Two
big ideas that I picked up on in Chapter 4 were the idea of the responsibility
of choice and the windows and mirrors theory of book selection. Daniels and
Zimmerman write that giving kids choice about their reading material does not
give them an easy way out but that “the flip side of choice is responsibility”
(70). I’m sure that it is tempting for some students to choose a piece of
writing simply because it is the shortest, but I think that as long as you
follow up the readings with valuable activities, it won’t matter which piece they
chose because they will be accountable for it. Even more basically, if you only
offer choices that are valuable and content-rich, it won’t matter how short
they are- a nod to Daniels and Zimmerman’s argument that sometimes it is
perfectly appropriate to have 3rd grade material in a 9th
grade classroom. Activities like
jigsawing or think-pair-share seem like they would make students accountable
for reading their choices closely; knowing that you are partially responsible
for another student’s learning makes you take it seriously.
I
appreciate the thought of the “windows and mirrors” theory of book selection.
Research shows that students who feel that they belong to their school
community perform better. I’m sure that, beyond academic performance, there are
other social and psychological benefits to seeing yourself reflected in the
material that you read. On the flip side, one of the most valuable aspects of
reading is its ability to transport you somewhere else, to help you live an
experience through the identity of someone else. I believe that this helps
students develop empathy and the capacity to compromise.
In
general, I really appreciate the wit with which Daniels and Zimmerman return
back to the Common Core Standards and the wiggle room teachers have to teach
it. My understanding has been that teachers generally do not approve of the
CCSS because they feel it takes away their autonomy and puts too much pressure
on simply covering the content versus teaching it. By reading Subjects Matter I am starting to come
around the the Common Core; I think you just need to actually understand what
it means so that you can defend your choices, versus approaching it as a
bureaucratic enemy.
Hi Paige, I agree with what you said about the Common Core Standards. Before this class, I did not know very much about the CCSS and from what I heard from other teachers it sounded like the standards were more restricting to what they could do with lessons. However, after reading Daniels and Zemelman, I can now see how they can easily be incorporated into lessons, across all contents. I like that the book gives so many examples in content areas like science and history. It helps me to picture how I will incorporate reading into my classroom.
ReplyDeleteI also give a 'nod' to Daniels and Zemelman (not Zimmerman :) ) for saying it is ok to have 3rd grade material in a high school classroom. After all, I read texts that are not college level but I still enjoy them, or learn something new from it, or find it valuable. Students need to start somewhere if they don't like reading or struggle with it. It does not mean they will remain at a 3rd grade reading level. So I completely agree! The windows and mirror theory was an awesome way to describe reading choices. There is definitely value in reading both types of material. Too often though I think students don't get enough of the "mirrors" in required readings. It's usually something they have to find on their own.
ReplyDelete