To Teach- William Ayers Chapter 7 'The Mystery of Teaching'

"GREATNESS IN TEACHING, TOO, REQUIRES A SERIOUS ENCOUNTER WITH AUTOBIOGRAPHY. WHO ARE YOU? HOW DID YOU COME TO TAKE ON YOUR OWN VIEWS AND OUTLOOKS? WHAT WAS IT LIKE FOR YOU TO BE 6? WHERE ARE YOU HEADING? OF ALL THE KNOWLEDGE TEACHERS NEED TO DRAW ON, SELF-KNOWLEDGE IS MOST IMPORTANT". (Ayers, pg.97)  

These five lines above, from page 97 of William Ayers' book, struck me the most, as I mentioned in our class discussion, when analyzing chapter 7. The author here  states something extremely important, that I myself have come to understand about myself, being a part time teacher. Self-reflection, a look into my own past, my own experiences as a student in the educational world, has helped me understand my eight and nine year old students to a great extent. I can relate to them. And being able to relate to your students I believe is not only the hardest task of all, but also the most important one. Familiarization and acceptance of a teacher from his students can effectively only happen, if that teacher is aware of his own past, his own personality/character and what he wishes to achieve in his classroom. Personal goals coincide with the students' goals, and are so deeply connected and relative to each other, that, if both are not accomplished simultaneously, the teacher can fail in passing on the knowledge he wishes to pass and will completely lose that connection he wants to have with his students. For example, I teach my elementary students Greek every weekend.  It is a foreign language to them, as they are all raised in the US and attend American schools. I have been an elementary student myself in the past, and every day I go to class to teach, or every time I make a remark or a comment, or assign homework or do an art project with them, I try to relate to my students as best as I can, by recalling my own personal experience of that age. And it is extremely helpful. I feel as if they know that, and it makes them happy and pleased. Only by conducting my own personal autobiography and fully understanding  my own aims and goals (what I wish to achieve not only in the classroom, but in my everyday life, as an individual) am I able to teach. I not only believe, but I know, from my multiple teachers in the past, but also from myself, that a teacher who lacks self knowledge, is not a teacher. If I don't know who I am as a person, how can I expect to guide my students in the right path, essentially helping them understand who they are and who they will become? 

The "GOOD" School- Fact or Fiction?

What is a good school for me may not be a good school for any of my fellow classmates or friends. The characteristics that define a "good" school for me are different than those that define the "good" schools of others. So can any educational institution  be truly defined as being "good" or "bad"? I personally believe that every school has both positive and negative characteristics that define it, and an attempt to create a school based on the "Utopian model"  is not only impossible but completely unnecessary as well. In order to further support my opinion I would like to present certain characteristics from my high school and my university and by comparing and contrasting them show how: a) there is no one "good" school and there can never be b) schools are both different and the same in many different ways and c) the implementation of my ideas for what would be my "good" or "perfect" school is impossible. Some of my ideas may sound interesting and could even be possibly implemented, however some others I am certain would face opposition as they serve my personal wants and desires that are probably different than those of others. I feel that both my high school back in Greece and the university that I attend here in the United States are "good" ones (whatever that is supposed to mean!). My high school back home was private, had excellent facilities, I had excellent teachers, many of which,  shaped the person that I am and guided me towards the educational tract that I am following today. It was also backed up by a very strong and successful community that wanted to make sure that students and school remained in high standards. However, the curriculum was much too difficult, we covered a variety of classes throughout my years there, most of which were difficult to follow and do well in, there were teachers who I felt weren't teaching me appropriately and as effectively I would have liked and the athletics department was rather unorganized, something that personally upset me. The same goes with my university. I have excellent, engaging teachers, I am really enjoying the curriculum so far and all the classes I am taking are really fascinating and I believe I am doing well in them. People have embraced me as a person and the foreign culture I brought with me, I have many friends and I enjoy being here thoroughly. The facilities here at John Carroll University are exquisite as well and I like the fact that the religion aims and ideological background of this institution is a part of everyday life here in campus. But, just as my high school, John Carroll, has some things that I don't like or necessarily agree with. I am sure the same can be said about any single school on this planet. But, the things that I perceive as being negative, that I may personally think affect the lives of students here in a bad way and should be changed, someone else may not agree on. The ideas I have for example that I believe could turn John Carroll University into a "good" institution and separate it from the "bad" ones, could be the exact opposite for some other student studying here. Therefore I strongly disagree with labeling a school or institution as being "good" or "bad". They are both good and bad, effective and ineffective, serve certain of my needs and others they don't. The important question that should be asked is whether I feel contempt here as an individual student. If I am satisfied with the positives, and these positives outrun the negatives, then I can say that I am happy, satisfied as an individual, and the institution I belong to can assist me in achieving my future goals. So this notion of a "good" school for me is a fallacy and a misinterpretation. The place I go to be educated, to socialize and to become a mature adult ready to tackle the modern society should not be good or bad and cannot be good or bad, it is impossible as it incorporates a little bit of both. So the "GOOD" school that some people may believe to exist is, according to my argument above, an educational and societal inaccuracy. 

To Teach- William Ayers Chapter 4 'Building Bridges'

"THE BRIDGE FROM CHILDHOOD IS LONG AND COMPLEX, BUILT BLOCK BY BLOCK" 

This quote from Chapter 4 struck me because it cannot be true enough, and directly relates to every individual's life and his/her process of maturing and becoming an adult, a functional, independent and competent member of society. People say that children have brains like sponges, they absorb everything they see and hear from their surroundings and the people closest to them from infancy, and form their character accordingly. There is a process however through which this happens. An infant must get the appropriate examples from his parents in order to become a capable toddler, then be introduced to the stage of early childhood, adolescence, young adulthood etc. until he becomes an actual independent adult. The blocks that this quote talks about must be laid out accordingly in order for this to happen and ensure that the individual develops properly. It starts at home from the parents, who raise the child from day one, and provide it with the necessary "tools" in order for it to survive and grow and satisfy its everyday needs. So initially the close family environment plays a detrimental role in making sure this happens, there is no question about that. What baby can survive without immediate care, love and affection? However, the next step of familiarization with larger societal groups and establishment within a larger human environment would be schooling. From preschool  up until college, the schooling system and the individuals that make it up (teachers, students etc.), in combination with life at home provide each individual with the "building blocks" he needs in order to mature appropriately. If you think about it, teachers are like our second parents and our school has forever been like our second home. Almost half of our days from about age four are passed within the school walls. And there is a reason for that. Our teachers are there to help us use our "blocks" appropriately  so that when the time comes, the structure we've built with the blocks will a) not collapse and b) help us move forward in life. People sometimes tend to forget what an important role teachers have, and how careful they have to be to ensure that they help their students develop so that they can one day become successful members of the harsh society that they will have to enter. From the moment a preschool teacher tells a child not to pull on his friend's hair, to the moment a first grade teacher shows someone what it means to spell out a word and make a sentence by combining these words to the college professor who talks about finance, or biology or literature, every one of these lessons is there to serve the ultimate purpose. Of bridging the gap between childhood and adulthood. It is funny to think about it, but a teacher's job is very delicate. Instead of having one child or two children at home to give "building blocks" to, he must give the necessary "building blocks" to new children he must familiarize with every year. And that must be scary, because a teacher is who these children, who are trying to cross the long and complex bridge of life, always look up to and trust, for some things even more than their own parents. I know I have, and I am sure at some point in their lives everyone has to some greater or lesser extent. The teacher thus, must be careful, help the child build his bridge just like the parent does. They work together in a way. But, as I previously said (and as the quote says) the blocks have to be laid out very carefully and delicately, or else the bridge may collapse. 

