My 11 year old sister is currently going to sixth grade at a local charter school.
Their reading assignments go like this: for every single page they read in any book that they read have to write a "prediction" or a "connection" or an "observation". Technically, they were supposed to do two of those per page, but the teacher thought that was too difficult. Not too mention the multitude of book reports and analyses and what have you.
I can't believe it. That method is just...too stupid for words. I think nearly every kid who goes into that kind of system will either come out hating books or liking them less than they did before. Luckily my sister already loves reading.
I hope that they don't take that away from her.
Posted by TL (Member # 8124) on :
Your sister shouldn't do it. She should just take an F and not do it. If she were my sister, I would encourage her not to do it.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
God that is aggrivating. I would call the teacher and complain about it- explain how unproductive the assignment is, as you see it.
Posted by Megan (Member # 5290) on :
So many people hate reading because of English class? Or because they're asked to think about what they read? I did plenty of analyses in English class, and I loved to read, and I still love to read. If thinking about reading makes a person hate reading, then I think that person didn't really love it to begin with.
Posted by Zeugma (Member # 6636) on :
There's a difference between "thinking about what you read" and "choking every last ounce of enjoyment out of reading", and having an 11 year old child stop reading at the end of every page to do a homework assignment is clearly, in my mind, the latter.
And yeah, while I very much appreciate the writing and critical thinking skills I learned from my intense English classes in high school (by "intense" I mean at one point I wrote 73 pages in three days analyzing King Lear), by the end of them I had completely stopped reading on my own. Seven years later, I still have trouble picking up a book and "just reading". Either I decide immediately that the author doesn't know crap about writing and toss it aside in disgust, or I trudge through it with a little voice in my head critiquing every run-on sentence or poorly-phrased idea. Fun. :-P
Posted by Dr Strangelove (Member # 8331) on :
I was helping my friend do that in his senior year of highschool. He was reading things such as "The Rhyme of the Ancient Mariner" and "Beowulf", but I found the entire concept repulsive. Once again, I'm incredibly glad I was homeschooled.
Posted by Noemon (Member # 1115) on :
quote:Originally posted by aragorn64: Their reading assignments go like this: for every single page they read in any book that they read have to write a "prediction" or a "connection" or an "observation".
If you had a printer that would print on a continuous feed instead of on individual sheets, you could find an electronic copy of the story and print her a scroll. Technically it'd only be a single page.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
aragorn,
It might be interesting to find out more about this technique before concluding that it will make kids hate reading. Maybe there's a point to it that you haven't been made privy to. Also, when you say "every reading assignment" could you be more explicit? The school year is young. Has this happened three or four times? 8 ir 9? Is it intended to last the entire term?
Surely the suggestion isn't that reading assignments in school should be purely for enjoyment? Perhaps students for whom this is their only exposure to reading might come away hating reading. But a kid who reads a lot ion her own is more likely to dislike this process, than to come away thinking reading is bad...
imho.
Posted by Hank (Member # 8916) on :
I had a similar assignment, and what I did was read with a pencil, and whenever something seemed even vaguely interesting, I'd underline it and write a word or two to remind me what I wanted to say about it. That way, I didn't have to stop reading altogether every time I wanted to make a note. I'd just shorthand it and go back and write them out later to hand in.
Posted by Brinestone (Member # 5755) on :
I can see the theory behind this assignment, but it definitely does seem like overkill. Studies have shown that readers who automatically make connections to their own lives and predictions about the outcome as they read understand far more of what they read than do those that don't. We who read well do it all the time: we think, "Oh, yeah, I hate that feeling when you . . . " or "I'll bet he's the murderer and he . . . " or even, "I'll bet Petra becomes friends with Ender later on."
Some people don't actually do this, and they are considered very poor readers. If a teacher can teach these students what the good readers automatically do, that teacher will give them the gift of understanding what they read.
So the reasoning is sound. But . . . there are a lot of ways to teach these things that don't also kill the desire to read.
Posted by Zeugma (Member # 6636) on :
Now there's an interesting thought... if a child doesn't naturally empathize with characters in books, could an assignment like this teach them to? I was almost sent home from school the day I finished Bridge to Terabithia, I was crying so hard. But I don't think that was anything I was taught, not that I remember.... hmm...
Posted by Pelegius (Member # 7868) on :
Repulsive indeed. I dislike English teachers who forget what is important. The philosophy of the author is important, the prose is important, the characters are important, the plot is mildly important (but much less so than the characters or the writing.) The rest is silence.
Nobody wants to look at every single simile in any given opus. That is just obnoxious. Students should read more books, write more essays and fewer "summaries."
If the teacher wants to know what happens without reading the book, may I suggest SparkNotes?
I am cruel, but I can never understand why a woman with an M.A. in literature feels obliged to make her students summarize ever scene from Marlowe. Goodness knows her professors didn't make her do it at Princeton. Passing a test generally suggests having read the material, writing a good essay does so even more.
Posted by Teshi (Member # 5024) on :
That's so weird. Maybe at the end of a chapter this would make sense, but writing a prediction every thirty seconds to a minute (depending on her reading speed) seems like watching a movie in thirty-second increments! No one would ever do that!
quote:I am cruel, but I can never understand why a woman with an M.A. in literature feels obliged to make her students summarize ever scene from Marlowe.
I've had a professor who purely summarized. You sit there, wondering if it was worth reading the book to hear it all spewed back at you.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:Passing a test generally suggests having read the material, writing a good essay does so even more.
Once, my roommate was supposed to write a paper on Brothers Karamazov. He read one chapter in the book the night before, wrote a paper on it, and was given an A with the comment "Nice Focus".
That guy got away with everything. Both his girlfriend and I were waiting to watch him finally go down in flames. We were dissapointed. Posted by aragorn64 (Member # 4204) on :
I'm no teacher, and I've never conducted any sorts of studies on the subject.
But come on -- doing one of these every single page is absolutely ridiculous. Like Teshi said, I could see one every chapter. Book reports are acceptable, I suppose. But getting to the point where you have to stop, write a stupid "connection" or "prediction" every time you finish a page will, I think, actually kill your ability to make those predictions and connections naturally. I mean come on, how many kids are going to make 150-200 of those seriously? Eventually they're just going to start making junk up, and who can blame them?
And besides, another major point I meant to bring up is the second people see reading as this huge amount of work, it'll suck every bit of enjoyment out of it (maybe forever, even). In a sense they've been told that reading is merely work (which it definitely is, sometimes) and ought to be avoided at all costs. Case in point: in my high school English classes I'd say only about 1/3 of the students ever actually read anything they assign. (The rest either take bad scores on the assigments, or use SparkNotes.) Most of them will -- and I'm serious here -- brag about how they haven't ever read a single thing of their own volition.
*shrugs* This is all just a layman's opinion, of course.
Posted by Icarus (Member # 3162) on :
It does seem like overkill to me. Stopping the flow every minute or so seems like a good way to break someone out of the spell.
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
That kind of assignment would have driven me insane.
-pH
Posted by Morbo (Member # 5309) on :
Whoever gets the last post on this page should carry out the assignment on it. Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
lol
I'm no teacher, but...
Okay, look, any sentence that starts that way means you aren't qualified to render an opinion on the pedagogic value of the technique. To then say "it's absolutely ridiculous" is, well...absolutely ridiculous -- as in deserving of ridicule.
Here's a thought:
1) Find out what the method is supposed to acccomplish.
2) Find out whether advanced readers who demonstrate excellent comprehension early in the term are likely to have to continue with it.
3) Remember that English language class, and reading assignments have a purpose in a school environment that is not the same as "here's a good book to enjoy."
I'm not saying that this is a great way to accomplish whatever goal, but this just seems like a lame complaint unless you're going to at least find out what the aim of the exercise is. And you still haven't given us details of the "every reading assignment" statement. If this really is on every single thing that this teacher assigns as reading, it does seem like a weird thing to do. If this is assigned on things like character-based fiction in order to assess whether kids are demonstrating good reading comprehension, and maybe use it as a tool to help those with poor comprehension, then that's another matter entirely.
Look...
All I'm saying is ask a few questions first before blasting the teacher and the method. I'm betting this isn't nearly so bad as it's sounding in your posts.
Maybe this teacher only intends to do this for a few assignments early in the term. Maybe she's got a grant and has to do it the kids all year. Maybe this is some stupid thing she made up and is bound and determined to see it through even if every kid in the class hates life. You are making some HUGE assumptions about the teacher, the method, and the attitude of the kids. You have little basis other than your own opinion for making any of those judgements.
I think it's worth spending a little time trying to get information first.
I might agree that this is a bizarre form of torture once I see the answers to a few obvious questions.
Posted by pfresh85 (Member # 8085) on :
Assignments like that are what have driven me away from more classic works. I remember in 9th grade we had to read A Tale of Two Cities and every time a character entered or left the scene we had to write it down. We also had to write down quotes that corresponded to each character, as well as several other things. I know by about a quarter of the way through the book I had over 30 pages of stufff written. It was ridiculous. Needless to say, I began to hate the book, didn't want to read it (as I didn't want to have to do the work attached to the reading), and ended up just cutting corners on the entire last half of the book. A real shame. I'm glad most of my other G/T and AP English classes in high school avoided that stuff for the most part. It really takes any fun out of reading.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
I offer the following solution:
Read the classics for fun on your own. That's what I did. I avoided as many reading assignments as possible in high-school and college. In undergrad, I worked hard to get into alternative tracks that didn't have me sitting there reading the classics and writing book reports. I didn't get out of everything, but I managed to avoid English Lit and criticism for the most part. Then, I read them all later on just for fun.
I have to say that anyone who lets a junior-high school experience spoil their enjoyment of great literature for the rest of their life, really only has themself to blame.
Go to B&N, by the cheap-press version of something, and read it. There's no law against reading this stuff for fun.
And much of it IS fun.
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
My Hon. Modern Epic prof tried to get us to read Gravity's Rainbow my first year of college.
I hate that book. I refused to read it. And since the whole book is pretty much Pynchon playing a practical joke on intellectuals, I could make up random crap in class discussions, and it worked just fine.
