Chapter 2 draws attention on various things. Initially, the chapter starts by claiming, “It’s not what we teach, but it’s what they learn”. Here, the author claims that what happens does not matter when children do not understand or experience them. Therefore, the article asserts that punishments and rewards can help children in realizing that they can only be lovable if they do good deeds. Interestingly, the same happens in school when teachers punish students involved in bad acts while reward the good ones. However, it is true to conclude that if the reward of punishment system does not make sense to students and children, then whatever the teacher or parents use as reward or punishment system to children does not bring out the intended effect. According to me, I do not support the idea of this article stating, “It’s not what we teach but it’s what they learn”. This is because children have varying behaviors therefore; parents and teachers should not reward or punish them according to intention, instead, they should do so basing on their acts. For example, when children get involved in bad behaviors, then parents and teachers should punish them regardless of how they will view it, similarly, when a child does something good, it is imperative to reward her or him.
Secondly, the article talks about “who is cheating whom”. The article claims that everyone knows that cheating is bad. Therefore, it is essential for everyone not to cheat. However, this has been facing some challenges where students cheat but come up with reasons that enable teachers to understand why they did so. This commonly occurs when children experience academic tasks given to them by their teachers as boring, overwhelming or challenging. However, the article further claims that cheating can be lower in classrooms when learning is engaging and meaningful to students. Cheating is also common among students when they consider the major goal of learning to be achieving good grades. An academic environment that pressures students to improve on academic performance also fuels cheating. Concurrently, high rates of cheating occur among students who apply shortcuts in doing their assignments, because they will not derive any intellectual benefits. I concur with this article concerning the issue of cheating. This is because the article identified major reasons that cause students to cheat in school. For example, most students cheat in schools in order to obtain good grades and move to the next level as well, there are others who cheat because they used shortcuts in undertaking their assignments hence facing difficulties during exam time and decide to cheat.
Thirdly, the article focuses on “how to create nonreaders: reflections on motivation, learning and sharing power”. According to the article, it is difficult to motivate anyone apart from yourself. The article also claims that if an individual has power, he can make people to do things but it will not be to perfection. Additionally, the authors claim that motivation calls for support because it cannot be instilled in students. The article asserts that most teachers do not motivate students, instead they kill it. The article highlights seven different ways through, which teachers kill students’ motivation including quantifying their reading motivation, making them write reports and isolating them among others. The article further offers principles that can support the desire for students to learn and read. I support what the article claims on motivation and power. This is because in common setting; people cannot apply power to enhance any good performance since it can only lead to doing whatever they want but not perfectly. Additionally, most teachers kill students’ motivation because they rarely reward them.
Finally, the article talks about “the trouble with rubrics”. It considers the rubric letters to be detailed and authentic. However, the author claims that rubrics are not good because they mostly fail to deliver the promised precision. Teachers also depend on rubrics to standardize their imaginations regarding student assignments. They do this by giving rubrics to students thus asking them to navigate. I do not agree with the articles’ information regarding rubrics because improving the designs of rubrics, will not be able to solve the problem as it is inherent to the very idea of rubrics as well as the goals they serve.
