Summary
McKeough Article:
Narrative stories usually have all of the following: sequentiality, particularity, intentional states, and canonicity/breach. The article claims that while the CCSS addresses the first three, it fails to account for canonicity and breach. These are key in the development of writers at all stages, since "character development is an integral component of plot when seamlessly linked to breach" (78). Developmentally, even pre-k children "have a considerable understanding of the narrative genre" (79). By third grade, they often include complicating events and problems in their stories. By fifth grade, students usually also include a resolution to those complications. Finally, by middle school and high school, students are exploring characterization and include indications of "higher level characteristics such as personality traits" (85). In terms of instructional approaches, the article suggests Reading with a Writer's Eye, which "supports students to take a metacognitive stance toward story."
Ferreti & Lewis Article:
Argument is an "inherently social activity" that involved controversial issues, but it is not haphazard (115). On the other hand, arguments "possess a structure and organization... [and] are acts of reason" (115). The article recommends a dialogic approach to teaching argumentative writing, which supports the argumentative thinking behind their writing (115). In terms of self-regulated writing, argumentative writing can be approaches as a "problem-solving process" (116). Students should also be supported in gaining disciplinary knowledge so that they can engage in thoughtful, well-informed arguments about each of the disciplines, like many disciplinary experts do. In terms of supporting students in their writing (particularly, students with learning disabilities), teachers can use the following strategies and models: self-regulated strategy (SRSD) (explicit instruction for scaffolding), the TREE strategy (a framework for presenting arguments), the STOP and DARE strategy (for pre-writing reflection), the AIMS strategy (for constructing introductions), the SCAN strategy (for revisions), and the ASCQ strategy.
Response
McKeough Article:
In high school, we are asked to focus a lot on analyzing character development in texts, but I feel like we aren't really asking our students to create well-developed characters in their own writing. As the article said, narrative writing is fairly neglected at the high school level. I think that it could be easily used to help teach characterization, at the very least. I do think we would have to better equip high school teachers to teach the complex aspects of narrative before asking them to teach narrative, though. Most teachers that I know don't see it as being relevant to the standards that they are supposed to be teaching. I hadn't really given it a ton of thought, myself. I would love to do more narrative writing with my classes.
Ferreti & Lewis Article:
Thinking back on our discussions in class this weekend, I really do support the idea of trusting students to handle controversial topics maturely and thoughtfully. I think dialogue is absolutely critical to their argumentative development and investment in their writing. Before asking students to make any sort of argument in writing, I have them think about controversial topics related to our reading by doing 1-2 days of "four corners." I present them with opinionated statements about controversial topics and have them stand on the "agree" or "disagree" side of the room (both sides are divided into "strongly" and "slightly"). Then, they present their arguments. I regulate it by saying that they will not get credit for their participation if they do not have a logical, factual, or textual basis for their argument, and I provide structure for the debates by requiring that they use "talking tickets" I give them. That way, everyone talks about the same amount, and no one is shouting over anybody else. I've never had four corners fail me, and I'm always thoroughly impressed by the thoughtful approaches that many of my students take to their arguments, especially when they take the time to consider counterarguments. I've seen them talk about very controversial topics in very thoughtful and nuanced ways--racism, rape, censorship, victim blaming, and justified violence, just to name a few. I think that the writing samples I receive after these discussions would not be of nearly as high quality if we did not begin by setting aside time for these debates.
Questions
- How do/would you work narrative writing into a curriculum that requires so much expository and argumentative writing?
- In my responses, I talked about the structure I most often use for argumentative debates in my class. What other approaches could you take to quell the issues we brought up this weekend?
- How do/would you approach disciplinary argumentative writing so that students have sufficient background knowledge to make an informed argument about their topic? I'm especially curious about how to approach this if students are all making a wide variety of arguments.
Sunday, October 26, 2014
Sunday, October 19, 2014
Week 9: Writing Instruction for Adolescents
I'm so sorry about the delay! I realized late this evening that I completely forgot to do the blog this week. I read the chapter Wednesday, but since I hadn't read the articles yet, I somehow forgot to finish everything. I guess this is what I get for trying to work ahead, haha. Sorry again! It's alright if you don't get a chance to respond to my blog this week, of course.
