I find it interesting that Milner used the example of “The Great Gatsby” in the discussion on literary theory, because I recently reread it after having done so as a freshman in high school. As a teen, I was an avid reader and ELA was my favorite subject, but I was completely bored with the lesson on the book and quite honestly, couldn’t have cared less. As an adult, I found it fascinating and couldn’t put it down; I really “got it,” and loved looking at the text from many different angles. When we talk about how to approach books in the classroom I agree with Milner; before launching into the more technical stuff, students must be “comfortably and personally engaged and confident of their own immediate and considered responses” (p. 154). Our students must learn to like books and discussing and thinking about what they have read before they will find things like structured criticism useful and interesting, otherwise we will just chase them away. I feel conflicted about the language as development approach as presented in Gere. There are many things about it that I like, particularly that it meets the students at the level they are on and then tries to build on it. It is reminiscent of Nancie Atwell’s approach in “In the Middle.” The idea that student errors and mistakes are a “diagnostic” tool (p.119), rather than a sign of (un)intelligence really resonates with me as a teacher. However, some of the limitations Gere discusses seem too noteworthy to ignore, particularly the point made about its apolitical and nonasthetic aspects. I do see my role as more than a “teacher of strategy,” and genuinely want to share my love of reading and writing with my students. Despite my reservations, the aspects of language as development that appeal to me can easily be meshed with other teaching strategies. The section on grading in Russell seemed to answer as much for me as it created new questions. It seems crazy that something that carries so much weight can be ambiguous and subjective. I have my reservations about grading in general, but norm-referenced grading seems completely unfair to me. I much prefer the criterion-referenced method, but after that it gets a little fuzzy. I always wonder if I should grade with an eye toward effort, improvement, and participation; the chapter didn’t help settle that question for me. While I like the idea of multiple grading for all students, not just for those in special circumstances, Russell later points out that grades are really supposed to be about academic achievement. A teacher can easily send the wrong message by nudging a grade too much or too little, a message that potentially can set the student up for unintentional failure.
I completely agree with you about grading. Like we discussed in class, I think the best method is to grade based on improvement and to hold each student to a set of standards that are specific to that student's abilities, progress, and effort. I realize that this is an idealistic approach and may require a lot of me but I find myself against norm-referenced grading entirely. I also have issues with grading solely on mastery. I feel like mastery is subjective and that everyone has a different definition of what it means to master writing a thesis statement or analyzing a text. My idea of thesis statement or proper analysis may differ greatly from the next teacher and I feel like all I'm doing is sending mixed messages to my students. If I tell them they have mastered writing a thesis statement and then they go into another classroom where the teacher has different ideas about what a good thesis statement should include, that student will realize that academics is not about learning but rather strategy based on teacher expectations.
The quote on the first page of the chapter (Alan Purves & Richard Beach: “At the center of the curriculum are not the works of literature… but rather the mind as it meets the book, the response.”Milner et al., 2012) reminded me that English curriculum isn’t based around books; it is based off what can be learned from the book. The chapter went on to talk about how English equals literature. Students show up to English class expecting to read and write. And then of course they ask the questions: Why do we have to read this? Why do we have to write about this? Milner et al. (2012) provided some reasons we ask for stories: to be entertained, instructed, enchanted, informed, thrilled, and comforted. The problem is that as adolescents, no one is calling for complicated literature. Choosing literature that is more appropriate for young adults and adolescents will keep them interested and related to what they are reading, which will result in better responses to what they have read. When we have these better responses, we know that our students are gaining self-understanding as well as critical and analytical skills.
Gere 5: Language and Reflection
It was interesting to read about the language as development perspective. I guess what I found so interesting about it was learning that it was its own perspective. I kind of assumed these were all things that should be done in the classroom anyway. Learning goals, using prior knowledge to connect to new ideas, organizing information, and acquiring cognitive and metacognitive structures are basic to learning language. I liked that it listed that learning occurs in phases yet is not linear (Gere et al., 1992). Different students with different backgrounds are going to learn in different ways. They may go through similar phases, but they are not necessarily going to go through them in the same way or the same order.
Russell 9: Classroom Assessment
I get nervous when I think about having to grade tests and essays, and provide an overall grade for report cards. I need to keep in mind that grades are always based on teacher judgments (Russell & Airasiam, 2012). I thought it was interesting that this book said that grades were used to motivate students to study and to guide them toward appropriate courses, course levels, colleges, and special services (Russell, 2012; p. 255). It’s kind of funny, because when I was in school it seemed like students either cared way too much about their grade, or they didn’t care at all. I agree that grades are capable of motivating, but lately it’s become a bit overwhelming. But overall this chapter helped me take a deep breath and calm down when I think about grading. It can’t be something that I rush through to get over with. It’s going to depend on my judgment, and I need to make sure I do it right.
Your point about grades is interesting because it is something that worries me too. I don’t necessarily feel like grades are successful motivational tools, because like you said, some students either care way too much, and other students don’t care at all. I think it takes the focus away on the actual learning. Just because a student gets an A doesn’t always mean that they have learned, maybe they already had those skills so the assessment was easy, maybe they temporarily memorized the correct responses, but not in a way that is lasting. I think the bottom line is that as teachers we should be trying to motivate students in other ways, like providing them with the opportunity to learn content that interests them. I actually read an article this morning that discussed a model for learning that was research based learning. Students decide what they want to learn about, then do research on it. Apparently it was really successful in failing schools Mexico. Students still received grades, but they were excited and engaged, and learning... the whole point of school in the first place.
Russell’s chapter was an eye-opening look at most important aspect of education from a student’s point of view: grading. The chapter discusses different types of assessment and when they might be appropriate, as well as the mentality with which we need to approach grading. Norm-referenced grading, or grading on a curve (260), is unappealing to me. Assigning a certain number of students an A, a certain number a B, and so on seems unfair. I encountered this style mostly in college, and it feels like it is looking to match an abstract idea rather than the students’ actual performance. Most classes will likely shake out along the average anyway, but some can be exceptionally good (or bad). I believe grades should reflect what’s really in front of the teacher.
The school I work at bases its letter grades on effort and improvement, which is a difficult thing to quantify. I don’t think there’s any way to replicate that kind of grading in an ordinary school (nor should it be replicated), but one thing that my school does is to attach a page-long letter describing the student’s progress. Teachers, aides and therapists all contribute to this evaluation and it usually skews toward positive comments. This would be extremely time-consuming for a public school teacher with upwards of one hundred students, but I would like to replicate that for my students in the future to some extent. It expresses much more than a letter grade and a short, computer-generated comment.
Milner’s chapter also struck me for its approach on responding to literature. The outline for the four stages of reading literature (123) was interesting to me because it is not how I approach reading for myself. I almost never pick up a book looking to relate to it; in fact, I like reading wildly different points of view. It’s hard for me to remember that most people don’t like reading at all and that, when they do read, they often look for those hooks to latch onto. The methodology outlined here seems like a good way to engage students who wouldn’t normally like to read. By connecting to a student’s personal life first, a teacher puts the student on familiar ground first before launching into more difficult literary analysis. This chapter gave me insight on my own point of view and how I need to keep that in check in the classroom.
The “language as development” approach from Gere’s chapter seems like something I want to use. It seems most appealing when it’s broken down into the model of scaffolded instruction, from modeling to guided practice to independent practice and then feedback (120). I do worry about the limitations of this approach (127), especially that it privileges reading over writing, but these can be avoided as long as instruction varies in a particular class. I also liked that this chapter lists the cartoon analysis (136) that we saw in action at Lawrence High as a possible activity.
While I was reading Russell’s chapter on grading, I was having similar thoughts to yours about norm-referenced versus criterion-referenced grading. I remember suspecting some of my teachers throughout the years of using norm-referenced grading and believing that it was strange when only a certain number of students in the class received A’s. Like you, I think this is totally unfair. For instance, if a teacher has decided before the class to only give out three A’s and five students perform to relatively the same academic level, how does the teacher decide which three receive the A and which two receive an A-?
You raise an interesting point about personalizing grading when you discuss how your school issues page-long letters when distributing report cards. I also like this idea in theory and wonder how it would work in a public school setting. I think we all would agree that if we could give our students this much individual attention, we would do so. Perhaps there is another way to do this type of assessment so that it does not occur in one block when report cards are issued. What if you devote time throughout the semester to doing this for each student instead of waiting until the end of quarters and semesters? This might be a feasible solution.
In Chapter Five of Bridging English, Milner et al. discuss the relationship between their three phase teaching cycle of literary instruction and the four stages of reading literature. They aim to answer the question: “What can we learn from literature?” (Milner et al., 2012, p. 117). Through neat instruction that clearly defines a beginning (“enter”), middle (“explore”), and end (“extend”), students can smoothly progress through the four stages of reading with a sense of comfort and confidence. These four stages include (1) reader response, (2) interpretive community, (3) formal analysis, and (4) critical synthesis. Most teachers effectively teach the first two and some of the third, but Milner et al. recognize the lack of emphasis on critical synthesis. Whether because of teacher’s lack of knowledge or doubt about whether students will understand, teachers often neglect to teach literary criticism, an element of critical synthesis that extends the teaching cycle. Personally, I think teaching students even just the foundation of literary criticism will contribute to their critical thinking skills and help move the text from the page and into real life. While it might not be helpful to teach Platonic or Aristotelian theory, students could certainly benefit from learning through lenses such as feminist, formalist, historical, and reader response. Reading texts from a variety of literary angles might help students interact with the text and therefore extend their literary competency beyond simple comprehension.
In Chapter Five of Language and Development, Gere et al. introduce the “language-as-development” model in which students learn by building upon prior knowledge and developing language skills through direct instruction of cognitive abilities like study skills, critical thinking skills, and problem-solving skills (1992, p. 119). Gere et al. state that in the “language-as-development” classroom, language learning mostly occurs in a “goal-oriented” environment (1992, p. 117). In this way, the “language-as-development” classroom agrees with the main idea in Chapter Nine of Russell and Airasian’s Classroom Assessment. In this chapter, Russell and Airasian discuss the significance of grading in today’s classrooms. While no student likes receiving their report cards or grades, they are imperative not only because they are required, but because they motivate students, act as planning tools for teachers and class placement, guide instruction, and inform students and parents about progress (2012, p. 255). Grades create the “goal-oriented” environment the “language-as-development” classrooms crave. However, Russell and Airasian do warn that we should be fair in grading and use grading carefully to properly deliver messages about student performance we wish to convey without clouding judgment (2012, p. 256).
