Lizzie Maroudas

MAT 602

How To Be A Person 101

Every August and September children and teenagers put away their well-worn swimsuits,

cover up their scabbed knees and sun-kissed tans, and return to school. At some point in the

course of the following nine months, each teacher will hear some rendition of disgruntled

students wondering why this knowledge is necessary to their future and how they will apply it to

the real world. Though the individual answers of each teacher may vary, the sentiment is the

same; the information is needed because it will be on the test. While many teachers will include a

caveat in regards to a singular application of the specific topic the class is studying, the bottom

line remains. American schools, in attempting to establish a fair education system and a uniform

student understanding across all subjects, have created such rigorous standards that many

teachers across the United States feel trapped. On the other hand, standardization has freed many

teachers to droll on about topics that students find uninteresting and irrelevant. When asked

about he mundane nature of the subject matter, teachers point to compliance with the standards,

refusing to shoulder any of the burden for their own teaching styles. But standardized education

does not have to look like the stereotypical photographs that appear when searching “teacher” in

Google. Holding teachers accountable in ways that vary from standardized tests, drawing upon

students funds of knowledge, and developing essential questions and understandings for each

unit that point beyond the classroom curriculum and into the wider world will help to garner an

educational environment where students are free to explore their own lives, cultures, and

connections to what is happening in the classroom. In this way, the American education system

would benefit from deeper incorporation of the Authentic Education Style of teaching.
 At the most basic level, schools exist to teach people how to keep from being harmed,

hoodwinked, or harried. They demonstrate the ways that students can be successful in the society

in which they live. At a more complex level, the purpose of schools is to teach students how to

be people. They must demonstrate the basic principles of humanity. They connect students in

academic and social settings and in doing so help students establish a foundation for their

understanding of how to connect with people on a personal, community, and global scale. To do

this, students are placed in a variety of classes. In math they learn how to keep from getting

cheated, in science they learn how the world around them works, in English they learn how to

communicate, and in history they learn how to be people. But somewhere along the way, the

connection between school and the real world has been lost. Instead of exploring the world they

are expected to become a part of, students are asked to sit in desks and listen to what they might

encounter. They are given a series of hypothetical situations that they have no connection with

and in doing so find themselves isolated from those around them. But, “Leaving the discussion at

the level of the individual is irresponsible, disenfranchising, and unethical” (Davis, Sumara, and

Luce-Kapler, 2015, p. 178). To combat this, teachers must look for societal roots and responses

for the students in their classrooms and understand that each student is an individual that

functions as part of a larger whole. Once knowledge of this whole as been gleaned, students

should be encouraged to determine the functionality of the whole. If it is flawed, they must fix it.

If it is working, they must find out how to maintain it. Above all, they must question. They must

look at the world around them and what it means to them as an individual with a unique set of

experiences, but afterward they must see what their role is not only as a member of a given

society, but also as an inhabitant of a globe with limited resources in a constant state of change
(Giroux, 2012). This cannot be taught with a simple set of standards and a teacher who flips

through a PowerPoint presentation from behind a visually divisive desk.

The root of disconnect between the American education system and the real world comes

in large part from the misuse of standardization and the commodification of education through

the outsourcing of standardized tests and curriculum (Giroux, 2012). This demonstrates that,

“Our school system is indeed rooted in efforts to control” (Kohn, 2004, para. 9). By giving the

rights to curriculum determination to outside sources, educators lose control of what happens in

their classroom (Giroux, 2012). While standardization is at its root a valiant attempt to generalize

education in a way that makes all students capable of accessing the same knowledge and allows

for easy transfer of moving families, it has become a system of over testing that determines

success based on failure (Kohn, 2004). Thus as standardized testing has become increasingly

popular, other parts of education are sacrificed (Kohn, 2004), which leaves students frustrated

with their inability to connect to the breadth of subject matter thrown at them in a desperate

attempt to make the school look good. The solution to this conundrum lies in a deviation from

the Industrial Revolution inspired teaching style that places students in neat rows and teaches

them to answer to a bell (Davis, Sumara, and Luce-Kapler, 2015). An example of the success of

moving away from standardized teaching can be found in Finland, a country whose test scores

far exceed that of the United States, though educators there reportedly hold these scores in little

esteem (Hancock, 2011). However, too much change too quickly could cause the system to

collapse upon itself. Instead, American schools can move toward a more authentic model of

education, which will modify standardized education enough to put the student back at the center

of learning.
 Currently, the education system determines the effectiveness of teachers based on how

their students perform on standardized tests. But, “It is important to stress that teachers must take

active responsibility for raising serious questions about what they teach, how they are to teach

and what the larger goals are for which they are striving” (Giroux, 2012, para. 25). To

accomplish this, teachers should be evaluated not on the success that their students have on

standardized tests, but on their effectiveness in the classroom as observed by administrators and

teaching coaches (Paulson, 2012). This system, while flawed in its own way (Personal

Observation 2019), allows teachers to focus on the implementation of their own pedagogies and

connect with their students on a deeper level (Paulson, 2012). In the case of Finland, this is

demonstrated through the country’s devotion to learning through play and providing teachers

with time to plan and get to know their students (Hancock, 2011). The implementation of

observation-based evaluations, however, needs to be undertaken in a strategic way. Failure to do

so could alienate some in the profession (Personal Observation 2019). Thus it is crucial that

observations and evaluations be undertaken both formally and informally by trusted

administrators and coaches, which could help teachers to become stronger advocates for the

futures of the students in their classrooms.

