In your entry, talk about how your professional practice will change because of the work you've done in this course. Also, address questions that remain for you. What do you still need to figure out? What new questions have you developed because of the work you have done?
Throughout this course, I have reflected a lot on my technology practices both for myself as a learner and for my students. I admit, I am not the typical student completing this course. For most, it is the launching point for their Masters in Educational Technology. For me, I completed my masters back in 2013, and have acted as an instructional technology facilitator for the past 5 years, only now, entering back into the classroom.
In week 3, we examined our Professional Learning Network (PLN), something that educators should do on a regular basis. It is essential to be sure that you are staying connected to others not only in your grade level, or school level, but around the country and around the world. Technology brings such a power to educators now that we do not have to teach in a silo and do as we have always done. The world is full of experts and eager learners, hoping to connect and share. Embrace it. It has been my professional development goal to participate in more edchats, with the plan to be affiliated with or aid in facilitating. In my new district, I would like to get these going. I'm curious, how do I begin? How are channels like this started? What steps are needed or taken to facilitate?
Many of the weeks involved tools I was already familiar with, or practices already in place in my classroom and profession. For example, my students have already begun Genius Hour, learning a skill or topic online through the expertise of others. We are using Google Classroom as our platform. In my Networked Learning Project, it caused me to reflect more on the process of learning and exploration. I will bring my struggles and findings to my classroom with my students to aid in this process.
Lastly, I think the final week, on Creative Commons, has proven most beneficial to me. Copyright and safe searching have been two items I have emphasized with staff in the past. As teachers, we are notorious for infringement for the "sake of the children." A common mantra, is not to ask permission, but rather to beg for forgiveness. These resources are great and I hope to use these with my team and my school to help inform them as to how we can utilize resources, but also the affordances that our students may have in their creativity or transformation of other material. My questions surround this and other content forums, as well as open source and the connection between. How can I protect projects and ideas I have and share to the public? When developing curriculum, where does the intellectual property lie? If creating it while working for the district is it their property? These questions and more involve my work in curriculum writing, with the hope to eventually produce a consulting business and curriculum development. How can I protect myself and ensure I am not infringing on others?
Moving forward I hope to increase the creative opportunities for my students while using Chromebooks. I strive to go further than the basics, and hit that sweet spot of TPACK to transform their learning. I want to go beyond the typical tasks and really have them apply their learning to create something new, something unique, something original. I want to empower students to make their digital footprint for the better.
This week in CEP 810, I revisited TPACK and the critical relationship that technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge should play in all lesson planning for the classroom. When designing student learning utilizing technology, teachers are often motivated by new shiny tools or apps. As an educator, we need to think critically about the way in which that tool will support the methods of learning and the content being covered. Although this was not a new concept to me, Dr. Kohler and Dr. Mishra recorded a video explaining TPACK in further detail.
In my activity, we had to apply TPACK to cooking, and having the right (or wrong) tools to complete a task. In this case, the technology was an ice cream scoop, a glass tea plate, and a wooden salad bowl. The content I was trying to learn or accomplish was making a peanut butter and jelly sandwich. Therefore the process was somewhat up to me how I achieved the task, different from how I typically would make a sandwich. The first challenge I faced was that we didn't have any jelly. So I attempted the task with just a peanut butter sandwich.
Here's my attempt:
In my experience, we can often adapt a tool or use something in a different way just to skate by and get the task done. However, when using the right tool, efficiency and accuracy are greatly increased. I think it is so easy to be eager to try a new technology just because it's new, however, we need to really ensure that the tool we are using is helping the learner through pedagogy to comprehend the content knowledge.
On their website, tpack.org, they have a plethora of resources about finding that sweet spot where TPACK truly occurs. They describe the difference between just TK, or CK, or PK, and having some overlap with TPK, TCK, or PCK.
As an instructional technology facilitator, it was my role to make sure that teachers were not distracted by technology, to lose sight of the curriculum goals or the best practices in pedagogy to get the students there. It is incredible the way that technology can motivate, engage, and truly transform the learning when done with purpose and intention.
This topic has been especially challenging to learn strictly from YouTube and help forums. With baking, I am instantly drawn to talking to those I aspire to be in the kitchen, and reading the comments and conversations on recipes. There is so much wisdom to glean from others, but I found those who posted in forums were not always very creditable sources.
this comment for example, this person has no experience with sourdough And as I mentioned in the last post, sometimes it is challenging to find videos from those you connect with.
My reflection and overview:
Given my progress over these 4 weeks, I decided it was more feasible for me to focus on getting a starter going for sourdough. Let me talk you through my journey. I watched several videos, as I mentioned in post number 2, but had a few failures.
Looking back, attempt one. The first attempt I expected success immediately, so when the water and flour separated, I threw it out and started over. How hard could it be? Water + flour = yeasty sourdough starter. Wrong. I had also used measuring cups for this, but I couldn’t leave anything else up to chance. I bought a kitchen scale.
Using measuring cups, I started small as many forums suggested.
So I tried again, this time was much better, right around our update post. I was eagerly awaiting. I was nervous as the water and flour separated, so I stirred and made another one.
Separation
The next couple days I noticed little bubbles. We have had a really cold, rainy week here in northern Michigan. I began looking at forums relating to temperature and sourdough starters. I saw a lot of posts about the temperature being too warm. If it is too cold, yeast slows and becomes more dormant, but many keep their starter in the fridge long-term. The bubbles didn’t look exactly like the videos I had seen, so I tried to find a warmer place to leave it. I also covered it with a tea towel at this point instead of a lid, which, as I read, allowed it to breathe a little more.
Look! It’s alive and bubbling! A little
More days passed and I was required to feed it. This was tricky so I started another starter just in case. To “feed” the starter, you have to discard part of it, and then replenish it with water and flour so that the yeast has fresh flour to feed on. At this point it really started to smell. That is one aspect that is hard to get from a video. Remove 1/2 the starter (which I put in another jar), and add 1 c flour, and 1/2 c warm water.
Apparently at this point, your starter should really be growing. It took mine a little longer and I had to wait to feed it again, but then it started to grow and it looked much better – or at least more like the videos.
It’s growing!
All in all this was a very beneficial learning process! I realized that some of my fears of yeast are certainly warranted, as it is a tricky critter to keep a live and keep growing. I may have needed a more introductory bread to get me started.
Moving forward, I would not learn baking in this way, but I see the benefits for other contexts. There were a lot of pros and cons:
I have been very fortunate at my school to have 1:1 Chromebooks which allows me to take learning further, while increasing engagement. We utilize a lot of technology in our classroom to enhance their learning, but this week’s reading really pushed my thinking about the tools and how we are using them. Although we are lucky to have Chromebooks, I am unlucky to have to teach math with extremely outdated textbooks. In order to support student learning, I supplement a lot.
Here is a lesson plan I have created for perimeter, to utilize more technology to reach my students. This lesson is structured as an “investigation” in our textbook, but does not set the students up for success. This lesson is often very dry in a textbook, given arbitrary scenarios in farming and planting a garden. Students are often disengaged and unable to envision what that situation really looks like. Utilizing technology, I am to engage students at various points in the lesson, gain real-time input on their understanding, keep students accountable, and allow them to learn through play.
After direct instruction and formative assessments, using peardeck and google forms, students move on to practice with play using Spheros. Douglas Thomas and John Seely Brown (2011) emphasize that “All systems of play are, at base, learning systems” (p.97). It is essential for us to build time into lessons for students to play. Furthermore, they state “(Play) are ways of engaging in complicated negotiations of meaning, interaction, and competition, not only for entertainment, but also for creating meaning” (p.97). Previously I worked with a kids museum to emphasize the power of play and learning, my county even developed a magnet theme surrounding the concept of play. When we allow the time, and provide the constructs, students make play an extremely memorable and helpful learning experience.
My goal is to provide students with various opportunities to demonstrate proficiency with the standard and objectives. In the beginning of the lesson, I gain a baseline of understanding, then scaffold the instruction to build on their background. After participating and practicing, they again have an opportunity to demonstrate proficiency, before moving on to the next level of the learning. Utilizing Sphero requires them to use more critical thinking skills and reasoning while working with a team. Not only do they need to be accurate in their measurements, but understand the level of coding to command the robot to move along the perimeter of the shape. All students in the group have a job to 1. measure, 2. command, 3. drive, 4. check and improve. The reiterative nature of using robotics in math, pushes students to strive for perfection while taking interest in the learning process. Another goal, as Hobbs emphasizes, is to promote curiosity. I hope that using these tools will spark curiosity and creativity in my students for the future.
What
are the best practices and methodology for upper elementary students in Common
Core State Standards to be successful in reading and writing?
(2) The intended population you wish to study (examples may include my 3rd grade students, my fellow teachers, my school's curricula/standards, etc.).
My population will be focused this fall on my 4th grade students, but will also look into the practices of other teachers within out school. We are just now switching to Common Core and I am curious to see how reading and writing instruction changes to reflect the changes in the standards. I will implement workshops in my classroom and use the results to show growth versus my instruction last year.
(3) What you plan on measuring in your study (student learning, teacher attitudes, history of an educational practice, usage of technology, etc.).
I will measure student learning in regards to their ability to read and write. The basis for the change in curriculum and practices is based upon the educational research and theories that have been published in the past.
(4) How you plan on acquiring the data for your study (a test, a survey, historical documents, etc.).
I will collect writing samples from the beginning of the year, as well as previous year's writing samples from their student portfolios. I will use research based measures for data improvement such as Reading 3D and rubrics to show the students' growth. I plan to survey teachers on their practices, while following my counting plan, to find out how much time is truly dedicated to literacy each day in every class.
(5) Which general form of design you intend to employ
This study will primarily be qualitative, although I feel that there should be some quantitative data used, for reading I would use data and I would survey teachers and students to get their take on the workshops. As for qualitative, this may involve a variety of data collection. For example, through interactive, I would observe the collective classroom as a social group and the conversations had through ethnographic research, but also may have a specific case study of students in my classroom and possibly others. Ideally, I would achieve a triangulation design for research, so that there is less subjectivity in the qualitative findings.
Two cups of coffee, two halves of plain bagel, two tablespoons of cream cheese, eight hours of sleep, and one happy morning. I often think of counting things on a regular basis, as strange as that seems. I tend to think quantitatively about the frequency of things, for example, yesterday I had the hiccups three times and sneeze seven today. There are so many numbers that rule our daily routines and affect our lives that we rarely think about. I think it is safe to say that the most commonly counted item for adults are calories, whether they are consumed or spent and for children how many songs are on their ipod or levels achieved on a video game. I think it says a lot about a person, if you asked them one quantity from their day or life, what would they say?
In the teacher world, my focus is completely different. How many of my students say please or thank you? How long does it take the average student to go to the bathroom and at what length of time should I be concerned? How many students are present today? How many copies do I make of this assignment? How many pages did they read for homework? My daily life is consumed by numbers at school, and I am only a reading teacher. The increasing amount of data driven instruction adds to those numbers, how many students mastered the concept? How many words did they read in a minute? What is their AR level and how many points is that book worth? It is truly shocking when you think about the countless numbers we encounter regularly.
I would like my counting plan to tie into my research topic. How many minutes are students given to write (or read) in one day? This count will be collected as a poll from all teachers anonymously. In that poll I would also ask the subject they teach. Moving to Common Core Standard Course of Study, literacy should be present in every classroom regardless of the subject. Students may read nonfiction texts and respond to them, they should read and write word problems in math, they should be able to explain and justify their answers, they should be able to explain the process they followed to reach that solution, etc.
I would like to count this because research states that students should spend at least 90 minutes a day in literacy. I am afraid that although they are getting a 90 minute literacy block (in some grades), that instructional time is being somewhat lost and the 90 minutes are not preserved. Another concern may be the honesty of the teachers completing the poll. Using the information, I would be able to support other teachers to incorporate reading and writing in their lessons, or encourage teachers to find other ways to allow students additional literacy time.
By including literacy in all classrooms, reading and writing become interdisciplinary and will make up for the instructional minutes lost in Language Arts class. These results may also support the need for additional time spent reading and writing or homework, to insure that 90 minutes are spent daily. The connection of literacy between the classroom and home is also supported by the research I found. Literacy cannot stop at the end of the school day, they need to see the continuation of reading and writing in all aspects of their life. To truly be proficient according to Common Core, students need to see the ties of literacy across all subjects and dedicate the time to practicing those skills. Through this counting plan, it would confirm or deny the need for additional efforts in all classes to allow for literacy to take place, and may even prove that this may be an immediate concern. If proven that very little time is dedicated daily, then it would further emphasize the need for writing workshop in all Language Arts classroom, and may change the way that my school looks at literacy and our curriculum. Additionally, this could lead to action research through which a team of teachers really evaluates and practices a variety of ways through which literacy can be used in other subjects (math, science, social studies, even the specials classes – art and music). This counting plan may lead a realization and confirmation that there is not enough time truly utilized for literacy in the day.
Writing Workshop and Common Core Standard
Course of Study: Teaching students to be Writers
Introduction
Topic:
Writing
is the format through which thoughts, understanding, and opinions are published
and shared and for too long, writing has been pushed aside in the classroom to
allow for more instructional time for math and reading. How can we deny the connection between writing
and all subjects, do they not go hand in hand? As schools continue to evolve
and adapt to the changing student, writing should be at the forefront of all
communication. Adoption of the Common Core Standard Course of Study requires
students to explain their thinking and justify their answers, which means, being
able to express their ideas and understanding in words, through writing. The
topic that has been so long ignored must reemerge into every subject and every
classroom. Not only must teachers begin teaching student to write, but also
this involves instruction on grammar, conventions, and spelling. It is
necessary to make up for the years they have lacked in writing experience and
make years of growth in just one year to ensure that students are competitive
in their academics. Schools must adopt a writing program to encourage the
writer in every child.
General Overview of the
Literature:
Research
supports that schools are in need of a Writer’s Workshop and the
characteristics that should be involved. However, there are several quality programs to choose
from, but what makes an excellent workshop? In reviewing literature by several
researchers, Donald Graves, Nancie Atwell, Jane Hansen, Mark Dressman, and
others who have great contributed to the study, there are certain
characteristics that were interlaced and supported by nearly all of the
experts. A workshop should involve student led discussions and allow for
freedom of choice in their writing. According to Fletcher and Portalupi,
“…Young writers work best when they feel a sense of ownership – personal
investment – in their writing…” giving them a “this really matters to me
feeling as they write,” (p. 23) if a teacher cannot invest the students the workshop
may be a lost cause (2001). When teachers release control to the students, they
are able to explore and learn on their own. It is also evident that one of the
most important criteria for an effective workshop is allowing for time;
students need the time to brainstorm, write, confer, and revise their writing. All
researchers were in favor of choice for students in their writing, but also
promoted worthy questions that also affect a writer’s voice and development.
Rationale:
Common Core Standard Course of Study
requires students to effective explain their reasoning and thoughts across the
curriculum, schools are in need of a writing program that is supported by data
research. Teaching writing is hard; it is a collection of skills that
require other subject knowledge and ability to put thoughts into words
(Fletcher, 2001). As there is plenty of research around writing, the focus of
this literature review will be in the overall environment in the classroom to
foster excellent youth writers. Denise Leograndis identifies four primary goals
for writing workshop: build a safe writing community, establish rituals and
routines, generate lots of thinking, talk and writing, and develop the
understanding that all good writing has meaning, detail, structure, and pacing
(2008). Therefore, the majority of research fell into three major aspects that
must be present for a successfully workshop: proper teacher modeling, students routinely
given time to write, and opportunity for student choice.
Body
Kinds of Work Reviewed:
To
form an educated opinion, one should consider scholarly research from a variety
of studies, case studies, reviews, and articles. Many of these researchers are
interrelated and often discuss the others’ research in their own. It seemed
that many built their theories and studies based upon another’s. Lucy Calkins
and Donald Graves studied and researched together, which led to many findings
involving each other’s work. One such study by Graves and Calkins that related
to the revision process of students (1991). This research also contained his
case study featured in Research in the
Teaching of English that looks specifically at the writing process of
seven-year-old children. All the research pointed conclusively to the need for
writing workshop in the classroom environment, but differed slightly as to what
need to be emphasized in that workshop (1975). All agreed to the development of
student choice to develop themselves as authors. Mark Dressman conducted his
research by reviewing the procedures of reading initiatives in to states, Texas
and California. Although not direct research upon the writing program, reading
and writing should not be separated, which included the emphasis on explicit
teaching to marry reading and writing in the classroom setting (1999).
Primarily this research seemed to be qualitative research based on the
observations of students and their interaction within the classroom. This type
of subject is difficult to support with data analysis because students vary in
countless ways. However, the results are conclusive; writing workshop is a
necessary aspect for teaching student writers with specific characteristics
involved, but primary emphasis upon student choice within their own writing
development.
Description of selected
important works:
Writing
should be an opportunity for students to have a choice and a voice in the
classroom and their writing. Nancie
Atwell
(1985), references to Lucy Calkin’s idea of an “underground curriculum” of the
students’ ideas and knowledge, which the teacher too often ignores. It should
not be the teacher’s role to assign mandatory writing topics, but rather
demonstrate good writing habits for students to imitate and make their own. By
modeling and participating, the teacher demonstrates that each student has
their own story to tell. According to Donald Graves and Lucy Calkins research,
students should develop as writers by having the opportunities of authors:
“daily time for writing, conferences with teachers, and peers, and
opportunities to draft, revise, and publish their writing; most significantly
they took responsibility for deciding what and why and for whom they would
write” (p. 35). This is a necessary freedom for children to find their own
author’s voice. Furthermore, the recognition for the need of time, talk, and
reading all play an important role in writing. This journal, really hit upon
many aspects that I have found must be in a writing workshop for maximum
success in the development of student writers. That being said, one of the most
important aspects is creating the proper classroom environment where students
feel able to write freely and bring out the author inside, whomever that may be
(Atwell, 1985).
Gender and environment can affect the type
of writer a student becomes. Through a case study of a seven-year-old
child, Donald Graves (1975), finds after observing students’ writing, the
classroom setting in which this occurred, analyzing writing samples, and
looking at the interventions of the teachers in those classrooms, that
“learning environments, sex differences in writing, developmental factors and
the writing process” (p.234). Thus proving that students need a relaxed
environment to be able to write freely and independently and recognizing the
difference in the needs of students based on gender. These conclusions led him
to the classification of two writers that students may become due to these
factors: reactive or reflective. Understanding the ways in which students write
and their writing styles, allows a teacher to better mold the workshop to fit
those writing needs. For example, reflective writers do not usually need as
much time before writing, and often revise frequently at a phrasal level.
However, the needs of these two writers are very different and by recognizing
their strengths and weaknesses, and providing support for both, the teacher
would ensure that a proper environment, conducive to their writing is produced.
It takes time for a student to truly develop who they are as a writer (Graves,
1975).
Students need ample time to routinely
practice the writing process. After reviewing the practices in two highly
regarded states for eduction, Dressman (1999), found the need for curriculums
to proide “explicit, systematic instruction…” (p. 278). Not only must a writing
program encourage writers, but also students need consistency and instruction
when they write. It is through these
lessons and teacher modeling that students observe proper skills for writing
and truly learn and internalize the writing process. (Dressman, 1999).
Teachers
are active learners and model the writing process for student learning in the
classroom. As teachers,
we should continually be learning and growing in our profession, as we do
through professional development. Jane Hansen and Donald Graves (1986),
emphasized the importance of the teacher actively portraying a learner in the
classroom. Not only should teachers teach, but they should learn from their
students as well, giving students ample time to be teachers in the classroom. Teachers
should attend professional development, read educational literature, or even do
research, and demonstrate this continual growth to their students as a model for
students to imitate their learning habits. Similarly, the teacher needs to
demonstrate the act of selecting topics and the writing process, especially
revision, for students to truly grow in their writing (Hansen & Graves,
1986).
Students
demonstrate sophistication of writing.
As students develop as writers, their stories become more descriptive and
detailed. Donald Graves (1991), found that character development is a primary
characteristic to show development in a child’s writing. He goes on to address
poetry, as another form of development. Lucy Calkins (1994), mentions poetry
beginning with songs and chants, where students are able to the sounds of their
writing, but Graves says students are developed when they are able to
understand what information is necessary to the piece and what is superfluous.
Students can fall into the trap of writing what they think the teacher wants,
but advanced development shows when they truly act as a writer and find their
own voice. Their growth as a writer leads to appreciation of author’s craft, in
turn developing their overall literacy(Graves,
1991).
Literacy development through reading and
writing is critical in students. For true literacy development, workshops
must develop students as lifelong readers and writers. Referencing other great
researchers, Nancie Atwell, Lucy Calkins, and Donald Graves, Mark Dressman
(1993), creates the statement “students largely read silently and
independently from books of their choice and dialogue with teachers and
classmates through response journals, while promising to transform the
reluctant readers…into lifelong loves of books and into critical, literate
citizens, are also, by design, a socially reproductive practice” (p. 258). That
is the true purpose of literacy development and the workshop program. However,
as readers and writers, literacy cannot be confined to the classroom (Dressman, 1993).
Writing should bridge the connection between
home and school. Connecting home and school can be a
great challenge, but with a literacy program that embraces and enables parents
to be an active participant in their student’s life is what every school needs.
By having a program in which the teacher has more control over the content and
subjects taught, they are able to incorporate lessons and texts that reinforce
the lives of their students. Although this article discusses greatly, ways in
which to involve parents, the relevance lies in the flexibility allowed through
various reading workshops that is not allowed through textbook programs. As
McCarthey emphasizes, understanding their students’ backgrounds is important so
that the teacher may “alter curriculum and discourse patterns to include all
children,” and strictly following a textbook of stories through which families
cannot relate, will not bridge the gap from classroom to home. Through workshop
style curriculum, the teacher would be able to reinforce those connections and
allow parents to be a great part of their student’s literacy development
(McCarthey, 2000).
Conclusion
How
your work is informed by the work of others:
After
extensive research, I have found the criteria upon which to base a writing
workshop. The research has been very conclusive as to what the teacher should
provide and what the students must bring to the workshop. Many of the articles
and books I reviewed led to similar conclusions as to the emphasis of writing
workshop. I now understand that workshops should be primarily student led in
conferences and discussion of topics. Although the teacher must set an example
and provide instructional mini-lessons, for the students to use, the teacher
must allow student choice to play the primary role in their writing. The
workshops purpose is for the students to find their voice in their writing. The
element of choice for students was evident in nearly all the researchers’
works. Prior to this research, my understanding of a workshop was to provide
plentiful writing prompts for students to choose from and that would allow them
choice. It seemed more teacher led, the teacher choosing topics for the
students to follow and practice a skill of writing daily. However, I have found
that this is not the case; the best word for the teacher that I have found is
“facilitator.” Lucy Calkins emphasizes that this is not the case, as teachers
we should gradually release the responsibility, initially helping students to
brainstorm, but in the end the students should choose a topic that is
meaningful to them. Fletcher and Portalupi (2001), put it best in saying that
students must have the “this really matters to me” (p. 23), feeling in their
writing. If a student is not invested in telling their story, then they are
unable to create the detailed piece with proper character development that is
necessary for a proficient writer.
Without
doubt, my vision of a writing workshop has drastically changed and as I had
mentioned before, countless researchers reference Lucy Calkins and her writing
workshop. Although I have heard of other programs, this research continuously
peaked my interest in evaluating the aspects of Calkins program. That being
said, this research confirms my need for writing workshop for students to be
proficient according to Common Core Standard Course of Study and will lead to
my proposal to our school for the adoption of Lucy Calkin’s writing program.
This program ensures that students are given a choice, within a safe
environment, and their writing is facilitated by the teacher model, but they
encouraged to find their own voice.
As Common Core primarily supports argumentative writing, as opposed to
narrative, some adaptations will need to be made to the workshop to promote
this writing. Naturally students write what is familiar and that involves
stories that do not need factual support. Thus, more emphasis upon teacher
modeling will be needed to teach students to find a topic that interests them
and go through the writing process for a persuasive piece. How will students
learn to write if they are not given the time, the choice, and the support to
do it? Writing workshop will be in place in my classroom and hopefully within
my school.
Atwell,
N., (1985). Everyone Sits at a Big Desk: Discovering Topics for Writing. The English Journal, 74 (5), 35-39. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/817698
Writing should be an opportunity for
students to have a voice in the classroom. Atwell references to Lucy Calkin’s
idea of an “underground curriculum” of the students’ ideas and knowledge, that
the teacher too often ignores. It should not be the teacher’s role to assign
mandatory writing topics, but rather demonstrate good writing habits for
students to imitate and make their own. By modeling and participating, the
teacher demonstrates that each student has their own story to tell. According
to Donald Graves and Lucy Calkins research, students should develop as writers
by having the opportunities of authors: “daily time for writing, conferences
with teachers, and peers, and opportunities to draft, revise, and publish their
writing; most significantly they took responsibility for deciding what and why
and for whom they would write.” This is a necessary freedom for a child to find
their own author’s voice. Furthermore, the recognition for the need of time,
talk, and reading all play an important role in writing.
