For me, the readings for this week had the opposite effect of the readings from last week. Last week I found chapter one in Deeper Reading to be interesting but simple, and the readings in Critical Encounters to be intriguing. This week, however, I was FAR more captivated by chapters two and three in Deeper Reading than I was with chapter three of Critical Encounters. In fact, I found the Critical Encounters reading to be almost cryptic, to a point where it was hard to continue reading. Therefore, I will spend most of my time talking about Deeper Reading. The texts supplemented each other, but Gallagher made the subject matter entertaining while Appleman put me to sleep (literally, I fell asleep and woke up with the book beside me the other night).
By the way, is Kelly Gallagher a genius or what? After reading almost every section a lightbulb went off in my head. The fact that some individuals aren't engaged with certain books because their background knowledge of the content is minimal seems simple and obvious, yet this concept is something I've never before considered. I can recall times in my high school English classes where I was told to read a book with no explanation and, admittedly, the book was hard to get through. When Gallagher talked about how his daughter was uninterested in The Grapes of Wrath, I (shamefully) had the same experience. Actually, I am ashamed to say that to this day I've never read it. I would absolutely love to read it now, especially because I have more background knowledge on the subject matter. The assignment was an independent novel study and I chose The Grapes of Wrath but changed my book after reading up to the second chapter. I had no prior knowledge of the content of the book and had trouble becoming immersed.
There were a few points of Gallagher's that I really enjoyed. First was the point that collaboration helps students to understand text on more levels than if a student were to read a text on their own. Even the brightest students may miss something other students have found, which is why input from several people is beneficial for everyone.
Secondly, I like how Gallagher emphasized the importance of "warming up" before getting into a lesson. Teenagers have a lot of things on their minds, and I recognize that diving into silent reading or discussing the next chapter in a novel is not the most effective way to encourage people to participate right off the bat.
Another valuable point Gallagher made was that teachers must change their class structure from time to time, otherwise classes become predictable and in turn they are not stimulating for the students. His suggestions for different strategies to start classes were useful.
I also really enjoyed the layout of Gallagher's concepts. His points were easy to understand, and I especially liked the way he started out by including a short story in the textbook to work with. I found his suggestions for teaching extremely helpful and I'm sure they will benefit me if I am ever to teach literature in the future (fingers crossed)!
The only two complaints I have are that:
1. Many of Gallagher's suggestions are terrific, but for them to be executed successfully, a classroom would have to be full of highly stimulated, highly engaged students. In a perfect world, his concepts are just that - perfect, but students are not always as willing to participate as Gallagher makes them sound. Which leads me to my second point...
2. He makes the point that reading a text twice is highly beneficial, but I also find this highly unlikely. Class time is limited, and although reading a text twice is ideal, it is not realistic. Students' attention spans only go so far.
No comments:
Post a Comment