when students have power


Published on

This presentation is showing general concepts of showing students voice as power.

Published in: Education
1 Like
  • Be the first to comment

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

when students have power

  1. 1. When students have power <ul><li>Modifying teaching discourse </li></ul><ul><li>A. Language choice: Students have the opportunity to read, write and speak their own language variety as well as the standard </li></ul><ul><li>B. Generative content: The curriculum is chosen by students and teachers to address issues they consider important. </li></ul>
  2. 2. <ul><li>C. New Knowledge: students and teachers produce knowledge for themselves and others. </li></ul><ul><li>D. Action: Students and teachers initiate and /or support actions which challenge inequitable power relations in and out of the classrooms. </li></ul>
  3. 3. <ul><li>1. First class encounters (typical and unauthorized) </li></ul><ul><li>Empowered arrangement for teachers, in syllabus decision under generical headings. </li></ul><ul><li>Empowered democracy for students? </li></ul><ul><li>Collaboration is essential in democracy. Students making decisions over knowledge. (Dewey) </li></ul>
  4. 4. <ul><li>Against a banking method. Reproducers of rules to control students. Responsability? </li></ul><ul><li>In undemocratic practices students do assert themselves informally and subversively </li></ul><ul><li>No developing democratic habits. No real life abilities to be citizens , fiction. </li></ul><ul><li>Choices are in some way dependant on the economical situation in the world </li></ul>
  5. 5. <ul><li>How do we judge our students based on economic situations they are surrounded they can’t do anything about? </li></ul><ul><li>Teacher shaping their image against the economic and political situation and who makes decisions over them. Uncomfortability. </li></ul>
  6. 6. The siberian syndrome <ul><li>Questions for the first meeting. </li></ul><ul><li>General information about themselves and their families. Their free time activities and expectations. </li></ul><ul><li>Why they took the course. </li></ul><ul><li>Changes they would like to make in their college if they had the chance to do so. </li></ul><ul><li>Same for their city </li></ul><ul><li>Questions dealing with the socio-political situation of the country. </li></ul><ul><li>Questions specifically about the subject matter. </li></ul>
  7. 7. <ul><li>Differences in each class, time and context </li></ul><ul><li>Approaching the subject to their context and relating together </li></ul><ul><li>Critical thinking as a literate social performance enabled in an experientially and linguistically meaningful context, enacted in the language students possess, inside a purposeful, negotiated process which encourages them to question the cultural assumptions of society and to imagine alternatives to the status quo. </li></ul>
  8. 8. <ul><li>Restrain the teacher’s didactic voice so as to generate students’ expression as the foundational discourse. </li></ul><ul><li>Try to discipline ourselves more than discipline the students to follow the teacher’s pre-emptive lecture. </li></ul><ul><li>Frontloading student discourse and backloading the teachers’ commentaries. Freire: praxis, Dewey: agency of democratic education. Put theory into action. </li></ul><ul><li>The teachers´authority is dialogical in discourse. </li></ul>
  9. 9. LEADING A PEDAGOGY OF QUESTIONS <ul><li>Posing questions more than making comments. Legitimazing authority in a low profile. Not easy to retain discourse. Patience is needed. </li></ul><ul><li>Provide students the chance to speak can be a change to start with changes and know about them. Priorities and perceptions. Row material for building a syllabus and class discourse. (written or spoken) </li></ul>
  10. 10. <ul><li>Generative topics became the topics of the agenda to be developed in the course. Projects. Committee students. Collaborative work. </li></ul><ul><li>Teacher leaves students work in their rhythm, excluding teacher´s talk. Construct critical discourse. </li></ul><ul><li>Developing the course as starting with the students’ previous comments, teacher took notes on them, students felt they were importat. Show respect. Authority to credit their remarks. </li></ul>
  11. 11. <ul><li>Collective texts, Big Bigelow (1990) Christensen (1990) collective thought. </li></ul><ul><li>Stating the subject matter as follows: </li></ul><ul><li>A. Where does the subject come from? And what do we do with it? </li></ul><ul><li>How questions could be biased. Authority inmersed. Consequently view on evaluation and grades. ( students mimicking teacher’s point of view for grades). </li></ul><ul><li>Concretize the questions in single situations. </li></ul>
  12. 12. <ul><li>Extend and monitor students talk outside the classroom. Different spaces students use </li></ul><ul><li>Students ask and answer questions to frontload in their idiom. </li></ul><ul><li>Students challenge the topics, not a memory or mimicking exercise. </li></ul><ul><li>Following to answer the questions in the order students wanted to. (empowering them) </li></ul><ul><li>codeveloping. </li></ul>
  13. 13. <ul><li>Advising theoretical reading on the topics already detected by the students in their questions. Influence by teacher´s point of view. (not free from ideologies, no teaching is neutral) </li></ul><ul><li>Students must show their positions even when they don’t agree with the teachers’ views. That is democracy. Punishment is not there, it rewards public criticisism. </li></ul>
  14. 14. <ul><li>Offering of conceptual handles for studying the subject matter. </li></ul><ul><li>Stating concrete situations in order to display the concepts to analize them. </li></ul><ul><li>Negotiating the curriculum (power sharing, shared authority, cogovernance) </li></ul>
  15. 15. <ul><li>CONCLUSIONS </li></ul>