What a stupid book.
-pH
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
quote:I have to say that anyone who lets a junior-high school experience spoil their enjoyment of great literature for the rest of their life, really only has themself to blame.
I completely disagree with this. If a large percentage of a class come out of it hating reading, I'm going to say that the teacher and system have a responsibility for this. If the techniques the teacher uses are or are similar to ones that have been established through careful research to encourage antipathy for the material, then I think they bear a responsibility.
It's very easy to blame the individual for everything, but I think we need to acknowledge the responsibility of those who influence the person, especially those whose responsibility it is to influence the person.
In addition, the logic of looking at a class where let's say 80% come out with negative feelings for reading and saying "It's their fault." escapes me. If a system is constantly failing, I honestly don't care where the blame lies. Assigning blame isn't going to ameliorate this failure. If there is a different way to do things that has a higher success rate, then that's what we should be using.
Posted by Libbie (Member # 9529) on :
Blech! How about having them make a single "connection" or "observation" when they finish a chapter...or better yet, a BOOK?
WHY, WHY, WHY would any teacher agree to turn something as wonderful and fun as reading into a MINDLESS DRUDGERY? Not to mention, encouraging kids to interrupt their flow in a good book to write a stupid, pointless sentence on a piece of paper. I can understand that it's meant to check on reading comprehension, but you can do single-page assignments for that kind of stuff. Sheesh.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
quote:Originally posted by MrSquicky:
quote:I have to say that anyone who lets a junior-high school experience spoil their enjoyment of great literature for the rest of their life, really only has themself to blame.
I completely disagree with this. If a large percentage of a class come out of it hating reading, I'm going to say that the teacher and system have a responsibility for this. If the techniques the teacher uses are or are similar to ones that have been established through careful research to encourage antipathy for the material, then I think they bear a responsibility.
It's very easy to blame the individual for everything, but I think we need to acknowledge the responsibility of those who influence the person, especially those whose responsibility it is to influence the person.
In addition, the logic of looking at a class where let's say 80% come out with negative feelings for reading and saying "It's their fault." escapes me. If a system is constantly failing, I honestly don't care where the blame lies. Assigning blame isn't going to ameliorate this failure. If there is a different way to do things that has a higher success rate, then that's what we should be using.
Any one want to assert that anywhere near 80% of kids come out of this experience scarred for life?
C'mon. You're all just reacting to this as if it were a present-day assignment for YOU, not a bunch of 11 year olds.
Get a grip, people.
And, yes, if you as an adult have an antipathy for the classics because of some junior high teacher, shame on you.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
quote:Originally posted by Libbie: Blech! How about having them make a single "connection" or "observation" when they finish a chapter...or better yet, a BOOK?
WHY, WHY, WHY would any teacher agree to turn something as wonderful and fun as reading into a MINDLESS DRUDGERY? Not to mention, encouraging kids to interrupt their flow in a good book to write a stupid, pointless sentence on a piece of paper. I can understand that it's meant to check on reading comprehension, but you can do single-page assignments for that kind of stuff. Sheesh.
No...mindless drudgery would be copying the words at random.
Thinking about each page before you go on...well, it's not the style of reading I would elect on my own, but, again, if there's a pedagogic reason for it, maybe we should find that out before all turning up our noses.
Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
Bob, I know that if I read a book in school and didn't like it, I wouldn't be inclined to try to read it again. I look at this from a different perspective, though. At that age, I was starting to have severe problems with whether or not I had read something "right," so I would read and re-read paragraph after paragraph. An assignment like this really would have made me lose my mind. I really don't see how it serves any purpose, either. Reading is so much more fun when you can just READ and worry about the analysis or the paper or the whatever later. I think kids need to learn how to read a BOOK, not a bunch of pages.
-pH
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
If the kids aren't learning anything, at least they've been kept busy.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
I always resented it when my teacher punished me because I read ahead. I think it my teacher had tried to make me stop every page, I would have either not done the assignment and been resentful, or read the whole book, then just re-read the chapter and done the assignment later. That's what I usually did. I developed the ability at a very early age to make reasonable hypotheses and observations about what was happening in a chapter even though I knew what was going to happen because I had usually already read the book, or else got caught up the first day it was assigned (they usually were pretty good books) and read the whole thing that night-- and like I said, my teachers usually punished me if they caught me "reading ahead."
Posted by Sterling (Member # 8096) on :
Based on the information proffered, this seems like an incredibly lousy technique.
Worse, it sounds like a technique that was more devised to insure that the students were actually reading the book than actually increase their understanding of it. I'm wondering if perhaps the teacher is leery of his or her students turning in book reports they obtained off the internet.
Unless they're reading some kind of student editions, books are not organized as "one coherent thought per page" or "one character introduction per page" or "one grand overriding concept per page". An analysis per chapter or, as some have suggested, for the whole book, would seem to make more sense.
This technique seems like it would create reader fatigue, slow down reading (not necessarily in a good way) and quite possibly cause a reader to end up with fists full of mini-analyses but no particular understanding of the book as a whole- the "forest for the trees" effect.
You are correct, Bob, that I don't know the overall lesson plan, the intent of the method, or whether better readers can opt out. But based on what we've been told, it sounds like something meant to obtain a broad, easily measurable goal (insuring the students have read the book slowly and carefully, perhaps) while failing or even confounding the development of more useful and worthwhile skills (reading and absorbing of long sections, understanding of stories and themes as a whole.)
And while the purpose of a reading assignment may not be the joy of the book, to leech the joy that might be gained out of the reading of it would be a poor decision. And if there is no inherent joy to be gleaned from reading it, I'd have to say in many cases the selection of the book itself must be questionable.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
quote:Any one want to assert that anywhere near 80% of kids come out of this experience scarred for life?
I'd ssert that there are several prominent school districts that were studied during the 90s that (edit: consistently) had kids coming out with negative opinions of reading in the range of 80%. I don't know that I'd say that they were necessarily scarred for life, but I would say that this indicates a problem with the way they were educated that goes beyond "shame on them."
[ September 30, 2006, 03:12 PM: Message edited by: MrSquicky ]
Posted by aragorn64 (Member # 4204) on :
quote:Okay, look, any sentence that starts that way means you aren't qualified to render an opinion on the pedagogic value of the technique. To then say "it's absolutely ridiculous" is, well...absolutely ridiculous -- as in deserving of ridicule.
I will admit that a person with less specialization in a subject will not have the same level of understanding and insight on it.
I apologize for not knowing more about the method before hand. I don't know the teacher, and I don't know the studies, blah blah blah. (And yes, I asked my sister and she says that it's a standard method that their school requires for every reading assignment.)
Maybe I was jumping to conclusions; but I'll stand by my assertion that this method is more harmful than helpful.
Posted by TL (Member # 8124) on :
quote:Okay, look, any sentence that starts that way means you aren't qualified to render an opinion on the pedagogic value of the technique. To then say "it's absolutely ridiculous" is, well...absolutely ridiculous -- as in deserving of ridicule.
What? So you can't have an opinion on the value of something unless you are trained, somehow, in that specific thing?
We all have experience as students, and therefore any one of us is perfectly qualified to form an opinion on the value of the effectiveness of certain teaching methods, don't you think?
I don't necessarily think a student has to understand the theory behind *why* a teacher is using a specific method in order to understand whether or not it is working.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
If the kids aren't learning anything, at least they've been kept busy.
Porter,
Do you really think you have enough info to say this?
Posted by Libbie (Member # 9529) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz:
quote:Originally posted by Libbie: Blech! How about having them make a single "connection" or "observation" when they finish a chapter...or better yet, a BOOK?
WHY, WHY, WHY would any teacher agree to turn something as wonderful and fun as reading into a MINDLESS DRUDGERY? Not to mention, encouraging kids to interrupt their flow in a good book to write a stupid, pointless sentence on a piece of paper. I can understand that it's meant to check on reading comprehension, but you can do single-page assignments for that kind of stuff. Sheesh.
No...mindless drudgery would be copying the words at random.
Thinking about each page before you go on...well, it's not the style of reading I would elect on my own, but, again, if there's a pedagogic reason for it, maybe we should find that out before all turning up our noses.
It sounds dull and boring to 26-year-old me. How much more dull and boring would it sound to 11-year-old me? Would YOU want to do this assignment as an eleven-year-old, Bob? Would you feel excited about reading if your teacher made you stop every few paragraphs to write a bunch of stuff down?
Like I said, at the end of a chapter, dandy. At the end of a page? It seems like ridiculous overkill. How many predictions or connections can you make every five paragraphs...in an ENTIRE BOOK?
Posted by Libbie (Member # 9529) on :
quote:Originally posted by MrSquicky:
quote:Any one want to assert that anywhere near 80% of kids come out of this experience scarred for life?
I'd ssert that there are several prominent school districts that were studied during the 90s that (edit: consistently) had kids coming out with negative opinions of reading in the range of 80%. I don't know that I'd say that they were necessarily scarred for life, but I would say that this indicates a problem with the way they were educated that goes beyond "shame on them."
I know with very few exceptions, my reading instruction in elementary school was bland at best, and frustrating at worst. The only reason I like reading as well as I do is because my mother taught me to read early. Very early. I read Charlotte's Web to her at age three.
The reason why my mom taught me to read as a baby: All of her experiences in reading came from the way she was taught in elementary school. Even today, at age fifty, she can barely finish a fairly simple novel in six months. She just HATES reading. Her only explanation is that she "doesn't understand how to do it right." She got through four very grueling years of pre-med and OT school, so she is obviously literate. I believe what she means is that she doesn't understand - and never learned - how to string the flow of a story together in her mind. She gets so caught up in taking things "one paragraph at a time" that the entire story becomes a blur to her. It makes me a little sad to realize that once I get something published, my mom probably won't even be able to read it - or at least, she won't really comprehend it as a complete story, just as a series of paragraphs that sort of seem to go together.
I think the teaching of reading hasn't changed that much since my mom was in elementary school, and that's a damn shame.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
I think it's pretty telling that almost every person criticizing this technique is saying things like "I don't see what purpose it serves..." or something like that. Exactly...you don't. But it's okay to criticize in ignorance, right?
