In chapter 9 of Atwell, she talks about self-evaluation and portfolios; things we have been doing and learning about a lot lately. I like that she pointed out that her students are always in a state of self-evaluation because of the reading and writing they do in workshop (300). Students are always tougher on themselves during a self-evaluation, and that is how we as teachers can learn what our students really know. I appreciate how she does portfolios in that, “Our goal is using portfolios is to collect evidence that documents what a student has worked on and produced and how he or she has grown.” (301). Letting students decide what to put in their portfolio puts an ever greater value on the work that they are doing, instead of just submitting something they are told to submit.
I was highly interesting in the reading self-evaluation form, as well as some of the other forms that were shared in the book (306-307). The particular example provided revealed much important information about the student and how he was coming along with his work. I just know that not all students are going to provide such insight to their reading. But it’s definitely still worth the attempt.
In chapter 9 of Smagorinsky, we are told that writing instruction rarely occurs in isolation. With that said, I was beginning to wonder how difficult it would be to create a writing curriculum. But I think a writing curriculum would span the entire year; writing will be sprinkled throughout every unit.
I thought the idea of the spiral curriculum was interesting. I know we mentioned it briefly in class before when we talked about teachers claiming books to read. But the spiral curriculum makes more sense, in my opinion. I didn’t think it would initially, but I think more skills can be acquired when material is being looked at again from a different perspective: “Revisiting ideas and experiences allows students to engage in narration and argumentation in increasingly sophisticated forms and in relation to more complex ideas as readings and concepts become more challenging.” (183). After all, people watch movies several times or reread books just to get what they missed the first time. Why shouldn’t we do this in school too?
As a side note, I think the possible conceptual units grades 7-12 (190) will be a valuable resource. It gives many options that can be adjusted. My favorite unit that I never thought of or had the chance to experience was the gangs, cliques, and peer pressure unit. I believe this unit would be helpful for many students during adolescence.
This week’s reading in Atwell seemed providential as putting my portfolio together for this class has been on my mind and her guiding questions have helped me reflect more deeply on my own writing and writing process. The questions she poses for the purpose of a student questionnaire also “round out” the idea of a workshopped classroom for me because the end product (as in learning goals and grades) seem more concrete. From her standpoint, she cannot completely assess or assign a grade to her students without first consulting them about what they have actually learned, which makes sense, especially if you are not giving traditional pen and paper tests, which also don’t always reflect student learning either. Atwell also feels that when students have to think about and write their answers to her questions they are able to “sum up and capture a learning experience and not let it melt away into hazy recollection” (p. 308); in short, when students formalize their thoughts they solidify knowledge. Atwell also discusses her grading system (when she must give them), and I like her focus on goals and effort. Students should strive and be encouraged to be the best they can be, but the reality is everyone had different strengths and weaknesses; Atwell sees excellence in working hard to meet the goals you set based on where you need to improve, and a willingness to take risks.
The chapter in Smagorinsky also seems to bring everything we’ve been reading in the text together. Sometimes it seems like we learn so many bits and pieces about the art of teaching, but putting it all together into one confluent curriculum seems daunting. Smagorinsky’s example of an entire year’s curriculum is helpful, yet it is pointed out earlier in the chapter that context is everything and there is no “one size fits all answer” to planning until you actually are in the school where you are going to teach. Everything from formal assessment criteria (i.e. focus on text prep) to the community values of the school must be accounted for in planning. The idea of a spiral curriculum also seems practical, especially if you believe in “depth not breadth.” Students learn better when you reinforce concepts and ideas and make connections. I think that many teachers probably do this in their own classroom during a single year, but shouldn’t it also be in practice across a student’s entire school experience? Perhaps that is one of the better intentioned goals of the Common Core, however, most teacher prefer more autonomy and license to teach what they would like to. So how can we achieve a spiral curriculum without dictating what teachers teach?
