Blog #1: My Response to the Curriculum so far

Although still in the beginning of the middle years teacher education program, I am already wondering how I will successfully support the diverse needs of my students.  In order to prepare myself I must be able to recognize the characteristics of a learner and be able to determine how the Prescribed Learning Outcomes (PLO) will help guide me in meeting learning needs. By integrating class and textbook material into my analysis of a learner I am able to compile the resources of Tompkins et al. (2009), learning theorists Jean Piaget and Lev Vygotsky, professor James Nahachaewsky and the BC ELA IRPs to accomplish exactly this.

“Learning [is] the modification of student’s cognitive structure as they interact with and adapt to their environment” (Tompkins et al 2009, p.5) Through my experience as a student and teacher’s assistant, I realise that learners come from diverse backgrounds and that there are many different types and levels of learners. According to Nahachaewsky, how we relate who learners are relates to the culture and the characteristics of a learner is reflective of culture and community where they live. Nahachaewsky suggests that the characteristics of a leaner can best be summarized by combining the constructivist and sociolinguist models (Tompkins et al., 2009, p.4-9). Piaget and Vygotsky describe learners as unique individuals who are curious, social, active and motivated and who make sense of the world through experiences, interactions with others and use of language. They process new information through assimilation and accommodation, relate it to a pre-existing schema of knowledge and require scaffolding and support while they learn within the zone of proximal development. They then require a gradual release of responsibility as they move from actual level to potential level of knowledge.

Both Tompkins et al.(2009) and Nahachaewsky stress that learners learn best through a variety of texts, experiences and interactions and when they are provided with modelling, demonstration, guided practice, questions and answers, information, breaking complex tasks into smaller ones, active participation, reflection and set goals for improvement. Through rehearsal, predicting, organizing, elaborating and monitoring, they arrive at metacognitive thinking which allows them to be able to take more control over their learning.

Just as learning becomes, “Teaching is a conscious act” (Nahachaewsky, class lecture, Sept. 17,2010). I am slowly discovering that the BC ELA IRP is a curriculum bible that guides teacher’s continual learning of how to accommodate the characteristics of learners. The ELA K-7 recognizes that language is fundamental to thinking, learning and communicating in all cultures” (BC ELA IRP,2006, p. 3), and aims at providing students with the opportunity to develop their language skills and literacy at a certain level that will provide a powerful and enriching learning experience and skill development. This stresses to me that my teaching should reflect the value, importance and power in language and literacy development.

Although it is more of a guide and a framework to be consistent in teaching, and not a “clear road map” (Nahachaewsky,class lecture, Sept.), I find it easy to navigate and am very comfortable with the language. The IRP philosophy recognizes both the constructivist and sociolinguistic models by stating that learning requires an individual or group process of active participation, recognizes that people learn at different rates and in a variety of ways and that reflective and goal orientated learning is most effective (BC ELA IRP, 2006 p. 3). This reflects that the IRP takes into consideration the various cultures, interests, needs, abilities and experiences that students will have. Although it doesn’t provide direct ways to address diversity directly it provides specific end goals and objectives “it is expected that students will…” (BC ELA IRP,2006, p. 45), while stressing the importance of continual assessment and offering the flexibility of arriving there. The openness of the curriculum and use of a variety of texts will allow me to tailor lessons, material and texts, technology, media etc towards the multiple characteristics of learners and of any particular learning needs of my students each year (BC ELA IRP, 2006, p. 15). I will incorporate subject units, lessons and activities that are guided by the PLO but that will reflect teacher and student choice and relevancy to the local context. I will also use the suggested timelines to assist in my concentration of material. I feel that the PLOs offer the freedom to incorporate different teaching strategies, methods and philosophies that will allow for a more enriched teaching and personal learning experience for myself.

Although so far my IRP analysis has been a positive one I find that there is a significant lack of resources available (hypertext form for example), that can help unify strategies and offer materials or access to centres that support teachers. As a new teacher I am unsure of the exact assessment that the school, parents and government will be looking for and if it differs from my own. It would be nice to have clear assessment expectations, guidelines and techniques. Although the PLO helps me recognize where students need to go I am not sure where they are supposed to be at the beginning of the year and what to do if they are not there. The flexibility of the ELA IRP places an enormous amount of expectation and responsibility on teachers. I am learning though that as a teacher I will be part of a large supportive community that can help assist me. I just wish some parents had this expectation on them as well! It really does “take a village,” (Hillary Clinton, book tour, 1996).

Blog #2: Ineffective ELA learning context that I remember from my own years as a student.

School was such a long time ago for me that when I reflect on my ELA learning contexts or situations I don’t remember much. But perhaps it’s more because I never had any truly inspirational teachers nor horrible ones. I was a student who did just above average, excelled when I tried, but who didn’t usually try because I didn’t particularly enjoy school. In fact that is one of the forces that drive me to be an inspirational teacher. After having developed more wisdom through life I have come to realise how wonderful learning is and what an incredible experience it can be for any ability and level of learner.

 I do remember my experience in grade 10 English however, I had a teacher that left us on our own to learn independently more than he ever provided us with guided instruction or engaged in project or critical thinking learning. It seemed perfect at the time, in fact, many students seemed to enjoy his lackadaisical approach as he didn’t demand effort. And face it we were teenagers!  I actually vividly remember the smell of marijuana coming from many students clothes in that class.

In some aspects I believe he was trying to utilize a resource-based approach (Tompkins et al, 2009, p.63).  We read texts, and watched their movies and did worksheets as activities. But I remember the instruction process, types of worksheets and tests were the same no matter what we were working on. It was so consistent that I didn’t actually realise we were learning anything more than how to read, which I could already do well. The teacher always chose a text for us which seemed basic to me (for some reason I specifically remember “Lord of the Flies”), and it was the same book for the whole class each time. For the most part we completed this task by silently reading at our desks while he left the classroom. I found that this disengaged me as a LA learner because I had no one to guide me in constructing meaning with the print. Sometimes I would drift away in my own land and forget to even read. Occasionally he would stick around and have the class take turns reading out loud yet we never truly discussed the social context or metaphors of the book. The worksheets were always based on the basics of the material we had read, as well as on vocabulary. He would often allow us to work together on the worksheets in pairs or small groups and he would again leave the room. The social learning element was great, we looked forward to sharing ideas and asking each other questions however, the class was kept at the easy end of the zone of proximal development and he didn’t provide the scaffolding to allow us beyond an actual level of knowledge so the social learning was simply a reflection on the material rather than a tool to inspire inquisitive or critical thinking.

Thereafter a movie would follow while he disappeared. I remember connecting to the imagery of the movie and it providing me with the interpretation of a few of the lost messages. Overall I never felt like I was building upon previous skills. The only thing I was building on was a disdain for ELA. We were then tested on the book. I recall that the tests often had more challenging critical thinking and thought provoking questions than what we had ever discussed. I often felt frustrated and like I hadn’t learned anything but then at test time was challenged too much and never knowing the process so that I had difficulty learning what it was that I was supposed to know on the tests!

In reflection I realise he may also have been exuding the remnants of a transmissive approach (www.teachers.net.qa, 2006). He expected us to learn the content in a legitimate form from him as the information provider. In theory he provided the same factual interpretation from all students in a systematic manner. And it appears that, although I’m sure he was a mastery of ELA (probably bored of teaching it to the same grade for 22 years), he found it difficult to work with students that couldn’t immediately grasp the logic of the content or lacked passion for it so instead of building on that, he merely stopped trying. In addition he also had forgotten the necessity of connecting material to life outside of the classroom.

Blog Entry #3: Love that Classroom

As Professor James Nahachewsky suggests, to effectively teach you must explicitly identify and share with the students the goals and objectives of the writing activities which include the process of the writing and the end product (class discussion, Oct. 12, 2010). For me, this is an important factor that I will utilize in developing an effective classroom. I will clearly state goals and objectives of writing activities and have them displayed for students to refer to. This will help them in peer and personal assessment and help them build on the development of their work as they complete the writing processes. I will also provide a marking rubric or developmental scheme so they have something to reflect upon and use as an aid if they feel lost in a process. “If you build it, many of your students will come” (class discussion, Nahachewsky, Oct.5, 2010).

In order to follow the true development of students writing there must be consistency in the steps and in the process of writing that is provided and visible to them. Also equally important is to provide mini-lessons throughout the process on ELA elements that students may be inquiring about or having trouble with.  As discussed in class and in the textbook, the five stages of writing are an enriching process that provides structure that assists in knowledge development and metacognitive thinking while offering the freedom for meaningful learning that will enhance communication abilities.

The first stage is the Pre-Writing stage. In class we discussed that this stage can take up 70% of the time and provides a space for students to brainstorm a topic, gather and organize ideas, identify audience and identify writing purpose. As a teacher I can support my students by suggesting a spider web, talking and discussing with peers and drawing pictures and constructing idea webs as idea generators and organizational tools. According to Nahachewsky also provide examples with discussion in order to engage the students thinking on the particular area, to provide inspiration and ideas and to exemplify the goals and objectives (class discussion Oct.5, 2010). In “Love that Dog,” Jack starts out as a reluctant poetry writer believing that only girls write poetry. His teacher encourages his participation and supports the development of his attitude and skills by allowing him to select topics that are meaningful to him. The teacher also brought in a variety of poetry examples and a speaker. As noted in Jacks personal journal entries, “I really really really did NOT get the pasture poem you read today” (Creech, 2002, p.20) she also engages the class in discussion about them.  By creating journal usage Jack’s teacher helps maintain organization as all of their preliminary work and final work are together in one book. This also makes things more organized for when she needs to assess their work. She corresponds with them in their journals and offers an organized way of offering ideas and feedback. It appears Jacks teacher also offers a structurally well-organized writing classroom. There is an in-class library area, bulletin board for their work, computer area, place for them to write in their journals and possibly a reading area for the poems and speaker.

The second stage is the Drafting stage.  Students write a rough draft and the emphasis is placed on the content rather than the mechanics of writing. As suggested in class, as a teacher I can model the behaviour by demonstrating another example (possibly my own work), that is rough, imperfect and unfinished. I will then follow this with a class discussion on where it could go next, additions that could be made and reflect on whether it has followed the stages of writing etc.  In Casey and Hemenway’s article, Paige’s class was set up in writing groups that assisted each other. They were further supported by mini lessons, teacher feedback, reachable expectations and sufficient time. This also allowed “students to teach themselves to write by trial, error, hard work and persistence” (Casey & Hemenway, 2001, p. 69). The authors argue that these students were thus able to develop a personal understanding of the writing process.

The third stage is the Revising stage. Students share their writing with peers and teachers in individual conversations, group discussion or in manners such as the author’s chair. As a teacher I will also encourage them to discuss with friends and family outside of the class. Here students make changes and reflect on reactions and between first and final draft students should make substantial changes to their work. As highlighted in Paige’s sixth grade interview, without proper explanation, activity variety, guidance, encouragement, challenge and adequate time during this stage, students can miss the benefits of this stage, loose their motivation, fail to conduct proper research or reflective thinking, fail to conduct metacognitive thinking and thereby creating students “who once wrote to please themselves were now churning out lifeless, largely unrevised writing to please their apparently easily-pleased teacher” (Casey & Hemenway, 2001, p. 70). This example highlights the importance of achieving support throughout the entire writing process as well as providing variety in the activities. Incorporating and supporting students through personal, imaginative and informational writing processes is an important factor to me in developing an effective and balanced classroom. In order to maintain interest, meet diverse needs and encourage growth, I aspire to create writing process guidelines for each that are visible as well as provide students with the opportunity for choice.

The fourth stage is the Editing stage. Students proofread their own work and help with others work. Students progressively identify and correct their own work. Emphasis is on writing skills, correcting grammar and utilizing new and advanced vocabulary.  Mini lessons, vocabulary sheets, dictionaries and grammar explanation can be provided to deter repeated mistakes. Page was upset that her teacher only corrected her spelling, punctuation, and grammar but didn’t write any comments on her essays. This is important to also provide students with in order to properly scaffold them through understanding grammar techniques and word usage instead of simply marking up their paper. Students who are creative and critical and analytical thinkers yearn to understand their errors or why adjustments need to be made. Writing is also a time to be spent on improving grammar and writing techniques. This also highlights why drafting and editing require their own individual stages.

The fifth and final stage is the Publishing stage. Here students publish their work in an appropriate form as designed by teacher and/or class. As discussed in class, students must share their work with an appropriate audience and the more opportunity to share their work the more reward there will be for most students for their hard work. Displaying their work provides the opportunity for peer evaluation and discussion which ultimately provides peer and community feedback that can further increase their confidence and ideas/opportunities for building on their skills and abilities. The ability to learn from each other seems to be a cross discipline approach to learning and displaying can be just as rewarding for group as it is for individual work. Pages’ grade three class was an example of an engaged writing classroom. The students were having fun together while working hard towards perfecting a class book. This allowed for both individual and group work, provided multiple audiences for conferencing and feedback and kept the students engaged with going through each process together. As stated by Nahachewsky, when you provide them with an audience that isn’t solely the teacher, students will have purpose to broaden their writing to other audiences. This provides authenticity to their writing (class discussion Oct.12,2010). In “Love that Dog,” Jack’s teacher also allows him the choice on what to publish. “I guess it does look like a poem when you see it typed up like that.” (Creech, 2002, p. 18). “I guess you can put it on the board if you want to but don’t put my name on it in case other people think it’s not a poem” (Creech, 2002, p. 16). Later apparent is Jacks own progression, and he allows the teacher to post his poem “My Sky,” on the board and includes his name with it.