Tuesday, June 28, 2011

annotated bibliography

Research Statement:
I believe increased numbers of Hawaiian high school students in rural, isolated communities would take and be successful in advanced science and math placement classes if a culture based science curriculum was integrated in the middle school.



Beaulieu, D. L. (2000). Comprehensive reform and american indian education. Journal of American Indian Education, 39(2). 1-17.

Dr. Beaulieu, who wrote this article in 2000, was the Director of Office of Indian Education, U.S. Department of Education from 1991-1996. He was the first American Indian to be appointed as a Commissioner in the Minnesota State Government. This research was collected in areas throughout the U.S. where Tribal schools and schools where Native American communities were located. This article was written for educators and stakeholders in education, whose focus is on the education of Native/Minority American students. This article’s purpose is to provide evidence “that schools as organizations can, in fact, be transformed and improved and that this improvement would result in increased levels of student achievement for all learners, particularly Native American learners.”

This article investigated barriers to Native Indian children’s academic success as well as identified factors related to their academic success. Recent research supports the author’s conclusions that factors that result in low achievement of Native American learners include high rates of staff turnover, high dropout rates, and inconsistent models of school reform in schools that serve tribal communities. It also identified positive directions that tribal governments and Indian communities have moved towards: culturally appropriate and more effective school reform; missions and purposes that meet the social, cultural, and economic needs and requirements of developing Native communities; and collaboration between parents and communities to define purposes and goals to guide education with clear direction synchronized with community developments.


Castagno, A. E., Brayboy, B. M. J. (2008). Culturally responsive schooling for indigenous youth: a review of the literature.        Review of Educational Research, 78 (4). 941-993.

Angelina Castagno, an assistant professor in College of Education at Northern Arizona University, focuses her work on Indigenous education, multicultural education, and critical race and Whiteness studies.  Bryan McKinley Jones Brayboy is Borderlands Associate Professor of Educational Leadership and Policy Studies at Arizona State University and President’s Professor of Education at the University of Alaska at Fairbanks. His work focuses on Indigenous education, Indigenous knowledge systems, and the experiences of students, staff, and faculty of color in institutions of higher education. In 2008 this article was written with a the primary purpose being to review the literature on CRS for Indigenous youth in the United States, and provide a comprehensive, yet readable, overview of the work to prompt discussion and changes in practice among educators working with Indigenous students.

This article provides: 1) an historical overview of efforts to articulate CRS for Indigenous youth; 2) a discussion of a number of definitions for CRS, including both what is and what is not included in most definitions; 3) a review of the most common reasons given for educators to engage in CRS for Indigenous youth; 4) an overview of the two most frequently discussed topics related to CRS for Indigenous youth- pedagogy and curriculum; 5) discussion of teacher characteristics that are necessary for engaging in CRS; 6) a discussion of school- and district-level issues related to CRS; and 7) some case studies and examples of successful attempts at CRS for Indigenous youth.

Chinn, P.W.U. (2007). Decolonizing methodologies and indigenous knowledge: the role of culture, place and personal experience in professional development. Journal of Research in Science Teaching. 44(9). 1247-1268.

This article was written in 2007 by Pauline W. U. Chinn, a professor of Curriculum Studies at the University of Hawai‘i at Mānoa. This study reports findings from a 10-day professional development institute on curricular trends involving 19 secondary mathematics and science teachers and administrators from around the world, and explored three questions: 1. How would teachers evaluate traditional/indigenous knowledge and its role in curriculum before and after exposure to Native Hawaiian practices oriented to sustainability? 2. Would there be evidence of transformative learning defined as interest in developing place-based curriculum relevant to environmental issues? 3. Would place, culture, and prior experience figure in their lessons and evaluations?

