Are we limited?

I personally have experienced the Tyler rationale through my own schooling by the way in which my teachers would educate us. Obviously, they had their curriculum goals in which they had to get us to, but they all took us in different ways. By the end of what they had taught us, evaluation then took place. My success in evaluation often relied on how the educator was able to teach us the information. In high school, evaluations are much more important for the future, but evaluations are still very apparent in elementary schools. In my elementary school career, we would often get our spelling words of the week which consisted of 10-15 words that I had to learn how to spell by Friday. Every Friday, we had a spelling test which then determined who was the better speller. For some teachers, they would have us look up the words in the dictionary to have a deeper understanding of the words, but for others they would just give us the words and to have us write them out 10x each. Either way, they had their own ways of us practicing the words to be evaluated by the end of the week.

I find that this limits students who don’t often do well with evaluations or who struggles with the information. Most often, from personal experience, students try and shove the information all in their brains and try and run with it, sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn’t. It really only benefits those who are good at being evaluated, but it limits those who struggle. So, because they are unable to do this testing, they are unable to be seen as successful and really limits the students. 

However, despite the negatives about this, there are some benefits to this as well. Overall, an educator may have a better understanding of where their students are in terms of understanding the information that is being presented. I feel like there are many more benefits for the educators rather than the students, but these teaching styles are are supposed to be made to benefit the students as well. For the students, they learn a great deal of information in a small amount of time and it really makes sure that the students are understanding and retaining the information being taught.

Week 1: January 6, 2020

How does Kumashiro define ‘commonsense?’ Why is it so important to pay attention to the ‘commonsense’?

Throughout the article, Kumashario defines commonsense as something that everyone in a particular society is expected to know, and not question because it’s simply, “commonsense”. Since this is the case, commonsense that is never questioned might oppress a certain group of people in a certain society. Commonsense differs where you are in the world, since every society functions differently and has different normalities and traditions. In Nepal, it is commonsense to discipline children in a different manner than what was considered normal to Kumashario. Whereas, in America, it is commonsense to not hit children because to that society, it is considered child abuse. 

It is very important to pay attention to commonsense because of the oppression that it may cause. Although commonsense may offer some sort of comfort to understand why we do what we do, it covers up a lot of societal issues at hand. Issues that are cloaked by commonsense because we simply don’t question it, include religious intolerance, economic bias and gender inequity. Since we don’t often question these issues, they go unnoticed in our everyday life, which we consider to be a normality. Paying attention to the commonsense simply has everyone questioning why we do things and to question if it’s in the best interest of every party involved.

Create your website at WordPress.com
Get started