Wow....what a summer! Or should I say what a spring AND summer since I haven't been on here since February. But, I am asking my students to keep blogs this semester, and like a good educator I model for my students, so I will be blogging regularly once again.
As we go back to school one of the things I always think about is how I can get everyone to partake in the conversation. I know there are students who don't like to speak, therefore they may never ask a question for clarification, they may never give their input, though input from everyone is valuable.
A while back one of my Writing for Non-Print Media students shared poll-everywhere with the class.
The idea is simple. The instructor posts a question, and students are able to respond by texting to a number that appears on the screen. The name "poll-everywhere" is actually a bit misleading, as you can also post open-ended questions. I've made a sample poll for my readers to take.
Clearly there are concerns about having cell phones in the classroom, but I really don't think this is going to hurt anyone. We live in an age where we are consumed in technology, media and methods of communication....so why not be proactive?
I will be using this tomorrow in my College Writing class, in hopes that I can engage students and encourage them to respond to the reading. I really like that they can do this anonymously, because many times students have told me "I was afraid my question or comment would sound dumb." Poll-everywhere gives all students an equal voice. And if they don't have cell phones, I would encourage a small group, where they take turns texting. It's my hope that using poll-everywhere is just the beginning for some students, and that they learn that their voice is very important in the classroom.
Tuesday, August 27, 2013
Sunday, February 24, 2013
Sharing the gift of literacy
Often times when we hear the phrase "giving back" we think it's an ideal idea. It's always a wonderful idea to give something to someone when they need it, especially if we are in abundance. But we often think "I just don't have enough money to spare..." or "I don't know how..." or "how can I be sure my donation will be received by the proper party?"
I've found a site that allows students, educators, scholars and anyone with books to give to those that are lacking literature. The site is called bookmentors.org It is a national non-profit agency that allows those with books to give to classrooms that are in need. It's very simple. You can create an account, search by school or by book and send. Sometimes teachers request class sets, but sometimes they only request a few books. The site is easily navigable, and you have the option to request or send less than a class set. Some teachers are looking for as few as 4 copies of a text. In order to request books, your school must be listed on the site http://www.greatschools.org/find-schools/ .
I really can't think of a great way to promote literacy especially to students in schools who need more books.
Some ideas I have are suggesting that students in my current classes give up one of their texts to donate to bookmentors. I even wonder if I could convince my class to send a set. I know it's hard to give up a book, especially if you are an educator or college student....but I just think this is a unique way to promote literacy because you can share a specific book with a specific class or teacher.
If you have the time, please check out bookmentors today.
I've found a site that allows students, educators, scholars and anyone with books to give to those that are lacking literature. The site is called bookmentors.org It is a national non-profit agency that allows those with books to give to classrooms that are in need. It's very simple. You can create an account, search by school or by book and send. Sometimes teachers request class sets, but sometimes they only request a few books. The site is easily navigable, and you have the option to request or send less than a class set. Some teachers are looking for as few as 4 copies of a text. In order to request books, your school must be listed on the site http://www.greatschools.org/find-schools/ .
I really can't think of a great way to promote literacy especially to students in schools who need more books.
Some ideas I have are suggesting that students in my current classes give up one of their texts to donate to bookmentors. I even wonder if I could convince my class to send a set. I know it's hard to give up a book, especially if you are an educator or college student....but I just think this is a unique way to promote literacy because you can share a specific book with a specific class or teacher.
If you have the time, please check out bookmentors today.
Saturday, February 16, 2013
Teachers embrace digital learning strategies
As someone who teaches pre-service teachers about the benefits of new literacies and technologies in the classroom, I was quite interested in the following article found here. To summarize PBS Media Learning took a survey which revealed that today's teachers absolutely want more digital learning in the classroom. I am not surprised by these results, but I did find it problematic that some of the largest findings in this survey had to do with engagement. For example, the first icon on the top left of the article (you know...where your eyes naturally go as you read a page) mentions that "74 percent of teachers say that 'educational technology is a student-motivator.'" I have no problem with using technology as a motivator, but I don't think that is a strong argument for using technology.
Naturally students in this digital, post-MTV age find digital content enticing. Look at all the students with ipads, kindles, nooks and i-phones. Just today I almost hit two young adults texting and crossing the street. (or perhaps they were facebooking?) Clearly I love and value technology. And what's not to say that I've never crossed a street while texting. But my point is...I think it's a thin argument to use technology as a motivator.
The survey did redeem itself, however. Some of the cognitive value was mentioned. Awesome. For example...73% of these teachers said a benefit of technology was that it responds to a variety of learning and 74% of the teachers said that a benefit was that it "reinforced and expanded content."
