Day 6
I think I finally found the reason why management is so obsessed with the idea of keeping the learning objective nailed to the wall for all students to see. I've always been against it. I teach year 2 and the learning objectives are too hard to read for them or so basic that they don't need to be presented. Well, I was wrong.
Each day we were presented with slides with information that seemed to deal with a variety of topics and they were scattered far and wide. Some are close to each other and the relationship can be easily seen. The presence of a goal or objective in the presentations would have been so beneficial to the course. Well, I think I finally found them, they were in the course Syllabus and when reviewing it, it all linked together.
So back to the purpose of today's assignment.
Our resource share was sprinkled with lots of good examples and activities that we could use in the classroom. The most effective activity was a group-based one where the purpose of teams was discussed. What struck a chord with me was that it could be used to better develop stations in the class. Our school emphasizes group learning and the use of stations is a big deal. My motto has always been that some groups need to be autonomous and should be able to do tasks without teacher intervention. The problem was, that those groups always needed a lot of intervention to complete their "autonomous" tasks. What this activity highlighted was that all teams have a leader. This was something that I neglected to give each of my stations. Giving learners rotating authority would address my problem with the groups not being autonomous.
We then went on to discuss relationship-based schools and how important relationships are to learners as they develop. A table discussion was made about "The Positive Interaction Cycle" and we looked at examples of those within our classroom. Everyone had those kids who were disruptive and needed that little bit of attention to soothe their needs. We then all came to the same conclusion, "how do we deal with a classroom where there are 25 different needs?" When will we be covering the syllabus?
This exercise was a prelude to "Responses That Build Relationships". In this activity, we had to recognise how availability, sensitivity, acceptance, and investment into a relationship will help the child. For me, this was a new concept and I'd never thought to categorise the action I needed to perform. From the range of scenarios, I identified a couple that I've experienced and how I tried to deal with those barriers. The most successful strategy that I did perform, was just standing close to the person who had no one to play with during break times. They never felt alone and the other learners who talked to me, were then effectively talking to the learner who was alone. That learner would be included in the company of others and learn from social interactions.
The downside of a relationship-based educator is drawing those professional boundaries. As a year 2 teacher, I am very familiar with the risks and prejudices that others have over a male in the position. I've taught myself how to thwart hugs from kids and convert them into something appropriate. I keep myself visible when with a single student and always ensure that I am never alone with only small groups of students. I see myself as a very effective relationship-building teacher and I am able to draw professional boundaries. Safeguarding in my perspective is a dual medium, not only for the learners, but for my family as well. I can't afford that a single misinterpretation from a student or overcommitment to a student student cost me the livelihood of my family.
Comments
Post a Comment