use in their voices? I noticed while sitting in church that while saying prayers, everyone has the same inflection and phrasing with their voices. This was never taught, however it is a learned action by the church community. I don't believe that classically trained musicians speak a private language. I think that classical musicians are more in touch with their innate sense of musicality. I believe that all humans are musical. It is wrong for Woodford to express that classical musicians speak a private language. This statement makes classical musicians to sound as elitists. Of all the classical musicians that I know, most of them have been extremely down to earth, as well as humble individuals. Woodford said that classical musicians have a communication problem. Did Woodford think that maybe it wasn't the classical musicians, but the others in the community? Maybe the others in the community have difficulties communicating with the classical musicians? Music is so important in all aspects of life and it is important to advocate it in school. Statements like the one Paul Woodford made in his book, do not support music education in the public schools. 

"Music and music education majors both in the United States and Canada suggest that students identified by their teachers and peers as less talented may be inhibited in their development" (Woodford 33) 

I have seen teachers do it to other students, and teachers have done it to me. I fully agree with the above statement. If a teacher tells a student that they are not "good" enough to complete a certain task, it will be that much harder for the student to complete it. Students need to know that you believe in them. Student's can achieve so much more if they feel that they have your support. Students constantly look for approval, and it is important as educators that we give them approval and support. By providing approval and support, students will get more out of their education. 

"The current lack of public support for orchestras and classical music, and for music education in public schools, may in significant part be a consequence of past elitist and exclusionary performance and teaching practices (or treating music education as 'just' entertainment) and our general failure as a profession to respectfully engage with the public through performance." (Woodford 35) 

Woodford again makes another assumption that music educators are elitists. Most of the music educators that I know are extremely humble and down to earth, not elitists. Most of the music teachers that I know strive to connect music to the students other classes, in an interdisciplinary sort of way. Music educators should strive to communicate with other teachers to use the information that they are teaching. Performance is a big part of music education, but the process leading up to the performance is equally as important. 

I believe that Woodford makes a lot of strong assumptions about music education and music educators. Many of the assumptions that Woodford writes, does not portray the music teacher in a good light. It is our job as music educators to defend music education in schools, we know the importance of music education and we need to defend it. 

Conservative?

I want to address Woodford's statement that "music teachers are notoriously conservative". First of all this statement immediately puts me on the defense. I don't consider myself to be conservative when it comes to my music. On my own time I enjoy all varieties of music and I'm always listening to new things. In a classroom I would be comfortable teaching any genre of music. My personality might be more reserved at times, and I may not always talk in class but I still have very passionate views on things. In a survey taken in England and Whales it was discovered that although popular and ethnic music was studied in school, the majority of the teachers felt more comfortable teaching classical music. Even though their students were more receptive to the popular music, teachers ignored those connections to stay inside their own comfort zones. At the end of all the statistics, Woodford makes this comment. "In short, music education in England and Whales (and in North America, too) is out of touch with current school and social realities." I am uncomfortable with this assumption Woodford makes. First of all this survey was taken in England. How can these results be transferred into the United States school system? Was there a similar study done here? I would agree that not every school is striving to teach popular music. There are teachers who have been doing their job for a very long time and may not feel as equipped to teach rap or hip/hop. However, this does not give the leeway for such a blanket statement to be made. In our education here at Westminster Choir College, one of the more classically focused schools, we are encouraged to step outside of our comfort zone and connect with our students using their music. To honor their wold and use students current emerging culture to connect with them, while inserting our knowledge of the past. Even if we are not being expressly told to focus that way, our common sense steps in. Examples from our own music experiences influence us on how we want to teach children. If we had bad musical experiences where we were bored and not interested, we want to be the opposite and challenge students and help them enjoy the experience. If we had great experiences we as teachers, want to continue that experience and add our own flavor to it. In the survey the typical picture of the teachers who participated was of a classically trained musician who had just entered teaching from a traditional music degree. To my thinking, if you can see that your students are not engaged and not interested and you do nothing to change that in any way, you are not a good teacher. If a teacher feels more comfortable doing one thing all the time because that's what is familiar, then I happened to feel that they should not be a teacher. They need to put their education to good use! Where is the passion for teaching and spreading knowledge? I may be a few things, but passive and conservative about music I am not!

SAT. Scholastic Aptitude Test vs. Stupid Awful Test

SAT. The nations largest, most important standardized test whose results are known for making or breaking your college career. Testing in Mathematics, Reading Comprehension, Science, English Skills, and Persuasive Writing, the SAT scores not only determine the future of the students but how the government funds the schools. Instead of these tests being about how well the students learn and take tests, it becomes the battle for money and educational funding.
In the movie (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JUHe3xcXkSc), The Perfect Score, a group of students who are worried about the SAT decide to come together and steal the master test from the testing center located here, in Princeton. Their plan was to get the test, and work together on the problems to come to a common answer. Each student comes from the classic “Breakfast Club” clique but all share the same issue with test anxiety and the fairness of the way the test was created. By the end of the movie, the students realize that the SAT’s should not, and do not have control over their future. They, themselves, have control over what steps they take with their life. The overall theme of the movie, is that regardless to what standards are set, or what the government says you “have” to do, you need to make sure that it is the best for you.
This movie is a good example of how we as future teachers and human beings need to take more risks in challenging the standards that are set for our students. Tests like the SAT’s are becoming more and more popular, starting with testing as young as second grade. These standardized tests are supposed to be used to create “equal opportunity learning” but end up really turning kids, and their teachers off to learning.
The government uses these tests to gage how much funding goes into a school system. The lower end schools receive money to rebuild their fundamental classes and the higher-level schools receive money to promote “higher level learning”. The biggest problem with these tests is its lack of ability to connect to the student. With SAT Prep classes, we are training students to become carbon copies of the “ideal” student, not allowing them to discover and learn on their own, topics that are interesting to them. The government decides everything from what schools should and need to teach in order to have the students be successful to whether the arts hold a place of their own in a school environment.
Below is a link to a video of Roger Brown, President of Berklee College of Music. He talks about the importance of the arts and music in the classroom today. I feel that everything he says is truly important with democracy and the government. The arts have been proven to raise tests score, yet the school systems always pull these programs when money is taken away. If the SAT’s were changed with sections that the students could choose, while keeping the main math, reading and writing, the students would have a better success rate. A test that is so highly evaluated should be fair for all students, especially those who connect to the arts and sports classrooms when they struggle in other classes. I believe that the SAT’s need a change or done away with completely.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uA6p1I9GkX0

Democracy & Liberalism

Democracy is an ideal governmental system that all generations in the United States should strive to establish. It can only exist when citizens all understand their critical role in making sure their voices are heard and that they are represented in a way they approve of. Democracy thrives off of the principal that all men and women are created equally and therefore deserve equal representation. Unfortunately, democracy never has and never will exist. It is an overly-optimistic system that we as a society will never actually reach. One might have the belief that all people are of equal value, but it is impossible to treat everyone the same. Each person has his or her biases that get in the way of democratic ideals. People in various classes have a difficult time relating to each other. Women are still experiencing sexism, which prevents from their voices being heard. Each racial group is susceptible to certain stereotypes that prevent them from interacting with one another. It is ironic that the United States people, who often boast about their democratic governmental system, are so divided by race, class, and gender.
I personally feel that all people are created equally, but that doesn’t mean that they act like it. I have my own opinions on what is right and how people should and should not act. At the same time, my neighbor could have opposite standards of how people should act that conflict with mine. Who am I to say that I am right? It is extremely difficult to maintain the belief that we are all created equally when we disagree on what is right.
However, this doesn’t mean that we can’t try to agree. The beauty of a claimed democratic government is that people are capable of making collective decisions to determine what is acceptable and what is not.
I truly enjoyed Woodford’s definition of the liberal. The word liberal has such negative connotations in the United States, which is unfortunate, since it is linked with the more progressive Democratic Party. It’s opposite, the word conservative, is used with dignity and in a society where people always want more of the same. Woodford described liberals as people who are in the minority, whose opinions are not as respected or understood as the majority. History shows that those who were the minority and were misrepresented eventually were able to express themselves and change the way in which we live. Perhaps the reason why so many Americans dislike the idea of liberalism is that they are comfortable with the way things are and fear change. Liberals often rock the boat and highlight problems others are willing to ignore.
An example from today’s presidential election is health care. Throughout American history, health insurance was privately owned and bought by individuals across the country. Unfortunately, companies who run health insurance do not have the well-being of the public in mind and take advantage of those in need of medical help. The liberals believe that all people should be able to afford health insurance even if this means the government stepping in and providing it for them. Conservatives like John McCain refuse to acknowledge that not everyone can afford healthcare, believing that if families are not medically covered, it is their choice. I find Woodford’s explanation of liberalism refreshing. It gives necessary voice and power to the misrepresented throughout society.

