[etni] Re: My reflections on the literature course
- From: "Nira Artzy" <arnira@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <etni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 4 Dec 2008 19:50:56 +0200 (����
I think Anon and others has raised very good questions. I haven't taken the
course yet and I'm very worried about doing the new modules, especially with
my 4 pts students. My 4 pts students can hardly write a few sentences in a
composition (a letter to a friend, for example). How will they be able to
write a few papers for every story/poem? Of course there will be cheating!
There's already a lot of cheating in project writing and I'll bet there will
be new sites where people will be able to download the literature work
required. On the other hand, if I choose the exam, I'll have to teach what
the Ministry dictates, which may not be suitable for my 4 pts students.
As Adele wrote a few days ago, Judy Steiner does NOT answer ETNI posts, but
she does answer questions addressed to her on the Ministry site,
http://cms.education.gov.IL/educationcms/units/mazkirut_pedagogit/English/wh
Atsnew/
And click on the bottom of the menu to the left that says: Contact Us. Or go
Directly to:
http://cms.education.gov.IL/EducationCMS/Units/Mazkirut_Pedagogit/English/Co
NtactUs/
This will get you directly to Judy Steiner, and she ALWAYS answers!"
I hope Anon, Judy vinograd and all the others who have written about the new
program will write Judy steiner and receive an official answer. I certainly
intend to write.
Nira
-------Original Message-------
From: Ask_Etni
Date: 03/12/2008 22:14:42
To: ETNI
Subject: [etni] My reflections on the literature course
A month or two ago, the new literature module was the subject of much
controversy on this list. At some point it died down, but I think that I'm
going to stoke the embers a bit by sharing my reflections on the literature
hishtalmut that I am currently attending.
Let me preface this with a few important points:
First, lest I be attacked by zealous Irgun members for attending the course
to begin with, I'd better point out that I am not a member of the Irgun, and
therefore am not bound by the Irgun's directives regarding the course, the
project, etc. That does not mean that I don't support the directives
(especially after a few sessions of this course!), but I did feel that I
could attend the hishtalmut without any pangs of conscience.
Second, I am posting anonymously. Some list members probably won't like it,
and I understand that, but I do have reasons (and unfortunately have
witnessed firsthand that they are quite valid) for fearing the repercussions
of posting a rather uncomplimentary letter about the Ministry to a public
forum of this sort.
Lastly, before I am accused by literature module proponents of being
pre-prejudiced against the whole concept, let me assure you that that is not
the case. I spoke to quite a few people who took last year's pilot program,
and they all spoke very highly of the experience. That, more than anything
else, convinced me to attend the course, and I was actually waiting eagerly
for it to start so I could see what this whole exciting thing was all about.
Unfortunately, I've been more than a little disappointed by what I've
discovered.
So now, for my reflections on the course:
1) It is WAY too long and drawn out. In our first session, the instructor
assured us that we weren't going to be doing anything new, just giving names
to things that we had already been doing in the past. My question at the
time was: Then why do we need 56 hours (14 long face to face meetings!) to
learn how to do that? By the end of the first session, I knew that the
question was justified. I had learned exactly one new thing - the criteria
for the pieces of literature that we will be allowed to use - in that whole
three and a quarter hour session! Subsequent sessions were no better, and
this is not only my feeling. I have spoken with numerous other participants,
and everyone is bored out of their mind and consider the course an enormous
waste of time (those that stayed, that is - many dropped out, and no
wonder). And I can assure you that no one walked in that way - we all wanted
to learn something new. So why do we have to spend 3 sessions talking about
what literature is and why we teach it, etc.? Maybe this is suitable for
first year teachers, but surely the Ministry realized that most of the
teachers taking the course are far from first year teachers. Actually, most
of the participants have been teaching for so long that they've pretty much
reached their gmul limit, so why should they waste their time on 56 hours of
blather? (Even those who haven't would rather get 56 hours for actually
studying something.) The Ministry should have taken that into account and
condensed the course - from what I've seen so far, it could have been cut by
at least 50%.
2) This program is, to an extent, going to kill literature. Just look at the
criteria for an accepted piece of literature: it must be unsimplified and
unabridged (yes, for 4 pointers, too, at this stage, although supposedly
they're still working on the 4 point criteria) and originally written in
English. Oh, and everything has to be a certain length. OK, I understand
levelling the playing field when it comes to length, so that you don't have
some teachers getting away with murder while others work very hard, but
sometimes that makes no sense. Some short poems, for example, have much more
to work with than much longer poems. The unsimplified part is going to be a
killer for four pointers. And using only works originally written in English
means that we won't be able to teach books like Night by Elie Wiesel, just
as one example. This criterion was not in the pilot program - but next year
we will all have to deal with it. Oh, and we were told that we need to spend
7 lessons minimum on each piece of literature - including poems. To me,
that's total overkill. (By the way, that's 70 hours total for 5 pointers,
more of course since a novel / play will obviously take more than 7 hours.
When exactly are we supposed to teach other things?) There are also lots of
criteria for how to teach the literature - you must go according to seven
steps, and students have to have written proof in their literature log that
you've done each step. All the participants I've talked to are getting a
very boxed-in feeling from all these requirements. We ALL teach literature
for literature's sake and love doing so, and now we are going to have to
rearrange our whole way of teaching, not in order to enhance literature but
in order to enhance students' higher order thinking skills. I have nothing
against teaching higher order thinking skills - on the contrary, I spend a
lot of time on that (without giving it a name... ), but I don't think that
it should be on literature's back.
3) The Irgun was right: this program is going to require an awful lot of
extra work. All you English teachers who are bored out of their skull
because they have nothing to do after they come home from their cushy
classroom jobs, step right up here to join! For the one or two that don't
match that description, be prepared for a lot more work. Basically, students
doing the log must have lots of pieces of written work for each piece of
literature - much more marking than we've done in the past, and believe me,
I do plenty as it is. Unless the Irgun manages to win this fight (which I
highly doubt, and forgive me for being so cynical), we're not going to be
paid extra, but the Ministry will have saved the cost of marking 2
modules... why shouldn't we get that money instead??? I assume that most
schools will prefer the log, because if you choose the test, you must teach
certain pieces of literature whether you like it or not, mostly golden
oldies such as All My Sons. If you're sick of those pieces of literature and
would prefer to teach something fresher, you have no choice but to choose
the log. In addition, I understand (although I don't have all the details)
that even students taking the test will have to prepare some sort of log,
and that on the whole, preparing students for the test won't end up being
less work than having them do the log.
So these are my reflections on the literature course. Am I eagerly
anticipating implementing the program next year? That's a resounding NO you
can hear echoing in the background! Has the Ministry once again jumped in
without taking into account everything that goes on in the classroom? Oh,
yes, no doubt about it. Once again, I'd like to emphasize that the
hishtalmut I am in is being attended by some of the brightest, most
experienced, most motivated, most caring teachers that I know - not people
who are being forced to attend, but people who really wanted to know what to
do with this program. If we are all at the same hostile stage regarding the
program, the problem is with the program and the course, not with the
participants. Will anyone in the Ministry even bother to take note of this
post? Probably not. But at least I know that I've warned others about what's
to come...
Anonymous
-----------------------------------------------
Call for Articles
The Etni Rag needs you
** Etni homepage - http://www.etni.org
or - http://www.etni.org.il **
** for help - ask@xxxxxxxx **
** to post to this list - etni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx **
-----------------------------------------------
__________ NOD32 3661 (20081203) Information __________
This message was checked by NOD32 antivirus system.
http://www.eset.com
-----------------------------------------------
Call for Articles
The Etni Rag needs you
** 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: