N'ACH (Need for Achievement)

November 25, 2004
After discussing the need for achievement model in class yesterday, I have to admit, this idea really tweaked my interest-even if it is outdated. Without a doubt, if I were given a garbage can and a basketball in this movie, I would have been a kid testing the boundary and asking myself how far back can I stand and still make a basket. Why? I always like a good challenge. However, I fail to see how this desire for competition could make me successful. It could go either way! Constantly pushing the boundary can also lead to failure. This is mostly because setting high expectations for oneself also leads to a dangerous thing called perfectionism. As everyone is well aware, it’s impossible to be perfect all the time. However, if you have those high expectations, some tasks are never officially completed. In the workforce, this is a dangerous reality thanks to a little thing called deadlines. If you are unable to make these deadlines, there goes your job and any previous dreams you had of success.
The guy standing right over top of his garbage can may have a good thing going for him in the end. At least he can count on the outcome, and receive the prize of a promotion in the end instead of having to look for another job. While it is true simple equals boring, simple may also be safer in some instances.
I think I would have be a Miss. Devil’s Advocate if I would have taken a Sociology of Education course 30 years ago that was focused on this need for achievement model. However, I do like to argue…just ask me how many debate competitions I won in junior high school.

The Five Models of Failure-A Critique

November 24, 2004
I hate playing what appears to be a blame game in our Sociology of Education class. Lately, we’ve been discussing the Five Models of Failure, and each model has a different idea of who is at fault.

Our initial idea was that the individual was to blame for his or her own circumstances. As expected, this didn’t fly for very long. After all, how much influence does one person possess when it comes to dictating how the country is run? The answer is one vote out of approximately 30 million. From where I stand, those aren’t very good odds. The only thing that one might seriously control is our outlook on life, and this may influence where we end up in the end.

Then we moved to saying that some kids fail because of troubled family backgrounds. We all come from dysfunctional families on one level or another, so who are we to pass judgement? Most parents do the best job they know how to do, and we can expect nothing more. If we look to point fingers, this is definitely the wrong direction to be facing.

The next target was the culture in which some kids were raised. As someone who has never thought about becoming a member of the KKK and pledging white supremacy, I vow to never fall victim to the culture of poverty idea that says your language or beliefs are wrong because they do not conform to upper class ideals. Every culture has value and deserves to be maintained at all cost. I believe it is possible to teach people what they need to know without resorting to forced assimilation.

The last model we looked at before the end of class dealt with class structure. It basically said a family transmits a distinct set of values to their children. Ultimately, this limits them to the occupational level of their parents. Even though my parents raised me with a strong set of working class values, I desire more than that. I have already obtained a higher level of education than anyone else in my family, and want to establish a career for myself before having any children. Of course, this is all foreign territory to my parents, however they respect my decisions, and I respect theirs.

So far, I have managed to find exceptions to every one of these models. What I find funny is that we have yet to discuss the teacher’s role in the failure of a child. Since society expects the schools to train the up and coming generation, why hasn’t the finger been pointed this direction? I’m sure teachers’ attitudes affect a student’s performance. After all, I remember blaming bad marks on the fact that certain teachers really didn’t like me.

Inclusive Education-Good for all?

November 22, 2004
During my extensive research on the subject of inclusive education, I found many articles published that argued inclusive education may not meet the needs of bright students. One article in particular entitled “Inclusive Education-Good for all? A Parent Perspective” by Debra Chinchilla really caught my attention.

Throughout the article Chinchilla highlights many of the trials and tribulations her gifted son encountered in the regular school system. While enrolled in a French Immersion Kindergarten, this child was immediately coded as gifted. By the end of kindergarten, his French skills were at a grade 3 level. However, his teachers gave him more of the same work to keep him busy; not differentiated curriculum. The time he did spend in a special pull-out scenario was ineffective as he was expected to pursue his interests in French, but did not have the vocabulary background to be successful. As time went on, he came to view himself as smarter than all his classmates. This attitude and self-portrayal caused an evaporation of his willingness to work. He preferred to do nothing at all except read so the teachers let him disappear to the library for hours on end.

Of course his parents were appalled at the obvious lack of instruction. However, when they confronted the teachers, they were told it was their fault, and that they shouldn’t have introduced him to reading, math, and science at such an early age. Determined no to let their son’s negative attitude about school persist, and significantly worried about the lack of instruction, the parents decided to enroll their son in an academic challenge program. This proved to be a difficult transition. He was no longer the smartest in the class, and had to work to achieve academic success. Lots of whining and complaining was the result. However, over time the attitude of this particular student changed from a bored, unwilling worker to a child who works when he needs to achieve an objective, and occasionally works really hard just for fun.

Obviously for the writer of this article the answer to the question “Can a gifted student’s educational needs be met in mixed ability groups” is obviously no. Her reasons are as follows:
1) It is especially hard for a young child to stay motivated, when all of his/her classmates have no interest in what he or she is doing, or if they are interested they remain observers unable to contribute anything new. This results in loneliness and isolation in a mixed-ability classroom for any gifted student.
2) As well, some of the bright kids may be asked to peer-tutor, putting another barrier in between the gifted students and the rest of the class. This easily results in nicknames like “teacher’s pet”.

The author of this article concludes her argument against inclusion by stating there is no greater inequality than the equal treatment of unequals (Chinchilla, 1993).
Even though I do agree with this last statement, I do not agree that a gifted child must be placed in a challenged program to ensure they are intellectually stimulated. Clearly the teachers who had this gifted boy in their class were inexperienced in dealing with the gifted, and were not ready to admit their weaknesses. Gifted students can (and should) be fully integrated into the regular classroom. This is because the emotional and social growth of gifted children lags behind their intellectual capacity. Hanging out with age-appropriate peers will satisfy this deficit quite well. Teachers just have to educate themselves about gifted and talented students in general, get to know the gifted children in their classes well enough to cater to their interests while addressing some challenges, and acquire resources and a support group that can be consulted in times of need. After all, it’s not easy keeping a gifted student interested

Victimization Caused by the Social Construction of Intelligence

November 19. 2004
Whether we admit it or not, we’ve all been victimized by the social construction of intelligence. It causes vicious, and unnecessary competition that often destroys an individual’s self-esteem. I’ve already briefly mentioned how lack of ability has pretty harshly labeled my brother in the school system, and how it’s changed his attitude toward school and teachers in general. But even the students deemed successful in the regular school system are at risk of victimization.

I was always labeled the smart kid by students and teachers alike, so it comes as no surprise that after awhile I started to expect the A’s and the scholarship money. I knew if I didn’t receive this level of gratification, life as I knew it, would come crashing down.

Out of the blue, I began struggling early in my Social Studies 30 class. Test after test, I was turning up mediocre grades. At first, I thought it was a reflection on me (i.e. I was having a bad day, or I didn’t understand the curriculum), but after Professor Runte’s comment in class today, I know my grades in no way reflected how well I knew the curriculum. After all, when it came time to write the essay for the diploma exam, I did an awesome job. Plus, my Social Studies 10 and 20 marks were through the roof. The reason I ended up with such a low grade in the course overall was a reflection of my teacher’s assessment practice. He would always produce pages of old multiple choice diploma questions to use as our unit tests. Without fail, I would always become discouraged because I never understood what the questions were asking, and resort to guessing. It now is apparent, that in grade twelve I was not reading at a university level, which is the level of comprehension these multiple choice questions are constructed to model. After barely passing Social Studies 30, it is no surprise I began to doubt my abilities to teach a subject like social studies, and quickly changed my major from Sociology to French. Sadly, this is a prime example of how society and individuals place too much value on grades, which are based on an artificial concept known as intelligence.

On a similar note, my roommate always had a terrible time finding summer employment. Eventually, I agreed to help her improve her resume, and interviewing techniques. One summer, I asked her to keep me updated on the job searching. It surprised and shocked me that she confessed to having failed personality or written exams that she was given by possible employers such as Canadian Tire and Home Depot. Back then I failed to understand how your score on a personality or written exam (with quadratic equations) could have any bearing on whether or not you would make a good employee. After all, how do they expect you to answer the detailed questions they were asking with no prior experience or training? From my point of view, what these employers were asking seemed like impossible tasks, and I had no idea how to help prepare her for future exams of this caliber. Again, after today’s class, I now understand what was going on here. These companies are looking for people who will effectively represent management’s beliefs and values. A person’s score on these exams has no reflection on their actual intelligence. However, the only reason these employers give for not hiring individuals like my roommate is you failed our exam. Thereby communicating the message that “you are stupid” and making unemployed people feel responsible for their situation when ultimately society is to blame for the amount of emphasis they place on the artificial reality of intelligence.