Since elementary school we are taught about George Washington, our founding fathers, and their great experiment. Henceforth, the word Democracy is enshrined within the hearts and minds of Americans as being the pillar of liberty and justice. Despite our convictions and commitment to democracy one must question whether our actions as citizens, especially in the classroom, are actions that create and reflect democratic principles. Democracy goes beyond what we are taught in school. The principles of our founding fathers and the ideals guaranteed in the constitution exceed our traditional notions of democracy. Democracy cannot be restricted to being a form of government, or an ideal that promotes freedom. Democracy is a fundamental philosophy that promotes equality and ensures that all Americans have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Do we as citizens and social architects promote democratic principles or stand in opposition because of a fear, mistrust, entitlement, or a lack of hope and faith in ordinary citizens. Do we as teachers and political leaders keep people in a state of dependency due to a feeling that they as citizens are inadequate? Is it solely our government that is responsible for the increasing lose of our civil liberties or is it we as citizens who recreate an autocratic society that is afraid of its own citizens and freedom?

We must also look at ourselves as citizens and social architects. Did we loose our voice? Having a voice is the central pillar in the infrastructure of democracy, and therefore as social architects we must be persistent in making sure our voice is heard among the people. We are political leaders! We must think of ourselves as political leaders due to the position we hold within the community. Over the last 2 decades many citizens have lost faith in their political leaders and politics in general. As a result, many individuals have neglected to participate in the political process. Participation is the political process is paramount and regardless of the atmosphere we as social architects need to raise of voice. The education field has and always will be political. Politics will always occur when people gather, and people will always disagree. The job of a social architect is to ensure that one voice is favored over the others and that the environment respects all individuals. However, the education field has fallen guilty to favoring one voice over the other. The implementation of Standardized tests, subject emphasis, NCLB, labeling, and standard curriculum all infringe upon equality. As a result, teacher preparation is centered upon following "the law" and is not based upon democratic principles. As teachers, it is our responsibility to voice our opinion, and lobby on behalf of equality. We cannot remain silent or else we become part of the machine. Silence is the death march of democracy. Reflect, Voice, and Act.

Receptors and Disengagement

Over the past few weeks in our CP3 classroom setting, a certain schism has made itself rather apparent amongst our community. There are the talkers, and then there are the listeners, the haves and have-nots, so to speak. We have addressed this issue several times in the classroom- are there people whose voices are not being heard, or are they choosing not to speak? This question tries to go beyond the phenomena of "I don't like to speak up in class" or " I may act this way in the classroom, but it does not define who I am." I'm getting a little weary- not of hearing the same active voices over and over, but rather not hearing the passive students' voices in the classroom. I have to ask myself an important question- are the students who are not being active really being silence, or are they just disengaged from what we are doing within and without the classroom?

