SABER TOOTH CURRICULUM

The Saber-Tooth Curriculum can be considered a satirical version of modern day education. In the story, a character called New Fist is trying to construct a basic curriculum on how to “grab fish with bare hands,” “horse clubbing,” and finally “saber tooth tiger scaring with fire.” He would be considered a progressive educator, by our modern day standards, because of his desire to improve and invoke change into the current system. As he put it, the children had no purpose in their play, and he felt the need to structure their activities. It would also serve the future of the tribe in that the children would acquire the skills for the survival of themselves and the tribe.

His system seemed to work until some of the conservative elder members of the tribe resisted the modernization or change. They can be equated to several members of the educational community (administration, board members, veteran teachers), or even associates of education (parents) who feel that current values are fine and in no need of improvement. Usually those that are reluctant to change have either implemented the current system and do not feel it is flawed, or are just afraid to partake on new ventures because of complacency in their lives.

Then as years go on, the system in the satire became obsolete, and needed updating, as similarly in the current move to invoke technology into all curriculums. But what is missing is the need to teach the basics, the concepts that will get them to the point where they can build and improve on curriculum.

We are so caught up in teaching modern, new-improved lessons, as well as upper level concepts to students at earlier ages and grades every year. We often take for granted that the basic concepts are the most important aspect that we should be instilling. Anything taught above that will have its rightful place later.

"180"

I have only been in education for about 6 years. My wife has been teaching for over 20. I remember having discussions with her about "only" teaching 180 days, and how easy it was, and that she should try and teach (work) for twelve months. That was before I started teaching. Now I am in total agreement with her. Teachers need to be on their game always, or the kids will suffer, pick up on it, and the lesson would lose its effectiveness. A teacher needs that 2 month break to rejuvenate their batteries. Think about the added hours we work at home, preparing lessons, copying, just rethinking techniques and topics. ENOUGH SAID ABOUT A TEACHER........

Looking at the "180" opened my eyes to certain things: how little time we do have to teach. It is correct in showing the interruptions to daily lessons, some of which are necessary, but also, that we really have such a short window to present our lesson, and cover material. We have a mind set that we have plenty of time to cover all curriculum, but we really don't.

Are We Really Reluctant to Change?

We are quick to say that education is too slow to change. That may have been true in the past. I think that as technology continues to grow, we have to integrate technology into our daily lessons, either through supplemental programs, or simply by creating interdisciplinary lessons to bring that technology into our classrooms. Older, more experienced educators resist accepting change, in general.

It is in our very nature to resist change, or to have fears about it. Many times, change is thrust upon us, rather than through selection. We have lost jobs or have been forced to go down a new road in our life. This is not a choice of ours, but most of us make-do and restructure ourselves, sometimes with different priorities. Change can come also by choice, either in selecting a new job or career, or in relocating our families. But even in that, it is rare that we do it without some reluctance.

In education, change is a constant. We teach new concepts, we change a technique, we adapt to the changing student. We never reinvent the wheel, but we constantly look to improve on it.

With change, we sometimes also get excited. We hope a student becomes more motivated. We hope to change a bad situation into something positive with more potential growth opportunity. So, change is not always bad. We just have fears that it won’t work out.



November, A. Hopes and Fears, http://anovember.com/

PRENSKY CHALLENGE

The purpose in the "Prensky Challenge'" as I see it' is to have us as teachers look to an alternative way of teaching. He poses a 2 part school year, with the essential material being covered in the first. If it is completed, and the standardized tests all passed, then the goal is to have a second semester doing activities that they would do every day anyway- like nintendo, ipods, cell phones, etc.
Is it really an incentive. Possibly. But old school teachers and parents believe that success should be the carrot, and not games, and toys, etc. We sometimes forget to instill this into our children's minds. I am an old school parent, and I try not to play that game. Maybe I am the minority.