This week’s readings on Diversity and Inclusion struck a dual pronged chord with me. I am an international student and an instructor at the same time. It was interesting to read the interplay between both the sides. It was enlightening to learn that much as I can feel left out as a student due to my ethnicity, I am pretty susceptible to making someone else feel the same way, by virtue of my teaching position. This section of the readings also ties in with my goal of making a class culturally significant in my teaching philosophy. It made sense to look at students via the human and learner centric lens.
I agree with Davis’ view that stereotypes about any ethnicity, race, gender, sexuality, disability, religion etc. can cause imbalance in the learning outcomes for the students. The idea is to rise above the stereotypes. This is also in vein with being cognizant of the changes in identifiers for ethnic groups. (ex: minority students-outdated, Mexican Americans as opposed to Hispanic).
The idea of varying assignments to accommodate varying learning styles becomes even more pertinent in a diverse class room with various cultures (Davis quotes an example of some cultures emphasizing on memorization as opposed to those that value reasoning, analysis or critical thinking). The ‘cafeteria menu’ of assignments-assessment combinations with different points and level of input required-as pointed out by Davis helps meet this objective. As mentioned, later in Davis readings, this approach is also helpful for students with disabilities. To that end, I don’t think there’s any need to label ‘disabilities’ all the time, unless it’s to meet some functional purpose. There should be no extra show of leniency while grading ‘students’ with disabilities’ papers. Such an approach can be seen as condescending or offensive, instead of being supportive.
Based on my teaching goals, I'm with the 'transformative learning' school of thought, as mentioned by Lang. The reason is that all transformations vis-a-vis learning automatically involve assimilation of new and old information to make sense of the knowledge gained. I also think that this kind of learning pushes the students to process knowledge on a more intimate level.
From Lang's reading, it appears that during the initial stages of cognitive development in students, comfort zones are likely to be created through the expectation of absolute truth-dualistic thinking in students. This can also be equated with the 'puppies and rainbows' mindset that we talk about so often in class. To that end, motivating students beyond just ‘either-or thinking’ (which is the earliest stage of cognitive development, as pointed out by Davis) to ‘deep learning’ ranks high on my pedagogical agenda. Cumulative testing might prove to be helpful here. Out of Kolb’s learning styles, divergers and assimilators appeal to me as they involve higher order thinking. Out of the multiple intelligences mentioned by Davis, aside from the verbal-linguistic and logical intelligence, I tend to gravitate a lot toward musical intelligence. Since music plays a significant role in my own educational pursuits, I want to bring that sense of connection through music to my classes too.
I also feel (woe betide me for sounding too idealistic) that the last stage of commitment as pointed out by Lang, doesn't necessarily have to be the last one to be accomplished. If an instructor can manage to have the students 'commit to the moment of learning' irrespective of the stage the students are in, then that's a goal worth striving for.
As suggested by Davis, it makes sense if the classroom environment invites participation in the case of re-entry learners. This is because adult learners pay more importance to learning via interaction and discussion. Since, re-entry students have experienced life outside college; it would make for compelling exchange of information and learning for all students in group activities. Lang has quite the same suggestion except to mention that the presence of re-entry learners can be a little tricky, as they could question the instructor on a more authoritative level.
No comments:
Post a Comment