Chapter 5 brought up ideas on how to create authentic discussion by having students say what they would do in certain situations. By asking the students to think about what they would do in the “Lost at Sea” scenario, they were able to put themselves into the mode of survival and it helped then become more understanding of characters in extreme situations even though they have never actually experiences these severe circumstances. This is not something that I have ever thought of as a way of introducing a piece of literature. I guess that I have been so trained on introducing literature with the literary devices that will be present in the piece as opposed to looking at and trying to relate to the experiences that the characters will have to face. The book says that this activity is a good way to get students involved in debating on differing ideas, which in turn causes them to become emotionally engaged. I would agree with this because I can tell just from reading about the scenarios that people would have differing opinions and they would want to voice these opinions.
I found chapter 6 to have a lot of good information, but it got a little extreme a couple of times. I like the way that it talked about different introductory activities you could do to get students thinking about the book they will be reading, and get them interested. The part that I found to be extreme was the opinionnaire/survey part. I think a survey would be a good way to start the lesson, but the book basically says that you should give the students the survey at least three times! It says that you should start off the lesson with the survey (which is a good idea), then once you get into the literature, you should take the survey from the point of view of the author (which would be pretty interesting, I guess). But then it wants you to take the survey again at the end and see how your own views have changed. I think that this is a little overboard, and I know that I, personally, would get really annoyed. It’s fine to take it once or twice, but three times is too repetitive for my taste.
One part I really liked in chapter 6 was the idea of role-playing/simulations. I like to be active in classrooms, and I will always be one of the first people to volunteer. I know not everyone will like to be a volunteer in acting out situations, but who doesn’t like to watch their classmates make fools of themselves? J This is a great way to get students thinking about what the characters will have to go through and help them be empathetic toward them.
I also liked the idea about writing in response the prompts because the prompts ask students questions about how they would react in certain situations. I really felt like thing part related to chapter 5 because it is meant to motivate students to have the desire to find out what the characters will do. They will get to compare their response with how the character handled the situation, which I found to be a good tool. I really agree with this too because in chapter 5 the question was posed as to what we would do in the soldier’s situation, and I was really wanting to know what choice he ended up making.
I didn’t really find chapter 13 to be very interesting. It talked about different ways to evaluate your teaching to make sure that you are allowing students enough time to respond and that you are responding to them in an appropriate and encouraging way. The only thing that really stood out to me in this chapter is that students should be talking more often than teachers when it comes to discussion. Also, I thought it was funny when the department chair who was observing a classroom told the teacher that he responded to students’ talking with “okay” over 30 times! While that sounds like a lot, I realize that when I give mini lessons, I probably respond with “okay” just as often. We need to be aware of how our reactions and gestures are taken by students. Do they encourage them to keep talking or do they discourage them and make them not want to say another word?
Wednesday, October 17, 2007
Sunday, October 7, 2007
Chapter 10 Response
In this chapter, the authors talk about the use of discussion to improve writing due to the fact that it helps focus students and causes them to engage in higher level thinking. When they are able to collaborate and debate with their classmates, they are able to develop a broader understanding. Also, students can figure out exactly where they stand on the issue, which in turn helps them when it comes to writing their argument. They get to see what the counter-arguments are, and they can come up with a way to contradict it.
I feel that this is a great way to get students to form an opinion about something and then be able to argue that opinion. With each scenerio that I read, I formed an argument of my own. For the Max Burger story, I thought it was rediculous that he would be arrested for murder or even manslaughter. Like the students in the book pointed out, he was given ample warning about the security system, and he shouldn't have been breaking in to the restaurant anyway. This reminded me of the story about the guy who was robbing a house and in the process he broke his leg and SUED the family who lived in the house, and WON! The only thing Max Burger should have gotten in trouble for was violating building and city firecodes. Other than that, he was just trying to protect what was his.
In the scenerio about more students getting better grades, I felt as though the argument that teachers were giving out better grades to get better scores was silly. My position is that the teachers started teaching better, not to get better scores, but because they were able to see in what areas they were strong, and in what areas they were weak, and used the surveys to improve their teaching styles.
