Wow...almost over. Faster than the blink of an eye it seems. And as always, after reading the responses here, David's experience seems to be the most similar to mine. I also have found that I won't be able to cover nearly as much as I had hoped in science. Despite scheduling everything in detail, I covered maybe 2/3 of what I wanted to do, mostly because my kids ask great questions that provide (I shudder when I hear this phrase) "teachable moments"...I'm not complaining about this at all, but to provide some balance, I had them postpone questions for about a class and a half, so I could teach what I needed to and get to the questions by email or in an optional lunchtime review class. Because although 1/2 of the questions are amazing, the other 1/2 are questions about things that I just haven't gotten to yet, questions that will have answers if I could just finish this goddamned lecture!!! (Not that I ever said such a thing out loud!) ;)
Like David, I have been doing math, even though I have exactly two courses of university math (calculus), not nearly enough for a minor - apparently science and math are frequently lumped together in high school teaching assignments, for some bizarre reason. This is not too hard in grade 7...we finished basic polynomial operations (addition, subtraction and multiplication...with exponents even), and dividing monomials (with multiple variables and exponents).
Getting the students' attention has been a bit of a challenge for me as well - they are quite talkative and easily distracted. I have been described as soft-spoken by my CT (in a good or neutral way I think) even though I often have to use my loud teacher voice to establish some order...I guess I am soft-spoken relative to most other teachers!
However, I find that my 7s are not so mark-focused; the 8s and 9s are moreso. I just gave a test which was really well-written except for about 6 people, half of whom failed, with the other half in the 60s and 70s. But even though they are highly competative students, the people with 60s and 70s were actually not concerned at all with their mark (which was somewhat shocking). I guess they expected to fail...?! And the people who failed readily admitted that they did not study enough.
I already knew that teaching was organising, re-organising and rethinking, but didn't think to express it that way, thanks David, succinctly put! I would add in "learning the material in very great detail"; to teach something well you have to know it well enough to understand the relationships within the hierarchy of knowledge. This is more applicable in the older grades, but a couple of my grade 7s have taken to asking the most incisive questions that cut right to the heart of a concept, exposing the layers of detail that flow from the not-too-broad strokes I've drawn, and it's good to have answers ready.
All-in-all, this environment (private school) has been a hugely positive experience for me, and I think the classes I have taught have benefitted from my presence. With 100% of graduates going on to university, I have found that Redekopp's First Law does not apply so much here: they are like me, to a first approximation. They value the knowledge I have shared enough to be sincerely curious about the places this knowledge leads. Since the school was a perfect fit to my skills, personality and desires, the assessments from my Faculty Advisor were uniformly positive and my Collaborating Teacher has been entrusting more and more to my control. I absolutely cannot wait for March!
I hope all's well with everyone else, and will see everyone soon!
~Chris
No comments:
Post a Comment