235 Chapters
Medium 9781574416367

Murray’s Problem

Gayle Reaves, Editor UNT Press ePub
Medium 9781935249801

Chapter 1: Releasing Responsibility: A Framework for Teaching and Learning

Nancy Frey Solution Tree Press ePub

Moving from a 20th century goal of student compliance to a 21st century goal of student competence requires an instructional model designed to accomplish this. The thinking behind the gradual release of responsibility model is that teachers must plan to move from providing students extensive support to having them rely on peer support to expecting them to function with no support. Or as Duke and Pearson (2002) suggested, teachers have to move from assuming “all the responsibility for performing a task . . . to a situation in which the students assume all of the responsibility” (p. 211). Unfortunately, in too many classrooms, releasing responsibility is unplanned, it happens too suddenly, and it results in misunderstandings and failure. Consider the classroom in which students hear a lecture and are then expected to pass a test. Or the classroom in which students are told to read texts at home and come to class prepared to discuss them. Or the classroom in which students are assigned a problem set twenty minutes after the teacher has explained how to do the problems. In each of these cases, students are expected to perform independently but are not well prepared for the task.

See All Chapters
Medium 9781622500291

Assisting the Handicapped 1

Saddleback Educational Publishing Saddleback Educational Publishing PDF

name

_________________________________________

date ____________________________

ASSISTING THE HANDICAPPED I

Do you have a physical handicap? Do you know someone who does? If so, the words and phrases in this lesson will be important to you.

A. Have you noticed that many buildings have special features that make it easier for handicapped people to get around? The Americans with

Disabilities Act prohibits discrimination against individuals with disabilites in employment, housing, education, and access to public services. The box below lists five of those features.

ramps    handrails    elevator    eye level    Braille

Complete the following passage with words from the box. First unscramble the letters. Then write each word on the line.

Since Holly’s accident, she has learned to get around in a wheelchair. She has been happy to find that most public buildings are wheelchair accessible. In many places, ____________________ (maprs) run alongside stairways. Most restrooms have special stalls with ____________________

See All Chapters
Medium 9780253007452

5 Unflipping the Flop

Michael Lempert Indiana University Press ePub

CHERYL OTIS: Senator Kerry, after talking with several co-workers and family and friends, I asked the ones who said they were not voting for you, “Why?” They said that you were too wishy-washy. Do you have a reply for them?

JOHN KERRY: Yes, I certainly do. (laughter)

—8 October 2004. Second presidential debate, held at Washington University in St. Louis, Missouri

On 30 October 2007, more than two months before the primaries began, the Democratic Party held a televised debate in Philadelphia for seven of its presidential hopefuls, which included then front-runner New York senator Hillary Clinton (New York Times 2007). At a certain moment, as recounted in chapter 3, Clinton was pressed about her view on governor of New York Eliot Spitzer’s beleaguered proposal to issue driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants. “It makes a lot of sense,” she was quoted as saying of his plan in New Hampshire. In response to the debate’s co-moderator Tim Russert, her answer this time around seemed more measured: two parts sympathy (“what Governor Spitzer is trying to do is to fill the vacuum”) and one part disapproval (“we need to get back to comprehensive immigration reform because no state, no matter how well-intentioned, can fill this gap”). Sen. Chris Dodd, one of the seven candidates on stage, read Clinton’s sympathy as tacit agreement with Spitzer’s position, and she swiftly corrected him: “I just want to add, I did not say that it should be done, but I certainly recognize why Governor Spitzer is trying to do it.” With this John Edwards and Barack Obama resumed the evening’s grating refrain: that Clinton was inconsistent, that her inconsistency bespoke a lack of conviction. This was arguably what people in the industry call a “moment,” a turning point in a candidate’s fortunes. In post-debate coverage on the political talk show Hardball, Joe Trippi, senior strategist for the Edwards campaign, ratcheted up the criticism, attributing Clinton’s shifting positions to whether she was in “primary mode or general election mode” and predicting that her position would change again once she spoke with her consultants (MSNBC 2007a). It was left to the commentariat to name the charge against Clinton, as editorialist Michael Graham (2007) of the Boston Herald did in an uncharitable opinion piece published two days after the debate:

See All Chapters
Medium 9781936764976

PART III The Process Approach

Richard E Ferdig Solution Tree Press ePub

PART III

The Process Approach

The process approach to writing instruction is a broad concept. Most educators define it as a means of providing students with extended opportunities to plan, write, edit, and revise their work. Student ownership, inquiry, and conferences with teachers and classmates are also critical elements of process writing.

The process approach is based on the work of Linda Flower and John Hayes (1980), who find writing to be a recursive practice rather than a linear event. Writers do not simply move linearly through stages of prewriting, writing, and rewriting, but rather they are engaged in a complex and continuous process. Research supports the process approach to writing instruction as an effective pedagogical practice (Graham & Perin, 2007c). Outstanding researchers and practitioners, including Janet Emig (1971), Peter Elbow (1973), Donald Graves (Graves & Sunstein, 1992), Donald Murray (1999), and Nancie Atwell (1998), have been proponents of this approach to writing instruction. The National Writing Project also cited the process approach as foundational (Graham & Perin, 2007c; Pritchard & Honeycutt, 2006).

See All Chapters

See All Chapters