[etni] Re: Sorry for the oversight
- From: James Backer <drjamesbacker@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: etni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 07:49:50 -0800 (PST)
Greetings Maxine and all!
Yes, we do agree that Literature should be taught and that it should be in the
Bagrut exam.
We also agree that HOTS is normally part of good teaching, of almost any
subject, but:
1. I'm not so sure that Literature should be forced into facilitating HOTS,
just because we have to cover X number of HOTS in Y number of Literature
pieces. I guess that most teachers could learn how to contort what should be a
free flow of enjoyment into structured HOT lessons. We can also learn how to
walk with a pebble in our shoe.
2. I don't see the sense in having the kids memorize and deal with the names of
the HOTS while learning Literature. I would rather they spend the time and
effort learning the terminology of literary analysis, which is certainly hard
enough as it is. In the future, the literary analysis will help them enjoy
Literature as adults, something that will not be achieved by learning HOTS
terminology. (Yes, they should be taught how to use HOTS in analysizing
Literature and other things, but why focus on the nomiclature?)
3. I am absolutely sure that students should NOT have to answer ANY
meta-cognitive questions in the Bagrut exam. With the modular Bagrut system,
each module has very few questions, giving a very heavy weight to each
question. Even one meta-cognitive question can skew the score which was meant
to show compentencies in English language and English Literature.
I do understand the practical and technical problems of having an essay exam
for Literature, and the resulting limitation of pieces. One possibility is to
have a relatively small core program to choose from, that includes what will
appear on the exam. Teachers will then have to teach x number of additional
pieces, of their choice. These non-core pieces would be approved by the
Inspectors. Dealing with these other literary pieces will be reflected in the
school grade, as it is supposed to be now.
Yes, I know that this opens up the possiblity of schools just teaching the core
and skipping the other pieces, but it probably will be a reasonable compromise
in most cases. Even in the laziest of schools, the core pieces will be taught.
In the other schools, hopefully the vast majority, the kids will prepare to be
examined on the core and then just enjoy the others for the sake of enjoyment.
I know that there are very few inspectors covering a massive number of schools,
but a few random (or not so random) spot-checks may encourage the schools to
follow the rules.
One thing is sure: If a teacher enjoys teaching Literature, then the chances
are much higher that the kids will enjoy Literature. If a teacher feels trapped
and frustrated while teaching Literature, the chances are that the kids won't
enjoy it either. The obvious conclusion is that we have to encourage teachers
to enjoy Literature. I doubt that subordinating Literature to HOTS is the most
successful way to do this.
Jimmy
Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2009 12:50:17 +0200
From: maxinetz <maxinetz@xxxxxxx>
Subject: [etni] Re: Sorry for the oversight
Hi Jimmy. Thanks for answering my question. First of all, I was happy
to see that you think Literature should be brought back to the Bagrut in
some way. So we agree! Second of all, interestingly enough, you advocate
some kind of return to the method that was used over 30 years ago, testing
Literature via essay questions, with plenty of choice. However, let me
remind you that even then there was not unlimited choice!! I'm sure you
realize that on a national standardized exam there can't be unlimited
choice, because of the issues of test reliability and marker familiarity
with the pieces tested. The exam option as it is foreseen will allow
wide, though limited choice (from among 10 stories and 10 poems, the list
of which will be gleaned from teachers' recommendations) for HALF of the
Literature Program. And leaving aside your reservations about the Log
option, here you are allowed unlimited choice, subject to your inspector's
approval. So far I don't see that much disagreement between us....
As I understand you, your major concern, though, is with the HOTS. Have
you been reading the postings of teachers such as Shelley Ganiel and Aviva
Shapiro who participated in the Pilot Program last year? From their
experience the infusion of HOTS did not impair their creativity or freedom
to teach the literature as they wanted to, and in fact enhanced it. This
was the feedback that I also got as a counselor for the pilot, although I
admit at the beginning teachers were complaining that they were getting
bogged down with the HOTS, until they learned how to integrate them into
their lessons naturally. You shouldn't brush off the experience of those
who actually tried out the program and were pleased with it . As to
whether or not there should be explicit questions relating to metacognitive
skills on the Bagrut EXAM, yes, there is disagreement about this, that's
true. In any case, even as it stands now, if you look at the
specifications for the upcoming Module F Literature Exam next week, you'll
see that the questions on the HOTS are far from being the focus.
My only plea is for everyone to see the bottom line here: literature is
being brought back into the Bagrut, which I would think we'd all be
applauding instead of griping about. We can discuss the details, yes, and
changes are being made all the time as a result of feedback from the field.
In any case,
if you look objectively you'll see that the way you envision it being tested
is not all that different from the vision of the program under way.
Regards,
Maxine Tsvaigrach
-----Original Message-----
From: etni-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:etni-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf
Of James Backer
Sent: Friday, February 06, 2009 2:39 PM
To: etni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [etni] Sorry for the oversight
Greetings, all - again,
I just realized that I got so wrapped up in the issues of teaching
Literature, that I didn't fully answer Maxine's question about testing it. I
apologize for that.
Yes, it would appear that many schools will only teach Literature if it
appears on the Exam, so it should appear somewhere on the Bagrut
exam. Unfortunate, but true.
Without claiming to be an expert on constructing exams, here are a few
suggestions:
1. Do not test meta-cognition, test English and English Literature.
2. Ask general questions that could be relevant about most pieces of
Literature. Have separate questions about plays, novels, short stories, and
poetry. These general, yet genre-specific, questions will give the teachers
and the kids more flexibility in the Literature they experience in class.
Preparing for this type questions will train kids to appreciate, and even
enjoy, literature in the future. (Asking about which HOTS they used will
have very little value in their future.)
3. Let the kids choose one or two questions out of a larger number of
questions.
4. I guess this means going back to the Literature essay format, or some
type of short-essay format. I don't think that this would be an unreasonable
challenge for real 5-pointers. I'm not so sure about 4-pointers - that takes
more thought.
Of course, having more essays would cost the MOE more money, but sometimes
the right way of doing things cost more.
I'm sure that there are lots of other reasonable ways of examining ENGLISH
and ENGLISH LITERATURE, without having to ask meta-cognitive questions.
Jimmy
-----------------------------------------------
** 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: