Albert Cullum changed lives with his teaching. After viewing the film, what can we learn about teaching and learning from this peek into his relatively short teaching career.
The activities Cullum used in his classrooms look like a lot of fun. Students bought into Cullum's antics excitedly and willingly. The movie shows students eating with a spoon everything Mr. Cullum did and said. He played with the students, and they played back. His peers and students' parents, however, didn't always want to play. Already during my relatively brief time student teaching, I have sensed this sort of animosity among a couple of lax teachers toward teachers who have broken out of the boring mold. I think I've even heard one teacher say to another, “Quit making me look bad.” At home, high quality and lousy parents alike probably did get tired of hearing about that crazy Mr. Cullum, as he pointed out. I wonder if Albert Cullum had extended himself to his colleagues more openly would they have not turned against him. He mentioned that eventually he quit spending time around other teachers. Perhaps he could have passed some of his useful techniques on to others. My admiration for Cullum is countered by thoughts that he perfected teaching more for himself than for the greater good of education. Anyone can say “Teacher education on the national level is a cancer of mediocrity. It should be four years of self-development, not how you're going to inject facts into people: how you have developed.” I'd like to know if he has a collection of tips for teachers. That'd be nifty. I'd like to read his Dead Geranium book. Now that I know a little bit of what he's about, I'd like to hear more about his specific methodologies. Many praise Cullum for his “advocacy of children.” It appears as though students were really central to his work in education—not major reforms, not standards, not programs.
I was really inspired by the movie. (I thought he said that he did go on to teacher education, and that he said it is one of the most difficult things to do.) I only wish that I can inspire my students the way that he inspired his. There were so many quotes that I just thought were outstanding. He said, "Don't limit your child's world." I think that is one of the most intelligent things I have heard in my student teaching so far. He's basically saying expect excellence. Why should we be holding students back from the things that they want to achieve. He said that they knew that he was in charge, but it was their class as well and that they were a team. That sounds a lot like what we've been taught. Another thing that sounded original to me was that he said "you can't lose when there's pride. Pride is everything." I hope that I can instill some pride in my students. The students should be proud of themselves and what they are achieving in class. Cullum was, he said, "I'm not deliberately different, I'm just me." That's just awesome, what a guy. I think that one of the most obvious things that Cullum did that we can try to achieve is to make our classrooms a safe learning environment where students feel like they can express themselves without ridicule.
A consideration is the time in which he taught. His techniques were truly innovative in an era of worksheets and memorization of sometimes questionable material. The cinematographer might be more to blame for placing Cullum on a pedestal than Cullum himself: I don't get the idea he was motivated by self importance. I have not looked into the book you mention, but will try to do so.
Albert Cullum was a very interesting person, and I think this more than anything, is what inspired his students so much. I was enthralled by the documentary and especially the comments the students had, when they met his 40 years later. There is a lot he did that can't be done these days, like the 'swimming the Mississippi' bit, but a lot of it can. It was interesting to see that the parents of some of his student's objected to what their kids were learning and tried to stop it. I wonder if that in part led to his going on to teach college. After seeing this film I began thinking if any of my teachers came close to the example Cullum sent, and sadly, no, none of them did. And now I'm thinking of how I can make my planned lessons fun. As Cullum showed, it's not impossible. And until the end, it lokked like he never gave up teaching Shakespeare to students, I wonder if Shaw and Sophocles were taught as well?
