When I start writing this MVP, I think the most interesting point is the curriculum integration. There are many benefits that curriculum integration can provide for students: engage in learning ideas that are meaningful to their lives; make significant connections between ideas they study and their lives; learn concepts and principles at a developmentally appropriate level; participate in democratic decision making that affects the daily classroom, etc. It also mentioned that students themselves can engage in the decision of making curriculum integration. “Student-designed is true CI as defined by ultimate curricular decision making by students ”(P195 Middle-Grade Research Journal Vol.6, No. 4, 2011). Then I have questions. What is the standard to exam students and courses when adding more different levels of people to decide the new curriculum? All Students have different and similar backgrounds. So how do we decide what types of students can join into designing curriculum?

The article also mentioned one interesting point is that “many classrooms have become less progressive in their curricular design than in previous decades”, which can refer to the traditional curricular designed classroom. I experienced the very traditional curricular designed classroom when I was studying in China. I think the traditional curricular designed has the explicit learning and teaching goals, and the benefits are more obvious reflected on the exam scores, which is the most direct way to see how is the students level and what percent of the knowledge he has mastered from class. And the traditional curricular designed classroom can definitely meet the high schools need because high school students have more exams for entering into higher education level.

“The reasons for providing student-directed learning through CI are many and proved opportunities for students to…be exposed to social equity issues that are on young adolescents’ minds…” (Brown, 2011, pg. 195)

Education does not exist in a bubble outside of what is happening socially, politically and culturally. Standardized content is limited in that it does not move, change or react to what learners observe constantly in their daily life. Content Integration seems so vital to me, not only to keep learners engaged, but to address challenging, disturbing or puzzling things that happen in the world. To not address things like #metoo, the 2016 election, climate change, Parkland or Colin Kaepernick kneeling is not only a hindrance to young developing minds but an insult to their intelligence. Curriculum and content must exist as fluid, and educators must be creative and adaptable.

For example, last year I was teaching dance to high school students and they literally could not concentrate right after the Parkland shooting or #metoo, because they wanted to talk about it, to process and to analyze it. Whatever I was trying to get across that day did not matter in the slightest because they knew and could feel in the world around them that bigger things were happening, things that actually affect them on a daily basis.

Content Integration can begin earlier than middle school too, however maybe in a different way. I do not teach elementary age students, but I nanny for two as my day job. Recently, I overheard the 4th grader and her friends talking about Donald Trump and immigration, they were mostly mimicking statements I’m sure they overheard their parents saying, but what was most clear was that they knew something about it was important.

In these situations the most obvious question being asked is why? Why are people devastated by the election? Why do school shootings keep happening? Why do we keep people out of our country? While, we may not have the answers to why, and may not ever, we can engage our students in deep thinking about the systems at work that allow for certain events to happen or to not happen. We must integrate content or we are seriously limiting our students.

Because of the diversity present in the middle or secondary classroom, teachers must address the individual characteristics and needs of students in order to enhance the chances of their learning success” (Smith, Gardin, & Murdick, 2012, p.166)

This chapter addressed so much relevant information, but I think this quote does a good job of grasping the main take-away. Our classrooms are a melting pot of unique individuals who come from a multitude of cultures, socioeconomic backgrounds, have various likes and dislikes, interests, each have their own characteristics, are at different stages of development, and of course, learn in different ways. Continue reading Teaching to Diversity →

Friday was a difficult day for me. On my way to my student teaching placement I had finished reading this article. Towards the end of 7th period (out of 8), I was setting up my side of the classroom for my stand-alone ENL group that I was about to pick up. As I wrote the aim on the easel, the middle schoolers on our floor were transitioning to their last period of the day and were quite loud, “rowdy”, and excited. They were 45 minutes away from the weekend. But one of the teachers in my department went on a bitter rant:

“They’re criminals. All of them. I swear I’m going call 311 or something and report this. This is ridiculous. I don’t even know why we waste our time on them”

I stared at her in disbelief as a million and one things raced through my head and her words rang in my ears. My eyes swelled up and it was as if my voice had been taken away from me, after what seemed like an eternity in this stare, all I could say was “are you serious?”.

Each one of those students is either 14 or younger. They are children. They’re supposed to be excited about the weekend. Unfortunately, this teacher is convinced that these “lower track” students need to be more docile and obedient or face the consequences.

What hope is there for a the students of an openly discriminatory teacher who has already labeled some of her students as lost causes, others as criminals, and others as a waste of time?

Tracking has made sure that these students have a less enriched curriculum. Tracking has made sure that their teachers focus on order, obedience, and silence rather than content and creativity. Maybe I’ve only seen the bad side of tracking but I’ve seen it do more harm than good. My overall question becomes: Why are we still tracking? Why won’t we stop?