Title: “The Cassette Tape: An Aid to Individualizing High School English.” Earl R. Danielson, Lesley Burrows and David A. Rosenberg. English Journal (March 1973), pp. 441-445. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE).
Quote. Here’s the problem: “You open your first class discussion on a major novel only to find that some students have barely started reading it, others are on schedule, while a few with great pride announce that they have completed the novel. Frustration! How does the teacher focus a discussion along lines that encourage the slow reader to read more, provide depth for the average student, and at the same time stimulate the thinking of the reader eager to talk about the whole book?”
Summary: The authors suggest making audio tapes for discussion whenever each group is ready to discuss at different times.
Comment: As I understand the problem, the students have been told to read the novel and at a given time should show up in class ready to discuss, only some students have barely begun, some are on schedule for discussion and some are ahead of schedule and want to discuss the whole book.
I suggest beginning to read the novel in class, together. After reading the cover information and fielding any questions the cover raises, all the students begin reading the first chapter at different places near the beginning of the book—for ten minutes. The slow reader will read a little in ten minutes, the average reader will read somewhat more and the fast reader will read quite a lot.
At the end of ten minutes, stop reading. Now ask students to tell what they have read. Put key words on the board. Ask the students what questions they have about the novel. Again, record key words on the board. You will find that the questions will fit into three categories—questions of fact about the novel (Who is the person who told the lie?); questions of interpretation (Why did Character A say what he said?); and questions of literary criticism (Why does the author write in such short sentences?).
Now start to read again near the middle of the novel. Students read for ten minutes. Summarize what has been learned. List questions of fact, interpretation and criticism, not in any order. The questions can be re-grouped later.
Next, begin reading for ten minutes three-fourths through the novel. Summarize and list the students’ questions.
Conclude by reading for ten minutes near the end of the novel. Students summarize what they have read and list their questions. The questions will elicit discussion then and there. And the students will speculate and predict. (By the way, this process always elicits questions; knowing the plot stimulates and does not stifle questions.) One teacher who tried the technique with The Red Badge of Courage, said that she could not shut the students up. Organize the questions into questions of fact, interpretation and criticism.
Now the students begin to read knowing what they are looking for. But they will do so at home. Since all novels have “drag spots” in them, times when interest lags, suggest to the class that they read one paragraph a page until they are again engaged in what they are reading and want to return to reading everything.
With the students’ questions raised and the students involved in finding the answers to their questions, they should be able to complete their reading by the required discussion date and they WILL be ready to discuss, just based on the sampling done in class. RayS.
The purpose of this blog is to summarize articles on teaching English/language arts, from kindergarten through college, published in English education journals from the past.
Monday, June 30, 2008
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Dialects
The purpose of this blog is to summarize articles on teaching English/language arts, from kindergarten through college, published in English education journals from the past.
Topic: Dialect
Title: “A Learning Activity Package: Discovering Dialects.” Charles R. Duke. English Journal (March 1973), 432-440. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE).
Technique: You will need a tape recorder for this activity. Ask a classmate or relative to pronounce the following words;
greasy………. car……… food
Mary………. pecan………. last
merry………. house………. lost
marry………. fire………. pan
tomato………. oil………. empty
dog………. barn………. sorry
hungry………. out………. door
water………. father………. dairy
aunt………. creek
Compare your pronunciation with the person’s who recorded the words. You may be amazed at the differences.
Comment: This activity really caught my attention. While I do not recognize how a word like “house’ could be pronounced all that differently, “Mary” and “merry” strike right in my family.
My wife is from the North Country, upper New York State, on the Canadian border. I’m from the Philadelphia area. For “merry” I say “murry.” My wife says “mary” for “merry.” She also says “fairy” for “ferry” and I say “furry.” North Country people “flatten their vowels in the first syllable. I once became embroiled in a confusing discussion with someone from whom I wanted to borrow a “cot.” She kept insisting that I was asking to borrow a “cat.”
