Final Course Reflection

            When I first walked into this class on a Monday evening in January, I was both nervous and excited.  It was the first day of the first course I was taking for my Master’s Degree and I didn’t really know what to expect, but I was looking forward to meeting fellow teachers and engaging in academic discourse.  To be honest, on that first day I didn’t really expect to learn very much in this class because unlike my cohorts who were in their first or second year of teaching, I had already been in the secondary English classroom for a decade.  I spent my first three years teaching in the public school system and was in my seventh year of teaching at one of the most prestigious private schools in the county.  Don’t get me wrong, I did not and do not think that I am a seasoned veteran that has nothing left to learn (I did enroll in graduate school to learn and improve as a teacher), but I thought this course would cover very basic secondary English teaching techniques that I would have learned and/or used somewhere along the way.  I was wrong.

            One of the first readings for this course was on backwards planning.  This concept did make a lot of sense to me as I read, but I had not encountered it prior to the reading.  Although the culminating activity (or at least one of them) for my prep school students is typically an analytical essay, I don’t usually know exactly what the prompt will be when I begin teaching a unit. Many times I choose an essay topic based off of a class discussion on the literary work.  I often tailor the essay prompt to each class period.  However, when I implemented the backwards planning strategy in crafting my unit plan for this course, I realized that it really affected my lessons in a positive way.  Every step of my lesson was created with the specific prompt that I had already selected in mind.  I did actually use the lessons that I created for my unit plan in my classroom this semester, although the final analytical essay has not been given yet because it will be a part of the final exam.  I do feel that implementing the backwards planning strategy has already had a positive impact on my teaching and has helped my students to produce better work.

            Another strategy that was new and extremely helpful was Nerd Libs.  While I have used a sentence frame in the past to teach my students how to craft a thesis statement, the Nerd Libs reading provided multiple frames for students to use in analyzing or writing about many different types of texts.  It also explained the reasoning behind the strategy and provided examples for each of the different frames.  I did include this tool in my unit plan in a basic way, but I plan on introducing it earlier in the school year next year and incorporating several different Nerd Libs throughout the school year in order to help strengthen my student’s analytical writing skills.

            One last thing that I learned was to incorporate an overarching theme in my class.  Because I teach secondary English at a college prep school, I do not teach from textbook.  I design the courses I teach based off of the literary selections the school provides, similar to a college literature course.  I do try to associate the works in some way, but reading about an overarching theme made me realize that I could do a better job of connecting the literary selections for my students.  This semester, I did just that with the four independent reading selections for my sophomore American Literature course.  They were Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby, Richard Wright’s Native Son, J.D. Salinger’s The Catcher in the Rye and Arthur Miller’s Death of a Salesman.  I realized that the protagonists in all of these works wrestles with both isolation and alienation so I decided to change my focus on each of these novels.  I taught a compare/contrast lesson on alienation and isolation and then had students identify characters in The Great Gatsby that experience alienation and isolation.  In Native Son, my students looked for examples of the protagonist, Bigger Thomas, feeling alienated or isolated and examined how these feelings directly impacted his actions.  Now my students have begun reading The Catcher in the Rye and they will do the same with Holden Caulfield.  In a couple of weeks when we begin Death of a Salesman, I think recognizing these feelings in Willy Loman (despite his concerted effort to hide them) will help my students sympathize with this character more than they have in the past.  I feel like identifying an overarching theme for these works have not only enhanced my teaching, but also helped my students delve deeper into the characters and relate to them in a more authentic way.

            I really did enjoy this class and I know that I’m walking away from it with strategies that I will use in my classroom for years to come.  I have already seen my students benefit from them and I know that with a little refinement they will be even more effective next year.  I also really enjoyed being in a small class with other teachers who face different challenges than I do.  It made me remember my early days of teaching, taught me to be grateful for what I have, and gave me the opportunity to both teach and learn from my peers.

           

Lesson Feedback

Whitney - I really liked that you ask your students for their opinion on what they believe the song is actually saying about beauty and success and then asked them why they felt that way.  I think that many times as teachers we are focused on getting through the curriculum and making sure our students learn facts and concepts, and we forget to ask our students what they think about current events and topics in their world and more importantly, why they think that way.

