MacKenzie Hooker

Philosophy Paper Addendum

Many of my thoughts and beliefs from the original philosophy paper are still true, even

years later. I mention at the end of the original paper that I had hoped to continue to refer back to

my original thoughts, while also adding to my beliefs, and I am finding that is exactly how it is

playing out. Most of the original paper revolves around the ideas of a essentialist and

progressivist philosophies of teaching, both of which I still believe should be present in the

classroom. However, some statements and thoughts presented in the original paper have altered

over time. These are listed and explained below.

The first change that has been made over time comes from the discussion of students

learning best from trial-and-error. And as I still believe this is a great way for a student to learn,

it is not a technique that I see myself using on a daily basis with my students. In the original

paper, I stated that “letting students figure out an answer based on what they know through trial-

and-error…allows the students to thoroughly understand what they have been taught”. I believe

that this is a good strategy and technique to use when studying curriculum such as predictions in

both math and science, as well as creating a hypothesis and testing that hypothesis.

As I have seen in multiple field placement observations, students have become easily

unengaged and unmotivated to complete their work if they continue to fail. For instance, if I

stuck with the technique of allowing my students to learn from trial and error with every

assignment or activity, the students who may take longer to complete the assignment or

understand the assignment could become frustrated from failure. Trial-and-error is not always a

bad approach to take while learning, but I believe now that teacher involvement and review of

the curriculum with these students is must more effective than trial-and-error. Students not only
remain engaged with the material, but they become motivated to complete and figure out the

answer with the trust and help from their teacher, creating a positive learning environment and

positive student-teacher relationship.

Another change that I found while reviewing my original philosophy paper was that of

students with disabilities being able to learn the same as other students if application is present. I

have come to learn that this is not true in all cases. Some students truly need accommodations,

504 plans, IEP’s, and in the worst cases, medications in order to apply themselves in the

classroom. I would love to go back and ask myself why I thought it would be easy for a student

with a disability to apply themselves the same as another student, because I would never believe

that statement now. Even students who do not possess a learning disability find it hard to apply

themselves at times, much less those with a learning disability. I have found that the best way to

accommodate these students is to see what exactly is needed for the student to succeed and to

allow that student the proper adjustments whether that be a different version of an assignment

that does not have as many parts, more time on assignments and tests, and even a student helper

that can assist the student with the learning disability.

For example, a student that may suffer from ADHD may have a written 504 or EIP plan

that allows the student extra time on assignments and tests. However, many of these students are

only given the extended time on tests and assignments that are standardized or benchmark

related. How is this fair for that student? It is written on their plan that they should receive extra

time, but we only allow this extended time on the tests that are counted for the state? Each

student should be allowed the correct accommodation that is needed for them to succeed to the

best of their ability, no matter the success rate of their peers.

 Lastly, I have seen a drastic change in the way I would set my classroom management,

and this is from the way I have seen host teachers use classroom management skills. Even

though I have only been at ACE for a week or so, I can already see a change in the students

behavior compared to that of other Bibb County Schools. From teachers yelling in a child’s face

for misbehavior, to a teacher having the child explain how their action was wrong, completely

changes the relationship between the teacher and student as well as the behavior moving

forward.

A statement that I had made in my original paper discussed how I would deal with

disrespectful behavior, and moving forward, this has changed. I had originally written that “if

disrespectful behavior is shown in the classroom… the student should be addressed in private”. I

can now see how unrealistic and unlikely that this method of addressing misbehavior will be

used. Many times when unexpected behavior is present, if the behavior is called out without

singling the student out, other students will begin to do what is expected. For instance, if I were

to see a student playing with a pair of scissors when completing a grammar activity, I could call

out the unexpected behavior and other students who may not be on task will go back to being

engaged. On the other hand, I could reverse this and call out a student that is doing what is

expected and those who are using unexpected behaviors will become engaged with the expected

behavior. It just seems so unlikely to pull a student to the side or outside of the classroom every

time unexpected behavior occurs.