[etni] Re: A Response to Sharon Tzur - The Literature Pilot
- From: David Graniewitz <graniewitz@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: agarti@xxxxxxxxxxxx, etni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 22:11:18 +0200 (IST)
I was plesaed to read that Aviv has so many positive things
to say about the upcoming literature module. However, I do
have a couple of questions about what she wrote.
1. Aviva writes that her pupils were given 5 hours of
English a week and that was not enough. What will happen in
those schools (such as the 2 in which I teach) where only 4
hours a week are allocated? If 5 hours was not enough for
Aviva, what are the rest of us to do?
2. The issue of the workload was brought up. Given the fact
that the F and G modules are basically the same, getting rid
of one should not, in theory, cut down on the amount of
preperation time needed. How will getting rid of the F
module cut down our workload?
It must be stated thast there is still a great amount of
apprehension about the new module amongst teachers that I
have spoken to or corresponded with.
Regards
David Graniewitz
Jerusalem
Dear Sharon,
It was good to hear from you and read your involved interest
in what I believe to be no less than a revolutionary upgrade
of both the teaching of English in general and the attitude
towards the subject of English in high schools in
particular.
I'll gladly answer each one of your many : ) questions, all
important and relevant. Be advised, though, this mail will
be anything but short..
First I'd like to emphasize that when I referred to the very
demanding and hard work we had to put in, the pilot is what
I had in mind. We all know that pilots are by definition
very challenging and, more often than not, the learning and
initial experimental implementation of all those new ideas
could involve strenuous and often stressful effort.
(Especially if you happen to be a hopeless geek heading a
team of some more hopeless geeks..)
Much of it is the result of the nature of such projects,
they're experimental, and they require a lot of
resourcefulness, adjustment abilities and resilience on the
part of the participants. (yes, I'm complimenting my staff
members, proud of you, dears!) But - all this concerns
working under pilot conditions. It is a totally different
saga when the program is implemented as an integral part of
the High School Curriculum in English starting from 10th
grade.
We implemented the Literature Pilot Program in our 11th 5
point classes. We were only 4 teachers, because that
particular year we had fewer students than the usual in our
school. The number of students who participated in the pilot
is around 130.
We were sure we wanted to join in and participate in the
pilot because it happens that practically (apart from one
teacher, who along the way got swept into our enthusiasm as
well) all of us are avid literature appreciators. We were
not sure whether to choose the log or the exam. My staff
pushed for the exam and though I was concerned about the
risks I thought we were taking, in hindsight I can only hug
them and thank them for insisting on the exam.
The literature pieces were 6 all time favorite classics,
traditionally taught in many schools in Israel: All My Sons,
Eveline, A Summer's Reading, The Road Not Taken, Richard
Cory and Musee Des Beaux Arts.
Since I myself have been teaching these classics for some 28
years, the more we delved into the new program, the more I
felt confident about teaching them for an external exam and
also incorporating the new HOTS approach to literature that
the pilot was about. We taught the pieces as usual but we
added the aspect of Higher Order Thinking Skills which
(believe it or not ) got many students interested in the
actual process of recognizing thinking skills and applying
them to reading literature (and in English..)
We taught literature as we knew how, including literary
techniques, thematic analyses and even bridging text and
context though we didn't call them that, previously. The
background material that students studied was used as an
introduction and we would occasionally quote the authors or
comments about the authors or their pieces and ask the
students what they thought about that comment etc. I
remember an exam I gave some 4 years ago to my 12th 5 point
class in which I included a writing task with a quote by
Joyce about The Dubliners and Eveline in specific, saying
that through those characters he wanted to recount "the
moral history of his country". The students had to respond
to that quote and they found it interesting and some came up
with really insightful ideas.
At any rate, the teaching itself was probably one of the
most professionally gratifying experiences for one main
reason: students, for the first time, perhaps, could be
presented with a direct, unequivocal cause and effect link
between what they put into the subject of English and their
performance on tests.
That is one great advantage of choosing the exam rather than
the log. In fact what I'm advocating as a wonderful
experience is the exam option of the new Literature Module.
As for assessment, we gave them tests and writing tasks.
Many of them. First, we put together exams according to our
own interpretation of what was required. Later on, we got
the detailed specifications and the sample exam and that
paved the way to more and more tests and writing tasks based
on the same principles.
You're asking if it's the same amount of work as a regular F
or G. Truthfully, I think that given the fact that so far we
had to teach the literature in depth in addition to and not
instead of one of these modules, I can almost dare to guess
that having a Literature Module might even save us some
work..
I have to add here that all this holds true if you do indeed
teach literature in depth and implement the requirement of
Appreciation of Literature and Culture to the letter.. which
I have been doing wholeheartedly since 1982..
Back to numbers: we had 5 weekly hours (alas not enough
but..) out of which 2 or 3 were devoted to the literature,
not including the past three months..
The program, which will hopefully be implemented starting
next year, is the best thing that has happened to the
subject of English in years. How often have you heard that
there is nothing to study for prior to a test in English?
Not from students, but from other professionals in the
system? How often have you heard that students could be
asked to give up a lesson of English in order to catch up on
history, math, physics or any other subject with specific
material that needs to be covered for exams?
Our students, not without moaning and groaning, to be sure,
were lucky to experience the true meaning of "no pain no
gain" or Yagata umatsata, in ancient Hebrew. That in itself
is no less than a revolution.
I have to, again, stress that this is true about our
experience doing the exam and not the log. I'm afraid that,
especially where the status of the subject of English is
concerned, the literature exam rather than the literature
log is the change that a system like ours needs.
To conclude, if you're interested in how the program has
affected the learning process, go to the students. One
comment that can attest to its beneficial impact on the
subject comes from a 12th grade student council activist
who, while presenting the plan for the school Purim party,
has announced that "all English teachers are invited to the
party thanks to the good exam they arranged for us".
That more or less covers about .. half of what I had to
say..
I hope it helped clarify the picture a bit.
All the very best,
Aviva Gartenberg
Hadarim High School
Hod Hasharon
-----------------------------------------------
** Etni homepage - http://www.etni.org
or - http://www.etni.org.il **
** for help - ask@xxxxxxxx **
** to post to this list - etni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx **
-----------------------------------------------
Other related posts: