(**The title of this blog was inspired by the musical Phantom of the Opera that I saw this weekend. The Phantom was Christine's Angel of Music. Christensen's is my angel of writing.)
"Essay writing is boring!!" Every student in my class has said this at one point or another. Despite that, I still feel proud that each student respects the topic enough to still be invested because they understand the importance of essay skill. I was very excited to read Christensen's chapter on the subject due to the fact that she has made each past subject seem so much more interesting in ways that would invest students. I was pleasantly pleased!
Firstly, I was excited to find that there was one thing that I do that Christensen also does. I find feedback during IN CLASS writing time to be greatly beneficial to students. Before this strategy, my students would work on a paper, and I would give feedback. However, they were usually too discouraged to change their work because they were so invested and proud of the work they had already done. By providing feedback more often and while they work, it changed the mindset and allowed me to address misconceptions and 'trends' faster.
Secondly, I loved her Criteria for Essays. I feel that I have encouraged students to use evidence from multiple sources and in multiple ways. However, this list provides clear examples of how to do this in different and engaging ways. I also am excited to spice up my introductions because they are pretty dry write now with my models of hooks being 'interesting facts' or a 'relate-able question'. I look forward to implementing these within my classroom next year.
Lastly, there are some things I am looking forward to using but still have some questions. I found it eye-opening that the thesis statement isn't the first/main focus in her writing process. I have always coached students to develop their thesis once the brainstorming is complete. Of course, I have instructed them to be flexible in case they find their point to change later. But Christensen's approach seems to make more sense. But I wonder how this would apply to 'on-demand essays' where the thesis really needs to guide the work to finish in a timely manner. I also wish I could pick Christensen's brain about the 'research' of the topic she models. I love that personal experience is used as evidence, but I wonder if kids focus more on the experience than the literature. I also wonder how/if a list of resources on the subject at hand is created/presented/found.
Christensen is amazing. But I sure wish we were best friends so that I can have 24/7 access to her brain!
Sunday, March 24, 2019
Sunday, March 17, 2019
The Great Debate
As a teacher, I have a lot of teacher friends and the common core standards (or any standards) are a topic of hot debate. As I writing teacher, I always tell my kids you must be able to argue both sides. So here we go...
FOR:
Holding educators and academic systems to a set of standards allows all students to learn on an equal academic level despite systemic racism.
If teachers are properly trained to use the standards, it will ensure all students learn the same thing. For example, according to the Common Core Standards, all students would learn to write the three most popular genres of argumentative, informational, and narrative. These are tools that would help all students succeed, especially with higher education. Another example is the Common Core Standards for Language. Grammar is the first thing cut from curriculum. Grammar is important not only in the written sense but also in a verbal sense. If all students were taught the same thing, they would be better equipped to handle their professional futures.
If all standards were taught at every school, no matter the social class, it would close the achievement gap that currently helps assist in racial divided America. For example, at low poverty schools, the expectation is not always in sync with standards which can affect academic achievement compared to higher income districts . This allows the ratio of students being accepted into college to be in favor of those from wealthy school districts. Now while this is not the only factor, it still creates a problem today.
AGAINST:
Academic Standards cannot help the educational system because they are too generalized and limit teacher autonomy.
The standards are vague and are therefore not productive to the education of our youth. In the standards, the strand about writing an informational texts use language like develop topics and use appropriate transition words. However, they do not mention more specific skill sets like "selecting best evidence"or "creating a thesis statement to show comprehension". These skills are crucial to crafting informational texts. While some teachers may be able to develop more specific aims within each strand, not all teachers receive the professional development in which to do so.
Teacher autonomy is often extinguished when standards come in to play. Standardized testing come hand-in-hand with state standards which can lead to teaching to the test. Teachers may feel they cannot do inspiring lessons like what Christensen promotes due to the standard. Students may not be motivated to learn when teachers aren't passionate.
Either way, this will remain the great debate.
FOR:
Holding educators and academic systems to a set of standards allows all students to learn on an equal academic level despite systemic racism.
