In the introduction, DiPrince and Thurston suggest that Unjournaling encourages students to "have fun with language" and that "silly writing really helps writers loosen up" (5). In prompt #201, when instructing the reader to "describe farting in a new light", they seem to take their advice to "loosen up" quite literally (58). Nonetheless, in the spirit of the assignment, here is my Ode to farting:
Shakespeare was wrong. Farting, not death, is the great equalizer. I fart. And like it or no, whether you are President Obama, Brad Pitt, Oprah, Tom Brady, J.K Rowling, Lady Gaga, Darth Vader, Osama Bin Laden, Sarah Palin, Captain Kirk, Mr. Rogers, Big Bird, or Mother effing Theresa, you fart too. Farting is a natural, biological process. Like breathing.
Unfortunately, when it comes to farting in public, there is an air of surliness that lingers in the obdurate hearts of the masses. We turn our noses to it. It is a social more that few are ever brave enough to break, and that plain stinks! We suffer enough stress day to day, why add needlessly to our burdens? And, as it turns out, farting freely has been the key to solving a majority of the modern citizen’s problems.
Experts have shown that holding a fart in causes a physical discomfort which triggers a complex chain reaction within the body that ultimately leads to a violent psychological disturbance of our otherwise mentally/psychically balanced selves. If we allowed ourselves to jake-brake freely, war, poverty, discrimination, and hatred would all cease to exist. Marriages would last longer. Literacy would increase. The economy would rebound. And as it turns out, unabashed farting is actually good for you too. In a highly scientific study just conducted by my brain, 99% of those who fart freely live healthier, longer lives.
Have we become that enslaved to certain social mores? I say no more to abruptly excusing yourself from your date to rush off to the public bathroom! It is only when we find the courage to fart in front of our partners that love becomes real. Farting makes the world a less frightening place (just think of OBL farting in some remote cave in Pakistan). Embrace the rapture, the pure sweet relief that comes with unencumbered release. Loosen up that sphincter and let ‘em rip. Dare to be the pioneer who makes a board meeting a little more interesting, who passes gas while sitting in class, who crop dusts while teaching class, who rocks the casbah while sitting on a flight from Pittsburgh to Paris, who unleashes the thunder from down under while acting on stage, who airbrushes their boxers while defending their dissertation. Rid your trunk of the ephemeral flatulent junk. Let ‘em fly. Let ‘em rip. Become a public farting advocate - you’ll gain my vote and my respect. I’ll be doing a lot more farting in the future. And whether you admit it or no, you will be too. Tear down the walls that have been holding relief hostage. The world needs more farters in it. Your sphincter will thank you. The world will thank you, and I with it.
Bottoms Up!
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Okay. You got me. There is no prompt #201 on page 58, but there is prompt #190 on page 56 that I thought would be fun to modify slightly for the purpose of this class. Did anyone fall for it?
Saturday, October 30, 2010
Thursday, October 28, 2010
Assessing and Evaluating-- or, why I will never teach
In this chapter, Williams describes exactly the confusion I face when I read over my peers' papers or when I attempt to write one myself. Sadly, the first thing I consider as a student is usually the professor-- do I know the professor? what does she/he like? will she/he allow me to resubmit this for a better grade?
As a professor, however, I do not know how I would grade writing reliably so that it would be "consistent across evaluators and across time" (304). To me, this seems like a lot of pressure. Before reading this chapter, I assumed that, if by chance I do become an English teacher down the road, I could simply form my own "taste" for writing and grade accordingly. After all, this is how I have learned to write-- with evaluators and their different tastes in mind first and foremost. Williams calls this type of behavior out in Chapter 16, and he has made me glad once again that I am not pursuing a career in education. My assumptions about teaching were all wrong. And I had a feeling they were.
Another aspect of teaching that Williams points out, and that I am glad to avoid, is the workload. I have recently dug through a bunch of my papers I have written throughout college, and I have found exactly the types of comments Williams describes on page 315: little comments scribbled in the margins, then a paragraph at the end that seems to begin in a celebratory tone-- stating the positives of my paper-- and then shift to a more constructive tone to describe my weaknesses.
Overall, I found that Williams once again spends the majority of this chapter's pages to tearing down the traditional writing pedagogy with which I am most familiar. He then proceeds to offer research supporting his claims, and then he finally offers better methods for assessing and evaluating writing. I must admit that I like his suggestions for improvement. I was glad to see that I have experienced some of these improved methods in several classes. I like the idea of universal grading for writing, and I believe that Williams's suggestions could steer future teachers toward a reliable scale.
Posted for Mark
The problem with teaching language arts, as I have feared, is the pre-determined standards of correctness: or, rather, the lack of black and white guidelines for interpreting the skills of the student. In some way, I believe the notion is what attracted me to language arts in the first place. Understanding the complexities of assessment in our discipline leaves a lot of room for bad assessments.
When considering the objective of meeting a standard, we, in language arts, realize that a standard must be in place in order to achieve a measurement of some sorts of our students’ grasp of the subject-matter. But this standard only exists when we allow for the view points of someone—whether at the school or state level—to have credibility. I guess I am wondering what gives any one person or any panel the authoritative license to dub an interpretation or criticism of any literary work as a standard.
Even applying all the key factors in assessment, any teacher teaches any given child for one year’s time. Now at the end of one year’s time a general assessment is finalized and students either get to the top of—unless they’ve been there already—the class, get to the middle, or stay or fall to the bottom (the average, of course, being in the middle). But one year’s time cannot determine which student ultimately develops into a great writer over a longer measurement of time. And the fallacy of our assessment system is that it measures some “improvement” within a narrow framework of time, based on a standard that may or may not be valid. The rightness or wrongness of interpreting text is one thing. But the rightness and wrongness of expressing oneself by way of writing is another.
