>Amanda,
I think you mentioned having written an appendix. Is that available on
the core standards site?
Craig
Ed,
> The research that I know of on the America's Choice curriculum/program was
> not conducted in Pittsburgh; I'm not sure where it was done. The lead
> author was Brian Rowan, if you'd like to search for more information. I
> don't think there's any research out yet about long-term effects, positive
> or negative, of America's Choice on graduation rates or high school
> writing.
> Amanda
>
>
> On 6/11/10 1:20 PM, "ed Schuster" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Amanda, Craig, et al,
>
> I have seen unfortunate effects of low expectations in the lives of two
> good friends, and I have seen extraordinary positive effects of high
> expectations as a teacher in the Court Reporter program at Temple
> University in downtown Philadelphia. I am very much in favor of high
> expectations. However, I have also spent many years reading essays
> written by Pennsylvanian eleventh graders for the annual state assessment.
> It is based on that experience that I consider the writing
> expectations/standards/goals---whatever one wants to call them---of the
> Common Core Committee unrealistic.
> On the other hand, I was delighted to hear about the success of the
> America's Choice writing program in elementary schools in Pittsburgh and
> elsewhere, and perhaps if such early intervention were more universal,
> eleventh grade writing might improve dramatically. I would like to think
> so. Is there any indication, Amanda, that this program has had a positive
> effect on graduation rates in Pittsburgh, or is it too soon to know that?
> (We do know that dropout rates nationally have risen recently, in spite of
> the hiking of standards in many school districts. See
> Diplomas Count, the June 10 report in Education Week.)
> Thomas Newkirk wrote his commentary before the final writing standards
> were released, and in the final version the high school example that he
> used seems to have been eliminated; the elementary example is still there,
> but it has been significantly modified. Perhaps the standards makers
> themselves were aware that they had been been pitching too high?
>
> Ed
>
>
> On Jun 10, 2010, at 9:09 AM, Godley, Amanda Joan wrote:
>
> Craig et al.,
> Craig wrote that the common core standards are "strangely arbitrary." I
> think that's right on target, especially as someone who was asked to
> consult on the language-related standards. The language-related standards
> were originally imbedded in the editing standards for writing, suggesting
> that the only reason to think about language at all would be for editing
> formal academic writing. Over the course of the seven months that I
> responded to drafts of the standards and wrote the appendix that presents
> current research on learning and teaching about grammar, I found that
> some of my suggestions (such as including standards that addressed
> "knowledge ABOUT language" and asking students to think about the
> FUNCTION of clauses and phrases) ended up being included, but many other
> suggestions were not. The resulting language-related standards definitely
> focus more on teaching the conventions of Standard English than I would
> like, but I'm glad that they at least nod toward and leave room for
> teaching other kinds of knowledge about language. As far as I know, I am
> the only person with a background in teaching/researching grammar and
> language who was a consultant on the project, and that concerns me.
>
> Re: the writing standards, I actually don't think that the example of
> second grade writing standards you shared, Ed, represents an unrealistic
> dream. My children (grades 1 and 3) attend Pittsburgh Public Schools -
> an urban district - and are taught the district-wide, standardized ELA
> curriculum, America's Choice. I have seen an astonishingly high level of
> informational and persuasive writing from my kids and their classmates.
> I've also seen how early elementary children can be taught to develop a
> vocabulary for and meta-awareness of writing that typically isn't taught
> until high school or college. As a former high school English teacher and
> university-level basic writing instructor, I think the America's Choice
> writing curriculum is not perfect, but it has demonstrated to me that
> K-12 students are capable of far more difficult and complex literacy
> tasks than we typically ask them to complete. Interestingly, large-scale
> studies out of the University of Michigan also show that urban schools
> that use America's Choice demonstrate significantly higher student
> achievement on 4th grade standardized tests of reading and writing than
> comparable literacy curricula/reform programs. The researchers
> hypothesize that the higher 4th grade reading scores may be caused by the
> greater focus on argumentative and informational writing in the America's
> Choice program.
>
> Amanda
>
>
> On 6/9/10 10:49 PM, "Craig Hancock" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>
> Ed,
> They do read a bit more like goals than standards. On the other hand,
> I
> think we have resisted any clear articulation of standards for some
> time. I think our students are capable of a great deal more than they
> have been asked to do. I know we have shamefully high dropout rates in
> many of our schools, but I get the sense from students who survive
> those schools that whole schools suffer from low expectations, not
> from high ones. I know I'm in a much different situation when these
> students come to college, but they respond very well to raised
> expectations when they get here. They take pride in being asked to do
> much more.
> If I were poor and raising my children in an urban neighborhood, I
> wouldn't accept any of that as an excuse from them (or anyone else)
> for mediocre performance. Raise the bar high. Give the kind of support
> necessary for those who struggle with it. To me, that's a formula for
> high engagement. Again, I know I say that from the luxury of dealing
> with students who have made it to college. The view from here, though,
> is that we don't care enough and don't expect enough (though there are
> saints in the middle of all that. Bless them all.)
> It seems to me that they have decided that students should learn to
> write narratives, to write an argument, and to write informatively. If
> you look through the sequence, it becomes clear that we don't already
> have some sort of proven way laid out to accomplish that. They seem to
> be imagining a sequence that might work. There are huge unexplained
> goals (like "logical") with a strange assumption that everyone knows
> what that is all about. Hugely important goals like "coherence" seem to
> be reduced down to the right sort of transition words, which I can
> guess will become formulaic. I would love to see a word like
> "perspective" show up from time to time. (Either something is an
> opinion or it's factual/logical, not much respect paid to the fact that
> many topics benefit from a myriad of perspectives. It looks different
> from this neighborhood than it does in the suburbs.) There's no place
> in all this where students are encouraged to report on their own world
> or become "expert" enough to have something to offer. There doesn't
> seem to be a recognition that the narrative of their lives is also the
> ground for significant contribution to public issues. (Why are the drug
> dealers not bothered? What happens around here when someone gets sick?)
> I guess I wouldn't be alone among writing teachers in wondering where
> engagement comes in. You've got to know what the hell you are talking
> about OR BE WILLING TO ADMIT THE LIMITS OF WHAT YOU KNOW and I don't
> see any respect paid to that. I keep getting students out of high
> school who have been encouraged to take definitive positions when they
> don't have the knowledge base. Most of these standards seem articulated
> as ends in themselves. There's no sense that these are or can be very
> natural developments of the students' own voices and interests
> (interests in a double sense--what interests them and what is in their
> interest to find out and to articulate.)
> I would say the standards are not fully thought out and at times seem
> strangely arbitrary. But I'm not convinced they are too high.
>
> Craig>
>
>
> Craig et al,
> > Indeed, he thinks the standards are too high, and so do I. He
> gives
> > a couple of excellent examples, including this one, for SECOND grade:
> > Write informative and explanatory texts in which they introduce a
> > topic, use facts and definitions to develop points, present
> similar
> > information together using headers to signal groupings when
> > appropriate, and provide a concluding sentence or section.
> > And another, for 12th grade, which he says is more appropriate
> for
> > college literature classes. (Once again, I agree.)
> > I can't believe anyone on that writing committee has ever taught
> > below college, or in any public schools that I'm familiar with, and
> > I'm amazed that officials from AFT and NEA are going along with this
> > nonsense.
> >
> > Ed
> >
> >
> > On Jun 9, 2010, at 7:56 PM, Craig Hancock wrote:
> >
> >> Ed,
> >> My quick reaction to the writing standards is that they are very
> >> much
> >> genre focused without a particularly sophisticated understanding of
> >> the genres in play. It would be interesting, too, to see the language
> >> section more closely connected to genre, since the corpus grammars are
> >> now giving us a pretty good view of functional language patterns
> >> within the genres.
> >> I couldn't access Newkirk's article without subscribing. Does he
> >> think
> >> the standards are too high? Why would the dropout rate be staggering?
> >>
> >> Craig>
> >>
> >>
> >> I agree with Herb. Also, has anyone looked closely at the writing
> >>> standards? Read Thomas Newkirk's comments on them in the current
> >>> issue of Education Week. He calls them an instance of "magical
> >>> thinking," and I agree totally. If they are adopted and enforced,
> >>> the
> >>> dropout rate will be staggering.
> >>>
> >>> Ed
> >>>
> >>> On Jun 9, 2010, at 5:16 PM, Craig Hancock wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> The National governor's Association's Common core Standards have
> >>>> been
> >>>> released and can be accessed at www.corestandards.org
> <http://www.corestandards.org> .
> >>>> Though they still don't go as far as they ought to in that
> >>>> direction,
> >>>> they seem a radical shift in favor of knowledge about language (not
> >>>> just language behavior) throughout the grade levels. This, for
> >>>> example, is from grade 7: "Explain the function of phrases and
> >>>> clauses
> >>>> in general and their function in specific sentences." This seems
> >>>> to me
> >>>> the sort of thing that can't happen solely "within the context of
> >>>> writing" or through mini-lessons.
> >>>> Check it out. If I am reading this correctly, they are calling
> >>>> for
> >>>> far more conscious attention to language from K-12.
> >>>>
> >>>> Craig
> >>>>
> >>>> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
> >>>> interface at:
> >>>> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> >>>> and select "Join or leave the list"
> >>>>
> >>>> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
> >>>
> >>> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
> >>> interface
> >>> at:
> >>> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> >>> and select "Join or leave the list"
> >>>
> >>> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
> >>>
> >>
> >> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
> >> interface at:
> >> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> >> and select "Join or leave the list"
> >>
> >> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
> >
> > To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
> interface
> > at:
> > http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> > and select "Join or leave the list"
> >
> > Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
> >
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
> interface at:
> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
>
>
> **********
> Dr. Amanda J. Godley
> Associate Professor
> English Education
> Department of Instruction and Learning
> University of Pittsburgh
> 5316 Wesley W. Posvar Hall
> 412-648-7313
>
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web
> interface at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and
> select "Join or leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
> at: http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html and select "Join or
> leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
> **********
> Dr. Amanda J. Godley
> Associate Professor
> English Education
> Department of Instruction and Learning
> University of Pittsburgh
> 5316 Wesley W. Posvar Hall
> 412-648-7313
>
>
> To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface
> at:
> http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
> and select "Join or leave the list"
>
> Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
>
To join or leave this LISTSERV list, please visit the list's web interface at:
http://listserv.muohio.edu/archives/ateg.html
and select "Join or leave the list"
Visit ATEG's web site at http://ateg.org/
|
