A teacher is one who makes himself progressively unnecessary. - Thomas Carruthers

I taught the class, Introduction to Literature, which was an adult accelerated class with a institutionalized syllabus. This meant that a typical semester-long class was condensed into only four weeks – with the expectation that the students complete approximately 20 hours a week of study outside of class and consolidate their learning in a 4 hour face to face class. It was a fast-paced survey course of short stories, poetry, Greek drama and modern drama. The lesson in the first week of class was focused on short stories. The students were required to read ten different short stories and be prepared to discussion them. Recognizing that the students would need support in both analyzing and discussing the stories, I decided to use the Jigsaw Technique to give the students the opportunity to gain confidence in leading the discussion of a particular story through their expert group and then discuss five of the stories through the jigsaw group. After a break, the students completed the final five stories using the same procedure.

Instructions to Students

Discussing the Stories

Expert Groups

• Talk through the assigned story, focusing on the literary elements
• Prepare to lead the discussion on your assigned story in small groups
• Write down some topics/questions for the group
• Approximately 15 minutes

Jigsaw Groups

• Each person is a leader for one story
• One person should be a “secretary” for each story
• Write down important ideas, comments and/or questions
• Post the page under the story title on the wall
• Have your books and notes open
• All members should participate when discussing each story
• Approximately 10-15 minutes/story

Reflection

Reading ten short stories in a week and attempting to discuss all ten is a Herculean task, yet in this course, it was required. Since the students were also required to turn in their notes from reading the short stories, I thought most students would have completed the reading of each of the stories, but probably didn't spend much time analyzing the stories for their literary elements, which was an objective of the course.

I choose the Jigsaw Technique for several reasons. First, it focused the activity on the students, not me, the teacher. I believe that in a class discussion, the students should be doing most of the questioning and responding. With small groups, more students have the opportunity to discuss, especially compared to a whole class discussion. Second, it provided support for the students to gain confidence in leading the discussion. Recognizing that most students probably completed a cursory reading of the stories, the expert groups provided an opportunity for the students to clarify their understanding and create good discussion questions which would increase their confidence in leading a small group discussion. Finally, it is an efficient method to discuss a large amount of readings.

By including a written component, where each jigsaw group had to produce a summary of each discussion of each short story, I could quickly assess each group's progress and understanding. In addition, by consolidating all groups' summarizes, as a whole class we could gauge the major points of each story at the end of all the discussions.

After working all day, sitting in a four hour class can be daunting. However, students commented at the end of class that they were surprised how quickly the time flew by. One student said that he was dreading this class because he was anticipating having to sit and listen to a lecture for hours, but with the groupings there was a lot of activity and mental engagement so it “wasn't so bad.”

The Jigsaw Technique -Barbara Tewksbury, Hamilton College - http://serc.carleton.edu/NAGTWorkshops/coursedesign/tutorial/jigsaw.html

National Board for Professional Teaching Standards Proposition 2: Teachers Know the Subjects They Teach and How to Teach Those Subjects to Students.

How do literacy coaches think about and perform their jobs?

Years ago, I was introduced to the concept of Teaching for Understanding (TfU), which has been the cornerstone of my classroom instruction. In using a TfU framework, I ask four major questions 1) What topics are worth understanding? (Generative Topic) 2)What about these topics needs to be understood? (Understanding goals) 3) How can I foster understanding in my students? (Performances of understanding) 4) How can I tell what students understand? (Ongoing assessment)

As I moved into higher education, I found that the framework continued to apply to adult learners. In building my curriculum for the master level course Supervision of Instruction, I began with a generative topic of – How do literacy coaches think about and perform their work? In other words, I wanted my students to think and act like a literacy coach during the class.

To accomplish this, I needed to create authentic experiences for the student that embodied the major tasks of a literacy coach. In brief, a literacy coach's job is to help support teaching and learning in a school through finding solutions to problems or needs. For the culminating project of the course, each student created a needs assessment for their school and identified an area of need. After identifying the need, the student conducted a literature review to identify possible solutions and the positive and negatives of each solution. Formulating an action plan, they wrote a position paper, written as the literacy coach, and presented it to class as if it were a presentation to a school board. This is a realistic simulation of the work of actual literacy coaches. Therefore, the major understanding goals were:

1. How do literacy coaches identify needs within their schools?
2. How do literacy coaches critically read and use research?

2. How do literacy coaches create a plan of action?
3. How do literacy coaches cultivate support?

Throughout the semester, each understanding goal was addressed through different activities. The first weeks I provided models of needs assessments and students worked together to create and implement a needs assessment for their own school. Students then generate a list of needs, prioritized the importance of each and made both short term and long term plans for improvement. From this list, the students chose one topic to advocate for in a position paper. Having been accustomed to just summarizing research articles, I provided models and activities to support more critical reading of published research, which were incorporated into the position paper. Each performance of understanding (activity) helped students gain the skills and thinking processes needed to complete the full project and provided for ongoing assessment.

In summary, I would describe my approach to curriculum planning in a two short phrases – “begin with the end in mind” and “set students up for success”.

 Dr. L. Dee Fink - www.wcu.edu/WebFiles/PDFs/facultycenter_SignificantLearning.pdf

Presidential Invited Address: Intervening to Shape the Future

These are very rough notes from the session.

Scheduled Time: Sat, Apr 9 - 4:05pm - 6:05pm Building/Room: Sheraton, Floor Third Level

Session Participants:

Participant: Yrjö H. Engeström (University of Helsinki)

Discussant: Jan Derry (Institute of Education - London)

Chair: Barbara Rogoff (University of California - Santa Cruz)

Discussant: James G. Greeno (University of Pittsburgh)

Discussant: Hugh Mehan (University of California - San Diego)

Dewey – 1927 Experimental thinking vs absolutist thinking

• Systematic knowledge is shaped and tested as tools of inquiry
• social action is a working hypothesis.
• Much of the problems that ppl are facing now, it that fact that we try to have complete control – which we can't. We need to accept that our actions have unexpected consequences – and figure out what that may be. We can not push thru complete designs – without adaptation.
• Cultivate tentative solutions by means fo experimentation, first locally and then generalizing them through dialogue and further experimentation

Bronfenbrenner 1977

• Naturalistic studies are limited by presently located systems
• In the USSR, we are looking to see what children can become. (rather then in the US, where we look at what he come from).
• Transforming experiments – how to change what a child is

Formative interventions (trans-formative experiments) – not micro study of a few subjects, but entire schools or organizations.

Why intervention research?

• All research intervenes anyway – we should be transparent about this
• Interventions are going on anyway – not just the researchers
• Intervening deliberately and methodically generates possibility knowledge, so we need to stop being satisfied with categorical knowledge about what already exists.

These ideas come from Newman 1990 and Cobb et al 2003, Long 2001.

The actors in our interventions, influence the intervention, sometimes works against. We need to recognize the agency of the actors/participants.

