I'm not sure if it is the fact that I have other things on my mind or if I have just been over thinking the topic of teaching, but I am really struggling with how constructivist learning/teaching will/does look in my classroom. In my content area I am most concerned about the students' abitility to communicate in another language (and for a variety of purposes). I am constantly asking my self why am I doing everything I do (and trust me, it gets tiring). I know that ultimately constructivist teaching should require more of the students and less of me (or so it seems); however, right now I am working my tail off. I need to understand how to look at cohesion as a class differently. Because if the ideas and studies of constructivism are true then the reality is that all of my students will be in different places with their learning and that is not only good, but more natural to allow each student to internalize the material.
I am constantly having my students produce authentic lanugage. I no long give out a fill in worksheet (ever). I have them free write on topics that they are interested in, that make them think and some that are somewhat controversial. Their writing definitely has more heart, but frustrates them. Expressing one's self is one of the hardest things in a foreign language because when we do this we want to use idioms, pronouns, and slang. I like the idea of having them create their own vocabulary lists (requiring they have verbs, nouns, expressions, and adjectives). This is my goal next semester. I'll guess I'll see how it goes.

As I continue obsessing about where my middle ground is and my beliefs in education. I am wondering about the common knowledge of all students and letting the students get to this knowledge when they are ready.
Here is my question: When all of the students are learning the same vocabulary and/or reading the same book, isn't this common knowledge what then allows the students to have discussions (like Socratic Seminars) and speaking activities in a foreign language? (Even blogging together in a class on a specific topic?) If half or more of the students weren't there yet, or didn't do the reading, then wouldn't they be unable to participate in their learning? I am struggling with the logistics of some of this.
If I allow my students learn/use vocabulary that intrests them and not at least some (70%)common vocabulary (even if they are applying the rules of the language correctly in all of this). Wouldn't it be impossible to have my students do any speaking or communication activities with each other? They wouldn't have the vocabulary base to understand each other it would seem.
I feel like discussions, labs, and group work create a great deal of constructivist learning; however, how can these quality activities happen if students don't have a lot of the same base knowledge?
Am I the most annoying blogger EVER?????? (Don't answer that)

The more and more I clutter my brain with thoughts of constructivist teaching, active learning, teacher just facilitator, discovery learning, grading, time, what's best for kids, PLC's, essential learnings, common assessments, etc. I need to step back for a minute. I truly believe that what makes a healthy person, or education is BALANCE. I have a strong belief in active learning and when students create their own understanding, that knowledge is imbeded much deeper for a long period of time (should I dare say "forever"?) However, I really do believe in a strong balance. A balance of teaching students to be strong listeners and obtain meaning from a mini lecture, teaching students work ethic/responsibility to turn that paper in on time so I can read it and give them the appropriate feed back, teaching the abiltiy of rote memorization and the study skills to really interalize facts and information, teaching them logic and to questions everything they read, see, and hear for validity.
I think I sometimes get too focused on one aspect and need to realize that learning is an awesome woven quilt that needs the thread and needle as much as the fabric and the design.
I truly have been feeling like we are going overboard with "there is never one right answer". Although I agree with this most of the time. There are commonalities that the students in my class need to know (as there are common things that we as adults need to understand.) Yes 2+2 may be able to equal a great deal of things; however, I want my daughter to understand and know why it equals 4 first. (And yes, I did use a semicolon.)

I agree with Alan November in this article that we, as educators, don't share enough of what we do with the outside community/world. There are a great deal of people, especially in politics, that seem to think they know exactly what we do and how we do it and they are the ones portraying our image. We really need to ask ourselves why we aren't more public about what we do in our classrooms. November suggests that the question today about the possibility of web cams in every classroom is the same as the question in the 1990's about the possibility of computers in every classroom. I think this is very interesting to think about. Anyone can drop into our classroom at any time! I think we do amazing things and if parents, community members and the political leaders saw our classes their jaws would drop open and they would be truly astonished at the critical thinking and engagement of our students.
I also think November's thoughts on how to integrate techology are interesting. We need to focus on teaching students how to use technology to become innovators, problem solvers and critical thinkers continually in the pursit of the truth that often lies somewhere is an extremely large pile of other stuff.
Now my question becomes this: How, in my Spanish class, can I teach my students to use techology in this way?
http://www.anovember.com/Default.aspx?tabid=159&type=art&site=18&parentid=18