Being disengaged is easy to do when one hasn't done their readings, when homeworks from other classes are due that day and the classroom is the only place to finish them. Sometimes I just have to think to myself "just do the class a favor and don't come if you are not ready to participate." And participation does not mean having something to say. Participation is having that fire burning inside of you that probes you to ask who? what? when?. It means coming to the classroom with a something to share. If you are just coming to go through the motions and hopefully be inspired by classroom discussions/ activities, then what is the point of going to class at all? It may seem harsh, but your physical body does not account for you being present. Education is about taking in all that we hear, read, see, and processing it into our own unique views. When Woodford references the writings of Dewey, he uses the phrase "passive receptacles" as those who simply received information but did not process it, simply stored it. We must turn our passivity into action, for without each of our views "society would be deprived of potentially valuable ideas and resources. Individuals might not be especially wise or talented, but they were positioned to reflect on, and to act intelligently to improve, the quality of their own lives and of those around them." This shows that Dewey has faith in the human race to be able to become learned citizens, to not just take everything at face value, but rather to mold it and while not taking anything away from what it "is," we can reshape it to conform with our own ideas. Knowledge is not a series of rights and wrongs, like bricks that are weighty and solid in mass, but rather knowledge is like water, able to move in between small areas, acquire great mass and force, and is also able to cool or be heated. When I think of traditional education, I always come back to one of my favorite anarchist pieces "The Wall" by Pink Floyd. This work faces the issues of the theoretical "wall" we build around ourselves by closing ourselves off to new experiences, to making a safe haven of what we know to be right and disregarding what must be false. After a while, we all just become bricks in the wall, we are the faceless mass to which facts and "knowledge" have come to be. Soon we found ourselves lost and eventually suffocated by our own closing off of the outside world.

Education is not just about learning what we do not know, it's about reshaping what we assume to be true and taking the elements of what we have learned to help shape our own personal outlooks. But that first comes with knowing what it is we are talking about. It is about absorbing those previously held notions of what is right and becoming extremely comfortable with them before we can reject their value. We are so fortunate to be able to be cognizant of the fact that facts are not facts (ok?) but rather what is assumed to be true over a given period of time. It is exciting that our minds might be those that shape new directions of growth and change. We can see that as evident in our current presidential election. There is on one hand a radical thinker, who wants to reshape our world to help shed it of its 20th century skin. There is another candidate who wants to preserve traditions of how things have worked in the past and have proven themselves true. Each candidate is valid in their viewpoints, but only one is looking to promote change of a positive variety. Change is what can make something grow, otherwise we are just repeating the past on a larger scale. Maybe if we changed the way our country (or classroom) was structured, we would be able to bring new ways of strengthening our bonds to light. Maybe its time for our classroom to become more proactive in changing how we govern ourselves and those around us. It is so important to be flexible and yielding, to try to approach everything with a positive attitude and to try to be helpful to others. It is with an open mind and heart that real acceptance and love can move us forward into new ways of thinking.

Free Mind Vs. Free Action

I have never thought of myself as one to not speak how I feel. I don’t hide my emotions very well, I consider myself to be passionate about my views and I usually know when the right moment arises for me to share these views. I suppose usually is the key word here, Tuesdays class being a prime example when my passion was challenged.
Dr. Schmidt’s stern talk directed at some of the students in class made me take a look at how I truly feel about education in schools today and re-evaluate myself as a future educator and participator in the class.
Woodford’s first chapter highlights the idea of the freedom of mind. He notes that a free mind empowers students to demonstrate a degree of intelligence or control over an experience. This relates back to the last class discussion because I believe freedom of mind is not always freedom of word. If everyone was to say everything they wanted or felt at any given moment it would be as Woodford puts it “freedom of action” and would result in confusion and disorder.
I’d like to think that I generally participate when I feel it is necessary. I also think it is important for me to sometimes sit back and let all the things going on around me sink in. I know it is important to get angry and frustrated at times in order to get things done and your point across. However, when working with children or in any leadership position one must know when to get angry and when to just listen and take it all in. I suppose I need to work on this aspect of my classroom skills.
In the classroom I believe it is important to be yourself. I feel that an educator should work their hardest to not compromise their own belief system. This is not to say that a well rounded teacher should not be aware and open minded to other belief systems, but rather to be a role model of a strong figure in the community as well as good example to their students of a strong member of a democratic society.
By being a role model for my students, and teaching and talking to them in a way that I feel best demonstrates a strong and intellectual person, as well in a manner that gets through to them best, in turn they will hopefully become better members of their own individual and collective communities and grow into free-minded people themselves.

Discrimination

Like the government, today’s schools have a major job to do – to develop the power of human individuals without respect to race, sex, class or economic status. Within the school systems and the government, these are some of the most debated topics and discrimination is always an issue in some capacity.

