|
QUICK CLICKS: |
Table of Contents |
|
Speaking OutThe Essential PartnershipThe magnitude of the current assaults upon public education requires all teachers across the spectrum of education to join together to take full responsibility for the quality of our profession. The goal of this effort: to ensure that ownership of the quality of learning at all levels of education remains in the hands of teachers. Securing the unity this effort demands requires the entire education community to forge new working relationships that can increase the power of the whole. Power brokers of every persuasion are currently defining education primarily as an extension of the marketplace. Those of us who believe there's a deeper bond between students and society need to speak out and strengthen our influence upon public values and policies. Increased collaboration among all teachers is the essential path to control of the profession. Achieving higher levels of cooperation requires that some familiar attitudes be examined. College professors, for instance, must recognize their weakened political position. Traditional modes of governance like faculty senates, though valuable to the work of academic life, have not given faculty any real say in decision making. Defining your academic profession solely in terms of your discipline works against achieving a more potent scholarly and political community. Traditional elitism has also contributed to a separation of higher education and K-12 faculty. A rapidly diminishing tenure track faculty dramatizes for faculty the need for coalitions of mutual interest with K-12 colleagues. Besides acting together in the academic and political arena, the time has also arrived for higher education faculty to recognize and promote an emerging K-18 professoriate. Teaching, whether it's teaching doctoral students or first graders, is equally important. Accordingly, increased educator power could lead to an enrichment of the whole profession. The opportunity to structure a new fusion of educator power exists within NEA. Born of necessity, this alliance would improve the quality of education for all students. What's the first step? Try calling and speaking with a colleague who you might not have thought of as a colleague before.
|
I'd like to Say...In "Discussion: Alive and Well" (Advocate March 1999), you mentioned criteria for grading participation in discussions. Since I use discussion extensively in my courses and grant a percentage of credit for "participation," I would be interested in the criteria others use. In Hawaii, discussions have a different flavor from the mainland -- less tendency to be argumentative and more tendency to seek consensus, fewer students seeking to be distinctive by answering off the tops of their heads and more students preferring to withhold judgment until they are sure of a good answer. As a consequence, I tend to avoid Socratic dialectic in favor of consensus-building questions. For grading, I notice attentiveness and listening skills as much or more than the quantity of speech or even the willingness to say/ask dumb things (very few students will risk that). I would be interested in learning how others measure small group participation. Thanks, Dr. Karen Jolly |
|
We welcome your opinion. Join our talk back community discussion boards. |
|