Albert Cullum, an eccentric and passionate elementary teacher, was revered for being creative, daring, dedicated, and intense. How could he not be? He taught his students Shakespeare and Lorca (among other great writers), and seemed to keep his curriculum forever outside of the box. He believed that every student is unique, and everyone has a touch of greatness; his responsibility was to help students see this, and to know that every student has a success level, whatever subject or interest it is in. Albert was not just a schoolteacher, after all; he was also a coach. His former students, who participated in the documentary, commented that Albert was “there for us,” “fought to be in the classroom,” “brought the world into the classroom,” and let people open boxes and travel and learn, and pursue things.” He taught kids how to think critically, which is so rare (not to mention, it is really unheard of at this age level), and he constantly personalized instruction. In order to make Shakespeare fun and accessible, he had his students put on plays and even had a Shakespeare Festival. His students were very involved, serious, and excited about this; they must have felt incredibly artistic, talented, and important. When interviewed about their experiences, they sounded very sincere and dedicated to acting. They understood that they were being exposed to writing that most upper-level students would not embrace, understand, or even ever read. They did not take it for granted that they were encouraged to always go beyond what most people would expect of them. He sounds like a wonderfully gifted and incomparable teacher, although I do think that most teachers now could never get away with what and how he taught. His students were polite, genuinely interested, highly intelligent, affluent, and hardworking. I imagine that not having much exposure to television, not having the internet, and not being bombarded by sex, violence, and drugs, was integral to both their success and their drive to learn. But we do not live in the 60’s anymore. Teachers could and should strive to have their students think critically and grapple with material, but I doubt they will be met immediate grace and good behavior. I watched this documentary with Tim, and we both commented on the idea that great teachers are great because they inspire, go beyond what is expected, and challenge their students with texts and ideas that normally they would not be exposed to; however, with all of the regulations, curriculum barriers, and rules, rules, rules, it is apparent that we aren’t actually supposed to be like Albert Cullum. We’re supposed to adhere, or inevitably face criticism and possibly disciplinary action. I am an idealist. When I think about what kind of teacher I want to be, I know that I am capable of breaking certain molds and really challenging and inspiring my students. Yet I feel as though I am not encouraged to do this. As much as this program might revel in various articles, discussions, movies, and presentations about teaching outside of the box, it certainly feels like we are just supposed to admire what is outside of it without ever actually leaving it. But, I suppose there is a method to the madness. Perhaps…we need to understand the box before we can dismiss it. (Okay, now I’m just brown-nosing to avoid raising any eyebrows).
Albert Cullum, an eccentric and passionate elementary teacher, was revered for being creative, daring, dedicated, and intense. How could he not be? He taught his students Shakespeare and Lorca (among other great writers), and seemed to keep his curriculum forever outside of the box. He believed that every student is unique, and everyone has a touch of greatness; his responsibility was to help students see this, and to know that every student has a success level, whatever subject or interest it is in. Albert was not just a schoolteacher, after all; he was also a coach. His former students, who participated in the documentary, commented that Albert was “there for us,” “fought to be in the classroom,” “brought the world into the classroom,” and let people open boxes and travel and learn, and pursue things.” He taught kids how to think critically, which is so rare (not to mention, it is really unheard of at this age level), and he constantly personalized instruction. In order to make Shakespeare fun and accessible, he had his students put on plays and even had a Shakespeare Festival. His students were very involved, serious, and excited about this; they must have felt incredibly artistic, talented, and important. When interviewed about their experiences, they sounded very sincere and dedicated to acting. They understood that they were being exposed to writing that most upper-level students would not embrace, understand, or even ever read. They did not take it for granted that they were encouraged to always go beyond what most people would expect of them. He sounds like a wonderfully gifted and incomparable teacher, although I do think that most teachers now could never get away with what and how he taught. His students were polite, genuinely interested, highly intelligent, affluent, and hardworking. I imagine that not having much exposure to television, not having the internet, and not being bombarded by sex, violence, and drugs, was integral to both their success and their drive to learn. But we do not live in the 60’s anymore. Teachers could and should strive to have their students think critically and grapple with material, but I doubt they will be met immediate grace and good behavior. I watched this documentary with Tim, and we both commented on the idea that great teachers are great because they inspire, go beyond what is expected, and challenge their students with texts and ideas that normally they would not be exposed to; however, with all of the regulations, curriculum barriers, and rules, rules, rules, it is apparent that we aren’t actually supposed to be like Albert Cullum. We’re supposed to adhere, or inevitably face criticism and possibly disciplinary action. I am an idealist. When I think about what kind of teacher I want to be, I know that I am capable of breaking certain molds and really challenging and inspiring my students. Yet I feel as though I am not encouraged to do this. As much as this program might revel in various articles, discussions, movies, and presentations about teaching outside of the box, it certainly feels like we are just supposed to admire what is outside of it without ever actually leaving it. But, I suppose there is a method to the madness. Perhaps…we need to understand the box before we can dismiss it. (Okay, now I’m just brown-nosing to avoid raising any eyebrows).
