Blog #11 Responding to Student Work and Re-Thinking Grading

This weeks reading brought me back to our very first class. We went around in a circle and voiced something we were looking to learn in this course. I said that I wanted to learn how to correct or grade student papers when there are so many mistakes you don't know where to start or where to place priority. Funny how our last reading answered my question; I should have known Christensen would have the answer!

So, to answer past me: do like Christensen and don't grade papers, but rather look for strengths and give sensitive and encouraging feedback. I always love the vignettes about Christensen's students, but I really really love the one in chapter six, about Nathan and the way he progressed from writing one or two reserved sentences to writing a more vulnerable and personal paragraph. Thats amazing, and Nathan's second go at the assignment made me smile. His love of football was palpable in that small piece and that is good writing, even if he had spelling and capitalization mistakes.

I love the way Christensen handles Nathan's writing––giving feedback that pertains to the story being told and then later paying attention to the writing conventions that need to be addressed. Honestly, I don't think I have ever written something, with no correction, that had perfect grammer. I am constantly mixing up the em dash and the comma and at times I have certainly capitalized a word that was perfectly okay with a lowercase letter. This is not even to mention spelling. With this in mind, it would only make sense to address conventions after I have gave feedback on content. After all, I am much more comfortable with content than conventions.

At the end of the day, I understood Nathan's writing. Sure, I noticed the misspelled words and the choppy sentences, but these things didn't get in the way of his message. I still felt smelting when I read his piece. I suppose that is the goal: to engage students in meaningful writing and to watch the way they utilize language––to foster a relationship between the student and the act of writing. The truth is, all students will have a different relationship with writing, one that progresses well beyond their days in your classroom. Some students may write for newspapers, and some may hardly write at all, but they may leave your classroom with a confidence in themselves and what they have to say, and this is important for all people.

I also liked the way Christensen touched on Ebonics/AAVE and their role in students writing. This brought to back to our class a few weeks ago about ELL students and the writing process. It is really just about being understood, and writing in a fashion that suites you and your needs. The student is the subject, the student determines the rigor, not testing platforms.

Turner and Hicks also offered a message that encouraged teachers to not judge but "coach" student in writing. I think this is great because it really further defines your role as teacher: a judge is distant, all knowing, and accusatory, but a coach is encouraging, caring, and forgiving. As mentioned above, I am not the knower of all grammar rules so I should not be the judge. Instead, I strive to be the coach, working with students, figuring things out, exploring new ideas, and holding space for the personal narratives that mean so much to students, peer, and teachers.

Better Late Than Never...A Response to the Resisting ICE Panel Discussion

I think I stand with most people, when I say that the Blood and Soil posters that popped up around campus earlier this semester were pretty alarming. Although it is disturbing, white supremacy groups like this and their propaganda isn't exactly surprising; however, what is rattling is seeing these hate driven messages plopped in the middle of our college campus––a place that I tend to consider a friendly, safe space. What I am trying to say is this: I know these groups exist, but I haven't considered the fact that they could be my neighbors, my classmates, or members of my community.

I was moved by the three speakers that presented and answered questions during the panel discussion, and, although I learnt some things from the presenters, I was left feeling like I had some personal work to do. The truth is, I am not fully versed on what the immigration process looks like, nor do I know too much about deportation and how that system functions. So, I had to do some research, and, although I won't go into detail here, I have a better understanding of what those people immigration and being deported in the US face.

This was a bump in personal knowledge, but what does this mean for my future students and my suture self, as an educator? Well, I have to start by admitting that I did not totally follow what was being discussed during the ICE panel because I did not have the framework to place and process the stories, terms, and timelines being given. If I don't have the framework––perhaps I am along, although I doubt it, in lacking an understanding of this system––then how can I expect my students to understand and grapple with concept of deportation and immigration? Are students not, in a public school, entitled to be educated about their government and its various systems? I think so, but who is teaching it? That isn't a sassy backhanded comment; I seriously don't know––perhaps the history teachers?

I think that for me, the resisting ICE panel discussion reminded me how important it is to have a conceptual framework for information. Information isn't as powerful if it is getting stuck in the middle of mental processing because you don't know where to put it. Students need proper scaffolding to enter into tough conversations like these, and I think that it is important to have these conversations and thus find ways to help students understand what the immigration and deportation process looks like. Who knows, you may even have a student who has personally experienced ICE and may have things to share with your class.

The takeaway for me: students need proper scaffolding, not just to read and write essays and poetry, but also to participate in civic discourse and understand the way certain systems are oppressing them or others.

Blog #10 R.E.A.L Instruction and Artifactual Literacies (Pahl, Rowsell, and Stewart)

In Exit West, Mohsin writes about the calm before the storm, "the foundation of a human life, waiting there for us between the steps of our march to our mortality." I feel as if Pahl and Rowsell are somewhat addressing this calm in their discussion of "artifacts" (of course a "calm" is more an emotion and "artifacts" are things, but I think the message is the same: it is the little things that make up life). They seem to be looking towards all the minutiae surroundings of life and, despite how unassuming they may appear, their potential significance. For them, a scarf can be much more than an accessory; it can be a portal to the past, a simple reminder, or an opportunity for connection.

It is interesting to think about this idea in terms of EL students and the ESL classroom. Often objects, and their significance, have less to do with language and more to do with feelings or human experiences. Inviting students to write about the artifacts of their life can also encourage them to explore their shared experiences or feelings.

For example, I think of my journals; they are so much more than just pages of writing. Each one houses different stories and they each have a different feeling or vibe associated with them. My first journal has a purply blue suede cover, and it houses the story of my first heartbreak and all the tears and experiences that went along with that. If asked to write about that journal, I would write about emotional pain and the importance of friends and family. This could lead to a discussion, or a, "yes, that happened to me too!".

Using a handy acronym, Stewart also writes about connecting the lives of students to curriculum. "R.E.A.L. Instruction" is relevant, engaging, affirmative, and literacy oriented. I think this concept is important to keep in mind for EL students, but could also be applied to your monolingual English students. All students deserve curriculum that is relevant, engaging, affirmative, and, of course, literacy oriented.

What I really enjoyed about Stewart was, what came across as, her love for ELL students. She writes, "we need to ensure that we are learners of our students and their lives." I think that this is really at the heart of teaching ELLs and, really, all students. Schools may be physically separate from other areas of life, but education can not exist in a vacuum; life compliments and sometimes complicates learning, but, regardless, the two can never be fully separated. Honestly, I don't think I would even want them to be.

Life informs learning and learning informs life. I think the balance between the two is really lovely, and, after last weeks guest speakers and recent readings, I think working with and learning from emergent bilingual students can add some real depth and richness to that balance.

Blog #9 Language and ELL Students (Fu and Martinez)

"Code Switching can serve as a borrowing strategy by using the native language to fill in English words they don't know; so they can continue their thinking process."
(Danling Fu, 49)

I have always thought about code switching as a necessity for ELL students, and I have always admired people who can move in and out of different languages (even if the transitions aren't super smooth). I have been trying, with moderate dedication, to learn Spanish for the last few years, and it wasn't until reading Fu that I realized my real problem is my resistance towards code-switching (and exposure if we are keeping it real). I would never start a sentence in Spanish that I wasn't sure I would be able to finish in Spanish; I didn't want to sound silly or produce sentences that weren't properly conjugated or structured. I think this has probably stunted my growth and made me a nervous speaker. 

I say this because I think it takes courage to code-switch and to allow yourself to engage with this form of learning––this process. I also think it is natural when you are learning a language to move between a comfort zone and a place that is not so steady. In reference to the above quote, allowing yourself to code-switch allows the thinking process to continue. This reminded me of our first week, the Cameron reading, and her advice to "just begin." I think allowing students to write in their first language and then later allowing them to move between the two languages gives them a place to begin and turns what could seem daunting, writing in another language, into a gradual and natural process.

When Martinez writes, "one way in which linguicism gets upheld in classrooms is when Black and Latinx youth get categorized as English learners, long-term English learners, standard English learners, or the more common catch-all label, "at risk"." I think here he is speaking to the way we sometimes look down on those who don't speak proper English or what we would consider "standard English." This is of course not everyone's belief but we do hear that, "if your in the United States, speak English." I think this really shows no respect for the courage of code switching or the difficulty it takes to communicate a different language.

Martinez is encouraging readers, like Fu, to see those practicing another language as brave and capable people; it doesn't matter if they are in fourth grade. I think both are also advocating for preserving first languages as a means of making sure that students don't loose the richness of that first language. I think this is really important for teaching and for that reason I think it totally makes sense to have kids write in their first language and then gradually move into English, as Fu describes in his book, Writing Between Languages. 

Blog #8 Finding a Balance With the Digital World and Ourselves (Boyd Podcast and Hawley Turner&Hicks)

Reading, "No Longer a Luxury: Digital Literacy Can't Wait", both entertained me and broadened my perspective of digital literacy. I say entertaining because I had a few laughs reading about the way some teachers think a PowerPoint presentation counts as a digital requirement, and the way the authors referred to those who browse the internet but do not engage as "lurkers." I laughed because I am totally a "lurker" in this digital sense; although, I suppose I am a recovering lurker, as I am getting a little more involved digitally. Additionally, I used to be a big PowerPoint clinger, so this was knowing laugher.

Although, for a lurker/ PowerPoint junkie, I was really surprised by the way I was moved by Hawley Turner and Hicks. In both the text, Argument in the Real World, and the article, "No Longer a Luxury: Digital Literacy Can't Wait", I felt the authors did a great job pointing out the way social media and the online sphere can serve as an authentic space with a real audience. This is a perspective I had yet to encounter and, quite frankly, it really challenged my current attitudes towards writing in the online space. 

In the text, the authors write, "to highlight the power of social media to provide a real audience and to help his students learn to anticipate and respond to counterclaims, Alex used Yelp.com in his classroom." First off, I think this idea of a "real audience" is brilliant. Initially it feels a little funky because we sort of assume students are already writing for real audiences (aka the teacher), but in reality they actually have very limited, if any, opportunities to engage with an actual audience of folks outside of teachers, administration, and classmates. Secondly, as someone who is a little resistant to technology in the classroom (out of lack of familiarity), I am quite smitten with this idea of having students use Yelp.com or Amazon to write reviews for places or products. I would not have thought of this, but I think it is a unique and fun way to put student writing out there and see what sort of authentic feedback comes their way.

In regards to the podcast with Danah Boyd from onbeing.org, I was interested by what she had to say and it had me thinking and pondering and talking to myself in the car after the podcast finished (always a good time :)). Boyd seems to be rallying against voices that attribute the ills of the online world to the creation and existence of the digital world itself. I have to agree with her in disagreeing with these people––the online sphere is a reflection of our physical world and its physical shortcomings rather than an entirely new beast in itself. 

For example: if I were to claim that Instagram encourages young girls to post revealing photos of themselves for attention, I would be wrong to blame the platform. This is a greater societal issue, in which young women feel they are as good as their bodies are perceived to be––a unfortunate side affect of, lets say to name one reason, female objectification in advertising. 

I think what I took from Boyd is this: the online world is full of amazing technology and opportunities for connection, but it is up to the user to determine their personal boundaries––how much digital exposure is comfortable and when does it become too much. This is personal and varies by individual needs and wants. However, I don't think younger kids know how to determine this nor do I think they are even cognizant of a need to find a balance. I don't think we teach kids, or even adults, to form and foster balanced relationships with themselves and their world. If you don't have a relationship with yourself, how can you determine your zone of comfort when it comes to interacting with the digital world? 

That said, do we actually think the digital sphere is engineered for our personal comfort? For example, I know if I am feeling bad about myself, I need to keep a close eye on my breathing, cut down on caffein, and log out of Instagram. I log out of Instagram because I am not in the healthiest mental space and I know I will not approach other's posts without comparing. I know that about myself, but that took learning and finding the balance of exposure that works for me. However, I am not sure younger teens are that self aware and even if they are, push notification are just that––pushy.

