Chapters 3 and 4 present to me completely unsatisfactory methods of teaching. Chapter 3 discussed at length an extreme behaviorist classroom. Everything in the classroom had a structured name and a designated purpose. The students were taught in a form of “Taylorism” the teacher said. My response to this is that students cannot be equated to factory workers. The processes involved in producing a car are not the same as the processes required to produce learning and critical thinking in students. Organization in the classroom is one thing, but this robotic form of classroom management is entirely another. It was even noted that the students seemed to lack emotion and expression in the classroom. To train students not to express emotion and to follow commands as if from a drill instructor does not have a place in our educational system.
Chapter 4 discusses the “tracks” we place out students on. Students are, from early on, designated into tracks depending on their ability. We all went through some form of this in High School. In my high school you were either college prep or tech prep. Of course the college prep students were looked on with a much more favorable light than the tech prep students, which is completely wrong. If a students skill are not up to par with what would be needed to go to college, are they simply doomed never to pursue such an endeavor? Is the knowledge that students are supposed to be gaining in school simply a commodity that some attain and other do not? The way I look at it is, not all students want to go to college. Not all students have to go to college. Our society requires the tech prep people and the blue collar workers to survive. However, not being suited for college and not having the aptitude for college are two separate issues. If a student isn’t suited for college, it may simply mean that they hate school or could care less about pursuing it. However, if a student hasn’t been sufficiently prepared to pursue college, blame the educational track we forced on them.