I am very happy that many studies and surveys today are looking past engagement. I think that the argument that technology engages is simple. Yes, the engagement is valuable....and engagement is necessary for learning. But that cannot be the most important factor when it comes to using technology in the classroom. I just hope more and more educators start to look at cognitive values of technology. Because it's not enough to get technology in the schools...it's what we do with that technology.
Naturally students in this digital, post-MTV age find digital content enticing. Look at all the students with ipads, kindles, nooks and i-phones. Just today I almost hit two young adults texting and crossing the street. (or perhaps they were facebooking?) Clearly I love and value technology. And what's not to say that I've never crossed a street while texting. But my point is...I think it's a thin argument to use technology as a motivator.
The survey did redeem itself, however. Some of the cognitive value was mentioned. Awesome. For example...73% of these teachers said a benefit of technology was that it responds to a variety of learning and 74% of the teachers said that a benefit was that it "reinforced and expanded content."
I am very happy that many studies and surveys today are looking past engagement. I think that the argument that technology engages is simple. Yes, the engagement is valuable....and engagement is necessary for learning. But that cannot be the most important factor when it comes to using technology in the classroom. I just hope more and more educators start to look at cognitive values of technology. Because it's not enough to get technology in the schools...it's what we do with that technology.
Monday, February 11, 2013
Elements of Standardized Testing
Several times yesterday while tooling around on facebook I came across an article titled A Warning to College Profs From A High School Teacher. After ruminating for a night and reading the article a second time, I have to say that I feel for Strauss. I was fortunate to have all the say I wanted in my curriculum development while I taught high school for 9 years. And as a college professor, I once again have that advantage.
I have to wonder though....if I hadn't made the leap to university...would I still be teaching high school? I honestly cannot answer that question. I try to stay in contact with what is happening in school districts. Though I am a professor in an English Department, I teach several English Methods courses to the Secondary English Ed majors. I try very hard to avoid being in "the ivory tower" because I witnessed that in my graduate program and swore I would always stay connected to the "real world." But after reading this article I really started to worry. How can we keep good teachers in schools of the curriculum is becoming more and more rigid. I think I might have an answer. At least I hope I do.
Consider the skills on which students are being assessed. For example...everyone knows that students have to learn to make inferences. But does that mean you have to skill and drill it? No. One of the best experiences I have had with teaching inference was seating the class in a circle and having them read aloud the play Sorry, Wrong Number, a suspenseful piece in which a woman over-hears a plot to murder her. The clues were becoming more and more obvious that the woman was going to be murdered that at one point one of my students yelled out "Mr. O....this woman is so stupid!" I asked why she thought that and the student told me that there were several clues in the story that suggested she was the intended target. I then looked at the student and told her that she made an inference.
The student learned the concept before knowing what the concept is called. This is quite similar to an instructional method called concept attainment. The difference is that in concept attainment the instructor gives positive and negative examples of a concept, and the student, seeing the similarities in positive attributes, is able to identify the concept. The point of the comparison is that rather than saying to my students..."today we're going to learn about inference" and then giving them a definition and a few unrelated examples...we dug deep into a text...found solid examples that CONNECTED to a text....used/discussed them authentically....then learned the concept.
I think the same could be done with other strategies. Context clues, for example, can be taught while teaching almost any piece of literature. Have each student pick out a word or words that they aren't 100% familiar with, note the page number and take a guess. By pairing and sharing they will discuss and hopefully, eventually come up with the correct meaning of the word.
I know that re-developing lessons takes an incredible amount of time....but my point is that if you are a future or practicing teacher, try not to become discouraged with what you HAVE to teach...and try and focus on the WAYS you can teach.
I have to wonder though....if I hadn't made the leap to university...would I still be teaching high school? I honestly cannot answer that question. I try to stay in contact with what is happening in school districts. Though I am a professor in an English Department, I teach several English Methods courses to the Secondary English Ed majors. I try very hard to avoid being in "the ivory tower" because I witnessed that in my graduate program and swore I would always stay connected to the "real world." But after reading this article I really started to worry. How can we keep good teachers in schools of the curriculum is becoming more and more rigid. I think I might have an answer. At least I hope I do.
Consider the skills on which students are being assessed. For example...everyone knows that students have to learn to make inferences. But does that mean you have to skill and drill it? No. One of the best experiences I have had with teaching inference was seating the class in a circle and having them read aloud the play Sorry, Wrong Number, a suspenseful piece in which a woman over-hears a plot to murder her. The clues were becoming more and more obvious that the woman was going to be murdered that at one point one of my students yelled out "Mr. O....this woman is so stupid!" I asked why she thought that and the student told me that there were several clues in the story that suggested she was the intended target. I then looked at the student and told her that she made an inference.
The student learned the concept before knowing what the concept is called. This is quite similar to an instructional method called concept attainment. The difference is that in concept attainment the instructor gives positive and negative examples of a concept, and the student, seeing the similarities in positive attributes, is able to identify the concept. The point of the comparison is that rather than saying to my students..."today we're going to learn about inference" and then giving them a definition and a few unrelated examples...we dug deep into a text...found solid examples that CONNECTED to a text....used/discussed them authentically....then learned the concept.
I think the same could be done with other strategies. Context clues, for example, can be taught while teaching almost any piece of literature. Have each student pick out a word or words that they aren't 100% familiar with, note the page number and take a guess. By pairing and sharing they will discuss and hopefully, eventually come up with the correct meaning of the word.
I know that re-developing lessons takes an incredible amount of time....but my point is that if you are a future or practicing teacher, try not to become discouraged with what you HAVE to teach...and try and focus on the WAYS you can teach.
Sunday, February 3, 2013
You go English Majors!
So while my doctorate is in English Education, and while half the courses I teach are required courses for secondary English Education majors, the reality is that I am an English Professor in an English Department. And while I couldn't be happier at the variety of courses I teach, I am often asked by people "What can you do with an English Degree?" I am constantly stating how English majors are typically well versed in reading and writing, something that ANY career requires. The path may be less direct than it is for a Business or Technology major, but every job out there, in one way or another, requires reading and writing. But I always forget, that there's more to it that that, which is why I am so happy to have found this article which essentially suggests that there is a lot of complex cognition going on in the department of English. In other words, yes, there is a lot of reading and writing, but there is so much more than that, as the authors suggest. Creativity, does have value. That's the number one reason why I went into English Education. If I can't find creative ways to teach and assess...then I'm not happy. But not everyone that majors in English wants to be an educator.
Give the article a read if you are interested in majoring in English or if you are curious as to why the major has value, or especially if you know someone who is interested in majoring in English. Like I said earlier...the career path may not be direct....but there are a multitude of positions out there that require complex thinking and analysis, skills that all English majors acquire.
Give the article a read if you are interested in majoring in English or if you are curious as to why the major has value, or especially if you know someone who is interested in majoring in English. Like I said earlier...the career path may not be direct....but there are a multitude of positions out there that require complex thinking and analysis, skills that all English majors acquire.
Sunday, October 21, 2012
Signs? Sig(h)ns.
If you know me at all, or have followed this blog, you know that I am a proponent of multimodality. I love teaching about, learning about, using and advocating multiple modes in the classroom. I also propose that we pay attention to the modes around us outside of the classroom. I do worry, though, that the world depends so greatly on signs. Just like we have multiple interpretations of words, we, too, have multiple interpretations of signs.
Just a few minutes ago, I logged into my blogger account so that I could read some more of my students' blogs. I have decided to follow all their blogs, so that when I log into dashboard...there they are. The problem...I can never remember how to log in to my dashboard. I typically have to click two or three places before it shows up. It wasn't until a few minutes ago, that I clicked on the white B in the orange box. To me...that logo meant "blogger" and I assumed it was going to take me to the home page. Makes sense right? But because I was logged in, it took me to my dashboard. I could swear that when I started this blog almost a year ago, there was an actual link to dashboard. I mean the word "dashboard" was underlined. So I am used to clicking on the word. Not the logo for blogger.
So...why the change? The same thing happened to me a few years back. I wanted to delete an e-mail from my g-mail account. Typcially, I would click on the box to the left of the e-mail...go to the top and click on the word "delete." I swear, it took me longer than it should have to eventually figure out that they replaced this with an icon of a garbage can. Now, why did I never click on the garbage can? Because in another e-mail program, the garbage can led you to your deleted e-mails. So in one e-mail program the garbage can was literally the place where your "deleted" e-mails or "garbage" was found. And in another e-mail program, you had to click on the garbage can to delete your message.
So here is the issue. One sign means two different things. When there are words, it is much simpler. You know the meaning. But with symbols, it might take multiple attempts or some practice to understand what they mean.
I truly believe we are becoming more sign-based because we are a global society. The plus side to using images is that they are (most often) universal. But the negative side is that even signs can have different meanings depending on one's prior knowledge.
