I have found that the more I read about teaching writing and the more reps I actually get in the classroom, the more I see it as an artistic craft and less as a learned skill. When I view writing from this perspective, it makes the process of teaching it more exciting and less daunting. I feel as though being a writer makes me an artist by consequence and I also feel as though I have a strong grasp on the craft (or art) of writing. The more I see writing as an art and myself as an artist, the more I begin to see my students as budding artists. Now, when I begin to think about how to teach an artist, it is about equipping them with the tools of the craft and showing them how to approach creating the art in a way that will allow them to be most successful. Of course, it is tricky, because if my instruction is too static and formulaic, I'm inhibiting their creativity, but if my instruction is too vague and lacks a certain structure, they will never grasp the craft enough to create in the first place.
The artistic, creative, and emotional aspect of English is what drew me to the concentration. I hate math and science because I hate formulas and their inflexibility. So, I say all that to say this: that the 6+1 Traits didn't seem overly formulaic and reading them felt like something one might read if looking at "Components of a Quality Painting." Each "trait" was something that should be included, but left room for personal choice and interpretation, aside from the "Conventions" trait, which isn't fun to think about teaching, but is important and unavoidable. But the other traits were artistic traits, so much so that I think they could be applied to something "traditionally" viewed as artistic, such as painting, and that made them appealing to me.
Ideas, Organization, Voice, Word (Stylistic) Choice, Fluency (Flow), Conventions, and Presentation are all things that you can teach individually. Once learned, these qualities become checkpoints for students during the writing/revising process, that is to say that students are encouraged to be cognizant as to how these elements operate within their writing. "How is your word choice? Do you feel like your voice is present? Is your flow, clunky or smooth?" When I consider structures vs formulas, these traits seem to epitomize what an effective structure should look like.
One thing I would add to this list of traits would be something about the "type of writing" and how these elements are adjusted depending on the task. Are you writing a narrative? Poem? Essay? Letter? Periodical? What are the components? " The "conventions" trait sounds like it would address this, but I don't see the language. I think a trait like this would help students think about intentionality, purpose, and audience, which I believe are huge factors that influence how we write. Otherwise, I think these traits are useful.
Sunday, November 19, 2017
Wednesday, November 8, 2017
11/8/17
Assessment seems like it is the elephant in the room that rarely gets addressed in classes, and yet I know that it is going to be a huge piece of the job. One of the reasons I am so excited to start student teaching is the opportunity to gets reps assessing student work. Out of all of the areas of the profession, this is the one that I feel I have the least amount of exposure to, and it is pretty intimidating, if I'm being honest. Having said that, the readings this week provided some peace of mind.
Gallagher took what I believe my instinctual approach to assessment is and put it down in words. The major takeaways for me were that I need to make the time to meet with students one-on-one, focusing less on full class writing instruction, where students who are struggling can fall through the class, as well as providing essential feedback more during conferences and less in the comments I make on papers. This approach makes a lot of sense to me, and it appeals a great deal to me as I want to make as much time for one-one-one instruction as possible. However, it is in the balancing of time and the management of the classroom during these conferences that I know will be the challenge. The level of trust that I develop with students to work on their own and maintain focus while I am working with someone else is going to me a huge determinant in whether or not I can pull this individual approach off.
Christensen also pulled a ton of weight off my shoulders, specifically in the "Letting Go of the Grades" chapter. It seems so taboo to say that "I don't grade student papers," but in reality it doesn't actually mean that we aren't evaluating and commenting on them. In double reality, Christensen's approach actually takes more time and effort than just chopping up a paper and handing it back, and yet for some reason it reduces my stress levels when I consider adopting her more laborious approach. Assigning number grades never appealed to me, especially when I consider how much it could ruin student motivation and self-efficacy. I want every student to KNOW that an A is possible for anyone who is willing to do the work, even if they aren't great writers walking into my classroom. I want their goal in my classroom not to be "getting an A," but rather "to become a better writer." My only concern in adopting this approach is how administrators and parents will respond to this type of grading system, and what kind of potential obstacles I could face in trying to implement it in my own classroom. I obviously won't be telling everyone "I don't grade papers," but word is bound to get around when students compare my grading to other teachers' and recognize the imbalance. Either way, I have basically accepted that I am going to be receiving pushback from multiple directions in how I will teach, so I can just add this to the list. :-P
Gallagher took what I believe my instinctual approach to assessment is and put it down in words. The major takeaways for me were that I need to make the time to meet with students one-on-one, focusing less on full class writing instruction, where students who are struggling can fall through the class, as well as providing essential feedback more during conferences and less in the comments I make on papers. This approach makes a lot of sense to me, and it appeals a great deal to me as I want to make as much time for one-one-one instruction as possible. However, it is in the balancing of time and the management of the classroom during these conferences that I know will be the challenge. The level of trust that I develop with students to work on their own and maintain focus while I am working with someone else is going to me a huge determinant in whether or not I can pull this individual approach off.
