Two days ago saw the end of term (big sigh of collective relief there.)So I was sitting in the English office contemplating the summer break on the last morning of term, when one of my Year Tens came in and handed me an essay. Come on! On the last hour of the last morning of the last day? But I gave her a bright smile, thanked her and bade her a good summer. And waited until the door had closed behind her to curse.
Actually, she was only doing what I had asked. I'd handed back the class' first draft of their Romeo and Juliet essays and had suggested in passing, that they should do the rewrite over the summer break, or, if they preferred, they could do it before and I would mark it for the beginning of next term. So, swallowing my unreasonable irritation, I read the first paragraph of her essay. And almost cheered. It was riveting. Enthralled, I read on.
By the time I had finished reading the six pages of closely typed A4 sheets, I had tears in my eyes. OK, I could say it was because I was very tired, or it was an allergic reaction to the accumulation of dust on the table. But these would be lies, because the reason for my reaction was simply the fact that the essay was superb. It was the best thing that I had read for a very long time. I had brilliant students in my last lovely year eleven and I've written loads about them, but this essay was something else. My best students from last year, achieved this quality of writing and understanding towards the end of their final year. This girl, has just turned fifteen. She has another year to go of her GCSE, and she's already writing like a very good A level student.
I've had a lot of fun with this girl while teaching R and J. She adores the play and won't hear a word against it. So needless to say, suggesting that Romeo was a bit of an idiot elicited an interesting response. When I suggested that the main theme of the play was not love, if she'd had a gun she'd have shot me! However, although she (very wisely) totally disagreed with me about a lot of what I said about the play, she's very, very bright and can hold her ground in an argument, something of which I thoroughly approve. And it was this originality that came out in her essay. The question had been about the methods that Shakespeare used to manipulate his audience's emotions in Act 3 Scene 5 (the scene when all Hell breaks loose with Juliet's father.) By the time I'd finished reading her essay, not only was it very clear that she completely understood what the Bard was saying, she'd also shown total engagement with the two lovers. Her work was polished, sophisticated and mature. I could give her nothing lower than full marks.
It's been a difficult term and for various reasons mentioned elsewhere, I was really wondering why on earth I was still doing this job. Then I read this girl's essay on Romeo and Juliet, and I rememered. And I ended the term with a smile.
Friday, 24 July 2009
Tuesday, 14 July 2009
The 'Alan Shore technique'
My year tens have had their final lesson of the year. It consisted of the final few speeches from the class. One of my girls stood up and despite obvious nerves (which she conquered pretty quickly) delivered a riveting speech on tolerance and the monstrous (her word not mine) behaviour of racists who gain followers by pretending to be reasonable and patriotic. Her speech was technically brilliant. Any persuasive technique you could have wanted was there. Her passion and clear understanding of both her subject matter and the what I now call (and so do the kids) the 'Alan Shore technique' was evident in every line and every movement. She was wonderful.
And I wasn't the only one who thought so. The class listened in total silence, completely enthralled by her. When I asked for comments at the end, one of the students, who had mislaid her GCSE speaking and listening criteria said it was an A*. I asked her how she could be so sure if she didn't have the criteria in front of her and she said, "Everyone listened. You could have heard a pin drop. She used all the Alan Shore techniques, but more than that, we were all completely grabbed by what she said, and if that isn't total engagement of audience, I don't know what is."
I had to agree. She was correct. Of course she was.
But the thing was, it wasn't the fact that the student's speech was clearly an A* grade, it was the fact that the other students knew it and were happy for it to be an A*.
There was no jealousy or resentment, just genuine pleasure at the quality of work produced by one of their colleagues. They were, as a whole class, delighted by the work each and every one of them had produced.
During this entire exercise, they were supportive and generous with their praise and help. Not once did I sense envy at a good speech, or malicious glee at a less successful student's work.
When I tried to explain to a colleague that the first ten minutes of all my lessons are spent creating and developing an atmosphere where students feel relaxed, cooperative and part of a team, this is exactly what I was referring to. There is a feeling of friendship in the class. A feeling of everyone being in it together. It takes a while to create this, and sometimes it doesn't work. But it was nice to see in that last lesson, that in this class, it had.
And I wasn't the only one who thought so. The class listened in total silence, completely enthralled by her. When I asked for comments at the end, one of the students, who had mislaid her GCSE speaking and listening criteria said it was an A*. I asked her how she could be so sure if she didn't have the criteria in front of her and she said, "Everyone listened. You could have heard a pin drop. She used all the Alan Shore techniques, but more than that, we were all completely grabbed by what she said, and if that isn't total engagement of audience, I don't know what is."
I had to agree. She was correct. Of course she was.
But the thing was, it wasn't the fact that the student's speech was clearly an A* grade, it was the fact that the other students knew it and were happy for it to be an A*.
There was no jealousy or resentment, just genuine pleasure at the quality of work produced by one of their colleagues. They were, as a whole class, delighted by the work each and every one of them had produced.
During this entire exercise, they were supportive and generous with their praise and help. Not once did I sense envy at a good speech, or malicious glee at a less successful student's work.
When I tried to explain to a colleague that the first ten minutes of all my lessons are spent creating and developing an atmosphere where students feel relaxed, cooperative and part of a team, this is exactly what I was referring to. There is a feeling of friendship in the class. A feeling of everyone being in it together. It takes a while to create this, and sometimes it doesn't work. But it was nice to see in that last lesson, that in this class, it had.
Saturday, 27 June 2009
A lesson in three parts
Yesterday, my yr 10s began their oral work based on the speeches they'd been watching. This was quite a hairy exercise as it turned out that this lesson was to be observed - officially. I'd already set up the lesson, so remembering too late that this would be a performance managed lesson (observed to see if I know what I'm doing!). I just hoped that my yr 10s would do the business.
I've been told by 'people in the know' that I should be doing three-part lessons, involving some 'starter' exercise to get the kids interested, a development and then a plenary, summing up what I'd done.
Well, I begin every lesson with conversation. I talk to my classes. I show interest in what they do. I let them know that they matter. The result of this is students that know their teacher doesn't just see them as receptacles for knowledge, that the teacher sees them as people. The effect of this is students who are in the mood to be cooperative. Who are in the mood to learn. This, is my 'starter'. And it works.
So this is what I did at the beginning of yesterday's lesson. I know that they don't particularly enjoy standing up and speaking formally, so it was my place to make them feel comfortable, so they could do the best that they could. I cracked a few very bad jokes (the groan-worthy ones are always the best!) then told them about assessment. I'd decided that they would peer assess the speeches and have to justify the grade using the GCSE criteria which I gave to them. I also told them that they should always look for the positive in their peers, to focus on that and not on what might not have worked so well. This comment (a bit sneakily I suppose) was also intented for the assessor sitting in the back of the class.
They then began their speeches. They were quite wonderful. They were articulate, clever and persuasive. They used the Alan Shore techniques (see previous blog) to perfection. I was so proud of them. The colleague observing my lesson may have been there to watch me, but I wanted her to see them. To see how good they have become. They are bright students who work well. They work well because they enjoy their lessons. And they learn. Surely this is what matters and not whether or not my lessons have these arbitary 3 parts.
I've been told by 'people in the know' that I should be doing three-part lessons, involving some 'starter' exercise to get the kids interested, a development and then a plenary, summing up what I'd done.
Well, I begin every lesson with conversation. I talk to my classes. I show interest in what they do. I let them know that they matter. The result of this is students that know their teacher doesn't just see them as receptacles for knowledge, that the teacher sees them as people. The effect of this is students who are in the mood to be cooperative. Who are in the mood to learn. This, is my 'starter'. And it works.
