This week I had the pleasure of observing a history and english teacher and her wonderful students at south high school. The building was quite consistent with most high schools I have ever been in. The teacher I was observing was clearly passionate and must have been a favorite of the students there because she was constantly visited and many of the students spoke when we walked down the hall. The two classes she taught were a history course called All Nations, which covered Native American history and culture, and advanced placement (AP) language and composition. While her overall attitude remained consistent, there were clearly different classroom management techniques between the All Nations course, consisted of mostly minority underclassmen, and her AP language and composition class, which was primarily white upperclassmen.

At the start of the All Nations course, the teacher spent a few minutes trying to calm them down so she could begin her lesson. the class consisted of tables formed in a U-shape with chairs on both sides of the table. The students were allowed to sit on either side of the tables (remember that…). Although the seating would suggest a progressive approach to teaching, the work she presented seemed on par with most classrooms I had experienced in the past. She instructed them to copy and define vocabulary words from the textbook  for the first twenty minutes of class. When confronted with disruption she asked them to be quiet, or she would give a referral, a clear sign of consequence modeling. There was very little interaction between her and her students. She presented a very teacher-centered, teacher powered stance as she did most of the talking, and at one point even read to them. The passage she read was from a small book called Native American Stories. The passage described a young native american girl learning how to do beadwork for the first time. This struck a positive with the students, as most were native american and knew someone who did beadwork, or knew how to do it themselves. There were also two native american women who were aids in the course, and they provided some insight into beadwork as well. If I were to apply Delpit’s ideas of expectations into this class, I would say that the teacher seemed to have low expectations for these students. Between the vocabulary words, and the reading of the passage, there was little room for community discussion, or critical thinking.

The AP class was a completely different experience. Upon entering the class, the students also listened to music, but the students could not sit where they wanted. In fact, they were specifically instructed not to sit on the insides of the tables. She wanted everyone to face the middle so they could see each other. She also pulled a chair up, and sat with the students in the circle. A stark contrast from the standing and pacing posture she demonstrated with the class prior. I believe she decided that a more constructivist approach was more suitable for this group.  The lesson of the day was on ethos, pathos, logos. As she sat with the students, she often encouraged participation and discussion from her students. She seemed to be more comfortable allowing the students to share more of the power in this class. She appeared to create a climate where learning was the main priority, and had high expectations for these students.

Upon reflecting, I think she felt she needed to change her power dynamic to fit her students maturity level more than cultural background or race. I was disappointed to see the change in expectations. I just wonder if that was something did intentionally, or unintentionally? Either motive for lowering expectations is wrong, but unintentionally could tell another story of how she views those students of color, and that can be dangerous ground. All in all, I enjoyed my time and look forward to observing more classes in the future.