Some current thoughts on class discussions

I am finding the examination of these transcripts to be extremely valuable, at least I think so.  I like to imagine that when I start teaching on my own I will be able to incorporate what I think I have learned. We will see. I am really enjoying hearing these classroom discourses and seeing how teachers react and think on their feet, and how students derive meaning from discussion questions and the comments of their peers.  I feel as though I am learning a lot from, as we have discussed in class before, the experience.  Some things I have noticed so far:

Clarity-The instructors are almost always speaking more coherently than the students.  When I was working on our transcription, I would listen to the audio and could understand what a student was saying, but closely reading what I had transcribed, someone who never heard the audio would have no idea what was being said.  What has impressed me with these classroom discussions is the understanding students have with each other and their teacher.  Things can be said in very roundabout, incomplete ways but the context helps to fill in a lot of blanks.  I think this is a very important function of classroom discussion because so often a students' idea they are sharing may just be coming to them at that moment.  It is not elegantly prepared and supported most of the time, but they are able to primitively share it with their classmates and it can be built upon.  It is so interesting to hear how a students' own idea can change throughout a class period or even within one section of speech, either because they are having difficulty refining what they want to say, or they are swayed be classmates or teachers.  I know both of those are often the case for me.

Anecdotes-The use of personal anecdotes in discussion offers a lot of possibilities. I think they can be extremely helpful for engaging students, the Mr. K example we were looking at at the end of class on Friday seemed to show this.  Students love to share personal stories and to think about how ideas apply to their own lives.  I think the most important mechanism here is that the teacher recognizes when it has gone on for too long and can steer the students back to topic.  For my own classroom I hope to get each student personally involved and recognizing how what we are learning about can be viewed from multiple perspectives.  However, I have been in classes, especially in high school, when teachers let the story-telling go on to the point where the same ideas are being repeated over and over and nothing new is being said.  I want each student to have equal opportunity to participate but I don't want to let it get too far off course.  While the monologue of 'Greg' in my transcript was a pretty lengthy one, I think it worked pretty well in engaging a pretty quiet class that seemed to be having difficulty discussing different classroom scenarios.  Greg didn't exactly answer the question that was posed but he did help his classmates examine what conflict of opinion between teacher and student can look like in a classroom, and I think he made the topic more accessible for them.  I don't think hearing two more similar stories would have been very helpful but I think the class was able to gauge this.

Role of Instructor:  All of these teachers so far in the transcripts we have looked at are central to the flow of conversation.  While students were leading the classroom discussion with questions they had prepared in the classroom Doug and I sat in, the instructor was able to reformulate and re-ask these questions to get more responses.  This is one skill I want to acquire, so that I can be prepared to handle topics that aren't going over too well in a class.  I also know that I will need to be able to work on my interpretive skills in what students are saying sometimes.  Like I said before, students sometimes have a tough time explaining ideas that are just coming to them.  I tend to have difficulty in this area and have been misinterpreted in discussions before because of it.  I want to be able to help students clarify what they are saying to make sure their points are being understood and to move the discussion in the direction they are intending.

Classroom discussions are something I am sure I will be tweaking for my entire career.  I have some ideas and most are stolen or at least built upon formats I experienced as a student.  For instance, I had a poetry teacher who was having trouble getting our class going in discussions on the poems we were supposed to be reading for homework.  He decided to start taking 4 students from our class and sitting them in a small circle in the middle of the room while the rest of the class sat around them in a larger circle.  The group of 4 would have to discuss a poem with one another with no help from the teacher or the rest of the class.  This was a motivating tool to get all of the students reading as well as discussing, even if it was a bit scary.  I liked this technique and saw its effectiveness.  One idea I had, however, was instead of the class simply sitting and observing the discussion, they will need to be writing while it is going on.  Noting ideas that come up that they are interested in, building on these ideas, disagreeing, etc. Then I would give them a few minutes to share any additional comments they might have at the end of class, and turn their writing in to me for participation credit.  When I was in this class format I often felt that students who weren't put in the middle of the circle would kind of tune out, this way everyone would need to be engaged, and those students who possibly really wanted to talk about a certain poem would still get a chance.  I also want there to be a lot of writing in my classes, and will always be looking for ways to incorporate more.  I like the method of writing for a few minutes before discussion that we do in this class, I feel as though it really helps me to solidify my ideas.  I think I will definitely utilize it in my own classes.  My personal opinion of calling on an unsuspecting student to answer a question is that it greatly depends on the question. If it is a question about a reading they should have done or about a topic that is pretty familiar, I think it is OK. I don't think it is OK or even very effective to call on a student to instantly share a complex analysis of a text or idea, unless it was a prior assignment.  Posing a complex question that requires thought and expecting someone to know their answer right away is asking a lot.  This is another reason why I like the idea of having part of the class discuss and part of the class write.  I have a theory that if a student is trying to think of something to say and is trying to form their words in their head, they are probably missing out on some of the discussion.  Letting them have at least some days where they can think and solidify their thoughts and share them later on would at least be an interesting experiment.  I look forward to seeing if there are some other things for me to steal from these upcoming transcripts.

