As I sit down to write this, I realize that we are all enacting digital writing on an article about digital writing; dare I say it, having a meta-digital writing experience!
That being said I found Beach's introduction/piece a little unsatisfactory. Since I'm going to be using blogs and wikis in my classes at Central, I was looking for some more concrete evidence, or just something else, I'm not really sure to be honest. I liked the example of using the blogs at Edina H.S and how the students "were much more engaged than they had been in their face-to-face discussions...students' own questions were driving their discussions" (Beach et al 1); it made me question the use and purpose of the blogs at Central. Are my students there getting to this level of engagement or depth of response with their blogs, or are they simply another medium through which to write a structured assignment? Is it my responsibility to change the level of usage (or depth of responses) as a student teacher or do I merely maintain the use? I know that for many students access is a problem and I wish that this article had addressed that in a little more depth; perhaps it is explained more fully in the actual text but it seemed to me that there weren't a whole lot of solutions for low income schools, except to get as much lab time as possible. Beach and company write that "when students have their own laptops in classrooms, they are seven times more likely to use computers, 40 times more likely to do their own composing...had higher levels of motivation than student with access to shared lab/cart computer access" (Beach et al 14). To me, this seems like a no brainer! If students have the computers available to them every day, of course it's more likely that a teacher will incorporate them into the class and increased use will cause increased comfort which would increase motivation to use computers (since the proficiency is higher)!
I feel that as of late, my journaling has been more of ranting that positive comments but maybe that's just the way I have to approach everything--which a super critical eye instead of taking it in aesthetically...*shrugs* I liked the Beach article because it really makes me question the use of the blogs and wikis in the class I'm going to be student teaching in. I hope that I'll be able to incorporate the use of the blogs more, but I understand that access is a problem. Access is one thing that I'm not sure how to address. Do I make exceptions for kids who didn't have a chance to type it up? Go to the computer lab? Give them a pass to go to the library to type it up and miss class time? Or are the expectations high enough that students will take the time to make arrangements to work after school, at a local library or at a friend's house to get the paper/blog typed up?
Links of the week:
Class wikis for the courses I'll be teaching at Central, an actual use of digital writing and digital literacy.
http://centralenglish12.pbwiki.com/
http://10ib.pbwiki.com/
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Tuesday, February 17, 2009
For February 19
Wow, it's already 10:30! I really should get motivated earlier in the day:) Today has been quite a positive day and I finally had an epiphany (well it's about time...) about my lesson planning so I'll hopefully be able to get down to some hardcore planning soon!
These readings today were useful. The Dornan touched on standardized assessment and I would like to steer clear of a heated discussion of the horrors of standardized assessment and AYP and NCLB and all of those other acronyms of doom. However I found one quote intriguing and I can't help but put it on here. Randy Bomer (in Dornan) says "high-stakes testing is a failure of democracy: it presents unequal structures of opportunity, it closes off inquiry, it allows the corporatization of education, it disenfranchises the people most affected by it because the public sphere is no longer available, and it creates an oppressive school environment" (Dornan 213). Sounds like he's pretty much summed up a lot of how we all feel about teaching to tests and being smothered by adherence to standards.
The rest of the Dornan chapter was quite interesting. I liked that he made some distinctions between "response, assessment, evaluation, grading" (Dornan 183); these distinctions are something I guess I thought I inherently knew but having it written down in a text book and explained to me, makes it all the more real. I feel like these definitions are something I should cut out and post over my desk (or wherever I'm grading papers) to remind me what I'm doing while grading. Dornan mentions that teachers shouldn't use red pens to correct because of the negative connotations that are wrapped up in pages of markings (186); now I know that it's bad to use the red pen, but there is such power in that thin tube of ink and the slashes it makes in the margins or on the words. I know I received many papers back full of red pen and yes, it was a little intimidating and I can see the validity of not using them, but as an-about-to-be-teacher, I am ready for the tables to turn and to be the one making the slashes over misspelled words and tense shifts.
