Image from Dan Haesler I suppose you can make certain psychological, adademic, and behavioral generalities, but in general, generalities are unfair. I think we understand that social stereotypes can be misleading, but that's the same kind of idea that provides fodder for most national educational consultants. To be fair, there are two sides, and both sides have valid points - which, incidentally, kind of proves what I'm writing about.
The consultants will tell us, they have research that proves their opinions/edicts/expertise are true.
Teachers will respond by declaring, "You don't know my kids. You don't know my teaching style. You don't know our needs."
And both are right. See how that works?
I consider myself to be an eclectic teacher. Understanding one's personal teaching personality and needs is important. Knowing what works for me and the chemistry of my classroom is important. That's why I always weigh what a consultant says, and gather all the bits that will work for me and my students. The idea is to take a piece of a strategy, but not necessarily the whole thing.
That's how I have incorporated parts and pieces of Whole Brain Teaching, Positive Classroom Discipline and Instruction, Visible Learning, Student Team Learning, Cooperative Learning, Multiple Intelligences, and a host of other strategies into my teacher toolbox.
I really believe that every teacher needs to recognize this about himself. To completely submit to a single process or program severely limits a teacher and very possibly does harm to the classroom. I wish educational consultants would accept that fact, as well. You see, they'll readily tell us that children learn differently, but they often refuse to believe in the art of teaching, instead focusing on a more scientific response based on student data. In other words, they ignore the data that comes from the instructor's own data - that is, the teacher's strengths, skills, and personality. Until a consultant agrees that the art is at least as important as the science, s/he fails to consider the facts.
The consultants will tell us, they have research that proves their opinions/edicts/expertise are true.
Teachers will respond by declaring, "You don't know my kids. You don't know my teaching style. You don't know our needs."
And both are right. See how that works?
I consider myself to be an eclectic teacher. Understanding one's personal teaching personality and needs is important. Knowing what works for me and the chemistry of my classroom is important. That's why I always weigh what a consultant says, and gather all the bits that will work for me and my students. The idea is to take a piece of a strategy, but not necessarily the whole thing.
That's how I have incorporated parts and pieces of Whole Brain Teaching, Positive Classroom Discipline and Instruction, Visible Learning, Student Team Learning, Cooperative Learning, Multiple Intelligences, and a host of other strategies into my teacher toolbox.
I really believe that every teacher needs to recognize this about himself. To completely submit to a single process or program severely limits a teacher and very possibly does harm to the classroom. I wish educational consultants would accept that fact, as well. You see, they'll readily tell us that children learn differently, but they often refuse to believe in the art of teaching, instead focusing on a more scientific response based on student data. In other words, they ignore the data that comes from the instructor's own data - that is, the teacher's strengths, skills, and personality. Until a consultant agrees that the art is at least as important as the science, s/he fails to consider the facts.
