As a secondary school teacher of 30 years before I took early retirement, I had to teach the curriculum content. But I was the only arbiter of how I taught it. Consulting others and listening to the strategies of others is a very good thing to do, as are things like co-op teaching but when the classroom door closes, it's your interpretations that rule!
Working for the education authorities as well would allow you, as it did me, to gain deep insight into the current curriculum and suggest ways to improve its delivery.
This is further enhanced by producing your own materials and offering them to other teachers of your subject and getting their feedback after using them.

I think it depends on your metaphysical structure etc.
So for me, I always look for the larger narratives which underlie the issue (how the enlightenment was a development of 4 nations against the catholic church with france going metaphysical and political and england going poetic and political and italy going into plastic arts, the cause of all domestic issues in usa is based off lockean liberalism vs rousseauian, etc) so the more universal the narrative is the higher value it necessarily has.
With that being said, I feel like the Great Books, of the high value still that they have, are too discrete and the point of a teacher is to help/teach kids how to connect the dots on their own and see/prove which dots connected have more value and which less.

Students should learn this: How not to fuck up?

If that's not possible, then this: How not to fuck up the fuck up?

I am in favor of a great books (lower case) approach, but this must be tempered by an acknowledgement of the fact that the majority of students at both the high school and college lever do not and in many cases cannot read these kinds of books. They have been taught and trained to read textbooks and to read for information.

You might have some success with a "great videos" approach. Good conversations can take place with the right set-up. Short statements in terms that they can relate to. "The unexamined life is not worth living". "All men are created equal". At various points introduce more of what various people from various disciplines and cultures said about this

In my opinion what you want to do at this stage is introduce them to ideas and get them involved in thinking. You will lose them if you give long, complex quotes. You want to leave them with questions and an awareness of the problems. Any answers or resolutions should be more material for questioning and examining.

As you are already aware "Great Books" might act as a trigger. It may be best to avoid such terms if asked about your educational philosophy in an interview. They might not even be interested in your ideas on content since you probably won't be making decisions on curriculum as a new teacher. What they might be more interested in is what you have to say about learning and a holistic view of students that includes problems and issues they bring to school from their home and social environment.

What are y'all's views on how to best review? Do y'all think debating an issue helps y'all work through it better? I understand in a classroom it's not as easy to implement what works for oneself.

Schopenhauer's Vanity of Existence and Studies in Pessimism. Maybe his broader Wisdom of Life essays. Perhaps E.M Cioran's The Trouble with Being Born as well. They have to learn somewhere that it was best never to have been, and that now that they are here, they better contemplate this very core understanding and not be distracted by the spreadsheets and concrete drying.

I’ll definitely keep this as advice for the future! What subject(s) did you teach?

I see your point but maybe save this for higher education. I’d rather students get into people like Marcus Aurelius because it teaches them how to have a stiff upper lip. Dostoyevsky I think would be good for them once you get past all the difficult Russian names.

Applying for several positions to teach high school history for the next school year has led me to ask the question of what students should be learning. Anyone can stand up there and read off of a slide and get paid for it. I know that there is a way to make students interested in the content even if they don’t find it interesting. I tend to advocate a kind of perennialism, sometimes called a “Great Books” curriculum. In the college setting as I’m sure many of us know, myself included, this kind of curriculum is frowned upon if not openly attacked. You can teach about Plato, Sophocles, Marx, Shakespeare, and Dostoyevsky in an intellectually honest manner. You can teach the Bible or teach American State Papers (i.e. Declaration, Constitution, Bill of Rights, Federalist no. 10) in an intellectually honest manner. You can teach the driving factors behind Greco-Roman society and Ancient Chinese society in an intellectually honest manner. All of these things to some people may seem contrarian but they reveal what Mortimer Adler and Robert Hutchins called the Great Conversation, a discussion of various ideas. These are, of course, just my thoughts. I just feel that teaching be it at the secondary level or college level is becoming way too politically charged. — Dermot Griffin

All great stuff, but you have to look at the population. If the kids are already set up for this kind of thinking then you are fine, but a lot of US schools will be lacking in even bare minimum reading level comprehension and behavior control.. They are kids after all.. I bet you have in mind private school or perfectly attuned honors kids that are hanging on your every word.. Not in most common public schools

See above.

I’ll keep your words in mind. You make a good point. I work for the public school system already and thankfully the school I’m at currently is vocational; respectful students that seem somewhat engaged in the work. The emphasis however is on getting them set with a career after they graduate.