All factors of assessment have limitations. For instance, there have been many instances—as I have witnessed myself—which fly in the face of the predictability of one’s future performance in their later academic endeavors. Also, the issue of equity falls short with any given assessment in a particular group. The “fairness” factor necessarily falls short because of the endless amounts of differences between one student and the next.
So, gaining an “accurate” assessment of students’ abilities within small units of time—because this our most “efficient” way of doing so—categorizes students and artificially dubs them either good, average, or bad writers. I know, there must be some grading. But that one year’s assessment doesn’t stop after that one year, not for the student. They carry that “ranking with them. I apologize for the wordiness and hope my quantity did not out at least some quality. It is a manic day!
When considering the objective of meeting a standard, we, in language arts, realize that a standard must be in place in order to achieve a measurement of some sorts of our students’ grasp of the subject-matter. But this standard only exists when we allow for the view points of someone—whether at the school or state level—to have credibility. I guess I am wondering what gives any one person or any panel the authoritative license to dub an interpretation or criticism of any literary work as a standard.
Even applying all the key factors in assessment, any teacher teaches any given child for one year’s time. Now at the end of one year’s time a general assessment is finalized and students either get to the top of—unless they’ve been there already—the class, get to the middle, or stay or fall to the bottom (the average, of course, being in the middle). But one year’s time cannot determine which student ultimately develops into a great writer over a longer measurement of time. And the fallacy of our assessment system is that it measures some “improvement” within a narrow framework of time, based on a standard that may or may not be valid. The rightness or wrongness of interpreting text is one thing. But the rightness and wrongness of expressing oneself by way of writing is another.
All factors of assessment have limitations. For instance, there have been many instances—as I have witnessed myself—which fly in the face of the predictability of one’s future performance in their later academic endeavors. Also, the issue of equity falls short with any given assessment in a particular group. The “fairness” factor necessarily falls short because of the endless amounts of differences between one student and the next.
So, gaining an “accurate” assessment of students’ abilities within small units of time—because this our most “efficient” way of doing so—categorizes students and artificially dubs them either good, average, or bad writers. I know, there must be some grading. But that one year’s assessment doesn’t stop after that one year, not for the student. They carry that “ranking with them. I apologize for the wordiness and hope my quantity did not out at least some quality. It is a manic day!
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
write, wrITE, WRITE!
Generally, I never regurgitate text. As many who have read my blog know, I tend to write in a stream-of-consciousness format that dances around within the required reading of the week. Sometimes this works, other times it feels messy. After last week’s discussion, I have selected one topic that REALLY stood out for me this week (as I have been contemplating this issue in my mind before stumbling on it). I’ll try to make this work ;)
A concern I have as an educator is how I can give enough focus to an individual student’s work among a towering load of papers. In my student observation, I have been given the task to work with one student to help them improve their performance. After doing this task for less than a week, I am concerned as to how I will be able to monitor the performance of 30-90 other students each week. Is it easier to communicate a student’s errors and mistakes on paper or in a one-on-one meeting? Williams notes, “Given the labor-intensive nature of writing comments, teachers have only two choices when deciding on a method. They can assign little writing but try to provide copious written comments, or they can assign much writing but make few, if any, written comments. Most teachers opt for the first choice” (314). I’m not certain that I agree with this.
I personally prefer greater workloads. Not necessarily more papers and greater length, but a strong emphasis on daily journals and a few larger papers as the semester rolls along. I believe that giving a daily prompt (with a small focus on time, maybe 5-7 minutes) will not only allow students the opportunity to get their creative juices flowing, but allow them to develop their craft. This also works to my advantage as well. If we collect the journals quarterly (or more), we will be able to notice patterns of error that a student may frequently make. If we can recognize these patterns early, we will be able to note their progress on a much more frequent basis. I believe this will also decrease the possibility that these mistakes will appear in much more significant writing pieces. I could be totally wrong with this assumption, but I think it is worth a go.
A concern I have as an educator is how I can give enough focus to an individual student’s work among a towering load of papers. In my student observation, I have been given the task to work with one student to help them improve their performance. After doing this task for less than a week, I am concerned as to how I will be able to monitor the performance of 30-90 other students each week. Is it easier to communicate a student’s errors and mistakes on paper or in a one-on-one meeting? Williams notes, “Given the labor-intensive nature of writing comments, teachers have only two choices when deciding on a method. They can assign little writing but try to provide copious written comments, or they can assign much writing but make few, if any, written comments. Most teachers opt for the first choice” (314). I’m not certain that I agree with this.
I personally prefer greater workloads. Not necessarily more papers and greater length, but a strong emphasis on daily journals and a few larger papers as the semester rolls along. I believe that giving a daily prompt (with a small focus on time, maybe 5-7 minutes) will not only allow students the opportunity to get their creative juices flowing, but allow them to develop their craft. This also works to my advantage as well. If we collect the journals quarterly (or more), we will be able to notice patterns of error that a student may frequently make. If we can recognize these patterns early, we will be able to note their progress on a much more frequent basis. I believe this will also decrease the possibility that these mistakes will appear in much more significant writing pieces. I could be totally wrong with this assumption, but I think it is worth a go.
blog 10
First, I'm not quite sure I agree with Williams' assertion on page 308 about students with good vocabulary using having better writing skills, and, therefore, standardized testing on vocab is a good measure of a student's writing ability. I've never used or even SEEN one, but don't they make those SAT vocab books? How easy would it be to memorize those meanings, memorize a few of the sentences the word is used in, and pass the test that way? Even if students aren't passing the vocab section that way, I really can't agree that having a good vocabulary means you're a good writer. Now, if the student scores well on, say, the reading comprehension part, I'd be willing to agree that student has a good grasp of writing. Good readers are usually good writers. Not always, but usually.