These last two chapters in The Dynamics of Writing Instruction (Smagorinsky et al., 2010) and In the Middle (Atwell, 1998) are a perfect way to end the readings for this Teaching of Writing class as we approach deadlines for the History of a Piece project and our portfolios. Smagorinsky et al. urge us, as future teachers, to recognize the benefits of the spiral curriculum which encourages students to reinforce and repeat topics throughout their academic experiences in more sophisticated ways (1998). They also discuss the importance of widening the curriculum to include various forms of writing outside the traditional five-paragraph-essay. This is essentially what we were asked to do in our History of a Piece assignment. Allowing students to explore other genres and styles of writing lets them discover new interests and engages them with the practices of writing and reading in a way more “traditional” assignments fall short. I also like how Smagorinsky et al. urge teachers to integrate community aspects into the classroom. We saw Scarlet do this with her students in Lawrence because she had her students read Bread and Roses, Too—an accessible novel rooted in their own city.
Furthermore, Atwell’s chapter on evaluation is very appropriate for us in preparing our final assignments. Atwell believes that any evaluation in the classroom begins with self-evaluation because the writer of a piece knows their writing better than any other person (1998). I love Atwell’s guiding question-based self-evaluations. One of the most thought-provoking and reflective questions she poses on the samples is: “What would you do differently if you could rewrite the trimester? (1998, p. 305). This stood out to me as an important question because it asks students to step outside their comfort zones and criticize their own efforts and processes. I think it is quite a difficult question to answer, too. This chapter inspired me to reflect on my own progress as a writer this semester and conclude that I wish I had been able to give myself more time to work on my history of a piece sample of writing. Although I did work hard on it when I gave myself time and wrote several drafts, I know I am never comfortable considering a piece to be done until I have written and rewritten it more times than I can count. This is just one example. Atwell’s chapter has inspired my self-reflective thoughts for this semester and the timing could not be better as I begin to plan my final portfolio more concretely.
Despite the fact that these chapters were about curriculum and evaluation, I feel like underneath it all, they were really about reflection. When we have our students evaluate themselves, we are really asking them to reflect on what they have done and how well they have done it. When we come back to idea or a theme that we have already covered, we are asking them to reflect on what we have done and how well we have covered it. Reflection is an integral part of growth. As a student or a teacher, we need to be able to recognize when it is time to come back to an idea or when it is time to reflect on our progress. Education, when boiled down to the essentials, is really about self-improvement. We are asking our students to improve themselves when ask them to read more or write more. We are asking them to improve themselves when we ask them to study, learn something new, or take a test. The only major difference between self-improvement and education is the motivation. Education is extrinsically motivated despite our best efforts. Pressure from the state, the district, and society itself motives education, teachers, and the students themselves. So what would happen if we made education more about the intrinsic factors and less about the extrinsic ones? Does that mean education would move to the self-help section of Barnes and Noble?
I realize there is a level of absurdity when thinking about education in this way but think about it this way. How is education any different from improving the body? Exercise, nutrition, and general bodily health is considered self-improvement. Why is improving the mind any different? When we ask our students to write a paper about theme we are asking them to stretch the new muscles they have formed in their brain. When we ask our students to solve a math problem we are asking them to use an exercise to further their muscle growth. Why do we treat education so differently than health? Education is a form of mental health. When we ask our students to reflect on themselves we are asking them to look at their mental health and evaluate their growth. When we ask our students to learn something new we are asking our students to form new muscles. I think if we can remember that education is about individual growth than I think we are on the right track.
Chapter 9 of In the Middle discusses practical and meaningful ways in which to evaluate students. I appreciate how Atwell focuses on the use of portfolios for her own evaluation. More importantly though, she uses portfolios so that students may learn to evaluate themselves. Atwell brings out, “Our goal in using portfolios is to collect evidence that documents what a student has worked on and produced and how he or she has grown” (1998, p. 301). I can personally remember my own writing portfolios from several grades. For me, they were able to demonstrate all the areas in which I had grown. They were so meaningful to my development as a writer, that I have kept all my writing portfolios throughout my years in school.
Another aspect of this chapter that I appreciated was the self-evaluation questionnaire that Atwell has developed for her students. These questionnaires ask for hard data and numerical facts such as: how many piece has a student completed? These really help students to track their progress and enable them to be accountable for their work. More importantly, they allow parents to see something measurable. And further, these sheets enable teachers to have some sort of numerical data in reference to grading. I am not personally a proponent of grades, however most schools require them. So, self-evaluations allow teachers to have student input and hard data to translate into the sort of grading that a school would require.
Chapter 9 of The Dynamics of Writing Instruction, discusses curriculum development. The concept of a “spiral curriculum” is discussed as an enriching means of reinforcing knowledge in students. This immediately made me think of the image on Brown’s nexus504 home page where he has quoted Lev Vygotsky regarding the spiral path of learning. Students need consistent reinforcement and repetition of skills. However, as brought out in this chapter, this is not always possible due to the time constraints that our current educational system imposes upon teachers. As teachers, we need to be creative in cycling current lessons back toward previous lessons. By doing so, we will help our students appreciate the importance and connections of prior curriculum, and we will reinforce what was previously taught.
Smagorinsky’s idea of a spiral curriculum is one that is new to me, but I think it dovetails nicely with Atwell’s workshop. If a workshop approach were instituted at a young age and continued from grade to grade, it would be easy for students to return to forms and themes they’d previously covered and give them new depth. Consistently keeping a portfolio would bolster this approach. There would be clear evidence that students were becoming capable of that which they were not in previous years. It’s always frustrating to imagine the ideal classroom, structure, or curriculum and have it buck up against the reality of our present school systems, but I think Atwell and Smagorinsky have presented worthwhile styles. Even if we can’t apply Atwell fully, the spirit of her workshop can live on in activities and mini-lessons, and hopefully much of the positive results she has had will be replicated in our own classes.
I really appreciate Atwell’s system of self-evaluation. Self-evaluation is a skill that will serve students in every class throughout their education and in every job they’ll hold for the rest of their lives. I don’t think it necessarily needs to be framed in that way for it to be effective, but the probing questions of Atwell’s surveys (311-313) could easily be rephrased to fit other contexts. Students target their strengths, weaknesses, and areas that need improvement; the ability to do so is useful in any setting. The surveys for her class target growth as a reader and writer, which are themes she has emphasized throughout her book. It’s clear that she makes her intent obvious to her classes from the start of the year and carries it out in all of her activities.
Goal-setting is also a life skill that’s crucial to success. I appreciate that Atwell is flexible in that regard. She holds her students accountable to the goals they set for themselves, but if something more promising comes up, they all adapt. Goals “aren’t carved in stone, and if something happens that” means they need to be altered, “the writer and [Atwell] alter them” (325). This is reflective of real life, and there’s value to be taken from this philosophy even if a student leaves the classroom still hating books and literature. This idea of flexibility is mirrored in Smagorinsky’s unit plan. That’s a valuable resource, but I like the advice that none of this is “hard and fast” (189). We need to find what’s best for our own students and help them work toward their own goals. That’s what education ultimately has to be for our students and for us.
This week’s reading in Atwell is one I really liked. Self evaluation has become a favorite of mine no thanks to Brown’s classes this year. The evaluation she made for her students was a little different, asking more factual questions, but nonetheless still asking students to take a look at him or herself critically. This is not something easily done so I feel like it can become a great skill for students. I really love something that Atwell (1998) mentions, no matter what the circumstances are or how many students she has, “[she has] to figure out how to put students’ appraisals of their work at the heart of the evaluation process” (p. 301). Although the teacher is supposed to be critical and have criteria for grading and assessment, her belief in putting the student’s thoughts at the center of it all is really great. I just wonder how that would work if the student believes there work is the complete opposite from what the teacher’s criteria expects?
As for Smagorinsky’s chapter it really ties this class together nicely now that we are nearing the end. Teaching a writing curriculum is something that is not going to happen in a week or a month; it is really something that takes the year and a lot of thought and creativity from both the students and the teacher. The very first line in this chapter really struck me, “writing instruction rarely occurs in isolation” (Smagorinsky, 2010, p. 181). My first thought was that no, students do not work in isolation on their writing, ever. There is always peer editing, teacher workshops/discussions, group work, etc. when it comes to creating and working on writing. But then I realized it was talking about instruction and I still thought that it is never isolated. Students learn from each other all the time. There was a chapter we read earlier in the semester that mentioned having students rely on each other at times, for example if Jimmy is well educated on the solar system because that is what he enjoys, then when Sarah is writing a piece on Mars have her talk to Jimmy. The teacher does not always have to be the expert on everything; students can be experts too.
In chapter 9 of Atwell, she talks about self-evaluation and portfolios; things we have been doing and learning about a lot lately. I like that she pointed out that her students are always in a state of self-evaluation because of the reading and writing they do in workshop (300). Students are always tougher on themselves during a self-evaluation, and that is how we as teachers can learn what our students really know. I appreciate how she does portfolios in that, “Our goal is using portfolios is to collect evidence that documents what a student has worked on and produced and how he or she has grown.” (301). Letting students decide what to put in their portfolio puts an ever greater value on the work that they are doing, instead of just submitting something they are told to submit.
ReplyDeleteI was highly interesting in the reading self-evaluation form, as well as some of the other forms that were shared in the book (306-307). The particular example provided revealed much important information about the student and how he was coming along with his work. I just know that not all students are going to provide such insight to their reading. But it’s definitely still worth the attempt.
In chapter 9 of Smagorinsky, we are told that writing instruction rarely occurs in isolation. With that said, I was beginning to wonder how difficult it would be to create a writing curriculum. But I think a writing curriculum would span the entire year; writing will be sprinkled throughout every unit.
I thought the idea of the spiral curriculum was interesting. I know we mentioned it briefly in class before when we talked about teachers claiming books to read. But the spiral curriculum makes more sense, in my opinion. I didn’t think it would initially, but I think more skills can be acquired when material is being looked at again from a different perspective: “Revisiting ideas and experiences allows students to engage in narration and argumentation in increasingly sophisticated forms and in relation to more complex ideas as readings and concepts become more challenging.” (183). After all, people watch movies several times or reread books just to get what they missed the first time. Why shouldn’t we do this in school too?
As a side note, I think the possible conceptual units grades 7-12 (190) will be a valuable resource. It gives many options that can be adjusted. My favorite unit that I never thought of or had the chance to experience was the gangs, cliques, and peer pressure unit. I believe this unit would be helpful for many students during adolescence.
ReplyDeleteThis week’s reading in Atwell seemed providential as putting my portfolio together for this class has been on my mind and her guiding questions have helped me reflect more deeply on my own writing and writing process. The questions she poses for the purpose of a student questionnaire also “round out” the idea of a workshopped classroom for me because the end product (as in learning goals and grades) seem more concrete. From her standpoint, she cannot completely assess or assign a grade to her students without first consulting them about what they have actually learned, which makes sense, especially if you are not giving traditional pen and paper tests, which also don’t always reflect student learning either. Atwell also feels that when students have to think about and write their answers to her questions they are able to “sum up and capture a learning experience and not let it melt away into hazy recollection” (p. 308); in short, when students formalize their thoughts they solidify knowledge. Atwell also discusses her grading system (when she must give them), and I like her focus on goals and effort. Students should strive and be encouraged to be the best they can be, but the reality is everyone had different strengths and weaknesses; Atwell sees excellence in working hard to meet the goals you set based on where you need to improve, and a willingness to take risks.
The chapter in Smagorinsky also seems to bring everything we’ve been reading in the text together. Sometimes it seems like we learn so many bits and pieces about the art of teaching, but putting it all together into one confluent curriculum seems daunting. Smagorinsky’s example of an entire year’s curriculum is helpful, yet it is pointed out earlier in the chapter that context is everything and there is no “one size fits all answer” to planning until you actually are in the school where you are going to teach. Everything from formal assessment criteria (i.e. focus on text prep) to the community values of the school must be accounted for in planning. The idea of a spiral curriculum also seems practical, especially if you believe in “depth not breadth.” Students learn better when you reinforce concepts and ideas and make connections. I think that many teachers probably do this in their own classroom during a single year, but shouldn’t it also be in practice across a student’s entire school experience? Perhaps that is one of the better intentioned goals of the Common Core, however, most teacher prefer more autonomy and license to teach what they would like to. So how can we achieve a spiral curriculum without dictating what teachers teach?
These last two chapters in The Dynamics of Writing Instruction (Smagorinsky et al., 2010) and In the Middle (Atwell, 1998) are a perfect way to end the readings for this Teaching of Writing class as we approach deadlines for the History of a Piece project and our portfolios. Smagorinsky et al. urge us, as future teachers, to recognize the benefits of the spiral curriculum which encourages students to reinforce and repeat topics throughout their academic experiences in more sophisticated ways (1998). They also discuss the importance of widening the curriculum to include various forms of writing outside the traditional five-paragraph-essay. This is essentially what we were asked to do in our History of a Piece assignment. Allowing students to explore other genres and styles of writing lets them discover new interests and engages them with the practices of writing and reading in a way more “traditional” assignments fall short. I also like how Smagorinsky et al. urge teachers to integrate community aspects into the classroom. We saw Scarlet do this with her students in Lawrence because she had her students read Bread and Roses, Too—an accessible novel rooted in their own city.
ReplyDeleteFurthermore, Atwell’s chapter on evaluation is very appropriate for us in preparing our final assignments. Atwell believes that any evaluation in the classroom begins with self-evaluation because the writer of a piece knows their writing better than any other person (1998). I love Atwell’s guiding question-based self-evaluations. One of the most thought-provoking and reflective questions she poses on the samples is: “What would you do differently if you could rewrite the trimester? (1998, p. 305). This stood out to me as an important question because it asks students to step outside their comfort zones and criticize their own efforts and processes. I think it is quite a difficult question to answer, too. This chapter inspired me to reflect on my own progress as a writer this semester and conclude that I wish I had been able to give myself more time to work on my history of a piece sample of writing. Although I did work hard on it when I gave myself time and wrote several drafts, I know I am never comfortable considering a piece to be done until I have written and rewritten it more times than I can count. This is just one example. Atwell’s chapter has inspired my self-reflective thoughts for this semester and the timing could not be better as I begin to plan my final portfolio more concretely.
Is That My Reflection?
ReplyDeleteDespite the fact that these chapters were about curriculum and evaluation, I feel like underneath it all, they were really about reflection. When we have our students evaluate themselves, we are really asking them to reflect on what they have done and how well they have done it. When we come back to idea or a theme that we have already covered, we are asking them to reflect on what we have done and how well we have covered it. Reflection is an integral part of growth. As a student or a teacher, we need to be able to recognize when it is time to come back to an idea or when it is time to reflect on our progress. Education, when boiled down to the essentials, is really about self-improvement. We are asking our students to improve themselves when ask them to read more or write more. We are asking them to improve themselves when we ask them to study, learn something new, or take a test. The only major difference between self-improvement and education is the motivation. Education is extrinsically motivated despite our best efforts. Pressure from the state, the district, and society itself motives education, teachers, and the students themselves. So what would happen if we made education more about the intrinsic factors and less about the extrinsic ones? Does that mean education would move to the self-help section of Barnes and Noble?
I realize there is a level of absurdity when thinking about education in this way but think about it this way. How is education any different from improving the body? Exercise, nutrition, and general bodily health is considered self-improvement. Why is improving the mind any different? When we ask our students to write a paper about theme we are asking them to stretch the new muscles they have formed in their brain. When we ask our students to solve a math problem we are asking them to use an exercise to further their muscle growth. Why do we treat education so differently than health? Education is a form of mental health. When we ask our students to reflect on themselves we are asking them to look at their mental health and evaluate their growth. When we ask our students to learn something new we are asking our students to form new muscles. I think if we can remember that education is about individual growth than I think we are on the right track.
Chapter 9 of In the Middle discusses practical and meaningful ways in which to evaluate students. I appreciate how Atwell focuses on the use of portfolios for her own evaluation. More importantly though, she uses portfolios so that students may learn to evaluate themselves. Atwell brings out, “Our goal in using portfolios is to collect evidence that documents what a student has worked on and produced and how he or she has grown” (1998, p. 301). I can personally remember my own writing portfolios from several grades. For me, they were able to demonstrate all the areas in which I had grown. They were so meaningful to my development as a writer, that I have kept all my writing portfolios throughout my years in school.
ReplyDeleteAnother aspect of this chapter that I appreciated was the self-evaluation questionnaire that Atwell has developed for her students. These questionnaires ask for hard data and numerical facts such as: how many piece has a student completed? These really help students to track their progress and enable them to be accountable for their work. More importantly, they allow parents to see something measurable. And further, these sheets enable teachers to have some sort of numerical data in reference to grading. I am not personally a proponent of grades, however most schools require them. So, self-evaluations allow teachers to have student input and hard data to translate into the sort of grading that a school would require.
Chapter 9 of The Dynamics of Writing Instruction, discusses curriculum development. The concept of a “spiral curriculum” is discussed as an enriching means of reinforcing knowledge in students. This immediately made me think of the image on Brown’s nexus504 home page where he has quoted Lev Vygotsky regarding the spiral path of learning. Students need consistent reinforcement and repetition of skills. However, as brought out in this chapter, this is not always possible due to the time constraints that our current educational system imposes upon teachers. As teachers, we need to be creative in cycling current lessons back toward previous lessons. By doing so, we will help our students appreciate the importance and connections of prior curriculum, and we will reinforce what was previously taught.
Smagorinsky’s idea of a spiral curriculum is one that is new to me, but I think it dovetails nicely with Atwell’s workshop. If a workshop approach were instituted at a young age and continued from grade to grade, it would be easy for students to return to forms and themes they’d previously covered and give them new depth. Consistently keeping a portfolio would bolster this approach. There would be clear evidence that students were becoming capable of that which they were not in previous years. It’s always frustrating to imagine the ideal classroom, structure, or curriculum and have it buck up against the reality of our present school systems, but I think Atwell and Smagorinsky have presented worthwhile styles. Even if we can’t apply Atwell fully, the spirit of her workshop can live on in activities and mini-lessons, and hopefully much of the positive results she has had will be replicated in our own classes.
ReplyDeleteI really appreciate Atwell’s system of self-evaluation. Self-evaluation is a skill that will serve students in every class throughout their education and in every job they’ll hold for the rest of their lives. I don’t think it necessarily needs to be framed in that way for it to be effective, but the probing questions of Atwell’s surveys (311-313) could easily be rephrased to fit other contexts. Students target their strengths, weaknesses, and areas that need improvement; the ability to do so is useful in any setting. The surveys for her class target growth as a reader and writer, which are themes she has emphasized throughout her book. It’s clear that she makes her intent obvious to her classes from the start of the year and carries it out in all of her activities.
Goal-setting is also a life skill that’s crucial to success. I appreciate that Atwell is flexible in that regard. She holds her students accountable to the goals they set for themselves, but if something more promising comes up, they all adapt. Goals “aren’t carved in stone, and if something happens that” means they need to be altered, “the writer and [Atwell] alter them” (325). This is reflective of real life, and there’s value to be taken from this philosophy even if a student leaves the classroom still hating books and literature. This idea of flexibility is mirrored in Smagorinsky’s unit plan. That’s a valuable resource, but I like the advice that none of this is “hard and fast” (189). We need to find what’s best for our own students and help them work toward their own goals. That’s what education ultimately has to be for our students and for us.
This week’s reading in Atwell is one I really liked. Self evaluation has become a favorite of mine no thanks to Brown’s classes this year. The evaluation she made for her students was a little different, asking more factual questions, but nonetheless still asking students to take a look at him or herself critically. This is not something easily done so I feel like it can become a great skill for students. I really love something that Atwell (1998) mentions, no matter what the circumstances are or how many students she has, “[she has] to figure out how to put students’ appraisals of their work at the heart of the evaluation process” (p. 301). Although the teacher is supposed to be critical and have criteria for grading and assessment, her belief in putting the student’s thoughts at the center of it all is really great. I just wonder how that would work if the student believes there work is the complete opposite from what the teacher’s criteria expects?
ReplyDeleteAs for Smagorinsky’s chapter it really ties this class together nicely now that we are nearing the end. Teaching a writing curriculum is something that is not going to happen in a week or a month; it is really something that takes the year and a lot of thought and creativity from both the students and the teacher. The very first line in this chapter really struck me, “writing instruction rarely occurs in isolation” (Smagorinsky, 2010, p. 181). My first thought was that no, students do not work in isolation on their writing, ever. There is always peer editing, teacher workshops/discussions, group work, etc. when it comes to creating and working on writing. But then I realized it was talking about instruction and I still thought that it is never isolated. Students learn from each other all the time. There was a chapter we read earlier in the semester that mentioned having students rely on each other at times, for example if Jimmy is well educated on the solar system because that is what he enjoys, then when Sarah is writing a piece on Mars have her talk to Jimmy. The teacher does not always have to be the expert on everything; students can be experts too.