Can you think of a time in your own educational experiences when a teacher has pushed you or other students in a way that really reflected the values of a "democratic classroom?"
What are the benefits of this approach?
How does this relate to teaching students their abc's and 1,2, 3's?
"Democracies require students to think for themselves, to make judgments based on evidence and argument, to develop minds of their own. Democratic classrooms are places where teachers encourage students to ask those fundamental questions—Who in the world am I? How did I get here, and where am I going? What are my choices? How shall I proceed?—and to pursue the answers wherever they might take them. We must refuse obedience in favor of teaching initiative, courage, imagination, creativity, and more. These are the qualities to be modeled and nourished, encouraged and defended."
Click HERE to download the article!
Ayer's definition of a "democratic classroom" seems to me like a valuable lens through which to frame our own thinking about the classroom environments we hope to create this summer. I think that, in a lot of ways, the summer is not about achieving a democratic classroom as an end-goal (or beginning goal), but rather as a process in and of itself. In other words, since this summer is a learning experience for everyone involved, we will continually search both for our own definitions and for our own ways of achieving our “democratic classrooms.”
ReplyDeleteConsidering SB’s unique teaching model, I think it’s interesting to mentally switch "teachers" and "students" in the quote above, and see where it leads. If our classrooms are going to be truly democratic, shouldn't we as teachers be developing "minds of our own" as well, and shouldn't our students encourage us (or at least inspire us) to "ask those fundamental questions"?
In terms of this summer, building a “democratic classroom” is definitely a challenge! We have our curricula to get through, and a room of students to manage, and we can't realistically take the time to wander down every creative or imaginative path that they open up. I do think, however, that we can step back and apply this concept to SB as a whole. In that light, I think we're well on our way to being what perhaps Ayers would consider a "democratic community." All of the elements of SB - the classroom, the cheers, the advising, the field trips - are designed to provoke reflection on those fundamental questions (sometimes by asking our students explicitly). And if we view ourselves as pieces of that wonderfully democratic community, maybe it will seem less daunting to emulate that in our classrooms as well. At least I’ll try to remember that whenever I get discouraged!
It is definitely tricky to find the balance between encouraging our students to “pursue the answers wherever they might lead” and leading our students to pursue the answers to their math homework! So how do we find that balance? I don’t know, and I’m interested to hear others’ responses. I guess my best thought at the moment is that maybe the “democratic classroom” is more of a mindset rather than a constant reality. What do you all think?
Ayer's article on education was a fascinating piece because it brought ideas to the table that can be taken in many directions.
ReplyDeleteWhat I like, and what I hope to apply to teaching is that it seems as though Ayer's is advocating for breaking away from the conventional structure of teaching, and social behavior as a whole. To have the courage to stray away from the structure that tells us to continue to follow what has been done in the past--the safe route--to study hard, get good grades, go to college, get a good job, and then raise our children to do the same thing.
Now there is nothing wrong with doing all of the above. The problem lies when I experience 2/3 of my graduating class at Bryant University majoring in an area in which they have absolutely no interest in. Why do they study this then? For the potential of making money, of landing a secure job, and to do what is imposed on them ever since they can remember. I am a firm believer that both students and teachers alike should always understand WHY they are doing what they do in the classroom. And the reality is that if someone had taken the time to ask my classmates "Why are you studying this?" somewhere along the line, we might have a very different academic landscape here.
So on one hand I think it is an awesome idea to challenge students with questions that are unconventional. However, I think that sometimes Ayer's advocates for a COMPLETE overhaul of the current educational system. I do not believe this is the safest bet either. Bill Ayer’s says “We must refuse obedience in favor of teaching initiative, courage, imagination, creativity, and more.” My response would be “This sounds great, in theory. But what does it mean to refuse obedience? Better yet, to what extent” Because on one hand, we can teach students to dispel the notion of conforming to what society says we should do in terms of being materialistic and instead doing the better good. On the other hand, when social disobedience is introduced to 13-15 year olds in the wrong context, it can lead to a dangerous outcome. I think as teachers (even if just for the summer) we want to stay as far away from bias as possible because promoting bias disables students from making informed decisions. And if we in some way or another prevent the next generation to make informed decisions, then we have not accomplished what we set to accomplish by dedicating ourselves to the cause of education.
In essence, being unconventional is great and challenging students to think outside the box in terms of society is great. However, these challenges are powerful weapons, which if misused, can do a heavy amount of irreversible damage.
This is just my opinion. I love to be challenged to think in different ways so feel free to pass along any thoughts :)
I agree with most of what the quote says. Teachers shouldn't focus on teaching students how to abide by the rules and they shouldn't stick to the curriculum 100 percent of the time. School should be a place where everyone can have a voice, especially because some of the students might not have anywhere else to express themselves and to speak up on what they actually want to learn.
ReplyDeleteIf the classrooms today were more democratic, kids would enjoy going to school more because they wouldn’t feel weighed down by expectations. These expectations include things like getting good grades on a subject that they aren’t even interested in. A democratic school system could essentially lead to higher attendance rates because if students were able to learn what they felt was necessary, they would enjoy school more. However, all regulation shouldn't be pushed aside. Students can learn a lot of responsibility from school rules and curricula. In their adult lives, the students might need to complete a task that they have no interest in but they need to complete it.
I hope that throughout the summer, I can give the students an opportunity to tell me what they would like to spend some time learning. Taking a different road and completely avoiding the curriculum would be too extreme, but in SB it’s easier to do with days like ASE day and/or the different BOT activities, where we can take a step away from just teaching math and literacy, and help the students “build bridges” to other areas of education.
In my Biology class this school year, we had a bit of a democratic classroom going on. Our teacher would give us an outline of what we needed to learn for the midterms and finals, but she wouldn’t move on teaching the next area until the 15 of us in the class were confident that we understood the material. This approach allowed the teacher to teach the curriculum without forcing the lessons upon us. We had say in when we would take quizzes and tests which allowed us to have better results on our tests. Overall, the approach helped us prepare for the midterm and eventually the final.
Like Ayer mentions in his article, education is "the special intersection of desire and transformation". In order to be successful teachers, we need to show the students that we want to teach, and hopefully that can lead to their desire to want to learn. I'm sure that we're all ready for an ambitious summer! Take care :)
As an aspiring teacher, I think this quote defines how school should be experienced and almost a standard teachers should reach. Students should be able to find themselves,learn,and grow in the classroom because their in school in the beginning stages of their lives.
ReplyDeleteI once had a writing professor who believed that there shouldn't be a wall between teachers and students. She felt as though she was teaching in order to learn from her students. Unlike some teachers she would not sit at the teacher's desk, but she would tell us to form a circle so we could see each others faces and she would join the circle in a student desk as well. I saw her as a student, more than a teacher which I thought helped the class open up more. I can honestly say her class has had the biggest influence on me and the way I view the role of a teacher because she was different. She actually taught the class to be open minded, and to learn from each other rather than a text book.By the end of the semester, I could honestly notice a difference within myself, and my peers, because we were all growing as learners.
This approach benefits the whole classroom because it leaves room for growth. I really believe that when your learning, your growing as an individual as well. I think its important to make connections, and to think of things "outside the box", which is where the actual learning takes place. This quote emphasizes on a goal that any teacher should have and try to achieve, because teachers play a MAJOR role in the development of a student...more than we actually might even think.
Ayer's democratic classroom is similar to my high school experience. From the small things, like calling teachers by their first name, to the bigger things, like having the curriculum centered around project based learning, students were able to intellectually roam free (sometimes physically).
ReplyDeleteHaving experienced that, the term "classroom" limits what I think Ayers is trying to get at. What presupposes a democratic classroom is a democratic school. In our case, as SB teachers, we should not only be thinking of ways to shape our individual classrooms into freethinking areas, but ensure that the entire program is run that way. It is part of our jobs to not only teach, but to mold the atmosphere as well.
That all being said, I think there are a lot of precautions to take when implementing democratic classrooms. What if students go through the entire process and end up not learning the content? Like it or not, our education system is based off of standards. Denying students access to content, therefore, is synonymous with denying them opportunity.
In conclusion, we need to find a balance between student exploration and finite learning (like a parachuter landing on big tarp), which I think can be found in many creative ways! Also, we should be aware that the loftiness of a democratic classroom can sometimes be lost in practice. Teachers should undergo introspective assessment to see if they really will "refuse obedience in favor of teaching initiative, courage, imagination, creativity, and more". Theory and practice are two very different things.
To ask America to over hall their school systems and implement democratic classrooms is a recipe for disaster. Mostly because America is too stubborn to realize that the current theories of education don’t work for everyone. It’s understandable that Stanley Kurtz would perceive Ayers words as a “strategy to turn America’s youth into little revolutionaries”. On the one hand what is wrong with that, revolution is a natural part of history. When people are oppressed and infuriated they revolt. The way America’s school system is running now, it doesn’t seem like that far stretched of a conclusion. On the other hand Ayer isn’t trying to make “little revolutionaries” instead he is trying to place each child’s future truly in their own hands.