All I've been saying is find out BEFORE you criticize. Sure, it seems like a bad way to teach a reading assignment, but maybe that's not the purpose of the lesson. I don't know. None of us do. I've seen at least two possible explanations (reading comprehension exercises and "making sure the kids actually read the assignments") that could provide at least some motivation for the exercise.
Something tells me that there may be another factor at work. If this really is a "school-wide" style, I start to suspect that the school or district admins obtained a teaching grant and/or have made this school part of some pilot implementation of a new technique. I think some of the teachers on this forum could vouch for the fact that schools sometimes adopt new techniques or curriculae in exchange for funds, or because they are otherwise part of some study that the state has put together. Often, the teachers really hate this stuff because it ties their hands and makes them adopt techniques that they had no hand in developing -- essentially turning them into technique deliverers rather than educators.
I don't know if that's what going on here, but if I were a parent of a child exposed to this, here's what I would do:
1) I'd have already talked to the teacher to find out what was the aim of this technique and what made them think it was better than other obvious methods that seem to have worked in the past.
2) If my child was showing signs of diminshed interest in English language arts and reading, I'd make that fact known to the teacher and ask for a plan on how to address the problem in the school setting.
3) If I was still unsatisfied, I would escalate to the Principal and discuss the matter in frank and honest terms regarding what I wanted to see different, and to ask if there was a different track that my child could participate in -- again, assuming I felt like this particular method was crap.
4) If that didn't work, I would appeal to the district to change the policy or transfer my child out of that school.
5) If that didn't work, I'd take my kid out of the school system either by home-schooling or finding a private school that taught things the way I thought was best for my child.
But...first and foremost, I'd ask a lot of questions. I wouldn't just automatically label this -- call it "the reason people hate reading" issue pronouncements about busy-work, or what have you.
If you have kids, you have to decide if the public school system is right for your child or not. You can ignore things or gripe about them without understanding them, or you can find out and participate.
Finally...I have zero sympathy for any adult who blames their teachers for their current lack of interest in the classics. Seriously...so you had a bad teacher...if you want to read a book, read it. If you don't, then don't. It's your choice, not some person 20 years in your past (or whatever).
I'm not "blaming" anyone. I just don't think a crummy teacher is a good excuse for something like "I don't want to read Dickens." Bad teachers can turn you off to a subject, but if you express an interest in reading something and don't read it...well...who loses? And who is stopping you? Suddenly you have a mental block against the classics and can't pick one up without palpitations?
Please!
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
quote:Originally posted by Libbie:
quote:Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz:
quote:Originally posted by Libbie: Blech! How about having them make a single "connection" or "observation" when they finish a chapter...or better yet, a BOOK?
WHY, WHY, WHY would any teacher agree to turn something as wonderful and fun as reading into a MINDLESS DRUDGERY? Not to mention, encouraging kids to interrupt their flow in a good book to write a stupid, pointless sentence on a piece of paper. I can understand that it's meant to check on reading comprehension, but you can do single-page assignments for that kind of stuff. Sheesh.
No...mindless drudgery would be copying the words at random.
Thinking about each page before you go on...well, it's not the style of reading I would elect on my own, but, again, if there's a pedagogic reason for it, maybe we should find that out before all turning up our noses.
It sounds dull and boring to 26-year-old me. How much more dull and boring would it sound to 11-year-old me? Would YOU want to do this assignment as an eleven-year-old, Bob? Would you feel excited about reading if your teacher made you stop every few paragraphs to write a bunch of stuff down?
Like I said, at the end of a chapter, dandy. At the end of a page? It seems like ridiculous overkill. How many predictions or connections can you make every five paragraphs...in an ENTIRE BOOK?
I haven't said once that I would choose this technique. I just have to ask what my feelings about it have to do with the main question which is: does it have pedagogic value?
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
Isn't it interesting that the people who ARE interested in reading got that way because of their parents, not their school. And it started way before school age.
Posted by TL (Member # 8124) on :
quote:I don't necessarily think a student has to understand the theory behind *why* a teacher is using a specific method in order to understand whether or not it is working.
Any response to this?
Posted by MidnightBlue (Member # 6146) on :
I think it depends on what you mean by the theory. You certainly need to know what the method is trying to do to know if it's working, though I suppose you don't necessarily have to know how.
Posted by TL (Member # 8124) on :
quote:You certainly need to know what the method is trying to do to know if it's working, though I suppose you don't necessarily have to know how.
Do you need to know what the method is trying to do to know whether or not you are learning anything, or to know whether or not it is making you miserable?
Posted by MidnightBlue (Member # 6146) on :
That wasn't the original question. The question I answered is "Does a student have to understand the theory behind why a teacher is using a specific method in order to understand whether or not it is working". To answer your next question (or at least address it) I don't think whether or not it is making you miserable is necessarily the point. Learning something and enjoying something are not always the same thing. Obviously you don't need to know what the method is to know whether it is making you miserable. And since the point of a specific method may or may not be about trying to get students to learn (making sure they are doing the assignment in the first place could in fact be the point), I think knowing what the point is is important simply to know whether the student is supposed to be learning anything.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
Bob, If I take a kid and condition him by pairing the color green with noxious stimuli, whose fault is it that he hates broccoli?
Many of the explanations for the failure of contemporary educational techniques rest partially on processes on the level of associative conditioning that sap motivation and create reactions to the taught things as noxious. These can be overcome, but I don't think it's fair to say that it's only the person's fault if they aren't.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
MrSquicky,
Your analogy to conditioning theory is ridiculous.
quote:Many of the explanations for the failure of contemporary educational techniques rest partially on processes on the level of associative conditioning that sap motivation and create reactions to the taught things as noxious.
Really?
quote:These can be overcome, but I don't think it's fair to say that it's only the person's fault if they aren't.
That might be precisely why I didn't ascribe blame. I objected to the attitude of blaming a past teacher. I didn't say anything about blaming the individual. I said, repeatedly, that if you want to read something, you should, and that if want to read it and don't, shame on you -- don't blame a bad teacher.
Question: Why, in a thread ABOUT reading comprehension, am I having to explain points I've made quite clear?
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
quote:Originally posted by TL:
quote:I don't necessarily think a student has to understand the theory behind *why* a teacher is using a specific method in order to understand whether or not it is working.
Any response to this?
In some cases, knowing the theory behind why a teacher is using a specific method might actually render the method ineffective.
But to answer your larger question, measures of effectiveness can exist in absence of understanding. I didn't see anyone offering any measures of effectiveness. I saw a lot of judgements about the effectiveness of what people thought the method was, and I saw a lot of people projecting their current selves into a situation that has been presented by an 11 year old to her brother and then to us.
We don't have any details about what the method is, how it is really being applied, OR what the theory is.
But let's all call it horrible and say that it's killing the "love of reading" that some kids have!
I say we burn the schools, and then find out what this was all about!!!
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
Bob, Do you know any of the research surrounding this issue?
Because, from my reading, which is pretty extensive, my analogy isn't ridiculous, nor is it completely an analogy. I'm reasonably sure I've established myself as someone who can generally be trusted to have a pretty good idea of what he's taking about when he represents himself as knowledgeable. I don't believe I deserve to be dismissed so cavalierly.
Also, perhaps we have different interpretations of what it means to say "shame on you". To me this carries a very stong element of blaming the person, of saying that it is their fault. If they are not to blame and if it isn't their fauly, I don't see how it's fair to think they should have shame over it.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
MrSquicky. Link to research surrounding this issue?
Put up or shut up. I'm pretty well versed in conditioning theory and, frankly, while I've seen people in the education realm totally misuse the terminology and concept from experimental psychology before, I am finding it difficult to imagine that your analogy is really something in the mainstream of educational research. In particular, I'd like to see the concept of "associative conditioning" laid out in an article from a contemporary education theorist and then linked to a particular pedagogic technique. It need not necessarily be the one we've been discussing here, but let's see something on "noxious stimuli" and associative conditioning, please.
As for "shame on you." You said something about ONLY the person being to blame. I never said that. I said if an adult stops themselves from reading something and blames their junior high English teacher, then shame on them. As in -- it's a shame they don't just go do what they obviously want to do. There's nobody stopping them, and to blame some fool teacher from their past is not healthy or productive. So, yes, it's a shame -- shame on them.
What else should I call it when adults play the victim for something they have complete control over in their lives? Is it society's fault that they can't bring themselves to go to a library and take out a book? Seriously? Should they be allowed to sue their prior teacher for the lost potential in their lives?
Is blame productive or useful in this instance? I'm not blaming them. I'm suggesting they go do something about it. If you want to read something, go read it. If you want to read it and don't, then don't whine about it. You have every opportunity to do what you want with respect to reading material. If you choose not to avail yourself of the freely available resources at your disposal, then that's your choice. It's not the fault of some person in your past.
GAh! You're talking like they strap kids down and shock them.
Posted by Sharpie (Member # 482) on :
Bob and Icarus are right; we don't know what the goal here is. I have a friend who teaches at a school in Boston where they take incoming ninth-graders who are functioning at a fourth grade level and graduate them in four years ready for college. Do they use intensive methods like this? You better believe it. They are teaching the kids to PROCESS.
Do I read for entertainment this way? No. Who would? (Except for House of Leaves.) But, um. They are not reading for entertainment in the classroom, either. Should they be?? Not that learning can't be enjoyable, not that reading isn't pleasurable for its own sake. But that is not the only goal, any more than the only goal of running a race is the joy of taking in deep breaths of air and feeling the smack of the pavement traveling rhythmically through our muscles. Sometimes running is part of a system of physical fitness, sometimes it is running for your life, sometimes for a medal, sometimes for the sheer joy of running in the autumn. (That's my limping analogy.)
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:Porter,
Do you really think you have enough info to say this?
Meh. In my experience, over half of the work in high school is really busy work, so it's not that big a deal to say that this is probably busy work as well, especially since it looks like busy work.
