The assignment template as aligned to California’s Common Core state standards for English and writing

The assignment template as aligned to California’s Common Core state standards for English and writing is highly suggestive of common core state standards utilized for its intended purpose. This purpose being an easily assessable, strict but non- restrictive set of guidelines intended to guide students objectively towards skills that are necessary for college education and the workforce. The template overview for reading rhetorically, making connections between reading and writing, and writing rhetorically is well organized and its expectations of objective skill based goals are explained thoroughly and clearly in such a way that the buildup of one objective upon the other is in plain view. The stress of connecting what is being said to one’s own writing is reflected to be well sought after as an ideal method of understanding the subject matter and drawing conclusions validated by the texts. As a practitioner of literature analysis and objective reading, the document’s description of the importance of annotations heavily implies that the bulk of learning and the acquisition of understanding stems from questioning the text and discussing the details in the context of the text and actively making connections orientated towards the objective of finding more questions to ask, discuss and pick apart.

Questioning the motives of the author and the meanings behind the author’s language choice is one of the most fundamental steps towards being ready for and participating in a productive discussion about the material and deciphering the relevance and importance of the content. It’s all about making connections with the text, the author and to each other’s interpretations.

“To know of a fact, does not make it relevant; one needs to impose it upon another and question its validity to make use of it.”

Pre reading the material, at least in part, is a critical foundation for objective reading and allows the reader to actively make connections while they process the information being presented.

The Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts Instruction in Grades 6-12

What can I say? The common Core State Standards (CCSS) is a foundation, a skeletal structure that has room for organs, muscle, nervous systems and blood irrigation transit-ways. CCSS as a “standardized approach to curriculum” does not stand on its own. It is merely a framework from which instructors can pluck class expectation relevant guidelines to use as a starting point. As a fledgling educator, I intend to use the CCSS as such; adding to the overall curriculum or lesson plan by providing sources, assignments and experiences relevant to the unique student body reflective of the backgrounds, interests and innate knowledges of myself and of my students.

I hazard to say, “An educator is equally educated by the Acolyte as the Acolyte is educated by their educator.” An instructor who is actively learning from and alongside his or her students has greater potential of activating the students’ innate knowledge, yielding lessons that draw from relevant, prior experiences and command the interest of the student body thus creating an environment within which both the students and educator may, together, create progress toward their aspirations indicated by known expectation.

This “Core curriculum” is exactly as it appears to be; it is a core, and cores only have use when extensions are slotted into place. The CCSS is only useful when an instructor actively builds their lesson plans around it rather than trying to patch together a myriad of potentially unrelated topics creating a ragged “skin-suit” with no backbone just flapping in the wind; critical information is hazard to being easily lost on the students’ minds. 

Educators serve the purpose of creating standards and facilitating the experience of the students that are achievable and build upon the strengths and inadequacies of said students as they pertain to each student individually. While an instructor may not always satisfy the role of “life coach”, the instructor should be at least held responsible for presenting and providing instruction in the use of various life skills and tools from which students, through their own understanding, acquire a respectable level of proficiency and with it, build relationships and actively communicate effectively with others over a myriad of mediums.

Journal Response to Discussion as a Way of Teaching, Stephen Brookfield

Class discussion can be either a beast of terrible silence amidst awkward blank stares between students, each other and at their instructor, or discussion can be a relaxed and rewarding classroom social activity. I find that opportunities for class discussion can either make or break an experience that students and even instructors will look back, critique and reflect upon. It opens a dialogue option for folks to ask and answer various questions like, “why is this important?” “why did the author phrase this line this way?” among other, more precise queries. There is a strong difference between information memorized under the instruction of arbitrary assignments and a full-bodied classroom discussion that dissects and critiques the source material used in the lesson and the relevance of such material in context of both in the classroom setting and generating connections with the outside world or local culture. Having questions is where most of these dialogues can begin.

A wise individual once said “An intelligent man has all the answers, but if unwilling to share those answers with anyone, he may as well know nothing.”

As such, learning may be able to be achieved through strict memorization or practice with a certain skill set or tools, but for a student to acquire an understanding of the learning material presented they need to ask the right questions and test the validity of the material they have at their fingertips. Knowledge does no good if it remains unused. Healthy group discussion can lead to an opportunity to see the same question or material through different perspectives; more perspectives, mean a greater understanding of the true nature of whatever the focus of the discussion is. Even if your class discussion is as simple or as structured as a circular group meant to take turns responding to a single topic question, it is still more inspiring to hear others’ ideas and perspectives than to continuously rehash your own ideas over and over on repeat for it is madness to do so and think you are really understanding anything.

http://webshare.northseattle.edu/Sustainability_in_Healthcare/Discussion_as_a_Way_of_Teaching%20INC-Learning%20Circles.pdf