We used the cafe routine last week as we are finishing our unit on clauses. Basically, each group of four to five boys rotates to each of four stations around the room and has a set time limit at each station. I used the four pictures below with the directions next to them, and each group had approximately ten minutes at each station. We used laptops instead of butcher paper for this cafe, and we all agreed that it worked much better because it was easier to read other groups' sentences. At the end, we all rotated to each station to review each group's work and put stickers on sentences we really liked. This routine is one of my favorites because it gives me a great picture of each student's understanding of the concept, and it also shows me how well they are able to collaborate with others.
Your picture is of the recent volcanic eruption in Iceland. If you were a witness describing what you saw, what would you say? Write 3 compound sentences. Circle the subject and underline the verb in each clause.
Your picture is of the iPad, a new product released by Apple this year. If you were an iPad, what would you say to convince people that you were an important innovation? Write 3 complex sentences. Mark each clause as dependent or independent. Circle the subject and underline the verb in each sentence.
Your picture is of a woman in Haiti. This picture was taken some time after the recent earthquake. Why is this woman crying? Try to write at least one compound-complex sentence (two independent clauses and at least one dependent clause). Mark your clauses as dependent and independent.
Your picture is of Phil Mickelson, who just won the Masters golf tournament in Augusta, Georgia. If you were to write a caption for this picture, what would it be? Write 3 creative captions. Use only one independent clause in each caption. Circle the subject and underline the verb in each clause.
We used the CSI routine yesterday to discuss the main character of each of our Literature Circle books. As a Language Arts teacher, this routine appealed to me immediately at PZ because I could see how it would lead to a much more complex analysis of literary characters. Since we are reading four different works of historical fiction, I want the boys to understand enough about each other's characters to be able to make connections between texts. This routine definitely helped with that-- like I told the boys, at the end of Literature Circles, I want us to feel like all four of the characters: Ned, Joe, Joey, and Grandma Dowdel, are all sitting in the classroom with us. As we reviewed their responses, we were able to make connections between characters and also discuss differences (i.e.-- Grandma and Gabe seem very different because Grandma faces her fears head-on while is afraid of everything, even moving up to the 5th grade). At the beginning of the year, I got a lot of what I call "surface" responses with this routine (for example, a baseball for an image of a boy who plays baseball). Now that we've used the routine a good bit, their responses demonstrate an understanding of figurative language--- for example, I loved the example of an image of a car driving in the "slow lane" to represent a character who lives in the "slow lane of life." Another example was the color red to represent a character's "true heart, perseverance, and willingness to shed blood for his country."
After a great first day of Literature Circles, we had some time to "debrief" on Friday to discuss everyone's impressions of how their group worked together, what they would like to improve upon, and what they accomplished. I decided to use the Chalk Talk routine I learned about at PZ, and I asked the boys these two questions: "If Mrs. Droke or Mr. Burns (our assistant headmaster and headmaster) walked in our room during Lit. Circle meetings, what would they be excited to see? What do you believe good learning looks like in the context of Lit. Circles?" Chalk Talk is basically a conversation on paper, and the boys generated excellent ideas about what good learning looks like. One of my favorites was the shot at the end that says, "Cooperation + organization + creativity + facts x fun = learning." I love that this student chose a mathematical relationship to express himself. The incredible thing about these routines is that it's not necessary to review as a class what everyone wrote. I just had them walk around at the end, and then I put the butcher paper up on our walls as a reminder. I encouraged them to remember those ideas and implement them in their groups when they meet next.
I've been reflecting lately on what learning looks like, and I was excited to see a true picture of it yesterday. When Marie and I set out to try Literature Circles this quarter, we were definitely apprehensive and completely unsure about what we were doing. With a lot of help from our tech coach, we were able to set up completely paperless (except for the texts!) Literature Circles. Last week, I presented the four books they would be able to choose from: Code Talker (by Joseph Bruchac), A Long Way from Chicago (by Ricahrd Peck), The Liberation of Gabriel King (by KL Going), and Jackie and Me (by Dan Gutman). We chose books at a variety of levels, and the boys used Survey Monkey to select their top three choices. We passed out books last week, and I gave them the "job" that they would be starting with (we aren't sure how the jobs will work, and we may end up doing away with them completely after a few meetings). We had our first official meetings in class yesterday, and I was incredibly impressed with what I saw. As I walked around the room and listened to the conversations taking place, I heard boys making connections to the text, pulling out examples of figurative language, and sharing reflection journal entries from the night before. When I ponder what learning looks like, I'm sure that it looks more like the videos below and less like the way I was taught. It is student-centered, student-led, and that is what makes this venture so exciting. As I continue to read about Literature Circles (Harvey Daniels' books have been very helpful, especially Mini-Lessons for Literature Circles and Literature Circles: Voice and Choice in Book Clubs and Reading Groups), I think this will be something we implement throughout the school year next year. We'll continue to supplement with short stories and will definitely continue to do whole-group reading.
We used the Ladder of Feedback thinking routine on Friday as one student presented his narrative writing submission on WPP on the Smartboard. As we approach the WrAP test, I think the best way for my students to understand what strong writing looks like is to see each other's work and critique it. The student read his story aloud, and we then moved through the steps of the Ladder of Feedback: clarifying with questions, valuing the work, sharing concerns, and then providing suggestions. As we have used the routine more throughout the year, my students are becoming more comfortable with it. As you can see in the video, the steps in the routine sometimes get blurred together, but I do feel that they know what it means to ask clarifying questions versus valuing the work, etc. What excited me most as I watched this video after class was to see them making connections betweent their own writing and other students'. One student stated, "You're having the same problem I am...". I like that they are not afraid to admit their weaknesses in writing, and then look to each other for support and guidance. They have become more reliant on peer editing and feedback, and this routine adds an even deeper level of peer feedback to their writing.
Yesterday we discussed the author's purpose in class, and I was excited about the way we were able to talk about this concept. I basically wanted to convey that authors write for one (or more) of three reasons: to persuade, to inform, or to entertain. Instead of telling the boys these categories, I just started the conversation by asking them why authors write. This was a simple lesson, but I think it shows how my mindset is really beginning to change about the way I teach. I didn't want to tell them what to think because I see what a difference it makes in their learning when they generate the ideas and reach conclusions on their own. Yet again, I see the need for my students to feel a sense of agency and autonomy in our class. One student pointed out that the author's words on a page are like hands that come out to grab you, and another noted that some people write to try to teach a lesson (they used the example of the movie "Blindside") because it showed one student how lucky he is. Basically, they were able to generate the three categories on their own with a small amount of guidance from me, and I was excited we were able to have a lively conversation with almost everyone engaged in what we were discussing.
This week, we tried doing the entire 3-2-1 Bridge thinking routine, and I didn't know if the boys would be able to do it or not-of course, they blew me away. So far this year, we have only done "half" of the bridge. When the boys come up with 3 words, 2 questions, and 1 simile, it does help them to "unpack" their understanding of a character or concept, but it is not really getting at the point of the routine. When I participated in this routine at Harvard, we generated the words, questions, and simile using the idea of culture-- then we read a fascinating article, did the same thing again, and then built our bridge to connect our understanding and articulate how it changed. I finally saw an opportunity to try this routine because we had read a fascinating chapter in The Twenty-One Balloons about a very innovative and unique house full of creative inventions. Before they read the chapter, we came up with words, questions, and a simile associated with the idea of a house. Then we discussed common threads running through most people's ideas-- they realized comfort, security, stability, strength, protection were the connections they found. Then the next day, after they had read the chapter, I showed them the animated video below of Frank Lloyd Wright's Fallingwater house and also showed them pictures from a site with "weird houses from around the world." I told them we weren't going to talk about what they saw, but that I wanted them to consider how these houses were different than what we had talked about the day before. They met with their same partners and generated new words, questions, and similes. Then they used an index card and yarn to connect their similes and explain how their thinking had changed. This was the most difficult part for them, but it was incredible to hear what they shared. One group went from the simile of a house being like a box to a house being like a drawing-- they explained that now, they see that "anything is possible" with a house, unlike being "stuck in a box" before. Another group's new simile was a house being like clay "because you can mold it into whatever you want it to be." I was fascinated by the conversation we were able to have about going from "one-dimensional, flat thinking" to "3-D thinking." I have never felt so invigorated or excited about what was going on in our classroom- they were engaged and excited about what we were doing. I will definitely continue to use this routine in this format because it challenges the boys to explain their own understanding and how it has changed.
