Saturday, October 25, 2003

More thoughts rising out of considerations of the "hidden curriculum." In essence the impact that circumstance and society have on the delivery of curriculum. I'm really enjoying the exploration of pedagogical semantics we're undertaking in CTL 1000. A recurring theme in our discussions is that teachers, trainers, coaches, facilitators -- educators -- interact with learners in ways that mimic educational experiences they've enjoyed....

Along the lines of our discussion, I've been considering teachers who've made a big that made a huge difference in the way I view pedagogy.

NOTE: I continue to interact with "huge difference" educators as a graduate student @ OISE/UT. In fact I've been extremely impressed with the "computer-mediated communication (CMC)" faculty I've encountered in the last two and a bit years. They've all been first-rate. Some a little more challenging than I may have been prepared for, but all most capable and engaging.

In terms of those before -- in the "formative years" if you will -- there are a few who bear mentioning for the positive impact they had on the way I look at the world :

  • Wayne Haramis, Shirley Kucharuk and Susan Teske of Queen Elizabeth Public School
  • Brian Yuke of Central Public School,
  • Les Anderson, Dave Lesaux, Lew MacDonald, Chuck Miller, Brian Percival, Charles Robinson, Gary Scott, Barry Stevens of Renfrew Collegiate Institute
  • Grieg Henderson of the University of Toronto

Indeed, the introspection required when considering of the hidden curriculum has made me realize that I owe those named above -- and many more -- a great deal in terms of what they taught me by example in their classes.
(There are also a number of individuals who provided "non-examples" who shall remain nameless to protect the guilty;-)

Although all the interaction I had with teachers over the years has been face-to-face, much of what I've learned F2F is directly applicable to the on-line interactions I have with colleagues in CMC environments. CMC can be a great leveler in the student-teacher dynamic, if the teacher will allow it. Relating to learners "at their level" is something that's applicable to all learning environments -- be they CMC, F2F, or "blend" or "hybrid" of both.

That's exactly why I enjoyed my interactions with those named above -- they made an effort to reach out to the learners they encountered in their classes. Each established an environment of mutual respect, which informed day-to-day interaction in the class. The positive impact this had on "classroom culture" was welcome, productive and every bit as possible in CMC environments. I know this to be the case by virtue of my CMC-based studies at OISE/UT.

No comments: