Judith Baker's chapter in the book deals with how she incorporated code-switching into her curriculum. By respecting the students' home language she motivated them to not only want to learn standard english, but also study different dialects, including their own. Her methods were astounding to me. I can actually see this method as delivering the results Baker is reporting she had. I think it also, more than anything, should be incorporated into more curriculums due to the amount of respect it instills in students. It makes students more inclined to avoid prejudices and stereotypes because it looked at reasons behind differences in speech. It forced them to look for causes instead of labeling effects. I do not question the methods behind the strategy, the one thing I have to ask is how to gain permission to use this way of teaching?
Baker's methods, while productive, were also extremely different than the standard way english is taught. I wonder whether or not a school district like east baton rouge parish would even allow me to use this in a classroom. Baker was teaching at a vocational school, so one aspect of her job is to teach students how to speak in a professional setting. This focus on job training and contextual situations provided an easy entry for a method like the one Baker designed. On the other hand, the standard public school does not focus on such things and may look down upon this action. Although I feel it would prove just as well in a standard public school, would public school administration feel the same? I also wonder how parents took/will take the introduction of such a strategy.
I think this experimental method is a great way to get students excited about learning, but I am also afraid it will not be accepted in public school in a district like east baton rouge parish. Should we just abandon hope and allow ourselves to let this wonderful opportunity slip by? Or is there a way we can incorporate this into our classroom curriculum?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Ch. 7 Response
ReplyDeleteI think the Gloria J. Ladson-Billings indirectly addresses the inquiries you have posed in her work, “I ain’t writtin’ nuthin’: Permissions to Fail and Demands to Succeed in Urban Classrooms.” The method implemented by Judith Baker seems admittedly time-consuming and thus would be difficult to incorporate in the majority of curriculums. However, what I took from Ladson-Billing’s work is that there are many ways to achieve “academic achievement, cultural competence, and socio-political consciousness.” Ladson- Billing’s describes the story of Carter Forshay and the exercise he implemented in his classroom in response to his unmotivated students. The exercise she describes could easily be done in a week’s time and yields results similar to those achieved through Baker’s method. Ladson-Billing’s asserts that to be a successful teacher one must be thoughtful and reflective. Forshay decided to use a medium that the student’s enjoyed, music, to encourage them to write. By identifying the interests of his students he motivated them and they willingly composed stories. Forshay’s level of commitment to his student’s learning prompted him to think unconventionally about how to teach students something they were previously unwilling to learn. He gave reading and writing a purpose and demanded success. I think it is imperative that reader’s draw from Forshay’s story that we cannot allow for our students to be complacent by permitting mediocrity. The lack of an effort on part of the teacher precipitates into lack of effort in the student. Alternatively, if teachers are willing to exert thoughtful effort by constructing culturally relevant assignments (not resorting to worksheets) then students will also be willing to challenge themselves, because they gain a sense of validation by producing work that is reflective of them.
Excellent exchange, you two. Super thoughtful.
ReplyDelete