Teaching, involving and for, social justice is vital to me as an educator. To make my students feel safe, welcomed, and heard within my classroom only aims to create a better learning environment. Exposing my students to other ways of life in a safe environment where they are able to explore and ask questions with no judgment is a huge goal of mine. I want to encourage tolerance, appreciation, and excitement for other cultures, gender identities, races, etc. I intend to do this through my lessons, involving and acknowledging that there are other ways of life and allowing my students to talk to one another and ask questions when they are curious. This sort of philosophy was one of the main reasons I decided to attend Boston College, there was such a huge emphasis placed on equitable and fair teaching that really drew me to the program. I remember during my time as a student teacher for a third-grade classroom, my mentor teacher and I found inclusivity crucial for the environment we wanted to provide our students with. I went out of my way to specifically choose diverse books during reading lessons and encourage students to write about their own experiences and cultures proudly.
Where I found myself falling short with inclusivity was in math, in terms of incorporating ideas and themes of cultural significance. I was not really sure of strategies to incorporate social justice into math, especially with a completely scripted curriculum. But one thing I did love about this curriculum, and something I intend to bring into my own classroom, was the built-in differentiation and fun instruction of math. I believe that this great experience with a well-designed curriculum really shaped my own math philosophy. This curriculum emphasized the use of manipulatives for those who needed extra support, as well as providing extensions for those who wanted challenges. It built math games into each unit that would emphasize the focus skill and the kids loved it. I saw such a vast improvement in so many students, especially post-covid where many were struggling. I found that this curriculum brought life back into math for those who had no taste for it and was built for a variety of learners and
learning styles. Not only did it incorporate all of the beautiful aspects that I listed above, but it encouraged and taught so many different strategies, which again helped all types of learners. Instead of just teaching the standard algorithm, for addition, for example, it encouraged number line usage, rounding, using place value, etc. So whichever strategy a student liked best they could use! I fell in love with mathematics even more so after teaching it this way and seeing how engaging it was and I plan to incorporate all of the above in my future classroom.
In terms of a psychological perspective on teaching, I’d say I first and foremost focus on developmental psychology and what is an appropriate level for students to be and learn at. This blends nicely with the zone of proximal development and where students are able to learn best, especially with well-planned instructions and support. Having a deep understanding of what is developmentally appropriate for your students will aid in creating the most effective lesson plans. I also really enjoy Brunner’s cognitive learning theory and, more specifically, his EIS theory. I love the critical and development thought that goes into this theory and that it focuses on how children think and therefore can provide a teacher with the best tools to create effective lessons, just as developmental psychology does. While I did not know that I was essentially using this theory at the time, I find that when I am differentiating my lessons, particularly in math, I tend to use similar methods as Brunners EIS theory. If students need an intense level of support enactive methods will be introduced, where I may take a student one-on-one or in a small group and walk them through problems and have them learn by doing, typically with manipulatives. Similarly, depending on the amount or lack of support a student needs I move on to iconic and symbolic methods of teaching until students master the intended skill.
Where I found myself falling short with inclusivity was in math, in terms of incorporating ideas and themes of cultural significance. I was not really sure of strategies to incorporate social justice into math, especially with a completely scripted curriculum. But one thing I did love about this curriculum, and something I intend to bring into my own classroom, was the built-in differentiation and fun instruction of math. I believe that this great experience with a well-designed curriculum really shaped my own math philosophy. This curriculum emphasized the use of manipulatives for those who needed extra support, as well as providing extensions for those who wanted challenges. It built math games into each unit that would emphasize the focus skill and the kids loved it. I saw such a vast improvement in so many students, especially post-covid where many were struggling. I found that this curriculum brought life back into math for those who had no taste for it and was built for a variety of learners and
learning styles. Not only did it incorporate all of the beautiful aspects that I listed above, but it encouraged and taught so many different strategies, which again helped all types of learners. Instead of just teaching the standard algorithm, for addition, for example, it encouraged number line usage, rounding, using place value, etc. So whichever strategy a student liked best they could use! I fell in love with mathematics even more so after teaching it this way and seeing how engaging it was and I plan to incorporate all of the above in my future classroom.
In terms of a psychological perspective on teaching, I’d say I first and foremost focus on developmental psychology and what is an appropriate level for students to be and learn at. This blends nicely with the zone of proximal development and where students are able to learn best, especially with well-planned instructions and support. Having a deep understanding of what is developmentally appropriate for your students will aid in creating the most effective lesson plans. I also really enjoy Brunner’s cognitive learning theory and, more specifically, his EIS theory. I love the critical and development thought that goes into this theory and that it focuses on how children think and therefore can provide a teacher with the best tools to create effective lessons, just as developmental psychology does. While I did not know that I was essentially using this theory at the time, I find that when I am differentiating my lessons, particularly in math, I tend to use similar methods as Brunners EIS theory. If students need an intense level of support enactive methods will be introduced, where I may take a student one-on-one or in a small group and walk them through problems and have them learn by doing, typically with manipulatives. Similarly, depending on the amount or lack of support a student needs I move on to iconic and symbolic methods of teaching until students master the intended skill.