Class Sept. 15th, 2011

Context. Context, context, CoNtExT, CONTEXT! I think Mr. Bax said the word in about every imaginable way, in about every imaginable location, in about ever imaginable context. Did this detract from my reading? Yes. Honestly the man annoyed me more than a slow-drip faucet into an empty tin pot. Until his conclusion, where he finally made the friggin point that he'd been attempting throughout the article. We get it, CLT (and other such non-contextualized- read: methodological- approaches) do not work everywhere even though theorists and stick-in-the-mud educators want them to. We all knew that. But the emphasis on a specific methodology at the expense of taking context into consideration is detrimental to the professional and the profession; even more importantly, it is detrimental to student learning. See, I just said it without having to rail away for 9 pages. "The dominance of methodology has made attention to context secondary and haphazard." (pg. 285, I paraphrased) Had he begun with this, provided evidence, and then supplied his Context Approach, I wouldn't be so angry. But there you have it.

All that having been said, I agree with him. I wouldn't have a drink with him or ever let him babysit my kids, but I agree. As he quotes one person in the article, the quest for methodological perfection (i.e., one prominent, perfect method for teaching) is ended and dead, with little-to-no progress having been made. It doesn't work. Each teaching experience is as unique as the learning experiences that they provide; they must be formatted for individual years, classes, units, etc. The only way to reach every student is to understand exactly how to reach them, not by cookie-cutting their individuality. And, I would argue, this requires a special kind of teacher. You know, a good one.

As Bax states, good teachers have been doing this since they took the lead in their first class. Teaching isn't just about packaging information to be shipped out and processed by robotic minds. There's more to all of this than that. A teacher must connect with his/her students, must understand the students. They've as much stake in the education as the educator does, and to do them the service that they deserve, the teacher must find a way to bridge the academic with reality. The social context of these young people is everything to them; friends, family, fun, these are all as important to them as actual learning- sometimes more important, who can say? Simply deeming them 30 (or so) like-minded, like-thinking individuals defeats the grand mission even before it is undertaken. So yes, context is everything. Methods shouldn't be considered biblical or how-to guides. Methods should be treated as reference guides and helping hands. Anyone who doesn't consider this important to their approach to teaching isn't going to be nearly as effective as the one who does take the controversial eclectic approach; not eclectic in the sense that many methods make for success, but eclectic in the idea that it takes several paths to reach even a single mind. When dealing with many minds, it only behooves one to use every resource available. The teacher owes that to the student, at the very least.