The Responsibility Of Teaching Students To Summarize

By Author: Tracy McGrady
Total Articles: 56
Comment this article

We are not sure that most teachers in secondary schools would accept the responsibility of teaching students to summarize. However, this need came from teachers who were looking at student work and realized that there was a gap. As a result, just a few months later, we observed a number of lessons in which content area teachers were focused on teaching, summarizing, and engaging students in conversations about how, why, and when to summarize.

The think-aloud component was the most difficult to institutionalize at Western. We hypothesized that this may be because modeling requires a change in teacher behavior whereas writing to learn, Cornell note-taking, and wide reading focus more on the use of time. Most teachers we observed did not Replica Tag Heuer really model, per se. Instead, they often explained how something worked or what the author was doing or what students might do to understand. Our regular feedback about this, over several months, caused tension in the teaching staff and some resentment among teachers. They wanted to do ...
... well and appreciated the feedback on the other components of the plan. However, during the first 15 months of this study when we talked about think-alouds, we would regularly be challenged or debated. As an example, in frustration, one of the teachers said, "Then you come into my class and do it." We took this as an invitation and later the next day did model thinking while reading to her students.

Thankfully, we had support from the principal and LLT to maintain the focus on think-alouds. Over time, teachers began to Tag Heuer Replica Watches incorporate this new behavior into their habits. One of the early naysayers was later interviewed and she said, "My [think-aloud] time has the most student engagement. They can't wait to hear what I think about what we're reading." Hopefully, there were no long-term negative feelings about the feedback we or the peer coach provided.

The one major, negative effect this intervention produced came from the vice principals. Given that their day was mainly devoted to student discipline, they felt left out and neglected as the school turned its attention to literacy. Before this effort, they were the "keepers of information" and "had a lot of power" because teachers went to them for support and guidance. According to the peer coach, the work of the LLT shifted the balance of power away from the vice principals, and teachers spent less time with them and more time with literacy resource staff. As a result, the principal was forced to address back-stabbing comments from her vice principals, including questions about her ability to run the school and periodic reports to the superintendent's office about how she spent her time.