Hi guys!! It's a freaking beautiful day! I'm currently blogging in a lovely grassy spot outside :)
I'm a little nervous because theres a bunch of tables nearby.. I think they're gonna set up that W day thing right where I'm sitting. Awkward.
Also, warning: I can't really see my computer screen due to the glare of the sun. Let's just say this blog is free form... I'm just going to keep typing. I can't see what I'm typing, and I'm not going to put in much effort to go back and change things (because I can't see)
Anways, I figured it was about time for me to start reflecting on the session we had on Tuesday. I'm a little nervous because I didn't really take any notes. I hope I can remember enough to write the reflection. I should have just blogged right after the session on Tuesday, but I was really tired and cranky. I guess that's my first point. I had been having a pretty bad couple of days before the session. I had a paper due that day, got minimal sleep the few previous nights before, was super stressed out with other homework, and honestly just wanted to pause life for a bit so I could sleep and get my shit together. I was feeling like my life's a mess.
Naturally, I was especially nervous about the session I was supposed to have. I felt like there was no way I could lead a productive session! I couldn't even think straight. The was no way I could help John make a cohesive paper if my thoughts weren't even cohesive. I was feeling a little guilty. I didn't want my life problems to hinder our session. Regardless, we started the session like any other.
Of course, John asked me to read the paper out loud. The one day where I really, truly didn't want to read aloud, and probably couldn't even focus enough to do so, the writer wanted me to read aloud. It was awful. I stumbling over lots of words, I had to stop and thinking about what I was actually reading. It was a problem.
I actually cane to realize that my confusion might have helped the session. I was asking real, honest questions because I didn't know what was going on. John was able to clear things up, and I think it changed the way he thought about the paper. He marked some things to change and clarify. Most importantly, we talked about whether or not each part of the paper was even relevant. We realized the argument he was trying to make was not stated in his thesis. WE made a plan to change the thesis, and restructure the paper to match. I feel like at the end of the session John knew what he needed to do, but I'm not sure.
I hope he thought the session went well. I hope he didn't realize I was a tired, cranky mess. Tuesday I learned that I need to make sure my personal problems don't affect the sessions.
Thursday, April 19, 2012
Thursday, April 12, 2012
Sex.
Hi guys. I don't remember the last time I wrote a blog outside of the hollenbeck lab. I'm in my dorm right now. We'll see how this goes.
Seeing as I come from an academic environment where the importance of a thesis was drilled into my head, I was digging the acronym today: FAST (focused, arguable, sexy, thesis). But on my way back to New Hall, I was thinking about the concept of a thesis. Is it possible to have a really well-written essay that doesn't have a thesis? I can't imagine every attempting such a thing, but what if the intro paragraph layed out the paper and set up an argument but didn't have a specific thesis presented at the end of the first paragraph?
Just a thought. Because I know we kind of have the concept of a five paragraph essay drilled into our heads in American. Hook, thesis, topic sentences, transitions, conclusion... why? This brings me back to that video we watched about ESL students and how other cultures tackle writing differently. In American academia, inconclusive, circular writing is frowned upon. A straight-forward argument is expected.
Returning to my first rhetorical question, I just realised: the definition of a "well-written" paper is so completly subjective. It depends on what country you're in and a whole host of other things. Regardless, it might be interesting to attempt an essay without a thesis. I don't think I could do it.
I like theses, like most of us. I believe in the power of a sexy thesis, and the "turn-off" created from the lack of a thesis. When there isn't a thesis in an essay, I'm immediately sceptical and nervous. I hate not knowing what the paper is going to be about by the time I've read through the introduction paragraph. A paper without a thesis leaves me disappointed, confused, and generally uninterested before I've even reached the second paragraph. That's a big deal.
So yay for sexy theses! Today's class redefined my relationship with theses and took it to a whole new level...
I'm gonna make some posters about this, I swear.