In the intelligence game, everybody is bound to come up a loser at least once, so why do we continue to hold this arbitrary concept in such high esteem? It really makes no sense!

The Prevalence of Social Darwinism Rears its Ugly Head

November 17, 2004
Talking to my mom today, I was reminded just how prevalent the Social Darwinism model of success still is in everyday society. As a student in my sixth year of university working towards the completion of a five-year degree, many people are becoming skeptical of my abilities.
For starters, when I first mentioned the idea that I would be taking an extra year of university, my parents automatically assumed it was because I had slacked off somewhere in the last five years. When I tried to explain that this decision in no way reflected my degree of commitment, they just laughed and told me to tell the truth. I know they assumed there was some degree of backsliding that I had to make up for (whether it was my own fault, due to peer pressure, or caused by the spell of some guy). The truth of the matter was, through trial and error, I had determined I could achieve better grades if I took four classes instead of five (especially if my semester included French or chemistry classes-which are the subjects I chose to focus on for my degree). Instead of forcing myself to take five classes and rush through to the finish line like most people only to receive mediocre grades, I decided finishing at my own pace with grades I was proud of would be more of an accomplishment. To this day, I don’t think my parents full believe the motive behind my actions.

To top it all off, many of my past teachers (most of which marveled at my abilities), are starting to also question why I am not finished my degree. These teachers are all fully aware of when I graduated from high school, and know how long I’ve been in university. In fact, many of these teachers expressed a desire for me to take their jobs once I graduated. That only applies however, if I decide to go back to my hometown. After hearing about the conversations they’ve had with my mother, I honestly think they are starting to plant seeds of doubt in regards to my ability. For some reason, they see taking longer to finish a degree as a negative thing. They fail to see that an extra year of courses gives me a more diverse background, and that I can demand a hire starting salary due to me level of education. I admit that it would have been ideal to graduate with my friends, and already be a full-time member of the workforce, but if it didn’t turn out that way, why does everyone assume the worst? Ultimately this clearly developed attitude is going to cast a shadow over my PS3 placement, which I have to do closer to home due to lack of funds. I will definitely have a lot to prove to some of these teachers that think I’ve become a slacker or something, and that’s added pressure I didn’t count on facing.

Teaching is Not Only a Profession, but an Art

November 15, 2004
In our sociology of education text, Barakett and Cleghorn (2002) address whether or not teaching is a full profession since the responsibilities, rights, and duties are not fully compatible to those of say a dentist or lawyer (pg. 48). In their argument, they address such issues as accountability, the client relationship, and prior knowledge.

When it comes to accountability, Barakett and Cleghorn (2002) admit that a teacher is obliged to teach children to the best of his/her ability, however the teacher is not legally responsible for the results. In other words, success or failure to learn belongs to the child.
I disagree with that last statement, especially when it comes to provincial achievement test grade levels. Every mark a child receives on assignments or exams is filtered through some degree of administration (or as is the case with provincial exams, even public scrutiny). If your students are not learning the designated curriculum, you are held MORALLY responsible which I think is a bigger deal than being legally responsible. In the end, you may not be sued a bunch of money, but a judgement will be made about your character that will make it hard to remain in the teaching profession, or switch careers because you couldn’t even communicate your thoughts and ideas to children.

