Educational Philosopher

I chose Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi for the educational philosopher that I identify the most with. He was a Swiss educational philosopher and believed that children should not be lectured in the classroom. He believed that they should be able to explore and experiment in order to gain knowledge. He also thought that children should not be given an answer to a question right away and should be able to come to the right conclusion by themselves. By doing this he is giving the students more contol of the classroom which leads them to feel more comfortable in school and in charge of their learning. With this method of teaching a student is never talked down to or treated like they are stupid. By teaching this way you are giving the students control by letting them do hands on activities and not just lecturing to them all day. I also feel that this method of teaching engages the students in the lesson a lot more than a lecture would. Students tend to doze off and day dream during lectures but when they are doing hands on activities with their classmates while the tacher is guiding them they actually get interested in what they are learning and don't just memerize it for a test. I feel that this method of teaching is the best for students because children should be active and take part in their own learning and not just sit back and listen to the teacher spout out information until the school day is over because that's not what learning is supposed to be about.

http://education.stateuniversity.com/pages/2319/Pestalozzi-Johann-1746-1827.html

Pros and Cons of Inclusion of Deaf Students

The reason I picked this topic is because my younger brother is deaf and he struggled all throughout school to learn and keep his grades up. He was in regular classrooms with all of his friends and went to learning centers during certain parts of the day for help on his work and speech. I always wondered what would be the better choice of schooling for deaf students. Do they do better in public schools in inclusion or would they do better at a school specifically designed for the deaf like the one in my hometown of Beverly? I found some of the pros and cons of inclusion for deaf students and each of the sides have convincing arguments.
The pros of a deaf student learning in a regular classroom would be that they interact with hearing students that are their own age. They aren’t just being kept with other deaf students like they have to be separated from the world. They can make friends with someone different from them and vice versa for the hearing student. I think that that opens up a lot of opportunities for making friends and meeting different people. My brother is a prime example of this because he has all hearing friends and only knows a few deaf people who were in his learning center with him. He was able to get past the differences and so were the hearing people so there is no need for students to be isolated in their own school. Another pro is that deaf students can get access to a large amount of programs offered at public schools. They can go into learning centers, resource rooms, have an aide come into the classroom with them, get a translator, and get so much extra help outside of the classroom if there is something they don't understand. They receive so much extra help and support in public schools and I think it's amazing. Of course at a school for the deaf they would receive the same care but to be able to get that at a public school that is close to home must be wonderful. I know that my brother would never want to go away from home for that type of care and I would imagine there are other children who wouldn't want to either. So for him to be able to get such exceptional care at a public school is very comforting.
Although there are some cons to a deaf child being in and inclusive environment also. One of them is the risk of isolation. There is always the chance that
and after going over them I think that with proper care and a well trained staff a deaf student can do just as well if not better than students at a school for the deaf. I think that there is always the risk that children won't talk to someone else if they are different that everyone else. A deaf student may not be talked to or well liked. They may have a hard time making friends and getting to know people in a public school. Another con is that public schools may not have a qualified and well trained staff to support and teach deaf students. The student may even end up doing worse and not benefiting from their help at all. And the last con is that a deaf student doesn't normally get direct direction. They often get instruction from a translator, lip reading, or something written on the board which may be missing this. The student may not be getting the whole instruction or lecture and could be missing out on important key point in the class.
After looking at the pros and cons of an inclusive classroom for deaf students I have to agree that an inclusive environment can work well for a deaf student. I feel that as long as the student is motivated, has a good support system, and understanding well trained teachers they should be able to thrive in the public school system.

http://sped.wikidot.com/the-benefits-and-risks-of-inclusion-for-deaf-students

Home Schooling vs. Public Schooling

I wanted to look at what the difference is between home schooling and public schooling and if one is better than the other. One reason public schools are so widely attended is because it's free and convenient. The parents don't have to pay for all the supplies except for a few folders and notebooks here and there but everything else is free. They don't have to pay for the text books, chalkboards, computers, programs, markers, and all the supplies for art, music, and gym. And there are no enrollment fees like there are in private schools. Also one parent doesn't have to stay home to teach their child. They are able to go to work and provide for their family. Another reason that public schools are good for students is because they get to meet a wide variety of people who have all kinds of different backgrounds. They probably wouldn't get to meet these people while being taught in their home. It could open them up to a lot of new things like hobbies, sports, and interests. A down side to Public schooling is that violence is much more common and children are more likely to be in danger in a public school than they would be at home with their parents. Also dropout rates are higher in public schools although it depends what school they attend because all public schools and areas have different dropout rates.
In a homeschooling environment the parents have control over what their child is taught and with what method of teaching. They can also add religious aspects to the teaching if that is a priority to them. By teaching their own child fist hand the parents will know when they are having difficulty in an area while a teacher at a public school may not. Students in public schools often get a minimal amount of attention from their teachers because they are 1 of 20 or 30 students. But in home schooling it is 1 on 1 and the student is the top priority. The only thing about home schooling is that I feel the child is missing out on working on their social skills. Children need to learn how to work in groups and use teamwork. When they are just working with their mother or father they are not getting that same experience that is provided in public schools.
Overall both methods of schooling offers both pros and cons although I tend to lean towards the public schooling because I feel that it offers more real life experience that can be used out in the real world. If a student is being sheltered at home they are missing out on a lot of wonderful and sometimes horrible things that I call learning experiences that can help them when they get older.

http://www.educationalgateway.com/advantages-disadvantages-public-school

Book Censorship and Banning

One of the reasons why I love going to school and want to become a teacher is because I feel that at school I have an infinite supply of knowledge. I feel that this should be the way that every child feels when they walk into their school and especially when they walk into their library. I believe that they have the right to knowledge as a student and should be able to access it whenever they please. I think that school is all about learning things from different perspectives, times, and people and shouldn't be limited to one point of view. Many other people both teachers, students, and parents alike feel the same way so why are some of the most influential books of all time being banned from schools? Classic books like "Huckleberry Finn" are banned from some schools because of racism and language used in the book which was perfectly normal for the time period, another book "Of Mice and Men" has been banned for containing profanity. I have read both of these books along with many others that are listed on the banned list like "The Catcher in the Rye”, “To Kill a Mockingbird", "Lord of The Flies", and the "Harry Potter" series. Needless to say I ended up pretty good even though I read these books. I didn't become a racist, I don't swear a lot, and to tell you the sad truth I don't really think I’m a wizard and that I attend Hogwarts(unfortunately). I think that when people, especially parents, find out that there's a bad word or a racist comment in a book they go over the top and race into protective mode for a child that’s old enough to know these things. They don't want their children to grow up and learn what has been and what is out there in the world. You can't protect your children forever and they do want to gain this knowledge and be educated in classic books. There are books out there that obviously shouldn't be read in the classroom. But the classics that ones that have been read in the classroom for generations should never be banned because they still have knowledge that is relevant to today's teachings.
http://712educators.about.com/od/bannedbooks/tp/banned_books.htm