Unfortunately, prejudices are so ingrained in American society that it is almost impossible to avoid them. However, another aspect of society is law, integrity, liability, responsibility, and possibility. As a teacher, it is important to learn how to make the law work for oneself and one’s classroom. Deciding to fight a school's discriminatory practice or a single teacher's obvious prejudice is not an easy choice. Fighting any battle within today’s public school systems requires commitment, moral conviction and courage.

Woodford states something to the effect that the education we give our students should foster “freedom of mind.” Our students should feel empowered to apply some sort of intelligent or conscious control to their experiences. Through experiences with discrimination, students can learn how to change their classroom community. This could eventually lead to further education on this topic world-wide.

As a whole, the teacher of a classroom must be aware of what is being said in the world and who is being discriminated against. Through contributing to wider intellectual and political conversations with a class, one is able to foster a more well-rounded learning community that is aware of the issues at hand.

Addressing these issues while still staying true to the emotions and experiences of those in your class can be a tough challenge, but sheltering our students is not the answer. One must work to create an equal balance between diversity and equality. Without this balance, individuals just are not aware of what is going on around them. It is through this aspect that fostering a good learning community and developing power within individuals exists.

Diversity? Really?

In the Woodford book the author speaks about 'freedom of mind' referencing John Dewey and his Morality Project. John Dewey believed that schools should help to create a sense of creativity among it's students; a sense of individuality. He thought that it was the responsibility of the school system to create an array of different people with different belief systems, who possess the ability to think independently think for themselves and construct their own ideas based upon who they are. On this, I agree with John Dewey.

In schools today, children are almost brain-washed. They are told what to do, when to do it, and in what amount of time there are to do it in. Sure, there is your occasional art project, music project, or for lack of a better term, show-and-tell, but this isn't really allowing students to become people. This is telling pupils who to become; telling people who they are supposed to be.

I know that in grammar school and in high-school, my teachers didn't really appreciate my presence in the classroom. They thought I was rude, and out of line; they didn't like the fact that I had my own opinions and my own ways of doing things. They always told me that I was rebellious, stubborn, and that I thought of myself as "above the rules". In reality, yes I may have been just a stubborn teenager, but at the same time, nothing was ever given the opportunity to be challenged; I challenged what I could.

It is to my belief that as an educator, it is the teacher's obligation to keep the classroom on task, and on the path of what is being learned. There are of course going to be your "teachable moments" when your class goes off-task; this is normal. What is not normal is preaching to your classroom that everything has to be one way; that everything is how it is taught. Our world, and our country for that matter revolves around the idea that our country is the melting pot of the world; the very mixture of diverse ways of thinking. Why is it that education is being stifled by this socialist way of learning?

The Importance of Technology

Throughout class on Monday, we spoke a lot about the importance of technology and the major impact that technology has on our society. It is only in recent times that we have become so reliant on technology. For some people technology has a prisoning type of reaction, people are so reliant on technology. Most people that I know can't live without checking their email, their Facebook or their Myspace. Technology, primarily the internet, has taken on an important aspect in society. The internet provides a ways of communication for many people. Many people primarily socialize with their friends over the internet. 

Because our society has recently become so deeply rooted with technology, it is important as educators to ask how this affects education. It is so much easier now for students to look up answers to their homework problems on the web. Is the internet in a way taking away critical thinking for our students, and having them retain information that they have found on the internet? I know some professors are nervous about websites such as Wikipedia, because anyone can post to it. How do we know the information that we find on the web, is truly correct? People who have spent years doing research all over the world, can now simply discover research online. The internet has an unlimited amount of information that students can research. We have to make sure however that our students have not lost the ability to think and research for themselves. 

We have to think about ways that the internet may be used as a portal for substantial changes in our world. When a major event occurs in the world, the entire world can learn about it within seconds when it becomes posted to the internet. The internet can be used to really connect people all around the world. A good friend of mine has a friend that she made on the internet from across the world. My friend speaks to her online friend on a consistent basis. She has learned the ways of life on the other side of the world, yet she has never actually met her online friend. We need to think of the possibilities that the internet has created for our world. How can we use the internet to better serve our world? 