Posted by SoaPiNuReYe (Member # 9144) on :
I had to do something like that last year. For every page we had to write down two 3 sentence thoughts on what was going on. At the end of the marking period we needed to have 200 of those. I didn't see the point in it so I ended up doing 3 before I stopped. I hate English class mainly because of stupid assignments like this. Everybody else in the class did them, only to find out that the teacher didn't even count them as a grade. I thought it was pretty funny but everyone else didn't think so.
Posted by MrSquicky (Member # 1802) on :
Bob, I'll ask again, are you familiar with the research?
Here's a book that addresses the issue from a this perspective. Here's an interview with the author.
quote:for something they have complete control over in their lives
And here's our point of contention. Ultimately, I believe that assigning blame is almost always counter- or at least non-productive, but we're talking about this is a context where how kids are currently getting taught and will be taught is relevant. As I said, when we're getting numbers like 80% of them coming out regarding reading negatively, I think this indicates serious problems with how they are being taught.
It's easy to say shame on you. We've had some huge blow ups around here recently because people are saying "Shame on you for being fat." And yet, for some reason, this one is different. To mirror that other conversation, I would regard people who don't like reading as less attractive both romantically and for friendships and I anticipate none of the attacks and accusations I got for the same statement about obese people.
I honestly don't know how much negative effect certain styles of teaching have on people. And, as I said, focusing on who to blame in terms of how to get them to read now isn't useful. But I'm pretty darn sure that they are not in complete control and that they way they were taught has some effect.
I don't tell fat people "shame on you." And in the same way, I don't tell people who don't like reading "shame on you." I'm not comfortable making the judgements involved. What I can do is try to encourage them to do otherwise.
edit: One thing that, looking back, I realize I haven't made clear is that the primary obstacle I see to people reading is that they really do't find it enjoyable. They canread, but they're going to derive very little pleasure from it. This can be gotten around, but, not, I think, by the person saying "I'm going to read this book and enjoy it."
[ September 30, 2006, 07:06 PM: Message edited by: MrSquicky ]
Posted by Libbie (Member # 9529) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz: MrSquicky,
Your analogy to conditioning theory is ridiculous.
quote:Many of the explanations for the failure of contemporary educational techniques rest partially on processes on the level of associative conditioning that sap motivation and create reactions to the taught things as noxious.
Really?
quote:These can be overcome, but I don't think it's fair to say that it's only the person's fault if they aren't.
That might be precisely why I didn't ascribe blame. I objected to the attitude of blaming a past teacher. I didn't say anything about blaming the individual. I said, repeatedly, that if you want to read something, you should, and that if want to read it and don't, shame on you -- don't blame a bad teacher.
Question: Why, in a thread ABOUT reading comprehension, am I having to explain points I've made quite clear?
Bob,
You are so very abrasive.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
*blink*
Posted by imogen (Member # 5485) on :
To be fair, I think Bob is getting more het up over this conversation than he usually does.
I still wouldn't describe his posts as abrasive though.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
I love when people who've been here a couple months make judgment calls about people that have been valuable members of this community for years.
In other words, Libbie, maybe you don't know Bob well enough to say that, do you think that's possible?
If you have something to say about what Bob has posted, then say it, along the lines of "Wow, Bob, that was an abrasive post."
But you honestly shouldn't be calling HIM abrasive because, well, he's not. Personal attacks aren't really welcome here. Criticize the idea or the posting style - that's fine, but don't attack or insult the person.
Posted by Samarkand (Member # 8379) on :
In response to the title/ first post - I would say that's not necessarily why people hate reading, it's why they hate school, homework, their teachers, etc. It may also prevent people from learning to enjoy reading since they associate it with busy work which the majority of people find unproductive. However, an assignment like this might have been useful for me when I was doing things like reading Faust in German, since it's not my first language and one page can take a bit of time to get through. Maybe also an ok idea for short chapter books when students are at that reading level. *shrug*
Anyway, I would have failed that class based on the fact that I have better things to do with my life. If it's making her crazy, I would try to drop that class in favor of another one or do independent study or something.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
Mr. Squicky.
A link to a book that no-one can actually access without purchasing is not sufficient to make your point. Judging from the title, the book has to do with artificial incentives. What that has to do with the original post, and your analogy about broccoli is escaping me at the moment.
Libbie. I'm upset. I read the thread title. Then I read the first post. Then I read a bunch of posts basically saying that the teacher doesn't know how to teach and that this will ruin every kid's love of reading.
I tried to make a simple point which was (and still is) that we don't know what anything about this method except what an 11 year old told her brother and then he translated to post here. I, personally, find the current vogue of blaming teachers for the ills of the world to be repugnant. I come from a long line of teachers and I know what they go through to prepare a class and to help their students to learn. I don't mind if people have something specific to back up their claims -- data, details, ...something... But I will admit to getting really upset when people just start going off on how BAD something is without asking even the most basic of questions.
And then we have people start throwing "research" around without producing ANY of it...and asking me if I'm "aware of the current research..." I've asked twice -- link to it. And what do I get? A link to Amazon where I can buy a book that apparently has nothing to do with this discussion, but instead talks about "competition."
I have a problem with having to repeat myself, yes, when people are getting upset about "reading comprehension." I think it's tragically ironic that people can get so upset about a teacher doing something they don't understand, but can't take the time to understand the contrary point of view enough to stop misinterpreting it.
And Mr. Squicky has finally agreed with me that Blame is useless (a thing I have said at least 4 times) and then told me that I don't understand that.
Libbie, from my perspective, several of the people on this thread are being purposefully dense and abrasive. I was forceful in my responses to them because I think they are talking without having anything like real information either about this specific case or about education in general.
Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
I think where people are talking past each other here is missing the part of Bob's posts where he says if people want to read something and don't, then shame on them. He's not saying if people don't like to read, shame on them. Not enjoying reading could be linked to bad teaching, or not being read to growing up, or too short of an attention span, or just personal taste. But for someone who does enjoy reading to saying they've always wanted to read the classics but don't based on a bad experience in high school? Meh, I don't feel much sympathy.
I'll also note that's different from saying "I've always wanted to read the classics to see what the big deal was about (or to feel more well-rounded, or whatever) but I've tried and I just can't get through them, they're too dry." That's admitting you don't like something, which is perfectly valid. Not trying to blame your dislike on a teacher from a couple of decades ago.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
Certainly, Bob is being no more "abrasive" than most of the posts commenting negatively about the assignment.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
I think where the confusion may be happening, ElJay, is that some of us may be thinking of people who don't enjoy reading, for whatever reason, possibly bad school experiences, but wish they had read the classics (or had read more of them, or actually remembered them rather than having had them analyzed to death and shoved down their throats but they were such a bad experience that they were forgotten two months later) in order to get the allusions people make, or whatever, but dislike reading so much that they can't get through them.
I used to want to go rock climbing, but had a pretty bad fear of heights which kept me from ever being successful at it.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
Thanks ElJay. That's exactly what I thought I'd said.
If I didn't say that, then just read what ElJay said, 'cuz that's what I meant to say.
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
It's what I got out of it, too.
Posted by ElJay (Member # 6358) on :
Yeah, kq. . . that's why I thought the clarification was in order.
No problem, Bob. That's what I thought you said, too, but it certainly didn't seem to be what some people were responding to. Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:I love when people who've been here a couple months make judgment calls about people that have been valuable members of this community for years.
I'm uncomfortable with treating somebody's posts differently because of how long they have or have not been a member of the forum.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
Actually, I agree with mph on this. I was (briefly) on a board where the long time folks were given much more leeway than any newbies or infrequent posters and it was a lot like bullying. The typical response if someone complained was "Oh that's just his way." Essentially telling the injured party to get over their hurt feelings.
I would not want to be party to bullying of that sort.
If I came on too strong re: the first post, I do apologize. My only excuse is that I do NOT like people complaining about teachers without having their facts first. And I really felt like we don't have nearly enough information to make any but obvious personal comments about this particular teaching technique.
I think there's almost no-one who would choose to read a book that way. I also think that there's not a teacher on the planet who would personally choose to read a book that way, or think that anyone else would want to read a book that way. Given that, I'm willing to assume that there's at least the possibility that the teacher had some goal in mind in using that technique.
Whether it worked or not is, to me, an open question. So far, all we really know is:
1) none of us would like it, and, 2) an 11-year-old with strong reading skills doesn't like it.
I have absolutely NO PROBLEM with people saying they wouldn't like it. I'd be amazed to hear anyone saying they would enjoy this.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
So I assume you are all for the idea of just calling the teacher and complaining. Maybe the teacher will actually convince him that she/he is right and its a good assignment. My personal prediction is that the teacher did it without giving it enough thought, is new, or subscribes to some ill-concieved method of teaching which conveniently creates paperwork "proof" that the class is learning. I remember these teachers from my elementary school days- my tedious homework assignments (like drawing a picture of every chapter in a book ) were touted as products of my education on parent night. That's just my prediction based on experience.
I'd like to see you go a little further Bob, and tell us why you think the assignment might be useful. Just curious, but I am trying to imagine the teacher's stated reasons for this idea, and they just seem pretty lame. What are your thoughts?
Posted by MidnightBlue (Member # 6146) on :
quote:So I assume you are all for the idea of just calling the teacher and complaining.
From what I can tell, that not what he's suggesting at all. It seems to me the suggestion is to call and ask why the work was assigned and what it was supposed to accomplish. Find out the facts first, and then if it seemed necessary, say something about it.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
I'm not saying posts should be treated differently based on how long you've been here. I was simply trying to make the point that Libbie couldn't possibly know Bob well enough to make a judgment about him. Likewise, I don't think I know Libbie well enough to make a judgment about her because she's only been here a couple of months.
I do think I know Bob's posting style and personality well enough to say that he's not normally an abrasive person, though, because I've been interacting with Bob for years. Libbie doesn't have that amount of experience with him so she shouldn't be making that type of statement.
That's all I was trying to say. This seems to be the thread for having to explain yourself. Posted by Megan (Member # 5290) on :
"But I can't explain myself...because I'm not myself, you see!"
