In a message dated 6/20/2001 9:32:59 AM Pacific Daylight Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:

<< Why can't students just sit at their desks and do several hours of
 intellectual work?

 "Contextual teachers" seem to jump through hoops to

Robert,

I don't really know how to respond to this.  It's a much deeper chasm than
the linguists and English teacher chasm that I joke about.

How do you define "intellectual"?  Why should they sit at their desk to be
"intellectual"?  Does sitting make it "intellectual"?  Does moving about make
it not?

Students learn from things that have relevance to them.  I can no more
remember how to differentiate an equation or balance chemical equations from
memory than I can become invisible.  In the context of my life, these things
don't matter.  The idea is that kids will only really learn something if they
have a structure to hang it on and a reason to remember it.

Here's an example: several years ago I had a math class of six or so kids
whom the regular teacher had kicked out, telling me they were behavior
problems and unteachable.  I asked the kids what had been going on in the
class, and they had been being taught by the "read section 3.2 and do the
even problems at the end of the section."  They couldn't see the point and
got bored and restless.

I had to teach them statistics.  We looked at the chapter in the book and it
was all about ratios and percentages.  As we discussed it, I had an idea.  We
developed it together, and the kids set out to design a poll to find out who
the "average" middle school kid was at our school.  They worked in groups to
design a questionnaire, assigned themselves to classrooms to ensure that all
kids would be questioned, and were off.

They learned so much more than ratios and percents.  They learned that what
you ask can skew the results ("What kind of house do you live in?" had to be
adjusted for kids with divorced parents, for instance), and that phraseology
matters ("You like NSYNC better than Backstreet Boys, right?" elicited a
different answer than "Which of the following two bands do you like better?")

When it was over, they took the results and displayed them on a PowerPoint
presentation.  They had to analyze the data and decide which of 12 different
graphs to use and justify their choice.  They had to make charts of the
average student in a variety of categories and make that data meaningful and
accessible, calculating percents and ratios all along the way.  They did it.
And well.  And they were NEVER bored or frustrated with the problems at the
back of the book.  They learned more than any of the kids who sat at their
desks, and I think more went on intellectually than at those desks where the
kids put away the books and forgot the lessons.  My kids were still arguing
over the design of the graphs weeks later.

Another example:  I subbed for several days in a sixth grade math class.  The
lesson was on volume of a cylinder.  The previous lesson was on volume of a
prism and the following one was on volume of another figure (forget just
what).  I ask the kids to put away the books and talk about volume for a
minute.  I asked how they determined volume. They could tell me chapter and
verse about the equations that they had had to memorize, but not one could
generalize a theory about how one would go about determining volume.  I gave
them cylinders, graduated beakers, and rulers and told them they could use
the equipment and water, but they'd have to figure out the formula for
themselves.  They were furious.  They wanted me to tell them the formula and
let them sit quietly at the desks and do the homework.  It took them all
period, but they finally figured it out (area of the footprint times height
if the figure is regular).  They had to reason out a hypothesis and test it,
sometimes five or six different times.  One girl told me she would never look
at volume the same.  "Why do they break it down into all those little
lessons?" she asked.  I still don't know what to say to her.

That's the kind of language arts class I run, too.  I don't entertain at all.
In fact I'd guess if you did a study, I do considerably LESS talking than
most teachers.  I want the kids to wrestle with the text and the writing.
It's not about me; it's about the kids making learning happen.  Lots of times
that means working in groups to support each other.  Many times it involves
art or drama or music in addition to literature or writing.  I happen to
think that all of it is intellectual.

Messy, yes.  Loud, sometimes.  But always intellectual.

I'll look forward to your reply,
Gretchen in San Jose
[log in to unmask]

To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
     http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"

Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/