Orange High School-AP Euro Class

At Orange High School I was placed in Mr. Chordas' 10th grade AP Euro Class (Advanced Placement European History Class). Being a history major myself, with area of concentration being European history I think they placed me in the best possible class which i found to be very interesting and I must admit I got carried away. The topic of the class discussion for the day (which lasted almost two hours) was trench warfare in the European battlegrounds of World War I. When I entered the classroom the discussion had already started. There were two groups of students sitting at opposing sides of the classroom facing each other. Half the students on the one side and half the students on the other side (on the east and west sides of the classroom). The teacher's desk was close to the southern wall of the classroom and then there was one more desk in the opposite direction (northern side of the classroom) where the group discussion leader for the day sat and basically "taught" his class. So basically everyone could see everyone. Everyone was facing each other. The classroom was decorated with different historic artwork from the students and other students who took history there. Everything from pictures of the US presidents and small descriptions of them, a timeline of World War II battles and main events, quotes from Mahatma Ghandhi, pictures of Ancient Greek and Chinese historic sites and the terracotta soldiers in the forbidden city in Beijing. A true history classroom! 

The classroom had about sixteen students in total who paid close attention to their fellow classmate attempting to ask them questions concerning their previous day homework readings and their in class conversation on World War I. One of the opening questions made from the student who was the "lecturer" for the day was: " How do you define glory?" and then " To some, being within the trench was described as a living hell. What is your own personal "hell"?" I could tell that the questions were specifically given by the teacher to the students to prepare at home for two purposes: a) so they can obviously get familiar with the kind of life soldiers and civilians in Europe were facing during the First World War and b) to get them to relate to this historic past through their own personal experiences of every day life. For example one student replied that she is frightened of cramped spaces, because she is claustrophobic. She also said that she is afraid of the sight of blood. The teacher immediately told her that the French, British and German troops fighting in battles like Ypres and the Somme had to live in tiny, narrow trenches for months, were dead bodies would rot next to them for days and days, were sanitation was horrific and soldiers would get sick from infections. He also told her that it was impossible for the to leave that place, because the moment they stuck their head out of the trench a bullet was most likely to take it off. I thought it was fascinating how the questions proposed by the teacher concerning trench warfare in World War I were introduced in such as a way so as to help the students relate them too their own personal life and experiences. 

So, the student at the one desk facing the others would ask questions and he would choose his classmates who raised their hand to respond. Having a friend and classmate of their own age asking the question, I believe was motivation for the students, who ALL responded at some time during the class, and did not feel intimated or worried of making a mistake. The teacher, on the opposing side of the room, was kind of the moderator of the conversation that took part, would state his opinion on occasion and also would show some pictures of the war and of the battlegrounds on the classroom screen while the conversation continued and changed topic or area of historic interest. The teacher in a way was a student, and would even occasionally ask his student who was the lecturer for the day answer one of his questions, and he raised his hand as well! He became a part of the class, and I thought that was excellent, and motivated his students very much, making them feel like his equals in class rather than his "subordinates". And I could tell the students were learning the material from their enthusiasm in wanting to answer the questions. 

There were a couple of negatives that I would like to point out from my observation. The first was that the class was way too long (almost two hours!), to the point that it made it tiring even for me, and I could tell after the first hour the enthusiasm started to deteriorate and the students started talking to each other and lost interest. It is hard talking about trenches in World War I for two hours. The teacher should have either given them a small break, shown them a video or some fun pictures from the war, or just changed the subject. The conversation although very interesting, was just a bit unnecessarily long. the other thing I noticed was despite his excellent technique of making the actual students run the class discussion and it was successful to a good extent, he himself was a little too distant and quiet, which is part of the reason I believe he followed this technique. He would sit at his desk, stood up once the whole time to fix his computer, asked a couple of questions or gave a couple of instructions and that was it. I personally believe in the enthusiasm of the teacher. I feel it is more motivating when the teacher talks more, and makes jokes, and is an actual part of the lesson. I feel that the teacher can and to some extent should come down to the level of the students and not be intimidating to them, but it should also be evident that HE is the instructor as well. 