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
Orincoro, On page 1 of this thread you'll find a detailed outline of what I would do if I were a parent of a child in this class and was concerned about the impact it was having on my child. My stance hasn't changed since then.
As for why this assignment "might" be useful, I hesistate to speculate because I really don't know the kids or the concern of the teacher. Anything I say would be pure speculation. Someone earlier mentioned that it might be a method aimed at artificially stimulating the readers' reading comprehension -- I think it was something about building empathy with the characters...I don't know.
Also, someone mentioned using this as a technique to ensure that the children read the entire assignment.
Both of those alternatives sound like they might be "useful" in certain settings and, one hopes, as temporary techniques either to identify the kids who need additional help or to teach the children not to skip assignments.
But I didn't come up with those ideas and I would love to hear what this teacher was hoping to accomplish.
And, as I said earlier, if I had a child in this class, I would call the teacher and make sure I understood what the purpose is before deciding what (if anything) to do beyond that.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
If the kids aren't learning anything, at least they've been kept busy.
OK, I am jumping in here as The Guilty Party.
What the teacher is having her students do is something called Guided Reading. As far as I have seen in my classroom, no child's brain has ever been harmed by it.
There are a few assumptions I see floating around here.
The first assumption is that the reading assignment is meant to generate pleasure. It is not. It is designed to internalize a process which many readers can already do automatically, but which many young readers cannot.
A second assumption is that the reading done in school is all literature. Reading assignments should be more focused toward nonfiction than fiction, and selections should be taken from all core subjects, even math. I firmly believe that students are failing state math tests not becasue of the math as much as the reading of the questions. (most reading of literature is done in the language arts class, not the reading class)
Another assumption is that this teacher is heinous and is just creating busywork to save her skin. And this makes me laugh heartily! Ha ha!(imagine a hearty laugh) Do you really think I give these assignments to create busywork, so that the busywork, multiplied by however many students I have, comes crashing down on my head when I have to correct it? Remember, it is the beginning of the year. We do not know our students yet. We are still in the process of figuring out what strengths and weaknesses they have.
Some students come to me "fully formed" as readers. I let them go at their own pace. They love to read, and zip through guided reading assignments without complaint. It is clear to me that they do not need this activity.
Some students, though, cannot read. They need to learn specific strategies that are not natural to them. They may not use all of them, but the bigger their bag of tricks, the better.
So, remember, a teacher does not wake up in the morning, drag him or herself out of bed, rub her hands together, and whisper(a la Peter Lorrie): "He he, how shall I make the children's learning more unenjoyable today..."
Disclaimer: I have not read every post. I skipped through the vitriol. I apologize if I have repeated stuff.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
Well put, Liz. (And Bob.)
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
Thanks.
As for children loving to read, I have not seen any practice or curriculum in twenty years of teaching which ensures a child will love reading. Some people love it, some people don't. Most of us on this forum are here because we love the writing of a particular author. We love to read.
I was the child who hated to put down a book. I loved to read anything, I loved to answer questions about the reading, I loved to talk about what I had read.
I read to my children as babies, as toddlers, as young children, and now. I make sure they set aside time to read.
They really don't love reading. My daughter went through a spurt, my son loves animal facts(Eye Witness type books) and sports stats, but could care less about novels.
It kills me! I imagined a house full of quiet O'Briens, busily reading books in our separate corners of the living room.
They just don't love it, nor do I think they learned this nonlove from school. Many of their friends are avid readers. Their father is all about Fact, and could care less about Fiction.
I think there is a cultural surge in this country which we are just beginning to see, and which I have absolutely no sound evidence for, but which I call my Gameboy theory.
Life these days is about jumping in and playing the game. Kids are not interested in planning, in reading directions, in any of the things which seemed standard fare for us old farts. And when I think about it, it makes sense. They do not have to keep track of a checkbook, they can punch up their balance on an ATM. They can find information instantly with a few key words typed in to Google.
I think this is different, not bad, and I think we need to start judging this generation by their own cultural standards, not by ours.
Posted by Libbie (Member # 9529) on :
quote:Originally posted by Belle:
In other words, Libbie, maybe you don't know Bob well enough to say that, do you think that's possible?
Really? I can't form an opinion on whether I find somebody abrasive based on my experiences with them?
So I guess I need to go back and read all of the archives before I can decide how people strike me, yes?
Posted by Libbie (Member # 9529) on :
quote:Originally posted by Bob_Scopatz:
Libbie. I'm upset. I read the thread title. Then I read the first post. Then I read a bunch of posts basically saying that the teacher doesn't know how to teach and that this will ruin every kid's love of reading.
I tried to make a simple point which was (and still is) that we don't know what anything about this method except what an 11 year old told her brother and then he translated to post here. I, personally, find the current vogue of blaming teachers for the ills of the world to be repugnant. I come from a long line of teachers and I know what they go through to prepare a class and to help their students to learn. I don't mind if people have something specific to back up their claims -- data, details, ...something... But I will admit to getting really upset when people just start going off on how BAD something is without asking even the most basic of questions.
And then we have people start throwing "research" around without producing ANY of it...and asking me if I'm "aware of the current research..." I've asked twice -- link to it. And what do I get? A link to Amazon where I can buy a book that apparently has nothing to do with this discussion, but instead talks about "competition."
I have a problem with having to repeat myself, yes, when people are getting upset about "reading comprehension." I think it's tragically ironic that people can get so upset about a teacher doing something they don't understand, but can't take the time to understand the contrary point of view enough to stop misinterpreting it.
And Mr. Squicky has finally agreed with me that Blame is useless (a thing I have said at least 4 times) and then told me that I don't understand that.
Libbie, from my perspective, several of the people on this thread are being purposefully dense and abrasive. I was forceful in my responses to them because I think they are talking without having anything like real information either about this specific case or about education in general.
Thank you for explaining, Bob. From my perspective, it looked more like you were telling everybody that their opinions were wrong, because you said so. That is something that I find dense and abrasive.
I disagree with you that they have no real information about education in general. In this case, it seems like everybody who's ever been a student has an equally valid perspective on whether the situation, as described, could potentially ruin reading for them. You were bascially telling everybody who disagreed with you that they had no basis for forming an opinion on this topic, which I found to be abrasive. If that was not your intent, and I didn't comprehend what I read well enough, then I apologize.
Posted by Libbie (Member # 9529) on :
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head:
quote:I love when people who've been here a couple months make judgment calls about people that have been valuable members of this community for years.
I'm uncomfortable with treating somebody's posts differently because of how long they have or have not been a member of the forum.
So am I.
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
"So I guess I need to go back and read all of the archives before I can decide how people strike me, yes?"
Libbie, in this case, yes.
If you toss him into the basket labelled "abrasive," you might not find the other baskets he hangs out in, such as the "funniest man alive" basket, the "extremely objective" basket, the "wonderful friend, husband and father" basket, the "incredibly intuitive" basket, and so many others.
Bob, stop hiding in the abrasive basket! Weave in some humor! Stop being so warped! Your abrasive side is looming over us!
Posted by Libbie (Member # 9529) on :
quote:Originally posted by Elizabeth: Libbie, in this case, yes.
If you toss him into the basket labelled "abrasive," you might not find the other baskets he hangs out in, such as the "funniest man alive" basket, the "extremely objective" basket, the "wonderful friend, husband and father" basket, the "incredibly intuitive" basket, and so many others.
Bob, stop hiding in the abrasive basket! Weave in some humor! Stop being so warped! Your abrasive side is looming over us!
I never said he wasn't also funny and intuitive. Generally, most people who are funny and smart and intuitive can also come across as abrasive sometimes. Usually because they're confident in their own opinions.
Abrasiveness isn't always a BAD thing. Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
I guess what I'm saying is that he is not usually abrasive at all. In fact, I don't even think he has been abrasive in this thread. (OK, maybe once)
Bob's opinions are strong, but he does not put them forth disrespectfully, and he listens to the other side of the argument and often changes his opinion.
He will find this Bob-praise abrasive, though, so I shall stop.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
Liz, I enjoyed your post earlier.
The first assumption is not one that I made, but I think it may be one that you saw in another comment. The idea that this assignment will kill the love of reading doesn't, for me, mean it that it will stop the kids from enjoying any book, but it will certainly stop them from having any desire to read this one book. I had plenty of tedious, needless assignments in my middle school years that I am positive made me hate the work we were looking at- but yeah, I still love books.
I know much of the reading done in school is not literature, but I think you'll easily agree with me that THIS type of reading- math and science texts, history, and other subjects, is often poorly handled. Either the writing is an invitation to slumber, or the assignments at the end of the chapters are mind numbing and tedious; rarely is a classroom text engagingly and interestingly written iirc. There is NO reason why they shouldn't be, they just aren't, in my experience. You may have found better books (I hope so), but plenty of school districts still rely on terrible books.
I absolutely understand about the students who can't read. Its so, so sad. I work at a teen center, and I have actually had a few teens, one in particular, who I've discovered are unable to read. One scrawled two letters on our sign in sheet,and when I approached him, (he is maybe 13), he was unable to spell his own first name. He was also unable to correctly spell the name of his school. Another shift leader told me later that this kid seemed to have to the mind of a 4 year old, and yet he appeared completely normal, and had normal (for a 13 year old) conversations with his friends.
The frustration I felt with people my own age when I was 13 came back to me that day, and it was an interesting feeling to be confronted with that hard fact again. Alot of these people can't do basic, necessary things.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
Libbie, I guess you either didn't read my posts or totally missed the part where I said it was perfectly acceptable to find someone's posting style abrasive and say so. What I took exception to was you calling Bob, the person Bob, abrasive. Had you simply said "I find your posting style abrasive" I would certainly not have had anything to say to you about it.
All I wanted to point out is that labeling someone you can't possibly know well is probably not a good idea. Criticize the ideas or the posting style all you want to, but keep your snap judgments about people to yourself. That's all I'm suggesting, you're free to accept that advice or ignore it as you please.
Posted by rivka (Member # 4859) on :
*agrees with Belle*
Posted by Elizabeth (Member # 5218) on :
"I absolutely understand about the students who can't read."
