Nothing excites me more than a student proving the ignorance of the powers that be.
On Monday, my room was visited for the great beauty pageant of education, the quality review. It wasn’t to observe me, though: the technology teacher had the class that period and it was mostly to observe her. I was sitting in the front of the room, doing some paperwork as if nothing was happening.
The reviewers entered the room, along with the four assistant principals, packed at four corners of my room. They observed, gawked, took notes, asked questions of some of the students. The technology lesson was supposed to be the focus.
My students, of course, stole the show.
As the teacher asked the students about the student surveys they would be taking online, one of my students rose his hand and explained, quite calmly, how the results can be manipulated to show students doing worse than they really are, so that it looks like they’re making progress. My supervisor laughed nervously. The other reviewers gasped.
I couldn’t be prouder. There was my kid thinking critically—with NO coaching—and noting the glaring flaws in the system.
Furthermore, it looked like the review team was looking less at the lesson and more at my room. Charts of Athenian democracy and Alexander the Great’s empire. Student-produced definitions of “civilization.” Projects about energy, including a provocative poster stating that nuclear energy “will blow your mind.” Quotes by Plato and Aristotle above the blackboard.
My supervisor darted to me as I was working at my desk. Usually very calm, she had a look of abject horror: “They want to know about what’s written on the whiteboard.” I had done an introductory class on Greek philosophy the periods before, and we came up with a list of philosophical questions, “big” questions that have no right answer. At the very top right was the ominous “Is God real?”
“It was a philosophy lesson, “ I explained. “Those are examples of philosophical questions they came up with.”
There was no reason to panic. A cursory look at the board would have given that clue: questions like “Where did the universe come from?”, “What happens when we die?”, “What is reality?”, etc. Yet questioning like this makes administrators panic—even as such thinking is critical to becoming a successful adult.
This is why I love philosophy. It makes kids smarter and scares the shit out of adults who think they know everything.
I’ve wanted to teach intro philosophy for a while, but I never found the right avenue: too many “kid-friendly” sites on ancient history are just that: too kid-friendly and not challenging enough. I wanted to use real texts, Plato’s dialogues and whatnot, but the translations were simply too inaccessible for my young kids.
In a weird way, my problem was solved through a rather profane little blog I came across by accident.
Philosophy Bro seems, at least on the surface, to be simply a Cliffs Notes of the great philosophical texts of Western civilization. It includes ancients, Hume, Locke, Voltaire, Russell, Marx, Hegel…you name it. If it were simply that, it would be a great place to get a snapshot of the works that shape Western thought.
Yet for classrooms, especially those in middle and high school, Philosophy Bro is much more.
P-Bro, for lack of a better pseudonym, could’ve easily just given a summary of the main points of each piece in a factual yet dry manner ala Cliffs or SparkNotes or any other study guide on the market. Yet he goes one step further. In a saucy, irreverent, often obsene manner, P-Bro gets at the essence of the text AS A TEXT, not simply as a repository of philosophical thought. He gets the cadences, rhythms, moods and style of each author—which makes his blog special.
Take Plato, for example…an example I used in class, after all. I could’ve easily gotten some thrown-together kid-happy reading piece about how Socrates made people think, and said things that weren’t popular and made people sad and forced him to die. Bullshit. I wanted to find an accessible text of Plato’s Apology, Socrates’ defense at his trial in 399 BCE. Mostly direct transcripts at first (which would make any middle schooler pass out after page 2), but then I stumbled on Philosophy Bro.
Now, to understand my enthusiasm: my intro to philosophy class at Georgetown was basically a boot camp in Plato and Aristotle. We read almost every dialogue, wrote a report on each one, tore it apart line by line. P-Bro nailed it. What’s even better, I got a two-fer: he also summarized the Crito, where Socrates talks his friend out of getting him sprung from jail. In both, Socrates’ zest and venom roll pure, even if the language can be puerile at times.
(Apparently, according to P-Bro, philosophy is naked without F-bombs.)
So I took his summaries, cleaned up the language a bit (quite a task) and presented to my students. They got it immediately. It was amazing how Socrates’ method, his ideals and his worldview rang true in a funny, bawdy way that kept the kids rolling.
The quicker you get students to think for themselves and to question the world around them, the better you’ll feel as an educator. Philosophy Bro was a great tool in allowing my kids to enter the world of Plato, Aristotle and the other thinkers of our civilization.
…and nothing feels better than scaring the shit out of pencil-pushing administrators.
Review of Khan Academy’s “American History Overview Part 1: Jamestown to Civil War”
I had not been a huge fan of Khan Academy.
Even before I started working with one of its competitors, I generally took a dim view of anyone that thought they could do better than a teacher with just a computer and a voice recorder.
However, Salman Khan’s little creation, originally meant to help his own cousin in math, has been a founding father of today’s explosion in virtual pedagogy. Practically everyone, including my own kin at LearnZillion, has a patch in the virtual quilt—from reading to math and even science and social studies.
When I heard that Khan Academy had ventured into history, again, I was skeptical. His approach seemed to work in math, and somewhat with language. History, however, is a massive, multi-headed monster that can go very wrong very fast if not handled properly.
Its just natural that I had to see if Salman went off the rails in his history videos.
There were quite a few to choose from, but I decided to start on American History overview Part 1, Jamestown to the Civil War. This is a typical spread for the first year of a two-year cycle in US history, and such an intro film made perfect sense.
Let’s start with the video itself.
Virtual production has come a long way since the first Khan videos. Yet here, they still stick with the crude visible cursor and neon handwriting reminiscent of a specials menu in a Chinese takeout restaurant. At least they’re consistent in their design—not thrilling, but consistent.
The voice, while familiar and somewhat relatable, doesn’t give me confidence. He doesn’t sound like he knows what he’s talking about. It feels like grad school when I basically corrected the poor adjunct they threw at me for two hours at a stretch.
Now for the facts. Honestly, Khan is not half bad here, since it is an overview. Just some notes as you use this video:
Apart from that, it’s not a terrible summation of the early years of the republic. I wouldn’t base a final report on this, but it’s a good introduction to the year, provided some of the gaps are covered in better detail.
In coming weeks, especially after my summer break begins, I’ll be looking at other Khan videos—as well as their competitors—to see how useful they can really be to serious history students.
By the way…the constant use of the word “Indian”, by a company named after an actual one, is really inexcusable.
Leave a comment
Filed under Uncategorized
Tagged as American History, Commentary, Curriculum, Education, education reform, Educational leadership, French and Indian War, History of the United States, Indigenous peoples of the Americas, Khan, Khan Academy, Opinion, Republic of Texas, Salman Khan, Social studies, Teachers, Teaching, television, U.S. History, United States