KathyYeah! I looked for the book around town as soon as we decided, but no one had it so I had to order it. I was told it would probably be here by the 17th. I can read and then come back to your posts during the week so I can still participate. I look forward to starting. On 6/11/11, judy5ca wrote: > Excellent suggestions, Parker and Teri! We defini...See MoreYeah! I looked for the book around town as soon as we decided, but no one had it so I had to order it. I was told it would probably be here by the 17th. I can read and then come back to your posts during the week so I can still participate. I look forward to starting. On 6/11/11, judy5ca wrote: > Excellent suggestions, Parker and Teri! We definitely want to finish this > summer, LOL. Okay, one unit per week it is. And I really like the > possibility of being able to compare thinking on the same topic. Let's > plan to read Unit 1, Ch. 1-2, by next Friday, June 17. Sound good, everyone? > Judy > > > On 6/11/11, Teri wrote: >> If we do it by unit, as Parker suggested, it stays a "summer read." We >> could read one unit per week. >> >> On 6/11/11, Parker wrote: >>> Oh my, there is no way I can read and digest the whole book anytime >>> soon. So chapter by chapter, or maybe 2 chapters per week since >>> there are 14 chapters, would be also be my preference. >>> Or...maybe this. The table of contents is divided into 5 units, >>> maybe we could discuss 1 unit at a time. For example: the >>> first "unit" includes ch. 1-2 and is titled Monitoring our >>> Comprehension. The next "unit" contains chapters 3-6 and is titled >>> Teaching Thinking. etc. >>> >>> >>> >>> On 6/10/11, judy5ca wrote: >>>> On 6/10/11, OK -Parker wrote: >>>>> Last student day was today. I have a few workdays next week >>>>> and then done. How far shall we read? >>>> >>>> I would prefer to read and discuss one chapter/author at a time. >>>> Last time we had a book discussion one person kept jumping to the >>>> end of the book. So it needs to be decided which way to read it: >>>> whole book, 1 discussion >>>> or >>>> 1 chapter + discussion on each chapter (I can see this possibility >>>> being 1 chapter per week to allow everyone time to respond) >>>> >>>> I've stated my opinion, but it's fine with me if the majority >>>> wants to have a whole book discussion. Please decide what you >>>> want and speak up, everyone! >>>> >>>> Judy >>>>
As I've posted here, I had a VERY difficult class this year. I've always been a bit sad as the year ends, but last week I was counting the minutes. I've learned so much and had beliefs reinforced: *kids need attention (as parents work longer hours, kids need us--I had some coming 45 min. before school...just to talk or for a hug or sit quietly whil...See MoreAs I've posted here, I had a VERY difficult class this year. I've always been a bit sad as the year ends, but last week I was counting the minutes. I've learned so much and had beliefs reinforced: *kids need attention (as parents work longer hours, kids need us--I had some coming 45 min. before school...just to talk or for a hug or sit quietly while I worked--they just wanted my attention) *trust them (I found ways to appear to trust even the most untrustworthy) *specific praise works wonders (Jan, are you listening? "You got an 81% because you are such a good listener and you always ask for another explanation when you need it.") *sadly, 1 kid can really change the tone of the class (you simply cannot imagine how much more relaxed the kids were when #1 troublemaker was on one of his suspensions) *what I'm really worrying about: I'm not helping them all. This year I had 6 students who were "working" well below grade level. I don't think I helped much. I'd like to, but I just don't know how to get to everyone. I already feel like I'm neglecting the high achievers for these kiddos, yet it's never enough.
Anyway, it's over. I don't think I'll have nearly as many low-low-low kids next year and I'm positive I won't have a child like #1. It's going to take me a while to recover, but I'm already starting to think about the new batch and what I can do to make it better for them.
Thanks to you all for helping me with history/social studies this year--I did a better (not great) job. Thanks to you all for getting me through this year.
By the way, Harvey "Smokey" Daniels NEVER proposed/expected people to use his literature circle roles all of the time. They were only meant to give teachers some help in establishing lit circles if they had never done them before. I never liked the roles and don't use them. Instead, I usually give my literature circles a focus or task to complete together. The task requires them to discuss the book, but helps keep them more focused so their conversations don't wander around to who's doing what this weekend.
On 6/17/11, KD wrote: > Judy, Thank you. It is not that I don't like Daniels, but I > don't like the roles in literature circles either. I don't > think I could consider myself having been a lit circle > person, I am a comprehension strategies person. I can't wait > to get my book now. I got an email that it has been shipped- > yeah! > On 6/17/11, judy5ca wrote: >> I've never been a Harvey Daniels fan because I didn't like >> the rigidity of roles in his literature circles. But I have >> to say he really impressed me in the introduction. I love >> his willingness to change. And I particularly like his >> conclusion, "There is no topic more important to human >> development--or to education---than learning how we humans >> come to understand. >> >> Were any of you lit circle people who moved to comprehension >> strategies? >> >> What did you think of Daniels' intro?
