Readings for March 1
Petit’s article made me question why I personally am so scared of grammar. Is it because of the way I was taught grammar? Is it because I don’t remember what I was taught? I think it is a combination of the way I was taught and the terminology that seems to confuse more than clarify. You feel stupid for not being able to formally name the parts of something you use daily (writing), particularly if you’re an English major. Thus, I was attracted to Dean’s article because she avoided the standard, confusing terminology. However, Williams made a valid point that we need to have a common language to use when teaching grammar and usage. I then began to wonder if perhaps Dean’s approach is not as grand as I initially thought it was. I despise thinking about teaching to tests, but if we are teaching parts of sentences and grammar anyway, shouldn’t we teach the students the proper names so that they could score higher on standard tests? Perhaps Dean’s approach could be slightly modified to include proper names after the students have already mastered identification.
Another reason I was drawn towards Dean’s approach was because I felt as though students were given the freedom to fail, in an informal setting. I think all three readings pointed to the fact that students deserve more freedom in grammar, and they deserve the knowledge to make grammatical choices. I think a teacher’s goal should be to give students knowledge that creates options for them and then let them choose for themselves. Petit, Dean, and Williams all seem to agree on that aspect.
Here’s a website that no one has heard of, I just know it. It lists some of Dean’s lesson ideas for teaching revision, organization, audience, and genres. http://www.readwritethink.org/lessons/author_detail.asp?authorid=225&lessonid=978
Sunday, February 25, 2007
Monday, February 19, 2007
Readings for February 22
After reading Spandel and Williams, I realize how difficult it is to properly assess student writing. I am particularly frightened assessing creative writing as I personally do not write creatively. I think one way to try to make each student successful, is to grade their process of writing in addition to their final product. Peer review, self-assessment, and various drafts will all combine to make up a student’s grade. In addition, I hope to have the time to allow students to continually revise for a better grade.
I really liked Williams’ approach about reading papers twice, and putting them in piles of similar strength. My cooperating teaching recently spoke to me about this approach and the numerous benefits so I was already sold on the idea. I think one way to cut down on grading and paper load is to have students write fewer papers, better. That is, to have multiple revisions of every paper. I think this gives them a deeper understanding and makes grading easier, since as a teacher you will have seen their paper numerous times.
Both Williams (although less blatantly) and Spandel spoke about the role of testing as a measurement of successful learning. Since we as a cohort have been discussing this for about a year, I don’t feel obliged to go into detail and I feel as though most of us agree current educators should play more of a role in making the standards. I did like Spandel’s advice on compassionate assessment and focusing on finding ways to assess that encourage students.
Spandel made some very interesting points regarding straying off topic. I feel that not allowing students to stray produces boring, restrictive, and possibly contrived writing. I also like how she mentioned that restricting students to prompts implies arrogance and a need for control on the part of the teacher. I couldn’t agree more and would like to add that it may also point to laziness (or time constraints) as a teacher would be able to grade papers more quickly when everyone writes about the same thing. Looking back on my most successful writing, I would come up with a thesis but would eventually stray as my research would point me in a different direction. Had I not had that freedom, those papers instead would have been some of my least successful.
This website makes some strong points on the importance of formative assessments for writing rather than summative. http://www.bridgewater.edu/WritingCenter/Resources/sumform.htm
After reading Spandel and Williams, I realize how difficult it is to properly assess student writing. I am particularly frightened assessing creative writing as I personally do not write creatively. I think one way to try to make each student successful, is to grade their process of writing in addition to their final product. Peer review, self-assessment, and various drafts will all combine to make up a student’s grade. In addition, I hope to have the time to allow students to continually revise for a better grade.
I really liked Williams’ approach about reading papers twice, and putting them in piles of similar strength. My cooperating teaching recently spoke to me about this approach and the numerous benefits so I was already sold on the idea. I think one way to cut down on grading and paper load is to have students write fewer papers, better. That is, to have multiple revisions of every paper. I think this gives them a deeper understanding and makes grading easier, since as a teacher you will have seen their paper numerous times.
Both Williams (although less blatantly) and Spandel spoke about the role of testing as a measurement of successful learning. Since we as a cohort have been discussing this for about a year, I don’t feel obliged to go into detail and I feel as though most of us agree current educators should play more of a role in making the standards. I did like Spandel’s advice on compassionate assessment and focusing on finding ways to assess that encourage students.
Spandel made some very interesting points regarding straying off topic. I feel that not allowing students to stray produces boring, restrictive, and possibly contrived writing. I also like how she mentioned that restricting students to prompts implies arrogance and a need for control on the part of the teacher. I couldn’t agree more and would like to add that it may also point to laziness (or time constraints) as a teacher would be able to grade papers more quickly when everyone writes about the same thing. Looking back on my most successful writing, I would come up with a thesis but would eventually stray as my research would point me in a different direction. Had I not had that freedom, those papers instead would have been some of my least successful.
This website makes some strong points on the importance of formative assessments for writing rather than summative. http://www.bridgewater.edu/WritingCenter/Resources/sumform.htm
Monday, February 12, 2007
Readings for February 15
I feel much better about our Voice mini-lesson after reading #9 of The Nine Rights of Every Writer. It would have been interesting to try to define voice by asking students what type of writing doesn’t have voice and why. Spandel also echoed Joe’s thoughts on voice by comparing it to fingerprints; they may be either faint or obvious, but your fingerprints are on all of your writing.
Rights #5 and #6 were very helpful. The right to write badly reminded me of teaching. Teachers should have the right to teach poorly on their way to becoming an effective teacher. Writers and teachers alike deserved to be praised for taking risks to make something better rather than continuing on the safe path. I particularly liked the idea about changing the wording of directions or writing prompts in order to get the student to unknowingly take risks in their writing. I felt that it corresponded nicely with Harper’s toolbox article. When students are taught the tools of revision, it is not as scary to take risks in writing because they know how to improve their work. I particularly liked the toolbox approach because it clearly defines how to begin revising. In addition, the tools are not specific to a writer; my tools can be used on your writing and vice versa. To become a good writer, I think it is helpful to recognize certain aspects of writing and to be able to critique writing. Harper’s toolbox makes this seemingly daunting task possible for students of all levels.
I feel as though the majority of the articles we’ve read in the past and for this week stress the importance of more focus on fewer issues. I think this is crucial for revising. Right #6 outlines how important it is to show writers the little steps in writing that often get over looked or that teachers assume students already know. I believe teachers often fail to teach when they are trying to cover too much and skip small steps on the way to getting to the top of the stairs. It is not enough to show a student a finished writing product. To understand the process, they need to see it modeled for them from start to finish.
I think this link is pretty self-explanatory, http://www.writers-toolbox.com/
I feel much better about our Voice mini-lesson after reading #9 of The Nine Rights of Every Writer. It would have been interesting to try to define voice by asking students what type of writing doesn’t have voice and why. Spandel also echoed Joe’s thoughts on voice by comparing it to fingerprints; they may be either faint or obvious, but your fingerprints are on all of your writing.
Rights #5 and #6 were very helpful. The right to write badly reminded me of teaching. Teachers should have the right to teach poorly on their way to becoming an effective teacher. Writers and teachers alike deserved to be praised for taking risks to make something better rather than continuing on the safe path. I particularly liked the idea about changing the wording of directions or writing prompts in order to get the student to unknowingly take risks in their writing. I felt that it corresponded nicely with Harper’s toolbox article. When students are taught the tools of revision, it is not as scary to take risks in writing because they know how to improve their work. I particularly liked the toolbox approach because it clearly defines how to begin revising. In addition, the tools are not specific to a writer; my tools can be used on your writing and vice versa. To become a good writer, I think it is helpful to recognize certain aspects of writing and to be able to critique writing. Harper’s toolbox makes this seemingly daunting task possible for students of all levels.
