Coach K has had many accomplishments indeed (some might say that with the best recruits at a prestigious college that he would be remiss to NOT win a whole crapton of games...but that's just what some might say), and is a great coach. I'm not sure about the whole "daughters hugging the team" thing - that might make me a bit uncomfortable: my teenage daughter (in the future) hugging college bball players - one might think that she'd think the most attractive ones need a lot of hugs...but I know what he's saying about considering the complete person.
When it comes to relationships with my students, I've discovered that I need to convey to them that I care about their specific progress not only as writers, but as thinkers. One of the things that students need to develop is the need to consider multiple perspectives - whether in terms of politics, literature, perspectives, writings, etc., it is always a relevant skill. Thus, conveying my desire to make them see that thinking this way will lead to better lives for themselves and those around them is key in their investing in the topics currently under discussion. "Buy-in" is important, and must be done, lest students ignore those around them and what drives them.
As far as "Value+Vision+Voice goes, I think that it's a pretty good method of thinking and getting to the heart of matters. I frequently say to my students that good writing is good thinking, so anything that gets them to look beyond themselves and their preconceived notions to consider multiple perspectives is a good thing.
I have to start the community building all over again this trimester, as we have shifted classes yet again (all but one class, anyway, resets with the turning over of a new trimester). So, I must start from scratch--however, that can be a good thing, as students sometimes need change to make them shake up their methods of thinking and their perspectives. Just like the modern-day media, they need the story-line to change and evolve to maintain interest - static=disinterest!
Saturday, March 15, 2014
Monday, March 10, 2014
21st century learning - curricular design.
A lesson that I implemented I think, actually, contained all 4 of the components of 21st century learning:
Students were to, the day prior to the debate, get into small groups of 2-3 that would take a side: "who would be a better leader for the Roman Republic - Brutus or Antony?" They'd compile evidence and opinions based on the speeches and soliloquies given in the play The Tragedy of Julius Caesar by William Shakespeare. Then, the next day, they'd get with all of the others that took their position and prepare a debate. Then, they give opening arguments referencing a. rhetorical devices used; b. direct quotations, and c. citing examples of creating Logos, Pathos, or Ethos, with reference to the Aristotelian triangle of rhetoric, and the positives of each of the points in turn. Then, they rebut the opposition. Lastly, they offer closing arguments. Here's why the 4 tines of 21st century learning were used:
Critical Thinking - well, there was a lot of it! Synthesizing that much rhetoric, logical appeals, and then parsing others' arguments looking for logical fallacies is an in-depth job, and requires much logic of the play, motivations of the characters, and rhetoric.
Creativity - While this is probably the least-implemented, coming up with reasons that the other side is wrong while not sounding snarky or belligerent is not a skill that is highly-developed in sophomores - so it's creative for them, if they succeed.
Collaboration - they must work well as a group, both in the research and presentation of their arguments.
Communication - see above!
The results of the controversy were: a good debate, engaged students with regard to Shakespeare (accomplishment!), engaged brains, and outraged students (see: losing side!). Everyone got a jolly rancher, though.
I learned that debate is awesome. Actually, I already knew that. But still!
Students were to, the day prior to the debate, get into small groups of 2-3 that would take a side: "who would be a better leader for the Roman Republic - Brutus or Antony?" They'd compile evidence and opinions based on the speeches and soliloquies given in the play The Tragedy of Julius Caesar by William Shakespeare. Then, the next day, they'd get with all of the others that took their position and prepare a debate. Then, they give opening arguments referencing a. rhetorical devices used; b. direct quotations, and c. citing examples of creating Logos, Pathos, or Ethos, with reference to the Aristotelian triangle of rhetoric, and the positives of each of the points in turn. Then, they rebut the opposition. Lastly, they offer closing arguments. Here's why the 4 tines of 21st century learning were used:
Critical Thinking - well, there was a lot of it! Synthesizing that much rhetoric, logical appeals, and then parsing others' arguments looking for logical fallacies is an in-depth job, and requires much logic of the play, motivations of the characters, and rhetoric.
Creativity - While this is probably the least-implemented, coming up with reasons that the other side is wrong while not sounding snarky or belligerent is not a skill that is highly-developed in sophomores - so it's creative for them, if they succeed.
Collaboration - they must work well as a group, both in the research and presentation of their arguments.
Communication - see above!
The results of the controversy were: a good debate, engaged students with regard to Shakespeare (accomplishment!), engaged brains, and outraged students (see: losing side!). Everyone got a jolly rancher, though.
I learned that debate is awesome. Actually, I already knew that. But still!
AR results summary
Honestly, some of the results of the Action Research are discernible more by me than by students (which, I suppose, isn't that surprising - I clearly know what's best for everyone!). In fact, it is even skewed by some of the percentages of grades that I've been measuring for students across 2 years of writing grade results. The largest percentage of improvement with regard to the new order and implementation of feedback order is in the numbers that aren't getting D's or F's anymore - that is good! In fact, from 9th to 10th grade, it was a huge jump in better grades, percentage-wise. That is good - now all I have to do is get those A's and B's up a bit and I'll be rockin' it.
The results are also prompting me to realize that, with the adoption of a new curriculum with my colleagues, I don't have things as polished and practiced as they will be in the future, and I know that I'll keep working to help that, and that that will help push the %'s in the correct direction.
The results are also prompting me to realize that, with the adoption of a new curriculum with my colleagues, I don't have things as polished and practiced as they will be in the future, and I know that I'll keep working to help that, and that that will help push the %'s in the correct direction.
AGAPE - relationships
It was the end of the trimester at ol' WHS, so the improvement of relationships took a bit of a backseat in a lot of ways. However, there is one thing that helps to bind students together in my Pre-AP 10 classes - we go to the Guthrie to a play (this year it's Othello) and we talk about theater etiquette, places to see in the theater proper, what we should ask the actors / stage director when we get to talk with them, how to not appear like an amateur-theatregoer, etc. Having a shared experience outside of school, yet educationally-focused and sponsored by the school, helps students see the material we're reading as more than curriculum, and that helps to bring out more texture and interest in it, as well as their acting out of it. So, in preparation, we did a lot of acting in class, talking about villainous villains (Iago) and linking that to modern parallels, which helps to personalize Shakespeare. It helps the classroom environment, and that bleeds into the interpersonal relatikonships.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)