Sarah
Seeing as I come from an academic environment where the importance of a thesis was drilled into my head, I was digging the acronym today: FAST (focused, arguable, sexy, thesis). But on my way back to New Hall, I was thinking about the concept of a thesis. Is it possible to have a really well-written essay that doesn't have a thesis? I can't imagine every attempting such a thing, but what if the intro paragraph layed out the paper and set up an argument but didn't have a specific thesis presented at the end of the first paragraph?
Just a thought. Because I know we kind of have the concept of a five paragraph essay drilled into our heads in American. Hook, thesis, topic sentences, transitions, conclusion... why? This brings me back to that video we watched about ESL students and how other cultures tackle writing differently. In American academia, inconclusive, circular writing is frowned upon. A straight-forward argument is expected.
Returning to my first rhetorical question, I just realised: the definition of a "well-written" paper is so completly subjective. It depends on what country you're in and a whole host of other things. Regardless, it might be interesting to attempt an essay without a thesis. I don't think I could do it.
I like theses, like most of us. I believe in the power of a sexy thesis, and the "turn-off" created from the lack of a thesis. When there isn't a thesis in an essay, I'm immediately sceptical and nervous. I hate not knowing what the paper is going to be about by the time I've read through the introduction paragraph. A paper without a thesis leaves me disappointed, confused, and generally uninterested before I've even reached the second paragraph. That's a big deal.
So yay for sexy theses! Today's class redefined my relationship with theses and took it to a whole new level...
I'm gonna make some posters about this, I swear.
Sarah
Tuesday, April 10, 2012
Love a Good Metaphor
Hi guys.
I loved the metaphor worksheet we did today! While at first I thought it was kind of strange, it really got me thinking about myself as a writing advisor. I love metaphors and symbolism and all that jazz. It reminds me of my theater classes in high school. Everything symbolizes something in theater! I remember having to design sets, and then having to write up a justification for everything on the set. A lot of the time, I would create the set with the first ideas that came to mind, and then make a metaphor/justification for it all later. My theater director really helped me realize that usually the first thing that comes to mind has relevance to us, and has strong meaning and symbolism. Often, people try to force a metaphor and make it really meaningful, but the ideas in the back of our head often have more power than the ideas we spends hours trying to come up with.
Cool stuff.
So, to summarize my metaphor sheet, I am a circular, navy chihuahua who loves yoga pants, Tuesdays, jazz, wind, and bread. Yay.
At first I tried to come up with a really significant response to each of these questions, but then I realized that by over thinking things, I wasn't giving honest answers. Kind of like theater.
With the animal metaphor, at first I wanted to describe myself as an animal known for wisdom or poise, but I realized that was so forced (and possibly inaccurate :P). I am a chihuahua --not the super annoying, wimpy kind, but the chihuahua that is excited, involved, enthusiastic, and ready to go. I love the writing center, and I'm already getting really excited about the work we do. I love talking to people about papers! I think language is really freaking awesome and I love to see how people use their words. Yes, I may have my tired days, but my enthusiasm for writing will never change.
The yoga pants were kind of a stretch (pun?). I think I am yoga pants as an advisor because yoga pants are comfortable and familiar, but they still make you look good. They are far more presentable than sweatpants, and look a lot less sloppy.
As an advisor, I am navy. Navy is warm and deep. I'm constantly searching for hidden metaphors and philosophical reasoning/ symbolism. I try to find a deeper meaning for everything, even if the writer wasn't intending to have some form of symbolism. (Although I won't try to change the writer's ideas; sometimes I keep these supposed metaphors to myself). I'm a circle because I always look for connection and logical progression in a paper. Papers must have a certain fluidity and cohesion.
I am wind because I push the writers along. I ask questions, and always look for a deeper development.
I am jazz music because, similar to the wind, I like to have the session constantly moving and developing. I ask unexpected questions, and I'm quick to improvise and create.
I am Tuesday because Monday's suck, but by Tuesday you're ready to take on the week. At least for me, I always have a general weekly to-do list created by Tuesday. I'm ready to be productive and dominate the week.
