First Response/Journal: Reader Response--Theory and Instruction
Hi Folks,
Please share your thoughts on reader response theory based on our readings in the Sheridan text. Secondly, share an example of reader response-based instruction from your classroom.
Our goal here is to consider what reader response looks like in our language arts classrooms.
I'm enjoying working with each of you and am honored to know that you have joined us in this district!
Brady
posted by Brady Kelso @ 8:26 PM
6 Comments:
Okay--I'll go first
“Response is a complex process . . . Response is intellectual as well as emotional, and more” (26) Yes it is. But that’s why I like it; it’s why I’ve always liked it. I did not become an English teacher because when I was 15 I thought that The Catcher and the Rye was a brilliant commentary on post-war American, although it is and I did. What was important to me was that the novel made me feel something. And I think, for a 15-year-old boy, that feeling I might have been experiencing for the first time was called thinking--thinking about my own coming of age, my own innocence, the world’s coming of age and the world’s innocence. Without that personal response, I’m not sure we can think of a piece as a brilliant commentary on anything until we internalize and make it our own.
I try not to forget this when I am teaching a lesson to my students. “Why would they do that? Would you do that? Do you know anyone like that?” I ask. This is where I get the most thoughtful, most amusing answers. “My cousin did that, and know they are in jail,” or, “That’s stupid. War is too scary and dangerous to join just because you want a horse.” And in writing too. I ask them to write letters to characters and give them advise. I ask them to create their own character and insert him/her/it into the story. I find that in responding to these prompts my students are most critical of the text and handle it with the most care and precision.
Correction: IN the Rye, IN the RYE
!!!!!
As I reflect on this past year as a Language Arts teacher, I have come to realize that I probably learned more this year than my students. What I mean by this is that I learned (and am still learning daily), what I need to do to shape my classroom into a more learning-rich, literature rich classroom. The book said, "Our students spend most of their time in English classes listening to their teachers talk about writing and reading. Between 70 and 90 percent of English class time is devoted to teacher talk, either lectures or directions". Unfortunately, I feel that this was the case in my classroom.
From the reading, however I began reflecting on my teaching, and then began brainstorming how I could change things within my classroom for next year to make the learning of my class more oriented around reader response. From this, I learned that I need to "let the talk [among my students] build and grow as naturally as possible". My goal is to have reader response be more prevalent in my classroom, with less teacher directions and more student discussion.
In reflecting on my high school experiences, I do not remember many times when we had open discussions about the books we were reading. I remember the teacher directed the questioning, however I never really made many connections with the reading. I always found the reading to be bland and unimportant. It wasn't until I got to college that I actually found myself as a reader. I felt that I had missed out on so many opportunities to read wonderful books, and that if only I had a teacher who would have helped me make connections with my reading, I would have found my love of reading a lot sooner in life.
Hi Mike, Sandi, and Jocelyn:
How refreshing to read the writing of English teachers! You each bring up important issues about reader response instruction and its place in the classroom. Moreover, your insights show me that you're truly reflecting on your work this year. We should always be thinking about our practices and what we could do differently. Also, we will have highs and lows when it comes to our English classrooms--each of them, five periods a day. What might work for one class could, in fact, fall flat in the next. This tells us something about the personality dynamics of each class.
What keeps me intrigued with this profession (and English teaching in particular) is that our students' responses do, in fact, enliven our classrooms and keep us, as teachers, going.
As English teachers, I don't think that we have to have all the answers. Once we realize that, and once we "lighten up a bit" with our students, a new ambience is created in the classroom--a new dynamic is formed.
Finally, we need to keep in mind that we're not necessarily training "future English teachers" when we work with our students. Rather, we're working to help them become strong thinkers, readers, and writers.
Keep up the great ideas!
Kristy and Cheri,
Thanks for the thoughtful responses on this approach/philosophy as it relates to your individual classrooms. Great observations!
Stacey Roth
Reading Mike's response made me think of how much I enjoy reading as well,
which is probably what led us to become English teachers in the first place.
It is also why I love, love, love my job (most days). Where else would I
be paid to read, write and talk all day about great literature, articles and
poetry?
But I am currently rethinking how I teach Language Arts because I am utterly
amazed that my students don't share my passion for the written word. How
can this be? What is there not to love about a new book? I live for it;
the uncreased spine of it, the creamy white pages, the delicious images and
intriquing information I find inside each tome. It's practically erotic for
me so WHY DON'T THEY GET IT????? It kills me.
When I think of reader's response I know that somehow I have to help my
students make the kinds of connections I make when I read...and I realize
that this is no easy task, because the vast majority of them don't like to
read at all. (I nearly choked as I wrote those words.)
I agree with our text's assessment that the average teacher (myself
included) spends about 70% of his or her time gabbering away, while the
students sit passively trying to ignore about 100% of this daily barrage of
aural communication. I would like to reverse this trend in my own classroom
by giving them 70% of the time to read and write while I sit-down and
shut-up. (Which will be very hard for me, because I love to talk to a
captive audience, which is probably the other reason I became a teacher.)
The trick is this: how can we insure that our students are reading, really
reading, if we give them valuable class time to do this? I have seen kids
fake-read time and time again which led me to stop giving them time to read
in class. Now I think that this was a mistake. But what do we as teachers
do to spark a love of reading and hold them accountable for that reading at
the same time? I think this is the fine line we tread because the
"accountabilitiy piece" can destroy the "pure love of reading" we want to
foster.
As a result of this inquiry, I have picked up Nancie Atwell's book, In the
Middle, again. I have also reread Ralph Fletcher's Writer's Workshop and I
am actively implementing some of their strategies in my classroom before the
year is over. I have found that the time I have given my students in class
to write is paying off; their narratives were definately more engaging and
better written than their previous attempts. The reading is harder to
monitor because it is not a tangible as a piece of writing. I do think book
clubs will be part of the answer to this quandary...but what about
self-selected texts? And how much time should I give them to read in class?
Does anyone out there have any ideas or strategies that they have used
which have worked? Help!
Post a Comment
<< Home