Response to Webinar

Writing Lesson Reflection

I am more confident with this weeks lesson than I was with the last one I taught.  I liked that I started my lesson my explaining WHY we were focusing on simile vs. metaphor, but I feel that I could have done more with this explanation. I might have cited a specific assignment or problem that I noticed my students had, and THEN explained what this lesson would accomplish instead of skating past this point.

I think that I met my goals for the lesson, and this impressess me. My goal was to appear confident and like I had a clear direction to the mini-lesson, following a logical order and progression.  I got some positive feedback on this in class.

I feel even better about the choice of game than I thought I would, however, I am still so frustrated that I forgot the time limit was 15 minutes instead of 10! I would DEFINITELY included a tie breaker if I had remembered that fact.  Also, although I didn't plan on including it, I think it would have been beneficial to include an assignment or next step to what I would then do at the end of the mini lesson to check for understanding. Also, I would have spent more time paying attention to each student's individual similes and metaphors during the game to gage where they needed to improve.

Overall, I am happy with my lesson, but wish I had thought of something more exciting to begin my lesson, rather than ONLY the excitement of the game at the end.

My thoughts on Reif and Smagorinsky...

Going into the Reif chapters, I first noticed that the topic he would be covering was quick writes.  I'm not going to lie, I was a little disappointed to see this, because I feel that we have covered this method several times now.  Any more would seem repetitive.  However, I was pleasantly surprised to see that Reif is now explaining to us the role of a teacher in the quick writes assignment.

Obviously, we should write for ourselves in our own writer's notebook whatever we have our students write, but in these sections Reif goes on to explain the discretion a teacher must use in determining which quick writes to encourage a student to further develop and which quick writes to allow to remain unchanged.  More than this, Reif explains the importance in student choice about which quick writes to revisit, and I feel that this is very important because it ensures that the young writers will be passionate about what they are writing and editing, at least to some extent.  

Reif's conferences, along with specific, thoughtful feedback about a few, specific areas for improvement, make his approach to student work optimistic and encouraging, and most importantly not overwhelming. Reif also explains how it is most important to tailor the conference to the specific student's needs, and allow them to take the dominant role in this very brief, yet informative, meeting.  

This, combined with modeling, not only raises the students' confidence levels, but also trains them to be well-reasoned and well-spoken members of the writing community. 

My questions for Reif are these:

How would you then address the student who views none of his quick writes as being worthy of expansion?

While letting students edit your model writing, how do you teach them discrimination in what they consider to be an appropriate edit?

While discussing the distinctly different topic of Unit planning, Smagorinsky suggests starting from a broad, general idea of how you would like it to look when it is finished, and then working backwards to determine the components and steps necessary to make this happen.

He makes an excellent point in chapter five, explaining first that the typical QWERTY keyboard that we are all so comfortable with nowadays is actually not the most efficient arrangement of keys.  This keyboard design was actually made to slow down fast typers, but now it is just accepted that this must be the most efficient, best way simply because this is how we have always done it.  The same can be said, Smagorinsky mentions, for the way we run schools.  We are often resistant to change in the way schools operate or in the ways certain things are taught simply because we are used to the norm, and assume that this must be correct because it has endured for so long.

Smagorinsky caters to all of his students differentiated strengths by allowing them to complete some of their assessments by using a medium of their own choosing.  

Like Reif, both authors vary their instruction by what their students needs are, therefor creating the ideal learning environment for each student.  This also causes students to leave their classes with a body of well-edited work that they can use in later portfolios of progress or even as future writing prompts.

How does one have time to tailor assignments to so many preferences and still have time to provide appropriate feedback for each different medium?

Our Process

Leah and I chose Robert Frost's "Mending Wall" as the text for our lesson.  We chose to approach the lesson as a pre-reading lesson.  The aphorism "good fences make good neighbors" is mentioned several times throughout the poem, and it is obvious that the poem's two characters each feel very different about this aphorism.
For our lesson, we were going to explain what an aphorism was, and have kids list as many as they could.  Then, we would pass out notecards with an aphorism on one side and either "pro" or "con" on the back.  The students would then find the person with the opposite position and the same aphorism, and then these pairs would develop mock debates about the wisdom or lack thereof for the given aphorism.
While this might not seem to address one of the specific common core goals, we were using the lesson to develop persuasive skills and critical thinking.  When the children then read the poem, they were going to take their own stance on wether good fences make good neighbors or not, but they then needed to cite specific lines in the text where one of the characters supported this claim.  Here, they would also be practicing citing textual supports, critically analyzing commonly held notions, and structuring debate arguments.

Questions for Reif

Dear Ms. Linda Reif,

While reading your book entitled "Read, Write, Teach," I was particularly struck by your idea of "ass kicking" mentioned in chapter six.  You mentioned that you want your students "to read and respond to reading in the spirit of ass kicking."  I am completely in agreement with this mentality.  I think it is very important for students to, as you said, react passionately to what the read, and even hopefully have that positively  influence their outside behavior.  My question is this: How do you stop the opposite effect?  That is, how do you explain to the class when and when not to take to the streets with their reactions?  It seems like you encouraged your class to kick the asses of others.  When do you draw the line between pretending and actual possible violence.

Also, later in the chapter, you stress the importance of choice in student reading.  You seem to be speaking mostly about fiction, such as Harry Potter.  How would you translate this autonomy to non-fiction, beyond letting children pick the subjects they read about?  Certain things readers look for and enjoy in free reading are not the same things looked for on the dreaded standardized tests.  How do you balance the two?

You also mentioned that you take every Friday as a reading day.  How do you find time to prepare your students for the standardized tests while devoting an entire class day not to a state prescribed text, but to a free-reading book?

Thank you for your time,

Joanna Meyer

Response to Hook Video

Overall, I think I was much less enthusiastic and lively than I thought I would be in teaching my lesson.  I think that it was a good decision to start with a quote, because this helped at least me to view the poem through the lens of the author/character relaying a memory for the sake of purposefully reaching the reader.  In this way, hopefully, the students opened the door to personal reflection and response.  

I noticed that I have the habit of using that front table as almost a fence between me and the class, as if I expect to be attacked at any moment.  At times, too, I notice that I lean forward on my arms toward the class.  I seem stuck behind the desk, even though I stiffly force myself to walk around the classroom at one point.

In some ways, I think my false bravado helps me appear mildly calm, but then again perhaps too calm and not very exciting.

I think my use of a personal example is a positive thing, because it further opens the door to the reader-response angle of my lesson.

I tend to jump on them, though.  I don't allow time for my students to answer/respond to my questions.

Assignment 1

Today we had our first assignment in the planning course, which involved writing briefly about how we believed teachers did their planning.  Then, as a secondary part of the assignment, we viewed several videos posted by actual teachers that explained what they actually did to plan.

The first video I watched was Mary's.  Her method of planning differed from what I originally thought in the fact that she mentioned that she takes into account the probability of snow days, fire drills, and hurricanes into her lesson plans.   She allows wiggle room for these events.  Other than that, her method of planning seemed very similar to what I would like to do.  She said that she over plans at the start in order to make sure she doesn't leave anything out, and then she goes back and re-plans if things need tweaking.  This method is great because it makes sure nothing is forgotten, and it also leaves room to be flexible and take the class' individual needs into consideration.

Seth mentioned a part of planning that hadn't even occurred to me, I am embarrassed to say.  He said that he plans backwards, first looking at what questions he wants his students to be able to answer at the end of the semester, and then planning backwards from there what needs to be taught and in what order.  I think this is very important, especially how he mentioned that you must look at your state's learning objectives.  I was thinking planning started at the beginning and mapped itself forward through the semester, but it might be wiser to do this backwards.

Rachael mentioned two different situations that she has worked in: making her own plans for the semester, and being told what to teach and when and where.  She also suggested working backwards like Seth did, with having the end goal lead you backwards through the semester.  I can't imagine how to teach when you are told what activities to do at what time and in what way.  One of the things I am most excited about in teaching is the creativity involved, and that situation seems to rob the teacher of creativity.  I will have to learn more about this.  

Kristie's post struck me as mildly depressing simply because it seemed to focus entirely on the assessments that need to happen with your students and the common core objectives that they must accomplish.  This is very intimidating to me.  In school, I didn't really notice this, but I may have just been unobservant.  I was thinking that there was more flexibility in what you choose to teach and how than what there seems to be.

Overall, I was a lot less knowledgeable about the methods of planning than I thought I was.  I came in with a "How hard can it be?" attitude, and this is way off.  In addition to this, backwards planning never occurred to me, nor did core objectives or professional learning communities.  I have work to do.