Why
Didn’t the STAAR Essay Matter?
Hey
All – I talked to Sherry some more about the essays and weighting.
- In fourth grade, there are 32
possible points. 8 of those points come from the essay. Kids have to get
18 points to score “approaches.” The essay itself is worth 25% of the
total value of the test. Technically, kids can tank the essay and get
enough of the questions right to still pass the test.
- In 7th grade, there
are 46 possible points. 16 of those points come from the essay. The essay
itself is worth about 39% of the test. So it gets harder for them to pass
without doing well on the essay, but it’s technically possible.
- In English I and II, there are
68 possible points. 24 of those points come from the essay. The essay
itself is worth about 35% of the test. Again, harder to pass without doing
well on the essay, but technically possible.
The
question you asked: Why did we spend all
that time on something that essentially didn’t matter for accountability? How
do we adjust our instruction to meet the growth expectations of the state?
And
the dilemma: How do we design instruction to meet the demands of the test for
the current year AND focus on best
practices AND lay a foundation for success and scores in future grades?
The Principle of
Context:
The written text is where rules are applied. We have to have teachers
working with kids on lessons for revising and editing that looks like what kids have to accomplish on the multiple-choice
section of the assessment. I don’t think we are doing a good job of
“recreating” that kind of thinking and approach to what the kids are writing.
When we are teaching revising and editing in context of a student’s writing, we
are replicating a process of logic and thinking that is very complex. The
answer choices for the multiple-choice questions identify for us the kinds of logical fallacies and pseudoconcepts
that students have about writing. If we (as teachers) cannot name the logical fallacies and
inaccuracies inherent in the incorrect answer choices, then we probably aren’t
teaching them to students either.
How A, B, C, D
Guide our Instruction:
Here’s
an example from the 4th grade
STAAR test this year. I’ll work through each answer choice, name the
grammatical lessons, fallacies, and instructional approaches implied by each
answer choice.
A: This answer looks pretty good. It’s
punctuated correctly. It establishes a good cause and effect relationship. It
fits in well with the first sentence that described Lauren’s excitement about
getting a new game. Combining the two sentences seems to eliminate unnecessary repetition
and creates a better flow without that short choppy second sentence between the
two longer ones.
If we are replicating this in the
application of student writing, the teacher would model this type of sentence
construction and flow, discussing why it isn’t very effective as it is. She
would have to connect back to the author’s purpose and meaning that drives the
decisions to combine those sentences. (Incidentally, this means that we would
have had to read and understand the whole text, genre, and identified the
author’s purpose before we started revising in the first place.)
In this case, it is critical for the
reader to realize how engaged Lauren becomes in the game. Comprehension of this
text, even though it is on the Writing test, is paramount. That theme of excitement runs through the
whole text. Establishing that cause and effect relationship early in the piece
sets the stage for the reader to understand the rest of the story.
After discussions about the meaning of the
passage and the author’s purpose, the teacher would give a charge to have kids
re-enter something they have already begun to write. The child should have a
clearly articulated understanding of their own
purpose for writing, or the activity is meaningless. You don’t revise a
sentence unless you need to change it
to “engage the human mind” (Pinker, 2014, p. 2). When a child understands their
own purposes for writing, it is then possible for them to find a cause and
effect relationship they can reveal for the reader. Then the student can explore combining sentences that seem to fit
together and form a flow that mirrors their purposes and meanings. After
playing around with the sentences and seeing how the revisions fit with the
surrounding text and impact the message, then
the students can evaluate the effectiveness of their revisions.
This question proposes to test TEK 4.15C “revise
drafts for coherence, organization, use of simple and compound sentences, and
audience.” The mistake here is in pinpointing instruction around simple and
compound sentences without considering how those sentence types create coherence, how they form organization, and how they communicate the author’s approach to the
audience. Until a child can re-enter a piece of their own text to answer some
important questions using “reason and evidence” rather than “dogma about usage”
and rules, we will continue to see no uptake of correctly punctuated compound
sentences (Pinker, 2014, p. 6). We will continue to be burdened with insipid
prose. We cannot keep teaching writing as if it were a set of rules. Instead,
we must talk about how writers can “enhance clarity, grace, and emotional
resonance” with their readers (Pinker, 2014, p. 6). The lesson here is NOT
about punctuating compound sentences. It is NOT about subordinating
conjunctions. It is NOT about the meaning of “so” or “because. But I imagine
that’s what most of our lessons look like instead of discussions about using
compound sentences to connect ideas for the reader.
B seems like a good choice too. It’s punctuated
correctly: you don’t need a comma when you combine sentences with a because
after the first independent clause. It flows well together. The logical flaw
here is the use of the word because. Skipping the introduction and getting
right to the action does not cause
Lauren to be so excited to play the game. Sentence 3 is the effect, not the
cause. I’d say that some kids might not
notice the flaw here because of flawed instructional practices. Since kids don’t
write complex sentences very well, especially when they begin with the dependent
clause, teachers tell kids never to begin a sentence with /because/. Which is
totally bogus. The correct way to write this sentence is to begin with the word
because: “Because Lauren can’t wait to play Zoo Madness, she skips through the
introduction and gets right to the action.” The lesson here is NOT about
punctuating a complex sentence. It is NOT about subordinating conjunctions. But
I imagine that’s the rule kids have been told do cite for their rejection or
misinformed acceptance of this answer choice instead of advanced sentence
constructions that could bring more variety and power to a text.
C. Classic comma splice. The horror.
But why is a comma splice so wrong? The whole point of punctuation is to
separate ideas into meaningful units and to replicate speech for the ear. The
writer who composes this sentence does not understand that two ideas are
discussed here. Their thinking is mushy and unorganized. If the paper were to
continue, I sense more runons and confused diction, but I digress. Mastering
the mechanics of a sentence is the foundation of understanding main idea.
Who/what are we discussing/ What are they doing or being? The lesson here is NOT
about comma splices. It is NOT about missing subordinating conjunctions. But I
imagine that’s the lesson taught instead of addressing the separation and
segmentation of major ideas and points.
D. Technically, the sentence is
correct. Seriously. In some situations, it might just be the most effective way
to write the sentence. Kids talk with a string of ands. Adults probably do too.
If the author was choosing to replicate the diction or excitement of a child
explaining an exciting event, that string of ands might work. I can’t climb
into the head of the psychometrician who composed this item, but I can resonate
with the teachers that approved this as an answer choice. Most novice writers
have entire pages full of these strings of ands. And as with anything that is
overdone, those patterns become annoying. And most kids aren’t choosing those
strings of ands on purpose and because they mean to. The lesson here is NOT
about compound sentences. It is NOT about the overuse of “and.” But I imagine
that teachers tell kids not to have more than so many ands in a sentence rather
than discussions about purposeful choices in combining sentences.
Solutions for
Instruction:
Instructionally, rules without reason and
connection to meaning and purpose is malpractice. Writing really does require a
“sense of style” required by the “thinking
person’s guide to writing in the 21st century” (Pinker, 2014,
emphasis added). Writing instruction should also convey a sense of style, or “’good
sense,’ as opposed to ‘nonsense,’ in this case the ability to discriminate between
the principles that improve the quality of prose and the superstitions,
fetishes, shibboleths, and initiation ordeals that have been passed down in the
traditions of usage” (Pinker, 2014, p. 7). The following paragraph establishes
what I believe to be a moral imperative in writing instruction today:
Today’s writers
are infused by the spirit of scientific skepticism and the ethos of questioning
authority. They should not be satisfied with “That’s the way it’s done” or “Because
I said so,” and they deserve not to be patronized at any age. They rightly
expect reasons for any advice that is foisted upon them (Pinker, 2014, p. 6).
A rule-based approach to our TEKS
and test prep will not achieve our goals, increase our test scores, or prepare
students for effective participation in society as thinkers, learners, and
contributors. I’ve blathered on about what I think is wrong and what is implied
about writing instruction in the age of assessment. I’ve alluded to some of the
solutions in the analysis of the STAAR question, but I think that I can be even
more clear.
Teacher
Preparation:
1.
Teachers
must analyze the multiple choice items to name
the thinking required in each answer choice. The analysis must address more
than naming the grammar, spelling, mechanics rule violations. Careful attention
must be paid to identifying the flaws in logic present in the major distractor.
(Distractors and items for campus focus can be found in the item analysis or
the leadership report card from lead4ward.)
2.
Once
the fallacies in logic have been identified, teachers must also focus on how
the choices and rules reflect author’s purpose and message. Comprehension
skills weave well into evaluating texts for revising and editing purposes. Writing
instruction that leaves off the other side of the literacy coin (reading) is
part of the reason we are in this sinking boat. Meaning cannot be divorced from
writing.
3.
Lessons
must be designed for students to replicate the kinds of thinking and decision points
represented in the analysis of test items.
Seeds:
Students must have a self-generated bank
of texts to re-enter, re-consider, and revise using the strategies and thinking
required by the rigor of the assessment. I call these Seed Papers. It’s not enough to have seeds. You have to
actually plant them. Till the ground and stick them in the lined furrows or
scatter them across the scraped soil. And kids have to write. And if we ask
them to write, it should be important enough to be shared and used. Why would
you do something that you have no intention of using? Why would you plant seeds
and never water them? We do that when we don’t give student writing a voice or
a choice.
I learned about “grouping” strategies when I first went to a New
Jersey Writing Project in Texas Institute. Later, I learned more about it in
Peter Elbow’s Community of Writers. Bluntly, here’s what I think. Kids
need to read what they have read aloud. They don’t fix their mistakes because
they don’t hear them. Or they don’t care enough about what they have written to
invest the tedious energy to fix the errors. Or they don’t have enough
experience hearing and reading good material to know what could be done. I’m
not sure that kids realize that their words are supposed to do something to
another person. That their words have power and affect others around them. When
we give them a chance to share their work with others, we give them a voice. We
give them a reason to write well. We show them how they can make changes for
themselves and others. And frankly - adolescents care about other adolescents.
They are more engaged and interested in sharing with people like
themselves...not us.
4.
3-5
Quick-Writes should be conducted in the first few weeks. These are collected in
the writing folder to be revisited during revision lessons.
5.
5-7
Prewriting Activities should be conducted in the first few weeks. This type of
prewriting should be the kind of prewriting that helps kids realize that they
have things to say. The focus is on creating a place where students can mine
their experiences and knowledge when they struggle to find ideas to write
about. Note – I am NOT talking about prewriting activities with bubbles our
outlines where kids plan out a paper they are about to write. I’m talking about
Blueprinting, Quicklist, Trigger Words, Looping, Pentad, Classical Invention, Hexagonal/Cubing…
6.
3-5
Drafts Within the first few weeks of school, students should have 3-5 drafts.
You’ll know you have enough when the kids say, “Are we ever going to finish one
of these?” You’ll say, “I don’t know…are you sure…I mean, do you like any of
them enough to continue?” These drafts become the seeds sown for the tilling
and weeding required by the soil of revision. These seed drafts are where good
writing begins to grow.
7.
1-2
Collaborative Drafts: Lead4ward’s year one ELAR Academy recommends an
innovative practice that warrants consideration. Students work in small groups
to compose a collaborative task. Over the course of the year, the writing
process is modeled and then practiced collaboratively before students are
expected to write independently. First, the group generates ideas. After new
lessons, the group organizes and drafts a text. When revision is taught,
students first apply the strategies to their evolving group text. And so on.
This process matches beautifully the gradual release of responsibility and
honors the socio-cultural construction of meaning.
Grouping
Strategies:
Use Grouping Strategies to help build
community. Students should be reading their writing aloud, receiving feedback,
and reacting to other students. Here’s the basic
protocol: (Carroll & Wilson, 2008; Elbow & Belanoff, 2000)
8.
Divide the writers into
groups. The type/purpose/time available of your grouping will dictate how many
people you place in each group.
9.
The writer reads his
piece aloud without disparaging it. They read directly from the piece. They can
correct/add words if they notice something missing. No paraphrasing or telling
is allowed.
10.
Listeners focus on
getting the “gist” of the piece.
11.
The writer reads his
piece a second time. Others listen for a specific “charge” according to the
lesson objectives. Listeners record their ideas on a sticky note, card, or
annotation bubble in a digital document. They explain their commentary to the
writer and hand them the card or enter their comment on the digital document.
Note: Listeners should explain what they wrote and tell why they selected it.
12.
Repeat the information
for each group member.
a.
After working with the
strategies over the years, I realized that students then need to explicitly
reflect on what they experienced in the grouping. What did they learn about
themselves as writers?
b.
Writers take the cards
or annotations given by the group members and annotate their piece by
highlighting the elements the group noticed about their writing.
c.
What do the comments
have in common, if anything?
d.
What do the comments
reveal about their strengths?
e.
How can these strengths
be applied to other places in the text they are composing now?
f.
What elements can be
applied to other compositions or work in other classes?
g.
Students revise and set
a goal for applying what they noticed in the next writing act.
Teaching Revision:
Sometimes an effective gardener will add plants to help the other
plants grow. We planted marigolds next to the tomatoes to keep bugs away.
That’s like adding a paragraph for explanation. Sometimes people grow plants in
a nursery and replant them when they are developed enough to handle the
weather. That reminds me of structuring an argumentative essay using Strawman
and Concession as an organizational structure. You move the plants around to
fit your purpose and timing. Other times, expert gardeners will take one plant
and graft it onto a completely different plant. Writers do that too. They take
what they have already composed, sometimes transforming it into a completely
different genre.
Three Instructional
Approaches to Revision:
In revising writing, students work on various elements: shaping or
refining the organizational structure, focusing on craft, adding depth, making
changes for clarity or word count. Mini-lessons and strategies provide students
with tools to re-enter their writing. There are several approaches to
mini-lessons: Direct Instruction, Inquiry, and Deductive
Modeling a New Strategy/Direct Instruction
1. Show/Compose the model in front of students.
(Modeled Writing/Think Aloud)
2. Students identify and mark a place in their
writing to attempt the strategy.
3. Students compose/revise.
4. Students read/share the before and after.
5. Students determine which version is effective
for their current writing purpose.
Mentor Text/Inquiry
1. Show a mentor text or sentence.
2. Explore the meaning, structure, and impact of
the text.What do you notice?What surprises you? How/why was that done? Text structure, craft, genre characteristics, mechanics, etc.
3. Students revise/compose to imitate the structure
or effect.
4. Or students can scan their writing to identify
similar characteristics in their own writing (things they are already doing)
5. Create an anchor chart to represent the ideas that came from
the discussion.What did you notice? Effect on
the reader? Why did the author do that? Purpose? How does this inform us as writers? Strategies/Tools
Ratiocination/Deductive
1. Share a “code”
2. Brainstorm solutions.
3. Students code their texts.
4. Students resolve the codes.
Once students have revised in one of these three
methods, it is time for another grouping. This time, the rules are slightly
different. The writer only reads a portion of the text. These can be done in
small groups or in a large group/whole class debrief.
Topics for Mini
Lessons: What needs to be taught?
First,
teach Revision Protocols
1.
Students read what they had already composed before learning the
strategy.
a.
Students read the sentence before the place they marked for
revision.
b.
Students read the focus of the revision.
c.
Students read the sentence after the focus of their revision.
2.
Students now read the revision/composing.
a.
Students read the sentence before the place they marked for
revision.
b.
Students read the revision/addition.
c.
Students read the sentence after their revision.
3.
Group members help the writer discuss the impact on the listener.
4.
Students determine which version they would like to use.
Now
Select
both explicit and global elements for instruction.
- ·
Explicit
Mini Lessons: Teach lessons that fit the data analysis needs from last year’s assessment
– the low TEKS. Again, these come from
the item analysis or the Leadership Scorecard.
- ·
Explicit
Mini Lessons: Teach lessons that you identify from what you see in student
writing.
- ·
Explicit
Mini Lessons: Use any of Kilgallon’s sentence combining lessons.
- ·
Global
Focus Mini Lessons: Teach lessons about strategies that writers use to revise.
Depth Charge, Prove-It!, Show Don’t Tell, Pitchforking,…
- ·
Global
Focus Mini Lessons: Use Jeff Anderson’s Invitation to notice strategies and
teach from language that has power and beauty!
- ·
Global
Focus Mini Lessons: Use the power of the reading and writing connection. Read
good stuff to kids and talk about it in terms of purpose and craft. Write from
the ideas the texts that make you wonder.
Editing:
Pruning.
Editing is pruning. You cut out the stuff that has turned brown, eaten by
insects, isn’t growing well. Or you brace it up like an Japanese bonsai artists
- contemplating the aesthetics and effect of the piece so that the viewer has a
pleasant experience.
Students are now ready to focus on the grammar, punctuation,
spelling, and such. Two things seem very powerful: Clocking from the New Jersey
Writing Institute and Gretchen Bernabei’s Grammar Keepers 101 placemat. I
changed my mind: three things. You can use Ratiocination to edit as well.
Clocking: Throughout the unit of study, the
teacher has been reviewing key points about grammar and mechanics. The teacher
creates an anchor chart as items are addressed. When it comes time for formal
editing, students take the most recent draft and number the lines. (How to add numbered lines in Microsoft Word.) Writers then gather all of their writing, placing the
most lined draft at the top, and create a cover sheet with items the teacher or
class has selected from the anchor chart. These are now the non-negotiables
that students use to edit the papers.
Usually, I have the students side in inside and outside
circles, facing each other. They give the entire stack of their work to the
person across from them. Students write their name on the cover sheet next to
the item they are editing. Then, they read/scan the paper to check for that
particular item. If I am reading Shanna’s paper for dangling modifiers, I will
write my name on the line, write the line numbers where I think she should
check, and the last line that I have edited. “Shona, 32, 46, 89; last 102). Now
the writer knows where she should begin checking as well as what point the
paper has not been checked. They still have the responsibility to keep checking
the paper, but have some examples to guide them. After a period of time (the
teacher makes the call), time is called, papers are returned, and the outside
circle rotates. The process repeats for a new item on the list.
Keepers 101 Chart: Can we just all agree that
Gretchen Bernabei is a genius? Here is a link to her Grammar Keepers 101 Chart. I made a large copy of this tool to use as a writing
placemat. Throughout the year, we teach the lessons with model texts and mentor
sentences. Students write those examples in black ink. Then, they find or
create examples from their own writing and record the response in another color
of ink. When it is time to edit, students look at their writing goals,
reference the chart, and edit their papers for those elements.
Ratiocination: We used ratiocination earlier to
revise. The only difference now is in the choices you make for what students
are looking for in their writing about grammar, spelling, and punctuation.
Instead of revising for sentence beginnings or passive verbs or depth, students
are looking for comma splices, misspelled words, etc.
Polishing/Proofreading:
I used to have a lovely philodendron. Over time, the
leaves would get dusty or spotted with our harsh Amarillo water deposits. When
company was coming, I’d wash off the leaves with a wet towel and sometimes
would use a bit of mayonnaise to make them really shine. Writers need to
revisit their work one more time before they invite people to peruse their hard
work.
Are we forgetting this
part of the process before we publish? This is the last chance before you turn
in the paper...the last scan before you hit send...the last chance for saving
face before you publish. You read with a pencil and make little marks or
corrections if you have to turn in that copy. You correct last minute things as
you read through, just to be sure. There’s always something.
Publishing:
There’s not much I want to say about HOW we go about publishing.
But there’s a lot I want to say about WHY? To continue the metaphor: Why do we
have plants anyway? Many reasons: food, medicine, entertainment. We don’t have
plants because they have been artificially assigned to us in class. Writing
should be no different.
Begin with the end in mind, we say. Why do kids know what we want
them to do? Because the objective is on the board? Or do we begin our lessons
with models of what their work should look like? I think we ask kids to write
things they have never seen. I think we ask kids to write things that don’t
exist in the real world. I think we assign things for kids to write and never
teach them how to do it. STOP. Kids need models and examples. Find, compose, or
keep good models of what you want students to create in your class.
Kids should complete their work, we say. But why would they want
to do much of the work we assign? Especially if we never taught them how to do
it in the first place? Not doing the work is probably a more emotionally
healthy response. Part of composing and creating is connected to what we care
about. When we don’t care, it’s just not worth the energy. Human nature. Truth,
ya’all.
So part of our work as educators is to help kids understand what
learning inspires them to do. How do we help them create and compose meaningful
work for real audiences about things they care about? The writing? It matters.
Armstrong Carroll,
J. and Wilson, E. (2008). ACTS of
teaching: How to teach writing. 2nd Ed. Portsmouth, NH:
Heinemann.
Elbow, P., and
Belanoff, P. (2000). A community of
writers: A workshop course in writing. 3rd Ed. Boston, MA:
McGraw-Hill Higher Education.