I’ll keep your words in mind. You make a good point. I work for the public school system already and thankfully the school I’m at currently is vocational; respectful students that seem somewhat engaged in the work. The emphasis however is on getting them set with a career after they graduate. — Dermot Griffin

Got it.. Try working in some urban or rural poor schools to get some perspective.. or even just middle of the road with a mix.. Sounds like you are here.. but I mean with mixed upbringings.. parents in jail, homeless, etc..

Great Books? I don't know. I'm not sure it matters as long as you teach them to think well. How to write. To love reading, if that's possible. Math and science, as needed for practical life, but also as a way of understanding the world. History and geography so they know where they fit in the world. Wood shop so they know how to work with their hands. What we used to call "home economics" so they know how to get along in the world - also cook and sew on a button. One of the most useful courses I took was typing. I'm using it now.

Good teachers matter more than specific curriculum. I still remember the best teacher I ever had, Mrs. Koepcke, my 11th grade English teacher. I still feel gratitude for what she gave me.

Teach them to love something, something that is theirs and they'll have for the rest of their lives.

The problem is, that there will always be niche elite programs out there.. Would this ever translate to wider society? Probably not in a multicultural, very diverse society. The problems of the differences between the private school/higher track programs and the other populations are very complex. Mostly, the fact that people (especially kids) are not naturally motivated the way you might be about a subject, and to have more than 10 people (typical classrooms being 20-30) causes all sorts of environmental factors of classroom management that you will deal with that have nothing to do with curriculum. Any deep Socratic method in that case goes off the rails real quick... In essence, your Epicurean/Socratic vision becomes about other things. It becomes about modeling behaviors, social work, child psychology, school administration policies, identifying or working with learning disabilities, and all the other things that have nothing to do with content.

I’ll definitely keep this as advice for the future! What subject(s) did you teach? — Dermot Griffin

Mathematics and Computing Science for the first few years. Full time Computing after that.
I became a marker of the standard grade final exams after delivering the curriculum for about 4 years.
After about 5 years of marking the various levels of standard grade. I became a higher grade marker, after a few years of that, I became an examiner for higher grade, which means you sample and check the marking of other markers. Then I became a setter, which means you write sections of the hgher grade final exam papers, then I did the same at Advanced higher.
Marking final exam papers offers invaluable insight into how pupils are answering questions all over the country which makes you best qualified to write educational materials.

I know that there is a way to make students interested in the content even if they don’t find it interesting — Dermot Griffin

I totally agree. There's always a way. This point is more important even than what it sounds! I mean, one cannot stress it enough. This has been my answer to discussions about "education" I participated in.

Unfortunately though, this is not what teachers usually do. And I wonder, is it better --even for yourself, as a teacher-- to have indifferent students in your class, some of whom are bored to death, than to have "alive" students, who are enjoying your class?

Besides, students might not find the subject interesting because of many reasons: prejudice, misunderstood/wrong/missing concepts, difficulties in learning, and so on. So if you can "repair' all that, I believe you offer a great service to them and the society as a whole. And everyone wins: both your students and yourself.

The ways to arouse interest are many. They must all though be centered on the usefulness of the taught subject in life. Practical and realistic examples help in that. But even if one cannot or is not supposed to apply the subject in life, understanding it and applying it in imaginary situations, increases logical thinking and thus intelligence. This is a product by itself!

Teach them to love something, something that is theirs and they'll have for the rest of their lives. — T Clark

Are you referring to women?

I wonder if the era of the Great Conversation has ended and amounts to anachronistic liberalism in our postmodern, tradition hating culture? I'm sure the hardest thing to do these days is engage students. Better they watch a TV show and explore its themes and characters with interest than stare hatefully and blankly at a page of Shakespeare before zoning out. I never had a single teacher I cared for or who taught with any hint of inspiration or skill. As far as I'm concerned school only interfered with my education. I took an interest in reading and 'classics' only in the years after I left school.

Applying for several positions to teach high school history ... I tend to advocate a kind of perennialism, sometimes called a “Great Books” curriculum. .... These are, of course, just my thoughts. I just feel that teaching be it at the secondary level or college level is becoming way too politically charged. — Dermot Griffin

If you feel strongly enough to get paid less, then you need to look at small liberal private schools that might agree to offer your broader Western cultural philosophy in teaching the biased politicized history of your community. Most public schools funded by the community will not tolerate your enlightened approach.

