My Philosophy

Here is my speech and powerpoint. No audio yet...waiting for my voice to come back since I have been sick. The audio will come in a few days :)


My philosophic beliefs regarding education are in line with the beliefs set forth by Swiss psychologist Jean Piaget and developmental-behavioral pediatrician Mel Levine. In his writing Levine (2002) suggests that “The growth of our society and the progress of the world are dependent on our commitment to fostering in our children, and among ourselves, the coexistence and mutual respect of many different kinds of minds” (p.13). Thus, it is essential that teachers and parents become aware and make appropriate accommodations knowing that all minds are vastly different and interact with the world in unique ways. Children are born innately motivated to interact and explore the world in order to make meaning. As infants, curiosity manifests itself in the form of kinesthetic movement such as throwing a rattle down the stairs to test the limits of the environment and of self. What sound will it make? What will happen? Will it happen again if all elements remain the same? These are the essential questions being answered by the infant in this stage of development. With age, the mode of interacting with the environment becomes increasingly more sophisticated and varied. Because the mind varies so greatly, deficits and strengths may develop as children grow. Teachers must be cognizant that “All students can be helped once we identify the strengths of their minds as well as the potholes that get in the way of their success or mastery” (Levine, 2002, p. 15). Teachers must truly believe that all areas of challenge can be managed and overcome with the right accommodation and attunement to the child’s needs. The task of the educator is to strengthen areas of deficit without taking away the uniqueness of that child’s mind.
Piaget (2005) suggests that children enter the world as little scientists whom without instruction test their surroundings and engage in sense making. However, this natural process is abruptly stopped when children enter school. For the first time, an external force is imposing a set of goals for the child and his experiments with the world. However, when teachers allow students to become co-creators of their curriculum and feel active in the process of their learning student motivation soars.
It is common knowledge that traditional education makes little effort to include all learners by using multiple modalities of instruction. Instead it prescribes one static form of learning modality to all, there is an over-reliance on the use of oral instruction or written word. Given that traditional education values linguistic learners, “…kids who are good with language are more likely to succeed throughout school. On the other hand, those poor souls with even the mildest (often unapparent) language inefficiencies are apt to suffer agonizing pain trying to make it in our schools” (Levine, 2002, p.32). Verbal acuity is a rare commodity in the special education classroom. My school, The Parkside School specializes in working with children with speech and language disorders. Due to late diagnosis of their language deficits, all of my students at one point in their academic career were placed within a typical education classroom. In these classrooms where linguistic language was most readily used, my students failed to acquire the basic principles and concepts required at their stage of cognitive development. It was assumed that these children were inept because they failed to mold to the traditional instructional style set forth by traditional educators. Their parents were told “Your son/daughter will never learn to read, write, or attain higher order thinking skills”. These students came to our school with battered self-esteem, acutely aware that something about their thinking was dysfunctional. As Levine suggests “Some price, modest, or substantial, must be paid any time a mind is forced or attempts to learn or perform something in a way for which it is not wired” (Levine, 2002, p. 23). In order for children not to experience the undue stress of constant failure, teachers must be cognizant to make close and continuous observation to identify deficits earlier and provide the support needed at critical times in development.
Having come to The Parkside School, all of these so called “inept” children have been able to succeed and learn through the use of their preferred modalities of instruction. Thus, teachers must broaden their audience to include all students by presenting their lessons in a wide variety of ways such as the use of movement, music, art, role playing, and the like. Applying these principles only to the special education classroom is limiting. Instead, teachers can apply the principles of universal design and multiple intelligences so that accommodations are made for all learners (special or typical) who need them but do not distract or take away from those who do not.
It must be explicitly stated that no modality of learning (kinesthetic, music, linguistic) should be preferred or valued over another. Just as teaching through auditory and written language is limiting, so is teaching through the use of visuals as a sole means of conveying information. A holistic education is created when multiple modes of instruction are used simultaneously. Imagine for a moment that you are a young child learning how to tie your shoe laces. It would be difficult at best to learn this skill through oral directives without being able to try out each step oneself. Conversely it would also be difficult to understand the steps had you never seen them completed by another person. In this same vein, limiting instruction through the use of one modality will result in the concept/principle remaining continually in abstraction. As Dewey so aptly suggests, “All principles by themselves are abstract. They become concrete only in the consequences which result from their application” (Dewey, 1938, p.21). In order to increase comprehension it is the task of the teacher to facilitate these quality learning experiences that build upon one another. That is to say, that no experience is detached from another as this would lead to compartmentalized thinking towards the application of concepts. It is of equal importance to note that the quality of an experience should not be determined by the level of enjoyment the child shows. We know too well that children will happily sit and watch a video despite it having very little educational value in terms of increasing purposeful thinking. This example, clearly illustrates the complex process through which information is internalized and applied.
A staple of any classroom should be the process of reflection. However, reflection cannot supersede experience. Children will have a hard time reflecting on such abstract concepts as injustice without having experienced injustice through a socially constructed exercise created by the teacher. As Dewey suggests, “There should be brief intervals of time for quiet reflection provided for even the young. But they are periods of genuine reflection only when they follow after times of more overt action and are used to organize what has been gained in periods of activity in which the hands and other parts of the body beside the brain are used” (Dewey, 1938, p. 63).
Every lesson has multiple teaching points that are intrinsic to learning; every lesson has the capacity to increase the child’s self-worth, feelings of ability, and their understanding of themselves as a learner. Making sure that lesson plans are inclusive of all students is essential to the mastery of the material being taught.