Two Vygotskian Principles – leads to agency

1. Volitional action
2. Double stimulation

A thought experiment of Vygotsky's – bring a subject into a room, and then leave. Do not interact. What do the subjects do? If there is a clock, the subject can make deals – when it gets to be 2pm, I'll leave. Without a clock, they don't know how long to wait, or if they are waiting. First stimulus, the contradictory task of waiting for an experiment. Second stimulus, the clock. Give agency, or action to the subject. Volitional action is not simple 1) Preparation (fan take a long time 2) Execution is smooth. Looks like a conditioned response.

Agency must be built through the creation of double stimulation

Learning activity – starts with sensory concrete experience and builds up to expanding conceptual concreteness. There are demanding learning actions in the process. 7 learning actions – which looks linear in the model, but it isn't.

1. Questioning
2. Analysis
3. Modeling the new solution
4. Examining and testing the new model
5. Implementing the new model
6. Reflecting on the model
7. Consolidating the new model

This is called expensive learning. Used in Engstrom's learning

1^st stimulus – mirror, recurring roles

2^nd stimulus – Model or vision

In between, the participants move between the past, present and future.

Used within situations that are facing contradictions and crisis without a clear directions for the future.

Discussant

Location of work – experimental and naturalistic work. All research, is reflexively related to the context and the people within it. Even the act of setting up a clean experiment, that too is an intervention. We need to make this recognition clear – no matter what type of research we do.

In defense of design research. In relation to formative intervention.

• There are many of the same qualities.
• Design research, does have agency in it, as the practitioner/researcher relationship. This is in response to the researcher designing a program, and the teacher implementing, which has been the traditional paradigm. This is shifting to a joint construction of research – the goals, the problems etc. Results should be jointly prepared and presented. Not only should research build knowledge, but also be useful.
• This is deep ethnographic work – in it for the long term, which gives us the insights we need.
• Yes, knowledge is distributed, but also concentrated
• Collaborative work is not a smooth research design. There are personalities, conflict of goals etc. When the results are not positive, it makes many people uncomfortable.
• Through the process of working with researchers, teachers learn new ways of viewing and articulating their practices, which can help them in their work.
• At the same time, researchers become more sensitive to the realities of teaching. Yet, to be careful of “going native” and becoming to assertive and supportive of the work as to lose credibility.

Beyond New London: Literacy Learning and the Design of Social Futures

These are very rough notes based on the symposium.

Discussant: Brian V. Street (Kings College, London)
The New London Agenda in Retrospect
*Mary Kalantzis (University of Illinois - Urbana-Champaign)
Learning and Knowing: Issues and Principles
*Gunther Kress (Institute of Education - London)
Language and Learning and Digital Media
*James Paul Gee (Arizona State University)
Appropriating Students’ Multilingual Strengths and Multimodal Interests as Resources For Learning
*Courtney B. Cazden (Harvard University), *Gail Heather Cawkwell (University of Waikato)
Multiliteracies in Australia: Educational and Economic Reforms?
*Allan A.J. Luke (Queensland University of Technology)
Teacher Orchestration of Talk in a Pedagogy of Multiliteracies
*Sarah Michaels (Clark University), *Catherine O'Connor (Boston University), *Richard Sohmer (Investigators Club)
Future Agendas for Multiliteracies
*William Cope (University of Illinois - Urbana-Champaign)
Chair: William Cope (University of Illinois - Urbana-Champaign)

Mary Kalantzis
1994 – Multi-literacies project – the issues haven't changes much since then. Why, despite all the knowledge and work we've done, there is still a huge gap in achievement? New London groups was named after the inn and city they met in. What brought them together was the question about what to do about the gap? Invented the word multi-literacies. Meaning making is essential across contexts and cultures. Effect of the new communication medias were potentially powerful. It wasn't just literacy, but meaning making in any communication media. The purpose was political – as all teaching is, and must be connected to each local context – what does it mean to be a citizen, worker, etc. Mission was performance – alphabetical literacy was not doing it – those who could read, did and those who couldn't didn't. So, a new language was needed – meaning making rather than literacy, design rather than grammar.

Diversity – race, gender, class etc influence the meaning making process
Multi-modality – having a repertoire of skills for learners for across context.
Pedagogy – needed to handled by professionals with choices, not just programmatic linear lessons.

Also recognized that employment was shifting, citizenship meant something new. Identity was a fluid this and multi – no matter how much govt. wanted to create a singular.

People were born into designed meaning making contexts, yet were also influencing that context.

Wanted to create a new vocabulary to talk about this – and to be able to leave our individual identities and co-construct this – therefore, the New London groups was without names, and a manifesto was written (and published) and there was agreement amongst the group.

Gunther Kress

Generosity – marked the bringing together of the group. Each person had very different backgrounds, yet the common goal kept the group together. With the world, going at a faster pace, we need to be even more generous. And recognition is one way of doing this – to see and recognize was people can do, which is the only way we can accord the dignity and respect for them.

Learning and Knowing

What and where is learning? We tend not to recognize learning within everyday contexts. A child showing another child something they found – frames the object, shows the object, and the person is engaged in the object. In profession work – doctors in surgery, through their actions, others are learnig. A multi-model approach to learning allows us to see this. By pointing (framing) and drawing attention, it is an indication of learning. By doing, and showing – this is learning too. Increasing, as practices at work is changing, this type of learning will be more common. Implicit vs explicit knowledge – people working together, though unspoken understanding. What is known, can be expressed through doing, drawing. This knowledge comes through communities – knowing depends on community. But, equally important is giving recognition to how people are engaging in the world. As a researchers, we need to do more than transcription – but rather simulations and recreations.

Jim Gee

Gaps – literacy, digital, knowledge, innovation, 21st century skills. We've been talking a lot of about gaps – and the gaps have multiplied. In addition, something else happened since the fist group meeting. A new school system has arisen - one outside of school, that of digital technologies, to get a community of learners (or affinity spaces). As people become passionate about their games, they are apply to explicitly describe the uses of the game – which otherwise is implicit. The ability for humans to see meaning – patterns, is great than a computer.

Through games, people are achieving professional levels of knowledge in science e(protein folds) social science (Sims:Nickel and Dime challenge)

Passionate Affinity Space

There is no limit on age, experience or time. Leadership changes frequestion, experts and newbies are in the same space. Often, experts don't recognize themselves as experts because expertise resides in community

Courtney Cazden

Multilingual – in multi-literacy - how students make meaning in multiple contexts across languages and dialects. Humans have made meanings visually long before writing – children show us this too.

Gail Cawkwell

Appropriating students multilingual strengths and multi-model interests as resources for learning

When children are encouraged to use their own representations of stories, these resources can be used to achieve more traditional literacy. Relationships are important to achieve this – to be interested and engaged with each other. Though, communication media has, in many cases, replace literature. This is now more of a learned skills.

Julie-ann – a case study of a classroom. Diverse learners – used drawing of read alouds. To talk about interpretation. They used graffiti journals. When they went to watch the video, they discussed their differences.

Alan Luke

We need to overcome our negativity or fear of trying to overcome politics, egos, etc. The new London Group shows that, as a group (community) we can effect change. In asking gee how to do this, replied, “Just make stuff up,” In other words, be imaginative – and don't rely on only others.

We need to “get our hands dirty” and work in and with children, not just theorize about what can happen, but make it happen. We need to be more than just a public intellectual, we need to be doing, not just saying. “what good is another citation in literacy going to do?”

We know that the same groups are continually being marginalized and lagging behind in education. The arguments that we are hearing (and did) does not help this. It just splits the community.. we wanted to come up with a new language, one that was inclusive, to break through this. Knowing how real teachers work, we needed to focus on the dialectical of the arguments Teachers weave between them throughout the day – direct instruction and open, phonic and novels.The group did not specifically define and dictate what multi-literacies was – to allow the teachers to be the professionals they are and interpret as needed within context.

Some problems:
1) Training – How do teachers learn about multi-literacies and multi-modalities Trying to commodify the ideas – it can't be programmatic.
2) Transfer – how can multi-literacies produce achievement in traditional litearcies – ie. What good does Garage band etc, support standardized test. Modal validity. Can video training be used across contexts? Mutli-model to pencil
3) In school and out of school – when things are working out of school, can it be transferred to in school? Does it lose it's power
4) Supply and demand – Add on all the new stuff – collaboration, technology etc, is laid over the top of current standards and curriculum. The stuff that is valued is tested, and so the othe stuff (new age literacies) are not taught. Creative industries (fashion, design, computers) are about 11% of US GDP. New world order – will the old stratification be reproduced?

Sarah Michaels, Catherine O'Connor

Classroom talk – will serve as a pedagogical tool. But, this means that some will still be more privileged than others.  How might teachers orchestrate talk in ways that support Mutli-literacies?
*Can not be scripted
*Can not be free form
*Classrooms are densely populated, noisy social spaces, and this must be managed.
*IRE is a proxy for real discussion – it looks like it
*Cultural tools that can scaffold academically productive and inclusive discussion
       *Discussion phrases for teachers – Can you say more about that?
       *Re-voicing – when teachers restate a student response to check for understanding of the response.
How do we train teachers learn to use this?
These are new tools – a new identity – and the tool won't do the work for you
sometimes teachers feel it is fake or scripted
Hard to see them at work in real content, goes by too fast in real life
Integrated within content
Framework of shared goals, integrated with content, and with videos
helping individual students to externalize their thinking – to share their reasoning out loud
Helping students to orient to others and listen to what others say
Helping students to deepen their reasoning
Helping students work with and engage with the thinking of others

Student don't do this automatically – teachers must scaffold this. Teachers work in small groups, with focused view guides and the videos.

Bill Cope

Testing – we found that testing is all important in US. My background (from the UK) had a curriculum that was highly regulated and not in the least transparent. In the US – NCLB focused on testing, even though there is no national curriculum. Standardize testing is poor as it reduces the raw material of knowledge (what can be tested), depends on process of inference (how this shows what kids know), and is an at-the-end managerial process.

What if we were really interested in knowing what kids know and learn?
Formative assessment and feedback, in such a way that would help students learn better.

U-Author
Ubiquitous authoring – it is available on any communication medium.

“The work” - (semantic editor) whatever text one is working on, integrates photo, video etc.
“About the Work” - social comments and feedback – machine supported.
Review
suggest
Check
Survey
map
Tag
Compare
Beta testing in schools (2nd iteration). Used in 2 different school - 1 that was highly successful and the other in a collapsing town. The poverty kids had more access to digital literacies than the university supported school.
Infinities of meaning – we can't standardize meaning making, computability dilemma,

Brian Street – respondent

What is new about New Literacies studies?
Many think it has to do what in new in literacy (computer etc) – but we meant it as finding new ways of seeing, looking, and understanding literacies
Newness – there were so much new in the group – meet in the New world, in New Hampshire, in New London – why do we continue to have old and new
Literacy – what does literacy refer too
Reading, writing, Reading/writing – but we mean other modes
muti-literacy, assumes that everything else is a literacy – oral, visual,
Is the old determinism (modes) in the new? It is the mode that determines what we do – ie schooling. Much of the framing of literacy in schooling, uses this. That the technology, or new thing, will fix society, the child,
Group – we were from all different backgrounds, camps and expertize and went off to meet with other groups to spread what they learned. Each group brings their own idea. We now have the New Orleans group
Multiplicity of meaning making – is it so new and are some of the claims being made problematic. From the Guardian, about the revolutions in N. Africa. Twitter/facebook revolutions – this is new phenomenon and the technologies are driving the revolution. Is it a means to power, not power itself. It can have different consequences. The media seems to relate that Twitter supports – but it is just a social practice, which could just as easily be used for oppression.
So – how is there change? Is is the new mode? Technologies?
We use literacy – but other groups are addressing the same issues without calling it literacy. IE super-diversity – how do we connect with related groups?
Literacy with a big L and a small single y (why)

Knowledge Building

A major aspect of affinity spaces is the sharing of knowledge – but not in the traditional consumption model in which the learner is presented with a body of knowledge to commit to memory or master a set of skills. Scardamalia and Bereiter propose (2003) that knowledge building is “the production and continual improvements of ideas of value to a community, through means that increase the likelihood that what the community accomplishes will be greater than the sum of individual contributions and part of the broader cultural efforts” (p. 1370). To have environments that build knowledge, ideas need to be addresses as “objects of inquiry and improvement” (p. 1371) and be made available to the community to dissected, connected and discussed. Therefore a shared work space is needed along with an organized method of interactions with the ideas. It is through this interaction that the ideas themselves are improved, but also the participants are able to engage in the discussion as their own level and make individual connections to the ideas. Knowledge building is a form of constructivist learning, in which the learner constructs his or her own meaning of the ideas through connecting the new experiences to previous experiences. However, deep constructivism requires that “people are advancing the frontiers of knowledge in their community” (p. 1372). To do so, the learners must identify their own problems and goals, gather and report information, make conclusions and theories, and refine the ideas, which Scardamalia (2002) calls collective cognitive responsibility. In other words, all members of a group have an individual responsibility to contribute to the joint creation of knowledge, which is distributed across the group, not concentrated in a leader.

In a 2002 article, Scardamalia delineated the principles of knowledge building:

• Real ideas and authentic problems
• Improvable ideas
• Idea diversity
• Rise above (forming theories or principles)
• Epistemic agency
• Community knowledge, collective responsibility
• Democratizing knowledge
• Symmetric knowledge advancement
• Pervasive knowledge building
• Constructive uses of authoritative sources
• Knowledge building discourse
• Concurrent, embedded, and trans-formative assessment

Affinity spaces seem to be good places to see knowledge building in action. Since affinity spaces are created based on the shared interest in content, or ideas, the building of knowledge within this space is a primary goal, plus the goals or problems are defined by the people inhabiting the space. In addition, according to the characteristics of an affinity space, as defined by Gee, status and leadership is porous or constantly changing – novices and experts work side-by-side.

References

Scardamalia, M. (2002) Collective cognitive responsibility for the advancement of knowledge. In B. Smith (Ed.), Liberal education in a knowledge society (pp.67-98). Chicago: Open Court.

Scardamalia, M., & Bereiter, C. (2003). Knowledge Building. In Encyclopedia of Education, (2^nd ed. pp. 1370-1373). New York: Macmillan Reference, USA.

Affinity Space

Gee builds on Lave and Wenger’s (1991) concept of communities of practice, but focuses more on the space, rather than membership. He proposes that the assumption of community is a false one, as people can participate in the same community, yet not feel a sense of belonging or membership. Gee defines affinity spaces as a “place, or set of places where people can affiliate with others, based primarily on shared activities, interests, and goals” (2004, p.73). With online communication becoming more prevalent, Gee believes that this re-conceptualization of communities of practice is needed because “if we start by talking about spaces rather than “communities” we can then go on and ask to what extent the people interacting within a space, or some subgroup of them, do or do not actually form community” (2004, p. 78). Using the term “community” indicates closer social ties, that of belongingness and membership with similar goals, which aren't always present in online communication. It may be easier to delineate the boundaries of the space and then look at how different sorts of people use that space - what they do there and what they get from that space.

To define the space, especially online where there are no physical or geographical boundaries, Gee (2004) suggests content and interaction as a way of defining the space. The things that give the space content and meaning, he titles the generator. The entry into the space he titles the portal which isn't another person, but rather a tool (textbook), activity (small group discussion), or generation of content (posting a lesson plan). For an affinity space, people choose to enter the space because of an interest in the content, not the people occupying the space, which is a significant shift from Lave and Wenger’s (1991) community of practice where the apprenticeship model and relationships are key. In an affinity space, there is little designation of apprentice or master. Gee’s (2004) defining characteristics of an affinity space include:

1. A common endeavor (interests, goals or practices)
2. People with varying levels of experience and skill share the same space
3. Ways of entering the space can also generate content
4. Content is organized and transformed by the users
5. Intensive and extensive knowledge is encouraged
6. Individual and distributed knowledge is encouraged
7. Dispersed knowledge (not in the space) is highlighted
8. Tacit knowledge is modeled and articulated
9. Many forms and routes to participation
10. Many routes to status
11. Leadership is porous and leaders are resources

Much of Gee's work, and others, focus on affinity spaces online and mostly through massive multi-player online role playing games or fan-fiction sites (Gee, 2003; Squire & Steinkuehler, 2005; Squire, Giovanetto, Devane, & Durga, 2005; Black, 2007 ). However, the characteristics Gee describes are evident in many other online spaces, such as a collaborative wiki or Ning.

References

Black, R.W. (2007). Fanfiction writing and the construction of space. E-Learning, 4(4), 384–397. Retrieved from dx.doi.org/10.2304/elea.2007.4.4.384

Gee, J.P. (2003) What video games have to teach us about learning and literacy. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.

Gee, J. P. (2004). Situated language and learning: A critique of traditional schooling. New York: Routledge.

Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. New York: Cambridge University Press.

Squire, K., Giovanetto, L., Devane, B., & Durga, S. (2005). From users to designers: building a self-organizing game-based learning environment. TechTrends: Linking Research & Practice to Improve Learning, 49(5), 34-74.

Squire, K., & Steinkuehler, C. (2005). Meet the gamers. Library Journal 130(7), 38–42

Communities of Practice

Communities of practice, as a concept has been around since the beginning of civilization when humans gathered together to support each other's survival. The more experiences members of the community would mentor and model the needed skills and ways of thinking to the less experienced members through storytelling, direct instruction and observation of practice. However, the term “communities of practice” (CoP) was coined as a research term by anthropologists Lave and Wegner (1991) to understand how apprenticeships help people learn. Through their study of multiple apprenticeship models in various careers, they recognized that the learning was situated, in other word, it was located within the practice and participation of the activities of the job. As novices, the apprentice was mentored into the community through a process of legitimate peripheral participation. Accordingly, the novices were given low-risk tasks, observed the masters, and in some cases, encourage to discuss the work. This legitimate peripheral participant advances the goals of the community while at the same time, provided the novices hands-on training in the work. The more directly involved with the work of the masters, the more deeply the novice is able to understand the activities and ways of thinking. As the novices gain experience, their own work moves toward the central activities of the community and they, in turn, become mentors to other novices. 

 

In brief, Wenger defines communities of practice as “groups of people who share a concern or a passion for something they do and learn how to do it better as they interact regularly” (Communities of Practice: An Introduction, 2006). There are three characteristics which define them: domain, community and practice. The domain is what distinguishes the group from just a network of people. Membership in the community is based on a commitment to the shared interest or concern. However, the only way to form community is through interaction – the sharing of information, activities, discussions, help and support. The interaction does not need to be face-to-face, asynchronous or daily; but consistent and dependable. Although the community is formed around a shared interest or concern, it is more than just a fan club. As McDermott observes, “communities of practice are not just celebrations of common interests. They focus on practical aspects of a practice, everyday problems, new tools, developments in the field, things that work and don't” (10 Critical Success Factors, 2000). The members of the community are practitioners of the activity – whether that activity is nursing, snow boarding, or engineering. The members, individual, engage in similar practice and therefore have common experiences or stories, but when working together as a community, they are able to extend or refine their practices. 

Although the concept of communities of practice has been around for thousands of year, the language initial defined by Lave and Wenger (1991) has allowed researches, companies, organization and educational institutions to look closer at the mechanisms that interact to make successful or less successful communities of practice. Much of the application of communities of practice has been in the workplace such as Xerox service repairers (Brown & Duguid, 2000), insurance claim operators (Wenger, 1998), and innovation in cancer treatment (Swan, Scarbrough & Robertson, 2002). However, the concept seemed to transfer well to online communities with case studies (Ardichvili, Page & Wentling, 2003; Pan & Leidner, 2003) of companies moving to on-line communities of practice and recommendations on how to design communities of practice online (Kim, 2000; Wenger, McDermott and Snyder, 2002). However, many of the studies of communities of practice in online contexts have been based on mandated use by the practitioner, as illustrated in the case studies mentioned above. There has been some study on a pre-designed communities, such as TappedIn – a professional teaching network (Schlager & Fusco, 2004). But, what about the online spaces that are created voluntarily by the practitioners and evolve with the needs of the practitioners, rather then the needs of an administrator?

Social Presence

Before computers became ubiquitous, Short, Williams, and Christie (1976) developed the theory of social presence to explain how people use telecommunications and the effect the medium could have on the communication process. They defined social presence as the "degree of salience of the other person in a mediated communication and the consequent salience of their interpersonal interactions" (p. 65). Salience, meaning the awareness of another person, can be created through the social context, which includes the task, process of the task, privacy and topics involved; perceived proficiency using the mediated communication; and interactivity of the communicators (Tu & McIsaac, 2002). Early researchers posited that social presence was an attribute of the communication medium (Daft & Lengel, 1986; Walther 1996), however, more recent research indicates that social process can be cultivated (Gunawardena & Zittle, 1997).

Whiteside and Garret Dikkers (2011) argue that social presence is really about the level of connectedness of person feels when engaging in computer mediated communication and is a factor in how active a role the person takes in constructing knowledge for both themselves and their peers. To support identification of evidence of social presence in online learning environments, Whiteside (2007) proposed a five element model:

• Affective association – words indicating emotional connections
• Community cohesion – words that indicate the participants see the group as a community such as greetings and group references
• Interaction intensity – questions, references and answers to each other's questions
• Knowledge and experiences – relaying personal knowledge and experiences to the group
• Instructor investment – the instructor participates consistently to guide and extend the discussion

References

Daft, R. L., & Lengel, R. H. (1986). Organizational information requirements, media richness and structural design. Management Science, 32(5), 554-571.