ReplyDeleteIn my mind it is a teacher’s job to give a student the tools and the capability to use those tools and then sit back and say the rest is up to you now. Obedience shouldn’t be a factor in a classroom, especially in our classrooms this summer. Instead there should be an understanding between teacher and student, to teach, learn and grow from each other.
My fifth grade math teacher taught me how to divide. I think was supposed to learn how to divide in fourth grade according to the curriculum but the concept just escaped me. I remember the day she taught the lesson, it was a review day. She put on a paper crown and stood on a chair. From that spot she commenced to have an interactive game where we were all in motion and somehow by the end of that class it had clicked in my head, I understood how to divide. This might seem way off topic but what I am trying to say is that even in school systems that can seem crippling to many, there are still those gems that open up that arena for their students to ask Ayers questions. We might not be able to create “little revolutionaries” but we can open up a safe space to ask the important questions and that’s a start.
Ayer's article was insightful and spoke a lot of truth. His comparison of education and the way a classroom is run to how the country of America is run, provided for a new lens through which I've not previously looked. I also have to say, that my experience at the Wheeler School has set a fine example of this "classroom democracy" that Ayer's spoke of in his editorial. However, it is clear that, depending largely on the teacher, some classrooms are much more "democratic" than others. Thus, even though SB as a whole program will try to create an overall "democratic" education system, it is up to the individual teachers to make this happen, and that is why I was so impacted by Ayer's insights. I have a love for learning, and for being a student, and it is crucial that I find the best ways to share my love of learning with my future students, if they haven't already seen the light. The "democratic classroom" is fundamental for this. The freedom of thought, wondering, asking, and creation needs to be encouraged and emphasized in the classroom. The class should feature the students, and not the teacher, and it should be flexible, to meet the students where they are and lift them higher from there. I will definitely have Ayer's article in my mind as I plan and teach this summer, and I aspire, as a new teacher, to begin to achieve something resembling this "democratic classroom"- this perfect, creative, space for students to ask and learn.
ReplyDeleteI agree with Ayer's beliefs regarding a "democratic classroom" in which independent thinking and self-questioning is much more conducive. Amidst the value of obedience and efficiency, it is almost a personal mantra of mine to induce independent thought and the questioning of one's values amongst those I interact with. As a teacher this summer and as an aspiring school psychologist, not only do I wish to fulfill my role as a professional, but I also wish to inspire others with the tools necessary to inspire themselves.
ReplyDeleteIn Catholic school, I have learned about evolutionism in my eighth grade science class. In high school, I have learned about environmentalism and the stark contrasts between sustainability and America's value on monetary efficiency. In college, I learned about philosophies undermining the reasons for our very existence. Perhaps it is this sort of curriculum that can brew "domestic terrorists" within the younger generations. However, it is curriculum like these that brew the world's leaders and the world's revolutionaries for change amidst a changing world.
The benefits of this approach are beyond imaginable. Amongst the increasing value of diversity, creativity, independent thought, and any number of other benefits, the democratic classroom may be able to provide the tools for human beings to understand one another amidst a world in anguish which is rooted in misunderstanding.
Never being a formal educator, I am not too sure how the democratic classroom will affect the way a student can come to learn how to count or learn the alphabet. Perhaps students will learn about the history of language, or that numbers are used to make sense of everyday life.
At its core, Ayer's argument is as much about reshaping the mindsets of students and teachers as it is about making classrooms more democratic. Indeed, Ayer is calling for a redefinition of a successful teacher, something that has become truly necessary within the American public schooling system.
ReplyDeleteIt is tough to disagree with many of the things that Ayer suggests. I mean, it is difficult to argue with the fact that courage, imagination, and creativity should be fostered more within schools, and that teachers should be at the forefront of such a change. A successful teacher is not somebody that gets a student to understand something arbitrarily for the sake of knowledge itself. Rather, a teacher should lead a student's self-discovery and encourage them to internalize the information he or she is exposed to.
Ayer provides a great theoretical model for the reshaping of schools in America. However, I think he misses some of the more subtle and important aspects of teaching. There is an inherent danger in making very general statements about the role of teachers and schools. As great as any of these models seem in theory, we need to remember that a teacher can have different impacts on different students in different situations. For example, a teacher can help a student with severe behavioral problems to respond better in social situations. That same teacher could help a student with a learning disability to find new ways of storing and remembering information. Though Ayer's vision is extremely positive and inspiring, the level of development and ability of the students must be taken into account as well.