Summary
Sweeny:
This article begins by making the case for incorporating new literacies in literacy instruction. Members of the Digital Age are not only consumers of information and texts, but they are also regularly called upon in their daily and professional lives to be "producers and collaborators" of it (122). Changes in written communication have led people to write less formally and more often incorporate multiple modes of communication, including images and video. Teenagers primarily use new literacies for two purposes: to socialize and to "seek out information" (124). The article continues by describing a few small ways teachers can incorporate technology, such as through online videos about writing or internet workshop lessons. Teachers can also have their students use the internet to communicate with and watch videos made by real authors so that those authors can talk with them about the writing process, which makes the process less "isolating" for students (125). With the internet, students also have access to a wealth of resources that help with the writing process, such as those provided by colleges. Teachers can utilize messaging applications, with which most students are familiar, for assignments in which students must be concise. Online forums work better when students are expected to "work collaboratively and publish their writing" (128).
Hansen & Kissel:
Writing instruction for adolescents must emphasize the power that adolescent writers have to make their own decisions. They must be allowed to choose their own topics, which they are more than capable of doing. They should also choose their genres and their writing process. Teachers may need to restrict students' choices to a few different options or encourage students to step outside their comfort zones, but the decision-making should still lie in the hands of the writer. Adolescents' writing choices are often "influenced by the reader(s) the writer has in mind" for their writing (401). Adolescent writers consider a variety of audiences, although they tend to have more passion for writing to certain audiences, such as those that resemble themselves. Students should not only be allowed to choose their audience, but they should also be encouraged to use their language skills to alter their language to appeal to each of their audiences. When it comes to evaluating drafts of their writing, adolescent writers benefit both from supportive evaluation and self-evaluation, and they willingly participate in both. Unfortunately, much of the evaluation that adolescents are receiving for their writing is less reflective than it should be and implies that there is one "correct" way to write, thanks to high stakes testing environments. Another negative effect of these environments is that students are not taught to value the various discourses and social languages in which they participate on a regular basis--only a single "schooled" discourse is framed as being valuable.
Hinchman & Sheridan-Thomas:
To think like effective writers, students should learn to "[pay] attention to [their] own thoughts" (155). Students should also learn that good revisions involve "mak[ing] substantial changes," rather than minute edits (156). Good writers write with their audience in mind and develop a purpose for their writing that relates to their intended audience. In terms of the CCSS, teachers must keep in mind that "variety is what the standards are seeking"--they should not focus on just one or two types of writing, but rather all types and approaches (160). Writing should be used as a tool that can have two purposes: "for thinking" and for "communicating effectively" in authentic contexts (161). Teachers can use writers' notebooks and give students experiences with writing for a variety of audiences to help them hone this tool. Effective structures for teaching writing within this framework include: giving time for writing in class (to emphasize the importance of writing), setting up individual writing conferences, addressing common issues with whole-class mini-lessons, and creating an environment that encourages "response, collaboration, and sharing" (166).
Response
Sweeny:
I thought it was significant that this article talks about how new literacies "allow for the author to think not only about the content but also about the presentation and the audience" of the text (124). These are some of the most important skills we try to teach our students as writers of and type of text. They seem to be skills that students struggle with the most--many find it a challenge to think about how to tailor their writing to a particular audience or how they should present their writing in the publishing stage of the writing process. New literacies might be the key.
In my experiences and discussions with colleagues, I often find that when they are incorporating technology into their classroom, they do it in a very isolated way. As the article mentioned, one of the main ways students use technology is to socialize and communicate, but often we aren't effectively utilizing this habit of theirs. This relates to one of the questions I have, which I've listed in the questions section.
