This is an area that is near and dear to my heart. I have always credited my, ahem, expansive vocabulary and metalinguistic abilities for my academic success. I believe strong vocabulary facilitates test taking (I may not know answers on content, but I can analyze the language in the question until I create meaning for myself and tie it back to some frame of reference for which I have schema), provides an advantage when writing (enabling me to be clear and concise, though I am rarely either), and encourages comprehension in content areas (approaching unfamiliar content-area language by looking for morphemes that convey meaning).
The chapter addressed something that I think is overlooked frequently: the importance in identifying what vocabulary is worthwhile and what vocabulary is for labeling purposes. This is not to discount labeling vocab - it's handy - but it's easy and it's something usually easy to infer from context. I believe time is better spent on conceptual vocabulary. The chapter says "Students....benefit from instruction on the differences between concept and label words because it can prevent them from getting bogged down in minutia at the expense of big ideas," which I thought was a lot of fun, since I imagined lots of people reading that passage and trying to come up with a meaning for "minutia."
Focusing on words with multiple meanings is how I got my French minor. (I know the chapter is talking more about things like "run" but I believe expanding to this area is a logical leap and I like to talk about it, so). Strong knowledge of cognates (based in a good foundation of understanding of Germanic languages and specifically Romance languages) allows me to "get the picture" when I read in Spanish, French and Italian, even though I've only studied French. The ability to generalize and recognize cognates is invaluable, in my opinion, and is something I believe should be explicitly taught as it can help students create meaning even when faced with unfamiliar subject matter.
If it were up to me, students would learn Latin from a young age. It's probably the most conservative educational belief I hold, but Latin provides a framework for understanding (truly understanding) the English language and by extension all Romance languages, as well as heavily influencing content language across the curriculum - government, law, math, all the sciences - simply put, Latin is everywhere. I know this is impractical, so I would instead focus on metalinguistic instruction in my own class - how to break words into parts and teach meaning from that end, giving students the ability to generalize language knowledge.
Monday, November 21, 2011
Sunday, October 16, 2011
Chapter 5 ?????????????s
“By maintaining a balance between asking and answering questions, the teacher returns responsibility for critical thinking to the students.” (100)
I think that quote spoke to me because I’m so romanced by the idea of teaching kids critical thinking/logic skills. I’m into it to a fault, though, and I realize that. This chapter actually pointed this out to me when it listed Aristotle’s styles of questioning. Logos wins for me, every time. Pathos and ethos make me impatient and I think “let’s move on to the useful questions.” I know, inappropriate. I’m working on it.
This chapter deals with questioning in the classroom and provides strategies to enhange questioning. AS we’ve all learned, all questions are not created equal. It is imperative, according to Fisher and Frey (and everyone else ever), to engage students in higher-level questioning 0 asking questions that require synthesis, analysis and evaluation rather than recall of facts. The chapter also devotes attention to the fact that students should be engaging in their own questioning, balancing teacher-directed and student-directed inquiry. They should be monitoring their own understanding by self-questioning as well as creating questions for others as the composition of (specifically higher order) questions promotes critical thinking and reflection beyond rote memorization.
The text recommends several strategies. The one I would be most likely to use, I think, is QAR. I like that the degree of difficulty is graduated so students can start with a simple, knowledge- or text-based question and expand on it through critical thinking. I think this helps students create these higher-level questions by understanding that yes, you do start with the facts printed on the page, and then you branch out and make connections to other material and inferences from the text to gain a richer understanding.
Some of the other strategies included SQ3R (and its many mutations [do I mean permutations?]), questioning the author (always hated that one in school, but I think I never saw it done well – the featured question the author about Annabel Lee and Poe was awesome, but then it’s hard to make anything dealing with beautiful Annabel Lee not awesome; this strategy always reminds me of Dear Mr. Henshaw where that kid spends the entire year writing to an author he likes about his depressing life with his single mom…), and ReQuest (which I felt was a study skill and in no way fit in with this chapter, which was about how to come up with, answer and think about high-order questions – not about handy ways to memorize information in the text, which is what this sounded like it would help with).
Is it better to take one or two of these strategies and use them all year so students are super familiar with what they are doing and can just work with the concepts/material at hand (slash questioning skills) or should you practice a lot of these techniques concurrently? I feel like you might spend a lot of time explaining the procedure for what you’re doing and it might be convenient to say “okay guys, we’re going to QAR this sucker” and everyone knows what you’re talking about and can get to work.
I think that quote spoke to me because I’m so romanced by the idea of teaching kids critical thinking/logic skills. I’m into it to a fault, though, and I realize that. This chapter actually pointed this out to me when it listed Aristotle’s styles of questioning. Logos wins for me, every time. Pathos and ethos make me impatient and I think “let’s move on to the useful questions.” I know, inappropriate. I’m working on it.
This chapter deals with questioning in the classroom and provides strategies to enhange questioning. AS we’ve all learned, all questions are not created equal. It is imperative, according to Fisher and Frey (and everyone else ever), to engage students in higher-level questioning 0 asking questions that require synthesis, analysis and evaluation rather than recall of facts. The chapter also devotes attention to the fact that students should be engaging in their own questioning, balancing teacher-directed and student-directed inquiry. They should be monitoring their own understanding by self-questioning as well as creating questions for others as the composition of (specifically higher order) questions promotes critical thinking and reflection beyond rote memorization.
The text recommends several strategies. The one I would be most likely to use, I think, is QAR. I like that the degree of difficulty is graduated so students can start with a simple, knowledge- or text-based question and expand on it through critical thinking. I think this helps students create these higher-level questions by understanding that yes, you do start with the facts printed on the page, and then you branch out and make connections to other material and inferences from the text to gain a richer understanding.
Some of the other strategies included SQ3R (and its many mutations [do I mean permutations?]), questioning the author (always hated that one in school, but I think I never saw it done well – the featured question the author about Annabel Lee and Poe was awesome, but then it’s hard to make anything dealing with beautiful Annabel Lee not awesome; this strategy always reminds me of Dear Mr. Henshaw where that kid spends the entire year writing to an author he likes about his depressing life with his single mom…), and ReQuest (which I felt was a study skill and in no way fit in with this chapter, which was about how to come up with, answer and think about high-order questions – not about handy ways to memorize information in the text, which is what this sounded like it would help with).
Is it better to take one or two of these strategies and use them all year so students are super familiar with what they are doing and can just work with the concepts/material at hand (slash questioning skills) or should you practice a lot of these techniques concurrently? I feel like you might spend a lot of time explaining the procedure for what you’re doing and it might be convenient to say “okay guys, we’re going to QAR this sucker” and everyone knows what you’re talking about and can get to work.
Chapter 5 ?????????????s
“By maintaining a balance between asking and answering questions, the teacher returns responsibility for critical thinking to the students.” (100)
I think that quote spoke to me because I’m so romanced by the idea of teaching kids critical thinking/logic skills. I’m into it to a fault, though, and I realize that. This chapter actually pointed this out to me when it listed Aristotle’s styles of questioning. Logos wins for me, every time. Pathos and ethos make me impatient and I think “let’s move on to the useful questions.” I know, inappropriate. I’m working on it.
This chapter deals with questioning in the classroom and provides strategies to enhange questioning. AS we’ve all learned, all questions are not created equal. It is imperative, according to Fisher and Frey (and everyone else ever), to engage students in higher-level questioning 0 asking questions that require synthesis, analysis and evaluation rather than recall of facts. The chapter also devotes attention to the fact that students should be engaging in their own questioning, balancing teacher-directed and student-directed inquiry. They should be monitoring their own understanding by self-questioning as well as creating questions for others as the composition of (specifically higher order) questions promotes critical thinking and reflection beyond rote memorization.
The text recommends several strategies. The one I would be most likely to use, I think, is QAR. I like that the degree of difficulty is graduated so students can start with a simple, knowledge- or text-based question and expand on it through critical thinking. I think this helps students create these higher-level questions by understanding that yes, you do start with the facts printed on the page, and then you branch out and make connections to other material and inferences from the text to gain a richer understanding.
Some of the other strategies included SQ3R (and its many mutations [do I mean permutations?]), questioning the author (always hated that one in school, but I think I never saw it done well – the featured question the author about Annabel Lee and Poe was awesome, but then it’s hard to make anything dealing with beautiful Annabel Lee not awesome; this strategy always reminds me of Dear Mr. Henshaw where that kid spends the entire year writing to an author he likes about his depressing life with his single mom…), and ReQuest (which I felt was a study skill and in no way fit in with this chapter, which was about how to come up with, answer and think about high-order questions – not about handy ways to memorize information in the text, which is what this sounded like it would help with).
Is it better to take one or two of these strategies and use them all year so students are super familiar with what they are doing and can just work with the concepts/material at hand (slash questioning skills) or should you practice a lot of these techniques concurrently? I feel like you might spend a lot of time explaining the procedure for what you’re doing and it might be convenient to say “okay guys, we’re going to QAR this sucker” and everyone knows what you’re talking about and can get to work.
I think that quote spoke to me because I’m so romanced by the idea of teaching kids critical thinking/logic skills. I’m into it to a fault, though, and I realize that. This chapter actually pointed this out to me when it listed Aristotle’s styles of questioning. Logos wins for me, every time. Pathos and ethos make me impatient and I think “let’s move on to the useful questions.” I know, inappropriate. I’m working on it.
