The “sub” way (i’m so clever, right?)

Thursday 5 February 2009

So now that I’ve been in a few different classrooms, at a few different schools, in a few different situations, I thought it might finally be time to talk a little bit about my experiences as a substitute teacher.  When I moved back home after Thanksgiving, the hope to earn a little money and still have some flexibility in my schedule made substitute teaching seem like a pretty good deal.  Plus, with a few years of actual teaching experience, I thought it could be a good way to use some of my skills and reconnect with the teaching profession as I ponder the possibility of returning to “formal education” at some point in the future.  (I mention “formal” education there because I think I’ve decided that I’m called to be an educator, it’s just the idea of what area/subject it might be in: math, special education, social justice, systemic racism, etc.)

FYI as you read along: Thus far, I’ve subbed for a HS Science teacher, a MS Special Ed. teacher, and lastly an 8th Grade Math teacher.

One thing my substituting experience has taught me thus far is the realities of how I, as a teacher, treated my subs, and just the general expectation a teacher has of a substitute.  When I was a teacher, I never gave the sub too much credit, especially if I didn’t know who it might be.  Maybe because of the subject material (HS Math), or maybe just because that’s the way it is, when I was preparing in advance for being away, I’d often schedule tests or quizzes for the day I was out, to make it “easy” for the sub (in my mind): it doesn’t matter how much a sub knows about the material, they can still proctor a test (hopefully!).  They very well may have taken Algebra II or Geometry in HS, but who’s to say they would be able to help a student calculate the value of an interior angle of a regular octagon, or better yet to teach them how to do such a thing?  There were times when I would give out WSs or bookwork (especially if the absence was unplanned, i.e. I was sick), but I think sub as proctor was probably the norm for me.  So that fact that  as Science (Anatomy, Biology, Physics) sub I monitored WSs and bookwork came as little surprise to me — and really, I don’t think I would have done much of a job teaching the students the muscles of the leg, thigh, and groin area anyway.  It wasn’t surprising, but at the end of the day, not too rewarding.

My second experience, this past Monday, was in a MS Special Ed. classroom.  I had a student teacher, which was nice, since the environment wasn’t familiar to me, and the small number of students during any given period was also quite enjoyable.  Since there was a student teacher who had report with the students, I didn’t do as much “teaching” or working with the students as I might have done if I was alone, but I was still able to work directly, both one-on-one and in small groups, with students during the day, so it felt much more rewarding than my first experience, which, really, left me kind of depressed.  It was a good sign for me, as I’ve thought about maybe switching to work as a Special Ed. teacher if I return to the classroom, so this was a nice introduction to one of the possibilities such a career could afford me.

My third experience continued the trend of feeling more valued and gaining more reward in my work — and that shouldn’t be too surprising, as it so happened that I found myself returned in a Math classroom.  While the “emergency sub plans” (every teacher has these, just in case) called for me to proctor general diagnostic tests all day, that soon went by the wayside when the teacher, who had meetings in the school, showed up to get me some actual lesson plans.  I mentioned that I was a math teacher by trade, so she looked at what she would have done and decided to just have me carry on with that plan of action!  Victory!  I would finally be “teaching” again, like the “good old days!”

It was a pretty good day.  Some of my general past shortcomings as a teacher came out (classroom management, motivation to learn), some of them possibly because I was a sub, universally required to gain less respect than one’s “normal” teacher, but it still felt good.  It took a few classes to recognize the general abilities and challenges students had with the material, but I caught on and adapted my teaching style and examples — four classes had the same material, and that fourth class was the most well behaved and did the best, as a whole, on their assignment, which I would claim to be a good sign of success (at least in part — let’s not oversell this, as I’m sure there will be much supplementing of anything I did in future classes).  There was even a funny fiasco where I thought I had destroyed the dry erase board with a permanent marker thrown in for good measure — even with the challenges of the day, it made me c:

And then today I got a call from the principal of the HS I attended (though he wasn’t there when I went to school), seeing if I was available tomorrow to substitute for the math teacher I had from grades 8-12, at his request.  In the words of the principal, “That way they can at least still do some math.”

So I’ll likely have to take the good with the bad, but maybe things are going to turn out OK after all c:

Advertisements

playing God

Sunday 13 January 2008

So this time it was a story from News of the Weird, of all places (along with discussion of globalization/imperialism and other harms to our earth), that got me thinking. Here’s the story:
A research team led by Richard Hanson of Case Western Reserve University (Cleveland) has produced a colony of “supermice” whose physical abilities are the rodent equivalent of those of gifted humans. By modifying a single metabolism gene, researchers enhanced the mouse’s ability to use body fat for energy, creating a mouse that can run five hours without stopping, live longer, and have three times as much sex as ordinary mice. According to Hanson, humans have exactly the same modifiable gene, “(b)ut this is not something that you’d do to a human. It’s completely wrong.” (6 Jan 2008 Issue)
Other stories on this: CNET News; The Independent (London)

The researcher’s quote made me think about what exactly you would “do to a human” and how we’re playing God so much already that doing something like modifying a metabolism gene really is maybe the least of our worries.

It seems shockingly horrible, doesn’t it: altering the essence of a human’s genetic code. But we have no problem making changes in the genetic codes of animals in our testing facilities — “in the name of Science” — and surely have no problem with genetically modified plants, as much or most of the crops grown in this country (and around the world?) have been altered to grow “better.” I think about my grandfather’s garden and some Monsanto corn he decided to grow which required the use of some Monsanto fertilizer, too. Unfortunately for his garden as a whole, any other plant grown close to the corn that got some of the fertilizer on it perished. And how does this genetic altering of plants and animals affect the future, and what of all the chemicals and pesticides that don’t affect their intended target? How are the estimated 99.9% of the 3 million tons of yearly pesticides globally that actually run off affecting this world for the worse? (More about pesticides here.)

I could go on many tangents here: greenhouse gases, corporate sweatshops and slave labor, oppressive governments (certainly not restricted to dictators), choices to act preemptively that kill others when you may have never been in danger yourself — the list is a long one. Ask yourself now, “What are some ways we, as a world, and maybe even I, myself, am playing God?”

The solutions to our world’s problems are not easy, and all the world’s oppressions are interconnected in some way. That’s why we must support one another as we work for change. As a quote attributed to Lila Watson(‘s group of Aboriginal activists) reminds us: “Your liberation is bound up with mine.” We’ve maybe come too far to return to an earth where we all farm our own fields and make our own clothes, but until we all find a way to collectively work and live so that no human, animal, plant, or anything on this earth — living or “non-living” — is oppressed, we are doing ourselves a grand disservice and expediting our own extinction.