I cannot fully express the shock I felt in the moment after I opened up to page 64 in Anderson and saw the word "Fragment" written across the top. Words cannot describe what I thought was never going to happened and in all honesty, after the shock wore off I was disappointed. These readings in the past have discussed the use of skill and drill and its ineffectiveness. Why are these parts of grammar being thrown in our faces?
In this particular section Anderson discusses the uses of fragments, run-on sentences, dangling modifiers, wrong or missing predispositions, the double negative, and the absolute. Obviously since I have already discussed my biased feelings on this particular subject matter I took the reading with a grain of salt. In a way it was a nice refresher to see the rules laid out again. To help see what children would have problems with. But at the same time I did not always agree with the rules. Does that make me a bad writer?
For example with fragments, Anderson explained how she would always discuss with the class the two questions needed for identifying a sentence. "Who or what did or is something" and "What did they do or what are they" These questions identify the subject and the verb; the two basic components for a simple sentence. Yes I agree, and I think it is important that our students understand that but then again I've seen and entire paragraph entered as one word.
Yes.
simple and powerful, usually answering a question proposed in the previous paragraph. When is it okay to use that liberty then? Never? I'm afraid these mini lessons leave me with more questions.
Yet Anderson uses a technique that I did find very interesting; "I want the kids to practice visualizing sentences. 'Close your eyes and picture a dog approaching you.'" Seeing the action of the sentence taking place in your head- seems like the simplest "duh" statement anyone could think of, but in my own writing my head is moving so fast with thoughts I don't usually take the time to step back and look if my message is conveyed correctly. I don't read the sentence word for word picturing the action in my head. When I really should.
The reading for Noden was, ...interesting? I do not know the correct word I am looking for in this very moment. I never entertained the idea of an original sentence. Yes a sentence that I write is mine but there has to be another sentence out there some where that is like any sentence I write down. Does that involve plagiarism? No, not at all, I am not intentionally stealing their words for my benefit. Yet Noden takes the approach of modeling sentences. Such as taking these mentor texts that we have been collecting and creating them anew. One models after the sentence structure rather copying the content.
At this very moment I am not sure how I feel about the idea. When looking at grammar I am sure it is a fantastic example of how to use a certain piece of grammar in a context to bring your point across.
What I really did like was his examples using the different types of logs, or using the imitated sentences and creating them as your own. I think students will have a chance to play with language and see how it and form and create meaning by what they add where.
Tuesday, February 28, 2012
Tuesday, February 21, 2012
February 21st
Weaver chapter 4 begins with a comparison between a minilesson from a teacher who attempted to combine grammar and writing into one lesson to a classroom taught by Amanda and Carroll who successfully combine the two concepts. I am relieved to see this because, as much as I am enjoying this idea of inter-grading grammar with writing, I draw a blank when I think about the how. Grammar is not my strong point... at all. I cannot pick out grammar in a sentence so when. In Connie's classroom she points out the sentence, "I felt the wing going through the tress like ice cream melting in the summer." To me this is a students attempt at a metaphor, not a type of grammatical error. If my fear of teaching grammar is not highlighted in the previous sentences I do not know how to further express it.
In a way I guess this is why I am connecting with the idea of teaching grammar in the context of writing. While reading Amanda's analogy with driving speaks the loudest. "What helped us to improve, our car manuals, or hours of driving practice?" Who actually read the car manual? I read it once to figure out what this little green button does underneath my gear shifter. Not by any means does this mean I am an expert on cars. Same goes with grammar, I probably know more than I think. I just do not know the proper name for the mechanics. How have I learned? I cannot say for sure. But practice does make perfect... or close to it.
The last couple pages of this chapter deal with different methods to incorporate grammar into the writing process. Thus calming my irrational fears. Weaver goes on to make this following point, "More important, we teachers need to learn to keep our hands off students' writing, lest their piece become our piece." I think this is a great perspective to take, and we touched on it the first day of class. If we, as teachers, take that red pen to all of our students' writing and constantly correct what is wrong I would safely say the piece is not theirs anymore. We have defiled the paper with red ink to make it what we, the teacher, believe it should be. So when Weaver discusses student conferencing as a way to incorporate students learning grammar I kept that in mind along with the red pen. You want to give students ideas not demean their writing. With that concept I also liked the idea of demonstrating grammar with use of your own writing. Gives the students a chance to reverse the roles on you without you actually giving them free reign.