Hansen & Kissel:
Every aspect of this article hearkens to what I know about adolescents. They are becoming independent, thoughtful young adults, and the things that benefit them most reflect that. They certainly want to feel a sense of choice and autonomy, and good writing instruction seems to accommodate for that. They also benefit well from being trusted to reflect on their writing in addition to the supportive evaluation they get from peers and mentors. Additionally, they suffer when they are not allowed the freedom to explore their individuality (their sense of writing style, their topic choice, their language decisions, etc.), since adolescents are often in search of who they are and what they want to be. Their writing is not separate from that search. If we keep all of these aspects of adolescence in mind, we can both engage our students as writers and help them become better writers while helping them develop their own unique writing voice.
Hinchman & Sheridan-Thomas:
I love the way this chapter frames writing. Writing is the act of "developing these invisible, fleeting notions [thoughts] into something purposeful," and writing is "a matter of controlling attention" (155, 156). I feel like this is really abstract, but if someone had framed writing that way for me when I was an adolescent, I think it would have helped me become a better writer more quickly. Writing is purposeful, which I didn't always realize, but the way we make it purposeful is by figuring out why the thoughts we have matter, and how they fit together to fit the purpose that we have set. I did finally realize later that writing is about controlling attention. I always felt overwhelmed by my own thoughts; I had too many, and they felt haphazard. The writing process that I developed for myself was to jot down all of the thoughts I was having, organize them into categories, and figure out if there was some sort of overarching theme or thesis to them. After I did that, I knew what my purpose was, and I could focus my thoughts enough to begin writing. Not everyone will have that exact writing process, of course, but if we can help our students think about writing in these abstract terms, I think it would help them really think about it as a process and help them understand both how and why we write.
Questions
- Do you think we should treat new literacies as tools for teaching general literacy skills (and helping students with traditional literacies), or do you think that they should be an integral part of literacy instruction because of their value as forms of literacy? What should the balance be?
- How can we best harness students' tendency to socialize (usually through technology) when teaching writing?
- How do you address writing instruction in our high stakes testing environment? Do you maintain student choice, engagement, and reflection? (If yes, how so?)
- Which classroom structures do you use to teach writing? Do you use any of the ones from chapter 9, and do you use others?
Summary
Sweeny:
This article begins by making the case for incorporating new literacies in literacy instruction. Members of the Digital Age are not only consumers of information and texts, but they are also regularly called upon in their daily and professional lives to be "producers and collaborators" of it (122). Changes in written communication have led people to write less formally and more often incorporate multiple modes of communication, including images and video. Teenagers primarily use new literacies for two purposes: to socialize and to "seek out information" (124). The article continues by describing a few small ways teachers can incorporate technology, such as through online videos about writing or internet workshop lessons. Teachers can also have their students use the internet to communicate with and watch videos made by real authors so that those authors can talk with them about the writing process, which makes the process less "isolating" for students (125). With the internet, students also have access to a wealth of resources that help with the writing process, such as those provided by colleges. Teachers can utilize messaging applications, with which most students are familiar, for assignments in which students must be concise. Online forums work better when students are expected to "work collaboratively and publish their writing" (128).
Hansen & Kissel:
Writing instruction for adolescents must emphasize the power that adolescent writers have to make their own decisions. They must be allowed to choose their own topics, which they are more than capable of doing. They should also choose their genres and their writing process. Teachers may need to restrict students' choices to a few different options or encourage students to step outside their comfort zones, but the decision-making should still lie in the hands of the writer. Adolescents' writing choices are often "influenced by the reader(s) the writer has in mind" for their writing (401). Adolescent writers consider a variety of audiences, although they tend to have more passion for writing to certain audiences, such as those that resemble themselves. Students should not only be allowed to choose their audience, but they should also be encouraged to use their language skills to alter their language to appeal to each of their audiences. When it comes to evaluating drafts of their writing, adolescent writers benefit both from supportive evaluation and self-evaluation, and they willingly participate in both. Unfortunately, much of the evaluation that adolescents are receiving for their writing is less reflective than it should be and implies that there is one "correct" way to write, thanks to high stakes testing environments. Another negative effect of these environments is that students are not taught to value the various discourses and social languages in which they participate on a regular basis--only a single "schooled" discourse is framed as being valuable.
