So,
My final blog post for 402. I could possibly cry.
My favorite quote from either of the three readings came from Tompkins in Chapter 10 when it is said that: "There's no one best way to teach reading and writing." (pg. 324) While it seems pithy to the point of overkill, I really like that! After spending last semester in 401 in which the science TA forced me to not only stymie my own teaching style but only to use materials, choices and stylings that only she would use, I started to get a bit disheartened about the program in general. I thought that the purpose of the TE department was to get us moving in our own direction, to allow us to flourish our own ideas (with some mediation of course) and to find our own strengths and weaknesses as a teacher.
What I like about the quote from Tompkins this week is that it is hopeful in its ambiguity. There really IS no right way to be teaching almost any content area, let alone reading and writing. One way might work perfectly well for me but might be stifling and/or ambiguous at best for someone else (and vice versa). And, since reading and writing is so pervasive in almost every single aspect about school (although I'm not sure how much it has to do with lunch or gym) as a teacher we have to become REALLY comfortable with how we feel we know how to teach it.
I feel like 401 (at least the science portion) was kind of a waste for me. I loved the social studies section of the class. But in science, I feel like I had something taken away from me. I feel like - yes it was important to learn the steps we learned to write the outrageously myopic lesson plan (epic at 43 pages, seriously what was my TA thinking?) - but I can't help but escape the feeling that it was all done at the whim of what my TA wanted to see and not necessarily what would have been beneficial to myself, my CT or our students.
"There's no one best way to teach reading and writing." I couldn't agree more.
Nathan,
ReplyDeleteI never thought about 401 like that but now that you mention it, you're so right. We were forced to teach in a specific way, following specific procedures. But do you think that was more to expose us to a KIND of teaching? She wasn't necessarily saying, "this is the right way!!" was she? This is a legitimate question. I can't remember. If this was the case, I wonder why we only learned one way of teaching science. At least in social studies we did the microteaching lessons were we learned about many different ways to teach social studies. Why didn't we do the same in science?
Thanks for your thoughts
Melody