Well, by not being able to read, I do not mean the children are illiterate. What I mean is that they are unable to find the information they need in a reading passage.
The guided reading exercise is something which all of us who are "good readers" automatically do. Once I recognize that someone is able to pull information from a reading selection, I can move them on to more open-ended reading assignments. The kids who have trouble, though, I will take step by step. Most teachers I know will do this. Still, it takes a little time to figure out my students' reading strengths and weaknesses, and I hate to base that on their records. I like to see it for myself.
One thing I do is read aloud. It gives those who have a tough time reading a chance to join in a conversation about a story that they would most likely not be able to read. I choose a book that is above the fifth grade reading level, and we have amazing discussions.
My dad taught for forty-five years. One of the things he was OK with(which surprised me), was letting kids see a movie before reading a book. This is anaethema to me. But his point was that many kids need the visual picture BEFORE they read. I have such a strong visualization of what I read that I do not want that marred by seeing a movie first.
So, in general, I would just caution good readers in their judgement of teachers' decisions to teach reading in a prescriptive, direct way. Many kids really, really need it. For those who don't, the hope is that the curriculum is differentiated enough that they are challenged. Let me tell you, these kids are the challenges for teachers, not those who are struggling. (at least, that is my case)
A fellow teacher said to me, when I asked about what he did for the advanced kids, "Kids who are that advanced need to have courses taught after school, or they need to go to private school. Public school teachers need to focus on raising the scores of the lower students."
I felt like throwing up. I completely disagree. What NCLB has done to the advanced learner is a crime much greater than what has been "done" to students of low skill. We are told to focus on raising particular scores. It gets down to data, like, Johnny B. needs to gain two points on his MCAS so he will show improvement. Therefore, top students are left to flail on their own, since we can count on their scores to be high.
This is a different discussion, but not really. A reader with a high reading level should not have to do guided reading. They should get the questions at the end, or display their knowledge in another way. It can be done. All levels can be taught in one classroom, and kids can feel OK about whatever level they are working at. The problem is, many teachers are so afraid to spend the time to develop a community in their classrooms where all levels of learning are respected, that it often backfires. I make it very clear that there are two things which will really piss me off: 1. Making fun of someone who makes a mistake. 2. Giving a substitute a hard time.
Once I make it clear that everyone in the room has the right to make a mistake without the fear of ridicule, the ridiculing stops. But so many people are afraid to "waste" the time, because they are focused on following their state guidelines. Integrated curriculum? Great idea! Sorry, I can't do that. I have to get through such and such unit.
We are raising a bunch of kids who cannot make connections, because they are not allowed to see connections happen naturally. Gameboy theory again. Learning is compartmentalized. It is really tough to say: is education creating this style of learning, or is the culture of youth creating this style of education? Either way, it seems like there are more square pegs for round holes.
Sorry for the babbling. I am really trying to figure this out. If it seems like I have a strong opinion, I really don't. I have a strong inkling, and I am worried that what is being done with NCLB is setting us back. Way back. There are changes occurring in kids that are greater than we have ever seen, and I think we are missing the boat.
Again, sorry for the rant/babble. It has been much on my mind these days, as we spend hours upon hours "analyzing the data."
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
I don't know what the difference between "you are abrasive" and "you come across as abrasive" could be since abrasiveness describes how you come across to others.
Posted by Megan (Member # 5290) on :
One describes the person that you are and makes a judgment on your inherent being (Bob's Bobness). The other describes how you said something, which may or may not have anything to do with your inherent being. So, Bob's post may have come across as abrasive (depending your POV), but Bob's inherent Bobness cannot be called abrasive from one post.
Or, I could just be blowing smoke. And trying to avoid doing work that I need to be doing.
Plus, I wanted an excuse to post something using the word Bobness. Posted by Libbie (Member # 9529) on :
quote:Originally posted by Belle: Libbie, I guess you either didn't read my posts or totally missed the part where I said it was perfectly acceptable to find someone's posting style abrasive and say so. What I took exception to was you calling Bob, the person Bob, abrasive. Had you simply said "I find your posting style abrasive" I would certainly not have had anything to say to you about it.
All I wanted to point out is that labeling someone you can't possibly know well is probably not a good idea. Criticize the ideas or the posting style all you want to, but keep your snap judgments about people to yourself. That's all I'm suggesting, you're free to accept that advice or ignore it as you please.
Aha, gotcha. I guess I misunderstood the point you were making.
Posted by Libbie (Member # 9529) on :
quote:Originally posted by Elizabeth: He will find this Bob-praise abrasive, though, so I shall stop.
Posted by Libbie (Member # 9529) on :
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head: I don't know what the difference between "you are abrasive" and "you come across as abrasive" could be since abrasiveness describes how you come across to others.
That's what I thought, too, m_p_h. I guess others interpret the whole "abrasive" thing differently, though. Fair enough.
Posted by Libbie (Member # 9529) on :
quote:Originally posted by Megan: One describes the person that you are and makes a judgment on your inherent being (Bob's Bobness). The other describes how you said something, which may or may not have anything to do with your inherent being. So, Bob's post may have come across as abrasive (depending your POV), but Bob's inherent Bobness cannot be called abrasive from one post.
Or, I could just be blowing smoke. And trying to avoid doing work that I need to be doing.
Plus, I wanted an excuse to post something using the word Bobness.
No, I suppose that makes it a bit clearer for me. And Bobness is a great word.
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
And here I was planning on doing my sanding with Bob.
Although I suppose Dana might not have liked that much.
Of course, I'm inclined to cut Bob a little slack right now if something he says doesn't come across as polite as he usually seems to try for, since he has a newborn living at his house.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
Liz, I actually knew what you mean by "can't read" but I was just sharing the extreme example. I find quite a few people can't really read with comprehension either- but to not be able to spell your name... that just stuck in my mind.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
quote:Originally posted by Elizabeth: A fellow teacher said to me, when I asked about what he did for the advanced kids, "Kids who are that advanced need to have courses taught after school, or they need to go to private school. Public school teachers need to focus on raising the scores of the lower students."
I felt like throwing up. I completely disagree. What NCLB has done to the advanced learner is a crime much greater than what has been "done" to students of low skill. We are told to focus on raising particular scores. It gets down to data, like, Johnny B. needs to gain two points on his MCAS so he will show improvement. Therefore, top students are left to flail on their own, since we can count on their scores to be high.
This is a good insight for you to have as a teacher. I was a california public school student just as some changes were being made in the 90s, and I remember spending a large amount of class time preparing, specifically, in the 4th grade, for a standardized test- I think it was the CTBS test. We even had to learn what kind of answers the test was looking for, and it was incredibly pointless and frustrating.
What was wierd about junior high for me was that it seemed I was really good at things that didn't get graded. I could write a really good essay or put together a decent book report, but it seemed that I was graded on a rubrick I didn't understand. I was always being told that my work was good, but that I needed to follow instructions and pay attention to the assignment. I had one teacher, an English teacher in the 7th grade, who's assignments I NEVER understood. I would leave each class asking myself what the assignments were about, and I would go home lost every day. Its not that I was way smarter than anyone, but I just didn't have the focus to allow me to look at an assignment and say: ok, circle the adverbs. I would just do the thing as quickly as humanly possible and never care what the grades were when they were returned. Then the writing assignments were my bread and butter, but again, I was trying to write interestingly, and the teacher was trying to show me how to properly parse my sentences. I still have parsing issues.
Over the long haul, the student with some intellectual interest wins out and goes to college, but without the tools he or she needs to really get down to the interesting material without distraction. I am still quite appalled by certain papers I read, written by music classmates who are brilliant people. Their writing just doesn't work, on a technical level; and I always stop myself and ask how it is possible that 21 year old student could write in the school newspaper:
"The problems of the recording industry can be translated to the way students download music on their computers instead of buying them."
This is a sentence that appeared in our paper. It reads like a foreign language translation, or a computerized thesaurus exercise...
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:From my perspective, it looked more like you were telling everybody that their opinions were wrong, because you said so. That is something that I find dense and abrasive.
What I don't get is that much of this thread consisted of people stating that others' opinions were wrong: the teacher, or whoever made up the assignment, to start with.
I've always been amazed that the person who first posts an opinion gets a free ride. If person X posts an opinion, "This is stupid/a waste of time/whatever," he has made a bald statement asserting that opinion.
When person Y posts "This is not stupid" in response, person y is often held to a higher standard of discourse. Demands are made for the reasons - when no reasons for the opposite opinion have been posted. Or someone claims that person Y is just telling someone they are wrong.
in this thread, a lot of people posted a lot of opinions. Many of those opinions clashed. Had many of the negative opinions been told to the person who designed the program, many would consider them abrasive. Yet, when someone doesn't even state the opposite opinion, but rather simply says "You all need to know more to form a proper opinion about this," he's labeled abrasive.
I truly don't get this attitude. Again, it seems like the first person to post on a topic gets a free pass from a lot of social rules people attempt to impose on others.
Posted by Libbie (Member # 9529) on :
quote:Originally posted by ketchupqueen: And here I was planning on doing my sanding with Bob.
HA!!
quote: Of course, I'm inclined to cut Bob a little slack right now if something he says doesn't come across as polite as he usually seems to try for, since he has a newborn living at his house.
Oh, that's right, eh? Sleep is probably scarce around the Casa di Scopatz. I forgot about that.
Posted by Sterling (Member # 8096) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee: I've always been amazed that the person who first posts an opinion gets a free ride. If person X posts an opinion, "This is stupid/a waste of time/whatever," he has made a bald statement asserting that opinion.
When person Y posts "This is not stupid" in response, person y is often held to a higher standard of discourse. Demands are made for the reasons - when no reasons for the opposite opinion have been posted. Or someone claims that person Y is just telling someone they are wrong.
in this thread, a lot of people posted a lot of opinions. Many of those opinions clashed. Had many of the negative opinions been told to the person who designed the program, many would consider them abrasive. Yet, when someone doesn't even state the opposite opinion, but rather simply says "You all need to know more to form a proper opinion about this," he's labeled abrasive.
