Let me start off by saying, there was
a large amount of useful information in all of the chapters and I am
going to narrow my focus down to the first chapter, Be efficient
and Integrate Basic Skills.
Routman discusses how, as teachers, we have become hung up on
teaching reading and writing skills in isolation without providing real purpose
for it. Such as emphasizing teaching verbs but not why and how we
use verbs in the whole. The research provided in the book shows that
isolated skill instruction does not help “turn kids into writers
(or readers)” (143). Instead she says to first, focus on developing
children sense of purpose for writing by having them write about
something that interests them and reminding them to write for their
audience.
To follow her advice, teacher's
themselves must be avid writers and have editing skills. One large
part of the plan described was the teacher modeling and explaining
how they write and edit their paper as they go along to show that
writing is a messy process and not a linear one. The reading also
pointed out when students are over concerned with perfection, their
writing suffers. I have often seen this in classrooms I have helped with. This is why showing how messy the process of
writing can be is helpful to students.
Another
expertise the teacher would need is how to work with standards,
school curriculum and reading programs such as Reading Street. My
mentor teacher is required to use Reading Street and it has the
“rigid requirements”, as described in the text, that stifles
students' voices. It has many activities in the chapter that are
isolated and do not involve student input. My main concern about
this is if your school requires you to use this program or
others like it, where is the room in your curriculum to keep writing
as a whole instead of parts?
Routman has studies that show writing
needs to start off as a whole with particular skill sets shown along
the way and brought back to the whole. The reason is students will
understand the purpose of writing and can see the big picture. The
reading also showed that standards are met and remembered much better
with this method. “I tell teachers, I will teach your students how
do all that is required, but the easiest and most efficient way to do
this is to first engage students in writing about topics they care
about for a reader who matters to them” (149).
Out of all three of the chapters we read this week, the 'Be Efficient and Integrate Basic Skills' chapter stuck out the most to me as well. Like you mentioned, Routman places a great emphasis on teaching kids the purpose of writing rather than just the skills themselves. I think that many teachers, both veterans and rookies, have become accustomed to simply using the techniques that they have seen in practice for years without really considering why they are (or are not) beneficial for student learning.
ReplyDeleteOne part of the chapter that grabbed my attention was when Routman went into detail about the process of revising and editing student writing. So often, we consider revision to be just another step in the writing process. The sequence has become engrained in our brains- we think, write, then revise. Too frequently, students think of doing revisions as having to go back to their first draft, underline as many spelling errors as they can find, and call it a day. However, this is not what the true purpose of revising should be. As Routman reminds us, "revision is when we revisit, revalue, reconsider, and look again at our writing," (156). What the chapter goes on to explain is that students need to have specific things in mind when doing revisions rather than only trying to find mistakes. Writers must revise their writing in order to clarify meaning, make the wording easily understandable, and hold interest. Routman suggests certain strategies such as reading aloud and doing shared writing to improve revision techniques.
A little later in the chapter, Routman launched into an in-depth discussion of word walls and their use in classrooms. I’ve seen word walls used multiple times throughout my placements from MSU, and every time, they’ve been used “incorrectly”. More often than not, the teacher would spend a few days going over the words, throw them up on the wall, and hardly ever referenced them again. While most of them were sight words that students would encounter on a regular basis, they were all chosen and placed on the wall by the teacher without any class-wide decision making. This is something that I would like to focus on developing for my own future use. I love the idea of having a word wall in my classroom, but I don’t want to fall into the trap of having it be just another decoration thrown up on the wall. If and when I create a word wall, I will need to make sure that the classroom as a whole is responsible for selection which words are listed and that everyone is aware of the words’ purpose.
Like Emily, I appreciated the text reminding teachers of the effectiveness of teaching "the whole," then focusing in on the specifics of writing. This idea is very unlike how the lesson planning was first introduced to us in TE401, so I can relate to students who become frustrated and paralyzed by not understanding the big picture of what their writing will eventually become. It's tough to get started going if you don't know where you're meant to end up.
ReplyDeleteAnother idea that should probably be intuitively obvious (but wasn't for me) was that teachers should make the point of learning a subject known to the students. Maybe my elementary teachers were just really good at this, but I don't remember always being told why were doing something. Maybe that's why making meaningful and applicable writing topics is so important because it prevents a teacher from needing too much explanation; the reason to learn how to do something practical can be obvious.
Emily, I, too, noticed the text reminding us of the importance of considering required curriculum. I agree that reading street seems to separate reading and writing for some reason and it seems really illogical and unnecessary; however, I did like how chapter 7 mentions a teacher who used "finessing" in her writing curriculum in order to keep standards in perspective.
For the first two days of the week she would teach an isolated skill, then she would create more authentic writing activities for the remaining days that would naturally incorporate the skill.
Later the text mentioned another teacher with a more "hybridized" routine where students would first write authentically, then the teacher would point out the good writing techniques and explain them in the context of the students already knowing how to do it! I think this is huge.
Sometimes in teaching a specific concept, we make it more complicated than it needed to be. I definitely prefer this tactic of letting students master a technique through logically coming across the processes themselves, then putting a name on the skill after the fact. The text emphasizes this numerous times to draw attention to what will be on the standardized test after they know how to do it.
Another strategy I am a big fan of is integrating writing into EVERY other subject, and it is totally possible, too. I liked the chart (no matter how unbelievable) that is on page 185. It took what appeared to be any teachers normal schedule filled with required teaching and then a revised schedule after incorporating more authentic writing. This is especially beneficial to do considering the inherent writing development that occurs from writing in about different subjects that require different formats, vocab, lengths, with different purposes and audiences. Students become especially clear about these differences between each writing assignment when they keep a writing history like on page 191.
I'm really excited to test out various ways to conference with students one-on-one in a time-efficient manner. Currently in my placement, students use peer assistance with their reading in the PALS program and I can picture a similar model being effective for writing to after enough training.
On a positive ending note, one thing I really liked reading was the encouragement to teachers that you can never give enough praise to students for their writing. For one, it will keep them motivated to keep writing. Two, in modeling good praise and giving specific reasons for why their writing is good and effective, other students will take note of the praised behavior and want to replicate it. Everyone learns!
I'm seeing similar areas of focus that I had noticed.
ReplyDeleteEmily S., the quote you used from Routman on page 149 jumped out at me as well. One reason I noticed it is because she sounds like THE authority on everything writing related (as Cheryl warned), but I was also intrigued by the notion of writing for readers who matter to them. I instinctively have figured out that writing about topics they like will help ignite a spark for writing, but considering the audience is not something that comes naturally to my approach when teaching writing. I do wish, however, that Routman dove into this idea a little bit more. I am a little unclear as to what age a student considers an audience and is aware of the fact that there are different audiences to write to. I know that Routman claims that she can focus on teaching writing "for a valued reader" but I am a little unclear as to who this reader is. For example, on page 150, when they write cafeteria rules, is the "valued reader" a classmate. A little more explanation would be helpful (for me anyway). I guess I saw some examples in chapter 8 (noting the audience as "self," "class," and "mom" as well as the "Real Choice" on 202) but I am a little hazy. Can anyone shed light on this?
As Hannah pointed out, that chart on page 185 jumped out as me as well. To me, the idea expressed on this page hammers the point that literacy is woven throughout all subjects in school. That is why, to me, literacy is the most daunting thing to teach and the most complex to work out in my mind. I do like how Routman stressed, though, that this method allowed the teachers to "find" time for writing as opposed to having a blocked off "workshop" scheduled. That is something I will consider as I begin to lead teach.
Chapter 9 really hit home with me because I saw this in action from my mentor teacher. We just did peer conferences for the first time this week and she demonstrated how to do them with a student before the rest of the class started. As if my mentor teacher was reading from this very chapter, she "put the writer first" by praising what she had shared and commenting on how she learned so much about her. She made a point to comment on the whole piece before diving into specific areas that she liked or suggested could be elaborated on. She repeated the lines the student used a lot as opposed to saying "that line was good," an example of being generous with praise. She also focused on the main teaching points (which, in this case, was expanding their metaphors in their "I Am.." poems) before she edited spelling and grammatical errors. Reading Chapter 9 with my mentor teacher's lesson fresh in my mind really showed me important things to think about when teaching literacy lessons and using student's work as examples.