[etni] Re: Sharon Tsur's posting... some more "Interesting point(s)"
- From: maxinetz <maxinetz@xxxxxxx>
- To: raemer@xxxxxxxxxxx, 'ETNI' <etni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 14:58:13 +0200
I second everything that Adele has written here. The claim that the exam
has been deliberately "sabotaged" in order to convince teachers to choose
the Log option, thereby fulfilling the diabolical plan of the Ministry of
Education to save money on our bent and broken backs, is particularly
delusional. Adele is absolutely right, and I can second the fact that even
in the Choice Program, teachers are choosing the well-known pieces, some of
which, by the way, are depressing and some of which are less so. Life
is depressing sometimes, and some of the world's greatest literature
therefore is, also. And what, may I ask, is "depressing" about All My
Sons? Yes, our protagonist commits suicide, but the play does end on an
optimistic note. Is The Road Not Taken depressing?
And let me reiterate two points made by Adele: one, that in the Log option
you are free to choose whatever pieces that turn you on, subject to the
approval of your regional inspector who will see that the pieces meet
certain set criteria (its depressiveness NOT being one of them ;-)) ).
In addition, half of the Exam consists of a Choice Program in order to
accommodate the desires of teachers to teach the pieces they love. There
will be a choice of among 10 short stories and 10 poems, based on the
feedback that we are getting from teachers in the courses taking place .
I am not an apologist for the English Inspectorate but everything Adele says
is true. They are bending over backwards NOT to dictate from above and to
see that the literature program meets teachers' needs to the greatest
possible extent.
Thank you, Adele, for presenting the facts. There has been a lot of
irresponsible maligning going on and I hope people are open-minded enough to
hear the truth.
Regards,
Maxine Tsvaigrach
-----Original Message-----
From: etni-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:etni-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of Adele Raemer and Laurie Levy
Sent: Tuesday, February 03, 2009 10:59 AM
To: 'ETNI'
Subject: [etni] Re: Sharon Tsur's posting... some more "Interesting
point(s)"
> From: "remanuel" remanuel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> By the way, core material is material dictated by the ministry for the
> exam - these are the "oldies"/depressing pieces
> of literature. You can choose your own pieces for the log.
Some more interesting facts that nobody who is so strenuously objecting to
what they are not sufficiently informed about, seems to know:
1. The pieces for the exam core were originally chosen after doing a
survey of what pieces teachers use the most in their classrooms. The
rationale behind that was that they (the steering committee) did not want
us all to be dealing with too much "new" all at once- so the idea was: let
the teachers learn the new pedagogy behind the methodologies for infusing
HOTS into English teaching in general, and literature more specifically, and
THEN to start introducing other, less familiar literature.
2. Another reason behind this choice was so as to NOT necessitate
massive purchasing of new anthologies- rather to use pieces from the
anthologies most used in our classrooms.
3. I just had teachers in my current online course, fill in a survey,
and - in addition to many lovely, unfamiliar, potentially very exciting
suggestions - the pieces that got the MOST votes for which pieces of
literature THEY most want to include. were the oldies! (Summer's Reading,
Eveline, Richard Cory, etc.) These are teachers from different schools in
Tel Aviv and surrounding areas.
4. Again- as was mentioned here - for the log you have PRACTCALLY free
choice. There ARE guidelines (length, authenticity, appropriacy of content)
but ANY piece of literature that YOU feel passionate about as being worthy
of including in your program, can appeal to receive special permission from
your inspector.
The thing that upsets me with all of these postings objecting to this
program, is that people seem to be accusing the powers that be of being
controlling, manipulating, mean-minded tyrants when the truth behind the
scenes is that the people on the steering committee (of which _I_ am NOT a
member, so I can write this freely and honestly) are dedicated inspectors,
counselors and teachers in the field who have invested - and are investing -
an unbelievable amount of time and effort, drafting among the best of the
minds and creative energies in the EFL teaching community in Israel in order
to advance our students and our professional teaching skills. They
brainstorm, draft, think and rethink, send out to others to review, ask for
(and get) feedback from teachers in the field using the materials, and
change/adapt again and again in an attempt to improve and perfect. ANY and
ALL teachers, at EVERY OPPORTUNITY have been and are called upon to send in
recommendations for pieces of literature. I wonder if the other
inspectorates can be accredited with such hard work and dedication.
Rather than appreciating all this hard work and dedication, all _I_ see
going on here is a lot of complaints and criticisms. Shame on us. We on this
list are dedicated English teachers/ educators. We know the importance of
praise for good, hard, serious work. This does not only apply to our
students...We should know better.
Adele
-----------------------------------------------
** Etni homepage - http://www.etni.org
or - http://www.etni.org.il **
** for help - ask@xxxxxxxx **
** to post to this list - etni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx **
-----------------------------------------------
-----------------------------------------------
** 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: