I got smacked in the face with a really hard question this week. "How did you do that?" It was in regards to my making meaning out of an EB White essay. How did I do that? I just did! I don't know
how I did. But shit, that's the essence of teaching right there. Have you ever had anyone try to teach you something and say "then you just do it, you know? Just like this..." and then they flip the pan or knit the stitch or do the kick flip or whatever, and
they've done it, but you still don't know how? A good teacher wouldn't just be able to do it -- they'd be able to teach you how to do it, too. And I wasn't sure how. I'm still not.
Task analysis is something that comes up a lot in teaching. The idea is that you have to break down a task into its parts. Something that we take for granted, a student may not. An example from my "Exceptional Child" class (special ed) was getting a candy from the machine. For us, we just go do it -- we don't have to think about the instructions. For someone with special needs, you might have to tell them to walk into the room, locate the candy machine, find the candy they want, locate the price, get the change out of their pocket, count out the coins until they have the right amount, put the coins into the machine, locate the number of the candy's slot, punch the number into the machine, get the candy out, and retrieve their change (if any).
The idea of task analysis can be applied to almost anything, from writing a sentence to using the Pythagorean theorem. You really have to break it down, though -- it seems unreal to non-teachers, but many of my kids have to be told to get out a pencil, open the book, etc. That's part of the instructions that I have to remind them about or they won't do it. I actually say "Okay, now get out a new, clean sheet of paper" several times a day.
That's not true of my honors kids, of course. They write down the homework in their planners. They do the reading. They know how to write an essay. They're smart. They're good kids. They're well-versed in the routines. But sometimes when it comes to making meaning, they run into a brick wall. Last year, we read Margaret Atwood's "The Handmaid's Tale." In it, women's choices are taken away and they live in near-slavery. The narrator's voice clearly evokes the pain of those affected. And from that, you could probably tell it was a feminist novel, right? They couldn't. Their minds went, "Women are treated badly, therefore this is an anti-feminist novel." I actually made a flow chart for them that said something like "Is one group oppressed? Yes/no." "If yes, does this seem like a bad thing? Yes/no" "If yes, the author is probably arguing AGAINST oppression."
I think part of it is that literature has been really sidelined in our schools. It's no longer the three Rs, but there's history, science, P.E., art and music (if they're lucky)... In some ways, we've really raised the bar for kids -- they sit for HOURS of tests in Kindergarten. When I was in Kindergarten, I could read, but many of my peers couldn't, and it wasn't a big deal. We had play time and snack time and naps, and stories read to us. Now they sit in a circle and make the sounds on flash cards: "Fff -- aaa -- nn. Fan!" The technical aspects of reading are very much focused on. They learn to read, but do they learn to understand, to appreciate? I don't think so. Knowing what I was asked to teach in 8th grade ("The fat cat sat at a mat. Tam sat at a mat."), I doubt most of the kids are exposed to literature. I read "Frankenstein" in class and "The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy" for fun. These kids read informational writings in class and nothing for fun. Not all of them, of course. I'd say that of all the kids who enter our school from junior high, 85% aren't very good at reading and don't like it. 8% have been taught well by passionate instructors, and another 7% are fired up with their own passion, although a lot of times that's for vampire romances.
At our own school, I really respect my principal and my colleagues, although I disagree with them on one important point: While I do think it's important to get them to read ANYTHING and to teach them to write well enough for college, I also think good literature is important. They'll say dismissive things like "Who reads Shakespeare anymore?" Well, ME! And every English major and probably a lot of humanities and liberal studies majors. And I have many more privileges than my students do -- I am white, solidly middle-class, a native English speaker, and I lived in a relatively safe neighborhood. But I also lived with a single mom, went to one of the worst high schools in town, was a slightly troubled punk rocker, and had terrible grades for the first two years of high school. I don't think anyone would have picked me out of a crowd and said "Yeah, she'll be an English major, get an MFA, win some awards for her poetry, edit two literary journals, and teach honors literature courses." So it peeves me when someone looks at my students and says "It's not like any of these kids are going to be English majors." (Yes, it's an actual quote.) I can only think, why the hell not?
But back to making meaning. Here's what came up the other day. We read an essay by EB White. The conceit is that he's feeling ill, and he is lying in bed surrounded by several books and articles by democrats he admires. He is also thinking of his long-dead beagle, Fred, who used to insist on hanging out in bed with him when he was sick. After describing Fred as hyperbolic, overly dramatic, and adventurous, he writes:
He was a zealot, and I have just been reminded of him by a quote from one of the Democrats sharing my bed--Acheson quoting Brandeis. "The greatest dangers to liberty," said Mr. Brandeis, "lurk in insidious encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding." Fred saw in every bird, every squirrel, every housefly, every rat, every skunk, every porcupine, a security risk and a present danger to his republic.
Now, there's a lot going on in there. The dog is personified. There's repetition, a list that goes on a bit too long, some challenging vocabulary ("insidious encroachment"), and some hyperbole of his own. But it still made perfect sense to me. Fred represents the "men of zeal," and those guys are a danger to liberty. I liked the whole essay, but particularly this. It feels so current and relevant because of things like the Patriot Act and the TSA grope-downs.
The kids didn't see it that way. They saw that Fred represented the Democrats. One thought that the writer was writing using the persona of the president. Some didn't know what to make of it. Nobody at all figured out that Fred was the men of zeal. It may be that they don't know what "zeal" and "zealot" mean, but damn it, they should have looked them up, right?
This is where the question came up. How did I know? And, well, I just knew, you know? I mean, he says Fred is a zealot, and then he throws down the quote about the men of zeal. It would be like if I said "Pop stars are dumb. Britney Spears is a pop star."
One of my kids, bright and cocky, then suggested that I show them how I did it, that I model reading a passage and making meaning out of it. I do this all the time in my remedial ninth grade classes. We talk about the skills of a good reader -- making predictions, visualizing, monitoring and repairing comprehension, etc. Then I'll read them a passage and stop to say "Oh, I wonder if Rodrigo will try to help?" "It seems like Rodrigo and Ana are brother and sister." "Whoops, I was wrong -- now I can see that they're neighbors." "He did try to help! Good, I was right!" "I can picture the frost-covered grass." And so on. But can I do it with more challenging texts and more subtle clues? Or is this my kick-flip, the thing I can do but not teach?
I took today and tomorrow off because I'm really sick. I wasn't going to take time off at all, but my doctor essentially ordered me to. She was printing up a note for work even as I protested that I really couldn't take time off. She looked me in the eye and said, "You are a source of contagion to your co-workers and your kids. Stay home!" So I am. I have a reliable sub, and I know it'll be okay. But come Friday, I'm going back, hopefully feeling better, and I'm going to try out this modeling thing. I think it's going to be a challenge. Teaching kids to make meaning can't be the only thing I teach, and really, you could spend the whole two years of the course trying. But it is probably the most important thing I could teach them, so I'm sure as hell going to give it a shot.