I'm sure you've heard that saying: Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll eat for a lifetime. I realize it's a stretch, but I see writing in a similar way. When it comes to writing ability and performance, incoming third graders run the whole gamut. The reasons for this variance are many and varied. For some students, English is their second language. Other students may struggle with small motor skills. Still, others may need to work on building their writing muscle through deliberate practice and time on task. Clearly, there are several reasons why students differ in writing ability and performance. 

        Regardless of whether students are or are not at grade level, as their teacher, I am tasked with moving them further along the spectrum than when they first stepped foot into my class. Meeting all my students' needs so they can experience growth is no easy feat. Success will depend on determining instructional needs by looking at my students through the following lenses: as a whole class, as small groups with similar needs, and as individuals. Additionally, I need to remember that these groups are fluid; I need to be alert to changes in need. 

        Here's a way that has served me well over the years. On the very first day of school, I have my students respond to a prompt about themselves. This year I asked them to tell me how they've changed over the past year. I steer away from content-related questions because I don't want content-area knowledge to be a barrier. In addition, I tell them to not worry about spelling. I don't want them to not use a word just simply because they don't know how to spell it. (There will be plenty of time to focus on spelling later.) Finally, I don't give them any precise directions because I don't want to influence them in any way. At this point, I want raw data. This assignment will serve as my baseline data. Looking at their writing through various lenses referenced in the previous paragraph will enable me to sort out groupings. 

        I realize that all teachers have different ways of teaching writing. In fact, I would venture to say that their approaches are as individual as the teachers themselves. Although the ensuing list of questions is certainly not exhaustive by any means, it can serve as a starting point: Do students 1) understand what a subject is? 2) what a verb is 3) know the difference between proper nouns that need to be capitalized and common nouns? 4) need to work on adding details? Taking anecdotal notes as you review students' daily writing can prompt mini-lessons for individuals, groups, or perhaps even the entire class. Of course, not every student is going to be a professional author. Still, every student needs to be a proficient enough writer to be able to skillfully convey information, ideas, and thoughts in whatever situation they find themselves in the future. 

       This quote captures how I feel about writing. I hope I can inspire my students to feel the same way! 

Huddle Time - Edulastic and Creating Sub Groups

 

Welcome to my second 'Huddle Time' - the purpose of this time is to provide a short video that offers student centered ideas to consider for your classroom.

HUDDLE TIME VIDEO

Today's Huddle Time focuses on 

    -  Edulastic and creating sub groups

Edulastic is an assessment platform that disaggregates the data based on your classes.  However, you can also create additional groups to compare within the any assessment you administer.

Remember to believe in yourself, believe that you matter, and believe that you can make a difference.

Teaching and still loving it,      

Kevin Stott                               

De Anza Middle School 

Owning Versus Renting

    Being an owner is way better than merely renting. And, no, I am not referring to real estate. I'm talking about knowledge. When my students are merely "renting" knowledge, it stays in short-term memory. They cannot become "owners" until that information moves into long-term memory. It can be difficult to determine owners from renters. 

   Unfortunately, I know this from firsthand experience. It became apparent to me this week. Let me explain. I've been consistently reviewing the eight Thinking Maps (that have been posted on my wall since the first day of school) and their corresponding thought processes. In fact, I've come up with a chant and gestures for each map.

    Yesterday I decided to test how many of the Thinking Maps and their thought processes they really knew. Here's what I did. I posted the various maps and assigned them each a number. Then I presented an imaginary scenario, such as "Let's imagine that I am a kindergartner and my teacher wants me to brainstorm all the animals I can come up with. Which map would describe the thought process necessary to generate all of those animals? When I say 'show me,' show me with your fingers which map I'm describing." 
    Students were eager to show me; however, their responses were literally all over the map, so to speak. Why?!? The answer: they were merely renting the chants and gestures. Sure they enjoyed the catchy chant and the playful gestures, but they weren't transferring, applying, or extending that knowledge. It wasn't their fault. It was most assuredly mine. I haven't given them the opportunity to transfer, apply, or extend that knowledge consistently. Are we still going to recite the chants with accompanying gestures? Of course. Chants are captivating, and gestures definitely help students remember. From now on, though, I am going to engage students in actually connecting the maps with their thought processes with real-world, as well as imaginary scenarios.

    Albert Einstein is credited with saying, "Insanity is doing the same thing over and over again and expecting different results." Perhaps truer words have never been uttered. If I want students to truly master Thinking Maps, then I need to change my approach. Note to self: DAILY extend students' understanding of Thinking Maps by not only presenting multiple imaginary and real-life scenarios, but by also directly teaching key words. This will enable students to become owners who can automatically connect the thought process related to a given scenario to its corresponding Thinking Map. To illustrate, I may say something like, "Imagine I am a seventh grader in a life science class and we are learning the various parts of a frog's body. Which map would help me connect the whole body of a frog to its different parts?" As time goes by, I will imbed fewer and fewer clues as students' automaticity grows. I am confident that my students will become Thinking Maps experts in no time!

Still living the Spotlight Life,

Lola E. Jollie