This week, I've been doing a lot of reflecting on summative assessment and classroom management, spending lots of time reading through or listening to (pretty much obsessing over) stuff by Alfie Kohn, Joe Bower, and Rick Wormeli, and considering how I can change my approach in the classroom to better align with the principles and values they (and I) support.
Jules Evans' blog post for this week gave even more food for thought. For me, he highlights the connection between what I'm doing in the classroom and the tentative democracy that my country is pursuing. I haven't read Martha Nussbaum's new book, but recall drooling over Not for Profit. Evans' review indicates to me that Political Emotions continues to reinforce the connection between the liberal arts and democracy (in particular, how liberal arts can cultivate the emotional disposition required to participate happily in a successful democracy), but that the book itself (in form and content) fails to evoke the kind of response it seeks.
Philosophers, politicans, and public educators need to do a better job of tapping into the liberal arts (especially pop culture: it frustrates me that Shakespearean plays are still mandatory for Alberta high school students [this is why]) and CBT (and/or CPS).
My conclusion based on this insane mashup of a post: I want to help my students to be free, happy, healthy, kind, understanding, helpful human beings. To do so requires that I thoughtfully and carefully design my classroom and lessons, and consider what's going on in the rest of the school, district, province, and country.
As a total side-note, I don't like that the school cafeteria has one line for students and another for teachers, but only one person working behind the counter who gives priority to teachers. I'm sure they have their reasons for it, but to me, this practice is undemocratic and effectively says to students, "You are not full citizens yet. Adults have the right to purchase and eat their food before you."