Hinchman & Sheridan-Thomas:
To think like effective writers, students should learn to "[pay] attention to [their] own thoughts" (155). Students should also learn that good revisions involve "mak[ing] substantial changes," rather than minute edits (156). Good writers write with their audience in mind and develop a purpose for their writing that relates to their intended audience. In terms of the CCSS, teachers must keep in mind that "variety is what the standards are seeking"--they should not focus on just one or two types of writing, but rather all types and approaches (160). Writing should be used as a tool that can have two purposes: "for thinking" and for "communicating effectively" in authentic contexts (161). Teachers can use writers' notebooks and give students experiences with writing for a variety of audiences to help them hone this tool. Effective structures for teaching writing within this framework include: giving time for writing in class (to emphasize the importance of writing), setting up individual writing conferences, addressing common issues with whole-class mini-lessons, and creating an environment that encourages "response, collaboration, and sharing" (166).
Response
Sweeny:
I thought it was significant that this article talks about how new literacies "allow for the author to think not only about the content but also about the presentation and the audience" of the text (124). These are some of the most important skills we try to teach our students as writers of and type of text. They seem to be skills that students struggle with the most--many find it a challenge to think about how to tailor their writing to a particular audience or how they should present their writing in the publishing stage of the writing process. New literacies might be the key.
In my experiences and discussions with colleagues, I often find that when they are incorporating technology into their classroom, they do it in a very isolated way. As the article mentioned, one of the main ways students use technology is to socialize and communicate, but often we aren't effectively utilizing this habit of theirs. This relates to one of the questions I have, which I've listed in the questions section.
Hansen & Kissel:
Every aspect of this article hearkens to what I know about adolescents. They are becoming independent, thoughtful young adults, and the things that benefit them most reflect that. They certainly want to feel a sense of choice and autonomy, and good writing instruction seems to accommodate for that. They also benefit well from being trusted to reflect on their writing in addition to the supportive evaluation they get from peers and mentors. Additionally, they suffer when they are not allowed the freedom to explore their individuality (their sense of writing style, their topic choice, their language decisions, etc.), since adolescents are often in search of who they are and what they want to be. Their writing is not separate from that search. If we keep all of these aspects of adolescence in mind, we can both engage our students as writers and help them become better writers while helping them develop their own unique writing voice.
Hinchman & Sheridan-Thomas:
I love the way this chapter frames writing. Writing is the act of "developing these invisible, fleeting notions [thoughts] into something purposeful," and writing is "a matter of controlling attention" (155, 156). I feel like this is really abstract, but if someone had framed writing that way for me when I was an adolescent, I think it would have helped me become a better writer more quickly. Writing is purposeful, which I didn't always realize, but the way we make it purposeful is by figuring out why the thoughts we have matter, and how they fit together to fit the purpose that we have set. I did finally realize later that writing is about controlling attention. I always felt overwhelmed by my own thoughts; I had too many, and they felt haphazard. The writing process that I developed for myself was to jot down all of the thoughts I was having, organize them into categories, and figure out if there was some sort of overarching theme or thesis to them. After I did that, I knew what my purpose was, and I could focus my thoughts enough to begin writing. Not everyone will have that exact writing process, of course, but if we can help our students think about writing in these abstract terms, I think it would help them really think about it as a process and help them understand both how and why we write.
Questions
- Do you think we should treat new literacies as tools for teaching general literacy skills (and helping students with traditional literacies), or do you think that they should be an integral part of literacy instruction because of their value as forms of literacy? What should the balance be?
- How can we best harness students' tendency to socialize (usually through technology) when teaching writing?
- How do you address writing instruction in our high stakes testing environment? Do you maintain student choice, engagement, and reflection? (If yes, how so?)
- Which classroom structures do you use to teach writing? Do you use any of the ones from chapter 9, and do you use others?
Saturday, October 11, 2014
Week 8: Disciplinary Texts - History and Art
Summary
H & S-T Chapter 13:
The biggest difference between how historians read and how students read is that historians do thinks "that help them think about ideas," rather than just remember facts (234). Specifically, they engage in sourcing, contextualization, and corroboration. In their thinking, they do thinks like "try to determine what perspectives may have been left out" of a historical text (235). In terms of vocabulary that students might struggle with, they often need support with "making sense of general academic vocabulary," rather than technical vocabulary (238). They also need support with words whose meanings have changed over time or words that have fallen out of use. Research shows that it is possible to provide this support, and when students are taught to "read as historians do," their understanding of historical events and their relationships increases (240). Regarding instructional strategies, teachers should begin by "chang[ing] students' beliefs about what it means to read history" (241). Students should be encouraged to "think about what perspective [a particular] author might have," and teachers should help students contextualize texts and "guide them in making inferences about why an author wrote what he or she did" (242). Students should also learn the skill of corroboration, a form of comparison and contrast. Additionally, teachers should engage students in thinking about possible "political, economic, social, or legal tactics" used by authors or historical figures (243). While reading, students should take note of when information is incomplete or is not presented chronologically. Teachers should also "expose students to claims and evidence in different genres" to help them think deeply about various historical arguments (243). In terms of vocabulary support, teachers should try to help their students with tackling difficult words "without telling them what the text means" (245).
J & S Chapter 8:
This chapter focuses on protocols for reading historical texts intertextually, since, as the chapter posits, "all reading is intertextual" (202). The chapter describes the protocols that two students, Brad and Ayesha, use when reading multiple historical texts. Brad is reluctant about "intertextual noise" and tries to separate the overlapping aspects of each text, whereas Ayesha welcomes it, and her comprehension is better as a result (203). Regarding the protocols that historians use, they tend to "frame their protocols with a sense that texts from the past can all contribute to understanding in different ways" (208). This supports the chapter's assertion that students' "understanding does not depend on first having comprehended the textbook" (209). The focus for historians, and the focus that the chapter posits for students to have for their protocols, is the "historical question(s) being pursued" that must be read by carefully synthesizing multiple historical texts (209). The chapter continues by assessing the two focal students' protocols and describing Ms. White's journey to her new approach for teaching history. The chapter posits that Ms. White's approach is superior to many other methods for teaching history.
J & S Chapter 9:
Music is textual in the sense that there are several things that "students create or interact with" in the way that they might with a traditional text (233). Music standards support the idea that "music and the arts are forms of communication," which makes them textual (236). The chapter posits that performing and listening are "crucial to the negotiation of music texts" (237). Students who are participating in "creating literacies" with music could engage in composing and arranging of musical scores and understand all of the different elements that go into communicating effectively through musical texts (239). Music standards also ask students to "understand and contemplate the interrelations between music and other forms of art" (240). Literacy strategies that can be used in music include "notation, improvisation, sight-reading, practice, memorization, intonation, expression, composition, and body movement," and working with students on these strategies improves their musical literacy (240). Like with music, texts in the visual arts constitute anything that can be interpreted and used to make meaning. To think like an artist, students must "think about how to convey messages by integrating the components of a work of art... into a certain structure," which is the creation of the visual art text (250). Visual art standards describe several skills related to visual art literacy, such as "applying, demonstrating, evaluating, differentiating, describing, analyzing, justifying, identifying, exploring, comparing, synthesizing, creating, problem solving, critiquing, evaluating, and reflecting about artworks" (253). Discipline-specific literacy strategies that students use in the visual arts include "the elements of design, principles of design, production of art, criticism, aesthetics, and writing" (255). Additionally, while most of the texts in music and visual arts classes are non-traditional, both fields leave room for traditional reading and writing to support students' literacies with the non-traditional texts in the discipline.
Response
H & S-T Chapter 13:
One section of this chapter claimed that students should be "focused on the historical purpose of... syntactic construction" to help build a basic understanding of history (238). Maybe I'm wrong, but I feel like this might be a little difficult to introduce in the "basic understanding" stage of a particular era or topic. I'm sure it could be scaffolded, but I feel like it might be a little too challenging before students have developed a foundation of knowledge. I would probably include it as an exploratory activity that students do when they re-read a text. What do you all think?
