It is what you make it, same with any job. Kids and most teachers are retarded, but you'll be dealing with retards at any job. Pay is low, but at least you get summers off.

>>25086670
not me but I just talked to an old friend who teaches English at a high school in Mass. He said he will give the kids a line from whatever the assigned reading is and ask any of them to produce a thought about it, literally any thought, and they can never come up with anything

>>25087215
That’s a horrible and counter-intuitive way to approach anything let alone literature.

>here’s a random except of something. Tell me what you think

>>25087282
I don't think that's a bad move. The point is that the kids have no reading comprehension and can't do anything with the words on the page besides sound them out. I think the idea there is to just see if they're gathering anything, but he said even something like "this is a new word to me" or just re-phrasing the line to show that they understand it would suffice, but they can't do it. Seems pointless to continue going through a book with them if they're just seeing a never ending sequence of unrelated words

File: 3617.jpg (37 KB, 300x463)

37 KB JPG

>>25087282
This.
Also, the task is probably so easy no one will give their thoughs except for the teacher's pet who is fishing for compliments.
"What does "the curtains were blue" mean?"
"It means they were blue!"
"Great job, Mark! Now, does anyone else have anything else to add?"
It turns "commenting on a passage" into something extremely performative.
>>25087326
>The point is that
Nah, you made up this situation in your mind to push the demoralization narrative of "the kids have no reading comprehension and can't do anything with the words on the page besides sound them out", and failed completely.
Also, it's not about reading comprehension, you retarded kike. The exercise is about critical thinking.
The teacher asked them to "produce a thought about it", not to "re-phrase the line". If they actually started doing what your friends expects them to do, then it would mean they didn't understand the question.
Is your friend a woman? Is she expecting them to read her mind to know what she trully wants them to do?

>>25086670
Man that film was aaasssssss.

>>25087177
Are you in the US? If so what state?

I try to teach the classics but the wokists make me teach kendrick lamar songs and AAVE prose

do you kids want to come to my poetry cave in the woods at night

>>25087382
>The teacher asked them to "produce a thought about it", not to "re-phrase the line".
lol which teacher? Why do you think you know what happened? I said "produce a thought" in my first post as a quick way to summarize the exercise, why do you think it's impossible for him to have then said "even a re-phrasing will do", just because I didn't put that in my post? Your evidence for my second post being wrong is my first post. I talked to the teacher, I know what the exercise and response were as told by him. You don't know anything about what happened. Comprehending the reading is step 1, step 2 is thinking about it critically. They can't do step 1.
I know you have the compulsion to speak and argue with people on the internet, but if you don't think before you speak you look like a fucking retard

File: Paulo_Freire_1977.jpg (86 KB, 660x833)

86 KB JPG

>>25088741
>lol which teacher?
I quoted your post, anon. Word for word.
>I said "produce a thought" in my first post as a quick way to summarize the exercise
Moving the goalpost lmao.
>even a re-phrasing will do
It's a completely different exercise. But I do trust the English teachers from "Mass" to know the difference.
>I know what the exercise and response were as told by him. You don't know anything about what happened.
No, no. I know what the exercise and the response were as told by you.
>Comprehending the reading is step 1, step 2 is thinking about it critically. They can't do step 1.
Why do you think that? Just because they don't literally rephrase a random line from a reading they much probably didn't read, doesn't mean they can't do that. If they aren't bootlicking retards answering every retarded request by a quite evidently power tripping teacher it means they have a more nuanced worldview than him, which means they did, in fact, thought critically about the request.

Also, reading comprehension has nothing to do with critical thinking.
Let's say you have to read an insurance contract. Can you argue that the redundant lingo, the latinisms, the long sentences that are used in said contract have the purpose to make the contract as boring as possible, for normal people to avoid reading it and end up signing a contract they didn't intended to sign?
In other words, can you say that the obtrusive style in which insurance contracts are written signal the intention of the author (the insurance company) to make itself incomprehensible?
Yes, you can do that even if you don't understand half of what is in the contract. Critical thinking about a work centers around learning and understanding the intention of the author.

Check the contribution of, first of all, Paulo Freire, and also John Dewey.
Freire was teaching illiterate Brazilian farmers how to critically think, in order for them to escape the cult mentality that the dictatorship instilled in them. You really don't need to know how to read to do that.

>>25086670
It's awful. Everyone just uses Sparknotes or AI instead of reading the book. You practically hand the answers to them and they still dont get it. Book discussions consist entirely of complaints.

>>25088838
>Check the contribution of, first of all, Paulo Freire, and also John Dewey.
Those two guys have done irreversible damage to the education systems of the third world. All their ideas and theories do in practice is to produce marxist vegan trannies in non-industrialized countries, which cements their status as permanent dependent shithole countries.

File: 8de7e7305091dab86676d14ae(...).jpg (11 KB, 255x255)

11 KB JPG

>>25088945
>Those two guys have done irreversible damage to the education systems of the third world. All their ideas and theories do in practice is to produce marxist vegan trannies in non-industrialized countries, which cements their status as permanent dependent shithole countries.
There's a reason why Freire is called "the Grandfather of Critical Theory", after all.
All the pink haired they/thems turned the US into shit by being inspired by Freire & Co.
Which means that, btw, that anon has a friend who is actively ruining the lives of the future generations by "teaching" them all that stuff. I'd be getting rid of such friends, but maybe that anon wants to see every american kid turn into marxist vegan trannies.

>>25088838
>I quoted your post, anon. Word for word.
>not to "re-phrase the line"
you quoted by post but then decided for yourself what they did and didn't say, which there's no way you could know. You fully believed my first post with "produce a thought", but then looked at my second post of "or re-phrase the line" and for some reason refused to believe that happened.

>Moving the goalpost lmao.
i'm just telling you what was said because you ran with an assumption. I didn't think I needed to spell out exactly what I was told because the point is simple, the kids don't know what to do with the words.

>Why do you think that? Just because they don't literally rephrase a random line from a reading they much probably didn't read, doesn't mean they can't do that.
look man, he asks them multiple questions. "Can anyone tell me what happened in this line?" "Which character are they talking about?" "Is anything about this line confusing to you?" "Is there a word in here that you don't know?" "Does anyone have any thoughts at all about this?", and no matter what, the kids give him nothing. I phrased this as "produce a thought". If they are comprehending the reading, they are showing no signs of it.

>Critical thinking about a work centers around learning and understanding the intention of the author.
how can you do that without first comprehending the text?

>You really don't need to know how to read to do that.
okay, critical thinking is possible without reading, obviously. The thing is, in this particular case, they are reading. It's the school's curriculum to read. If you need me to specify here that when I say "critical thinking" I'm talking about the reading they are doing, then you are hopeless and impossible to communicate with

File: 1760711507581069.jpg (58 KB, 896x615)

58 KB JPG

>>25089062
>If they are comprehending the reading, they are showing no signs of it.
Based kids. Fuck that patronizing faggot. Probably autistic too, if he can't understand that they refused to answer because he was power tripping, and not because they are "le retarded zoomers" and he is the "enlightened millenial".
That retard gotta start teaching what he wants them to do instead of asking retarded things.
>You fully believed my first post with "produce a thought", but then looked at my second post of "or re-phrase the line" and for some reason refused to believe that happened.
Again, I have to repeat myself, those are two different exercises. You are not a teacher, you couldn't possibly know whether reading comprehension and critical thinking require the same set of skills, so your made up story falls apart when someone who actually knows a thing or two about teacher-training programs.
Again, as I said, I trust Massachusetts teachers to know about the "greatest pedagogue of the XX century".
I trust that they won't make the mistake of conflating reading comprehension and critical thinking. So I can't avoid thinking that a retard like you (to whom I have to repeat myself multiple times, because your reading comprehension sucks so much) is just making all this shit up.
>how can you do that without first comprehending the text?
I gave you the example of the insurance contract being unintelligible.
>The thing is, in this particular case, they are reading. It's the school's curriculum to read.
Irrelevant. Critical thinking can be applied to any kind of word, spoken or written, doesn't matter. Again, I have to repeat myself once again: critical thinking has nothing to do with reading comprehension.
>If you need me to specify here that when I say "critical thinking" I'm talking about the reading they are doing
Why do you think kids will read anything given by a teacher like that? My position is that they didn't read anything. And you could have easily inferred it from my previous post:
>they don't literally rephrase a random line from a reading they much probably didn't read
Why didn't you infer such an evident conclusion from my post?
You are either a lying kike with the goal to demoralize, or you are a retard who is projecting his abysmal level of reading comprehension onto others.
Or maybe both, judging by Epstein's correspondence. Either way, kys.

>>25089606
>when someone who actually knows a thing or two about teacher-training programs
when someone who actually knows a thing or two about teacher-training programs is the one who reads it.*

>>25089606
man, at no point did I say my teacher friend said that reading comprehension and critical thinking are the same thing. That's just some shit you started blabbing about.

Your whole point here is that the kids blankly staring the teacher in the face when he tries to engage with them in any way means that they are actually good critical thinkers and that the teacher is power tripping. You're clearly just so fed up with the whole "kids are dumb these days" narrative that you've decided my friends class is actually smart for simply not saying anything. You're obviously biased here because you think I'm trying to push some agenda you disagree with, which I'm not.

>My position is that they didn't read anything
again, you're pulling way more out of this than what I said. The kids are reading it out loud with him in the classroom. Even if they weren't, they have the book and the line in front of them. Do you think the teacher is saying "page 10 line 4, think critically about it", expecting them to have it memorized, and then when they don't have anything to say just skip the idea that they didn't read it and conclude they can't comprehend it? What is even your idea here?

>I gave you the example of the insurance contract being unintelligible.
you're right about this I admit, but they're reading shit like "of mice and men" and you're giving them credit for the hypothetical that they critical decided that it's bullshit and not worth talking about lol

idk man just to be clear, I'm not pushing the whole zoomers are dumb shit, my generation's teachers said the same shit about us. I have no superiority complex here where I want to be a smart millennial bagging on the zoomers, but it's obvious that you've got a stick up your ass to defend them. All I did was report what my teacher friend told me and you went on a tirade where I represent a narrative you've heard elsewhere.

>>25089606
you're retarted anon you know that right?

File: 1730819224084081.jpg (288 KB, 880x1408)

288 KB JPG

>>25089705
>at no point did I say my teacher friend said that reading comprehension and critical thinking are the same thing
So, "Comprehending the reading is step 1, step 2 is thinking about it critically" is your take, which is wrong, as I have already proved multiple times.
So you are saying that the teacher asked two completely unrelated set of questions (the first one pertaining to critical thinking, and the other one pertaining reading comprehension) to his class? And you expect me to believe you?
>which I'm not.
You made up an absurd exercise where kids were supposed to critically think about a random sentence, in order to prove they didn't have a completely unrelated skill (i.e. reading comprehension), and now you are contraddicting yourself by saying that the two things have nothing in common.
>Do you think the teacher is saying "page 10 line 4, think critically about it", expecting them to have it memorized, and then when they don't have anything to say just skip the idea that they didn't read it and conclude they can't comprehend it?
>they can't comprehend it
>comprehend
See? You are making shit up. If they can't COMPREHEND it, it means they lack reading comprehension. He is asking them to critically think. Not to comprehend the text.
Critical thinking is way more concerned with how the text interracts with the world in its entirety, than what the meaning of the text itself. You know why? Because critical thinking has nothing to do with reading comprehension!
>but they're reading shit like "of mice and men" and you're giving them credit for the hypothetical that they critical decided that it's bullshit and not worth talking about lol
This is why critical thinking isn't taught in high school, my dear demoralizing kike.
https://www.quora.com/Why-isnt-critical-thinking-taught-in-high-school-in-the-United-States
https://medium.com/@frankbreslin41/three-reasons-why-public-high-schools-dont-teach-critical-thinking-89a587239a6b
https://one-roomeducation.com/critical-thinking-the-most-in-demand-life-skill-thats-not-being-taught/
It's an activity that you start doing in college/uni, but it's mostly taught after uni, during what is called "Adult education" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adult_education). It's an activity that requires you to have a keen interest in "boring" topics like economics, politics, sociology. No kid reads enough news to do some critical thinking. The most they can do is just critically think about the uselessness of reading that book.
K-12 is focused on *what* to learn, rather than *how* to learn.
>All I did was report what my teacher friend told me and you went on a tirade where I represent a narrative you've heard elsewhere.
>All I did was report what my teacher friend told me and you went on a tirade where I represent a narrative you've heard elsewhere.
A teacher who doesn't know that critical thinking isn't in the English curriculum, and mistakes it for reading comprehension? Makes sense.

File: 063ccaf3-6040-4c0e-816f-4(...).gif (510 KB, 400x167)

510 KB GIF

>>25089737
Woah, no argument and just namecalling. Did I hit a nerve, faggot?

>A teacher who doesn't know that critical thinking isn't in the English curriculum, and mistakes it for reading comprehension? Makes sense.
there's no point in trying to talk to you lol. He goes over a line with the class, asks them some questions about it, nobody says anything. Where are you getting this "the teacher doesn't know the difference between critical thinking and reading comprehension"? If you're struggling to know the difference between what I said and what the teacher said, here's my system: If I'm saying something with my own words, I will simply say it. If I'm recalling what the teacher said, I will preface that with "the teacher said..." or something similar.

I understand that there is a difference between reading comprehension and critical thinking, but they don't have a device to scan the kids brains and determine that the text was comprehended. All we got is ask them questions and see what they say. If the kid says "in this line he is asking his friend to take a walk with him" then we know he has comprehended the line. If he says nothing, then it appears he hasn't.

I would genuinely be down to talk about why my friend might suck as a teacher for asking the kids to speak and what would be a better way to have them do some reading, but it is genuinely impossible to communicate with you. I'm more than willing to admit when it seems like I'm not being clear enough but I s2g I've never had somebody straight up misinterpret my words this many times in a row. It's a huge chore to go through all your replies and try to correct where you misunderstood me because it's just going to continue forever

>>25089804
>He goes over a line with the class, asks them some questions about it, nobody says anything.
And you keep moving the goalpost.
Now it's not even about reading comprehension or critical thinking: now it's just about "some questions" lmao.
>a device to scan the kids brains and determine that the text was comprehended.
You have reading comprehension tests for that, you retard. Do you think all the stats about the literacy crisis, kids being "functionally illiterate", etc. are all based of vibez and feelz? Kek'd.

Everyone ITT should stay far away from children and classrooms