I have opinions about the other two scenerios as well: the one about the healthy food, and particularly about the John Q. Public one, but the point is that this method seems to be very useful. People are quick to form an opinion about things, and through discussion, they are able to voice these opinions. Once they voice their opinions, they are given the opportunity to see from the perspective of other people, and form a more developed/complete argument for when they sit down to write. Then they can come up with a better, more solid argument because they can hear what the counter-arguments are and then pick them apart. It also helps them to become more informed so they are not just spitting out and argument that has no basis of truth.
I feel that this is a great way to get students to form an opinion about something and then be able to argue that opinion. With each scenerio that I read, I formed an argument of my own. For the Max Burger story, I thought it was rediculous that he would be arrested for murder or even manslaughter. Like the students in the book pointed out, he was given ample warning about the security system, and he shouldn't have been breaking in to the restaurant anyway. This reminded me of the story about the guy who was robbing a house and in the process he broke his leg and SUED the family who lived in the house, and WON! The only thing Max Burger should have gotten in trouble for was violating building and city firecodes. Other than that, he was just trying to protect what was his.
In the scenerio about more students getting better grades, I felt as though the argument that teachers were giving out better grades to get better scores was silly. My position is that the teachers started teaching better, not to get better scores, but because they were able to see in what areas they were strong, and in what areas they were weak, and used the surveys to improve their teaching styles.
I have opinions about the other two scenerios as well: the one about the healthy food, and particularly about the John Q. Public one, but the point is that this method seems to be very useful. People are quick to form an opinion about things, and through discussion, they are able to voice these opinions. Once they voice their opinions, they are given the opportunity to see from the perspective of other people, and form a more developed/complete argument for when they sit down to write. Then they can come up with a better, more solid argument because they can hear what the counter-arguments are and then pick them apart. It also helps them to become more informed so they are not just spitting out and argument that has no basis of truth.
Tuesday, September 18, 2007
New Criticism and Reader Response
New Criticism is a lense through which literature is critiqued based upon its form and aesthetic pleasure. Through this lense, we see art as art with no references to historical meaning. Literature and art simply exist to be appreciated. The way in which we look at a literary piece through the lense of New Criticism is to look at the structure and style of the piece itself. Essentially, this is literary analysis, where you analyzing the setting, plot, characterization, imagery, symbolism, etc. The list goes on, but basically the writer’s craft is what’s important. Another huge part of New Criticism is “universal truths,” that certain human conditions will always be true. One quote that I found that held a “universal truth” was by Edgar Allen Poe. He stated (on pg 198 of the 9th grade LOL), “The death of a beautiful woman is, unquestionably, the most poetical topic in the world.” I found many other examples of New Criticism as well. On pg. 324 I found an overview that states the objectives as being: 1) appreciate a contemporary short story and 2) identify and examine different types of characters. On pg. 376, the instruction is to “ask students why Jerry refers to the other beaches as ‘her beach.’ What does the beach symbolize for Jerry?” On pg. 562 there is a question about style. It asks the students to “describe the shift of tenses between these two paragraphs. What dramatic effect does the shift achieve?” All of these things are examples of New Criticism because they want the student to look solely at the craft of the writer without worrying about if it has any historical values or beliefs.
Reader Response is another lense through which literature is critiqued, but instead of being critiqued on form and craft, it is based upon how the reader reacts and relates to a piece of writing. This suggests that not all people will have the same reaction to a text and that it is possible to get many different interpretations. On pg. 343, the book asks the students to connect the topic of the text to their own life. It states, “Think about how your life has changed in the last few years, and about how it is changing now. How do you feel about these changes? Using a chart like the one shown, describe the disadvantages of these changes and the immediate or long-term benefits.” On pg. 340 a question asks, “how do you react to the narrator as a person? Share your reactions with a classmate.” On pg. 255 the book asks, “what is your reaction to the way Frank is treated in the hospital?” And finally, on pg. 552 there is another question asking you to relate the text to your life. It says, “Different animals in nature evoke different responses from people. Copy the list shown and fill in your own opinions. Then, with a classmate, discuss your choices.” Each of these assignments exemplifies Reader Response because they only want to know what YOU think. It is not about what the author thinks, or what the historical basis is, but just how YOU, yourself, relate and respond to the text.
