Skip to main content

Revisionary Teaching

“By nature, aren’t the people who are drawn to teaching attracted because they love to learn? Isn’t revision a natural process for such people?” (Paraphrased from memory)
I nodded along as Mary spoke, for I had engaged in similar discussions about teachers who continually learn, adapt, and grow versus those who seem to stagnate – teaching the same content the same way to different kids across different years – many times. This time, however, Mary’s use of the word “revision” caught my attention. I don’t think a more apt word exists to correlate what English teachers must believe about the writing process and what teachers must believe and apply to the teaching profession.
To revise means to look again. We beg our students to recognize the merits of taking another look at their writing and to tweak it where possible by adding or cutting information, finding what works and expanding upon it, and making mindful choices about language and structure. Does it not then logically follow that, as teachers of the craft, we should do the same with our lesson plans?
I know; to many of you, this is nothing new. I have worked with many wonderful colleagues who relish learning and continue to do so, not just to earn PD hours, but to find the joy that comes with expanding their worldview. Many of us are also reflective – constantly assessing how well different lessons or approaches work and then honing or abandoning them as necessary. The best of us are constantly critical of ourselves – in a good way – because we know that we owe it to our students to be so much better than good enough, and we push ourselves to learn from our mistakes and be just a bit better each day.
So what prompted another professional conversation about the relationship between revision and teaching, and why did it gnaw at me long enough to result in this blog post? Maybe it’s my background in psychology, but I have always tried to understand how people think – especially if they have different views than I do. I simply do not understand the occasional teacher who seems content to teach the same exact way, year after year. Before I muse further, let me assure my readers that this is, thankfully, not a particular issue at my school, but the stories are out there, and perhaps each of us knows a teacher who is comfortable with his or her method and thus never seems to question or alter it. Maybe I envy those teachers a bit; I don’t know.
My goal is not to judge, but to understand. If most teachers I have spoken with believe that revision is a necessary and effective part of life, then how do some seem so satisfied without it? Since it is my goal to understand, I will list other questions that come to mind in relation to this query. Please comment with your answers and observations.
·      Is it possible to teach the same curriculum each year to changing student bodies and still be effective?
·      When curriculum remains static, does it help maintain focus on the skills being taught, or does the focus shift to a survey course in which lessons are ticked off as on a checklist?
·      Can a teacher’s effectiveness remain at a high level, year after year, if few adjustments are made to his/her methods?
·      Should teachers rest on what constituted sound pedagogy 10, 20, or 30 years ago, or continue to implement the best practices through new trainings, workshops, and professional books? Good pedagogy never gets old, but how do we know if we’re using the best methods if we don’t continue trying new ones?
·      Do students change enough from one cohort or generation to the next that we need to take this into account when selecting texts for our courses, or should we just stick to the classics to ensure that everyone has read them?

          One last note – during my revision process for this piece, I noted my own bias in the way some of the questions are worded. I am leaving them just as they flowed from my mind, to my pen, and later through my clunking fingertips on the keyboard because I stated my bias from the start. I am a revisionist. I keep what works, while it works, and seek to make it work better; I fix what doesn’t work or abandon it for something that will. I love to learn, and to that end – please enlighten me if you have insight on revision in teaching.
          To Mary: thanks for being a fellow revisionist who I can talk shop with. We’ve come a long way since Mrs. Van’s class!

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Station Eleven - a Review (With Spoilers!)

Warning: plot spoilers ahead... It's funny. Sometimes, the films and books I enjoy the most are the ones that I initially approached with hesitancy or ambivalence. Having recently finished the second book in a row for our book club that I found merely mildly entertaining, I had no real hopes for Emily St. John Mandel's Station Eleven , which I had not even heard of prior to the suggestion by one of our club members. With no expectations in mind, I skimmed the comments on the back cover and inside flap, but they didn't give much away. Thus, I started reading with almost no information about the book, its author, or even its genre. I knew it was post-apocalyptic, but was it dystopian? Was it similar to Cormac McCarthy's The Road ? Would it feature a teen love story as depicted in both  The Hunger Games trilogy and the Divergent series? I had several post-apocalyptic stories in mind as I began to read; boy was I surprised to find one that was different! Typically, aut...

Prayer to the Teachers to Forgive them for Solely Using TPCASTT

Last year, I began moving away from the formulaic TPCASTT and Somebody-Wanted-But-So methods of poetry analysis in my AP course. I still teach those methods of analysis; any tools my students have for decoding poems that serve as potential pathways toward understanding are valuable, and I want them to have as many tools as possible! However, I found that by emulating mentor texts, my students were able to find all of the poetic devices and reach a deeper understanding of the author’s work. This is simply a natural by-product of analyzing which parts of the poem – diction, syntax, theme, repetition and other devices – that they would like to mimic in their own work. My students came up with some of the most beautiful and deeply personal work I’ve ever experienced – some of which they performed at a poetry slam that they organized at the end of the year. To that end, tomorrow we will read “Forgive My Guilt” by Robert P. Tristram Coffin and “Prayer to the Living to Forgive them for B...

"Moist" - A Poem about a Much Maligned Word

“Moist” by Amber Counts In class, we were talking About words we hate. I heard a familiar term, A repeat offender, That seems to make everyone Cringe: Moist . Don’t believe me? Say it. In a room full of people, Ask how they feel About “moist.” Some will wince; Others will feel motivated To exclaim in protest. Someone almost always Says “that’s gross” Or “that sounds nasty!” But I always counter, Don’t you want your cake To be moist? This invariably begins a debate. What else could we call Moist cake But moist cake? Wet cake? Ew. Soggy cake? Not appealing. Juicy cake? I’m not even sure where to start With how wrong that is. Steaks can be juicy: Cakes cannot. So what do we use Instead of moist? Wet, damp, humid Tearful, watery, dewy Misty, rainy, steamy Muggy, clammy, dank Soggy, sweaty, sticky – None of these sound Like they would be good For a cake. Fun fact: According to an article By The Ne...