MD. SPONS AGENCY PUB DATE 96 25p. MFO1 /PCO1 Plus Postage. · DOCUMENT RESUME. ED 398 556 CS 012 574. AUTHOR McWhorter, Patti; Hudson-Ross, Sally TITLE Student-Centered Literacy Instruction

DOCUMENT RESUME

ED 398 556 CS 012 574

AUTHOR McWhorter, Patti; Hudson-Ross, SallyTITLE Student-Centered Literacy Instruction in High School:

I Want To, but How? Instructional Resource No. 29.INSTITUTION National Reading Research Center, Athens, GA.;

National Reading Research Center, College Park,MD.

SPONS AGENCY Office of Educational Research and Improvement (ED),Washington, DC.

PUB DATE 96CONTRACT 117A20007NOTE 25p.

PUB TYPE Reports Descriptive (141) Guides Classroom UseTeaching Guides (For Teacher) (052) Reference

Materials Bibliographies (131)

EDRS PRICE MFO1 /PCO1 Plus Postage.DESCRIPTORS *Classroom Environment; *Classroom Techniques;

Colonial History (United States); Content AreaReading; Content Area Writing; Higher Education; HighSchools; *Instructional Innovation; *Literacy;Program Implementation; Reading Skills; *StudentCentered Curriculum; *Teacher Education; TeacherEmpowerment; Writing Skills

ABSTRACT

A high-school department chair and English teacherswitched jobs with a university-based teacher educator. In thispaper, they define their shared vision of student-centered learning,describe how to create a student-centered environment, explain how toimplement student-centered activities, provide an example involvingthe colonial period in American literature, and provide a 23-itempractitioner's reading bibliography to begin exploring the range offields that helped shaped their ideas. The final unit plan developedby students for the colonial period research project is attached.(Author/RS)

***********************************************************************

Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be madefrom the original document.

***********************************************************************

SMDIERT7 CEHTEMELD -,07rEE' ACV OKOcrAUccnam

Moom OCKOEDL

CD 9 1E3m- 0=UmwT

Patti McWhorter Sally Hudson-Ross

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONOffide of Educational Research and Improvement

EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATIONCENTER (ERIC)

d'."...This document has been reproduced asreceived from the person or organizationoriginating it.

Minor changes have been made toimprove reproduction quality.

Points of view or opinions stated in thisdocument do not necessarily representofficial OERI position or policy.

BEST COPY AYAIIIBLE

MAJFIC Instructional Resource No. 29National Reading Research Center Summer 1996

NRRCNational Reading Research Center

Student-Centered Literacy Instruction in High School:I Want to, But How?

Patti McWhorterCedar Shoals High School, Athens, Georgia

Sally Hudson-Ross

University of Georgia

INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE NO. 29

Summer 1996

The work reported herein is a National Reading Research Project of the University of Georgiaand University of Maryland. It was supported under the Educational Research andDevelopment Centers Program (PR/AWARD NO. 117A20007) as administered by the Officeof Educational Research and Improvement, U.S. Department of Education. The fmdings andopinions expressed here do not necessarily reflect the position or policies of the NationalReading Research Center, the Office of Educational Research and Improvement, or the U.S.Department of Education.

3

NRRC NationalReading ResearchCenter

Executive CommitteeDonna E. Alvermann, Co-DirectorUniversity of Georgia

John T. Guthrie, Co-DirectorUniversity of Maryland College Park

James F. Baumann, Associate DirectorUniversity of Georgia

Patricia S. Koskinen, Associate DirectorUniversity of Maryland College Park

Jamie Lynn Metsala, Interim Associate DirectorUniversity of Maryland College Park

Nancy B. Mizelle, Assistant DirectorUniversity of Georgia

Penny OldfatherUniversity of Georgia

John F. O'FlahavanUniversity of Maryland College Park

James V. HoffmanUniversity of Texas at Austin

Cynthia R. HyndUniversity of Georgia

Robert SerpellUniversity of Maryland Baltimore County

Betty ShockleyClarke County School District, Athens, Georgia

Linda DeGroffUniversity of Georgia

Publications Editors

Research Reports and PerspectivesLinda DeGroff, EditorUniversity of Georgia

James V. Hoffman, Associate EditorUniversity of Texas at Austin

Mariam Jean Dreher, Associate EditorUniversity of Maryland College Park

Instructional ResourcesLee Galda, University of GeorgiaResearch HighlightsWilliam G. HollidayUniversity of Maryland College Park

Policy BriefsJames V. Hoffman

University of Texas at AustinVideosShawn M. Glynn, University of Georgia

NRRC StaffBarbara F. Howard, Office ManagerKathy B. Davis, Senior SecretaryUniversity of Georgia

Barbara A. Neitzey, Administrative AssistantValerie Tyra, AccountantUniversity of Maryland College Park

National Advisory BoardPhyllis W. AldrichSaratoga Warren Board of Cooperative EducationalServices, Saratoga Springs, New York

Arthur N. ApplebeeState University of New York, Albany

Ronald S. BrandtAssociation for Supervision and CurriculumDevelopment

Marsha T. DeLainDelaware Department of Public Instruction

Carl A. GrantUniversity of Wisconsin-Madison

Walter KintschUniversity of Colorado at Boulder

Robert L. LinnUniversity of Colorado at Boulder

Luis C. MollUniversity of Arizona

Carol M. SantaSchool District No. 5Kalispell, Montana

Anne P. SweetOffice of Educational Research and Improvement,U.S. Department of Education

Louise Cherry WilkinsonRutgers University

Production EditorKatherine P. Hutchison


Dissemination CoordinatorJordana E. Rich


Text FormatterAngela R. WilsonUniversity of Georgia

NRRC - University of Georgia318 AderholdUniversity of GeorgiaAthens, Georgia 30602-7125(706) 542-3674 Fax: (706) 542-3678INTERNET: [email protected]

NRRC - University of Maryland College Park3216 J. M. Patterson BuildingUniversity of MarylandCollege Park, Maryland 20742(301) 405-8035 Fax: (301) 314-9625INTERNET: [email protected]

About the National Reading Research Center

The National Reading Research Center (NRRC) isfunded by the Office of Educational Research andImprovement of the U.S. Department of Education toconduct research on reading and reading instruction.The NRRC is operated by a consortium of the Univer-sity of Georgia and the University of Maryland CollegePark in collaboration with researchers at several institu-tions nationwide.

