I oppose the emphasis on essential knowledge in the practice of teaching. Although I believe that all students need a core level of understanding in many key areas of instruction to function as an adult in our society, it is the method of rote learning that I am opposed to.
As I have evolved from a undergrad student to a secondary education teacher-in-training, I have experienced an Essentialism philosophic approach to teaching as well as a Progressivism method. Therefore, I can state that I prefer the pragmatic approach of the Progressivism philosophy. During my high school and undergraduate education tenure, I was taught by instructors using primarily the Idealism and Realism philosophy, with a few exceptions. My classroom experience consisted of lectures, assessments using quizzes and tests, and laboratory experiments thrown into the mix. My current education experience, as well as the thought processes I have developed due to the curriculum I am currently engaged in, supports a more Progressivism approach to teaching. In addition, as I was studying for the Praxis II test covering my content area of Biology, I came to the realization that the "big picture" made a lot more sense to me than when I was originally taught the same material in college. Of course I was not able to receive my instruction in a progressive manner seeing as I was being self taught. I think my life experience and knowledge helped me to grasp the content in a more meaningful manner. I was able to comprehend more readily how life itself is intertwined in so many unique ways. I found it easier to learn the concepts in terms of a "grand scheme of events"" versus merely learning and memorizing facts.
I have come to the conclusion that although it involves more work on my part and it will take a great deal of time for my teaching method to evolve, I will adopt a Progressivism philosophy of teaching when I am given the opportunity.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment