Tim Fredrick's ELA Teaching Blog

Giving power and responsibility to adolescents

Last night, I hosted a book group who read Robert Epstein's The Case Against Adolescence.  I came across this book in the spring when it came out and wanted to get together with other English teachers to talk about his ideas.

It is a long book and I'm sure my summary will not do it justice, but here goes ... Epstein argues that adolescence as a time of angst and turmoil is a construct which is particular to western, post-industrial cultures.  In other cultures and in our history, adolescents were not treated as children, but given a multitude of responsibility for themselves and their families.  Epstein cites several research studies to show that adolescents have the cognitive, physical, and emotional capabilities of adults.  As a culture, we infantilize them and it is as a result of this infatilization that adolescents are angry, depressed, and rebellious.  He gives many examples, but to me the most interesting and telling is that when a young woman under the age of 18 has a baby, she is responsible for making medical decisions for the baby, but because she is under 18 cannot legally make medical decisions for herself.

I was reading this book in the last few months of the school year and I was reconsidering my relationships with my students.  I sent out a few e-mails seeing if anyone else was interested in reading the book and discussing it with me.  I met with four other ELA teachers last night to discuss the book.

There was some criticism for his ideas, especially those which advocate for a series of competency tests which teens could take to earn the right to marry, drive, drink, etc.  This seems to be quite a big shift in our culture.  Despite this and other criticism, we had a good time talking about what happens when we treat our adolescent students more like adults - giving them choices and giving them responsibilities.  We discussed practical ways to do this in the classroom.  Some of the ideas that came forward were that students should be in charge of the bulletin boards, certain paperwork, and keeping the room clean.  We shared examples of students who had been having negative experiences in the classroom begin to turn their performance around when they were given meaningful responsibility to the classroom community and curriculum.

I shared with the group some of the work that I've done with self-assessment, teaching students to be more reflective about their learning.  I've gone as far recently to give students the responsibility for grading themselves, explaining why they deserve this grade, and defending that grade to me and a small group of their peers.  I maintain a veto power, but rarely use it.  When given that responsibility, students shine.  They set goals for their learning and begin to take a stake in their learning.  This, along with incorporating choice into the curriculum, is one of the themes I hope to explore in my doctoral work.

Teaching to the test, no matter what you call it

A new article on Education Week, "Teaching With The Test, Not To the Test" by Amy H. Greene & Glennon Doyle Melton, can let us know just how much tests have infiltrated education and how educators will go to any lengths to work with them.  Although, I fear that Greene and Melton have gone too far.

They offer fundamental beliefs to help educators prepare students for testing:

1. Successful test-takers must first be successful readers.
2. Successful test-takers must be able to translate the unique language of the test.
3. Learning to be a successful test-taker can be fun.

The first point is the most dangerous.  I fear that there will come a day (if it hasn't happened already) where students will see reading as test-taking, not as actual reading - like a book or magazine or newspaper.  Greene and Melton claim that a test is like any other genre.  I've heard this before and have been in schools where "Tests" is a unit on par with "Memoir" and "Persuasive Essay" (this is encouraged by a well-known and well-respected School of Education).  Tests are not a genre of writing.  They are an inappropriate assessment tool.  Period.  Claiming that they are a genre unto themselves is an attempt to legitimize teaching to the test (or with the test .. or whatever you want to call it).  Let's not kid ourselves.

The second point is the most benign.  Greene and Melton write about "test talk" and teaching kids what it is meant by the different language used in tests.  Fair enough.  Language is used in different contexts for different reasons.  We just need to make sure that "test talk" doesn't become the dominant discourse in classrooms as it so often does.  "Test talk" should also be taught along with the idea that these tests are culturally biased, since the language used invites some in while it excludes others.  It's only fair to let the students in on that fact.

The last point ... well, I can't imagine how learning to be a successful test-taker can be fun and Greene and Melton offer no evidence or suggestions as to how it can be.  Of course, the skills tested on tests could be taught in an interesting way without ever mentioning, discussing, or showing the actual test or questions on it.  And, that's what it comes down to.  Educators need to work hard to identify the skills tested and teach them like they would teach anything else.  In addition, educators need to go beyond the skills tested on the test, since states so often set the bar so incredibly low. 

The authors do not mention the effect their new efforts at improving test scores had on actual reading and writing.  I was expecting to read that they found that students were doing better in their overall reading.  Perhaps the students did, and the authors chose to leave that part out.  That, in and of itself, is dangerous.  Shouldn't that always be the goal?  There's not doubt that tests are a part of education reality (if you can call any of this 'real').  But that does not mean with have to throw good instruction out and replace it with something inferior and then claim it's good instruction.

Whenever someone talks about tests and teaching to (with ... whatever) them, I'm reminded of what I heard Deborah Meier once say at a speaking engagement:  If we have a generation of students who are good at taking reading tests, but never pick up a book on their own, we've done something wrong. 

Reading different stories: Who should decide what it means to be literate?

There are many issues on which I agree with Diane Ravitch, conservative education critic.  I was glad when she came out against the incentive program being implemented in some NYC schools this fall.  She stated the case against them far more elegantly that I was able to.

But, there are many issues on which I disagree with her.  I came across a blog post that she co-wrote with Michael Ravitch entitled "Cultural vandalism".  It starts off with a short description of the pair's new book The English Reader: What Every Literate Person Needs to Know.  This seems paired with Diane Ravitch's The American Reader, which thankfully has a different subtitle.  I'll let you decide for yourselves about the content of the volumes, but they seem to me to be more of the same old canon fodder with the American volume being a bit more inclusive.  (Both volumes seem to stop mid-20th century for some reason.)

It is the subtitle of the latest volume and their blog post where I'd like to focus my attention.  The subtitle - What Every Literate Person Needs to Know - is very Hirschian.  Ravitch frequently argues for a national curriculum and, in the post with Michael, says, "The young must have heroes; they must have stories that stir them. When the schools strip the history and literature curriculum of significant ideas, people and writings, replacing them with fluff and contemporary concerns, then the future of our culture is jeopardised."  They dismiss young adult literature, essays about contemporary social issues, and instruction on how to fill out a job application.  By including these, according to the Ravitches, we are putting our culture at risk.

The stories my students have read which have given them heroes and have stirred them are precisely those stories they argue against - young adult literature.  These, strangely, are also the texts that have made my students want to read more.  (Our culture definitely seems to be at risk from those terrible students who like to read books that interest them and speak to their concerns now.)  As my students have become "readers" their tastes in reading grow and begin to expand into the kinds of literature the Ravitches would presumably like.  Young adult literature is "a gateway literature".  It encourages students to read with themes and language which is appropriate for their lives and skills levels.  When they eventually grow out of it (and in both interest and skill level), they move into adult literature.  By dismissing young adult literature, the Ravitches are dismissing the most frequent way that students become "literate" (at least as they define it).

Looking at the texts in both Ravitch Readers, I've read many of them.  Some in high school honors and AP classes and, to be frank, I didn't get them then.  I was exposed to most of them in college (as an English major) and I struggled.  Even as an adult, I can say I don't fully understand some of them - the language used is very different and they don't speak to my most current concerns.  Imagine many adolescents trying to read them.  Texts like those included in both the Ravitch Readers (not all of them, but most) are just inappropriate for adolescent learners - for their skill level or their interest level.  The frustration that students face when reading them turn many of them off to reading and the written word altogether.  Where will our culture be then?

Most adults in our society live perfectly happy lives never having heard of any of those texts.  But, the subtitle remains ... it implies that those people are not literate.  I'm surmising that the Ravitches deem people "literate" who have read these canonical works of literature.  And, by the shear number of texts, I can surmise that very few people are as literate as the Ravitches would like.  This seems terribly elitist to me.  These texts are difficult to read for a variety of reasons and to claim that one isn't literate unless they "know" them is just wrong.

Being literate should mean that a person is able to use written and spoken language in every aspect of  his or her day-to-day life with skill and mastery.  Because everyone's day-to-day life is different, obviously there will be different meanings of literate.  Many people don't want to or care to read the canonical pieces of literature and can live very fulfilled lives without them and can be literate individuals. 

Given this, continuing to push the canon in our high schools as the only way to be "literate" in our society is dangerous.  Imagine if I decided that we couldn't be literate unless we all understood quantum physics and people bought into that.  What would happen to you when you don't get it (I'm assuming you wouldn't understand it - excuse my presumption!)?   How would you feel about yourself?  And, who am I to decide?  What authority was given to me?

I, too, believe in the power of literature.  Some great literature as withstood the test of time and those of us who choose to read it surely reap benefits.  But, that does not mean that we are more literate than anyone else.  We've just read different stories.

Dewey - Education in the here and now

I just finished John Dewey's Democracy and Education.  Light reading it is not, but I felt that I was definitely overdo in reading it. 

There are many things to take away from this seminal education text, but one of the things that is most influencing my thinking at the moment was his focus on education as growth, rather than preparation for some future event.  Often, educators tell students that something is essential for them to get a good grade on a test they have to take, or to get into college, or to get a scholarship, or because their future boss will want them to be able to do it.  I've given this rationale many times, but Dewey's text has made me rethink this.

Education, says Dewey, should focus on the growth of the individual in the here and now.  Education should not be preparation for something:

Children proverbially live in the present; that is not only fact not to be evaded, but it is an excellence.  The future just as future lacks urgency and body.

He goes on to explain what follows if educators do emphasize the future and education as preparation for some aspect of the future:

The future having no stimulating and directing power when severed from the possibilities of the present, something must be hitched on to it to make it work.  Promises of reward and threats of pain are employed.  Healthy work, done for present reasons and as a factor of living, is largely unconscious.  The stimulus resides in the situation with which one is actually confronted.  But when this situation is ignored, pupils have to be told that if they do not follow the prescribed course penalties will accrue; while if they do, they may expect, some time in the future, rewards for their present sacrifices.  Everybody knows how largely systems of punishment have had to be resorted to by educational systems which neglect present possibilities in behalf of preparation for the future.

How many times have you thought (or said), "Why can't these kids think about their futures? Don't they care?"  I know I have several times.  But, let's think about it.  How many adults do you know actually think in depth about their futures?  How many would make huge sacrifices now to get some benefits in the future?  Not a lot.  Probably more than you would find in adolescents, but we've had the experiences to realize that it pays off. 

Adolescents, young in age, think about the here and now.  Whether that is right or wrong, I don't think that it has ever been that different.  Some may be really driven, but that is usually the exception, not the rule.  So, given that human nature is what it is, shouldn't we account for that in our curriculum and methods and make their learning relevant for their lives now? 

Whenever I give students a choice in reading or writing topics, they always pick something that interests them now.  Very few will choose a book because they think it will be useful to them in college or choose a writing form because it will help them in their future careers.  In those assignments, I see students put more work into the activity and have a higher turn-out rate when the assignment comes do.  I doubt that this is any different in any other classroom. 

I know what critics will say: The kids don't know what is coming for them and we do so we have to prepare them.  We (adults) know better and we have a responsibility.  We are doing what is in their best interests even if they don't understand it right now.

I would answer that learning about the here and now is important and is in their best interests.  Dewey says:

If education is growth, it must progressively realize present possibilities, and thus make individuals better fitted to cope with later requirements.  Growing is not something which is completed in odd moments; it is a continuous leading into the future.  If the environment, in school and out, supplies conditions which utilize adequately the present capacities of the immature, the future which grows out of the present is surely taken care of.  The mistake is not in attaching importance to preparation for future need, but in making it the mainspring of present effort. 

We should keep an eye on the future, yes.  We do have the responsibility.  But, this does not mean that we make it our focus.  Our focus should be on the concerns of our students in the present.  As they grow, so will their concerns and step-by-step they will become prepared for their futures.

When does reflection become navel-gazing

I've noticed that my need to post to this blog has really declined in the past month or so.  I'm pretty sure this has a lot to do with my new school.  Reflection is a key component at this school - I meet with three different teachers formally for planning and reflection.  I meet with the High School Director every other week for formal reflection time.  As a staff, we formally meet about three times a week.

This doesn't count all the informal reflecting that is going on - passing in the halls, lunch, waiting outside our room in between classes ...

Don't get me wrong.  I'm not complaining at all.  Having this kind of interaction with my colleagues was what I was sorely missing at my old school and the whole reason why I wanted to transfer to this school.  I can tell that in the past month I've learned so much through this conversations that this transfer was a very good thing for me.

But, what about my blogging?  In the first year of this blog, I typically blogged during two times - when I had free time at school and when I got home from school.  My free time at this new school is now productive time - meeting with other teachers, etc.  The other time I have, I'm busy trying to plan lessons.  When I get home from school, it is usually later in the evening and the last thing I want to do is to extend the amount of time school has taken up in my life (I am more than a teacher, I keep having to remind myself).

Even without the time constraints, I just don't feel the need to blog.  I used it as a space for reflection and to get some feedback on my teaching.  I have that now as a part of my job.  In reading others' blogs, those who post the most seem to be in schools where reflection with peers is not commonplace.  At this point, I feel like blogging at the same frequency as last year would be an exercise in navel-gazing for me.  I spend the whole day thinking about my practice, and then I'm going to come home and do the same?  It's personally too much for me.

That's not to say that I don't plan on continuing posting on this blog.  But, I think it is a useful examination of the whole edublogging practice - especially those blogs run by and for teachers discussing classroom practice.  When the productive, reflective conversations are happening in the school, is there a need for the teacher to blog for a wider audience?

Classroom libraries

Every year I've taught, I've had a classroom library.  When I started at my old school, the Dept. of Ed. bought classroom libraries for all high school ELA classrooms, so there wasn't much to worry about.   Now that I'm at a new school, I have to get a new classroom library and because my school is new and wasn't around when the DOE bought libraries, I'm starting from scratch.  I had put in an order to get a classroom library, but it was not ordered until this past week and so I won't have it until October, if I'm lucky.

So, I'm supplementing the shelves with my own books, as well as the donations from a teacher in the middle school that's in our building.  Next week, I'm going to have the kids in my Inquiry class (which is also my homeroom and advisory class) sort the books into genres.  In the past, I've always put the books in order of author's last name like a normal library.  But, I'm going to try it by genre this year because I think it might be useful for students in helping them pick out books they like.  So many kids don't know how to do that. 

I'm not going to level the books - I never have.  I think doing so only stigmatizes those kids who really struggle with reading.  I know the justification of it, but I think it is inappropriate in high schools.  Students of this age care enormously about what their peers think about them and picking a book that is low level (and is clearly marked as such for all to see) could be a bad move.  (Of course, I could see some students who can read at a higher level picking a lower level book so as to not seem like a geek.)  Do we really not trust students to be able to look at the first few pages of a book and not be able to determine that he or she is capable of reading it?  I don't have a problem in the teacher knowing the levels of books; I object to making it public for all to see so easily.  The effects could be so stigmatizing.

So, now that I know that I'm going to organize by genres, I just have to figure out what those genres are going to be.  That's a whole other mess of vagueness and disagreement!  I won't even recall the arguments I've heard about the difference between a memoir and an autobiography!

Collaboration

As I said a few posts back, this really seems like it is going to be the year of collaboration for me.  I'm directly and intensely collaborating with three people this year. 

First, with A.M. as an ELA department.  While we will not necessarily be planning every single lesson together, we are planning some.  Where there is cross-over, we are both individually brainstorming ideas and bringing them to the meeting and developing lessons together that we could both use.  For example, our first cooperatively planned lesson will be on helping students come up with writing topics.  We are meeting this week to go over our individual brainstorms.  I think some great lessons will come out of this process.  We are also going to assess our students using a common structure (which I'm going to write about later).  Using this structure, we are going to assess our students skills and quantify the results.  We are hoping this will give us a view of what our students can or cannot do and we can use this to plan instruction cooperatively.

I'm also working with L. for our Inquiry period.  My new school has a common first period program where students are engaged in inquiry projects which surrounds a school-wide essential question.  Every month, the whole school will get together and each group presents their most recent findings to the whole school.  L. and I will be teaching this course together and planned the first week together last week.  It was a long process, but we both left feeling very positive about it.  We have a very solid plan and have planned out who is doing what when.  We also spent some time talking about issues where we felt we need to be on the same page - classroom management, philosophical, etc.  We seemed to both be on the same page already, but I think this process is so important so that the team will appear united in front of the students.

Lastly, I'm working with A.B. teaching different sections of the methods and student teaching course at the local university.  We met several times this summer to plan the syllabus.  This was a different process since I already had a syllabus and had been teaching the class.  We talked and made some adjustments to the curriculum, taking it in the direction I wanted to take it in.

So, I've gone from having very little opportunity to collaborate to now collaborating in almost every aspect of my teaching life.  It is quite an exciting adjustment.  One thing I've learned that has helped all three situations is that it is very important how well the personalities of the people working together mesh.  I'm lucky to be able to say that I feel that the personalities of all three of my partners mesh well - especially in terms of sense of humor.  I can think of many, many people (some of whom I respect and others whom I don't) with whom I could not work because I didn't appreciate the way they communicate.  So, personalities are very important, but I think in may case all three were cases of just being lucky.  If I were an administrator, I'd think very carefully about who I paired up, because if the personalities didn't mesh well or if the parties didn't approach it with the same attitude (whatever that attitude might be) then it could be a disaster for everyone involved - especially the students who are in the classroom.

The Messy Writing Process

I've always felt that the writing process as it is usually taught (brainstorming, organizing, drafting, revising, editing, and publishing) does not truly reflect the actual process  of writing.  We treat writing like a list of steps to be checked off when done.  As I was writing pieces and papers about the writing process and how important it was, I realized that I wasn't using the writing process as it is traditionally taught.

So, I've revamped it to make it less linear and more messy.  I may have  more revisions on this piece (see how messy writing is!), but here are my thoughts in the most final form I can muster as this point.

Topic and Idea Development
Topic Selection
Idea Development
Organization

In this first stage, the writer needs to first figure out what he is writing about.  This is selecting a topic.  As he starts to form his topic, he is also developing the ideas that may or may not be including in the writing piece.  This concurrent process - selecting topics and developing ideas - help in selecting the best topic.  After all, he would not select a topic for which he could not come up with any ideas for.  In this way, the writer may go back and forth between selecting a topic and develping ideas until a final topic is selected.  When the final topic is selected (and this is not to say that a writer couldn't - at any stage in the whole process - change his mind and begin a new topic), he then begins to develp ideas and organize them into what may make a decent structure considering the form and content of the writing piece.  The writer moves onto the next stage of the Messy Writing Process when he feels that he has the ideas and organization that allow him to begin drafting.  This stage may or may not involve writing any of these thoughts down.  Personally, this stage usually occurs mentally and only when I feel that I have my ideas develped and organized enough to draft do I start to write my thoughts down.  Students must be taught different methods for topic selection, idea development, and organization -- and be allowed to use the methods that work best for them.  Our jobs as writing teachers is to simply give them a tool box - this may mean having them practice different techniques, but the choice is up to them which ones they use for their writing process.

Writing and Revising
Continued Idea Development and (Re)Organization
Drafting
Soliciting Feedback
Revising
Proofreading and Adding Style

This stage is the most non-linear and messy of them all.  ALL of these steps occur in all different order - depending on the writer, the task, and the context of the task.  By no means, should the above list be considered 'steps'.  These occur in the most messy of fashions.  All through the process, the writer continues to develop ideas and organize his thoughts.  He may develop more ideas as (1) part of the natural writing process - as he writes, something else comes to mind - and (2) as a deliberate brainstorming when he reaches a wall or feels he needs to push his thoughts.  Just like the Topic and Idea Develpment stage, this continued idea develpment may occur mentally or physically (on paper).  Drafting is simply the act of putting thoughts down on paper in sentence and paragraph form.  Again, continued idea development may occur as a natural part of this process (too often, students shut off the voice in their head that gives them new ideas because it is not in their prescribed outline).  Writers may also (Re)Organize their thoughts as they draft.  (Re)Organizing means that writers change their original organization or a new organization develops organically as part of the drafting process.  Soliciting feedback could mean two things: (1) bouncing ideas off other people or discussing a topic (this is, in reality, an idea development technique), and (2) giving someone else a draft for their opinions.  These opinions may or may not be used in revising, which is changing words already written down in the drafting stage.  A writer may, after getting feedback, go back to the drawing board completely rip up a draft and recommence idea development.  All during this process, the writer is constantly evaluating and re-evaluating word choices and use of language.  In this stage, the ideas are of the utmost concern and should be the first priority, but it is 'okay' (and completely natural) for a writer to be drafting/revising and proofreading and adding style to the writing. The latter is particularly important.

As teachers, we have made the biggest mistake in making this stage of the process linear.  In writing conferences with students, I've commented on a particular paragraph that needs to have more depth and development and I suggest some brainstorming.  They look at me like I'm crazy and say, "But I already brainstormed!"  This stage is a constant barrage of develping ideas, getting feedback, evaluating what's been written, writing, re-writing, and scratching out.  In an attempt to teach students that writing is a process (certainly, a valuable lesson), we've completely screwed the process up.  We've tried to make it clean and 'teachable', but we've come up with a process that probably hinders students more than it helps.  Writing is messy.  That's okay.  Good writers are messy writers.

Finalizing
Proofreading and Adding Style

In this stage, the writer is nearing completion of the piece.  He has stopped the revising and soliciting of feedback.  He is now just putting the finishing touches on the piece, making sure that the i's are dotted and the t's crossed.  He may add some style changes here and there, but he is probably not going to revise whole chunks of text. This is a step that writing students often skip entirely.  When they are finished revising based on feedback, they rarely go back and read it as a reader, not as the writer of the piece.  They don't stop and take the time to see if the piece is 'clean' and 'enjoyable'.  This is an important step, and we need to give students the tools to complete this step.  The work done during this step could make the difference between and 'okay' piece of writing and a fantastic one.

Writing lessons worth learning

Nancy at Se Hace Camino Al Andar is writing about her experiences at the Teacher College's Reading and Writing Project's Summer Writing Institute.  As usual, she has some great thoughts and has taken useful pictures of her experience.

What I commented on her blog was that the most important point I see in what she's written is the idea that we are teaching the writer, not the piece of writing.  See the post for my complete comments.

Something else that I thought about her post, but did not comment on was the relationship between what TC is probably training people on and how the NYC Department of Education mandates it be put into practice.  The keyword there is 'mandate' - which goes completely against the main philosophy behind the TC approach.  Since I'm not in the training, I can't say if there is a big discrepancy, but I'd put big money on there being one.

Reflection and the middle school blogger

I ran across a report called "Reflection and Middle School Bloggers: Do Blogs Support Reflective Practices".  The authors read and scored random blogs written by middle school teachers.  The results are not that surprising - the blogs had varying levels of reflectiveness.

What I found interesting was the rubric they created from which to judge the rubrics and the anchor entries for the scorers.  The reflectiveness seems to hinge on the use of examples in the entries. I'm not sure whether I agree with that or not - I can't think of a reason not to, but my gut is skeptical.  It will make me think about my own posting and the reflectiveness.