|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
laogaiguk
Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Location: somewhere in Korea
|
 Posted: Mon Jul 17, 2006 1:13 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| huffdaddy wrote: |
| laogaiguk wrote: |
| FiveEagles and HuffDaddy. |
not sure why you are lumping me in with fiveeagles, but...
| Quote: |
Imagine I am hired to teach English in a Christian school. Now there are ads for this all the time on this site and they ask for someone who can uphold Christian ideals and ways. Now, I think Christian child brainwashing is inherently immoral, so if I was hired, should I promote different views in the classroom (ie Buddhist, Atheism, Hindu, etc)? The answer is no! |
Promoting an agenda and expressing an opinion are two different things. I'm not defending the former. I'm suggesting that a teacher expressing an opinion in class (within certain bounds) is not detrimintal to the students - and may even be beneficial. Meanwhile, I'm waiting for anyone to show me any study that says otherwise. We can then consider its validity and applicability (see my previous post regarding this). In the meantime, I'm not really interested in hashing out hypotheticals that don't represent my viewpoint. (although I do find it interesting that you'd use an intellectually-insular Christian school as an analogy for an ideal educational experience).
Again, please don't confuse me with fiveeagles. |
You and FiveEagles are like apples and black holes. Totally different except for one thing, fighting for opinions to be held in the classroom. I did not mean that in any way except addressing the only people fighting for it. In no way meant to lump you in with him outside of that.
Second, you 100% missed the point of that post. And I mean 100%. Not to mention the bolded part is most definitely not what I was saying. I was saying as a professional I should do what I was hired for, which would mean adhering to Christian ways of teaching. I am not talking about being a teacher now, but a professional employee.
The schools hire you to teach in a completely secular environment and without expressing your opinions (especially back home). Simple. Right or wrong, doesn't matter. Do what you are hired for.
You can continue to debate the right and wrong of doing it. But I have definitely shown why you can't offer your opinions inside the classroom in the current educational world. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 17, 2006 2:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| laogaiguk wrote: |
The schools hire you to teach in a completely secular environment and without expressing your opinions (especially back home). Simple. Right or wrong, doesn't matter. Do what you are hired for. |
I don't see anything about not expressing my opinion in my contract. Also your assumption about schools back home not allowing opinions to be expressed by their teachers is a flat out wrong generalization.
Two professional opinions can be found in this article:
http://www.csmonitor.com/2003/0325/p13s01-lecl.html
| Quote: |
"It is absolutely vital that our students talk about what's going on," says Sheldon Berman, superintendent of the Hudson, Mass., public schools. "If they are going to be effective citizens in the future, they need to discuss issues like the war. Students should have views; our job is to make sure their views are educated."
And, as part of helping these students understand democracy, teachers at Hudson High are free to let students know their personal views on the war, continues Dr. Berman, as long as they follow the school district's dictum: Do not teach to a point of view, but teach students how to ask questions, clarify viewpoints, look at multiple perspectives.
"Some of our teachers are uncomfortable about stating their point of view on the war," Berman says.
"Others believe there will be less bias in their teaching if they state their opinion at the outset. In other words, they tell the students: 'If I err on the side of my viewpoint, please correct me.' "
Jeremy Edwards, dean of students at the Edmund Burke School, a private college-prep middle and high school, does not think O'Brien acted inappropriately when she agreed to help the students.
"Teachers can express their views, but context and tone are important," Mr. Edwards says. He points out that there are probably more students and faculty at Burke who are against the war, particularly because the US is acting without support from the United Nations. |
| laogaiguk wrote: |
You can continue to debate the right and wrong of doing it. But I have definitely shown why you can't offer your opinions inside the classroom in the current educational world. |
Well, no, that proof is still lacking. you have one data points - Satori. That does not consitute a proof. What ever happened to the claim that expressing opinions is harmful to the students? No evidence of that has been shown. For all you know, your desire for an opinion free teaching method is counter productive to a better education. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
laogaiguk
Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Location: somewhere in Korea
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 17, 2006 2:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Huffdaddy, you are still talking about right and wrong. Either you are incapable of basic reading or incapable of keeping on topic. I am not talking about right or wrong. This conversation, as the one with FiveEagles, is finished. I will say my sister, friend and cousin are PROFESSIONAL teachers, unlike you, and all agree with me, Satori, and everyone else except for a fundi Christian and you. I have no need to continue this conversation. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TheUrbanMyth
Joined: 28 Jan 2003
Location: Retired
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 17, 2006 3:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| huffdaddy wrote: |
[. (although I do find it interesting that you'd use an intellectually-insular Christian school as an analogy for an ideal educational experience).
. |
Why is a Christian school intellectually-insular? Because it's Christian?
By that logic we could say a secular school is intellectually-insular since it refuses to accept any other theories than what the government has deemed acceptable. Also its curriculum and teaching programs are designed for it by the government in a standard cookie-cutter format. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Qinella
Joined: 25 Feb 2005
Location: the crib
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 17, 2006 3:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| huffdaddy wrote: |
| Qinella wrote: |
| huffdaddy wrote: |
| Not having done any research into the educational studies on this topic, I have reservations about their validity for a couple of reasons. |
I love when people say things like this. "Well, I have no idea what I'm talking about, but here's my opinion! Weee!"  |
And what is your knowledge of the subject? At least I'll admit my ignorance. But I know enough to be weary of any potential (and as yet, uncited or unnamed) educational studies. |
Weary means tired of. 
I haven't done any research on ESL ethics, either (though I've tried, but every internet search returns college courses). That is why I haven't given my opinion on the research I haven't read! That's what I was laughing at you about. It's like saying, "Oh, I haven't heard that band, but their music is so soulless!"
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| First, you cannot do hard science with education. |
What is hard science? Is it not simply using the scientific method of , observation, hypothesis, and experimentation? |
You don't know the difference between hard science and soft science and your dissing me for my ignorance? I'm not sure why I'm even going to bother with the rest of your comments. Maybe you'll learn something. |
Yo H. Diddy, magnify your understanding of language.
I was a social science major -- of course I know what soft science means. My point was that it's still science, hard or soft. I'm incredulous that you are trying to dismiss all education methods research on account of it not being a soft science. Non-qualitative doesn't mean useless, wouldn't you agree?
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| Any social science research is full of potential difficulties that would undermine their validity. This is the nature of social sciences, and there's little that can be done about it. |
There are actually controls for this very thing. You think researchers don't know about that when they perform tests? Have you ever taken a course on statistics? |
And do you really think all of these things can be accounted and controlled for? |
All of what things? Difficulties? Can ALL difficulties be accounted for? That's a good question. As soon as someone provides us with a link to some online research, we can look at it and see what we think, right? I mean, that's what educated people do, rather than completley dismissing something before even seeing it because of potential difficulties.
I know, I'm talking crazy talk here.
| Quote: |
| I'm sure you are aware of random assigment and control groups. How about bootstrapping? Care to show me one of your studies that uses bootstrapping? I've worked for a professor that did exactly this, and it's no walk in the park. In fact, he won a Nobel Prize in Economics for his work. |
Nope, I don't know about bootstrapping. How is this relevant to your complete dismissal of education research?
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| Secondly, in the world of academics and academic publishing, results which show causality are much more likely to be accepted or published than results which don't show causality. That is, any study which shows some sort of effect wrt opinions in the classroom has a higher chance of being published than a study which doesn't show an effect. So the resulting literature will come out one sided. |
What is your proof for this??? |
I ask for proof, and you dismiss me as anti-intellectual (below). |
Err.. I insinuated that you're anti-intellectual because you hand-waved an entire field of research due to perceived difficulties and distrust of soft sciences. I never said anything about you wanting proof.
| Quote: |
| Now you ask for proof? |
Yes. Or evidence. You made the claim, right? Why not support it?
| Quote: |
| Are you at all familiar with research academics and academic publishing? People don't get published for "inconclusive". They get published for results. That should be pretty easy to understand. |
Really? Now we're talking about inconclusive? Because, if you look above, you were talking about causality, not conclusiveness. You said, "In the world of academics and academic publishing, results which show causality are much more likely to be accepted or published than results which don't show causality. That is, any study which shows some sort of effect wrt opinions in the classroom has a higher chance of being published than a study which doesn't show an effect. So the resulting literature will come out one sided."
The reason I asked for proof is because this conclusion can not possibly be made unless one has ENORMOUS inside information as to the publishing decisions made by journals of all academic fields. It's a completely farcical opinion, and was simply devised as a prop to support your hand-waving of education research, which in turn is done to support anything that might go against your opinions. THAT is intellectually dishonest. Maybe you understand now.
Btw, here's a link to a study that didn't show causality. Also, you can google "health studies no causality" and find tons of published research that demonstrates non-causality.
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| Wow. It never ceases to amaze me when people hand-wave entire fields of science just to continue holding on to their opinions. Is it so difficult to change your opinion about something? Did you learn ANYTHING in college, or did you battle your professors every step of the way to avoid having to change your mind about things? Do you intend to be so anti-intellectual? |
I'm not hand-waving an entire field of science (if that's what you want to call it). The fact is, studies of humans and human behavior are fraught with difficulties and problems of validity. Even the best of human studies with the best of statistical methodology will not maintain the same standards of validity as an experiment in physics, chemistry, or biology. |
As I said before, you are simply hand-waving all soft sciences. Yes, it is hand-waving, don't run from the label of your actions. I know it's a shameful label. But wear it with pride, Huffy, because when you dismiss the unseen research this time based on its non-qualitative status just because it helps you in this one instance, you are hand-waving ALL research of its kind. Way to go.
| Quote: |
| As for being anti-intellectual, being able to make my own decisions on the matter seems a lot more intellectual than buying into someone else's theory, hook, line, and sinker. |
So who did that? Grabbing for straws, are we?
The point is this: you don't want to change your opinion, so you're coming up with all these justifications in order to shield yourself from dissent. If that's how you want to be, find, but let's be clear: HuffDaddy will talk to you, but there's absolutely nothing that can be done to sway his opinions.
Thanks for chatting.
Q. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 17, 2006 4:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Qinella wrote: |
| huffdaddy wrote: |
| Qinella wrote: |
I love when people say things like this. "Well, I have no idea what I'm talking about, but here's my opinion! Weee!" |
And what is your knowledge of the subject? At least I'll admit my ignorance. But I know enough to be weary of any potential (and as yet, uncited or unnamed) educational studies. |
Weary means tired of. |
replace weary with leary.
| Quote: |
I haven't done any research on ESL ethics, either (though I've tried, but every internet search returns college courses). |
Try 'esl ethics code'. You get this:
http://www.tesol-law.com/codeofethics.php
Correct me if I'm wrong (I know you will regardless), but I don't see anything about opinions in the classroom.
As for studies, I haven't found any myself. But Satori claims to have seen them, so I'm waiting for him.
| Quote: |
| That's what I was laughing at you about. It's like saying, "Oh, I haven't heard that band, but their music is so soulless!" |
I don't need to eat at every McDonald's to tell you that they're all crap.
On to the juxt of your post:
| Quote: |
Err.. I insinuated that you're anti-intellectual because you hand-waved an entire field of research due to perceived difficulties and distrust of soft sciences. |
I have an open mind. But the likelyhood of any single study swaying me is admittedly slim to none. I have a degree in a social science. I have worked in social science research. For professors at one of the top universities in the world. Including a Nobel Prize winner in Economics. A lot of social science quantitative research is junk. And I say this knowing what good quantitative analysis involves. If you think this is anti-intellectual, then so be it. I say it is having a standard of proof.
P.S. Bootstrapping |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 17, 2006 5:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
A separate (off topic) issue:
| Qinella wrote: |
Really? Now we're talking about inconclusive? Because, if you look above, you were talking about causality, not conclusiveness. You said, "In the world of academics and academic publishing, results which show causality are much more likely to be accepted or published than results which don't show causality. That is, any study which shows some sort of effect wrt opinions in the classroom has a higher chance of being published than a study which doesn't show an effect. So the resulting literature will come out one sided."
The reason I asked for proof is because this conclusion can not possibly be made unless one has ENORMOUS inside information as to the publishing decisions made by journals of all academic fields. It's a completely farcical opinion, and was simply devised as a prop to support your hand-waving of education research, which in turn is done to support anything that might go against your opinions. THAT is intellectually dishonest. Maybe you understand now.
Btw, here's a link to a study that didn't show causality. Also, you can google "health studies no causality" and find tons of published research that demonstrates non-causality. |
Lack of causality is inconclusive. You can't prove a negative. Not to mention that academics is not medicine. Of course medicine is going to be more interested in a lack of causality / inconclusiveness as people are basing decisions on a belief of causality and eliminating that belief is a valuable finding.
