I think I might "get" this one. When we are teaching our children to use strategies, that use becomes part of their comprehension process, that is the intersection of "questioning" or whatever with the process of comprehending about "X." However, if you are presenting a workshop to teachers about stragegies that work, the content of your workshop is the strategies. Now, of course it comes to splitting hairs before long because your workshop participants (unless it's late Friday afternoon) will immediately start hooking up their knowledge of the named processes (strategies) with how their learners process print and comprehend meaning, and it will turn into observing--and causing--understanding. However, for the teacher, it would start out as content. Clear as mud? It's sort of like when our students start noticing that "kn" sounds like /n/ in knot, knob, and knight, and, in the process, learn that that's really handy to know when you happen onto knickers or knit, so that the phonics understanding causes you to decode which causes you to comprehend which is one of the basic necessities in order to understand. Process. However--if you are the linguist that's studying the difference between the sound that "long i" "makes" in Oklahoma, Georgia, Washington, and Arizona (and perhaps why) that phonetic difference is indeed content. For a reader, even something that starts out as content--what can be defined as inference, for instance--eventually becomes part of a process heading toward understanding--ideally. However, just as was earlier commented, our "assessors" these days want to count all or most of these process skills which matter only if they are used, as content. So rather than trying to determine if a student can comprehend a text which includes many compound words, they test the content "compound words." Wow, I'm really adding clarity here, huh? Maybe I don't "get it." Bev
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sat, 19 Apr 2008 19:08:22 -0400> To: > [email protected]> Subject: Re: [Understand] Understand Digest, > Vol 2, Issue 29> > > OK> I am still thinking about this and want to add to my > previous post. I said > originally that maybe strategies are process and > teaching what it means to > understand is content but now I am rethinking > this. Maybe understanding isn't a > place/point in time. It is continually > evolving. You can always understand > BETTER....and you can CHOOSE to > understand more than you already do. > So...that's why Ellin includes > language like "struggle", "dwelling in ideas" and > "revision of thinking." > Those all sound like process. Only the last two ideas in > Ellin's chart > about what happens in our lives (page 17) seem to be more > > products...emotional connections and particularly...remembering. So...more > > confused than ever here in Maryland...maybe it is BOTH.> Jennifer> In a > message dated 4/19/2008 2:40:13 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, > [EMAIL > PROTECTED] writes:> > I am grappling with whether teaching strategies can be > anything but > process-based instruction. Anyone?> > > > > > > > > > **************Need a new ride? Check out the largest site for U.S. used car > > listings at AOL Autos. > > (http://autos.aol.com/used?NCID=aolcmp00300000002851)> > _______________________________________________> Understand mailing list> > [email protected]> > http://literacyworkshop.org/mailman/listinfo/understand_literacyworkshop.org _________________________________________________________________ Going green? See the top 12 foods to eat organic. http://green.msn.com/galleries/photos/photos.aspx?gid=164&ocid=T003MSN51N1653A _______________________________________________ Understand mailing list [email protected] http://literacyworkshop.org/mailman/listinfo/understand_literacyworkshop.org
