The "how-to" on Grading

Christensen's little secret is that she does not grade papers. As a future educator, reading that can seems a little far fetched simply because we do issue report cards and we do have to assess our students writing somehow! The system that she promotes or encourages is instead of correcting with our notorious red pen all of the errors the student made, we should start with what our students do right. Not only what they do right but what are their strengths in their writing before completely faltering a students confidence to write. We don't want our students to "clam up" and want to avoid writing at all costs, considering many are hesitant to write as it is. We can point out what is working and in the areas that could use improvement, give actual feedback. Some ways she suggests is to write questions to encourage deeper thinking and writing. Having these questions not only is concrete feedback, but from personal experience, can be very helpful when editing or revising a paper. It allows the student to understand what the teacher is looking for but also HOW to go about adding and editing their work.

Christensen also brings up a great conversation around the language of power. As ELA teachers, we will have students from multitudes of backgrounds with different home languages and a vernacular we may not be accustomed to. As we have talked about many times, we should not discourage the range of languages and vernacular in our classrooms because in doing so, we may lose the "meaningful" aspect of our students writing if forced to only write in Marketplace English. With that being said, we cannot forget that being ELA teachers, we are responsible for teaching our students these conventions and grammar in order for them to succeed. A great way Christensen introduces the idea of correcting is by using a Patterns of Error sheet that students will have access to when revising their work. These patterns allow students to monitor their corrections as well as for teachers to monitor their progress. Finding the patterns of errors will give teachers insights into why the students are making these mistakes, as well as give students the skills to develop a habit of self checking their small grammatical/conventional mistakes.

Hawley Turner and Hicks also add great insights on the importance of using technology in a purposeful and realistic way when using it for writing. If we create a rubric with exact checkboxes to check off (the example they use is how many slides/images/ etc) students will either 'over do' it or will add anything just to meet the requirements. This does not constitute as Meaningful Writing assignment. We have to find ways to ensure that our assignments are purposeful and have the capacity to feel their writing is meaningful and will be something they want to work on. Whether its a video production, blog, voice over, etc we have to remember why we are assigning it and what we want students to leave with. These readings definitely got me thinking about my MWP and the possibilities in our units!

How can we empower our ELL students?

“Young people who have experienced migration and/or are disempowered within their communities can bring their home artifacts into the classroom and make them come alive with their new meanings.”

The readings, Pahl and Stewart, are the first articles that I feel really have helped me understand the importance of spending time really understanding how we can access our ELL students as well as empower these students in their classrooms. Like discussed in practicum, we talk about how majority if not all curricula "leave out" what they want and select what's "most important". There will be students in your classroom who will not have one 'mirror' in your classroom.What does this tell our students? It tells them that their story doesn't matter, or count. It's a reflection of power that is engrained in our society that becomes undeniable when looking at what we teach our students.

The readings also point out that children do not see the relevance of “schooled literacy”. From being in classrooms for practicum I can completely understand why they are not valuing or recognizing the importance of school because educators are not connecting their work to their lives. As we hear time and time again, we have to bridge students home lives with their experiences in schools. Once we bridge the two, students become interested and meaning making can finally happen.

Artifacts are brought up a multitude of times as a way to bring these two worlds together. What is an artifact? This can be many things. They focus in on how artifacts do not have to be simply stories or texts. It can be something they listen to, feel/touch, drawings, how something tastes, etc the list goes on and on. In doing this, it opens up the kind of instruction that we can do with our students. It becomes less of direct instruction and creates a more student centered learning and students own discovery/observations. Not only do students get the opportunity to share something about themselves and culture, they also start that conversation that links back to power and privilege.

By not taking these things into account, (migration, ELL/EB students) we continue the power structure of the students that "fit" in the school system. Students that will succeed under the curriculum "fit" under this umbrella and it "worked" for them. I had a conversation with another classmate about the fact if I had not learned about differentiation and finding ways to access all students, I would be okay with sitting in rows, and learning straight from a book, with no other supplementary readings or thinking about my Emergent bilingual students, etc. The school system "worked" for me. I was a student who enjoyed the direct instruction, the lecture, and projects, etc. After taking my education courses I now understand how important it is to stray from that traditional scope of teaching and is something I really look forward to as a future educator.

How to Approach Our ELL Students

Before reading Fu and Martinez, I had a general understanding of the importance of encouraging students native language. After reading Fu, I found that she did a great job of laying out the stages of an ELL's journey when writing in their native language as well as writing in English. Almost a "chart" to guide educators through an outline of the expectations for their students as they continue to develop as a writer. As Fu reminds us, academic writing is difficult for everyone especially emergent bilinguals who are not encouraged or even forced to use English only when writing. Unfortunately, in doing so, students are not able to use their strengths in their native language to then translate their ideas to English.

Whenever reading topics around ELL and emergent bilinguals, I try to put myself in the shoes of these students.  I imagine myself in a classroom surround by those who speak anything but English and not having the opportunity to use English in the classroom. Writing in a completely different language would be impossible for myself; I cannot imagine attempting to write an entire academic paper in Spanish, for example. Allowing students to use their native language and how Fu puts it, following the "natural stages"(Fu 22) when developing their writing is an approach that is much more student centered and less deficit based language. These students are acquiring a different language at a quite a fast pace in my opinion. Fu's approach to ELL or emergent bilinguals seems to follow a more "natural" process which is very different than my experience with ELL students. Many teachers would hand out worksheets with different vocabulary words or grammar practice problems that they would fill out and do nothing with. Writing can be used as a tool to get our emergent bilingual students invested in their writing and continue to develop the skills to over time, code-switch and interlanguage to eventually writing in English.

Jamilia Lyiscott: "Three ways to speak English"

Martinez focuses on another aspect that Fu doesn't indulge in which is their cultural identity. Forcing students to not use their native language can be an act of "linguistic terrorism" (Martinez 183). As Christensen also reminds us, focusing too heavily on grammar and syntax of our writing and speech can derail a students writing progress, but also correcting students constantly on their English abilities  will hinder their view of themselves and close off their ability to express themselves and make meaning. Not only could this cause students to maintain a deficit perspective of themselves, but can also manifest into a form of internal oppression. Our main focus as educators is to give our students the space and opportunity to express themselves in the ways they feel most comfortable. Establishing this understanding will create a more open and safe space for their own progress in code switching and interlanguaging to develop their writing in English.