I have students in English Lit/Comp classes work in pairs to decipher the descriptions of pilgrims in The Canterbury Tales. In the past I've always gotten a lot of complaining about how difficult the language is to figure out. Some students just take a look at it, shut down and say "I can't." Today I tried a framing activity that came to me as I was reading Chapter 3 of Deeper Reading.
Instead of assigning pilgrims and having students get started on their own, I began by giving them the first stanza in Middle English, doublespaced so there was room to write between the lines. I read it to them in Middle English; it sounded pretty formidable to them, and the I can'ting started to rev up. But then I had them start over, and we went through it line by line to look for words they could recognize and wrote the Modern English words above their counterparts. When we'd done that, we went back through a third time, and they found they could translate it. Then I had them start on their pilgrims.
The students were pleased with how many words they got when we did the second round of reading. One even took a logic leap to see that "shoures" must mean "showers." She explained, "Because the line says April, and people talk about April showers." It was really neat seeing how proud they were of themselves when they reaized they could understand the Middle English so well after all. And it made a huge difference in the outcome of the pilgrim activity. They really attacked it in a way I haven't seen before. It was like they were thinking, "Hey, if I can figure out what the Middle English means, reading this modern translation should be a snap." Students were able to pull more information out of the text, and the change in collective attitude went further than just there wasn't the griping about "I don't understand this" that I was used to hearing. Most of them were kind of getting a kick out of getting to know their pilgrim.
Thursday, January 28, 2010
Wednesday, January 20, 2010
Deeper Reading Chapter 1
The book titled Deeper Reading by Kelly Gallagher begins by comparing reading to understanding the game of baseball. This may seem like an awkward analogy, but once you begin reading the chapter it makes perfect sense. Gallagher states that most people understand the basic rules of baseball (3 outs per inning, batters, pitchers, etc...), but they do not understand all of the nuances that occur between every pitch because they do not possess the knowledge to comprehend these events (signals, fielders moving by pitch, etc..). The same can be said for readers at the second level; most possess the ability to read and comprehend at the surface level, but they need to be taught how to understand a text more deeply. I have already used "Conversation Piece" by Ned Guymon as an activity to help students make inferences by using clues from the text.
Tuesday, January 19, 2010
Deeper Reading -- Chapters 1 and 2
After reading the first two chapters of the book, I'm encouraged. Usually, books that promise help with teaching reading are geared toward younger grades and are minimally useful, and then only after some modification to the strategies. This volume seems, so far, to keep focus on high school readers. I like the opening metaphor only because I have long been a fan of baseball. I have always looked up to the players who have studied the game at its deepest levels. I suppose that as more of an intellectual than an athlete, I appreciate the thinking man's approach to games. No matter the game, I love the fact that, on some level deeper than physical prowess, there's a different game going on. So it is with reading. Superficial reading, as Gallagher calls it, is a worthwhile activity -- one that I have spent countless hours enjoying. But those of us here realize how much more there is to enjoy beyond that level.
Chapter two offered a few strategies for helping students to read more deeply. The best advice here, however, isn't an enumerated strategy at all. Gallagher reminds us that readers must be taught to read deeply. We do not need so many new strategies to help us as we need to pass on effective strategies to our students. We do this, Gallagher tells us, by sitting beside our students. I believe we must do this both figuratively (as supporters) and literally (as guides and at times, reading peers). I quite enjoy this second instance. I try each year to read something my students are reading. In this way, I have read a number of interesting books I would never have picked up otherwise. In addition, I have been able to talk with students about the books as we read. We make predictions together. We critique characters. We talk about symbols and themes. It is, as Gallagher mentions, collaboration, but it is collaboration on what began as pleasure reading. I have developed some very productive reading relationships with a few of my former students. As often as I have introduced a student to a new author, I have met a new author. I have even rediscovered a couple of authors. I believe these relationships are so productive because students get to see my passion for reading, and they get to see, firsthand, how I make meaning as I read. And all of this they see as my peers in reading, not as my students (though I'm not naive enough to think the student/teacher relationship and the mystique it carries disappears completely). So I think the trick must be to take the best bits of these more personal reading relationships and bring them to the whole class. The problem I see therein is keeping interest level. It is much easier for two people to agree that they enjoy a particular author or genre -- it's what begins the relationship. With a whole class, and one that is reading from a prescribed canon, interest is always an issue. I look forward to seeing Gallagher's answer to this issue.