I'm sure you realize that you would be teaching well over the majority of your high schoolers' heads in conveying your joy of the subject matter. The great books were written in the context of their times, past, present, and in an intellectual direction. To teach that context and how the works advanced culture in history is difficult to absorb even for the brighter college students. That's why the standard curriculum, as impoverished as it is, protects you and the school system from attacks by parents who might disagree with you personally or with your point of view.

Are you referring to women? — chiknsld

I'm referring to everyone.

I suppose it is true, that women need love. Do you think that men and women have the same needs?

I suppose it is true, that women need love. Do you think that men and women have the same needs? — chiknsld

I'm talking about loving something outside themselves. I love lots of things - reading, writing, science - especially writing. I am most myself when I am thinking and trying to explain myself to others. It fills me with pleasure and it gave me a career that allowed me to make a decent living and do something worthwhile.

I agree with much of this.

I wonder if the era of the Great Conversation has ended and amounts to anachronistic liberalism in our postmodern, tradition hating culture? — Tom Storm

It is the liberal tradition that has led to the hatred of tradition - "dead white guys". Individualism, autonomy, and equality have led to the idea that no one has greater moral or intellectual authority then I do.

I'm sure the hardest thing to do these days is engage students. Better they watch a TV show and explore its themes and characters with interest than stare hatefully and blankly at a page of Shakespeare before zoning out. — Tom Storm

I think the lack of interest in reading and the lack of knowledge of how to read as a participant. They learn to passively in order to gather information. It they question a text it is often only to reject it rather than to see if the argument holds up.

But I do think that it is still possible to have great conversations in class, but requiring them read a book and discuss it usually a non-starter. You can pull out interesting ideas and issues, but some will not say anything for fear it will become clear they have not read the material, some will be afraid to admit that they do not understand something, some will be reluctant to say anything that others will object to.

When I was teaching I considered it a success if I had a few students in a semester who was interested and engaged.

That sounds fantastic. :)

It is the liberal tradition that has led to the hatred of tradition - "dead white guys". Individualism, autonomy, and equality have led to the idea that no one has greater moral or intellectual authority then I do. — Fooloso4

Indeed. Do you see a solution to this, or does it belong to the culture wars and the general malaise in Western culture?

I've been teaching elementary for 22 years. I noticed that when phones became commonplace, I lost my captive audience. The stuff I need to teach them can't compete for their attention with the content that's on their devices. Taking their devices away/making them put them away makes them resentful and counting down the time until they get their devices back. A schoolwide ban on devices might help. I've never taught at a school that had that, though.

Anyone can stand up there and read off of a slide and get paid for it. — Dermot Griffin

That is not teaching.

The curriculum is an irrelevance inflicted on teachers by meddling politicians, bureaucrats and wannabes. You are obliged only to give it lip service. Your duty is to your students only.

Nor is the content, be it great books or mathematical formulae, of much import or interest. Your aim as a teacher ought be to render yourself unnecessary, by enabling your charges to make their way by themselves.

Dancing in all its forms cannot be excluded from the curriculum of all noble education; dancing with the feet, with ideas, with words, and, need I add that one must also be able to dance with the pen? — F.N.

Students should learn this: How not to fuck up?

If that's not possible, then this: How not to fuck up the fuck up? — Agent Smith

:sweat: :up:

Your aim as a teacher ought be to render yourself unnecessary, by enabling your charges to make their way by themselves. — Banno

:100:

:fire:

Do you see a solution to this, or does it belong to the culture wars and the general malaise in Western culture? — Tom Storm

I think that teaching students how to actively read and interpret starting from the time they learn to read can help. There will always be those search and question and the numbers wax and wane.

I also think that too much emphasis is put on higher education. Too many people who are either not well suited or not well prepared end up in college where they don't belong. Part of problem is humanities requirements There is a recognition of the value of the humanities, but as a requirement it has become in too many cases just a matter of checking the box and getting it out of the way. The sciences support the continued teaching of humanities. The humanities are financially difficult to sustain on their own and humanities requirements is a way of justifying their continued existence. It fills seats.

The other side of the problem is that each year more humanities graduates with higher degrees enter the job market than there are jobs available. The push from the administration is to keep enrollment numbers up while at the same time replacing retiring teaching faculty with adjuncts whose dreams of gainful employment has been crushed.

Although painful in the short term, part of the solution may be to shrink humanities departments. This is already happening but the outdated model of department growth and a supply of graduates to meet the demands of growth is not sustainable.

Rather than optimism and solutions I ended up painting a cheerless picture of despair.

"Intellectual honesty is honesty in the acquisition, analysis, and transmission of ideas. "

In other words, a chimera.