Mickey is a college reading instructor like myself, hooray! She also teaches GED courses and God knows what else around the state. Well, yesterday before class she says to me students are motivated, I was like what? She says again, I believe students are motivated but social occurrences interfere with learning and development goals. Hmm, interesting, tell me more. God knows I hope I’m grabbing her sentiments from yesterday accurately (She’s a feisty one if you get my drift). Nevertheless, I got about thinking on classroom instructors, sociocultural perspective, and self-determination. My thoughts are below.
Some (Whomever that may be) theorize college reading students’ homes, communities, and mostly urban schools have sucked the motivational life out of them. Often, educators and pundits attest ‘these’ students lack motivation for a quality education. I’m not blogging to discuss these conjectures or provide cynics a point to argue. Although, these statements fill the air around water coolers and faculty lunchrooms. However, the discussion normally turn back however on students’ individual learning abilities or lack there of. In other words, some vilify the homes, communities, and schools and then also challenge students’ motivational drive. In the end, students receive labels as being socially deficient and cognitively (i.e., academic) inept.
According to Vygotsky and Freire for that matter, students are not empty vessels waiting on spoon feed academic nutrition. In fact, the self-determination theory (Ryan & Deci, 2000) suggest learners crave autonomy, relatedness, and competence. Thus it is safe to assume, college reading students desire to guide their own lives, feel wanted by their communities (i.e., college reading classrooms, college communities), and acquire competence that fosters adaptation and survival skills. If our learners harbor such natural instincts, how do we construct learning environments to match these traits? More important, how do we stop blaming homes, communities, schools, and students’ motivational levels and get about teaching and development?
Mick says, (paraphrasing again) students may lack necessary skills (i.e., self-regulation, motivation) because of additional social factors (e.g., poverty, unemployment, and family issues) pulling their time and attention. This was something to hear from her because as mentioned some educator blame both the learners' social environment and yet also blame students' motivation levels. I’m not saying who is guilty of this practice but it does occur frequently by educators and pundits alike.
Going back to Vygotsky, Mick implied social environments have a tremendous impacts on students’ learning and development, really (I’m kidding). More importantly, she seek to investigate the role of social conditions (e.g., personal and financial barriers) on adult learners. Hence, Vygotsky’s theory on sociocultural perspective would agree with Mick. I would however theorize social occurrences as difficult habits to break. I’ll see if Mick will pick on this and write more on it.
Going back to Vygotsky, Mick implied social environments have a tremendous impacts on students’ learning and development, really (I’m kidding). More importantly, she seek to investigate the role of social conditions (e.g., personal and financial barriers) on adult learners. Hence, Vygotsky’s theory on sociocultural perspective would agree with Mick. I would however theorize social occurrences as difficult habits to break. I’ll see if Mick will pick on this and write more on it.
Rob, I was with you til the last paragraph...I really liked the paragraph with SDT...I do believe the students want to control their lives and be seen as part of the community...as a fully functioning, equal contributor to the community rather than a statistic or disposable member. I find that students are frequently overwhelmed with their life circumstances. If you have never lived the life of a single parent or homeless teen I think its easy to underestimate the sheer physical exhaustion of having to cope with daily survival. So i don't agree that its a habit to break. Given more stable circumstances i have seen amazing things.~ Mick
ReplyDeleteBut the blame game is so easy!! It assuages guilt and allows us to feel like we are doing our best despite all that has transpired with that child. Passing the buck is an American tradition - no an American pass time more practiced than football. So what happens when we move beyond the shame of playing it? We are still left with students who do not live up to their potential and often fail in spite of the fact that they have been provided tools with which to succeed. How to explain it and how to overcome it are two HUGE pieces to the educational puzzle of helping students. I have not looked much at SDT and I probably should as it may inform my questions more than what I am finding now...thanks for that!
ReplyDeleteI agree with Mickie that students want to be seen as in control and as part of the community but often the circumstances in which they live and what we don't see can utterly exhaust that determination right out of their minds. No blame here, just in search of ways in which to help get and hold student interest beyond exhaustion.
When I read the work of Carol Lee, David Kirkland, or Ernest Morrell, I see how culturally responsive pedagogy is undergirded by socio-cultural theory. Too often, schools are either run or classrooms are conducted through a middle class gaze, that imparts middle class values for all. So as Mickie states, too many haven't lived the lives of students but also don't want to see those lives either.
ReplyDelete