I do not disagree with Boyd, I really liked what she had to say. I just think we are not properly setting the youth up to engage with the digital world in a manner that suites their personal/ spiritual needs. Again, not a problem with the internet, but rather with us, as a people. 

Bit of a ramble here––sorry for that! 

Blog #7 "Discourse" in our Social Climate and in Schools (Turner, Hicks, Christensen)

In their first chapter, "The Nature of Argument in a Digital World", Kristen Turner and Troy Hicks write, "teaching students how to craft argumentative writing, including digital arguments, involves a process of reasoning, critical thinking, and problem solving––all skills that we need to use when participating in civic discourse." Ohhh, civic discourse, hmm what is that again?

I completely agree with Turner and Hicks; I think ability to understand and participate in civic discourse is one of the many goals of teaching. Students who have opportunities to engage in critical thinking, problem solving, and reasoning are more prepared for experiences in the outside world and more comfortable or familiar with their own thoughts and thought processes. However, my sarcastic question above, what is civic discourse, stems from a personal skepticism of that word "discourse."

According to the Oxford English Dictionary, discourse is, "to hold discourse; to converse, confer; to speak with another or others, to talk, converse. Frequently with preposition (esp. about, of, upon): to engage in discussion or conversation about a particular matter." This definition involves a conversation– a give and a take between two or more people. However, in our current social climate, I don't see much give and take– an exchange between one who speaks and one who listens. I understand this is a bit of a sweeping generalization, but I am basing this assertion off of my personal observations and statements of others. I do not see very much "discourse" on the news, in politics, or even with my own family during birthday or holiday gatherings– "don't bring up Donald Trump, uncle Al will get angry." 

I hate to quote the same person two blogs in a row, but Brene Brown is a bad a** so here you go, "we make the uncertain certain, "I'm right your wrong, shut up" ... this is what politics looks like today, there is no discourse anymore, there is no conversation, there's just blame." I see this; I see this when uncle Al starts yelling in defense of trump and my cousin storms off; I see this when newscasters yell back and forth at one another, and what started out as a conversation erupts into a screaming match. There is a lot of tension right now, a lot of rage, and everyone seems to be pointing fingers. 

I think this tense climate needs to be considered when it comes to teaching students writing and argument crafting. Linda Christensen writes, "teaching essay writing requires a nonnegotiable belief that students can write, and that they have something important to say." So, how do we encourage students to speak out and trust what they have something important to say when it feels safer to just remain silent? 

Tom McSteen offers some advice in his blog post, "Hearing Every Voice." In his short, and refreshingly honest article, he writes, "When people do not feel heard, they are more likely to be dismissive of others’ voices. And, when people feel heard, they are more likely to allow others to be heard, in turn." I know this sounds optimistic, and I will admit, I don't think everyone is ready to sit criss cross in a circle and listen to everyone's opinions, but I do think with patients and effort we can try and regain space for discourse. 

As far as in the classroom, I think we can take a cue from Linda Christensen– she is focused on hearing every voice and giving all students an opportunity to be heard. On page 129, in chapter 3, Christensen writes about one student who wrote an essay that pretty much the whole class disagreed with, and, although Christensen also disagreed, she still appreciated the students writing and use of metaphor. 
Perhaps part of it is giving students assignments that require them to use their voice and think for themselves. Maybe this is what makes for a meaningful writing assignment within our increasingly divided, and sometimes hostile, social conversation. 



Works Cited: 

"discourse, v." OED Online, Oxford University Press, July 2018, www.oed.com/view/Entry/53986. Accessed 22 October      2018.
"Brown, Brene. "The Power of Vulnerability." TED. June. 2010. Lecture. Source:        https://www.ted.com/talks/brene_brown_on_vulnerability#t-1042498

Blog #6 The Voice of Standards and Racial Justice Assessment

I am writing my blog today from the very back of a sparsely populated library. It is getting late, the sun is sinking, and I can hear the rain dancing on the library roof. I'm include a small description of my whereabouts because I often pick up on the energy within a space, and sometimes it effects how I respond to readings or carry out my work in general. I like this particular library because it's warm lighting, long wooden tables, and, of course, stacks of books make me feel calm and stable.  So, I approached this weeks readings with a serene mind; however, serene and standards don't typically go together, do they?
Well, surprise surprise they just might!
.
.
.
Actually, they might not, but I was trying my best to align the two.