I truly don't get this attitude. Again, it seems like the first person to post on a topic gets a free pass from a lot of social rules people attempt to impose on others.
I think that's an oversimplification.
The originator of the topic presents a particular set of facts on a particular situation and their judgement on the situation. It goes without saying- or it ought to- that those who agree with that judgement do so on the basis of the information presented, and recognizing that perhaps not all information available about the situation has been given, nor is it necessarily possible that all information on the situation has been given.
When someone else refutes that statement based on their own assumptions, without further information on the specific situation, it is entirely reasonable that their point not be given equal weight.
Now, I don't think Bob's point is unreasonable, and he certainly has every right to broach the possibility that there might be more to the given situation than meets the eye. However, he does so on the basis of his own perspective, which apparently includes a greater faith in the good intentions of the academic bureaucracy in question, and not based on the information given.
Further, the originator of the topic clearly created it in a desire to vent about the unfairness and unreasonableness of the situation. Thus it behooves the polite to broach their alternate views of the situation with some tact, as being seen to dismiss an unfairness out of hand and to contradict the originator's story based solely on personal opinion can easily be seen as merely being contrary and rude.
And just to make myself clear, I'm not saying you are being contrary and rude, Bob, though I think perhaps all sides are getting a bit more heated than is entirely necessary.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:One describes the person that you are and makes a judgment on your inherent being (Bob's Bobness). The other describes how you said something, which may or may not have anything to do with your inherent being.
To me, that sounds like describing the difference between looking blue and being blue.
If you look blue, you're blue. There's no innate "blueness" distinguishable from appearing blue.
Posted by Rohan (Member # 5141) on :
quote: To me, that sounds like describing the difference between looking blue and being blue.
If you look blue, you're blue. There's no innate "blueness" distinguishable from appearing blue.
I was kind of thinking the same thing, but this says it better. Is it that people are more likely to take offense at "you are a fool" than "your opinion is foolish"?
Elizabeth, your posts have been fascinating.
Posted by Juxtapose (Member # 8837) on :
On the original topic, I like that this assignment is very open-ended. The connections the kids can draw is automatically tailored to what most interests them. A student who's an advanced reader will hopefully draw much different connections than one who is struggling. In that way it's great, as Elizabeth pointed out, for the teacher to get an idea of the students level. Compare this assignment with a simple response worksheet, for example. Cookie-cutter questions like "where and when does this story take place," will probably elicit identical responses.
But really, every page? I don't think I'd get past page 20. What about every chapter, or every 5 pages?
Posted by ketchupqueen (Member # 6877) on :
Orincoro, I was a student in the same system at the same time, and I remember the CTBS test-- but none of my teachers spent more than two days of the year "teaching to" the test, and that was just going over what was going to happen on the test, mostly.
Incidentally, we were in the top 5% of schools, CTBS scores-wise.
Posted by Orincoro (Member # 8854) on :
oh, I think for the CTBS test, the scores really don't depend on the school district. Maybe I am oversimplifying, but it occurs to me that at that age, the ability to do well on those tests is not imparted by the school, but by the parents and the general level of precociousness of the child. If a child is already smart, the school might help a little, but at the age of ten, what you can do and what the kid next to you can do is probably more a matter of natural ability than schooling. I could be wrong, but I think this is a genuine flaw in giving standardized tests at that age- its testing the ability to be tested (as tired as that point is, I know), is even more true at that age than at the highschool level, where teachers have had a shot at engaging students in some advanced levels of analysis and depth of knowledge.
I seem to recall that in my elementary school years, I spent one day every two weeks learning something new, and the rest of the time doing nothing. Half the class would sit abjectly bored, listening to the teacher explain something to the half that didn't get it. I seem to recall quite a bit of gazing out the window (we did have a good view), and reading under my desk in the 2nd-4th grades. It wasn't that half the class knew more than the other half, its just that everybody learned at one speed, and we didn't know better than to simply accept boredom as a part of school.
I was thinking of Liz's conversation with that other teacher- and it occured to me that he may be right, with the wrong attitude. If the schools are commited to teaching the slower kids, why not stop all this business of social promotion and holding the other kids back in a slower curriculum? My highschool offered 7 periods a day of classes, and a large variety of possible schedules. There were honors classes in every subject, and remedial classes in every subject, as well as regular classes. I started off my HS career in all regular classes, and by the time I was a junior I had "jumped up" to honors in every subject by getting A's in regular classes. This made perfect sense. It requires a more complex system, but it makes good sense. I didn't ever get that chance in elementary school, and I realize more and more that the experience did nothing but hold me back and mire me in the system that was designed for people (at least where I grew up) who are now in gangs, dealing drugs, or working at gas stations and as menial laborers. Nothing wrong with that, but out of all the people I was in the 6th grade with, I am one of 5 to go to college, that I know of, out of around 60.
[ October 02, 2006, 01:47 AM: Message edited by: Orincoro ]
Posted by Megan (Member # 5290) on :
quote:Originally posted by mr_porteiro_head:
quote:One describes the person that you are and makes a judgment on your inherent being (Bob's Bobness). The other describes how you said something, which may or may not have anything to do with your inherent being.
To me, that sounds like describing the difference between looking blue and being blue.
If you look blue, you're blue. There's no innate "blueness" distinguishable from appearing blue.
Well, maybe you're just blue on the surface. Or maybe only one of your fingers is blue, and it just so happens that your blue finger was the one that was showing at that particular moment. We can't extrapolate from that one finger that you're entirely blue.
Also, there's a world of complexity to human beings that descriptions of color simply don't cover. Blue, while visual, isn't really a matter of individual perception. Unless I have an odd form of colorblindness, when you see blue, I'll see blue. The same cannot be said of abrasiveness. Now, we might see different shades of blue, depending on the acuity of our eyesight or the name we think of for colors (I may see robin's egg blue, while you see sky blue). I think that scale is more along the lines of the comparison I was trying to make than the blue/not-blue dichotomy in your analogy.
Posted by Bob_Scopatz (Member # 1227) on :
In regards to abrasiveness on Hatrack, I would prefer a "no excuses" attitude. If I was abrasive, I will apologize, eventually. I always do. I wish that others who (I feel) truly are destructive of Hatrack would realize it every once in awhile and change their behavior, or at least apologize for it occassionally. I'm not yet ready to apologize more than I already have, but I will get there if it turns out I've actually stomped on someone's feelings. I know I was not my gentle nudging Bob-self in this thread, but there are times I won't be. Blanket statements about teachers are one of the issues that bring out my more direct-speaking self. If I apologize about it this time, it will be with the proviso that it'll happen the next time too. I absolutely HATE that kind of thing. There are other topics that will bring this out in me and I won't apologize for them either. But if I do misunderstand someone and hurt their feelings in the process, I will ALWAYS apologize for it, and I will try to be more careful next time. It's still a learning process for me -- how to be precise and direct online. If you were in front of me, you would've just gotten "the look" and this whole discussion would've ended a long time ago, I suspect.
In the meantime, I felt like there were several people on this thread who were NOT expressing a personal opinion (contrary to what Libbie said) about what they thought of the exercise, but were instead making unwarranted categorical statements about its value as a pedagogical technique and what it would do to the minds of children exposed to it. One person has tried to lump this technique in with artificial reward systems and one author's thesis (I won't yet say "research") on that topic, and then accuse me of not being aware of the "latest findings" on how bad our education system is for children.
If I'm wrong on any of this, please go ahead and let me know, but here's some evidence of what this thread looks like (in general) from my perspective:
The threads title, for example, claims that this technique is responsible for people in general hating to read. I know the person starting the thread didn't intend to make such a sweeping generalization, so I made a comment.
Secondly, when I read the initial post and several that followed it -- not stating so much how THEY PERSONALLY would've viewed this assignment, but how the assignment (and by extension the teacher) was just plain wrong, it hit one of my hot buttons.
And, clearly, the people doing so were making statements that they couldn't back up with anything like real knowledge of the situation. Not even the original poster has given us full details, so we can't even judge from the incident.
Look...if this was "clearly venting" then fine, I was MUCH too strong in my response. But if people would care to go back and retract all statements about teachers, the educational system, this teacher in particular, and the effect of this assignment on the general populace, I will gladly retract my one or two statements that are probably over the top.
I have not once commented negatively on someone's personal opinion about this technique and what they would've felt about it. I think people may have misinterpreted there, if they think I was attacking their personal revulsion to it. But, hey, I also expressed MY personal opinion that this technique wouldn't be my choice of how to read anything.
I also note that some people have assumed the reading assignments are all novels. Does it actually say that anywhere, or is Elizabeth's post a more accurate description -- short assignments of non-fiction given in a "reading excercise" context and not in language arts?
By the way, Elizabeth, I was appreciative of your posts in this thread. I was hoping one of the teachers with some background here would share their experiences with us. Thank you!
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:Originally posted by Sterling:
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee: I've always been amazed that the person who first posts an opinion gets a free ride. If person X posts an opinion, "This is stupid/a waste of time/whatever," he has made a bald statement asserting that opinion.
When person Y posts "This is not stupid" in response, person y is often held to a higher standard of discourse. Demands are made for the reasons - when no reasons for the opposite opinion have been posted. Or someone claims that person Y is just telling someone they are wrong.
in this thread, a lot of people posted a lot of opinions. Many of those opinions clashed. Had many of the negative opinions been told to the person who designed the program, many would consider them abrasive. Yet, when someone doesn't even state the opposite opinion, but rather simply says "You all need to know more to form a proper opinion about this," he's labeled abrasive.
I truly don't get this attitude. Again, it seems like the first person to post on a topic gets a free pass from a lot of social rules people attempt to impose on others.
I think that's an oversimplification.
The originator of the topic presents a particular set of facts on a particular situation and their judgement on the situation. It goes without saying- or it ought to- that those who agree with that judgement do so on the basis of the information presented, and recognizing that perhaps not all information available about the situation has been given, nor is it necessarily possible that all information on the situation has been given.
