Philosophy of Education

Running head: PHILOSOPHY OF EDUCATION

Philosophy of Education
Susan Stokley
University of Colorado Denver


My Literacy Development
My love for language analysis comes from my extensive reading background. I have been an avid reader for as long as I can remember. At first, I read for the love of the story, and as I matured, and became a more sophisticated reader, I read for style. I read all of the works by certain authors for their style these days, not necessarily for their content. My mother was an elementary school teacher for many years, so reading was always part of our home. As I grew, I read longer books, and classic literature. In the 1960’s, Young Adult Literature as we know it was very rare. I read the Nancy Drew Series, stories by Beverly Cleary, and finally, Judy Blume. Soon after, I moved to whatever books my parents had on their shelves. My mother preferred historical novels, and after a few, I was hooked. I still enjoy this genre. In high school, we read the canon, outside of class, we read Ayn Rand. It was not until college that I realized my love for language and the written word. World Literature—which at that time was from the Western Tradition—was the class that defined me as a reader. Multicultural literature was not included in this anthology, but it was the early 80’s. Now, multicultural literature is an integral part of any study, and lends another facet to the work. I will always be an avid reader. As an educator, I feel it necessary to read journals about my field of study, keep abreast of trends in Young Adult Literature, and continue to search for relevant, rigorous texts for classroom use.
Because I have always been a reader, I have never developed a writing style that is not academic and based on some sort of literary analysis. I do not journal, but I definitely see a place for this in the classroom. I write reflections and reports in my role as English Department Chair, and Co-curricular leader for 11th grade, but never seem to find time for any sort of creative writing. That said, I do enjoy my students creative writing. I feel it is necessary to allow them some creative outlets in all of their literature classes because personal responses and adaptations increase the relevance of the text for them. I am, however, because of my extensive college career, a good analyst. Through years of practice, I have also become very good at research writing and synthesis. I try to impart these skills to my students by giving them many opportunities to practice these skills, which is the way I learned. The difference for them from college is that I am there to support them along the way as they develop their own personal processes and styles.
I believe in providing access and equity to all students by teaching a rigorous, differentiated course of instruction.

Most educators today land on one side or the other in the debate over access and

equity in education, but Wagner and Benavente-McEnery, in their article, Education:

Misunderstood Purpose and Failed Solutions, posit that with a universally defined

purpose of education, this debate does not exist. This universal definition of the purpose

of education is traced back to the early civilizations and the writings of the Talmud, the

discourse of the Classical Greeks, Aristotle, and Maimonides. It consists of academic

discourse referred to as the Great Conversation, not to be confused with Mortimer

Adler’s Great Ideas series, but considered in concordance with the Great Books

Foundations standards of inquiry and discussion.

Using the minimal notion of the Great Conversation, the authors go on to use this concept as the basis for a unified purpose of education by suggesting that education is not just about content knowledge, but is also about knowing when and how to use this knowledge in the Great Conversation. They define the Great Conversation as the inherent capacity of human beings to ask the big questions concerning their environment and existence, “such as what is the world made of, how do things come into being, what is happiness” etc.
The idea is that all of humankind has these questions in common, and that only by engaging in a conversation about these larger truths can humans effectively cross cultural boundaries in search for understanding.
Unfortunately, according to the authors, two factions within the educational system differ greatly in their ideas on the purpose of education. Those with the power to legislate education require accountability based on hard data, in the form of assessment results based on test data. This type of assessment of skills and knowledge is limited to content specific material and does not test the student’s participation in the Great Conversation, and therefore the student’s ability to function cross-culturally in the global society as a contributing member. Programs like “No Child Left Behind,” have detracted from a unified purpose of education, and created an atmosphere of fear and competition instead. But, the authors continue, these federally mandated programs have been very good to curriculum creators and educational strategists. (Wagner, & Benavente-McEnery)
Ultimately, both Wagner and Benevente-McEnery conclude that the Great Conversation teaches both content and social consciousness, and invites participation by members of all races, classes, and genders. They caution that participants in this type of learning must always keep two questions in mind: “How do you know?” and “What do you mean by X?” These questions, according to John Dewey, are “moral imperatives” and promote intellectual integrity in which one must keep an open mind a show mutual respect for other participants.
The conclusions drawn are that both rigorous academic focus and curriculums that focus solely on self-expression are isolationist, and that participation in the Great Conversation enables all students to take a rightful productive place in the global society of today.
How, then do we maintain the rigor of the instruction, and accommodate the individuality of each student? The International Reading Association offers a comprehensive program of intervention that addresses these needs while educating teachers, parents, and administrators in the Response to Intervention process. In the February/March 2009 issue of Reading Today, one of the IRA’s publications, Response
to Intervention was considered one of the hottest topics in education today. Because of the close connection between the intentions of both the IRA and RTI to increase literacy, the IRA joined with the NCLD and other organizations interested in literacy to form the RTI Action Network. Further, the IRA has created six principles for the planning and implementation of the RTI program as follows: Instruction, Responsive teaching and differentiation, Assessment, Collaboration, Systemic and comprehensive approach to literacy, and Expertise. The International Reading Association supports the implementation of the RTI model for individual student success.
RTI and Me: As an Advanced Placement English Literature teacher, I am most interested in how to apply the IRA’s six principals in my own classroom to ensure student improvement in all literacy skills. As chair of the English department, I am interested in establishing a menu of common practices in our classrooms, which support the literacy development of our students while meeting their individual needs. My ideas and thoughts are outlined here.
Instruction: After five years in the classroom, I still find the most basic interventions to be the most effective. Strategies like reading aloud, questioning the text, and scaffolding instruction are still effective ways to reach most students. Some students already have these skills, but I find that modeling these strategies reminds the students to use them. Some students have never used these skills, and modeling is a way for them to emulate close reading and make them their own. For struggling students, these basic strategies help them make sense of the text in the most basic ways, and therefore enhance their comprehension skills.
Responsive teaching and differentiation: Differentiation does not mean giving students any choice they want to show their learning. Differentiation is adjusting your instruction to meet the needs of the individual students. That said, responsive teachers, of which I am one, approach content in a variety of ways and use different techniques and strategies to help students make sense of the material. This could mean using a variety of instructional strategies such as a cycle of individual work, then small group work, and finally whole class work to make meaning of any given text. I find literature circles to be particularly effective in this case. When students are in small groups and working individually in class, I can check for understanding and support each student according to their needs, while identifying students who may need more intensive interventions.
Assessment: The goal of the RTI model is to show student growth over the course of the school year, no matter how minute the improvement. By using a portfolio as a body of evidence collected over time, I can show student growth, and also have students reflect on their growth as they review their work over time; a very empowering, confidence
building practice. This alleviates creating a completely new system of assessments and presents more authentic artifact.
Collaboration: Communication is essential to the RTI model. There are three tiers of intervention for students, and each tier must collaborate to decide which level of intervention is needed to guarantee student growth and success. The first tier of intervention takes place in the classroom and is the responsibility of the teacher. She then recommends students who are not responding to her interventions to the second tier, which may recommend the student for Special Education interventions. If these are not successful, the third tier—the most intensive—takes over; staff members here include the school psychologist and the social worker.
Systemic and comprehensive approach to literacy: Perhaps the most important principle of the six, this piece requires a commitment from all levels of the educational environment of the student. Strategies here include establishing common vocabulary and expectations for implementation of the model., and a fidelity to implementation throughout the three tiers of intervention. As department chair, I am well situated to begin this task with the English staff.
I believe in using assessment as an instructional tool to improve standards based student performance.

In today’s data driven world of education, assessment matters. However, didn’t assessment matter before the advent of NCLB and school accountability reports? Of course it did, but in many different forms. I believe assessment always matters in education, because I think assessment data creates a permanent record of student growth and achievement. However, I also believe in assessing the whole student. One standardized, state-mandated assessment does not give an accurate picture of individual achievement. It is how we develop and evaluate a wide range of assessment data to inform our instruction that ensures student success. Common sense, right? Wrong. Too often, students are judged by their all-important CSAP scores: one test, one score, one label. Standardized test data must be combined with other forms of assessment to evaluate student performance accurately. We can assess students as much as we feel is needed, but what are we doing with the data we collect?
To be effective, I believe the assessment process must be circular. Quality standards-based assessments must be created and given, the data from all these assessments must be collected and evaluated, instructional decisions must be based on the data, and finally, new assessments must be created with student achievement in mind.
Assess process as well as product. I believe this to be an important piece of assessing the whole student. while process and product seem opposed to each other, I believe they are two parts of a whole in the assessment of student performance. Why have a process without a product? By combining these two methods of assessment, one gets a better picture of the student’s learning. The process shows assessment for learning, and teaches the students important skills and strategies to use both now and in the future. The product shows assessment of learning, and teaches students presentations and publication skills integral to both college and work force readiness. Seven Zemelman and Harvey Daniels, in their book, A Community of Writers, delineate the effectiveness of the old/traditional writing model and the new/process model. They suggest that the new model, in which the focus is on the process, is the most effective way to teach writing. This model supports collaboration, and the social aspects of writing which I consider essential to the development of quality writers. (Zemelman, & Daniels). I believe that there must be an end goal for students to work toward, and that this is the product.
Another important aspect of any writing project in my classes is the element of student choice. I always offer students several ways to show their learning relating to each unit, and I find that the students take more pride in both the process and the product when they create their own prompts. Combining process and product, and including an element of choice for my students has worked well for me in my classes, with the process model building toward a publication product which can be celebrated by students, teachers, parents, and administrators alike.
Use triangulation to corroborate data and make decisions. All students do learn differently and have different strengths and challenges. Therefore, in order to make decisions regarding student’s assessment data, that data needs to be both authentic and varied. Assessments should range from standardized test scores to in class assessments for learning. Each assessment should be analyzed and the data should be corroborated between the different types of assessments to gain a clear picture of student performance. Assessment data should also be collected throughout the child’s academic career in order to show growth over time as well.
Portfolios are an excellent way to collect and compile all types of data, depending on how one uses this system. Some portfolios only contain a student’s developing work, such as a writing portfolio, and some only show a student’s best work. I use portfolios to collect all kinds of data on my student’s growth. All of their work is kept in a file in the room: daily writing journals, daily in class assignments, diagnostic assessments, and embedded assessments. Some years I even add standardized test score data if it is available. This helps me create a picture of each student’s academic progress over the course of the school year, and becomes an excellent review tool during student and parent conferences. Students in my class interact regularly with the work in their portfolios. They reflect on their own processes, they choose work to revisit and revise, and they eventually choose their best work to include in their final portfolio assessment. For each of their choices, they must write a brief explanation of why they chose each piece and what it means to their own development. Portfolios can also be used in IEP meetings to show student progress in general education classes, and make recommendations as to the placement of students in next semester or year. I also make these portfolios available to administrators who are doing formal and informal evaluations of teaching and learning throughout the building. By triangulating data and using different types of assessments both for and of learning, proper decisions are made for the good of the student.
Portfolio assessments include selected response tests for reading comprehension and vocabulary, weekly reading assignments in the form of reading reports, and final essays. These varied assessments enable me and my students to assess strengths and challenges in their learning. With this data, I can offer choices of assessments that meet all students’ strengths and design instruction to support their weaknesses.
Our instructional decisions must be driven by the collection of quality assessment data.
What constitutes quality assessment data? According to Rick Stiggins, in his book, An Introduction to Student-Involved Assessment for Learning, there are three ways to record and collect data for analysis: the report card, the classroom portfolio, and the standardized test score. The report card is a record of data ranging from daily activities to major assessments and assignments. It serves the purpose of evaluating the student’s success with many types of assessments for learning. The portfolio, at least in my classes, contains the body of evidence that supports the repost card scores and data. These two records combine to become the main data used to make my instructional decisions in the classroom. The standardized test scores, in my experience, merely reflect the strengths and challenges I have already evaluated using the body of authentic student work in each portfolio.
Clarify and use standards in the assessment of reading, writing, speaking, listening, and doing. Currently, I am required to use two different sets of standards when planning effective lessons for my students. I use the Colorado Model Content Standards according to the requirements of the Colorado Department of Education, and I also use the CollegeBoard Standards for Student Success because our mandated curriculum is based on this set. There is a third set of English standards, created by the National Council of Teachers of English. Not only do we over-assess, but we over standardize our students. All of these sets overlap, and say the same things. In my analysis of all three, the Colorado standards best describe the essential learning of my students. Using these standards to build effective lessons is the final step in the effective use of assessments in my classroom, and brings us full circle to the creation of quality assessments. Writing and implementing standards-based assessments is another way to accurately assess and record whole student progress. As I move through the curriculum, I can track student proficiency on each standard for each lesson. This is a essential piece of the data picture, and proof that I am teaching the required skills, strategies, and knowledge for literacy development and for success on standardized tests. Thus, the assessment circle is complete.
I believe in using a variety of approaches to writing instruction to improve student expression and articulation.