I feel as though the majority of the articles we’ve read in the past and for this week stress the importance of more focus on fewer issues. I think this is crucial for revising. Right #6 outlines how important it is to show writers the little steps in writing that often get over looked or that teachers assume students already know. I believe teachers often fail to teach when they are trying to cover too much and skip small steps on the way to getting to the top of the stairs. It is not enough to show a student a finished writing product. To understand the process, they need to see it modeled for them from start to finish.
I think this link is pretty self-explanatory, http://www.writers-toolbox.com/
Monday, February 05, 2007
Readings for February 8
I don’t think it’s necessary to review the different points made regarding the pros and cons of the five paragraph essay. Instead, I’ll focus the one I agreed with the most, Nunnally. Nunnally made excellent points about the relevance of the five paragraph essay. Although the formula is not always applicable and reading them is tedious and dull, the five paragraph essay does teach useful writing skills such as thesis, clarity, relevance, and support of ideas. What I find baffling is that teachers often don’t relay this information to their students. Instead they focus on the three ideas. Students get caught up in following this formula without understand what they are doing. Thus, instead of relevance of ideas and support, students often are limited (by the three) or distort their ideas to fit (again three). I think it is important to tell them that they should concentrate on coming up with a thesis, and then finding ways to support that. Teachers should specify that an entire paper could be support of one idea or support of 10 ideas (or perhaps the paper does naturally have three ideas and it should be noted that that too is acceptable). More than one paragraph can be dedicated to supporting one idea. Again, students need to know why they are doing what they are doing. Nunnally sums this up by suggesting that, “students should be encouraged to see the FPT for what it is: a helpful but contrived exercise useful in developing solid principles of composition” (71). I do think that students should know about the five paragraph essay if for no other reason than to pass state mandated tests and to have an idea of where to start when writing a paper; however, they need to know that the formula can be changed to suit the needs of the paper and the thesis. The five paragraph essay is a good way to learn how to write but there is no need for it to be used repeatedly after one has mastered the concept.
The following website kind of outlines how a five paragraph essay can be used as a skeleton to start a paper, and how once you get into it, it often becomes far more than the standard FPT: http://www.brooklyn.liunet.edu/fw/portfolio_resource_guide/d1a.htm
I don’t think it’s necessary to review the different points made regarding the pros and cons of the five paragraph essay. Instead, I’ll focus the one I agreed with the most, Nunnally. Nunnally made excellent points about the relevance of the five paragraph essay. Although the formula is not always applicable and reading them is tedious and dull, the five paragraph essay does teach useful writing skills such as thesis, clarity, relevance, and support of ideas. What I find baffling is that teachers often don’t relay this information to their students. Instead they focus on the three ideas. Students get caught up in following this formula without understand what they are doing. Thus, instead of relevance of ideas and support, students often are limited (by the three) or distort their ideas to fit (again three). I think it is important to tell them that they should concentrate on coming up with a thesis, and then finding ways to support that. Teachers should specify that an entire paper could be support of one idea or support of 10 ideas (or perhaps the paper does naturally have three ideas and it should be noted that that too is acceptable). More than one paragraph can be dedicated to supporting one idea. Again, students need to know why they are doing what they are doing. Nunnally sums this up by suggesting that, “students should be encouraged to see the FPT for what it is: a helpful but contrived exercise useful in developing solid principles of composition” (71). I do think that students should know about the five paragraph essay if for no other reason than to pass state mandated tests and to have an idea of where to start when writing a paper; however, they need to know that the formula can be changed to suit the needs of the paper and the thesis. The five paragraph essay is a good way to learn how to write but there is no need for it to be used repeatedly after one has mastered the concept.
The following website kind of outlines how a five paragraph essay can be used as a skeleton to start a paper, and how once you get into it, it often becomes far more than the standard FPT: http://www.brooklyn.liunet.edu/fw/portfolio_resource_guide/d1a.htm
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