It is important to realize that the internet is also dangerous. Many people are abducted by "friends" that they have met on the internet. There is the feeling of safety when sitting behind a computer, but it's important to know that there is someone else behind another computer that may be targeting you. Conversations that people have with each other through instant messenger, do not compare to conversations that are had face to face. There are certain elements missing from an online conversation, including the inflection and the use of facial gestures. It is sometimes impossible for people to realize if the person that they are speaking to is being sarcastic, or actually being serious. There is also a certain bond created between people who have face to face conversations with each other. 

As music educators we need to be prepared for the way the world is changing through the power of technology. There are so many more ways of reaching students using the internet. Sites such as youtube, make videos of performances much more accessible to the average viewer. We have to realize that the world has become so much more accessible to us, through technology. It has become a major influence in society, and it is our job as educators to influence the way it becomes used. Technology has created new windows for students, and it is our job as educators to teach them the ways to open them. 

Borderlines In Life

When I began watching Half Nelson I initially really didn’t know what to expect. Due in part that I was watching for an education class, I suppose I expected a lot more teaching. A sort of stereotypical “Mr. Holland’s Opus”-esque type of film that shows how amazing some teachers are, and how they can accomplish almost anything no matter what the circumstances.
This movie however showed teachers in a whole new light, and rather than examining Ryan Gossling’s character in the classroom the focus was much more on his personal life and his interactions with one student outside the classroom.
I have to agree with Dr. Schmidt when he said that many of the scenes and interactions with the teacher and student made me uncomfortable. The first major interaction of the film is when the students catches the teacher smoking crack. The teacher is so reliant on the student in this scene that it’s a tad but creepy. This made me begin to think about boundaries and how teachers approach them in the classroom and out.
Were you ever driven home from school by a teacher or coach, or how about left alone with a member of your high school faculty doing an after school project or working on a school event. In some towns and cities this is all perfectly acceptable. I grew up in an extremely small town where everyone knew each other and there was never any worries about who your child’s teacher was and if they were staying after school with them. However, as my time comes closer and closer to becoming a music educator myself, I begin to think long and hard about my unmonitored time with my students. In the scene of the movie where all the students and teachers where at a school dance and Mr. Dunne began dancing very close with Drey I became very uncomfortable. In fact it made me cringe. For one why would any teacher or adult for that matter in their right mind think it is ok to dance like that with a fourteen year old? Lastly why would the other teachers and administrators look on while smiling? I find this so disturbing and unrealistic no matter where is the world you teach.
As teachers we are often at times viewed as leaders in our classroom community. If students are looking to us for guidance, for strength, and for direction in their own lives and futures, we can not be consistently put our flaws out there. This is not saying we should un-human. We are all individuals with skeletons in our closet and issues in our lives, however we must know when to share these sensitive moments and when to act like professional adults.

Breaking Down the Student/Teacher Barrier

As I was watching Half Nelson, I couldn't help but realize the boundaries between the students and the teacher. Ryan Gosling's character did not put up the barrier that almost every teacher has. You could tell that the student's in Ryan Gosling's class were comfortable with him, and able to express their true feelings. One of the problems with the education system in this country, I feel is that students are not being able to be themselves. 

Many students are only concerned about getting good grades, and getting into good colleges. These students create a false identity for themselves while they are in the classroom. They portray a character that they think the teacher wants to perceive. Looking around at my friends in my classes, I can't help but notice how different they are while they are in the classroom. It's almost as if they've taken on an entirely different personality. 

I admit, that I too am different inside of the classroom. If some of my teachers saw me outside of the classroom setting, they probably wouldn't believe that it was really me. In the classroom I am quiet and reserved, I don't really talk much. I do have things to say, but most of the time I am intimidated. I suddenly become more aware of the way my friends and colleagues are perceiving me, and become more afraid to voice my opinion or my response. However, outside of the classroom I am completely opposite. I talk, a lot. I'm extremely outgoing, and I'm sure that none of my teachers would ever think so. Why does this happen, why do students change when entering the classroom? 

