How many days did the chapter span really? Hank's story about the car chase and the wounded suspect made monumental leaps in quality in like three days. It was pretty amazing. Is this sort of jump in seemingly short time at all realistic? Commence pondering.
At one point in the chapter, the teachers reflect on their students' writing and decide that teaching the subjunctive tense would be time-consuming and "too complicated for [their] purpose of teaching narrative" (p. 73). Do these types of decisions occur often in teaching? Did the teachers make the right choice in not devoting time to the subjunctive?
I think if the students had been privy to the adults' conversation their heads would have been swimming. The time and mental effort it would have taken to teach it would have really sidetracked the students, but I liked the teachers' contingency plan to use the example from Ronakea's sentence to address it in context of their current work.
I think being attentive to not overly frustrating the students, and knowing when to forge ahead would be an interesting discussion question. Hank did not seem to be too frustrated during composition, and I liked his original ending about "we ain't hungry anymore". When she suggested that he have more dialog on the way to McDonald's I thought "hmmm, will Hank be stumped?" I would want to push the students just like one would push oneself in weight training. What are cues their frustration level is truly interfering with progress and about to backfire on you?
Jane decided that she didn't want to go over the subjunctive in the middle of the lesson, because she might want to devote a whole class period to it. If you were in the same situation and the students weren't fully understanding what you meant, what would you do? Would you completely brush it off until later? Or would you try to address the problem immediately?
During the "Digression on Teacher Comments" Hillocks discussed a study that was done where teachers could give short comments with at least one compliment and a few brief specific suggestions. Do you think that less is more when commenting on students' work? I think you should always stay positive, but is using ten or fifteen words enough to guide students in the directing they need to be going?
I tend to be wordy, period. You can't do that on 100 pieces of work, and I'm sure glad studies show that there are diminishing returns when you do. I can see how that would be true. Too many words on a written comment is just like if you're verbally explaining or correcting-they start to tune it out, or you start to include distracting side-notes.
I was thinking the same thing as I was reading that section. I wouldn't want to overwhelm the students by writing too much. But, 10-15 words?? That's going to be hard for me. eek!
I had a similar question, Whitney. I am more of a wordy person, myself, so I think it would be hard to give meaningful feedback that was only ten to fifteen words. My question is, do you think you could stay between ten to fifteen words for all students? Do you think it would be okay to have longer feedback for students who may be struggling more?
When should we end our attempts at introducing an element of 'formal English' in the classroom? We could all see how the teacher floundered with the subjunctive, and later they all decided it would take too much time for their unit. But will there ever be time? Will you ever devote a week to the sticky an complicated subjects in our language?
How much is it actually our job to try and teach students that their particular dialect (be it AAVE "Ebonics", or some other English dialect) is wrong? I mean, it sounds obvious that of course English teachers should only teach/allow formal English in the classroom, but there is plenty of evidence out there that dialected English does not have to equal poorly-educated English. And besides, when it gets right down to it, what is going to be a better thing for a student to learn, how to use the subjunctive, or how to analyze an essay? There are more important things we can be doing.
On Pg. 76, Hillocks mentions, "When the teacher compliments word choice or the use of detail, for example, the student tries to produce similar effects in the next piece of writing. Her attempts to revise, however, are frequently, complicated by differences between her and her teacher's values and knowledge. And whenever the teacher refers to information that has not been taught, the students attempts at revision inevitably fail in some way". Why is the tradition of only marking things wrong so entrenched?
I also want to know everyone's thoughts on this. Does it depend on the group of students you have per block/period? Some may be more advanced than others. Do we introduce it as we encounter problems with it? I know that most of my classmates & myself dreaded long days of busy work "covering" grammar in middle & high school. 9 times out of 10, it was used as a form of punishment or when the teacher was absent. I don't know if doing grammar drills on my own constitutes as being "taught". I didn't mind spelling because it was mostly incorporated into the unit & we'd have weekly spelling tests (which I think is good). But, grammar is one of those things that I just don't know how much time to devote per unit/semester.
Hillocks notes that one of the goals in the classroom was to teach students the correct form of punctuating dialogue in a narrative writing. This became a little bit complicated when the students started using "Ebonic" dialogue in their scripts. Even without a cultural slang of sorts, there have been several prominent writers who tend to bend or even break the rules of dialogues. An example would be Cormac McCarthy's novels where he leaves out punctuation marks all together in his dialogue. Should these dialogue rule breakers be allowed in the classroom? Should we encourage students to be crafty or experimental with form if it means possibly making a better story?
Hey guys. Sorry for the late posts. It's two am and I just got off of work so please excuse any grammar errors. I'm sure they will plentiful.
I was wondering, how do you avoid the destruction of a student's culture by correcting their English? How do you make the distinction between something like African-American non-standard English and Standard English a positive one? How do you teach standard English without accidentally making a student that their way is "wrong?"
How many days did the chapter span really? Hank's story about the car chase and the wounded suspect made monumental leaps in quality in like three days. It was pretty amazing. Is this sort of jump in seemingly short time at all realistic? Commence pondering.
