Tuesday, October 6, 2009
"Hidden Intellectualism" by Gerald Graff--The Unpost
This is the unpost. That's right, the unpost. After an admittedly limited amount of deliberation with my inner selves, I've decided that I will resist the temptation to write something brilliant and insightful designed to inspire you reflect upon the Graff reading. That would only push you to read the Graff piece through my lens. And if you know anything about me yet, then you know enough to know that this is not what I'm about. So, friends, have at it. After you've read the piece and reflected upon it carefully, go ahead and let us know what you found to be most insightful and most questionable. Review my $.02 on how to write an amazing brief and share your thoughts here in approximately 500 words. Also, you should know that you're encouraged to directly engage each others' positions in your written pieces (cite your classmates). So, be sure to read each others' pieces as well. If you feel compelled to sign back on after you've already posted to respond to one of your classmate's ideas, I won't be mad at ya ;-) Have fun...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
Hey Professor
ReplyDeleteGregg Clayton here on a break from my special ed class here on Stockton. I think I'm slowly getting the hang of this stuff. My wife, who is a teacher in Middle Township, would like to attend one of your classes with me. I was wondering if that would be okay.
She won't come next week because Jenn is her aide and she doesn't want to get her nervous when Jenn does her court case. She would like to attend class the following week, when I do my court case with Meradeth. My wife isn't worried about making me nervous!
Anyway please let me know if you're okay with my wife Mary attending class with me on the 19th. You'll find her just as much fun as I am!
Gregg C
I would love it if she would come to class, Greg. Thanks for inviting her...Have her come to class on the 12th and we can just have her step out when Jenn and Mindy present their wiki. How does that sound?
ReplyDeleteMary said that would be great! Thanks and we'll see you on the 12th.
ReplyDeleteGregg C
Hidden Intellectualism Gerald Graff
ReplyDeleteThe theme of this article had my attention from the first two paragraphs. As I read further, my initial interest was piqued even more. Graff was writing about my TED topic (if I don’t change my mind!) I am contemplating a TED talk on passion. I’m thinking about how to use my passions as a teacher, and more importantly, how to find the passion that each and every one of my students has, and use that as a way to teach, motivate and inspire them.
The main point that resonated with me was Graff’s assertion that intellectualism is not so much connected with subjects that are thought of as intellectual, but that it should be viewed as more of a technique that can be instilled in children through the things that they are interested in. I, like many of you, probably spent countless hours in classrooms throughout my education, up to and including college, sitting in a room while my professor droned on about a classic piece of literature. Meanwhile I was itching to get to the latest issue of Rolling Stone to see what was going on with my favorite group, which records were on the rise on the charts, which groups were in the studio, and what Pete Townsend was really thinking about when he composed Tommy.
How much more motivated might I have been to write a really deep, meaningful, well-argued and insightful essay about the story of Tommy, the deaf, dumb and blind boy who lives in a quite vibration land, than to pick apart Shakespeare’s Hamlet? My professor certainly could have still taught me all the basics of writing, but how much more excited would I have been to be able to choose my own topic, and write about something I knew. I’ve always heard advice from writers is to write what you know.
The statement on the bottom of page 145, “It was in reading and arguing about sports and toughness that I experienced what it felt like to propose a generalization, restate and respond to a counterargument, and perform other intellectualizing operations, including composing the kind of sentences I am writing now” that things really gelled for me. It’s not the subject it’s the process! I found that brilliant.
I found the caution in the article valuable also, as Graff warned teachers not to be lazy, to not use student’s interest as an easy way to get them to write, but to teach them techniques about writing with the same passion as if it was a topic the teacher him or herself had chosen.
My belief is this simple philosophy, which I may use for the title of my TED talk, “Discover passions and you’ll reach hearts and minds” can be used with any subject, any child, and in any circumstance. All children have interests, passions, and dreams. To my mind, a teacher needs to find a way to tap into those, and use them any way they can, to instill knowledge and intellectual capacity in all their students.
How exciting it is to be on the coming brink of some huge academic changes! The Graff article makes me excited to be a teacher of the 21st century. It made me think about how the inevitable failure of No Child Left Behind will bring forth a new age question of how to reshape education to best serve this new generation of children. These children born of technology, fast paced globalization, with wide-ranging talents and interests; will call for a brand new approach to what defines intellect.
ReplyDeleteThe definition of intellect for our forefathers was founded upon their interests and passions. In the shifting culture of technology and globalization; the intellect of yesterday is not matching up with the passions of today. Greg seems to agree when he says, “All children have interests, passions, and dreams. To my mind, a teacher needs to find a way to tap into those, and use them any way they can, to instill knowledge and intellectual capacity in all their students”. Children have access to the internet most times in the cell phone in their pockets and thus they have the ability to find an interest in any topic in every corner of the world. To show these children how to use these interests in an academic fashion, could give them the power to use their passions as a career some day. Graff believes that as teachers we need to show children how to “see these interests through ‘academic eyes’”(148).
This article also tied in nicely with the Ken Robinson TED talk we just watched on Monday about creativity. School can become the place for children to delve into their passions and ignite their creativity if we find a way to comingle academics and passions in an intellectual fashion. It seemed as though as a child, Graff felt like his passion for sports was just a side hobby and of no use. These hobbies “satisfy an intellectual thirst more thoroughly than school culture, which seems pale and unreal” (146). If Graff had been allowed to construct persuasive essays for his sports team, graph a math chart of that team’s successes, and paint a Monet inspired piece on his team’s logo; perhaps he would have progressed down a much different road to becoming a sports writer and not a teacher. Perhaps the children of today also squelch these passions because they do not align with the intellectual spectrum and we as educators are hindering the best kept secrets of tomorrow. It is definitely something to take into serious consideration in the classroom!
Unfortunately, thanks to No Child Left Behind; intellect is still strictly measured out by standardized tests in specific content areas. What a waste of passion and dreams! I hear Graff’s calling for a change in the approach of teaching. I just wonder how long it is going to take for the education system as a whole to realize that no child will be left behind when school can be the medium for them to learn the best possible ways to academically, intelligently, and practically use the things that they dream about at night.
-Andria Haneman
I'd certainly say that our first two comments are sufficiently insightful! I guess all I had to do is ask, huh? Great thinking, guys! Greg, I love how you made a personal connection with the reading, and gave us insight into the growth you're experiencing and the ideas burgeoning inside you. Andria, I really like how you highlight connections between Greg's ideas, the Sir Ken Robinson TED talk and our class discussions. Your future students will certainly benefit from your ability to recognize these kinds of relevant connections in discourse. Benjie Bloom would be proud...
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe article Hidden Intellectualism by Gerald Graff was an amazing, insightful piece. This article was so interesting to me because it basically describes my personality and how I am as a reader. Although Graff makes many good points, there are some things that I disagreed with. I will try my best to explain the things that seemed correct and the points that seemed a little too unrealistic for me.
ReplyDeleteThe first thing that I disagreed with was the statement “real intellectuals turn any subject, however lightweight it may seem, into grist for their mill through the thoughtful questions they bring to it, whereas a dullard will find a way to drain the interest out of the richest subject”. I do not necessarily agree with this statement because as the article was saying everyone has different interests. If something is very unexciting to a person, then they will not want to learn it and make minimal effort in trying. However, that does not mean that they are any less intelligent than someone who is interested in it and is willing to do the work; it just makes them lazy.
I do agree with his point that sports do take a bad name for itself when it comes to intellectual information, and that it does take many of the necessary “book smart” skills to completely understand it. Graff made the point that sports makes one learn how to argue, debate, use statistics, have analysis, and much more. This made me think of last week’s lesson on Bloom’s Taxonomy and how sports has some of the more in depth intellectual needs to understand it. It is not memorizing and using basic knowledge, but being able to completely comprehend is valuable.
Another point that Graff made that I agree with is that people do not want to appear like the typical “book smart” high school student. There are a lot of stereotypes that go along with that depending on the school the student attends. It is rare that a high school football star is actually a “geek” on the side. There is a stigma that goes along with being book smart and something needs to be done. Going along with the article, if sports and more topics of interest was involved in the curriculum then maybe being “smart” wouldn’t be such a negative thing to some students.
My final thought is based on Graff’s ideology that a lot more sports should be incorporated into the school system. Like I stated before, I believe that some points of interest should be added to keep the students wanting to learn. However, the base curriculum is there for a reason. If the teacher only taught what the student thought was interesting new doors would never be open for students to learn. Things like the history of the United States must be taught so mistakes are not repeated. People learn about things for a reason and changing it around completely now is not going to help anything. This country needs well rounded citizens that excel in a majority of subjects, not just cars and sports.
As a result, I agreed with the majority of this article. However, some of the topics seemed to go a little overboard for me. It will be interesting to see if this plays a role in the future of school systems. Although it will never happen all the time, maybe some students will strive for projects that they are interested in and will show more creativity and effort.
-samantha schanck
Yes, I do know someone who is street smart but does poorly in school. That would have to be me in high school. Haha. I never really could grasp biology or anything that I wasn't really interested in, but if you gave me chemistry or a subject that I actually enjoyed, I would succeed greatly. I agree with Graff 100%. I think that if you put an individual in a class where they have a great interest, they will achieve great things.
ReplyDeleteI like how he said " that my preference for sports over schoolwork was not anti-intellectualism so much as intellectualism by other means. " As samantha said, "it will be interesting to see if this plays a role in the future of school systems" Well Samantha, it has already taken place. If you look at electives in the high schools there's so much opening up. When I went to school, it was a bunch of electives like art, band, and say journalism. Now in schools they have, oceanography, advance editing in film, calligraphy, clay pottery, graphic design, dance, chorus, theater, etc. Also you can see that they have specific schools for what people want to major in. For example they have a school called charter tech which is a school for the performing arts. Another school is Vo-tech, which is the school for hands on learning such as car repairs and house hold repairs. This is taking effect.
Once again, I 100% agree with him saying that street smarts beat out intellectual smarts. If you notice, the days of when the colleges were looking for someone who got a 1600 on there SATS and a 4.0 GPA average since kindergarten. They are looking for the kid who has good grades, a better than average SAT score, and several extra curricular activities. They desire the well rounded student because you will be more of a benefit to the school, then the kid whos going to sit in his room all day and just study. I think that's why they need a little street smarts so then they can do the clubs, sports, and organizations.
I do agree with Graff. I like this article because I can definitely relate to this article. My brother is the book smart, and I am the street smarts. And I'd take street smarts any day. hahah
Dave Reustle
Graff’s essay is one that I feel every school superintendent, curriculum writer, and teacher should read no matter what age or grade level. Excluding the Type A personality and driver students, a student’s interest in their schoolwork is crucial to their success in school. In fact I strongly believe that extreme disinterest in schoolwork can be detrimental to a student’s academic success.
ReplyDeleteGraff's piece reveals how one-sided our school systems view intellectualism and the means at which to arrive at it. Our school systems seem to “assume that it’s possible to wax intellectual about Plato, Shakespeare, the French Revolution, and nuclear fission, but not about cars, dating, clothing fashions, sports, TV, or video games”. In reality intellectualism all about what an individual can do with any kind information, not simply knowing a plethora of information deemed “intellectual”. If an student can write a deeply intellectual and analytical paper on the role of culture in a television show, I would argue that that student has more intelligence than his classmate who constructs a paper on culture found in A Tale of Two Cities.
If this idea of intelligence were to take over the mentalities of all teachers and school boards, then a huge window of opportunity opens for our students. When intelligence is thought of as the process and not the subject, as Gregg said, teachers can use subjects of interest with their students to draw them into their schoolwork. It is true what Gregg said that all students have “interests, passions, and dreams” and they would be more likely to “take on intellectual identities if we encouraged them to do so at first on the subjects that interest them rather than those that interest us” (Graff). Graff himself is a prime example that intellectualism does not have to be learned through wearisome readings of Shakespeare but can be learned through applying intellectual thought on personal subjects of interest.
In my own school experience I can remember clearly how excited I was to write the few papers or stories that were of my choosing. It was in writing those papers that I learned how to mold sentences and allow them to flow together and how to choose the right words to paint a picture in my reader’s head. These papers were the ones in which I received the best grades on and I also intrinsically enjoyed writing them, which was not so for most other assignments. It was in these papers that I truly learned how to write, just as Graff learned how to intellectually make an argument through sports.
It depresses me to think that students are learning to dread writing, or learning in general, because their first experiences with it are of subjects that they could care less about. It is true that “students do need to read (and write about) models of intellectually challenging writing… if they are to become intellectuals themselves” and necessary literature and history lessons should not be denied to students just because they are not interested in them. Instead teachers should draw students into the world of intellectual thinking, reading, and writing with subjects that they are passionate about first, and then move them into more challenging material. If this approach could take place in every classroom in every school I believe we would see more motivated and intellectual students.
-Stephanie Pyle
I found this article to be intriguing and thought-provoking. Like Gregg, I could identify with the article on a personal basis, as I used to sit in my "boring" classes and think about my favorite musicians and songs. I remember many students who struggled relentlessly in school, but knew an amazing amount of information about non-school subjects, such as cars, music, or sports, and could have an intellectual conversation about their subject of choice. I love how Graff calls this "not anti-intellectualism so much as intellectualism by other means." I think his ideas in this article are a new way of thinking about intellect, and I think that having students complete assignments related to something they are passionate about is a great idea. I agree with Graff that the "potential for literacy training...is seriously underestimated" when it comes to allowing students to write about their subject of choice. He also points out that just because they write about their passion, doesn't automatically mean that they will write well. This is an extremely important point. Allowing them to write about an interest certainly will get them engaged, but they still may have to be taught how to write about these things in thoughtful, reflective ways. Getting them engaged, however is a vital and often extremely difficult step, so by using this method, the teacher can focus on teaching techniques, and not have to worry so much about motivating the students and keeping them from getting bored.
ReplyDeleteThe methods that Graff mentions in this article could be a really great way to get students who have negative attitudes about school more interested in being there. It may also get students who, like Graff, want the approval of the "hoods", to have a way to be intellectual but yet not considered a "geek".
I agree with Andria that the way intellect is measured, partially due to the pressures of No Child Left Behind", is not fair, and even worse, is creating in a lot of students a negative attitude about reading and writing. My hope is that it will eventually be eliminated or at the very least, altered in some way. I believe there are different types of intellect, and not every child can be tested or assessed in the same way.
I also agree with Samantha that the students cannot only be taught what interests them. There are the basics that need to be learned for them to be successful in life. They may not enjoy math or history, but need to learn certain skills and information. This article does make me think, however, about how the students’ interests could be incorporated in many different subjects, to keep them motivated and engaged.
-Melissa Christensen
Not only does encouraging students to read and research topics that they are interested in provide teachers with a vehicle to engage students, but it is necessary to cultivate the students’ abilities to analyze, synthesize and evaluate. Sports, music, art or other passions will nurture one’s intelligence and help show the student what the process of displaying his or her intelligence feels like. Teachers need to create a place where students feel confident to share ideas and make the classroom a forum where students can take intellectual risks and educated guesses.
ReplyDeleteWe must get students to achieve a deeper learning instead of just recollection, if using non-traditional subject matter is a means for a teacher to get proper feedback, then one of these subjects should certainly be used as a starting point. Graff explains that he learned the conventional way to analyze through his interests and found success in other areas, but he had to get to that place via his interest in sports. I really like Gregg's point when he says "Intellectualism is not so much connected with subjects that are thought of as intellectual, but that it should be viewed as more of a technique that can be instilled in children through the things that they are interested in". I completely agree that we need to change the way intelligence is viewed and allow students to find out that it is the way they are looking at the subject matter.
The benefits of teaching with this technique are without number. As Andria says, "To show these children how to use these interests in an academic fashion, could give them the power to use their passions as a career some day." I too believe that nurturing the ideas and passions that our students have will do them a great service for later in life, after high school. Not only does it help them formulate a career path, but as Graff explains, it helps them be a part of a larger community for years to come. Helping students with their path after graduating is important, but perking their interests early and helping them be present and engaged in school is a solid foundation. With this attention and interest, attendance and participation will rise and inevitably academic success.
