I’ve often wondered why different sections of the same class would read different literary selections.  It didn’t occur to me that as an undergrad, my job was to learn HOW to interpret the text, but to learn enough about the author and the text in order to regurgitate it to future students. Sure, we discussed the text, defined unfamiliar words, and listened to what others had to say, but then waited for the teacher to tell us the point or real meaning of the assignment. (And high school was so long ago, that I just can’t recall if any English teachers felt it was their job to teach us how to better understand what we had read). In looking back, I feel cheated; and although I enjoyed most English/lit classes, I wonder how much more satisfied, and less deflated at times, I could have been.  But as the saying goes, that’s all water under the bridge.

Thanks to Blau, I’ve reached that Aha moment! I’ve always been a voracious reader but would encounter texts that I just” didn’t get.” Of course, I thought it was just me and was too shy to ask for further help, but then I wouldn’t have known what to ask anyway.  I feel so much better now. My confusion represented an advanced state of understanding!

But what to do about the teachers who are not engaging the students to become the producers, especially students that are average or in the general ed. class?  As a parent of a son labeled LD, I know he is capable of understanding this process.  He loves looking through and reading books, and still allows me to read to him.  My fear is that because he reads on a lower, slower level, a teacher may overlook his cognitive ability since he’ll always be in the inclusion or general ed. class.  Some past teachers seemed more concerned with his lack of fluency and speed and yet continued to push him onto books that were beyond his reading comfort zone.  So I felt relieved (and a bit smug) when I read that weaker readers need extended exposure to easier texts, which is what I have been doing. Another thing is that I make sure to expose him to anything and everything I can since he has this terrific memory.  There have been many, many times were he has surprised teachers with his intertextual literacy.  In these cases, I’ve looked at the teacher with wonder, but would reply with a simple,” of course.” 

But I still don’t know what to do about the differences I see in the classrooms using the same curriculum.My son’s classes tend to be of the teacher- lecture/student- highlight type.  While another class may be more hands-on or interactive, I see this more so in the GT class.  As a parent, I’m quite frustrated at times by how and what he is being taught; but as a future teacher, I relish the opportunity to employ these collaberative strategies that Blau speaks of.  I just hope I’m not creating a disillusionment for myself.

Group work has always been a mixed bag though.  Once, in American lit., we were placed in groups of three to discuss T.S.Eliot’s poem “The Waste Land.”  Well, one student hadn’t read it and the other hadn’t reached the part that we had to analyze and present informally to the class.  Our interpretation time was practically wasted with them reading it for the first time. So perhaps by instituting this concept to younger students, they’ll learn the value of the exercise itself and the importance of being prepared.

Susan