I enjoyed reading your comments about what you think students can gain by learning the foundation of literary criticism and how it can help their critical thinking skills. As adolescents, it’s important that we help students take the text and bring it to real life so they can connect to it; otherwise they probably will lose interest and miss out on what we’re trying to teach them. Being aware of what we can use to help them think critically is important as well. Using feminist, formalist, historical, and reader response are great ways to get students to connect. These are all things they can probably relate to anyway. As teachers, we want to get our students beyond simple comprehension. You state that reading texts from a variety of literary angles might help students interact with the text, and this will help students get where we want them to be. I agree, and I think it’s important to get students at this age to be able to look at things differently in order to grow as learners.
As always, Bridging English provides us with literally dozens of ideas for lessons and activities, this time all revolving around the teaching of literature. I like the fact that the reading focuses on why literature is important, and that its activities focus on ways we can teach this point to our students. The chapter raises an important question, and its answers remind us why we want to be ELA teachers in the first place: “Why do very young children and humans throughout history call for a story? They do so to be entertained, to be instructed, to be enchanted, to be informed, to be thrilled, and to be comforted (Milner & Milner, 2007, p. 118). Part of our job as teachers will be to help our students remember these things.
The “language-as-development” model in the Gere chapter acts, in a way, as an extension of the Milner reading. It provides us with wonderful ideas for “mapping” and “clustering” as forms of scaffolding instruction. I have always felt that visual learning is the best kind of scaffolding instruction, especially for reading; why, after all, would we reinforce text with more text? Using other modalities – graphic organizers, videos, discussions, pictures – would seem to be a far more efficient way of teaching text to adolescents.
In Classroom Assessment: Concepts and Applications, we are faced with one of teachers’ oldest conundrums: grading. This is a difficult topic, because while I understand the need for grades – aptly summed up in Russell as the need “to communicate information about a student’s academic performance to students, parents, and others” (Russell & Airasian, 2012, p.255) – I also worry about how much emphasis is placed on them. Grades are most often derived from summative assessments, but it seems to me that formative assessments are more thorough in their evaluation of broad concepts and, ultimately, more fair, especially to students who understand those broad concepts but do not test well. I am grateful, therefore, that this chapter provides us with ideas about how to derive grades in more creative ways than tests and essays.
I like the points you make about visual learning used as scaffolding. Visual learning really allows the teacher to tap into other forms of understanding and comprehension to reinforce learning. I especially liked your question, "why, after all, would we reinforce text with more text?" Using other forms of media is also preferential in terms of time. It takes large amounts of time to read and consume a text in the classroom. Time management and being able to cover all the curriculum seem to be two of the biggest issues with which teachers grapple. When we reinforce with additional texts, we take up even more time. Visual aids however, introduce a lot of new concepts in a relatively small amount of time compared to reading an article or a short story.
I also agree with your comments regarding grades. Personally, I wish I wouldn't have to use grades at all. And if I have to use grades, I wish I could give everyone As. Obviously, none of that is realistic. I do wish however, that there wasn't such an emphasis upon grades. In order for that to happen I believe there would have to be an entire shift in school culture as we know it, so I don't see it happening at any point in the near future.
Chapter 5 of Language and Reflection, discusses the importance of modeling and scaffolding. Gere et al. describe modeling and scaffolding as “central elements of language-as-development instruction” (p. 120). This connects well with this week’s readings in the Teaching of Writing class where the application of modeling in writing was explained. In order to help our students, we need to walk them through the steps of learning. The process described in Language and Reflection outlines this well as “a step-by-step pattern usually called scaffolded instruction: modeling -> guided practice -> independent practice -> feedback” (Gere et al., p. 120). As I reflected upon this system, I thought, at first, that walking our students through every little step seems to connect to low expectations. But in reality, we would really be just supporting our students in meeting our high expectations. Helping them reach such goals demonstrates that we as teachers believe they can get there. So, even though it may seem silly to have to model the process of thinking, or the steps in creating a presentation, or even the steps of figuring out words in reading based upon context, we are scaffolding instruction so students can get there on their own.
I thought about modeling in connection with my own past experience in student teaching. Back in high school, I had the opportunity to teach a few lessons and even develop a project that would be implemented in the classroom that year. I wrote out directions for a pretty complex project, detailed every little aspect that I expected, and handed out extensive rubrics so that the students would know exactly how to tackle this project. Unfortunately, the projects did not quite come out the way I expected. They were excellent in quality and the students learned a lot, but they really didn’t reflect what I had in mind. Looking back, I realize that I really should have done the project myself and modeled it for the students.
To briefly comment on the reading in Bridging English, I really appreciated the point about conceptual readiness. Milner et al. point out, “studies have shown that prior exploration of a concept that is important in a text enriches the reader’s response to that text” (p. 126). This connected well with our class discussion last week regarding the use of canonical texts in the classroom. If we introduce concepts that allow students to access texts at levels appropriate for their stage of learning, we are more likely to be able to make learning meaningful for students.
I really like what you said in your first paragraph about scaffolding instruction and knowing that by doing each step we are helping our students to meet our expectations. As a student, even now, sometimes I still need the play by play on what a professor expects from me. Every once in a while it is a great thing to have that reminder, so as high school teachers I can see why we should give them each step so that they can model good work and understand the important steps. Your example from your own experience reminds me of what Professor Brown says to us all the time, “Do the work you assign your students.” If we do the assignment first we can gage how hard or easy it will be for our students and we can use our work as an example. This past summer Brown read us his educational philosophy, which was great to hear before I wrote my own; this is just one example I can think of.
It did not surprise me that, from a student’s perspective, school is grade focused. As a student, I was always focused on my grades. I used to calculate my grade percentages and keep track of everything myself. I was constantly aware of where I was academically and in some way it was reassuring but I do feel like I missed out on a lot. Instead of looking to improve my writing or understanding, I was focused on changing my numerical grade. I did not attain as much as I should have in high school and I think this is still a common problem today. Part of the problem is the focus on high stakes testing. Too many classrooms are teaching to the test and spending large chunks of time modeling how students should take the test. Though test taking is a valuable skill, I do not think so much time should be dedicated to this topic. As we have discussed in many of our classes, if we teach our students to critically think about their reading and writing then we are preparing them for a variety of tests.
If the goal of grading is to “communicate information about a student’s academic performance to students, parents, and others” then I believe there are more effective ways of doing so (Russell & Airasian, 2012, p. 255). Providing parents and students with information can take many forms. Numerical or letter grades are only one option out of many. This type of grading is the easiest and fastest way to grade students based on performance. However, it is not the most efficient method of communicating information. If students and parents want to be involved in academic improvement, having more information is key. Instead of using numerical or letter grades, teachers can send home a report card or progress report that includes a summary of what the student has been working on, where the student’s strengths lie, and where the student needs improvement. This form of grading takes time and is often seen as too much work for teachers in public schools. A shorter form can be used to accompany numerical or letter grades so that parents and students have some idea as to what needs to be done and what is already being done. This may relieve some of the pressure placed on letter grades and enhance student motivation and desire to grow academically rather than numerically.
Olivia, You make a good point about the effect of high-stakes testing on student mentality toward school. If we attach a number value or a label about proficiency to everything, students will always be looking to improve their score instead of improving their skills. Everything becomes a competition and there is no real joy in learning. Modeling to take a test is a skill that is valuable only until the student passes the test. After that, what is he or she really left with? Like you say, teaching critical thinking skills is a much better way to prepare classes for the necessary evil of the test while also giving them some real-life skills that carry on after their education.
I agree with your points about the value of letter-grading versus more extensive comments. I think the time constraint is huge. My high school English teachers must have had at least 100 students apiece, and it would have been a burden to write a long progress report for each one. There is, however, the option of writing a shorter report. Maybe the teacher could also use the first few paragraphs as a general commentary on what the class is working on before proceeding into a short blurb about each student. Like you say, this would be motivating to students and helpful to parents.
Milner’s section on The Four Stages of Reading Literature was my favorite by far this week. As Milner describes the chart, “the figure is neither linear nor circular – very much like our classrooms” (Milner et al., 2012, p. 123). Each different stage: reader response, interpretive community, formal analysis, and critical synthesis brings something new to the table and gives readers a different step in their reading growth. I also liked that it was clearly stated, but also clearly understood as I read each stage description that these were interchangeable stages. As readers we can go from one stage to another and back again depending on what we are reading and why.
In Gere, Linda Flower and John Hayes mention activities that both readers and writers go through that to me, can relate back to the stages in Milner in a sense. The three activities, “planning, translating, and monitoring and revising” create a path that students follow through reading and writing (Gere et al., 1992, p. 117). My favorite of the three is monitoring and revising because it is something that so many students go through; everyone stumbles on a word once in a while or is not sure of a sentence in a paragraph. No one is perfect, so everyone can understand revising his or her work.
As for Russell, this chapter was a killer. I am not a huge fan of grades and I find that too many times I have listened to the story of a student talking to a teacher about a grade and the teacher saying something like, “Oh, right, I didn’t give that enough attention, I can go back over it again…” That is unreal to me and is something that I have heard mostly from college professors; it’s a little disturbing. The chapter talks about how grading can be a judgment. Grading should not be guessing, which is, “what one does when there is no information of evidence to help make a judgment” (Russell & Airasian, 2012, p. 258). I think this is something that makes me the most nervous to become a teacher, having the power to judge others and be the factor that decides their fate. Is there some kind of baseline for new teachers to know what is A, B, C, D, or F worthy?
I laughed at your comment about the Russell chapter being a killer. I agree – the realization that I will have to give all my students grades is one of those realities that snaps me out of my English teacher fantasy land and reminds me that I have to teach in the real world where students and teachers are both held accountable. All of our readings about formative and summative assessments also have me worried, because I believe that formative assessments are the most comprehensive measure of a students’ progress and understanding but are also the most difficult to judge. How can I put a letter grade on formative assessments such as class discussions or group work? Ultimately it is a judgment call on my part, and, like you said, I will be deciding the fate of my students through a wholly subjective – and therefore potentially inaccurate – lens.