The second argument clearly spells out that the teacher-student client relationship is not direct (Barakett and Cleghorn, 2002). Stated another way, teachers do not bill students directly for their services, but rather are paid for by educational authorities-the government, the school board, the community. I believe this is how education should be paid for since ultimately, these students will be serving the common good of society at the end of their education program (regardless of the level of educational attainment). The government, school board, and community will be repaid ten fold when the student obtains a job and begins paying taxes. These organizations will see even more money if these past students decide to have children of their own. Whether the relationship is direct or indirect then appears to have no significant bearing on the functionality of this relationship. The ultimate goal of a teacher is to provide training to make students competent workers in their field or trade. Society appears to still be functioning, so teachers must be doing something right. The only flaw in this argument exists with the people who live off social assistance. However, living solely off social assistance is getting harder to accomplish due to the steady increase in quality of living. Almost everybody has at least a part-time job in his/her lifetime.

The third argument states that teachers are socialized into the profession, and not educated to the same degree as doctors or lawyers who enter their field of expertise (Barakett and Cleghorn , 2002). That is, prior to entering the program, most teachers if not all, hold a distinct image of what makes a good and a bad teacher. Most of this knowledge was obtained during their prior experience as a learner. As someone who always rated my teachers, I have to admit that I did admire and aspire to be like all my favorite teachers, and vow never to be like the teachers I hated. However, prior to entering the education faculty, I was never able to pinpoint why the good teachers were so great, or why the bad teachers absolutely sucked. And even if I could nail down those characteristics, I had no idea how to prevent myself from slipping into those habits once in the real world. Ultimately, my practicum experiences give me the opportunity to practice my so-called “great” ideas at a time when I’m still allowed to make mistakes. This way, if something doesn’t work, or I have a few bad habits, there is the opportunity for correction before it costs me my job. I mean let’s face it; there’s a lot of pressure involved with being a teacher. You are responsible for the future of mankind, and sometimes that’s an overwhelming burden. If one wasn’t trained for this job position, there would be a lot of people quitting after a few years from the stress, and society would never be able to accommodate the staff turnover. Ultimately, our education extends leaps and bounds above our socialization experiences. I believe without the education, our success rate in this career would diminish. We would be doomed to make the past mistakes of all teachers we hated and even admired. Human beings are not perfect, so why do we all of a sudden think good teachers are the almighty role model?

From the above statements, it is obvious that I think teaching is not only a profession, but also an art. Even though it may be possible to acquire the technique of teaching through observation, in order to be labeled a masterpiece and deemed authentic, teaching must be learned.

What Do We Choose First-Status or Occupation?

November 12, 2004
For the past 24 hours, I’ve wrestled with the question of whether we choose our desired status in society before picking a career, or if most choose a career and accept the economic status that is comes with it. Here is my response.
I believe the people who choose careers based on salary are the ones who end up switching jobs at least five times, and endure the dreaded mid-life crisis. Money should never be your motive because salary is often beyond your control when applying for jobs. You often have to take what you can get. Plus, if you base success on things such as material wealth, you will often find yourself in a never-ending competition. Somebody will always be one step ahead of you. Why else do you think they invented the phrase “Keeping up with the Joneses”? This type of motivation will undoubtedly lead to endless frustration and eventual unhappiness.
On the other hand, I believe the people who choose a career based on interest often satisfactorily retire after 30+ years in the business, and have established a legacy for themselves that many admire. When asked why they’ve been teaching so long, they admit it’s because they love it. They manage to acquire personal satisfaction from their jobs. Money doesn’t seem to be a factor that influenced their decision. They just accepted whatever salary was offered with the position.
What decision-making approach sounds more appealing and/or rewarding?
Personally, I chose my career path based on interest. However, being somewhat intelligent, I was constantly bombarded with information about the careers that had the latest job demands, or offered the best pay. I don’t believe anybody had dishonorable intentions though. They just wanted to see me succeed, and didn’t want me to shut the doors on any of my options prematurely. What I failed to tell everybody though was that my mind had been made up a long time ago about what career path I was going to take. I was going to become a teacher.
By the time I started grade twelve and began sending out post-secondary applications thereby making my decision public, I met more resistance to my choice than I thought. Many people downplayed the importance of a teacher based on their mediocre status in society. I had friends scoff about the academic potential that I was wasting. After all, in their minds, anybody could become a teacher. It was a position that lacked prestige, and many saw it as an insult to my level of intelligence. Due to the relentless backlash I was getting, it came as no surprise when I started to doubt my decision. I can remember resorting to a phase where took an endless amount of those stupid career matching tests based on your interests, but every single time the career lists popped up, teaching was always listed near the top. Lucky for me, those stupid lists helped to reinforce my decision, and it was reassuring that my parents were going to support me no matter what. Now most people I meet are frustrated by the fact that I always knew what I wanted to do with my life. Usually the decision isn’t that easy. There are normally more obstacles that stand in the way. What they fail to realize though, is that I have had to modify my decision. Originally, I wanted to be a kindergarten teacher, but that’s not going to happen because I’ve realized it’s too physically demanding for me. As well, my original instinct was to teach English and Social Studies, but because there was such a high demand for other subject areas, I switched to French and Science. I had faith that I could handle the challenge. Therefore I have come to realize some of my limitations specifically within the field of education. As I sit now, my ideal job would be teaching grade four, and I hope to be able to incorporate my French background into the elementary setting thanks to that mandatory second language program that is taking effect.

What if I Don't Like My Chosen Career?

November 10, 2004
I'm writing this blog sort of in response to the comments made by Tonya in her blog. I think it’s normal to contemplate the question “What if I don’t like my chosen career path?” After all, I have made a lot of sacrifices to get to where I am today.
For starters, I gave up any chance of a long-term relationship with my high school sweetheart by choosing to obtain my post-secondary degree from the U of L instead of the U of A. After all, love is a complete gamble, and I was repeatedly told if teaching was my goal, Lethbridge was the place to be. Everyone who knows me was not surprised by my decision. After all, I’m a pretty level-headed person, and chose to follow the path that lead to the greatest chance of success. Lucky for me, I have managed to stay best friends with this guy since we parted ways. This is mostly because he respects and admires my decision. Looking at the friendship we have now, I would never trade it for another chance at love. However, if teaching doesn’t work out, I know it is destined that I will always be haunted by the “what might have been.”
Secondly, I have a huge loan debt. The government or the bank has funded every year of my schooling at the U of L. By the time I finish, my loan will average $40,000. This is relatively normal for five years of university, however if I get out in the real world and decide this isn’t for me, I can’t justify spending all that money. Basically, I would look like a failure, and I have never failed at anything in my life.
Thirdly, my physical health has somewhat taken a turn for the worse since graduating from high school. I used to walk everywhere I went, but this campus is so big that I have no choice but to use a scooter to get around. This is a catch 22 situation because sitting in the scooter just gives my muscles the opportunity to seize up and get tighter. I used to have a home exercise program that I executed every night to keep myself limber, but for a while this was completely forgotten because my only priority was school and achieving the grades to get to where I want to go. It has only been in the last year that I’ve seen my mistake in this department, and have begun correcting my behaviour. My motivation stems from the fact that I know I will not be the kind of teacher I want to be without freedom of movement.
In the end, I know I’ve made the right decision in choosing teaching as my career because I am happy! Happiness will ensure that I will not fail at whatever I set out to achieve. Plus, I am not fussy about where I teach, just as long as I’m teaching. By being a teacher, I’ve been told I hold the keys to the future in the palm of my hand. I take that responsibility seriously. I want to give every kid that comes into my classroom the key to success. That’s the least that they deserve. This is how I see myself making a difference in this world. Having said all this, regardless what obstacles I face after graduation, nobody is going to tell me I’m not meant to be a teacher. This is definitely where I belong because it’s where my heart lies.

Are Your Life Prspects Determined by the Age of 7?

November 9, 2004
This is a very interesting question posed by the producers of the documentary 28 UP. In this series, 12 English kids are followed through their lives as they grow up. We first meet these kids at the tender age of seven. They are all from different backgrounds economically, and since England is run on the sponsorship mobility, their educational experiences mirror their status in society. By the time all the interviews are finished at seven, everyone watching has their own theories of where these children will be by the age of 28, which is the next video we watched in our education class (even though there is 14 UP, and 21 UP, and 35 UP and most recently 42 UP).

While the personalities of these children in the documentary shine through at the age of 7 clearly dictating likes and dislikes, and their economic status is pretty much written in stone, I believe it is impossible to completely predict their life prospects. This being said, I do not deny that your likes and dislikes, degree of talent, and SES all play an obvious role, it’s just that a person's environment can easily change upseting all of these factors.

