NP personal responses: how was it for you?

[Terrance]

Good point. It depends on the objectives. And it depends on the 
Students. In addition, this goes to the cannon issue. Reading and
writing can be quite therapeutic. I'm not suggesting that we turn all of
our classrooms into group therapy sessions. However, who could argue
now, after 9/11, that we are not providing an opportunity for catharsis.
I think this is one of the reasons why I love literature and why I think
a student-centered pedagogy (this includes a student-centered cannon)
has merit. 

I have no doubt that a classroom is often a place, one of the few
places, where students feel they are safe. Students will not think of
their experiences with literature as somehow divorced from their life
experiences outside the school unless they are trained to do so.  

My teaching experiences have been diverse to say the least. 

I taught progressive education to teachers. I taught for the Literacy
Volunteers of America.   I never taught basic literacy. I wish I had
tried it. All of my students were L2 or ESL students. I also taught in
NYC alternative High Schools. I taught at a New Comers school and at
NYC's School of Education.  New comers are students from another
country. To be eligible, they must be in the States for no more than two
years. The majority of my students had been living in the States for
less than six months.  Many come from nations where there is war. The
School of Education was not a "girls" school, but 85% of the students
were female, all of them from uptown Manhattan. These students will be
teachers some day. Now, I am teaching progessive education to adults
again. Some of my students will be teachers in the near future. I'm also
teaching students  obliged to attend college because they are Union
labor. Many are working at ground zero. 

My experience tells me that literature can serve many purposes. 

What I have tried to do is unify theory and practice and bring
University theory to Secondary practice.  I have not always been very
successful. There is a lot of resistance all round.  

The rest is just some thoughts about this wall. 

Why is there a wall separating secondary schools and the universities in
the U.S.? I think communication or miscommunication may be the mortar
that cements the boulders of the wall, but educators amass the stones
from both sides. The wall often divides good theory from good teaching.
Why are students convinced that they must choose to add stones to the
wall from one side or the other?  Good fences do not make good students
and there is something that doesn't love a wall.


In the introduction to Dewey's Experience and Education, Alfred L.
Hall-Quest states:

  "Education and Experience is probably the simplest and most readable
extended statement on this subject [Education] that Dewey ever made."
(1) The Macmillan edition of Dewey's Experience and Education is only
ninety-one pages in length and need not be read with an Oxford English
Dictionary and Cliffs Notes on Dewey (if they exist) as reference
guides. However, a reader that is either unfamiliar with Dewey's writing
style or has not read other philosophical texts may find that Dewey's
brief analytical lectures are too taxing. Students may not be able to
make much sense of the "arresting pages that await those who are
earnestly seeking reliable guidance." How can students and educators be
convinced that Dewey is worth the struggle? Educators will not read
Dewey simply because he is said to be the most important educational
theorist of the twentieth century any more than psychologists will read
Freud, Jung and Piaget based on their respective reputations and
contributions to theoretical psychology. Educators and prospective
educators who find reading Dewey's writing a difficult and arduous task
may be led to believe that theory is for philosophers and educational
theorists, that the practical knowledge of teaching is diametrically
opposed to such "ivory-tower pedagogy." Moreover, members of the
educational community may advise these same readers that theorists don't
teach, teachers do, and that theory is not important to good teaching
practices. Many teachers believe that teaching is a practical and not a
theoretical art. Even the Educator, Teacher, Student-Teacher, who is
encouraged to put Dewey's theories into practice may be obliged to
abandon these and implement theoretically unsound ideas and corrupt
practices when schools are not open to the possibilities of
participating in quality educational experiences as Dewey defines them.
Schools and teachers seem to be convinced that they can do only what
practical experience directs them to do. We learn to ride a bike by
riding a bike and not by reading about how to ride, and we learn to
teach by teaching and not by reading theories about teaching. Right? 


	In chapter twenty of Democracy and Education Dewey discusses the
alleged separation of knowing and doing. He begins with the Ancient
Greeks and traces the relationship of practical knowledge and
theoretical knowledge through history. It's important to understand the
progression of thought that Dewey outlines in this chapter.  By
following the development of conceptual frameworks that have defined the
relationship of theoretical and practical knowledge, we can gain new
insights into the relationship of these seemingly disparate aspects of
knowledge. 

 The ancient Greeks believed that true knowledge came from a higher
source than practical activity and therefor possesses a higher and more
spiritual worth. The ancient Greek conception of experience and
knowledge or theory and practice can be found in the writings of Plato
and Aristotle. Although these two Greeks disagreed on many fundamental
philosophical questions, their discussions of theoretical and practical
knowledge concur. The Greeks identified experience with purely practical
concerns and knowledge as existing for its own sake free from practical
reference. Experience always involved lack, need and desire; it was
never self-sufficing. Rational knowing, on the other hand, was complete
and comprehensive within itself. Hence, the world of practical
experience was in a constant state of flux while intellectual knowledge
was concerned with eternal truths. 
The sharp antithesis between the practical and theoretical found in
Greek thought is connected to the fact that Athenian Philosophy began as
a criticism of tradition and custom as standards or foundations of
knowledge and conduct. In the search for something to replace or
transcend mere experiential knowledge, the Greeks established their
conceptions of the truth, beauty, ethics, politics, education, etc., on
a belief in the supremacy of reason. Plato's assertion that philosophers
were best suited to rule as kings of the Republic was supported by the
Greek notion that rational intelligence and not habit, appetite,
impulse, and emotion should regulate human affairs. 
The historical factors that advanced the predominance of reason in
Ancient Greece have many parallels in twentieth century U.S. history:
Increasing trade and travel, migration and wars, a broadening of
intellectual horizons, cross-pollination of customs and beliefs. Civil
disturbance had become a custom in Athens; the fortunes of the city were
threatened by the strife of factions. blah blah blah.....



                               

Something there is that doesn't love a wall, 
That sends the frozen-ground-swell under it, 
And spills the upper boulders in the sun, 
And makes gaps even two can pass abreast. 

He says again, "Good fences make good neighbors." 

The Dewey Lab Approach: 

Every student is viewed as individual, unique in his or her combination
of developmental readiness, culture, lifestyle, learning style,
temperament, and special talents. We assist and encourage each student
to meet his/her potential for making a positive contribution to larger
society in a safe and caring environment.

The Laboratory Schools provide a rigorous, creative, well-rounded
education for a geographically, economically, racially, religiously, and
ethnically diverse student body. The Schools are committed to help each
student master important subject matter, learn to think critically and
creatively, understand the values and traditions that underlie our
society, and develop a sense of personal and community responsibility.

The Laboratory Schools believe that students have different needs at
different developmental stages, and bring with them different lifestyles
and cultural backgrounds. Students do not learn simply by exhortation
but through active participation and the Schools see itself as a
community of students and teachers, responsible to each other. Every
student is a teacher and every teacher is a student. The Schools work in
partnership with each parent to support and enhance the learning of each
student.

The Schools provide an environment that fosters the professional growth
of a dedicated and diverse faculty as they generate for every student
pleasure in learning and achievement.

Goals for the Schools

The following goal statements for the Schools emerged from discussions
among faculty and staff, administrators and Board, and parents and
students. 

1. To Articulate a Consistent, Coherent and Creative Curriculum 

The Schools continue to articulate an integrated, coordinated and
consistent curriculum within each grade level, across grade levels, and
across departments. 

2. To Encourage Teacher Creativity and Initiative 

The Schools value the creativity and experience each teacher brings to
the program. The task of developing a consistent, coherent, evolving
curriculum is primarily given to the teachers. Administrators lead and
facilitate this process. 

3. To Understand and Support the Whole Child 

The Schools aim to integrate classroom learning with students'
experiences outside of class. This is the focus of advisory, homeroom,
co-curricular and extra-curricular programs. In addition, every faculty
member accepts responsibility for balancing social, psychological and
emotional growth with academic learning. 

4. To Attract and Support a Diverse Student Body and Faculty 

The Schools continue to value and support economic, geographic, ethnic,
cultural, racial and religious diversity among students and faculty. To
this end, scholarships, special course offerings, mentoring and exchange
opportunities are offered to both students and faculty. 

5. To Achieve a Schools Community that is Socially Responsible 

The Schools address issues such as environmental degradation, violence,
drug and alcohol abuse, and positive gender and racial relationships as
an integral part of the program. Community service programs, exchange
programs, and a number of student clubs focus on linking the Schools to
the larger community. 

6. To Maintain Economic Stability 

The Schools maintain recruitment, tuition, and fund raising strategies
that contribute to their fiscal health. 
 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
© Copyright 1997 The University of Chicago Laboratory Schools.
1362 E. 59th St. -- Chicago, IL 60637 -- USA
Tel: 773-702-9450 -- Fax: 773-702-7455
We welcome your comments and suggestions about