1. What is your topic and why does it matter to you?
The main question I want to pursue through my project is, "Who is the 'real' you and how does language affect that 'you'?"
I really want to pursue this question in my future classroom. Students at the secondary level are asking the first part of this question already. However, as many of us expressed throughout this class, many of us never been confronted with many of these questions about how language affects us or even what it means to us. I think this would be an excellent question for juniors in high school to consider.
This topic is important to me because as a student I have experienced the feeling of pointlessness; I have wondered why we learn certain things. I have found that when any topic is made personally relevant, it becomes easier to be engaged. For this reason, I want to encourage students to consider what the way they use language says about them: I want students to consider whether they speak a certain way because of what social group they are part of or they are part of that social group because of how they speak. I want them to consider how their past influences their language use. Finally, I want them to consider where they want language to take them. By considering especially this last question, I hope to use student feedback to influence my teaching. It will, hopefully, relate my teaching to student ideas about CCR.
2. What format am I doing, and why did I pick it?
I want to plan a short unit plan in which to have students explore these questions. I want to do it in a timeline format: This is where I came from; this is where I am now; this is where it will take me.
I think this format will be the most useful for my career. I want to use this to encourage students to think about how language affects them. I also want to use it to influence my teaching.
3. What questions do I have about my project?
At this point, I don't have many questions. I am sure some will arise while I work on it. At that point, I will not hesitate to ask for help. I am, however, not opposed to any suggestions.
Sunday, November 25, 2012
Tuesday, November 13, 2012
Final Project Idea
So when we first started discussing Discourse Analysis a few days ago, in my notes I wrote a question that I think was presented in class. The question is, "Who is the 'real' you."
I think that for my final project, I would like to push this question a little further. I do not want to answer this question myself, but rather, I think this question could be used in a classroom to help students think about language and how it directly applies to them.
What I think I would like to do is create a lesson plan of sorts. The premise of the lesson will be for me to pose this question to students: "Who is the 'real' you and how does language affect that?"
What I want my students to explore is how the way they speak says something about who they are. I want them to examine stereotypes--do they speak a certain way because of "who they are" or are they "who they are" because of how they speak (getting into Gee's ideas of practices)? I want them to consider how they want language to define them and how they want to define language. I want them to examine the relevance of taking four years of "English" as a requirement to graduate high school: why should they be required to do that? How will it impact their futures?
I know that this would be a really big undertaking. However, I hope that this is a way that students can make an emotional connection to what they are learning in the classroom; I want them to answer the question, "Why are we learning this." I hope that, ideally, I can utilize what they come up with to impact my teaching. I imagine that this project would be done early in the school year and would probably be used in an 11th grade classroom. I am not sure about all of that yet, but this is just a starting point.
Any feedback would be more than appreciated!
I think that for my final project, I would like to push this question a little further. I do not want to answer this question myself, but rather, I think this question could be used in a classroom to help students think about language and how it directly applies to them.
What I think I would like to do is create a lesson plan of sorts. The premise of the lesson will be for me to pose this question to students: "Who is the 'real' you and how does language affect that?"
What I want my students to explore is how the way they speak says something about who they are. I want them to examine stereotypes--do they speak a certain way because of "who they are" or are they "who they are" because of how they speak (getting into Gee's ideas of practices)? I want them to consider how they want language to define them and how they want to define language. I want them to examine the relevance of taking four years of "English" as a requirement to graduate high school: why should they be required to do that? How will it impact their futures?
I know that this would be a really big undertaking. However, I hope that this is a way that students can make an emotional connection to what they are learning in the classroom; I want them to answer the question, "Why are we learning this." I hope that, ideally, I can utilize what they come up with to impact my teaching. I imagine that this project would be done early in the school year and would probably be used in an 11th grade classroom. I am not sure about all of that yet, but this is just a starting point.
Any feedback would be more than appreciated!
Friday, November 9, 2012
Close reading of Common Core
I am doing my close reading on the Craft and Structure portion for 11-12 grades of the Reading Standards for Literature 6-12. The section I am doing is found on page 38.
Significance:
The one thing that jumped out as being made significant is the work of William Shakespeare. The Common Core says in parentheses to include "Shakespeare as well as other authors." Clearly, Shakespeare is significant because he is named and singled out as a significant author to examine when looking at "language that is particularly fresh, engaging, or beautiful." Also, that very quote places significance on how language should be noticed. Language should be "fresh, engaging, or beautiful," and it is up to CCR 11-12 graders to determine such language.
Practices:
This part of Gee's discourse is hard for me to understand, but the way I do understand it is easily described by Gee as the "chicken and egg question." The way the Common Core addresses this, in my interpretation, is "Do we talk about word choice, authorial intent, point of view, etc. because they are part of Reading Standards?" OR "Do we call them Reading Standards because they include discussions about such topics?" I think thinking about these questions, and similar ones, can make us question why we teach the things we teach. Is it because they are part of reading standards or is it because they are important skills that they become part of reading standards?
Identities:
This portion of the Common Core is identifying students to whom this applies as students in "Grades 11-12." So, we could ask, "What does that mean: are these students physically 11th and 12th graders? Are these students intellectually at an 11th-12th grade level? Do these students have the prerequisites and background information to be successful in an 11th-12th grade classroom?
Because these students are on the brink of entering their careers or college, they are also identified as nearly College and Career Ready. By meeting the Reading Standards listed, they will be CCR.
Relationships:
The Common Core is definitely trying to establish a relationship based on academia. This relationship is being formed primarily with teachers and administration. It is the authority on Reading Standards for 11-12 grade students to which teachers and administrators must answer. I think it can be a good thing or a bad thing that this does NOT emphasize a relationship between teachers/administrators and students.
Politics:
This passage places social good on a CCR student. This student, in 11-12 grades, should be able to proficiently do everything listed. This includes determining word meaning, etc., analysis of word choice, impact, etc., and more. Also, a cultural capital is assumed by mentioning Shakespeare as a particular author whose work is an example of "language that is particularly fresh, engaging, or beautiful."
Connections:
The Common Core seeks to make connections between multiple facets of a written work. It desires CCR students to be able to start with basic understanding of literature then make connections from what they read to what is implied or meant as well as what the author intend the text to mean. I think this part of the Common Core is one of the best and potentially most effective. Connections are so important. What would make this part of the Standards more effective is to emphasize a need for students to connect the things in literature to life--to make emotional connections. Hopefully, though, this is something a good teacher will do without it being required in the Common Core.
Sign Systems and Knowledge:
The language used in the Standards definitely privileges English speakers, as it is written in English. Also, it privileges those with cultural capital, as I mentioned before, with an assumed knowledge of Shakespeare. The language is also directly connected to the language of academia, which not everyone would understand. It is written with a fairly specific audience in mind and would be inaccessible to some populations.
Significance:
The one thing that jumped out as being made significant is the work of William Shakespeare. The Common Core says in parentheses to include "Shakespeare as well as other authors." Clearly, Shakespeare is significant because he is named and singled out as a significant author to examine when looking at "language that is particularly fresh, engaging, or beautiful." Also, that very quote places significance on how language should be noticed. Language should be "fresh, engaging, or beautiful," and it is up to CCR 11-12 graders to determine such language.
Practices:
This part of Gee's discourse is hard for me to understand, but the way I do understand it is easily described by Gee as the "chicken and egg question." The way the Common Core addresses this, in my interpretation, is "Do we talk about word choice, authorial intent, point of view, etc. because they are part of Reading Standards?" OR "Do we call them Reading Standards because they include discussions about such topics?" I think thinking about these questions, and similar ones, can make us question why we teach the things we teach. Is it because they are part of reading standards or is it because they are important skills that they become part of reading standards?
Identities:
This portion of the Common Core is identifying students to whom this applies as students in "Grades 11-12." So, we could ask, "What does that mean: are these students physically 11th and 12th graders? Are these students intellectually at an 11th-12th grade level? Do these students have the prerequisites and background information to be successful in an 11th-12th grade classroom?
Because these students are on the brink of entering their careers or college, they are also identified as nearly College and Career Ready. By meeting the Reading Standards listed, they will be CCR.
Relationships:
The Common Core is definitely trying to establish a relationship based on academia. This relationship is being formed primarily with teachers and administration. It is the authority on Reading Standards for 11-12 grade students to which teachers and administrators must answer. I think it can be a good thing or a bad thing that this does NOT emphasize a relationship between teachers/administrators and students.
Politics:
This passage places social good on a CCR student. This student, in 11-12 grades, should be able to proficiently do everything listed. This includes determining word meaning, etc., analysis of word choice, impact, etc., and more. Also, a cultural capital is assumed by mentioning Shakespeare as a particular author whose work is an example of "language that is particularly fresh, engaging, or beautiful."
Connections:
The Common Core seeks to make connections between multiple facets of a written work. It desires CCR students to be able to start with basic understanding of literature then make connections from what they read to what is implied or meant as well as what the author intend the text to mean. I think this part of the Common Core is one of the best and potentially most effective. Connections are so important. What would make this part of the Standards more effective is to emphasize a need for students to connect the things in literature to life--to make emotional connections. Hopefully, though, this is something a good teacher will do without it being required in the Common Core.
Sign Systems and Knowledge:
The language used in the Standards definitely privileges English speakers, as it is written in English. Also, it privileges those with cultural capital, as I mentioned before, with an assumed knowledge of Shakespeare. The language is also directly connected to the language of academia, which not everyone would understand. It is written with a fairly specific audience in mind and would be inaccessible to some populations.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)