Chapter two offered a few strategies for helping students to read more deeply. The best advice here, however, isn't an enumerated strategy at all. Gallagher reminds us that readers must be taught to read deeply. We do not need so many new strategies to help us as we need to pass on effective strategies to our students. We do this, Gallagher tells us, by sitting beside our students. I believe we must do this both figuratively (as supporters) and literally (as guides and at times, reading peers). I quite enjoy this second instance. I try each year to read something my students are reading. In this way, I have read a number of interesting books I would never have picked up otherwise. In addition, I have been able to talk with students about the books as we read. We make predictions together. We critique characters. We talk about symbols and themes. It is, as Gallagher mentions, collaboration, but it is collaboration on what began as pleasure reading. I have developed some very productive reading relationships with a few of my former students. As often as I have introduced a student to a new author, I have met a new author. I have even rediscovered a couple of authors. I believe these relationships are so productive because students get to see my passion for reading, and they get to see, firsthand, how I make meaning as I read. And all of this they see as my peers in reading, not as my students (though I'm not naive enough to think the student/teacher relationship and the mystique it carries disappears completely). So I think the trick must be to take the best bits of these more personal reading relationships and bring them to the whole class. The problem I see therein is keeping interest level. It is much easier for two people to agree that they enjoy a particular author or genre -- it's what begins the relationship. With a whole class, and one that is reading from a prescribed canon, interest is always an issue. I look forward to seeing Gallagher's answer to this issue.
Deeper Reading: Closing Thoughts
This was a good book. I’m glad to have read it. There are so many valuable insights and activities. I worry that I’ll forget them. Perhaps the act of blogging and discussing will help me digest some of this. Perhaps the real point of the book is not to remember specific activities, but just to get me thinking deeply about my teaching practice.
Once after an observation of my class, Billy Parker said to me that it didn’t bother him if I made mistakes or found weaknesses in my teaching. He said that it would most bother him if I didn’t. The important idea is that, while we’re not perfect teachers, we’re thinking and trying to improve.
Thanks for the opportunity to better myself.
I know that some people were not enthused to read this book, and that some were turned off by the baseball analogy. As far as I’m concerned, it was a out-of-the-park home run!!
Once after an observation of my class, Billy Parker said to me that it didn’t bother him if I made mistakes or found weaknesses in my teaching. He said that it would most bother him if I didn’t. The important idea is that, while we’re not perfect teachers, we’re thinking and trying to improve.
Thanks for the opportunity to better myself.
I know that some people were not enthused to read this book, and that some were turned off by the baseball analogy. As far as I’m concerned, it was a out-of-the-park home run!!
Deeper Reading: Chapter Nine
The beginning of this chapter really resonates with me, as I'm sure it does with many teachers. As Gallagher writes, "we should be looking for ways to give students more exposure to a curriculum that, when taught with rigor, provides them richer opportunities to think critically" (p.168). Georgia is planning to adopt merit based pay for teachers. It's a great idea, in theory, but I question its implementation. What will be the criteria used to determine teacher and student success? Will it be student performance on standardized tests? This will encourage more teachers to step away from practical curriculum and to embrace test taking strategies. Will it be a subjective observation of class? That is rife with problems, also.
I'm glad that he brought up George Carlin. I've read Brain Droppings, too, and the man was a genius. Ever since my college days, I've recognized Carlin to be a true linguist at heart. His observations about language and culture were clever and right on.
This chapter was full of useful real world skills and good activities. At the end of the chapter, Gallagher writes about how many teachers will question if there is time for these real world practices, when there is so much other canonical literature to be taught. I share this concern. I really don't know how this Gallagher guy manages to get so much done in his classroom. Perhaps his methods are so overwhelming to me because they are the product of fifteen years in public education. He's had plenty of time to think, to teach, and to think again. These methods have become integrated. Maybe, if I work hard and always strive for excellence, I'll have reached a similar stage of enlightenment 13 years from now.
Many of the idea presented in this chapter, and in the book to this point, are things I've considered using and have occasionally tried. For example, towards the end of last semester, I taught a class on regional variances in the English language. We examined African American English and its rules, and compared it to Standard American English. AAE is actually formally recognized as a variation on SAE, with its own rules. For example, in AAE, it is acceptable to drop the "to be" verb in some sentences, such as "We are good friends." We did a couple activities where students would have to "translate" from one version of English to the next, and then we examined MLK's "I Have a Dream" speech. We looked at the speech for AAE elements as well as its poetic and rhetorical strategies. The students were very involved and enjoyed the lesson.
It is tough, however, to include these varied activities when were are under mounting pressures from so many different sources. Politicians, administrators, and parents want us to teach to SATs, ACTs, EOCTs, graduation tests, and departmental requirements. I sometimes feel as I have measured out my life with these bloated and unwieldy contrivances. I don't know when I can do things like these activities.
Gallagher's point, I know, is that these activities do fit into our standards and requirements. When we teach our classes his suggested activities, the students are practicing deep thinking and reading skills. However, in the real world, we educators will not be trusted to use our content as a scaffold to deep thinking and reading skills. It's much more likely, as in the example Gallagher gave, that an administrator would ask us to "suspend the normal curriculum" and teach to the test for a specified period of time. In this way, there would be definitive proof of teaching critical thinking skills, so that the administrator could defend his or her position by saying, "Look, we teach 'X' for a designated fifteen minutes every Tuesday and Thursday" instead of having to explain how the teachers incorporate those skills in the everyday activities (or trust educators to incorporate those activities). Oftentimes, I think the behavior of people in power is really dictated by fear or lack of faith in the ability of teachers. Ridiculous rules and micro-management is thrust upon us so that the higher ups can cover themselves from litigation and responsibility. Such is the environment created by the totalitarian NCLB.
I'm glad that he brought up George Carlin. I've read Brain Droppings, too, and the man was a genius. Ever since my college days, I've recognized Carlin to be a true linguist at heart. His observations about language and culture were clever and right on.
This chapter was full of useful real world skills and good activities. At the end of the chapter, Gallagher writes about how many teachers will question if there is time for these real world practices, when there is so much other canonical literature to be taught. I share this concern. I really don't know how this Gallagher guy manages to get so much done in his classroom. Perhaps his methods are so overwhelming to me because they are the product of fifteen years in public education. He's had plenty of time to think, to teach, and to think again. These methods have become integrated. Maybe, if I work hard and always strive for excellence, I'll have reached a similar stage of enlightenment 13 years from now.
Many of the idea presented in this chapter, and in the book to this point, are things I've considered using and have occasionally tried. For example, towards the end of last semester, I taught a class on regional variances in the English language. We examined African American English and its rules, and compared it to Standard American English. AAE is actually formally recognized as a variation on SAE, with its own rules. For example, in AAE, it is acceptable to drop the "to be" verb in some sentences, such as "We are good friends." We did a couple activities where students would have to "translate" from one version of English to the next, and then we examined MLK's "I Have a Dream" speech. We looked at the speech for AAE elements as well as its poetic and rhetorical strategies. The students were very involved and enjoyed the lesson.
It is tough, however, to include these varied activities when were are under mounting pressures from so many different sources. Politicians, administrators, and parents want us to teach to SATs, ACTs, EOCTs, graduation tests, and departmental requirements. I sometimes feel as I have measured out my life with these bloated and unwieldy contrivances. I don't know when I can do things like these activities.
Gallagher's point, I know, is that these activities do fit into our standards and requirements. When we teach our classes his suggested activities, the students are practicing deep thinking and reading skills. However, in the real world, we educators will not be trusted to use our content as a scaffold to deep thinking and reading skills. It's much more likely, as in the example Gallagher gave, that an administrator would ask us to "suspend the normal curriculum" and teach to the test for a specified period of time. In this way, there would be definitive proof of teaching critical thinking skills, so that the administrator could defend his or her position by saying, "Look, we teach 'X' for a designated fifteen minutes every Tuesday and Thursday" instead of having to explain how the teachers incorporate those skills in the everyday activities (or trust educators to incorporate those activities). Oftentimes, I think the behavior of people in power is really dictated by fear or lack of faith in the ability of teachers. Ridiculous rules and micro-management is thrust upon us so that the higher ups can cover themselves from litigation and responsibility. Such is the environment created by the totalitarian NCLB.
