Teaching Journal VII

-->

Monday: This was a hard class. I had reservations way before I even walked into class today. The Wysocki article is that lethal combination: long and dense. I had warned them that even I struggled through this reading, which in retrospect was not a helpful thing to say. I’ll keep that stuff to myself next time. I always urge them, with these harder readings, to power through. Even if they get lost, I tell them to think of each paragraph as a way to start over and find some footing. For the other difficult readings we’ve done, I’ve focused on the main ideas and overlooked some of the more difficult aspects of the readings. I wanted to try something a little different with the Wysocki reading. For whatever reason, I got it into my head that the best approach would be a sort of close reading approach, where we would look together at key passages and decipher them until we could grasp them. I made a PowerPoint presentation to help with this, projecting the key passages on screen. I then wanted to focus on synthesis because I had found many strong and significant connections to other readings, which I also thought would be another way the students could grasp this piece. I was wrong.

We did not, of course, begin with this tack. I took one of Yavanna’s suggestions and projected the Peek ad and asked them a series of questions (I asked them about 10-12 questions about it). I first asked them to free-write their initial reactions to the ad. The response was disappointing. I didn’t take Yavanna's suggestion of dividing the class by gender because I have 4 male students and 14 female. I did bring up if this imbalance changed their answers or affected what they felt comfortable saying in front of the female students, and the 4 of them admitted that it good. This question generated some pretty good response, but they did not relate to Wysocki’s conflicted feelings (anger and pleasure). They all agreed they had a non-reaction to the ad, which I was not prepared for. I thought there’d be some disagreement and that someone would say it was an offensive image.

Instead of taking their lifeless response as an indication that they either hadn’t read Wysocki closely or didn’t understand it, I moved on to the text, and we worked through Wysocki’s responses to Williams, Arnheim, Bang, and Kant. As I suggested earlier, this just got worse and worse. I think they were getting it, but they were not into the close reading at all, and I eventually lost them. It basically turned into a discussion between one very participatory student (the one who clearly demonstrated she had read the article) and me. They wouldn’t even speak up during our discussion of Wysocki’s claim that this objectification can lead to violence against women, which I thought would be a very interesting debate. They also didn't latch onto the discussion about using visuals/text as rhetorical choices. One good thing they said to me after I asked them about the lack of discussion was that my power point presentations really help them understand it. I'm not sure how to take that because I don't like using them as a crutch. Although I incorporate a kind of Q and A with my PowerPoints, it still feels a bit like lecture. After observing Heather, I have been impressed with how she led discussion. I feel like I talk too much.

I'm not sure how I'll teach Wysocki next time, but I definitely would like suggestions (I wish we had posted the Wysocki lesson plans to blackboard).  One thing is clear to me, though. I will not be having them do dialectical notebooks for assignments anymore (even with the added summary and synthesis). I don't believe the notebooks result in the students' understanding of the texts (at least not any better than the reading responses). I think students skim read for good-sounding passages. 

Wednesday: Computer lab day. I began class by going over project 2 again to clear up what they were doing. I should have also gone through what I expected of them because I know they won't read the project 2 instructions themselves. I will do this on Monday. I then told them to take a couple minutes to go through their own literacy narratives (which they wrote out for today) and pick out their main literacy sponsors and any main points. In the example literacy narrative i used, I pointed out how that student essentially described reading as an escape from an unhappy home life. We discussed how this could be used to develop a theme/argument within their groups. They all decided that they didn't need the time to summarize these things, and opted instead to just jump right into it with their groups.

I then went around to each group and tried to provide guidance and suggestions- and tried to complicate their initial ideas. All the groups pretty much had their arguments ready to go by the end of class, with one group still trying to figure it out exactly. For the most part, I was impressed with how well they were working on these and the ideas that they came up with. I also really enjoyed this experience from a teaching perspective quite a bit. I enjoyed being able to be a resource for them as they were brainstorming. It was one of the few times I felt like I had a real purpose and that what I said was effective and helpful. 

Friday: Another computer lab day. I spent a bit of time going through some of the mediums listed on the project 2 instructions (I spent some time Thursday going through these myself and picking out the ones I found the most fun/helpful). Everyone really liked XtraNormal, although I think only one group is using that as part of their project. I then spent some time explaining storyboards. Even though they said they had never done them before, they seemed to understand it more quickly than I had anticipated. I'm not sure if I just underestimate their abilities or I am getting better at explaining things. I didn't even need to show the Pixar video. For the rest of class, I went around to each group. I quized them on their arguments and asked each member how their literacies related to the topic. Then I talked to them about which mediums they would use. One group is doing a Prezi ( I also encouraged them to make a website), one is doing a video, one is making a book, and the rest are doing websites (and one is putting an XtraNormal video on a website). I am pleased with both their topics and their chosen mediums. My only concern is that if they don't get the projects mostly finished in the lab days, then one student will end up "finishing it up" for the rest of the group. So I am now working on a way to ensure this doesn't happen.

Overall, the week began poorly after a disappointing Wysocki discussion but improved with the lab days. I enjoyed my role during lab time better than on Monday's discussion. I also graded their project 1 revised essays this week and felt that I provided good comments and feedback to them. I suppose as a teacher I need to focus on being a better discussion leader even though I get the most satisfaction (and feel I do the best job) from being a direct resource/mentor? to the students.