Hi Everyone!
Hope you are enjoying the break. As we begin our discussion, I just want to make clear that this book is not a network initiative, but a vehicle for discussion. In fact, folks on my team might disagree with Beers in places and you should feel free to disagree as well. I chose the book because I found it to be inspiring, provocative for conversation, and practical for classroom application. I think it asks questions that can help us all reflect on the teaching of literature during these new times.
So, I'll kick off the conversation and we'll see where it leads.
I am wondering what you think of the rigor question. I ponder this daily as I grapple with DOE initiatives, visit rooms, watch kids, talk with teachers. What do folks think about Beers's claim that "the essence of rigor is engagement and commitment?" During this test prep season, we have no choice but to load kids up with complex texts. I think it's vital that TEACHERS, not administrators or academics or government officials, come to together to discuss how that's going. What are we discovering? What works? What doesn't? What are OUR thoughts on rigor, given what we see with the young people we teach?
Likewise, I wonder about the intellectual community concept. Is it relevant to us during these times?Beers is pretty pointed on this topic, going so far as to say "New standards, without addressing old problems, won't change anything." I'm not so sure I agree. I think the new standards give us something clear to shoot for. On the other hand, I have to agree that if students don't engage with the work, we've got problems.
I'm traveling, but will check in on the conversation nightly. Rest up, awesome teachers--and post your thoughts.
Rigor !?! A confusing concept
ReplyDeleteI always wondered: What is rigor? How is “rigor” shown in a classroom? I did ask these questions once. No one could really define or give me concrete examples of it. It is a buzzword that sounds so …. Hum! You decide.
The definition of Beers and Probst that “rigor is engagement” sounds quite right to me. The interaction between the text and the person allows for clarity to take place and connections to form; hence, a greater understanding of what has to be communicated. In order for “rigor” to take place, the reading material must be readable by the students. It is the only way for them to generate and produce higher-lever questioning, thinking and work/product.
But…. What is my Boss’ definition and expectations of rigor?
In my 6th grade classrooms, I am expected to use 6th grade or beyond reading level texts. Understandable. But, there is a problem! The majority of my 6th graders read at a 2nd grade or 3rd grade reading level. What do I do? How does “my Boss’ rigor” translate into my classroom? What resources do I use? Do I present 4th grade or 7th grade level texts?
So once again: What is rigor? How is “rigor” shown in a classroom?
Note
Before reading the third chapter, I had to research or Google the word. I viewed the YouTube video that Beers and Prost suggested in the book (Rigor in the Classroom by Xtranormal). I ended up being more confused. I had to watch another video by the same producer: Example of Rigor in the Classroom. It did give me a little bit more clarity on the subject. Then I watched R I G O R 5 strategies to increase rigor in your classroom by Barbara R. Blackburn, which was the most helpful video (http://www.eyeoneducation.com/Authors/Barbara-Blackburn).
Intellectual community! What a dream!
ReplyDeleteI entered the field of education in order to be part of the development of the intellectual community. Nurturing and fostering the democratic citizens of tomorrow were what seduced me into becoming a teacher. Reality has shut my vision down.
Teaching to the State Tests has become America’s motto for education. So, old standards or new standards, do they make a difference? Nope because the objective of our education is still the same: Teach to the test.
Until there is a flip in our bureaucrats’ approach to education (not trying to re-invent the wheel) and a change in the school calendar (have the State Tests in June), it will be impossible to create an intellectual community. And we will continue to have those learning and social problems.
Hi Jennifer! Thanks for being the second person to post comments. I hope we can continue to discuss this rigor question. I agree that your readers on a 2nd grade level need more than grade level texts. Is it possible to save some student work so that you can make the case for small group strategy work with a text on their level? Most experts would agree (and you just know from working with them). As for the intellectual community--let's not give up. Maybe we can't achieve it all day long yet, but I think it can come in bits. If the kids are engaged and you ask a higher order question and they think and talk an intellectual community is present, if only for a few moments. I understand your discouragement, and I think at this time of year we all feel the test overtaking us, but I wonder if the rest of the book might help us imagine our classrooms beyond the test. What kinds of topics, questions, readings do you think would engage the kids to think deeply and want to know more? Have you had an bright spots this year that indicate what might work to get them thinking more? Thanks again for your comments, Jen. Hang in there. Oh, and I watched that video, too. I think it's supposed to be funny, but it's kind of hard to tell! I am glad to know about the Blackburn video. I've seen her book, so I will check out the video.