ReplyDeleteAt one point in the chapter, the teachers reflect on their students' writing and decide that teaching the subjunctive tense would be time-consuming and "too complicated for [their] purpose of teaching narrative" (p. 73). Do these types of decisions occur often in teaching? Did the teachers make the right choice in not devoting time to the subjunctive?
ReplyDeleteI think if the students had been privy to the adults' conversation their heads would have been swimming. The time and mental effort it would have taken to teach it would have really sidetracked the students, but I liked the teachers' contingency plan to use the example from Ronakea's sentence to address it in context of their current work.
DeleteI think being attentive to not overly frustrating the students, and knowing when to forge ahead would be an interesting discussion question. Hank did not seem to be too frustrated during composition, and I liked his original ending about "we ain't hungry anymore". When she suggested that he have more dialog on the way to McDonald's I thought "hmmm, will Hank be stumped?" I would want to push the students just like one would push oneself in weight training. What are cues their frustration level is truly interfering with progress and about to backfire on you?
ReplyDeleteJane decided that she didn't want to go over the subjunctive in the middle of the lesson, because she might want to devote a whole class period to it. If you were in the same situation and the students weren't fully understanding what you meant, what would you do? Would you completely brush it off until later? Or would you try to address the problem immediately?
ReplyDeleteThis was my question, as well!
DeleteDuring the "Digression on Teacher Comments" Hillocks discussed a study that was done where teachers could give short comments with at least one compliment and a few brief specific suggestions. Do you think that less is more when commenting on students' work? I think you should always stay positive, but is using ten or fifteen words enough to guide students in the directing they need to be going?
ReplyDeleteI tend to be wordy, period. You can't do that on 100 pieces of work, and I'm sure glad studies show that there are diminishing returns when you do. I can see how that would be true. Too many words on a written comment is just like if you're verbally explaining or correcting-they start to tune it out, or you start to include distracting side-notes.
DeleteI was thinking the same thing as I was reading that section. I wouldn't want to overwhelm the students by writing too much. But, 10-15 words?? That's going to be hard for me. eek!
DeleteI had a similar question, Whitney. I am more of a wordy person, myself, so I think it would be hard to give meaningful feedback that was only ten to fifteen words. My question is, do you think you could stay between ten to fifteen words for all students? Do you think it would be okay to have longer feedback for students who may be struggling more?
ReplyDeleteWhen should we end our attempts at introducing an element of 'formal English' in the classroom? We could all see how the teacher floundered with the subjunctive, and later they all decided it would take too much time for their unit. But will there ever be time? Will you ever devote a week to the sticky an complicated subjects in our language?
ReplyDeleteHow much is it actually our job to try and teach students that their particular dialect (be it AAVE "Ebonics", or some other English dialect) is wrong? I mean, it sounds obvious that of course English teachers should only teach/allow formal English in the classroom, but there is plenty of evidence out there that dialected English does not have to equal poorly-educated English. And besides, when it gets right down to it, what is going to be a better thing for a student to learn, how to use the subjunctive, or how to analyze an essay? There are more important things we can be doing.
ReplyDeleteOn Pg. 76, Hillocks mentions, "When the teacher compliments word choice or the use of detail, for example, the student tries to produce similar effects in the next piece of writing. Her attempts to revise, however, are frequently, complicated by differences between her and her teacher's values and knowledge. And whenever the teacher refers to information that has not been taught, the students attempts at revision inevitably fail in some way". Why is the tradition of only marking things wrong so entrenched?
ReplyDeleteWhen do you decide to introduce grammar and spelling? Is it a slow, incremental process? Or do you devote weeks to it sequentially?
ReplyDeleteI also want to know everyone's thoughts on this. Does it depend on the group of students you have per block/period? Some may be more advanced than others. Do we introduce it as we encounter problems with it? I know that most of my classmates & myself dreaded long days of busy work "covering" grammar in middle & high school. 9 times out of 10, it was used as a form of punishment or when the teacher was absent. I don't know if doing grammar drills on my own constitutes as being "taught". I didn't mind spelling because it was mostly incorporated into the unit & we'd have weekly spelling tests (which I think is good). But, grammar is one of those things that I just don't know how much time to devote per unit/semester.
DeleteHillocks notes that one of the goals in the classroom was to teach students the correct form of punctuating dialogue in a narrative writing. This became a little bit complicated when the students started using "Ebonic" dialogue in their scripts. Even without a cultural slang of sorts, there have been several prominent writers who tend to bend or even break the rules of dialogues. An example would be Cormac McCarthy's novels where he leaves out punctuation marks all together in his dialogue. Should these dialogue rule breakers be allowed in the classroom? Should we encourage students to be crafty or experimental with form if it means possibly making a better story?
ReplyDeletei like this question, rob! And, cormac mccarthy's lack of punctuation! ahh! it took me some time to get used to. haha.
DeleteHey guys. Sorry for the late posts. It's two am and I just got off of work so please excuse any grammar errors. I'm sure they will plentiful.
ReplyDeleteI was wondering, how do you avoid the destruction of a student's culture by correcting their English? How do you make the distinction between something like African-American non-standard English and Standard English a positive one? How do you teach standard English without accidentally making a student that their way is "wrong?"