Deeper Reading: Chapter Seven
The most thought provoking element of this chapter was fairly late, when Gallagher discussed writing as the lost “R” in education. I agree whole-heartedly that there isn’t enough writing done. I’ve addressed this by making writing a regular part of our schedule. Tuesdays and Thursdays are designated writing days. My 10th grade class, for example will write one major paper (a persuasive essay or research paper) during most weeks. In addition, paragraph writing is good for pre-reading activities.
For example, today, prior to reading “A Taste of Snow” (an essay about a Japanese-American’s first experience with snow, while in a WWII internment camp), I asked students to write about their first experiences with snow in a five sentence paragraph. While many students have been born and raised in Georgia, we have others who have lived in other states and countries. After 5-10 minutes of writing, we can discuss. It makes the class more interactive, more diverse, and it also helps the discussion when students can formulate their thoughts beforehand.
I see his point about using metaphor as a springboard to writing. I think these metaphorical graphic organizers can move very naturally into persuasive writing. I do, however, think that some of the graphic organizers are overly contrived and “corny.” I’m sure that students would love them, as they love any break in the routine.
For example, today, prior to reading “A Taste of Snow” (an essay about a Japanese-American’s first experience with snow, while in a WWII internment camp), I asked students to write about their first experiences with snow in a five sentence paragraph. While many students have been born and raised in Georgia, we have others who have lived in other states and countries. After 5-10 minutes of writing, we can discuss. It makes the class more interactive, more diverse, and it also helps the discussion when students can formulate their thoughts beforehand.
I see his point about using metaphor as a springboard to writing. I think these metaphorical graphic organizers can move very naturally into persuasive writing. I do, however, think that some of the graphic organizers are overly contrived and “corny.” I’m sure that students would love them, as they love any break in the routine.
Deeper Reading: Chapter Four
Is he actually suggesting that students would reread a novel or challenging text?
I really like the examples he uses in the text. He uses Romeo and Juliet, Hamlet, The Lord of the Flies, and other works that I would actually use in class. This makes the text engaging and practical for me.
The idea of acknowledging, even encouraging, reader confusion seems sincere and noble. Too often, students feel shame when they struggle with texts, and it's great to acknowledge that all readers have moments of confusion. I struggle every time I attempt, yet again, to read Ulysses. I understand how hard it is to maintain one's energy level despite a complete lack of understanding. I am always quick to relate my own troublesome experiences with students, especially when we approach any text that's particularly challenging for them.
I'm going to use his driving metaphor in my class (p.64). It's an apt comparison.
After reading this far, I think my "Levels of Questioning" activity is a good, sound pedagogical approach. I sometimes have students come up with questions after or during reading a text. It's like Gallagher's Twenty Questions (p.58), but I ask them to think of questions on the different levels. It works well to get them thinking deeply about what they've read, and it encourages them to make meaningful connections.
I'm also going to use his sentence idea for vocabulary acquisition. I had been planning to use the Word of the Day, but maybe I could incorporate sentences and context into it as well. (Actually, I tried it out today, and it seems to work well. I might alternate this with other vocabulary strategies, such as sentence construction.)
I really like the examples he uses in the text. He uses Romeo and Juliet, Hamlet, The Lord of the Flies, and other works that I would actually use in class. This makes the text engaging and practical for me.
The idea of acknowledging, even encouraging, reader confusion seems sincere and noble. Too often, students feel shame when they struggle with texts, and it's great to acknowledge that all readers have moments of confusion. I struggle every time I attempt, yet again, to read Ulysses. I understand how hard it is to maintain one's energy level despite a complete lack of understanding. I am always quick to relate my own troublesome experiences with students, especially when we approach any text that's particularly challenging for them.
I'm going to use his driving metaphor in my class (p.64). It's an apt comparison.
After reading this far, I think my "Levels of Questioning" activity is a good, sound pedagogical approach. I sometimes have students come up with questions after or during reading a text. It's like Gallagher's Twenty Questions (p.58), but I ask them to think of questions on the different levels. It works well to get them thinking deeply about what they've read, and it encourages them to make meaningful connections.
I'm also going to use his sentence idea for vocabulary acquisition. I had been planning to use the Word of the Day, but maybe I could incorporate sentences and context into it as well. (Actually, I tried it out today, and it seems to work well. I might alternate this with other vocabulary strategies, such as sentence construction.)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)