Gunawardena, C. N., & Zittle, F. (1997). Social presence as a predictor of satisfaction within a computer mediated conferencing environment. American Journal of Distance Education, 11(3), 8-26.

Short, J., Williams, E., & Christie, B. (1976). The social psychology of telecommunications. London: John Wiley & Sons

Tu, C.-H., & McIsaac, M. (2002). The relationship of social presence and interaction in online classes. The American Journal of Distance Education, 16(3), 131-150.

Walther, J. B. (1996). Computer-mediated communication: Impersonal, interpersonal, and hyperpersonal interaction. Communication Research, 23(1), 3-43.

Whiteside, A. & Garrett Dikkers, A. (2011). Using the social presence model to maximize interactions in online environments. In St. Amant, K. & Kelsey, S (Eds.) Computer-mediated communication across cultures: International interactions in online environment. Hershey, PA: IGI Global.

Social Media and Teacher Learning

I'm currently working on a proposal about teaching learning through social media.  Here is a Prezi of my initial thoughts.
Social Media and Teacher Learning

Social Media and Teacher Learning on Prezi

A Beginning Research Statement

The more you read, the more things you will know. The more that you learn, the more places you'll go.” ~ Dr. Seuss, I Can Read With My Eyes Shut!

Broadly defined, my research interests focus on how adolescent students make meaning from text and how teachers can help foster both skillful reading and an interest in becoming a life-long reader. I am particularly – though not exclusively - interested in the reading response writing students are often assigned to guide their reading and prepare for small group discussions of the literature. Part of my research involves helping teachers articulate the purpose of implementing small group discussions of literature and aligning their pedagogical choices to their purpose and philosophy.

Having spent over a decade in the classroom, and loving every moment of it, I have high respect for practitioners, which figures into my research agenda and methodology. I want to be a partner with teachers in researching the issues they find imperative and listen closely to their voices. Formative design research is a central part of my research philosophy which focuses on collaboratively investigating pedagogical designs and goals in the context of real classrooms. My dissertation topic is the refinement of implementing peer-led small group literature discussions at the middle school level. At the same time, I am conducting a case study of the professional development of teachers in a suburban middle school who have chosen to implement literature circles in their classrooms. In addition, using a classical grounded theory approach, I investigated the characteristics of expatriate teachers who successfully adapt to living and teaching internationally.

Small Groups Literature Discussions as Seen Through CHAT

When I was a child, my dad was a mechanic and I remember him using the common proverb, “Use the right tool for the right job.” I know that it is nearly impossible to get a SAE (American standard) bolt tightened with a metric wrench, therefore I have to identify the job I want done and find the appropriate tool. In schools, matching the right tool to the right job is just as important, whether that tool is in curriculum, pedagogy, or materials. However, sometimes, when a new tool is developed, it tends to be applied to multiple jobs, with varying results.

In response to calls for more student-centered instruction in the late 1980s and early 1990s, one tool that has been applied indiscriminately in schools is small group literature discussion groups. Several different structures for small groups literature discussions were developed such as Daniel's (1994) Literature Circles; Peterson & Eeds' Grand Conversations; Beck, McKeown, Hamilton, & Kugan's (1997) Questioning the Author; and Raphael & McMahon's Book Clubs. Each of these models guide students to take a distinct stance toward literature, often through pre-discussion written preparation of questions, notes or role sheets. Stance, originally theorized by Rosenblatt (1978), means the purpose for reading the text and she identified a continuum of two stances – aesthetic, or the experience lived through the literature and efferent, or the information the reader can take from the text. Chinn, Anderson, & Waggoner (2001) add a third stance, that of critical/analytical in which the reader questions the text for its argument,bias, or worldview. Each stance requires a particular type of thinking and privileges a particular style of discussion.

Currently, language arts teachers are encouraged to use a generic form of small group literature discussions as this embodies many of the tenants of Best Practice as defined by Daniels & Bizar (2005) such as cooperative, student-centered, active learning with an emphasis on higher-order thinking skills. Often teachers select a defined model, like those named above, and implement it by-the-book. Yet, without interrogating the purposes and structures of the small group discussions, from the perspectives of both teachers and students, there is a good chance that fulfilling the method becomes more important than the impact on learning. In other words, both teachers and students need to identify the job that needs to be done before the right tool can be chosen rather than choosing a tool for an unspecified job. As the old adage goes, if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.

Cultural Historical Activity Theory (CHAT)

Originating in the social-cultural theories of Vygotsky, cultural historical activity theory attempts to understand human learning as it takes place through activity, mediated by physical and psychological tools, in contexts and with practices that have cultural, social and historical groundings. Vygotsky (1978) theorized that higher mental functions (thinking) in an individual develops from the social processes that the individual is involved in and can only be understood through the tools or signs used to mediate the process. Since humans can not directly interact with the world, the psychological tools or signs (such as language) and physical/technical tools (such as a pencil) mediate human thinking and action. These mediational tools are shaped by the cultural, social and historical context, yet they also shape the context (Wertsch, 1991). Vygotsky tended to focus on individual action and thinking, whereas Leont'ev believed that activity is a collection formation of the person(s), world and the activity itself, therefore focusing on the whole activity, with multiple participants moving toward a group outcome or motive, is more important than the individual action and that the individual action can only be understood in the context of the activity. Engestrom moved the unit of analysis to encompass the entire activity system, which would then account for tools use, distributed action among members and the evolving social, cultural, and historical results of action over time. In this model, the system is a dialectical relationship in which people influence and are influenced by the context of the activity. Engstrom identified the major component of the system as: subject (person), instruments (tools), object(ive), outcome, division of labor, community and rules (See Figure 1). The activity system is being constantly constructed and renewed by the interactions of the components, which, over time can develop contradictions within the system. These contradictions motive change to new forms of activity

Contradictions are the core of activity system analysis. By using cultural historical activity theory, an activity system can be analyzed at multiple levels. Primary level contradictions are those that occurs within the components of a system. For example, the understanding of how to use a tool differs between people, so although the same tool is used, it is used differently. Secondary contradictions occurs between components of the system. For example, then the rules of the context does not allow for the outcome to occurs – otherwise known as a Catch-22. Finally, a tertiary contradiction occurs when activity systems intersect such as the activity system of school district policy collides with the activity system of the classroom.

Small Group Literature Discussion

In the past, literature discussions in the secondary classroom were specifically teacher-led and generally focused on textual, surface level comprehension or one-sided, lecture format. This led to a pattern of interaction known as IRE – Initiation by teacher, Response by student, and Evaluation by teacher (Mehan, 1979; Sinclair & Coulthard, 1975). With this staccato rhythm, students generally did not originate or extend the conversation. This has been the model classroom for almost 100 years – teacher firmly in control of covering the curriculum, while students obediently follow. In other words, a strong focus on what Rosenblatt (1978) called an “efferent” stance to the literature, or information gathering.

However, with the development of reading response theory (Rosenblatt, 1978) and an understanding of the power of discussion based approaches, many teachers began experiment with instruction that was more responsive to student interests. Often these led to discussions that lie within the “aesthetic” stance (Rosenblatt, 1978) or an “expressive” stance (Jakobson, as cited in Soter et al, 2009) such as Eeds & Wells' (1998) Grand Conversations, in which students took a more active role in the generation of discussion. This precipitated a move toward peer-led discussions such as Daniel's (1994) Literature Circles, and Raphael & McMahon's (1994)Book Clubs. Both forms emphasize student generated response to create authentic conversations about text, not just answering questions.

Most of the models of student-led discussion use some form of pre-discussion writing based on the text. This may take the form of Role Sheets (Daniels, 1994), reader response logs, double entry journals, or sticky-notes on the page. Some of these techniques have been researched individually and separate from their use in discussions and have been shown to provide opportunities for students to actively make meaning from the text. However, there has been anecdotal evidence of mechanic, stilted conversations when using Role Sheets, or reading response logs within a student-led discussion of literature. This sometimes leads teachers to abandon student-led discussions because they feel the discussion lacks depth and meaning. However, multiple researchers have shown that discussion based approaches leads to better understanding of the text. (Applebee et al, 2003; Murphy, et al, 2009).

Teachers Taking Charge of Their Own Professional Development

Too often, professional development programs in schools use a “drive-by” or “shot-gun” method of in-service. In the drive-by, teachers are herded to an auditorium to hear an expert explain how to use a new method or technique and the teachers are expected to implement it in their own classrooms without any support or follow-up. The shot-gun approach provides teachers with a variety of choices, but no focus for the school or student learning. It is clear neither approach is effective in changing teachers' daily practice, yet it continues ( Loucks-Horsley, Hewson, Love, & Stiles, 1998). So, what should schools and program directors consider when approaching the professional development of its teachers?

When designing professional development programs, Ball & Cohen, (1999) encourage a systematic approach for designers which asks the following questions: “First, what would teachers have to know, and know how to do, in order to offer instruction that would support much deeper and more complex learning for their students? Second, what sort of professional education would be most likely to help teachers to learn those things? Third, what do these ideas imply for the content, method, and structure of professional development?” (p. 7). Rather than focusing on bringing in a new method or technique, this approach encourages teachers to investigate their own work, determine their own needs and time-frames and provide scheduled time to allow teachers to meet, talk and document their investigations.

This follows the theory of andragogy - the methods and techniques used to teach adults - as schools must also take into account that the “students” of the instruction are adult learners with unique needs. Malcom Knowles (1984) considered the adult learner to be a different type of learner than a child. He reintroduced the term andragogy, as compared to pedagogy, to help distinguish the characteristics of working with adult learners from those used with children. These characteristics include: 1) Being more self-directed 2) Having a reservoir of experiences as resource for learning 3) Needing immediate relevance to learning 4) Having clear purposes for learning 5) Being internally motivated 6) Wanting problem-focused learning experiences. Ball & Cohen's (1999) recommendations address most of these principals.

Schools must also help teachers embrace the identity of a lifelong learner. Each year brings new students, materials, technology, standards and policy changes. Hammerness, Darling-Hammond, Bransford, Berliner, Cochran-Smith, McDonald, & Zeichner, (2005) contend that teachers need to be “adaptive experts” (p. 360) who are able to balance efficiency and innovation to effectively respond to complex classroom needs. To become an expert, a teacher must be motivated to deeply reflect about his/her own teaching practices. The authors also recognize that innovation can be challenging and even threatening, as teachers must “re-think key ideas, practices and even values in order to change what they are doing” (p.361). This may at times led to decreased efficiency, as teachers learn new ways of thinking; yet by abandoning some ineffective practices and adopting new ones, teachers become more expert. In other words, we should expect a learning curve when teachers try new materials, methods or techniques and support the struggle teachers must endure in order to better their practice. This support is best found in communities of practice – working side-by-side with other teachers to improve teaching. In addition, coordinated time is needed to allow teachers to meet and discuss their work.

Traditionally schools tend to look to the principal, curriculum director or other specialists to provide the leadership and direction for professional development. However, by accepting the principles of adult learning we can change this paradigm. More teachers are becoming informal teacher-leaders in their schools, especially when the formal processes of leadership have been ineffective. According to Whitaker (1995), “These [informal teaching] relationships often determine the degree to which the beliefs of faculty members can be changed on a schoolwide basis” (p. 356). When teachers learn something new that is effective with students, they often want to share the results of their learning. “A powerful relationship exists between learning and leading. The most salient learning for most of us comes when we don’t know how to do it, when we want to do it, and when our responsibility for doing it will affect the lives of many others. This is where teacher leadership and professional development intersect . . . only when teachers learn will their students learn” (Barth, p.445.) Effective principal leadership, and long-term change, can be enhanced by identifying and supporting these informal leaders (Zepeda, Mayers, & Benson, 2003). 

Recently, teacher improvement has been a fodder for politicians and Hollywood producers, with a range of solutions proposed from pay for performance to alternative certifications. Yet the real issue is not teacher improvement, but rather teacher learning. If we recognize that teachers are learners, with unique needs and issues, we can eliminate the deficit model of professional development and instead, focus on the strengths and expertise already embedded in our schools with a goal of supporting the continued learning of all teachers, which will then result in increased student learning and achievement.

References

Ball, D. L. & Cohen, D. K. (1999). Developing practice, developing practitioners: Toward a practice-based theory of professional education. In G. Sykes and L. Darling-Hammond (Eds.), Teaching as the learning profession: Handbook of policy and practice (pp. 3-32). San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Barth, R. (2001). Teacher leader. Phi Delta Kappan, 82(6), 443-500.

Hammerness, K., Darling-Hammond, L., Bransford, J., Berliner, D., Cochran-Smith, M., McDonald, M., & Zeichner, K. (2005). How teachers learn and develop. In L. Darling-Hammond & J. Bransford (Eds.) Preparing teachers for a changing world: What teachers should learn and be able to do (pp. 358-389). Jossey-Bass: San Francisco.

Knowles, M. (1984). Andragogy in action: Applying modern principles of adult education. San Francisco: Jossey Bass.

Knowles, M. (1984). The adult learner: A neglected species. (3rd ed.), Houston: Gulf Publishing.

Loucks-Horsley, S., Hewson, P. W., Love, N., & Stiles, K. E. (1998). Designing professional development for teachers of science and mathematics. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Whitaker, T. (1995). Accomplishing change in schools: The importance of informal teacher leaders. Clearing House, 68(6), pp. 356-357.

Zepeda, S. J., Mayers, R. S., & Benson, B., N. (2003). The call to teacher leadership. Larchmont, NY: Eye on Education.

An Educational Philosophy Acrostic

Cultural Historical Activity Theory as Applied to Literature Discussion Groups

"Well," said Pooh, "we keep looking for Home and not finding it, so I thought that if we looked for this Pit, we'd be sure not to find it, which would be a Good Thing, because then we might find something that we weren't looking for, which might be just what we were looking for, really." (Milne, 1928, p. 121)

What makes an effective literature discussion? What place does gender have in small group discussions? How can teachers best support student discussion of literature? What is the role of the teacher in literature discussions? Questions like these tend to be focus of research on the use of small group literature discussions. Investigators have tallied and analyzed the content of discussions, traced the changing roles of students and teacher, and created taxonomies of the type of talk that happens in literature discussions. However, by using these approaches, which are too narrow to address the scope of the entire activity as it is occurs in a cultural, historical, and social setting with complex and sometimes competing goals and purposes, we loose sight of the forest for the trees . I propose that, by using a different theoretical framework for studying small group literature discussions than has been used thus far, we can achieve a broader understanding of both student and teacher development within this context. By using Cultural Historical Activity Theory (CHAT) we can understand how the individuals within the activity setting influence and are influenced by the other individuals, contexts, and tools used to achieve a learning objective. “Because then we might find something that we weren't looking for, which might be just what we were looking for, really.”

Although book clubs have existed before, in the late 1980s adult book clubs became a hot commodity for libraries and bookstores and women across the country began publicly acknowledging the importance of book clubs in their lives. Researchers jumped on the band wagon to investigate the social and cultural meaning of book clubs and generally found positive results – in both generating personal and emotional support through the group and in encouraging adults to read more. Educators, many who were in book clubs themselves, attempted to translate that same atmosphere into their classrooms.

In the early 1990s, several models of literature discussions were published, including Daniel's (1994) Literature Circles using role sheets, Peterson & Eeds' Grand Conversations, Beck, McKeown, Hamilton, & Kugan's (1997), Questioning the Author and Raphael & McMahon's Book Clubs. Most of these models focus on student choice of text, preparing for reading through some form of note-taking, having discussions generated through student questions, and supporting collaborative meaning making from text. In a educational culture of “best practices”, language arts teachers have now encouraged to use small group literature discussions as it embodies many of the tenants of Best Practice (Daniels & Bizar) such as cooperative, student-centered, active learning with an emphasis on higher-order thinking skills.

Each model has a specific purpose and structure that guides the development of the discussion. In Literature Circles, the goal is to help students generate personal responses to the text – or an expressive stance. In Collaborative Reasoning, students are guided to take a critical or analytic stance on the text. Using Questioning the Author strategies, students search the text for for information and take an efferent stance toward text. Each of these models support a specific type of inquiry and purpose to the discussion. Without a clear articulation of one's purpose to the discussion, teachers may find themselves implementing a structure that runs counter to the vision they have for the discussion.

This is where cultural historical activity theory (CHAT) can help us understanding the complex environment of a literature group discussion. “Activity theory (Cole, 1996; Leont'ev, 1981; Tulviste, 1991; Wertsch, 1981) is predicated on the assumption that a person's frameworks for thinking are developed through problem-solving action carried out in specific settings whose social structures have been developed through historical, culturally-grounded actions. . . Activity theory also calls attention to the goals of development (telos) and the ways in which environments are structured to promote development toward these goals (prolepsis) . . . A central concern of activity theory, then, is to understand the kinds of culturally defined futures that motivate people's activity and the sorts of tools they develop in order to help mediate one another's progress toward those futures.” (Grossman, Smagorinsky, Valencia, 1999, pp.4-5 ).

Literature discussion groups are nebulous creatures to understand. There is a tangled interaction of teacher, students, texts and context, where most of the meaning-making is invisible. In this paper, I will attempt to apply the theory of CHAT to better untangle the interactions and reweave the various aspects of literature discussions in the attempt to better understand how the teacher directed use of tools, such as pre-discussion note-taking, influences the process of meaning-making from text at both the individual and group level.

My Life in Seven Stories

Life is like a patchwork quilt, with experiences being stitched together to create the quilt as a whole. Here is a small part of my life’s quilt.

The Green Sheet

The Green Sheet was the 4-page comic strip section of the Milwaukee Journals when I was a child. Before I could read, I would be able to find the Green Sheet in the stack of news and pull it out before my parents would read the events of the day. Lying in the sunshine on the floor of the living room, I would follow the panels and try to figure out the story. But, I couldn't read the words. I would ask my older brother, but he wouldn't be interested in reading to me. When my dad was home on Saturdays, he would sit in the arm chair and read to me. Although I loved the comfort of being on my dad's lap, I couldn't wait to be able to read the comics to myself. To this day, Dad and I continue to discuss Prince Valiant, even when hundreds of miles apart.

Lucky

Being a farm girl, I would sometime invite my friends to a sleepover in the hay mow of the barn. It was filled with the scent of fresh cut alfalfa and the chirp of crickets. Yet, one night, it was punctured by the bleat of a lost kitten. In the light of day, my brother and I searched the loft until we found a very small, very lost kitten – all white except for his gray tail and one gray ear. Fitting in one hand, we carried him home and pleaded with our parents to allow us to keep him – in the house. After several days of bottle feeding and mid-night comforting, it seemed the poor creature would live. Like many other rescued animals before him, he became Lucky and part of our household for 18 years. Furry critters remain an important part of my life with my shetland sheepdog, Rasa, and as a Feline Friend at the humane society.

Where the Buffalo Roam

One of the stereo-typical family trips for Mid-westerners is a car trip out to the Blackhills of South Dakota, with a stops at Wall Drugs, Mount Rushmore, Crazy Horse, and Custer State Park. After years of hearing about the massive herds of the majestic American bison, I was determined to be in the midst of the herd. My family drove around the park for three hours, but couldn't find a single buffalo – nor did we see any for the entire 7-day trip. Once home, my mother wrote to the tourism board and requested a small buffalo stuffed animal to fulfill my desire for a Dakotan buffalo. Hence, my obsession with the American bison – the symbol of abundance – and I have been abundantly blessed.

My First Classroom

My first team meeting was frightening. One teacher told me he was just hoping to survive the two years before retirement. Another told me I was hired because I was in the army and therefore would bring discipline to my classroom. The third one told me she was very happy with what she was doing and didn't want to change anything – all the new technology seemed a waste of time. Like many first year teachers, I had dreams of changing the world and making a difference in the lives of the children - this wasn't the way it was supposed to go. I faced a very traditional school and curriculum and choose to make small changes, such as purchasing a class set of novels and approaching my team about doing some interdisciplinary work. I exchanged classes with the science teacher and taught his least favorite unit – rocks and minerals. He taught his favorite story to my English classes – “Rip Van Winkle”. The other team saw some of the unique lessons we were doing and decided to try some new things too. I learned that leadership and change didn't need to come from mandates, but rather from strong relationships with colleagues and a focus on student learning.

I'm a Medic. I can help.

A passenger airplane crashed in a corn field in Wisconsin and I was part of the team called to triage the injured. The scene was chaotic and scary – even knowing it was a training exercise. People cried out in pain and their moulage makeup wept bright red blood and certainly looked real. The fast pace of making potentially life altering decisions was both exhilarating and sobering and I liked it. As a medic in the Army National Guard, I not only learned medical skills but confidence and resilience.

Road Trip in Brazil

Part of the thrill of being an international teacher is the chance to live in a different country and see the things only locals tend to see. The Itiquira Waterfall was just a few hours north of Brasilia, Brazil, yet few non-Brazilian have the opportunity to see it. My husband and I had been teaching at the American school for just over a year when a group of friends decided to take a road-trip to the Falls. We packed a cooler full of sandwiches and homemade brownies (as ready made foods were not available) and made the trek to the largest free falling waterfall in Brazil. The roar of the falls could be heard before the entrance of the park. The rainbows generated by the spray was not damped by the chilliness of the water. Although there were many challenges living overseas, both personally and professionally, experiences like this highlight the reason I choose the adventure.

Connection to the Past

“Those that fail to learn from history, are doomed to repeat it." - Winston Churchill

When other kids spent their summer vacations swimming or going to the park, I spent it at museums, historic sites or reading about the Ancient Egyptians or inspirational historic women such as Florence Nightingale, Clara Barton, Elizabeth Blackwell and Sacagawea. Growing up in my family meant growing up immersed in stories of the past – family, local, state, nation and the world's stories. Oral histories gave flesh to the written histories I read. I've walked the school aisle where Clara Barton first taught. I've crept through the dark corridors of the Giza Pyramids to the sarcophagus of the kings. I've knelt in the battlefield of Gettysburg which ran red with the blood of the soldiers. These tangible remnants of the past inspire me to remember the lessons of the past, treasure my present moments and think deeply about the future.

My Favorite Resources for Supporting Active Learning

Books

Burke, J. (2000). Reading reminders: Tools, tips, and techniques. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Publishers.

Burke, J. (2003). Writing reminders: Tools, tips, and techniques. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Publishers.

As the titles indicates, each book is a reminder of the things we know are good instruction for readers and writers, yet sometimes forget. Burke is a practicing teacher and writes for teachers. Each book includes 100 tips, techniques, and tools to help secondary teachers teach reading or writing. Both are easy to read and use, as each tip is about 2 pages long and often includes a template and student examples. Especially nice is his explicit link between theory and practice, as he sites the support for each idea. My favorites include his section on vocabulary development and vocabulary squares (reading) and how to create a culture of writing and explanation of the genres of writing. You can find sample chapters of each books here: http://www.heinemann.com/authors/1334.aspx

Buehl, D. (2009). Classroom strategies for interactive learning (3rd ed.). Newark, DE: International Reading Association

I have purchased each edition of this book and worn out my old ones. Buehl was a social studies teacher and reading specialist at Madison East High School and compiled this compendium of content area reading/writing strategies over the course of his time working with students. The third edition has expanded to include recent understandings of comprehension and how to teach for comprehension. The second half of the book includes 45 strategies which focus on instructional strategies, ways of thinking and characteristics of effective readers. Each strategy is explained, modeled, and has a template for student use. My favorites include: Discussion Web, Magnet Summaries, and RAFT.

Tompkins, G. (2008). 50 Literacy Strategies: Step-by-Step (3rd Edition). Prentice Hall.

Like Buehl's book, I have bought and worn out each edition of this book. Although geared more for elementary students, I have found the ideas to be highly adaptable for middle school and a few for high school. Like others, Tompkins explains, models and provides student examples of each of the 50 strategies. I especially like the Open-Mind portraits, in which students draw a portrait of the character and then, using a second paper, draw and/or write about the feelings and thoughts of the character, which can be revealed by opening the portrait. Another favorite is Plot Profiles, in which students graph the important events of a book and rate them for excitement/tension.

Wilhelm, J. D. (2002). Action strategies for deepening comprehension: Role plays, text-structure tableaux, talking statues, and other enactment techniques that engage students with text. New York: Scholastic.

This is one of the books in Scholastic's Theory and Practice series, which are all great books that link theory to practice in a clear and concise manner. This particular book encourages teachers to help students literally embody text through drama, tableaux and other enactment techniques. Each chapter focuses on a technique and gives a little of the theory, but really expands on the practical aspects of the technique such as how to plan for and introduce it to students, assessment and multiple ways to adapt the technique. With the addition of real life examples and voices from the field, this book truly achieves praxis.

Burke, J. (2002). Tools for thought: Graphic organizers for your classroom. Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook Publishers.

Yes, another Burke book – but so worth it! This is a great complement to Buehl's Classroom Strategies. As the title suggests, this is all about graphic organizers for content area reading and writing at the secondary-level. Although most of the examples come from English classes, most can be adapted for other content areas. The “tools” he provides are graphic organizers that are generic enough to be adaptable to many situations and are more about the thinking processes than the particular reading or writing task. Having introduced many of these tools to my students, over time, I saw their independent use of the strategies to help organize their thinking outside of my classroom. Some favorites include: Episodic Notes (story-boarding), Target Notes (identifying the main point of inquiry and elaborate on it), and Think in Threes (to expand diametric thinking).

Bromley, K. DeVities, L.I. & Modlo, M. (1999) 50 Graphic organizers for reading, writing and more. New York: Scholastic.

Targeted at grades 4-8, this book provides templates and examples of typical graphic organizers for Language Arts such as T-Charts, KWL Chart, Coat of Arms, and Venn Diagrams. This is great for making large posters (laminated) for the classroom as there is ample space to write. Although the templates are elementary looking, I have adapted many of the ideas for high school. One of my favorites is Getting Into Character Map, in which students draw the character and label the body with the various thoughts, feelings and actions of the character (located by the eyes, ears, mouth, heart, hands and feet).

Cerveny, C. & LaCotti, M. (2003). 35 Learning tools for practicing essential reading and writing strategies: Mini-lessons with reproducible bookmarks, checklists, strategy cards, trifolds and more. New York: Scholastic.

Geared toward grades 4-8, this book provides many templates for creating posters or handouts to remind students of important strategies when reading/writing. I've photocopies the Discussion Starters bookmarks on card stock and was amazed at how many of my middle-schoolers requested them. There are bookmarks for writing also, but I found they were more helpful enlarged into posters to develop a consistent language about responding to reading through writing, such as the RARE answer to a question that Restates, Answers, Revists for examples, and Explains.

Silberman, M. (1996). Active learning: 101 strategies to teach any subject. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

The author begins with a very brief overview of the theories behind active learning and moves quickly into the strategies, which cover all aspects of a lesson from grouping, team-building, assessment, discussion, and reviewing. Grounded in practicalities, each strategy gives an overview, a bullet procedure list, and variations. Some of my favorites include Jigsaw Learning (helping students teach students), Bumper Stickers (summary of learning), and Lecture Bingo. Many of these strategies can be adapted to any age level, including college, and especially useful for teachers moving to a block schedule.

Websites

Instructional Strategies for Engaging Learners – Guilford

http://its.guilford.k12.nc.us/act/strategies/

This site has three links: Activating Strategies, Cognitive Strategies (comprehension and retention), and Summarizing Strategies. Each link has about a dozen strategies and each strategy includes a description, procedures and examples. My favorite summarizing strategies include Final Countdown and Shaping Up Review, which I have used from middle-school to college level.

Glossary of Instructional Strategies

http://glossary.plasmalink.com/glossary.html

Being a glossary, there isn't much of an explanation, but there are 1271 strategies or methods listed with brief definitions and some have links to more information.