The onus of educational failure
It's not my fault!
When there is failure, who does the failing, and who gets failed?
What are the requirements for failure? What is the contextual scope for failure? Is success merely the absence of failure? What are the elements of failure?
Modulus of cognitive elasticity (plasticity? deformation)/ yield strength of convictions / faith / guts / willpower / What are the effects of academic, acquisitional, learning, exposure with intent to extract meaning, stress upon cognitive strain?
What are the forces that bring about cognitive change?
What are the forces that maintain cognitive stability?
Are these a function of the "span" coefficient? How much are we accounting for? How far are we extending out "there"? What is the stretch?
Process of question milking (reviewing a text and extracting all of the possible questions from it.)
Who do we blame for students not learning? What evidence indicates the causal connection between what is taught and what is learned?
Okay, suppose the full curricular armamentarium is at your disposal (text, media, activities, exams, classroom environment, computers, A/V equipment, labs, groups, teachers, help sections, counselors, methodology, etc.) has an unbearably low coefficient of positive affect (sucks), there are several well established excuse pathways (what would be the positive contrast? accomplishment pathway? Are there organic accomplishment pathways?) which may be useful in maintaining an unwavering and perhaps even augmented revenue stream to teachers, administrators and all who depend on the educational systems in this country for their livelyhood. This may be accomplished even in the environment of neutral or even negative learning outcomes.
Warning: make sure that you are able to completely control the discourse environment . Do not allow cross examination of your points. If a question is asked, simply route your answer to a proximal prepared response. For example, question: Are you sure all children have ADHD? Respose: Not all children have sufficient insurance to have a complete clinical diagnosis, however we do not want to get into issues of political responsibility or budgetary constraints. What is important here are the children. They are the ones in need. They are the ones with the pathology. Would you not agree that the children are important? --Then continue your monologue. If the questioner persists, you must in a loud voice call out to the audience something like, "THIS MAN HERE, THE ONE WHO BELIEVES THAT CHILDREN ARE NOT IMPORTANT, NOW WANTS TO DOMINATE THE FORUM BY ATTACKING THE TRUTH I AM HERE TO DISCLOSE TO YOU. IF THERE ARE OTHER ENEMIES TO THE TRUTH AND TO CHILDREN, PERHAPS YOU COULD FORM YOUR OWN KLAN OR CULT, BUT AS FOR THOSE GATHERED WHO BELIEVE THAT CHILDREN ARE IMPORTANT AND WHO BELIEVE THAT TRUTH IS WORTH HEARING, WE WILL NOT GOOSE STEP TO YOUR NAZI DRUM BEAT, WE WILL NOT DRINK YOUR POISON COOL AID. ---Then continue on with a chant "children children children are important. . . "If you can reduce your message to a chant, no one can resist.
Choose any of the following to substantiate your claim.
It is not my fault; it is the fault of the:
[If you can blame the lack of success on the students, then you really don't have to do a thing or change a thing. Hey, it's their fault.]
Students because:
They have ADHD
Q: all of them?
A: yes, all of them. [globalize as much as possible]
Q: How do you know? [make it a personal or socio-political issue that he is attacking--even if he is not attacking]
A: Are you suggesting that my people are somehow less capable than your people of judging others, you rasist pig!
Q: Not at all I simply. . .
A: (interrupting) Well there is no other interpretation possible in this context. You are a rasist and a bigot
It doesn't even matter to you that my people were not afforded affirmative action or special rights. You probably do not even know
the constitutional guarantees found in Section 9 of the US constitution, do you? [Either say something in Latin or refer to a specific section of a primal legal document--it doesn't matter what or where it is]
Q: Well no.
A: You see, you didn't pay attention in school did you? [now you go on the offensive to propound your point. Find a way to be taller than the questioner.]
Q: Yes I did.
A: Well not when they taught you about section 9 of the constitution of your own country. I submit to you the evidence of your own words that you yourself must have had some sort of attention deficit, or you would have learned what you were taught. You must pay attention in order to learn, right?
Q: I guess so.
A: So the fact that you did not learn says to me in clear and unmistakable terms that you did not learn which means that you did not pay enough attention which logically points to some kind of attention deficit. Now I gotta go. Time's up. [If you can work in words like apriori or afortiori or phrases like "the aprioristicallity of your reference frame in this matter
They are learning disabled
[This is great. I know it sounds like ADHD, and many of the arguments could overlap. However, consider the logic of the following: I have taught, and I have taught from the text book written by more than a dozen PhD's. The textbook got great reviews, many other schools are using it, and it is the number one best seller from the publishing company. Therefore its credentials are stellar, so it can not be the fault of a deficient text book, and for you to suggest that I or my methods, or my use of classroom assets have any culpability is to accuse me of being teaching disabled, and I have a certificate that proves that is not the case, so what else is left? It must be the students' fault.]
So if the students:
have other clinical issues
or are (are subclinically, and therefore diagnosed by the teacher) lazy
do not have self esteem
just want to play
Then I, the teacher, am absolved, because it is their fault. They are not conforming to my teaching, my orders, my environment.
[Point to consider: How would orchids do in a habitat where the keeper made them conform to her environment]
Their parents did not train them
I can't discipline them
They have minds of their own
They spend all their time playing video games
They can not understand my English
They do not respect me
They are in gangs
They are too lonely
When there is failure, who does the failing, and who gets failed?
What are the requirements for failure? What is the contextual scope for failure? Is success merely the absence of failure? What are the elements of failure?
Modulus of cognitive elasticity (plasticity? deformation)/ yield strength of convictions / faith / guts / willpower / What are the effects of academic, acquisitional, learning, exposure with intent to extract meaning, stress upon cognitive strain?
What are the forces that bring about cognitive change?
What are the forces that maintain cognitive stability?
Are these a function of the "span" coefficient? How much are we accounting for? How far are we extending out "there"? What is the stretch?
Process of question milking (reviewing a text and extracting all of the possible questions from it.)
Who do we blame for students not learning? What evidence indicates the causal connection between what is taught and what is learned?
Okay, suppose the full curricular armamentarium is at your disposal (text, media, activities, exams, classroom environment, computers, A/V equipment, labs, groups, teachers, help sections, counselors, methodology, etc.) has an unbearably low coefficient of positive affect (sucks), there are several well established excuse pathways (what would be the positive contrast? accomplishment pathway? Are there organic accomplishment pathways?) which may be useful in maintaining an unwavering and perhaps even augmented revenue stream to teachers, administrators and all who depend on the educational systems in this country for their livelyhood. This may be accomplished even in the environment of neutral or even negative learning outcomes.
Warning: make sure that you are able to completely control the discourse environment . Do not allow cross examination of your points. If a question is asked, simply route your answer to a proximal prepared response. For example, question: Are you sure all children have ADHD? Respose: Not all children have sufficient insurance to have a complete clinical diagnosis, however we do not want to get into issues of political responsibility or budgetary constraints. What is important here are the children. They are the ones in need. They are the ones with the pathology. Would you not agree that the children are important? --Then continue your monologue. If the questioner persists, you must in a loud voice call out to the audience something like, "THIS MAN HERE, THE ONE WHO BELIEVES THAT CHILDREN ARE NOT IMPORTANT, NOW WANTS TO DOMINATE THE FORUM BY ATTACKING THE TRUTH I AM HERE TO DISCLOSE TO YOU. IF THERE ARE OTHER ENEMIES TO THE TRUTH AND TO CHILDREN, PERHAPS YOU COULD FORM YOUR OWN KLAN OR CULT, BUT AS FOR THOSE GATHERED WHO BELIEVE THAT CHILDREN ARE IMPORTANT AND WHO BELIEVE THAT TRUTH IS WORTH HEARING, WE WILL NOT GOOSE STEP TO YOUR NAZI DRUM BEAT, WE WILL NOT DRINK YOUR POISON COOL AID. ---Then continue on with a chant "children children children are important. . . "If you can reduce your message to a chant, no one can resist.
Choose any of the following to substantiate your claim.
It is not my fault; it is the fault of the:
[If you can blame the lack of success on the students, then you really don't have to do a thing or change a thing. Hey, it's their fault.]
Students because:
They have ADHD
Q: all of them?
A: yes, all of them. [globalize as much as possible]
Q: How do you know? [make it a personal or socio-political issue that he is attacking--even if he is not attacking]
A: Are you suggesting that my people are somehow less capable than your people of judging others, you rasist pig!
Q: Not at all I simply. . .
A: (interrupting) Well there is no other interpretation possible in this context. You are a rasist and a bigot
It doesn't even matter to you that my people were not afforded affirmative action or special rights. You probably do not even know
the constitutional guarantees found in Section 9 of the US constitution, do you? [Either say something in Latin or refer to a specific section of a primal legal document--it doesn't matter what or where it is]
Q: Well no.
A: You see, you didn't pay attention in school did you? [now you go on the offensive to propound your point. Find a way to be taller than the questioner.]
Q: Yes I did.
A: Well not when they taught you about section 9 of the constitution of your own country. I submit to you the evidence of your own words that you yourself must have had some sort of attention deficit, or you would have learned what you were taught. You must pay attention in order to learn, right?
Q: I guess so.
A: So the fact that you did not learn says to me in clear and unmistakable terms that you did not learn which means that you did not pay enough attention which logically points to some kind of attention deficit. Now I gotta go. Time's up. [If you can work in words like apriori or afortiori or phrases like "the aprioristicallity of your reference frame in this matter
They are learning disabled
[This is great. I know it sounds like ADHD, and many of the arguments could overlap. However, consider the logic of the following: I have taught, and I have taught from the text book written by more than a dozen PhD's. The textbook got great reviews, many other schools are using it, and it is the number one best seller from the publishing company. Therefore its credentials are stellar, so it can not be the fault of a deficient text book, and for you to suggest that I or my methods, or my use of classroom assets have any culpability is to accuse me of being teaching disabled, and I have a certificate that proves that is not the case, so what else is left? It must be the students' fault.]
So if the students:
have other clinical issues
or are (are subclinically, and therefore diagnosed by the teacher) lazy
do not have self esteem
just want to play
Then I, the teacher, am absolved, because it is their fault. They are not conforming to my teaching, my orders, my environment.
[Point to consider: How would orchids do in a habitat where the keeper made them conform to her environment]
Their parents did not train them
I can't discipline them
They have minds of their own
They spend all their time playing video games
They can not understand my English
They do not respect me
They are in gangs
They are too lonely
posted by Ben at
2:02 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home