Guest Speaker

Rick Hanson's lecture was very interesting. talked about the three pedagogies of the rules of writing. The first was the Current Traditional Paradigm which is more concerned with the study of writing and its rules rather than focusing on improving the students' writing by actually make them write.
The second pedagogy is Expressivist which is focused on the writing process more than what the product ends up being. There is a lot of concern for finding one's "true" voice and being "true" as a writer and that is very problematic because everyone's truth is different so there are no real guidelines. There was one extreme that was far too rigid and too focused on the rules but this pedagogy is too free and lacks structure. There needs to be some kind of guidance in the writing world or it will be utter chaos.
The third and most thought-driven pedagogy is the Social Constructivism. Here, there is an emphasis on how social forces affect writing and gets students to recognize that each piece of writing needs to be looked at through a certain socially contextual lens. With this pedagogy, there is a focus on both the process and the product of students' writing within a particular context.
When looking at the three pedagogies, it becomes clear that one lacks concern for content of writing and has too much rigid focus on rules, the next lacks the rules almost entirely, and the third is the correct balance of the two that allows for free expression of ideas and opinions while keeping a structure so that something meaningful is actually said. It is not rigid or fluid, it is flexible.
I like to look at the three pedagogies as the three states of matter. The Traditional is rigid like a solid. Expressivist is free and chaotic in every direction like a gas. And Social Constructivism is free-flowing but can still be contained by some general guidelines which makes it like a liquid.

Presentations

One of the more interesting presenatations to me was the one that was done during Tuesday's class where the speaker talked about the very high expectations that have been placed on teachers not only to be educators of book knowledge but also emotional and social educators. I thought it was interesting that the speaker believed that that was not part of the job. Of course, teachers are not nearly paid enough for the work that they do, but I personally believe that the emotional and social education of students is a large part of what educators are teaching. All of those things flow and work together to create this larger chunk of knowledge that will carry students through their life. Teachers are not just supposed to teach facts but general life lessons. With that being said, I believe one of the other points that the presenter touched on was the need for a concern for the teachers' emotional health if they are going to be held responsible for their students' emotional well-being. This is totally right. Some teachers spend more time in a day with their students than those same students spend with their parents at home and as a result, teachers get to experience a lot of the students' transitions, etc. and need to know how to cope with and help a child that has a bad home life or just when students have a bad day to have the skill and knowledge to play counselor for long enough so that they can be effective in their primary task of teaching. I thought this was a really important and interesting subject to explore and I was very glad to see it brought to light.

Response to Haas

This article was one of the more interesting ones that we have read and I think that I feel that way because there was a journey to be followed as we watched Eliza's skills grow. This caught my eye because I saw a little bit of my own growth in the area of the motives for reading or how I would read texts for school. I used to approach it the wrong way as well where I would read certain things all the way through highlighting almost everything and then I would not even remember what I had read after I was done.
Anyway, back to the article. Eliza's growth seemed very gradual and steady. If this was not a study that was executed over a long period of time and we just got a snapshot of Eliza's reading skills, the picture from her freshman year and senior year would be completely different and there would be no appreciation or acknowledgment of Eliza's journey and how much she had grown throughout her four years. Her reading became more "sophisticated" and she was able to take useful notes and highlight good chunks of information instead of highlighting everything simply because she did not understand it well enough to discern what was important. It seemed that the turningpoint in Eliza's learning process was when she was mentored by Shelly and was able to obtain one-on-one guidance when she needed it. At the end of the article it even lists that "Instructional Support" was one of the four factors that most likely contributed to Eliza's growth.

Response to Coles

This piece was very interesting in the sense that it was easy to read but also addressed a lot of the issues that are surrounding what is called "The Great Debate" over issues of literacy. I think there is a lot to be said about Coles' introduction about changing the terms of the debate because it would seem that people are focusing their attentions and efforts on the wrong parts of the issue. There are no standardized ways to measure whether a child or anyone for that matter is "literate" because there is still a developing definition of that term. There is no way to measure in a standardized way if all the children of a certain age understand a concept to the appropriate degree because they are all different and have different learning styles so it would be hard to instill those concepts in their minds in the first place. It is silly to argue over the methods that should be used to teach children. It does not have to be one or the other. Educators need to be equipped in such a way that they are able to meet children at different levels and styles of learning and if they better understand those differences, they will be able to reach that child with a technique that is suited to promote that particular child's literacy. It may sound like a lot of work and a very idealistic view of eduaction but it is important for people to know how to read. More and more it becomes the way that you relate to the world. If you can't drive down the street and read a sign or a menu or a short story in a magazine, that is a very isolated existence. Basically, the idea I got from the exerpts is that there really is no right or wrong answer... There are many possible ways of teaching and making children "literate" and it will take them all to succeed.

I lied... I didn't create a new one

I think maybe NOW I have it figured out

I think I night have it figured out now

I had to create a new blog because my other one got messed up... Sorry. I think this one will work now. :)