Jacalyn - I loved the way your lesson promoted critical thinking through the types of questions you asked and incorporated the idea of honor versus money as a motivating factor to produce art.  I will definitely be bringing this idea into my class the next time we discuss art as a part of a literary movement.

Raul - The American dream aspect of your lesson is what speaks to me the most, especially because I think that so many of the youth generation don't understand this concept or that the dream is something that one must strive for or how unique our country is because of it.  Examining the American dream concept as presented in Gatsby by asking students to relate to it in their own lives and examine that concept in modern society is crucial in my opinion.

Theresa - I really liked the QAR presentation that you gave.  I had never heard of QAR before and it was really helpful to see the four different types of questions laid out in an easy-to-understand format.  The question stems that you provided were also a valuable resource to me as a teacher.   I may even use this information to teach a lesson or two for The Illustrated Man in the upcoming weeks.

Response to Elizabeth Birr Moje's "Foregrounding the Disciplines in Secondary Literacy Teaching and Learning: A Call for Change"

As I read through the article, I found myself nodding in agreement with a lot of what Moje had written.  I also found myself sympathizing with content area teachers who feel as though literary strategies "place an unfair burden of teaching reading on them when they should be teaching content" (98).  As I continued reading about how educators, researchers, and teacher educators need to re-conceptualize how they think of disciplinary learning and literacy instruction, I couldn't help but think (once again) about the Flipped Learning seminar I attended last November.  Although content area literacy was not specifically addressed, the idea of re-imagining secondary education was a central focus.  

Moje cites three key challenges in rethinking disciplinary learning and literacy instruction:  student knowledge, beliefs, and practices; teacher knowledge, belief, and practices; and school structures and subject matter dominance.  She asserts that students "bring ideas about what counts as learning to their disciplinary classrooms and teachers make decisions about classroom practices in interaction with students and in the context of the secondary school as an institution" (98).  Teachers also bring their own ideas about the appropriate practices within their disciplines.  Additionally, the very division of secondary school learning into subject areas and the organization and structure of the physical space of the classroom implies that knowledge is different in different disciplines.  This ultimately creates more of a disconnect within the mind of students; they don't see how the disciplines are interconnected.

So back to that Flipped Learning seminar that I mentioned earlier.  There was was school model that was presented that was quite revolutionary.  Although secondary students did have different subject areas to work through, their schedule was flexible and very student-centered.  Classes were not provided at set times with a group of students and a teacher at the front of the room, rather content was made available through different stations and students chose what they would work on at a given time on any given day (very similar to the Montessori method).  Teachers would roam around the different stations, offering guidance, answering questions on content, helping students to manage their time, etc...  The structure of the school itself also broke the secondary education mold.  The layout was a large room with individual desktop computer stations in one area, there was another area with comfortable seating for individual or group work, there was another station with table for group meetings or work, and yet another area with private study rooms.  Of course, there were several electrical outlets at all of the stations so that students could plug in their laptops or tablets as needed.  There was even another station that was a gym equipped with treadmills and elliptical machines that would allow students to exercise while reading a book (or read from a tablet).  In this kind of an environment, it is easy to see how "the knowledge, belief, and practices" (98) of teachers and students is completely turned on its head and re-imagining how the content areas teach literacy is facilitated by the physical learning space.

I believe Moje is right when she asserts that not only does literacy need to be taught in the content areas, but we also need to work to transform how we approach secondary education.  Our world is changing, our students are changing, and formal education needs to change along with them.

Moje: Foregrounding the Disciplines in Secondary Literacy Teaching and Learning: A Call for Change

In Moje’s (2008) article, she calls for disciplinary literacy strategies to be used at the secondary level. I agree with this approach to some extent. I think that students should learn how to think like scientists, historians, mathematicians, etc. so that they understand how to think critically from different perspectives. However, I fear that in some ways this approach only deepens the bias that school systems have towards producing scholars. As Ken Robinson describes in his Ted Talk, “How Schools Kill Creativity”, the whole purpose of the public education system seems to be to produce university professors, and a lot of talented and creative people are steered away from pursuing their interests because their abilities do not align with what is valued by public education. The reality is that the majority of the students that study these subjects will not become academic experts in these various disciplines. They will have jobs in which they have to draw from different skills across a variety of disciplines. I think that more than anything, the barriers of specific disciplines need to be broken down so that students understand that work and life is often not divided into school subjects.

Along these lines, I wholeheartedly agree with Moje’s suggestion that subject area teachers should not “ignore the powerful ways that young people already use to negotiate multiple discourse communities and literacies in their lives” (103). As technology transforms the way that students are engaging in discourse with one another, teachers should focus on how students can apply their knowledge of nontraditional literacies like social media to the classroom. Having students use their technological skills appropriately in a more professional setting will help them to gain valuable skills for the workplace, as many companies use social media in powerful ways to communicate messages. For example, writing a tweet about theme in a Language Arts class could help students with the skill of narrowing down information to include only the most important and relevant words to get a message across clearly. This is exactly what companies would do to send a message about a new promotion to their customers. Overall, students should be practicing culturally relevant literacies and understanding the connections between the various disciplines and how all of them are applicable to the skills they may need in the job market. 

Fisher & Frey

For this blog entry I will be discussing  "Implementing a School-wide Literacy Framework: Improving Achievement in an Urban Elementary School" by Douglass Fisher and Nancy Frey. It was enlightening to read about the Rosa Parks Elementary School and how they transformed their school by implementing a school wide literacy approach. The Principal allowed the teachers to abandon the scripted literacy curriculum to create a plan that would work for their school. They wanted to implement a plan that everyone believed in and everyone followed. Initially, they drafted their core beliefs about literacy. They believed learning is social, conversations are critical for learning, reading writing, and oral language instruction must be integrated, learners require a gradual increase in responsibility. They then proceeded to develop an instructional framework that supported their core beliefs about literacy. Once this was established they needed a school wide plan to on-board teachers effectively. They created focused professional developments, learning communities, and peer coaching to ensure their teachers were adequately prepared to implement the framework created. This carefully constructed method worked for Rosa Parks Elementary School. Their plan was most beneficial because they created consistency across grades that kids become familiar with. 

What I learned most from reading this was change needs to be implemented from within. In our current school system, the ETO has tried to implement some of the practices discussed in this article, such as an instructional framework, professional developments, learning communities, peer coaches, but we are not seeing the same results as Rosa Parks Elementary. I believe we are not seeing the same results because change comes from within a school. The first thing Rosa Parks Elementary school did was sit down and clarified their core beliefs about literacy. Their beliefs did not come from an external group of people imposing  beliefs on the school. After clarifying their core beliefs and what worked best for children, they were able to create an instructional framework that worked for their school. Because everything came from in-house conversations, they were able to take ownership over it, they created their own professional developments, and their professional learning communities were geared towards their needs, and what their school needed to propel their literacy plan forward. In our district it is very hard for us as teachers to implement the ETO's plan with fidelity when we do not share their beliefs, and what they think is best for children does not always work for our students. In order for us to see the same results Rosa Parks Elementary school is seeing we need to create a plan that works for our teachers and our students. We need to come together as a school and define our core beliefs about literacy and what works best for our students. From there we can create an instructional framework we believe in. I believe when teachers have autonomy they can create great things that they are more likely implement with fidelity. Additionally, teachers will constantly work on improving the plan to fit the needs of their school. 

Final Post for April 28 Class; Fisher & Frey article

          For this week's final post, I chose to read and discuss Douglas Fisher and Nancy Frey's article entitled, "Implementing a Schoolwide Literacy Framework; Improving Achievement in an Urban Elementary School." Because the assigned reading for the class this semester has primarily focused on teaching at the high school level, I thought it would be interesting to delve into something somewhat different, i.e. an article regarding urban elementary schools. I was surprised, however, while I was reading the article, to discover that much of the teaching and learning techniques being implemented at the secondary level are not completely foreign at the elementary level, and that just because the students may not be engaged in as advance learning, the teachers and administrators still value student success in the classroom as extremely significant. I also found it interesting that the authors noted how despite the fact that innovations are everywhere, few are actually being implemented consistently across grades and teachers, and that we do not need more prescriptive, scripted curriculum or instruction, but instead, that we need more precision in our teaching. This stood out to me as a key point because all semester long we have read articles about various innovative theories, and it is difficult for me to comprehend the reasons behind the lack of connection between an idea and its actuality. For this reason, Fisher and Frey's article was extremely fascinating for me to read.

          It was truly incredible to learn more about how Rosa Parks Community School developed a literacy framework that was implemented school-wide and provided teachers with an opportunity to focus their teaching, rather than script it, and that this resulted in students who read, write, and think at impressive levels. I thought that the committee's four core beliefs about literacy--learning is social, conversations are critical for learning, reading, writing, and oral instruction must be integrated, and learners require gradual release in responsibility--were not only accurate, but also informative to a new teacher such as myself. I especially found the section on how learners require a gradual increase in responsibility to be illustrative of some of the teaching principles I picked up during the course of the semester. The teachers in our Secondary English sub-group would regularly reference the notion of "gradual release" for their students, a term I had really never heard before joint this class. As time went on, however, I began to understand this concept more and more, including why it is important in the first place and how to accomplish this task effectively. By the time we were writing our final lesson plan as a group, I was comfortable with the ways in which we could incorporate this process into our lesson and presentation. 

Fecho Ch. 10-12

In Chapter 10, Fecho discusses the power of a question. When I first found out that I was going to be teaching English at Central, I thought insightful questions would be at the heart of my lessons. I was disappointed to find out, however, that as Fecho points out, many schools “have perverted the concept of the essential question” (88). Every common planning that I was in, I cringed at the questions that were considered essential questions and “higher order thinking” questions. Because the pacing guides are aligned to multiple-choice exams like the FCAT, I think the whole curriculum actually discouraged students from posing their own thought-provoking questions or coming up with unconventional answers that couldn’t be found in letters A, B, C, or D. This year, because I do not have a pacing guide to follow, I have incorporated some of my own questions into my lessons and have found that students have a lot of trouble thinking outside of the box and considering situations from various angles. They seem to have never really been asked to do this, and to me, this is a sign of an education that has failed them because they have not learned how to think on their own, at least in an academic setting.

Fecho’s discussion of our dialogical selves in the next chapter made me think that I have not done enough to encourage students’ to bring their many contexts into the classroom. Fecho explains, “When the wobble in our lives becomes too great to be withstood, it needs to be understood” (101).  I know that my students are experiencing a lot of wobble in their lives, and I feel as though the general approach towards this knowledge throughout the school has been to, “teach in spite of the wobble”.  I agree that students should receive the same quality education as their wealthier peers, but I also think that we should incorporate some of our students’ struggles into the curriculum. As Fecho shows with his discussion of his student Isaac, reading and writing can be an outlet for students who are struggling with their identity. I think in an age in which informational texts and textual evidence are being pushed so heavily, teachers are discouraged from having students bring personal experience into their writing. Textual evidence and personal experience are not mutually exclusive, however, and I think the two can complement each other well in writing, because they can lead to a deeper understanding of a text that is linked to the many contexts with which a person interacts.

In Chapter 12, Fecho laments the fact that teachers are essentially being removed from the classroom, much like workers have become estranged from the process of work in many industrial workplaces and offices. He explains, “By advocating instruction focused on discrete and narrow skills and stressing factual recall over meaning making, schools present a concept of learning that restricts students in their use of imagination, creativity, and insight” (105). This statement very much aligns with my experience as an accountability teacher at Central. I was constantly reminded by reading coaches and the ETO to teach the benchmark and not the literature, and it seemed very counterintuitive. First of all, I never knew what a benchmark was in high school, and I don’t think I needed to. I’m sure my teachers were teaching to the Massachusetts state standards, but students did not have to be aware of this to learn. Instead, my teachers taught good literature. Because of the high quality of this literature, we discussed everything that would be covered by benchmarks in depth throughout the year. Secondly, teachers and students alike were much more engaged when discussion of literature was at the heart of the class rather than multiple meaning words. I remember a dynamic English class when my teacher drew her own representation of East Egg and West Egg on the board to explain the symbolism of both places. The literature that we read encompassed all of the elements of the “state standards” and we were simply studying them all together in the context of a well-written novel. Because teachers are supposed to take such a formulaic approach to their lessons, it stifles their passion and creativity, and I think that students’ lack of capacity to think outside of the box and ask questions is a reflection of the robotic nature of teaching in many schools.

CORE CLASS: Fecho ch. 10-12

Teaching for the Students:  Habits of Heart, Mind, and Practice in the Engaged Classroom (2011) 

by Bob Fecho

 

A lack of intellectual curiosity is one of the most common complaints uttered by faculty about students at my school.  I am certainly one who is baffled by my students lack of questioning.  I want them to question the world around them, what they read or watch or listen to, what I teach them and why I am trying to teach them that particular thing.  It seems, however, that their attitude is  "tell me what I need to know so I can pass the test, get a good grade in your class, and go to college."  It's frustrating.  It's soul crushing.  It's every day.  However, while reading chapter ten of Fecho's book the following quote struck me:  "It takes effort and practice to shift from a telling classroom to a questioning one" (page 92).  It's not like I didn't know this, but what he made me realize is that in order to shift my students into a mode of questioning, I need to learn to shift my questions into ones that help them create a relationship with what they are reading.  This, of course, is easier said than done, but I felt like this chapter laid the foundation on which I can begin building this shift and hopefully inspire a room of intellectually curious students.

In an earlier chapter, Fecho discussed the idea of continually changing contexts of a classroom.  Students file into one's class for a particular period and what has just happened to them outside of class has an impact on how material will be received and processed.  Each class period, therefore, may cover the same material but the changing context affects interpretation, processing and understanding of it.  In this chapter, the focus is on the continually changing context of the individual.  "...an individual's identity continually undergoes centripetal and centrifugal tension, that it is subject to both unifying and individualizing forces simultaneously" (page 95).  Of course, this holds true not only for students but also for teachers.  Fecho stressed the importance of teachers providing space for the exploration of the continually shifting contexts that their students are negotiating and notes that "...if we who educate can grasp that all of us are entered into a complex mesh of dialogical transactions with our selves and our many contexts, then we can also grasp that we teach for so much more than competency on a test" (page 101).  I just really loved that; the reminder that we are not just teaching our students our subject, but we are teaching them how to connect with and come into themselves.  It's one of the things I love most about teaching.

In the final chapter of the book, Fecho uses a yoga analogy to illustrate that teaching is a constant struggle towards perfection, but advises that we must find joy in that struggle.  After nearly a decade of teaching, I decided to finally attend graduate school.  Part of the reason was because I realize that an advanced degree would afford me more flexibility in my career options down the road, part of the reason was because I always envisioned myself earning a graduate degree, but the main reason was because I recognized that I am still growing as a teacher.  I still have a lot to learn.  I still have many areas in which I need to improve in order to be the best teacher that I can be for my students, in order to have the best chance at making a positive difference in this world.  And although there have been days, especially lately, when this struggle towards perfection feels overwhelming, I still somehow find the joy.

Post for April 7 class; Fecho chapters 10-12

          In chapter ten of Fecho's book, I especially enjoyed his discussion regarding how questions can often frighten students. Fecho points out how a follow-up question, in particular, is read by many students as an indication that what they said was wrong, incomplete, or incomprehensible, and that as a result, he has learned to follow-up questions with phrases like that's an interesting point or I've never heard of it that way. This point specifically stood out to me because I often find that my Criminal Procedure students similarly view such questions as a rap on the knuckles or a means to expose their ignorance, rather than an invitation to explain and explore their ideas. Because the legal issues sprinkled throughout a typical law school exam cannot be analyzed with merely one or two sentences, I find it important that I continue to push the students with follow up questions in class so that they learn to do this on their own once exam day arrives.

          In chapter eleven, I thought Fecho's discussion of the individual's cultural identity was not only significant to me in my capacity as an educator, but also to my role as a friend, significant other, daughter, etc. In short, Fecho states that who we are becoming depends on where we are, how we have constructed ourselves to date, and to what extent we remain in dialogue with our contexts and diverse identities. This resonated as a key point for me because I feel as though this description of cultural identity applies to me in both my professional and personal life. I am trying more and more to be conscious about where I am as both a woman and an educator, how I have constructed myself in these roles in the past, and how often I take time for a little self-reflection both in and out of the classroom.

          Finally,  in chapter twelve, Fecho describes how pacing schedules, scripted lessons, commercial literacy programs, and incessant testing imposed from outside the classroom leave teachers little room to contemplate how best to teach. Furthermore, Fecho opines that the focus in too many schools is on raising test scores rather than on nurturing the ability of students to become critical readers, writers, thinkers, inquirers, and problem solvers. This stood out as a key point for me because throughout this semester, I have learned a great deal about the public school system in Florida, and specifically Miami-Dade, from the perspective of my classmates. While I am the odd-ball-out law student, the other teachers in my small class group are all high school teachers in the Miami-Dade area. Almost every class session my classmates would point out some way in which state standards would consistently cramp their style as educators. Having attended a private high school myself, I had no idea how many extra "stresses" public school teachers must address on a daily basis. I have such profound respect for these men and women!

Fecho, Chapter 7-9

           In chapter 7, Fecho describes teaching writing early in his career, and explains how helpless he felt. He would assign essays and ask students to respond to literature in writing. The essays were not what he expected, they contained minimal words or thoughts were convoluted. He initially faulted them and focused on their short comings. He then realized if he wanted his students to take greater interest in their writing, he had to take greater interest in their writing. He had to shift the locus of control. This resonated with me due to my current situation. I share his earlier sentiments and am often frustrated with the lack of writing instruction my students have received up to this point. I also struggle with how to get them invested in their writing.

            After shifting his locus of control, Fecho began conferencing with the students about their writing one on one and giving them individualized feedback. Conferencing with them individually was much more effective than general comments to the entire class. He noticed they began responding to writing in new ways. The students began writing more and invested more in their writing because they knew he would conference with them. Additionally, he was able to provide specific corrective feedback that would help them improve their writing.

           Fecho states, "By my taking a visible interest in their work, students themselves showed greater interest as well. They began to care about what they wrote and to see it as a means for making sense of their lives." I am eager to try this as my students are crafting autobiographies.This approach will give students more time in class to write and it will give me more time to provide them feedback, and motivate them to write more. 

            In Chapter 8, Fecho discusses shifting contexts and includes a quote from Bakhtin (1981) "... all meaning is made in context and context never remains static." The meaning my students extract from each lesson is dependent upon the time of day the lesson is delivered as well as a multitude of variables impacting the student at that moment. Each class period during the day is extremely different from one another. Similarly, each class period is different from day to day. A variety of factors impact the students' mood, attention span, ability to complete a task ect. ect. This is evident every single day I walk into the school, however, what was not as evident was how this impacts each lesson. Too often my lesson are created with an exemplar response in mind. My exemplar response is just that, my response based on the meaning I created within my context. Too often I try to guide students to understand my correct response and how I got there. As teacher we need to understand students make meaning of text based on their context and the meaning they derive from the text and what they extract may be different based on their personalities, moods, and experiences. We need to embrace this. Fecho emphasizes that shift in context causes a shift in learning, teachers should not fear this shifting context, rather embrace it as an opportunity to build upon the students knowledge. If we do not allow students to create and share the meaning they have created from the text then we are stifling their growth as independent and critical thinkers. As we are trying to be more student centered this is a perfect tactic to keep in mind.

            Chapter 9 perfectly expands upon chapter 8, students will generate meaning from the text based on their culture and experiences related to their culture.As I read through Fecho's experiences with culture helping to create meaning from the text, or lack of cultural awareness impeding someone's comprehension of the text, I think of my students' experiences. My students lack a cultural understanding beyond what they are exposed to daily. Even their cultural exposure through television shows is diminishing due to reality tv's inaccurate depiction of reality. Their lack of cultural awareness impedes their understanding of some of the text's we read. As teachers we need to utilize these moments as teaching moments and the opportunity to expose them to a various aspects of different cultures. We need to help students create meaning and make connections as they are reading. This will help develop their schema's and background knowledge, which too often impedes their comprehension on culturally biased, high stakes assessments.