professornana (professornana) wrote,
professornana
professornana

  • Location:
  • Mood:

Le Sigh

Here is a tweet from my Twitter feed yesterday: IF a teacher presents what is in the text rather than students reading it. Red Flag, not common core #CCSS

Let's ignore the rather horrendous grammar errors and cut to the chase. Let's talk about what this means (at the risk of raising a red flag, of course). If I read this solely on a literal level, I could suggest that this means that a teacher tells kids what is in a text so they do jnot have to read it. Why would a teacher do this? I think this is njot the intent of the author of this tweet. I think perhaps this tweet is referring to teachers providing background information that migfht be pertinent to a text. And, as we all know from CCSS and close reading, this is WRONG.

And herein lies the problem with the misunderstanding and misapplication of close reading one of the apparent pillars of ELAR and the CCSS. Yet, close reading is not one of the foundational skills presented in the standards nor does it appear in, say, the 8th grade standards. It is not in ANY of the anchor standards specifically (and if I am missing this, perhaps I am not reading "closely"?). Here is Doug Fisher's answer to a question abhout whether or not close reading is in the standards:

Close reading isn’t in the Common Core State Standards. However, an analysis of the Common Core State Standards really says you’ve got to learn the text well. The Common Core State Standards require that students provide evidence and justification for their answers. The only way we know how students can do this - that they really learn to provide evidence and justification - is if they closely read. This is a quote from the Common Core Toolbox, BTW.

So, when I see a tweet or a post that suggests the only good reading is a close reading, I want to shriek. Same with the word "rigor" as it applies to text. Generally, when I see rigor in a CCSS context, it refers to the level of difficulty of the words in a text and not to form or format or even style. This misappropriation of terms and techniques, this misunderstanding of what the standards mean and say, these are just part of my concern about how this is all being implemented. All it took to convey misinformation here was 140 characters. Imagine it in a classroom with kids. Le sigh....
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

    When you submit the form an invisible reCAPTCHA check will be performed.
    You must follow the Privacy Policy and Google Terms of use.
  • 0 comments