On pages 309-10, Williams talks about the correlation between performance and funding, and that there is very little correlation between more funding and higher performance. He references schools out in Ohio that were given plenty of funding, but had low performance and average to above-average performing schools had less funding. Who would have guessed that some problems just can't be solved by throwing money at it? (I hope you caught the sarcasm..) It doesn't matter what kind of books or technologies a school has. If the teachers are lazy and the students don't care, performance is going to be low. We need teachers who are willing to inspire students to work hard and actually learn some things. That's a hard task...humongous, really. But it takes time and perseverance to get through to ALL students.
Similarly, if students are going to learn anything about writing, we need to be willing to invest time into giving detailed, constructive comments to our students. Like Adrienne, there's nothing I hate more than an 88% on a paper with a "Great Job!" at the top and no comments. If I'd done a "great job," wouldn't I have gotten a 100%? Page 316 provides some good tips for evaluating papers. One of the ones I liked especially was reading each paper twice. Not every mistake or good point of a paper is going to shine through the first time. We need to slow down and really devote some quality time to each paper. Now, I know that's a little idealistic, but if we're going to teach these kids about writing, we're going to have to go above and beyond. As mentioned in class and in previous chapters of Williams' book, writing is a complicated process, and progression to becoming a better writer is slow. Feedback is essential if they're ever going to get better.
On pages 309-10, Williams talks about the correlation between performance and funding, and that there is very little correlation between more funding and higher performance. He references schools out in Ohio that were given plenty of funding, but had low performance and average to above-average performing schools had less funding. Who would have guessed that some problems just can't be solved by throwing money at it? (I hope you caught the sarcasm..) It doesn't matter what kind of books or technologies a school has. If the teachers are lazy and the students don't care, performance is going to be low. We need teachers who are willing to inspire students to work hard and actually learn some things. That's a hard task...humongous, really. But it takes time and perseverance to get through to ALL students.
Similarly, if students are going to learn anything about writing, we need to be willing to invest time into giving detailed, constructive comments to our students. Like Adrienne, there's nothing I hate more than an 88% on a paper with a "Great Job!" at the top and no comments. If I'd done a "great job," wouldn't I have gotten a 100%? Page 316 provides some good tips for evaluating papers. One of the ones I liked especially was reading each paper twice. Not every mistake or good point of a paper is going to shine through the first time. We need to slow down and really devote some quality time to each paper. Now, I know that's a little idealistic, but if we're going to teach these kids about writing, we're going to have to go above and beyond. As mentioned in class and in previous chapters of Williams' book, writing is a complicated process, and progression to becoming a better writer is slow. Feedback is essential if they're ever going to get better.
Teacher Comments on Papers
As a student, one of the most valued components of the receiving of graded papers is not necessarily the grade, but the teacher comments. If I receive a 90% on a paper, rather than 100%, I would like to know reasons why I didn't get the grade I thought I deserved and how I can improve my writing. It becomes very frustrating to see points taken off a paper, but no explanation, or worse yet, to see "Great job!" or some other bullshit feedback.
Since I know the frustration of lack of feedback or lack of quality of feedback, I hope to use that as perspective into what my students need to improve their writing. "Given the labor-intensive nature of writing comments..." (Williams 314). Hold it, right there. Yes, it's labor-intensive. Isn't it your JOB to provide feedback via written comments? "...teachers have only two choices when deciding on a method. They can assign little writing but try to provide copious written comments, or they can assign much writing but make few, if any, written comments. Most teachers opt for the first choice," (Williams 314). I believe that written feedback is important, but if a teacher is limited on time to write those comments, they can meet with students through conferences, allowing the students to receive that feedback they so desperately need.
Currently, my placement at Ben Franklin (Harrisburg School District) has revealed to me that 1. Kids aren't reading enough, leading to 2. Kids aren't writing enough. In a staff meeting yesterday, the principal told the teachers on my "team" that no matter the content area, the students need to be writing everyday. To most, this may seem excessive, but Harrisburg School District is ranked 498 out of 502 in standardized testing scores, leaving them far behind many schools in the area and almost the worst in the entire state. A component of the tests that was especially low was in writing proficiency, so to improve this, the assignment was given to have students writing everyday. That said, teachers cannot possibly look at 100 entries each day, and offer constructive, thorough feedback that the students both need and deserve. Over the next few weeks during my placement, I hope to try and problem-solve how these writing opportunities can turn into learning opportunities. Sometimes kids need to write just to become comortable with the process, but whenever possible, teachers need to (dare I say!?) earn their paychecks and do something other than a scantron sheet test.
Since I know the frustration of lack of feedback or lack of quality of feedback, I hope to use that as perspective into what my students need to improve their writing. "Given the labor-intensive nature of writing comments..." (Williams 314). Hold it, right there. Yes, it's labor-intensive. Isn't it your JOB to provide feedback via written comments? "...teachers have only two choices when deciding on a method. They can assign little writing but try to provide copious written comments, or they can assign much writing but make few, if any, written comments. Most teachers opt for the first choice," (Williams 314). I believe that written feedback is important, but if a teacher is limited on time to write those comments, they can meet with students through conferences, allowing the students to receive that feedback they so desperately need.
