Co-Teaching, Gallagher 5, Christensen 2

The first reading I looked at was the chapter on co-teaching.  My first impression when reading was similar to the teacher from New York City, who raised a concern that co-teaching shows students that education degrees are essentially useless, and that "anyone can teach."  I also thought about that, and worried that allowing students to really teach, not just present a project, would make them think that I am not really capable/don't want to teach them, and reinforce the stereotype that teaching is easy.  Throughout my high school experience, many of my classmates, when discussing teachers, would say "She's nice, but she doesn't teach."  I heard that so many times from classmates who felt that they were not being taught anything in classes.  When I first read about co-teaching, that was one of the first things I thought about,  and how it could be perceived as "not teaching."  However, once I completed the chapter, my perspective changed completely.  I absolutely loved the example of how the student stood up in the middle of a lesson to take the marker away from the teacher., although the idea of it scared me at first.  In general, I worry that if/when I am a teacher in an urban school, I will not be able to connect well with my students and they will start to resent me as their teacher.  However, I think that making co-teaching an integral part of the classroom would allow students the space to take risks and get the most out of their learning.

The chapter by Kelly Gallagher was also very interesting.  I loved the writing strategies she presented and my favorites were the "Pass the portrait" activity and the activity where students generate questions for their classmates.  I think that these are really great ways to get students excited about writing.  She challenges the concept of the "boring topic" with the example of the dollar bill, which got all of her students to think critically.  Similarly, Christensen's chapter was also full of great strategies and examples that are accessible and useful.  I liked the read around procedure, even though in my own experience as a student, I didn't particularly enjoy doing this.  However, as a teacher, I see how this type of exercise opens students up to one another and provides a space for positive and respectful commentary, as well as what Christensen calls a "positive classroom climate."

PARCC Testing and Standards

The teacher reactions to the PARCC testing did not surprise me at all.  For a few semesters now, I have been working with an eighth grade teacher at Times2 Academy in Providence.  While reading this paper, all I could think was that this particular teacher could have been any one of the teachers who responded to the survey.  Almost every time I see her, the conversation goes back to the negative effects of the PARCC test in her classroom.  When we debrief my experience in the class that day, she always express how her students really need to spend more time working with specific elements of the curriculum, but the PARCC preparation and testing itself just does not allow for that.  I found it really interesting to read what other teachers had to say about the tests, especially since I have heard these same types of statements firsthand.  What really struck me about this piece was the recurring sentiments from teachers who were concerned that they would not be able to reverse the damage done to student's confidence levels after taking the PARCC tests.  I particularly liked the line "this negative academic experience cannot be separated from the students' self-perceptions."  I have not read a lot of literature on the PARCC tests, I have mostly just heard things from professors and teachers, so going into this article, I had some of my own ideas about how I might handle standardized testing in my own classroom.  I thought that it might be effective for me to tell my students how little the tests mean and how they shouldn't let them deplete their self-esteem in the classroom or have another similar reassuring talk with my class.  However, the paper makes it clear that some students, particularly those with special needs or ELL's, already have little to no confidence in their academic abilities, and being presented with a high stakes test where they cannot even understand the questions, only further damages their self-images.  They will not be able to forget or ignore this negative experience.
In regards to the standards, I looked at the NCTE standards in particular, and saw that their purposes do not align with the teachers' feelings towards the PARCC tests and their outcomes at all.  The purpose of most of the standards seem to be to create lifelong learners out of our students, but what the tests are doing are making the classroom a place filled with anxiety, fear, and sadness.  In that type of environment, how can we as teachers possibly make our students lifelong learners?  In my opinion, that would only make students want to get out of the classroom as soon as possible.  In particular, I thought the standard about participating in literacy communities was especially contrasted by the outcomes of the PARCC tests.  The tests have made the creators of PARCC and the 'higher-ups' in education, into an exclusive community where students and teachers are not allowed to participate.  They have no say in the tests' content, preparation, or anything relating to it, and are forced to deal with its negative effects.