And if you hear a peculiar pronunciation of “out,” I’ll bet that that person is from Canada. It sounds more like “oat.” As a Philadelphian, I also say “crick” for “creek.” We in Philadelphia say “bayad” for “bad” and “sayad” for “sad” and “beuateeful” for “beautiful” and “atteetude” for “attitude,” for which one of my principals who was from Scranton, Pennsylvania, criticized me severely.
Comparing pronunciations is a real conversation starter. Try that list at a party some time.
This activity was a small part of a larger “Learning Activities Packet” dealing with many characteristics of dialect. You will need to retrieve the entire article to find out how you could put together a complete unit on American dialects. RayS.
Topic: Dialect
Title: “A Learning Activity Package: Discovering Dialects.” Charles R. Duke. English Journal (March 1973), 432-440. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE).
Technique: You will need a tape recorder for this activity. Ask a classmate or relative to pronounce the following words;
greasy………. car……… food
Mary………. pecan………. last
merry………. house………. lost
marry………. fire………. pan
tomato………. oil………. empty
dog………. barn………. sorry
hungry………. out………. door
water………. father………. dairy
aunt………. creek
Compare your pronunciation with the person’s who recorded the words. You may be amazed at the differences.
Comment: This activity really caught my attention. While I do not recognize how a word like “house’ could be pronounced all that differently, “Mary” and “merry” strike right in my family.
My wife is from the North Country, upper New York State, on the Canadian border. I’m from the Philadelphia area. For “merry” I say “murry.” My wife says “mary” for “merry.” She also says “fairy” for “ferry” and I say “furry.” North Country people “flatten their vowels in the first syllable. I once became embroiled in a confusing discussion with someone from whom I wanted to borrow a “cot.” She kept insisting that I was asking to borrow a “cat.”
And if you hear a peculiar pronunciation of “out,” I’ll bet that that person is from Canada. It sounds more like “oat.” As a Philadelphian, I also say “crick” for “creek.” We in Philadelphia say “bayad” for “bad” and “sayad” for “sad” and “beuateeful” for “beautiful” and “atteetude” for “attitude,” for which one of my principals who was from Scranton, Pennsylvania, criticized me severely.
Comparing pronunciations is a real conversation starter. Try that list at a party some time.
This activity was a small part of a larger “Learning Activities Packet” dealing with many characteristics of dialect. You will need to retrieve the entire article to find out how you could put together a complete unit on American dialects. RayS.
Wednesday, June 25, 2008
Dialects
The purpose of this blog is to summarize articles on teaching English/language arts, from kindergarten through college, published in English education journals from the past.
Topic: Dialects
Title: “A Learning Activity Package: Discovering Dialects.” Charles R. Duke. English Journal (March 1973), 432-445. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE).
Technique: Different people use different words for common objects in different sections of the country. Using the following list of choices, have students ask relatives, friends and classmates which word they use to describe the object.
a. soda, soda pop, soft drink, tonic
b. living room, sitting room, parlor, front room, or _________
c. andirons, dogs, fire dogs, dog irons
d. mantel, mantel piece, mantel shelf, fire board
e. roller shades, curtains, blinds, window shades
f. clothes closet, closet, cupboard, clothes press
g. storeroom, lumber room, junk room, catch-all
h. porch, stoop, veranda
i. gutter (of roof), eaves, eaves trough, water trough
j. pail, bucket
k. frying pan, skillet, spider
l. faucet, spigot, tap
m. paper bag, bag, sack, poke
n. lift, elevator
Have the person who answered the survey, identify all the places they have lived—city, state—and draw a conclusion about which places in the country use which words to describe each object.
Comment: This activity was a small part of a larger “Learning Activities Packet” dealing with many characteristics of dialect. You will need to retrieve the entire article to find out how you could put together a complete unit on American dialects. RayS.
Topic: Dialects
Title: “A Learning Activity Package: Discovering Dialects.” Charles R. Duke. English Journal (March 1973), 432-445. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE).
