There's all kinds of different magic that takes places in classrooms. Some is on a personal level when you make a good connection with a kid. You get them, and they know it and they feel good and safe when they are in your class. Sometimes magic happens when students that struggle suddenly grasp the concept. They feel smart and it radiates into their smile, posture, and confidence in your class. I enjoy both those types of magic immensely. There is another type of magic that I want to write about today, though. It starts in program, curriculum, or unit design, and continues through the teaching of each lesson. It is the type of magic that brings significant meaning to what I (and many other teachers do) in the classroom. It centers around making what students learn matter to them.
When I was in middle and high school, I didn't really find a lot of fulfillment in my history classes. I learned the stories, but had difficulty connecting many of them to my world. We learned things for the sake of learning them. Finding the meaning and the connection to our everyday lives wasn't something built into the unit and lessons. It was something that happened on the side. As a history teacher, I ask myself, "Why is what I teach important for these kids to learn?" "What am I preparing them for?" I'm preparing them for their adulthood where they will navigate political worlds, where they will watch the news and try to interpret international affairs, and where they will have conversations with people from all over world and will need to have some sort of understanding of basic aspects of human systems and life. Conveniently, all the themes of human existence are repeated throughout history. We can safely predict that they will continue into the future. Let's use history to help our students understand the world around them - in the present, and future. What brings me great joy is designing lessons that connect these timeless human themes from across the eras, thereby making what we learn matter. I almost never get the question from students, "Why do we have to learn this?" If I do, I can tell them. I can tell them in a way that communicates that it is critical that they learn it because they are going to need it when they go out into the world either that very day, or in the future. What they learn will help them understand the world they live in a little more. So why this long discourse on educational theory? I've suddenly realized something today. I realized that that connection is missing in a lot (though not all) of the lessons that I teach here. It isn't built into the program. It isn't on the assessments. It isn't in the final exam at the end of the year. I realized it today when I found myself wanting to take my class on a journey of understanding cadaver donation as a present day solution to increasing medical understanding of the human body - something that had its origins with body snatching in early Renaissance times, the topic I was supposed to be focusing on. (Well actually I was just supposed to focus on the Renaissance, but I focussed more specifically on dissection in the Renaissance!) I've looked back at the term that I've been here and realized that there are so many topics that lend themselves well to connection to the present, but the program had me teach them in historic isolation. For example: I was supposed to teach about Middle Ages castles and castle defense. Some teachers had students make their own castles, others had them analyze castles for defense weaknesses and strengths. They are using good analyzing skills, but what does it have to do with today? I would loved to have taken a parallel approach and analyzed how military defense has changed between Middle Ages and today. How have we changed our defense systems because of the types of war being waged? That matters. That is information the kids can use when they turn on the news. That's just an example. Now I will mention that I've been told I can approach all of the program topics from any direction that I want, but I just don't have the time to do it right as the program is full and there aren't any resources. Besides, modern defense isn't part of the program. They won't be assessed on it. This kind of thing has to be built in to the approach of the unit. On Wednesday, my TAL staff had a curriculum building meeting after school. It was quite impressive, as far as how much work got done in such a small amount of time. Our goal was to incorporate geography standards into the Year 7 Humanities program for Term 2. Having been a part of our curriculum committee back home, I was really interested to see how it all unfolded. We all sat around the center table in the faculty room. One person had the geography standards, another typed the new info into the program , and another person looked at the history and english components to see how we could marry geography with them. Everyone else offered ideas, suggested changes etc. It was very efficient in that we got a lot done in a small amount of time. What I noticed, though, is that the question of how and why did what we were having kids learn matter to them today. Surprisingly, the one class that I have felt the most fulfilled on this topic is my Year 10 Geography class. We spent the first 8 weeks learning about coasts and how erosion and deposition forms our land. That is totally relevant today! This week and next week I'm teaching about urban growth and development. What a cool topic! I'm learning so much and am having so much fun helping students to understand how cities like Sydney developed and how Gosford is a part of the whole picture. Next week we'll be talking specifically about urban decline here in Gosford. How relevant! This matters to kids. This concept of connecting the past to the present isn't totally foreign here, though. When we first got here, I received an email from one of my Head teachers about a new approach she wanted to take with the program where we look at movement of people today as an avenue of helping us understand movement of people in the 1600-1800s. I wrote back and told her that I thought it was a great idea and that I was all for it. Later, I found out that the approach had been scratched as there wasn't enough buy in from the rest of the faculty. I was genuinely bummed. That would have been so fun to teach and would have brought a little more meaning to the topic for the students. In reality, though, it takes a lot of work to develop this kind of approach in lessons - a lot of work. If given the time and freedom to steer from the program and approach it this way, would I? Would it be worth it? I'm here for a year, and I'm so stretched between trying to be a good teacher, learning new classroom management techniques, trying to help my own two children adjust (Olin still struggles a little at school), and experiencing random moments of non-school Australia that I just am not sure I'd have enough left to get that creative. Besides..... because it would be a new approach, I'm not sure how my students would respond. There are lots of types of magic. I think maybe I'll just try to aim for them all around as best I can and see what I get.
2 Comments
Candy Webber
3/31/2017 09:58:05
The last 2 posts were just wonderful, Myla Hope you have saved them to the 'cloud' or what ever. You need to write a book of this past year, 'Down Under'
Reply
Myla Liljemark
3/31/2017 13:13:18
Thanks Candy! I appreciate your support. I'm learning so much here!
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorThe Liljemark's enjoy exploring the world. This blog chronicles our adventures. Archives
December 2017
Categories |