Response to Gorski, Thomas, NCTE

I really enjoyed reading the article, “Poverty and the ideological imperative: a call to unhook from deficit and grit ideology and to strive for structural ideology in teacher education” by Paul Gorski. Before this semester, I had never heard of the term “deficit” views/ideology in the field of education.  I am ashamed to admit that I was one of the people Gorski criticizes for their ideological view of those living in poverty.  Obviously, this was never my conscious intention, but I realized after reading this article, that I need to change my perceptions as I prepare to be an educator.  I feel that many future teachers, including myself, operate under the false assumption that their job is to make poor students and their parents care about school and education.  In this view, the teacher is essentially saying that socioeconomically disadvantaged parents don’t value education and don’t see the importance in being present for their child at school events.  However, Gorski really put it into perspective for me when he said that there are structural barriers that exist in our society, and as teachers we need to learn how to change our ideology to respond to them.  I really enjoyed how Gorski broke down both the deficit and grit views, which I think are unfortunately still dominant amongst educators.

I also found the Thomas article, “Failing Still to Address Poverty Directly: Growth Mindset as Deficit Ideology” which seemed to be in conversation with the Gorski article, very interesting.  I particularly like his example about how our assignments typically start at 100 and we lose points for what we’re lacking rather than everyone starting at 0 and earning points for what we did well.  It was a great example that illustrated his point about deficit mindsets.  This article again made me realize that I had some false ideological beliefs about people in poverty.  I never directly said anything such as “if poor people worked harder they wouldn’t be poor,” but when reading, I still felt guilty because I believe that has been a part of my mindset.  In my own experience, I feel that I’ve worked hard to get where I am, but at the same time, I have middle class parents who I can fall back on at a moment’s notice if I need to, and I have in the past.  For those in poverty, there isn’t the same ability to “work hard” because they do not always have the basic privileges of food security, housing security, etc. 

The last reading from the NCTE website was very helpful to me.  I liked the “What does this mean for teaching” sections, because they gave great ideas for teaching writing.  I think it is important to recognize that 5 paragraph academic essays are not the only relationship students should have to writing, and that varying your teaching to include writing for other purposes will be a very practical and beneficial skillset to give to your students.  All three of these readings really challenged my professional identity and have caused me to rethink my educational beliefs.

Response to "To High School English Teachers (and All Teachers)

“To High School English Teachers (and All Teachers)”

Overall, I was very inspired by this reading.  I really enjoyed what the author, P.L. Thomas shared about teaching English.  The part that struck me the most was his bullet “Resist teaching so that students acquire fixed content and instead foster students as ongoing learners.”  Although it may seem obvious to some that, as teachers, our goal should be to create lifelong learners, the author’s perspective on this was very interesting and made me say “Aha!”  I really enjoyed the example about MLA formatting, as this is something I can directly relate to in my own experience as a student.  Throughout high school and even college, I have had teachers and professors who insist that students should memorize citation rules.  This piece made me realize the issue with these kinds of “fixed content.”  Teachers time would be better spent teaching the importance of WHY we cite and how to find the latest citation information, rather than simply presenting students with a list of rules that must be memorized.   

Before this article, I had never thought about the concept of “fixed content” but it really struck a chord with me once I thought about it more.  I feel that as a student myself I was taught to acquire fixed content rather than be an ongoing learner.  I remember always hoping and wanting to get to current events and read more contemporary literature, but always hearing that studying history and classic novels “are things you just have to know.” Of course, all of that history and the classics have immense value, but they can definitely be taught in a way that incorporates modern and real world issues.  I feel that this approach helps students find purpose in what they’re learning, and understand how the past can be valuable to their present. That understanding is how life long learners are born.

For another class, I read a chapter of a book about strategies for lifelong literacy.  Unfortunately, I’m not able to link it here, but one of the examples it included is particularly relevant to this reading.  It talked about a student teacher, who prepared a unit on irony.  His cooperating teacher challenged him to push beyond the boundaries of the curriculum that was in place, and encouraged him to think about what his students would know HOW to do after the unit.  I think the teacher’s emphasis on learning new skills rather than simply new information, speaks to Thomas’ point about ongoing learning.  English, along with many other content areas, is not a fixed area.  It continuously grows and changes, and students who have been taught in this area, should have the ability to grow and change along with it.