ReplyDeleteI find it interesting that Milner used the example of “The Great Gatsby” in the discussion on literary theory, because I recently reread it after having done so as a freshman in high school. As a teen, I was an avid reader and ELA was my favorite subject, but I was completely bored with the lesson on the book and quite honestly, couldn’t have cared less. As an adult, I found it fascinating and couldn’t put it down; I really “got it,” and loved looking at the text from many different angles. When we talk about how to approach books in the classroom I agree with Milner; before launching into the more technical stuff, students must be “comfortably and personally engaged and confident of their own immediate and considered responses” (p. 154). Our students must learn to like books and discussing and thinking about what they have read before they will find things like structured criticism useful and interesting, otherwise we will just chase them away.
I feel conflicted about the language as development approach as presented in Gere. There are many things about it that I like, particularly that it meets the students at the level they are on and then tries to build on it. It is reminiscent of Nancie Atwell’s approach in “In the Middle.” The idea that student errors and mistakes are a “diagnostic” tool (p.119), rather than a sign of (un)intelligence really resonates with me as a teacher. However, some of the limitations Gere discusses seem too noteworthy to ignore, particularly the point made about its apolitical and nonasthetic aspects. I do see my role as more than a “teacher of strategy,” and genuinely want to share my love of reading and writing with my students. Despite my reservations, the aspects of language as development that appeal to me can easily be meshed with other teaching strategies.
The section on grading in Russell seemed to answer as much for me as it created new questions. It seems crazy that something that carries so much weight can be ambiguous and subjective. I have my reservations about grading in general, but norm-referenced grading seems completely unfair to me. I much prefer the criterion-referenced method, but after that it gets a little fuzzy. I always wonder if I should grade with an eye toward effort, improvement, and participation; the chapter didn’t help settle that question for me. While I like the idea of multiple grading for all students, not just for those in special circumstances, Russell later points out that grades are really supposed to be about academic achievement. A teacher can easily send the wrong message by nudging a grade too much or too little, a message that potentially can set the student up for unintentional failure.
I completely agree with you about grading. Like we discussed in class, I think the best method is to grade based on improvement and to hold each student to a set of standards that are specific to that student's abilities, progress, and effort. I realize that this is an idealistic approach and may require a lot of me but I find myself against norm-referenced grading entirely. I also have issues with grading solely on mastery. I feel like mastery is subjective and that everyone has a different definition of what it means to master writing a thesis statement or analyzing a text. My idea of thesis statement or proper analysis may differ greatly from the next teacher and I feel like all I'm doing is sending mixed messages to my students. If I tell them they have mastered writing a thesis statement and then they go into another classroom where the teacher has different ideas about what a good thesis statement should include, that student will realize that academics is not about learning but rather strategy based on teacher expectations.
DeleteMilner 5: Bridging English
ReplyDeleteThe quote on the first page of the chapter (Alan Purves & Richard Beach: “At the center of the curriculum are not the works of literature… but rather the mind as it meets the book, the response.”Milner et al., 2012) reminded me that English curriculum isn’t based around books; it is based off what can be learned from the book. The chapter went on to talk about how English equals literature. Students show up to English class expecting to read and write. And then of course they ask the questions: Why do we have to read this? Why do we have to write about this? Milner et al. (2012) provided some reasons we ask for stories: to be entertained, instructed, enchanted, informed, thrilled, and comforted. The problem is that as adolescents, no one is calling for complicated literature. Choosing literature that is more appropriate for young adults and adolescents will keep them interested and related to what they are reading, which will result in better responses to what they have read. When we have these better responses, we know that our students are gaining self-understanding as well as critical and analytical skills.
Gere 5: Language and Reflection
It was interesting to read about the language as development perspective. I guess what I found so interesting about it was learning that it was its own perspective. I kind of assumed these were all things that should be done in the classroom anyway. Learning goals, using prior knowledge to connect to new ideas, organizing information, and acquiring cognitive and metacognitive structures are basic to learning language. I liked that it listed that learning occurs in phases yet is not linear (Gere et al., 1992). Different students with different backgrounds are going to learn in different ways. They may go through similar phases, but they are not necessarily going to go through them in the same way or the same order.
Russell 9: Classroom Assessment
I get nervous when I think about having to grade tests and essays, and provide an overall grade for report cards. I need to keep in mind that grades are always based on teacher judgments (Russell & Airasiam, 2012). I thought it was interesting that this book said that grades were used to motivate students to study and to guide them toward appropriate courses, course levels, colleges, and special services (Russell, 2012; p. 255). It’s kind of funny, because when I was in school it seemed like students either cared way too much about their grade, or they didn’t care at all. I agree that grades are capable of motivating, but lately it’s become a bit overwhelming. But overall this chapter helped me take a deep breath and calm down when I think about grading. It can’t be something that I rush through to get over with. It’s going to depend on my judgment, and I need to make sure I do it right.
Hi Brianna,
DeleteYour point about grades is interesting because it is something that worries me too. I don’t necessarily feel like grades are successful motivational tools, because like you said, some students either care way too much, and other students don’t care at all. I think it takes the focus away on the actual learning. Just because a student gets an A doesn’t always mean that they have learned, maybe they already had those skills so the assessment was easy, maybe they temporarily memorized the correct responses, but not in a way that is lasting. I think the bottom line is that as teachers we should be trying to motivate students in other ways, like providing them with the opportunity to learn content that interests them. I actually read an article this morning that discussed a model for learning that was research based learning. Students decide what they want to learn about, then do research on it. Apparently it was really successful in failing schools Mexico. Students still received grades, but they were excited and engaged, and learning... the whole point of school in the first place.
~Trish
Russell’s chapter was an eye-opening look at most important aspect of education from a student’s point of view: grading. The chapter discusses different types of assessment and when they might be appropriate, as well as the mentality with which we need to approach grading. Norm-referenced grading, or grading on a curve (260), is unappealing to me. Assigning a certain number of students an A, a certain number a B, and so on seems unfair. I encountered this style mostly in college, and it feels like it is looking to match an abstract idea rather than the students’ actual performance. Most classes will likely shake out along the average anyway, but some can be exceptionally good (or bad). I believe grades should reflect what’s really in front of the teacher.
ReplyDeleteThe school I work at bases its letter grades on effort and improvement, which is a difficult thing to quantify. I don’t think there’s any way to replicate that kind of grading in an ordinary school (nor should it be replicated), but one thing that my school does is to attach a page-long letter describing the student’s progress. Teachers, aides and therapists all contribute to this evaluation and it usually skews toward positive comments. This would be extremely time-consuming for a public school teacher with upwards of one hundred students, but I would like to replicate that for my students in the future to some extent. It expresses much more than a letter grade and a short, computer-generated comment.
Milner’s chapter also struck me for its approach on responding to literature. The outline for the four stages of reading literature (123) was interesting to me because it is not how I approach reading for myself. I almost never pick up a book looking to relate to it; in fact, I like reading wildly different points of view. It’s hard for me to remember that most people don’t like reading at all and that, when they do read, they often look for those hooks to latch onto. The methodology outlined here seems like a good way to engage students who wouldn’t normally like to read. By connecting to a student’s personal life first, a teacher puts the student on familiar ground first before launching into more difficult literary analysis. This chapter gave me insight on my own point of view and how I need to keep that in check in the classroom.
The “language as development” approach from Gere’s chapter seems like something I want to use. It seems most appealing when it’s broken down into the model of scaffolded instruction, from modeling to guided practice to independent practice and then feedback (120). I do worry about the limitations of this approach (127), especially that it privileges reading over writing, but these can be avoided as long as instruction varies in a particular class. I also liked that this chapter lists the cartoon analysis (136) that we saw in action at Lawrence High as a possible activity.
Ian,
DeleteWhile I was reading Russell’s chapter on grading, I was having similar thoughts to yours about norm-referenced versus criterion-referenced grading. I remember suspecting some of my teachers throughout the years of using norm-referenced grading and believing that it was strange when only a certain number of students in the class received A’s. Like you, I think this is totally unfair. For instance, if a teacher has decided before the class to only give out three A’s and five students perform to relatively the same academic level, how does the teacher decide which three receive the A and which two receive an A-?
You raise an interesting point about personalizing grading when you discuss how your school issues page-long letters when distributing report cards. I also like this idea in theory and wonder how it would work in a public school setting. I think we all would agree that if we could give our students this much individual attention, we would do so. Perhaps there is another way to do this type of assessment so that it does not occur in one block when report cards are issued. What if you devote time throughout the semester to doing this for each student instead of waiting until the end of quarters and semesters? This might be a feasible solution.
In Chapter Five of Bridging English, Milner et al. discuss the relationship between their three phase teaching cycle of literary instruction and the four stages of reading literature. They aim to answer the question: “What can we learn from literature?” (Milner et al., 2012, p. 117). Through neat instruction that clearly defines a beginning (“enter”), middle (“explore”), and end (“extend”), students can smoothly progress through the four stages of reading with a sense of comfort and confidence. These four stages include (1) reader response, (2) interpretive community, (3) formal analysis, and (4) critical synthesis. Most teachers effectively teach the first two and some of the third, but Milner et al. recognize the lack of emphasis on critical synthesis. Whether because of teacher’s lack of knowledge or doubt about whether students will understand, teachers often neglect to teach literary criticism, an element of critical synthesis that extends the teaching cycle. Personally, I think teaching students even just the foundation of literary criticism will contribute to their critical thinking skills and help move the text from the page and into real life. While it might not be helpful to teach Platonic or Aristotelian theory, students could certainly benefit from learning through lenses such as feminist, formalist, historical, and reader response. Reading texts from a variety of literary angles might help students interact with the text and therefore extend their literary competency beyond simple comprehension.
ReplyDeleteIn Chapter Five of Language and Development, Gere et al. introduce the “language-as-development” model in which students learn by building upon prior knowledge and developing language skills through direct instruction of cognitive abilities like study skills, critical thinking skills, and problem-solving skills (1992, p. 119). Gere et al. state that in the “language-as-development” classroom, language learning mostly occurs in a “goal-oriented” environment (1992, p. 117). In this way, the “language-as-development” classroom agrees with the main idea in Chapter Nine of Russell and Airasian’s Classroom Assessment. In this chapter, Russell and Airasian discuss the significance of grading in today’s classrooms. While no student likes receiving their report cards or grades, they are imperative not only because they are required, but because they motivate students, act as planning tools for teachers and class placement, guide instruction, and inform students and parents about progress (2012, p. 255). Grades create the “goal-oriented” environment the “language-as-development” classrooms crave. However, Russell and Airasian do warn that we should be fair in grading and use grading carefully to properly deliver messages about student performance we wish to convey without clouding judgment (2012, p. 256).
