Ideas for our Project

I recently saw a quote from F. Scott Fitzgerald that said, “You don’t write because you want to say something; you write because you’ve got something to say.” We all have our own writing stories to share and that mean something to us. We all have something that we feel is important to say. But how are they connected? Some may be about the moment you found your voice. Others may be about a writing moment that was significant in some way to your life. We need an umbrella large enough so as not to limit anyone, but concise enough to have a point of view. I also, as others posted, like Laura's idea of Writing Matters. However, I've been trying to think of some other possible titles myself. I have to admit that it's not easy. Just a few thoughts, not necessarily titles. Ughhh:

The Power of Writing???
A Moment in Writing???
The Writing Connection??? 
How Writing Feeds Us???

Tobey's Reaction Paper- Sommers and Murray

Tobey's Reaction Paper

Jaxon, Bean, and Beach & Friedrich- Teacher Comments, Peer Response, and Revision

This week I found all three articles to be helpful. They actually all gave concrete suggestions that teachers can use to benefit their writing students. I really liked that I had some "take away tools" to implement into my classroom. One of the biggest thoughts I had as I was reading brought me back to the Sommers article from a few weeks ago, and that was how students can easily feel that their teachers are not invested in them. That became most clearly stated in the Bean article. I loved that he included research showing students' comments after receiving vague or mean feedback on their writing pieces. This was so telling to me. Kids are emotionally invested in their work, and teachers often dismiss this. To get these types of comments must be so frustrating, even damaging. I enjoyed how he modeled how using feedback can be useful and even showed the improved revised piece afterwards.

The Beach and Friedrich piece was helpful in that they honed in on the different types of feedback out there and how each works. They addressed ELL students often, stating that these learners want more negative comments because they want to know what's wrong and fix it. I also really liked that they suggested taping comments and conferences. Such a clever idea. That can be useful for low level learners and for teachers. Being able to reflect on ourselves is so important. What better way than to hear ourselves instructing our students. And, Nancie Atwell. I simply admire her, and the fact that they quote one of her strategies that I vowed to use this year is so cool. Attwell's In the Middle, is a great resource for all things writing, and a place I often like to visit. Beach and Friedrich mentioned her tactic of writing back to her students, a useful technique that I read about last year and added to my list of "thing to try" for this year. Overall, I think their article has some substantial meat to it and gives teachers some groundwork for helping them provide the best feedback in order for their students to create stronger revisions.

Finally, the Jaxon piece was great. She had many concrete ideas to strengthen peer responses. I love having my students work together on their writings, but man, it takes a lot of practice and modeling to get them to a place where they can do the work Jaxon poses. Because I have my students for two years, I feel that there is so much growth in this area, but baby steps need happen. Right now we are practicing using "glow" and "grow" statements. They still all want to comment on handwriting, spelling, or grammar. I do agree with her reasons for why we incorporate peer work: that a deeper knowledge is created, there is an immediate audience for the text, and it helps students reflect on their own work. This is smart work, but takes time to build.

Reconsiderations: Voice in Writing Again: Embracing Contraries: Peter Elbow  and   Bi, Butch, and Bar Dyke: Pedagogical Performances of Class, Gender, and Sexuality: Michelle Gibson, Martha Marinara, and Deborah Meem

Ahh! Peter Elbow! I truly love his way of thinking. Each piece we read by him makes me think he is so right on! He starts this piece off by discussing how "voice" was once the "hot topic" amongst theorist. There was buzz about it and much disagreement. However, as of late, the topic has grown cold and quiet. Elbow believes it to be a worthy topic that should be revitalized. How does he do so, by writing this piece that not only addresses both sides of the argument, but brings up new ways of thinking about it. He argues for both sides! How clever! 

As I was reading, I couldn't help thinking about how each side of his argument had validity. On one side of the argument he states how using voice in our writing creates and allows for a sense of self and identity. Who you are as a writer and individual comes through when there is voice. I know, for example, that when I read pieces by my own students who have achieved voice, I am able to tell which piece is theirs. I don't even have to look at the name. Their pieces have an identity and flare that is unique to them. Consequently, I also agree with Elbow's other side of the argument that there are certain writing forms that are more formal or informational, and perhaps by including voice, the information gets lost, and therefore the piece becomes unclear. This may be the case for scientific studies and such. Just as with last week's Peter Elbow piece Ranking, Evaluating, and Liking, there needs to be a balance. As good writers we need to decide what form we using to create our piece, whom the intended audience is, and the purpose for the piece. If I'm creating poetry, I better have voice as opposed to a lab report that probably will do well with the just the facts. 

He ends the piece by stating,"I'm asking us to learn to be wiser in our scholarly thinking and writing... Such thinking can often release us from dead-end critical arguments that are framed by the unexamined assumption that if two positions seem incompatible, only one can be valid."  Elbow proves that there are often multiple view points to analyzing a topic of interest. He urges theorists to reexamine the issue of voice, but to look at it the light that there may not be one true correct method. I feel that this piece was very successful in this task.

In the text, Bi, Butch, and Bar Dyke the three professors shared personal stories about how their identities effected their teaching lives. Each reflection was honest and unique. The narratives shed light on the challenges that this minority group faces within their professional worlds. 

While reading, there were times when I felt anger or sadness for these women. The first time was when Marinara shared how she felt connected to her advanced composition course of all women, only to soon feel betrayed by their negative comments about Adrienne Rich, the well known lesbian poet and writer. She states, "I had forgotten how different I am from many women." My heart broke for her. It was in that moment that she realized that she had had become too comfortable with this class. In addition when papers came in that were more about personal opinions she reverted to grading the papers  focusing on academic and theoretical arguments. She no longer shared anything about her life. 

The other moment was when Gibson shared her very honest self-assessment with her administrative team and was told how it was basically unacceptable. Talk about using voice! The fact that she is an accomplished professor who came from a difficult past shows her drive in life. In addition, when she shared how she connects with her students and they told her she should be connecting with them not her students, I felt disgusted. Don't we or shouldn't we as teachers all have at least a few stories about how we connected with students, shouldn't those administrators have been able to identify with her through her stories, by thinking Ah, yes. I remember when this student... I do realize that perhaps she shared a bit much and not everyone in academia is ready for such brutal honesty,or perhaps she needed to think about her audience a bit more, but some of their comments were harsh (this reads like a rant). It felt as though there was a silencing happening.

The most important point about the entire article for me comes in the conclusion. It states, "We must think seriously about the identities we bring with us into the classroom, remain conscious of the way those identities interact with the identities our students bring, and insert ourselves fully into the shifting relationships between ourselves and our students at the same time resist the impulse to control those relationships." I think each woman learned this. There once again needs to be a balance. More diverse literature and topics needs to come into our classrooms. More open conversations need to happen. However, we need to maintain a balance between who we are in the classroom and who our students are. Meem's chart shows that there are many hats that encompass us. We are not one identity. We must remember that when we are designing lessons for students. The best thing we can do for our students is to teach them to think for themselves. 



Final Project

I never really write too much about the final project because I have been ok with all of the awesome ideas we have had. However, I am really happy with what we sorted out last week. It felt much more friendly to everyone in the class, which was a concern of mine. I also have quite a few ideas swarming around in my head. I need to sit and narrow down my thinking. I like the personal feel of the vignettes and I like that they can take any form. 

Ranking, Evaluating, and Liking: Sorting Out Three Forms of Judgement: Peter Elbow &     Grammar, Grammars, and the Teaching of Grammar: Patrick Hartwell

Peter Elbow really puts into perspective the harm that can be caused by over assessing and assigning grades. Teachers, students, and parents, have become very reliant on individual grades. In his piece, he addresses the distinct problems with ranking students and the harm it causes. The one issue that I relate to the most is number three, " Ranking leads to students to get so hung up on these oversimple quantitative verdicts that they care more about scores than about learning-more about the grade we put onto paper than about the comment we have written on it." It made me think about Nancy Sommers and our discussion from last week. So, we finally change our ways of commenting to make them stronger and meaningful, but the kids could care less because they just want to see the number and letter the paper received. Alas, we all know that grades are a part of our educational world. And, I would be a big liar if I said that I didn't want to know how I was doing based on grades. I get just as anxious when I turn in an assignment and know that I am being evaluated by my professors as my students are when they turn work into me. I am also pleased and feel good about myself if I receive a good grade. However, I think this is Elbow's point, the final product and letter grade that accompanies it, should not define how we feel about ourselves as learners.