Now I come to chapter 3 in the Anderson text. I cannot express the amount of joy I felt in my heart when the idea of a writing journal was posed. This is something that I was thinking about in my head and I wanted students to model when they got into class. I can think of no better way to safely give students a zone to write without my thoughts being imposed on them; for their ideas to flow freely and unrestricted by nothing more than their imagination. A smile composition book that their class would keep in the classroom even. Kind of like in Freedom Writers. What better practice and repetition can a writer have? It is a good way to foster creativity and a renewed passion for writing. The journal then also becomes a resource for kids to go back and improve their writing and can be a source of a grammatical lessons through examples.
"Simply force yourself to write without stopping for ten minutes" -- when I came across this sentence I had to laugh. My mentor professor for my IA position does this without fail. He says, "to just keep your pen moving even if you have to draw squiggly lines until your brain catches up."
Finally I am learning how to apply these theories and I am so glad to have that position because I get to see what we are talking about teaching, being taught to those I'd like to teach!
In a way I guess this is why I am connecting with the idea of teaching grammar in the context of writing. While reading Amanda's analogy with driving speaks the loudest. "What helped us to improve, our car manuals, or hours of driving practice?" Who actually read the car manual? I read it once to figure out what this little green button does underneath my gear shifter. Not by any means does this mean I am an expert on cars. Same goes with grammar, I probably know more than I think. I just do not know the proper name for the mechanics. How have I learned? I cannot say for sure. But practice does make perfect... or close to it.
The last couple pages of this chapter deal with different methods to incorporate grammar into the writing process. Thus calming my irrational fears. Weaver goes on to make this following point, "More important, we teachers need to learn to keep our hands off students' writing, lest their piece become our piece." I think this is a great perspective to take, and we touched on it the first day of class. If we, as teachers, take that red pen to all of our students' writing and constantly correct what is wrong I would safely say the piece is not theirs anymore. We have defiled the paper with red ink to make it what we, the teacher, believe it should be. So when Weaver discusses student conferencing as a way to incorporate students learning grammar I kept that in mind along with the red pen. You want to give students ideas not demean their writing. With that concept I also liked the idea of demonstrating grammar with use of your own writing. Gives the students a chance to reverse the roles on you without you actually giving them free reign.
Now I come to chapter 3 in the Anderson text. I cannot express the amount of joy I felt in my heart when the idea of a writing journal was posed. This is something that I was thinking about in my head and I wanted students to model when they got into class. I can think of no better way to safely give students a zone to write without my thoughts being imposed on them; for their ideas to flow freely and unrestricted by nothing more than their imagination. A smile composition book that their class would keep in the classroom even. Kind of like in Freedom Writers. What better practice and repetition can a writer have? It is a good way to foster creativity and a renewed passion for writing. The journal then also becomes a resource for kids to go back and improve their writing and can be a source of a grammatical lessons through examples.
"Simply force yourself to write without stopping for ten minutes" -- when I came across this sentence I had to laugh. My mentor professor for my IA position does this without fail. He says, "to just keep your pen moving even if you have to draw squiggly lines until your brain catches up."
Finally I am learning how to apply these theories and I am so glad to have that position because I get to see what we are talking about teaching, being taught to those I'd like to teach!
Wednesday, February 8, 2012
I did not realize until after I had already composed much of my thought that I did not read the second part of the pedology for this week. I feel so utterly in concomitant right now. I am not one for making excuses because as busy as I ever could have been during one day I could have done the work before hand. Which leads me to my discussion at 2:33am.
For the first time in my life I was handed The Red Pen last Thursday. Not just any red pen. The Red Pen. The one that English teachers grades 6-12 have used to correct and grade my papers. I assumed there was to be a tie in with our correcting grammar in our class as the class was also given an article by the article The English Teacher's Red Pen: History of an Obsession. On an attempt to begin my relationship with red pens I embarked my reading of the article with a red pen in hand but soon changed my mind and ended up trading in my red pen by the end of the first page.
I split this essay into two different parts. There was the part I agreed with and the part of which I was not fond. The very next thing I would like to say is this: I am the daughter of a teacher. My father currently teaches drafting and design technology at Dauphin County Technical School and never has he once, out of 25 years of teaching there, ever missed a softball, basketball, volleyball, or band practice due to extensive amounts of grading. Yes I realize that my father is not an English teacher. But he does have to go through countless numbers of daily drawing done by his student and correct them with a red pen.