I enjoyed reading your comments about what you think students can gain by learning the foundation of literary criticism and how it can help their critical thinking skills. As adolescents, it’s important that we help students take the text and bring it to real life so they can connect to it; otherwise they probably will lose interest and miss out on what we’re trying to teach them. Being aware of what we can use to help them think critically is important as well. Using feminist, formalist, historical, and reader response are great ways to get students to connect. These are all things they can probably relate to anyway. As teachers, we want to get our students beyond simple comprehension. You state that reading texts from a variety of literary angles might help students interact with the text, and this will help students get where we want them to be. I agree, and I think it’s important to get students at this age to be able to look at things differently in order to grow as learners.
DeleteAs always, Bridging English provides us with literally dozens of ideas for lessons and activities, this time all revolving around the teaching of literature. I like the fact that the reading focuses on why literature is important, and that its activities focus on ways we can teach this point to our students. The chapter raises an important question, and its answers remind us why we want to be ELA teachers in the first place: “Why do very young children and humans throughout history call for a story? They do so to be entertained, to be instructed, to be enchanted, to be informed, to be thrilled, and to be comforted (Milner & Milner, 2007, p. 118). Part of our job as teachers will be to help our students remember these things.
ReplyDeleteThe “language-as-development” model in the Gere chapter acts, in a way, as an extension of the Milner reading. It provides us with wonderful ideas for “mapping” and “clustering” as forms of scaffolding instruction. I have always felt that visual learning is the best kind of scaffolding instruction, especially for reading; why, after all, would we reinforce text with more text? Using other modalities – graphic organizers, videos, discussions, pictures – would seem to be a far more efficient way of teaching text to adolescents.
In Classroom Assessment: Concepts and Applications, we are faced with one of teachers’ oldest conundrums: grading. This is a difficult topic, because while I understand the need for grades – aptly summed up in Russell as the need “to communicate information about a student’s academic performance to students, parents, and others” (Russell & Airasian, 2012, p.255) – I also worry about how much emphasis is placed on them. Grades are most often derived from summative assessments, but it seems to me that formative assessments are more thorough in their evaluation of broad concepts and, ultimately, more fair, especially to students who understand those broad concepts but do not test well. I am grateful, therefore, that this chapter provides us with ideas about how to derive grades in more creative ways than tests and essays.
I like the points you make about visual learning used as scaffolding. Visual learning really allows the teacher to tap into other forms of understanding and comprehension to reinforce learning. I especially liked your question, "why, after all, would we reinforce text with more text?" Using other forms of media is also preferential in terms of time. It takes large amounts of time to read and consume a text in the classroom. Time management and being able to cover all the curriculum seem to be two of the biggest issues with which teachers grapple. When we reinforce with additional texts, we take up even more time. Visual aids however, introduce a lot of new concepts in a relatively small amount of time compared to reading an article or a short story.
DeleteI also agree with your comments regarding grades. Personally, I wish I wouldn't have to use grades at all. And if I have to use grades, I wish I could give everyone As. Obviously, none of that is realistic. I do wish however, that there wasn't such an emphasis upon grades. In order for that to happen I believe there would have to be an entire shift in school culture as we know it, so I don't see it happening at any point in the near future.
Chapter 5 of Language and Reflection, discusses the importance of modeling and scaffolding. Gere et al. describe modeling and scaffolding as “central elements of language-as-development instruction” (p. 120). This connects well with this week’s readings in the Teaching of Writing class where the application of modeling in writing was explained. In order to help our students, we need to walk them through the steps of learning. The process described in Language and Reflection outlines this well as “a step-by-step pattern usually called scaffolded instruction: modeling -> guided practice -> independent practice -> feedback” (Gere et al., p. 120). As I reflected upon this system, I thought, at first, that walking our students through every little step seems to connect to low expectations. But in reality, we would really be just supporting our students in meeting our high expectations. Helping them reach such goals demonstrates that we as teachers believe they can get there. So, even though it may seem silly to have to model the process of thinking, or the steps in creating a presentation, or even the steps of figuring out words in reading based upon context, we are scaffolding instruction so students can get there on their own.
ReplyDeleteI thought about modeling in connection with my own past experience in student teaching. Back in high school, I had the opportunity to teach a few lessons and even develop a project that would be implemented in the classroom that year. I wrote out directions for a pretty complex project, detailed every little aspect that I expected, and handed out extensive rubrics so that the students would know exactly how to tackle this project. Unfortunately, the projects did not quite come out the way I expected. They were excellent in quality and the students learned a lot, but they really didn’t reflect what I had in mind. Looking back, I realize that I really should have done the project myself and modeled it for the students.
To briefly comment on the reading in Bridging English, I really appreciated the point about conceptual readiness. Milner et al. point out, “studies have shown that prior exploration of a concept that is important in a text enriches the reader’s response to that text” (p. 126). This connected well with our class discussion last week regarding the use of canonical texts in the classroom. If we introduce concepts that allow students to access texts at levels appropriate for their stage of learning, we are more likely to be able to make learning meaningful for students.