In general though it was a very interesting and unique experience for me to visit class (especially a history class!) in an American high school, and I could definitely in the future see myself having a class like that of my own. The students were very respectful, interested, and made excellent historic observations, and I myself enjoyed seeing them fascinated by some of the things I myself have been fascinated with for a very long time.  

Banking Education-Paulo Freire

For our previous class on February 25th, we were instructed to read chapter 8 in the Educational Foundations boo, which primarily discussed and argued against a very new and unique educational subject called "Banking Education". Now from my understanding of the reading and our intense fifty minute talk in class, banking education is seen as a negative approach of teaching students, and is highly structured upon the idea that the student sits at his desk, keeps his eyes wide open for hours, looks at the authoritative figure who feeds him and feeds him information of his liking (which could be anything, but since he is the teacher it must be something important), and then expects the student to receive the information, accept it, memorize it, prove his success in doing so, stand up and leave. When I see or hear "Banking Education" all I can say is "Another Brick in the Wall"! That song by Pink Floyd and the awesome video clip that we saw in class, shows how education is in a sense a "laboratory", feeding the minds of children with anything and everything at the same time, regulating their lives and ignoring their own personal opinion,  basically turning them into little manufactured robots that learn to do whatever they are told, respect whoever they are told to respect, and say whatever they are told to say. Students are oppressed are oppressed and need to break free. They need to go beyond taking in information and memorizing it because authority tells them to do so. They need to explore and question in order to learn properly. Paul Freire, the author, fights against this "Banking Education" notion within the educational field by promoting a bit of his own experience within the text. His Brazilian background suggests how education should not be a form of oppression but rather a form of liberation for the masses. Just as any dictatorial regime is condemned for denying people their democratic freedoms and overthrow them (as happened in Brazil), in the same way students should be able to overthrow the "Banking Concept" which oppresses and dictates their life within education. 

Beachwood Middle School

Our class field/observation trip to Beachwood middle school, was very interesting, however left me with mixed feelings upon my return to campus. First of all, I must admit, that the staff at the school was very helpful and welcoming and the facilities incredible. I don't think that in my life I have ever seen a school so modern, and so highly technologically equipped with such a multitude of educational tools. That was incredible! However, it made me think of the inequality in the educational system here in the United States. How schools that are located in wealthy neighborhoods are able to enjoy such luxuries, whereas other schools located in East Cleveland and down in the inner city, need to beg for equipment every year because they can't afford it. Anyhow, I attended two different classes during our trip, and was paired up with two friends and classmates, Ally Klimko and Katie Cavassini. The first class we visited and had the opportunity to observe was a seventh grade social studies class (I myself am a history major so I was lucky to be able to observe a class). This class relied a lot upon the use of modern technology and optioacoustic media during the lesson. The teacher sat behind his desk in the far left corner of the class, while the students, backs facing to him, where constantly either on their laptops or staring directly at a huge screen on the front wall of the class. The lesson we saw was about life in the middle ages. The kids were learning about castles, and fortresses, knights, kings and queens, peasants, armor, how houses and towns were built in the 1200's etc. A very interesting topic that I loved to learn about in junior high school myself. They all had blogs, similar to what we have in our ED 100 class, and every day, for homework, had to answer a series of questions posted on the class web page by their teacher, in their own blog so the whole class could see what they answered. They also had to conduct their own research on the web, downloading pictures and music and incorporating them within their blogs. There was also something like a chat, where they could ask questions to their professor if they needed to, or if they struggled with their homework. The kids watched a lot of videos in class, and listened to medieval music in order to get deeper into the concept. Don't get me wrong in any way, the teacher in the class had done impressive work, using technology as a primary tool of teaching these twelve and thirteen year-olds history. It was amazing to see these kids so familiar with everything, simultaneously working on their laptops, typing, listening, answering questions, having their little passwords, and email addresses and usernames was unbelievable. At age twelve, they probably know how to use a computer better than I do and that was impressive. However, and this didn't strike me until after a couple of days, I personally think it was a little too intense. I myself, prefer the traditional way combined with a modern way of teaching my students. Standing up in front of them, never sitting down, reading to them from an actual book, not from some website while they can't see me. I feel it is necessary for the student to have a clear view of the teacher while he is receiving information. I use technology as well, when I teach my kids. I show them videos and play music for them so that they can get used to the Greek language. However I do it sporadically, because I feel that there should be a limit with everything including technology. I am not a fan of the fact, that in ten years as estimates prove, kids won't need books or notebooks anymore, everything will be done electronically. I believe that it is important, if not crucial, that the students interact with each other and the teacher, and not just stare at their laptops or at a big screen. We were there for roughly an hour, and more than 75% of class time was attributed to lecture via a computer screen. I feel that kids need both, and need to be balanced out and that a teacher should always be facing them. I also didn't feel like the teacher was very approachable and it was hard asking him questions and concerns about how the class is taught.