The NRRC's mission is to discover and documentthose conditions in homes, schools, and communitiesthat encourage children to become skilled, enthusiastic,lifelong readers. NRRC researchers are committed toadvancing the development of instructional programssensitive to the cognitive, sociocultural, and motiva-tional factors that affect children's success in reading.NRRC researchers from a variety of disciplines conductstudies with teachers and students from widely diversecultural and socioeconomic backgrounds in pre-kinder-garten through grade 12 classrooms. Research projectsdeal with the influence of family and family-schoolinteractions on the development of literacy; the interac-tion of sociocultural factors and motivation to read; theimpact of literature-based reading programs on readingachievement; the effects of reading strategies instructionon comprehension and critical thinking in literature,science, and history; the influence of innovative groupparticipation structures on motivation and learning; thepotential of computer technology to enhance literacy;and the development of methods and standards foralternative literacy assessments.

The NRRC is further committed to the participationof teachers as full partners in its research. A betterunderstanding of how teachers view the development ofliteracy, how they use knowledge from research, andhow they approach change in the classroom is crucial toimproving instruction. To further this understanding,the NRRC conducts school-based research in whichteachers explore their own philosophical and pedagogi-cal orientations and trace their professional growth.

Dissemination is an important feature of NRRCactivities. Information on NRRC research appears inseveral formats. Research Reports communicate theresults of original research or synthesize the findings ofseveral lines of inquiry. They are written primarily forresearchers studying various areas of reading andreading instruction. The Perspective Series presents awide range of publications, from calls for research andcommentary on research and practice to first-personaccounts of experiences in schools. InstructionalResources include curriculum materials, instructionalguides, and materials for professional growth, designedprimarily for teachers.

For more information about the NRRC's researchprojects and other activities, or to have your nameadded to the mailing list, please contact:

Donna E. Alvermann, Co-DirectorNational Reading Research Center318 Aderhold HallUniversity of GeorgiaAthens, GA 30602-7125(706) 542-3674

John T. Guthrie, Co-DirectorNational Reading Research Center3216 J. M. Patterson BuildingUniversity of MarylandCollege Park, MD 20742(301) 405-8035

