The experience of reading Chapter 4
in Nakkula’s “Understanding Youth” left me a little cold. Thankfully, Chapter 5 recaptured my
attention and seemed to have more practical ideas. In the end, I was much more captivated by Chapter 5.
Why did chapter 4 frustrate
me? To start, I’m getting a little
tired of the “problems at home” premise for every high-risk behavior student. Aren’t there students who have great
home lives who get in trouble in school?
Haven’t we learned that many of these problems are complicated and
nuanced and don’t all fit into one category? Why are all these counselors portrayed as superheroes? This couldn’t be further from the truth…
The next issue I had was the fact
that Lorena was able to join rowing as opposed to basketball – isn’t that playing
a sport still? I’m unclear why
that she would be allowed to row but she couldn’t play basketball. Couldn’t she have learned the same
extracurricular skills she acquired from rowing while playing basketball? Maybe I’m being nitpicky here, but if
you’re disqualified from one sport, doesn’t it count for all? Isn’t that one major reason why
high-risk students go downhill: they can’t play sports, the one aspect of
school they’re good at, so they give up on everything else?
Extracurricular activities are
important, but frequently participation costs money. Low-income students are at a disadvantage. I think Nakkula should’ve touched on
this in the chapter. Project IF is
nice but like this entire chapter, a bit too idealistic to prevent me from
rolling my eyes.
Whenever I read about projects like
Project IF, it automatically triggers my memories of the television show The
Wire. In the fourth season, the
main focus is on a group of four 8th grade boys in inner city
Baltimore. By the end of the
series (spoiler alert) all but one of the boys makes it into productive society. The other three end up on the street,
involved in the drug trade. That’s
likely the percentage of these programs: one in four make it. Otherwise, this isn’t the end-all,
be-all answer to our plights. It’s
way more complicated than that.
Our society needs to take a hard look at many facets of what creates
these issues.
I also started getting frustrated
by the next section of this chapter.
The author asserts that women are not socialized for math and science
careers. That is probably true, yet
there is little to no evidence in his argument. Where’s the study?
Where are the examples? I
recall more women than men in my AP math and science courses in high school,
but less in college. I’d be more
curious about why this is the case.
Still, does the author think we already know this injustice before we’re
reading? There needed more explanation
here.
OK now that I’ve gotten that out of
my system, I see that I’m not focusing on what we’re trying to discover: how do
students learn? Sometimes students
do learn from their extracurricular activities. I only wish there was less of a generalized approach to this
chapter and more of a nuanced approach.
How I wish I could make all my troubled students join the track team and
discover the joys of distance running.
Unfortunately, that’s not how the real world works.
Hey,
the less-annoyed Corey is back!
And he has less negative thoughts about chapter 5!
Chapter 5 linked more to the idea
of identity and relationships that were found in chapters 2 and 3. The interpersonal theory of psychiatry
– that mental health is linked to evolving interpersonal history – was a
profound thought for me. I
interpreted this theory as a solid argument that mental health problems don’t
have easy black and white answer.
Issues of this magnitude could stem from many difficulties! Interpersonal history could cause many
personality problems!
On p. 81, Nakkula writes that “time
and again students tell us they work hard “for” the teachers they like,
teachers by whom they feel respected and valued or, as some students put it:
teachers who treat us like real people.” This idea came up in my interview with an adolescent:
the student said the more comfortable she was with the teacher, the more likely
she would take risks with learning.
This idea also ties into the importance of extracurricular activities
for students. The adolescent I
interview also said that she likes to work hard in English class for her drama
teacher, since she has a relationship with her outside of class. This section further solidifies my idea
that relationships are important with teaching students.
Further on p. 81, Nakkula writes “[u]nfortunately, so much
of education has become a numbers game.”
Nakkula is referencing the high-stakes testing and scores that have
over-taken our classrooms. Testing
does suck for teachers and students, but our sound bite, knee-jerk culture
isn’t going away anytime soon. I’ve
been trying to look at these unfortunate teaching truths now more like a
scientific equation, where there’s a constant never changes and is always going
to be annoying. Gravity can be
annoying, too. But that’s true of
any job. There are annoying
points. We try to find strategies
to work around them, and do our best to not let it get to us.
The next section, chumship, seemed
like a sensible idea, though unfortunately named. Adolescents finally start to learn empathy from their peers
around the age of 12. Nakkula
explains this stage as a complex network of relationships that optimizes
opportunities for learning.
On p. 88, Nakkula discusses
interpersonal understanding, or, the evolution of child and adolescent
sensorimotor and moral cognition.
He puts this evolution into different levels of understanding. This goes along with the ideas of
identity we learned about in chapters 2 and 3. More empathy of others allows adolescents to learn to
collaborate and negotiate with others.
Though these negotiations are not always healthy or wise (diffuse
personality), they do help adolescents form a view of the world. Students who have empathy problems
probably find it difficult to negotiate or collaborate with others and have
fewer opportunities for growth.
Adolescents need these ‘authentic’ opportunities in order to connect to
their own self and promote these ideas in others (95). When we are attempting to help students
learn, we must keep these growth opportunities in mind.
I must say, I am a high school student and I thoroughly enjoy reading your blog. I want to pursue a career as a high school teacher when I grow up, and it's nice to see things on here from a teaching perspective.
ReplyDeleteI especially enjoy this post because I agree with nearly all of your points, and one in particular that I so dearly wish you had elaborated more extensively on.
"Why are all these counselors portrayed as superheroes?"
The counselor at my school lacks the emotional capacity to understand and empathize with students. Instead, students are made out to feel like fools for being upset or having problems, simply because it's not an experience that the counselor has had to deal with in her own life, and therefore, she finds it necessary to belittle one for feeling that way. For example, in one of my visits there, I mentioned that I was having family problems, and went a little further into detail about my relationship with all of my family members. Her response was something along the lines of "So what? That's not a real reason to be upset." In no way has her actions or words ever helped me, and I think it's a shame.