I certainly hope other education students are reading material like this and that it is a large concentration during those so-called "silly" (an understatement according to those who have been around the education block) workshops. It’s our job to empower our students to take control of their education and help them realize that there is room for their interests in school. Let’s make our classrooms a place where their interests are welcomed and help mold those interests into appropriate lessons.
We must still remember the importance of the traditional subjects in school. In Samantha’s response she talks about opening doors for students by teaching them things outside of their comfort zone. I agree, just imagine the thrill when the inattentive math student brings in her love for vintage couture then goes on to master your geometry class and becomes the brainpower behind a wildly successful atelier in Paris. Oh how proud you will be!
- Jess Gushue le Grange
Throughout my years in school I would have to admit that whenever I was given an assignment where I got to chose my own topic I was always more engaged in the activity. So I completely see where the author is coming from when he discusses the impact that teachers could make by acknowledging what student interests are when issuing an assignment. I think that was the main issue in the article, what teachers can do to help those students who are considered to have street smarts and not academia smarts.
ReplyDeleteI really liked a few comments that Graff made starting with “students do need to read models of intellectually challenging writing … if we encouraged them to do so at first on the subjects that interest them.” I feel as though the best way to engage the students in any lesson or assignment is to relate it to something that the students enjoy. If a teacher can do that then the students will be engaged and learn and become intellectuals because they will be using the tools that are associated with being an intellectual.
Other comments that I felt were insightful were when Graff was discussing his need for approval from “the hoods” but still be “clean cut”. I think a lot of students go through this dilemma of wanting to be accepted by their peers who maybe aren’t doing as well in school, but also prove to themselves that they are smart and not let down adults in their lives. This is a slippery slope when you’re young, you don’t have the foresight to know that it’s better to learn and make yourself knowledgeable, you’re focused on being accepted by your peers. I can remember being a young student who did well in school and thinking to myself, I could be accepted by a lot more people if I didn’t focus so much on school work. This is why as a teacher you need to engage the students with something they’re interested in, because then everyone is learning and no one is being stigmatized as “hood” or “clean cut”.
Ultimately there are going to be students that want to learn and students that think school is a waste of time. It’s the job of the teacher to show all students that there is a reason for school and a reason for learning. I feel as though a great way to do that is by finding a topic the whole class is interested in or by allowing students to individually select their own topic; this way everyone is engaged.
I understood Gerald Ghraff’s main idea in, “Hidden Intellectualism,” to argue that “non-intellectual” interests can be used as subjects of study to encourage literacy and higher-order thinking in students. I agree with this point completely. The literacy text, “Literacy for the 21st Century” by Gail Tompkins, makes the point, ad nauseum, that students who read more have better literacy. By literacy she means that these students read with better comprehension, write more developed ideas and use better grammar. She even explains that very young students begin to develop their literacy by reading environmental text and their own names. After being exposed to those ideas, it seems only obvious that teachers would encourage students to read ANYTHING. Sadly, this idea seems to escape integration into most curriculum. I notice that Lakeside Middle School in Millville, NJ gives students a 20 minute period of the day, where they are required to read something of their own interest. Students are provided with the newspaper and independent reading level books in the classroom and are encouraged to bring in reading materials of their interest. This is an example of the first part of the point Ghraff was intending to make, but this school did not heed Graff’s warning not to end it there. Ghraff stated that “making students’ nonacademic interests an object of academic study is useful . . . for getting students’ attention and overcoming their boredom and alienation, but this tactic won’t in itself necessarily move them closer to an academically rigorous treatment of those interests.” Lakeside does not push their students to see their reading material through “academic eyes,” thereby cheating their student out of the higher order thinking that they would be practicing if they had been required to do so. I feel that Lakeside is trying to do a good thing by allowing their students to have 20 minutes to read and they almost have it, by allowing them to read something of their own choice, but they are not “there” yet by not pushing their students to “make an argument, weigh different kinds of evidence, move between particulars and generalizations, summarize the views of others, and enter conversations about ideas.”
ReplyDeleteThough it was not Ghraff’s main point, I found the way that he explained what makes sports more interesting than academics is the way that sports debates are relatable to the large, national community. The Phillies’ progression in the World Series is a perfect example for us, right now. I can only discuss the relation of genetic mutation to it’s placement on the chromosome with students who; 1) have, at least, had college level genetics, 2) remember what they learned in college level genetics and 3) give a hoot about forming higher order evaluations, synthesis and analysis on this topic. Those factors all together may add up to about 1 out of 20,000 people, which gives me the chance of running into that person nearly impossible. Therefore, I am left in isolation with my chromosomes to ponder. If I want to talk about the Phillies, I can open my mouth absolutely anywhere, with any age group of people and I can have any type of discussion that I may want, or possibly more than I may want. In this way, if I’m feeling particularly lonely one day and I want to relate to someone about something, all I have to do is say, “Phillies” and people will literally come running to talk. I feel that this is an example of the point, which Ghraff means to make in his comment, “When you entered sports debates, you became part of a community that was not limited to your family and friends, but was national and public. Whereas schoolwork isolated you from others. . .”
Another point, related to the point of isolation vs community is of the nature of “fact” that school relays its information to its students. Schools do not relay information as opinion or working theories. No “rival texts, rival interpretations and evaluations of texts” are mentioned. Most students have no idea that bodies of thought actually do have “fan clubs.” The general public has no idea how truly geeky, science-geeks really are! I’m one of them, I really do know! I actually have written in my educational philosophy that I think it is most important that students understand that science is not based in fact. It’s creativity and good scientific procedure that makes science. I feel that we are cheating our students by not giving them the tools and courage to question, things that don’t make sense to them. If you don’t believe that ice melts when it gets warm, go home and test it, but be sure to use good scientific procedure, and if you find that it doesn’t melt, then let’s figure out why. Children are wonderful sources of unbridled creativity and they should be encouraged to use this in all subjects, most importantly in science! We have some cancer to cure here, we need all the help we can get! I makes me proud of the students that I share this class with, to find that many of us also want to change the “old way” of teaching and give our students’ individual creativity more respect! I really feel that Ghraff would agree with me, that students’ brains are not peg boards to pound useless pegs into, they are active and alive. We need to put a thought in their brain and let their own brain find the way that it “fits” and how it will use it, like putting a wire cage up for topiary to grow on. You give it the structure, the will to grow and the gentle guidance and let it find its own way. I enjoy gardening endlessly, and the most important thing that I learned from it is that nature has better ideas than me. When I organize and plan everything down to the detail it looks terrible, but if I give it wiggle room and I work collaboratively with nature, it’s amazing what results I find. I feel that this is also an important lesson to apply to teaching.
ReplyDeleteOverall, I very much enjoyed Ghraff’s “Hidden Intellectualism.” He mostly made points which I agree with completely but had already come to the same realizations on my own. He specifically enlightened me with the relation of schoolwork and sports to community. I generally like to keep to myself and I have never felt a sense of community in the places that I have lived, but for the first time I understand now why I love to be involved in so many sports. I finally understand that, even though, I thought that I didn’t need to feel like part of a community, I actually do. I fulfill my “thirst for community” through my involvement in Rugby, MMA fighting, football and hockey and I had no idea that this is actually what I was doing. The other idea that Ghraff introduced to me in this article was how a teacher can ensure that her students are seeing their nonacademic interests using Bloom’s evaluation, synthesis and analysis. Ghraff mentioned “challenging arguments, debates, problems for analysis and (application of) intricate statistics.” These are all relatively easy and natural things that teachers can encourage their students to engage in after reading nonacademic material.
The "hidden intellectualism" Gerald Graff discusses in this piece definitely exists, and I think most people can think of a prime example of someone how excelled outside of the classroom, but just did not seem to have that passion for academic work. The points Graff makes throughout the excerpt are valid and compelling and definitely got me thinking about today's education system, our class discussion, and methods for engaging students in the classroom and still producing quality work. Graff's personal journey to find the connection between his youth developing his intellectualism by other means and his intellectual status in academia today is a challenge that all teachers encounter while trying to reach their students.
ReplyDeleteGraff makes a point to say, "it makes pedagogical sense to develop classroom units on sports, cars, fashions, rap music, and other such topics,"(148), making an inference that students might be able to write a better analysis of these topics rather than a Shakespearean play. These topics may excite and grab the students attention a bit more, but not if the teacher is really working at their craft. Graft even states himself, "Real intellectuals turn any subject, however lightweight it may seem, into grist for their mill through thoughtful questions they bring to it, whereas a dullard will find a way to drain the interest out of the richest subject," (143). Teachers have the ability to make any assignment exciting, interesting, and meaningful to students; just the same way they can drain the fun and interest out of an assignment. If a teacher is a dullard, they can make a sports assignment dull, uninteresting, and painful too. The assignment topic is not always what matters when it comes to academic work, it is the way it is presented and the passion of the person assigning it. If a teacher has a passion for their subject and is a real intellectual in that topic, according to Graff, they should be able to bring about interest in it somehow.
The problem with assigning topics only students are interested in, even if they are instructed to complete the assignment through academic eyes, is that usually it is something the teacher is not interested in. The teacher, most likely, went into their field because it was something that caught their interest and excited them. The challenge for teachers is to peak the students interest in their subject through using compelling assignments or lectures.
This makes me think of my first year at Stockton, when I was signing up for classes, I needed to take Chemistry II, which is organic chemistry. The stories I had heard about organic chemistry classes had been worse than horror stories; organic chemistry was an entirely new topic for me, all new material, in a subject that was not my best to begin with. I was dreading the class. I signed up for the course with Dr. Griffiths. It ended up being a great class, not because it was easy or I ended up being a natural at o-chem, it was Dr. Griffiths pure passion and excitement about the subject that kept the entire class engaged. His enthusiasm and animation about what he was teaching us made it a great class. Dr. Griffiths’ own brilliance shined through in his teaching and he got gratification from seeing us learn this new material. Even the seemingly most painful subject can be turned into a great class, depending how the teacher goes about it. Dr. Griffiths did not incorporate sports or fashion, but he definitely was not a dullard.
Graff’s point that real intellectuals can turn a subject into an interesting one is probably the best point in the piece. So, I guess what I’m saying is, I disagree with Samantha’s view of this point. I think if a teacher really wants to get students excited about their subject, they have to get excited about it first, and let the students see and feel their own passion.
Just an update on the Graff article. I found a news item in The Current Newspaper about the Somers Point School District's new writing workshop. It lets students choose their own topic. To read the story, which describes a program right out of Graff's article, click on the link below.
ReplyDeletehttp://shorenewstoday.com/nls/index_last_week.htm
If you can't click on it you can copy it and paste it into your browser. It will bring you to the archive page for The Current. The story is in the September 30th issue.
It's nice to see some of the stuff we're reading about is being put into practice!
Graff’s article really hit home for me in many ways. As Dave had mentioned in his post about the extra-curricular activities, I remember having little choice in the classes I took. We got to choose from band, art, or cooking. I was forced to take classes like painting or parenting class (yes parenting class as a sophomore in high school) because I could not play an instrument to be in band. Even in my art classes we were told what to paint, which techniques to use, even what colors to use. There was little room for creativity even in an art class! If writing about the Giants was an option in any of my classes I would have actually put thought into a lot of my work. I believe that shows a lot more about a student if she can compare the rivalry between Eli Manning and Tony Romo with the disputes of the Korean War, rather than just memorizing boring facts about the two political parties. Any student can study and recite events or memorize multiplication problems but without the know it all to apply this knowledge to everyday life and be able to have an intellectual conversation with somebody they cannot really be considered intelligent.
ReplyDeleteThe conversation we had in class last week about a culture of power also takes consideration. Students need to keep up with what is going on around them. Current events, whether it be in sports, or dance, or music, are important for forming a well rounded student. All throughout middle school I, as Teale has also mentioned, had to do current event assignments and bring in articles from papers or magazines that showed something that had happened in the past week. At first I started finding all children articles, or ones that had to do with dance or music, but in search of those articles I found information that also caught my attention. Some were sports related, others had to do with politics (yuck), many things that were out of my comfort zone. I started out only searching for topics of interest but broadened my horizons in the process.
Teachers should find a way to incorporate both aspects of intelligence into assignments and assessments. Book smarts should never take a back seat but cannot be the main focus of education. In reading the “Hidden Intellectualism” I got to thinking how behind I am in “real life.” Sometimes I get so caught up in the “facts” that it is hard for me to just see things how they are and have a conversation about them. When Graff mentioned, on page 146, “the real intellectual world, the one that existed in the big world beyond school” it got me thinking how behind I am in my knowledge of the world beyond the walls of Stockton College and Ruby Tuesdays. This article has definitely encouraged me to make more of an attempt to increase my “street smarts” in hopes to gain true intelligence.
- Brittany Falsetti
After reading “Hidden Intellectualism” by Gerald Graff, I was overwhelmed with memories from high school. I remember the musically inclined rocker types who never seemed to be paying attention to anything the teachers had to say. The jocks who seemed to do just enough school work to get by and play in their next game. But mostly I remember myself, and how easily I could be distracted from my all important school with something that really interested me. During spring break of my senior year of high school as a family we were going to visit the three colleges that I had decided was where I wanted to spend my next four years. On the trip we were going to Clemson, Florida State, and Salisbury, but before the college visit extravaganza we were spending a couple of days in Charleston, SC. Why is this important, I bet you are wondering? Well in my A.P. English class we were reading Frankenstein, my interest in this book was so minuet that I went out and bought the book on tape. I loathed reading Classic novels with every fiber of my being. (I am pretty sure the only one I actually enjoyed was William Shakespeare’s “Midsummer Night’s Dream” and that was only because we “acted” the whole book out in class, never an assigned reading to do alone, at home) SO, my mother discovers the tapes, and loses it completely, but her rant instantly morphed into the teacher from Charlie Brown, wa wah wa wa, you get the picture; so in our hotel room in Charleston my mother decided that I was not allowed to go to Florida State, because how in the world would I make it in college if I am go to take short cuts. I was, however, able to talk my way to Clemson University, where I learned my mother is always right.
ReplyDeleteBasically, I am an intelligent person, I have the memory of an elephant, I just keep retaining and absorbing everything that I hear and see. BUT I just despised reading. Now my experiences with school may have been a bit different than Graff’s but I get the feeling that teachers didn’t understand what was really important. My whole time at Clemson I barely cracked a book and someone I just got by. It was not until I became a flight attendant did I realize the great pleasure that is in reading a good book, and finally from reading in genres I truly enjoyed I was able to return to the Classics with new eyes. It also helps when I am not required to do something; I am a bit of a rebel after all.
Really what it comes down to is I know now what I suspected all along, just because I didn’t want to read Frankenstein or Shakespeare did not make me less intelligent, I was just intelligent in other ways. I truly believe that all people are like that, not everyone is going to love school in the traditional sense. Every child has their own needs as a student and as a future teacher it is important to plan lessons that will engage all the students. Engaging your students with original angles on traditional lessons may help even students who just “get it” understand the concepts more completely.
-Emily Asay
Teale, why would you want to talk about the Phillies??? Just kidding. On to the intellectual......
ReplyDeleteFirst let me say that all the prior posts were very well put and informed. This takes me directly to what spoke to me in Graff's "Hidden Intellectualism": the power of labeling and the crippling effect of fear. As I was reading the piece I was thinking about society's reluctance to validate certain types of knowledge as valuable-argually his main point. Perhaps because I am an "amiable," I began to think about classroom experiences I have had and some I observed and how students feel. Many people have very deep fears of being perceived as stupid, ignorant, not getting it, uneducated, take your pick. We learn to label early (anyone in Elementary Ed observes that)and that label, directly associated with a value placed on one's displayable knowledge, sticks.