He goes on to discuss using evaluation as a much more promising method to teach writers how to improve their work. He calls evaluation, "looking hard and thoughtfully at a piece of writing in order to make distinctions as to the quality of different features or dimensions." This allows a teacher to truly read a piece and give the kinds of feedback we discussed last week. It opens dialogue between the teacher and student, and provides an opportunity for the student writer to make changes he feels will truly strengthen his work. I definitely feel that Nancy Sommers would agree with Peter Elbow's method here. There feels like a marriage between their thinking. 

Elbow also goes on to state how he knows he can't have his way one hundred percent, and that there is a compromise to be made between ranking and evaluating. His use of portfolios, contract grading, a holistic grid, and student magazines give the students the ranking they want. In addition, he provides "evaluation free zones" where students participate in free writing and create non evaluative assignments, where his only comment is "thank you." I agree that students can grow through these non-evaluative activities. Free writing permits a writer freedom to experiment with choice, voice, and technique. Knowing that the piece doesn't have to be shared opens the writer up to taking risks. Daily practice is invaluable. 

Finally, Elbow addresses the importance of writers liking their work. I never really thought about this before, but makes such sense to me. "It's not improvement that leads to liking, but liking that leads to improvement." What a simplistic and genius statement. If a writer doesn't buy into their piece, doesn't care about it to start with, then why would they care to invest the time and energy working on it? Liking, doesn't mean that a piece is perfect and that it doesn't need to be rework and revised, it means that there is great potential and drive to do the reworking. It's important to teach our students this notion. 

Onto grammar! Hartwell certainly let's the grammarians have it. He starts off by basically stating that grammarians are never really satisfied with any research that is done because it doesn't fall in their favor. They seem to always find excuses as to why the studies can be picked apart. They even find excuses as to why their own research failed to fall on their side. It seems that grammarians and anti-grammarians simply don't trust each other. He goes onto state that this piece will put it all to rest because he is going to look at the grammar issues in a whole new light. He addresses four specific questions that hopes are answered and will lay any debate to rest.

I actually enjoyed his point of view. He makes a very strong case for why we should not teach formal, skills-centered grammar in isolation. By providing the five definitions of grammar and plucking apart each one, he must leave grammarians with their mouths agape. (As a side note, if  I was instructed to teach my class grammar as Kolln and Neuleib stressed, I would quit. I can't think of anything more dull, joyless, and tedious. )

The examples he provides are powerful and true. How many times do I hear teachers say, my kids can't name a preposition or a linking verb? However, the kid can create a correct sentence. I'm not saying that there are not students out there who have true deficiencies. Who are not constructing sentences and don't know how to punctuate and capitalize correctly. I know there are. They are in my classroom. What I do know, is that cramming a bunch of grammar rules down their throats is not going to fix the problem. These students who have writing deficiencies are also my students who are not at appropriate reading level. Hartwell makes that distinction in his text as well. there is a connection to writing and literacy. The problems low achieving students are experiencing, are far beyond not knowing the rules for commas. Besides, as he states, once students learn a set of rules there are thirty exceptions to those rules that mess things up!

Grammar instruction is important. It needs to be taught and is often overlooked. However, Kolln's and Neuleib's vision is not only out dated (this piece is written in 1985) and boring, but it is useless. 

We truly need some new and innovative ways to address the area of teaching grammar in a writing classroom.








Thoughts on the Shared Project

I really enjoyed hashing things out more last week. I think we are headed somewhere. As we were talking things through, my wheels started spinning, and I was able to think how I could contribute to any of the ideas we had listed. I really like the idea of creating a list of innovative lessons that any writing teacher can use. Incorporating things like an "anti" lesson, music, or pop culture is a great way to pull students in and keep their interest. I also like thinking of ways that we can create writing pieces that may not be traditional. Having a bank like this is something teachers would love to go to. I know I would. I think back, once again, to KUWP and how we were all inspired by each others lessons, and couldn't wait to try them in our own classrooms. Having resources from other educators is amazing. My concern is the age group, I don't want anyone to feel that they are creating lessons for a group they aren't interested in or to feel uncomfortable. Many lessons can be tweaked for different ages, so we can probably work out this issue.  