Students begin the learning process the moment they enter the classroom. What many do

not realize, however, is that this process encompasses more than the facts and data presented in a

series of textbooks. In the classroom, students learn how to be contributing members of society

(Giroux, 2012). But what of those students who society has failed? What of the students who

teachers are too afraid to teach? An example of this can be found in an article written by

Chrysanthius Lathan in which she states that as a person of color, her classroom became a

revolving door for students of color in the school (Lathan, 2019). The same can be said for
special education students, who, in many cases, are seen as a disability rather than a person

(Personal Observation, May 2018). By taking the time to create a strong and trusting classroom

community, teachers provide themselves with a better opportunity to foster strong relationships

with their students and the cultures and experiences they bring to the classroom. According to

data gathered from schools in Finland, taking the time to get to know students helps them to do

better in the classroom (Hancock, 2011).

Focusing on the student also allows teachers to implement authentic assessments and

classroom practices such as portfolio-based assessments, performance assessments, exhibitions,

and student led conferences (Christensen, Kanp, Peterson, and Yonamine, 2019). Through

moving away from standardized testing and toward an authentic assessment that “simulates the

ways in which a person’s knowledge and abilities are tested in real-world situations” (Wiggins

and McTighe, 2008) teachers could be provided with a student approved response to the often

asked question of why they need to learn the given material in each subject. Real world

applications of knowledge organized through structured essential questions and real world

understandings provide a foundation for teacher focus on students funds of knowledge and in

doing so help to make education personally and culturally relevant (Wiggins and McTighe,

2008). Gloria Landson-Billings provides further evidence of this when she states that,

“Culturally relevant teachers work hard to help students engage in meaningful projects that solve

problems that matter in their lives” (Landson-Billings, 2017). This means that teachers not only

gear curriculum toward the unique background and experiences of the students in their class, but

they also appreciate that each person is unique and that no two students understand any given

material in exactly the same way (Davis, Sumara, and Luce-Kapler, 2015). Furthermore,

authentic education provides a venue of success for students who do not have a comprehensive
grasp of the English language as is evidenced by Kristina Rizga’s case study of a student named

Maria (Rizga, 2012), or students who struggle with disabilities that inhibit their learning in a

traditional education classroom as demonstrated by Florence William’s description of the unique

learning environment that enabled Zack Smith to find educational success (Williams, 2018). This

shows that in pairing deeper student understanding with the incorporation of essential questions

and understandings that tie classroom curriculum to real life learning, teachers give students a

more authentic education.

Despite the efforts of many, change is a constant. Because of this, it is entirely possible, if

not ultimately necessary, for American schools to move away from standardization and toward

an authentic form of education. This style will allow teachers to move away from standardized

testing and be evaluated on observations of their teaching and the knowledge they impart to

students outside of traditional linguistic activities. The implementation of essential questions and

understandings that focus on real life applications will enable students to draw on their funds of

knowledge and cultural experiences in a way that allows them to be contributing members of the

society and world in which they live. In doing so, school no longer becomes a boring place of

uncomfortable desks, but an exciting platform for exploration and the end of summer. While still

somewhat somber, is not a prison sentence. The children who walk into the school as the summer

sun drifts into autumn leaves are the future of the Earth and their contributions could very well

ensure its continued existence.

 References

Christensen, L., Karp, S., Peterson, B., and Yonamine, M. (2019). The new teacher book:
Finding purpose, balance, and hope during your first years in the classroom. Milwaukee:
Rethinking Schools.

Davis, B., Sumara, D., & Luce-Kapler, R. (2015). Engaging minds: Cultures of education and
practices of teaching. New York: Routledge.

Giroux, H. (2012). The war against teachers as public intellectuals in dark times. Truthout.

Hancock, L. (2012). Why are Finland’s schools successful? The country’s achievements in
education have other nations, especially the United States, doing their homework.
Smithsonian magazine.

Kohn, A. (2004). Test today, privatize tomorrow: Using accountability to “reform” public
schools to death. Phi Delta Kappan.

Landson-Billings, G. (2017). “The (r)evolution will not be standardized: teacher education, hip
hop pedagogy, and culturally relevant pedagogy 2.0.”

Lathan, C. (2019). “Dear white teacher”. The new teacher book: Finding purpose, balance, and
hope during your first years in the classroom. Milwaukee: Rethinking Schools.

Rizga, K. (2012). “Everything you’ve heard about failing schools is wrong.” Mother Jones.

Wiggins, G. P., & McTighe, J. (2008). Understanding by design. Alexandria, VA: Association
for Supervision and Curriculum Development.

Williams, F. (2018). “Please pass the hacksaw.” The nature fix: Why nature makes us happier,
healthier, and more creative. New York, NY: W.W. Norton & Company.