Before we dive into the real meat-and-potatoes of this chapter, I'd first like to point how much I like the style Daniels and Zemelman use: it's breezy, it's approachable, and it made for a much more interesting read than Wilhelm. Considering that they are writing about reading strategies, I really appreciate how accessible they strove to make their work--meta-cognitive theories can be difficult to both explain and comprehend, so I appreciate the work that went to making this read enjoyable.
Onto the reading itself. When taking notes on the chapter, I excitedly made a note about page 10, and with a "YEAH!" of agreement. "Yes, there are a lot of obstacles to young people falling in love with math, science, history, language, and the arts. But that doesn't mean that our idealism is sentimental and misplaced..." (D&Z 11). I read and reread that line several times, with more and more mounting relief. As an aspiring teacher you hear a lot about the "real world" and how our careers won't be a remake Freedom Writers. Of course that's true, but at the same time you can't expect us to go into the classroom already dreading our students--it's not fair to them or to us! I've always believed that optimism tempered with realism is the best route to take, and it was nice to see that sentiment echoed. You can't win them all, but there's nothing to stop you from trying.
The second chapter dealt a lot with reading and reading strategies, all of which I found fascinating--you never really think about how you're reading until it's brought to your attention! But the thing I loved most about these chapters was how history in particular was addressed. History is a text-heavy subject that requires both the analytic skills of English and the data-collecting skills of science--just look at the Common Core Standards for History on page 16! To be literate in history you have to combine qualitative sources with quantitative data, and that's no mean feat even for us history buffs. As a teacher, I'll have to help my students learn how to understand the who and the why and the when and the how--and the CCS make that goal seem so dry and clinical. History, as D&Z note, is a much a narrative as it is a science.
It's the idea of history as a narrative that has always made history so much more fascinating, and what's excited me the most about learning and teaching history. It becomes so much more interesting and accessible as a living narrative, rather than a dead series of documents. Don't believe me? Check out this trailer for the History channel mini-series, Mankind: The Story of All of Us.
If I can catch just a bit of the pulse-pounding awe a mini-series like the Mankind: The Story of All of Us inspires, then I may have just awoken a passion for history in my students. I love this trailer because it really brings history to life--it presents history not as a series of big isolated events, but as exactly what it is: an ever-expanding narrative of miracles and disasters and heroes and villains, the kind of story you can get emotionally invested in. I want my students to be able to read history not as a series of facts and dates and names, but as a narrative. They shouldn't only be critical thinkers--but imaginative thinkers too!
p.s. Don't eat at McDonald's.
Emily, I felt the same way when I read page 10. I was excited to see that my feelings about my chosen profession were being validated by the authors. I particularly enjoyed what you said: "You can't win them all, but there's nothing to stop you from trying." I could not agree with you more. :)
ReplyDeleteEmily, I think that is what I most enjoyed about Daniels and Zemelman's writing technique in these first two chapters of our textbook: they illustrate with a fluidity that does not confine the reading to be black or white but rather a mixture of both. With the good comes the bad and with the bad *should come the good. Being a good reading means having to do some grunt work, but that grunt work pays off in our future everyday habits of being able to scan a reading and "take something away" from our reading.
ReplyDeleteYou point out that:
As a teacher, I'll have to help my students learn how to understand the who and the why and the when and the how--and the CCS make that goal seem so dry and clinical. History, as D&Z note, is a much a narrative as it is a science.
I myself noticed that it is a part of our jobs to teach our students how, what, and why they're reading. But I do disagree that the CCS make it dry and clinical. How I have always seen the CCS were as a minimum to our students assets and abilities. As we teach them the one-two in reading and about our subjects, all the information and tests in the CCS should simply swim alongside their learnings. In other words, I sort of see our teaching the students what, how, and why they're reading as the overall objective, whereras the CCS are simply a lesson to overcome.
I wonder, then, what type of approach will you bring to reading for your classes? You have a fascination with history and its ability to be a living narrative, this is true. But how do you think you will illustrate that to your students (for example, what will you make them read, how will you make them recreate what they learn to you, and what will you bring to the classroom that wasn't brought to you as a student?)
I felt the same way reading that part on page ten. I think young students of education like ourselves are sometimes generalized as idealistic and it isn't fair to teachers who look to get the most out of their students. I would like to see teachers strive to strike a balance between idealism and pragmatism.
Delete