Participants explored the roles of culture, place, and personal experience in science education through writings and group discussions. The findings, relevant for educators and stakeholders of educational practice, suggest that critical professional development can raise teachers’ awareness of the connections among personal and place-based experiences, cultural practices and values, and teaching and learning. An implication was the development of a framework for professional development able to shift science instruction toward meaningful, culture, place, and problem- based learning.


Demmert, W.G. Jr. (2005). The influences of culture on learning and assessment among native american students. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice. 20(1). 16–23.

The author of this article, written in 2005, is William G. Demmert, Jr., a professor of education at Western Washington University. He was the first U.S. Deputy Commissioner of Education for the Office of Indian Education and served as Director of Education for the Bureau of Indian Affairs. He was also Commissioner of Education for the State of Alaska, co-chair of the Indian Nations At Risk Task Force and primary writer for the Indian Nations At Risk Task Force Report. Dr. Demmert works with Ministries of Education in Russia, Canada, Greenland, Alaska, Norway, Sweden, and Finland to improve the academic performance of indigenous peoples in each country.

The purpose of this article is to look at influences of culture on assessments of Native American students. The research cited is information from national data sources on the achievement of Native American students. “Cultural aspects of assessment and principles of assessment are discussed, using personal experiences to encourage others to reflect on cultural aspects of assessment. The article ends with the argument that there is much to learn about assessing Native American and other minority students, taking into account the external influences of culture, environment, attitudes, context, and perspectives.”


Avery, L. M., Kassam, K. (2011). Phronesis: children’s local rural knowledge of science and engineering.  Journal of Research in Rural Education, 26(2). 1-21.

Dr. Leanne M. Avery, a professor of Elementary Science at Cornell University, and Karim-Aly Kassam, International Professor of Environmental and Indigenous Studies in the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences at Cornell University, authored this study in 2011.  This study uses Aristotle’s concept of phronesis, or practical wisdom, to analyze videotaped interviews and 407 photographs taken by 20 – 5th and 6th grade students in rural New York State. This data was used to document and frame the findings and their implications, for their science and engineering learning. “Key findings indicate that: 1) All 20 children found examples of science and engineering; 2) The children learned by observing or doing or both; 3) The children learned from family members, particularly parents and grandparents; 4) These 20 children learned numerous science and engineering concepts by participating in activities associated with their daily lives; and 5) Only when directly probed did students make explicit connections between what they learned outside school in their local environments and what they learned in the science classroom. These findings point to the need to anchor the teaching and learning of science and engineering in the students’ experiential habitat; thus, bridging the gap between children’s local knowledge and global science.

Pu'uhonua o Honaunau

Pu'uhonua o Honaunau

Wednesday, June 22, 2011

Lesson Plan: Finding Your Voice



Lesson Plan: Finding Your Voice
Name: Beth Custer
Length of Time: 90 minutes
Grade: 6-8, Common Core Standards - Writing Standards

Grade 6 students:                                    Grade 7 students:                                    Grade 8 students:

3.            Write narratives to develop real or imagined experiences or events using effective technique, relevant descriptive details, and well-structured event sequences.
a.            Engage and orient the reader by establishing a context and introducing a narrator and/or characters; organize an event sequence that unfolds naturally and logically.
b.            Use narrative techniques, such as dialogue, pacing, and description, to develop experiences, events, and/or characters.
c.            Use a variety of transition words, phrases, and clauses to convey sequence and signal shifts from one time frame or setting to another.
d.            Use precise words and phrases, relevant descriptive details, and sensory language to convey experiences and events.
e.            Provide a conclusion that follows from the narrated experiences or events.






3.            Write narratives to develop real or imagined experiences or events using effective technique, relevant descriptive details, and well-structured event sequences.
a.            Engage and orient the reader by establishing a context and point of view and introducing a narrator and/or characters; organize an event sequence that unfolds naturally and logically.
b.            Use narrative techniques, such as dialogue, pacing, and description, to develop experiences, events, and/or characters.
c.            Use a variety of transition words, phrases, and clauses to convey sequence and signal shifts from one time frame or setting to another.
d.            Use precise words and phrases, relevant descriptive details, and sensory language to capture the action and convey experiences and events.
e.            Provide a conclusion that follows from and reflects on the narrated experiences or events




3.            Write narratives to develop real or imagined experiences or events using effective technique, relevant descriptive details, and well-structured event sequences.
a.            Engage and orient the reader by establishing a context and point of view and introducing a narrator and/or characters; organize an event sequence that unfolds naturally and logically.
b.            Use narrative techniques, such as dialogue, pacing, description, and reflection, to develop experiences, events, and/or characters.
c.            Use a variety of transition words, phrases, and clauses to convey sequence, signal shifts from one time frame or setting to another, and show the relationships among experiences and events.
d.            Use precise words and phrases, relevant descriptive details, and sensory language to capture the action and convey experiences and events.
e.            Provide a conclusion that follows from and reflects on the narrated experiences or events.


4.            Produce clear and coherent writing in which the development, organization, and style are appropriate to task, purpose, and audience. (Grade-specific expectations for writing types are defined in standards 1–3 above.)
5.            With some guidance and support from peers and adults, develop and strengthen writing as needed by planning, revising, editing, rewriting, or trying a new approach. (Editing for conventions should demonstrate command of Language standards 1–3 up to and including grade 6 on page 52.)




4.            Produce clear and coherent writing in which the development, organization, and style are appropriate to task, purpose, and audience. (Grade-specific expectations for writing types are defined in standards 1–3 above.)
5.            With some guidance and support from peers and adults, develop and strengthen writing as needed by planning, revising, editing, rewriting, or trying a new approach, focusing on how well purpose and audience have been addressed. (Editing for conventions should demonstrate command of Language standards 1–3 up to and including grade 7 on page 52.)


4.            Produce clear and coherent writing in which the development, organization, and style are appropriate to task, purpose, and audience. (Grade-specific expectations for writing types are defined in standards 1–3 above.)
5.            With some guidance and support from peers and adults, develop and strengthen writing as needed by planning, revising, editing, rewriting, or trying a new approach, focusing on how well purpose and audience have been addressed. (Editing for conventions should demonstrate command of Language standards 1–3 up to and including grade 8 on page 52.)


 Content Concepts:
Students will be able to hear an author’s voice in selected readings.  Students will tune their unique voice, expressing themselves from the power base of their culture and language and experiences, and use their voice to connect with readers.

GLO’S: Self-directed Learner, Effective Communicator, Community Contributor, Complex Thinker

Objectives: Student will be able to identify different voices in selected readings, and will be able to identify how voices change in different rhetorical situations.  Students will identify stylistic devices commonly found with a variety of emotions.

Assessment(s) and or Evaluation:
Papers are not graded, due to the quickly done 1st draft activity.  However, papers can be collected and positive examples underlined to share with the class the following day.

Resources:
Browne, Anthony.  Voices In the Park. New York: DK Publishing, 1998

Kirby, D., Kirby D.L., Liner T. Inside Out: Strategies for Teaching Writing. Boynton/Cook Publishers, Inc., 2004

Galdone, Paul. Henny Penny. New York: Clarion Books, 1968.
Wattenburg, Jane. Henny Penny. New York: Scholastic Press, 2000.

Beginning Procedures (lesson, objectives)

Lesson Introduction: Voices In the Park
Objectives:  Students will identify different voices in selected readings, will visualize physical traits of characters from their voice, will describe personality of characters from their voice, will hear their own voice, and will adapt their voice for different purposes and audiences.

Middle Procedures (Learning Activities)
 Mad Talk, Soft Talk, Fast Talk quick writes.
Groups will be given directives on their 5 minute freewrite.  They write and then share with group and discuss what they hear in the different voices to match each rhetorical situation.  Volunteers share and we discuss how voices change and differ in each situation.  On chart paper divided into 3 columns we list stylistic devices used in each kind of writing.