I think it's important for teachers to get to know their students as people. Most teachers know their students as students, but not as people. Teachers should encourage students to bring their true personalities into the classroom, and to not be afraid. Teachers should get to know their students outside of the classroom. Ryan Gosling's character got to know his student outside of the classroom, it's unfortunate how they did under the circumstances however. They had a different relationship then the normal student/teacher relationship. Ryan Goslings character made students feel comfortable with him, and they weren't afraid to speak what was on their mind. Ryan Goslings character really connected with those students, I am sure that those students would have remembered everything learned in that class. 

When did the barrier between students and teachers come to exist? This barrier limits so many classrooms. Students are afraid to speak, and maybe teachers are really just afraid to listen as well. Maybe some teachers don't want to know what is going on in their students personal life. This barrier needs to be broken down, teachers should recognize that students are different once they leave the classroom setting. Students need to be reassured that they can make mistakes, and that sometimes there isn't just one right answer. We need to stop being so afraid to be ourselves. 

Students should also learn that teachers, are not only teachers. My mother is an educator, and students are shocked to see her outside of the classroom. I remember a summer day sitting at the pool club with my Mother, when student's that she had that year walked by. They were so surprised to see her there, and that she was really just a normal typical Mother, with her own children. Why would this shock students? Students need to realize that their teachers are people too, and that they also have a life outside of the school. 

When this barrier is broken down, I believe that true learning will take place. Students will really become engaged and become connected in the class. Students and Teachers need to realize that personalities differ outside of the classroom. The personalities outside of the classroom should be brought into the classroom. 

K.I.S.S. (Keep it simple and small)

As an advocate of strong community building through leadership I decided to take a look at the actual importance of transformation as presented to me in chapter nine of the Block. Although leadership is extremely important, (as I have previously stated in both my past blogs and critical paper) the actual transformation that occurs within a community is focused on the participation of everyone as a whole. This participation of everyone can be useful, but it is even more important that this group is broken into smaller groups to create a more personal atmosphere.

In the Student Government Association, we as leaders have a job to foster community growth. The Executive Board does so by holding weekly meetings as a board. We find that we accomplish more when the meetings are small and only have the people who are absolutely necessary involved.

The entire Student Government Association meets as a community once a month. Other members of the student body are also invited to attend these meetings to be updated on what is going on at the school. We instruct the other organizations within the student body community to have their own individual meetings to further their own growth and progress. The information that is collected at these meetings is later brought to the community as a whole where we discuss what is going on.

Like Block states in chapter nine, the small group is the unit of transformation. It is the intimate conversations that make the transformation develop and cultivate. The more those small groups are created, the more different the ideas are that are brought to the table. New conversations are then created and no time is wasted through argument or lack of ideas. Smaller group meetings also allow each voice to realize they are valuable and have something important to bring to the table. With a smaller group, every voice can be accounted for and it is not as intimidating to speak up.

Through this, we also can discover that others may share the same concerns as us. This reduces all thoughts of isolation and aloneness. Another important aspect to small group meetings for transformation is that people use their gifts and talents to minister to one another. Sometimes, within a large group, one may find that certain gifts and talents can be lost through lack of confidence or authority. Within a more personal situation, one may be able to speak up and use their abilities to help promote expansion for the small group or even the entire community as a whole. Group members in close situations hold each other accountable. If someone announces he or she plans to work on making a change, other members of the group may ask how it went the next time they get together. This can be done in a friendly, informal way. Or group members may make a plan to be accountable to each other. Along with this, people are more likely to practice what they learn and can help each other in hard times. People often feel isolated, alone or abandoned when facing issues. Small group members can provide a "safety net," supporting one another in hard times. This situation could eventually lead to friendships within a community which furthers transformation even more.

Community: Icing the Cake of Hipocrisy

So after watching the movie, and reading chapters 8-10, I have come to the realization that, in my opinion, most of the stuff we read about and watch are just merely ideas. They are ideas that have been put into play, ideas that have proven to be true, but are they really realistic ideas?

