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!!!
Wednesday, November 30, 2011
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)