Section 1:
Today was my first day visiting Northfield High school!

Even though Northfield High school is a public high school, I did not sit in or observe any “traditional” classroom settings; rather, I observed several of the high school’s specialized programs aimed to offer more individualized support for students. I’m working with Lisa Battaglia, who appears to lead multiple programs related to offering support and tutoring for students who are struggling academically. During the two hours that I was there, I observed three different “classes” / learning spaces: 1) “credit recovery” (a class in which students take online courses to make up for lost credits or failed courses), 2) structured study hall, and 3) “S120” (a multipurpose student center of sorts, in which students can come and go as they please for tutoring, mental health help, or simply a space to rest during free periods). In addition to Lisa, I believe that I will be working with Sam and Twyla, two recent college graduates who are volunteering at the school through AmeriCorps.

To begin, I assumed that I would be sitting in on a “typical” classroom setting, one that consisted of a teacher going through a lesson plan with students. So, when I first arrived at S120, I will admit that I was a bit confused as to what kind of classroom or subject I shadowing – especially since I moved between several rooms throughout my time at the school today. However, I learned that Northfield high school has extensive “alternative” learning environments, and that it was these sorts of environments that I would be observing and shadowing. While part of me does want to see the typical or mainstream classrooms that majority of the student body is in (particularly because I did not have a public high school experience), I am also excited to learn about how this public school approaches the differing academic needs and learning styles of its students via its support programs. So far, I have been quite impressed with how much the school (or at least Lisa) is invested in meeting many students’ various needs; however, I remain mindful that what is advertised to me may be quite different from the students’ actual experiences and opinions.

The students I observed today were between the 10th and 12th grades, putting them in the formal operational stage of cognitive development. I did not engage in any tutoring or witness any formal learning today, since the spaces that I observed were not really classrooms but rather structured study halls; thus, I did not notice any particular examples of formal operationalist characteristics such as propositional thinking, metacognition, abstract thought, etc. in learning. However, one student did make a comment that really stuck out to me. While visibly frustrated with math homework, he said, “The teacher doesn’t know how to teach the way I understand it…I don’t know, I already failed two semesters before this.” This immediately made me reflect on our class discussion about how not all students of the same age and/or developmental stage will learn in the same way or at the same speed. It also made me think about how standardized methods of teaching can be problematic: it can lead students to doubt their own abilities or intelligence, when reality is that the mode of teaching may simply not be effective for their learning style.

Later, near the end of my visit, one of the faculty members spoke to me about their views on running the high school: “When you thinking about it, we aren’t a school – we’re a corporation. And at the end of the assembly line, will we be proud about what we’ve produced?” He also mentioned that many of the students are “smart kids, but some of them are just very resistant to adjustment”.

I believe that these comments were coming from a good place and a belief that the school should hold the students to high standards. However, I was particularly struck by this faculty member’s comparison of a school to a corporation, and frustration (?) with students who seemed unwilling to “put in the effort” or “adjust”. Schools are places of learning, and learning is a dynamic process unique to each individual… Thus, it seems to me that approaching school as a corporation (noting especially that corporations are typically places of strict hierarchy, obedience, and rote tasks) conflicts with the collaborative and fluid nature of learning. I think this relates to Dewey’s idea of “don’t make the child fit the education, but make education fit the child.”

Section 2:
As we’ve begun to learn about the contrast between what proves as effective teaching versus how public education is often structured in reality, I find myself wondering: How can the U.S. educational system take these theories and put it into praxis? Is it even possible? Would it we need some sort of catalyst to introduce such institutional changes (and as we’ve mentioned in class, we may have already missed such an opportunity with the pandemic)? I think about how there is no simple or single answer, as there are so many factors involved in (such as training teachers with educational psychology, increasing the value and respect placed on our educators, adjusting the standardized approach to assessing academic success, allowing more flexibility in school curricula, etc.).

Observing Lisa at the high school today has reminded me that so many public school educators around the country are passionate, dedicated, and caring mentors. I can imagine all of the progress and “wonderful ideas” that could be produced if these teachers were provided with the appropriate resources, budget, time, and flexibility to truly meet students where they are.

• This topic was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by admin.