A little boy I had been working with for a few months handed me a piece of paper.
"What's this?" I asked.
"It's my math homework."
On the page were written three double digit numbers in a rough triangle formation.
"Okay," I said. "What should we do with these?"
"Math."
I learned three lessons in this instance.
One. Don't assume a student can fill in the blanks. He had numbers, which constituted math in his mind, but what was he suppossed to do with the numbers? List the factors or the multiples? Were they degrees? Were they page numbers from a text or problem numbers from a workbook? So many possibilities all called math. A teacher needs to remind students what they are doing adn why they are doing it. And even when they do, problems occur.
Two. Forgive the well meaning student who makes a mistake. A school should be a safe environment to learn. When I told they boy I wasn't sure what to do, he was hysterical. He was sure that he was going to get in trouble with his teacher. It was terrible to see a little boy devestated by a mistake and fearful of the consequences. I can still see him crying.
Three. It was amazing how much faith this boy had in me, that he could hand me three numbers that made no sense to him and I would be able to translate. These are the times when I have to check myself. I can't do the impossible, even though I wanted to, even though I tried. What I could do is give the teacher a call, which I did at a later date, once I got the nmber and permission.
I didn't tell the teacher the boy cried. Along with some suggestions for making sure the boy understood the homework, I told the teacher how much the boy respected him as well as his desire to do good work. It seemed to strike the right chord and help the relationship a bit.
Then, it was up to them. I couldn't fix all the problems, just help where I could. for the rest, I just had to have faith, not too much, just enough.
Tuesday, February 28, 2012
Monday, February 27, 2012
Better than a Guess
One weekend before New York State's Regents Exam in Global History, a student of mine confessed that she was nervous about the essay part of the exam.
Standardized tests are written in a specific language form. If you get comfortable with the discourse, navigating the questions and expressing in preferred terms becomes much easier. The best way thing for a student to do is practice, practice for the test by answering the questions on old tests. The student should be exposed to the test to mitigate the initial shock of seeing the presentation for the first time on the day of the test.
Then, when possible, a student should be taught how to decode the language of the test. If the student knows what the test is really looking for then they have another set of coordinates to locate the information.
These methods usually work wonders, but not always. Some people don't test very well. Whether it's the foreign nature of the content of the test, or the very real problem of test taking anxiety, not all people test well.
I try to explain to students that the world doesn't end with a bad test grade (Unless that was what the Mayan calendar was referring to). Nor, does a test indicate their intelligence or ability; nor does it predict the success levels of their future.
A test is a form of assessment, a flawed form, but one that has been popular for quite some time, much like baggy blue jeans. If a test offers anything at all, it is general information about the areas of a subject that require further study by a particular student.
So, knowing all this, I still encourage students to do their best. Tests are puzzles, you try to solve. You can't fail a puzzle. You either solve it or you don't. To some, tests are a game, and you can't win every game you play (Unless you are the 1972 Miami Dolphins) but you can certainly do your best. And as any fan of games (and I am one) will tell you, luck is part of the equation for victory.
"Guess," I suggested. "If you don't know the answer, just guess."
A sensible strategy, the sharing of this idea had particular relevance to my student as guessing was completely foreign to her. She would not answer unless she remembered reading the information or hearing it from a trusted source. If she didn't remember, she kept quiet. Some people rely too heavily on their memory. The brain is capable of so much more: synthesis, dreaming, re-writing commercial jingles for chicken to include the names of presidents-- I feel like Grover Cleveland, like Grover Cleveland.
Use what you have. And luck, scientifically speaking, is just understanding probability. So in that way a guess is scientific.
I spoke to her on the phone after the exam.
"How was it?" I asked.
"It was good," she replied. "I didn't know the essay."
"So what did you do?"
"I guessed."
"Good!" I shouted into the phone. "That's great. What was the question?"
"How did geography affect the development of the civilization in places like India?"
"What did you guess?"
"I wrote about how the mountains kept other cultures from mixing with the Indian culture."
Lucky? Or properly prepared? Or, truthfully, she was just much smarter than she knew! By eliminating self doubt, she was able to deduce, or induce, the right answer.
Sometimes, a guess is better than what you know.
Standardized tests are written in a specific language form. If you get comfortable with the discourse, navigating the questions and expressing in preferred terms becomes much easier. The best way thing for a student to do is practice, practice for the test by answering the questions on old tests. The student should be exposed to the test to mitigate the initial shock of seeing the presentation for the first time on the day of the test.
Then, when possible, a student should be taught how to decode the language of the test. If the student knows what the test is really looking for then they have another set of coordinates to locate the information.
These methods usually work wonders, but not always. Some people don't test very well. Whether it's the foreign nature of the content of the test, or the very real problem of test taking anxiety, not all people test well.
I try to explain to students that the world doesn't end with a bad test grade (Unless that was what the Mayan calendar was referring to). Nor, does a test indicate their intelligence or ability; nor does it predict the success levels of their future.
A test is a form of assessment, a flawed form, but one that has been popular for quite some time, much like baggy blue jeans. If a test offers anything at all, it is general information about the areas of a subject that require further study by a particular student.
So, knowing all this, I still encourage students to do their best. Tests are puzzles, you try to solve. You can't fail a puzzle. You either solve it or you don't. To some, tests are a game, and you can't win every game you play (Unless you are the 1972 Miami Dolphins) but you can certainly do your best. And as any fan of games (and I am one) will tell you, luck is part of the equation for victory.
"Guess," I suggested. "If you don't know the answer, just guess."
A sensible strategy, the sharing of this idea had particular relevance to my student as guessing was completely foreign to her. She would not answer unless she remembered reading the information or hearing it from a trusted source. If she didn't remember, she kept quiet. Some people rely too heavily on their memory. The brain is capable of so much more: synthesis, dreaming, re-writing commercial jingles for chicken to include the names of presidents-- I feel like Grover Cleveland, like Grover Cleveland.
Use what you have. And luck, scientifically speaking, is just understanding probability. So in that way a guess is scientific.
I spoke to her on the phone after the exam.
"How was it?" I asked.
"It was good," she replied. "I didn't know the essay."
"So what did you do?"
"I guessed."
"Good!" I shouted into the phone. "That's great. What was the question?"
"How did geography affect the development of the civilization in places like India?"
"What did you guess?"
"I wrote about how the mountains kept other cultures from mixing with the Indian culture."
Lucky? Or properly prepared? Or, truthfully, she was just much smarter than she knew! By eliminating self doubt, she was able to deduce, or induce, the right answer.
Sometimes, a guess is better than what you know.
Saturday, February 25, 2012
When a Fatso isn't a Fatso
For a few years, I worked with a little boy who was the youngest in his family of four by almost ten years. The difference in his personality, when compared to the other family members, was remarkable. While his siblings were polite and shy, he was bombastically direct. Where the others deferred to their elders, he championed his cause until he got what he wanted. His weapon of choice -- Fatso!
Fatso shot from his mouth faster than a speeding bullet and had more concussive force than a bomb. He leveled people with a resounding "Fatso!", a presumed judgement on their physical attractiveness, strength and overall value as a human being.
I've fielded my share of insults from children, but I have come to understand that they are a result of a young mind's inability to recognize a staggeringly handsome, brilliant and witty super ... Well, my mom thinks I'm cool.
Anyway, kids, and adult as well, lash out to express discomfort (anger, frustration) and they only have the words they know at their disposal. Harder sounds (phonemes) help drive home the emotion. Drat! Blast! Curses! These illustrate the point and happen to be some of my favorite expressions of anger. (Of course, I was rasied by Snidely Whiplash.)
So, as unpleasant as it is to hear, kids say nasty things so they don't have to do work. Upsetting the teacher shuts down the process. So, I have learned that my glasses make me a "four eyes," my academic interests make me a "nerd," and the fact that I like teaching makes me a "Weirdo!" I find that, ironically, most qualities selected for insult are often either innocuous or laudatory (Important to note when counselling victims of bullying).
This boy did not want to finish his homework, while I had been charged with getting him to do just that.
"You're a Fatso!" he said.
"I need you to do your work," I said.
"You're a Fatso."
"We need to get this done."
"You're a Fatso."
"But, I'm not fat!" I replied, in a moment of candor.
"No, you're a Fatso," he explained.
So, Fatso, like the island on Lost, was not all it seemed to be. I continued to observe his usage with his parents and his siblings. Fatso was, in fact, a word that referred to something other than weight. To him, a "Fatso" was someone who kept him from doing what he wanted. A "Fatso" was someone who didn't agree with him. Most importantly, a "Fatso" was a temporary state, as he used it with his loved ones whose attention he cherished.
Why Fatso? Well, in this case, he found it worked. Members of a weight-conscious family, and I found his family to be just that, would react strongly to an attack on their physical appearance. However, his reason for choosing the word was not an attack on their BMI, but rather an attempt to convey how he felt by making them feel teh same was -- lousy.
From then on, I worked to equip him with a variety of words, so that he could express how he truly felt. When he used "shorthand" expressions, I had him provide context and subtext so that we could find a better alternative. I prompted him to be aware of the actual reactions his words engendered. Finally, I translated the true meaning of Fatso to his family.
As he acquired words, he needed help learning how they worked. He wanted to communicate clearly and he was interested in learning. We made a good team and when time permitted we showed our sychronicity with a game of frisbee. One time, he even felt compelled to express his opinion of my throwing style.
"No offense," he started. "But, you're a great Frisbee player!"
Admittedly, there was more work to be done.
Fatso shot from his mouth faster than a speeding bullet and had more concussive force than a bomb. He leveled people with a resounding "Fatso!", a presumed judgement on their physical attractiveness, strength and overall value as a human being.
I've fielded my share of insults from children, but I have come to understand that they are a result of a young mind's inability to recognize a staggeringly handsome, brilliant and witty super ... Well, my mom thinks I'm cool.
Anyway, kids, and adult as well, lash out to express discomfort (anger, frustration) and they only have the words they know at their disposal. Harder sounds (phonemes) help drive home the emotion. Drat! Blast! Curses! These illustrate the point and happen to be some of my favorite expressions of anger. (Of course, I was rasied by Snidely Whiplash.)
So, as unpleasant as it is to hear, kids say nasty things so they don't have to do work. Upsetting the teacher shuts down the process. So, I have learned that my glasses make me a "four eyes," my academic interests make me a "nerd," and the fact that I like teaching makes me a "Weirdo!" I find that, ironically, most qualities selected for insult are often either innocuous or laudatory (Important to note when counselling victims of bullying).
This boy did not want to finish his homework, while I had been charged with getting him to do just that.
"You're a Fatso!" he said.
"I need you to do your work," I said.
"You're a Fatso."
"We need to get this done."
"You're a Fatso."
"But, I'm not fat!" I replied, in a moment of candor.
"No, you're a Fatso," he explained.
So, Fatso, like the island on Lost, was not all it seemed to be. I continued to observe his usage with his parents and his siblings. Fatso was, in fact, a word that referred to something other than weight. To him, a "Fatso" was someone who kept him from doing what he wanted. A "Fatso" was someone who didn't agree with him. Most importantly, a "Fatso" was a temporary state, as he used it with his loved ones whose attention he cherished.
Why Fatso? Well, in this case, he found it worked. Members of a weight-conscious family, and I found his family to be just that, would react strongly to an attack on their physical appearance. However, his reason for choosing the word was not an attack on their BMI, but rather an attempt to convey how he felt by making them feel teh same was -- lousy.
From then on, I worked to equip him with a variety of words, so that he could express how he truly felt. When he used "shorthand" expressions, I had him provide context and subtext so that we could find a better alternative. I prompted him to be aware of the actual reactions his words engendered. Finally, I translated the true meaning of Fatso to his family.
As he acquired words, he needed help learning how they worked. He wanted to communicate clearly and he was interested in learning. We made a good team and when time permitted we showed our sychronicity with a game of frisbee. One time, he even felt compelled to express his opinion of my throwing style.
"No offense," he started. "But, you're a great Frisbee player!"
Admittedly, there was more work to be done.
Friday, February 24, 2012
Precision and the Missing Clock
I returned to my room at the learning center to find my travel clock missing and my student with a grin from ear to ear.
I used a small travel clock because the room in which I worked had no way to keep time, despite a rigid time based schedule, and I had an irrational devotion to the Swiss. My watch battery had died and cell phones were things of the future (Well, to me anyway, as I only reluctantly joined the club a few months ago. And no, I'm not updating this post by kerosene lamp).
"Did you take my clock?" I asked my student.
She was my first student, ever, and one I wound up seeing through high school. My relationship with her symbolizes the notion of the dialogic discourse (Freire) as I learned as much from her as I ever taught. Diagnosed with Central Auditory Processing Disorder and already well aware of what that meant thanks to her mother, a speech language pathologist, she let me know what she needed and I provided. Mostly, I sued my own background as a student in Catholic schools with rigorous curricula to translate the requirements of her school into terms she could understand. It went swimmingly and we became respected friends. So when she responded, "No," to my query, I knew she was telling the truth.
But, she kept laughing.
I searched the cabinet, the windowsill and the area outside the room. No clock. I asked her again.
"Did you take my clock?"
"No," she replied, her laughter increasing.
It was a conundrum, a logical riddle that bent my brain in a knot, much like the enduring appeal of the Kardashians. A missing clock, but the only suspect didn't take it. There had to be a logical explanation to it all.
Then, for whatever reason, it dawned on me. I exercised control over what I could. I changed my terms.
"Did you hide my clock?"
"Yes," she said bursting into laughter.
I learned three valuable lessons.
One, you must choose your words carefully. Even a degree off in a calculation can send a space shuttle millions of miles off course. The same goes for words.
Two, minor modifications can yield staggering results. Sometimes it is easy, sometimes it requires some effort, but the difference in improved communication is amazing.
Three, kids can be such stinkers!
I used a small travel clock because the room in which I worked had no way to keep time, despite a rigid time based schedule, and I had an irrational devotion to the Swiss. My watch battery had died and cell phones were things of the future (Well, to me anyway, as I only reluctantly joined the club a few months ago. And no, I'm not updating this post by kerosene lamp).
"Did you take my clock?" I asked my student.
She was my first student, ever, and one I wound up seeing through high school. My relationship with her symbolizes the notion of the dialogic discourse (Freire) as I learned as much from her as I ever taught. Diagnosed with Central Auditory Processing Disorder and already well aware of what that meant thanks to her mother, a speech language pathologist, she let me know what she needed and I provided. Mostly, I sued my own background as a student in Catholic schools with rigorous curricula to translate the requirements of her school into terms she could understand. It went swimmingly and we became respected friends. So when she responded, "No," to my query, I knew she was telling the truth.
But, she kept laughing.
I searched the cabinet, the windowsill and the area outside the room. No clock. I asked her again.
"Did you take my clock?"
"No," she replied, her laughter increasing.
It was a conundrum, a logical riddle that bent my brain in a knot, much like the enduring appeal of the Kardashians. A missing clock, but the only suspect didn't take it. There had to be a logical explanation to it all.
Then, for whatever reason, it dawned on me. I exercised control over what I could. I changed my terms.
"Did you hide my clock?"
"Yes," she said bursting into laughter.
I learned three valuable lessons.
One, you must choose your words carefully. Even a degree off in a calculation can send a space shuttle millions of miles off course. The same goes for words.
Two, minor modifications can yield staggering results. Sometimes it is easy, sometimes it requires some effort, but the difference in improved communication is amazing.
Three, kids can be such stinkers!
Thursday, February 23, 2012
Earth's Two Moons and Deliberately Getting it Wrong
On February 23, 2012, I entered the phrase “earth has two moons” into a Google search. Here is a list of the headlines produced followed by the Website, in parentheses) taking credit for the story.
Earth has two 'moons' right now, theorists say - Technology (MSNBC.com)
Christopher Maag: Surprise: Earth Probably Has Two Moons (Huffington Post)
3753 Cruithne – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (Wikipedia)
Earth has always had two moons| Mail Online (The Daily Mail)
Earth has always had two moons!-Hindustan Times (Hindustan Times)
Earth Has Two Moons, But It’s Not What You Think - Technology (Atlantic Wire)
Earth Has Two Moons, But It’s Not What You Think - Yahoo! News (Yahoo News)
Scientists: Earth Has Two moons - Softpedia (Softpedia)
Two Moons on August 27? –Mars Spectacular - Urban Legends (About)
By the end of perusing that Google page, it’s pretty clear that the Earth has two moons. Only one headline, repeated twice, indicates that there is more to the story. And somewhat ironically, of all the sources, only the few lines for the entry from Wikipedia (Scourge of education!) bothers to mention that the use of the word “moon” in the stories is misleading.
For those of you who don’t know, Earth does not have two moons. It has one noticeable, consistent and reliable satellite we call the moon, and the occasional, relatively smaller object, like a massive rock, that gets caught in the Earth’s gravitational pull. The MSNBC article goes on to refer to the particular object of interest as a ‘second moon’, an asteroid caught in Earth’s gravitational field, a “space rock”, one of the “natural satellites other than the moon” and finally “temporary moons”. These words and phrases are only very loosely synonymous, but also indicate a wide vareity of things other than the moon.
I see two major problems with the use of the word “moon” in these headlines. According to Dictionary.com’s primary definition, the moon is the primary natural satellite of the Earth. I think many would see the word “moon” as the name of the object and not the description. The sun is a star; a star is not the sun. In this way, the definition of moon allows for more than one satellite, but not more than one moon, at least for us. As a Star Wars fan, I know that the Ewoks were from the third moon of Endor, but we don’t live on Endor. We only have one moon which leads me to my second point.
The majority of people understand the moon to be the sphere in the sky, but as the moon it has different significance to different people. The moon has inspired everything from creation myths to love songs. A generic satellite in the sky, one replaceable by any other floating object, hasn’t done that, the moon has. So even if there was another sphere, same size, same mass, orbiting the Earth it would not be the mythological, religious, geopolitical moon.
Why am I stomping all over poetic license? I’ll tell you why, thanks for asking, because there are two major aspects of writing: creativity and communication. Creativity should have no boundaries, no rules and no limitations. Communication, however, must so that it can be shared and understood in an expedient manner. There is a place, a n exhalted one, for creativity in communication, but not if it makes the message unclear and confusing.
Imagine you are a young student or just someone new to astronomy or even new to the English language. You are charged with researching the moon. You go to Google, punch up information on the moon and come across this staggering revelation that there are two moons. You write your paper with vim and vigor, excited to learn something new, hand it in and are told you are wrong. You question yourself. Did I misunderstand? You doubt relaible sources like scientists and Google. You are rocked to the very foundation of your being ... okay, maybe not, but the experience would still sting.
However, there is something worse, the information could go unchecked and spread. It would be like the old game of telephone, where a line of people transmit a sentence from ear to mouth. The actual truth is lost as it is passed from person to person. and bold falsehood becomes accebale truth. The Earth is flat. The Earth is the center of the universe. Barbara Hershey did the voice of ET.
That is why it is imperative that the information be presented as concretely and consistently as possible. I know why the expression “two moons” was chosen. It draws eyes to the story. It draws Web surfers to the site, but do the people who surf the Web, particularly the children know that? I belive writers can do better. They must. When the written word is so easily reproduced, when editors put their spin on it, when advertising wants to drive traffic, specificity in words is essential.
If not, it is up to educators to spread the word about the problems in mass communication and to correct the mistakes that are made. Otherwise, children might not be as impressed at the feat of a certain nursery rhyme and the remarkable jump of a cow. Why didn't it clear both moons? Of couse, in this day and age the cow would also face accusations of steroid abuse. Insert your own beefed up joke here.
To see for yourself:
https://www.google.com/webhp?hl=en&tab=nw&authuser=0#hl=en&gs_nf=1&tok=hHF-uHb8Ty1q2aIzNzKm8g&cp=15&gs_id=1m&xhr=t&q=earth+has+two+moons&pf=p&sclient=psy-ab&authuser=0&site=webhp&source=hp&pbx=1&oq=earth+has+two+m&aq=0&aqi=g4&aql=&gs_sm=&gs_upl=&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=d10435dcaad589af&biw=1619&bih=798
Earth has two 'moons' right now, theorists say - Technology (MSNBC.com)
Christopher Maag: Surprise: Earth Probably Has Two Moons (Huffington Post)
3753 Cruithne – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (Wikipedia)
Earth has always had two moons| Mail Online (The Daily Mail)
Earth has always had two moons!-Hindustan Times (Hindustan Times)
Earth Has Two Moons, But It’s Not What You Think - Technology (Atlantic Wire)
Earth Has Two Moons, But It’s Not What You Think - Yahoo! News (Yahoo News)
Scientists: Earth Has Two moons - Softpedia (Softpedia)
Two Moons on August 27? –Mars Spectacular - Urban Legends (About)
By the end of perusing that Google page, it’s pretty clear that the Earth has two moons. Only one headline, repeated twice, indicates that there is more to the story. And somewhat ironically, of all the sources, only the few lines for the entry from Wikipedia (Scourge of education!) bothers to mention that the use of the word “moon” in the stories is misleading.
For those of you who don’t know, Earth does not have two moons. It has one noticeable, consistent and reliable satellite we call the moon, and the occasional, relatively smaller object, like a massive rock, that gets caught in the Earth’s gravitational pull. The MSNBC article goes on to refer to the particular object of interest as a ‘second moon’, an asteroid caught in Earth’s gravitational field, a “space rock”, one of the “natural satellites other than the moon” and finally “temporary moons”. These words and phrases are only very loosely synonymous, but also indicate a wide vareity of things other than the moon.
I see two major problems with the use of the word “moon” in these headlines. According to Dictionary.com’s primary definition, the moon is the primary natural satellite of the Earth. I think many would see the word “moon” as the name of the object and not the description. The sun is a star; a star is not the sun. In this way, the definition of moon allows for more than one satellite, but not more than one moon, at least for us. As a Star Wars fan, I know that the Ewoks were from the third moon of Endor, but we don’t live on Endor. We only have one moon which leads me to my second point.
The majority of people understand the moon to be the sphere in the sky, but as the moon it has different significance to different people. The moon has inspired everything from creation myths to love songs. A generic satellite in the sky, one replaceable by any other floating object, hasn’t done that, the moon has. So even if there was another sphere, same size, same mass, orbiting the Earth it would not be the mythological, religious, geopolitical moon.
Why am I stomping all over poetic license? I’ll tell you why, thanks for asking, because there are two major aspects of writing: creativity and communication. Creativity should have no boundaries, no rules and no limitations. Communication, however, must so that it can be shared and understood in an expedient manner. There is a place, a n exhalted one, for creativity in communication, but not if it makes the message unclear and confusing.
Imagine you are a young student or just someone new to astronomy or even new to the English language. You are charged with researching the moon. You go to Google, punch up information on the moon and come across this staggering revelation that there are two moons. You write your paper with vim and vigor, excited to learn something new, hand it in and are told you are wrong. You question yourself. Did I misunderstand? You doubt relaible sources like scientists and Google. You are rocked to the very foundation of your being ... okay, maybe not, but the experience would still sting.
However, there is something worse, the information could go unchecked and spread. It would be like the old game of telephone, where a line of people transmit a sentence from ear to mouth. The actual truth is lost as it is passed from person to person. and bold falsehood becomes accebale truth. The Earth is flat. The Earth is the center of the universe. Barbara Hershey did the voice of ET.
That is why it is imperative that the information be presented as concretely and consistently as possible. I know why the expression “two moons” was chosen. It draws eyes to the story. It draws Web surfers to the site, but do the people who surf the Web, particularly the children know that? I belive writers can do better. They must. When the written word is so easily reproduced, when editors put their spin on it, when advertising wants to drive traffic, specificity in words is essential.
If not, it is up to educators to spread the word about the problems in mass communication and to correct the mistakes that are made. Otherwise, children might not be as impressed at the feat of a certain nursery rhyme and the remarkable jump of a cow. Why didn't it clear both moons? Of couse, in this day and age the cow would also face accusations of steroid abuse. Insert your own beefed up joke here.
To see for yourself:
https://www.google.com/webhp?hl=en&tab=nw&authuser=0#hl=en&gs_nf=1&tok=hHF-uHb8Ty1q2aIzNzKm8g&cp=15&gs_id=1m&xhr=t&q=earth+has+two+moons&pf=p&sclient=psy-ab&authuser=0&site=webhp&source=hp&pbx=1&oq=earth+has+two+m&aq=0&aqi=g4&aql=&gs_sm=&gs_upl=&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.,cf.osb&fp=d10435dcaad589af&biw=1619&bih=798
Wednesday, February 22, 2012
Save the Voice
Save the Voice! Not, the TV show which I think is doing fine, but rather the voice of each emerging writer.
Late one night, I met with a student of mine who presented me a problem -- a pile of work and a few hours to do it. Now, take it from me, this young woman is a worker. She does all her schoolwork, extra credit as well. An aspiring artist, she spends five hours a day after school working on her art portfolio and takes courses on the weekends when she's not volunteering at her school or her church. In between all of that, she filled out about a dozen applications accompanied by various and sundry essays all for college admissions. So when she presented me with one of her brother's old papers as a way to save some time on an English assignment, I was a little surprised.
Kids, sometimes they just don't think, right? Wrong. The problems that kids get into, particularly the ethical ones, happen when kids think very practically, almost utilitarian.
Problem: Homework is boring.
Solution: Don't do it.
Problem: School is hard.
Solution: Stay home, watch TV, play games, listen to music, and have fun.
(My strategy of choice as a lad, but in all fairness, I learned a lot from the $25,000 Pyramid).
Problem: Need a good grade, but can't seem to get one with your own work.
Solution: Take work from someone else.
And I learned that was the true motivation to the scheme. Sure time was short, but she really wanted to pull up that English grade. After I read the paper, I made a face that elicited an "Oh God!" from my student. She feared the paper was bad. It wasn't. She feared I was disappointed in her plan. Nope.
"This doesn't sound anything like you," I explained.
Over the past year, this young woman has made phenomenal strides in her writing. Her early work was redundant. Now she got to the point. Once, she wrote vague statements. Now she supported her ideas with clear and coherent examples. Grammar and spelling were not ever problems. However, what excited me the most was the emergence of her voice: her observations, her comparisons, her choice of words, and a little of her humor. None of that was present in the paper that she borrowed.
She had re-written a bit and as I read through it, I could see her expressions (phrases and clauses) as sure as fingerprints. Would a teacher notice? Possibly, but maybe not. Teachers have a lot to read. So, maybe she would get away with it, but that's not the point.
I feel strongly that in the teaching of writing, one of the primary goals should be the protection of the individual's voice. I don't want to read the same written work over and over again. I want to hear the unique observations that people have to offer. So that was what I communicated to my student; no judgements, fully understanding her reasoning.
My student re-wrote her paper because she cares about her work. She's not a cheat in any sense of the word. She was just being practical. However, she was cheating herself, an opportunity to voice her own identity, and cheating the world, pluralism and individuality are the strengths to a society.
Overstating it, am I? I don't think so. Save the voice and save the world! (Maybe that's overstating it a bit, and lifting from the TV show Heroes).
Late one night, I met with a student of mine who presented me a problem -- a pile of work and a few hours to do it. Now, take it from me, this young woman is a worker. She does all her schoolwork, extra credit as well. An aspiring artist, she spends five hours a day after school working on her art portfolio and takes courses on the weekends when she's not volunteering at her school or her church. In between all of that, she filled out about a dozen applications accompanied by various and sundry essays all for college admissions. So when she presented me with one of her brother's old papers as a way to save some time on an English assignment, I was a little surprised.
Kids, sometimes they just don't think, right? Wrong. The problems that kids get into, particularly the ethical ones, happen when kids think very practically, almost utilitarian.
Problem: Homework is boring.
Solution: Don't do it.
Problem: School is hard.
Solution: Stay home, watch TV, play games, listen to music, and have fun.
(My strategy of choice as a lad, but in all fairness, I learned a lot from the $25,000 Pyramid).
Problem: Need a good grade, but can't seem to get one with your own work.
Solution: Take work from someone else.
And I learned that was the true motivation to the scheme. Sure time was short, but she really wanted to pull up that English grade. After I read the paper, I made a face that elicited an "Oh God!" from my student. She feared the paper was bad. It wasn't. She feared I was disappointed in her plan. Nope.
"This doesn't sound anything like you," I explained.
Over the past year, this young woman has made phenomenal strides in her writing. Her early work was redundant. Now she got to the point. Once, she wrote vague statements. Now she supported her ideas with clear and coherent examples. Grammar and spelling were not ever problems. However, what excited me the most was the emergence of her voice: her observations, her comparisons, her choice of words, and a little of her humor. None of that was present in the paper that she borrowed.
She had re-written a bit and as I read through it, I could see her expressions (phrases and clauses) as sure as fingerprints. Would a teacher notice? Possibly, but maybe not. Teachers have a lot to read. So, maybe she would get away with it, but that's not the point.
I feel strongly that in the teaching of writing, one of the primary goals should be the protection of the individual's voice. I don't want to read the same written work over and over again. I want to hear the unique observations that people have to offer. So that was what I communicated to my student; no judgements, fully understanding her reasoning.
My student re-wrote her paper because she cares about her work. She's not a cheat in any sense of the word. She was just being practical. However, she was cheating herself, an opportunity to voice her own identity, and cheating the world, pluralism and individuality are the strengths to a society.
Overstating it, am I? I don't think so. Save the voice and save the world! (Maybe that's overstating it a bit, and lifting from the TV show Heroes).
Tuesday, February 21, 2012
What You Don't Know Could Change the World
I read a study once (actually it was an article about a study, but I wanted to sound a bit more academic) which concluded that people who don't know, don't know they don't know. No, that wasn't a type-o on my part. People don't know the areas of their own ignorance. Interesting. Young romantics who fall for the wrong person, will still fall for the wrong person because they don't know what led them to that decision. Poor investors will still follow bad advice, even after they are burned. However, there is an important caveat to this theory. Sometimes people don't know that they do know.
Just yesterday, a student of my acquaintance begrudgingly admitted her self-assessed deficiencies in the course of literature as well as her subsequent hatred for the subject as a whole. Someone hates writing?! This is a job for Super Tutor (or me, for those who find my references opaque).
I asked her if she needed help reading the stories. No shame. Just as some students have trouble seeing words in order to read, others have trouble comprehending written words even if they have the ability to read them. Think of me as a living, breathing pair of reading glasses, cat's eye frames, of course. However, she had already completed all three works from authors the likes of Hemingway and Updike.
S,o I suggested we discuss. She demonstrated no trouble comprehending: identifying symbols and conflict; traversing subtext and context; recognizing motives; or finding a common theme running through all three separate narratives, which was what her paper required.
"So why, exactly do you hate Literature?" I asked.
"Oh you know, grammar and spelling. I'm terrible," she explained.
I will save the debate over the value of grammar and spelling for another post, but I will say this, grammar is not literature. If so, start tossing poetry out of literature courses. It does have it's place as a system developed to improve communication, but not as bonds to shackle expression, especially when that expression works without it.
Spelling is not literature, either, and as we continue to develop into a world of e-mails and texts, it is less and less a part of communication. I don't mean to give up the ship on teaching spelling. It is another tool in uniform, and therefore, convenient communication, but let's understand the arbitrary nature of the etymology of words. Some spellings of words stuck, others didn't. English is a Germanic language. American English is a derivation of that and a further amalgamation of other influencing languages. The spellings, as well as the pronunciations, of English words have changed over time. We have 26 letters for over 44 sounds. It is not as simple as it appears.
Again, let's not give up, let's work on it, but let's recognize that the study of literature is something different than commas and I before E .
So, my student needs to work on her grammar skills and she needs to practice spelling, but her comprehension skills are superlative. Had I not pointed that out to her, the literature course would have lost a potential star pupil; the literary world would have lost a valuable reader, and a promising voice would have been silenced. The very fate of the world would have been doomed! Too melodramatic? Maybe, but the point is, allowing her to judge herself that was would have been a shame. (And if you will allow me some word play), it would also be a shame, as in a guilty conscience, she wore like a Scarlet Letter, unjust and unnecessary.
Just yesterday, a student of my acquaintance begrudgingly admitted her self-assessed deficiencies in the course of literature as well as her subsequent hatred for the subject as a whole. Someone hates writing?! This is a job for Super Tutor (or me, for those who find my references opaque).
I asked her if she needed help reading the stories. No shame. Just as some students have trouble seeing words in order to read, others have trouble comprehending written words even if they have the ability to read them. Think of me as a living, breathing pair of reading glasses, cat's eye frames, of course. However, she had already completed all three works from authors the likes of Hemingway and Updike.
S,o I suggested we discuss. She demonstrated no trouble comprehending: identifying symbols and conflict; traversing subtext and context; recognizing motives; or finding a common theme running through all three separate narratives, which was what her paper required.
"So why, exactly do you hate Literature?" I asked.
"Oh you know, grammar and spelling. I'm terrible," she explained.
I will save the debate over the value of grammar and spelling for another post, but I will say this, grammar is not literature. If so, start tossing poetry out of literature courses. It does have it's place as a system developed to improve communication, but not as bonds to shackle expression, especially when that expression works without it.
Spelling is not literature, either, and as we continue to develop into a world of e-mails and texts, it is less and less a part of communication. I don't mean to give up the ship on teaching spelling. It is another tool in uniform, and therefore, convenient communication, but let's understand the arbitrary nature of the etymology of words. Some spellings of words stuck, others didn't. English is a Germanic language. American English is a derivation of that and a further amalgamation of other influencing languages. The spellings, as well as the pronunciations, of English words have changed over time. We have 26 letters for over 44 sounds. It is not as simple as it appears.
Again, let's not give up, let's work on it, but let's recognize that the study of literature is something different than commas and I before E .
So, my student needs to work on her grammar skills and she needs to practice spelling, but her comprehension skills are superlative. Had I not pointed that out to her, the literature course would have lost a potential star pupil; the literary world would have lost a valuable reader, and a promising voice would have been silenced. The very fate of the world would have been doomed! Too melodramatic? Maybe, but the point is, allowing her to judge herself that was would have been a shame. (And if you will allow me some word play), it would also be a shame, as in a guilty conscience, she wore like a Scarlet Letter, unjust and unnecessary.
Mission Statement
I share these observations about teaching and tutoring for four reasons. The reasons, it just so happens, are also my goals when I work with a student, which is convenient because I struggled to come up with one workable acronym and now I can double dip. I like to think of it as intellectual frugality, but I digress. The four reasons (well five, my intense egomania) follow:
1. Awareness
2. Reflection
3. Translation
4. Self Esteem
ARTS. Or I could rearrange it to STAR or TARS or RATS ... or another utterly forgettable word that would insure I fail any basic marketing course. Anyway, for now, it's ARTS (subject to change) and these four dynamics provide the backbone in the relationship between a teacher and a student.
Why awareness? A teacher should develop awareness in a student, so a student can self correct. "Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish ..." Well, in dealing with academic material the "fishing" is developing cognitive skills. A teacher who develops awareness about a student makes a more substantial connection.
Why reflection? I agree with the widely held idea that knowledge is acquired through experience, but learning helps strengthen the understanding. Reflection, a form of metacognition, provides an opportunity to learn about what is acquired. It works for both students and teachers.
Why translation? Essentially, translation is what I do. I make the material relatable to the student. Mathematics is as much a language as English or Spanish. Computers have a language, so does the field of Social Studies. Philosophy, Psychology, Physics all have their own languages, fascinating ones that should be shared. James Gee calls the different languages Discourses. Students have their own and may be willing to teach an educator who treats the students, as well as their modes of communication, with respect. I like to learn, so the more languages the better.Let's all be exegetes. (Impressed logophiles? Not so much, sesquipedalians?)
Why self-esteem? (Why do I keep asking why?) People need to have their own backs because the world does not. I'm what Viktor Frankl called a tragic optimist. I believe the world provides the negatives without prompting, so it is up to people to remain as positive as they can. Pointing out good qualities (truthful, observable, substantiated characterstics) is a hobby of mine. So is comic book reading. Just kidding. Comic reading isn't my hobby. It's my lifestyle. And I think, in this time in particular, teachers need a bit of a boost, too.
Recently, I read about the idea of dialogic discourse (thanks to the works of Paulo Freire), a fancy way of noting that students learn from teachers and teachers learn from students. So, here is a blog, celebrating all the students who have taught me so much through anecdotes and observations. I hope it will help improve the relationships between educators and students.
1. Awareness
2. Reflection
3. Translation
4. Self Esteem
ARTS. Or I could rearrange it to STAR or TARS or RATS ... or another utterly forgettable word that would insure I fail any basic marketing course. Anyway, for now, it's ARTS (subject to change) and these four dynamics provide the backbone in the relationship between a teacher and a student.
Why awareness? A teacher should develop awareness in a student, so a student can self correct. "Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day. Teach a man to fish ..." Well, in dealing with academic material the "fishing" is developing cognitive skills. A teacher who develops awareness about a student makes a more substantial connection.
Why reflection? I agree with the widely held idea that knowledge is acquired through experience, but learning helps strengthen the understanding. Reflection, a form of metacognition, provides an opportunity to learn about what is acquired. It works for both students and teachers.
Why translation? Essentially, translation is what I do. I make the material relatable to the student. Mathematics is as much a language as English or Spanish. Computers have a language, so does the field of Social Studies. Philosophy, Psychology, Physics all have their own languages, fascinating ones that should be shared. James Gee calls the different languages Discourses. Students have their own and may be willing to teach an educator who treats the students, as well as their modes of communication, with respect. I like to learn, so the more languages the better.Let's all be exegetes. (Impressed logophiles? Not so much, sesquipedalians?)
Why self-esteem? (Why do I keep asking why?) People need to have their own backs because the world does not. I'm what Viktor Frankl called a tragic optimist. I believe the world provides the negatives without prompting, so it is up to people to remain as positive as they can. Pointing out good qualities (truthful, observable, substantiated characterstics) is a hobby of mine. So is comic book reading. Just kidding. Comic reading isn't my hobby. It's my lifestyle. And I think, in this time in particular, teachers need a bit of a boost, too.
Recently, I read about the idea of dialogic discourse (thanks to the works of Paulo Freire), a fancy way of noting that students learn from teachers and teachers learn from students. So, here is a blog, celebrating all the students who have taught me so much through anecdotes and observations. I hope it will help improve the relationships between educators and students.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)