Closing Procedures:
Talking Back to Yourself.  Students will write a dialogue in which they say something and talk back to themselves, for 10 minutes. Volunteers share. Discuss how point of view changes and register shifts.

Support activities:
Teachers can read two versions of Henny Penny. Lead discussion comparing the two books. Point out that the stories and characters are the same, but the tone, or voice, of one of the books is markedly different from the other.

Modifications for Diverse Learners:
Students may not be at grade level. The teacher will monitor these students through conferencing and positive reinforcement and will encourage those students to set appropriate goals.  Teacher could model Mad Talk with beginning writers, provide support with Soft Talk, and have student write Fast Talk independently.
Review objectives.
Exit pass.
 Teacher Reflection:  When I had read the chapter on Voice in the Inside Out book I knew I wanted to do my lesson on it.Voice is a content my students have always struggled with and I was anxious to try some new strategies for teaching Voice.  I felt the lesson went fairly well.  I knew that the participants were getting complacent in their groups and so decided I would mix them up to stimulate some new partnering and hopefully fresh ideas.  I think the Voices in the Park activity went really well.  The participants seemed to like the variety of activities and modes of instruction.  I am not sure if I was as clear on the Mad Talk, Soft Talk, Fast Talk objectives.  I know that we are all enjoying the class but also our energy and attention are waning.  As this was a middle school lesson it required more writing, and I do believe it was challenging to keep everyone motivated to write.  I think the concluding activity went well; I am again, not sure if my objectives were clearly outlined to the participants.  

Overall I think the lesson went well.  I think there were definitely strengths, and areas I might modify if doing again.  I do thank everyone for their active participation and attention!  Mahalo


Monday, June 20, 2011

Lehua Writing Project 2011

Lehua Writing Project 2011

Inside Out chapter 5

IInside Out, Strategies for Teaching Writing
D. Kirby, D.L. Kirby, T. Liner
Chapter 5 – The “J”

This chapter is an endorsement of using the journal as a critical writing tool.  The author’s obvious support of the use of journal writing is evident from their statement that “it is the most consistently effective tool for establishing fluency…” because students are writing about topics important to them without being worries of conventions.  The authors acknowledge the challenges teachers face in managing journals.  The focus of this chapter is to renew teacher interest in the journal and to provide some ideas for keeping it manageable.

Some of the reasons ‘Why the Journal Works’ is that it is a safe, protected place invites students to open up, to explore thoughts, feelings and people.  In addition, because students write about what they want to write about they write with clearer and more powerful language.  Students are more motivated to write.  Also, the journal is intended for the student, and can support the student in developing not only their voice but also their sense of audience.   Lastly, it provides a venue for students and teachers to connect as people without losing the role of student – teacher.

In answering the question “what is in it for you” the authors believe that it can provide a great source of information on how they are doing as teachers.
Students keep teachers posted on the “good, the bad, and the ugly of their teaching.”
In addition, the journal keeps teachers connected to their students’ interests and culture; what their interests are, their language, fads, fashions, etc.

There are 4 main types of journals discussed in this chapter. 
1.     First, The Writers Notebook, most often used by creative writing teachers, and is often a miniature greenhouse where students plant seeds and nurture ideas.  It is suggested this not be graded.
2.     Second, The Class Journal, where students do most of their writing, and used 3 or more times a week.  Also can be used for students to respond to literature.  Used to develop the habit of reading, writing about the reading, and then discussing.
3.     Third, The Dialogue Journal, students write their questions/reflections and then a partner responds, in that student’s journal.
4.     Fourth, The Project Journal, an efficient way to keep students on track during a project that stretches over time.

