Farris & Anson's chapter 16 and Janice Lauer's chapter 3

     Farris and Anson's chapter 16 by Kathleen Blake Yancey dealt primarily with reflection and how it can improve instruction. When looked at through the lens of a college professor, the amount of reflection Yancey speaks of sounds like it could be doable. But looking at it as a high school teacher who can see well over one hundred students on a daily basis, it seems impossible.

     There is always a level of reflection after a class and it is never the same for each class. The students in each class create variety in instruction and game planning. The one element that can't be prepped for is how the students will be on a given day. I have a colleague who prays that she gets observed during 5th period because that is her "good" class and not during her "bad" 8th period. A student who likes to cause trouble will view a supervisor observing his teacher as a challenge to be difficult.

     I turn to talk of observations because I want to discuss how reflection has become part of teacher evaluations, and not something a teacher does to improve. In my district, we have Charlotte Danielson to thank for this. Her Framework for Teaching has been adopted by many districts in New Jersey, and has really turned how teachers reflect on their lessons into a chore.

blogs.puyallup.k12.wa.us

     As you can see above, Danielson has created four domains that teachers must focus on. Reflection is a big part of each domain, and requires artifacts (the term for evidence) in order to be properly evaluated. When a teacher gets observed, there are forms that have to be filled out on a website that tracks everything. One form is all about what you plan on teaching and accommodations you've made. Another form is where you reflect after the lesson. It's nice in theory, but the fact that it is part of the evaluation has driven teachers to see it as a chore. This, in turn, makes reflection a chore and teachers then dislike doing it.

     Educators have to be willing to reflect on their experiences in an attempt to become better. Think about why most students don't enjoy doing homework. They don't see it as beneficial practice that improves skills. Instead, it's a punishment and something to be avoided whenever possible, even though it's necessary.

Teachers line up to provide artifacts.
xpressivecafe.com

Farris and Anson's Chapters 1 & 2: Ferry and Vandenberg

     I've always had a relatively good sense of self-worth. My self-esteem is pretty good and I feel like I'm at a point in my life where I'm comfortable with who I am. Then I read this week's readings. I thought Chris Christie had done a good job of bad mouthing teachers, turns out he doesn't have anything on what we can say about each other.

     Maybe it's how I read the chapters, but it came off really snooty (I don't think I've ever written that word before). It's like when you watch With Honors or Good Will Hunting and the professors are so high on themselves and their brains, there can be no equal. The word hierarchy was used often in the reading and that idea overshadows what I always thought we were in school for- knowledge.

     I admire anyone who has knowledge of something I don't. I have no problem asking for an explanation from someone, anyone, who might know what I need to know. That's why I think the classroom should be respected, not looked down on by scholars. Without lowly teachers, where would we get the eventual scholars? Are they all self-made? And what would be the point of a university then?

     Ferry states that practitioner knowledge is referred to as "lore".  Why not "data"? Why not "evidence"? Lore makes it sound like mythology. Maybe we should stop using the term "theory" and start calling it "suspicion" or "guess"?

     Of course, I write all of this with a bit of anger at being looked down upon, but I'm guilty of the same thing. I look at my school and I have a hierarchy formed in my mind. At the top are the brass, obviously. Even though many of them aren't leadership material, their positions require that. A colleague was sitting for the Praxis for administration and supervision this past week and he was quite nervous. The only advice I had for him was to look at some of the people in our administration and know peace.

     A group of workers that I place high on the hierarchy is the maintenance staff, security, and technical support. I had an undergraduate professor who told us to keep them in mind because they "do all the dirty work". I always do my best to make their job easier- push in all the chairs, throw out all the garbage, keep classroom management tight so that security doesn't get tired of coming to my room for every little thing. Some teachers will call security over the smallest thing. A student keeps putting his head down? Call security. It's laughable and those teachers are not respected by their support staff.

     I would then put all the teachers at the lowest level. Maybe that makes me as bad as what I was railing against before. I don't think of the profession as lowly as the chapters did, but someone has to be on the bottom, it doesn't mean we're garbage.

     The bottom belongs to the gym teachers. Out of sheer jealousy, all other teachers despise them. I've thought about the amount of grading and work I'll do by the time I retire, and compare it to the grading and work a gym teacher will do over the same time span. It's enough to make you cry.
   

Farris and Anson's Chapter 9 and Pritchard & Honeycutt

     I'm going to assume others had problems with Hypothesis this week. At first, I thought my school's wifi was prohibiting me from posting comments, but then it didn't work from home either. A few comments snuck through for Neff, and then I could make comments for Pritchard and Honeycutt, but I couldn't highlight the selection. I tried to submit comments multiple times, so they either never went through, or they were submitted many times and I look foolish.

     Like Martha, I had a lot of trouble with Neff's chapter. Perhaps spring break has turned my brain into a lump, but I couldn't get into it. Grounded Theory, as I understand it, is conducting a bunch of research, indexing it, and looking for patterns to write about.

     This seems like a great way to arrive at something since you write about whatever information you uncover. I hesitate to use the word conclude since the chapter states that this method is ongoing and leads to more research. In a sense, the researcher is crowdsourcing. If there is something of interest to the reader and he/she wishes to pursue it further, he/she can now contribute.

     I enjoyed Pritchard and Honeycutt's look at the process approach. Much like Debbie, it reminded me of how I learned to write in school. It also provided data (finally) the showed how effective a specific writing strategy can be for students.

     I always think of my students when we read an article and see new techniques. It's now the third marking period and I've used the phrase "the training wheels have come off" more times than I would have liked. My students rely heavily on teacher direction and can't move on to the next paragraph without asking me to check the first.

     What drives me nuts is that I have gone through a systematic approach to what they should be doing. In early assignments, I've detailed what should go in each sentence and still had issues. It seems as though the confidence in their abilities is missing. The only thing I can deduce from this is that writing wasn't being done before they came to me. As ridiculous as this sounds, word around the district is that such is the case.

     Because of this, my students have a hard time seeing writing as a process. All attempts at pre-writing and revision have failed because of this. I've had to make the rough draft of an essay a quiz grade that must be present in order for the final draft to count as a test grade. This is artificial because it forces the student to write a rough draft, but it's done grudgingly and the student doesn't benefit from any academic growth.

How I feel right now.

     My school is in the process of adopting textbooks. Believe it or not, the last time they purchased new textbooks was 2007. The last year anything from one of the textbooks was actually in the curriculum was 2010. Needless to say, I'm excited. The new book is completely interactive. The students not only get a physical book, but a digital version as well. Each digital version comes with interactive lessons, and lo and behold, one of them is entitled "Writing as a Process".

I think I'm going to like this book.