[etni] Fw: F and D
- From: "Ask_Etni" <ask@xxxxxxxx>
- To: "ETNI" <etni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 1 Feb 2009 22:40:14 +0200
----- Original Message -----
From: "Sharon Tzur" <sharontzu5@xxxxxxx>
Subject: F and D
F and D
Today, our we had a meeting with our recezet about the new Lit module, and
if I might borrow an expression from one of my favorite short stores, I feel
"saturated in depression. Literature has always been my favorite part of
teaching. In Hebrew, there is a lovely expression, "tzipor nefesh" - the
bird within my soul, and I honestly feel that the bird within my soul is
about to be strangled. Still, I'll try to put my personal feeling aside and
present what I see are major problems and suggestions for adjustments.
I- I think there should be some choice even within the core program,
especially regarding the long piece., I understand that there will be a
choice between the play and a novel. However, that's not enough of a choice;
considering that we spend a very significant amount of time on the "big"
piece, we should have more of a choice. We should have a choice among 4
pieces (2 plays / 2 novels or 3 plays 1 novel - I imagine that most teachers
prefer a play.) Similarly, there should be 4 short pieces from which we
CHOOSE two (not two mandatory), and 5 poems from which we choose 3. At any
rate, the test has to have questions on a large number of pieces in order
to accommodate the choices we make from the list of 10, so why not put the
choice into the CORE program (even at the expense of cutting the "choice"
list down to 6 -8 pieces). Do you know what it's like to be forced to teach
a piece of literature that you don't like?
II. I understand that people in the pilot and in the courses will be able to
give input as to the pieces to be selected for the 10 pieces that are not
core. Why aren't all high school English teachers being asked for their
input?
IV. I personally think there are serious problems with the Core pieces
chosen for the 5 pointers. We want our students to learn to love literature.
Would we get students to learn to love music by teaching them funeral
dirges? We have a play in which one young guy crashes his own airplane and
dies, while another character end up committing suicide. Then there is a
poem with another suicide, and another poem with a crash - this time a young
boy into the ocean. Both of these poems deal with human suffering, and the
bleakness of life. Then, in case the kids are too cheerful at this point, we
move into the dusty, dark claustrophobic atmosphere of Evelyn, with her
bleak life. My Summer's Reading seems downright cheery after all of that,
and no would exactly describe the atmosphere in that story as uplifting.
(How many of you would list A Summer's Reading on your list of your favorite
10 short stories... or even favorite 20...). I wonder what book they'll
chose? Lord of the Flies? Night, by Eli Weisel? Unfortunately, we live in a
country that is plagued by troubles. Must all the literature in the program
be so depressing?
Now I think that All My Sons and Evelyn are good pieces of literature, but
how palatable are they for today's youth? How many 17 year-old-guys are
going to find Evelyn, with its heavy language and slow introspection,
interesting? Moreover, there is the sensitivity problem. Unfortunately, we
have many students who belong to bereaved families. It's not a play I'd like
to teach to anyone who has a relative who was killed in a war, in a terror
attack, or even in an accident. Not to mention the fact that some of us
taught these pieces for more than 10 years during the time of the old, old,
old Bagrut. Why must we go back in a time warp and go back to teaching these
same pieces again. (Scotty, Warp 5).
V. The exam. I thought that Part 1 and Part 2 a-c are fine. However, part 3
is very difficult. Relating the story to a quote about the background is
really difficult. If I understand correctly, the students will get a quote
that they have not necessarily been exposed to before, and will relate it to
what they've read. Now I'm on half sabbatical and I just happen to be taking
a literature course with the very Dr. Enav who is being quoted in the
question on Evelyn. And we learned Evelyn with him and he just happened to
quote the very quote about Evelyn which appears in the exam. Just how are
they supposed to know what is meant by "moral paralysis". I'm not sure what
Joyce meant by that (I could take an educated guess). We discussed the term
in the class, but this is a class for adults, almost all of whom are native
speakers. And not only is the content very challenging; it's extremely
difficult to formulate an answer. And this item is worth 30 points!!
Now, we've been told that we are supposed to be working with the kids on
life skills. Just how many of our students will be called upon in the future
to write the answer to an analytical question of that kind in English?? I
feel that this item should not be given so much weight, and care must be
taken to select quotes that are not too difficult to understand.
The question I object to most on the exam is the one that asked them which
cognitive skill they used to answer Part II d, and why they used this
particular skill (Part II e). I don't see any problem teaching students
LITERARY TERMS and I don't see any problem helping students see what
cognitive processes they are using in class, but I don't think it's
reasonable to ask them to answer such a question as PART OF A TEST IN
ENGLISH!! We can teach a student different ways to approach a multiple
choice question, but when a student answers a multiple choice question on an
exam, do we make them tell us HOW they did it? (eliminated wrong answers?
Formulated the correct answer and then looked for the closest thing among
the choices?? Etc.) and do we go on and ask them WHY they approached the
answer in that manner. I'm really sorry, but I don't think the
"meta-cognitive" question has ANYTHING TO DO with knowledge of English,
with English skills, or with learning literature.
I have a decent background in educational psychology, including a course on
Cognition, and I couldn't necessarily pinpoint - even to myself - which
thinking skill I use to answer a certain question, let alone why I chose
that thinking skill - (as if these skills worked independently of each other
- what kind of thinking DOESN'T involve "making connections" for example.)
This is not a psychometric exam or an exercise for cognitive psychologists -
it's an exam on English literature for students (mostly) who are learning
English as a second language.
While we're on the subject, I don't think all of the things listed as
thinking skill are thinking skills. "Cause and Effect" is not a thinking
skill. The ability to make the connection between cause and effect is
perhaps a thinking skill. (Cause and Effect is not on the list in the
appendix, but given as an answer in the answer - the appendix says,
"Causality", which is also not a thinking skill). Likewise, "part and whole"
is not a thinking skill. I think there will be a great deal of confusion
over what the thinking skill is (finding a connection between cause and
effect) and what is the RESULT of the thinking (a cause and effect
relationship in the text). And remember that we are supposed to be teaching
all of this in English! If the Ministry of Education thinks it's important
for students to be aware of their thinking processes, why not do it in
Hebrew, for a Hebrew subject - why in a foreign language? And why in
literature. We're going to kill literature for a lot of the kids who will be
turned off by this kind of analysis.
Now I'm sure that someone is going to say that I should wait until I take
the course, or I should wait until I've taught it. Well, that will be too
late. Anyway, I've had experience with meta-cognition in teaching reading
comprehension skills. Some find it interesting and helpful, but many find it
tedious or confusing. It doesn't help everyone. Different students have
different ways of analyzing a text. But we've never asked students on a test
to explain how they came up with the right answer.
By the way, I really had trouble with the All My Sons question about the
meaning of the play changing as you read the play. I never assumed that
"All My Sons" refers only to the family - and I don't remember anything in
the TEXT that would suggest that. The first reference I remember to the name
All My Sons was when Keller uses the words in ACT III. (I must admit it's
been many years since I've read the play, but I once knew it practically by
heart.) I don't think I thought about the name of the play until Act III,
so to answer the question about the "changing meaning of the title", I'd
have to make something up.
Hope my remarks, especially about giving choice in the Core, choosing less
depressing pieces, and eliminating the meta-cognitive questions will fall on
attentive ears. I'd like to hear what other teachers think.
-----------------------------------------------
** 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: