Inquiry projects sound awesome. I think it is especially useful that Daniels and Zemelman provide different "serving sizes" of inquiry projects to suit different classroom needs and constraints. As far as Common Core Standards go, I feel like I've practiced "backmapping" (259) without even realizing it when designing lessons for other classes. I've found that it's a lot easier to design a lesson then go back into the CCSs to find what applies versus feeling like you need to design a lesson that has CCSs 4-7. Inquiry projects seem like they encompass all the things that Daniels and Zemelman are advocating for: choice, student-centered learning, authentic performance/audience, research, connections to real world issues, varied reading material, and teamwork/collaboration. Unfortunately, I can't really remember any inquiry projects I did in high school. I think that if I had done one it would have been memorable. I like the idea of using inquiry projects to spark a debate, like their example of the US dropping the atomic bomb on Japan. I think that inquiry time would be good to get students prepared for a debate.
I feel like chapter 9, about helping struggling readers, was not that great. Daniels and Zemelman offer "key" strategies for helping struggling readers, including create supportive relationships, model thoughtful reading, promote self-monitoring, etc. I feel like these "keys" are just a rehash of everything they have been saying up until this point. I wish they had another "grey" section of actual strategies to use.
No comments:
Post a Comment