This chapter deals with questioning in the classroom and provides strategies to enhange questioning. AS we’ve all learned, all questions are not created equal. It is imperative, according to Fisher and Frey (and everyone else ever), to engage students in higher-level questioning 0 asking questions that require synthesis, analysis and evaluation rather than recall of facts. The chapter also devotes attention to the fact that students should be engaging in their own questioning, balancing teacher-directed and student-directed inquiry. They should be monitoring their own understanding by self-questioning as well as creating questions for others as the composition of (specifically higher order) questions promotes critical thinking and reflection beyond rote memorization.
The text recommends several strategies. The one I would be most likely to use, I think, is QAR. I like that the degree of difficulty is graduated so students can start with a simple, knowledge- or text-based question and expand on it through critical thinking. I think this helps students create these higher-level questions by understanding that yes, you do start with the facts printed on the page, and then you branch out and make connections to other material and inferences from the text to gain a richer understanding.
Some of the other strategies included SQ3R (and its many mutations [do I mean permutations?]), questioning the author (always hated that one in school, but I think I never saw it done well – the featured question the author about Annabel Lee and Poe was awesome, but then it’s hard to make anything dealing with beautiful Annabel Lee not awesome; this strategy always reminds me of Dear Mr. Henshaw where that kid spends the entire year writing to an author he likes about his depressing life with his single mom…), and ReQuest (which I felt was a study skill and in no way fit in with this chapter, which was about how to come up with, answer and think about high-order questions – not about handy ways to memorize information in the text, which is what this sounded like it would help with).
Is it better to take one or two of these strategies and use them all year so students are super familiar with what they are doing and can just work with the concepts/material at hand (slash questioning skills) or should you practice a lot of these techniques concurrently? I feel like you might spend a lot of time explaining the procedure for what you’re doing and it might be convenient to say “okay guys, we’re going to QAR this sucker” and everyone knows what you’re talking about and can get to work.
Tuesday, October 4, 2011
I am really into this project. At first I was torn - the part of me that enjoyed getting my English degree was all excited about this, but the part of me who then tried to get a job with that English degree found the prospect of increased hirability after graduation thanks to a service learning project to put on my resume very appealing. Then the bleary-eyed single mom part of me, who thinks that what boils down to a third day of practicum in a week is just a little too much for this semester, weighed in, and I decided the project was for me.
I wish I hadn't read the thing about Halloween for a topic though, because man, I do love Halloween. And I'm in a particularly interesting place - I have a 4 year old, so you'd think I could go whole hog and really decorate and get into the spirit. Unfortunately, my son is terrified of all things Halloweeny. I put a little ceramic pumpkin up on a shelf in my room so I can have a little Halloween without bothering him, but devoting an entire project to it would be so great - well.
I would probably be equally interested in doing something dealing with stars, since I am also a big fan of those-the role of stars in literature or the evolution of astronomy or...
Mostly I'm just excited to write. I used to write all the time and I feel like I never do anymore.
I wish I hadn't read the thing about Halloween for a topic though, because man, I do love Halloween. And I'm in a particularly interesting place - I have a 4 year old, so you'd think I could go whole hog and really decorate and get into the spirit. Unfortunately, my son is terrified of all things Halloweeny. I put a little ceramic pumpkin up on a shelf in my room so I can have a little Halloween without bothering him, but devoting an entire project to it would be so great - well.
I would probably be equally interested in doing something dealing with stars, since I am also a big fan of those-the role of stars in literature or the evolution of astronomy or...
Mostly I'm just excited to write. I used to write all the time and I feel like I never do anymore.
Wednesday, September 28, 2011
Question, Quote, Qonnection - Chapter 6
I'm going to start with my personal connection because my question is based on my connection. I absolutely hate graphic organizers. I realize I just said something very broad and to be fair some of the more linear, organized, clear charts aren't...horrible. It's the big sprawling mind maps with lines all over the place that just do absolutely nothing for me. I've had at least two (possibly more?) classes now where we had to make Inspiration-style mind maps for assignments and I could not stand doing it. They are a great big mess to me and I would much rather just make a nice, neat outline. My adviser likes the big mind maps with lots of connections and bubbles and stuff. She looks at them and suddenly understands all the information on the page. I just get overwhelmed. I skip those charts when they are featured in textbooks (you know, "figure 1.2 arranges the information into a chart" or whatever - when the text tells me to refer to a figure, I just skip it.)
So, how do you use graphic organizers with students who find them stressful? Do those kids get to organize their information in another way? How do you figure out what kids benefit from graphic organizers and which ones don't?
I did think the part about using graphic organizers as a metacomprehension tool was sort of interesting. I think maybe using one of those mind maps with information I already KNOW, things I just need to organize, might work. I've always used them to try to learn new information.
"It is more than just understanding -- it is being consciously aware of what needs to be done in order to support one's own learning, planning and executing the strategies, then reflecting on their effectiveness. The opportunities presented through graphic organizers activate these comprehension strategies and metacognitive skills." (103)
I chose that quote because it sounds great. If graphic organizers really do all those things -- support learning, planning and executing strategies as well as reflecting on the effectiveness on those strategies -- then they are very useful tools indeed. I have just not been exposed to many effective graphic organizers.
Another thing about them, and this might just be me not understanding subtleties, but how are these not just more worksheets?
So, how do you use graphic organizers with students who find them stressful? Do those kids get to organize their information in another way? How do you figure out what kids benefit from graphic organizers and which ones don't?
I did think the part about using graphic organizers as a metacomprehension tool was sort of interesting. I think maybe using one of those mind maps with information I already KNOW, things I just need to organize, might work. I've always used them to try to learn new information.
"It is more than just understanding -- it is being consciously aware of what needs to be done in order to support one's own learning, planning and executing the strategies, then reflecting on their effectiveness. The opportunities presented through graphic organizers activate these comprehension strategies and metacognitive skills." (103)
I chose that quote because it sounds great. If graphic organizers really do all those things -- support learning, planning and executing strategies as well as reflecting on the effectiveness on those strategies -- then they are very useful tools indeed. I have just not been exposed to many effective graphic organizers.
Another thing about them, and this might just be me not understanding subtleties, but how are these not just more worksheets?
Wednesday, September 21, 2011
Text Talk/Chapter 4
This article deals with methods not just for reading aloud in class but for making read alouds more productive educational opportunities. The article deals with young students' tendency to respond to teacher-generated questions about read-aloud text based on pictures and background knowledge rather than by analyzing text content. They suggest waiting to show students pictures until they have answered questions based on text material and redirecting students from using background knowledge by asking specifically what the book tells us about the question. They also suggest some, i think, very engaging methods for approaching vocabulary instruction based on read alouds.
Chapter 4 goes hand-in-hand with the article, suggesting strategies for read alouds for specific content areas in older grades. The text says using read louds to motivate older students is an often overlooked method, but can be effective. The tet advises ensuring you have selected an appropriate selection, good planning involving questioning and engaging students and methods like shared reading.
How do you balance students' useful background knowledge on text topics with their desire to "rabbit chase" and take background knowledge in other directions or let it overshadow the information they are getting from the text?
How do you make read alouds interesting for older students when using trade/expository texts?
Chapter 4 goes hand-in-hand with the article, suggesting strategies for read alouds for specific content areas in older grades. The text says using read louds to motivate older students is an often overlooked method, but can be effective. The tet advises ensuring you have selected an appropriate selection, good planning involving questioning and engaging students and methods like shared reading.
How do you balance students' useful background knowledge on text topics with their desire to "rabbit chase" and take background knowledge in other directions or let it overshadow the information they are getting from the text?
How do you make read alouds interesting for older students when using trade/expository texts?
Tuesday, September 13, 2011
Chapter 8 & Article
"Writing to learn 'involves getting students to think about and to find the words that explain what they are learning, how they understand that learning, and what their own processes of learning involve" (140-141). I think this perfectly pinpoints why this strategy is so useful across the content areas -- knowing answers is great and useful, but knowing the process and being able to put it in your own words and relate that process or information as well as the "why" behind it indicates a much deeper level of comprehension. The text and the article compliment each other, but I think the text does a better job exploring how useful the writing to learn process is across content areas. The article features lots of useful strategies, but the text provides ways to implement those strategies in non-language arts specific classrooms, which is something that I consider a challenge. The text, then, is a useful supplementation of the article, providing insight on how the proposed strategies may be successfully implemented across the curriculum.
1. How harshly or leniently do you "grade" students' writing to learn pieces? It seems there would be a delicate line between keeping them "low stakes" and ensuring students take them seriously enough that they be useful.
2. Do you think it would be more effective to adopt, say, one or two "go to" strategies that are used across curriculum to cut down on time spent explaining the strategy or is it worth that bit of extra time to keep things "fresh" daily or from subject to subject?
1. How harshly or leniently do you "grade" students' writing to learn pieces? It seems there would be a delicate line between keeping them "low stakes" and ensuring students take them seriously enough that they be useful.
2. Do you think it would be more effective to adopt, say, one or two "go to" strategies that are used across curriculum to cut down on time spent explaining the strategy or is it worth that bit of extra time to keep things "fresh" daily or from subject to subject?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)