You have made a number of insightful observations, in particular concerning the point that teachers' fears of the standards of common core will preclude any experimentation in methods of teaching, such as the use of dialogic questioning as Beers and Probst propose. I agree that the intent of common core is to foster independent thinking, but that will not be a comfort to teachers under pressure to ensure that their students pass standardized tests, which--by the way--are based upon right and wrong answers, not degree of engagement. Whether teachers will find some level of balance between two seemingly contradictory positions remains dicey, to say the least. I like the idea of experimentation in teaching and believe that what works depends on 1) the subject being taught, 2) the teacher doing the instruction, 3) the students. That is complicated enough without the pressure of standards, well-intended but sometimes vague in their wording.
Discussion is a necessary part of every English classroom, no matter what role the standardized test plays in the curriculum. I'm surprised that you see the two as contradictory - as they are actually quite complementary. If students learn to think in supported, even creative ways, won't their comprehension scores on the test elevate? And, is the goal of an English classroom to prepare students for a test or for keen, invested and critical participation in an increasingly complex world? I hope that no one in our class is becoming an English teacher because he/she wants to help students grow into savvy test takers. What we view in the video is not experimentation - it is teaching.
Hey Lisa, I also got some ideas out of this for my upcoming lesson. I was impressed with the video showed as well. I think the turn-and-talk scaffolding is a great way to get there. I was thinking about how this applies in Common Core when I was watching as well, and I think that you may actually gain classroom time if you can give students the tools to analyze on their own and don't have to "review" every text to death in a class discussion.
I'm also glad Beers and Probst didn't completely dismiss monologic questioning from the classroom; there's definitely a place for that kind of questioning, even if it is just to make sure students are following along with the plotline of a book. I liked your comment about how teachers need to set up their classrooms in a way that emphasizes the process of learning, so that students won't be afraid of giving the "wrong" answer and will be more willing to share their own thoughts and ideas.
Hey Lisa, You mentioned that you don't remember having such meaningful, thought-provoking discussions in high school or middle school, and I feel the same way. I also think that's one of the reasons why the students' conversation impressed me so much. I don't know if I've ever experienced middle schoolers engaged in classroom discussion in that way. I think it just goes to show how rapidly education is changing and, in this case, moving in a positive direction.
Greetings, Lisa.
ReplyDeleteYou have made a number of insightful observations, in particular concerning the point that teachers' fears of the standards of common core will preclude any experimentation in methods of teaching, such as the use of dialogic questioning as Beers and Probst propose. I agree that the intent of common core is to foster independent thinking, but that will not be a comfort to teachers under pressure to ensure that their students pass standardized tests, which--by the way--are based upon right and wrong answers, not degree of engagement. Whether teachers will find some level of balance between two seemingly contradictory positions remains dicey, to say the least. I like the idea of experimentation in teaching and believe that what works depends on 1) the subject being taught, 2) the teacher doing the instruction, 3) the students. That is complicated enough without the pressure of standards, well-intended but sometimes vague in their wording.
Discussion is a necessary part of every English classroom, no matter what role the standardized test plays in the curriculum. I'm surprised that you see the two as contradictory - as they are actually quite complementary. If students learn to think in supported, even creative ways, won't their comprehension scores on the test elevate? And, is the goal of an English classroom to prepare students for a test or for keen, invested and critical participation in an increasingly complex world? I hope that no one in our class is becoming an English teacher because he/she wants to help students grow into savvy test takers. What we view in the video is not experimentation - it is teaching.
DeleteHey Lisa,
ReplyDeleteI also got some ideas out of this for my upcoming lesson. I was impressed with the video showed as well. I think the turn-and-talk scaffolding is a great way to get there. I was thinking about how this applies in Common Core when I was watching as well, and I think that you may actually gain classroom time if you can give students the tools to analyze on their own and don't have to "review" every text to death in a class discussion.
I'm also glad Beers and Probst didn't completely dismiss monologic questioning from the classroom; there's definitely a place for that kind of questioning, even if it is just to make sure students are following along with the plotline of a book. I liked your comment about how teachers need to set up their classrooms in a way that emphasizes the process of learning, so that students won't be afraid of giving the "wrong" answer and will be more willing to share their own thoughts and ideas.
ReplyDeleteHey Lisa,
ReplyDeleteYou mentioned that you don't remember having such meaningful, thought-provoking discussions in high school or middle school, and I feel the same way. I also think that's one of the reasons why the students' conversation impressed me so much. I don't know if I've ever experienced middle schoolers engaged in classroom discussion in that way. I think it just goes to show how rapidly education is changing and, in this case, moving in a positive direction.