This chapter kept making me think about how much reading historical texts relies on context. If I had to rank the order of important factors in reading historical texts, I'd probably say context is first, text is second, and reader is third. That's in contrast to ELA, which I think is text-and-reader first, with context second (albeit still important). Math and science are on the opposite end of the spectrum; the text is almost always one of the only things that matters in those texts.
J & S Chapter 8:
The conclusion of this chapter recommends additional studies to "[attempt] to sort out which strategies and protocols work best when, and under what circumstances, in order to move students... forward" (220). I think this is really important in any area of education. In terms of history, there are certain ways that experts read, which we've read about, but not all students are going to be able to accomplish that just by saying "do this." I think it's really important to study what factors go into students' reading experiences and which instructional and reading strategies best support students within several possible circumstances.
J & S Chapter 9:
This chapter, more than any we've read so far, really made me think about what literacy is and what constitutes a text. Even when we were discussing what texts are a few weeks ago, I didn't really think about music and visual arts as much as I thought about things like new literacies. The things this chapter discusses make sense, though, since literacy is a socially constructed experience, like music and art. I suppose literacy might actually boil down to meaning making within a communication process.
Questions
- My first question is in the first paragraph of my response to chapter 13, and the context is important.
- What's an area of historical literacy that you would like to see more research about?
- After having read chapter 9, how would you define literacy and text?
H & S-T Chapter 13:
The biggest difference between how historians read and how students read is that historians do thinks "that help them think about ideas," rather than just remember facts (234). Specifically, they engage in sourcing, contextualization, and corroboration. In their thinking, they do thinks like "try to determine what perspectives may have been left out" of a historical text (235). In terms of vocabulary that students might struggle with, they often need support with "making sense of general academic vocabulary," rather than technical vocabulary (238). They also need support with words whose meanings have changed over time or words that have fallen out of use. Research shows that it is possible to provide this support, and when students are taught to "read as historians do," their understanding of historical events and their relationships increases (240). Regarding instructional strategies, teachers should begin by "chang[ing] students' beliefs about what it means to read history" (241). Students should be encouraged to "think about what perspective [a particular] author might have," and teachers should help students contextualize texts and "guide them in making inferences about why an author wrote what he or she did" (242). Students should also learn the skill of corroboration, a form of comparison and contrast. Additionally, teachers should engage students in thinking about possible "political, economic, social, or legal tactics" used by authors or historical figures (243). While reading, students should take note of when information is incomplete or is not presented chronologically. Teachers should also "expose students to claims and evidence in different genres" to help them think deeply about various historical arguments (243). In terms of vocabulary support, teachers should try to help their students with tackling difficult words "without telling them what the text means" (245).
J & S Chapter 8:
This chapter focuses on protocols for reading historical texts intertextually, since, as the chapter posits, "all reading is intertextual" (202). The chapter describes the protocols that two students, Brad and Ayesha, use when reading multiple historical texts. Brad is reluctant about "intertextual noise" and tries to separate the overlapping aspects of each text, whereas Ayesha welcomes it, and her comprehension is better as a result (203). Regarding the protocols that historians use, they tend to "frame their protocols with a sense that texts from the past can all contribute to understanding in different ways" (208). This supports the chapter's assertion that students' "understanding does not depend on first having comprehended the textbook" (209). The focus for historians, and the focus that the chapter posits for students to have for their protocols, is the "historical question(s) being pursued" that must be read by carefully synthesizing multiple historical texts (209). The chapter continues by assessing the two focal students' protocols and describing Ms. White's journey to her new approach for teaching history. The chapter posits that Ms. White's approach is superior to many other methods for teaching history.
