No, my wariness of autonomy comes from the fact that I'm not sure promoters of autonomy as it is defined on page 131 have any idea what they are actually saying. I'm not sure that the world and society have any idea what they are asking for when they desire complete autonomy. And I'm not sure now long it will take some people to realize that there is truth and that every single person on the planet will be held responsible for that truth someday -whether they choose to believe in it right now or not. I guess this is a post that has been a long time in coming, but that stems from many factors, the sole most important factor being my faith in Jesus Christ. It is a post that combines my spiritual and educational views, because they cannot be separated. My faith in God demands my first and foremost in everything... and therefore penetrates everything I do and believe in. I hurt for those people who have no such stability in their lives. Chapters like this one from Kuma are the result of that. I am learning more and more how intimately related my faith and my educational philosophy are... and I wouldn't have it any other way.
Kuma writes, on page 131: "The concept of autonomy, in one form or another, has long engaged the minds of people everywhere. It is grounded in a human tendency to seek control over one's life. [...] In its most basic form, it represents a fundamental longing for freedom of thought and freedom of action in personal, economic, social, political, and other walks of life."
Do we realize what this is saying? People are looking for a life with no responsibility, no boundaries, no limits, no structure, no nothing. Is that really what we want?
How many broken families have resulted from parents' desire for freedom from the 'restriction' of marriage and responsibility?
How many hurting children are orphaned, abused, or even aborted because of their parents' lack of desire to take responsibility for their own actions?
How many children turn to crime and less-than-desirable ways of making a living because of their parents' lack of desire to take the responsibility to care for them?
Is that really what we want our society to look like?
How many wrong things - fornication (sex before marriage) and homosexuality, just to name a few - does our society condone or push for because of desire for freedom from responsibility, restrictions, or boundaries?
So when do we stop? What happens when people decide that according to themselves, stealing isn't wrong? What happens when they decide that according to themselves, killing isn't wrong? What happens when they decide that according to themselves, cheating isn't wrong? Who decides if those things are wrong or right? Who decides? Some may look at that first list and say "but there's nothing wrong with those things". They are wrong, because God says so. But I don't know anyone who would say that killing, stealing, and cheating aren't wrong. Where do we come up with that standard? How do we determine what is right and wrong?
I will tell you. God's standard is what determines right and wrong. And ultimately His standard is the only one that matters. People say there is no truth. There is truth. God is Truth.
It's a lot easier to do what we want when there isn't truth, isn't it? It's a lot easier to pretend like those things aren't wrong. It's a lot easier to forget that we have Someone to answer to. It's a lot easier to just do what we want, how we want it, what works best for us. Some would even say, it's a lot easier to be "free" when there isn't truth. I disagree.
Jesus says, in the book of John, chapter 8, verses 28 - 32: "When ye have lifted up the Son of man, then shall ye know that I am he, and that I do nothing of myself; but as my Father hath taught me, I speak these things. And he that sent me is with me: the Father hath not left me alone; for I do always those things that please him. As he spake these words, many believed on him. Then said Jesus to those Jews which believed on him, If ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed; And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free."
It's a very radical idea, isn't it? The TRUTH will make us free. Jesus promises that, and so we know that it is true.
I could go on and on. In fact, in the first draft of this post, I did go on and on. But right now I want to explain how all of this relates to my educational philosophy.
There are currently trends in education for really individualized education. REALLY individualized. The 'Classroom of 1". Teaching students' native languages in an ESL classroom. (wait before protesting, please - explanation below!) Our "Burger King society" (have it your way!) has infiltrated the classroom with devastating effects.
By not setting rules, boundaries, or typical ways of doing things, we are hurting our children in more ways than we ever know. By accepting anything and everything, we allow them to be unfocused and cater to themselves.
I will give an example. The 'Classroom of 1" movement, as I understand it, is an educational technique that allows students to tune into the classroom via podcast, internet, etc. at whatever time is most convenient for them. It sounds great, doesn't it? It caters to their schedule, their learning style, their preferences, and their desires.
However, I beg you to consider...
What happens when they enter the working world and have to collaborate with others?
What happens when they decide to start a family and have to live according to someone else's time schedule?
What happens when they have to sacrifice themselves for children's needs?
What happens when they have to, perhaps, teach others - according to that other person's learning styles and preferences?
Do you see the downward spiral? Do you see where this could go? When there is no standard, when there is no expectation, when there is no responsibility, when there is no truth... people think only of themselves. And society cannot function when people think only of themselves. Because God designed people to function together.
How does this play out in the ESL classroom? I want to start by making a few "disclaimers", I suppose. I want to make sure the reader understands my position on several important points.
1. I believe that it is necessary to validate students' first languages.
2. I believe that it is necessary to value students.
3. I believe that it is necessary to cater to different learning styles in the classroom.
4. I believe that it is necessary to take student needs into account when designing lesson plans.
5. I believe that it is necessary to offer language support to those students with few literacy skills in their first language.
6. I believe that is is necessary to give students individualized attention when they are struggling.
7. I understand that the nature of English as a powerful and prominent language makes it different, in some ways, from other languages.
Recently in class, the idea was put forth: 'We should teach our children's native languages in the ESL classroom, because it will bring them together, help them to have something in common, and validate those languages'. The purpose of an ESL classroom is to teach English. I realize that this in itself can be problematic because English is a powerful language, and some students may be speakers of more marginalized languages, and they can feel as though the languages that they speak and all of the culture and heritage that comes with those languages is not important. However, when we begin to teach students' native languages, to the other students, in the classroom - not for the purpose of supporting the child's literacy in their first language but simply for the purpose of unification - we are missing the point entirely. The children already have something all in common - they are learning English. English can be a uniting language. English does not have to discriminate if we do not allow it to discriminate.
The problem with teaching students' native languages in an ESL classroom is... well, I don't know if I'll do a good job of explaining why this is a problem, because it looks pretty good. Its similar to Dolores' classroom in the article we read for last week. It looks pretty good and on the outside it maybe sometimes serves its purpose. However, I would argue that the problem is underlying.
This is wrong, or problematic as we prefer to call it these days, because it strays from the purpose. The message that this sends is, "even though this is the purpose, even though this is the "truth" of this classroom, anything goes". This is a disservice to the students, who are there to learn English. There has to be a standard; there has to be a focus. Look at all the problems I listed above that have resulted from us as a society straying from Biblical standards. I'm not saying here that English is the standard. I'm saying that in this classroom, where the purpose is to learn English, the focus or standard to which we are responsible is to learn English. I'm also not comparing the English classroom to the Bible. What I'm intending to do, and I'm not sure if I'm doing it well, is that we as a society have a problem with sticking to standards. We have a problem with expectations. We have a problem with responsibility. And it stems back to a desire to all do our own thing - to be free from expectations, schools of thinking, etc. - it stems back to autonomy.
And all of this - many classrooms - are a reflection of society. Society not only strays from the truth - it avoids it.
I just want to make sure everyone knows that there is TRUTH. And we are responsible for it.
No comments:
Post a Comment