Philosophical Quotes:

“All students can be helped once we identify the strengths of their minds as well as the potholes that get in the way of their success or mastery” (Levine, 2002, p. 15).
“The growth of our society and the progress of the world are dependent on our commitment to fostering in our children, and among ourselves, the coexistence and mutual respect of many different kinds of minds” (p.13).

“Some price, modest, or substantial, must be paid any time a mind is forced or attempts to learn or perform something in a way for which it is not wired” (Levine, 2002, p. 23).
“…kids who are good with language are more likely to succeed throughout school. On the other hand, those poor souls with even the mildest (often unapparent) language inefficiencies are apt to suffer agonizing pain trying to make it in our schools” (Levine, 2002, p.32).
“All principles by themselves are abstract. They become concrete only in the consequences which result from their application” (Dewey, 1938, p.21).
“There should be brief intervals of time for quiet reflection provided for even the young. But they are periods of genuine reflection only when they follow after times of more overt action and are used to organize what has been gained in periods of activity in which the hands and other parts of the body beside the brain are used” (Dewey, 1938, p. 63).
“..the importance of the participation of the learner in the formation of the purses which direct his activities in the learning process… to secure the active co-operation of the pupil in construction of the purposes involved in his studying (Dewey, 1938, p. 67).




My Own Beliefs:

Respect for all minds uniqueness is essential
All areas of challenge can be managed and overcome with the right accommodation and attunement to a child’s specific needs.
Understanding a child’s strengths and weaknesses can help inform the way to best reach the child.
Teachers must create a balance between external imposition of their goals and curriculum and student’s freedom interests. Teachers provide experiences so that students feel it is a collaborative experience as opposed to one that was predetermined with little regard for their interests.
Reflection is essential but should not supersede experience
Experience must be built into the curriculum so that abstract concepts can be made concrete through application
Multiple modes of instruction (Gardner/multiple intelligences) should always be used to increase student understanding.




References:

Cole, M., Cole, S.R., Lightfoot, C. (2005). The development of children (5th ed). New York: Worth Publishers.

Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. London, UK: Collier Books.

Gardner, H., James, C & Weigel, M,(2009). Learning: Peering backward and looking forward in the digital era. [Electronic Version]. International Journal of Learning and Media, 1, (1). Retrieved June 5, 2009.
Levine, M. (2002). A mind at a time. New York, London, Toronto.

Paul, R. W & Elder, L (2002) Critical thinking: Tools for taking charge of your professional & personal life. Upper Saddle River, NJ. Pearson Education.