The next class we visited was a reading and writing class. The teacher who was a woman, was very welcoming and explained to us in detail how she teaches and structures her classroom. First of all, the kids (again seventh grade I believe), were all sitting in a big square of desks, and they could all see each other. I think that is very important. Then each student would be assigned a reading, or a character in the story, which he/she practiced at home, and then read to the rest of the class. While we  were there they were reading a story about a family celebrating Hanukkah and having guests over. The kids all respected the boy who was the narrator, and the rest of the students who were assigned to read for the day. They all had books in front of them, however there was also a big screen were the reading was also visible in case someone left their book at home. That was very smart, as young kids tend to leave their material at home very often. I am at college and still do many times as well! They all had notebooks open right by their laptops and were instructed to write down vocabulary words from the texts, and find their meaning. The teacher said she focused a lot on their writing skills, and had them writing a lot of essays and comprehension questions at home, due to the fact that exams, as she said are becoming more and more difficult and competitive. Compared to the other class the students were a little louder and talked to each other, but for me personally it is more pleasurable seeing them interact with each other, and laugh a little and giggle than be focused on their laptops the whole time. In general I have to admit, that this was a great experience for me and would again like to thank Beachwood Middle School for letting us visit them and observe, and also Dr. Shutkin for arranging the trip. I would definitely consider visiting the school again and possibly observing another one of their classes just for fun. 

LGBT

LGBT COMMUNITIES WITHIN THE EDUCATIONAL SYSTEM

During my high school years in Greece there was never an organized LGBT community that I encountered or knew about. It was a concept and organization that I encountered for the first time here in the United States when I came for college. Honestly, it is still something I am not completely familiar with. I would like to elaborate on my own personal experience in Greece. I had a couple of good friends who were openly homosexual and I can never really say that, within my own school, I ever noticed anyone discriminating against them or treating them in a disrespectful way. I was actually very proud of my school (staff and students) for the way they never excluded people based on ethnicity, religion or sexual preference. Racism was looked down upon from everybody, and there was always severe condemnation by the majority of students, if someone was in any way mistreated. I feel though, that had there been an actual LGBT community at my high school back home, it would've been even better for them, as I feel any group within a school environment, is capable of producing something positive. Whether that be informing the public on specific issues or topics, supporting other societal groups, volunteering or conducting  fundraising activities. Like I said previously, I have had gay friends that I spent a time with in high school and were genuinely some of the greatest individuals I have ever met. I would like to conclude this blog post of mine with something a good friend of mine once told me back home and I will never forget. He was not gay, however we were out one night and had a conversation about the way homosexuals are mistreated and discriminated against all over the world, in some cases even humiliated in the most grotesque ways possible. He literally said:  "Whatever one wants to do in their own bed and own home is absolutely none of my business, and whether straight or gay I really wouldn't like to know either! As long as they are nice to me and treat me well and with respect, I will do the same". I couldn't agree more with him, and what he said that day is something I have come to live by.