ReplyDeleteI think that in regards to rigor there is room for both types that have been described. The dichotomy that you have mentioned could also be the beginning of a conversation about rigor with your principal. However, I feel that the two types of rigor can co-exist in the classroom when it is acknowledged that they serve different purposes.
ReplyDeleteI feel that rigor of engagement will create high-level discussions and increase student questioning and understanding, but can only be created with an instructional level text, not a grade level text. Students have to be able to comprehend enough of what they read independently in order to be able to question, make connections, and make predictions that are grounded in text evidence.
Using a grade level text for students who read significantly below grade offers an opportunity to model basic comprehension strategies, but will not likely create the same opportunities for rigor of engagement due to the comprehension needs of the students. There are times when grade level texts are appropriate for students who read below grade level. For example teaching comprehension strategies or vocabulary. Opportunities to read on a student's instructional level, even if it is significantly below level, will likely contribute to the most growth in reading level. It will also spark the kinds of rigors discussions and produce the kinds of rigors writing that principals and the standards are looking for, and ultimately produce more life-long learners.
Hi everyone. Sorry to be silent for a few days. Just got back from vacation yesterday and am getting back in the swing of things. So you raise an interesting point about instructional level, Stephanie. I agree that we can model with virtually any text, and do some vocabulary work, too. I think in general teachers are becoming less obsessed about a "just right" book being an exact level. I like it that people are rethinking a stance where kids are forbidden to read a challenging book. That said, I still wonder about independence. Instructional means teachers is still necessary. If kids are giving a steady diet of way hard and a bit hard (instructional) texts, will they dig into independent thinking in the way we hope they will? I am wondering what you guys think about the text-dependent question chapter. Here, Beers goes pointedly against Coleman and New Criticism. I tend to agree with her, but I also think an over-reliance on "connection" work hampered reading comprehension in some ways. We naturally refer texts to ourselves, and I don't think we should discourage kids from doing so, but it came to dominate reading comprehension and gave rise to pointless connections that disconnected, rather than connected the reader from the text, or focused on minor details (in my opinion). Then we have the questioning issue. Teachers' questions or kids' questions? Certainly a combinationi is best, but in the latest lesson plans and units I see coming out, there is little attention given to student-generated questions, making kids increasingly passive and dependent on the teacher. I happen to love Beers's sensible procedure for "Letting Students Create Text-Dependent Questiions." Quite doable--and challenging for kids, too. What do you guys think?
DeleteAfter reading the chapter on rigor, I have to say that the one quote that most struck me was "Rigor is not an attribute of a text but rather a characteristic of our behavior with that text. Put another way, rigor resides in the energy and attention given to the text, not in the text itself." How true is that??? How can anyone not love Kylene Beers!
ReplyDeleteI do believe that often time’s teachers think if the text is hard then it is rigorous. When I first started teaching that is how an Assistant Principal that never taught a day in her life explained rigor to me. She looked at me and said, “Give them something hard to read and make them understand it. Then test them on it. That is rigor. That’s what she said.” However, the example Beers uses referencing Beowoulf spoke volumes to me. What that teacher did is something I would have done years ago. But now I see that defeats the purpose. When we as teachers lose sight of our students ability in an attempt give them something "hard" or "challenging" in their ability to read it, then we lose sight of the point of reading the text (unless of course the purpose is to read crazy hard words).
That said, if we do find texts that engage our students and we challenge them to dig deeper, then we are creating a rigorous learning environment. As Beers states, "Rigor, in other words, lies in the transaction between the reader and the text and then among readers. The essence of rigor is engagement and commitment." And that is something I do believe as teachers we all want to achieve.
-Kristin