Blog 09

“More teachers than ever before are sharing criteria openly with students – or even working with students to define together what it means to write well” (Spandel 102). If there has been one subject I have been interested in since I started college it is the subject of trust and what trust is. I believe that one of the biggest obstacles faced by teachers is the lack of trust that exists between the teachers and their students. I just mentioned obstacles and that is exactly what a lack in trust is and near physical wall that permanently separates student from teacher. One way I think that trust can be gained is through what Spandel is talking about in that single line I quoted above. By allowing the students to know, up front, all of the rules, expectations, and requirements of an assignment the teacher can effectively beginning to hammer at the wall that exists between him or her and the student. However, I am slightly apprehensive about allowing students to help define those rules, expectations, and requirements. During the summers I work as a councilor at summer day camp close to my parent’s home. One year, after taking a course in adolescent psychology, I decided to allow my kids (as I called and still call all the children at my camp)to help in the formation of the rules of the camp . . . it was the biggest mistake I ever made, and for one overriding reason: the majority of children and teenagers are self-serving. This is not necessarily a bad thing as it is a crucial part of mental development, however, the self-serving attitude of many children and teenagers make any rule just and balanced rule system impossible. The only thing I can suggest is that after fully disclosing the rules, expectations, and requirements in a class the students should be allowed to make suggestions and give feedback on the rules and such with the teacher taking the suggestions and feedback under advisement.

The Juska article was interesting, but more for the setting than the message behind the article. After all, we have had it beaten into our heads for four or more years that process writing is flexible, adaptable, and the way to go when teaching writing (although I wonder if the product writing generation had the same message beaten into their heads as if it was “gospel truth?”), so it was no surprise that Juska managed to teach writing, and teach it well in a maximum security prison.

One of the worst things about writing is getting started. The ideas exist, the thoughts bubble up and overflow in the brain like a cup of chocolate milk that a child is blowing into, but those thoughts cannot, for some reason, make it from the overflowing cup of the brain to the hand holding the pen or resting on the keyboard. Oft times what a writer needs is a sounding board, someone that they can just blurt, with no form, no function, no style the ideas overflowing (yet trapped) in their minds. This sounding board of a person acts also as a filter and focuser, asking the questions that need to be asked and cutting off the loose ends that are not needed. I think this may be what Smith is trying to say in the first part of his article about teachers demonstrating writing. Maybe by acting as the soundboard and focuser of one student while allowing the other students to watch and study would allow them (the students) to figure out how to finally allow the overflowing cup in their brain release itself through pen or keyboard . . . this is one very long fragment. When Smith talked about the researchers and the stop watches the only thing I could think was my own difficulties lately with lesson planning and “proper use of time.” While it is not true I think part of the problem with allowing time (enough time) to read and write in school is that allowing them can be seen as not a productive or full use of time. Here let me explain better:

Students are reading Romeo and Juliet in class, a mixture of silent self reading and group reading out loud. The school administration does not see this as productive because class time should be used to discuss and drill into the students Shakespeare’s intent, and meaning, and the subtles of his language and the meanings behind the text. And most importantly a large chunk of class time must be spent reviewing what they read to make sure they understood it.

I am not saying this is the case all around, and I’m not saying that it is even a real reason, but I do know that many teachers feel that they may get in trouble if it looks like THEY are doing nothing.