Cynthia’s Blog

“…it is equally important for teachers to know how such technology can be used to teach their content more effectively.”        

       —Janet Alsup and Jonathan Bush, “But Will it Work with REAL students?”                     

            Coming from our courses in which there is heavy emphasis in using technology in the classroom, I was curious to see how the use of technology works in the day-to-day schedule of middle school.  It wasn’t.  The teachers were too busy with administrative work, behavioral issues, and planning to spend too much energy on getting available equipment into the classroom, let alone press the media specialists into delivering it.  I made it my mission to get some type of devise into the room so I could try out my PowerPoints, internet video, and sound clips.  

              What I discovered is that the students are far more attentive to the visual presentations and seem to remember more than they do from a lecture or notes displayed on a transparency. Yet, as Alsup and Bush warn, the flash of the videos and music have the potential to pull conversation and attention from the lesson.  I agree with the authors that the teacher must know exactly what he or she intends by using technology, and have safety nets in place (printed transcripts of a video interview, for example) should the gadgets malfunction.  Conversation and activities should continually refer to the goal of the lesson.  Technology has been doled out in small increments in my current classroom because the students have been trained to expect that they can “tune out” during longer movies and escape any real work—a habit teachers need to break!  

            Interestingly, the new literature book in my classroom came with several CD’s of prepared PowerPoint presentations.  They are editable–and save the teacher the time and effort of creating one.  With the guidance my mentor teacher is giving me in other areas, I hope I can help ease her fear of technology. 

A place to start implementing technology:           

 Brief video and audio clips of writer interviews and poets reading their work can be accessed at www.readingrockets.org and www.poets.org

“It is important to have a core set of beliefs or a core philosophical perspective that includes ideas about both theory and practice.  Such a philosophical perspective is the foundation upon which a personal pedagogy is built” (p. 2)  

“”The approach [literature circles] is based on the belief that students must have some choice over what they read and how they read it.  In literature circles, each small group of students reads a different book, and often all of the books are thematically linked” (p. 3)

from Alsup, Janet & Bush, Jonathan.  (2003) “But will it work real students?” Scenarios for teaching secondary English language arts. Urbana, IL: NCTE.

     In reading chapter one of Alsup and Bush’s book, the two quotes above stuck me as related to some of the issues I’ve been grappling with this past week as we have begun our practicum experiences.  Our discussions and readings in the past two semesters have, thus far, have made me convinced that one way to encourage students’ attention is to offer some choice in reading material and ways of communicating, and quite determined to incorporate these ideas into my future classroom.  Naturally, this literary “pro-choice” viewpoint makes me a bit resistance to the dictated curriculum that seems to be the trend in so many of our local school systems. Couldn’t I be trusted to develop a rich, varied, and interesting curriculum for my Language Arts class? 

So I was surprised to discover that I actually liked the activities filling the pages of the new curriculum being implemented at my practicum site.  The lessons incorporate group work, interpretation, reasoning, critical thinking, and performance.  On the days the students worked through the exercises they were lively, interested, and eager to share their opinions.  There were fewer sleepy heads to nudge awake and fewer notes to confiscate.  Hey, this isn’t so bad, I thought.

      I was surprised to hear the grumbling taking place among a few of the teachers.  And, yes, I agree that I’d rather have more freedom, but I have to argue that even within the guidelines of the workbook, a teacher can implement some extras.  First of all, teacher personality and creativity affect how much students gain or miss.  Even as I listened to my mentor teacher I was thinking that an extra explanation could be added in this place for this class, or adapted slightly for the next class.  Other poems could be added or used as homework, or even read for fun in the last few minutes of class.  The opening activity that seems so rigid could be modified so that it adds an extra layer of information or contrast.   She seemed to do this naturally as the classes changed and the day progressed.  Second, a teacher’s attitude toward the curriculum colors the lesson.  When other pre-service teachers have told me that they overhead instructors tell students that they “had to hurry to get through this” (implying that something more fun or interesting might come later), I shudder at the message they are sending.   Working within boundaries is a fact of life and we teachers should strive to model that to our charges.

Appleman writes in Critical Encounters in High School English that “theory helps us recognize the essential quality of other visions” and that “theory asks us to treat the text and our responses to it as cultural objects” (p. 75).  This concise and, I believe, accurate description of literary theory strengthens my resolve to include literary theory into my lesson plans. Providing that there is equal treatment or emphasis on a number of different viewpoints—feminist, Marxist, deconstructionist—students should grow to appreciate that their own views are heard and gain some appreciation for other, perhaps opposing, positions.  The danger of having a viewpoint dismissed—feminism, let’s say—when five out of eight texts are read that way, or when the feminist lens is applied without regard for other interpretations.  This type of reading seems devalues literary theory as a whole. 

Appleman later states that “a critical lens is not an artifact of interpretation suitable to only a particular text but rather is a flexible tool that can be used with a variety of texts” (p. 79). As teachers we must keep in mind that identifying Woolf’s A Room of One’s Own solely as a feminist text places the theory in the role of a genre rather than that of an interpretative devise.  Is there no way to apply a Marxist, historicist, or reader response lens to this book? While touting this book as primarily feminist and a representation of that theory, we need to leave space for other readings.  Appleman suggests that when we are able to apply a critical lens to texts that are less “predisposed” a theory.  Then, we have helped craft a sophisticated, clever reader

In reading Rex Gibson’s Teaching Shakespeare this past week, I was struck by how similar Gibson’s ideas are to those of Bruce Pirie in Reshaping High School English (1997, NCTE), a book I read as an undergraduate for senior seminar. Both Gibson and Pirie advocate active exercises in textual and character analysis.  They both emphasize the place of drama in the English classroom.  An issue that came up in our class discussions of Pirie rose again for me as I read Gibson:  How can there possibly be enough time in class to accomplish this much moving around and discussion?  And, will these “fun” lessons really work to encourage learning and synthesis of information?

The time issue seems a big concern, especially as I listen to the new teachers of our group as they struggle with classroom management issues and keeping students’ interest.  Many of my peers teach students classified as in the lower percentile for academic interest and achievement.  I worry that the very students who might benefit the most from new, active learning opportunities might not get them because of these behavioral issues.  Gibson does adapt many of his strategies for young students—elementary age—and I hope that as I continue reading I will discover that Gibson addresses the issue of class personality and student motivation at the middle and high school levels. 

As for whether or not these lessons help our students cultivate learning, I think that the instructor must be very careful about guiding students to make connections and develop opinions so that the purpose of the activity is not lost.  There must be a real art to doing this subtly! 

In Deborah Appleman’s chapter on feminist literary theory (in Critical Encounters in High School English) for example, student comments are wonderfully complex and fit neatly into the goals the teacher had for the group.  Students made connections between the text and their real lives and from one text to another.  Were these students motivated to begin with? Was the teacher particularly gifted at crafting the conversation?  Does it always (or mostly) work out this way?  This teacher must have developed a classroom standard for talking about literature and with each other.  I expect that she modeled how she wanted this done and reigned in the conversation when required or prodded for answers when eyes glazed over.  I think it will be critical for me as a student teacher to observe successful teachers as they guide students into meaning making—especially after the clever and energetic lessons Gibson suggests

    This blog is maintained by a current Master’s Degree in Education candidate. Education will be a second career for me, although teaching was an early interest and always in the back of my mind.  The world of education seems to have changed a great deal since I first considered teaching (as a young child, actually), but I think of it as one of the most important jobs one might have. 

    I am continually amazed by the depth of committment teachers must have and by how complex the art of teaching seems.  (I am convinced it is an art.)  With a bit of hesitancy–derived mainly from previous and frustrating encounters with technology–I enter the world of blogging.  I can’t wait to see what develops.  From the examples I have read it seems possible that this media might add an additional, student-friendly layer of possibilities for open communication about subject matter and study strategies.

Welcome to my first foray into the world of blogging.  As a master’s degree candidate in the field of Secondary English Education, I am completing this blog as part of a course requirement. 

When I first considered education as a career I never imagined that such internet “gadgets” would be part of my training!  However, I am curious to learn how information is exchanged in this medium and how this type of communication might work in a classroom.  Should any internet surfers happen upon my blog and have experience implementing such practices in a classroom, I would love to hear your opinion.