Final project

Final Project

Topic:  For my final, I am going to try and incorporate many of the ideas we have discussed in class into a lesson plan that explores dialect, culture, and identity.  My goal is to put something together for students to learn how to speak in another’s voice/dialect, and in so doing find a deeper understanding of their own voice, identity and dialect (and hopefully make the connection that all dialects, and in fact all people are equally important).  At this point I envision something like our group study/presentations on dialect.  Followed up with reading Twain’s A True Story, Repeated Word for Word As I Heard It—then a writing project, for which students will be asked to write approximately two pages of dialogue (either fiction, or transcribed like our classroom dialogue project) representative of the parlance of their time/place.

Format:  4-6wk lesson plan.  I will be using the “Backward Design Model” (Tomlinson & McTighe, Understanding By Design), as my template.  The backward—design, lesson format is one which I have been working with a little bit, and also hope to use it during my student teaching experience.  After creating the lesson plan, I will also address which elements of the Common Core Standards this lesson plan touches upon.

Questions:  At this point I am wondering if I have too broad a topic, and am hoping the answer to this question will reveal itself as I start putting the lesson together.  Plus I would appreciate any feedback that may help guide me to a better end product.

Oh Gee's

The Note

From common core page 35—Reading Standards: 

Note on range and content of student reading

To become college and career ready, students must grapple with works of exceptional craft and thought whose range extends across genres, cultures, and centuries. Such works offer profound insights into the human condition and serve as models for students’ own thinking and writing. Along with high-quality contemporary works, these texts should be chosen from among seminal U.S. documents, the classics of American literature, and the timeless dramas of Shakespeare. Through wide and deep reading of literature and literary nonfiction of steadily increasing sophistication, students gain a reservoir of literary and cultural knowledge, references, and images; the ability to evaluate intricate arguments; and the capacity to surmount the challenges posed by complex texts.

Discourse analysis questions from Gee chapter 6 “Figured Worlds as Tools of Inquiry”

C) How consistent are the relevant figured worlds here? Are there competing or conflicting figured world at play?  Whose interests are the figured worlds representing?

I found Gee’s chapter 6 to be very insightful, especially when questioning my own ‘frames of mind’ or ‘figured worlds.’  In regard to the common core, we all bring our own perspective and simplified view of what is normal.  As for the aforementioned section, Gee’s ‘tools of inquiry’ really help me to see that the common core is trying to tie so many things together in an attempt to cover all the bases that it loosely connects so many ideas that the ‘consistency of the relevant figured worlds’ is, well, inconsistent.  Gee helps me understand that there is no one lens through which to see the world, and although I appreciate those whom collaborated on the common core, Gee, and discourse analysis in general helps me to see that there are multiple voices speaking through the common core document.  Are these voices competing?—I think that, again, depends on who is reading, or viewing the document—although many voices are present, there are still voices that are missing.  As for “whose interests are the figured worlds representing?,” I believe the document is trying to represent the voices of students, but it is also representative of the efficiency experts and business interests hoping that education falls in line with producing human beings ready-made for military-industrial complex that is shaping modern human existence.  Just one reading… certainly not the only one.  In fact, a reading that is the complete inverse of what I have just said is highly possible and certainly relevant.

 

 

Discourse analysis questions applied to a passage of the common core

The Note

From common core page 35—Reading Standards: 

Note on range and content of student reading

To become college and career ready, students must grapple with works of exceptional craft and thought whose range extends across genres, cultures, and centuries. Such works offer profound insights into the human condition and serve as models for students’ own thinking and writing. Along with high-quality contemporary works, these texts should be chosen from among seminal U.S. documents, the classics of American literature, and the timeless dramas of Shakespeare. Through wide and deep reading of literature and literary nonfiction of steadily increasing sophistication, students gain a reservoir of literary and cultural knowledge, references, and images; the ability to evaluate intricate arguments; and the capacity to surmount the challenges posed by complex texts.

Discourse analysis questions from Gee's chapter 2 (the 7 things language is enacting/building):

1)      Significance.  Question: How is this piece of language being used to make certain things significant or not and in what ways?

The note works to make certain works to be read, and certain ways of reading significant.  The note uses certain words, and combinations of words as signifiers of works and the reading of those works to result in “college and career” readiness, including: ‘extends across genres, cultures, and centuries,’ ‘human condition,’ ‘thinking and writing,’ ‘seminal documents,’ ‘classic,’ ‘timeless,’ steadily increasing ‘sophistication’—all in all, the note is describing a literary canon, or a to be red list combined with a how to read list.  We are made to assume that reading these works (and ‘grappling’ with them) will make students more college and career ready.

2)      Practices (Activities).  Question: What practice (activity) or practices (activities) is this piece of language being used to enact (i.e., get others to recognize as going on)?

The note pushes the idea that the act of reading (to become college and career ready) follows along a few linear paths: from less complex to more complex; from being about history to being about the present; from being about one’s own culture to being multicultural; and from being literature to being nonfiction.

3)      Identities.  Question: What identity or identities is this piece of language being used to enact (i.e., get others to recognize as operative)?  What identity or identities is this piece of language attributing to others and how does this help the speaker or writer enact his or her own identity?

The note is trying to see that it is providing a map towards college and career readiness.  If one follows the suggestions therein, they will be college and career ready.  The identity of the speaker is that of an authority.

4)      Relationships.  Question: What sort of relationship or relationships is this piece of language seeking to enact with others (present or not)?

The note actively discusses students’ relationships with written texts.  In being a document about education, relationships range from student to teacher; student to school; student to family (care provider); student to community/society; student to college and career—plus many more possible relationships. It would also be possible for one to interchange the participants in the aforementioned relationships—for example, student to teacher could become parent to teacher—there is a large range of relationship possibilities enacted by the note.

5)      Politics (the distribution of social goods).  Question: What perspective on social goods is this piece of language communicating (i.e., what is being communicated as to what is taken to be “normal,” “right,” “good,” “correct,” “proper,” “appropriate,” “valuable,” “the way things are,” “the way things ought to be,” “high status or low status,” “like me or not like me,” and so forth)?

The note communicates a proper set of events that ultimately leads to college and career readiness (which this note works to claim is a high status).  Plus informational texts seem to be given a higher status than literature (if you follow the logic that as you progress from grade to grade informational texts are given more attention).

6)      Connections.  Question: How does this piece of language connect or disconnect things; how does it make one thing relevant or irrelevant to another?

The note connects reading to what it is to be human and works to create a connection between reading and writing as a way to connect humans from the past to humans in the present, and to what being human may look like in the future.  It also works to connect reading certain texts in certain ways to what it is to be college & career ready.

7)      Sign Systems and Knowledge.  Question: How does this piece of language privilege or disprivilege specific sign systems (e.g., Spanish vs. English, technical language vs. everyday language, words vs. images, words vs. equations, etc.) or different ways of knowing and believing or claims to knowledge and belief (e.g., science vs. the Humanities, science vs. “common sense,” biology vs. “creation science”)?

As previously stated, this note privileges informational texts over literary texts.  It also privileges certain texts as being those that lead to and represent college and career readiness.  Complexity is privileged over simplicity.

 

discussing discussions

            From looking at the class transcripts, the pattern that really stands out to me is that if you label the teacher, T, and the students, S, the overwhelming pattern is T-S-T-S-T-S.  As we discussed in class on Friday there are different reasons for this: giving students encouragement and direction (both on topic, and who speaks next). 

            As for what I hope to accomplish with class discussions, one of the main goals is for all students to feel comfortable speaking and sharing ideas.  I understand the need to keep discussions moving in a certain direction, but I believe that comes after first setting the tone, or atmosphere where everyone is encouraged to speak. The idea of right and wrong and superiority/inferiority has been touched on many times during our discussions, and is one area I hope to keep in mind while teaching—I believe that it is very important to put a lot of time in at the beginning of the year, or semester to set a kind of tone where everyone feels their point of view is valid.  I was watching a TED Speaks talk about education and creativity, and how the older we get the more worried are about making mistakes.  The speaker made a point that has resonated with me ever since “learning is a process of making mistakes.”  In my classroom, I want to encourage my students to make mistakes, I want to encourage them to question each other, and question me.  I hope my classroom is a place where students do not feel afraid to speak out of a fear of making a mistake.  I hope that my students are learning from me and each other what they think for themselves by having discussions.  I realize that efficiency is important, and time is limited, but I hope that I am not just plowing through information and steering students towards answers just to save time.  There may be a place for this kind of teaching, but I would not call it a discussion, it is lecturing. 

            Now I think I am done Gregging!  I look forward to more discussions.

what we have in common

            College and career readiness means what it says, right?  Ready for college and ready for a career, now this seems too simplistic.  There are two different readinesses being described here—college and career, so are they the same, or do we need to define them separately?  Rather than make that distinction, I am going to assume that one of the goals of education is to make opportunities available to everyone, and therefore dive into college readiness.    

            For college readiness, we all are here in college, so we’ve went through a similar process: taking college entrance exams, filling-out applications (discussing our GPA, involvement in extra-curricular activities, an essay of some sort, and provide a couple of references), and a few interviews.  Now we’re getting somewhere, narrowing it down a bit.  So, without getting any deeper, college readiness seems to be defined by the ability to perform certain tasks: fill out forms (and read those forms), write essays, take tests, be involved in some activities outside of the classroom, get to know a couple of people to vouch for you, and be able to make it through an interview.  As for the task of defining the educational goals for college readiness, we then must include preparation for these things—filling out forms, writing essays, taking tests, working on social skills in school and in extra-curricular activities, and having some practice with interviews.   Ultimately it comes down to trying to do everything possible to prepare students for their next phase in life.  Aligning educational goals nationally, like common core, seems to be a very good, common sense idea.  Knowing that there are over 14,000 school districts in the United States, each with their own standard for graduation pulls me in two directions: 1) I can’t believe it, and it makes no sense; and 2) it makes perfect sense considering the history of the United States, its land mass, and population.  There needs to be some common ground between national standards and local autonomy, and the idealist inside me believes that it can be done, and should be done.  The teacher inside of me believes the testing needs some refinement.

            When thinking about other ways I want my students to be literate, I have a difficult time putting a label on it as a kind of literacy.  Let’s see if describing it leads to a connection with literacy… I believe it is very important for students to understand and be aware that there are different ways of viewing reality—we all have and bring our own biases to bear on how we view the world.  We are all human and living on the same planet, yet the reality experienced by a person who grows up in a city in China is different than the reality experienced by a person who grows up in a city in Brazil.  You can see where I’m going here, each person experiences the world at least a bit differently than another person, and some people’s experiences are so different that it may appear like they are on another planet, or at least in a different world. To the best of my ability, I hope to present different views of reality through literature and other media to students.  Ultimately, I hope my students are able to be approach life with an open-mind and be able to understand what Robert Byrne meant when saying: “Until you walk a mile in another man’s moccasins you can’t imagine the smell.”  There, that helps me to understand it best.  I believe the literacy I am talking about falls under cultural literacy/awareness.

 

.

literally literate

Literate, literacy, illiterate, illiteracy

            What first comes to mind when thinking about what the divide between being literate and illiterate is goes back to my work with the Red Cross… when you donate blood you have to ‘give consent’ by signing your name or leaving your mark.  When I thought of leaving a ‘mark’ in place of a signature the artist formerly known as Prince, and his replacing his name with a symbol came to mind.  Of course this is not why the consent form is worded this way, instead it is because some people are unable to read and/or write, and that is the first definition that comes to mind when I think of what divides the literate from the illiterate—a distinct ability to read and write vs. a distinct inability to read and write.  In reality literacy is not defined as clearly black and white, but is more of a gray area.  Instead of thinking in absolute terms, literacy can be better explained as a scale ranging from illiterate to literate; some people can read and write but struggle through it, while others may struggle with reading but not writing, and others are highly proficient in both areas.

            Last year I observed a teacher for 6 weeks who taught four ninth-grade English classes and two classes called ‘credit-recovery.’  During my observations, the students in credit recovery displayed literacy’s scale in very human terms.  Some of the students had learning disabilities, but many of them had simply slipped through the cracks and skated-by passing from one grade to the next without having ever really built a strong foundation in reading or writing.  Not learning how to read and write—reading especially—handicaps people in so many different classes and other areas of life, and the students in credit recovery told countless stories to provide evidence of this.

            As for a concrete definition, literacy has grown in its capacity to include more than just reading and writing.  The first example I think of is computer-literacy.  With this in mind, literacy is synonymous with competency.  And in many instances of pop culture, ‘illiterate’ is used as a kind of a catch-all put down.

Assignment 6: Putting grammar in its place

            The Hartwell article pointed out that there is really very little or no correlation between having a focus on grammar lessons in the classroom and students’ ability to write well.  My first instinct then is to throw grammar lessons out and focus class time on other issues, yet there is undoubtedly going to be issues with grammar for some students.  Plus I have my own issues with grammar—I’m not the best at diagramming sentences and identifying the dangling modifiers from the dangling participles.  However, I do feel that as an English teacher, grammar is an area that I should have a better understanding of.  This leaves me with the question: if I don’t know all there is to know about grammar, what areas of grammar are important, and how should I teach them?

            The areas I believe to be important are identified by Hartwell as the kind of grammar associated with ‘usage’; I do not care so much if my students know all of the rules of grammar, but I do care that they are able to put words together into sentences that make sense.  With that in mind, I believe I will cover some of the basics of grammar like subject/verb agreement and discuss some of the quirky verb conjugates like swim, swam, swum, but for the most part I believe that I will let grammar teach itself by my students living, breathing, and speaking in an English-speaking society.

            As for my worries about my own knowledge of grammar, I believe I will dig a little deeper into the rule book to get a better understanding of the intricacies of the English language.  This is a selfish endeavor, and one that is driven mostly by fear—the fear of a student, parent, or colleague asking me to explain the rules to them, and me being an English teacher and not knowing my own subject.