Adger's text about dialects wasn't something that I had considered when teaching writing. I understand the differences between vocab/usage/mechanics in written and spoken word but I guess I only ever thought of this difference in terms of students who are learning English, not those who speak with a different dialect of American English. The thing I found most surprising is that "organization problems may relate to culturally based expectations for how to tell a story or make an argument" (Adger 115); this was just something I had never considered. I never occurred to me that culture and language can affect the organization of a paper. Adger also talks about students having experiences "in writing for a wide range of audiences, both inside and outside of school" (Adger 118) and I feel that this would be an excellent way to incorporate using a Multi-Genre paper. Students could write pieces in their vernacular dialect and mix in a piece using Standard English, validating both expressions of language. Adger had a lot to say in this short chapter and I think that vernacular and dialect are things that we all need to consider as we start teaching; if we move to other cities or other countries, how will changes in dialect and vernacular affect our lessons? Will we have to be more flexible and less critical since our students may not speak or write with a traditional Minnesotan/Wisconsinite accent?
Let us not forget that "the profession has no accepted definition or criteria for what 'good writing' really consists of" (Dornan 181).
Michael Perry, a writer from New Auburn, Wisconsin, writing about his life in the small town of 485ish people. His dialect and writing are a combination of informal storytelling and somewhat formal language and structure. Read his biography, it's great:) http://www.sneezingcow.com/index.htm His stories are valid, I feel because Perry employs such passion and love for seemingly every day events through dialect that is very accessible to people living in the Midwest. Perhaps he is an alternative to Garrison Keillor (for those of you who find him less than pleasing)?
These readings today were useful. The Dornan touched on standardized assessment and I would like to steer clear of a heated discussion of the horrors of standardized assessment and AYP and NCLB and all of those other acronyms of doom. However I found one quote intriguing and I can't help but put it on here. Randy Bomer (in Dornan) says "high-stakes testing is a failure of democracy: it presents unequal structures of opportunity, it closes off inquiry, it allows the corporatization of education, it disenfranchises the people most affected by it because the public sphere is no longer available, and it creates an oppressive school environment" (Dornan 213). Sounds like he's pretty much summed up a lot of how we all feel about teaching to tests and being smothered by adherence to standards.
The rest of the Dornan chapter was quite interesting. I liked that he made some distinctions between "response, assessment, evaluation, grading" (Dornan 183); these distinctions are something I guess I thought I inherently knew but having it written down in a text book and explained to me, makes it all the more real. I feel like these definitions are something I should cut out and post over my desk (or wherever I'm grading papers) to remind me what I'm doing while grading. Dornan mentions that teachers shouldn't use red pens to correct because of the negative connotations that are wrapped up in pages of markings (186); now I know that it's bad to use the red pen, but there is such power in that thin tube of ink and the slashes it makes in the margins or on the words. I know I received many papers back full of red pen and yes, it was a little intimidating and I can see the validity of not using them, but as an-about-to-be-teacher, I am ready for the tables to turn and to be the one making the slashes over misspelled words and tense shifts.
Adger's text about dialects wasn't something that I had considered when teaching writing. I understand the differences between vocab/usage/mechanics in written and spoken word but I guess I only ever thought of this difference in terms of students who are learning English, not those who speak with a different dialect of American English. The thing I found most surprising is that "organization problems may relate to culturally based expectations for how to tell a story or make an argument" (Adger 115); this was just something I had never considered. I never occurred to me that culture and language can affect the organization of a paper. Adger also talks about students having experiences "in writing for a wide range of audiences, both inside and outside of school" (Adger 118) and I feel that this would be an excellent way to incorporate using a Multi-Genre paper. Students could write pieces in their vernacular dialect and mix in a piece using Standard English, validating both expressions of language. Adger had a lot to say in this short chapter and I think that vernacular and dialect are things that we all need to consider as we start teaching; if we move to other cities or other countries, how will changes in dialect and vernacular affect our lessons? Will we have to be more flexible and less critical since our students may not speak or write with a traditional Minnesotan/Wisconsinite accent?
Let us not forget that "the profession has no accepted definition or criteria for what 'good writing' really consists of" (Dornan 181).
