Chapter 1-3 Reflection

Chapter 1 – So I’m thinking of one student as I read “Ability + Interest = Flow” (5).  He is in the special education program and I work with him in both math and biology.  In biology class, he has asked to get the reading given to the kids who have accepted the accelerated program.  I have told him no each time.  My reasoning is because he doesn’t do the regular work expected of him on time and needs help with that, so why should he be reading above and beyond.  But now I wonder if maybe he has the interest then maybe he’ll do the work asked of him.  Does helping “student find flow” work in the field of special education by giving them activities above their level?  To me it would seem to tax the para-educator! 

          Funny that in the conclusion of Chapter 1 she talks about avoiding burnout in the classroom by knowing personality types.  I burned out but not because of the classroom but because of the administration.  So I’m sure knowing personality types of administration and co-workers is also very helpful.

Chapter 2 – I drew my classroom (elementary style) and then looked at the list to see which style I fit under.  It was hard to tell because a lot of my classroom design fell under the category of “this is what I know to be true.”  For instance, the student population in my classroom was 22 because there’s no way it would be less in a public classroom.  And I never thought of a door to the outside because I never had a door to the outside!  Maybe I just didn’t do the activity right!  I’m definitely an extravert.

          How I gather information is through sensing.  Being this type of teacher and looking at curriculum is like cooking in the kitchen.  I have always done just as the textbook suggests – “view curriculum as their lesson plans” (15).  But I figure after a few lessons, just like cooking, I can play with the “recipe” and make it my own.  I just need to get it under my belt first.  At the end of this section, I disagree with the statement that sensing teachers do more and more of the same thing to get students to understand a concept.  But maybe it’s my special education training that has taught me to find 10 different ways to teach one concept.

          The section on Thinking and Feeling is not very pleasant toward “Thinkers”.  On page 19 it is stated that elementary and middle school teachers are mostly Feeling.  Are the majority of high school teachers Thinking? 

          I’ve decided I can’t partake in the exercise about whether you’d start your project right away or wait and think about it.  I just don’t know what I would do.  With this paper, I waited until 3 days before it was due but I wasn’t thinking about it for the last 10 days.  So where does that leave me regarding this exercise?  My natural approach to work, school, and life in general is judging. But this is the category that is most controversial for me.  I don’t know if I just don’t understand it or if I fall somewhere in between.

          I found this chapter to be very helpful in describing the personality types again.  I still need to get a better grasp on all of them – and my type.  I think what I liked most about this chapter was the common traps we can fall into when teaching and our natural personality type comes out.

          Chapter 3 – After reading this chapter I would love to think of a student and work through the activity on page 41.  I have two students in mind.  When I initially did the personality type for both (page 24-27), it was funny to find that I was very similar to Student A, matching 3 of 4 types with him.    But it’s with Student B that I enjoying working with more.  You know what they say . . . opposites attract!

One response to “Chapter 1-3 Reflection

  1. I was so excited to see your long article posted this afternoon, and I hope in class we can enjoy a great conversation around these topics. Just to give you some brief feedback, though, here are some of my thoughts about questions you raise.

    I always wanted special ed students to be part of my classroom, and fought (and lost) several battles over particularly challenged kids. In my last year of teaching, though, there was one student who had always been in a highly restrictive environment with a regimented program of instruction. He wanted to come into my classroom so badly that the director of the program, with advice from a professional consultant, finally allowed it. I believe that the plan was, when he fails, then he won’t be so disruptive when he returns to us. Well guess what — he thrived! He did well, learning much and earning excellent grades with little or no modification in his lessons or assignments, and never had a temper outburst or behavior issue in my classroom. I believe always in giving kids a chance if they are asking for harder work. Another year, I had a special ed student who not only volunteered for a role in the social studies play, but also memorized her entire part, on her own. I think it’s always a mistake not to allow students to try for higher ground if they are seeking it. That said, though, we also need to make sure we’re there if they fail! The reassurance and yes, counseling, for students who take a risk that didn’t go well can be critical.

    Regarding your notes on teachers being “Thinking” vs. “Feeling” – it is true that many Thinking teachers choose higher grade levels. I have some tables to show you in class that will illustrate the information.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s