The discussion among my group members definitely centered on how McCourt’s personal experience informed his teaching style. Our group felt that incorporating the lived experience into the classroom was essential for creating an engaging environment. In thinking about this further, I think it’s very clear that McCourt’s impoverished background played a significant role in his ability to relate. Feeling overlooked and marginalized as a child seemed to give him a unique ability to find empathy and acceptance for all of his students. Our group did note that McCourt retired in 1987, and we all wondered if McCourt would have found similar success in a modern classroom.
I’m also left with the question: what type of classroom is best for creating an environment that encourages interest and passion? McCourt’s pursuit of “self-education” at NYU highlights how an unstructured approach to education can be just as effective as formal schooling. This is in stark contrast to pervasive ideas of structured educational paths. I personally like the idea that education can be viewed as flexible and unstructured, allowing a more individualized approach. I guess I’m already showing my anti-institutional colors.
No comments:
Post a Comment