The First Day of School

So, today was the first day of school, and I survived. My feet hurt, but that is about the only injury I suffered. In all honesty, I had a great time at school today. I met all 8 classes of students (4 reading, 1 Global Perspectives, and 3 AICE English Language A). Highlights of the Day: 1. I got some students to check out books for independent reading. It may not seem like a lot, but the first day is where--especially in the reading classes--kids are feeling each other out. Once the first student got up and asked for a book others soon followed. Some titles that got checked out: Divergent, Insurgent, Smoke, Matched, Crossed, Ashfall, Unwind, and Crank. 2. We got right to work in the Language class, and I must say I think it was a cool way to start them thinking about language, language choices, context, purpose, and how language changes. About a week ago, I came across an article in the Huffington Post about what people were calling a "terrible" Toyota minivan ad. I watched it, and it was perfect to think about how pop culture makes its way into our lexicon. So, I showed three versions of minivan ads by Toyota: 2006, 2013, and 2015. Then we had a brief discussion (time was running out) about what words made their way into the ads and why. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6xkGJx16kqs (2006) https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UKXPBnMzT1s (2013) http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/08/03/busta-rhymes-swagger-wago_n_5645838.html (2015)

Fostering and Teaching Comprehension

As I wrote in an earlier post, this summer I have really been making an effort to revisit and reflect on last school year in order to better plan (and teach) this year. I'll have four preps this fall: Global Perspectives, AICE Language--Level A, Dual Enrollment Composition, and Intensive Reading C. It's a lot to think about and, to be honest, the class that scares me the most is Intensive Reading (IR). The students in IR failed the FCAT, maybe once, maybe three times. The FCAT is gone--hooray! However, an unknown high-stakes exam will be replacing it. Yes, unknown because-a month away from school starting for teachers--we have no idea what the test will look like. Which means, you guessed, it no way to use the summer (when I am not teaching all day and grading at night) to prepare for it. Not that I teach to the test, but it would be nice to have some idea of what my students will face. The state did release some resources this week, such as item specifications and an online website to practice. Not much help at the moment, though. So, I am doing what any teacher does: I am going back to solid research to plan. One of my favorites that had been on my to read list is "Essential Elements of Fostering and Teaching Reading Comprehension" by Duke, Pearson, Strachan, and Billman, which came out in Samuels and Farstrup's (2011) What Research Has to Say About Reading Instruction (4th ed.). In this chapter, the authors describe 10 essential elements to foster and teach reading comprehension. While most relate to elementary school students, I've been reading and commenting with secondary students in mind and the curricula I had to teach last year and may have to teach this year (We have not been told what curricula we will be using this year . . . that's an issue for another blog post). I want to focus on the author's first essential element: Building Disciplinary and World Knowledge. A couple of quotes need sharing: --" . . . reading, writing, and language are best developed when they are put to work as tools to help students acquire knowledge and inquiry skill in a specific domain" (p. 58) --"words are not the point of words; ideas are" (p. 58) --"when we link knowledge development to reading for comprehension, both knowledge and comprehension are the beneficiaries" (p. 58) --"by emphasizing generic reading instruction at the expense of disciplinary learning, we may be . . . cutting off our noses to spite our faces" (p. 58). When I really studied the above quotes and read them with my given curricula in mind, I realized that there was little match up. The implications for me are: (1) vocabulary instruction in reading classes, especially, cannot rest on weekly word lists and/or the words selected by the publisher (words, by the way, that I would NEVER have chose, but are mandatorily tested by my district. Those selected words are on the mandated test that I must administer because it is tracked by a computer program and the district looks at my students' scores) and (2) reading strategies need to be taught as part of "something." One of the two required programs that I had to teach (and which was tested) was not tied to inquiry nor was it thematically interesting. The other mandated program was computer-based non-fiction reading with multiple choice questions and vocabulary words to the side of the text. Each student read a slightly different version of the article (based on Lexiles) and was given different vocabulary words and different reading questions. It was hard to "teach" because the pressure was to get lots of articles completed. Inquiry could have been done but at the expense of the "number" of articles "they" (whoever they are) wanted us to get through. My point is that if "they" want us to help kids get better at reading and comprehending then we need to be given the time, freedom, and tools (because we are experts) in order for us to DO IT WELL. This year, the content and reading practices that my Cambridge courses employ are perfectly adaptable for the kids in my IR classes. Kids in IR classes deserve the same critical reading, thinking, and discussion opportunities that their "more advanced" peers receive on a daily basis.

Play in (High) Schools?

This morning I came across an article in my Facebook feed titled "How Finland Keeps Kids Focused Through Free Play." We often talk about, and argue for, recess for K-5 students, but I started thinking about my own teaching and the high school schedule in terms of recess or play time. There is none. And I am guilty of it, too. Schools instituted block scheduling so there would be more time for learning, and as teachers on block schedule we know to vary our activities in order to keep kids awake and focused. But, is that enough? I wonder after reading this article. I feel the pressure to get it all done, and I have come to the conclusion that no matter how many days or hours I am allotted to teach I WILL NEVER GET IT ALL DONE. There. I said it. So, what would be the harm in giving my students a 10-15 minute break halfway though each period. Food for thought as I continue to eat humble pie this summer . . .

Accountability and Classroom Control

This morning's read was a book I've owned for close to 10 years but never found time to read, and I was missing a gem: Kathleen Andrasick's Opening Texts: Using Writing to Teach Literature (1990, Heinemann).

As I reflect on my own teaching and the curricula I am given to "teach," I can only assert that I must do things differently this year. And, I must keep this section of text in mind each and every time I plan, asses, and reflect. I quote directly from pages 17 and 18: As Peter Elbow suggests, "much teaching behavior stems from an unwarranted fear of things falling apart" (1986, 71-72). A classroom centered around the teacher dispensing wisdom and information, then evaluating student assimilation of that information, feels like a quiet, safe place to work, a place where nothing can fall apart. And it is--for the teacher, who is in control, who knows exactly what will happen next and how, because he or she is making it happen. It is not such a safe place for students, however. They are being directed by forces over which they have no control (the teacher, the text, and the curriculum, for example). Furthermore, they have little or no control over classroom events, not even over the topic of discussion or its direction. For students, things often fall apart. They encounter surprise quizzes, questions they have never considered and for which they have no answers, and tasks for which they have had little or no training. At school, they confront the risk of embarrassment and failure hourly. We should not need to be told that the tension and discomfort (and perhaps fear) that students feel deflect their attention from learning. Common sense tells us that the context we create for students affects their thinking; classroom context can limit as well as empower learning."

Humble Pie

Okay, so maybe it is not as extreme as eating humble pie (which according to definitions is extreme humiliation), but the phrase is fitting as pie--like any other food--offers our bodies calories to use to perform. My journey as a teacher--especially as a high school teacher--continually offers up slices of humble pie. Just when I think I am finally "getting it," along comes a book, or blog posting, or twitter post, or Facebook link to show me just how little I actually know. As I work on planning for the next school year I think to myself, "Oh, that was a good lesson (or unit) that I taught." And then there's Jeff Wilhelm or Kelly Gallagher or Carol Jago or Tom Newkirk or Penny Kittle or many others to remind me that I was kind of fooling myself. And then, I have to hit the books (some of them for a third time) to try to make sense of what I did in order to figure out what I need to do next to improve. There are some outside of education that proclaim that teaching is instinct, that anyone could do it, that knowing your subject is all that matters, and maybe for a rare few teachers that is true. Poof! Lessons work magically and students shine brightly. Or, maybe that is just what they tell themselves . . . What most outside of education do not understand is how being a reflective teacher--and I stress that word--is tough and can beat you down. If. You. Pay. Attention. We want our students to do the work of learning, and we have to do it with them. Even when it hurts. This kind of pain is good. It means that we recognize something lacking. However, by feeling it we can address it. We can make it better. Humble pie doesn't taste so good, but it is nourishing and gives the nutrients and sustenance we need to keep moving and growing.

Re-reading a "classic"

Part of my summer must-do list is reading/re-reading a stack of professional development books I purchased over the years. Now that the first year back is under my belt, I want to be more organized and thoughtful about how and what I teach. That means going back to books I meant to read or think I need to revisit. Why? Nearly every day last year I found myself almost frozen with indecision: how should I teach writing?; how should I incorporate vocabulary; which reading strategy should I use to teach _______? Maybe that's the curse of being a teacher--there are always going to be a myriad of ways to teach. I want to be the best that I can for my students, and that means I cannot remember that I, too, am a lifelong learner. Today's book was Carol Jago's (2000)With Rigor for All: Teaching the Classics to Contemporary Students. One paragraph really struck me. "Every time teachers of literature give an objective test, they undermine their students' confidence in themselves as readers. The very act of posing questions whose answers will be judged as correct or incorrect sends wrong messages to students: that there is only one right answer, that their teacher is the source of all correct information in a classroom, and that the purpose of reading is to answer questions. Unless this set of beliefs is what we want to encourage, we must abandon all tests forever" (p. 97). As I was reading this I couldn't help but think of our nation's (and state's) obsession with standardized tests. We are equating reading with one test--a test that determines a whether or not a student gets a real diploma or a "certificate" that says he/she attended high school. Why on God's green earth are we doing this to kids?

Summer?

Ah, the proverbial "summer vacation," where my K-12 colleagues and I get paid to go to the beach, eat bon bond, and pretty much do nothing but mooch off tax payers. Yeah right! I realized yesterday that school starts again in two months. Yes, two months! And that is giving us around 10 more days than we had last summer. And, I also realized that I need more than two months! I have so much work to do to prepare for my new courses--courses which have some pretty high-stakes attached to them. You know that moment at the buffet when you are really, really hungry and there are like 10 stations of food to choose from? Well, that's me. And, life is certainly not a beach right now.

Really?

Really? It's been four months since I've written anything??!! I am the WORST blogger ever! So much has happened this semester--and there are only two weeks left--that it is hard to process it all. I have learned, and continue to learn, some important lessons about my kids, the school, the community, the tests, the curriculum, the laws, the rules . . . but, more importantly, I have learned a lot about myself as a teacher. Some of what I've learned I have really liked and been proud of, while other things haven't been so great. I have learned that I really like kids and even on "bad" days, I still pretty much like them. That's good. However, my 10 years in higher education shows itself from time to time. I need to learn to bring things to their level. I am getting better and I continue to try to learn. I still love teaching writing and writing and that translates to my honors kids and the ones needing "help" in reading. I love when I hear kids discuss books and recommend books to each other. I like that they scream in (good) frustration over Tris and Four, holding the book high overhead and proclaiming, "I need to hurry up and read to find out what's going on!" I love that boys who proclaim to have never read a book, keep going back to my shelf to work through biographies. I have learned that I am good at coming up with some good classroom practices to promote learning; however, I still hate grading! I need to get a better attitude about it and grade in a quicker fashion. I learned that a year away from research was much needed, but I miss it and have the research bug poking its head nearly every day. I am learning the hard lesson of letting things go. I can't reach all kids, and oh do I wish I could, but it just isn't possible. 20 absences out of 80 days of school is hard to overcome. Mostly, I have relearned and re-seen just how great my colleagues--and teachers in general--are. They work so hard, with passion and joy and humor. They love the kids. We love the kids. I love the kids.

Planning for Instruction . . . On a Short Timeline

Okay, so as of last week--the new semester--I have five new classes of kids, four of which are Intensive Reading. There are three levels of reading classes here in Florida: A (the lowest performing), B (those in the middle range), and C (those who are close to passing the FCAT). All three levels are really complicated because the students in them fluctuate in scores from year to year--no big surprise there. That said, I have new kids--the Cs--and my job is to get them ready for FCAT retakes, which are in three months from now. No pressure there! The FCAT is a mandated hurdle that all kids must pass; I hate it, and I think it's complete BS. However, it is what it is. I want my students to pass and LOVE to read and THINK CRITICALLY and become INFORMED YOUNG ADULTS. First things first--how to plan instruction to maximize time and help students the most.

I downloaded all their FCAT overall scores and sub-scores and created excel files for each class mainly looking at the last two test administrations. With this data, I hope to be able to both differentiate instruction and create small groups to focus on the individual literacy practices that students need the most help with. Mind you, I also have to use two "texts"/"programs" that our district spent a bajillion dollars on. Neither one is aligned with (a) what the FCAT tests or (b) what I would do based on my PhD and ten years in higher ed. Like all things (I am thinking about AR), "programs" are often erroneously equated with teaching. Moreover, neither one promotes critical thinking. So, critical literacy/critical thinking is what I will have to come up with and USE in between the "mandated" texts I have been given (oh, and I only have 5 copies of one required text and I have 25 students! HA, the irony)

Even More on DOK Misinformation

I am reposting this from Dr. Walkup's blog: Karin Hess, probably the most prolific national trainer on Depth of Knowledge, has agreed to share her thoughts on the matter: I'm glad you said that you see this as problematic - I do as well. I call this the "DOK wheel of misfortune" and tell people in my workshops to discard it. It flies in the face of what DOK is about: What comes AFTER the verb. I usually point out that, for example, comparing two story characters (DOK 2) does not show as deep understanding as comparing (analyzing across texts) themes from two different stories (DOK 4). Secondly, verbs alone are "generic" to content and again research tells us that analyzing in science, for example, does not require the same mental schemas as analyzing literature or mathematics. The DOK wheel is easy (efficient?) to use, but ineffective in terms of delving deep into content and processes. Feel free to use it and to quote me on how useless the wheel is. http://granted-solutions.blogspot.com/2014/01/karin-hess-weighs-in-on-bad-depth-of.html

Good Intentions Gone Awry

The more I am back the K-12 school system the more I see good intentions gone awry and good information misinterpreted and misrepresented. Most of it relates to the Common Core, which was led by two non-teachers (don't even get me started on those two folks). As I was preparing to work on my first set of lesson plans for the new semester I found myself "missing" my DOK chart. Now, for those of you unfamiliar with it--in my 10 years as a teacher educator I had NEVER come across such a thing--it is a chart (really it is a wheel) with 4 levels of knowledge and tasks (verbs) associated with them. It is similar to Bloom's Taxonomy. Anyway, we have to use the top two levels of this chart to write objectives and guiding questions for all daily lessons. Since I had misplaced mine I of course went to the Internet to find another. Imagine my surprise when I came across a blog that showed that Webb did not create this wheel and, even worse, he has "explicitly stated that he considers the wheel chart misleading and has always discouraged its use."

According to David Walkup, who talked to Webb, "The problem with the DOK wheel chart rests on the fundamental, but completely false, premise that teachers can simply select certain action verbs to raise and lower the DOK level of their instruction." A link to Walkup's blog is below. http://granted-solutions.blogspot.com/2013/12/bad-dok-chart-sabotages-understanding.html