I agree that we need to take comprehension strategies deeper, but most of us figured that out as soon as we started teaching them. Keene seems to think we taught the strategies on a surface level when, in fact, the whole purpose was to get kids to think more deeply.
That said, I did like a few of the practical suggestions and hope to work them into my teaching: *Jen's In My Mind/My Actions charting is very smart--I like that as another method (besides my questioning) to get kids to go deeper (p. 18 and on) *I liked Keene's interest in EMPATHY and would like to make her box #1 (p. 20) into a week's worth of lessons *I'll admit, I wrote a note to myself to come back to the nonfiction outcomes and dimensions when I get closer to teaching that, so I guess Keene IS giving me a lot to think about. (pp. 20-22) *I don't like it quite as much as Britton's "floating on a sea of talk," but I will try to remember Keene's, "it's in the talking that we come to understand." (p. 27)
It's not that I disagree with anything Keene has written, I'd just hoped for more. What did you think?
Even if only about 1/2 the class was able to come up with thoughtful reflections, having one or two then share out would enable me to bring in the others who often could spark off those ideas. Or ask questions, etc...
>> What do others do? >> Judy >> >> >> On 6/20/11, dc wrote: >>> dc here, jumping in late! >>> Hopefully you are all still reading these posts! >>> I think my first reaction was the same as yours, Judy! Long ago, >>> we all immediately realized we couldn't just ask kids to identify >>> text to self connections. We realized that we had to go further >>> and ask them, "And how did that connection help you understand the >>> text better?" It was then and only then, that we got to deeper >>> understanding through those back and forth conversations. >>> >>> Here's my problem that I'm hoping that all of you brilliant >>> teachers can help me with. It's basically a "classroom >>> management" simultaneous engagement problem. Whenever I'm engaged >>> in a brilliant conversation with a child about their level of >>> comprehension and we are going back and forth with questions and >>> discussion, I feel the rest of the class "going to Tahiti". How >>> do you keep the rest of the kids engaged with this one on one >>> discussion in a small group? Obviously, in individual >>> conferences, this is not an issue, but in larger group >>> discussions, I find that I have to make sure not to call on kids >>> with hands up, but to randomly call on kids. Then I get blank >>> stares sometimes. I have tried eliciting discussion from the >>> lesser involved kids using the techniques mentioned (what did your >>> partner say, what would you say if you DID know the answer), but >>> it takes TIME and I feel the tension and frustration from the >>> faster thinkers and processors in the room. To adequately elicit >>> this deeper thinking from the quieter, less-engaged students, you >>> need to give them lots of time. Can you all talk about ways that >>> you have dealt with this? Unfortunately, with all of the time we >>> now devote to RTI, Student Success Sessions, Rotations for >>> Success, and Intervention/Enrichment Blocks, we have very little >>> time for long blocks of whole class modeling/guiding/discussion >>> anymore.
dcYES, EXACTLY! It is only since I've been doing whole-brain teaching methods (not all of them, but some of them) that I've realized how little the whole class is engaged cognitively when I'm discussing back and forth with ONE child. When I ask kids to turn and teach and then I circulate to LISTEN, that is when I realize how much the quiet and slower...See MoreYES, EXACTLY! It is only since I've been doing whole-brain teaching methods (not all of them, but some of them) that I've realized how little the whole class is engaged cognitively when I'm discussing back and forth with ONE child. When I ask kids to turn and teach and then I circulate to LISTEN, that is when I realize how much the quiet and slower processors in the class just rely on the quicker speakers and thinkers. I am trying to use more of these methods. It makes me realize that when I base my judgments about how the class is doing solely on the level of thinking of my quicker students, I am way off the mark. So many of the examples that I see in the books are based on these one-on-one discussions between teacher and student. They sound so brilliant, but in the back of my mind I'm thinking, "Yeah, but if I had a video focused on the other 25 kids in the classroom, I can just imagine what they would be doing (fiddling, looking up at the ceiling, playing with their pencils, talking to a neighbor). I'm trying to make sure that ALL of the kids are engaged cognitively ALL of the time, not just a few. Judy, I really thank you for mentioning the strategy: "Joey, did you hear the brilliant thinking that Jonah just shared? Say it again and share it with Joey. I want Joey to hear it too." That's a great strategy. Not only does Joey (and his whole side of the room who just went to Tahiti) get more cognitively engaged, but Jonah gets recognition and gets to restate (and maybe even further develop) his thinking. We could even take it a step further to have Jessica (sitting next to Jonah) do the sharing with Joey and then have Jonah listen to see if Jessica stated his thinking correctly or to have him clarify it, thus getting another kid involved as well.