If teachers are properly trained to use the standards, it will ensure all students learn the same thing. For example, according to the Common Core Standards, all students would learn to write the three most popular genres of argumentative, informational, and narrative. These are tools that would help all students succeed, especially with higher education. Another example is the Common Core Standards for Language. Grammar is the first thing cut from curriculum. Grammar is important not only in the written sense but also in a verbal sense. If all students were taught the same thing, they would be better equipped to handle their professional futures.
If all standards were taught at every school, no matter the social class, it would close the achievement gap that currently helps assist in racial divided America. For example, at low poverty schools, the expectation is not always in sync with standards which can affect academic achievement compared to higher income districts . This allows the ratio of students being accepted into college to be in favor of those from wealthy school districts. Now while this is not the only factor, it still creates a problem today.
AGAINST:
Academic Standards cannot help the educational system because they are too generalized and limit teacher autonomy.
The standards are vague and are therefore not productive to the education of our youth. In the standards, the strand about writing an informational texts use language like develop topics and use appropriate transition words. However, they do not mention more specific skill sets like "selecting best evidence"or "creating a thesis statement to show comprehension". These skills are crucial to crafting informational texts. While some teachers may be able to develop more specific aims within each strand, not all teachers receive the professional development in which to do so.
Teacher autonomy is often extinguished when standards come in to play. Standardized testing come hand-in-hand with state standards which can lead to teaching to the test. Teachers may feel they cannot do inspiring lessons like what Christensen promotes due to the standard. Students may not be motivated to learn when teachers aren't passionate.
Either way, this will remain the great debate.
#TeacherNerd
I've been to two or three teacher conferences and I've always loved them. This writing workshop was no different! <3
My first session was art in education. Upon entering the room, I was immediately distracted by the amazing chairs. But I won't make the same mistake twice! The session presenters had us do two separate activities. First, we did something similar to blackout poetry but were given additional craft implements and were invited to create art with a message. I found the activity even more inspiring than the first we did in class. Both allowed for creativity but the second invited more options. In addition to the poems, we also interrupted Shakespeare using Tableaus. We split into groups and it allowed us to really analyze the reading in order to stage the tableaus. After each activity, the presenters asked us, "What did we do?" They promoted us to use only short descriptions like communicate, interpret, analyze, etc. It ended with a sharing of best practices of other art in the classroom. I only wish we had more time.
The second session was about relationship building. Some stuff I learned, I already know like Human Bingo. But I learned other activities like Name Juggling, One-minute listening, and 365 Questions of self. My favorite thing about these activities were the presenter always ended the activity by asking how we can use this activity in our classroom. It allowed us to get pretty creative on how to build relationships while academically improving.
Though I wasn't as inspired by the keynote speaker as the sessions, I found her activity of letter writing inspiring and only hope it would have the same effect on a student.
Overall, it was a wonderful learning experience. I am thankful I was reminded of how much I love these conferences.
My first session was art in education. Upon entering the room, I was immediately distracted by the amazing chairs. But I won't make the same mistake twice! The session presenters had us do two separate activities. First, we did something similar to blackout poetry but were given additional craft implements and were invited to create art with a message. I found the activity even more inspiring than the first we did in class. Both allowed for creativity but the second invited more options. In addition to the poems, we also interrupted Shakespeare using Tableaus. We split into groups and it allowed us to really analyze the reading in order to stage the tableaus. After each activity, the presenters asked us, "What did we do?" They promoted us to use only short descriptions like communicate, interpret, analyze, etc. It ended with a sharing of best practices of other art in the classroom. I only wish we had more time.
The second session was about relationship building. Some stuff I learned, I already know like Human Bingo. But I learned other activities like Name Juggling, One-minute listening, and 365 Questions of self. My favorite thing about these activities were the presenter always ended the activity by asking how we can use this activity in our classroom. It allowed us to get pretty creative on how to build relationships while academically improving.
Though I wasn't as inspired by the keynote speaker as the sessions, I found her activity of letter writing inspiring and only hope it would have the same effect on a student.
Overall, it was a wonderful learning experience. I am thankful I was reminded of how much I love these conferences.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)