Michael Perry, a writer from New Auburn, Wisconsin, writing about his life in the small town of 485ish people. His dialect and writing are a combination of informal storytelling and somewhat formal language and structure. Read his biography, it's great:) http://www.sneezingcow.com/index.htm His stories are valid, I feel because Perry employs such passion and love for seemingly every day events through dialect that is very accessible to people living in the Midwest. Perhaps he is an alternative to Garrison Keillor (for those of you who find him less than pleasing)?
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
For February 12
Dornan’s text seems to me, a listing of what exactly should be taught in the context of student writing. I enjoy that the writers of the text realize that “grammar, usage and mechanics should not be codified into a pre-determined sequence of skills to master at teach grade level” (Dornan 92) but it seemed like the writers fell short of providing some actual strategies of how to incorporate the intended conventions into teaching writing. For each set of concepts/terms, Dornan et al addresses the what, why and objectives but doesn’t provide concrete descriptions how to actually do it! The writers list concepts that should be addressed at the very least, which are helpful for making a general outline but not help with the execution. If I’m going to spend time reading a text book chapter about teaching grammar, something that is loathed by so many educators, it would be the most beneficial to have some practical usage portions to enhance the incorporation of grammar, usage and mechanics into the classroom.
Now I’m biased because I think Mechanically Inclined, by Jeff Anderson, is an excellent text with practical, useful examples of how to incorporate teaching grammar, mechanics and usage into the writer’s workshop model. Anderson admits in the beginning of his work that he didn’t like grammar and wasn’t very good at it, but knew he had to write the book because of his intentions for “students and teachers to view grammar and mechanics as a creational facility rather than a correctional one. The teaching of conventions is about what punctuation can do to enhance the writer’s message”(Anderson 14). The book is very accessible and I feel chock full of useful, relevant information such as, “we will save ourselves a lot of frustration if we shift our notion of teaching punctuation and grammar to one of teaching principles instead of rules” (Anderson 4). Rules are to be learned by rote and repetition and I feel that principles are learned by practicing them in context.
However both Dornan et al and Anderson realize that teaching grammar, usage and mechanics is the most useful when “students’ developmental needs as writers” (Dornan 92) are being met. Anderson suggests that “...we need to analyze students’ writing, looking for patterns of error, but beyond that what matters most...Match it up with what’s tested on editing and grammar examinations. Match it up with your state standards” (Anderson 7). I feel that teaching what is the most relevant to my students is what will make the lessons actually stick and make the most lasting impact. If the lesson isn’t something that is directly applicable to them, then what’s the point? All our classes keep reiterating that we need to make our lessons relevant to life outside of school and I think proper grammar, usage and mechanics are such a thing. A student needs to make sure that their point is clear on a job application, a scholarship application, a college essay, an email sent to an adult or professional and of course for school work.
Oh grammar, how I love thee; it’s so math-y and formulaic and I think that’s what draws me in. There’s almost always a right answer and the possibility for change requires only the smallest misplacement of a pronoun. Finding the errors and dissecting sentences is something that I love doing. Although, I know that that the approach of going crazy finding all the mechanical errors in a student’s paper is pretty ridiculous and doesn’t necessarily accomplish anything (except generate a false positive or over generalization about a usage rule)
Fulwiler’s article was really interesting and made me regret my papers, hastily written in the 24 hours before the due date, with editing and revision (if any) done in the wee hours of the morning. There’s something so satisfying about revision and making a story even better; I enjoyed Fulwiler’s different approaches and liked how he lazered in on specific things to help the students’ writing get better. I know in middle school when I finished my first typed draft, I took it home and essentially rewrote the entire thing, maintaining main characters and a basic plot structure. I remember coming to class and conferencing with the teacher and her being shocked with all of the revision I had done. As a result of my mom’s persistence in “show don’t tell” and making sure my tenses were correct, I enjoy helping people revise their work and aiding in the improvement of their draft. I remember Mom asking questions that my 13 year old self thought impossible to answer, but as I grew older, I asked those questions to the writer whose paper I was looking over.