Technique: Different people use different words for common objects in different sections of the country. Using the following list of choices, have students ask relatives, friends and classmates which word they use to describe the object.
a. soda, soda pop, soft drink, tonic
b. living room, sitting room, parlor, front room, or _________
c. andirons, dogs, fire dogs, dog irons
d. mantel, mantel piece, mantel shelf, fire board
e. roller shades, curtains, blinds, window shades
f. clothes closet, closet, cupboard, clothes press
g. storeroom, lumber room, junk room, catch-all
h. porch, stoop, veranda
i. gutter (of roof), eaves, eaves trough, water trough
j. pail, bucket
k. frying pan, skillet, spider
l. faucet, spigot, tap
m. paper bag, bag, sack, poke
n. lift, elevator
Have the person who answered the survey, identify all the places they have lived—city, state—and draw a conclusion about which places in the country use which words to describe each object.
Comment: This activity was a small part of a larger “Learning Activities Packet” dealing with many characteristics of dialect. You will need to retrieve the entire article to find out how you could put together a complete unit on American dialects. RayS.
Tuesday, June 24, 2008
Language Games
The purpose of this blog is to summarize articles on teaching English/language arts, from kindergarten through college, published in English education journals from the past.
Topic: Language Games
Title: “Playing with the English Language.” Stanley Bank. English Journal (March 1973), 419-431; 440. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE).
Summary: Suggests that English teachers note the use of words in all aspects of the English program and explore their meanings, pronunciation, etc. Examples:
Have students collect different pronunciations between nouns and verbs as in “predicate,” the predicate of a sentence, and “predicate,” the verb, pronounced, “predicayte”; “prog’ress,” the noun form and “progress’ the verb form.”
Students collect different pronunciations between places and common uses: “Nice” and “nice.” Or between places, “Cairo,” Illinois and “Cairo,” Egypt etc.
Throw out the proposition that in English there are no exact synonyms and have the students look in a thesaurus to note the slight differences in meaning among the synonyms. “Can you give two words which have the same meaning and to which you react in exactly the same way?”
Student makes up a word and its meaning. The inventor of the word must change the part of speech of the word and use it in a sentence. The other students try to guess the meaning of the word.
Comment: To most teachers and students in English class, the term “language” means grammar. In my book, Teaching English, How To…., I include a chapter on playing with language. I suggest that students become language researchers. A sample project is collecting the reasons that people are given their first names and to categorize the reasons—after a movie star, etc., and draw conclusions about why people name their children as they do. In the second project, I distributed quarters of maps of the United States and students took down names of places that interested them. They then categorized the names according to origin—Biblical, geographical features, people, etc. Again, the students try to formulate a generalization about the origin of American place names.
I point out that people love words and students should be introduced to crossword puzzles, jumbles, etc. Don’t hesitate to introduce students to books written about the history of word origins, surnames, etc. RayS.
Topic: Language Games
Title: “Playing with the English Language.” Stanley Bank. English Journal (March 1973), 419-431; 440. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE).
Summary: Suggests that English teachers note the use of words in all aspects of the English program and explore their meanings, pronunciation, etc. Examples:
Have students collect different pronunciations between nouns and verbs as in “predicate,” the predicate of a sentence, and “predicate,” the verb, pronounced, “predicayte”; “prog’ress,” the noun form and “progress’ the verb form.”
Students collect different pronunciations between places and common uses: “Nice” and “nice.” Or between places, “Cairo,” Illinois and “Cairo,” Egypt etc.
Throw out the proposition that in English there are no exact synonyms and have the students look in a thesaurus to note the slight differences in meaning among the synonyms. “Can you give two words which have the same meaning and to which you react in exactly the same way?”
Student makes up a word and its meaning. The inventor of the word must change the part of speech of the word and use it in a sentence. The other students try to guess the meaning of the word.
Comment: To most teachers and students in English class, the term “language” means grammar. In my book, Teaching English, How To…., I include a chapter on playing with language. I suggest that students become language researchers. A sample project is collecting the reasons that people are given their first names and to categorize the reasons—after a movie star, etc., and draw conclusions about why people name their children as they do. In the second project, I distributed quarters of maps of the United States and students took down names of places that interested them. They then categorized the names according to origin—Biblical, geographical features, people, etc. Again, the students try to formulate a generalization about the origin of American place names.
I point out that people love words and students should be introduced to crossword puzzles, jumbles, etc. Don’t hesitate to introduce students to books written about the history of word origins, surnames, etc. RayS.
Monday, June 23, 2008
Persuasion and Critical Thinking
The purpose of this blog is to summarize articles on teaching English/language arts, from kindergarten through college, published in English education journals from the past.
Topic: Persuasion and Critical Thinking
Title: “Step Right Up and Try Bloo Goo.” Arlene Lowenstein. English Journal (March 1972), 409-412. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE).
Summary: Students must try to sell “Blue Goo,” a nauseous-looking concoction made out of Jello. By trying to sell such a product, students learn the techniques of persuasion used by advertisers.
Topic: Persuasion and Critical Thinking
Title: “Step Right Up and Try Bloo Goo.” Arlene Lowenstein. English Journal (March 1972), 409-412. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE).
Summary: Students must try to sell “Blue Goo,” a nauseous-looking concoction made out of Jello. By trying to sell such a product, students learn the techniques of persuasion used by advertisers.
Wednesday, June 18, 2008
Journals in the Classroom
The purpose of this blog is to summarize articles on teaching English/language arts, from kindergarten through college, published in English education journals from the past.
Topic: Journals in the Disciplines
Title: The Journal Book, edited by Toby Fulwiler. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook, 1987, 402. Reviewed by Anne Johnstone. College Composition and Communication (October 1988), 363-365. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE).
Summary: Articles on using journals in the classroom, mostly in the humanities.
Comments: I have steadfastly avoided asking students to use personal journals in class, i.e., journals that discuss students’ personal lives; however, I do think that students gain a great deal by using journals to respond to the content of classes in all subjects. Personal responses to ideas and questions about concepts should bring about personal involvement with the class and its ideas and should give teachers an understanding of how students are responding to the course. Most helpful should be questions about what students do not understand.
The authors point out that teachers will need to show students how to use the journals as part of the class. RayS.
Topic: Journals in the Disciplines
Title: The Journal Book, edited by Toby Fulwiler. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook, 1987, 402. Reviewed by Anne Johnstone. College Composition and Communication (October 1988), 363-365. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE).
Summary: Articles on using journals in the classroom, mostly in the humanities.
Comments: I have steadfastly avoided asking students to use personal journals in class, i.e., journals that discuss students’ personal lives; however, I do think that students gain a great deal by using journals to respond to the content of classes in all subjects. Personal responses to ideas and questions about concepts should bring about personal involvement with the class and its ideas and should give teachers an understanding of how students are responding to the course. Most helpful should be questions about what students do not understand.
The authors point out that teachers will need to show students how to use the journals as part of the class. RayS.
Monday, June 16, 2008
Response Groups in Composition
The purpose of this blog is to summarize articles on teaching English/language arts, from kindergarten through college, published in English education journals from the past.
Topic: Response Groups in Composition
Title: “Catching the Drift: Keeping Peer-Response Groups on Track.” M. Francine Danis. College Composition and Communication (October 1988), 356-358. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE).
Summary: “ ‘We waste a lot of time in our group—you know, we talk about the papers for a while: then we get into other topics.’ That’s a fairly common judgment when students evaluate their peer-response group.”
“They [students] feel cheated—justifiably so—when group discussions turn repeatedly into mere bull sessions.”
The author suggests that groups keep on track when they make observations about the paper under discussion. For three minutes after reading the paper, they write non-stop what they observed in the paper. Rules: No negatives. No judgments. No inferences. Just observations of what they see in the paper.
Example: “The middle part was the best.” Judgment. NO!
“The middle part is intense.” Inference. NO!
“The middle part is mostly dialogue.” Observation of what is really on the paper. YES!
The group then reads their observations to the writer.
Comments: Will these observations be helpful to the writer? What will they learn from them? How will the observations help the writer to improve the paper? Who decides if an “observation” is negative, judgment or inference? This technique , for me, would be one which I would use with the students and have the students determine if it was successful. RayS.
Topic: Response Groups in Composition
Title: “Catching the Drift: Keeping Peer-Response Groups on Track.” M. Francine Danis. College Composition and Communication (October 1988), 356-358. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE).
Summary: “ ‘We waste a lot of time in our group—you know, we talk about the papers for a while: then we get into other topics.’ That’s a fairly common judgment when students evaluate their peer-response group.”
“They [students] feel cheated—justifiably so—when group discussions turn repeatedly into mere bull sessions.”
The author suggests that groups keep on track when they make observations about the paper under discussion. For three minutes after reading the paper, they write non-stop what they observed in the paper. Rules: No negatives. No judgments. No inferences. Just observations of what they see in the paper.
Example: “The middle part was the best.” Judgment. NO!
“The middle part is intense.” Inference. NO!
“The middle part is mostly dialogue.” Observation of what is really on the paper. YES!
The group then reads their observations to the writer.
Comments: Will these observations be helpful to the writer? What will they learn from them? How will the observations help the writer to improve the paper? Who decides if an “observation” is negative, judgment or inference? This technique , for me, would be one which I would use with the students and have the students determine if it was successful. RayS.
Friday, June 13, 2008
Organization of Writing
The purpose of this blog is to summarize articles on teaching English/language arts, from kindergarten through college, published in English education journals from the past.
Topic: Organization of Writing
Title: “Interacting with a Reader: Using the Strip Story to Develop Reciprocity.” Chris Hall. College Composition and Communication (October 1988), 353-356. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English.
Summary: Duplicate a short essay and cut the paragraphs apart. In small groups, each student is given a paragraph and then together the group discusses how to reassemble the essay. They then try to explain why they put it together as they did.
Topic: Organization of Writing
Title: “Interacting with a Reader: Using the Strip Story to Develop Reciprocity.” Chris Hall. College Composition and Communication (October 1988), 353-356. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English.
Summary: Duplicate a short essay and cut the paragraphs apart. In small groups, each student is given a paragraph and then together the group discusses how to reassemble the essay. They then try to explain why they put it together as they did.
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Teachers' Comments on Compositions
The purpose of this blog is to summarize articles on teaching English/language arts, from kindergarten through college, published in English education journals from the past.
Topic: Teachers’ Comments on Compositions
Title: “Mr. V. and ‘A Saturday Morning in the Republic of One.’ ” Nancy L. Walker. College Composition and Communication (October 1988), 350-353. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English.
Summary: Gives an example of how a student is first confused by her teacher’s comments and then infuriated by his lack of understanding of what she had written, including a number of allusions to Thoreau’s Walden. Summarizes the article by offering these questions to help teachers evaluate their comments:
1. “Is the tone of my comments clear?
2. “Am I trying to re-create the student in my own image?
3. “Do I distinguish between comments that are praise or criticism and those meant to prod the student’s thinking?
4. “Are my comments complete enough to be comprehended?
5. “Am I reading carefully enough to understand the student’s meaning?
6. ”Are my comments in the margins compatible with my summary comments?”
Comments: Might be a good idea to summarize the content of students compositions. Students can quickly see that you understood what was being said—which is a revealing comment in itself. RayS.
Topic: Teachers’ Comments on Compositions
Title: “Mr. V. and ‘A Saturday Morning in the Republic of One.’ ” Nancy L. Walker. College Composition and Communication (October 1988), 350-353. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English.
Summary: Gives an example of how a student is first confused by her teacher’s comments and then infuriated by his lack of understanding of what she had written, including a number of allusions to Thoreau’s Walden. Summarizes the article by offering these questions to help teachers evaluate their comments:
1. “Is the tone of my comments clear?
2. “Am I trying to re-create the student in my own image?
3. “Do I distinguish between comments that are praise or criticism and those meant to prod the student’s thinking?
4. “Are my comments complete enough to be comprehended?
5. “Am I reading carefully enough to understand the student’s meaning?
6. ”Are my comments in the margins compatible with my summary comments?”
Comments: Might be a good idea to summarize the content of students compositions. Students can quickly see that you understood what was being said—which is a revealing comment in itself. RayS.
Monday, June 9, 2008
Archive. Writing: Process or Product?
The purpose of this blog is to summarize articles on teaching English/language arts, from kindergarten through college, published in English education journals from the past.
Topic: Writing: Process or Product?
Title: “Preparing Future Composition Teachers in the Writing Center.” Irene Lurkis Clark. College Composition and Communication (October 1988), 347-350. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE).
Quote: “With reverence and devotion, these new disciples repeat the maxim that writing is a process, not a product.”
Comment: I beg to disagree. Writing is a process AND a product. Teaching students the process of writing should produce a better product. Try telling employers that the product doesn’t count. RayS.
Topic: Writing: Process or Product?
Title: “Preparing Future Composition Teachers in the Writing Center.” Irene Lurkis Clark. College Composition and Communication (October 1988), 347-350. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE).
Quote: “With reverence and devotion, these new disciples repeat the maxim that writing is a process, not a product.”
Comment: I beg to disagree. Writing is a process AND a product. Teaching students the process of writing should produce a better product. Try telling employers that the product doesn’t count. RayS.
Friday, June 6, 2008
Archive: Writing by Pen, Typewriter and Computer
The purpose of this blog is to summarize articles on teaching English/language arts, from kindergarten through college, published in English education journals from the past.
Topic: Writing with Pen and Paper, Typewriter and Computer
Title: “The Effects of Word Processing on the Revision Strategies of College Freshmen.” Gail E. Hawisher. Research in the Teaching of English 21 (1987): 145-159. Reviewed in College Composition and Communication (October 1988), 336. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE).
Summary: No improvement favors any of the three methods of composing. “Finds no support for the view that students will revise more, and in different ways, when using a computer than when using pen and typewriter, and finds that the quality of final drafts revised on pen and typewriter was as good as that of final drafts using the computer.”
Comments: I am prepared to accept that revising with pen and paper, typewriter and computer do not give advantage to any of these mediums so far as quality is concerned. However, my experience when teaching composition with pen and paper, primarily, and with a typewriter by students trained in typing, was that revision was confused with editing surface mistakes in grammar and was so tedious [the whole composition had to be revised by hand] that students did not revise.
On the other hand, when word processing programs were not too complicated and could focus on writing, the students’ attitude was positive and they were willing to revise and to be shown how to revise. Students loved word processing and, as a result, they enthusiastically embraced writing. Quality of writing might not have been better, but attitude toward writing was! RayS.
Topic: Writing with Pen and Paper, Typewriter and Computer
Title: “The Effects of Word Processing on the Revision Strategies of College Freshmen.” Gail E. Hawisher. Research in the Teaching of English 21 (1987): 145-159. Reviewed in College Composition and Communication (October 1988), 336. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE).
Summary: No improvement favors any of the three methods of composing. “Finds no support for the view that students will revise more, and in different ways, when using a computer than when using pen and typewriter, and finds that the quality of final drafts revised on pen and typewriter was as good as that of final drafts using the computer.”
Comments: I am prepared to accept that revising with pen and paper, typewriter and computer do not give advantage to any of these mediums so far as quality is concerned. However, my experience when teaching composition with pen and paper, primarily, and with a typewriter by students trained in typing, was that revision was confused with editing surface mistakes in grammar and was so tedious [the whole composition had to be revised by hand] that students did not revise.
On the other hand, when word processing programs were not too complicated and could focus on writing, the students’ attitude was positive and they were willing to revise and to be shown how to revise. Students loved word processing and, as a result, they enthusiastically embraced writing. Quality of writing might not have been better, but attitude toward writing was! RayS.
Wednesday, June 4, 2008
Archive: Teachers' Comments on Compositions
The purpose of this blog is to summarize articles on teaching English/language arts, from kindergarten through college, published in English education journals from the past.
Topic: Teachers’ Comments on Compositions
Title: “A Good Girl Writes Like a Good Girl: Written Responses to Student Writing.” Melanie Sperling and Sara Warshauer Freedman. Written Composition 4 (1987): 343-369. Reviewed in College Composition and Communication (October 1988), 331. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE).
