“Prove D=M/V:

“Calculate and graph the densities of at least three substances using at least one liquid and one solid (Some suggestions are rubbing alcohol, water, cooking oil, clay, and aluminum). You must have at least three different sizes for each substance to measure and graph. Using the calculations and graphs, prove that D=M/V no matter what the size of the sample. Your proof must include:

“Include a typed explanation of density; Define density, explain how it is calculated
and explain why it is a characteristic property of matter.
…”

(I omitted the rest to save you wear and tear).

My daughter was stuck on explaining why density is a characteristic property of matter. So was I. So we looked up what the teacher told her are characteristics of matter. Matter has mass and volume. I reasoned that since matter is characterized by mass and volume, then density represents these characteristic properties. My daughter got it marked wrong. The “correct” answer was that for a particular type of matter, density remains the same regardless of the mass or size. That’ll teach me!

Of course, requiring a “proof” of a definition raises other questions, but I gave the teacher the benefit of the doubt and assumed the question was ill-posed.

As educators, we are thrown the “new” solutions to fix the problems in our urban school settings. Who is designing these structures for us to follow? What data are they using? Are their variables fixed or not? But I do know that “the researchers and studies have shown and/or demonstrated that …” Right. Thank you. I can also write the solution to our educational program if I had the time to sit and ponder about it. But many of us don’t. We are right in the middle of the fight day in and day out. We are quickly modifying the “workshop model” in order for our kids to have a chance of being “successful” in their learning or at least their attempts of trying. It boggles my mind when I hear the following from colleagues, “I know the workshop model. I am an expert in the implementation of this model.” My inner thoughts: Wow!!! Great!!! But can you please tell me how the “workshop model” can be successful in a classroom in which there aren’t enough books to make-up a library, 15 kids with IEPs, ELLs at different levels of language acquisition, and a handful of students below grade level? Better yet, “SHOW ME!!!!

Thank you for the post. Got me all hot and bothered-as always.

Don’t wait for a green light to involve the kids, go for it! :)

And if it’s done right, then yes, it does have a place for those, but frankly, even when it’s done like let’s say in an observation, some administrators would argue that modeling and, more importantly, taking the time to demonstrate more explicitly what you’re trying to convey, is not a tenet of the workshop model.

Frankly, it was more satire, and I would never personally do the workshop model like this, but your comment definitely gave me food for thought. Peace.

Also – does the workshop model not have a place for modeling and guided practice?

@ Hugh, yeah I do what I can. Thanks. Honestly, it’s funny what happens when 3 pissed off teachers get around a table and eat.

@ Frum: because they’re not interested in what we have to say.

@ Francis: does racism taste good? And secondly, I didn’t see the relevance of that link you slyly attached to the bottom of the comment. :: shrugs::

@ am: huuuh?

Unfortunately, the use of the word “racism” itself is based on the assumption that the characteristics of the phenomenon are self-evident. How often do we say that something is “racist” without stopping to analyze the behavior as you have this cake to say what, specifically, are the characteristics of “racism” that are present in this individual case of “racism”? And so nobody really learns anything from the discussion, any more than they learn about cakes by saying “that’s a cake.”

Compare the term “racism” to the term “Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder.” Among the elements of the term PTSD, the word “Post” tells us “after-something.” The word “traumatic ” tells” us that there must be a “trauma” present. The word “stress” tells us that the trauma has caused “stress.” and the word “disorder” tells us that the traumatic stress must have caused a disorder to “make” this definition. So, if you have experienced trauma and stress, but it has not caused a “disorder,” as is the case with many people, then you do not have PTSD.

The word “disorder” invites us to wonder what the symptoms of this disorder are. Who can tell us what they recognized and generally agreed upon symptoms of “racism” are? The fact is, we rarely discuss what these symptoms are, because the term “racism” again encourages us to believe that the individuals symptoms are self-evident. They don’t need to be discussed, just like what makes a cake good is self-evident and doesn’t need to be discussed with specificity, right?

The next time someone tells you that someone else is “racist,” ask them two questions:

(1) Is the racism a mental problem and, if not, what kind of problem is it?

(2) If the racism IS a mental problems then what are the specific symptoms of the mental problem of “racism” that are present in this particular individual?

Believe it or not, everyone would benefit from leaving the gross generalizations behind and engaging in this level of specificity, just as your students benefited intellectually by being asked to state with specificity what makes a cake “good.”