J & S Chapter 9:
Music is textual in the sense that there are several things that "students create or interact with" in the way that they might with a traditional text (233). Music standards support the idea that "music and the arts are forms of communication," which makes them textual (236). The chapter posits that performing and listening are "crucial to the negotiation of music texts" (237). Students who are participating in "creating literacies" with music could engage in composing and arranging of musical scores and understand all of the different elements that go into communicating effectively through musical texts (239). Music standards also ask students to "understand and contemplate the interrelations between music and other forms of art" (240). Literacy strategies that can be used in music include "notation, improvisation, sight-reading, practice, memorization, intonation, expression, composition, and body movement," and working with students on these strategies improves their musical literacy (240). Like with music, texts in the visual arts constitute anything that can be interpreted and used to make meaning. To think like an artist, students must "think about how to convey messages by integrating the components of a work of art... into a certain structure," which is the creation of the visual art text (250). Visual art standards describe several skills related to visual art literacy, such as "applying, demonstrating, evaluating, differentiating, describing, analyzing, justifying, identifying, exploring, comparing, synthesizing, creating, problem solving, critiquing, evaluating, and reflecting about artworks" (253). Discipline-specific literacy strategies that students use in the visual arts include "the elements of design, principles of design, production of art, criticism, aesthetics, and writing" (255). Additionally, while most of the texts in music and visual arts classes are non-traditional, both fields leave room for traditional reading and writing to support students' literacies with the non-traditional texts in the discipline.
Response
H & S-T Chapter 13:
One section of this chapter claimed that students should be "focused on the historical purpose of... syntactic construction" to help build a basic understanding of history (238). Maybe I'm wrong, but I feel like this might be a little difficult to introduce in the "basic understanding" stage of a particular era or topic. I'm sure it could be scaffolded, but I feel like it might be a little too challenging before students have developed a foundation of knowledge. I would probably include it as an exploratory activity that students do when they re-read a text. What do you all think?
This chapter kept making me think about how much reading historical texts relies on context. If I had to rank the order of important factors in reading historical texts, I'd probably say context is first, text is second, and reader is third. That's in contrast to ELA, which I think is text-and-reader first, with context second (albeit still important). Math and science are on the opposite end of the spectrum; the text is almost always one of the only things that matters in those texts.
J & S Chapter 8:
The conclusion of this chapter recommends additional studies to "[attempt] to sort out which strategies and protocols work best when, and under what circumstances, in order to move students... forward" (220). I think this is really important in any area of education. In terms of history, there are certain ways that experts read, which we've read about, but not all students are going to be able to accomplish that just by saying "do this." I think it's really important to study what factors go into students' reading experiences and which instructional and reading strategies best support students within several possible circumstances.
J & S Chapter 9:
This chapter, more than any we've read so far, really made me think about what literacy is and what constitutes a text. Even when we were discussing what texts are a few weeks ago, I didn't really think about music and visual arts as much as I thought about things like new literacies. The things this chapter discusses make sense, though, since literacy is a socially constructed experience, like music and art. I suppose literacy might actually boil down to meaning making within a communication process.
Questions
- My first question is in the first paragraph of my response to chapter 13, and the context is important.
- What's an area of historical literacy that you would like to see more research about?
- After having read chapter 9, how would you define literacy and text?
Saturday, October 4, 2014
Week 7: Disciplinary Texts - Science
Synthesis
Jetton and Shanahan Chapter 6:
There are several challenges that science texts present. The technical vocabulary can be a barrier to comprehension, and students "struggle with the structure" of many texts (155). Students also do not know how to focus on the pertinent information, and they "have difficulty with the combination of graphic information and text (155). One thing teachers can do to help students is to be aware of how science experts read. When scientists do not "know the information, they read to learn"; conversely, when they are familiar with the information, "they read for critique" (159). In terms of supporting students' understanding of vocabulary from science texts, it is important to note that those texts include "scientific terminology that [has] to be learned not only on the surface level but also in depth" (159). For general comprehension, teachers must know that the "various forms of representation" need to be explicitly taught and connected because they "represent the same concepts but in a different way" (160). Students must also be able to "[know] how and when to move from text to graphic to formula to text" when reading (160). Additionally, when writing, there are two important factors to keep in mind: precision, and disciplinary knowledge. In terms of implications for instruction, a few different instructional strategies can help, including: "expository text strategies" that are interdisciplinary, vocabulary notebooks in which students define all unknown terms within each definition, feature analysis charts, and RAFT (165-169).
