With a partner, discuss and share the documents and topics you found that match the 3 themes you chose. Use the google form to capture your thinking and don't forget to hit send before closing your document. |
0 Comments
We've been working on student concept of the Common Core Standards.
Sounds kind of dull, right? Turns out, exposing 50 eighth graders to varying levels of the same standard is pretty enlightening. Turns out, deep-diving into the Standards explicitly and deliberately enhances the work at hand. In this case, the work at hand was a close-read and analysis of a passage from The Book Thief, lots of pre-writing frontloading and scaffolding in an effort to teach my class how to write a CEA (Claim, Evidence, Analysis) lit paper. I chose RL8.4 Determine the meaning of words and phrases as they are used in a text, including figurative and connotative meanings; analyze the impact of specific word choices on meaning and tone, including analogies or allusions to other texts. We close-read the Standards RL6.4, RL8.4 and RL9.4. Students paraphrased (a valuable skill in and of itself albeit pretty low-level in terms of critical thinking) each standard, noted the differences in each, verbalized those nuances, and then applied the standard as best they could to a passage from The Book Thief. Note: It's very difficult to meet any of the RL9-10th grade standards with a short text, because part of the standard is the culminating impact. However, it is possible to glean a culminating impact of a passage in a paragraph or two. Here' s the passage I chose: At first, she didn’t look at the woman but focused on the washing bag in her hand. She examined the drawstring as she passed it over. The mayor’s wife, who never spoke, simply stood in her bathrobe, her soft fluffy hair tied back into a short tail. A draft made itself known. Something like the imagined breath of a corpse. To her left, she saw the woman again, standing by a large desk, still holding the small tower against her torso. She stood with a delighted crookedness. A smile appeared to have paralyzed her lips. What did the students get out of this process? (ps I don't like the words lesson or activity, so I'm going with 'process')
Was it worthwhile? Most definitely. What did I, as a Language and Literature teacher get out of this process?
Teaching students to "embrace ambiguity", to quote Aubrey. Yes, therein lies our most recent orchid and onion. Every class is different, and this particular class, this virgin voyage Next Generation Curriculum group of 8th graders is stuck in their own rigidity. Here's a sample of common language amongst this group:
How many sentences are in a paragraph? How many paragraphs do you want? Do you want a paper copy or send it on the google drive? Is this the right answer? Did I do this right? On the one hand, I'm thrilled they have this internal academic antennae. But on the other hand, in order to achieve true student ownership over learning, they will need to let go of the "right way" and the "right answer" and even the GRADE (Yeah, about those grades: I don't care about grades as a teacher. If a kid isn't blowing off the lit, turns stuff in and participates in class--that's an A. If I were in charge of the world, Language and Literature for IB would be pass/fail. But I'm not in charge of the world, and I do not actually believe a letter is a true measurement of a child's unique ability and even worse, that that letter should correspond to a number on a standardized test score. But I digress.). So what to do? We work toward "embracing ambiguity". We work toward a student's realization that the right answer might not exist. We work toward the idea that this Next Generation Curriculum is a journey and a learning path the instructor and student walk together, side by side. Do you remember the original tethers designed for toddlers who ran away from their parents? The child wore a leash attached to a backpack harness and the parent held the other end of the, well, leash. Eventually this tether contraption evolved into a more humane parent arm to child arm connection. This is what I feel is happening in the midst of this NGC work. I've been teaching since 1991. My years of experience have led me to crave the high, the actual hair standing on the back of your neck, head rush that comes from imparting new knowledge to a group of 30 kids. True, it is even sweeter when I am able to slowly pull the information out of them--dancing around with the give and take and questioning until BINGO some kid speaks aloud what I, in all my wisdom, am THINKING. The literary device, the term, the tone or mood of a passage. The light bulb goes on in a child's head and there's a murmur across the room of "Oh, now I get it" and "Oh, that's really cool". You know what I'm talking about, if you're a teacher. You want them to read your mind. Well, that's not exactly embracing ambiguity, now is it. What I am learning is I can actually have my cake and eat it too. As a teacher, we can always take a class to that place, that sweet spot of telekinetic academic telepathy blahblahblahblahblah. That part's easy. But there is an even sweeter spot. The Caribou Coffee hot chocolate of teaching: not just allowing, but creating a space for students to create their own learning and embrace ambiguity. It is a magical place. When a student asks: "Is this right?" I say, "I don't know, is it? You tell me". Liberation in the classroom. Our next steps: Since we're knee-deep in The Book Thief and next week will be NWEA testing and our annual trip to the Holocaust Museum, we're going to have (gasp) NGC within the context of our content areas. We will focus on two standards. Here's one I'm going to have students examine. Notice we'll be examining the 6th grade, the 8th grade and the 10th grade versions of the standard in order to differentiate between the levels of complexity within the context of a relevant text: RI8.8 Delineate and evaluate the argument and specific claims in a text, assessing whether the reasoning is sound and the evidence is relevant and sufficient; recognize when irrelevant evidence is introduced. RI6.8 Trace and evaluate the argument and specific claims in a text, distinguishing claims that are supported by reasons and evidence from claims that are not. RI10.8 Delineate and evaluate the argument and specific claims in a text, assessing whether the reasoning is valid and the evidence is relevant and sufficient; identify false statements and fallacious reasoning. Brigid Jennings will do the same using a different standard during her usual Big History time. Aubrey will come in an rotate between our classrooms to collect data and be a presence in the rooms at a time the students don't consider "NGC". We want the skills and process of NGC to become more fluid. I don't want it to become a box, a canned "NGC time" when they see Aubrey at school. In an effort to further student understanding of "theme" and in response to the lack of understanding of 'theme' last week, we made the decision to remove as many variables as possible in order to isolate the concept of THEME. It's important to note the fact that we aren't even sure what we mean by theme. Maybe it's a concept, or a message, or an idea with broad global connections. Maybe it doesn't fit in the box of "poverty" or "culture" or "identity" or "religion". Maybe it's something BIGGER.
The best way to find out? We're hoping the best way to coin the term is right along with the students. We seek understanding. Here's what we did for this week:
|
Archives
December 2014
Categories |