So this is what I did at the beginning of yesterday's lesson. I know that they don't particularly enjoy standing up and speaking formally, so it was my place to make them feel comfortable, so they could do the best that they could. I cracked a few very bad jokes (the groan-worthy ones are always the best!) then told them about assessment. I'd decided that they would peer assess the speeches and have to justify the grade using the GCSE criteria which I gave to them. I also told them that they should always look for the positive in their peers, to focus on that and not on what might not have worked so well. This comment (a bit sneakily I suppose) was also intented for the assessor sitting in the back of the class.
They then began their speeches. They were quite wonderful. They were articulate, clever and persuasive. They used the Alan Shore techniques (see previous blog) to perfection. I was so proud of them. The colleague observing my lesson may have been there to watch me, but I wanted her to see them. To see how good they have become. They are bright students who work well. They work well because they enjoy their lessons. And they learn. Surely this is what matters and not whether or not my lessons have these arbitary 3 parts.
Monday, 22 June 2009
My yr 10s are shaping up nicely. This week we are preparing for a speaking and listening exercise. They're pretty good, but their style is pretty unsophisticated (not surprising - they ARE only yr 10!) but for the A* grade, they need to be more structured in their talks.
I, like most of the world am mesmerized when Barack Obama speaks, so I decided to look at good speech writing and delivery. At some future date, I intend to get the class to analyse the techniques used in Obama's speeches (for anyone interested, the famous speech at his election is analysed in detail on Changingminds.org) but for now I found something simpler.
I found transcripts of the closing defence speech from 'A Time to Kill' (incredibly powerful speech) and one of the inimitable Alan Shore (wonderfully played by James Spader) closings from 'Boston Legal' - the one I chose to start with is a speech about condoms (yes, really!) It's a powerful speech that uses loads of persuasive techniques and is so well formulated that it makes a really good model for the kids to follow. Then this week, I used another one from a later episode that's a swingeing attack on the PATRIOT Act. It's witty and clever, and like the earlier condom speech, is great for teaching persuasive techniques.
I quite often use film or TV series to supplement my teaching and following the fallow period since Buffy left (although she still makes guest appearances every year in my Gothic lessons, or my lessons on the use and development of language...) Alan Shore has brought a lot of useful material into my classroom. So between him and Denny Crane, (the other major character in the series) Speaking andListening lessons will never be the same again!
I'm looking forward to hearing my Yr 10 speeches!
I, like most of the world am mesmerized when Barack Obama speaks, so I decided to look at good speech writing and delivery. At some future date, I intend to get the class to analyse the techniques used in Obama's speeches (for anyone interested, the famous speech at his election is analysed in detail on Changingminds.org) but for now I found something simpler.
I found transcripts of the closing defence speech from 'A Time to Kill' (incredibly powerful speech) and one of the inimitable Alan Shore (wonderfully played by James Spader) closings from 'Boston Legal' - the one I chose to start with is a speech about condoms (yes, really!) It's a powerful speech that uses loads of persuasive techniques and is so well formulated that it makes a really good model for the kids to follow. Then this week, I used another one from a later episode that's a swingeing attack on the PATRIOT Act. It's witty and clever, and like the earlier condom speech, is great for teaching persuasive techniques.
I quite often use film or TV series to supplement my teaching and following the fallow period since Buffy left (although she still makes guest appearances every year in my Gothic lessons, or my lessons on the use and development of language...) Alan Shore has brought a lot of useful material into my classroom. So between him and Denny Crane, (the other major character in the series) Speaking andListening lessons will never be the same again!
I'm looking forward to hearing my Yr 10 speeches!
Monday, 1 June 2009
Out of the mouths of babes...
A few weeks ago, I began teaching Romeo and Juliet to my Yr10s. One of my girls, L, revealed a total passion for the play, not that she really knew it, she just knew approximately what it was about. She also said how much she hated Baz Luhrman's film version with Leonardo Di Caprio, claiming it was a travesty...