Christensen also pulled a ton of weight off my shoulders, specifically in the "Letting Go of the Grades" chapter. It seems so taboo to say that "I don't grade student papers," but in reality it doesn't actually mean that we aren't evaluating and commenting on them. In double reality, Christensen's approach actually takes more time and effort than just chopping up a paper and handing it back, and yet for some reason it reduces my stress levels when I consider adopting her more laborious approach. Assigning number grades never appealed to me, especially when I consider how much it could ruin student motivation and self-efficacy. I want every student to KNOW that an A is possible for anyone who is willing to do the work, even if they aren't great writers walking into my classroom. I want their goal in my classroom not to be "getting an A," but rather "to become a better writer." My only concern in adopting this approach is how administrators and parents will respond to this type of grading system, and what kind of potential obstacles I could face in trying to implement it in my own classroom. I obviously won't be telling everyone "I don't grade papers," but word is bound to get around when students compare my grading to other teachers' and recognize the imbalance. Either way, I have basically accepted that I am going to be receiving pushback from multiple directions in how I will teach, so I can just add this to the list. :-P
Wednesday, November 1, 2017
11/1/17
Gallagher provided great foundational and practical strategies for helping students take their writing to the next level. In many ways, I feel like I was already familiar with these strategies on the surface, but seeing them written beside actual models and examples really drove the ideas home, and I'm not even a visual learner.
I have always been a firm believer that the only way to become a better writer is to actually put words on the page, but after reading in Ch. 2 about just how often other contents completely neglect writing, I feel an even larger responsibility to have my students piling up pages in their writing portfolios. I'm sure it depends on the school and the teachers, but I am curious about how open teachers from other content areas would be to collaborating and allowing students to convey their level of knowledge through writing, especially since writing is one of the core skills which they will unequivocally use after their schooling careers are long over.
I also really liked that Gallagher emphasized writing alongside students and "demystifying the writing process." The instinct to simply provide a model definitely exists, especially when unpacking the process step by step is so tedious and time consuming. Regardless, Gallagher's argument to directly model and specify each step of the writing process, as well as identifying and modeling each component for whichever medium we are covering, actually prevents a lot of the mistakes before students even have a chance to make them, which saves a ton of time in the long run, not to mention the confidence and self-efficacy that it provides students.
My questions about how just how structured or "formulaic" our writing instruction should be was directly addressed in the Kenney article. I really enjoyed how English teachers at her school developed their own acronym, which the school adopted, as a way to teach students how to write effectively for standardized tests. Still, the fact that teachers are even having to teach this kind of writing is frustrating and discouraging, and the time required to teach students this formulaic writing method which they will never use in any other facet of their lives, steals time that could be used to empower them as writers and encourage them to write about things that are actually relevant and engaging. As long as these tests exists, even the pliability of standards won't be enough to allow teachers to fully empower their students as creative and critical writers.
I have always been a firm believer that the only way to become a better writer is to actually put words on the page, but after reading in Ch. 2 about just how often other contents completely neglect writing, I feel an even larger responsibility to have my students piling up pages in their writing portfolios. I'm sure it depends on the school and the teachers, but I am curious about how open teachers from other content areas would be to collaborating and allowing students to convey their level of knowledge through writing, especially since writing is one of the core skills which they will unequivocally use after their schooling careers are long over.
I also really liked that Gallagher emphasized writing alongside students and "demystifying the writing process." The instinct to simply provide a model definitely exists, especially when unpacking the process step by step is so tedious and time consuming. Regardless, Gallagher's argument to directly model and specify each step of the writing process, as well as identifying and modeling each component for whichever medium we are covering, actually prevents a lot of the mistakes before students even have a chance to make them, which saves a ton of time in the long run, not to mention the confidence and self-efficacy that it provides students.
My questions about how just how structured or "formulaic" our writing instruction should be was directly addressed in the Kenney article. I really enjoyed how English teachers at her school developed their own acronym, which the school adopted, as a way to teach students how to write effectively for standardized tests. Still, the fact that teachers are even having to teach this kind of writing is frustrating and discouraging, and the time required to teach students this formulaic writing method which they will never use in any other facet of their lives, steals time that could be used to empower them as writers and encourage them to write about things that are actually relevant and engaging. As long as these tests exists, even the pliability of standards won't be enough to allow teachers to fully empower their students as creative and critical writers.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)