Novel Bookmark Idea

I’m starting a new novel with my students on Monday, and I like to give out a reading schedule for each book. Instead of a typical placeholder, I like to do two things with the bookmark.

First, I print out a daily schedule of readings with the date and the pages to be read for that day. This means the students enter class having read those pages, and I have scheduled activities for the period.

Also, on the back of the bookmark, I will have the major themes listed down the paper slip (or the students list them). When the students identify an example of the theme in the novel, they can jot down the page number next to the theme. This is a quick and easy way to allow students to set a (minor) purpose for reading and to help students make a list in preparation for in-class writings. Plus, this doesn’t really interfere with the students’ reading process (which is a major complaint I hear regarding “during reading” study guides).

Any quick and easy ideas you use?

The ABCs of Learning

Every high school student knows his ABCs, and that’s a good thing since those very ABCs are a good tool in allowing kids to learn in fun ways. A number of assignments I use require the basics of the English language, and here are a few I’ve used recently.

1) I had one of my classes choose a Greek/Roman myth to read outside of class while we read a play in class. Once the students choose their myth, they must retell the story using 26 sentences. The first sentence starts with a word beginning with an A, the second sentence starts with a word beginning with a B, and so on through the alphabet. I also require that the students include a citation for their source material, and the 26 sentences must be free of any errors. Not one grammar, spelling, punctuation, or content error is allowed.

They have 26 days to get the assignment completed perfectly for 100 points. Any error reduces the score to 50 points. One correct sentence a day doesn’t seem like too much to ask. Plus, the kids can turn it in to me for correcting as often as they wish. I put a check mark at the end of a line if I find an error, and the students’ job is to find and correct the error. I stop marking errors after I find a third one. It’s rare that a student does not get it done perfectly in that time.

2) I put students into groups of four and have the students write their ABCs down the left side of a page as if numbering the page. Then I give the students a word such as “said” or “good” or “bad” or “sad” or some other overused and simplistic word; they write this word at the top of the page, and I give the students 15 minutes to write down as many synonyms as possible for the given word. I sometimes make this a competition with candy bars to the top group, but I always collect the students’ lists and have my TA compile their lists into one master list which gets hung on the wall. They then have a master list of better words than the given simplistic starter word.

3) I have the students in their groups of four letter their page (as in #2 above) at the conclusion of a novel of study. Then the students are to write down any characters, traits, themes, locations, or other terms related to the novel that they can (all of which is written by the letter which begins the word). For example, after reading Julius Caesar, the students may have a partial list started like this:

• A: ambition, alliteration, attack, Antony, allusion, antagonist, avarice, Artemidorus, allegiance, apostrophe
• B: Brutus, beloved, betrayal, blood, body, bias
• C: Cassius, Casca, Cinna, Crassus, conspiracy, coronet, commoners, Calphurnia, compromise, chaos, Cicero, connotation, constancy, climax

Again, the students turn in their lists, my TA compiles them, and the students have a massive study guide, one they generated without needing me to create it for them.

New Course

For some time I’ve considered proposing a new course or two to my department and then my administration.

My first thought is a Film Analysis course where students analyze movies (the way the film is shot and the thematic elements within each film). We could connect the films to literature, other films, and the students’ lives as well as meet the Common Core standards chosen for the senior English courses at my school. In addition, I could incorporate the following using contemporary and classic films:

• literary devices, 
• the heroic cycle,
• Joseph Campbell’s ideas on mythology,
• classic motifs and patterns,
• Christ-like characters, and
• more.

My second thought would be a Modern History through Science Fiction course. This course could be a Social Studies or a Language Arts class and could begin with The Civil War and move through to the modern day. Authors such as H.G. Wells, Isaac Asimov, Arthur C. Clarke, Ray Bradbury, Phillp K. Dick, and others would form the basis for a decade by decade historical study of political, economic, and military events as well as look at the ways science fiction reflects and influences American society.

Do you have a course like either one of these at your school? I’d love to know how well respected they are in addition to their popularity.

Common Core Question Answered

On the 1st I mentioned my concern about administrators in my district pushing non-fiction texts into Language Arts classrooms to an unwelcomed and unintended degree. This article by the two co-lead authors of the Common Core Standards affirms my assertions:

By high school, the Standards require that 70 percent of what students read be informational text, but the bulk of that percentage will be carried by non-ELA disciplines that do not study fictional texts. Said plainly, stories, drama, poetry, and other literature account for the majority of reading that students will do in the high school ELA classroom.

And:

The Standards in no way ask ELA teachers to abandon literature; instead, they require that students read demanding, high-quality fiction and demonstrate their ability to analyze such fiction.

Common Core is Here

Well, the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) are here, and my district (and a few department members) see it as the panacea for this generation of students. While I don’t have anywhere near that sort of faith in the new standards, I do like the professional development that could stem from the implementation of the standards.

However, I do see three problems looming: too much commonality, too much reliance on hope, and not enough joint accountability.

Firstly, I see my department being pushed to use exactly the same assignments in every class on the same day, almost as if a scripted curriculum could be imposed. Of course, we’re told “not to worry” because the new standards will help us all become better teachers. But, then the same veteran teachers (me, for one) who were successful using the old standards are then teaching my department members how to use the new standards. While I think teaching people what the new standards mean, how to reach the standards, and why scaffolding is needed are all excellent ideas to learn, nothing really new is happening. We’re taking what we have and adapting that to new skill expectations. Fortunately, the CCSS differ little from my state’s old standards. Still, I’ve never believed lock-step assignments and daily lessons take into account student and class individuality and needs, a teacher’s strengths, or student interest.

Secondly, the notion that people think these standards will be the magic pill to cure all of our students’ ills bothers me. Standards don’t help students pass a test or learn a skill or achieve. Teachers do. Teachers of excellence with the abilities to engage students, to adapt to student needs, and to scaffold lessons for students will be successful no matter what standards are adopted. Teachers who were successful with the old standards will be successful with the new standards. Teachers who struggled previously will continue to struggle without strong, reliable mentors and skillful evaluators.

Lastly, as an English teacher, I continue to hear the maxim that “all teachers are responsible for reading,” but only the English Department is held accountable for reading scores. When my school’s state reading test results came in, literary reading (fiction) far surpassed non-fiction reading scores. Instead of asking the other disciplines–which teach non-fiction almost exclusively–to improve non-fiction teaching approaches and to become more skilled reading instructors, the English Department is again being asked to add something to its already crowded curriculum.

And, the new CCSS backs this up. An expert speaking to my department about the new standards suggested that 70% of a student’s reading load be non-fiction. I responded that this is splendid since only 1/6 of a student’s day is spent in a literature-based class (reading fiction), which means that students currently read non-fiction 83% of the day (80% if we exclude P.E.). I was told “no, this means the English Department should teach much, much more non-fiction.”

Now, I’m not against teaching non-fiction texts. I do this with every unit I teach, generally using non-fiction texts to help set the context for the fictional readings with which students are engaged. Then, my students must integrate the contextual information into their fiction-text responses and writing.

In short, I’d like to see school-wide reading trainings to begin and to hold all disciplines accountable for raising students’ reading levels. The CCSS could help here since all included subject areas have reading standards now, but administrators at the building and district levels must get on-board and help support this philosophy with action and not just talk.

P.S. People want to compare schools, districts, and states across the nation with the new tests, but I think we missed the boat here by not using the SAT or ACT. How helpful would it have been to pay for kids’ tests already required (or expected) by colleges and universities? Plus, we could have already looked at comparisons. Granted, all curricula are not set up with the SAT or ACT as the endgame in mind, but when have we ever done this? And, the kids still take those exams.

P.P.S. The text book companies have strong lobbyists.