Trust me, I have worked for five years for three different, well published professors, in different fields, at a major US university. I have co-written and presented papers at conferences. I've had friends not get their PhD because of inconclusive results. It's not even a matter of journals not accepting inconclusive results. Inconclusive results rarely even get drafted. That some studies which show no causality get published doesn't disprove me either. I do believe I come into this discussion with a lot more "insider information" than you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Woland
Joined: 10 May 2006
Location: Seoul
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 17, 2006 8:03 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Qinella wrote: |
| I haven't done any research on ESL ethics, either (though I've tried, but every internet search returns college courses). That is why I haven't given my opinion on the research I haven't read! |
The reference you want is:
Johnston, B. (2003). Values in English Language Teaching. London: Lawrence Erlbaum.
I've pretty much stayed out of this debate on this and other threads, except for one widely ignored post that actually referenced specific publications on the debate on the influence of evangelism in ELT and the moral issues it raises. You can find it here:
http://www.eslcafe.com/forums/korea/viewtopic.php?t=60931&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=15
I find it interesting that so much of this discussion here has turned on what the research says, no one is really doing the work to find the relevant references. In particular, Satori and Laogaiguk have failed to deliver. Huffdaddy, to his credit, did dig up one article (albeit a journalistic one) that clearly refutes their claims and they haven't responded with sources to support themselves. Family members and personal experience don't cut it.
As the one person in this argument probably who has published educational research in a peer reviewed journal and who reviews articles for other journals in the field, I can only say that based on the evidence, Huffdaddy has won this argument.
Satori and Laogaiguk can't find articles to support their position that teachers expressing opinions in the classroom is harmful to students because as far as I know (and I've read a bunch in this area), they don't exist. I know of no direct scientific research that has explored that question. And I think the reason it has gone unexplored is that it is not an answerable research question; a study on this could not be well-constructed (read, controlled - how could you guarantee that only certain opinions were expressed and not others?). (Just for the record, I've spent seven years teaching research design and supervising MA theses; I know about what a good research question is.)
People may believe that they should not express opinions about particular topics, but what these are or what kinds of opinions may be expressed will vary across individuals. That is why this is a moral discussion, an exploration of what we believe to be right and wrong. Moral questions are not ones where the answers are clearly available to us. Quinella asked the right question at the beginning (and Fiveeagles dodged it): What are the boundaries? It's really too bad that this discussion got sidetracked from that, although it is unlikely that any agreement would have been reached.
The expression of opinions and thus, the moral issues of boundaries (and boundary conflicts) are unavoidable in EL classrooms. This is the major thrust of Johnston's book, along with the idea that we need to bring these moral issues into the open and try to understand the views of others as well as ourselves to make progress on them.
Let me just quote a little portion of it which might inform further discussion. Here Johnston is discussing one part (curricular substructure) of a three part framework for looking at morality in the classroom from the general education book, The Moral Life of Schools (P. Jackson et al, 1993; Jossey-Bass). This part is of particular interest to the discussion here because of the argument that we are just hired to teach the language. What exactly does that mean? And note Johnston's quoting of Jackson et al on the point that this substructure is often unacknowledged by teachers and students:
"The curricular substructure comprises 'conditions that operate to sustain and facilitate every teaching session in every school in every subject within the curriculum (Jacksonn et al, 1993, pp. 15-16). These conditions thus underlie the form and content of curricula in different subjects. According to Jackson et al (1993), these conditions have two outstanding qualities: they are 'seldom explicitly acknowledged by either teachers or students' (p. 16) and they are imbued with moral meaning. The curricular substructure can be thought of as 'enabling conditions' (p. 16). Jackson et al describe them as 'an elaborate amalgam of shared understandings, beliefs, assumptions and presuppositions, all of which enable the participants of in a teaching situation to interact amicably with each other and work together, thus freeing them to concentrate on the task at hand' (p. 16). They include the assumption of truthfulness - that what teachers and students say in class is true - and the assumption of worthwhileness - that there is inherent value in the topics and materials covered in class" (pp. 24-25).
This is what the original discussion should have been directed to - what are our assumptions, presuppositions about what we should be teaching and what are the boundaries that separate what is worthwhile from what is not.[/i] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
EFLtrainer
Joined: 04 May 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 17, 2006 8:13 am Post subject: Re: re: |
|
|
| seoulunitarian wrote: |
| I think there is a huge difference between a teacher sharing his/her feelings on a subject, and a teacher pushing their point of view on students. I think it is perfectly ethical, if students are discussing religion, for a teacher to also present his point of view. |
Wrong. A teacher's job is to get the students to explore THEIR thoughts, thinking, logic, etc. As stated earlier in the thread, the teacher has TOO MUCH authority. Some students will, whether consciously or subconsciously, subsume their beliefs to the teacher's. Even more so in a Confucian society. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
seoulunitarian
Joined: 06 Jul 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 17, 2006 4:45 pm Post subject: Re: re: |
|
|
| EFLtrainer wrote: |
| seoulunitarian wrote: |
| I think there is a huge difference between a teacher sharing his/her feelings on a subject, and a teacher pushing their point of view on students. I think it is perfectly ethical, if students are discussing religion, for a teacher to also present his point of view. |
Wrong. A teacher's job is to get the students to explore THEIR thoughts, thinking, logic, etc. As stated earlier in the thread, the teacher has TOO MUCH authority. Some students will, whether consciously or subconsciously, subsume their beliefs to the teacher's. Even more so in a Confucian society. |
In a confucian society, wouldn't a younger student also subsume their beliefs to an older student's beliefs? Where do you stop with being so careful? If a teacher expresses their opinion in the context of open discussion, and does so in a way that the opinion is expressed ONLY as an opinion, there is no harm done. The occassions when this occurs should be few and far between though, especially in an English subject classroom. Religious topics simply need not be discussed very often, especially with younger students. I can understand a religious subject coming up in a free-talking class with older students.
Peace |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Satori
Joined: 09 Dec 2005
Location: Above it all
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 17, 2006 7:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Some people still refuse to believe what I have said about the strong message we got all through our teacher training program. You want references, sorry, ain't gonna happen. This was 6 years ago, and I have no recollection of text titles, and the texts exist in the library at the language school, and I am in a remote area of Japan. Even though I'm sure they remember me fondly, my former instructors at the training college are very busy as you can imagine, and I doubt highly that they would be interested in finding the text, finding the quotes, photo copying them, scanning them, and sending them to me just so I can win points in an internet debate.
I have given you the best information right from the sourse where all the most current knowledge of teaching is gathered, teacher's training college. You have chosen to ignore me. Frankly, I don't care enough about your own development as a teacher to be bothered to push the issue. I will say one more time though...the message we got throughout our teacher training was to keep opinions out of the classroom. I encountered this message in several different texts that were assigned, and I heard it from the mouths of several different professors, quite regularly throughout the year. Only a moron would have gotten through the course and not got the message, it was loud, clear, repeated, and thouroughly emphasised. Now, that is good information from the best sourse ( an institution that studies and teaches the art of teaching ). If you chose to ignore it and call for references then you are more interested in winning points in an internet debate than improving your approach as a teacher... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Satori
Joined: 09 Dec 2005
Location: Above it all
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 17, 2006 7:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Here's the first four items of the teachers code of ethics...
1.1
The foreign language/second language teacher shall give foremost consideration to the students' well being.
1.2
The foreign language/second language teacher shall direct his/her whole professional effort to assist the students to develop his/her second language speaking ability.
1.3
The foreign language/second language teacher shall foster in his/her students, honesty, integrity, and consideration for others and shall do nothing, by precept or example, to discredit these qualities.
1.4
The foreign language/second language teacher shall act, and shall be seen to act, with justice and fairness.
Each of those four items if considered deeply and seriously all prohibit the expression of opinion in the classroom... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
laogaiguk
Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Location: somewhere in Korea
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 17, 2006 8:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="Woland]
I find it interesting that so much of this discussion here has turned on what the research says, no one is really doing the work to find the relevant references. In particular, Satori and Laogaiguk have failed to deliver. Huffdaddy, to his credit, did dig up one article (albeit a journalistic one) that clearly refutes their claims and they haven't responded with sources to support themselves. Family members and personal experience don't cut it.
As the one person in this argument probably who has published educational research in a peer reviewed journal and who reviews articles for other journals in the field, I can only say that based on the evidence, Huffdaddy has won this argument.
Satori and Laogaiguk can't find articles to support their position that teachers expressing opinions in the classroom is harmful to students because as far as I know (and I've read a bunch in this area), they don't exist. I know of no direct scientific research that has explored that question. And I think the reason it has gone unexplored is that it is not an answerable research question; a study on this could not be well-constructed (read, controlled - how could you guarantee that only certain opinions were expressed and not others?). (Just for the record, I've spent seven years teaching research design and supervising MA theses; I know about what a good research question is.)
[/quote]
I went away from whether it is harmful or not, right or wrong a long time ago. Learn to read . I can't believe how dense you and Huffdaddy are. I have said in my last 3 posts "I am not discussing if it is right or wrong or harmful, just that most schools hire you with the understanding that you will leave opinions out of the classroom (as the Canadian BEd emphsizes this for sure, from four sources). I am not even talking about being teachers anymore, just employees. Your customers, ie parents, are not expecting you to bring your opinions up in class. 100%, if your kid came home and said that the teacher said, "Well, my teacher says parents can be wrong sometimes and I should make my own decisions. I shouldn't always listen to what you say." You would be on the phone in less than a minute. I can think of many, many more "teacher opinions" that if they were brought up you would not be happy.
Do you get it? Just incase, even though you have proved that a graduate degree does not make you smarter though it does give you a much larger ego, I AM NOT ARGUING IF IT IS HARMFUL, JUST FROM AN EMPLOYEE POINT OF VIEW, YOU ARE GOING OUTSIDE BOUNDARIES INSIDE THE COMPANY OF WHAT IS EXPECTED OF YOU. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 12:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| laogaiguk wrote: |
I went away from whether it is harmful or not, right or wrong a long time ago. Learn to read . I can't believe how dense you and Huffdaddy are. I have said in my last 3 posts "I am not discussing if it is right or wrong or harmful, just that most schools hire you with the understanding that you will leave opinions out of the classroom (as the Canadian BEd emphsizes this for sure, from four sources). I am not even talking about being teachers anymore, just employees. Your customers, ie parents, are not expecting you to bring your opinions up in class. |
Yes, I get your point. I addressed it above. Two quotes from a superintendent and a dean of students in America saying opinions were okay, within bounds. Did you not read this? Obviously your take on opinions in the classroom is not universal.
Even to say "most schools" requires some sort of proof. Do you have any studies, qualitative or quantitative, to support your argument? Sorry, but anecdotes and personal references don't sway me. I can come up with just as many to counter yours. And refering to your teacher training is not necessarily indicative of what or what is not allowed by most employers / schools.
Furthermore, if my director doesn't like my lessons and opinions contained within (and there are cameras and microphones in every room, so she's free to moniter my classes) then she can say so. It is not your place to tell me what she expects from me. And whether or not that behavior is ethical.
| Quote: |
| 100%, if your kid came home and said that the teacher said, "Well, my teacher says parents can be wrong sometimes and I should make my own decisions. I shouldn't always listen to what you say." You would be on the phone in less than a minute. |
Straw man, as I am not advocating this.
| Quote: |
| I can think of many, many more "teacher opinions" that if they were brought up you would not be happy. |
Sure, there is responsbility involved with expressing your opinion. That would be a valuable discussion. But dismissing all opinions, sight unseen, is going a bit to far, IMHO. Should I not tell the children that my favorite color is blue, that I like strawberries, or that I find Korean bacon too fatty?
My final point is this - we were originally discussing the ethics of teaching. i.e. right and wrong. Just because a school tells me I have to wear a tie, it doesn't make it unethical for me to not wear a tie. Ergo, what they teach in NZ or Canada doesn't mean squat to me unless there is an implication on my student's education. And that remains to be shown. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 18, 2006 12:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Satori wrote: |
Here's the first four items of the teachers code of ethics...
1.1
The foreign language/second language teacher shall give foremost consideration to the students' well being.
1.2
The foreign language/second language teacher shall direct his/her whole professional effort to assist the students to develop his/her second language speaking ability.
1.3
The foreign language/second language teacher shall foster in his/her students, honesty, integrity, and consideration for others and shall do nothing, by precept or example, to discredit these qualities.
1.4
The foreign language/second language teacher shall act, and shall be seen to act, with justice and fairness.
Each of those four items if considered deeply and seriously all prohibit the expression of opinion in the classroom... |
Haha. That's a stretch, to say the least. How does telling my students that I like the color red interfere with their well being? discredit their integrity? cause injustice?
BTW, http://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&lr=&q=education+&btnG=Search has 2,500,000 links. If you can't find your studies there, I'll loose all hope in you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
