Is that too much to ask?
“What
conditions promote literacy development?” This is another one of our guiding
questions for the course this summer. I think that it is one that deserves
careful consideration, especially in the world of high stakes testing and
student/teacher/administrator disenchantment. I’m not saying that every
student, every teacher, every parent, and every administrator is unhappy with
their specific educational experience. However, I do know that as I enter the
field of teaching I’ve heard a lot of the negatives about the system just so
that I’m aware of “what you’re getting yourself into.”
Burke’s
(2001) chapter 4: “Reading Tests” and chapter 5: “Reading Literature” provide
some clear delineations between how teachers and students can approach literacy
development in the ELA classroom. “Reading Tests” provides some strategies for
students, and teachers on how to prepare students for high-stakes testing,
since testing is most-likely going to be a part of education forever. He is not
suggesting teaching to the test, but he is suggesting having a basic understanding
of the structure of standardized tests and what types of language is used to
trip students up. In regards to testing in the classroom, he suggests that
students ask what is on the test and look for examples from other exams they
have had with that teacher. He suggests that teachers provide necessary
vocabulary and key concepts in ways that students can understand their
importance and relevance on an exam. All fine strategies, and while some form
of assessment needs to happen to check student understanding, my question is
how do we ensure that students are engaged throughout the semester so that when
it comes to testing it is not just some new, stressful experience, but rather
just a small piece of the learning experience?
I
once heard from a young man, preparing to become a teacher, that his goal was to
have a class where all students scored as high as possible on PARCC. He wanted
to understand the PARCC exam so well that there was no way that his students
could score below proficiency. He wanted to teach to the test. This kind of
broke my heart a little. At the same time, I’ve heard very passionate and
experienced teachers say that if you have good relationships with your
students, really understand them and their needs and prepare lessons that are
engaging for them, they’ll do fine on the PARCC because you will have taught
them how to think. I like this idea so much more.
In
chapter 5, Burke discusses how ELA teachers make literature exciting and
meaningful for their students. I think that no matter a teacher’s discipline,
that content seems exciting and meaningful because that is why they are
teaching that discipline. As someone being certified to teach secondary ELA, of
course I love all of the genres of literature, I love words and I want my
students to love words! Will 100% of them feel this way? Absolutely not.
However, Burke talks about the way that literature crosses disciplines, and
allows students to identify themselves in text, or others that they know. It
allows students to make connections to history, science, math, health, and
create opportunities for students to identify these connections on their own
through reading and writing. This seems like the most valuable part of an ELA
curriculum, to me. I want my students to find something in their study of
literature that speaks to them, even if it’s only one connection that year, so
that they can start building those connections in other academic disciplines as
well.
Ahhh the standardized test...and the dissatisfaction and frustration it causes. I relate so much to what you describe. Last spring I had the privilege of teaching Analytical Chemistry to a group of students who were motivated, intelligent, insightful and engaged. Honestly I could not have had a better group of kids to work with as a student teacher. Over the course of the first semester and part of the second I developed really great relationships with these kids. There was a lot of respect in the classroom. And then the spring testing season rolled around. Suddenly kids who were engaged, cheerful and kind became distant, grumpy and irritable. I can’t blame them. I was taking the NES exams required for teacher certification had several large projects for my graduate classes and was trying to plan a curriculum when I met with half my students nearly daily and didn’t see the other half at all. I felt the same as my kids. Clearly the standardized tests take a toll on everyone.
ReplyDeleteI don’t like the idea of teaching to the test, and yet, when planning my curriculum for the coming school year, I started with the NM-PED standards and performance level descriptors. I also have been trying to incorporate the Next Generation Science Standards (NGSS) since these are far better (in my opinion) at linking larger themes and ideas in science curricula. But, I realize in taking this approach that I am, to a degree, teaching to the test. Your comments from Burke about “having a basic understanding of the structure of standardized tests and what type of language is used to trip students up” really makes sense to me. Perhaps including these discussions in the classroom can help prepare students for the exams they must take and provide them with some meaningful strategies for success. Do I want to be the young man you mention, the PARCC expert? No, but then, from my experience knowing my kids wasn’t entirely successful way to address standardized tests either. Maybe there is a middle ground?
I think that as far as conditions that promote literacy go, they must engage the student. I like what you said towards the end of your blog about education making connections to the students’ real lives and being meaningful to them. Hopefully that sort of environment would be exciting for students and would impassion them to be participatory in their learning. I do not like the idea of teaching to the test. I feel that it sucks all the life out of the classroom. Without teaching to guide and inspire your students what are you really giving them? I think conventions that will appear on the test can be included in the lesson planning but through the action of teaching other methods, creating real world connections and engaging students in role play and experimental hands on learning.
ReplyDelete