I am bread, because I believe in starting with the basics. Bread serves as a substantial base to every meal. I believe that a strong thesis and an clear set of ideas are the most important part of a a paper. They are the base of the paper, and that's where I like to focus my attention.
Have a lovely day,
Chihuahua <3
I loved the metaphor worksheet we did today! While at first I thought it was kind of strange, it really got me thinking about myself as a writing advisor. I love metaphors and symbolism and all that jazz. It reminds me of my theater classes in high school. Everything symbolizes something in theater! I remember having to design sets, and then having to write up a justification for everything on the set. A lot of the time, I would create the set with the first ideas that came to mind, and then make a metaphor/justification for it all later. My theater director really helped me realize that usually the first thing that comes to mind has relevance to us, and has strong meaning and symbolism. Often, people try to force a metaphor and make it really meaningful, but the ideas in the back of our head often have more power than the ideas we spends hours trying to come up with.
Cool stuff.
So, to summarize my metaphor sheet, I am a circular, navy chihuahua who loves yoga pants, Tuesdays, jazz, wind, and bread. Yay.
At first I tried to come up with a really significant response to each of these questions, but then I realized that by over thinking things, I wasn't giving honest answers. Kind of like theater.
With the animal metaphor, at first I wanted to describe myself as an animal known for wisdom or poise, but I realized that was so forced (and possibly inaccurate :P). I am a chihuahua --not the super annoying, wimpy kind, but the chihuahua that is excited, involved, enthusiastic, and ready to go. I love the writing center, and I'm already getting really excited about the work we do. I love talking to people about papers! I think language is really freaking awesome and I love to see how people use their words. Yes, I may have my tired days, but my enthusiasm for writing will never change.
The yoga pants were kind of a stretch (pun?). I think I am yoga pants as an advisor because yoga pants are comfortable and familiar, but they still make you look good. They are far more presentable than sweatpants, and look a lot less sloppy.
As an advisor, I am navy. Navy is warm and deep. I'm constantly searching for hidden metaphors and philosophical reasoning/ symbolism. I try to find a deeper meaning for everything, even if the writer wasn't intending to have some form of symbolism. (Although I won't try to change the writer's ideas; sometimes I keep these supposed metaphors to myself). I'm a circle because I always look for connection and logical progression in a paper. Papers must have a certain fluidity and cohesion.
I am wind because I push the writers along. I ask questions, and always look for a deeper development.
I am jazz music because, similar to the wind, I like to have the session constantly moving and developing. I ask unexpected questions, and I'm quick to improvise and create.
I am Tuesday because Monday's suck, but by Tuesday you're ready to take on the week. At least for me, I always have a general weekly to-do list created by Tuesday. I'm ready to be productive and dominate the week.
I am bread, because I believe in starting with the basics. Bread serves as a substantial base to every meal. I believe that a strong thesis and an clear set of ideas are the most important part of a a paper. They are the base of the paper, and that's where I like to focus my attention.
Have a lovely day,
Chihuahua <3
Tuesday, April 3, 2012
Are all sessions this fun??
Hi friends!
Due to my excessive coffee consumption over the past couple hours, my excitement for the writing center is completely amplified, but I ensure you the excitement is not false. I'm super excited for next year!!! Back home I used to work at an Italian restaurant, and that job made me happy. I love having a job to escape from the rest of my moderately stressful life. I can already tell that working on the Writing Center is going to be the same kind of happy escape :)
Talking to people about their papers is really cool --especially when the subjects are this interesting! A book about how technology is going to destroy society? Heck yes. So cool. I hate technology. I have avoided a smart phone for the longest time. I'm only getting one this weekend because my phone broke, and an iPhone is equally as expensive as a non-smart phone.
I will be stealing Whitney's copy of Feed and reading that book this summer. Yay. John's paper was over all pretty well written and made me want to read the book. I was actually pretty nervous about how well written it was. I thought I wasn't going to have much to say (who am I kidding, I always have something to say), but I feel that by paraphrasing his argument as we went along, we were able to have a pretty solid conversation. I gave him the perspective of someone who hadn't read the book, which happened to be exactly what his paper needed to consider.
Throughout his paper, there were several instances where he would mention characters or events from the book that I was unable to fully grasp. These were easy fixes, but still extremely important. When he quoted the book, I was unable to understand the significance of the quote because I didn't understand exactly what was going on, or who the character speaking was.
There were also sentences that would be unclear to even those who have read the book. Every once in a while, we paused and examined sentences that were vague, had pronoun issues, or had lack of parallelism. I was able to voice what the sentence appeared to say, and John was able to correct the sentence in a way the conveyed what he was actually trying to say. It went well. He's a strong writer and immediately knew how to rephrase the sentence. I mean the kid took AP lit. I didn't even take AP lit at my high school.
Our final concerns were repetition and being concice. I was a little nervous because John's thesis appeared to set the body paragraph's up for 1) a paragraph on technology and being uniformed 2)a paragraph on technology on ignorance. But John actually had two paragraphs on ignorance. I thought this was going to feel kind of unbalanced, but it worked really well. His second paragraph on ignorance proved to be a natural extension of the first. I didn't see a ton of overlap, but we marked a couple things he said he was concerned about. At the end of the session, he seemed to have a clear direction.
I like using my blogs as a way to collect my own thoughts. This session reflection shouldn't be too bad, seeing as I just essentially reflected for 500 words or so. Awesome.
PS: "Our final concerns were repetition and being concise." -----> is there a noun that basically means "the act of being concise"? Concision? Oh I googled. Concision it is!
Pretend it says: "Our final concerns were repetition and concision". Sounds better.
Kay bye friends.
Have a lovely day.
Check out the Jack Johnson Pandora Station. Instant happiness.
That's all.
Due to my excessive coffee consumption over the past couple hours, my excitement for the writing center is completely amplified, but I ensure you the excitement is not false. I'm super excited for next year!!! Back home I used to work at an Italian restaurant, and that job made me happy. I love having a job to escape from the rest of my moderately stressful life. I can already tell that working on the Writing Center is going to be the same kind of happy escape :)
Talking to people about their papers is really cool --especially when the subjects are this interesting! A book about how technology is going to destroy society? Heck yes. So cool. I hate technology. I have avoided a smart phone for the longest time. I'm only getting one this weekend because my phone broke, and an iPhone is equally as expensive as a non-smart phone.
I will be stealing Whitney's copy of Feed and reading that book this summer. Yay. John's paper was over all pretty well written and made me want to read the book. I was actually pretty nervous about how well written it was. I thought I wasn't going to have much to say (who am I kidding, I always have something to say), but I feel that by paraphrasing his argument as we went along, we were able to have a pretty solid conversation. I gave him the perspective of someone who hadn't read the book, which happened to be exactly what his paper needed to consider.
Throughout his paper, there were several instances where he would mention characters or events from the book that I was unable to fully grasp. These were easy fixes, but still extremely important. When he quoted the book, I was unable to understand the significance of the quote because I didn't understand exactly what was going on, or who the character speaking was.
There were also sentences that would be unclear to even those who have read the book. Every once in a while, we paused and examined sentences that were vague, had pronoun issues, or had lack of parallelism. I was able to voice what the sentence appeared to say, and John was able to correct the sentence in a way the conveyed what he was actually trying to say. It went well. He's a strong writer and immediately knew how to rephrase the sentence. I mean the kid took AP lit. I didn't even take AP lit at my high school.
Our final concerns were repetition and being concice. I was a little nervous because John's thesis appeared to set the body paragraph's up for 1) a paragraph on technology and being uniformed 2)a paragraph on technology on ignorance. But John actually had two paragraphs on ignorance. I thought this was going to feel kind of unbalanced, but it worked really well. His second paragraph on ignorance proved to be a natural extension of the first. I didn't see a ton of overlap, but we marked a couple things he said he was concerned about. At the end of the session, he seemed to have a clear direction.
I like using my blogs as a way to collect my own thoughts. This session reflection shouldn't be too bad, seeing as I just essentially reflected for 500 words or so. Awesome.
PS: "Our final concerns were repetition and being concise." -----> is there a noun that basically means "the act of being concise"? Concision? Oh I googled. Concision it is!
Pretend it says: "Our final concerns were repetition and concision". Sounds better.
Kay bye friends.
Have a lovely day.
Check out the Jack Johnson Pandora Station. Instant happiness.
That's all.
Thursday, March 29, 2012
Buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo.
Any more buffalo than that and I'm done. I tend to get words stuck in my head in the same way people get songs stuck in their head.
*BUFFALO BUFFALO BUFFALO BUFFALO*. Thanks mike.
But thinking about this makes me wonder, why are the Buffalo Buffalo so mean to their fellow Buffalo buffalo? Moving on:
Today's session was so extrememly helpful. I brought in a piece of crap summary --partially because I did it right before class, and partially because I had a really hard time deciding what to focus on in summarizing Muriel Harris's article. It wasn't that I didnt understand the article, there was just so much information! I couldn't figure out a way to efficiently and successfuly simplify it. Kelsey really helped me break down her article and gather my thoughts.
In general "Making Our Institutional Discourse Sticky: Suggestions for Effective Rhetoric" is about the way writing center's present themselves to institutional audiences. She explains that we tend to define ourselves by what we are not. We aren't a fix it shop, we do not write papers for students, we do not work with only remedial students. Harris notes that this is a poor way to define ourselves; "If we define ourselves by what we are not, we cannot be much to ourselves or others." She says that instead, we should define ourselves in terms that are sticky: "writing that is positive, appeals appropriatley to our audiences, is highly memorable, and is concrete and specific." In writing with stickyness in mind, people "will understand and correctly remember who we are and what we contribute to the process of writing."
Wow. Okay maybe I can incorporate some of what I just said in this blog into my new summary.
As you can see, the over all arguement of the article makes sense. (At least it makes sense to me). But I think what really threw me is the size and structure of her arguement. In her introduction she bassically gives a mission statment of the article:
"I offer here cautionary advice to help avoid some tempting morrasses to unwittingly fall into as well as some more solid ground to stroll along when composing our institutional prose"
So then in the body of the piece she gives three or four methods we SHOULDN'T use to present the center, along with psychological research supporting her arguement for each example, and then she finally concludes with the right way to present the center. I had a really hard time summarizing all of this. By citing her research, was I getting too detailed? Should I incorporate a summary of each of her examples of "the wrong ways" to define the center?
This 20 page article is separated with sections with headings. I initially tried to include a bit from each section, but doing so forced me to create a really awkward body paragraph with little flow. Its really a gross paragraph. I'm actually super embarrased that we have to turn our draft into mike. I would never turn in something with that low of quality.
I've decided to reformat my introduction paragraph with bits and pieces of what I stated above. I'll make a thesis statment of sorts that outlines her article a bit better. I've decided to focus on two parts of her argument, the usagage of negation in defining something, and our tendancy to use abstact, rhetorical language in describing what we do. I'll also summarize her solution to this problem. Okay I feel much better about this.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everything above that line is a personal rant for my own benifit. I essentially just talked myself through how I'm going to fix this crappy summary. My appologies for being really boring/selfish in this blog. I'm sure you guys don't really care about my plans for revision.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PS. I just realized I wrote the title of the article wrong in my first version of this summary. I such a successful summarizer.~
ooooh!!! on the plus side I just hit the spelling check thing and it didn't highlight anything! Usually I spell really simple words wrong/
I may be a summarizing failure, but today I am a spelling champion!!
*BUFFALO BUFFALO BUFFALO BUFFALO*. Thanks mike.
But thinking about this makes me wonder, why are the Buffalo Buffalo so mean to their fellow Buffalo buffalo? Moving on:
Today's session was so extrememly helpful. I brought in a piece of crap summary --partially because I did it right before class, and partially because I had a really hard time deciding what to focus on in summarizing Muriel Harris's article. It wasn't that I didnt understand the article, there was just so much information! I couldn't figure out a way to efficiently and successfuly simplify it. Kelsey really helped me break down her article and gather my thoughts.
In general "Making Our Institutional Discourse Sticky: Suggestions for Effective Rhetoric" is about the way writing center's present themselves to institutional audiences. She explains that we tend to define ourselves by what we are not. We aren't a fix it shop, we do not write papers for students, we do not work with only remedial students. Harris notes that this is a poor way to define ourselves; "If we define ourselves by what we are not, we cannot be much to ourselves or others." She says that instead, we should define ourselves in terms that are sticky: "writing that is positive, appeals appropriatley to our audiences, is highly memorable, and is concrete and specific." In writing with stickyness in mind, people "will understand and correctly remember who we are and what we contribute to the process of writing."
Wow. Okay maybe I can incorporate some of what I just said in this blog into my new summary.
As you can see, the over all arguement of the article makes sense. (At least it makes sense to me). But I think what really threw me is the size and structure of her arguement. In her introduction she bassically gives a mission statment of the article:
"I offer here cautionary advice to help avoid some tempting morrasses to unwittingly fall into as well as some more solid ground to stroll along when composing our institutional prose"
So then in the body of the piece she gives three or four methods we SHOULDN'T use to present the center, along with psychological research supporting her arguement for each example, and then she finally concludes with the right way to present the center. I had a really hard time summarizing all of this. By citing her research, was I getting too detailed? Should I incorporate a summary of each of her examples of "the wrong ways" to define the center?
This 20 page article is separated with sections with headings. I initially tried to include a bit from each section, but doing so forced me to create a really awkward body paragraph with little flow. Its really a gross paragraph. I'm actually super embarrased that we have to turn our draft into mike. I would never turn in something with that low of quality.
I've decided to reformat my introduction paragraph with bits and pieces of what I stated above. I'll make a thesis statment of sorts that outlines her article a bit better. I've decided to focus on two parts of her argument, the usagage of negation in defining something, and our tendancy to use abstact, rhetorical language in describing what we do. I'll also summarize her solution to this problem. Okay I feel much better about this.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everything above that line is a personal rant for my own benifit. I essentially just talked myself through how I'm going to fix this crappy summary. My appologies for being really boring/selfish in this blog. I'm sure you guys don't really care about my plans for revision.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PS. I just realized I wrote the title of the article wrong in my first version of this summary. I such a successful summarizer.~
ooooh!!! on the plus side I just hit the spelling check thing and it didn't highlight anything! Usually I spell really simple words wrong/
I may be a summarizing failure, but today I am a spelling champion!!
Tuesday, March 27, 2012
How can I help you?
Hey guys. I'm kinda in a slump right now. I have a super cool headache. ~
Receiving the new syllabus in class today made me so nervous! Is it possible that we really have less than 5 weeks left? So crazy. And judging by the amount of stuff I have to do, I'm sure the weeks will fly. Summary, reflection, an education research paper, another reflection, and the ever so daunting pedagogy. Oh and then a final project for astronomy. AHHHHH.
Sophomore year is quickly approaching, and I'm really excited to work in the Writing Center.
Side note: screw all the people in the Hollenbeck Lab right now. SHUT UP. This is a quiet zone or something, right??
Anyways, the mock sessions today were really interesting. Too often I assume that our work in the writing center will strictly involve "less experienced" writers, but that is far from the truth. It is entirely possible for a writer to bring in a dense, well-written, almost finalized draft of a paper that is on a subject I don't know about. Previously, I would have thought that I would be able to handle a paper of an advanced level, but the one in class today made me really nervous.
I have no problem flat out telling the writer that I am unknowledgeable of his topic. I'll admit to not reading a particular book, not knowing anything about history, or not understanding technical scientific ideas. What I'm afraid of, however, is not being able to help. The paper we looked at today seemed finalized to me. I had no suggestions. I had no commentary. How do you deal with that in the center? Should I just become really picky and find something minuscule that could be changed?
Sarvanni said something really interesting in class. She said, "I forgot, the writer is aloud to be right." So true. So maybe in this scenario we can comment on positive aspects of the paper, and have conversation with these advanced writers that centers on our understanding of the point they are trying to get across. At the end of the discussion, we may not have any critiques, but at least we can provide a sense of reassurance for the writer.
Regardless, I still hope writers don't come to me with finalized papers. I know no paper is perfect, but providing no constructive criticism would make me feel like I didn't help the writer at all.
Receiving the new syllabus in class today made me so nervous! Is it possible that we really have less than 5 weeks left? So crazy. And judging by the amount of stuff I have to do, I'm sure the weeks will fly. Summary, reflection, an education research paper, another reflection, and the ever so daunting pedagogy. Oh and then a final project for astronomy. AHHHHH.
Sophomore year is quickly approaching, and I'm really excited to work in the Writing Center.
Side note: screw all the people in the Hollenbeck Lab right now. SHUT UP. This is a quiet zone or something, right??
Anyways, the mock sessions today were really interesting. Too often I assume that our work in the writing center will strictly involve "less experienced" writers, but that is far from the truth. It is entirely possible for a writer to bring in a dense, well-written, almost finalized draft of a paper that is on a subject I don't know about. Previously, I would have thought that I would be able to handle a paper of an advanced level, but the one in class today made me really nervous.
I have no problem flat out telling the writer that I am unknowledgeable of his topic. I'll admit to not reading a particular book, not knowing anything about history, or not understanding technical scientific ideas. What I'm afraid of, however, is not being able to help. The paper we looked at today seemed finalized to me. I had no suggestions. I had no commentary. How do you deal with that in the center? Should I just become really picky and find something minuscule that could be changed?
Sarvanni said something really interesting in class. She said, "I forgot, the writer is aloud to be right." So true. So maybe in this scenario we can comment on positive aspects of the paper, and have conversation with these advanced writers that centers on our understanding of the point they are trying to get across. At the end of the discussion, we may not have any critiques, but at least we can provide a sense of reassurance for the writer.
Regardless, I still hope writers don't come to me with finalized papers. I know no paper is perfect, but providing no constructive criticism would make me feel like I didn't help the writer at all.
Thursday, March 22, 2012
Lincoln Elementary
Alright guys, I'm going to be really upfront with this: my blog today is going to be about the tutoring I did at Lincoln this afternoon, and I'm going to hope I'll find a connection to the writing center by the end of it. It may be a stretch.
So for my Philosophical Perspectives in Education class, we're tutoring for an hour once a week, every week, at Lincoln Elementary school. The way they set up the tutoring is that we are each paired with a student from one of the classes, and we sit with that student during their scheduled "reading block" and help them with whatever they need. Basically we join in on the class, focusing on one particular student. Not all of the students get tutors.
Lincoln Elementary is consistently producing poor reading scores on state tests. To fix this problem, the school has decided to focus on the "bubble students": students that are in the middle ground. Bubble students are failing tests, but they aren't so far gone that they can't be helped. These bubble students are assigned Wittenberg tutors. Not all of the students get a tutor. In my class, for example, its just me and one other guy from my education class who are serving as tutors.
Today was different from how most of our tutoring days will be, however, because it was "Book Share presentation day". Instead of working side by side with a student, we sat in the corner and observed. I felt pretty fortunate to have my first day at Lincoln be an observation day; I was able to learn a lot about the kind of culture that exists within the Springfield City schools.
My apologies to any native Springfielders who may be offended by my description of Lincoln and its students, but Lincoln is Springfield's worst school. It is in the heart of one of the worst parts of Springfield. The school itself may look nice with its new renovations, but its appearance is a facade. The school houses students who are consistently behind what is expected for their grade level. Not only are the students behind in reading and math, but they are also behind in social expectations.