Currently, my placement at Ben Franklin (Harrisburg School District) has revealed to me that 1. Kids aren't reading enough, leading to 2. Kids aren't writing enough. In a staff meeting yesterday, the principal told the teachers on my "team" that no matter the content area, the students need to be writing everyday. To most, this may seem excessive, but Harrisburg School District is ranked 498 out of 502 in standardized testing scores, leaving them far behind many schools in the area and almost the worst in the entire state. A component of the tests that was especially low was in writing proficiency, so to improve this, the assignment was given to have students writing everyday. That said, teachers cannot possibly look at 100 entries each day, and offer constructive, thorough feedback that the students both need and deserve. Over the next few weeks during my placement, I hope to try and problem-solve how these writing opportunities can turn into learning opportunities. Sometimes kids need to write just to become comortable with the process, but whenever possible, teachers need to (dare I say!?) earn their paychecks and do something other than a scantron sheet test.
Blog 10
What is assessment?
I never really thought about the difference between assessment and evaluation before. I never considered them synonymous, but I found it hard to pin-point a difference between them before reading this section. I certainly agree with Williams that assessment is harder for writing teachers than the teachers of other subject majors. In high school, for math (and sometimes for other subjects where the answers were straight-forward) we would grade each other’s papers, and, other than the potential for cheating, it was an simple and accurate system for teachers to see how the class did on the assignment. With writing, though, it’s obviously not so straight forward. There is no wholly right or wholly wrong. When I was doing my observations last semester, I spent quite a bit of time grading papers, and it was amazing to me to see how broad the spectrum was throughout the class. Fortunately for me, though, the teacher had a very specific rubric that helped immensely.
There’s a quote on page 299 that I really like. Williams writes, “students who have been writing C papers for weeks will get excited about an idea or a project, will work on it for days, and will produce B work or better. . . . By the same token, students who generally are very good writers occasionally will stumble, producing a paper that is barely passing.” It goes on to say that in both cases not everything that a student submits will reflect his or her true ability. I can’t remember where I read about this, whether it was this class or my EDUC416 class, but this is one of the reasons I like the concept of a portfolio. Of course, I will have no way of knowing just how effective a portfolio is until I try it in a real world situation, but, as a theory, I think it sounds promising. With a portfolio, students could choose papers and projects (the quantity of which would be predetermined by the teacher beforehand) to submit in their portfolios. They could include the works of which they are the proudest, and they would not have to include the ones on which they did poorly. The portfolio would be weighted more heavily than individual papers themselves.
Key factors in assessment and evaluation
Validity
One of the earliest assertions of this section, the statement about assessing what was taught, reminded me of something my 10th grade teacher used to do. As part of our heading, he would instruct us to list specific factors, all of which we discussed in class, that he was going to be focusing on heavily when grading. I didn’t understand the purpose of it then, but now I see that he was trying to improve our work step by step by focusing on the new things we learned.
Reliability
This section talked about the SATs, and while I can understand where they’re coming from in their statements (the tests are all scored the same way so it’s an easily tabulated means to get a general overview of progress), I do not think the SATs are reliable. The knowledge of the students needed to pass the SATs says very little about that student’s actual writing skill.
Predictability
If assessment systems are so often unreliable, how can predictability be accurate?
Cost
The last sentence in the first paragraph (page 307) talks about “teaching to the test.” This is something that worries me. It seems like so much time is spent “teaching to the test” that important lessons get pushed to the side.
Fairness and Politics
The “fairness” section was short and straight-forward. I have nothing to add in response to this piece of text. As for the “politics” section, I have a hard time coming to a conclusion with political ends related to teaching. Because I’m not a teacher yet, I still look at it from an outsider’s perspective and I can only make unbacked, theory based assertions. The section made me think of me of a George Carlin comedy sketch. He said: “No Child Left Behind! Oh really? Well, it wasn’t long ago you were talking about giving kids a Head Start. ‘Head Start’? ‘Left Behind? Looks like someone’s loosing f***ing ground here.” Maybe that’s not the most relevant quote (or the most appropriate) but it’s what stuck in my mind as I was reading the “politics” section. Relating to the section itself, I have a hard time believing the assertion that funding has little to do with performance scores. How is a school that does not even have enough books for all students supposed to compete with a school with Smart Boards in every classroom?
Reducing the paper load
I like the quote on page 316 that says, “everything we know about how students learn indicates that improvement comes when comments are made on a draft that students will revise . . .” I completely agree with this. In high school, many of our papers were single draft submissions, so when we got our work back, even though we read the comments, we didn’t put the comments into practice because the paper was finished and it was time to move on to something different.
Holistic scoring
I like the idea of holistic scoring. I think it’s something I’d have to wait until I had a few years of teaching behind me before I attempt it though because there’s so much at risk if I don’t facilitate it correctly. I would hope that a process like holistic scoring would encourage students to reflect upon their own work, knowing in advance how their classmates would be grading their papers. Additionally, I liked the idea of students working together to develop their own rubric. I think they’d care more if it was their own creation.
Portfolio grading
Williams presents portfolios as an alternative to holistic scoring. Of the two, I prefer portfolios, but I would like to give holistic scoring a try sometime. I’ve already mentioned portfolios earlier in my post, so I won’t readdress it here.
Sample rubrics and sample papers
Being able to see examples was helpful for me, though I’m not sure if they needed to include quite so many examples.
Williams 297-344
Williams states “…funding is not a significant factor in student performance” (pg. 310) but after watching a reality show School Pride on NBC I have a hard time believing that. Proper funding ensures that the students have a safe environment, proper equipment-books, computers, supplies and qualified teachers. The one show that I watched featured a middle school in Compton. The buildings were in extreme disrepair-crumbling ceilings, restrooms that looked like outside gas station bathrooms, roaches, and rodents. The science teacher had to foot his own supply expenses and the other classrooms did not have adequate supplies. I would have to wonder if Williams would send his own kids to an under funded school in any area. I would bet that he would send his kids to a top rated private school and not have to worry about the public school system. The government, in an effort to try to get schools to adhere to certain testing standards, fund according to test scores. Teaching to the test has now become a must in order to ensure funding. “In many states, schools that show improvement in test scores are rewarded financially, whereas schools that fail to show improvement are “sanctioned”. Who is this punishing-the students or the teachers? I believe that the governments’ efforts in education have definitely backfired. Unfortunately, student’s education is all to often put in the hands of politicians who usually do not care about the students, but rather about getting into office.
One of my clients is dealing with a situation in her son’s school. Her son has been diagnosed as being autistic but the school is refusing to place him in an autistic classroom. She is seeking legal advice to fight this. One of the reasons the school may be refusing to place her son in the autistic classroom may be the high cost that comes with providing the educational needs of a special education student. Ultimately, it is the son who loses out on an education that would best suit him.
One of my clients is dealing with a situation in her son’s school. Her son has been diagnosed as being autistic but the school is refusing to place him in an autistic classroom. She is seeking legal advice to fight this. One of the reasons the school may be refusing to place her son in the autistic classroom may be the high cost that comes with providing the educational needs of a special education student. Ultimately, it is the son who loses out on an education that would best suit him.
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
Assessment Vs Evaluation
First of all extremely important and helpful chapter, not only for the teacher but also for a student who would like to have a better understanding of how he or she is being assessed. And what tools are being taken to assess the quality of a paper.
The definition of assessment is very well defined in this book. Deciding what to measure and the instruments used in measuring and using these instruments properly is what assessment should really be about.
I liked the Holistic Scoring approach that Williams talks about. The best part is that you would not really necessarily need a workshop to implement this approach. I think the hard part could be creating a general rubric, rubrics tend to be quite subjective and a rubric by a teacher may not be quite easy to follow by a student. But I guess a general basic rubric could be a start. I Still feel students should be asked to make their own rubrics just as Dr. Kearney asked us to make for our I search peer review. I think it is important that students learn to assess them at some point which can help them understanding how much they are deviating from their own set standards.
However the portfolio grading sounds more feasible and fun. Having the capability to choose the best papers and being evaluated on them. From a teacher's point of view not only does it save time and energy but I think it makes more sense because then the teacher will not have to spend tens of hours reading bad papers over and over again by hundreds of students. This approach may have several draw backs such as failure on the part of teachers to follow the portfolio protocols but between the two approaches, the portfolio approach seems more helpful.
But I am not quite sure about letting other students grade their peers in my class if I were ever to teach. But I would definitely have them write comments in the papers. I do not think that it is the student's job to grade another student. I think what truly helps is honest insights from different students to make a better paper. So I truly do not know if I would use the Holistic approach as promising as it may sound.
The suggestions on pg 316 on how to make written comments more useful were good ones.
It says to read a paper twice, actually depending on the depth and complexity of the paper, that number changes. But definitely any paper should be read more than once. Then another bullet point emphasizes on keeping comments short. Even if teachers find it hard to resist long comments for a good reason of course, but that may confuse the students more.
Finally the chapter ends with Sample papers and rubric which was interesting to read and extremely helpful.
blog number uh ten
On page 300, Williams refers to the regular practice of poor assessment standards and grade inflation amongst high schools: "The skills that served them [the students] well in high school will not enable them to excel at a university." If we are preparing our high school students for failure in college composition, this raises the question should we then adopt collegial standards for writing?
To the first question, which college's standard for writing would we choose? Harvard? Community College? For me, the one major difference between a college composition course and high school english was the emphasis on writing and not literature. While we did read and discuss various works, we never had to list all of the characters, describe the plot elements, or take vocabulary tests. College composition was mainly a student run discussion with the professor sometimes acting as facilitator and participant. Topics for our papers were chosen among a list, discussed with the professor, drafted and peer reviewed multiple times, and then published. A grade of B or higher in the class meant the paper was well-written, focused, and revised many times with intermittent discussions with the professor and the class. This was never ever the case in my high school english classes. We read books and answered boring right or wrong questions. I would write maybe four essays a year. If the focus was on the test, I never paid much attention but still managed to score in the 90th percentile or higher every year. Comparing and contrasting were such simple terms that I would have been insulted to have been given a graphic organizer highlighting them in the ninth grade. The key facet of my learning was that I enjoyed solving problems: this involved reading, putting together puzzles, or even organizing my room to highlight my trophies better. If something wasn't challenging, it was not worth my time, and I think this is how a lot of students feel when we give them boring worksheets. I wonder what would happen if we really let them discuss whatever they wanted regarding a book. Wouldn't there be comparing and contrasting, inferencing, mood, etc? If we foster a collegial sort of environment, where questions are nurtured and answers are student driven, a collegial standard for writing will follow.
To the first question, which college's standard for writing would we choose? Harvard? Community College? For me, the one major difference between a college composition course and high school english was the emphasis on writing and not literature. While we did read and discuss various works, we never had to list all of the characters, describe the plot elements, or take vocabulary tests. College composition was mainly a student run discussion with the professor sometimes acting as facilitator and participant. Topics for our papers were chosen among a list, discussed with the professor, drafted and peer reviewed multiple times, and then published. A grade of B or higher in the class meant the paper was well-written, focused, and revised many times with intermittent discussions with the professor and the class. This was never ever the case in my high school english classes. We read books and answered boring right or wrong questions. I would write maybe four essays a year. If the focus was on the test, I never paid much attention but still managed to score in the 90th percentile or higher every year. Comparing and contrasting were such simple terms that I would have been insulted to have been given a graphic organizer highlighting them in the ninth grade. The key facet of my learning was that I enjoyed solving problems: this involved reading, putting together puzzles, or even organizing my room to highlight my trophies better. If something wasn't challenging, it was not worth my time, and I think this is how a lot of students feel when we give them boring worksheets. I wonder what would happen if we really let them discuss whatever they wanted regarding a book. Wouldn't there be comparing and contrasting, inferencing, mood, etc? If we foster a collegial sort of environment, where questions are nurtured and answers are student driven, a collegial standard for writing will follow.
