I liked that there is a major emphasis on reading and writing being integrated, and that they should be integrated regularly (loc 586). My project that I would like to focus on is using mentor texts so this has been helping me build my case for our curriculum.
Peer revision I think is scary for many teachers because you have to trust your students to do it. Often the outcomes of student feedback ranges from pointless to repetitive or not descriptive. One trick they mentioned is giving short periods of time for feedback (loc 937). I always gave more time because I thought it would allow them to think about it more, but perhaps that would be better towards the end of the semester when they have done this more. They also gave ideas of how to frontload peer revision so that students know how to respond to what to respond:
The trick is to teach them ahead of time what constitutes a helpful
response. For this purpose, teachers often conduct an actual student
response group while other students look on, and then ask everyone to note
what they have seen. Another teaching tool is to play with the size of the
group. Starting with partners often simplifies the dynamics as students are
learning to talk about and analyze each other’s writing. Teachers can add to
the mix as students become more proficient and competent, from duets to
triads, to quartets, and so on. (loc 932)
One thing I had never thought about was the "progression of writing continuum" (loc 1244). Murphy and Smith talk about theorists are trying to figure out what genres should be taught at what grades, but I never realized that was an issue. I guess I had expected that students would be exposed to many genres continuously during their academic careers. I'm curious to know the different theories on this.
On a side note, if anyone wants to borrow Stealing Buddha's Dinner by Bich Minh Nguyen, I have it to lend out! She is a Michigan author and this book was the Great Michigan Read pick in 2009-2010.
No comments:
Post a Comment