First, it keeps people from actively participating in class. Even as an adult student, I distinctly remember my first semester here at a "real" college (opposed to the gasp! community college where I earned my A.A., which an associate labeled inferior)and feeling very intimidated that at least one idiot had undervalued my education. This speaks to Delpit's article where she points out that students who feel undervauled feel disempowered, and that dissociates them completely from the learning process. Like Teale said, this is cheating students, just a different form.
Brittany, you mentioned the relevance of this article to our discussion of a culture of power, and I agree. Graff relates being forced to choose between being literate and being tough (144). The fear has the power to perpetuate stereotypes and class divisions, which therefore keeps a culture of power in place.
I wonder sometimes if that well established University professor is ever afraid of striking up an intelligent conversation about "The Simpsons" because his colleagues might label his as "slipping", dumbing-down, or losing touch with what is "important."
Gregg, I completely agree with your opening point (and not because you are my partner)which stresses technique over subject. If I had a stamp marked RELEVANCE and red ink I would have stamped this many times. Graff's final sentence on page 145 struck me hard:
"Sports after all was full of challenging arguments, debates.....AS SCHOOL CONSPICUOUSLY WAS NOT." I see such and obligation now to make the point of relevance in student's lives. This not only keeps their interests, but by valuing what is valuable to them they own their own learning, conquer fear, and feel empowered.
Meredith
How about rewriting the opening of the article: What a waste that an academic facility so fully funded with intellectual opportunites through brilliant professors, extensive library holdings and up-to-date technological equipment fails to harness the creative learning potential of its students.
ReplyDeleteHey Meredith
ReplyDeleteI love that! I'm so glad you are my partner. Your rewritten opening is very well thought out.
It's a shame that the education system places so much emphasis on "academic interests" and Gerald Graff's article clearly explains why. He appreciated sports through analyzing, arguing, and intellectualizing facts with both strangers and peers. Like Gerald Graff's article and Melissa Christensen's blog, I too found pleasure in subjects such as Art and Music because it allowed me to be creative, energetic, and excited to learn. More importantly, it allowed me to be myself. I was able to self reflect and understand who I really was as a person during these classes. I focused my attention on attending various museums, unique art exhibits, and drawing in my spare time. I enjoyed discussing the controversies, beauty, and importance of Contemporary Art with complete strangers and how art challenged the mind while being completely disturbing at the same time. Yet, our high school curriculum had us focusing our attention on mastering the SAT exam, reading and critiquing countless Nobel Prize novels, and making sure we had a 3.7 to enter the National Honors Society. More often than not, people become empathetic and impatient with a given subject, due to the fact that it does not suit the individual's interest. If the arts were Incorporated into the material presented, students who function on an expressive level, (generally creative and visual learners) would better understand the material which is presented.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading Graff's article, I reflected back to Benjamin Zander's TED talk about the importance of classical music and how he captured the audience's attention through humor, movement, and overall sensitivity. Students would certainly be more interested in learning what would sometimes be portrayed as boring subject material if only teachers presented their material like Zander presented his speech.
And in Stephanie's words, "In my own school experience I can remember clearly how excited I was to write the few papers or stories that were of my choosing. It was in writing those papers that I learned how to mold sentences and allow them to flow together and how to choose the right words to paint a picture in my reader’s head," I couldn't agree more. As is overly apparent in day-to-day interaction, the best approach to communicating with any group or individual is by first understanding their desire and building off that into the material being presented or conveyed. It seems that Graff has a similar stance and position; he agrees that the material presented by the school board and society is crucial to our accepted development and progression, however, the material fails to capture and engage the audience in the necessary manner. If the education system could compromise and include subjects such as Art, Music, and Sports into the "academic interests," students would benefit tremendously.
-Kristin Ciccone
Hidden Intellectualism
ReplyDeleteGraff’s piece was amazing; not only in his writing technique, but also with the various subjects he touches upon and compares: the jock to the geek, the knowledge of fashion and natural instincts. It’s all relevant in education and many students don’t know how to hinder that knowledge and make it applicable. I’m currently in my introductory semester for the education program and am learning the different ways students learn: auditory, visual, and kinesthetic. Auditory learners can sit in class and listen to hour long lectures while absorbing all the information. Visual learners need visuals whether it’s photos or actual texts to look at. Kinesthetic learners learn by using their hands. Jocks or natural athlete’s are typically kinesthetic learners which is why many of them don’t do well in school. Teachers are being taught now how to adapt different learning styles into their lesson plans. In the upcoming years, there should be a significant drop in “drop out” percentages, because the new generations of teachers are being given this new information. We will be able to teach to every learning style and therefore more students will be able to understand and pass.
In the world of advertising, one can have all the correct training in marketing a product and do the necessary research, but that doesn’t mean that person’s presentation is going to be the best or even chosen. Any and all commercials and marketing are aimed to please the lowest intellectual in society. The number one seller is “sex”, and a person with “street smarts” and not “book smarts” is more likely to come up with a marketing angle that focuses on “give the people what they want.” It doesn’t mean that the person with the “street smarts” marketing the product is unintelligent; he or she just knows what is more likely to grab the audience’s attention.
I loved reading Greg’s response to the piece and how it inspired his TED talk. Like Andria, the article reminded me of the TED talk we watched about schools killing creativity. Ken Robinson’s wife is an example of “street smarts”. She was born to dance and it wasn’t recognized until someone believed something to be seriously wrong with her. All it turned out to be was a physical need to move and flow. This also reminds me of a television show I watch called So You Think You Can Dance. Many of the dancers learned on the street and taught themselves how to dance with no formal training. When it is time for them to pick up formal choreography and switch from a “B-Boy” or a “Popper” to the Matador in a Paso Doble, many of the “street smart” dancers adapt well and much better than first expected. It only goes to show how much can be harnessed from a person when given the right opportunity.
Let us look at a person I consider to be a master of rhyme, meter, and Iambic Pentameter: Eminem. He repeated his freshman year three times and dropped out of school by the age of 17. Had he be given the right teacher, the right atmosphere, and the right classes, he could have finished school and gone off to college on a writing scholarship. Eminem has an ear for diacritics; the accent marks that give words different sound; the difference between desert— to abandon someone— and the desert. It’s really hard for people to diagram poetry, because not everyone has an ear that can differentiate diacritics. Despite Eminem’s lack of education, he is still a successful rapper and artist.
It all comes down to the teacher. Since we are all on the path of becoming educators, we will be much more prepared to attend to the needs of every kind of learner and student.
When I first started to read this article the first thing I thought about what it could be about by reading the title. Hidden intellectualism is such a common thing, so many students or people in general have different types of intellect whether its book smarts or street smarts. So who can really define what a “real intellect” is? Graff starts out by stating what a waste it is for someone to be so intelligent in many things but can’t seem to apply any knowledge to academic work. Well why not channel their street smarts into the classroom to aid their academic work. I have had some teachers who do this and it is definitely a big help when they bring topics from outside the classroom and join them with ones inside the classroom. Graff speaks a lot about sports being a street smart; I believe this to be a knowledge that is very impressive to have. There is so much to know about sports, and to contain all that information is amazing. My older brother is a very intelligent guy and who would have thought his intelligence first sparked at a very young age when he knew everything about sports! Our parents would tell us how he could hold a conversation about sports with any adult when he was still a child. I believe this knowledge really helped mold his intelligence to this day, and who would of thought sports was the basis of his intelligence. Anyways, this goes along with what Graff stated on page 142 “we associate the educated life, the life of the mind, too narrowly and exclusively with subjects and texts that we consider inherently weighty and academic”. Our intelligence is not just about the history and math we learn in school and it’s not just about sports and fashion. I believe that it is both together that really shows intelligence, not one or the other but both.
ReplyDeleteThis topic can also be discussed through our culture and I think everyone could relate to this in someway. Graff says on page 144 that it was not all good to be book-smart. This is something that is true for every culture. To this day there are still “nerds” and they still get made fun of. It’s unfortunate that some have to hide their book smarts to fit in. Every type of intelligence should be welcomed just like street smarts should be.
I also like how Greg connected the TED talk to this article as did some others. The first talk we listened to grabbed peoples attention because he incorporated many things that people could relate too. I can also say that I am more inclined to do our TED talks because I can talk about something that I care and know enough about, it’s not some boring history topic that I could care less about ha.
Finally, I really liked the quote Graff brought in from Ned Laff that the challenge “is not simply to exploit students’ nonacademic interests, but to get them to see those interests through academic eyes”. I was trying to understand what he was really trying to say, he’s saying that yes street smarts are important but they aren’t enough. They need to be applied to our academic work and I feel like there would be a large development of creativity this way. Graff’s last line in his article is very strong and sums up the article very well. He says that street smarts and book smarts can co-exist after all and I agree with that one hundred percent.
I thought Gerald Graff’s Hidden Intellectualism was very interesting. I believe we can relate a lot of what he talks about to today’s academic atmosphere but I also believe some of his ideas are outdated. When I was in middle school, the bad kids or as Graff refers to them, the “hoods“, were the popular kids, everyone wanted to be friends with them and wanted to be one of them. They always seemed to be the “cool kids” that everyone was always talking about, but when I got to high school, I noticed that it all began to change. The “cool kids” were no longer the “hoods” but they were the smart kids who were at the top of their class. Everyone then started to want to be like the smart kids and the bad kids became increasingly less popular. The prom king in my school was also the Valid Victorian, however I am sure that this is not the case everywhere but it is an emerging trend.
ReplyDeleteI do agree with however, that “we associate street smarts with anti-intellectual concerns” and I believe that is something we need to change. Street smarts should be considered intellectual smarts because kids who have street smarts know how the world really works and sees the world for what it really is. However, we need to let the kids with the street smarts know that they can turn their knowledge into something useful in an academic setting. We can’t just label these kids “hoods” and wipe our hands of them. They have so much to offer the world and should be encouraged in school. We need to get them involved in academic settings.
Getting kids involved can be difficult because they just aren’t interested, well it is our job as educators to get them interested. We need to spark their intellect with something that they enjoy and something they might not consider work. Graff talks about how he only wanted to read sports magazines when he was in school, which by reading magazines even though he didn’t know it he was learning. I observed in a resource room for kids who couldn’t read in a middle school. The teacher would assign them reading homework and send them home with car, sports, or teen magazine, depending on the students interests, and they always did their homework. The next day she would ask them questions about what they had read the night before and they always cheerfully responded to her questions. The kids were engaged in this learning process because it was interesting to them
If we as teachers give our students this type of freedom, give them some choices in assignments, they will be more eager to learn. Let them right papers on something they want to write about, let them read something they want to read, and they will be more engaged in the classroom. They will feel more comfortable about learning and it might even spark their interest in other subjects and tasks that they need to do. If we encourage our students to take an active interest in the things that they love, they might then take an active interest in school.
What is education? To me education is learning and opening the door to new experiences. If you were to ask a traditional teacher, with a directive teaching approach, he or she would probably say reading, writing, and math. However, we are now in the 21st century and times are changing and so are the students. Hopefully, teachers today would say that education goes beyond those three subjects. For example, inspiring your students, using hand on approaches, learning who one is, preparing one for life after college, and allowing one to be creative. “The most important thing a teacher can do is to teach them to read, write, speak, compute, thing, and create through constant, rigorous instruction, culturally instruction” (Wollfolk, 190). Graff’s article implies that teachers need to know their students and their student’s interest in order to engage them in a high level of thinking.
ReplyDeleteMany students dread going to school today for the same reasons we did. We have all been there. Sitting in class daydreaming about things that interest us, instead of listen to the teacher’s boring lecture about some novel or wondering why do I need to learn this or am I ever going to use this in the real world. Graff’ stated “the real intellectual world, the one that existed in the big world beyond school” (146). This is way Graff’s piece is important because it shows that there is much more to intellectual learning then just the traditional subjects. Not only does it interest them, but also it allows us as teachers to get to know what they like as individuals. The students may be able to teach us a thing or two. I feel that incorporating this style of intelligence would motivate students. Graff’s “non academic” way in the end ends up being more of an impact because it shows that intelligence is more then just about getting good grades.
Gregg said, “I’ve always heard advice from writers is to write what you know.” It’s a known fact that people’s best work comes with passion and drive. “It was in reading and arguing about sports and toughness that I experienced what it felt like to propose a generalization, restate and respond to a counterargument, and perform other intellectualizing operations, including composing the kind of sentences I am writing now” (145). I agree with Gregg and Graff, while it is important for students to about the subject, it is the process that is most valuable. Andria said “how the inevitable failure of No Child Left Behind will bring forth a new age question of how to reshape education to best serve this new generation of children”.
Teachers should find a way to integrate both parts of intelligence into their classroom. I agree with Britney when she said, “Book smarts should never take a back seat but cannot be the main focus of education”. It is important to have that intelligence as a strong foundation, because in the end the foundation is what you build on. So whether you are street smart or book smart never stop learning.
PS GO PHILLIES :)
What a great article!!! I do believe like Stephanie mentions, that every superintendent, curriculum writer, and teacher should at some point in their careers read this article no matter what grade level they are teaching. This article hits close to home for me as well. My brother, an aspiring art major, who of course hasn't said anything to our parents yet, because he knows they would disagree completely. It hurts even more because my parents are constantly comparing him to me, the book smart child of the family. When little does he know I wish I had half his talent. I really couldn't tell you the last book my brother read except of course his art books. It makes me so sad to know that students are dreading school and counting down the seconds for the bell to ring. Graff makes an interesting point in saying it's not just important to be book smart nor just street smart. We have to start "recognizing that the two can coexist after all" (148). Many including members of my family can't grasp the idea of being both book and street smart. As Dave mentioned in his blog comment, colleges are looking for a well adjusted student who could contribute the most to that school's environment. They are looking for the student who is a great student, plays sports, is a member of clubs all while showing qualities of a leader. As a professor in Graff's article mentions, it "is not simply to exploit students' academic interests, but to get them to see those interests through academic eyes" (147). As teachers, we must allow we must allow our students to excel in every way possible. We must encourage them and provide an environment where they feel free to speak their interests. Students who know from an early age that they would like to learn more about say cars, electronics, and even beauty school can opt to go to Vo-tech. These students are wasting no time in by excelling in what interests them the most. I agree with Graff when he says that is with "these discussions with my friends about toughness and sports, I think, and in my reading of sport books and magazines that I began to learn the rudiments of the intellectual life" (145). It was through his street smart that he learned how to construct a great argument which is the key to writing a great essay as it was forever drilled in our brains from our wonderful past teachers. I finally understand the importance of creating a Google reader account. You aren't just asking us to subscribe for homework purposes but for whatever is interesting us at the time. This way we are constantly gaining knowledge and as future teachers we can never stop learning. We have to keep up with our students and their interests in order for them to succeed.
ReplyDeleteAphrodite Triantafillou
It is intimidating to follow so many insightful and passionate comments on Graff's article.
ReplyDeleteThe second sentence in Graff’s excerpt makes me laugh. I am the opposite. All my life I have heard “what a shame - she is so smart and yet she has no “street smarts” or common sense.”
I was an avid reader and thinker since I was a child. I only wish I were street smart like my mom, brother and husband. I loved to read from the very beginning. To this day, I will read almost anything I see (cereal box, poster in the workplace) until I finish it, or discover it is unworthy. Writing this made me realize that I now have an answer to that “what is the one thing that you would bring to a deserted island?” question. I would bring something to read.
Education has changed significantly since I attended school in the 1960’s and 70’s. I learned how to read and write and speak well because of my elementary and junior high school education. The foundation was strong and my teachers were enthusiastic and encouraged both creativity and learning the essentials. My teachers taught me what I needed to know so I could read and write about the topics that interested me – music and politics. Today teachers are frustrated because they have to teach to the test and have little time to work with the students in a way that would inspire them or fully tap into their individual talents.
Introspective from an early age, I found that reading and writing was a wonderful way to explore and be expressive. Music, however, was the great equalizer between the street-smart kids and me. My passion is still music. I have always been tuned into the words, the melody, the harmony, the instruments, the beat, the orchestration and the overall production. In 1967, my classmate and I would discuss and debate everything about the Sgt. Peppers Lonely Hearts Club Band album. Music, like sports brings many people into the conversation.
In high school, classes were boring most of the time. Thank goodness that I learned how to read and write well in the early grades.
As so many have said before me, I agree that a good foundation is necessary and that just giving interesting reading and writing assignments isn’t going to make little Dick or Jane a literary genius. A skilled teacher can inspire a student to find a way to fit their interests or street smarts into a lesson.
Andrea brought up a great point with a controversial artist. Eminem’s music and its construction is a great teaching tool for an English, Math, Music lesson. His life story could be a Social Studies lesson. Baseball cards are a great way to introduce statistics.
Although I haven’t read Rolling Stone in a number of years, I remember the articles were always well written. A Rolling Stone article could be a great teaching tool for an English class.
As new teachers who will see NCLB get LB, we will have the opportunity to support the intellect that is in all of students. How exciting is that?
This particular article struck a personal chord with me as I have always considered myself to have many gripes with the education system. There have been many great posts on this subject and I am posting mine rather late (another example of what I'm going to be talking about), but I think anyone can relate to this topic. All through grade school I struggled with my grades. It wasn't because I was unintelligent, because when I put forth effort I did well. The issue was that I just didn't care. I was interested in what Iwas interested in and did not have the slightest concern to put effort into anything else.
ReplyDeleteIt was never a matter of what is popular or not. In Graff's article, he mentions a struggle of hiding his intellectualism in fear of being ostracized or made fun of because of it. I definitely agree that not caring about grades used to be more "cool" but now it seems it is the cool thing to actually care about grades. Myself, I never cared about it being cool or not, I just knew I didn't care. I always had a feeling school wasn't authentic and that it wasn't real. Throughout high school I got better grades, but i still never cared. I never put any more effort than I absolutely had to and the subject matter almost never appealed to me (except some items in Literature classes such as Beowulf, Shakespear, etc.). I think it was likely a sense of not enjoying being forced to do things. I never liked being told to read a certain book or do a certain amount of work. For some reason, I just found doing things like that was a waste of time. I could spend that time doing enjoyable things and becoming more involved in my hobbies. Graff described himself as a classic anti-intellectual and I can definitely relate to that feeling. Now that I am in college I keep up to my work generally better and I have improved my grades significantly, but I do admit I feel like an outsider in a class room most of the time. Not physically or socially, but I always just felt like I was not meant to be in a class room. It's kind of a weird statement to make and I can't pinpoint exactly while I feel that, but I just feel like most of the time that I am simply going through the motions. There are exceptional classes. I have a business and marketing class a few semesters ago with a teacher (i cant remember his name) that really made me look forward to going to class. He would hold the class in a conversational tone, starting off by asking people how their weekends went. Somehow the conversation would turn into being about the current reading, but it was done seamlessly ... you almost didn't notice the topic shift from weekend storytelling to the subject at hand. It didn't feel like a class and it made me want to be more involved in the reading. We put our own personal ideas forward often and I didn't have that "confined" feeling.
The funny part is that I want to be a teacher. It may seem weird since I have so many bones to pick with the education system, but I want to be one of the teachers that I liked. I want to be the exception for somebody who may not be a typical "book smart" kid. I have no disrespect to those who are book smart, very studios and get only excellent grades. Those people are hard-working, dedicated and deserve praise, but I know I just can't relate to them. I also don't believe people should be made fun of for being "nerds" or hide their effort in school. It's still them working hard and should be praised and I think, as some other said in this post, that it is more cool now to be book smart than it's ever been in the past. To me, almost everyone is or has the capacity to be an intellectual because there are so many categories of intellecualism. If some kid is obsessed with comic books and he knows all of that information, he's intellectual. I think if the education system could find a way to delve into individual interests of students and try to combine that with general knowledge in some seamless way, more people would be successful and we'd so alot more output from students.
Andrea wrote, "Since we are all on the path of becoming educators, we will be much more prepared to attend to the needs of every kind of learner and student," which I found to be quite inspiring. It's reassuring to know that we can take the information Professor Hall is teaching us in FSC and utilize it towards becoming successful teachers with eager to learn students.
ReplyDeleteLynn, you are not alone. My husband still shakes his head at me at least once every few months saying " How can you be so smart and have no common sense???" Of course, he isn't being mean about it--I know street smarts aren't my forte!
ReplyDeleteMeredith
Thanks Meredith! It is good to know that I am not alone :-)
ReplyDeleteI read Graff again and feel the need to throw some sh*t into "the game."
Michael Bloomberg began paying students for getting good grades and parents for making sure that their children made it to school. I did a short presentation on this in Ed Psych and brought it up again this semester. It is not a popular idea amongst my peers at Stockton. One professor made it known that she didn't approve.
One of Graff's major points is about missed opportunities to teach a student by exploiting (my term) his or her interests.
It is simply functional. We get paid to go to work. I don't go to "work" for free. I am interested in cash. I give the new puppy treats to train him to relieve himself outside. At nine weeks, he would just as soon pee in the house. Eventually he will learn that he is supposed to pee outside. Right now, he is interested in treats!
If a parent gets paid when Johnny and Suzie attend school regularly, the parent benefits and Johnny and Suzie are in "the game".
Incentives are useful. Let Johnny or Suzie read and write about sports or Barbies or Sponge-Bob if it sustains their interest. If the child stays home, he isn't in "the game" at all.
If you can entice a reluctant eater to the table, he may just eat something. Lets get the kids to the table. lets get the kids in the game any way we can.
Lynn Rosch-Brancato
An intellectual Person is not only book smart but is well rounded and diverse in subjects such as cars, games, sports and fashion. People should be given the opportunity to be judged by all of their characteristics and not simply on their book smarts. Book Smarts do not teach people how to tie their shoes, cross the street safely or to throw a curve ball. It is teachers’ responsibility to find a way to get through to each one of their students whether it be through sports, television, or a common hobby. But in doing so they’ll be able to broaden their horizon from cars and games to Shakespeare and history.
ReplyDelete“Real Intellectuals turn any subject, however lightweight it may seem, into grist for their mill through the thoughtful questions they bring to it, whereas dullard will find a way to drain the interest out of the richest subject. This is what we will be doing later in the semester through our TED talks. I have already chosen to talk about the Air National Guard and portray to the class why I believe it is a positive move for anyone trying to move forward in their futures. It is a way to grow as and individual, meet new people, a means of making money, having your education paid for and most importantly to teach discipline. By my being interested in what I am telling the class my enthusiasm will reflect through what I am saying hopefully highlighting to the class how I really feel about the Guard. The same is true for students, if we allow students to write or talk about things that interest them instead of textbook characters like President Washington or Clara Barton they’ll have a new excitement in school and a more profound yearning to want to learn- or at least want to pay attention more so if it is something that interests them.
Sports are a prime example as to something that is a diverse interest to the whole country. Whether it is recreational, high school, college or professional the majority of the United States shows an interest in sports. However, what most intellects overlook is sports are not only very competitive but are full of challenging arguments, debates, problems of analysis, and intricate statistics that are crucial to the game and ending result of the game or season. For example, my boyfriend graduated from Stockton last May with a bachelors in business; he can tell you absolutely everything you want to know about NFL history but getting him to read a book is harder than pulling teeth from an old man’s mouth with no teeth. What I’m trying to get at is that intellectualism shouldn’t be measured by how much knowledge you grasp from reading a book however it should be measured by the whole picture.
I’m willing to bet that if teachers did a study that entailed them giving a class assignment to write and project to the class about their favorite book or favorite sports team that they’d extract much more information and enthusiasm out of the assignment than doing the same project on Shakespeare. “It is not to exploit through nonacademic interests, but to get them to see those through academic eyes.” I agree with Graff,” schools and colleges are missing an opportunity when they do not encourage students to take their nonacademic interests as objects of academic study.” In order to learn and retain the information students have to have an interest otherwise they are zoning out. If they could take courses that interested them you would see an increase in grades and participation.
Great doc that relates to this weeks discussion..