Chapter 10
This chapter brought up many points that, as a future educator, I have thought about or need to think about a lot more. The first that jumped out at me is the difference between assessment and evaluation. We have learned these textbook definitions in our education classes, but I find that the refresher on the meaning of the words is useful to begin this chapter. The idea that writing teachers "have a much harder job than any of their colleagues when it comes to evaluation...it is more difficult(Kindle, p6529)" rings true to me. Math, science, and history are held up to objective standards that cannot be deviated from. However, "with writing, the situation is significantly different..evaluation involves comparison on two levels: the standard set by other students in the class and by some pre-established standard of good writing(Kindle, p6535)" This has me wondering: WHERE does this pre-established standard of "good writing" comes from? After viewing my classmates rubrics and seeing how everyone, basically, has dissimilar ideas of what constitutes "good writing", it seems almost impossible to agree on ANYTHING.
However, later in the text, Williams mentions having students create a rubric of their own. "This procedure helps students to feel that the rubric is theirs, that it reflects their views on what successful responses will look like. The empowerment that comes from this procedure is highly beneficial to students and their progress as writers(Kindle, p7086)". The empowerment the students feel, I believe, makes them more passionate about their own writing, as well as more successful within their writing.
One thing that is ONCE AGAIN mentioned in Williams is the fact that teachers have such a heavy student load that they do not have time "to conduct numerous conferences(Kindle, p6664)" Unfortunately, in certain schools this is true. With so many students to tend to, one on one time is next to impossible ALL THE TIME. However, in the middle school I am observing in, when the teacher has too many students to conference with, she employs peer conferencing. It is interesting watching the students working together, because each student is learning from the other. Each is nervous and leery of sharing their thoughts and opinions, yet they grow from the experience. Overall, this chapter was very beneficial to me!
However, later in the text, Williams mentions having students create a rubric of their own. "This procedure helps students to feel that the rubric is theirs, that it reflects their views on what successful responses will look like. The empowerment that comes from this procedure is highly beneficial to students and their progress as writers(Kindle, p7086)". The empowerment the students feel, I believe, makes them more passionate about their own writing, as well as more successful within their writing.
One thing that is ONCE AGAIN mentioned in Williams is the fact that teachers have such a heavy student load that they do not have time "to conduct numerous conferences(Kindle, p6664)" Unfortunately, in certain schools this is true. With so many students to tend to, one on one time is next to impossible ALL THE TIME. However, in the middle school I am observing in, when the teacher has too many students to conference with, she employs peer conferencing. It is interesting watching the students working together, because each student is learning from the other. Each is nervous and leery of sharing their thoughts and opinions, yet they grow from the experience. Overall, this chapter was very beneficial to me!
Sunday, October 24, 2010
What to Do When You Catch Your Fillet Mignon Smoking Weed: A Survival Guide
High Steaks, get it?
While Williams does point out a number of flaws in high-stakes-testing, when it comes to assessing assessment he does not go far enough. Assessment is more than a political force; it is an economic one.
Let's talk about the giant duck in the room. ETS, NTE, SAT, SAT 9, ACT, GRE, LSAT, etc., etc., etc., are all money-making forces. These blood-sucking leeches have corrupted and decimated education to the point where- having morphed it into an INDUSTRY of profit and efficiency - education is no longer recognizable. It is in the industry's best interest to find, solicit, and elect politicians whose goals are most closely aligned with their own. As such, the newly forged education industry will doubtless prove a formidible opponent to topple. To maintain profit, it is in their best interest if the status quo does not change and they will fight tooth and nail to make sure it does not.
In the cold detached world of profit, loss, and bottom-line efficiency what room is there for the concerns of the student? Is it any wonder our system is failing? While Williams's discussion of Holistic scoring is well intended - it may even work within the industry to improve students' writing - Williams fails to address the over-arching problem of education as industry.
Students, not profit, should be the focus of any policy aimed at correcting perceived deficiencies in our educational system. To this end, Williams deserves some credit for unearthing some potential focal points for improvement, namely: writing as an incremental process; shifting demographics; class size; teachers working together; teacher pay; and the break down of the family. Williams describes writing as one of the most complex disciplines to assess (297). Therefore, it should follow that any solution for improvement should be equally complex (it should also look to undermine the education industry).
Imagine a world where, for writing, you had the same instructor from beginning to end. From grades 1 to 12. Let's stretch our imagination a bit further by suggesting that not only we have the same instructor, but the same group of 10 - 15 classmates for the same stretch of time(again just for writing). Such an approach might resolve issues of "the break down of family" by creating an environment where a student from a broken household could - at least on some level - substitute family with classroom - and without fear of abandonment. Additionally, by having the same instructor all twelve years, any lack of continuity from grade to grade would be eliminated while simultaneously addressing the issue of writing as an incremental process - the instructor being able to assess the student's entire body of work over a number of years. Of course, keeping records of assessment over such a long period of time is a considerable amount of work, and instructor pay should reflect the additional load. But, perhaps the most radical suggestion for improvement I can offer addresses grading.
I like the concepts of rubrics, student workshops, and teacher as coach. Why not implement these in the system described above, but, instead of earning a grade throughout a semester with a final grade at the end, just have one final assessment upon graduation that looks at the entire body of work? This approach would really put the students' grades in their own hands - where it belongs. At the same time, this approach would stealthily avoid concerns of students' aversion to writing which may result from negative reactions to criticism from a wicked red pen.
Williams raises some interesting concerns, but ultimately falls on the wrong side (or short side) of the issue. My ideas may be radical, but I believe they have merit. What do all of you think?