5

NRRC Editorial Review Board

Peter AfflerbachUniversity of Maryland College Park

Jane AgeeUniversity of Georgia

JoBeth AllenUniversity of Georgia

Janice F. AlmasiUniversity of Buffalo-SUNY

Patty AndersUniversity of Arizona

Harriette ArringtonUniversity of Kentucky

Marna BanningUniversity of Utah

Jill BartonElizabethtown College

Eurydice BauerUniversity of Georgia

Janet BentonBowling Green, Kentucky

Irene BlumPine Springs Elementary School

Falls Church, Virginia

David BloomeAmherst College

John BorkowskiNotre Dame University

Fenice BoydUniversity of Georgia

Karen BromleyBinghamton University

Martha CarrUniversity of Georgia

Suzanne ClewellMontgomery County Public Schools

Rockville, Maryland

Joan ColeyWestern Maryland College

Michelle CommeyrasUniversity of Georgia

Linda CooperShaker Heights City Schools

Shaker Heights, Ohio

Karen CostelloConnecticut Department of Education

Hartford, Connecticut

Jim CunninghamGibsonville, North Carolina

Karin DahlOhio State University

Marcia DelanyWilkes County Public Schools

Washington, Georgia

Lynne Diaz-RicoCalifornia State University-San

Bernardino

Mark DressmanNew Mexico State University

Ann DuffyUniversity of Georgia

Ann Egan-RobertsonAmherst College

Jim FloodSan Diego State University

Dana FoxUniversity of Arizona

Linda GambrellUniversity of Maryland College Park

6

Mary GrahamMcLean, Virginia

Rachel GrantUniversity of Maryland College Park

Barbara GuzzettiArizona State University

Frances HancockConcordia College of Saint Paul,

Minnesota

Kathleen HeubachUniversity of Georgia

Sally Hudson-RossUniversity of Georgia

Cynthia HyndUniversity of Georgia

Gay IveyUniversity of Georgia

David JardineUniversity of Calgary

Robert JimenezUniversity of Oregon

Michelle KellyUniversity of Utah

James KingUniversity of South Florida

Kate KirbyGwinnett County Public Schools

Lawrenceville, Georgia

Linda LabboUniversity of Georgia

Michael LawUniversity of Georgia

Donald T. LeuSyracuse University

Susan LytleUniversity of Pennsylvania

Bert ManginoLas Vegas, Nevada

Susan MazzoniBaltimore, Maryland

Ann Dacey McCannUniversity of Maryland College Park

Sarah McCartheyUniversity of Texas at Austin

Veda McClainUniversity of Georgia

Lisa McFallsUniversity of Georgia

Randy McGinnisUniversity of Maryland

Mike McKennaGeorgia Southern University

Barbara MichaloveFowler Drive Elementary School

Athens, Georgia

Elizabeth B. MojeUniversity of Utah

Lesley MorrowRutgers University

Bruce MurrayUniversity of Georgia

Susan NeumanTemple University

John O'FlahavanUniversity of Maryland College Park

Marilyn Ohlhausen-McKinneyUniversity of Nevada

Penny OldfatherUniversity of Georgia

Barbara M. PalmerMount Saint Mary's College

Stephen PhelpsBuffalo State College

Mike PickleGeorgia Southern University

Amber T. PrinceBerry College

Gaoyin QianLehman College-CUNY

Tom ReevesUniversity of Georgia

Lenore RinglerNew York University

Mary RoeUniversity of Delaware

Nadeen T. RuizCalifornia State University-

Sacramento

Olivia SarachoUniversity of Maryland College Park

Paula SchwanenflugelUniversity of Georgia

Robert SerpellUniversity of Maryland Baltimore

County

Betty ShockleyFowler Drive Elementary School

Athens, Georgia

Wayne H. SlaterUniversity of Maryland College Park

Margaret SmithLas Vegas, Nevada

Susan SonnenscheinUniversity of Maryland Baltimore

County

7

Bernard SpodekUniversity of Illinois

Bettie St. PierreUniversity of Georgia

Steve StahlUniversity of Georgia

Roger StewartUniversity of Wyoming

Anne P. SweetOffice of Educational Research

and Improvement

Louise TomlinsonUniversity of Georgia

Bruce VanSledrightUniversity of Maryland College Park

Barbara WalkerEastern Montana University-Billings

Louise WaynantPrince George's County Schools

Upper Marlboro, Maryland

Dera WeaverAthens Academy

Athens, Georgia

Jane WestAgnes Scott College

Renee WeisburgElkins Park, Pennsylvania

Allan WigfieldUniversity of Maryland College Park

Shelley WongUniversity of Maryland College Park

Josephine Peyton YoungUniversity of Georgia

Hallic YuppCalifornia State University

About the Authors

Patti McWhorter teaches high school English atCedar Shoals High School in Athens, Georgia,where she serves as chair of the English Depart-ment. Her 22 years in classroom teaching haveincluded grades six through college. In addition,she has conducted numerous staff developmentcourses throughout the state and presented atprofessional conferences throughout the state andnation.

Sally Hudson-Ross works primarily with secondarypreservice teachers and their mentor teachers in localhigh schools through the Language Education depart-ment at the University of Georgia. In 1993-1994,Sally exchanged jobs with Patti McWhorter, a localEnglish teacher and department chair in anotherNRRC project entitled The SYNERGY Project.Insights they gained from doing one another's jobs asteacher educator and high school teacher for a yeardirectly influenced the Collaborative Inquirty Projectreported here. Details of the SYNERGY Project arereported in other NRRC reports.

Student-Centered LiteracyInstruction in High

School:I Want to, But How?

Patti McWhorterCedar Shoals High School

Athens, Georgia

Sally Hudson-RossUniversity of Georgia

National Reading Research CenterUniversities of Georgia and Maryland

Instructional Resource No. 29Summer 1996

Abstract. Patti McWhorter and Sally Hudson-Rossexchanged jobs during the 1993-1994 school year.Patti, Department Chair and English teacher atCedar Shoals High School in Athens, Georgia, wentto the University of Georgia to work in teachereducation while Sally assumed Patti's teaching roleof five classes. In this article, they define theirshared vision of student-centered learning, describehow to create a student-centered environment,explain how to implement student-centered activities,and provide apractitioner's reading bibliography tobegin exploring the range of fields that helpedshaped their ideas.

Die-hard Andy Griffith fans remember theepisode when Aunt Bea, feeling her age, buysthe Colonel's magic elixir for its promise of

1

vigor and vitality. The image of Aunt Beapounding her piano keys in a thundering rendi-tion of "Toot, Toot, Tootsie" was unnatural.Her demure, proper demeanor was the antithe-sis of the woman at the piano, whose singingcould be heard for blocks away. The magicelixir truly had no medicinal value and nolasting effects.

A little like Aunt Bea, classroom teachersconstantly search for the "magic elixir" ofteaching. The perfect activity. The perfectstrategy. The perfect approach. Something toreach every student. A motivational miracle.We flock to workshops and conferences withthe hope that we can find that magic. Often,we return to our classrooms to find that ournew ideas and approaches, without carefulnurturing, become empty and ineffective. LikeAunt Bea, we might even feel hung over anddisappointed after something does not work outas we planned. Students balk. Confrontationsensue. We feel cheated by the promise ofmiracle cures.

Unlike Aunt Bea's conniving Colonel, Sallyand I found our own kind of miracle over aperiod of years. It was not the kind of brightflashy classroom miracle that only happens insomeone's classroom in another state or evenanother country. (Not a note of "Toot, Toot,Tootsie" could be heard.) It was more like agradual transformation, a slow metamorphosisof our classrooms from places where teachersrule, to places where students and teacherscome to understand and appreciate each othermore fully; classrooms where teachers learnfrom and with students, and students takeresponsibility for learning.

9

2 McWhorter & Hudson-Ross

What we offer here is an overview of ourexperiences and the definitions and principleswe have come to live by in our teaching. If youasked us to write this again next year, wewould have more to say about what we havelearnedthat's the exciting thing about themindset we have adopted. We do not have allthe answers. We accept the uncertainties ofteaching, but we also delight in its possibilitiesand its promises.

Defining Student-Centered Learning

Student-centered classrooms, in our under-standing, are places which are responsive to theneeds of a particular group of learners. Theseclassrooms respect adolescence as a develop-mental stage, capitalize on student interests andenergy, and minimize student apathy. In theseclassrooms, decisions are made collaborativelyand thoughtfully by both the teacher and thestudents. Learning activities are not gimmickyor cute; they are engaging, challenging, andrespectful of the learners present. Heterogene-ity among student abilities, interests, andcultures offers opportunities, rather than limita-tions or excuses for poor performance orminimal learning.

Teachers in student-centered classroomsknow and understand the varied styles of learn-ers, have understanding of how the humanbrain processes information and learns, andapply this information in their planning. As aresult, content delivery is contextualized intomore personally meaningful learning experi-ences for the students. Students are challengedto learn morenot less.

Our vision of student-centered language artsclassrooms evolved over years of professionalreading and experiences and continues toevolve. From Nancie Atwell, we learned thepower of choice and individualization forstudents; from Eliot Wigginton of Foxfire, wemade the connection to the world outside theclassroom. From a variety of other movementsin educationcooperative learning, perfor-mance assessment, multiple intelligences,constructivismwe discovered that a focus onindividual student learning, not the transmis-sion of content, connects them all. Each theorypositions students in the center of learning andcelebrates their unique abilities, while chal-lenging us as teachers to orchestrate a class-room that maintains high standards in alllearning.

Changing a personal approach to teachingtakes time if a teacher does more than add newactivities to an already existing framework.However, adding new activities and trying newideas can be a beginning point, a safe place tostart. But these ideas look different when theyare selected to meet student needs rather thanbecause a teacher likes them. The best advicewe have for teachers who are thinking deeplyabout student learning and their classrooms isto start slowly. Most importantly, do notexpect any one approach to "cure" the prob-lems in your classroom. Make thoughtful,careful changes, rather than wholesale ones.Do not give up if something you try does notwork the first time. Write down what wentwrong and keep considering how you could tryagain. Think about your students in positive

NATIONAL READING RESEARCH CENTER, INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE NO. 29

10

Student-Centered Literacy Instruction in High School

waysfocus on what they can or might doinstead of on their shortcomings.

None of us has time. But if you give your-self the 15 minutes a day you deservebeforeschool, after school, before bedyou can beginin three ways. (1) Read widely in the profes-sional journals. The bibliography we include isguaranteed to inspire and spark new ideas. (2)Begin a personal/ professional journal andrecord what went well today, what questionsemerge, how things are going, and new goals.(3) Find ways to share and build your owncommunityattend workshops, ask lots ofquestions of teachers who are trying to movetoward student-centered classrooms, seek thecompany of teachers like yourself who desire achange in their teaching, and get on the In-ternet and explore NCTE, teacher research,and other discussion groups. Remember thatyou are in control of yourself and your profes-sional growth. This is a powerful beliefonethat can transform you and your classroom ifyou allow it to do so. By reading, writing, andbuilding community, you share with yourstudents exactly the activities you are askingthem to engage in and make it far more likelythat you will both understand and have theenthusiasm for these activities.

Creating a Student-Centered Environment

Get to Know Your Students

Every classroom situation, every new groupof students presents a new challenge for theclassroom teacher. Experienced teachers knowthat the same lesson plan can look distinctlydifferent with each group of students. So many

factors can come into playthe size of theclass, which students are present or absent ona given day, the abilities and interests of thestudents, the time of class period, the eventstaking place in the schoolall can affect thesuccess or failure of a carefully planned lesson.The better a teacher knows and understandshis/her students (and the better students knowand understand each other), however, thegreater the odds are that s/he can predict possi-ble obstacles in the learning and adjust thelesson accordingly.

This understanding has most dramaticallyaffected my approach to evaluation with mystudents. After an extended period of studyingperformance assessment and the many formsthis approach to assessment can assume, I

began to evaluate students less at the beginningof the year, approximately through the firsttwo grading periods, and instead assess theirindividual strengths and weaknesses. I plan awide variety of reading, writing, and speakingactivities and provide students with points forcompleting these activities. I evaluate very fewactivities according to an "A, B, C" scale.Those that are, are done so only after studentsknow and understand the evaluation criteria.Simultaneously, I begin to form a picture ofeach of my students and their respectiveclasses.

My approach includes a variety of anec-dotal data, questionnaires, surveys, writing sam-ples, and practice activities which have replacedan early emphasis on testing and evaluation. Asthe picture of each group of learners takesshape, I can begin to see how each class willrespond to different types of activities. Some


11


classes and individual students, for example,may handle group activities better than others.My planning can be done accordingly.

Be Supportive in the Lives ofIndividual Students

Effective high school teachers, we believe,understand and appreciate the complexities ofadolescence. They view teenagers as fascinat-ing, humorous, capable people. These teachersaccept their students, every blemish, everyfault. This acceptance, however, does notconstitute a miracle cure for every challenge orproblem in the classroom. Rather, it providesa positive mindset for these kinds of teachers.They remain optimistic that all students canlearn in spite of personal, family, and societalproblems.

For me, the individual lives of students andtheir personal problems are issues I had tocome to terms with early in my classroomteaching career. The sheer numbers of studentsin each classroom and across a teacher's sched-ule make it impossible to deal very effectivelywith each student's personal situation. Thelives of students can consume and overwhelma dedicated teacher who takes these problemshome each evening. To survive, many teacherscome to a place in their thinking that allowsthem to continue to strive to help students withpersonal issues, while balancing the demandsof teaching and learning.

These kinds of teachers use every availableresource in a school setting to help these stu-dentscounseling, social services, student sup-port teams. They accept their limitations asindividual teachers, celebrating small victories

sometimes, in lieu of larger ones. They havewhat we like to call the "ant moving the rubbertree plant" mentality. Rather than bemoaningthe sad state of society, the lack of parentalsupport, and resources, they work on theseissues in a variety of ways. More often than isrealized, their efforts are meaningful andtransforming to individual students in quiet andpowerful ways.

Build a Community of Learners

A student-centered classroom is a carefullyconstructed ecology of cooperation and collab-oration. Individual competition is deliberatelyminimized. Students are encouraged to worktogether to achieve instructional goals. Creatingthis kind of atmosphere takes careful planningand attention on a teacher's part. Consultingthe numerous professional resources availableon building classroom communities is a helpfulstep toward understanding how this might workwith a specific group of students.

I begin the process of building a communityat a very basic levelstudents in my classroomhave to successfully identify each of theirclassmates with a first and last name, spelledcorrectly. They take a "Name Quiz" periodi-cally over the first weeks of school until eachstudent has made 100 %. In my racially andacademically diverse classroom, knowing eachother as individuals is essential. As a class, wecan circumvent much conflict if we know eachother as people, rather than that "girl in the redsweater" or that "boy with the hat."

The merits of group work are well estab-lished in the professional literature. Studentsbenefit from working with others. Students in


12

Student-Centered Literacy Instruction in High School 5

Sally's classes nominated Team Leaders whothen selected the small groups with which theywould work, ensuring diversity in race, gen-der, and ability. Students took their responsi-bilities as Team Leaders seriously and assistedall members of their team in assigned activities.Teachers who are inexperienced at organizingand monitoring group work can begin in smallways to experiment with this teaching strategy.

Taking the time to build a classroom com-munity is an issue for some teachers who feelassaulted by content and curriculum, gradua-tion tests, standardized tests, district and schoolrestrictions. The more recent emphasis inpublic education on the school-to-work transi-tion, however, offers strong support for theinclusion of team-building skills in any class-room setting. Students moving into the worldof jobs and careers will be called upon to workcooperatively with diverse groups of peopleand find solutions to problems in the work-place. Both require that they leave high schoolwith an understanding of the problem-solvingand decision-making strategies needed to suc-ceed as workers.

What we discovered and what we stronglybelieve is that without a feeling of communityand common purposes for being in a class-room, students can become passive or resistant,apathetic learnersa condition we are collec-tively determined to reduce, if not completelyeradicate in our teaching. What is required byoutside forces is not often enough to motivatestudentswe discovered that we could engagemore of our students when we chose the team-work approach. Our actions confirmed for

them that we were in this thing called "theireducation" together as partners, even whenproblems seemed insurmountable.

Implementing Student-Centered Activities

Project-based instruction, we have found,provides us with the most opportunities torealize our vision of student-centered class-rooms. Projects can offer multiple opportuni-ties to address required curricular objectives,and students can learn a variety of skills andcontent in a more meaningful context. Projects,teamed with a reading/writing workshop ap-proach, offer a balance between teacher-directed and student-centered activities.

Basic Tenets

1. Student input into the daily workings ofthe classroom is solicited and encouraged bythe teacher. The time spent involving andinviting students into the decision-makingprocess creates a more productive workingenvironment. Classroom decisions should benegotiated by teacher and students withinacceptable parameters so that all can learn.

Both Sally and I have found that studentscan solve the day-to-day logistical problems ofthe classroom much easier than we can inisolation from them. Although our solution toa problem or our decisions might be the sameas those of our students, we have found that bysimply asking their opinions about procedures,ways to organize instruction, and instructionaloptions, we become partners in the classroom.


13


Adolescents have opinions, sometimes strongones, and we have found it useful to use thatdevelopmental tendency purposefully. Theadded benefit of this strategy is that we aregiven an opportunity to teach problem-solving,compromise, and consensusskills studentsdesperately need in the real world.

A teacher who wants to move toward morestudent-centered practice can begin in smallways with the decision-making process in theclassroom. I began this transformation in myown classroom by negotiating timelines forprojects and activities with my students. As Ibegan each teaching unit, I worked with thestudents in a whole class setting to determinethe most sensible time frame and deadline for

. activities, presentations, written products, andtests. Student response to this practice was sooverwhelmingly positive, I continued and ex-panded this practice of inviting student inputinto almost every area of my teaching.

Both of us discovered that classroom deci-sion-making is an excellent context in which toteach problem-solving with students. I addressproblems in my classroom by putting the prob-lem before the class, facilitating a brainstorm-ing session on possible solutions, and workingwith the class to reach consensus on the solu-tion to be adopted by the class. For example, Idiscovered with my students that Fridays werenot the best day to have large projects andassignments due. Students confessed that theywere often tempted to hand in a project late ifit was due on a Friday. Since my practice is toenforce a penalty rule for work handed in late,this often resulted in lower grades for the

students. I took the problem to the students.Their decision was that large projects or as-signments should be due on Mondays, allowingone last weekend of opportunity for them tosucceed.

This practice sends students the clear mes-sage that problems can be solved if people arewilling to explore issues, offer viable alterna-tives, and compromise. Although I could havemade the decision to alter the day large assign-ments were due, the few minutes of class timeit took to discuss the situation with my studentsturned the problem over to them. They becamethe responsible party. Students who still pro-crastinated about completing the work could nolonger complain that the due date was the faultof the teacher. They owned the problem aswell as the solution. The percentage of studentshanding in the larger assignments on time in-creased.

Inviting students into the decision-makingprocess does not mean that we have abdicatedour responsibilities as teachers. Rather, wecarefully examine our own agendas as theteacher to discern if there are places in ourdecision-making process for the voices of ourstudents. We give them choices. We take thetime to hear what they are telling us about theirneeds as learners.2. Students should be provided with a rangeof choicesin activities, in reading materialand subject matterin all aspects of theirlearning.

I can no longer plan an instructional unitwithout first considering how students will begiven choices. So many options exist for in-


14


cluding the element of choice. The choice maybe in the topic about which the student is toread or write. The choice may be in the day ofthe week for sustained reading or the form usedfor keeping a record of independent reading. Inlonger units, I include as many options aspossible for students. One variation is to re-quire that students complete an establishednumber of activities alike and then choose froma list of optional activities in addition to thoserequired. The opportunity for students to makechoices in the classroom exist in abundance;the teacher, however, must learn to see thepossibilities.

If you are comfortable with your basalliterature book, it is easy to begin with simplestudent choice there. Ask students which storythey would prefer to read together to illustrateplot or symbolism or in which order theywould like to read them. Invite students to setdeadlines for outside reading, to submit ques-tions to help you shape the discussion, todecide whether to read aloud or silently inclass, or to suggest ways to convince you thatthey have read (journals, quizzes, projects,etc.). If your text includes a thematic table ofcontents, invite students to select poems to beread in conjunction with similar stories, todecide which theme to engage in for a shortunit, or to decide how they will go beyond thetext materials to explore a shared theme.3. Student learning should have connectionsto the world outside school or be integratedinto a meaningful context. A "need to knowthe information" must be established by theteacher or the teacher working in concertwith the students in order to motivate themto achieve.

From Foxfire methodology, we learned thevalue of connecting classroom learning to theoutside world. Our students have created atelevised talk show, public service announce-ments, and informational brochures. Throughthese activities, students learn the value ofcorrectness and preciseness in writing, the needto read critically, the value of research.

Whether we like it or not, state testing re-quirements for high school graduation andother testing by those outside the classroom,such as the College Board's SAT, AchievementTests and Advanced Placement testing pro-grams, provide the "need to know" context forsome students. For others it is the desire for ajob, for college entrance, or for personalreward and satisfaction. Once students arehelped to acknowledge their willingness tolearn for these tests or any outside goal, themotivation is established. As long as we canhelp students see these connections to ouractivities, we are freed to use methods weknow are more productive for our students.They are willing and creative participants intheir own education.

Once students see a need for learning, theywill learn. Until that need is established, learn-ing does not happen. In our experiences, themost successful moments in teaching have beenthose in which students asked us to providethem with informationinformation to be usedin the completion of a project or unit whichconnected in some real and meaningful way totheir lives or their future. When Sally's secondperiod decided to produce a video for a localcable channel about school violence, theirdecisions to hold a panel discussion for the


15


school demanded that they learn how to sendoral and written invitations, develop schedules,plan group movements, speak in public with amicrophone, manage sound equipment andlights, plan questions and be prepared to re-spond to answers, videotape for close-ups andlarge group pans, and a myriad of other skills.Sally could not help in many of these areas, sopeers and other adults became teachers thatstudents sought out because of the "need toknow."

Equally important is returning to establishedobjectives and discussing with students theirprogress relative to those objectives. Within in-structional units, this discussion and interactionhelps us and students understand their learningbehaviors more fully. We can adjust tried andtrue activities and requirements to increasestudent awareness and learning as we assess.Sally adapted an old language arts activitytheresumeto help her second period make senseof their video work. They brainstormed all theactivities they were involved in, listed theconcordant skills they had learned, and toemphasize their new talents, they presentedthemselves in resume and cover letter format toemployers.4. Students are encouraged to examine theirown work, critique its strengths and weak-nesses, and set goals for continued improve-ment.

Teachers want to teach students who canthink for themselves. Yet our methods oftenrob students of this ability. As long as wemake all of the instructional decisions, thelearning remains oursnot our students. When

we slow down long enough to allow students totake a look at themselves as learners, theeffects can be dramatic.

My first teaching adventure with portfoliostaught me this lesson. Given the opportunity toconsider a semester's work in reading, writing,and general learning behaviors, both ninth- andtwelfth-graders gained insight into their ownpersonal motivations and took a more intenseinterest in improving as readers and writers.Rather than viewing their work in piecemealfashion as it was returned, the portfolio pre-sents a comprehensive view of a student'sacademic ability, skills, and growth.

Sally's experiences reflected my own. Hersophomore students shared their portfolios witha parent or "significant other" to widen theaudience for their work. Like my students,Sally's students evinced similar behaviorsastrong sense of ownership for the body of workthey had created and a clarity of insight intotheir own personal behavior as learners. As aside benefit, many parents were brought into anew awareness of their high school student'swork.

To assist students in monitoring theirgrowth as readers and writers, we both estab-lished the practice of goal-setting activities withstudents, teaching them to set small, attainable,short-range learning goals and develop strate-gies to attain those goals. Students who wereformerly passively resistant to learning, wefound, began to show sparks of interest inlearning when we pursued these approaches.

Given the time to slow down and take a hardlook at themselves as learners made a differ-


16


ence for our students. Classroom activities tookon a new quality, a different context for them.Assignments became an opportunity to tryagain, to improve their skills in reading andwriting, to demonstrate what they had learned.5. Depth of learning should not be sacrificedfor content coverage. Language arts learningactivities should serve multiple purposesand/or objectives in order to maximize in-structional time.

The pressure to cover material in a lan-guage arts course can actually be detrimental toreal learning. Under this pressure in past years,I often found myself in a monotonous teachingroutine: study background material on authors,assign stories, assign questions, organize aclass discussion, administer a test over thematerial. My teaching, it seemed, turned intoa desperate race with myself to cover morematerial each year, sacrificing any examinationof a topic in-depth. My classroom was orga-nized; my students were obedient. By manystandards, an outside observer would find myteaching more than satisfactory.

Graduate work and exposure to many of theinfluences we listed earlier, however, forcedme to reconsider my methods over a period ofyears. Although at times I felt unsettled aboutmy decision to examine and perhaps change myteaching methodology, I believe the gradualnature of these changes allowed me to examineand think deeply about my role as a teacher,often in hindsight. I did not take any onemethod and buy into it wholesale; I experi-mented in small ways with questioningtechniques, writing and reading workshops,

Foxfire-type projects, and performance assess-ment. As students responded positively, I feltempowered to continue to retool my teaching.

These gradual changes helped me see howI could teach my students more about readingand writing by slowing down the instructionalpace. Rather than read all of the short stories inthe unit, I began to give choices of stor-iesallowing students to pursue individualinterests. If my instructional objective was toteach characterization, I could still meet thatobjective without having them read everystory. I made time for more activities on char-acterization and consequently made it possiblefor my students to really learn about thechoices that writers make when they createcharacters in literature. The level of thinkingamong my students deepened, evidenced bytheir writing and their discussion in class.6. Students should be involved in determin-ing standards and criteria for assessmentand evaluation within the framework of theinstructional projects and in the largercontext of the language arts course.

From the wealth of information on perfor-mance assessment, I have come to the practiceof involving my students in discussing anddetermining standards for assessment andevaluation for the work done in class. Tointroduce them to this practice, I begin bypresenting my own checkpoints and guidelinesfor each assignment. Students know beforethey begin the work exactly how the work willbe assessed. This provides them with the op-portunity to set a personal goal on each assign-ment.


17


As my students understand my standardsand the methods I use for evaluation, they seemto be able to make a logical step toward formu-lating their own guidelines for assessment.Holistic scales are easy to develop with stu-dents. Using letter grades with which they arefamiliar, we work to articulate the criteria foran assignment to receive an "A," "B," "C," or"F." Students are also able to develop analyti-cal scoring guides for assignments whichprovide specific scoring criteria for differentaspects of the assignment.

Since my practice is to use both holistic andanalytic scales to evaluate student work, I feelcomfortable working with students to developthese types of evaluation scales. This level ofcomfort, however, came gradually over aperiod of years as I experimented with thevarious scales developed to assess writing. Asconfidence in my own ability to develop thesetypes of scoring scales increased, I knew thatstudents would benefit from a similar exercise:As we develop standards for evaluation to-gether, there is a natural transfer to the workcompletedquality increases.7. Parameters for projects are established bythe teacher, but they are flexible parameters,subject to change if student interest and stu-dent learning can increase.

To begin project-based instruction on agradual basis, teachers might try projects thathave been tested by other teachers with similargroups of students. Successful projects havesimilar qualities in their level of challenge forstudents, their relevance to students' lives, andtheir clear sense of organization and expecta-

tion. As confidence with this approach grows,teachers can then turn to students to incorpo-rate their ideas and suggestions into the re-quirements and choices.

The American Literature Colonial Periodproject described below outlines one approacha teacher might follow in preparing studentsfor a project. The basic requirements areprovided by the teacher, and students are givenan opportunity to "flesh out" the details.

An Example: The Colonial Period inAmerican Literature

An American Literature/Compositioncourse is a challenging context in which toexamine our beliefs about student learning andour commitment to student-centered instruc-tion. Traditionally, the Colonial Period inAmerican Literature offers little literature ofinterest to students in the 1990s. Teachersoften resort to cute projects to get studentsthrough the period or resort to laboringthrough each writer. Neither approach isentirely successful. The firstcute pro-jectscan actually sidestep the issues of thetime period. The secondlaboring througheach writerdooms most classrooms to bore-dom. A more productive approach is to de-velop projects which incorporate the contentand require students to develop and employ avariety of instructional skills.

The Colonial Period project, which I beganto develop by specifying broad project guide-lines (see below), was created within the con-text of state-required curricular objectives for the


18


course, the state high school graduation test,and my own personal and departmental goalsfor my students. This project, as it is organizedand completed over a two-week period, accom-plishes several objectives:

Provides the historical backgroundneeded to understand and appreciateThe Scarlet Letter without resorting toteacher lecture.Reveals students' abilities to functionin a group setting.Provides insight into students' abilitiesto conduct and synthesize research.Reveals the standards students set forthemselves for class presentations with-out direct intervention from the teacher.

In the initial planning stage, I brainstorm,consult my teaching files and resources andwork with colleagues in my department tocreate a list of possible activities and require-ments, as well as possible evaluation criteria.Since my method includes presenting theproject to my students for possible modifica-tion, I decide if any of the activities are nego-tiable or optional. (The cardinal rule is not tooffer students a part in the process only tooverrule them at every suggestion.)

In working with students to develop thesetypes of large unit projects, I generally proceedthrough the following steps:

Spend a class period allowing studentsto provide input and ideas using thebroad project guidelines, activities, andevaluation criteria. Inform studentsthat they will be given a choice of topic,

and groups will be formed accordingto students' choices.Briefly explain the objectives of theproposed project. (Time spent discuss-ing each potential requirement andinviting student input helps studentsgain a general understanding of thepurposes and objectives of the project.)Work through each requirement, eval-uation point, and potential problem.Make changes and clarify expectations.(Rather than reacting to a list of thingsthat I want them to do, students be-come active discussants of each activ-ity, gaining understanding and clarifi-cation of the purposes of the unit.)Establish deadlines for each step of theproject. (Students learn to handle largeprojects more confidently and success-fully if mini-deadlines and checkpointsare established.)

As an experienced teacher, I can just aseasily determine what I want students to do foreach of these requirements, print the handout,explain the project and move on with the work.Choosing to involve students in establishingrequirements, however, establishes a relation-ship of trust between the teacher and the stu-dents, raises student self-esteem, and increasesstudent commitment to the learning, in thiscase establishing an atmosphere for the rest ofthe year.

Teachers just beginning to utilize this strat-egy cannot go into the discussion of require-ments with students without some notion of whatneeds to be discussed. Having a list of ques-


19


tions which need to be answered about eachcomponent of the project enables the teacher toprovide clear directions for the students andtruly involve them in the decision-making pro-cess. Questions I used to focus the discussionin each area are provided in parentheses besideeach requirement. These questions guide thediscussion and ensure that the requirements forthe work are clearly established for the stu-dents.

topics for research (Are there otherareas we might add?)oral presentation on the topic (Howlong?)equal responsibility for the work (Howwill we know that everyone participat-es?)utilization of research materials (Howmany resources? How extensive?)evidence that all group members un-derstand the research process (How todocument?)visuals (What kind? How many?)handout which includes key points(Typed? Handwritten? Required for-mat?)individual written product (Whattopic? How long? Typed? Handwrit-ten? How evaluated?)group project grade: group parti-cipation/on-task behavior; thorough-ness of research; group presentation(interesting/organized/meets time re-quirement/class evaluation); requiredresearch components (Who evaluatesthese? What will the scoring guide-lines look like? )

peer evaluation score (Do we knowhow to do this? Is this important?)score on the written component (Whoevaluates?)group members who are not present onthe research/group work days (What isour policy?)group members who are not present onthe day of the group presentation(What is our policy?)

Attachment A is the final unit plan my ju-niors developed as a result of our negotiationsof these questions. It worked for them. Impor-tantly, however, I cannot say the unit is nowcomplete. In true student-centered learning, Imust take the same set of questions to nextyear's class and expect and enjoy the new com-bination of options they create for their inter-ests and schedules. If I have several classes atone time, it is clear that I may need to keepthem together; in that setting, I simply sharethe input across classes and shape one plan forall to allow me to stay sane. Students under-stand that parameter, among the many otherguidelines they respect, in this type of plan-ning. Planning in student-centered classroomsis never ended and that's what keeps our workinteresting.