I've never seen a class of sixth graders so disrespectful. These kids are what, twelve? And it's like no one has ever taught them how they are supposed to act in a classroom. They were all running around up out of their seats, yelling out, and over all just being rude. The teacher had to ask them several times to sit back down, listen, pay attention. I was surprised by the disrespect. The students talked back to the teacher, denying her command to do anything productive.
Once the presentations started, I realized this was a group of sixth graders unlike any class I had seen before. The range of their skill level was astonishing. While one sixth graders had a well organized report on the lengthy, 750 page final book of the Twilight series, another student had a vague report on a book that seemed to be the intellectual equivalent of Go Dog, Go or whatever. It was such a strange comparison. These students were all over the place. Someone from my class who had tutored earlier this week said that his sixth grader didn't know the differences between "there, their, they're," and he couldn't begin to spell any of them! He wrote "ther". He's in the sixth grade.
I met the girl that I will be working with these next few weeks. Her name is Selena. At the end of the class, I got to sit next to her for five minutes or so while she did a reading comprehension activity, and she seems pretty bright. I can't wait to start working with her and see the problems that might arise. Maybe I'll test some of the tutoring theories we've discussed in class, though with a younger student it might help to be a bit more direct than our advisers generally are in the Center.
So for my Philosophical Perspectives in Education class, we're tutoring for an hour once a week, every week, at Lincoln Elementary school. The way they set up the tutoring is that we are each paired with a student from one of the classes, and we sit with that student during their scheduled "reading block" and help them with whatever they need. Basically we join in on the class, focusing on one particular student. Not all of the students get tutors.
Lincoln Elementary is consistently producing poor reading scores on state tests. To fix this problem, the school has decided to focus on the "bubble students": students that are in the middle ground. Bubble students are failing tests, but they aren't so far gone that they can't be helped. These bubble students are assigned Wittenberg tutors. Not all of the students get a tutor. In my class, for example, its just me and one other guy from my education class who are serving as tutors.
Today was different from how most of our tutoring days will be, however, because it was "Book Share presentation day". Instead of working side by side with a student, we sat in the corner and observed. I felt pretty fortunate to have my first day at Lincoln be an observation day; I was able to learn a lot about the kind of culture that exists within the Springfield City schools.
My apologies to any native Springfielders who may be offended by my description of Lincoln and its students, but Lincoln is Springfield's worst school. It is in the heart of one of the worst parts of Springfield. The school itself may look nice with its new renovations, but its appearance is a facade. The school houses students who are consistently behind what is expected for their grade level. Not only are the students behind in reading and math, but they are also behind in social expectations.
I've never seen a class of sixth graders so disrespectful. These kids are what, twelve? And it's like no one has ever taught them how they are supposed to act in a classroom. They were all running around up out of their seats, yelling out, and over all just being rude. The teacher had to ask them several times to sit back down, listen, pay attention. I was surprised by the disrespect. The students talked back to the teacher, denying her command to do anything productive.
Once the presentations started, I realized this was a group of sixth graders unlike any class I had seen before. The range of their skill level was astonishing. While one sixth graders had a well organized report on the lengthy, 750 page final book of the Twilight series, another student had a vague report on a book that seemed to be the intellectual equivalent of Go Dog, Go or whatever. It was such a strange comparison. These students were all over the place. Someone from my class who had tutored earlier this week said that his sixth grader didn't know the differences between "there, their, they're," and he couldn't begin to spell any of them! He wrote "ther". He's in the sixth grade.
I met the girl that I will be working with these next few weeks. Her name is Selena. At the end of the class, I got to sit next to her for five minutes or so while she did a reading comprehension activity, and she seems pretty bright. I can't wait to start working with her and see the problems that might arise. Maybe I'll test some of the tutoring theories we've discussed in class, though with a younger student it might help to be a bit more direct than our advisers generally are in the Center.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)