Chapter three of Curtis Hayes, Robert Baruth, and Carolyn Hayes’ Literacy con Cariño mainly focuses on Robert’s tactics and the type of conversation he and the students had within their dialogue journals. What began as insecurity and reluctance from his students quickly transformed into lengthy entries about their families, struggles, likes, dislikes, feelings, and so much more. Robert was careful not to correct any mistakes he found in their writing for fear of discouraging them once again. He knew that what held them back was the fear of failure, which is why he made failing the dialogue journals impossible. Instead of pointing out their mistakes and deducting points, he simply attempted to input the correct version of those words in his responses. The realization that the journals were simply for communication was what the students needed to write …show more content…
Until I read this chapter, I did not realize that the dialogue within the journals was continuous. As I saw how the students grew from the constant flow of conversation though, I was able to witness the benefits of this type of reflections as opposed to Robert just responding “good job” or “keep up the good work” as most teachers do. Something else that I found interesting was the fact that “some students insisted that Robert correct their spelling” (Hayes et al., 1998, p. 55). Because of the trust Robert built with them, the same students who detested their failures now asked for them to be pointed out so they could fix them. The success the journals helped the students achieve amazed me. I am aware of journals being kept throughout classes to document what
In Knoblauch's essay, he evaluates four distinct views of literacy; Yagelski's essay focuses on how high school student can accomplish exceptional things by communicating themselves through literacy. Out of the respective views that Knoblauch provides, Yagelski
Classrooms are different today from those of previous generations, they have become communities of learners where students assume more responsibility for learning. As opposed to a place where the teacher is in charge the modern class room there is often a hum of students, talking about books they are reading and working together in small groups using digital as well as print text. The students are more culturally and linguistically diverse, many have English as a second language (ESL). This Critical- reflective essay will explore using the four resource model developed by Luke and Freebody, focusing on; how young children learn to read, the four roles within the resources model are Code breaker, text user, text participant and text analyst. This essay will also articulate the understanding of the three phases of reading and writing development. Phase one, experimental reading and writing. Phase two, early reading and writing and phase three, transitional reading and writing. This understanding will then be applied to an early years setting including and application of strategies for cultural differences.
As a future teacher of a fast-changing generation that searches restlessly for new interests, I believe that old and new must meet to keep the basic values of a balanced literacy. Focusing on prior knowledge, collaborating with colleagues, peers, families, and community, creating connections with our surrounding, and empowering students’ learning style throughout the process of gaining knowledge of reading and writing. Foremost, my personal philosophy of teaching literacy is based on constructivism and sociolinguistic, where hands on experience and guidance are priority in an informational world. To facilitate a child’s acquisition of literacy skills , as I plan for literacy instruction for my future classroom, I will take into consideration
CCSS and teachers together need to be viewed as “sponsors of literacy” (99). Scherff discovered that her teaching strategies already fit into the CCSS, which inspired her to develop a chart including critical and higher-order questions and discussion starters along with the CCSS nine anchor reading standards questioning approaches for each level. Two doctoral candidates were asked to collaborate and describe how the CCSS fits into their role as teachers. The first candidate, Allison Wynhoff Olsen describes her initial fear of the standards and how to implement them in her classroom. Her mentor showed her how to bundle and combine aspects that met CCSS. It is important to work with the standards because “educators have agency to help all students work toward powerful literacy education” (104). Olsen introduces Simon’s article “Starting with What Is’: Exploring Response and Responsibility to Student writing through Collaborative Inquiry” to show a new way of reviewing student papers collaboratively with other teachers instead of “individually from a deficit perspective” (105). This kind of approach encourages students to more freedom to express themselves and create a “broader social change” (105). Teachers must incorporate the CCSS in their classroom; however, they must also take into consideration the needs of each student and adjust their teaching strategies to reach the common goal of promoting literacy. The second candidate, Emily Nemeth describes two students demonstrating different learning styles and how teachers needs to keep in mind the needs of each unique student when designing classroom plans following the CCSS. She stresses the importance of supporting preservice teachers with “theoretical and pedagogical framings” to accompany the CCSS they must abide by in the classroom (109). The CCSS fails to take
A self-reflective journal is a good way to keep records and reflect upon what happened during a lesson. I plan to, at the end of each day, jot down a few comments about what worked in my lessons, what didn’t work, and how I would modify the lesson to better support my students’ development. As this information will be recorded, I can always come back to it for reference when preparing future lessons. I also plan to often read the information on this journal so I can constantly remind myself of what strategies worked and what strategies didn’t work.
The Learning Journal is a space where you should reflect upon what was learned during the week and how it applies to your daily life and will help you with your life (career) goals.
Murray is insightful not only to instructors but also to learners. Murray argues that the challenge facing writing is the fact that teachers have treated it as a product rather than a process and the same concept passed on to students. The author holds that the main problem with this view is that students get to receive irrelevant criticisms that are not related to their learning goals. While I tend to agree with the author based on the arguments presented, it is notable that Murray has paid little attention to the idea of education in the contemporary world. In most learning institutions, the outcome of the writing is considered more than the process. As a teacher paying attention to the process of writing but not be consistent with the students, who are mostly driven by
The journals I have written came from my four years of high school English. Everyday I came to class there would be a topic on the board. I took five minutes each day to write about the given topic. It was brainstorming and giving our input on whatever the topic was. I think
The process of learning to read is one of the most essential skills to master. One might not remember originally tackling this task, but it is certain that parents put copious amounts of effort into teaching this necessary skill to their offspring. As cultural backgrounds differ from person to person, methods of teaching do the same. The main topic in Andrea R. Fisher’s piece titled “Becoming Literate: A Lesson from the Amish” is the process and procedures of becoming fluent in reading in the Amish community. Throughout the piece, lots of sophisticated language describes the process, and the piece greatly benefits from such diction.
Tyre’s The Writing Revolution is mainly centered on a turnaround story for New Dorp High School, a school located in Staten Island that had been underperforming for years. The school had a large population of seemingly extreme low-performing students, which was thought due to the school’s make-up being mostly children from the surrounding area who were from poor and uneducated families. When faced with closure of the school the principal, Deirdre DeAngelis, constructed a plan to find out the school’s problem and ultimately created a revolutionary plan to turn the school around. When investigating into the low-performance at New Dorp, it was discovered that the main weakness many of the students possessed was the inability to write coherent sentences and often had trouble transitioning their thoughts into written word. After knowing this DeAngelis constructed a plan, where she and teachers visited Windward, a private school who had a writing program that could only be described as legendary in its ability to turn students around.
I observed Dr. Jenny Crisp’s English 98 class on January 19, 2016. The class began at 12:15 PM and lasted until 1:20 PM. The room that the class met in was on the third floor of the Liberal Arts building, and the room had individual computers for each of the students to work on. The class was divided into two sections on this day because Dr. Crisp had scheduled an introductory visit to the writing lab, which began at 12:45. Prior to the visit to the writing lab, Dr. Crisp guided the class in a discussion on the topic of revision in regards to the first paper that the class had submitted. The stages of revision were discussed and the students were shown where additional help could be found within the book. Dr. Crisp told the students that the reason that their grades on the essays were significantly lower was because the essays were lacking in detail and had Type One errors. She stated that revision is important and that could help bring up the grades on the essays.
In order to assess Lucy’s progress in writing, I analyzed a sample piece of her opinion writing worksheets. Each student in Mrs. McDonald’s kindergarten listened to Mrs. McDonald read them the book, “ The Mixed Up Alphabet” by Steve Metzger. The students were guided through a worksheet that outlined who to write to, what their opinion was, a reason why, and whom it was from. This writing piece was given during a single writing period, which consists of 30 minutes of individual work time. I was able to conference with Lucy during her writing process. She was able to tell me what her opinion was on the book they read and why. She was able to initially decide what she was writing without a prompt from me. To assess her writing, I collected the outlined sheet of her writing.
The investigation will also analyze the students learning journals and identify material that contain the content, formatting style and subject matter. This review will also concentrated on the significance points
The question of what to teach and how to teach it arises when McCourt sees that writing paragraphs has minute relevance to the lives of teenagers at a technical high school. During this time he meets parents that have grown up in “traditional households” which have shaped their “traditional opinions” about what should be taught in
Learning to read and write, or getting an education in general, is something that is easily handed to us in the world today. Imagine living in a world where you were expected to be uneducated, illiterate, and stupid. In the texts “The Joy of Reading and Writing: Superman and Me” by Sherman Alexie and “Learning to Read and Write” by Frederick Douglass, these young boys grew up in different worlds where they were looked down upon and were expected to fail due to the standards they grew accustomed to. Although Douglass and Alexie underwent contrasting hardships on their educational journey, they both shared the realization that learning to read and write was both a curse and a blessing. With those shared