Pedagogy of Poverty vs Schultz's Pedagogy

The pedagogy used by Schultz in "Spectacular Things Happen Along the Way" varies greatly from the Pedagogy of Poverty introduced by Martin Haberman. The "Pedagogy of Poverty" does not allow for creative thinking. Students are given directives in which they are expected to follow and teachers are more concerned with maintaining classroom order and behavior than with developing the critical thinking abilities in their students. On the contrary, Schultz was able to implement a system in which the students develop their own curriculum. Schultz's pedagogy constantly allows his students to think critically and develop new ideas.

The Pedagogy of Poverty, mostly present in urban school systems, includes:
giving information,
asking questions,
giving directions,
making assignments,
monitoring work,
reviewing assignments,
giving tests,
reviewing tests,
assigning homework,
reviewing homework,
settling disputes,
punishing noncompliance,
marking papers, and
giving grades."

None of these activities allow for students to engage in the learning process and take ownership over their education. Overall, critical thinking and application is not developed. Students are given cues in which they are to respond.

Schultz's pedagogy is vastly different from the Pedagogy of Poverty. By instituting a curriculum in which the students feel as though they are doing something worth wile and have a direct impact on their lives and community, they take great pride in their work. The students were willing to work harder than they had ever worked before because they were interested in the material.

Schultz's was able to organize the students ideas and encourage them to act on their ideas. He was constantly assessing his pedagogy, making sure the students were developing and learning. His pedagogy, unlike the Pedagogy of Poverty, continuously caused the students to formulate their own ideas. Their curriculum encourages group and individual thinking, developing strategies, collecting data, setting plans into action and analyzing results. Furthermore, the students are able to see their hard work pay off and not just on a test grade. They were able to see the effect they were having on their community and the response they were generating. This payoff was a motivation to them. Receiving a test grade on information they are forced to learn in a certain way has little appeal to them. Working on a project in which they feel worthwhile and invested in caused Schultz's students to learn invaluable skills without even realizing they were learning them.