Our district is BIG on cognitive engagement for all learners all of the time. They never like to see one child/one teacher interactions. Consequently, I'm always reading these P.D. books with this in mind and trying to figure out ways to modify them to fit my "reality" in my district. Thanks Judy, Teri, and PMo for weighing in with your suggestions and support. I love when we get "down and dirty" with a book and float on our own sea of talk!!
I am thrilled to hear her take on 21st century learni...See MoreWell, blow me down! I'd never liked Zimmermann as much as Keene, but I love the insight and thoughtfulness she displays here along with some solid recommendations. I agree with her fully that it's all about encouraging "daring thinking." I love that and am stealing it: daring thinking.
I am thrilled to hear her take on 21st century learning and warn us not to become "trivial."
I like her recommendation to "slow down" and her citing of Outliers and Gladwell's 10,000 hours of practice (thanks, Kim-wherever-you-are for recommending Outliers to me). I am so guilty of rushing and trying to fit more in. Slow down, Judy.
I especially like her reminder, "The thinking strategies are not an end in themselves. They are a means to an end. The end is avid reading and good thinking." (39)
Zimmermann said many of the same things Keene did, but somehow I felt more relevance in her thinking. Keene made me nod; Zimmermann inspired me.
On 6/17/11, Teri wrote: > On 6/17/11, judy5ca wrote: >> Well, blow me down! I'd never liked Zimmermann as much as >> Keene, but I love the insight and thoughtfulness she >> displays here along with some solid recommendations. I >> agree with her fully that it's all about encouraging "daring >> thinking." I love that and am stealing it: daring >> thinking. >> >> I am thrilled to hear her take on 21st century learning and >> warn us not to become "trivial." >> >> I like her recommendation to "slow down" and her citing of >> Outliers and Gladwell's 10,000 hours of practice >> (thanks, Kim-wherever-you-are for recommending >> Outliers to me). I am so guilty of rushing and >> trying to fit more in. Slow down, Judy. >> > I thought this was a really good point too. I think we're all > guilty of trying to do too much too fast. > > >> I especially like her reminder, "The thinking strategies are >> not an end in themselves. They are a means to an end. The >> end is avid reading and good thinking." (39) > > This is the point I need to make sure gets through to my > students. Many do the strategies superficially and then > wonder why their reading skills aren't really improving. "I'm > doing all the work." They think they can go through the > motions in class and then somehow, magically, on the day of > the state test, their scores will magically improve. > Frustrating to say the least. >> >> Zimmermann said many of the same things Keene did, but >> somehow I felt more relevance in her thinking. Keene made >> me nod; Zimmermann inspired me. > > My favorite part of chapter two, however, was the First, Do No > Harm. "Do nothing that makes a child feel ignorant or > inferior; nothing that bores children so they turn off to > learning; nothing that underestimates their gifts and > potential; nothing that values a test score over a child's > imagination." In today's educational, high-stakes testing > world, I think this is such an important issue for us, as > teachers, to remember. (Not to mention that I'd like to force- > feed it down my state legislature's throats!)
One is Robyn Jackson's Never Work Harder Than Your Students- -which appeared on my Amazon recommendations and really sounded good. I started it yesterday and am about 1/2 way through it already. While there's nothing "new" here, it is a great book for helping me reflect on what I have been doing in the classroom and re-focus on what I need to be doing in the classroom. The mastery self-assessment was a real eye-opener for me--revealing the area(s) where I really need to do some work.
On 6/18/11, Teri wrote: > Summer is definitely my time for professional > reading/study. In addition to Comprehension Going Forward, > which I'm re-reading for our discussions, I'm working on a > couple/few other books this summer. > > One is Robyn Jackson's Never Work Harder Than Your Students- > -which appeared on my Amazon recommendations and really > sounded good. I started it yesterday and am about 1/2 way > through it already. While there's nothing "new" here, it > is a great book for helping me reflect on what I have been > doing in the classroom and re-focus on what I need to be > doing in the classroom. The mastery self-assessment was a > real eye-opener for me--revealing the area(s) where I > really need to do some work.
I've been thinking about this t-chart and how to help the kids build one. I even reread the description, but I'm puzzled by the reality. Do we want kids to "connect" them? Do you think we tell them that each column is a separate (but simultaneous) response to reading? Judy
On 6/18/11, judy5ca wrote: > I see that the next section is 4 chapters, so we have a > choice. You decide. > 1. Read all 4 chapters. > 2. Read 2 chapters a week for 2 weeks. > > I vote for #2.
ninaTwo, please On 6/18/11, judy5ca wrote: > I see that the next section is 4 chapters, so we have a > choice. You decide. > 1. Read all 4 chapters. > 2. Read 2 chapters a week for 2 weeks. > > I vote for #2.
Can someone get the discussion going tomorrow please? I fell walking and really hurt my wrist (and dignity). Typing one-handed is slow and annoying. Thanks! Judy