Summary: “…explores the reasons why the written comments of even a conscientious teacher can be misread and misunderstood by the student writer, showing how the information, goals and values of teacher and student can differ enough to prevent their ‘matching their definitions of writing problems and solutions,’ and illustrating sources of difficulty in the written comments of the instructor.”
Comments: I said it before and I’ll say it again: ask students what they think your comments mean and how they will use them to correct problems. I was as big a sinner as any other teacher of writing in using cryptic and confusing comments that students probably did not understand—until I asked students what I meant by my comments and how they were going to use my comments. Did I get an earful! RayS.
Topic: Teachers’ Comments on Compositions
Title: “A Good Girl Writes Like a Good Girl: Written Responses to Student Writing.” Melanie Sperling and Sara Warshauer Freedman. Written Composition 4 (1987): 343-369. Reviewed in College Composition and Communication (October 1988), 331. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE).
Summary: “…explores the reasons why the written comments of even a conscientious teacher can be misread and misunderstood by the student writer, showing how the information, goals and values of teacher and student can differ enough to prevent their ‘matching their definitions of writing problems and solutions,’ and illustrating sources of difficulty in the written comments of the instructor.”
Comments: I said it before and I’ll say it again: ask students what they think your comments mean and how they will use them to correct problems. I was as big a sinner as any other teacher of writing in using cryptic and confusing comments that students probably did not understand—until I asked students what I meant by my comments and how they were going to use my comments. Did I get an earful! RayS.
Tuesday, June 3, 2008
Archive: Expressive Writing
The purpose of this blog is to summarize articles on teaching English/language arts, from kindergarten through college, published in English education journals from the past.
Topic: Expressive (Narrative?) Writing
Title: “The Role of Expressive Discourse in the Teaching of writing: A Review of Current Composition Texts.” Jeanette Harris. Freshman English News 15. 3 (1986): 2-4. Reviewed in College Composition and Communication (October 1988), 330. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE).
Summary: “Claims that expressive writing is unsatisfactorily defined in the literature and even questions the existence of such a category.”
Comments: I’m assuming that “expressive writing” is personal narrative writing. In my experience at a community college, having students write a personal narrative often resulted in their writing about experiences that embarrassed them, so I strictly controlled those topics to avoid embarrassment. Practicing narrative writing, however, has a practical value. Portions, sometimes major portions, of the writing in expository or academic formats is narrative. Rays.
Topic: Expressive (Narrative?) Writing
Title: “The Role of Expressive Discourse in the Teaching of writing: A Review of Current Composition Texts.” Jeanette Harris. Freshman English News 15. 3 (1986): 2-4. Reviewed in College Composition and Communication (October 1988), 330. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE).
Summary: “Claims that expressive writing is unsatisfactorily defined in the literature and even questions the existence of such a category.”
Comments: I’m assuming that “expressive writing” is personal narrative writing. In my experience at a community college, having students write a personal narrative often resulted in their writing about experiences that embarrassed them, so I strictly controlled those topics to avoid embarrassment. Practicing narrative writing, however, has a practical value. Portions, sometimes major portions, of the writing in expository or academic formats is narrative. Rays.
Monday, June 2, 2008
Archive: Preparation for Argument
The purpose of this blog is to summarize articles on teaching English/language arts, from kindergarten through college, published in English education journals from the past.
Topic: Argument
Title: “Counter-Statement: Using Written dialogue to Develop Critical Thinking and Writing.” Stephen Hahn. College Composition and Communication 38: (1987): 97-100. Reviewed in College Composition and Communication (October 1988), 329. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE).
Summary: Author teaches students to write dialogue to work out their ideas and counter opposing views in preparation for a debate or to write and argumentative paper.
Comment: Sounds like a good idea. RayS.
Topic: Argument
Title: “Counter-Statement: Using Written dialogue to Develop Critical Thinking and Writing.” Stephen Hahn. College Composition and Communication 38: (1987): 97-100. Reviewed in College Composition and Communication (October 1988), 329. A publication of the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE).
Summary: Author teaches students to write dialogue to work out their ideas and counter opposing views in preparation for a debate or to write and argumentative paper.
Comment: Sounds like a good idea. RayS.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)