I pose no question. I just wanted to rant about signs for a moment. While I do love teaching about understanding signs and other modes, I too, get tripped up from time to time.
Just a few minutes ago, I logged into my blogger account so that I could read some more of my students' blogs. I have decided to follow all their blogs, so that when I log into dashboard...there they are. The problem...I can never remember how to log in to my dashboard. I typically have to click two or three places before it shows up. It wasn't until a few minutes ago, that I clicked on the white B in the orange box. To me...that logo meant "blogger" and I assumed it was going to take me to the home page. Makes sense right? But because I was logged in, it took me to my dashboard. I could swear that when I started this blog almost a year ago, there was an actual link to dashboard. I mean the word "dashboard" was underlined. So I am used to clicking on the word. Not the logo for blogger.
So...why the change? The same thing happened to me a few years back. I wanted to delete an e-mail from my g-mail account. Typcially, I would click on the box to the left of the e-mail...go to the top and click on the word "delete." I swear, it took me longer than it should have to eventually figure out that they replaced this with an icon of a garbage can. Now, why did I never click on the garbage can? Because in another e-mail program, the garbage can led you to your deleted e-mails. So in one e-mail program the garbage can was literally the place where your "deleted" e-mails or "garbage" was found. And in another e-mail program, you had to click on the garbage can to delete your message.
So here is the issue. One sign means two different things. When there are words, it is much simpler. You know the meaning. But with symbols, it might take multiple attempts or some practice to understand what they mean.
I truly believe we are becoming more sign-based because we are a global society. The plus side to using images is that they are (most often) universal. But the negative side is that even signs can have different meanings depending on one's prior knowledge.
I pose no question. I just wanted to rant about signs for a moment. While I do love teaching about understanding signs and other modes, I too, get tripped up from time to time.
Tuesday, October 16, 2012
Instant Memes
So tonight I was watching the presidential debate, and like many others, I was on facebook at the same time. Though I heard Romney mention that he had "binders full of women" from which to seek cabinet members...I'll be honest....I didn't think too too much of it. At best, I thought he was kissing ass. About a half an hour later, I noticed that that my newsfeed on facebook was filled with binder comments. Eventually I was led to this link. Clearly, I first laughed my ass off. But what fascinated me was the speed in which these were generated. In fact, my partner was not watching tonight. So I paused to tell him what the facebook nation seemed to focus on...this one comment. (And believe me...if we're going to pick at Mittens...there was plenty to pick on.) I even joked with him that this was "bindergate." My partner's response was that there was so much mockery in such a short amount of time.
This got me thinking. We are used to make comments on facebook within seconds. But now we are creating memes. In minutes after a gaffe. Look at the speed in which we can send information. It used to be that we could send e-mails to a selected party...but now we can communicate with ANYONE within moments after an event. Being a multimodal theorist...I worry about this. We tend to use multiple modes to express our thoughts...but...do we really want/need to have them out there for everyone? Or are we impulsive? Have you ever waken up after a drunken facebook night and thought "Jesus....I really didn't want everyone to hear my thoughts?" I'm just worried, because with social networking....and web 2.0...do we think before we post?
i would be lying if i said i was a model example of posting. i mean, look at my facebook any friday am and chances are...if i could take back a post i would. not just because i may have had cocktails...but because when i facebook...which is traditionally at night...it's after a long day of work...and to tell you the truth..i am worked up.
that's what worries me about web 2.0. It's so easy to post without full thoughts. Think about it. I know I will.
I know I don't want to slant my posts...but my God...binders full of women...can't stop laughing!
This got me thinking. We are used to make comments on facebook within seconds. But now we are creating memes. In minutes after a gaffe. Look at the speed in which we can send information. It used to be that we could send e-mails to a selected party...but now we can communicate with ANYONE within moments after an event. Being a multimodal theorist...I worry about this. We tend to use multiple modes to express our thoughts...but...do we really want/need to have them out there for everyone? Or are we impulsive? Have you ever waken up after a drunken facebook night and thought "Jesus....I really didn't want everyone to hear my thoughts?" I'm just worried, because with social networking....and web 2.0...do we think before we post?
i would be lying if i said i was a model example of posting. i mean, look at my facebook any friday am and chances are...if i could take back a post i would. not just because i may have had cocktails...but because when i facebook...which is traditionally at night...it's after a long day of work...and to tell you the truth..i am worked up.
that's what worries me about web 2.0. It's so easy to post without full thoughts. Think about it. I know I will.
I know I don't want to slant my posts...but my God...binders full of women...can't stop laughing!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)