As future teachers, our heads are full of thoughts about what kind of educators we want to be, how we want our classes to run; our own ideas as being the epitomy of the perfect teaching. I realize that in the course of our blogging so far, that I have been completely cynical, but I can't seem to help it. My personality revolves so much around not being able to fully trust in, or rely on people because all I have experienced in the past from community is dissapointment. We have watched 'Half Nelson' and we have discussed what had happened during the course of the movie; about how the movie relates to what we have been reading in the Block book. What I took from both is this idea of 'leadership'. Yes, there have been some great leaders in the past and the present-I'm sure there are more to come in the future- but are there really followers and leaders, or are we just one big group of leaders?

In the movie, I felt as though the teacher was the 'leader' but how could he have possibly been the leader when he, himself , was a follower of some-sort; the bad example. How are you going to sit there and tell your classroom full of students to be good people, to not do certain things that are tagged as bad by the government, when you are sitting at home doing those very "bad things" yourself?

I like to look at community as this big cake, and all of these "great ideas", all of this "leadership" as the icing. In the cake you have your community, hidden under all of the deception, negativity, and greed; these problems aren't just there, they are deeply rooted in the community. After the cake comes the icing; sugary happiness filled with positive ideas, and so-called 'leadership' covering up all of the problems as to make them seem as though they have never existed.

Talk is cheap, and I find that no matter how many inspirational movies you may watch, and as many books you read, they are all just the icing on top of a problem filled cake that is growing bigger and bigger as each day passes us by. It is nice to imagine the glass as being half-full. The sad reality is that it is really half-empty.

Personal Relationships in the Classroom

Our personal lives are items of great interest to our students. They want to find out things about you and they are immediately entranced by anything you have to tell them about yourself. Students sometimes view their teachers and professors as only that. They don't stop to think about the personal life, hobbies, or family of their teachers. When these things are brought up in conversation, the student becomes surprised to hear that Mr. Smith has his pilots license or that Mrs. Scott runs marathons on the weekends. Teachers are put into this box that only deals with educational experiences and is in no way related to after school. As teachers we are not supposed to bring much of our personal lives into the classroom. We have to present an unbiased stance on politics and religion, and even though we might feel strongly about such subjects it is regarded as inappropriate to talk about such things with our students.

The relationship between a student and teacher is one that has certain boundaries. There are unspoken lines that cannot be crossed. As a teacher it is our job to educate our students. Some people go as far to say that we are not to be their friends, we are only there to educate. I have a hard time agreeing with this statement. I am a friendly person, and I like to make connections with people. I understand perfectly the boundaries that a student/teacher relationship has, but I also feel that in order to be a good teacher we have to bring ourselves down from this pedestal of the higher being. The idea that "I have more knowledge than you, and I am only here to make sure you learn it" doesn't sit well with me. I was once and in fact still am in the position of student. However, looking at it in a hindsight view, I certainly didn't want to learn from anyone who had an attitude or thought they were better than me. To me its all in the approach, and all in the connections a teacher makes with a student.

I have mixed feelings about this relationship idea. In the movie "Half Nelson", I was uncomfortable with the relationship the teacher had with his student. To my way of thinking it completely crossed those boundaries and even influenced that student in ways she could never see. The teacher was heavily involved with drug use, but at the same time was telling the student to stay away from drugs. In a sense he was trying to save her from falling into what he had fallen into. However, what good is the teachers advice if he can't even follow it himself. What impact will he make on the student by telling her that, if she witnesses that he can't even attempt to clean up his own life.

I also feel that if teachers don't make personal connections with students, real learning will not fully take place. If the student is uncomfortable in a classroom or feels vulnerable they will not open themselves up to new experiences. It is when they feel a bond of trust or a connection to a teacher that they open up the parts of them that they close off to others. Meaningful learning can occur in this way and therefore I feel that personal connections are needed. This is an issue I need to work out in my own mind, and it requires a lot of thought and really finding a place where I am comfortable. I disagree with the movie, for moral and ethical reasons but I agree that personal connections need to be made. As confusing as it sounds in writing, it makes sense in my own head. As long as I create meaningful musical experiences for my students and don't cross any boundaries I will be happy.