Write What You Know
This week’s reading was extremely helpful in not only creating my own rubric but in also summarize the semester’s readings thus far. While most of this chapter is about creating rubrics that try to fairly asses a student’s grasp of the concepts, I was fascinated with some of the early features of this chapter. I had a major light bulb moment and am so elated to share it with you all. A wise mentor-teacher told my high school freshman writing class that her only rule for the year was to write what we know. At first we all nervously laughed because we thought the whole point of a classroom was to teach us stuff we did not know and our grades would showcase the extent of our hard work and discipline in conquering the material. However, I did not realize the depth of her wisdom till this weekend. In this blog, I will try and “show” you my point.
The whole point of write what you know is not solely fixed in the content of the material but rather the understanding and recognition of the audience. If I am going to write a book, I am first going to decide the genre. Most people would argue that I would then be putting the primary focus of my book on the content rather than the audience. However, I argue that the board and generalized genre of my book allows me to focus on my readers and thus, will allow me to actually write a book that a member of the particular community would seek to read. For example, if I would write a medical crime book, I would utilize medical jargon because my audience is medical personnel. The “know” part is about understanding the shared and accepted community jargon. Throughout his book, Williams tries to stress the importance of audience but what is also equally vital is that of the shared understanding between the writer and readers. This common or shared understanding will allow the writer to either enhance his or her point (through the use of vivid descriptions which will allow the reader to conjure up an image that will once again allow the reader to mutually share in the visions of the writer [be on the same page]) or to aid the writer in not overdoing it (by boring and or belittling my audience) on an already mutually shared point. For example, I will offer up textual evidence to support my expanded ideas while at other times, I simply refrain from using certain comments or statements to further develop a point since I am aware of my audience and our common vocabulary. In chapter two, Williams writes that
“Many English teachers try to set aside this paradox [to write an English paper] by asking students to write about world affairs or local issues rather than works of literature, but these well-intentioned efforts merely encourage journalistic prose and do not address the underlying issue, which is that most writing is produced for a particular audience, not a general one, and therefore must follow conventions specific to that audience” (68).
At another point in chapter two, Williams reiterates this point. He states
“that if the audience of a paper ‘belongs to an identifiable group, . . . [one] will be writing for insiders.’ But if the audience ‘does not belong to such a group, . . . [one] will be writing for outsiders.’ Writing produced for insiders is , by its very nature, exclusive, whereas writing produced for outsiders is inclusive. . . . Articles in professional journals use language, concepts, interpretations, and references that only insiders fully understand…” (73)
Thus, one can see that Williams believes that we write for our audience and the way we write depends on whether or not we know our audience.
Williams continues to write that most of the classroom writing is centered on being broad “because the teachers in these classes lack sufficient content-area knowledge to help students produce texts for insiders” (73). This quote led me to this week’s assigned chapter. This chapter is focused on “assessing and evaluating writing” (297). Yet, Williams is not solely focus on outlining his readers (most are teachers or soon to be educators) the best or easiest way to quickly read and grade numerous students’ papers. He is arguing that teachers have for too long been dependent on time honored and outdated methods and thus, we should not be surprised that our students have come to dislike writing. The problem is that students do not hate writing. They despise grammar and have not yet had an authentic writing experience. We have talked about in class how grammar, usage and mechanics are areas of study that teachers need to learn in order to aid (after appraising a students’ writing samples) their students but students need to actually write. We have discussed how students’ writing does not improve through the extensive study of grammar and that this is the problem that Elbow seeks to fix. Williams writes that “In the typical language arts class, ‘writing instruction’ focuses almost exclusively on surface features such as punctuation, subject-verb agreement, the three types of sentences… and the parts of speech…” (302).A writing class needs to be writing otherwise, the grammar focus education will stunt the writing ability of students. Williams states that “These features are taught through exercises that provide students with lists of error-filled sentences that they must correct and with fill-in-the blank worksheets asking them to identify terms… as though such knowledge somehow is related to effective writing” (302). Thus, students are assigned papers in response to books so that the teacher can once again decide (assess) the student’s grasp of the information. After all don’t most schools have a summer reading list in which the students must read a book and then write a paper? These papers are graded in the first few weeks of school and are used to not only test the student understands of the book, like Watership Down, but also to evaluate the student’s knowledge of grammar. After grading the papers, the teacher will decide (evaluate) whether or not this class needs to redo drills on prepositions, commas, etc. According to Williams, “it is silly to suggest that the study of the play is somehow related to learning how to write a piece of literary analysis. Likewise, it is incorrect to suggest that students can transfer what they learned from the punctuation exercises to their own writing” (302).
Lastly these exercises do not allow students to better understand the vital role of audience and audience accepted language into the creation of a paper, article or book. Williams writes that “freshmen enter college having received nothing but A’s on all their high school essays… these students discover that they cannot earn anything higher than a C in freshman composition. The skills that served them well in high school will not enable them to excel at university” (300). The students are unable to recognize their new audience member and shared vocabulary because they have never been trained to write first for the audience and then edit. In other words, our students are able to do the telling part of writing but they cannot do the showing part. Elbow informed us last week that telling is “talking about the actual writings…” and that students can describe a piece by stating “ first this happened, then this happened, then this happened, and so on” (Elbow 89, 87). Showing on the other hand is “like installing a window in the top of your head and then taking a bow so the writer can see for himself. There’s no need to try to remember what was happening as you read… Showing conveys more information but in a more mixed and ambiguous form” (Elbow 92). Students are use to telling because they have done it for years in order to receive grades but the showing part is the real sticky issue. A writer needs to remember his or her audience otherwise the paper, article or book will never be well received. A quick way to understand the difference between telling and showing can be found in the musical “My Fair Lady”. The one song, “Show Me” really highlights Elbow’s outline of both tell and show. Here is a website to listen to the song : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8zyF0ZOy3k&p=E15427EA30609A20&playnext=1&index=11
Looking forward to Thursday’s discussion. This chapter really got me “excited about an idea” and I just had to share it with you all (299).