When someone else refutes that statement based on their own assumptions, without further information on the specific situation, it is entirely reasonable that their point not be given equal weight.
It goes without saying- or it ought to- that those who disagree with that judgement do so on the basis of the information presented - both in the original post and any additional information in the response.
When someone else refutes that statement based on their own assumptions, without further information on the specific situation, it is entirely reasonable to assume that their opinion is based on the information presented.
quote:Now, I don't think Bob's point is unreasonable, and he certainly has every right to broach the possibility that there might be more to the given situation than meets the eye. However, he does so on the basis of his own perspective, which apparently includes a greater faith in the good intentions of the academic bureaucracy in question, and not based on the information given.
Assuming for the sake of argument that your characterization is accurate, this puts that opinion on the exact same basis as the opinion to which it was a response.
quote:Further, the originator of the topic clearly created it in a desire to vent about the unfairness and unreasonableness of the situation. Thus it behooves the polite to broach their alternate views of the situation with some tact, as being seen to dismiss an unfairness out of hand and to contradict the originator's story based solely on personal opinion can easily be seen as merely being contrary and rude.
The idea that merely posting a contrary opinion lacks tact is exactly what I don't get.
Posted by mr_porteiro_head (Member # 4644) on :
quote:Is it that people are more likely to take offense at "you are a fool" than "your opinion is foolish"?
Here, I disagree. It is very possible to act foolishly without being a fool. Half the sea lies between those two.
quote:Well, maybe you're just blue on the surface.
Goodness. What a nit to pick.
If you described a car as blue and I objected "It's not a blue car! It's only blue on the outside! If you scrape away the paint, it's not blue at all!", most people would roll their eyes and assume I wasn't being serious. Becaue, afterall, when we say that something is blue, that means is that it looks blue. It still being blue if we cut it open and expose the inside is not required.
Posted by Megan (Member # 5290) on :
Sure, I don't disagree with you on that at all. What I said in the rest of my post, though, was that, unlike the physical appearance of such an either/or quality, abrasiveness is a subjective quality. What seems abrasive to one person might not be objective to another. Also, a person might be abrasive sometimes and not abrasive all the time. So, the criticism might be stated, "You seemed abrasive in that post," or "That post was abrasive." To declare the entire person abrasive from one post, however, seems to me to be akin to declaring an entire car blue just because one its tires was blue.
Now, if the MAJORITY of the car is blue, then sure, call it a blue car. If you look at a car that is mostly red with one blue panel, you would probably call that car a red car. Unless you're being as silly as the "it's only blue on the outside" people, you're not going to say, "That 90% red/10% blue car."
Posted by El JT de Spang (Member # 7742) on :
quote:Once, my roommate was supposed to write a paper on Brothers Karamazov. He read one chapter in the book the night before, wrote a paper on it, and was given an A with the comment "Nice Focus".
By junior year of High School I refused to read our summer reading assignments (for those who didn't have these, they were a list of about ten novels, of which you would choose 4 to 6 to read and write a book report/analysis on). Because they were usually complete tripe. The weekend before school started I would go over to a friends' house and borrow two people's reports on a single book, read them, and then base my report on their reading.
I proofread their papers as I was reading them, so it worked out fine for them.
But I did then, and do now, refuse to read something that someone else insists I need to read. If I'm not interested in the blurb, or the summary, or the first chapter it's not worth my (valuable and limited) spare time to read.
---------
I wouldn't term Bob's posts in this thread abrasive, but he has been more in-your-face than I've ever seen him be on any topic. Less 'voice of calm and reason' and more 'let's see you prove that'. But I'm glad to see there are things that can get him riled up.
It's disconcerting when someone's unflappable.
Posted by Libbie (Member # 9529) on :
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee:
I truly don't get this attitude. Again, it seems like the first person to post on a topic gets a free pass from a lot of social rules people attempt to impose on others.
Well, Dagonee, like I said already, I called Bob abrasive (for which I already apologized, since apparently he is not) based on my reaction to how he was responding to my comments (or my perception of how he replied, at any rate). I can't speak to the entire culture of the internet, only to my own reaction. I perceived him to be reacting in a dismissive, somewhat mean manner, so that's how I reacted to the situation. Not because his opinion differed from mine, which I truly do not care about, but because of the way in which I thought he was presenting his opinion (in a manner suggesting that anybody who didn't agree with him was dead wrong and too dumb to comprehend what they read, end of discussion).
One of my many personality flaws is that I calls 'em like I sees 'em, even if I sees 'em incorrectly.
Posted by Libbie (Member # 9529) on :
quote:Originally posted by Juxtapose: On the original topic, I like that this assignment is very open-ended. The connections the kids can draw is automatically tailored to what most interests them. A student who's an advanced reader will hopefully draw much different connections than one who is struggling. In that way it's great, as Elizabeth pointed out, for the teacher to get an idea of the students level. Compare this assignment with a simple response worksheet, for example. Cookie-cutter questions like "where and when does this story take place," will probably elicit identical responses.
But really, every page? I don't think I'd get past page 20. What about every chapter, or every 5 pages?
Yeah, after reading Elizabeth's experiences with NCLB and teaching in general, it makes more sense to me...providing the teacher is tailoring it to suit all levels of learning represented in her classroom. I still think that every single page is overkill (maybe even exaggeration by a frustrated 11-year-old, who knows?). But after reading how Elizabeth would use an assignment like this, it makes somewhat more sense.
Posted by Libbie (Member # 9529) on :
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro:
I was thinking of Liz's conversation with that other teacher- and it occured to me that he may be right, with the wrong attitude. If the schools are commited to teaching the slower kids, why not stop all this business of social promotion and holding the other kids back in a slower curriculum?
Yeah, but it's a huge mistake for that guy to believe that all gifted kids' parents can afford private schooling. I know it would have been absolutely out of the question for my family, and my sister and I were as smart as they come in elementary school. For my sister, who is older than I, the school district elected to push her ahead a grade so she could learn at a more advanced level. For me, they stuck me in a part-time gifted program, but there was a two-year waiting list, and it was only twice a week.
I don't even want to know how NCLB would have affected me as a kiddo. Posted by pH (Member # 1350) on :
JT, I got to be somewhat like you. Except I would start reading the book, and if it couldn't hold my interest by the first half (or the first few chapters if it was exceedingly boring), I wouldn't finish it. Then when it came time to discuss in class, I'd volunteer opinions based on either what I'd read or as a counter to what others were saying. I usually had some idea of what the book was about to start anyway. I am an expert on writing papers with this method:
1. Have an idea of what the book is about. 2. Flip through book to random pages. 3. Pick out passages that seem interesting or fun to analyze. 4. Write paper based on passages and storyline.
I read the books I liked, though. And the books that I liked might've been kind of surprising at the time. I love Jude the Obscure, for example. It's probably my favorite book. Crime and Punishment? Meh.
-pH
Posted by Dagonee (Member # 5818) on :
quote:Originally posted by Libbie:
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee:
I truly don't get this attitude. Again, it seems like the first person to post on a topic gets a free pass from a lot of social rules people attempt to impose on others.
Well, Dagonee, like I said already, I called Bob abrasive (for which I already apologized, since apparently he is not) based on my reaction to how he was responding to my comments (or my perception of how he replied, at any rate).
In the post in which you called him abrasive, you quoted his response to someone else, not you, so I'm not quite sure how I was supposed to figure that out.
quote:I can't speak to the entire culture of the internet, only to my own reaction. I perceived him to be reacting in a dismissive, somewhat mean manner, so that's how I reacted to the situation. Not because his opinion differed from mine, which I truly do not care about, but because of the way in which I thought he was presenting his opinion (in a manner suggesting that anybody who didn't agree with him was dead wrong and too dumb to comprehend what they read, end of discussion).
My point is that, on an ongoing basis, I see accusations of this type levied when the posting of the original opinion is just as blunt.
And the negative opinions about this assignment were just as blunt as anything Bob said. So, the question is, why is a person more abrasive for posting an opinion that flat out contradicts someone else than a person who posts the contradictory opinion first?
Posted by Juxtapose (Member # 8837) on :
quote:posted by Libbie: Yeah, after reading Elizabeth's experiences with NCLB and teaching in general, it makes more sense to me...providing the teacher is tailoring it to suit all levels of learning represented in her classroom. I still think that every single page is overkill (maybe even exaggeration by a frustrated 11-year-old, who knows?). But after reading how Elizabeth would use an assignment like this, it makes somewhat more sense.
And what if, gasp, I'm really really INTO the book? I know my work (and handwriting) would suffer horribly as I try to scratch out a thought in under four seconds because I NEED to know if Samantha is really dead or not.
Hopefully the teacher is willing to make some allowances for climactic portions.
"Samantha's alive! YAY" - check-minus.
Posted by Belle (Member # 2314) on :
quote:Is it that people are more likely to take offense at "you are a fool" than "your opinion is foolish"?
Well, I certainly would find the first instance more offensive than the second, because I believe it's possible for intelligent people to sometimes hold foolish opinions but it doesn't make them foolish people. In fact, why bother debating or talking if you don't think the people talking with you are intelligent enough to possibly re-evaluate their opinions? If you think they're just stupid fools, why even bother conversing with them?
I prefer to consider us all intelligent, reasonable people who happen to disgree with each other on occasion.
Posted by Adam_S (Member # 9695) on :
quote:Their reading assignments go like this: for every single page they read in any book that they read have to write a "prediction" or a "connection" or an "observation". Technically, they were supposed to do two of those per page, but the teacher thought that was too difficult. Not too mention the multitude of book reports and analyses and what have you
I would presume this is supposed to help reading comprehension test scores.
Funny, the number one strategy for reading comprehension tests is not to read the text immersively but to read the questions first so you can read the text selectively to find the right answers. That equals zero comprehension of the overall passage. Teaching reading comprehension to reading comprehension tests, in my opinion, destroys the possibility of reading for pleasure. That is a hideous chore of an assignment. I would encourage your sister not to complete it.
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Evil]](graemlins/evil.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
) were touted as products of my education on parent night. That's just my prediction based on experience.![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)