1 An alternative
 |
| Psst! The above is NOT literacy and numeracy |
That every teacher automatically embeds literacy in their classroom is a great idea. That ought to be the norm. The notion of embedding should be universally embedded!
Therefore, I welcome the opportunity to engage in a course designed to achieve that outcome. I'm willing to put in the time, effort and energy. I'm more than ready to reflect on my teaching so as to improve my performance in that direction.
Additionally, I feel is useful to look at adult education from different cultural slants. (After all, as Goethe once said, you need to understand another culture before you can know your own.) And so, since we live in Aotearoa New Zealand, it makes eminent sense to consider the Maori perspective as well as the European.
It also makes sense to examine the past. We need to determine how we started out, and how we proceeded, before making a stab at the best future trajectory from this point on. It makes good sense, I feel, to consider just what literacy and numeracy consist of, maybe break it down into its component parts, and to reason out how we might incorporate that logistical awareness into our teaching.
So far so good . . .
On the other hand, I do have certain issues and reservations with this particular expiring unit standard (21204 version 5). I deal with the most serious two here.
Myself, I'd prefer a more open brief that was not as prescribed, did not consist of micro-managed instructions, and was more realistic. Something along the lines of:
Take an open look at what literacy (and numeracy) truly consist of. Take into account the Maori point of view, explore some of the historical background, look over what is being practiced now, and think about how we might better address the question of improving literacy/numeracy. Discuss how you as an educator might act upon some of your conclusions within your classroom.
That's it! That would be all the direction that a professional would require. That would give the freedom to take a good hard look at what I as a teacher am doing, and what I might do (even) better.
Seeing how numeracy embeds within literacy - or ought to, where it does, where it doesn't (see here) is potentially useful. So is the idea of reversed embedding (which I try to do here). In my opinion, such as assignment would be far more likely to generate useful insights and actions.
In the spirit, therefore, of critical thinking - which , I read from an actual worksheet I have recently used in one of my classes from 'A complete English for Academic Purposes program / Student Book', does not just mean 'being critical' - I intend to 'morph' this assignment into one which for me as a professional is much more more useful and relevant. This will, no doubt (as the same worksheet states) "involve thinking carefully about a problem or an issue and applying useful thought processes to help make practical decisions, [and] express your opinions clearly and logically".
So that is why I'm doing what I do, have done, or am about to do. I require that any project of this size and type be USER-friendly. By that acronym I mean that the work must be Useful, Sensible, Efficient/Effective and Relevant to the teaching that I do.
In my case, the unit standard is largely irrelevant to the work that I've been engaged in at Otago Polytechnic since 1997. In its current form, for me the unit standard is, I'm sorry to say, largely useless. It would absorb an unduly disproportionate amount to time to complete it in its current form, and it is likely to lead to only minimal benefits. It is of questionable value to me. Therefore, I mean to convert it into something that is of value.
In other words, I'm going be scathing. I'm going to be critical. I shall throw mud, not mince words, say it as it is and generally behave like a pain in the ass. I do this in order to release a lot of energy. That process will, I hope, something of value along the lines of gold being purified in a forge. In short, I refuse point blank to take on this work unless I am convinced that it is likely to improve my teaching. Otherwise, it's a waste of my time (and, at the age of 61, I need to think more carefully than younger players about how best to utilize my remaining years).
Early on in adult life, I chose not to take part within the world of academia. I didn't go the research route with my Science degree. I have never been a fan of academic writing. To me, such an approach feels too constraining, too slow, and too narrow. Hence an informal rant suits me better.
The scientific method too is okay as far as it goes (and people like Richard Dawkins have made a career of it), but it doesn't go everywhere. To a man with a hammer, everything looks like a nail, and I want to be a better carpenter, as it were.
The above goes to explain why I won't trot out a conventional academic essay. I won't laboriously build up my arguments; I'd rather leap straight to the point. I'm not going to do the APA referencing thing. And I won't contaminate my thinking by commencing with a literature review.
That's not how my mind works. That's not how I want my mind to work. Rather, I describe myself as a scanner / gister (see p 29 of Deception Point by Dan Brown) / and grokker.
Consequently, I have elected to use blogging as my mode through which to communicate. I feel comfortable doing so, having employed blogs in the classroom since 2006. I am able to operate its tricks readily, and I have for many years blogged to reflect on my own teaching and learning. The blogging format enables me to link easily to various sources. It allows me cross-reference to other materials and texts that I've already created. It saves trees and paper too, I fancy. (But maybe I'm deluding myself there.)
Naturally, I plan to address the learning and sub-learning outlines of the unit standard in the order in which I feel that they flow best. However, readers are welcome to navigate their way by either using the site map, or to enjoy my rant simply by clicking each NEXT link at the foot of every post.
NEXT
Comments
Post a Comment