And the AP debate continues

[ginlindzey]

 I'm sorry.  I'm confused.

WHY should we Latin teachers think we are above other teachers in being able to have a varied curriculum?

The debate continues regarding whether Vergil will remain as is, whether there will be other authors added to it, etc.  If so, what authros would we like to see? Etc.  Then someone exclaimed that they couldn't stand to teach Vergil and only Vergil until the end of time.  (Well, something like that.)  

Think about all the other teachers on campus.  They don't have choices and opportunities for  variety.  Everyone else has their own AP curriculum at the pinnacle of their field.  

And even if we weren't teaching AP, MOST school districts and schools have set curricula.  There are certain novels that are read in English, there are certain things that must be covered in science and in math.  Some districts require the use of the same 6 wk tests!

Why should teaching Vergil each year be any worse than teaching from the same beginning textbook?  HEck, the more I teach from CLC, the more I like the little things that were put in by the original author(s). The repetition isn't necessarily bad.   Anyway, we aren't professors.  We aren't in colleges offering a wide variety of courses.  We offer the basics--heeeellllllloooooo!  We are high school.

And I still think it's funny that people do not want to do prose.  I still say people are intimidated by prose.

And what's to say that we can't still stick our favorite things here and there in AP?  Aren't we supposed to prepare students to sight read ANYTHING, including PROSE????

Oh, but what do I know?  I haven't taught AP yet so I know I'm just speaking from what I imagine.  But surely if we are teaching real reading skills and teaching students to read the texts and not just cover the lines, then we should be able to interest them in other authors to read on their own.  Yes, it could happen.  Students WILL read on their own if they think they are able and feel successful at it.  And they will only feel successful if we are NOT covering lines but are teaching READING skills, true READING skills.

Or, hell, introduce them to Loebs.

But back to my point.  We as a profession sometimes act like we deserve special treatment--we deserve our 3rd or 4th year classes to make, even if the numbers are too small.  We deserve to choose what we teach, even when our other colleagues are having their curriculum prescribed for them. We deserve to have 2 AP courses even when all of the other foreign languages are geing cut back to one pinnacle course.  

Has anyone stepped back and thought of what we sound like?  

I dunno.  Maybe I'm just being a pain in the ass.

Comments

[ukelele.livejournal.com]

"Intimidated by prose". How weird. I have barely any poetry background -- I'm much happier wallowing in prose.

And as for the variety thing...well, one of the reasons I left the profession is I couldn't stand to do the same thing every year. (And I was in middle school, so it was worse.) And it's tricky, when you do have a set body of material you need students to master, so they kind of need to *learn* the same thing every year...But I think the answer isn't to say "oh, what makes Latin teachers so much better", but "how can we change the structure of the profession to better meet *all* teachers' interests in variety and advancement." I think the "do the same thing for decades until you retire or die, and never get a raise[1] or a promotion" thing is one of the most serious things wrong with the field, and while it worked in years when women didn't have a lot of other career choices, and works for people who are chiefly interested in stability, I can't see it working well for my generation or those after it.

[1] I don't consider a yearly cost-of-living adjustment to be a raise. A *raise* is a thing I get because my boss says "hey, we've noticed the work you do is really good, and we think you're adding a lot of value here, and here's a meaningful sign of appreciation." A cost-of-living adjustment is something I get for continuing to breathe and sign my contract. And this would be another reason I'm not teaching any more.

[ginlindzey.livejournal.com]

I don't disagree with this. That is, a salary that reflects--truly reflects--the hours we work and the value of our work would be nice.

But as for variety...while I appreciate that, consider the teachers who only teach Biology or Chemistry? I mean, I'm sorry, it's what you sign up for. And if you are creative, you are not restricted--only if you allow yourself to be restricted.

I can't imagine that any course I will ever teach will be the same as what I taught the previous year. I experiment with different things, try new approaches, have different assignments. A course is only boring if you allow it to be boring.

There are plenty of jobs in this world outside of teaching where you really have boring stuff to do, boring, repetitive stuff with no creativity necessary--let alone the fun of working with young people.

And I doubt that there is anyone out there who teaches--even up through university--who hasn't taught courses that weren't there favorites, but who taught those courses because they needed teaching. And perhaps they tackled their favorite author in a conference course or something.

Unless you are in a private school, unless you can be isolated and do whatever you like, in all likelihood you will be part of the public education machinery, which for better or worse, is the backbone of this country. We can make the most out of it and put our all into it, or we can abandon it and abandon the majority of Americans who wouldn't be able to afford private schools.

But then, when I taught English, I could never understand the teachers who said things like, "I can't teach sophomore English! I just HATE Animal Farm!" How can you be a teacher and lover of literature and not be able to admire the book for what it is? Or Lord of the Flies? Or Fahrenheit 451?

I can understand the "I couldn't stand to do the same thing every year" only to a certain point. But for me, it's always about, "ok, how can I do it even BETTER next year? How can I work in more writing, more oral, maybe some TPRS, or something?"

I dunno. I never feel like I'm stepping in the same river.

[ukelele.livejournal.com]

I did different things every year -- all my lesson plans were always from scratch, actually -- but it's just not the same. "How do I do something totally new" is an interesting challenge. "How do I do the same thing I've done before, better" is not. (And to me, the same subject matter conveyed in a different way is the latter. It meets your need for challenge and variety; it doesn't meet mine.)

I think my response *was* considering those other teachers, too! I said we need a path where *all* teachers' needs are considered. I'm not sure how you get to that given that, as I said, there's a certain amount of material that students need to learn each year, but if there are teachers in non-Latin subjects who are dissatisfied because their needs for variety aren't being met, a better system would be to meet their needs too, not to say "well, you don't get it so why should Latin teachers be better". (I feel like I am repeating myself, really. Did this not come through in my first comment?)

And I get those English (or whatever) teachers...I mean, you can like English and not like *every novel ever written*, you know? (Personally, I love Orwell, can't stand Bradbury or Lord of the Flies. And I was a math major, but I didn't like differential equations or Fourier analysis. I can appreciate what they're good for, but I think everyone is better off if I'm not the one doing them.)

(I was in a private school, actually. ;)

[ginlindzey.livejournal.com]

Oh, you were perfectly clear. And I do understand your point of view. But what I was trying to say is that a job is a job. Jobs can be repetitive. This is why it is work. This is what we sign up for, whether we like that or not. Some people like repetitive. They don't mind flipping burgers because it frees their minds for creative thought. And for some people, it could be a challenge for perfection. Think of the repetitiveness in athletic training.

My husband likes computers because the technology is always changing and life is never repetitive. He'll never read the same book twice unless he has to. I'll reread certain books every two years or so because I want to relive it and to find some deeper something in it.

Different strokes for different folks.

But teaching...there's a certain amount of repetitiveness you sign up for that I don't think people should complain about.