Reader Response is another lense through which literature is critiqued, but instead of being critiqued on form and craft, it is based upon how the reader reacts and relates to a piece of writing. This suggests that not all people will have the same reaction to a text and that it is possible to get many different interpretations. On pg. 343, the book asks the students to connect the topic of the text to their own life. It states, “Think about how your life has changed in the last few years, and about how it is changing now. How do you feel about these changes? Using a chart like the one shown, describe the disadvantages of these changes and the immediate or long-term benefits.” On pg. 340 a question asks, “how do you react to the narrator as a person? Share your reactions with a classmate.” On pg. 255 the book asks, “what is your reaction to the way Frank is treated in the hospital?” And finally, on pg. 552 there is another question asking you to relate the text to your life. It says, “Different animals in nature evoke different responses from people. Copy the list shown and fill in your own opinions. Then, with a classmate, discuss your choices.” Each of these assignments exemplifies Reader Response because they only want to know what YOU think. It is not about what the author thinks, or what the historical basis is, but just how YOU, yourself, relate and respond to the text.
Wednesday, September 12, 2007
Lit-Crit Part 2
Example 1
The assignment: Look at the picture, “Solitary Confinement: Insects Witness My Agony,” then answer “What aspects of the story (“Marine Corps Issue”) can you find in the painting?” The story is about a boy whose father was in the Vietnam War. When he returns, he never talks about the war, but keeps three locked boxes in the garage. After watching a movie about the war, the boy becomes very interested in finding out more about the war and more about his father. He makes it his mission to find out what is in the boxes. He gets away with looking at the contents of two of the boxes and as he is looking at the third, his father finds him. Obvious anger is seen in his father’s eyes and stature, but he does not punish the boy. Instead, his eyes well up with tears and he goes out to his garden, where he digs up two more boxes. The picture that the question asks the reader to look at is a picture of a man in solitary confinement and in obvious agony. The assignment is an example of New Criticism because it is asking the reader to look at the piece of art and find out how it fits together with the reading. How does the picture work with the structure and the writers craft to unravel the universal human condition? Any person who is in forced solitude will suffer. This is a universal truth that is recognizable in the story as well as in the picture. The father is suffering from an internal solitude, and the man in the picture is suffering from solitary confinement.
Example 2
The assignment: “Connect to life.” After reading the two poems, “Young” and “Hanging Fire,” the reader is asked the following question: “Based on your own experience and your observation of adolescence in general, which of these poems do you think is more true to life?” This question is definitely an example of Reader Response because asking the reader to come up with their own meaning and interpretation of which poem they believe to be more realistic. Answers will certainly differ according to each reader, because no two people have experienced adolescence in the same manner. The question also encourages the readers to relate to the text by comparing the poems to their own life and perspectives.
The assignment: Look at the picture, “Solitary Confinement: Insects Witness My Agony,” then answer “What aspects of the story (“Marine Corps Issue”) can you find in the painting?” The story is about a boy whose father was in the Vietnam War. When he returns, he never talks about the war, but keeps three locked boxes in the garage. After watching a movie about the war, the boy becomes very interested in finding out more about the war and more about his father. He makes it his mission to find out what is in the boxes. He gets away with looking at the contents of two of the boxes and as he is looking at the third, his father finds him. Obvious anger is seen in his father’s eyes and stature, but he does not punish the boy. Instead, his eyes well up with tears and he goes out to his garden, where he digs up two more boxes. The picture that the question asks the reader to look at is a picture of a man in solitary confinement and in obvious agony. The assignment is an example of New Criticism because it is asking the reader to look at the piece of art and find out how it fits together with the reading. How does the picture work with the structure and the writers craft to unravel the universal human condition? Any person who is in forced solitude will suffer. This is a universal truth that is recognizable in the story as well as in the picture. The father is suffering from an internal solitude, and the man in the picture is suffering from solitary confinement.
