week 6

What does it mean to be academic? A fellow classmate's blog from last Friday raised this question for me. I quote his blog: "But should a dance major or basketball major graduate with the same degree as all of these difficult academic majors?" Previous to this statement, Mr. Blogger included music in the same line as dance and basketball, though he did not specify what "these difficult academic majors" includes. I believe he is saying music and dance are not academic majors. Huh, interesting. Let's analyze this a bit...According to the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary, "academic" is defined as:

Main Entry: ²academic

Variant(s): also ac·a·dem·i·cal \-mi-kəl\

Function: adjective

Date: 1588

1 a : of, relating to, or associated with an academy or school especially of higher learning b : of or relating to performance in academic courses c : very learned but inexperienced in practical matters d : based on formal study especially at an institution of higher learning
2 : of or relating to literary or artistic rather than technical or professional studies
— ac·a·dem·i·cal·ly \-mi-k(ə-)lē\ adverb

(http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/academic)

Now I will admit that I do not know anything about the dance major at Luther College or anything about basketball (imaginary major), but I personally know what is entailed in a music major at Luther. Therefore, I will consolidate my argument to music as it is what I know. According to the definition above, I do not see how music is not an "academic major."

1) Music is taught at a school of higher learning (1a, 1d). It is an accredited subject and quite frankly, it is a difficult one. Typically what non-music majors think is that music majors just play instruments listen to music all day, learn notes and musical terms, and learn to improve our ability to perform on our instruments. While this is true, this is only the surface level. Music challenges the mind, body, and spirit, and it takes endless hours studying, listening, playing, exploring, practicing, etc to understand and overcome these challenges. (I apologize for beginning to rant, but it helps to have at least a shallow understanding of being a music major)

2) Music majors are constantly performing, both intellectually and physically (1b). Playing on instruments is an everyday event, and must be done everyday if one has hopes to improve. Also, composing and improvising challenges one intellectually as these activities involve much thought and analysis of musical ideas.

3) Learning a subject without practical experience occurs in all majors, including music (1c). This is the point of college right? We learn in order to leave college to apply our knowledge in practical experiences.

4) The second definition speaks for itself when it says relating to the artistic (2). Music is an art form and fits into the realm of the artistic.

So my point in all of this is that music is an academic major, NOT just a major done out of pure interest or as a hobby. My analysis of music through this definition of "academic" can be applied to many other subject areas. We, as future educators, need to be careful in what we label as "academic" or "non-academic" because if we mislabel a subject area, it may not be taught in schools and students would be deprived of an academic experience. Since students have different learning styles and interests, it is important that we provide them with every possible learning opportunity.

My hope with this entry is to dismantle the idea that music is not an academic subject and to challenge everyone to have an understanding of what "academic" means before designating majors as "academic" or "non-academic."

week 5

"We need to understand and frame schools in ways that help us get at the core values, the core beliefs and whether this is the kind of place we want students to assimilate into. " -Jim Langholz

Taken directly from today's lecture notes, this quote holds a mighty objective that I believe has great importance in the lives of teachers and school administrators. The tricky part is to define these core values and decide which values should be included into the assimilation. Now this conversation could easily get into an argument over whether who should be responsible for teaching values- parents? churches? schools? but I am not equipped to begin that argument nor do I want to. All I will say is that morals or values do have a place in school. Children spend a majority of their day, 3/4 of the year in a school classroom and I think ignoring values and morals in the classroom is doing a disservice to them.

A teacher is a role model for children: they look up to this teacher, and trust this teacher to give them a good education (even if they are unaware of this). Therefore, I think teachers need to care about their students and show them that they care. They need to create trusting relationships with all students. Maybe some would see this as going past the expected teacher behavior, but as Jim notes, teachers teach morals whether purposefully or by default, so we may as well endorse and encourage teachers to get to know their students and form relations with them.

In talking to Jason Rausch, choral director at Decorah High School, the topic of caring about kids and forming relationships with them came up. He said it makes all the difference, especially in a subject that students choose to do (such as music). This conversation along with the lecture this week really drove home the idea that teachers need to invest in students beyond academics. In doing this, teachers teach their students that they value them as people and not just as elements of their job. This can make all of the difference in impacting a student's life.

week 4

JENGA!!! This game challenges us physically and mentally as we decide which pieces to eliminate from the tower while keeping the tower standing. Oh don't forget that pieces can be added on to the top to create even more of a challenge. Hmm... sounds hard doesn't it? Welcome to the world of education and making decisions in U.S. schools.

In lunch the other day, a few education majors and myself were chatting and Brett Epperson (yes, I'm giving him credit and not stealing his idea) jokingly suggested that the school system is a game of Jenga. As we laughed, it dawned on us: he's right. We have this tower, or school system, made up of different elements. Constant revision is being done to this tower and elements (ie: budget cuts, arts programs, science programs, teachers, etc) have to be eliminated. The challenge lies in choosing which block or element to take out of the tower while not letting the tower fall crashing to the ground. Oh and don't forget that blocks are sometimes added on top of everything else, even if the tower is swaying unsteadily. Blocks like standardized testing requirements, tighter teacher requirements, etc. just add to the school system tower, creating a complicated situation. Sound challenging? You bet!

This analogy very much sums up the school system and our efforts to make better decisions for U.S. schools. Some things have to be cut, but what can we afford to loose and still have a solid tower/school system that benefits all students? Some things are added when we least expect them and how do we balance those new things into the system without letting the system fall apart? These are issues that we have been discussing and will continue to discuss in PCAP. I am interested to see where we will find ourselves at the end of the semester. Though we are (thankfully) not responsible for a school system and our discussions will not have immediate affect students, we are setting ourselves up for future situations in which we will be either as teachers, parents, or community members. Based on what we discuss and decided, will our tower still be standing? Will we successfully manage making decisions in our school systems without letting it fall apart and fail our students? I hope so!

So here's the challenge: Go forth and play Jenga, but don't let the tower fall because if you do, you'll be letting down the people who need you most. Good luck!