Cassandra,
DeleteI really like what you said in your first paragraph about scaffolding instruction and knowing that by doing each step we are helping our students to meet our expectations. As a student, even now, sometimes I still need the play by play on what a professor expects from me. Every once in a while it is a great thing to have that reminder, so as high school teachers I can see why we should give them each step so that they can model good work and understand the important steps. Your example from your own experience reminds me of what Professor Brown says to us all the time, “Do the work you assign your students.” If we do the assignment first we can gage how hard or easy it will be for our students and we can use our work as an example. This past summer Brown read us his educational philosophy, which was great to hear before I wrote my own; this is just one example I can think of.
The Grading Curve
ReplyDeleteIt did not surprise me that, from a student’s perspective, school is grade focused. As a student, I was always focused on my grades. I used to calculate my grade percentages and keep track of everything myself. I was constantly aware of where I was academically and in some way it was reassuring but I do feel like I missed out on a lot. Instead of looking to improve my writing or understanding, I was focused on changing my numerical grade. I did not attain as much as I should have in high school and I think this is still a common problem today. Part of the problem is the focus on high stakes testing. Too many classrooms are teaching to the test and spending large chunks of time modeling how students should take the test. Though test taking is a valuable skill, I do not think so much time should be dedicated to this topic. As we have discussed in many of our classes, if we teach our students to critically think about their reading and writing then we are preparing them for a variety of tests.
If the goal of grading is to “communicate information about a student’s academic performance to students, parents, and others” then I believe there are more effective ways of doing so (Russell & Airasian, 2012, p. 255). Providing parents and students with information can take many forms. Numerical or letter grades are only one option out of many. This type of grading is the easiest and fastest way to grade students based on performance. However, it is not the most efficient method of communicating information. If students and parents want to be involved in academic improvement, having more information is key. Instead of using numerical or letter grades, teachers can send home a report card or progress report that includes a summary of what the student has been working on, where the student’s strengths lie, and where the student needs improvement. This form of grading takes time and is often seen as too much work for teachers in public schools. A shorter form can be used to accompany numerical or letter grades so that parents and students have some idea as to what needs to be done and what is already being done. This may relieve some of the pressure placed on letter grades and enhance student motivation and desire to grow academically rather than numerically.
Olivia,
DeleteYou make a good point about the effect of high-stakes testing on student mentality toward school. If we attach a number value or a label about proficiency to everything, students will always be looking to improve their score instead of improving their skills. Everything becomes a competition and there is no real joy in learning. Modeling to take a test is a skill that is valuable only until the student passes the test. After that, what is he or she really left with? Like you say, teaching critical thinking skills is a much better way to prepare classes for the necessary evil of the test while also giving them some real-life skills that carry on after their education.
I agree with your points about the value of letter-grading versus more extensive comments. I think the time constraint is huge. My high school English teachers must have had at least 100 students apiece, and it would have been a burden to write a long progress report for each one. There is, however, the option of writing a shorter report. Maybe the teacher could also use the first few paragraphs as a general commentary on what the class is working on before proceeding into a short blurb about each student. Like you say, this would be motivating to students and helpful to parents.
Milner’s section on The Four Stages of Reading Literature was my favorite by far this week. As Milner describes the chart, “the figure is neither linear nor circular – very much like our classrooms” (Milner et al., 2012, p. 123). Each different stage: reader response, interpretive community, formal analysis, and critical synthesis brings something new to the table and gives readers a different step in their reading growth. I also liked that it was clearly stated, but also clearly understood as I read each stage description that these were interchangeable stages. As readers we can go from one stage to another and back again depending on what we are reading and why.
ReplyDeleteIn Gere, Linda Flower and John Hayes mention activities that both readers and writers go through that to me, can relate back to the stages in Milner in a sense. The three activities, “planning, translating, and monitoring and revising” create a path that students follow through reading and writing (Gere et al., 1992, p. 117). My favorite of the three is monitoring and revising because it is something that so many students go through; everyone stumbles on a word once in a while or is not sure of a sentence in a paragraph. No one is perfect, so everyone can understand revising his or her work.
As for Russell, this chapter was a killer. I am not a huge fan of grades and I find that too many times I have listened to the story of a student talking to a teacher about a grade and the teacher saying something like, “Oh, right, I didn’t give that enough attention, I can go back over it again…” That is unreal to me and is something that I have heard mostly from college professors; it’s a little disturbing. The chapter talks about how grading can be a judgment. Grading should not be guessing, which is, “what one does when there is no information of evidence to help make a judgment” (Russell & Airasian, 2012, p. 258). I think this is something that makes me the most nervous to become a teacher, having the power to judge others and be the factor that decides their fate. Is there some kind of baseline for new teachers to know what is A, B, C, D, or F worthy?
Rae,
DeleteI laughed at your comment about the Russell chapter being a killer. I agree – the realization that I will have to give all my students grades is one of those realities that snaps me out of my English teacher fantasy land and reminds me that I have to teach in the real world where students and teachers are both held accountable. All of our readings about formative and summative assessments also have me worried, because I believe that formative assessments are the most comprehensive measure of a students’ progress and understanding but are also the most difficult to judge. How can I put a letter grade on formative assessments such as class discussions or group work? Ultimately it is a judgment call on my part, and, like you said, I will be deciding the fate of my students through a wholly subjective – and therefore potentially inaccurate – lens.