Routman had a lot of advice for teaching writing. A general
statement that I liked a lot from her was “Teaching is like a draft-in-process:
never linear, always changing” pg 149, which is always important to keep in
mind for all subjects. Focusing in on the writing aspect, it also applies
extremely well. When teaching a writing lesson, something that you did not
think of when planning might come up, which would force you to change your
plans immediately to be able to meet the needs of all students, or to even just
clarify what you are teaching. I also like how she wants students to be more
independent and responsible. To be able to make this happen, teachers would
have to model, model, model. For example, on page 175, Routman talks about
giving students responsibility for daily writing, but without clear instruction
and modeling your expectations, students could be lost or confused with what
they are supposed to do. Also, without clear instructions or modeling, students
might not get the most out of the daily writing, or would be asking many
clarification questions.
I also liked that in chapter 7 Routman thought it was
important for students to know why they were learning what they were learning.
I remember as a student I always had to know why we were learning what we were
learning, and how I could apply it outside of the class. By explaning this
upfront, I feel as if students will make the most of it instead of doing what
the teacher is asking just to do it. If they know it is important, students
will be more motivated to do what they are asked of well, and have it be more
meaningful.
A dilemma I might encounter while following her advice would
be trying to meet all of her “check lists”. She gave a lot of good ideas of
what mini lessons could include, but trying to incorporate all at once could
overwhelm me as a teacher, or even the students. For example, on page 155,
there are a lot of things that go into “common minilessons”, which incorporated
into one lesson would be overwhelming. If all of that was incorporated over a period
of time, it would be more realistic, but at the same time, would we as teachers
have enough time to include all of that while getting through all of the other
standards?
On page 185, Routman also included a new “schedule” which I thought
was interesting. There is A LOT more reading/writing included in this schedule,
but it is, in a way, spread out. Instead of having an hour of math, recess, and
then 45 minutes of social studies/science/etc, there is 30 minutes for math in
the new “current” schedule, a break with other activities that incorporate more
reading and writing, and then math again. I feel as if students might be able
to keep their attention in the “current” schedule more because the students are
not doing the same subject for an extended period of time. At the same time, it
could be difficult for teachers to get a more in-depth lesson covered. I do
like this schedule to include more literacy instruction, but for more detailed
lessons, sometimes I would have to change the schedule and make one subject
longer or shorter, depending. Linking back to my opening quote about “teaching
is a draft in progress”, the timing all depends on how the lesson is going in
the classroom.
Stephanie, I would say use all those minilessons as you see necessary with your group of students. Every year students will have different needs so it may not be worth the time to go down the checklist. I plan on using this book as a resource each year and I'm sure with each time I will need to add/drop minilessons.
ReplyDeleteI also like the new teaching schedule Routman included. I know that these days schools are focusing on increasing their reading and math scores more than anything else but including writing throughout the entire day would really benefit the students. They gain more exposure to different writing genres and we can find time to include subjects like social studies and science that often get pushed aside.
In regards to your question about teaching the concepts Routman suggests in her "common minilessons" (p.155) and still covering all of the other other standards, I would say to keep in mind how effective it can be to make learning meaningful. On p. 153, Routman shares a passage from a "conscientious teacher" that is similarly concerned about covering standards and feels that she has to teach the concepts in isolation in order to meet all requirements. Routman responded by saying that "even if your state or district standards and curriculum documents focus narrowly on the parts of learning, you will easily satisfy those minimum standards---and much more-- through meaningful teaching.
ReplyDeleteI also like that students are not doing the same subject for extended periods of time in the current schedule (p. 185). It is also helpful to see how other subject areas can also incorporate literacy instruction. For example, on the current schedule, the bubble next to "math journals" explains that students will write story problems and explain how they got their answers. Next to science/social studies/health/science journals, it says that science journals were added for students to write facts, label pictures and do more expository writing (p. 185). Although the subject matter changes, reading/writing is still embedded into these lessons, so these skills will continue to be strengthened during these parts of the day.
ReplyDeleteStephanie, I agree that it is really important to explicitly tell or ask students what the purpose of an activity/task/lesson is. Even though we know the benefits and learning objectives from our lessons/activities/tasks—unless our students know them, they will see no desire to learn or as Routman puts it, “not likely to take work seriously or feel the ‘need’ to learn something unless they understand and value its purpose” (Routman, 147). Further, how can we teach with “the end in mind” when our students don’t know what the (real intended) end result is? I think that by teaching students the explicit goals for that particular activity/lesson it would empower students to be responsible for their own learning (towards the goal).
ReplyDeleteI especially liked the section about teaching nonfiction writing. I agree that this form of writing is not taught enough (Routman, 199). I really like the idea of having students write letters because it gives students the opportunity to write an authentic piece with a specific audience in mind (and in their voice!). I also really liked the whole section about sharing and teaching students how to listen (212). With kindergarteners, especially, it can be difficult for them to concentrate on their peers and really listen to or give feedback when sharing. Since many of them do not have prior schooling experience, I think we really need to model exactly what we need from them—even if it’s something they may think they already know how to do like “listen”.
A lot of suggestion are given to stimulate your thought process and sometimes to give you that little bit of reassurance when you are currently doing something you read about. I think you can also combine or merge skills in the various mini-lessons and activities. You can never have too many tools! Especially when each class comes with their own unique challenges and knowledge base.
ReplyDeleteI think by combining skills, it is also a way to scaffold them in mini-lessons. Combining the newly learned skills can help students understand them better, and learn to use them on their own.
Delete