kinderjane
Wed, 18 Jul 2007 18:44:42 -0700
A little. I thought they made it easier to understand. My idea of synthesis is that it is the global aftermath of processing what I read. In fiction--that might mean realizing themes and messages; while in nonfiction it is more about becoming attuned to the topic as a whole and what I do know and do not yet fully understand. In nonfiction synthesis I find myself listing new areas of discovery that I want to pursue. While in fiction I want to talk to some other reader about what it all means. What is your take on synthesis? I was a Child Development major in college (30 yrs. ago!) and studied Piaget in several classes.??MOT2 helped me see that synthesis is like Piaget's "assimilate and accomodate".? Aha!? Jane in SC? :-) -----Original Message----- From: Bonita DeAmicis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Special Chat List for STW2 <stw2chat@literacyworkshop.org> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Wed, 18 Jul 2007 6:13 pm Subject: Re: [STW2Chat] First Section - Shelley's comments Hi Shelley, Loved all your thoughts on STW. I can feel your enthusaism from here! I respond to points below. You said: > I can't even remember how I found it, but what a journey it started for me! > I was the only one at my school to hear of it. I tried to do it on my own, > but seeing the necessity of having a common language, I recommended the book > to our curriculum specialist who eventually had it adopted by our entire > elementary school. I picked up this one before I even knew about Mosaic of > Thought! I was thinking--wow--what different roads. I picked up MOT first. Joined a book group in my district as my district began moving toward much more Text and controlled reading environments. Whole class instruction is standard in my area. I am, however, enjoying my first time through STW. I love how it brings all of the various ideas we discuss on this list into a more practical guide for the classroom. You: > pg. 12 "It is not enough to merely think these thoughts. Strategic readers > address their thinking in an inner conversation that helps them to make > sense > of what they read. They search for the answers to their questions. They > attempt to better understand the text through their connections to the > characters, the events, and the issues." and again on pg. 13 "Getting > readers to > think when they read, to develop an awareness of their thinking, and to actively > use the knowledge they glean are the primary goals of the comprehension > instruction outlined in this book. In this way, reading shapes and even changes > thinking." Yes. I think this may be a very difficult area of strategy instruction. All instruction really. It is so easy to get lost in the action and forget what the action is for. Like having students practice 100 math calculations, but never having them address a real "problem" that math can address. >You: >use of a strategy, but so what? It doesn't seem to > make a difference in their lives. Many don't appear compelled to answer > their own questions or to develop their own lines of thinking. It was a great > "A ha" moment for me as I read this section and reflected that I am probably > > putting too much emphasis on the strategy and not enough emphasis on the > reason for the strategy, I love how reflective you are. I also notice that my students, coming from some rote sorts of instruction, are comfortable not thinking too deeply and this, too, is a cause of less than adequate use of the strategies for real-live thinking. Initially, my students are often frustrated that they can't just read and answer questions in my class. I have found the more I allow discussion (since talking is so easy--really) the better they adapt to the thinking that I am looking for. The sooner I ask them to put it on paper--then I get the lazy rote sort of strategy use. Does that happen to you? > But I once again had an "A ha" > as I thought of purposes for reading different genres of literature. I > "mention" some of these as I teach about a genre, but I want to emphasize much, > much more that students use a purpose for their reading that is meaningful > to > them. I was also struck by all the shorter types of reading that Harvey and Goudvis are advocating (new articles, essays, letters, etc.). I am grateful that I purchased Comprehension Toolkit because it takes a little of the work load off to have so many quality articles at my disposal. > I've gone on too long, but one question. Does the way synthesis is talked > about seem to be different to you? A little. I thought they made it easier to understand. My idea of synthesis is that it is the global aftermath of processing what I read. In fiction--that might mean realizing themes and messages; while in nonfiction it is more about becoming attuned to the topic as a whole and what I do know and do not yet fully understand. In nonfiction synthesis I find myself listing new areas of discovery that I want to pursue. While in fiction I want to talk to some other reader about what it all means. What is your take on synthesis? :)Bonita _______________________________________________ Stw2chat mailing list Stw2chat@literacyworkshop.org To unsubscribe or modify your membership please go to http://literacyworkshop.org/mailman/options/stw2chat_literacyworkshop.org. Search the STW2 Chat Archives at http://snipurl.com/stw2archives. ________________________________________________________________________ AOL now offers free email to everyone. Find out more about what's free from AOL at AOL.com. _______________________________________________ Stw2chat mailing list Stw2chat@literacyworkshop.org To unsubscribe or modify your membership please go to http://literacyworkshop.org/mailman/options/stw2chat_literacyworkshop.org. Search the STW2 Chat Archives at http://snipurl.com/stw2archives.