The whole point of write what you know is not solely fixed in the content of the material but rather the understanding and recognition of the audience. If I am going to write a book, I am first going to decide the genre. Most people would argue that I would then be putting the primary focus of my book on the content rather than the audience. However, I argue that the board and generalized genre of my book allows me to focus on my readers and thus, will allow me to actually write a book that a member of the particular community would seek to read. For example, if I would write a medical crime book, I would utilize medical jargon because my audience is medical personnel. The “know” part is about understanding the shared and accepted community jargon. Throughout his book, Williams tries to stress the importance of audience but what is also equally vital is that of the shared understanding between the writer and readers. This common or shared understanding will allow the writer to either enhance his or her point (through the use of vivid descriptions which will allow the reader to conjure up an image that will once again allow the reader to mutually share in the visions of the writer [be on the same page]) or to aid the writer in not overdoing it (by boring and or belittling my audience) on an already mutually shared point. For example, I will offer up textual evidence to support my expanded ideas while at other times, I simply refrain from using certain comments or statements to further develop a point since I am aware of my audience and our common vocabulary. In chapter two, Williams writes that
“Many English teachers try to set aside this paradox [to write an English paper] by asking students to write about world affairs or local issues rather than works of literature, but these well-intentioned efforts merely encourage journalistic prose and do not address the underlying issue, which is that most writing is produced for a particular audience, not a general one, and therefore must follow conventions specific to that audience” (68).
At another point in chapter two, Williams reiterates this point. He states
“that if the audience of a paper ‘belongs to an identifiable group, . . . [one] will be writing for insiders.’ But if the audience ‘does not belong to such a group, . . . [one] will be writing for outsiders.’ Writing produced for insiders is , by its very nature, exclusive, whereas writing produced for outsiders is inclusive. . . . Articles in professional journals use language, concepts, interpretations, and references that only insiders fully understand…” (73)
Thus, one can see that Williams believes that we write for our audience and the way we write depends on whether or not we know our audience.
Williams continues to write that most of the classroom writing is centered on being broad “because the teachers in these classes lack sufficient content-area knowledge to help students produce texts for insiders” (73). This quote led me to this week’s assigned chapter. This chapter is focused on “assessing and evaluating writing” (297). Yet, Williams is not solely focus on outlining his readers (most are teachers or soon to be educators) the best or easiest way to quickly read and grade numerous students’ papers. He is arguing that teachers have for too long been dependent on time honored and outdated methods and thus, we should not be surprised that our students have come to dislike writing. The problem is that students do not hate writing. They despise grammar and have not yet had an authentic writing experience. We have talked about in class how grammar, usage and mechanics are areas of study that teachers need to learn in order to aid (after appraising a students’ writing samples) their students but students need to actually write. We have discussed how students’ writing does not improve through the extensive study of grammar and that this is the problem that Elbow seeks to fix. Williams writes that “In the typical language arts class, ‘writing instruction’ focuses almost exclusively on surface features such as punctuation, subject-verb agreement, the three types of sentences… and the parts of speech…” (302).A writing class needs to be writing otherwise, the grammar focus education will stunt the writing ability of students. Williams states that “These features are taught through exercises that provide students with lists of error-filled sentences that they must correct and with fill-in-the blank worksheets asking them to identify terms… as though such knowledge somehow is related to effective writing” (302). Thus, students are assigned papers in response to books so that the teacher can once again decide (assess) the student’s grasp of the information. After all don’t most schools have a summer reading list in which the students must read a book and then write a paper? These papers are graded in the first few weeks of school and are used to not only test the student understands of the book, like Watership Down, but also to evaluate the student’s knowledge of grammar. After grading the papers, the teacher will decide (evaluate) whether or not this class needs to redo drills on prepositions, commas, etc. According to Williams, “it is silly to suggest that the study of the play is somehow related to learning how to write a piece of literary analysis. Likewise, it is incorrect to suggest that students can transfer what they learned from the punctuation exercises to their own writing” (302).
Lastly these exercises do not allow students to better understand the vital role of audience and audience accepted language into the creation of a paper, article or book. Williams writes that “freshmen enter college having received nothing but A’s on all their high school essays… these students discover that they cannot earn anything higher than a C in freshman composition. The skills that served them well in high school will not enable them to excel at university” (300). The students are unable to recognize their new audience member and shared vocabulary because they have never been trained to write first for the audience and then edit. In other words, our students are able to do the telling part of writing but they cannot do the showing part. Elbow informed us last week that telling is “talking about the actual writings…” and that students can describe a piece by stating “ first this happened, then this happened, then this happened, and so on” (Elbow 89, 87). Showing on the other hand is “like installing a window in the top of your head and then taking a bow so the writer can see for himself. There’s no need to try to remember what was happening as you read… Showing conveys more information but in a more mixed and ambiguous form” (Elbow 92). Students are use to telling because they have done it for years in order to receive grades but the showing part is the real sticky issue. A writer needs to remember his or her audience otherwise the paper, article or book will never be well received. A quick way to understand the difference between telling and showing can be found in the musical “My Fair Lady”. The one song, “Show Me” really highlights Elbow’s outline of both tell and show. Here is a website to listen to the song : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H8zyF0ZOy3k&p=E15427EA30609A20&playnext=1&index=11
Looking forward to Thursday’s discussion. This chapter really got me “excited about an idea” and I just had to share it with you all (299).
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)