Dressman,
M., (1993). Lionizing Lone Wolves: The Cultural Romantics of Literacy
Workshops. Curriculum Inquiry, 23(3), 245-263. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1179992
Dressman directly addresses the ideal
of Reader’s and Writer’s Workshop through this article that emphasizes the
sense of community and individual choice to build life long readers and
writers. Referencing other great researchers, Nancie Atwell, Lucy Calkins, and
Donald Graves, he creates the statement “students largely read silently and
independently from books of their choice and dialogue with teachers and
classmates through response journals, while promising to transform the
reluctant readers…into lifelong loves of books and into critical, literate
citizens, are also, by design, a socially reproductive practice.” That is the
true purpose of literacy development. Dressman continues by linking a strength
in literacy to overall intelligence. Another important aspect, is the sense of
community within that safe reading environment. Students are able to make
connections between text and writing, between themselves and others, and
between texts. These workshops allow for a “collective negotiation of meaning”
and gives students a voice in the classroom where they are able to learn
through their own exploration.
Dressman, M., (1999). On the Use and
Misuse of Research Evidence: Decoding Two States’ Reading Initiatives. Reading Research Quarterly, 34(3), 258–285. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/748064
In
reviewing the reading initiatives of two highly regarded states in the world of
education, Mark Dressman reviews the practices of Texas and California. He
begins by referencing education of the past and effects of various diversity
aspects. Specifically Dressman addresses race in the school systems and the
role it has played in these two states. This is not of primary concern for the
article, after doing so, he begins to evaluate the development of literacy
through these programs. After much research and refences to many studies of
Phonemic/Phonological Awareness, he states that “the future of children as
literate individuals in these states is jeopardized by current curriculums
based principally on the reading and writing of meaningful texts…need to be
replaced by explicit, systematic instruction…” It is then evident that students
need a consistent program that marries reading and writing that is taught with
consistency. He also emphasizes the importance of research based teaching and
recognized that these states had not revisited their curriculum for the
relevancy to today’s youth. This further supports my desire to implement a
research based program that can be taught routinely beginning at a young age
for Phonemic/Phonological Awareness.
Graves,
D.H., (1975). An Examination of the Writing Process of Seven Year Old Children.
Research in the Teaching of English, 9
(3), 227-241. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/40170631
Through this case study, Graves looks
closely at the development of the writing process of seven-year-old children.
After observing students’ writing, the classroom setting in which this
occurred, analyzing writing samples, and looking at the interventions of the
teachers in those classrooms. This study came to conclusions about “learning
environments, sex differences in writing, developmental factors and the writing
process.” Thus proving that students need a relaxed environment to be able to
write freely and independently and recognizing the difference in the needs of
students based on gender. Reactive and reflective writers were identified, with
rather opposite characteristics. Reflective writers have a strong sense of
audience and provide reasoning for their feelings in writing. These are the
characteristics in writers that we should be aware of and encourage. However,
Graves goes on to ask further questions that apply to my research, and
emphasizes the need for additional observation on this topic of writing
development.
Graves,
D. H., (1991). Trust the Shadows. The
Reading Teacher, 45 (1), 18-24. Retrieved
from http://www.jstor.org/stable/20200796
Specifically looking at the writing
programs within American schools, Graves digs deeper to find out what kind of
writing is taking place in the classroom. One surprising finding was from the
school supply companies, noting that lined paper (which is used for writing)
purchases were in steep decline. One topic studied with Lucy Calkins, was the
process through which students revise their work. Graves also mentions the
differences in topic choice between genders and the range of focus through
which children write, but both genders place a large focus on the character and
the “motion and action” of that individual. The level of character development
in a child’s writing can also signify the level of their development as a
writer. Finally, he relates it, through poetry, to adult writers and the
importance of understanding what information is necessary to the piece and what
is superfluous. Students often write what they think the teacher wants as an
answer instead of truly acting as a writer and “trust (their) own
thinking.”
Hansen,
J., & Graves, D., (1986, April). Do You Know What Backstrung Means? The
Reading Teacher, 39(8), 807-812. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/20199226
.
In a study conducted by Jane Hanson and
Donald Graves, in Lee, New Hampshire at the Mast Way School (K-5), they found
the importance of the teacher actively portraying a learner in the classroom.
Teachers always attend professional development, read teacher books, or even do
research, but the importance of this study was to demonstrate that a teacher
learner values student knowledge and models learning for his/her students is
the most effective. The teacher must listen to his/her students and ask
questions, the students will then imitate the actions and do the same. This can
be related to reading and writing in the sense that the teacher must show
students how to be both and actively participate in the practices of reading
and writing. Teachers often hold back from allowing their students
opportunities to teach and share, sometimes afraid to lose control over their
classroom. Hansen and Graves emphasize teachers participate in similar
practices as their students, e.g. reviewing others’ writing. They then dive
deeper into the roles of both the teachers and students engaging in the writing
process.
McCarthey,
S. J., (2000). Home: School Connections: A Review of the Literature. The
Journal of Educational Research, 93(3), 145-153. Retrieved from
http://www.jstor.org/stable/27542260
Connecting home and school can be a great
challenge, but with a literacy program that embraces and enables parents to be
an active participant in their student’s life is what every school needs. By
having a program in which the teach has more control over the content and
subjects taught, they are able to incorporate lessons and texts that reinforce
the lives of their students. Although this article discusses greatly, ways in
which to involve parents, the relevance lies in the flexibility allowed through
various reading workshops that is not allowed through textbook programs. As
McCarthey emphasizes, understanding their students’ backgrounds is important so
that the teacher may “alter curriculum and discourse patterns to include all
children,” and strictly following a textbook of stories through which families
cannot relate, will not bridge the gap from classroom to home. Through workshop
style curriculum, the teacher would be able to reinforce those connections and allow
parents to be a great part of their student’s literacy development.
As more states across the nation make the
shift to Common Core standards, the rigor increases and the expectations of
higher level thinking skills required for proficiency far surpasses what
students have been required for proficiency. Being an upper elementary teacher,
I am eager to see the effects on students having been held to these standards all
along, but what does that mean for those students in upper elementary who have
barely gained exposure to what we are now asking. Going through their
elementary career, students have not been asked to write informational texts
and their time of free writing has nearly vanished. How do we adopt a reading
and writing program in upper elementary that will make up for the shortcomings
of these students while allowing for them to move at their readiness level and
be successful with the new standards? What would that reading and writing
program look like? So to begin exploring these options, the real question is,
what are the best practices and methodology for upper elementary students in
Common Core State Standards to be successful in reading and writing?
During the 2011 – 2012 school year, I was
hired as a Fourth Grade Reading teacher, and that was it. Our school had
separated reading and writing for my group of students. I was handed the SRA
Open Court curriculum and was informed that our Science and Social Studies
teacher would also teach writing, but had not curriculum or standards to abide
by. I was then given the option to veer away from Open Court and go where I saw
fit as long as the standards were met for the North Carolina Standard Course of
Study and that the students proved proficient on the End of Grade Test. This
lack of curricular structure, led me to discuss the options with other
teachers. Every teacher in our building was doing something different for their
reading and writing instruction. The only consistency was that we all had the
Open Court materials, some of them, and that we were aware of Reading A-Z as a
program that was available. Continuing through the year, I saw the disconnect
among grade levels as well as a lack of communication between all reading and
writing teachers. In the past, writing had been tested, but was recently
dropped and merely a writing sample is kept in each student’s portfolio.
Through this research, I hope to find a program that will enable our teachers
to have consistency and routine in their instruction to better prepare students
for the level of writing required for reading comprehension through Common
Core.
In doing so, I plan to present the data to
our school Principal to review for the upcoming 2012 – 2013 school year. By
piloting this program, there may be an opportunity for our district leaders to
review our work with the program and potentially implement them across the
district. However, for full district adoption, I will need to keep in mind the
cost of the programs I review, as well as the training required for teachers to
understand the materials and implementation of the program. Therefore, this
will not only guide my instruction in the fall, but potentially also within my
school and district to benefit all students to be successful.
Initially, I looked to leaders within my
school and two individuals who presented at our professional development
conference. After extensive discussions, I have decided to review work and
research done by Lucy Caulkins, Gail Boushey and Joan Moser – The 2Sister of
the Daily Five and Café, Dr. Robert Marzano, and Debbie Diller to name a few.
There have been additional researchers whom have conducted research upon these
programs, but through this study I hope to review their work as well as
discussing with teachers who have implemented these programs and seen results
to reach my final conclusion. It was the consensus, that students must
comprehend more informational texts and use higher order thinking skills, being
able to explain their thinking through writing to meet Common Core State
Standards. This is an ongoing issue and debate within classrooms across the
country. When reviewing the Six Shifts of the Common Core State Standards,
there are now required standards for writing that have not been in place prior
to adopting the standards. For example, one shift has gone from writing a persuasive
text to an argumentative text, not just your opinion, but have the evidence to
support that side of the argument (North Carolina Department of Public
Instruction, 2012). This is just one sample of increasing the rigor of the
expectations on students and their writing abilities. As the document, English Language Arts Unpacking Standards,
continues, it makes it more evident that our reading and writing programs
cannot remain the same, especially when they were nonexistent to begin with. If
students are raised to higher standards, we must be able to use the curriculum
to help them meet and exceed those standards.
Works Cited
North Carolina Department of Public Instruction.
(2012). English Language Arts Unpacking Standards.
Retrieved from http://www.dpi.state.nc.us/docs/acre/standards/common-core-tools/unpacking/ela/4.pdf
This course has really helped me to think about student learning, and what I need to do as a teacher to help as much as possible. It is not enough to use technology simply for the sake of using it, but rather we need to consider how it is helping the students and what benefits does it bring. In my lesson, I included technology to be able to reach a variety of learners in my classroom. I was still teaching, technology had not replaced me, but it aided my students in ways that I could not. Overall, the lesson was successful and my students really enjoyed the learning. Moving toward Common Core standards, students are required to write and distribute their writing. Technology allows for the best distribution imaginable. Please view my lesson reflection, and our class timetoast at the following links:
During Module 5, we reviewed a lot about technology and the effect it has on our teaching and on our students as learners. This week we were asked to create a lesson plan adhering to the TPACK model and really think about evaluating the technology we were planning to use.
asks my students to read biographies, and identify facts and main ideas to summarize that individual. They are then expected to add an entry for that person on our class timeline at Timetoast. This entry should include the lifespan of the person, the summary of their life, and a picture if the student is able.
When looking back on my first year of teaching, the most important story I wanted to tell was about traveling across the United States with my students. Without a great curriculum to use, I taught my 4th graders by linking readings within a state, and within a region. We read a novel to tie our travels in and put events into history. Through a variety of texts and internet resources, my students grew their understanding of the US.
Listen to our story through this video or go to Youtube
My technology certificate is complete, and now I begin the journey toward my Masters. The first class I am taking this summer is CEP 800 and then I will have CEP 822.
On this blog, I will display assignments, projects, and reflections as I continue through this program. The first assignment we have is for an audio production. I completed this assignment by interviewing upper elementary students about locations and attractions within the United States. The student in this audio file was asked verbal questions as well as hoping that he could point to the location on a map of the US as well. The audio portion is included in this file, and I have given some description as to the success of their ability to locate the sites on a map.
This is Linnea Czerney, speaking to you about my Wicked Project, I apologize for the difficulty you must be having understanding me, but I have lost my voice.
As a first year teacher, in a completely new environment, I found myself struggling to have effective communication with parents. In the past, the students’ agenda has been a very useful tool, but many of my students will remove a note from their agenda, lose it, or continuously “forget” to show the note to their parent.
After completing 50+ parent teacher conferences, the need has never been clearer for more effective parent communication. This has been an ongoing process with trial and error, but I hope that the inclusion of more technology availability will help to allow parents to be more involved and more informed about their child's class as well as their performance within that course. I have tried several methods to communicate, but not through technology. This is so important because so often parents are not involved because their student does not convey the message of homework or the material we are covering in class.
I had created a website for my classroom, but had been using it for educational resources geared toward my students, rather than using it as an informational tool to communicate with parents. When realizing the problem I was having, I immediately decided to use technology to help ease the communication between parents and teachers. Although I recognize that this is not a cure all, and is virtually useless to parents without internet access, I found technology and a website to offer many solutions to this problem.
To begin, I created a survey using Google Forms to give parents input and influence in the direction of my project. The resounding results told me that these parents wanted to have access to homework pages, school information, and access to grades. With that in mind, I made several changes to my website and sent mass emails to parents informing them about the website and what was going on in our classroom.
I then took their feedback and implemented a variety of technology tools in attempts to ease their concerns.
In the survey I had parents create a code name for their student. Some parents returned the survey in paper form, and some did not fully understand the purpose of the code name. I had one student’s parent choose the name of another student in the class, and one parent give their child’s name for the code name. I then had to email them to have this changed, and include further explanation of the code names. I then used these codes to begin using engrade, per feedback, I have been practicing with this before I make it public to parents. I also wanted to get the rest of my grade level on board and they have not, so although I set up engrade and hope to use it in the future, the rest of my team would not agree on this grade level decision.
Another aspect that has not been used at all, is the feedback option I posted on the site. Parents have not used this feature at all. I have kept our class google calendar up to date on the website, and parents have referenced this as helpful in emails. In addition to the calendar, I added an “announcement” feature on the site so that they are able to have up to date important announcements.
Lastly, parents wanted access to homework assignments after students have lost them. These are posted under the homework tab, when applicable. This last week, my students did not have homework, so there was nothing to post. Through emails, parents have also mentioned that this has been useful to them.
The amount of parent communication through email has greatly increased from the use of technology, which is much easier for a teacher, who cannot make phonecalls whenever necessary with students in the classroom. Many have utilized email and informed us of this through the survey.
I have seen the amazing effects of the increased parental communication, but have also seen the aspects in which technology could not solve the problem or features that were not as beneficial as I anticipated. I have proof through my website that there has been increased use. Since beginning this project, there have only been 3 days that my class website was not accessed, and this graph illustrates the unique users that have utilize the sites features.
There is still more that I would like to develop on my website and need to continue to remind myself that technology will not fix all the problems of communication, but is an excellent aid in this ongoing process. As teacher parent communication increases, I would like to increase the tools and information that is accessible through this site. As commented through feedback for this project, I need to ensure that this is not overwhelming and I take the process one step at a time. If I bombard my parents with tools they are expected to use, it may have a negative effect.
Overall, I am very happy and satisfied with the results of my project. I have asked parents for their input about the increased technology and availability of content and information to them, and it has been greatly appreciate. Is the problem completely solved? No, but I have taken several steps in the right direction, to bridge the gap between home and the classroom.
And as I mentioned in the last post, sometimes it is challenging to find videos from those you connect with.
