Nancy - Thanks for posting the context of Sharon's ideas and also for your own thoughts. I have seen, too, that students become consumed with the language of strategy instruction but miss the deep understanding that it is supposed to create. I have seen students writing T-T in the margin without being able to explain how the connection helped them as a reader. Often, it is the students who are used to high achievement who grab on to the language and not the concept. They are spouting "I have a T-S connection" or "I have an inference" every chance they get, but not showing any more understanding of the text beyond what the author wrote. I blame this on us, as teachers. We have a tendency to grab an idea and run with it, don't we? (Similar to the KWL chart phenomonon. I know I've been guilty of making the chart without ever returning to it again.) Soon after MOT was written, teachers (including myself) went wild making colorful organizers, rubrics, strategy sheets.... we wanted to make the ideas of MOT applicable to our classrooms. I think that the idea, purpose, theory of strategy instruction may have gotten a bit lost. And it also sounds like maybe that is partly what Sharon was saying, too. Hopefully, To Understand will help remind us all of what we were trying to accomplish in the first place. :)
Also, I love the posting from Beverlee about modeling and the stages of understanding that students go through! I love the idea that modeling is a way to build awareness for students who, before our modeling, may have been unaware that these processes in the mind exist. And that we need to move them to "incubating". It seems like To Understand will be all about how to get them there! :) Dana _______________________________________________ Understand mailing list [email protected] http://literacyworkshop.org/mailman/listinfo/understand_literacyworkshop.org
