Theme 1 Learning Log
I am a fully concrete sequential person, so please bear with me and my lists! When reading, I started first with the article we got to choose. I chose to read the article "I'm Not Stupid": How Assessment Drives (In)Appropriate Reading Instruction.
For me, the quote at the beginning sums up so much! Today it is all about their scores. Now I understand, if a student constantly fails tests and never knows the answer there is a problem. But so many students feel stupid these days because of test scores. However, if you asked them to explain it to you they will orally give you a fabulous answer. I am a firm believe that tests are not going anywhere. I had to take how many tests to become a teacher? I need to pass how many tests and classes to receive my masters? However, there is a point when we are just ruining our students with assessment.
During the article, Dr. Dennis talks about how she breaks her students down by individual needs. And as it was talked about in the article, she had to figure out these needs based on a single test. A test that labels the student either advanced, proficient, or below. This does not tell the teacher what they need to do to help the student. This test used was a high stakes test, and just like in Chapter four of Vacca, Vacca, and Mraz, testing is at its highest point and the stakes in high stakes testing keep rising. There have been a plethora or concerns about this test, which I believe is appropriately brought up in the "I'm Not Stupid!" article. High stakes testing do not tell me about my students. Informal assessments tell me more about them personally. Dr. D used informal assessments to really look into the needs of students and talks about having the students help set up their literacy goals (p. 289). However, the thing that stood out the most was how these results help differentiate instruction in their remedial setting. Though students are still instructed with mandatory materials, you can as a teacher direct certain aspects of a lesson towards a specific student without other students even knowing. But without the smaller IRIs, informal checklists, or student work samples you cannot get a full scope of what students need from high stakes testing. This also falls into the Reading Endorsement competencies. Teachers must be able to interpret data from many sources and not just rely on standardized assessment.
Sticking with chapter 4 Vacca, Vacca, and Mraz, they do a wonderful section on portfolios and how these stack up against testing. Though there a some pros under the testing column, I feel that the portfolio column truly has more benefits. The portfolios give a wide range of ways for students to be assessed and give them the opportunity to make their goals and adjust as they meet them. Students who fail third grade FCAT do go through a portfolio process before being retained in third. So why do not just use portfolios in the first place? Students who fail the portfolio then take the SAT 10 and go to summer school, with a small glimmer of passing and going to fourth, but why not skip the stressful testing. I do believe students should standardize test to show us how they stack up against other students, classes, schools, etc., but can't we use the test for the correct reason?
I was very intrigued by figure 4.8 on page 111. This is a really neat way to assess students in reading. I like how to includes all types of questions-- inferring and recall-- but trades between being able to use the book and not. Students nowadays get used to instant gratification and answers-- tablets, computers, etc. give them instant access to a world of answer. Sometimes I think they forget to think for themselves. So it is nice when testing their comprehension giving them opportunities to use the book, but making them work themselves and work through the thought process as well. I actually showed this figure to my social studies teachers-- we are departmentalized-- and asked how we can do this too! Again, I feel this figure could work with any concept.
Looking at Chapter 3 of Vacca, Vaccam and Mraz the major topic of multicultural literature comes up. Multi-cultural literature gives the students opportunities to really look into different background and gain background knowledge they cant get anywhere else outside of traveling. However, I feel teachers are lucky when they work with students in different backgrounds. But not all schools have diverse populations, so I feel working with multicultural literature is important. Of course, time is a problem. However, I think exposing students to different cultures does not always have to be whole group. It can be done during centers, or built into a collaborative structure.
Besides multicultural literature, Chapter three does a great job of focusing on ESL students in general. Though some teachers believe ESL students will never make the same gains as their English speaking students, this is far from true. By understanding how to work with your ESL student and setting goals for them, doing a portfolio on your ESL students would work wonders. Yes, there goals might be very different than the English speaking student, but that's the point of differentiation. Like Chapter 1 mentions-- knowing your grade level content and standards is important. By knowing this information, you can plan the steps you should take with your ESL student to ensure they hit those standards as well.
Staying with the knowing of content and standards, I tell my interns that all the time. It is great to use this wonderful basal reader that some company put together. But it is not the do all say all. You know a much better way to teach comparing and contrasting without using that story in a textbook please do it. However, take into consideration your standards. Are you hitting your standards with your stand alone lesson?
The part of chapter 1 that stood out the most was the way we are teaching is changing. My favorite quote from p. 7, "For centuries the most common use of the term literacy had been to denote one's ability to read and write a language with competence. Today, however, the dynamic nature of literacy is such that it encompasses more than the ability to read and write black marks on a printed page. Literacy has come to represent a synthesis of language, thinking, and contextual practices through which people make and communicate meaning." In today's schools, especially with common core, we have started to go so much further. We ask kids to delve into minds of the characters on the page to assess why the character did what they did. We ask students to take a few clues and imply meaning in multiple ways. We now are asking that they apply these skills to their every day lives. And it is a great idea, but what teachers and politicians are debating now is whether we are applying this grand idea in the best way. All of those best practices that the IRA mentions, are we doing those in the classroom by throwing these new standards in one year and changing how we assess them the next?
With these new standards and new types of literacy we have started to push onto our students has changed our jobs completely. Going back to multicultural literature, of course we don't always have enough time. According to my new reading series, I have to test every five days. Math? Forget about it? We have more lessons than there are until FCAT. We have built a textbook that has more lessons than days to teach it. So though we can follow competencies and thoughts of best practices from the IRA, can we do them with this load that is not lightening? If we do a great job of breaking down our kids and I have a kid that needs phonics in fourth grade is he going to make the comprehension gains on those tests that they are judging him and me on? Out went the old literacies and in came the new-- but without extra time or thought on how these change the education world.
