From: Lou Wilkinson (LWilkinson@schilli.com)
Date: 08/20/02-03:24:12 PM Z
I have never taught Art, in any capacity.
But for many years, I taught math to a residential placement home for
teenagers. The kind of place that's the "last stop" before complete
incarceration.
We had a great principal. When he hired me he told me that he was hiring
me to teach math. Not to sit in judgement.
He said that whatever resources I needed to get the job done, he'd find
them somehow....but I wasn't there to judge, I was there to teach...and he
expected me to do whatever I could to teach.
The message was clear: if a student works at it, and they don't get an A,
you haven't done your job. If you fail a student, then you'd better be
able to substantiate that the failure was a result of the student's effort.
That message was clear throughout the entire school.
And I'm not so naive as to believe that the philosophy will stand up in a
non-residential environment, where you have a LOT less control over the
students lives.
But since that time, I've wondered how our educational systems would work
if we were in the position to always hire teachers and hire fewer
judges....think how great it could be if an instructor, at any level, had,
as their mission, to make the student as absolutely drop dead successful in
that subject material as they could.
Sure, for some students that would mean harsh criticism...because that's
what some people need and even seek. For other's it's encouragement...for
other's it's more examples....
All people are different and it would be truly wonderful if we could expect
the instructors to try to adapt themselves to the individual students.
Sure, that's not much training for the world, the world doesn't adapt
itself to us...but then we don't actually pay the world tuition.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : 09/19/02-11:02:50 AM Z CST