Attachment A

Colonial Period/Research Project NameAmerican Literature/CompositionP. McWhorter Date

Objectives: To understand the Colonial American time period.To learn and improve research skills.To practice and improve writing skills and oral presentation skills.To improve and develop skills in working collaboratively in groups.

Topics for Research: (Circle the topic which you are assigned.)food/housing governmentreligionclothingoccupations

educational systemmedical knowledge/health careleisure/recreation/fine arts

Requirements:1. Each group is responsible for a 10 minute presentation on their topic.2. All members of the groups must share equal responsibility for the work. Groups will

be provided with instructions for documenting the participation of each groupmember.

3. Groups must use a minimum of three (3) sources for their presentations.4. Groups must submit evidence that all group members understand the research

concepts presented (bibliography cards/bibliographies; outlining; notetaking;paraphrasing). This evidence could be attached to each group member's individualcomposition.

5. Group presentations should include visuals (for example, posters/transparencies) and

a one-page handout which includes key points (typed/word processed; organized;

easily understandable).6. Each group member is required to write and submit a composition about some

aspect of the research which includes a properly formatted bibliography. (See #4above.) (Length: Approximately 2 pages handwritten. Typing/word processing ispreferable.)


21


Evaluation:1. Group members will share the group project grade which includes: group participa-

tion/on-task behavior; thoroughness of research; group presentation (interesting/organized/meets time requirement/class evaluation); required research components.

2. Individuals will receive a peer evaluation score and a score on the writtencomponent.

3. Group members who are not present on the research/group work days will receive areduced score unless they arrange for makeup work which meets the requirements/standards of the group.

4. Group members who are not present on the day of the group presentation can onlyreceive 50% of the group presentation score unless the group determines otherwise.


22


Recommended Reading

Armstrong, T. (1994). Multiple intelli-gences in the classroom. Alexandria,VA: Association for Supervision andCurriculum Development.

Atwell, N. (1987). In the middle. Ports-mouth, NH: Heinemann.

Atwell, N. (1990). Coming to know. Ports-mouth, NH: Heinemann.

Atwell, N. (1991). Side by side. Ports-mouth, NH: Heinemann.

Brooks, J., & Brooks, M. G. (1993). Insearch of understanding: The case forconstructivist classrooms. Alexandria,VA: Association for Supervision andCurriculum Development.

Caine, R. N., & Caine, G. (1991). Makingconnections: Teaching and the humanbrain. Alexandria, VA: Association forSupervision and Curriculum Develop-ment.

Calkins, L. (1991). Living between thelines. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Calkins, L. (1994). The art of teachingwriting. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Christenbury, L. (1994). Making the jour-ney: Being and becoming a teacher ofEnglish language arts. Portsmouth, NH:Boynton/Cook/Heinemann Publishers.

Foster, H. (1993). Crossing over: Wholelanguage for secondary English teach-ers. New York: Harcourt Brace.

Gere, A. R., Fairbanks, C., Howes, A.,Roop, L., & Schaafsma, D. (1992). Lan-guage and reflection: An integrated ap-proach to teaching English. New York:Macmillan.

Herman, J. L., Aschbacher, P. R., & Win-ders, L. (1992). A practical guide toalternative assessment. Alexandria, VA:Association for Supervision and Curric-ulum Development.

Hobson, E. & Shuman, R. B. (1990). Read-ing and writing in high schools: Awhole-language approach. Washington,DC: National Education Association.

Hubbard, R. S., & Power, B. M. (1993).The art of classroom inquiry: A hand-book for teacher-researchers. Ports-mouth, NH: Heinemann.

Moffett, J., & Wagner, B. J. (1992).Student-centered language arts, K-12.Portsmouth, NH: Boynton/Cook/Heine-mann.

Rief, L. (1992). Seeking diversity: Lan-guage arts with adolescents. Portsmouth,NH: Heinemann.

Romano, T. (1987). Clearing the way:Working with teenage writers. Ports-mouth, NH: Heinemann.

Routman, R. (1988) Transitions: Fromliterature to literacy. Portsmouth, NH:Heinemann.

. NATIONAL READING RESEARCH CENTER, INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE NO. 29

23


Routman, R. (1991). Invitations: Changingas teachers and learners K-12. Ports-mouth, NH: Heinemann.

Sylvester, R. (1995). A celebration of neu-rons: An educator's guide to the humanbrain. Alexandria, VA: Association forSupervision and Curriculum Develop-ment.

Tierney, R. J., Carter, M. A., & Desai, L.(1991). Portfolio assessment in thereading-writing classroom. Norwood,MA: Christopher Gordon.

Wigginton, E. (1985). Sometimes a shiningmoment. New York: Anchor Press/Doubleday.

Zemelman, S., Daniels, D., & Hyde, A.(1993). Best practice: New standardsfor teaching and learning in America'sschools. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.


24

qcNationalReading ResearchCenter318 Aderhold University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia 30602-71253216J. M. Patterson Building, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742

25

n

7

(9/92)

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATIONOffice of Educational Research and Improvement (OERI)

Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC)

NOTICE

REPRODUCTION BASIS

ERIC

This document is covered by a signed "Reproduction Release(Blanket)" form (on file within the ERIC system), encompassing allor classes of documents from its source organization and, therefore,does not require a "Specific Document" Release form.

This document is Federally-funded, or carries its own permission toreproduce, or is otherwise in the public domain and, therefore, maybe reproduced by ERIC without a signed Reproduction Releaseform (either "Specific Document" or "Blanket").

Documents

MD. SPONS AGENCY PUB DATE 96 25p. MFO1 /PCO1 Plus Postage. · DOCUMENT RESUME. ED 398 556 CS 012 574. AUTHOR McWhorter, Patti; Hudson-Ross, Sally TITLE Student-Centered Literacy Instruction