My initial reaction to this text was not great. I didn't like when Jago wrote, "earning suffers when teachers squander it by taking a full class period for seventeen-year-olds to play with markers and poster board," (Jago 2). But the more that I think about it, I think that she was talking about when teachers abuse activities like drawing storyboards in the classroom. I know that students are capable of thinking and learning better than some teachers expect.
Jago wrote, "The texts chosen for classroom study should be ones that students are unable to read without you" (Jago 2). I do not think that most teachers put this thought to practice. I couldn't agree more with Jago's ideas about having students analyze literature not just answer "who, what, where, when" questions (Jago 3). I also found her "mirror" and "window" metaphor for reading quite insightful. I agree that students need to read texts that 'mirror' his or her life but they also need to read 'window' texts that "offer readers access to other worlds, other times, other cultures," (Jago 5). I am enjoying reading this text so far because I think that teachers should push students to learn deeper than what most teachers do.
This book is pushing me to think past my initial response to something. Before this I would have said, "how can you expect a student to read a novel if they need you to help them with it." But now I'm understanding that while they can't read the whole book in class, the teacher can go over the problem areas to help them along. Students do need to be challenged and having a teacher that is willing to teach a difficult text is where that starts. It might be more work for the teacher, but his/her students will probably get more out of it.
ReplyDeleteMy thoughts exactly Beth. In high school I would have thought it was ridiculous to make students read texts that teachers would know they need help with. Now I understand how crucial the Zone of Proximal Development is to learning and how often it is not implemented in classrooms.
ReplyDelete