As a joke, I'll post the link Patrick sent out this morning.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mj6QqCH7g0Q&feature=PlayList&p=7A8DEFACBFDCE336&playnext=1&index=16
Writer's Toolbox: http://www.writers-toolbox.com/default.asp
This website is, granted trying to sell you something, but none the less interesting. The software being advertised looks really intersting and seems like a great way for writers to organize their thoughts and ideas; this website also has prompts/questions to better define and break down the parts of a scene, story and characters.
Now I’m biased because I think Mechanically Inclined, by Jeff Anderson, is an excellent text with practical, useful examples of how to incorporate teaching grammar, mechanics and usage into the writer’s workshop model. Anderson admits in the beginning of his work that he didn’t like grammar and wasn’t very good at it, but knew he had to write the book because of his intentions for “students and teachers to view grammar and mechanics as a creational facility rather than a correctional one. The teaching of conventions is about what punctuation can do to enhance the writer’s message”(Anderson 14). The book is very accessible and I feel chock full of useful, relevant information such as, “we will save ourselves a lot of frustration if we shift our notion of teaching punctuation and grammar to one of teaching principles instead of rules” (Anderson 4). Rules are to be learned by rote and repetition and I feel that principles are learned by practicing them in context.
However both Dornan et al and Anderson realize that teaching grammar, usage and mechanics is the most useful when “students’ developmental needs as writers” (Dornan 92) are being met. Anderson suggests that “...we need to analyze students’ writing, looking for patterns of error, but beyond that what matters most...Match it up with what’s tested on editing and grammar examinations. Match it up with your state standards” (Anderson 7). I feel that teaching what is the most relevant to my students is what will make the lessons actually stick and make the most lasting impact. If the lesson isn’t something that is directly applicable to them, then what’s the point? All our classes keep reiterating that we need to make our lessons relevant to life outside of school and I think proper grammar, usage and mechanics are such a thing. A student needs to make sure that their point is clear on a job application, a scholarship application, a college essay, an email sent to an adult or professional and of course for school work.
Oh grammar, how I love thee; it’s so math-y and formulaic and I think that’s what draws me in. There’s almost always a right answer and the possibility for change requires only the smallest misplacement of a pronoun. Finding the errors and dissecting sentences is something that I love doing. Although, I know that that the approach of going crazy finding all the mechanical errors in a student’s paper is pretty ridiculous and doesn’t necessarily accomplish anything (except generate a false positive or over generalization about a usage rule)
Fulwiler’s article was really interesting and made me regret my papers, hastily written in the 24 hours before the due date, with editing and revision (if any) done in the wee hours of the morning. There’s something so satisfying about revision and making a story even better; I enjoyed Fulwiler’s different approaches and liked how he lazered in on specific things to help the students’ writing get better. I know in middle school when I finished my first typed draft, I took it home and essentially rewrote the entire thing, maintaining main characters and a basic plot structure. I remember coming to class and conferencing with the teacher and her being shocked with all of the revision I had done. As a result of my mom’s persistence in “show don’t tell” and making sure my tenses were correct, I enjoy helping people revise their work and aiding in the improvement of their draft. I remember Mom asking questions that my 13 year old self thought impossible to answer, but as I grew older, I asked those questions to the writer whose paper I was looking over.
As a joke, I'll post the link Patrick sent out this morning.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mj6QqCH7g0Q&feature=PlayList&p=7A8DEFACBFDCE336&playnext=1&index=16
Writer's Toolbox: http://www.writers-toolbox.com/default.asp
This website is, granted trying to sell you something, but none the less interesting. The software being advertised looks really intersting and seems like a great way for writers to organize their thoughts and ideas; this website also has prompts/questions to better define and break down the parts of a scene, story and characters.
Tuesday, February 3, 2009
For February 5
I enjoyed the readings for this week's class and although I haven't finished the Romano text (tomorrow after work, I promise), I'm glad people are writing critical pieces that aren't just shouting (as some authors do in academic papers) about the horrors of the Five Paragraph Essay (FPE), but providing some evidence and personal testimony. Wesley recognizes that “the principles of unity, coherence and development that the five paragraph theme purports to teach” (Wesley 60) are good concepts to use in a classroom but realizes that there are better ways to do it. As a student taking a timed exam, organization was something that I know I lacked and having the good ole five paragraph essay format on stand-by was truly helpful in getting my words out on paper. The FPE shouldn’t have to be the stand by for organization, there has got to be another way to teach essay organization that doesn’t entirely squish student ideas into three paragraphs. I like the multigenre approach, but I don’t feel that standardized test graders would; it seems far too opened ended.
