Jewls Musings

rip van winkle

2007-04-22T16:06:00.000-07:00

This all sort of reminds me of the article in the Times about Rip van Winkle. He comes back and is amazed at all the strange things he sees--people talking into small, thin boxes next to their ears, people sittin and typing into computers, etc. He finally feels relieved when he walks into a school and everything is just as he remembered it. Kinda sad really. I think it is going to take a huge paradigm shift to puch schools into making learning meaningful and relevant to today's society.

Response to Adams--Powerpoint

2007-04-01T12:34:00.000-07:00

I agree that with any new tool it is helpful to look at the uses, advantages, disadvantages and the "hidden effects." However, as Adams discusses the pitfalls of PowerPoint in the classroom, it seems to me that those pitfalls are more a result of the individual using the technology/tool than the technology/tool itself. Many of the points she makes could be addressed to a teacher who uses a TE (tool) to dictate the path through a textbook from pg 1, through the end of the book, making sure not to skip the review questions at the end of each unit, nor the suggested teaching points outlined for each lesson in the TE. I don't think many would argue that the TE caused this linear uncompromising way of teaching. The tool, while it may suggest a "default" way of use, does not force one into a habit of plowing through the textbook. Instead, these actions would lie with the individual making use of this tool. Whether the tool is a TE/textbook or a PowerPoint slideshow, the difference in its use and effectiveness is the difference between a thoughtful, quality, creative teacher and a less thoughtful, perhaps less experienced teacher.

venting

2007-03-25T12:14:00.000-07:00

Have you seen that ad on t.v.? They say something to the effect of: studies show our kids are not prepared for college or high paying jobs...we (who?) want to make sure our teachers are better prepared...etc.... I'm not even sure what the point of the add exactly was or whose position it was coming from, but I am getting quite tired of people who are not in education saying what they think education should be. It strikes me as funny (not ha, ha funny) that people say our kids are not prepared, but then many of those same people promote things that don't help focus our efforts on meeting kids needs and preparing them for life after highschool. For example, high stakes testing shifts the focus off the student and their needs and onto what will be tested--which, in turn, isn't really preparing them for higher education or careers (Does passing a world history TAKS test enable you to be more successful in college or at a job? Does everyone need to show proficiency in Integrated Physics and Chemistry?) Test taking strategies rule and critical thinking, individualized learning and quality content experiences are put on the back burner. While, I think that children's progress should be assessed, and a certain amount of accountability should be in place, having one narrow test (and at the high school level, have everyone have to take the same tests) seems to leave behind precisely those kids who need help catching up or finding a way.

concentration of media

2007-03-16T14:23:00.000-07:00

Reading Lessig, reminded me of a Primetime (or some other similar news-magazine type program) I watched recently about North Korea. Or to be more precise, the show on life in North Korea made me, then, think about some of the issues Lessig brings up toward the end of the "Property" section. I remember watching in somewhat incredulous amazement at the way media there (among many other things) is controlled. For example, students have no access or awareness of the internet. It was shocking to think about a whole culture whose access to information about themselves and the "outside" world is so limited and strictly shaped. It is scary. At the same time, it made me think about how we get our information. So much of our understanding of the world, of the information we get (or don't get) about various issues and events, of the perceived importance of certain topics over others is based off a few media groups. Of course, via the internet, we have access to more information than ever before. But somehow that doesn't seem to address the media concentration issue brought up by Lessig.

a connection

2007-02-24T14:00:00.000-08:00

As I was sitting on my sofa, with my porch door open so I could try to, in some small way, take part of the gorgeous day, reading Chapter 1 The Technology Question, I was quite excited when I came to the example of Vygotski's theory of psychological tools(p.15), essentially saying that language is a product of culture. The reason this stirred a little excitement in me (albeit not as much as the birds twirping and the energizing sun tempting my attention) was because it reminded me of a response I had made to Danny's blog a week or two ago. He had given an example of his young niece (who had not yet learned how to read) being in a situation where she showed her ability to reason in a syllogistic manner. To my understanding, he was making the point against some of the readings we had done that cited examples of illiterate groups being unable to follow through with syllogistic logic. Thus showing that one did not have to know how to read in order to reason in this way. I responded with the idea that perhaps the reason his niece could perform the type of reasoning she did was not a result of her ability or inability to read, but rather due to the circumstances and culture in which she as been raised. Similarly, it made me wonder about how ones culture influences and shapes the way in which we use logic, reason and create understandings. My response seems to fall in line with Vygotsky's claim that a child learning language from a parent is as a result of her culture and that "socially supported and culturally sanctioned learning had the capacity to radically transform individual thinking." (p.15)

Reading Like Dancing

2007-02-17T13:10:00.000-08:00

Reading is a paired activity, the author and the reader. Like dancing where one partner takes the lead and ushers their counterpart around the dance floor, so does a writer make use of the conventions of langauge to guide their reader to an intended understanding. I was a little worried when I first began reading Ch 6 The Problem of Interpretation. Olson stated that, "when interpretation becomes impossible we require a theory, set of concepts to guide us." (p. 115) I was nervous that perhaps he would be asserting that in order for a reader to make an interpretation, that they would first require some "expert" guidance. Which I would have a difficult time agreeing with because I think all readers bring their own biases and schema to a text or any situation for that matter. As I continued to read, I think his intention became a little more clear: that understanding of certain genres and rhetorical forms as well as understanding the purpose and assumptions of the writer is an important part of literacy. In my experience, with my own growth as a reader and with my students, having familiarity with the mechanisms involved in specific types of writings is critical to assist understanding. Knowing that the author is weaving in clues and signposts to guide you to be in sync with his or her message allows you, the reader, to then be led. This is not to ignore the importance of what the reader brings to it. And Olson points this out as well, "The central achievement in reading texts critically is a new consciousness of what a new text could have meant..." So powerful this is, I can still remember the time I first was introduced to the idea that a text could be looked at through different frames. I was in high school, taking a summer college prep class and it was like an epiphany that I could choose areas of the text to focus on, bring my own meaning to them, analyze and critique them, rather than just paraphrase and summarize. Unfortunately my senior English teacher had apparently not reached that epiphany--needless to say it was a long year.

World on Paper--cause for reflection...are we depriving kids of the very thing that makes them good readers?

2007-02-11T14:45:00.000-08:00

I previouly posted responses to my reading of Chs. 1-5. But I was compelled to come back to a point brought up early in the readings (and not quite returned to as of yet), but of interest to me as an educator.

Olson brings up the a debate in Europe (pointed out by Clanchy) about the concern that with compulsory education schools might produce a "surlus of scholars..." "Such fears were allayed by reformers emphasizing elementary practical literacy and numeracy...rather than a liberal education...which remained as much the preserve of an elite of litterati." (p.10) Olson goes on to say, "The vast amounts of time some children spend on remedial reading exercises may be more appropriately spent aquiring scientific and philosophical information." (p.13) I find this an interesting point because it seems to parallel a sort of "back to the basics" type curriculum. In my experiences with different schools, I am struck by the difference in emphasis on thinking and repeating between schools that are higher performing (an often represent a higher socioeconomic status) and schools that are lower performing. Lower performing schools (with a disproportionate amount of at-risk students) seem to have a tendecy of focusing on the very basic levels of remediation, follow the steps, memorize the strategies--practice that mainly revolves around preparation for the TAKS test. Certainly this is not true of all schools, but I can think of many where science and social studies stopped in January to get ready for reading and math tests. Whereas, schools that are not as concerned with their scores (is there such a thing?) are focused more on dicussing and debating and reflecting on texts and on building critical thinking, hypothesizing, and inferential skills during their science and social studies experiences. I wonder if at times while we are trying to get kids to read, if we are in fact depriving them of the very experiences that are valuable to a critical reader.

World on Paper Ch 1-5

2007-02-11T13:31:00.000-08:00

I had trouble wrapping my mind around Olson's suggestion that writing "provided a model for speech." (p.76) It seems to me that his revisionist view on the history of writing and the traditional view--writing as a transcription of speech, both play a role between writing and cognition. They seem to go hand in hand, not one OR the other. Perhaps the difficulty lies in the fact that I am referring to my own understanding of literacy and the reciprocal nature of oral and written language today. But even historically, to a certain extent writing is or can be a transcription of speech or of intended communication. He cites Harris and Gaur as arguing that "writing systems were created not to represent speech, but to communicate information." (p.67) However, if information was previously only communicated orally, then even writing systems that are developed to just communicate information would still have to rely in some sense on speech and representing speech. I understand his point about words becoming things--an awareness of language once it is written and objectified. However, I have a difficult time coming to terms with writing as a model for speech unless he means simply that people cannot be reflective of their language and analyze words, syntax and they way in which words are used unless those words and language structures are written down for them to examine. Does then speech model itself after writing? It seems I could think of times when this is not true. And then, could a people not be reflective of their language without written language? Any thoughts on this. Perhaps, I have missed the point!

Another point of interest for me was in Chapter 5 when Olson examines "reported speech." He writes, "in the management of reported speech...speech and writing tend to diverge." (p.97) I would think reported speech (versus regular speech) and written language would be more similar than different since they would both have the burden of decontextualizing and recontextualizing. He does point out that the function of text in Medieval times was more to preserve memory and would use specific methods like poetry and metaphor. So in this case perhaps recontextualizing was really more of memorization, but then as he describes reported speech he explores how oral language is intended to get across meaning. So it would follow that even though writing neccessitates "speech act verbs" and metalinguistic commentary to convery illocutionary force, it would appear that oral language would need to make use of this as well--tone and body language don't completely convey meaning. In other words, I don't think that simply the act of having to recontextualize something in written form is the main reason for having language that explains feelings and emotions.

Storytelling in light of Bauman and Briggs

2007-02-10T16:26:00.000-08:00

Telling a story of a historical Texas battle to my students was an example of entextualization. The story, shared orally, flowed like a text, with a clear beginning, middle and end. Although there were some brief pauses in the story, and a few comments made by the audience, it was clearly not a conversation made up of turn-taking nor a dialogue whose topic could end up taking a myriad of different directions. Thus, the tale I told them could easily be detached or decontextualized from this situation and recontextualized somewhere else, perhaps when they go home and retell it to their parents. I found myself using language I had used before--I've told this story for six years. The work of entextualizing this historical tale was not too hard. In part because my position (as a teacher) provides for me to be the "storyteller, " but also through my tone, rate of speech and demeanor, I was able to set this "story" apart from just a regular lesson or discussion.

Two random, but related thoughts:

I'm reminded of the story Knots on a Counting Rope where a little Native American boy sits around the fire with his grandfather asking him to "tell me again about the day I was born." At the end of the grandfather telling the story (much of which the boy actually tells), Grandfather tells him to make another knot in his counting rope. He also tells the boy that he won't be around forever and when he gets to the end of the rope, the boy will be able to tell the story himself. (An example of setting a story up to be entextualized and later decontextualized.)

I grew up with my father telling me (recontextualizing) fables and fairy tales that were passed down from his mother. When she would be doing house work like ironing, she would sit her children around her and tell them stories from memory (her own recontextualization for stories she heard when she was young) to keep them occupied.

Stortytelling

2007-02-04T16:30:00.000-08:00

I recorded myself in my fourth grade classroom sharing a Texas history story--the Battle of Gonzales, with my students. Essentially the story is about one of the first skirmishes leading up to the Texas Revolution. Mexican soldiers are coming to the town of Gonzales to take back a small cannon that was given to the colonists by the Mexican government for protection from the Native Americans.

I began by setting the stage, I lean in, my voice lowers and I hold my students eyes with an expression that says, you're not going to miss what I have to say, "I have a story tell you, a story about a one of the first battles that led Mexicans and Texians into WAR! But let's go back a little bit..." Here's where I make sure that we are beginning with common knowledge, a little aside into reviewing the key players, and the different perspectives on each side. The kids, familiar with this part of the story chime in..."Stephen F. Austin, empressario, the Old Three Hundred, had to learn the language, promised to become Catholic, were given cheap land and agreed to follow Mexican rules..."

I go on with the story, simplifying in parts, using language they would understand/be familiar with to clarify parts of the story. Many students comment on how they would feel if someone was coming to take away a cannon given them. I pause the story to tell them, in fact, many of the colonists felt the same way. They get excited when I tell them that the colonists, who didn't have hardly any ammunition, stuffed the cannon with nails and other scraps of metal. I tell them about the white flag the people of Gonzales put above the cannon with the words, "COME AND TAKE IT!" We digress from the story to explore together the meaning of that phrase and not just it's meaning, but it's intent. One student suggests it is taunting and several try the phrase out. I continue by sharing a part of the story that is more legend than truth. "Some people say it was made out of an old bedsheet, but some versions of the story say it was made out of the wedding dress of Green DeWitt's wife."

Before I get to the ending, we stop to discuss how anyone today would know this information, after all there were no cameras or news crews covering this battle. We have a short discussion about oral tradition, storytelling, diaries and letters (an interesting parallel to this class). I notice through out how I am now a part of passing this story on and am more mindful of the ways in which my voice rises and falls to mantain their attention, how I speed up when it gets to an exciting part and pause a second or two longer before I reveal the conclusion. The kids get so involved in the story that many of them cheer when they find out that the greatly outnumberd (and out weaponed) colonists force the Mexican soldiers to retreat. This is interesting to watch because many of the had just written in their journal how they actually sided with the Mexican goverment and felt that the colonists should keep their promise. The story is over. Questions, comments and debates ensue.

Upon reflection:
--person telling the story has the power--there is a sense that they hold the "knowledge" ; just like when I sit and listen to my grandparents tell me stories of the world they grew up--they control the story, they possess the knowledge; or like a preacher at a church--it is their perspective of a collective story that gets shared and listened to
--the audience is an important part of storytelling, furthering the story with questions or by monitoring their attention/enthusiasm/understanding
--it would be hard to look at the above story without the context; the way I told it, the words I used, the reason I told it was all necessitated by the context of the situation; even retelling it here on this blog changed the context and the form in which I relayed it

Transcript

2007-01-28T18:38:00.000-08:00

Part of conversation at Fast Eddies; two couples. This happened to be an interesting exchange because it's topic touched on different perspectives of upcoming technology (as viewed by two different age groups) and meandered into perspectives of appropriate conversational interactions. While the conversation took place, we were concurrently watching a basketball game and playing NTM.

Paul: Me and Jenn had an interesting moment with my parents a couple of weeks ago...they brought up the fact, uhh...they brought up the...checking yourself out at the grocery store thing, like the .......

Paul: ............you check yourself
Julie: ...........self checkout

Julie: oh right
Jenn: like at Lowe's or the grocery story

Paul: They brought it up, they were talking about it completely as a negative thing, like they hate it because...there's not customer service there, like their point was going, like,

Paul: what happened to the days
Jenn:like there's no interaction

Paul:when like, somebody checked out your stuff for you? and you talked to them and blah, blah, blah and me and Jenn are going like, no...it's bad ass, you don't have to talk to anybody[Jenn--laugh] you just do it yourself [Julie-laugh] and you do it quick

Paul: and there's no like
Julie: you don't have to wait

Paul: my ways the right way .........I like plastic.................yeah (agreeing with Jenn)
Jenn: ...................like they wanted, they wanted service....................if you check yourself out there's no service

Paul: We're going like,... screw that we want it quick
Jenn:...............................they're used to the days where.....

Paul: just use the computer, like do it, be done with it.....not have to talk to anybody, just (whistle) go do our own thing....so that was interesting
Julie: .........................................AAND...when you do go through the line, it's like people who are having conversations with other......like...a bagger or something
Paul:...................................................................................Right.
Julie: and not about....

Jenn: and they won't even talk to you
Julie: yeah like don't acknowledge you, like just...
Jenn: .............................................that's what I hate....

Julie: and like...
Jenn: I walk up and........... nothing
Julie: ................I'd rather go to a machine

Julie: I'd rather not be...I'd rather go to a machine that's not supposed to pay attention to me, then be ignored by a person there
Paul:......................................and for me part of it is just, I think it, it's neato that I can check myself out [Julie-yeah] I think it's fun to do, "like, oh! this is neat"

Jenn: Wooh! (attention turns to NTM game starting back up)
Juan: What was it Jenn?
Jenn: I got one.
Juan:...........axis? yeah I didn't read it all.

Jenn: umm...I was telling Paul, our little gas station we go to, Valero, on Howard and Parmer. So we went in the other night and this creepy guy was in there, a guy we haven't seen for a long time and I was...and he was training this new guy, who was freakin' sucked, but was like totally understandable, whaterver, right,...and I was, and creepy guy kept saying "I apologize " cuz it took him forever to ring up two packs of cigarettes, it was like 80 cents off ifyou bought two versus one, right, [julie-laughs] and I was like, trust me, it's better than the guy who is usually here..."The Ethiopian?" I was like yeah, he sucks, he suucks. I hate going in there when that guy is in there, I won't even go to that gas station anymore cuz when I walk in the guy says NOTHING and I will literally stand at the counter and wait until he says something....

Julie: yeah like
Jenn: I know that he'll...

Jenn: (laugh) hold on (checking NTM answer) What's the question?

Julie: rear mounted engine--like a beetle
Jenn: unhhh...

Juan: Porsche (pause) isn't it
Julie: .......................................is it?
Juan:..............................................no..
Julie:..................................................maybe? (long pause) or a fiat?
Julie: Oh, it is a porsche, you're right
Juan:........it is a porsche..

Jenn: So I totally hate dealing with that guy, I hate the fact that I have to walk to the counter...
Julie: ..............................................................................like he just stands there?
Jenn: mmhhm

Julie: yeah I don't like that either...

Jenn: and instead of me saying a pack of Marlboro lights ...in a box
Juan: ..............................................................he doesn't even say "hey"
Jenn: nah uh

Convesation ends, due to cheering for the Spurs in the last seconds of overtime.

Initial Thoughts

2007-01-27T07:48:00.000-08:00

My fourth grade students will graduate high school in the year 2015, a world yet to be fully imagined. During our first class, my mind started racing through the strategies I use in my classroom and the experiences I provide for my students. I was quickly trying to assess how what I do, compares with what they need. I was also trying to mentally evaluate how well I make use of the resources available to me--in terms of technology. A whole stream of issues come up: the impact of teaching struggling readers (how does strategy instruction change?), the reading/writing connection (whole new possibilities!), the integration (or separation) of using new technology in the classroom (not to mention accessibility and lack of knowledge or confidence by teachers). Even as I write this (I will admit my 1st blog--I have a tendency to keep personal thoughts amongst close friends and colleagues), I think about how this is a completely different form of writing than ones that I teach my fourth graders (gotta prepare them for Writing TAKS)--approach is different (Do you need to brainstorm and web your thinking before you blog? How about editing and revising?) , purpose/audience is different (You can actually talk to your reader? Is it a conversation?). I also think about how new avenues are now available for communication. In truth, 4th graders aren't the best listeners. They are pretty much concerned about their own thoughts. Having a conversation and actually listening and responding to each other is something we work on all year (most of my kiddoes don't get that experience at home). Participating in a blog would be an interesting way to slow down their thinking and, by the very nature of it, force them to reflect and respond to someone else...interesting.