Styslinger, Ware, Bell
and Barrett: “What Matters: Meeting Content Goals Through Teaching Cognitive
Reading Strategies with Canonical Texts”
Milner and Milner, “Formal
Analysis”
Kelly Gallagher, “Readicide”
Say:
I see the importance of
fostering students’ metacognition to help them see themselves as competent
readers. In the article, "What Matters," three secondary teachers use the same cognitive
strategies across several different canonical texts. I appreciate the artifacts presented and particularly liked Jesse’s chart asking students to
list 5 challenges they came across while reading and what strategy they used to
move past the challenges. One personal resistance I have discovered about reading strategies
is the use of multiple texts at one time. I can see using a poem, article, etc,
while teaching a novel; however, asking
students to read two novels at a time is an unappealing idea to me because I do NOT enjoy reading more than one novel
at a time. I wonder if this is a hard and fast rule (that teaching strategies/literary elements must happen across synergistic novels), or if I may be
able to help my students become better readers by using one novel text and
multiple smaller texts.
I feel confident in my
formal analysis skills and I enjoy helping students develop theirs. There is
always room for improvement, and I’m no guru, but I do have a strong analytical
bent that comes in handy for teaching formal analysis in fun ways. I like how
Milner and Milner argue that we need to “seize the teachable moment,”(144) because
THAT MOMENT is the goal. I try to build lessons that ask the kinds of questions
that lead my students to formal analysis, and I love that Milner and Milner
assert that a teacher “should be alive to literature” in order to show students
how formal analysis works; principally, that “formal analysis should originate
in your own considered pleasure and understanding of the way in which
literature works” (150). I love this whole idea – that the teaching of
literature increases my love for literature and my ability to formally analyze
it. I’ve been teaching English for eleven years, and I can wholeheartedly agree
with this truth.
Cultural literacy: a controversial concept and one that is not going away anytime soon. I think
that I am, for the most part, on the side of Gallagher. I just happen to think that
our cultural literacy should include works that reflect us as a diverse and
multi-cultural society. Gallagher nicely points out that there are strong
benefits to having a society where every student has read and discussed certain
texts. I very strongly agree with Gallegher when she says, “Hamlet isn’t the
problem. The problem lies in how the work is taught (or how the work is not
taught)” (92). I think the teacher is the sweet spot—we introduce rigorous
texts by framing. We scaffold. We provide focus and purpose. While reading
Gallagher, I realized that I teach novels exactly as she does—with the big
chunk/little chunk approach. I have always found it to work magnificently,
whether I’m teaching honors or regular level classes, secondary or higher education
courses. Readicide is one of my favorite articles so far; as controversial as some of
her statements are, I find that Gallagher's ideas, methods, and strategies resonate
with me. I need to see if she’s written any full-length texts.
Do:
One book that I have
found INCREDIBLY significant for my teaching of formal analysis is Foster’s How to Read Literature Like a Professor.
I have used this text in my high school honors classes and my college classes. Sometimes,
I have had students read it themselves—but other times, I have synthesized his
main ideas with examples from media, music, and film and created PowerPoints to
accent whatever texts we’re working on. I have a dog-eared copy of Foster, and
I recommend him unreservedly. You can order Foster here.
 |
Rosina,
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with all of your insights into this weeks reading! Since I have seen you in action with formal analysis in our English classes, I have no doubt that you will push your students to gain an appreciate for those tougher canonical texts and perhaps find a love for them. I also love the question that you raise in terms of allowing students to read two different texts at the same time. I can see the reasoning behind the method; however, like you, I can see the downside of it because I do not like to read multiple texts at the same time and could see my students maybe getting lost. Perhaps you can just cut up those YA novels in a way that is purposeful and meaningful, yet the class is more focused on the canonical text? I also thought Gallagher's article was my favorite that we have read because the approaches offered seem effective with tougher content as well as allowing teachers to use reader response, critical synthesis, etc. Love your say because I had to buy that book in high school for AP lit. It was super helpful and I think can help scaffold students on how to read canonical texts because it shows in a non threatening way of the different techniques or archetypes authors use to create these stories. Completely forgot I even owned it until now so I am definitely going to revisit it! :)
You raise, as always, an interesting question--how does our reading process compare to that of our students? You mention above that you don't like to read 2 texts at one time--that this doesn't work well for you--but we have to come to know our students as readers and determine how they process? How many classes do they take at one time? How much reading do they balance in and out of school? And then there is their secret reading life that has nothing to do with school? My point is we read many "texts" at one time--my fear is if we teach strategies with only what text, do they transfer these strategies to other texts? But then again, how do we balance sharing our metacognition, formal analysis, front load-support-extend reading and teach vocabulary all at the same time (and let's not forget about personal response and critical synthesis)?? It's like a tightrope we walk--a la Ferlinghetti and his "Constantly Risking Absurdity." As for the DO, I have not read this book and will add it to my holiday reading list--
ReplyDelete