Graphic Organizers

I have learned over the years that there is only one way I will be able to retain information,


and this is by seeing it with my own eyes. I am a visual learner. When I have an idea and / or am trying

to stick something to memory, jotting it down it down in an organized fashion is the only way I will be

able to recall the information at a later date. This brings me to Graphic Organizers: the easiet way for

a visual learner like myself to express ideas. These organizers have several advantages in the classroom. They

are a way for students to see and think about information in a create way. I think I can speak for many when I say

that constantly writing sentences, paragraphs, essays and reports gets old. It's easy for students to get frustrated

when trying to come up with ideas that fit a given topic. With graphic organizers, students are able to focus on the

connections between the information and its content.

Although graphic organizers are helpful for most students, I believe that teachers need to take a

auditory approach to the information as well. By just going over the organizers with the students gives them

a visual representation as well as an auditory explanation.

Since every student learns a different way, graphic organizers may be confusing. If constructed the wrong

way, the organizer may not allow students to report all the information that is needed. This brings me to my question.



Is it a good or bad idea to allow the students to construct the graphic organizers?

(or)

Is it better for the teacher construct the model, provide the information and allow the students to copy it?

Text Talk Article

 “Don’t judge a book by its cover.” We have all heard this saving several times throughout our life, for it’s literal meaning as well as life situations. The saying can also be used to describe what this article is about. The idea that children are not getting the most out of texts or stories because of the pictures that are provided gives me mixed emotions. I understand that pictures can take away from concentration of what is being read. From past experience, however, the kindergarten class I read to was very receptive to the questions I asked. Not only did I show the pictures to the class as I read, I also acted as an entertainer by changing my voice for each individual character. The students loved it and were able to give thoughtful answers, for their ages, to most of the questions I asked throughout the story. By showing the students the pictures as well as acting, enabled them to think of more creative answers to the questions I was asking. For example, in the story, A Balloon for Isabel, Isabel is a porcupine who is trying to figure out a way to make her quails less dangerous. Half of my class did not know what this animal looked like, therefore, they would have had no idea how to think of ways to cover up the animal’s sharp quails if I had not shown them the pictures. I understand what the article is trying to state, but I feel like the kids are too young and have not experienced enough to have to create mental pictures of what is being read to them. This brings up my questions.

1. How can you get a student who has no experience of reading or being read too to make a mental picture of a story? 

        2. Isn’t the ages 4-7 too young to not show pictures of information being read to them? 

Writing to Learn Across the Curriculum

This article has made me question my past - big time. All of the writing evaluations such as the checklist and the reading log were not really used when I was younger. I have always believed that the more writing assignments a child is given the better the writer he or she will be. I have also heard the following saying a thousand times:  "Practice makes perfect". But, does it really? The problem with this statement is that it is not entirely true. If you practice a bad habit over and over again it becomes natural. So, practicing something COULD end up in a perfecting the perfect wrong? Hmm...
I agreed with what the article said that, "Sometimes, the prospect of grading an avalanche of papers prevents teachers from encouraging extensive student writing." From personal experience, I never remember having problems with my writing in my early education. Like I said, we did not use the reading logs and checklists; we had a prompt or topic and were told to write. Thinking about all of this has made me wonder a few things.

1. Was I really a good writer when I was younger?   (or)
2. Did my teacher overlook many of mistakes/faults because of lack of time and / or laziness?

If number 1 is right, then why throughout highschool, college, and present time did/do I HATE writing papers?
If number 2 is right, then is that the reason I have struggled in writing throughout my years, and in sequence, HATE writing papers?

"Making A Case and A Place for Effective Content Area Literacy Instruction in the Elementary Grades"

This article was very interesting to me. The concept has really never crossed my mind, and looking back in my elementary years, I cannot recall ever being overwhelmed in my later elementary years. A time that does stick out in my mind is the year I had Miss Arrington as my third grade teacher. She would  read to us in the beginning of class every single day. What made it so memorable was that she did not just read out of a story book; she would read from magazines, newspapers, and a variety of other prints. After she would read, we would be asked to write in our journals about the "Text of the Day". Each day she had a different prompt such as "If you could change the ending of that story, what would you change and why?"  It was always a fun and entertaining, and it caused us to think about several different topics that we probably would not have been introduced to for several more years. She must have known what she was doing because I have no bad memories of reading and understanding information during my elementary years.

Another part of this article that struck my attention was the section from the Carnegie Reporter that stated, "Nearly half of 17-year-olds are unable to read at the ninth grade level".  This is a very disturbing statistic, and causes me to feel naive since I had no idea this was even possible when I was in high school. This brings up my question.

--- How can we discover if children's inability to read later on in life is a result from the "systems" used to teach them, or if it was actually a reflection of a year or years of poor teaching?