So, I will go as far to say is I think Zemelman and Daniels exaggerate a little in their first couple paragraphs. Their outlook on the current system is very condescending In their sinister perspective however there is some truth. I have my doubt when they say, "And what other teachers expect everyone else to feel so sorry for them because of their overwhelming paper load?" Never in my career as a student and observer have I ever heard these words come out of an English teachers mouth. My father complains about grading yes but its no more than any general comment made before. As an English teacher it is part of the job requirement. I believe instead what they are attempting to convay in radical terms is that the amount of work imposed on English teachers by the nature of their work does not have to be so time consuming and demanding
This point leads into the idea of fostering a love for writing. I have naturally had this passion for writing and never had a problem with red marks on my English paper. I understood I was human and made mistakes. Spelling and grammar were weak points and so I looked to those red marks for guidance. I understand not everyone is like me though. Which is why I agree that sometimes this extensive editing process is not needed. Determined on a case by case basis I believe in the editing/revising process there is need for the corrections to help with the writing process but the article is right, even today, when given a paper back I do not look at the marks on the paper. I look at my percentage and grade. Nothing else. The paper is discarded either right then, or at the end of semester when I clean out my binder.
That being said I whole-heartily agree with this concept presented with "unmonitored practice with limited feedback" In my own words I call this free writing, or even creative writing. As a English Major I miss this very concept in school. I have such a passion and love for writing that I do not get to exercise say for the strict confines of the rubric for a given paper. The fun and easy going air attached to writing has been scratched out by this red pen. The constant search for errors does not foster creativity. I will not go as far to say that content and context is lost to mechanics but I will say the passion in the context is taken out. If the mind is given space to fly, imagine the heights it could reach. Technicalities are weights, not keeping us from flying but from exploring new heights.
For the first time in my life I was handed The Red Pen last Thursday. Not just any red pen. The Red Pen. The one that English teachers grades 6-12 have used to correct and grade my papers. I assumed there was to be a tie in with our correcting grammar in our class as the class was also given an article by the article The English Teacher's Red Pen: History of an Obsession. On an attempt to begin my relationship with red pens I embarked my reading of the article with a red pen in hand but soon changed my mind and ended up trading in my red pen by the end of the first page.
I split this essay into two different parts. There was the part I agreed with and the part of which I was not fond. The very next thing I would like to say is this: I am the daughter of a teacher. My father currently teaches drafting and design technology at Dauphin County Technical School and never has he once, out of 25 years of teaching there, ever missed a softball, basketball, volleyball, or band practice due to extensive amounts of grading. Yes I realize that my father is not an English teacher. But he does have to go through countless numbers of daily drawing done by his student and correct them with a red pen.
So, I will go as far to say is I think Zemelman and Daniels exaggerate a little in their first couple paragraphs. Their outlook on the current system is very condescending In their sinister perspective however there is some truth. I have my doubt when they say, "And what other teachers expect everyone else to feel so sorry for them because of their overwhelming paper load?" Never in my career as a student and observer have I ever heard these words come out of an English teachers mouth. My father complains about grading yes but its no more than any general comment made before. As an English teacher it is part of the job requirement. I believe instead what they are attempting to convay in radical terms is that the amount of work imposed on English teachers by the nature of their work does not have to be so time consuming and demanding
This point leads into the idea of fostering a love for writing. I have naturally had this passion for writing and never had a problem with red marks on my English paper. I understood I was human and made mistakes. Spelling and grammar were weak points and so I looked to those red marks for guidance. I understand not everyone is like me though. Which is why I agree that sometimes this extensive editing process is not needed. Determined on a case by case basis I believe in the editing/revising process there is need for the corrections to help with the writing process but the article is right, even today, when given a paper back I do not look at the marks on the paper. I look at my percentage and grade. Nothing else. The paper is discarded either right then, or at the end of semester when I clean out my binder.
That being said I whole-heartily agree with this concept presented with "unmonitored practice with limited feedback" In my own words I call this free writing, or even creative writing. As a English Major I miss this very concept in school. I have such a passion and love for writing that I do not get to exercise say for the strict confines of the rubric for a given paper. The fun and easy going air attached to writing has been scratched out by this red pen. The constant search for errors does not foster creativity. I will not go as far to say that content and context is lost to mechanics but I will say the passion in the context is taken out. If the mind is given space to fly, imagine the heights it could reach. Technicalities are weights, not keeping us from flying but from exploring new heights.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)