So many questions!

I cannot read

multiple texts simultaneously, so this week I read the rest of TWW, Chapter 3 of

Smagorinsky, and I finished up with Beach. Whoa!!! To say I was kind of brought 

back to reality is a complete understatement. I also began my observation hours and sat in on a

Department meeting . . . WHOA! As I read over my notes, I realize that the
more I read about teaching strategies, CCSS, and observe my classes, the
more questions I have about teaching effectively.  What  else can I
learn so that I am prepared to the highest level possible to provide my
kids with the skills they need in and out of the classroom?

Here are my
thoughts for the week:

In Teaching to
Exceed the English Language Arts Common Core State Standards (I'll

refer to this text as Beach), one of the first things that begged my attention 

was that "there is no strong evidence that adopting standards will . . . improve
student achievement"(11).  My question here is "who else knows this?" If this  

claim is true, then why are we adopting this in our classrooms? It seems to me that 

more and more teachers complain about the CCSS.  Further, Beach explains

how"standards provide a definition of what is possible, but ... Are not curriculum 

documents,"(4). It's as though "they" are saying, "here's a rocket,
there's the moon, now figure out how to get to the moon successfully 

without crashing this rocket."  It's a
little upsetting, I think.  To further add to this and bring a real world scenario, 

I sat in on my school's Departmental meeting recently. The teachers were there 

and so was a "teaching specialist." This person provided the teachers with ideas 

and strategies that they are supposed to be implementing in their classroom.  After the 

meeting, my cooperating teacher explained that the teaching specialist has never taught

in the classroom.  My question here is how do we as teachers, parents, and just members 

of our communities, allow for something like this to happen?  How do we
send a teaching specialist, who has never utilized the strategies she provides
teachers with, to dictate what the teachers, who plan and execute, have to teach?  This 

is a big problem, and I'm not quite sure how we fix it.

Beach also focuses on how "adopting standards may also lower, rather than raise,
achievement" (11).  He lists the reasons as to why this is so. The first reason he 

lists is "Homogenization of Instruction."  He explains how teachers often teach the 

same content regardless of the differences amongst their kids, and also talks about the 

adoption of "teacher-proof" scripted curriculum.  As I read this I thought, how do I quiet 

this angry voice in my head?  How will I break away from that "scripted" curriculum.  I
know that there is not going around the CCSS, so I must teach what is expected
but to allow this to narrow my curriculum (as Beach calls it) is unacceptable.  

The book talks about how certain standards can actually do a disservice to students.  

One of the claims as to why the standards may lower achievement is the failure to 

acknowledge cultural diversity.

I worked in the Writing Center for a few semesters and this is something that they absolutely
love and value, and rightfully so. We are such a culturally diverse city and should 

embrace that.  However, because we are also a city of neighborhoods, our city's 

demographics are often "divided" or broken down by neighborhoods.  What does
this mean for our kids?  Perhaps some of our kids have not traveled outside of their 

respective neighborhoods and may not be knowledgable of different cultures.  So, I think: 

how can I provide my kids with a better understanding of our multicultural city? 
How can I engage them so that they want to learn more about cultural
diversity, and further, to become culturally sensitive?  Here is where Smago saves the day!

Chapter Three focuses on providing us with a myriad of student-generated whole class 

discussions and activities.  These "tasks"/strategies rely on students to produce the content of
discussions.  If we want to teach in a more Socratic sort of way, we as teachers, must 

break away from the need to want to control the direction in which class discussions take 

place.  So, here is where I thought about cultural diversity, student engagement, and 

Smagorinsky's ideas of awesomeness.

There are, undoubtedly, so many wonderful ideas for students to produce discussions.  

My favorite are the following (and I explain how they'd increase cultural literacy, 

cultural awareness, and cultural sensitivity):

*   Coat of Arms -->  p. 37 provides specific instructions for creating the Scottish coat 

     of arms. I think in doing so, students can learn, by doing some background research, 

     about the Scottish culture. Further, I think this activity would work nicely with a 

     Romeo and Juliet Unit.

*  Mandala --> my students would learn about the Hindu and Buddhist religions, India, 

    and the religious and political meaning associated with the mandala.

Further, I thought
about how problematizing one single issue could lead to fights for social
change and students becoming involved in their own community.  For example, I thought 

about students being in discourse with one another about a recent social issue on the
news.  My first thought was the Trayvon Martin murder case.  What I'd like students to 

focus on would be the amount of media attention and emphasis on violence, more 

specifically on racism and violence committed between different races.  To
problematize the issue, I would pose the question: Why aren't we just as upset
when we commit violence against our own race?  I think that this would trigger students 

to participate in discourse and in activities.  

As I stated before, I have more questions now, but I look forward to learning more and 

questioning more.  I want to learn more ways to help my students and assess their writing 

and achievements in more ways than just a test.  I don't want to simply "let them eat cake!" 

I want to create thinkers and curious people.  

Further, to carry on the Smagorinsky-an analogies, I thought

of the CCSS as the isolation of the many brain muscles (this is an anatomically
incorrect term).  Think of it this way, if you're familiar with weight
lifting and the isolation of muscles to further increase size, you focus
particularly on one given area.  So, say you always work on your arms
(bis, tris, shoulders) . . . How can you hold your body up with such weak
legs? 

Until next time,

(Smiley Face)