comin down on a sunny day

Without looking at the common core definition of college and career readiness, I am going to go ahead and assume that they are talking about specific academic knowledge and skills, just for fun.  I am going to assume that they are talking about communicating effectively through writing, particularly essay writing, as well as having solid reading comprehension.  Outside of English I'll assume this definition also includes basic understandings of mathematical principles and scientific facts.  I guess I have this idea of CCR resembling a kind of General Education requirement for high school students.
I listened to the podcast Angela posted on her blog regarding 'non-cognitive' skills, researched by economist James Heckman.  Heckman argues that there are skills important to education aside from traditional academic skills. These include resilience, the ability to cope with stress, and impulse control, among others.  I can probably stretch and try to apply these to literacy somehow, but definitely, if I am thinking about college and career readiness, these are attributes I consider to be important.  I don't think my high school education really prepared me for college, and I don't really feel like my first college education prepared me for my career.  But, I don't think this is education's fault. I just don't think I had the character for either yet.  Can we as educators nurture our students' character to prepare them for the rigors ahead? I really think this answer is yes, but ultimately it is a measurement that is only important at the individual.  Everyone is at a different level before and after high school and college, and there is only so much teachers can affect.  But these are attributed I would try to work on with students, especially those who come from particularly stressful home environments.
We have talked in this class about exposure contributing to ones' literacy.  I don't think I was truly career ready until my first job after college in which I was responsible for a lot and given very little assistance and guidance.  Finally understanding the importance of my actions and what all depended on them was a big wake-up call for me and a big reason I feel prepared for the responsibilities of being a teacher.

Literacy

To me, a useful definition of literacy goes beyond the capability to read and write.  When someone says that they are 'computer literate' they are expressing that they know how to use the functions of computers with ease and to their benefit, they aren't just saying that they know what a computers' tools are.  There are a lot of students who know how to read and write in a basic sense but who still struggle greatly.  Some have difficulty thinking abstractly about a text, or even interpreting written information correctly.  Some students who now how to write have no confidence that they can convey meaning in their own writing.  I define literacy as not only being able to read and write, but to be able to grasp the intended meaning of a text and to be able to write with intent and control.  I don't mean that someone who is literate needs to be able to be able to apply complex literary criticisms, but they should be able to at least follow a basic text and take something away from it.
I have experienced moments with coworkers where it seemed as though a text was read and nothing was gleaned from it.  For instance, an instructional company wide email in which an employee cannot discern what is important and what actions need to be taken after receiving it.  It is as though they lack the patience or confidence to interpret the directions for themselves without needing to ask questions.  I don't mean to say that I think this person is illiterate, as this kind of material or use of is more complex than what I am thinking for my definition, but I do think that it could demonstrate that they never received proper instruction on how to do this kind of reading.
I guess I am taking this blog assignment and turning it into creating a definition of literacy/illiteracy that I want to have in mind for my own classroom.  I think it could be a definition that can change for the individual, especially as they age.  Literacy can be something one can always improve upon and develop.  As a high school English teacher I want students to be able to read a text and understand what it is saying, to be able to approach a text from different perspectives, and to keep an open mind and allow for abstract thought.  I want them to be able to write with purpose and authority.  As a teacher I want to allow the avenues for these abilities to flourish--I want to help students gain confidence in their reading and writing abilities and to encourage them to keep an open mind when doing both.  I don't want my students to go to college or to work and feel afraid of the written word.  I know that this definition is completely self-derived and simply what I want it to be, but I want a definition that can be used as a tool for myself when setting goals for my students.

Grammar(s) in the Classroom

Before I read the Hartwell article, I was under the impression that English instructors always unanimously consider grammar instruction to be vitally important.  It was a great relief for me to learn that is not the case.  I have often reflected on my own lack of formal grammar training, wondering why I never really received any growing up.  I have felt at a disadvantage as a student and future English teacher because of this, and have found myself wishing that I had gotten some formal instruction.  After reading Hartwell's article I find myself wondering if perhaps I was taught about grammar in school, and I just don't remember any of it. This may or may not be the case but either way I am much more confident now in my feeling that grammar instruction should not take up ample classroom time.  I already have too many things in my mind that I want to teach my students, and I consider this content to be much more important than grammar instruction after reading about all of these case studies denouncing its effectiveness.  I know that I learned my 'grammar 1' from all of the reading and writing I did as a child, and I want to help my students pick it up the same way.  An idea I have for possible instruction technique is to include the recognition of grammar errors in students' work, but not grading it.  This might be a way I could point out some of the formal rules but in a way that is not so confusing and rote.  I could have them correct their errors for a homework assignment so they get some practice in correcting at least some more widely used and accepted rules of formal grammar.