Anyway, we got into the play and when we got to the bit when Romeo dumps Rosaline for Juliet, she was disgusted and expressed her dismay at her idol's feet of clay in no uncertain terms. I suggested that perhaps he was just being a 'bloke' (which needless to say deeply offended the boys in the class -but that's half the fun!) to which L said, "He's actually being a complete dick, Miss."
I suggested that her choice of language might be a bit unfortunate and that she probably shouldn't describe Romeo using quite that word...but I agreed that perhaps she had a point...
We got to half term, so for homework I asked the class to finish reading the play (they're a fast paced group so this wasn't as onerous as it might seem). Today, the first day back, L greeted me with, "What on earth was Shakespeare thinking about when he wrote that ending?"
"What?" I asked, "the way everyone dies you mean?"
"No, not that," she said, "the bit that happens afterwards, all those people standing about talking! Talk about an anti-climax! Even Baz Luhrman didn't do that!"
I had to smile. I intend to explain the ending soon (the Greek tragedy format etc) but I was delighted that she had formulated an opinion based on actually reading the play. She was actually thinking. But the thing that made me really smile was her final comment as the class filed out to their next lesson.
I asked her as she packed her stuff, "So, what do you think of Romeo now? Still a plonker?"
There was a thoughtful silence then she said, "No. Not a plonker. He's just a boy isn't he? A kid. Look at the way he behaved when he was with Friar Lawrence. Throws himself on the floor and has a hissy fit. That's the behaviour of a boy, not a man. Shakespeare's writing about children...not adults. That's why they behave the way they do. It's not a play about grown ups. It's a play about teenagers...and we all know how they behave!"
And tossing her 15year old head, she smiled at me and walked out. Leaving me grinning like a Cheshire cat.
It was a wonderful feeling, seeing these students beginning to think for themselves and I hope that my lessons encourage freedom of thought. I might not agree with everything my students say, but that's not the point. They're supposed to argue with me: it shows they're not afraid to go their own way. And that's just what they should be doing.
Anyway, we got into the play and when we got to the bit when Romeo dumps Rosaline for Juliet, she was disgusted and expressed her dismay at her idol's feet of clay in no uncertain terms. I suggested that perhaps he was just being a 'bloke' (which needless to say deeply offended the boys in the class -but that's half the fun!) to which L said, "He's actually being a complete dick, Miss."
I suggested that her choice of language might be a bit unfortunate and that she probably shouldn't describe Romeo using quite that word...but I agreed that perhaps she had a point...
We got to half term, so for homework I asked the class to finish reading the play (they're a fast paced group so this wasn't as onerous as it might seem). Today, the first day back, L greeted me with, "What on earth was Shakespeare thinking about when he wrote that ending?"
"What?" I asked, "the way everyone dies you mean?"
"No, not that," she said, "the bit that happens afterwards, all those people standing about talking! Talk about an anti-climax! Even Baz Luhrman didn't do that!"
I had to smile. I intend to explain the ending soon (the Greek tragedy format etc) but I was delighted that she had formulated an opinion based on actually reading the play. She was actually thinking. But the thing that made me really smile was her final comment as the class filed out to their next lesson.
I asked her as she packed her stuff, "So, what do you think of Romeo now? Still a plonker?"
There was a thoughtful silence then she said, "No. Not a plonker. He's just a boy isn't he? A kid. Look at the way he behaved when he was with Friar Lawrence. Throws himself on the floor and has a hissy fit. That's the behaviour of a boy, not a man. Shakespeare's writing about children...not adults. That's why they behave the way they do. It's not a play about grown ups. It's a play about teenagers...and we all know how they behave!"
And tossing her 15year old head, she smiled at me and walked out. Leaving me grinning like a Cheshire cat.
It was a wonderful feeling, seeing these students beginning to think for themselves and I hope that my lessons encourage freedom of thought. I might not agree with everything my students say, but that's not the point. They're supposed to argue with me: it shows they're not afraid to go their own way. And that's just what they should be doing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