Yancey's "On Reflection" and Sommers' "Responding to Student Writing"

I have to admit that I really enjoyed both pieces this week as I felt they pertained to my teaching life. Providing feedback has been something of a "hot topic" in my language arts department at work, while using reflection more with my students is a technique that I have wanted to grow this year.

To begin with, the Nancy Sommers' piece was filled with value and truth. As my students begin their first big writing piece of the year, and we begin to talk about the importance of revision, I ask them if they have ever been given back a paper with comments from the teacher that they either didn't understand or that the don't know how to fix. Almost every hand goes up. They share that some teachers only care if they make grammar mistakes even if they have written the greatest stories of their young lives, or that they get the "you need to elaborate more" comment on every paper ever written, but the teacher never teaches them how to elaborate more.  My students seem to exhibit frustration when sharing these reflections. This resonates exactly with Sommers' text.

Within the text, Sommers opens by stating how time consuming writing comments and feedback on students' papers is. One would think that such a time consuming endeavor would be the most beneficial in helping student writers grow. However, she goes on to raise concerns surrounding this practice. The two issues found within her research shows that,"teachers' comments can take students' attention away from their own purposes in writing a particular text and focus that attention on the teachers' attention in commenting." The other finding states that," teachers' comments are not text-specific and could be interchanged, rubber-stamped, from text-to-text." Both of these findings show that the teacher holds a lot of power over the student and their writing. The voice and intention of the student can easily become lost as they worry more about the vague feedback they try to fix to gain a good grade. 

I am guilty of the red penned papers from my past, before I knew better. However, I feel that I have gotten stronger in teaching students that feedback comes along the way as they write. Comments are not special only to the end of a published piece. As hard as it is for students to understand this, writing truly is recursive. When I meet with my students in small groups or one on one, they gain feedback. When we gathered for whole class mini-lessons on how to ___ they are gaining feedback through a lesson that they need try in their writing. Yes, there are comments at the end, but they are never, "you need more elaboration." They are specific to each child based on his piece and his need. It may become a goal for his next piece. 

My favorite quote from this piece is," the teacher holds a license for vagueness while the student is commanded to be specific." That is really unfair!

While reading the Yancey piece, I could not help but think about my time over the summer with the Kean University Writing Project. Whenever anyone asks me about my biggest take aways from my time in this institute, I always talk about the time that I had to reflect. I was able to reflect on myself as an educator, on my teaching practices, on my writing, and on myself as a person. I came to understand that reflection is invaluable. I also know that there is not always enough of it happening. It is something that I want to do more within my own life and also with my students. As I looked over some of my classmates' blog posts, I noticed that Colin really hit the mark on how writing reflection is treated in schools. It is that quick, end of the year piece, that goes on to their next year's teacher. What I would like to do is instill more time throughout the year. I have set up blogs for my students to reflect on their learning at different moments throughout the year. This text really solidified the value that I already knew was there.

Throughout the text there were many phrases and thoughts that stood out to me. That reflection:

• Brings about self awareness
• Shows how learning is happening
• Is an ongoing conversation a writer has with himself
• Stimulates the growth of consciousness
• Gives authority to what is going on inside the writer's head
• Allows for goal-setting
• Is controlled by the learner
• Calls for dialogue 
• Allows us to understand ourselves through explaining ourselves to others
• Is a habit of the mind- one that transforms
• Is rhetorical
• Helps teachers to know which methods are the most successful
• Can be private or public

Finally, thoughts on our final project...

I was kind of amazed at how quickly ideas jumped out. I'm kind of a "marinater (??)." I need to really think about things afterwards. I like the idea of the handbook. I think I like it more for teachers than for students, as I feel it would be a very different construction. I think if we create it for teachers we can divide it into age groups or by lessons. I also agree (someone's post said it) that we need to think about those in the class who are not educators. How do they feel about this? Could there be more than one project? I'm sure the answer is yes. What is the focus of the handbook?  I'm also happy with digital and analog I do see the argument for both sides. I guess I'm still vague here. Perhaps we need a little more "hashing it out."