One interesting things I learned in this chapter was variety of ways you can assess the journal.  Having used journals, and loved them, I admit I have always struggled with keeping up personal responses to each student’s journal each week.  I love the idea of having students respond to each other.  I do think it would be hard to take this step back, as I get interesting insights into the students by reading their journals.  I also like the idea that the journals can be used to track students’ activities/progress on research papers.  I would definitely incorporate the research log the next time I have students complete a research report.  What a great way to quickly access where students are on the report; and it would be a great way to keep parents informed of the timeline and their child’s progress.  I also really liked the project journal, where students wrote updates on what they did for a group project.  I think this is a great idea, and wish I had used these years ago.

What I most liked about this chapter was it confirms that journals continue to be influential in improving student writing.  I also agree it is a great way of keeping up to date on the references and slang students use, and has been a great tool in letting me connect with my students.

Inside Out book review chapter 14


Inside Out, Strategies for Teaching Writing
D. Kirby, D.L. Kirby, T. Liner
Chapter 14 – Grading and Evaluating

We all agree that grading and evaluating student progress is one of toughest jobs in teaching.  Deciding how evaluation and grading can help a student is part of the problem.

The book presents some General Principles for Grading Writing which I found very helpful.
·      Grading should be deemphasized – this works only if you actually deemphasize grades in your class by finding a set of strategies to put such rhetoric into practice
·      Drafts should not be graded – withhold grades until students engage in a number of drafts and then submit their pick for evaluation
·      Develop grading criteria with students – It shows what you want as well as develops their own critical sense and evaluative judgement.
·      Students should be involved as graders and evaluators – Students grade one another’s papers.  You don’t necessarily have to record the grades given, but it helps them become better readers of one another’s papers.
·      Grade process as well as product – Allows a grading strategy that rewards students for careful preparation, extensive revision, and practice.  Portfolios can be a component of this, and receive an grade of equal weight to the final product.
·      Focus your grading – Limit your criteria.  Focus on what you’ve been working on.  Add additional criteria to grading scale slowly.
·      Give ideas, inventiveness, and content an important weight in your grading scale  - Suggest use of a rubric that values both content and inventiveness.

As teachers think about grading they need to engage in self-evaluation.  Keep your primary emphases in the forefront.  Ask yourself what your grading methods will develop in your students?  Avoid the curse of mindlessness in grading. Develop a number of grading alternatives and test drive different ones.

Some additional approches discussed were:
·      Nongrading Approach  (A noble endeaver, not one usually open to public school teachers.  As an alternative you can have a number of assignments that are not graded.  These practice exercises lead to a published, graded product.) 
·      A performance System (do the assignment get the grade)
·       Holistic Grading Strategies (guided procedure for sorting or ranking work)
·      Roundtable grading (students read papers, establish criteria, and evaluate)
·       Impression Marking (mark papers on some general feeling about papers effectiveness)
·       Holistic Guide for Evaluating Student Work (use list of characteristics of good writing to guide grade)
·       Portfolios
1.     Performance (indicate a students point of mastery in a learning/writing process)
2.     Showcase (gathers and highlights a students best work)
3.     Process (Include the full range of pieces during the process of a specific assignment)
·      Analytic Scales (precise and carefully articulated grading scales that identify specific features and assign those features with specific points – Diederich Scale)
·       Checkpoints (teacher created, content specific)
·       Evaluation by Peers (Elbow’s Center of Gravity, Cooperative Grading, Round Robins, Psychological Boost)
·       Self Evaluation

I was surprised that the 6 traits scale is not recommended.  It was the standard for so long.   I am still unsure about the holistic grading strategy. I like the idea that all papers are graded consistently, and can see this would be more manageable as no errors or marginal notes are made.  I guess that the idea is the notes have been made in the drafts – still think it would be difficult not to make comments on students work. 

Inside Out book review chapter 8


Inside Out, Strategies for Teaching Writing
D. Kirby, D.L. Kirby, T. Liner
Chapter 8 – Responding to Student Writing

Students need reactions from others both during and after they write.  They want to know what teachers think of their writing, but have developed a self preservation instinct by trying to figure out what the teacher wants and giving it to them, and insulating themselves against writing criticism.  The secret to building good writer –responder relationships lies in the touch of the responder.  Universally, good writing teachers look for and draw out the good in student writing, the have a positive mind set.

One way to bring out the good is to Respond as a Person.  Share your own thoughts and feelings as you read the writing.  However,  Looking for the Good may be your most significant role.  This can be accomplished by being a real responder rather than an evaluator.  A personal response is personal and shared, it is here-and-now feedback, not a to-do list, but a response to what the writer has done.  A responder helps writers discover what they want to say and challenge them to say it better. Good examples from students’ own papers are most powerful.  Sometimes you have to “mine the slagheap to find the gems.”   “Goodness in writing is not an absolute standard and does not have a moral equivalent.”

Writing teachers are critical in delivering content knowledge, providing sophisticated and caring responses, and growing better student writers by sharing your knowledge and responses with them.

A key questions is What kind of Response is Helpful?  It is important that a teacher change roles as the student writer develops.  Teachers can create their own list of  what works in good writing.  Display and discuss examples of good writing in the word, sentence, paragraph, and whole discourse level.  Students can also make their own lists of what good writing includes.  As students become more confident and skilled the teachers’ roll changes to that of editor.  Responses should often be phrased as questions or informal advice.  The writer is always in control of the writing.  Responder and students will not always agree, but the discussion is most critical.  It is important to teach students to be responders to their own and their peers’ work.  Don’t give up on them; model, guide, lead, don’t get up.

How to teach students to be good responders is the focus of Developing Effective Writing Response Groups.  Following are the keys to this work:
·      The teacher’s response to student writing establishes the ground rules for all others
·      Establish a “NO Hunting” rule for your responses and enforce that rule with students’ responses to each other’ work.
·      Appropriate response generally begins by trying to understand what the writer is trying to say.
·      Finding things to like in the piece is important.
·      Making suggestions for how the writer can elaborate on what is already written is probably the most helpful editing posture
·      The reader’s questions and voice musing are also very helpful.
·      Question the writer about what he or she plans to do net with the piece.
·      Give the writer the chance to ask the responder questions.
·      Always focus on the piece rate than on the writer
Some ideas on how to model responding for students and to teach students to give constructive responses to their peers are:
·      Helping Circle – Use your own writing and ask students to give you feedback.  Model good respondent behavior.  Use their suggestions and bring in additional revisions of your work.  Transition from your work to a student’s work. It is critical the teacher enforces the rules in keeping a safe classroom environment.
·      Publishing Excerpts from Students’ Writing – Publish anonymous excerpts of students’ writing.  Focus on what makes the piece work and what the piece may need.
·      Partners – This is the response the authors use almost exclusively.  Student work in self or teacher assigned partnerships, but must stay productive.  The writer prepares questions to ask the partner about their own writing and then discuss those questions.  This helps writers work through the rough spots in their writing.  When students ask the teacher questions about their writing the teacher’s first response is to ask what the writer’s partner said.
·      Standing Groups – A comfortable place for a writer to helpful responses.  Give individual writer a home base.  If they cease to function effectively groups can be reassigned.
·      Editorial Boards – Requires lots of organization and an involved set of procedures. Groups of 5-6 students are the go to people. The board publishes an excerpt edition and is responsible for supporting the writers. The actual publishing process is simulated as much as possible.  Students are rotated as board members.
·      Holistic Ratings – groups are assigned and read, respond, and rate another groups’ papers.  This may work best with advance placement classes.



One of the most interesting things I read was the direction to be a responder rather than an evaluator.  I like this approach.  I also really like the idea of collecting excerpts of student work and sharing them with the class.  I have done this before when I had a pilot program for at-risk students; small classes.  Once I was back in a general education classroom I found it so time consuming I couldn’t keep up.