Wesley addressed the question of “how do I create writing assignments that encourage risk-taking and mental growth without letting good organizational strategies go by the wayside” (Wesley 59) and it is something that I also am struggling to get past. I want my students to explore their creativity and to express themselves in different ways, to (as the cliché says) think outside of the box. I feel that sometimes too much creativity leads to chaos and disorganization; it also has the potential to miss the main point of an assignment. I’m an outliner, a list maker and post-it note user and too much chaos drives me crazy; I think that letting go and allowing the students to do their own thing is something I will struggle with. It’s so much easier to give an objective test and have a certain expectation of class grades than spend all the time grading a special project. But, I feel like the students get so much more out of the unique projects.
Sherri Larson’s contribution (I don’t know if it’s necessarily an academic article as it is an actual account of what happened in her classroom) is outstanding. It showed to me that the inspiring idea of multigenre writing can be done in Minnesota and fulfill the state standards! I liked that she was willing to share her students’ journal entries; to me the students’ opinions and enthusiasm about the project means more than an academic article about it. One of the students is quoted as saying “some days, this project doesn’t even feel like work. I love my topic....I wonder if she’ll say no to any ideas I suggest for this project!” (Larson 187) Having student choice is crucial! Without it, I think that the joy and creativity of the project would be lost and “when students begin to make decisions about their own writing they being to define themselves as writers” (Larson 187)
Other interesting quotes:
“...critiquing these essays effectively helps students to see themselves as critical readers and to understand that the criteria for good writing are subjective and contextual” (Wesley 60).
“Teaching the rules of ‘intellectual property’ are critical elements of the multigenre project” (Larson 184)
Link:
After teaching the five-paragraph essay early in her career, Glenda Moss now describes how it locks students into thinking it is the only way to write. http://www.nwp.org/cs/public/print/resource/405 I found it another look at the rigidity of the five-paragraph form.
Wesley addressed the question of “how do I create writing assignments that encourage risk-taking and mental growth without letting good organizational strategies go by the wayside” (Wesley 59) and it is something that I also am struggling to get past. I want my students to explore their creativity and to express themselves in different ways, to (as the cliché says) think outside of the box. I feel that sometimes too much creativity leads to chaos and disorganization; it also has the potential to miss the main point of an assignment. I’m an outliner, a list maker and post-it note user and too much chaos drives me crazy; I think that letting go and allowing the students to do their own thing is something I will struggle with. It’s so much easier to give an objective test and have a certain expectation of class grades than spend all the time grading a special project. But, I feel like the students get so much more out of the unique projects.
Sherri Larson’s contribution (I don’t know if it’s necessarily an academic article as it is an actual account of what happened in her classroom) is outstanding. It showed to me that the inspiring idea of multigenre writing can be done in Minnesota and fulfill the state standards! I liked that she was willing to share her students’ journal entries; to me the students’ opinions and enthusiasm about the project means more than an academic article about it. One of the students is quoted as saying “some days, this project doesn’t even feel like work. I love my topic....I wonder if she’ll say no to any ideas I suggest for this project!” (Larson 187) Having student choice is crucial! Without it, I think that the joy and creativity of the project would be lost and “when students begin to make decisions about their own writing they being to define themselves as writers” (Larson 187)
Other interesting quotes:
“...critiquing these essays effectively helps students to see themselves as critical readers and to understand that the criteria for good writing are subjective and contextual” (Wesley 60).
“Teaching the rules of ‘intellectual property’ are critical elements of the multigenre project” (Larson 184)
Link:
After teaching the five-paragraph essay early in her career, Glenda Moss now describes how it locks students into thinking it is the only way to write. http://www.nwp.org/cs/public/print/resource/405 I found it another look at the rigidity of the five-paragraph form.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)