For example, when I was seven years old, I was taking piano lessons. I had a huge amount of talent, and enjoyed expressing myself through music. I was also fortunate enough to have the best piano teacher in the area (money wasn’t a factor). When asked what I wanted to be when I grew up, I always said a concert pianist. However, by the age of nine, the environment I was living in drastically changed. My mother got engaged, making it impossible for her to claim financial assistance as a single parent. This extra money awarded by the government was paying for my piano lessons, and without it I was forced to quit. In other words, the environment that I was living in no longer fostered my interest and/or talent. As a child, I had very little control over my environment. There was no way I could tell my mom not to get married, but this marriage I was not consulted about required that I change my outlook on life. Without the lessons, I knew there was no way I could become a famous concert pianist.

I can reach the same conclusion with my roommate. At the age of seven, she was taking art lessons. She had a huge amount of talent, and thoroughly enjoyed expressing herself through art. Knowing this, her parents stopped at nothing to ensure she had the best art teacher. When asked what she wanted to be when she grew up, her response was interior designer. However, in high school the art teacher just decided she didn’t like my roommate. There was an obvious personality conflict. The quality of artwork my roommate produced continued to improve (according to her private teacher), but the marks she would achieve on school assignments steadily declined. Of course, my roommate’s parents took their concerns to the principal of the school, but because there were no other complaints filed, the teacher didn’t lose her job. In fact, she just made my roommate’s life worse. Eventually, my roommate began to lose confidence in her abilities, and stopped working on her art portfolio for design school. Besides she knew her art teacher would never give her the recommendation she needed to get into the design school of her choice. She completely switched focus from art to academics, where at least her grades continued to reflect the degree of effort she put in to her assignments.

Therefore, unpredictable factors such as marriages, crushing failures, moving from one place to another, and even mental distress can wreak havoc on being able to predict where one will end up. In case you are wondering, I am one year away from finishing my degree in French and Education, and my roommate graduated last year with a Biochemistry degree and is employed by a pharmaceutical company in Edmonton.

Are We Adequately Preparing Future Teachers?

November 5, 2004
The debate of what teachers need to know before entering the classroom got raised in my individualized instruction class the other day, and I want to make a few comments on that.
When posed with the question of what teachers need to know, the most popular answers are: a) the subject they teach, b) teaching methods and c) knowledge of various learning styles (Barakett and Cleghorn, 2000, p.52). Despite this knowledge, universities across the country continue to inadequately prepare graduates in all three of these areas.
At the University of Lethbridge for example, I was required to take seventeen courses in my proposed major (all of which undoubtedly exceed the level of knowledge I will be teaching my future students), and only one education class centred on how to teach my proposed major. To me, this seems backwards. I think the university focuses too much on becoming an expert in our chosen majors instead of telling us how to share our acquired knowledge with others. This happens despite the fact that good teachers are not necessarily the experts in their field, but the ones that make learning a reality in their classroom. Learning can only occur if the teacher is successful in transmitting the knowledge they have acquired to their students in an effective manner.
As far as teaching methods are concerned, we are provided with a few examples that have proven to be effective while in the faculty of education. However, if your teaching style doesn’t match any of these methods, you are left high and dry to figure out by trial and error what works for you. This is also not fair. We should be provided with resources that dictate other teaching methods available, or the education classes should be more student-directed so that our peers will model other examples of teaching methods not addressed by the main professor.
As far as becoming aware of different learning styles is concerned, there is only one class at the University of Lethbridge that deals with differentiated instruction extensively, and it is not mandatory. Considering that every classroom is incredibly unique as a result of the inclusion movement and increasing cultural diversity, this is not necessarily a smart decision. Up and coming teachers will more than likely encounter diversity in their practicum experiences, and most will not have the tools to effectively deal with the situation. This provides unnecessary frustration, increases the likelihood of dropping out, and/or leads to early career switching. Although we don’t want to scare new teachers, we must prepare them for reality.
If we really believe that teachers need to know the subject their teaching, teaching methods, and knowledge of various learning styles, we honestly need to take a look at modifying how we prepare up and coming teachers for their future responsibilities.