Perhaps one of the most unusual aspects of democracy in a classroom is that it can be granted or taken away without students even realizing it. There is great power and responsibility in the nature of democracy within classrooms. Just because a teacher or school can precisely control the information that they are conveying to the students (perceived to be for the student's benefit) does not mean that it is right, or beneficial for the students. The most recent example that I can think of is the restructuring of social studies textbooks in Texas to convey biased information. A student may learn a lot of information, may succeed on tests, and may grow as a student, but will never be given a chance to explore alternatives, draw their own conclusions, or think about how this has impacted them. Creating citizens that know and believe exactly what a community, state, or nation wants them to believe is, without a doubt, undemocratic.
This summer, I think that we have a great opportunity to generate excitement for change in a new generation. I see our mission as not only helping students find their own strengths and talents, but unlocking ways to use their abilities to change the world.
Can't wait to meet everyone! =)
I believe that Ayer’s idea of a democratic classroom is an important and valid idea to an extent. Allowing students to have the ability to question, think independently, and be creative is crucial in creating a positive learning environment. However, there must be limits to how democratic a classroom is because we are dealing with middle school students that require guidance and structure. Being left to their own devices without effective oversight would be a disservice to students and their educations.
ReplyDeleteIf we want a democratic classroom we must not forget that the teacher is the president. While there is room for debate, creativity, and questioning the teacher is the person who must make sure that the students are developing the appropriate skills and comprehending the essential concepts. This is why teachers have the ultimate authority and to strip them of that authority in a fully democratic classroom mitigates their effectiveness as teachers and ultimately harms the students.
Teaching is both a science and an art and I feel that Ayers overlooks this point. A teacher must effectively explain ideas, create strong lesson plans, and evaluate students’ performances. Equally important is that a teacher knows and understands their students’ personalities, interest, talents, and passions. This knowledge is crucial in allowing a teacher to determine how democratic their classroom is.
I found Ayers article rather interesting, despite contesting some of his arguments.
ReplyDeleteI come to SB with many different expectations but only one conviction - I'm here to learn in as much as I'm here to teach.
So what has this got to do with a democratic classroom? In interacting with my students, I wish to ensure that they think for themselves, make judgments based on evidence and argument, and develop minds of their own: in line with Ayer’s ideals of a democratic classroom.
However that said, I agree with Jose in what I will call a critique of Ayer, when he says "When social disobedience is introduced to 13-15 year olds in the wrong context, it can lead to a dangerous outcome."
Coming from a system of education where obedience was the bread and butter of the system, I can say that it can be in many ways limiting and deteriorating to the creativity, and incentive of the students. However, I believe the reason for this occurrence was primarily that teachers refused to implement any other type of teaching model other than the 'sit-and-listen-and-take-a-test’ model. I would not blame obedience per se for the outcome. As such, despite possible negative effects, I would advocate a system with forms of obedience.
In my opinion, for anything to work well there must be some structure and a number of rules to ensure the smooth proceeding of whatever is occurring. I believe the same applies to a classroom. A curriculum is essential to ensure students are absorbing what they need to at an accepted rate (even if this rate does not apply to all, it’s a necessary generalization in the face of progress), and rules must be obeyed to ensure that the environment for the absorption for knowledge is maintained. What is more important is the question of how that specified knowledge is absorbed; and this is where I would say one can employ liberal methods. Here a teachers creativity and innovation, just as much as her knowledge, is needed in guiding and ensuring that students reach that point where they can think for themselves, make judgments based on evidence and arguments, and develop minds of their own. I do not see how obedience, if defined in terms of observing a general curriculum outline and basic classroom rules can undermined one’s teaching initiative, courage, imagination, creativity, and more. In fact, I believe they can work together to create an optimal class setting.
Like Chris Nho says "Like it or not, our education system is based off of standards. Denying students access to content, therefore, is synonymous with denying them opportunity." I would support a structured curriculum, and at the same time, applaud innovative teachers such as Mary's fifth grade teacher who taught her how to divide using an interactive game. Though Mary says "Obedience shouldn’t be a factor in a classroom, especially in our classrooms this summer." I repeat myself in saying obedience is not the antonym of creativity and innovation. I agree with her however when she says "there should be an understanding between teacher and student, to teach, learn and grow from each other."
And that again, is what I hope to achieve this summer.