6 comments:
The activities Cullum used in his classrooms look like a lot of fun. Students bought into Cullum's antics excitedly and willingly. The movie shows students eating with a spoon everything Mr. Cullum did and said. He played with the students, and they played back. His peers and students' parents, however, didn't always want to play. Already during my relatively brief time student teaching, I have sensed this sort of animosity among a couple of lax teachers toward teachers who have broken out of the boring mold. I think I've even heard one teacher say to another, “Quit making me look bad.” At home, high quality and lousy parents alike probably did get tired of hearing about that crazy Mr. Cullum, as he pointed out.
I wonder if Albert Cullum had extended himself to his colleagues more openly would they have not turned against him. He mentioned that eventually he quit spending time around other teachers. Perhaps he could have passed some of his useful techniques on to others. My admiration for Cullum is countered by thoughts that he perfected teaching more for himself than for the greater good of education. Anyone can say “Teacher education on the national level is a cancer of mediocrity. It should be four years of self-development, not how you're going to inject facts into people: how you have developed.” I'd like to know if he has a collection of tips for teachers. That'd be nifty. I'd like to read his Dead Geranium book. Now that I know a little bit of what he's about, I'd like to hear more about his specific methodologies.
Many praise Cullum for his “advocacy of children.” It appears as though students were really central to his work in education—not major reforms, not standards, not programs.
I was really inspired by the movie. (I thought he said that he did go on to teacher education, and that he said it is one of the most difficult things to do.) I only wish that I can inspire my students the way that he inspired his. There were so many quotes that I just thought were outstanding. He said, "Don't limit your child's world." I think that is one of the most intelligent things I have heard in my student teaching so far. He's basically saying expect excellence. Why should we be holding students back from the things that they want to achieve.
He said that they knew that he was in charge, but it was their class as well and that they were a team. That sounds a lot like what we've been taught. Another thing that sounded original to me was that he said "you can't lose when there's pride. Pride is everything." I hope that I can instill some pride in my students. The students should be proud of themselves and what they are achieving in class. Cullum was, he said, "I'm not deliberately different, I'm just me." That's just awesome, what a guy.
I think that one of the most obvious things that Cullum did that we can try to achieve is to make our classrooms a safe learning environment where students feel like they can express themselves without ridicule.
A consideration is the time in which he taught. His techniques were truly innovative in an era of worksheets and memorization of sometimes questionable material. The cinematographer might be more to blame for placing Cullum on a pedestal than Cullum himself: I don't get the idea he was motivated by self importance. I have not looked into the book you mention, but will try to do so.
Albert Cullum was a very interesting person, and I think this more than anything, is what inspired his students so much. I was enthralled by the documentary and especially the comments the students had, when they met his 40 years later. There is a lot he did that can't be done these days, like the 'swimming the Mississippi' bit, but a lot of it can. It was interesting to see that the parents of some of his student's objected to what their kids were learning and tried to stop it. I wonder if that in part led to his going on to teach college. After seeing this film I began thinking if any of my teachers came close to the example Cullum sent, and sadly, no, none of them did. And now I'm thinking of how I can make my planned lessons fun. As Cullum showed, it's not impossible. And until the end, it lokked like he never gave up teaching Shakespeare to students, I wonder if Shaw and Sophocles were taught as well?
Jessie Sobey
20 October 08
Reflection on A Touch of Greatness
Albert Cullum, an eccentric and passionate elementary teacher, was revered for being creative, daring, dedicated, and intense. How could he not be? He taught his students Shakespeare and Lorca (among other great writers), and seemed to keep his curriculum forever outside of the box. He believed that every student is unique, and everyone has a touch of greatness; his responsibility was to help students see this, and to know that every student has a success level, whatever subject or interest it is in. Albert was not just a schoolteacher, after all; he was also a coach.
His former students, who participated in the documentary, commented that Albert was “there for us,” “fought to be in the classroom,” “brought the world into the classroom,” and let people open boxes and travel and learn, and pursue things.” He taught kids how to think critically, which is so rare (not to mention, it is really unheard of at this age level), and he constantly personalized instruction.
