answer this queastions please AND then write feedback for my peers

2) Then give my peers feedback each one 100 words

· 3 peers =300 words for all the peers

· 300 words for the question

· 300 words for the PEERS

The question is

Please discuss the following excerpt from page 57. "Hence, in planning, teachers need to know something about the intellectual predicaments of their students and the questions that logically arise in such predicaments. Teachers, then, create lesson plans that will answer these questions."

Discuss the following excerpt from chapter 4 in association with the implementation of the educational movement toward the Common Core Standards. Existentialism, with its talk of human freedom and its rejection of systems, just does not fit the culture of a nation bent on systematic reform (p. 82).

Peer1(Amy)

Chapter 3: C.M.B. Macmillan and James Garrison introduced an 'erotetic' concept of teaching. In this concept, teachers are encouraged to answer questions of students given their intllectual predicaments. In other words, "to teach someone something is to answer that person's questions about some subject matter" (Noddings, pg 57). The authors note, however, that this is not intended to restrict teachers to simply answer questions that students may ask. Rather, the intention is to 'open a huge and fascinating domain for analysis' (Nodding, pg 57). Teachers are encouraged to prepare lessons in such a way that the instruction and activites answer the questions that students 'ought' to ask. The authors state that teachers, while planning, need to be aware of their student's 'intellectual predicaments' in order to create lesson plans that will answer the needs/questions of their students.  I tend to agree with the authors. As classroom teachers, we are tasked with the need to deeply understand our student's needs. Even a portion of the RISE teacher evaluation model assigns credibility to a teacher who is able to preemptively address student questions/needs before they arise. In order to do so, a teacher must have a fundamental understanding of their student's capacity.

Chapter 4: Existentialist place emphasis on the individual as a free agent, giving the individual a sense of responsibility, choice and self-determination. Many educational movements have had little effect on education. Noddings (page 61) suggests that one reason for this seemingly lack of impact may be related to our society being dominated by technology and a longstanding faith in scientific progress and control. Even Dewey maintained fundamental support for our nation's faith in science. Philosophers, like Dewey, helped to contribute clarity and consistency. Therefore, they continue to impact our educational framework as noted by continued citation in recent research articles. Therefore, it seems that "existentialism, with its talk of human freedom and its rejection of systems, just does not fit the culture of a nation bent on systematic reform" (Noddings, pg 82).  In applying the implementation of the movement toward Common Core Standards, existentialism seems to promote something on the other end of the spectrum. Systematic reform, which promoted 'sameness' in standardized testing, common core standards, minimum competency and adequate performance does not align with the concepts imbedded with existentialism.

Peer 2(Sarah)

I thought the passage on Macmillan and Garrison’s erotetic concept of teaching was very interesting.  The notion that we, as educators, should anticipate the questions that students ought to be asking sounds reasonable; yet, I am not sure that this could be fully achieved in first-year teachers.  We can engage in instructional design and break down a lesson into all of its component parts, making sure that all of the prerequisite knowledge is covered in order to achieve the stated lesson objective.  In that sense, we can anticipate possible questions just based on the hierarchy of knowledge that needs to be learned.  However, until we have experience interacting with students and with the subject matter, I think it would be much more difficult to anticipate all of the questions.  I know my first quarter teaching a first-year seminar was a big eye opener – I had planned out lessons, but truly had no idea how the students would react.  Even today, five years later, I am still surprised at some of the questions they ask. 

I do agree with the passage, that where possible we should create lesson plans that will answer the questions students ought to be asking.  I see two conditions to this statement, though.  First, we need to make sure that the lesson plans engage the students into discovery of these answers, not just creating plans that sequentially answer a series of questions.  Second, our lesson plans need to be reviewed on a regular basis as the students and their needs are ever changing. 

Peer 3(Bryan)

The excerpt from page 57 led me to a couple thoughts regarding the teacher's role in lesson planning, as it relates to the understanding of their students' intellectual predicaments and questions that may arise. First of all, I think the teacher needs to have some time invested in their students to understand their thinking process, and intellectual capacities. I think whether the teacher is a first year teach or a veteran is irrelevant, because all students will be different, not the same year after year. As far as the lesson planning goes, the teacher should be able to lead the students into their learning by creating such lessons that allows the students to work through the predicaments they may come to. The teacher should know when in the lesson those situations may arise for certain students, as well as the questions that may be brought up, and be able to guide the students into their own discovery of the desired purpose. Knowing the students capabilities and processes is very important while creating these lesson plans, and if done correctly, could lead the students into positive experiences and excitement in learning. 

The excerpt in chapter 4 made me think of an obvious contradiction, in my opinion, that is found across the entire nation and in our society. The contradiction is that we want our students and our citizens to have their freedom of choice and express their individuality through works, but yet try to control the process and outcomes that are based on a standard of equality. In regards to existentialism and the Common Core Standards, student expression and individualism are not accounted, and therefore cannot be compatible with the system of equal standards for all. I have read many posts discussing the fact that standards are not a fair representation of student learning due to the fact that all students are different, learn in different ways, and could show their learning through different ways other than a standardized test. I believe this is true. My point is, our nation cannot have it both ways. If we are to be accountable by means of the Common Core Standards, where everyone is equal, how are teachers not to teach as if everyone were equal?