When I was in third grade, my classmates and I were assigned a research project on a bird of our choice. Though I can’t recall the exact nature of the assignment, several details stand out in my mind. Firstly, the project was essentially interdisciplinary. Students wrote reports, but also engaged in self-directed artistic endeavors. Secondly, during the long task of researching our various birds (the combined processes of reading and note taking was quite tedious for an eight year old with attention deficit disorder), teachers provided advice and guidance rather than overly strict parameters. They supplied us with an extensive list of books, but the ultimate choice of material was left to us. And last but not least, we chose our own birds! Of all the students in the class, I was the only emerging “expert” on the mighty Osprey.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately, my acquisition of ornithological knowledge basically came to a halt after third grade. Nevertheless, the sheer exuberance at choosing my own topic, at carving my own path has stayed with me. I can no longer tell you the first thing about Ospreys, but still feel the pride of having completed both a written report and a large painting about that majestic bird. While there is undoubtedly value in the notion of learning for its own sake, a crucial aspect of early and adolescent education comes through learning how to learn. Emphasis must be placed on the process of learning itself, rather than on the final result. More important than the factoids I gathered on ospreys, were the skills I developed as a writer and researcher.
I believe that this is precisely what Ayers attempts to get at in discussing the role of education in democracy. School must be places of inspiration rather than indoctrination, sites of creativity over blind obedience. In aiming to allow children to form their own opinions, to recognize their own ability to make an imprint upon their society, a democratic educational system must focus on providing students with the proper tools. If, as Ayers suggests, students in a democracy must learn to question, to develop as independent thinkers, then is vital that they graduate with the skills to do.
However, as Ayers points out, the specific metaphors and descriptions we utilize in describing education plays a significant role in its realization. Students must not be conceived of as empty vessels, blank slates to be inscribed with knowledge, but as unique individuals with a wide variety of passions, inclinations, and learning styles. As Ayers also explains, it is schools that must be designed around the needs of the student and not the other way around. Thus, in designing classroom activities and exciting take home projects, it is we, the teachers, who must learn to adapt. If a particular type of lesson plan proves ineffective, it is our responsibility to remain flexible, to shift our plans in order to be the best teachers we can possibly be.
Though I would love to see all of my students extol the beauty of Shakespeare and Elizabethan drama come August, more realistically I think we need to aim at helping our students become better, more passionate learners and independent thinkers. Allowing them to form their own opinions, helping them to come up with creative and unique responses to the classroom questions we pose, will prove infinitely more valuable than demanding the memorization of facts.
Can’t wait to meet all of you!
Cheers,
Daniel
I believe the fundamental questions prompted by democratic practice in a classroom – those asking, “Who in the world am I? How did I get here, and where am I going? What are my choices? How shall I proceed?” – are central to a critical and engaging classroom. It is important, however, to recognize the disparate ways in which these concepts & questions can be incorporated into a classroom. Classroom dynamics and teaching techniques should be informed by their specific context, and should not necessarily rely on standardized or uniform practice. So while I agree that the critical questions and aims Ayers proposes should absolutely underlie pedagogical practice, I believe it is equally important for teachers to remain flexible and open in crafting diverse practices and techniques to integrate such questions and ideas into a classroom.
ReplyDeleteIn my experience, a democratic classroom is most powerful in teaching students how to think critically, rather than what to think. The presence of critical, essential questions can connect what is being learning directly to the students’ lives, rendering academic learning relevant & applicable. Critical to facilitating a democratic space in a classroom is fostering a safe space in which students feel comfortable sharing, thinking, and asking critical questions. I’ve felt most engaged and excited to participate when it is evident each presence and contribution is valued, and evident that teachers have faith in each student’s capacity to learn and guide their own learning. I hope to translate my experience being a part of a safe, receptive, and participatory space into my experience facilitating such a space this summer - a space where students and teachers are both able to develop critically and creatively.
I worry a flaw in the practice of a democratic classroom may sometimes be its easy detachment from reality. I’m very easily impassioned, and am often carried away by how theoretically powerful I imagine some type of learning or teaching to be. I am realizing how important it is to remain constantly grounded when reflecting on these questions, and how important it is to consistently tie the philosophy of a democratic classroom to its practice. If I do want to begin creating such a space, I must consistently ask myself how one does help to best facilitate and foster a democratic classroom. How does one help foster these understandings and questions in the context of students’ lives? As Ari discussed above, I think if a democratic classroom could serve as a lens this summer through which I am able to help develop a classroom space, there is extraordinary potential. It would be so interesting to see how such a lens could inform different and creative classroom practices for each of us.
If schools and classrooms do “show us exactly who we are” as a society, I want to invest in establishing as critical, receptive, and participatory classroom as I can.
So excited to meet all of you and so sorry for the late post!
- Erin