Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
This blog has been set up to facilitate discussion among the participants in the March session of the Active Literacy Across the Curriculum in the Lakeville Area School District. Each blog is a discussion question for the group. Please respond with your reflections, as well as comments about others reflections.
5 comments:
Elaine says:
On p. 121 Jacobs states that the isolated nature of literacy in our current school culture "prevents students from developing cumulative, consistent, and internalized language skills." As a substitute, I make a point of asking students to explain their strategies for their answers in math. The students are sometimes baffled until I model the expectation. Even then they "plus" numbers instead of "adding" them. They talk about not wanting to do "that wierd" problem which is the "Critical Thinking" problem, requiring a response to explain a concept, strategy, or rationale. Students are reluctant to use literacy skills in math. Ouch.
Mapping will give teachers the ability to analyze on the two levels Jacobs outlines here, both for math content and literacy skills.
I've deleted my comment about an article in the Spring 2007 "American Educator." It was too long to post here. I'll share that comment in class tomorrow.
Study after study shows that you get what you expect. One reason to map literacy is to set higher, but reasonable, expectations for literacy. As we have discussed in class and on the blog, we have students with some motivational deficiencies. We as teachers are finding it increasingly difficult to re-motivate them. If we use mapping as a way to reach a consensus on what proper literacy skills should be, then we as teachers will know what the students should be doing, we will be consistent in setting higher standards for the students, and the higher standards will result in improved literacy skills.
I think there are only 2 comments to this question because people see the word MAP and look the other way...sort of like the student that won't make eye contact when you say, "can anyone tell me..."
I think it's interesting how much energy is actually spent in this district by teachers avoiding or trying to get rid of mapping...it far outweighs the energy people have spent actually trying to learn the process and how meaningful it could actually be. We're all too busy...maybe, if people stopped to think and learn about mapping, they could actually see connections to other disciplines and how we might be able to lessen our loads. But we're too busy doing what we've always done to use our brains and think outside the box.The status quo ALWAYS wins in education (where we tout ourselves as teaching kids to be learners for a lifetime! How hypocritical is THAT?)
Heather Leier: I don't know, Steve, if I completely agree with your thoughts about mapping. I agree that there are many in avoidance mode, including myself at times. Part of the problem is 30 minutes twice a month is not enough time to create meaningful maps and have meaningful conversations about them, and that is all the time allocated for this HUGE endeavor. If the district really believes in this, if the district really wants us to believe in it, they need to show it by giving us the time and opportunity to do it right.
What struck me in this chapter was Jacobs' comment about the danger of informality when making these far-reaching decisions. I completely see her point: we go to a workshop here, a speaker there, we bring back some handouts to file, maybe try one new thing, and go on with life as usual. I strongly believe that the district is treating curriculum mapping in a very informal way. We are being counterproductive, taking this formalized process that can create good communication and reducing it to the "stuff to be filed away" informality that Jacobs comes out against.
If we claim to want to do mapping the way it is supposed to be done, why aren't we? Why hasn't this been prioritized? The district speaks the loudest about its priorities by where it spends its money and where we are directed to spend our time. I don't believe mapping is a true priority in our district. If it were, more people would be on board and fewer would be on the sidelines waiting for this to go away.
Is any body out there? I am quite convined that mapping literacy in an important activity. Still we need a chance map what we need to accomplish. After the mapping is done we need to stop and assess what has been completed, and where we are going to advance. Yes it is hard work. That is one reason that classes need to be smaller. Students need to know what language skills they need and whether or not they have demonstrated enough ability in those areas.
In a world of "well rounded students" advancing in academics, sports as well as community activities require that they are busy busy busy. It is expected. Like teachers, students need time to reflect upon their work. Is that possible?
Students do not properly interpret readings or charts of information. It is evident that they are able to copy ie. repeat the information. Using that information to synthesize something new, however, is difficult.
As an example, the word "trade" is difficult. "Money in trade" some write. One can imagine briefcases of cash being traded. Even the concept of larger or smaller may be missed when the numbers are in the millions or billions. Extracting information from text or table is important. Equally as important is curriculum mapping that diagrams where and when the skill(s) are developed. Equally as important is determing what, if any thing, happens when students lack these important skills. Curriculum mapping, then, needs to provide for remedial/ enrichment activities that can continue until students gain abilities.
Post a Comment