For our final project in the Penn Literacy Network our team decided to do an iSearch with an old assignment. In the past my students were assigned a research paper in which all of the essential questions were asked by me and were the same for every student. Basically I could have done this in a worksheet format, but I wanted them to practice writing research papers and utilizing MLA format.
A few days were spent in the library learning how to do an iSearch. Afterwards students spent time reading about different cases and chose one from an area of law that interested them. They were then asked to come up with three burning questions and then utilize any resource at their disposal to answer their three burning questions.
The assignments have not yet been turned in, but many of the students did who a genuine interest in their chosen topic. However, that is not to say that I don't have some concerns. While the students were reading cases some deliberately chose not to research cases that seemed not to have easily accessible information. Others came up with very poor burning questions that would simply allow them to easily complete the assignment. I forced them to come up with better ones, but as usual my honor students did not want to do much in the way of thinking and simply wanted to once again be the best at the easiest task.
I will hold them responsible for this when it comes time to grade, but overall I think I will get some good papers.
Tuesday, March 27, 2012
Wednesday, January 25, 2012
Teaching the Teachers
Having already tried the "Atomic Bomb" activity in class (and very successfully I might add) it was time to teach the activity to my colleagues. I wasn't too worried about this, I've presented in front of hundreds of teachers that I didn't even know so this was nothing new. The main focus on what I was presenting was its applicability to any content area and the manner in which the activity forces the students to interact with and go back to the text several times.
Not surprisingly the activity went well. All of the teachers could see how such an activity could be useful in their classes and many have begun using them with great success. The part they liked the most was by having the students repeatedly go back to the text it was teaching them how to really analyze a piece of writing and do more than simply read what was in front of them.
There was some very legitimate concern among a few of my colleagues. None of their concerns had to do with the method and material I was teaching by in implementing it in the school environment. Their concern was that the PLN strategies they would be exposed to would be simply that; something they were exposed to and might use but would fade away like so many other programs before. They expressed a concern that unless administration was more heavy handed in ensuring that this would be the standard way our district did things that the full potential of PLN strategies would not be met.
I understand and sympathize with their concerns. However, that is out of my control. I will continue to use PLN strategies in my class and encourage others to do so. Furthermore, I will be an open resource to my colleagues and share anything I can to help the improve reading and writing in their curriculum.
Not surprisingly the activity went well. All of the teachers could see how such an activity could be useful in their classes and many have begun using them with great success. The part they liked the most was by having the students repeatedly go back to the text it was teaching them how to really analyze a piece of writing and do more than simply read what was in front of them.
There was some very legitimate concern among a few of my colleagues. None of their concerns had to do with the method and material I was teaching by in implementing it in the school environment. Their concern was that the PLN strategies they would be exposed to would be simply that; something they were exposed to and might use but would fade away like so many other programs before. They expressed a concern that unless administration was more heavy handed in ensuring that this would be the standard way our district did things that the full potential of PLN strategies would not be met.
I understand and sympathize with their concerns. However, that is out of my control. I will continue to use PLN strategies in my class and encourage others to do so. Furthermore, I will be an open resource to my colleagues and share anything I can to help the improve reading and writing in their curriculum.
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
Peer Share/Review
At the last session of the PLN we reviewed several different strategies for incorporating more writing into the curriculum. This is something that I've always struggled with quite simply because I do not have the time to read 120+ essay or even paragraphs for that matter and have them returned in a timely fashion.
Nevertheless I did see something there that caught my attention and was something I thought I could surely utilize in my class; the method of peer reviewing.
This involves two students reading each others work but at different times and out loud. A student will give their written assignment to a partner whom they will be seated next to. That partner will then read aloud the other persons essay so as to review it for any errors.
I liked this method. I knew that reading aloud always help (me especially), but having a partner do it seemed like another fail safe. I knew that I would try it on my next written assignment.
About a week and a half later my students were finishing their founding father research paper. I had the students complete the review activity the day before their assignment was due and they all seemed to think that it was a worthwhile activity. There were many laughs about what they had caught in each others papers and lots of "oh my God!" going on in the class. Overall it made for a better product and the students assured me that they would be using this methods in other classes. Bottom line, it was easy to do, it worked, and produced a better product. Case closed!!!
Nevertheless I did see something there that caught my attention and was something I thought I could surely utilize in my class; the method of peer reviewing.
This involves two students reading each others work but at different times and out loud. A student will give their written assignment to a partner whom they will be seated next to. That partner will then read aloud the other persons essay so as to review it for any errors.
I liked this method. I knew that reading aloud always help (me especially), but having a partner do it seemed like another fail safe. I knew that I would try it on my next written assignment.
About a week and a half later my students were finishing their founding father research paper. I had the students complete the review activity the day before their assignment was due and they all seemed to think that it was a worthwhile activity. There were many laughs about what they had caught in each others papers and lots of "oh my God!" going on in the class. Overall it made for a better product and the students assured me that they would be using this methods in other classes. Bottom line, it was easy to do, it worked, and produced a better product. Case closed!!!
Friday, October 28, 2011
When a plan comes together!
Getting students to read and interact with their textbook is like trying to nail jello to the wall. However, there are times when this is a necessary evil.
I am fortunate enough to be able to teach in a co-taught class during one of my class periods. The co-teacher and I developed a lesson that we hoped would get students engaged with what they were reading and hopefully get the students to help each other become engaged with the text.
We introduced a ven diagram to the class (an oldie but goodie) and explained to them that half of the class would stay with me and use their text to write down the most important details about the Articles of Confederation. The other half of the class went with the co-teacher to summarize the most important details of the US Constitution. You see, the students are arranged in clusters of four; two would do the Articles and two would do the Constitution.
After ten minutes we reconvened. I collected the ven diagrams from the half that summarized the Articles and said, "Explain to the people across from you the most important parts of the Articles." Then this amazing thing happened; without me telling them they grabbed their textbooks and were telling the people across from them their information and then having the other students read it in the text. There were truly interacting with what they had read. Many times I heard the verbal explanation and then because their partners didn't completely understand they grabbed their book and said, "look here, read this." We waited a few minutes, switched, and had the Constitution students explain their part (without their diagrams).
The class concluded by comparing and contrasting the two documents as a whole. I was shocked by the level of participation and understanding that was demonstrated by virtually every class. It was a joy for me to see how they taught each other and interacted with the text in a much more meaningful way than if they had simply done a work sheet.
To quote Hannibal Smith from the "A-Team", "I love it when a plan comes together!"
I am fortunate enough to be able to teach in a co-taught class during one of my class periods. The co-teacher and I developed a lesson that we hoped would get students engaged with what they were reading and hopefully get the students to help each other become engaged with the text.
We introduced a ven diagram to the class (an oldie but goodie) and explained to them that half of the class would stay with me and use their text to write down the most important details about the Articles of Confederation. The other half of the class went with the co-teacher to summarize the most important details of the US Constitution. You see, the students are arranged in clusters of four; two would do the Articles and two would do the Constitution.
After ten minutes we reconvened. I collected the ven diagrams from the half that summarized the Articles and said, "Explain to the people across from you the most important parts of the Articles." Then this amazing thing happened; without me telling them they grabbed their textbooks and were telling the people across from them their information and then having the other students read it in the text. There were truly interacting with what they had read. Many times I heard the verbal explanation and then because their partners didn't completely understand they grabbed their book and said, "look here, read this." We waited a few minutes, switched, and had the Constitution students explain their part (without their diagrams).
The class concluded by comparing and contrasting the two documents as a whole. I was shocked by the level of participation and understanding that was demonstrated by virtually every class. It was a joy for me to see how they taught each other and interacted with the text in a much more meaningful way than if they had simply done a work sheet.
To quote Hannibal Smith from the "A-Team", "I love it when a plan comes together!"
Saturday, October 22, 2011
Trial and Error
A few weeks ago I, along with a few other teachers and administrators from my district, attended the first seminar of the Penn Literacy Network. While there the group focused on methods to improve student literacy in the classroom. The group was introduced to various strategies and was instructed that our first "assignment" was to try one of these strategies and record/journal how it went.
Classroom environment was something that our instructor focused heavily upon during our first meeting. He stressed the importance of pairing your students off and then bringing those pairs together into learning/discussion groups of four. Also, he continually explained that you want to make your classroom a learning center and that direction should come from at least three different sides of the classroom.
The instructor passed out a piece of literature that we were to read and then asked us to give a brief explanation of our thoughts which he would then expand upon as we continued to dissect the reading. I was intrigued; I had used strategies such as this before but had strayed from them through time. The session was enjoyable and I was truly interacting with the text. I kept asking myself why I had gotten away from this?
Needless to say the very next day I rearranged my classroom and had already chosen a piece of material to discuss/dissect with my classroom. This was not easy as the number of students I have when compared to square footage is rather large. Nevertheless, as my students wrote their thoughts as a part of the "do it now" activity I was careful to go around and give immediate feedback. This worked very well for most students. However, this is where things seemed to come apart at the seems.
The students' answers were silly at best; they did not take the reading or discussion seriously. I could not imagine having to complete this proverbial song and dance every day! As the day went on the discussions got better and naturally there were no problems in my honors classes.
What did I do wrong? Was the material bad? Was the question one that led to silly answers? Part of success is failure, as any innovator will tell you. Looks like it's back to the drawing board.
Classroom environment was something that our instructor focused heavily upon during our first meeting. He stressed the importance of pairing your students off and then bringing those pairs together into learning/discussion groups of four. Also, he continually explained that you want to make your classroom a learning center and that direction should come from at least three different sides of the classroom.
The instructor passed out a piece of literature that we were to read and then asked us to give a brief explanation of our thoughts which he would then expand upon as we continued to dissect the reading. I was intrigued; I had used strategies such as this before but had strayed from them through time. The session was enjoyable and I was truly interacting with the text. I kept asking myself why I had gotten away from this?
Needless to say the very next day I rearranged my classroom and had already chosen a piece of material to discuss/dissect with my classroom. This was not easy as the number of students I have when compared to square footage is rather large. Nevertheless, as my students wrote their thoughts as a part of the "do it now" activity I was careful to go around and give immediate feedback. This worked very well for most students. However, this is where things seemed to come apart at the seems.
The students' answers were silly at best; they did not take the reading or discussion seriously. I could not imagine having to complete this proverbial song and dance every day! As the day went on the discussions got better and naturally there were no problems in my honors classes.
What did I do wrong? Was the material bad? Was the question one that led to silly answers? Part of success is failure, as any innovator will tell you. Looks like it's back to the drawing board.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)