In an age of standardized assessment, the opportunities for our students to write authentically become less and less prevalent. It is imperative that we make time in our busy schedules of mandated curricula and test prep to allow our students the time to put their thoughts on the page. I find that when students are given permission to write for their own edification, they are much more apt to engage in the work and make the connections so important in developing their critical thinking skills. Creating a collaborative community of writers not only allows the teacher to engage on a different level with students, it allows students to engage on a different level with each other. The collaborative writing classroom is so much more than the teaching and learning of writing, it is the teaching and learning of life skills essential to student success. That said, this is my “Guide to Teaching Writing in the 21st Century.”
Classroom Climate: The way a classroom looks and feels is an integral part of creating a community of writers. If students enter a cold, bare-walled environment, they have nothing but themselves from which to draw inspiration. I find that having colorful, thought provoking posters and quotes on the walls gives students something to think about as they brainstorm ideas.
Kirby, Kirby and Liner, in their book Inside Out, suggest the following rules for setting up a successful writing environment:
Rule 1: Make a place for student products. This does not mean a portfolio. No one can see student work when it is stuffed in a file on a shelf. Bright colorful bulletin boards which draw attention to the work being celebrated give students a sense of pride in their accomplishments and allow others to see how successful they are.
Rule 2: Arrange the room in way that is comfortable for you. This is a key element in a writer’s classroom. Students and teachers should be able to move about freely, and collaborate with each other easily. Climbing over a row of desks to get to your writing group or to work with a group of students is inconvenient and unsafe ( Kirby, Kirby, and Liner 25).
While these strategies create the physical space necessary for a successful writing classroom, one must not forget the psychological environment. Students absolutely need to know that they are in a safe, secure community where they can take risks, give, and receive support. Creating this community should begin on the first day of class with introductions and community building activities. One of my favorites is called “Who should survive?”
“Who should survive?” is a group activity in which the students are given a list of several people, all of whom have different qualities. They add their names and qualities to the bottom of the list and then must decide which 10 of the 25 people should survive the spaceship wreck. The students get to know each other through the qualities they list for themselves and then discuss the outcome. Each group must then present their rationale to the whole class. It is amazing to see the interactions and engagement on the first day of class. As an exit slip, they write about their process within the group. This is essential in that it establishes the fact that we will write, and write often. I use this piece as a diagnostic assessment to inform my instruction for the first few weeks.
As we continue to build the community, I tend to switch up the groupings according to writing strengths and weaknesses. Pairing and grouping mixed abilities creates mentors and leaders who nurture the less advanced writers in each group. It is amazing to watch a random group of students work together in more supportive ways as the community develops. As we progress, I find that students are kinder to each other, too.
Workshop/Collaboration: Zemelman and Daniels in A Community of Writers, suggest that “A writing workshop is a regularly scheduled, substantial chunk of class time when students work on self-chosen pieces of writing” (Zemelman, & Daniels). But Hashimoto, in his book thirteen weeks, suggests that a workshop involves student participation, involvement, and experimentation through small five to ten minute in-class experiments designed to keep students under a little pressure to think about what they’re doing, work quickly, make small commitments to small ideas, and risk making mistakes” (Hashimoto). While these two ideas seem antithetical, they both actually have a place in the teaching of writing. The extended workshop that Zemelman and Daniels advocate is an excellent routine for the writing classroom. Students should meet regularly to discuss their writing process, make constructive suggestions, and offer support to the other writers in the community. This period should be dedicated to student-centered teaching and learning in which the teacher acts as a facilitator only, teaching a five-minute focus lesson at the beginning, and allowing the work to unfold naturally thereafter.
Unfortunately, this scenario does not happen overnight. Effective workshops start small, as in the Hashimoto example as the community develops. It is only when students feel safe and supported that they begin to take the risks necessary to expand their writing experiences. Smaller, more focused workshop experiences help students develop the collaborative and supportive skills they need for the longer, less structured workshops to be successful and productive. My approach is to set a regular time each week for students to engage in the workshop environment. Block days are an ideal time for this type of activity. I set the task for each session with a mini-lesson, based on the pieces they will be working on. As the students work, I facilitate and keep the focus on the task. After a few weeks of this approach, I gradually increase the workshop time and decrease my involvement, but am always available for guidance and feedback. As the community develops, I begin to bring my own pieces into different groups and allow the students to workshop my writing as well.
Writing to Learn: Writing to learn is an integral part of the writing classroom. All writing to learn activities should be extensions of the content students are working on at the time. These pieces, according to Zemelman and Daniels are defined as “short, spontaneous, unedited, exploratory, personal writing that’s used not to affect an audience but to channel, crystallize, record, direct, or guide a person’s thinking” (Zemelman, & Daniels). This type of writing should happen every day in some form or another. Entrance slips, exit slips, personal responses to a specific reading, or writing about their own writing process are just a few of the ways to ensure that your students are writing early and often. These pieces can be collected in a writer’s notebook, and then used to spark ideas for longer endeavors in the future.
Writing to learn is a powerful tool when related to content. By exploring their responses and feelings about a particular topic or reading, students find relevance and personal connections to the content. This creates engagement, but the student’s way, not the teacher’s way. I have found that this type of exploration has generated some excellent longer pieces on the works we read in class because the students were able to pull their ideas from their own personal responses. Writing to learn also serves another purpose in the writing classroom. These pieces can be used to generate higher-level discussions of a given topic. When students generate their responses and then discuss them with their groups, I find level of discourse to be passionate and focused.
One of the ways to engage students in writing to learn activities is to have them carry a writer’s notebook at all times. They are to put everything they write in the notebook: grocery lists, jottings on the napkin from the coffee shop, reminders they write to themselves, etc. All of their writing to learn goes in to the book as well. At the end of the semester, they are able to see the continuity of their writing to learn, and hopefully their growth as writers for life.
Persuasive Writing: Our students live in a persuasive culture. It is imperative that they know and understand the art of persuasion and its uses in order to become informed citizens of the future. It is not enough for students to be able to identify persuasive tactics and respond appropriately; persuasive writing is also an essential skill. Hashimoto suggests that too often, students are unwilling to take a stand on an issue and risk a commitment to one side or the other. His goal is to teach students to “weigh and evaluate, argue for or against something worth arguing about, clarify or demystify something worth clarifying or demystifying” (Hashimoto124). Unfortunately, students today are afraid to be wrong. They have not been encouraged to take these risks in the course of their education in order to learn. Hashimoto’s objective is for students to be able to write a clear thesis statement. Here is an excellent way to introduce persuasion and argument into the classroom. First, introduce students to the art of persuasion. Ask them where they go for lunch. As they argue for one place over another, point out the fact that their arguments are for or against each place. They have taken their first stance. Now ask them why one place is better than another. They will give you very specific data to support their claims in the form of prices, types of food, quantity, and quality. They are amazed when told they have the beginnings of an argument. Our next steps, after lunch, are to read and analyze persuasive arguments in preparation for writing our own. At this point the writer’s workshop becomes a reader’s workshop for a few sessions, so we can grasp the basic elements of an argument. Then students begin to experiment with their own arguments, incorporating the rhetorical strategies they have identified as effective in pieces they have read.
Research: The information highway is fraught with hazards and wrong turns. Teaching students to navigate the road successfully is one of the essentials of the writing classroom. As more and more students are accused of plagiarism, teaching them how to accurately incorporate other’s work into their own to support their arguments is especially important. Burke quotes Carol Jago in his book Writing Reminders: “Technology has made research sexy. Students who would never delve into tomes of the Reader’s Guide to Periodical Literature now find manipulating a search engine a cool thing to do, not a bit nerdy.” (Burke). While this is undoubtedly true, the availability of such a vast amount of information on any given topic can be overwhelming to students and lead to a copy and paste mentality. Students who conduct research without a clear idea of their own to begin with must resist the temptation to “borrow” work from others and use it as their own. Therefore, it is imperative that we teach our students skills and strategies like paraphrase and summary, and how and when to use the proper citation systems available. More important than properly crediting others for their work, we must teach our students how to think for themselves first, and generate their own ideas and arguments. I start my students with Web Quests. These are structured, focused explorations in cyberspace in which each student on a team has a specific task. With Web Quests, students are able to learn how to navigate the Web and discern reliable and unreliable sources. They are also able to conduct research with a specific purpose in mind, and find the information quickly and accurately. Incorporating this information into their own writing properly is the final step of the process. I find that students who are taught how to use other’s work intentionally to support their own original ideas are much more confident in their ability to write a research paper later in the year.
Grammar/Usage: Amy Martinsen, in her article titled The Tower of Babel and the Teaching of Grammar: Writing Instruction for a New Century, states, “To break a grammar rule is to show the world you are coarse and uneducated” (Martinsen). I believe this to be imminently true, therefore I believe grammar instruction has a huge place in the writing classroom. While I, too, believe grammar should be taught in context, I also agree with Martinsen when she suggests that grammar can be taught using any sentence students read or write. In this way, students can correct their own grammar in context, and see how grammar is used correctly in more professional pieces. Good examples of grammar that is used correctly can and should be pointed out when students are workshopping their writing, and when students are reading models of the genres they are learning at any given time. These models serve as a starting point and as the type of grammar students should try to emulate in their own writing. I do believe that when there is a specific, recurring issue within the context of the student’s writing as a whole, that these issues should be addressed both within context and then practiced in some way. In the case of verb/tense agreement, I see this often and assign several practice activities including writing sentences and basic worksheets to drive the point home. Reverting to this traditional course of instruction seems to help with specific issues, but I do not recommend it for much more that that. In any case, studying, practicing, and incorporating good grammar into his or her own work improves student’s writing dramatically.
Revising and Editing: Revision and Editing are the two most difficult tasks in the writing process to implement successfully. Peer editing is the proscribed technique, but I find that only a few of my students are advanced enough to really offer any significant feedback on their peer’s work. I believe that by shifting the focus in the classroom toward a community of writers, this climate would change for the better. The more comfortable students are with reading and commenting on each other’s work, the more
effective their peer editing exercises become. Shelley Smeade in her article, Interior Design: Revision as Focus, offers some excellent, logical techniques for introducing students to the basics of peer editing. Smeade outlines two steps to the early revision process. The first is to have the students count the words in each of their sentences. In so doing, they become aware of the lack of variation in their sentence structures. At this point, sentence combining and syntax work can begin. The second strategy is for the students to work on incorporating imagery into their writing by naming their nouns more specifically (Smeade). The benefits of this are twofold. First, the students see their own work come alive and become more interesting, but they also begin to see the benefits of reworking their own writing. This second activity works well in a workshop setting as the students try to outdo one another with more and more fantastic nouns. They truly catch what Smeade calls “the vision of revision” (Smeade). Our goal as instructors is to make revision and editing meaningful. By this, I mean that we must treat this process as one of the most important steps to the writing process, possibly by weighting our grade for the final product more heavily on this step than the final production draft. I really believe that Smeade’s success with these revision techniques stems from her ability to teach revision in a concrete way that shows students immediate results. Students get positive results they can then work with to improve their writing. Taking Smeade’s steps further, we can help our students reach their highest potential as writers.
Assignments: In an effective writing classroom, students should write often and intentionally. Our mantra should be to write as if we mean it. Teachers should share in the writing process and workshop situations with their students. In this way, students understand that they are not alone in their struggles to write meaningfully and well. They see that writing is a process that produces a product, and that the process does not have to be painful if we support each other as a community.
Zemelman and Daniels offer several topics for consideration when creating effective writing assignments in A Community of Writers. The first piece they consider is the students. Where are they in their learning? How much leeway can you give them in the decision making process? Are they able to and will they make appropriate and challenging choices if given options? Not considering these issues can derail an assignment faster than a penny on a railroad track. If the assignment is beyond the reach of the student’s ability, frustration will set in and students will disengage. The teacher will spend most of the class time devoted to workshopping the writing teaching students the skills and strategies they need to perform the task. Assignments should be student-friendly, but challenging.
The second thing to consider, according to the authors, is the direction of the writing. This includes addressing topic, purpose, audience and mode. These four elements of the assignment shape the final product and can be decided upon by the students. By allowing them the latitude to choose their topic and purpose, you are guiding them to consider audience and mode of delivery. By turning this aspect over to students, the teacher gives them the autonomy to write on a topic that is personal and relevant, which they have drawn from their writer’s notebook and writing to learn activities. Another benefit to allowing students to choose is that they must think about their writing on a much deeper level in regards to the message they want to convey.
The classroom process, the third consideration from Zemelman and Daniels, is up to the teacher. One must consider structure of the class, starting the process, data mining, support during process, revision, publishing, and finally evaluation. All of these aspects need to be orchestrated by the teacher for the assignment to be successful. Time is always the enemy when coordinating the computer lab and devoting class time to workshop and collaboration, but with forethought and creativity, one can design and implement a successful writing project. (Zemelman, & Daniels).
Students in my writing classroom write to learn every day. They also extend their writing into their private lives through the use of their writer’s notebooks as mentioned earlier. These assignments are the seeds of the products they will create as they grow as writers and thinkers throughout the year. Major papers and literary responses are assigned throughout the year, usually at the end of units of study, but shorter essays and personal responses are required regularly. One research paper is required per semester according to department guidelines, and I find that this is a good number. Too much research takes away from in-class writing and content time.
Evaluation and Responses: Kirby, Kirby and Liner state that “Grading students and evaluating their progress are the toughest jobs in teaching…we find the whole process tiresome, frustrating…” (Kirby, Kirby, & Liner). I have to say that I totally, absolutely agree. They offer a few suggestions to alleviate the pain. One of these is to incorporate more self-evaluation into the program. In this way, students are grading their own and each other’s work. I find that this works only for objective, fact-based activities, but it does lighten the load somewhat. Hashimoto’s suggestion in thirteen weeks is a bit more specific. He suggests that we give students specific criteria by using a rubric. (Hashimoto) I find these to be very beneficial both as checklists for the elements of an assignment, and as a scoring tool for the final product. Burke, in Writing Reminders, makes two very significant suggestions for the evaluation process: check for understanding and growth, and provide timely and useful feedback to student writers (Burke). These seem to be common sense strategies, but sometimes, timely feedback is difficult what with the extensive responsibilities today’s teachers are required to shoulder. I find that if I cannot grade students work in a timely manner, it is essential that I at least talk to them about their progress and process. The three-minute conference works well in this situation. Conferences also serve another intrinsic purpose in a community of writers; they allow students and teachers to engage in a two-sided conversation about the writing. Verbal feedback allows for more latitude and guidance and can take place in a shorter amount of time than written feedback. A few quick notes as you read each paper can turn into a five-minute conversation. Having students come to the conference with some pre-written concerns and goals can also be effective and keep the conference focused on the work.
As far as the written feedback I give students in my classes, I try to say at least one positive thing, and then list up to three things that could use improvement. I have stopped correcting every little punctuation and spelling mistake, but I do still correct
MLA citations and I now focus mostly on the bigger grammatical issues: fluency, ideas, structure and organization, and style. I remind students that spelling, grammar and usage still matter, but they can fix that on their own, as I stress their repeated mistakes by teaching grammar in context in class. Sometimes, I handle students individually as far as comments go. If I feel a student is lacking in confidence, I will add comments that are more positive. If papers come in close to the AP test, I will focus on structure and specificity, which are skills they need for the test. No matter what, I feel that feedback is an integral part of the communication between teachers and students.
Here are just a few final thoughts on teaching writing in general. Teachers must remember that they cannot teach all things to all students. It is important to choose those few skills and strategies you would like your students to master and tailor your instruction accordingly. If you cover too much too broadly, the mastery will be shallow as well. Your task will be to decide what it is you need your students to know and be able to do at whatever grade level you are teaching. Just remember, the community aspect of the writing classroom is the most important idea to take away from this guide. It is as a community of writers that your students will take risks, challenge themselves and each other, and achieve true growth as writers, and people.
I believe in teacher leadership to implement positive change within the educational system.
In today’s demanding educational environment, there is a huge demand for
teacher leaders. These teachers assume roles in their schools that go beyond the
classroom, and they effect change within their buildings through collaboration and
common goals. K Devnaey, in The Lead Teacher: Ways to Begin, an article for the
Carnegies Foundation on Education, published in 1987, defined several key areas where
teacher leaders can make a difference.
Continuing To Teach and Improve One's Own Teaching: Strong content knowledge
is essential for effective teaching. This knowledge comes through excellence in one’s
own academics, and a strong program of continuing education both in content and
professional skill. New teaching methods for all branches of literacy are instructed every
year, and it is the educator’s mission to stay abreast of these new and innovative ways to
affect student engagement. If one does not know that a film is a text, how can one teach
the lesson prescribed? If one has not learned the importance of giving students authentic
writing experiences for grammar development, how will students improve and
understand?
Organizing and Leading Peer Reviews of School Practice: This sounds great in
practice, but in reality committee work is really not as productive as it could be. We have
committees to review our tardy policy, school leadership, marketing and promotion,
eligibility, the list goes on. Most of this work starts in August and stalls somewhere
around Halloween due to lack of time and stamina to see things through to their finish..
For example, our school leadership committee is having us read a book on instructional
Rounds—our group is on chapter three and it is April.
Providing Curriculum Development Knowledge: As with any curriculum, the teacher
has to be an active participant in implementation. With the onset of mandated,
standardized curriculum, and the looming possibility of a national curriculum sometime
in the future, we cannot lose this skill. It is never enough to just teach page after page of
a generic curriculum, by using data and authentic student work, teacher leaders
automatically make adjustments to meet their student’s needs. A collaborative
department is essential here as well. Teachers need to share their ideas and adjustments
with other content teachers to ensure maximum student learning.
Participating in School-Level Decision Making: This can be a tricky position for a
teacher leader. Our school collaborative committee makes decisions based on the budget,
and these days this means deciding which departments can be reduced to save money. I
have seen these teacher leaders snubbed by members of reduced departments. Personnel
committee is another tricky position here. Maintaining and elevating the level of
expertise in your building is crucial to improving scores and reputation of the school.
Leading In-Service Education and Assisting Other Teachers: This essential is where
the real work begins. Collaborating with other experts in the field, participation in
mentoring programs for both teacher candidates and new teachers is really imperative for
our success as a profession. To improve and expand on the general public’s opinion of
teacing as a profession, we must ensure that only the best candidates become teachers.
This requires active participation in mentoring programs, and districts. It is our job to
make sure that only teachers who have the drive, motivation, stamina, content knowledge
and true dedication to educating students enter the classroom.
Conclusion
The field of education is both vast and deep. Here I have outlined a few of the areas I
truly believe make a great teacher. Addressing these issues, and incorporating them into
my daily practice takes time and intention, however, without a system of core beliefs, it is
easy for the educator to become bogged down in too many areas. By choosing these few
beliefs on which to focus, I can make the greatest impact in my school, for my students,
and in my field of study. I hope that by being an agent of change in these areas, I can
make my school a better place for both teaching and learning.

Bibliography
_____. (1996). International reading association mission statement. International
Reading Association. http://www.reading.org/General/AboutIRA/Governance/Mission.aspx

_____. (2002). A New Era: Revitalizing Special Education for Children and their
Families. US Department of Education. http://www.ed.gov/inits/commissionsboards/whspecialeducation/index.html
Burke, Jim. (2003). Writing reminders. Portsmouth, Massachusetts: Heinemann.
Devaney, K. (1987). The lead teacher: Ways to begin. New York: Carnegie Forum on Education and the Economy.
Hashimoto, Irvin Y. (1991). Thirteen weeks: a guide to teaching college writing. Portsmouth, Massachusetts: Boynton/Cook.
Kirby, Dan, Dawn Latta Kirby, and Tom Liner. (2004). Inside out: strategies for teaching writing. 3rd ed. Portsmouth, Massachusetts: Heinemann.
Martinsen, Amy. (2000). The Tower of Babel and the Teaching of Grammar: Writing Instruction for a New Century. English Journal.
Shapiro, Edward. Tiered Instruction/Intervention. RTI Network.
http://www.rtinetwork.org/Essential/TieredInstruction

Smede, Shelley D. (2000). Interior Design: Revision as Focus. English Journal.

Stiggins, Rick. (2008). An introduction to student-involved assessment FOR learning.
Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Pearson Education.

Wagner P.A. & Benavente-McEnery L. (2006, Feb). Education: Misunderstood Purpose
and Failed Solutions. Current Issues in Education [On-line], 9(2).Available: http://cie.ed.asu.edu/volume9/number2/

Zemelman, Steven, and Harvey Daniels. (1988). A community of writers. Portsmouth, Massachusetts: Heinemann,