ReplyDeletehttp://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ddjrk6cUJ20
from HBO
Schools today put too much emphasis on the academic side of teaching. In order to be considered smart a student needs to be able to read material by Dostoevsky, Camus, Shakespeare, Pirandello, and Kafka. They also need to be able to write papers and explications on these authors’ works. Another smart quality is being able to seat still for forty-five minutes and listen to a lecture on vectors and forces. School is not about developing a student’s natural interests or at least not all students’ interests. School’s nowadays only care about meeting the criteria and getting the grades during standards testing time. The schools system ignores students that are not interested in the academic life. These students are looked upon as being lazy. These students however can be the most innovative people in the world.
ReplyDeleteStudents tend to be more interactive when talking about something they find interesting. Graff mentions that he had analytical conversations with his friends about sports not knowing that they were analyzing the information. A good teacher can see when students are doing this and can take advantage of the situation by turning it into something academic in nature. One day during speech class my friends and I were having a heated debate about Nascar during our break. Our professor walked in and over heard us. She decided that she wanted us to go up front and deliver a persuasive speech for or against Nascar. A lot of students delivered great speeches and either made us love or hate Nascar. However, there were others who completely failed at getting their point across. My professor took a little squabble between friends into a productive class assignment.
Not all students are capable of using their street smarts and translating them into academic smarts. That is another point that Graff makes in the packet we read. This is only successful if the student can make an academic connection to the material. It will not always be a successful tactic or technique but it can lead a lot of unfocused students in the right path. It can show them that school can be fun and that there is a lot to learn. That school is not necessarily about hard to understand concepts. As a teacher it is good to know how to turn an everyday situation into an enriching experience that will help students grow as individuals and thinkers. That what a student is interested in can be used for school and it is not a useless source of information. It is not the norm but it is not wrong. A teacher needs to be there to encourage a student, help them develop their own, unique ideas, and help them realize that they can learn from anything in the world.
just wanted to try it out, it works.
ReplyDeleteHidden Intellectualism
ReplyDeleteThis essay captured my attention from the first paragraph. I believe that Gerald Graff’s essay Hidden Intellectualism arguments from the beginning in how society does not encourage some students, who Graff called “street smarts” to get educated and to succeed. Instead the system pushes these youngsters away just because they are not the usual”book smart” kids like some of the other students at school. “We associate the educated life, the life of the mind, too narrowly and exclusively with subjects and texts that we consider inherently about Plato,, Shakespeare, the French Revolution, and nuclear fission, but not about cars , dating, clothing fashions, sports, TV, or video games.” I agree with the writer because I have found that many people judge the “street smart” students and other individuals because they did not continue an education after they graduate from high school. Society negatively criticizes these individuals, as if they were not “smart enough” to continue with further education. Some graduate High School and they decide to work at a body shop instead of continuing college because they find interest in cars. It does not mean that these individuals are not “smart enough” because they have different interests in life. It is a great possibility that they do not chose to follow college because they never felt stimulated at school by the educational system.
Graff’s theory is a valuable way to use student’s interest to engage them in school. I strongly agree with the author because if a student is more interested in the lesson that is being taught, they are more likely to pay attention and actually he or she is learning something of significance. Graff also uses the words “cars, dating, clothing fashions, sports, TV, or video games” to make these less “book smart” students engage towards their schooling. My husband for example moved to the United States in 1987 when he was 23 years old. He never attended high school or college in the U.S. He was always “street smart” according to his family and his passion was not the books but the machines. He found enthusiasm in engines; from a small motorcycle engine to an electric massive machine. Today, he works successfully as a senior mechanic in a very well known corporation in Sayreville, NJ. He was never pushed neither by his parents nor by his teachers at school because he never showed interest in his studies. He hated math and science; he said he hated to read novels, or poems.
The author indicates that students that “are interested in sports or cars” will tune out education if they are not given the chance to express their intelligence. In addition I agree with Graff when he makes an argument and reveals that the schools should give all students; whether they are interested in sports, electric guitar, or Shakespeare, the chance to show their genuine intelligence and passion. I agree with the author because for example my daughter’s boyfriend attends the Ocean County’s vocational school. There he is learning mechanics for boats; this too requires intellectual, but many judge him because he does not read a literature book and instead he gets magazines in how to repair cars. Neither the school system nor his other teachers pushed him to do well in his regular classes; however I have to say that his vocational school teacher always reports that he excels in the program.
I think that both are imperative in different ways; to be “street smart” is an incredible ability, to be able to sympathize with others. As well, to be “book smart” is important because it helps you to get through; by being able to communicate to anyone through logic and reasoning is something that usually you don’t learn from being in the streets.
In my experience with children they seem to respond better to what they like. In a perfect world a teacher can make a lesson plan based on every students interest in the classroom.
ReplyDeleteBut, that is not possible or is it? Can there be a common ground when learning literature and learning about famous rock stars? Perhaps, the teacher can integrate both worlds into the lesson. The lesson no matter what the lesson is, should be based on critical thinking skills.
For example, Sting is a rock star but also a literature teacher. If I were that literature teacher I might give the option of the students picking a Sting song to write about or perhaps do a writing sample on Sting's past life.
The point I am attempting to make is this, If the student is interested in the subject than the result might be a really good thoughtful paper. To be able to debate, argue, and make a point is really a sign of being intelligent. So, I do agree with Graff's article.
I have been in classes where the teacher's passion for Milton is not the same as 90% of his class. Although, I like Milton, he is not in my top ten reading selections to pick from. But, it is important to understand Milton and other literature greats to understand history. Even if I didnt like Milton I had to pass his class to graduate and there was no way to relate Milton to sports so I could focus better! I had to teach myself how to appreciate Milton for what he was and also learn from his writing style.
So, although it is a great idea to give your students the option to learn what they want it does not really teach them what you need in the real world. When students go out in the real world they will encounter parts of their life they will have no interest in at all. How will they deal with these issues if they have not trained themselves to learn from things that might not interest them?
I believe it is important to have a happy medium when teaching students. You cannot just pick cool subjects to talk about. A good teacher should be able to interest their students on various issues the class is learning about and compare and contrast the issues with possible current ones the students can relate to in their own lives.
There will always be a student or two that will be interested in just what they want to be interested in. I do not believe that just giving into what ever they want to do is the answer. Like I said before, the goal should be to interest your students on learning the subject at task and if possible relating it the student's world.
I can relate strongly to this article. I have a cousin who all his life hated school. The schools said that he had a learning disability. I am not sure as to what this disability is but he was labeled as a child with a disability. The problem was that in many things outside the classroom it seemed as though he was quite the contrary. For example, if you were to explain to him that you had a problem with your brakes and explained what you experience he might be able to tell you what is wrong. If he could not diagnose a problem from explanation he would ask to take a look and usually find the problem. When he graduated high school we tried to send him to a technical school to be a diesel mechanic. He went but was disgusted with the school work. He was told that the classes were most shop work and little book work. If you could not tell he was also a hands-on learner. He had to be able to touch and do rather than sit and listen. But because of this need to do he dropped out of the school. My cousin’s case is similar to Graff’s case in that, Graff knew all about different sports where as my cousin new all about repairing of vehicles. Now I am not Graff does not explain if he was labeled as a child with special needs but he was anti intellectual. Graff’s childhood was also at an earlier time period where such things may not have existed yet.
ReplyDeleteI feel that sometimes students are label as Special needs because they may not speak during discussion in the class or outside the class. This may be incorrect because maybe it is that the topic is just not interesting to them and that is why they do not speak. Maybe as Graff says, talk about baseball or video games then we might have a class of intellect. If the student knows the subject like say a teacher knows subject matter then a discussion can go rampant and become an exciting one.
I don’t think that teachers are wrong for thinking that intellectualism lies within the curriculum. It is what they are taught and it is just passed on. As a math major and prospective math teacher I thought about this in some manner. One day I thought what is the best way to get math taught to every student? I came to the conclusion, before reading this article, I should try to make math interesting. I thought make problems that contain objects that are popular among teens. Like some kind of band and how far they are traveling, or if they are younger maybe some Pokémon. I know this doesn’t have much to do with speech intellect but it is how I can relate to this article.