This week I read on in Bird by Bird from where I left off a couple of weeks ago. Though it wasn’t assigned, I was glad that I read those extra 50 pages because there were some ideas that were presented that I would use in an elementary classroom. The main area of interest for me was the chapter on building characters. On page 45 Lamott says that the author needs to know everything about the character and lists some questions that the author needs to have answered when considering the character. This idea can easily transfer to the classroom, having the students fill out a worksheet that asks questions about their character, so we can get to know them. Taking this idea on step further, I thought I could use the idea of getting to know your character in a setting where the students have to think through the eyes of a Native American. Though students will be researching people of certain tribes throughout the US, having them give specific traits to the person may engage them in the activity, resulting in them enjoying and learning more during the lesson.
There was one thing that Lammott said in the week’s reading that I thought contradicted what we have learned in Routman’s reading. On page 108, Lammott says, “Maybe what you care most passionately about are fasting and high colonics – cappuccino enemas, say. This is fine,, but we do not want to write about them, “ which tells me that she wants writers to write about what she thinks is appropriate. This idea is completely different than Routman’s encouragement to let students free write, giving them no limits on their writing because it will get them to write more. I know that this is an extreme example, but are there times when it’s important to influence students’ writing during free write? I would think not.
Word Identification Strategies made me think, but in a way where I knew I was over thinking things, specifically, on page 94, when Fox mentioned the word find. I understand that the onset is f and the rime is ind, but I thought that when students later notice the /ind/ when trying to read a different word, like independent, they will be making a different sounds. Will the students know the different because, by the time the reach the level of learning these more difficult words, they will be more exposed to words like that or recognize the word? Is this something that we will be learning more about, as we learn the progression of word identification strategies through the later grades?
I also started wondering if the current trend of parents spelling their children’s names in odd ways could have an impact on the way that students learn word identification strategies. It seems like students will be learning the names of their peers early on, but may have a hard time using strategies when seeing oddly spelled names like Haydyn or Mikaylyah (just made up names – it seems like a lot of people are using ys in names a lot lately). Could this be a problem for children when they try to figure out names while they are reading?
Hey Jenny, I was thinking about what you wrote about Lamott's assertion that you shouldn't include every obscure detail in your work not jibing with what Routman says about free writing. Do you think, perhaps, that Lamott would be all for including that tedious minutiae in our "shi**y first drafts" while Routman would eventually want to students justify inclusion of such details during the editing process? This is the feeling I have. Lamott seems to promote getting everything down, even if you don't end up using it all - and as the statement you quote above says, you shouldn't end up using it all. Routman wants kids to put everything down, too, and, in my opinion, for good reason. It's all too easy to shut down a child by restricting or correcting them, especially early in the writing process. Eventually, though, the child will be at a place where they can revise and edit their work.
ReplyDeleteAnyhow, just my take on that. I'm curious if you saw anything similar.