Contest and Sponsored Mobility

November 3, 2004
After reading Ralph Turner’s article entitled “Sponsored and Contest Mobility and the School System”, I would have to say Canadians have for the most part bought into the idea of contest mobility. We believe everybody should have equal opportunity to succeed, and that striving for success is a lifelong goal. Why else would my sister have been granted the opportunity to attend the U of L without having Math 30 in her repertoire? When success is achieved, we reserve the right to brag about our achievements. After all, my mom has an entire wall in our house reserved for all my rewards, high school diploma, and soon to be university degree. It is also true that we all achieve success and elite status differently. My cousin is enjoying elite status through marriage, and some of my friends from high school are living comfortably due to popularity. I plan on achieving my elite status through hard work in academics. If I succeed in my goal, it is also true that I will look down on my cousin and friends from high school for taking the so-called “easy way out”. This feeling stems from my belief that status is something that one earns through a combination of hard work and talent, not by chance.
However, as more and more competing elites enter into Canadian society, I believe we run the risk of moving over to a more sponsored mobility standpoint. This is because once elite status is achieved; many naturally have the desire to pass this lifestyle onto family and friends. Therefore, successful family businesses merely get passed down from generation to generation. So-called “heirs” to the throne know their roles, and continue to accept their place in society regardless of personal wants or desires.
For example, I had a very smart friend in high school whose family owned a farming empire. Even though she had the marks to go to university and become a doctor, she married a guy with a farming background right out of high school, and settled into the role of being a farmer’s wife. She accepted this role because she was the oldest and it was her duty to take over the farm-no questions asked.
This acceptance of what you’ve been given also explains why the gap between the rich and poor in today’s society continues to widen. Although there is always the option of refusing your “crown”, doing so would result in an unknown future. We are all scared of the unknown, which is why many people do not hesitate in accepting what is laid before them. After all, it is guaranteed stability. However, there will always continue to be exceptions to the rule dictating that we will never be complete acceptors of sponsored mobility.

The Hidden Curriculum

November 1, 2004
The hidden curriculum refers to all those things that are taught and learned in school that are not part of the official curriculum. This would include all the unwritten rules that children encounter when first integrated into the school system. These rules have to do with such matters as expectations (work must be neat and completed on time), behaviour (no running in the hallways, no vulgar language, no chewing gum), and the establishment of roles (teacher vs. student) among other things. The school also serves as a transmitter of cultural values, norms, and dispositions, which can also be included in the hidden curriculum.
This being said, from the time students step foot inside your classroom on the first day of school, you are sending them a message. If you are asking how, my response would be, simple arrangement of the classroom speaks volumes. If you have your desks all in rows facing the teacher’s desk, this clearly states who’s in charge. If you have the desks arranged in groups, this clearly states that this is a team effort and the only demand is mutual respect.
This hidden curriculum is an overall scary concept. After all, no teacher wants to intentionally damage a young child’s impressionable mind. We want to be idea makers and not idea breakers. However, everything we teach is enforcing the status quo, or going against it. As we are all aware, learning doesn’t take place in a vacuum. No matter how hard we try, subconscious attitudes and opinions are always going to find their way to the surface.
Maybe the solution to the hidden curriculum lies in teaching our students to be critical consumers of information. This means teaching the necessary content, but allowing discussion and questioning. Any questions brought up in class should be answered as fully as possible. This may mean doing outside research, but it will make you a more well-rounded teacher. Chances are this freedom to question will provide students with the opportunity to explore their interests and make the content relevant to their personal environments. In the end, teachers just need to be aware of time constraints, and be able to provide evidence that their students learned the outlined curriculum. How you reach that endpoint really shouldn’t matter.
Even though some people are going to question whether the needs of the establishment are being met with this “critical thinkers” mentality, I would have to say we live in a democratic society. As such, we are all supposed to have a say in our future. It is not a true democracy unless we are informed voters. Teaching students to think critically will only allow them to effectively decipher all the information they are being given before going to the polls. This will thereby strengthen democracy, thus serving the needs of the establishment that decided we are a democratic country.