Hinchman and Sheridan-Thomas Chapter 17:
The focus of this chapter is Reading Apprenticeship, in which teachers "reframe teaching as an apprenticeship into discipline-based ways of thinking, talking, reading, and writing" (312). The chapter focuses on a specific teacher named Will, who implemented the program in his science class. One strategy he used was that he "concentrated on a handful of reading and discourse routines that he used over and over again in different ways quote" (313). He also used "conversational routines" that involved individual reflection, group discussion, and "returning to the individual" for reflection and revision (314). The focal student is described as "and uncooperative and I'm not motivated student" (311). In spite of his struggles, at the beginning of the year he "seemed to enjoy being a part of class discussions," and as the year continued, he "became increasingly willing to take risks as a reader and learner" (317). Eventually, the student "gained confidence and expertise as a reader," which the teacher used to encourage him to expand his learning, such as by using disciplinary language (318). The student also eventually overcame "his initial resistance to working with others," and he "emerged as a leader among his peers" (319). This chapter describes a case study that is an exemplary example of how learner dispositions can be influenced by class from structures and instructional strategies.
Jetton and Shanahan Chapter 6:
In comparison to other forms of learning scientific information, text is supposedly "more likely... to teach students in a way that overcomes misconceptions" (156). This is definitely because of the way that scientific texts are usually written. I think this is awesome, since I feel like science is a field in which it is especially easy to develop misconceptions, and in which it is especially important to avoid misconceptions. We see this every day in terms of students' misunderstandings of science, as well as adults' misconceptions about science. Perhaps we'd have much less of that if we had more text-oriented science classes?
From a literacy perspective, I am intrigued by the fact that "one goal of science is to be able to predict what will happen in a hypothetical instance," based on evidence (161). I think this is a scientific skill that transfers into other reading situations very well. For instance, when reading a fictional text in a language arts class, strong readers use textual evidence to make predictions about the text as the read. In history class, students should be reading headings, charts, etc. and using those things to predict what the chapter will be about. Learning how to achieve that goal in a science class could easily transfer into a general literacy skill.
Hinchman and Sheridan-Thomas Chapter 17:
(I feel like I had more questions than responses about this chapter, but this is one thing that came to mind while I was reading.) One section of this chapter talked about how "apprenticeship instructional routines normalize struggle," and I'm not sure what I think about that. I feel like the particular focal student in this chapter might be an exception to the rule in terms of what effect that might have on students. I would be anxious about how that would affect students' self efficacy and confidence. It's good to normalize struggle, in theory, but I also think that it could cause issues if you're too adamant about having students publicize their struggles in front of the whole class. However, I can see how it might encourage risk-taking in the classroom, so it probably just depends on how you approach it.
(I feel like I had more questions than responses about this chapter, but this is one thing that came to mind while I was reading.) One section of this chapter talked about how "apprenticeship instructional routines normalize struggle," and I'm not sure what I think about that. I feel like the particular focal student in this chapter might be an exception to the rule in terms of what effect that might have on students. I would be anxious about how that would affect students' self efficacy and confidence. It's good to normalize struggle, in theory, but I also think that it could cause issues if you're too adamant about having students publicize their struggles in front of the whole class. However, I can see how it might encourage risk-taking in the classroom, so it probably just depends on how you approach it.
Questions
Chapter 6 talked about how students need to be able to know "how and when to move from text to graphic to formula to text" (160). How can we help students build this kind of judgment and reading fluency?
Have any of you tried to "normalize struggle" in your classroom environment to the degree discussed in chapter 17? How did it work out, or how do you think it would work out?
If we are to concentrate on a limited number of strategies and routines throughout the year, like teacher in chapter 17 did, how can we determine which routines are best for us to focus on?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)