In order to make Shakespeare fun and accessible, he had his students put on plays and even had a Shakespeare Festival. His students were very involved, serious, and excited about this; they must have felt incredibly artistic, talented, and important. When interviewed about their experiences, they sounded very sincere and dedicated to acting. They understood that they were being exposed to writing that most upper-level students would not embrace, understand, or even ever read. They did not take it for granted that they were encouraged to always go beyond what most people would expect of them.
He sounds like a wonderfully gifted and incomparable teacher, although I do think that most teachers now could never get away with what and how he taught. His students were polite, genuinely interested, highly intelligent, affluent, and hardworking. I imagine that not having much exposure to television, not having the internet, and not being bombarded by sex, violence, and drugs, was integral to both their success and their drive to learn. But we do not live in the 60’s anymore. Teachers could and should strive to have their students think critically and grapple with material, but I doubt they will be met immediate grace and good behavior.
I watched this documentary with Tim, and we both commented on the idea that great teachers are great because they inspire, go beyond what is expected, and challenge their students with texts and ideas that normally they would not be exposed to; however, with all of the regulations, curriculum barriers, and rules, rules, rules, it is apparent that we aren’t actually supposed to be like Albert Cullum. We’re supposed to adhere, or inevitably face criticism and possibly disciplinary action.
I am an idealist. When I think about what kind of teacher I want to be, I know that I am capable of breaking certain molds and really challenging and inspiring my students. Yet I feel as though I am not encouraged to do this. As much as this program might revel in various articles, discussions, movies, and presentations about teaching outside of the box, it certainly feels like we are just supposed to admire what is outside of it without ever actually leaving it. But, I suppose there is a method to the madness. Perhaps…we need to understand the box before we can dismiss it. (Okay, now I’m just brown-nosing to avoid raising any eyebrows).
Jessie Sobey
20 October 08
Reflection on A Touch of Greatness
Albert Cullum, an eccentric and passionate elementary teacher, was revered for being creative, daring, dedicated, and intense. How could he not be? He taught his students Shakespeare and Lorca (among other great writers), and seemed to keep his curriculum forever outside of the box. He believed that every student is unique, and everyone has a touch of greatness; his responsibility was to help students see this, and to know that every student has a success level, whatever subject or interest it is in. Albert was not just a schoolteacher, after all; he was also a coach.
His former students, who participated in the documentary, commented that Albert was “there for us,” “fought to be in the classroom,” “brought the world into the classroom,” and let people open boxes and travel and learn, and pursue things.” He taught kids how to think critically, which is so rare (not to mention, it is really unheard of at this age level), and he constantly personalized instruction.
In order to make Shakespeare fun and accessible, he had his students put on plays and even had a Shakespeare Festival. His students were very involved, serious, and excited about this; they must have felt incredibly artistic, talented, and important. When interviewed about their experiences, they sounded very sincere and dedicated to acting. They understood that they were being exposed to writing that most upper-level students would not embrace, understand, or even ever read. They did not take it for granted that they were encouraged to always go beyond what most people would expect of them.
He sounds like a wonderfully gifted and incomparable teacher, although I do think that most teachers now could never get away with what and how he taught. His students were polite, genuinely interested, highly intelligent, affluent, and hardworking. I imagine that not having much exposure to television, not having the internet, and not being bombarded by sex, violence, and drugs, was integral to both their success and their drive to learn. But we do not live in the 60’s anymore. Teachers could and should strive to have their students think critically and grapple with material, but I doubt they will be met immediate grace and good behavior.
I watched this documentary with Tim, and we both commented on the idea that great teachers are great because they inspire, go beyond what is expected, and challenge their students with texts and ideas that normally they would not be exposed to; however, with all of the regulations, curriculum barriers, and rules, rules, rules, it is apparent that we aren’t actually supposed to be like Albert Cullum. We’re supposed to adhere, or inevitably face criticism and possibly disciplinary action.
I am an idealist. When I think about what kind of teacher I want to be, I know that I am capable of breaking certain molds and really challenging and inspiring my students. Yet I feel as though I am not encouraged to do this. As much as this program might revel in various articles, discussions, movies, and presentations about teaching outside of the box, it certainly feels like we are just supposed to admire what is outside of it without ever actually leaving it. But, I suppose there is a method to the madness. Perhaps…we need to understand the box before we can dismiss it. (Okay, now I’m just brown-nosing to avoid raising any eyebrows).
Post a Comment