Example 2
The assignment: “Connect to life.” After reading the two poems, “Young” and “Hanging Fire,” the reader is asked the following question: “Based on your own experience and your observation of adolescence in general, which of these poems do you think is more true to life?” This question is definitely an example of Reader Response because asking the reader to come up with their own meaning and interpretation of which poem they believe to be more realistic. Answers will certainly differ according to each reader, because no two people have experienced adolescence in the same manner. The question also encourages the readers to relate to the text by comparing the poems to their own life and perspectives.
Sunday, September 9, 2007
Lit-Crit
I flipped through quite a few pages before I started to realize that I kept focusing in on the “Customized Instruction,” particularly for the “less proficient readers.” With each question and possible response I read for the less proficient reader, I began to get more and more frustrated. The questions the book suggests to ask less proficient readers to answer are very basic and cause very little thinking to take place. When it comes to Bloom’s Taxonomy, the questions are all at the very bottom level, knowledge. There is not critical thinking that is being asked to take place what-so-ever.
On page 487 of the ninth grade version of The Language of Literature, I found a customized instruction that went along with an excerpt from I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings. The instruction was for the teacher to ask the less proficient reader the following questions: “What are the ‘gifts’ that Mrs. Flowers gives Marguerite?” and “How does Marguerite react to these gifts?” Both of these questions ask for a very simple response, where the student could simply look in the text and answer straight from the text. Neither question inspires a thoughtful answer.
It frustrates me that people do not realize that by labeling students “less proficient” not only lowers their moral, but discourages them from trying to learn or putting forth any effort. When little is expected from you, you are going to show little in return. Also, the book does not do anything to try to encourage the less proficient readers to think critically. If a question can be answered by taking a sentence or two straight out of the text, then it is not a good question!
Actually, now that I think about it, every time I have ever had to read something out of a textbook and answer follow-up questions, I can remember taking direct sentences and copying them as my answer. All that does is cause a student to remember where they heard that same thing before and go back to that spot in the text. It certainly does not ask a student to go through their own thinking process to come up with an answer. I do not think that when I am a teacher I am going to want to make my student just answer the questions from the text, because they are not very reflective of learning and understanding. And the less proficient readers need to have more encouragement, and need to be answering the same things as everyone else, or else their learning will be inhibited.
On page 487 of the ninth grade version of The Language of Literature, I found a customized instruction that went along with an excerpt from I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings. The instruction was for the teacher to ask the less proficient reader the following questions: “What are the ‘gifts’ that Mrs. Flowers gives Marguerite?” and “How does Marguerite react to these gifts?” Both of these questions ask for a very simple response, where the student could simply look in the text and answer straight from the text. Neither question inspires a thoughtful answer.
It frustrates me that people do not realize that by labeling students “less proficient” not only lowers their moral, but discourages them from trying to learn or putting forth any effort. When little is expected from you, you are going to show little in return. Also, the book does not do anything to try to encourage the less proficient readers to think critically. If a question can be answered by taking a sentence or two straight out of the text, then it is not a good question!
Actually, now that I think about it, every time I have ever had to read something out of a textbook and answer follow-up questions, I can remember taking direct sentences and copying them as my answer. All that does is cause a student to remember where they heard that same thing before and go back to that spot in the text. It certainly does not ask a student to go through their own thinking process to come up with an answer. I do not think that when I am a teacher I am going to want to make my student just answer the questions from the text, because they are not very reflective of learning and understanding. And the less proficient readers need to have more encouragement, and need to be answering the same things as everyone else, or else their learning will be inhibited.
Tuesday, September 4, 2007
Ch. 12 and 15
In chapter 12 of Talking in Class, the author discusses the importance of presenting students with thought-provoking problems and concepts in an effort to make them think critically and participate in deliberation and debate. By contributing to debate-type discussions, students are exposed to diverse opinions and ideas, and are also encouraged to defend the position they have taken. Through-out this process, the students reason with themselves and others, and in the end make realizations about themselves and their own ideas. A student may begin a discussion with a firm understanding of what he or she believes, but come out of the discussion with a revised idea after hearing different perspectives. This change in thinking is the result of analyzing and assessing one’s own perspectives to develop a stronger, less biased opinion of an issue. This process also open’s up the minds of students to diversity.