Admittedly, I felt slightly addled reading over the Common Core Standards (CCS); this was hardly a surprise. I have read them before, and every time I get a mental imagine of my slightly older self, amidst a stack of student writing, glancing from writing to standards, standards to writing and making a series of mental checks."Did they get it? Are they doing it?" I am almost certain this is not how aligning standards with your curriculum goes down but my imagination runs non the less. CC Standards always feel daunting, but, if were being fair, all standards weigh heavy because 1) I am not in a real classroom just yet and 2) they might actually be a little much even when you get in that teacher seat.

If I had to choose a favorite set of standards, not that that is particularly reasonable, I would choose the NCTE standards. Why? Mainly because I felt that they did less to derail my library vibes, and such vibes are rather important to me. I think this had something to do with the "Guiding Vision" provided. In particular these points within the "Guiding Vision":

• These standards assume that literacy growth begins before children enter school as they experience and experiment with literacy activities—reading and writing, and associating spoken words with their graphic representations.
• They encourage the development of curriculum and instruction that make productive use of the emerging literacy abilities that children bring to school. 
• These standards provide ample room for the innovation and creativity essential to teaching and learning.

I chose these particular parts because they did not assume that students were entering the classroom with a lack or a space that needed filling. In addition to this, these quick points made me feel as if the job of teaching is truly one that lies with the teacher and that the standards that followed were like the bumpers on a bowling lane– they are there to help keep you in your lane but you still get to throw the ball the way you want. With this vision in mind, I moved on to read the standards, all of which I enjoyed and saw much relevance in. 

I poked around the Common Core site for a bit looking for something that was similar to the "Guiding Vision" from the NCTE website. I found something similar in the introduction to writing standards. This paragraph embodied a different essence. There was an emphasis on "adequate mastery", "increasing sophistication", and "expected growth." The language here was much different from that of the NCTE website. I didn't feel as if there was much room for love and creativity here, but rather the language felt mechanical and impersonal. 

I am not saying I disagree with or did not like the CCS, I am simply saying that they did not jive with my library vibes and they did not feel very student centered. 

I think this is the perfect moment to transition into the three types of assessment Wayne Au presents in "Racial Justice is not a Choice." He identifies the difference between retributive, restorative, and reclaiming; with each type of assessment he provides three sort of guiding questions that rule each mindset. Retributive questions lack sensitivity, while both restorative and reclaiming questions demand consideration and care. 

Perhaps I was not successful, but in this blog I have been attempting to attribute a sort of voice to the two sets of standards– to find a motive, a drive backing the language of each. I felt more honesty and concern radiating from the words of NCTE, whereas the CCS felt a bit more stiff, robotic, and goal oriented. If these standards were taking up a human shape I would think that the CCS would be asking retributive questions and the NCTE would be wandering into the restorative/ reclaiming space. 

I found much inspiration in Au as he wrote, "activism as a central aspect of public education." Yes, yes, yes! I completely agree and I feel as if we touched on this last class with our discussion around the blurred lines between target, ally, bystander, and perpetrator. Of course we have teachers like Christensen who are creating meaningful assessments but perhaps this is not the national standard? I would think probably not, and thats a problem. 

I have thought a lot about creating a fair and meaningful classroom environment, and structuring my lessons in a way that promotes learning and a greater understanding of this society/ world we live in–  including issues of racial justice; however, I have not thought about shifting this mindset into the assessment realm. Maybe this is because I don't eagerly look forward to assessment in the way I loo to fostering an open and honest environment. I think Au is looking at what it would mean to have meaningful and robust assessments and not just assignments.

Have you considered assessment in this manner?