For an assignment, here is my second comment on an education blog outside my cohort- http://blog.mrmeyer.com/?p=5292
(comment 29)
I love your description of an individual living within the comments until they feel constricted and finally break out into their own blog. It is a great description of how one might begin blogging, but there are still so many other ways. The motivations for blogging are widespread. Some are aching to get their voice out and turn to the blogosphere for their audience. Still others, as you said, are motivated by others and in turn are contributing to a generational effect, but I doubt it’s very widespread.
For myself, I first started following blogs that I randomly came across, and I stayed if I found something interesting that kept me. Many times it was the writing. The writing was unique, full of voice, or inspirational. Often times the blogger reinforced my ideas or presented them in a new way. Rarely did I, or still do, read blogs that contradict my own beliefs.
Blogs can become Lost islands. It would be interesting to investigate how and why blogs and groups of blogs become islands.
Monday, November 30, 2009
Saturday, November 28, 2009
Ranking, grading, evaluating, and liking
What are the key points you want to keep in mind as you assess students? Why?
Ranking and grading are overused, inaccurate, and destructive. Rarely will two teachers ever give a paper the same grade. This is a stark example of how inaccurate grading can be. Similarly, when everything in the class is graded, students become unhealthily obsessed with their grade and rank. They learn to tailor their work for the teacher, rather than focusing on their learning. Finally, ranking creates a competitive atmosphere where students compare themselves to one another. If the purpose of education is foster caring people and bright students, ranking and grading seem to marginalize many individuals and undermine the purpose.
Evaluation is a great alternative to grading and ranking. Here focus can be on what the student has done well. Moreover, evaluation invites students and teachers to consider student work as a whole, not a stratified number on a spectrum. With evaluation, letter grades are discouraged and instead rubrics, even simple rubrics are used. Likewise, evaluation may be more careful than grading when looking at the work that is neither clearly great nor bad, but rather in the middle. For the students with work in the middle, it can become clear what was done well, and what needs improvement. Evaluation is not a perfect solution; it too can be abused or misused. To prevent this, do not over-evaluate. Not everything done in class should be examined.
Having evaluation-free-zones supports learning. The zones are clear for the students and teachers, and everyone knows that the work done here should foster learning. The students are free to explore and risk, while the teacher provides support. The zones may take the form of free-writes, 15 minute expository writing, creative writing, or whatever else students may need. While free from evaluation, progress in learning can still proceed. Having students share their works with one another can push their writing further. Students will listen to the writing and point out what was done well and why.
Finally, and this is new to me, become better at liking student work. Using the behaviorism model, looking for and rewarding positive behavior is effective in the classroom. Get better at liking student work, and discovering what was done well. When you like the paper you are reading, it is easier to critique and edit because you know beneath the surface there is good content there. When you don’t like the paper, as teachers, we begin to be careful with our criticism and our comments may come across as confusing. For these reasons, find what is good about the paper, and about the student work.
Ranking and grading are overused, inaccurate, and destructive. Rarely will two teachers ever give a paper the same grade. This is a stark example of how inaccurate grading can be. Similarly, when everything in the class is graded, students become unhealthily obsessed with their grade and rank. They learn to tailor their work for the teacher, rather than focusing on their learning. Finally, ranking creates a competitive atmosphere where students compare themselves to one another. If the purpose of education is foster caring people and bright students, ranking and grading seem to marginalize many individuals and undermine the purpose.
Evaluation is a great alternative to grading and ranking. Here focus can be on what the student has done well. Moreover, evaluation invites students and teachers to consider student work as a whole, not a stratified number on a spectrum. With evaluation, letter grades are discouraged and instead rubrics, even simple rubrics are used. Likewise, evaluation may be more careful than grading when looking at the work that is neither clearly great nor bad, but rather in the middle. For the students with work in the middle, it can become clear what was done well, and what needs improvement. Evaluation is not a perfect solution; it too can be abused or misused. To prevent this, do not over-evaluate. Not everything done in class should be examined.
Having evaluation-free-zones supports learning. The zones are clear for the students and teachers, and everyone knows that the work done here should foster learning. The students are free to explore and risk, while the teacher provides support. The zones may take the form of free-writes, 15 minute expository writing, creative writing, or whatever else students may need. While free from evaluation, progress in learning can still proceed. Having students share their works with one another can push their writing further. Students will listen to the writing and point out what was done well and why.
Finally, and this is new to me, become better at liking student work. Using the behaviorism model, looking for and rewarding positive behavior is effective in the classroom. Get better at liking student work, and discovering what was done well. When you like the paper you are reading, it is easier to critique and edit because you know beneath the surface there is good content there. When you don’t like the paper, as teachers, we begin to be careful with our criticism and our comments may come across as confusing. For these reasons, find what is good about the paper, and about the student work.
Monday, November 23, 2009
Resources on class wiki
For an assignment, I have added some resources to the class wiki page.
1) The map of local school districts near the bottom of the page (http://cohort14.wetpaint.com/page/Local+School+District+Websites).
2) The introduction to activboard pdf (http://cohort14.wetpaint.com/page/Activboard+and+Activstudio+3).
3) The visual program schedule (http://cohort14.wetpaint.com/page/Program+Schedule).
4) Documenting sources information, and Free Rice link (http://cohort14.wetpaint.com/page/Writing).
5) Teaching climate change information and resources (http://cohort14.wetpaint.com/page/Social+Studies/revision/1).
6) First day advice for teachers (http://cohort14.wetpaint.com/page/Tips%2Fadvice+for+interns/revision/5).
7) Posting of K-8 Teacher Certification Program Handbook 2009-2010 pdf (http://cohort14.wetpaint.com/page/Program+handbook+and+information).
1) The map of local school districts near the bottom of the page (http://cohort14.wetpaint.com/page/Local+School+District+Websites).
2) The introduction to activboard pdf (http://cohort14.wetpaint.com/page/Activboard+and+Activstudio+3).
3) The visual program schedule (http://cohort14.wetpaint.com/page/Program+Schedule).
4) Documenting sources information, and Free Rice link (http://cohort14.wetpaint.com/page/Writing).
5) Teaching climate change information and resources (http://cohort14.wetpaint.com/page/Social+Studies/revision/1).
6) First day advice for teachers (http://cohort14.wetpaint.com/page/Tips%2Fadvice+for+interns/revision/5).
7) Posting of K-8 Teacher Certification Program Handbook 2009-2010 pdf (http://cohort14.wetpaint.com/page/Program+handbook+and+information).
Saturday, November 21, 2009
The six traits which define strong writing
Have you experienced 6 Traits or writing conferences as a student or as a teacher?
The 6-traits which define strong writing are: ideas, organization, voice, word choice, sentence fluency, and conventions. While in primary and secondary school, I was taught the 6-traits and therefore have some experience. The traits allow the student to learn abstract concepts, which form the body of their writing. The concepts allow the teacher to guide the development of the child’s writing by providing concrete traits for the student’s focus. As a student, I never memorized what the traits were. In fact, I never knew it was important to know the 6-traits. Instead I was shown models for the traits. This worked well. I was shown how to create ideas with webs, organize my work with outlines, form voice by considering audience, select strong word choice by examining what it is I want to say, and building sentence fluency and conventions through editing.
My teachers wanted me to use these approaches whenever I would write an important piece, but I know some of the approaches did not work for me. For instance, outlines rarely helped my writing. However, I feel it is good I know how to outline because I would have tools for when I am stuck in my writing. If a child were to ask me, “why do I need this, I never use it,” I would explain it is important to have as many tools we can so that we can be effective and strong writers.
The 6-traits which define strong writing are: ideas, organization, voice, word choice, sentence fluency, and conventions. While in primary and secondary school, I was taught the 6-traits and therefore have some experience. The traits allow the student to learn abstract concepts, which form the body of their writing. The concepts allow the teacher to guide the development of the child’s writing by providing concrete traits for the student’s focus. As a student, I never memorized what the traits were. In fact, I never knew it was important to know the 6-traits. Instead I was shown models for the traits. This worked well. I was shown how to create ideas with webs, organize my work with outlines, form voice by considering audience, select strong word choice by examining what it is I want to say, and building sentence fluency and conventions through editing.
My teachers wanted me to use these approaches whenever I would write an important piece, but I know some of the approaches did not work for me. For instance, outlines rarely helped my writing. However, I feel it is good I know how to outline because I would have tools for when I am stuck in my writing. If a child were to ask me, “why do I need this, I never use it,” I would explain it is important to have as many tools we can so that we can be effective and strong writers.
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Optimal learning model and literacy instruction
2. Brown (Electronic reserve): This article examines the role of text in literacy instruction. Consider the optimal learning model (Routman) as you read about Barbara and Linda?s efforts to teach students Travis, Shamika, and Patrick. What connections can you make between these teachers? instruction (and use of texts) and Routman's model? What connections can you make between these teacher/student experiences and observations or interactions in your field placement?
Children advance through the process outlined by Brown (1999) the same way they advance through Routman’s (2005) optimal learning model. In the first model, the child progresses through learning about print, to breaking the code, and finally to going for fluency. This is similar to the second model, where the child is progressing from demonstration, to shared demonstration, to guided practice, and finally independent practice.
Model two places emphasis on who is holding the pen, and a similar emphasis can be extended to model two, who is holding the book. The child is first learning, then applying, then working independently in both models. Similarly, Brown (1999) details the choice of book is reliant on ability and scaffolding need. Routman’s model requires similar amount of tailoring content for the child. The teacher will choose appropriate content (see book or lesson) for the child’s need and ability. With both models, as Brown (1999) would likely point out, there is a relationship between accessibility and complexity. With respect to content, the more accessible it is, the less complex it is, and the less accessible the content, the more complex it is.
In my placement, I have observed the DEAR activity Brown (1999) outlined, and the kids’ access to appropriate books is called their Just Right Books. These approaches seem to work well because every child in the class has a book and all seem interested in the books they have chosen. Additionally, the teacher exposes the children to more complicated book during read aloud, much the same way Brown (1999) outlined. The teacher chooses a genre and complexity the kids likely have had little exposure to. He spends fifteen minutes a day reading aloud to the class, occasionally stopping to check comprehension. I like all these approaches I’ve talked about here and hope I can appropriately integrate them into my classroom.
Children advance through the process outlined by Brown (1999) the same way they advance through Routman’s (2005) optimal learning model. In the first model, the child progresses through learning about print, to breaking the code, and finally to going for fluency. This is similar to the second model, where the child is progressing from demonstration, to shared demonstration, to guided practice, and finally independent practice.
Model two places emphasis on who is holding the pen, and a similar emphasis can be extended to model two, who is holding the book. The child is first learning, then applying, then working independently in both models. Similarly, Brown (1999) details the choice of book is reliant on ability and scaffolding need. Routman’s model requires similar amount of tailoring content for the child. The teacher will choose appropriate content (see book or lesson) for the child’s need and ability. With both models, as Brown (1999) would likely point out, there is a relationship between accessibility and complexity. With respect to content, the more accessible it is, the less complex it is, and the less accessible the content, the more complex it is.
In my placement, I have observed the DEAR activity Brown (1999) outlined, and the kids’ access to appropriate books is called their Just Right Books. These approaches seem to work well because every child in the class has a book and all seem interested in the books they have chosen. Additionally, the teacher exposes the children to more complicated book during read aloud, much the same way Brown (1999) outlined. The teacher chooses a genre and complexity the kids likely have had little exposure to. He spends fifteen minutes a day reading aloud to the class, occasionally stopping to check comprehension. I like all these approaches I’ve talked about here and hope I can appropriately integrate them into my classroom.
New buddy
Today I met my 2nd/3rd grade buddy :)
In lieu of a writing prompt, I have filled out a study guide for the week's readings and will be bringing it to class.
In lieu of a writing prompt, I have filled out a study guide for the week's readings and will be bringing it to class.
Sunday, November 1, 2009
Routman's optimal learning model for writing
Writing Essentials Chapter 4: Consider the optimal learning model Routman introduces in this chapter in terms of teaching and learning writing skills. What do the components of the model mean? What do they look like in practice? How do these connect, compare, and/or contrast to your field experiences or past schooling?
Routman’s optimal learning model consists of four components: Demonstration, shared demonstration, guided practice, and independent practice.
Demonstration, as Routman outlines, is when the teacher holds the book, and the student holds the pen. The teacher/expert shows exactly how to do the skill hoping the student will emulate the teacher, but not imitate the teacher. In practice, the component looks like the teacher leading the classroom by example.
Shared demonstration is when the teacher and student still have the same responsibilities as before, but now the students collaborate on the writing as much as possible. Participation is facilitated by the teacher’s affirmation and encouragement. In practice, this component has the teacher and students working together while writing. Specifically, the student is contributing as much as possible.
During guided practice, the responsibilities now change. The student holds the book, and the teacher holds the pen. Relying on the previous demonstration, the student practices writing while the teacher closely supports, gives feedback, and validates. During this time the students should be monitoring their work and working towards independence. In practice, the students will be producing their own writing with the on-looking teacher giving support and feedback.
Finally, at independent practice the students choose their own topics while monitoring and setting goals for themselves. The teacher only provides minimal assistance. The students have become competent and confident enough and experience intrinsic pride with successful writing. In practice, the students are coming up with their own topics and writing freely. The teacher is providing just enough intervention to push the student further, to a higher level of writing.
The components, surprisingly, closely connect with my experiences in school. I realize now why some of the teachers push students to work independently, while providing different levels of support for other students. The teachers acknowledge the level of writing the student is at and is attempting to provide the appropriate amount of support.
Routman’s optimal learning model consists of four components: Demonstration, shared demonstration, guided practice, and independent practice.
Demonstration, as Routman outlines, is when the teacher holds the book, and the student holds the pen. The teacher/expert shows exactly how to do the skill hoping the student will emulate the teacher, but not imitate the teacher. In practice, the component looks like the teacher leading the classroom by example.
Shared demonstration is when the teacher and student still have the same responsibilities as before, but now the students collaborate on the writing as much as possible. Participation is facilitated by the teacher’s affirmation and encouragement. In practice, this component has the teacher and students working together while writing. Specifically, the student is contributing as much as possible.
During guided practice, the responsibilities now change. The student holds the book, and the teacher holds the pen. Relying on the previous demonstration, the student practices writing while the teacher closely supports, gives feedback, and validates. During this time the students should be monitoring their work and working towards independence. In practice, the students will be producing their own writing with the on-looking teacher giving support and feedback.
Finally, at independent practice the students choose their own topics while monitoring and setting goals for themselves. The teacher only provides minimal assistance. The students have become competent and confident enough and experience intrinsic pride with successful writing. In practice, the students are coming up with their own topics and writing freely. The teacher is providing just enough intervention to push the student further, to a higher level of writing.
The components, surprisingly, closely connect with my experiences in school. I realize now why some of the teachers push students to work independently, while providing different levels of support for other students. The teachers acknowledge the level of writing the student is at and is attempting to provide the appropriate amount of support.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)