There is no question that inequality exists in education. It is a simple fact that certain students have access to more technological devices and/or better technological devices. Some may think that the answer is to ignore this difference and treat all students the same, but I would argue that ignoring student differences is not the solution. It is okay to acknowledge that students in inner cities are different and that these differences require teachers to adjust and respond. Eric Jensen speaks to the cognitive differences of inner city students in the You Tube video below.
At the outset of this class and in thinking about my inquiry question, I asked myself “How do we provide inner city students the same opportunities afforded to others?” Realizing that these students are not the same was pivotal. For me, the most important thing I can do for my students is be there for them. Let them know that I care and that I’m empathetic. Trust is crucial in student/teacher relationships. Graves and Rychly (2012) speak to the importance of empathy saying, “empathy refers to the teacher’s ability to understand the classroom from her students’ perspectives. Thus, the caring teacher will be more successful if she approaches her goal of holding all students to the same rigorous standards by seeking first to understand where her students are” (p. 3).
As my thinking evolved, I realized the students are not the same, but the standards and expectations MUST be the same.
Realistically, we cannot provide “the same” opportunities for all students. However, we can apply culturally responsive pedagogy which focuses on student interest. Through learning what are students’ interests are, we engender in them the fact that we care. Just as inner city students are not the same, inner city teachers are not the same. We may not have all the most current technology in our classrooms. However, we have learned how to model global citizenship for our students. Teachers often bring their own devices, create Donors Choose projects, and maximize use of free tech devices at libraries and cafes. I realize now that I can provide OPPORTUNITY for students. We have been taught the tools to model global citizenship. Opportunity will look different in every classroom (even though ideally I'd love to be able to provide my students with the type of classroom described in this article!). “Sameness” is no longer the focus of my inquiry.
In thinking about empathy and what it means to be a good teacher, I started wondering what children think is important. The video What Makes a Good Teacher is a good measure of what children value in their teachers. The students describe teachers who are patient, understanding, inquisitive, protective, and smart. Students describe emotions evoked by their teachers. I especially like the little girl who mentions teachers' magical powers. Indeed, we are magical! We can use our magical powers to create different opportunities for different types of students. Lindsay and Davis (2012) remind us that we "are no longer an individual teacher creating with your students alone" (p. 201). Keeping that sense of community in mind, teachers can leverage opportunities to create technological opportunities for students to become digitally literate ... no matter the environment.
As my thinking evolved, I realized the students are not the same, but the standards and expectations MUST be the same.
Realistically, we cannot provide “the same” opportunities for all students. However, we can apply culturally responsive pedagogy which focuses on student interest. Through learning what are students’ interests are, we engender in them the fact that we care. Just as inner city students are not the same, inner city teachers are not the same. We may not have all the most current technology in our classrooms. However, we have learned how to model global citizenship for our students. Teachers often bring their own devices, create Donors Choose projects, and maximize use of free tech devices at libraries and cafes. I realize now that I can provide OPPORTUNITY for students. We have been taught the tools to model global citizenship. Opportunity will look different in every classroom (even though ideally I'd love to be able to provide my students with the type of classroom described in this article!). “Sameness” is no longer the focus of my inquiry.
In thinking about empathy and what it means to be a good teacher, I started wondering what children think is important. The video What Makes a Good Teacher is a good measure of what children value in their teachers. The students describe teachers who are patient, understanding, inquisitive, protective, and smart. Students describe emotions evoked by their teachers. I especially like the little girl who mentions teachers' magical powers. Indeed, we are magical! We can use our magical powers to create different opportunities for different types of students. Lindsay and Davis (2012) remind us that we "are no longer an individual teacher creating with your students alone" (p. 201). Keeping that sense of community in mind, teachers can leverage opportunities to create technological opportunities for students to become digitally literate ... no matter the environment.
References
Arsenault, L. (2013, August 26). What Makes a Good Teacher? [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPLO6kfcxoo&feature=youtu.be
Graves and Rychly (2012). Teacher Characteristics for Responsive Pedagogy. Multicultural Perspectives 14(1): 44-49, 6.
Jansen, L. (2011, March 8). Technology and teachers change inner-city school. CNN. Retrieved from http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/03/08/school.success/
Jensen, E. (2011, October 10). Eric Jensen of Jensen Learning on his Brain-Based Poverty Teacher Workshop [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPLO6kfcxoo&feature=youtu.be
Lindsay, J. & Davis V. (2015). Flattening Classrooms, Engaging Minds Move to Global Collaboration One Step at a Time. Pearson: New York.
Arsenault, L. (2013, August 26). What Makes a Good Teacher? [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPLO6kfcxoo&feature=youtu.be
Graves and Rychly (2012). Teacher Characteristics for Responsive Pedagogy. Multicultural Perspectives 14(1): 44-49, 6.
Jansen, L. (2011, March 8). Technology and teachers change inner-city school. CNN. Retrieved from http://www.cnn.com/2011/POLITICS/03/08/school.success/
Jensen, E. (2011, October 10). Eric Jensen of Jensen Learning on his Brain-Based Poverty Teacher Workshop [Video file]. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EPLO6kfcxoo&feature=youtu.be
Lindsay, J. & Davis V. (2015). Flattening Classrooms, Engaging Minds Move to Global Collaboration One Step at a Time. Pearson: New York.