Chapter 15 goes along with the concept of diversity and creating an atmosphere where students are able to debate on critical issues. The book states that it is important to “provide frequent occasions for students to engage in meaningful, content-related conversations about challenging issues that matter to them” (McCann 197). Exposure to diverse views increases awareness in all students, and in turn, this awareness is carried out in real-life situations. Not all students are conscious of the fact that everyone has their own opinion about each and every issue. But by engaging in debates where multiple perspectives are being presented, they develop this awareness which will most likely lead them to be more open-minded of other people and their ideas.
I can only think of a small handful of times when I have been involved in truly meaningful discussion, particularly in a classroom. Sure, I have taken part in many of these discussion in various other scenes, but in the classroom, where this type of discussion is critical, I can recall very few. In one of my high school classes, we had a debate on stem-cell research, but instead of actually having a true discussion, we were given a side to take and had to debate from that particular discussion. While I feel that this could be one way to open up your mind to another point-of-view, I feel more strongly that it only touches upon the stereotypical debates instead of getting down into what people actually think. When you are forced to put aside your own perspective, it eliminates the passion with which you will fight for your cause. For example, if I felt strongly about being pro-choice, and I was told to argue for why abortion should not be an option, I would not argue as strongly and passionately as I would if I actually believed what I was fighting for. Also, the group to which I was presenting/debating my argument would get a deeper understanding of my beliefs if I were actually arguing my true beliefs, instead of making something up. I feel that in order to have a true debate, you have to speak from the heart. That is the only way other people will be inclined to consider what you have in mind, instead of disregarding an argument they know you don’t even believe in.
For the most part, I agree with the authors that meaningful discussions are essential to the reduction of biases and broadening perspectives. The only way to open up the minds of students is to get them to realize that diversity is prevalent everywhere. Not just in the way people look and act, but also in the way people think. However, I also believe that a teacher has to be very careful about what debates to allow in the classroom, because people can easily become offended, and in turn, a teacher could get into a lot of trouble by allowing certain discussions to take place! It would make me very nervous to have debates on ultra-controversial topics, but I know at the same time that they are necessary to an extent.
Chapter 15 goes along with the concept of diversity and creating an atmosphere where students are able to debate on critical issues. The book states that it is important to “provide frequent occasions for students to engage in meaningful, content-related conversations about challenging issues that matter to them” (McCann 197). Exposure to diverse views increases awareness in all students, and in turn, this awareness is carried out in real-life situations. Not all students are conscious of the fact that everyone has their own opinion about each and every issue. But by engaging in debates where multiple perspectives are being presented, they develop this awareness which will most likely lead them to be more open-minded of other people and their ideas.
I can only think of a small handful of times when I have been involved in truly meaningful discussion, particularly in a classroom. Sure, I have taken part in many of these discussion in various other scenes, but in the classroom, where this type of discussion is critical, I can recall very few. In one of my high school classes, we had a debate on stem-cell research, but instead of actually having a true discussion, we were given a side to take and had to debate from that particular discussion. While I feel that this could be one way to open up your mind to another point-of-view, I feel more strongly that it only touches upon the stereotypical debates instead of getting down into what people actually think. When you are forced to put aside your own perspective, it eliminates the passion with which you will fight for your cause. For example, if I felt strongly about being pro-choice, and I was told to argue for why abortion should not be an option, I would not argue as strongly and passionately as I would if I actually believed what I was fighting for. Also, the group to which I was presenting/debating my argument would get a deeper understanding of my beliefs if I were actually arguing my true beliefs, instead of making something up. I feel that in order to have a true debate, you have to speak from the heart. That is the only way other people will be inclined to consider what you have in mind, instead of disregarding an argument they know you don’t even believe in.
For the most part, I agree with the authors that meaningful discussions are essential to the reduction of biases and broadening perspectives. The only way to open up the minds of students is to get them to realize that diversity is prevalent everywhere. Not just in the way people look and act, but also in the way people think. However, I also believe that a teacher has to be very careful about what debates to allow in the classroom, because people can easily become offended, and in turn, a teacher could get into a lot of trouble by allowing certain discussions to take place! It would make me very nervous to have debates on ultra-controversial topics, but I know at the same time that they are necessary to an extent.
Sunday, August 26, 2007
Ch. 1 Response
English classes should be a place where many original ideas are brought to the table. I was really disappointed to read that often times, authentic discussion is NOT talking place in classrooms, because discussion is a vital part in coming up with unique thoughts instead of regurgitating overused ones. I feel as though it is especially vital to an English classroom to have new, innovative ideas circulating because English classes should be fostering creativity instead of stifling it. Writing is not about memorization, but originality, and if our conversation within the classroom are lacking in authenticity, what we produce on paper will also be lacking.
The book mentions two different kinds of discussion, those being: authentic and recitation. Obviously, there will be times when recitation is necessary, for instance, when memorizing characters or main ideas in literature. But teachers need to remember that this tactic should only be used on occasion, and that authentic discussion should be part of a daily, or at least weekly, routine.
I know, from personal experience, that authentic discussion does not occur very often. It seems like a lot of the teachers I have had already know what they want the students to say, and in discussion will be guiding them toward whatever they are hoping the student will say. Too often, the class hour is spent with students being led into saying whatever it is the teacher is leading them to, but these are the same classroom conversations that leave my mind as soon as I exit the room. However, when I get to take part in a real, meaningful discussion, I walk away from the classroom with new ideas and cannot stop thinking about what just happened. It’s sad, actually, that this does not occur more often. The kinds of discussions that really get to me are the ones where I keep thinking of things I wish I would have said, or wish that we could continue the next time we gather together.
There was one part in the text that I would really like to address. On page five there is a quote from another source. I have to write my favorite part of this quote! It says, “…failure to think critically produces a democracy in which people talk at one another but never have genuine dialogue. In such an atmosphere, bad arguments pass for good arguments, and prejudice can all too easily masquerade as reason” (qt. in Talking in Class). I really love this quote because it seems as though people all too often simply REPEAT things they have been told, instead of questioning it, and coming up with their own opinion about it. I also think that along with “prejudice…masquerade[ing] as reason,” naivety can too easily pass for intelligence! Authenticity can only come if we are asking questions that lead to creative thinking and actually coming up with our OWN ideas!
The book mentions two different kinds of discussion, those being: authentic and recitation. Obviously, there will be times when recitation is necessary, for instance, when memorizing characters or main ideas in literature. But teachers need to remember that this tactic should only be used on occasion, and that authentic discussion should be part of a daily, or at least weekly, routine.
I know, from personal experience, that authentic discussion does not occur very often. It seems like a lot of the teachers I have had already know what they want the students to say, and in discussion will be guiding them toward whatever they are hoping the student will say. Too often, the class hour is spent with students being led into saying whatever it is the teacher is leading them to, but these are the same classroom conversations that leave my mind as soon as I exit the room. However, when I get to take part in a real, meaningful discussion, I walk away from the classroom with new ideas and cannot stop thinking about what just happened. It’s sad, actually, that this does not occur more often. The kinds of discussions that really get to me are the ones where I keep thinking of things I wish I would have said, or wish that we could continue the next time we gather together.
There was one part in the text that I would really like to address. On page five there is a quote from another source. I have to write my favorite part of this quote! It says, “…failure to think critically produces a democracy in which people talk at one another but never have genuine dialogue. In such an atmosphere, bad arguments pass for good arguments, and prejudice can all too easily masquerade as reason” (qt. in Talking in Class). I really love this quote because it seems as though people all too often simply REPEAT things they have been told, instead of questioning it, and coming up with their own opinion about it. I also think that along with “prejudice…masquerade[ing] as reason,” naivety can too easily pass for intelligence! Authenticity can only come if we are asking questions that lead to creative thinking and actually coming up with our OWN ideas!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)