http://www.slaq.org.au/advocacy/school_library_management/rbl.htm
Have found this article very beneficial. Should I have to do a professional reading when I am a TL I think that I will draw from this. In fact I think this may be a great thing to study up on when (if?) I have an onterview for a TL position.
Things I love about this article:
It gives a great idea of the role of the TL but it is v. succinct
It outlines the benefits to everyone:-
teachers - work load is lightened as TL assists in planning and preparation as well as assessment
principals - development of lifelong learners, optimum use of strengths of tchrs and TLs
parents - awareness of their chn as developing skills to be lifelong learners
students - more interesting and stimulating lessons, more individual attention and more catering for learning styles
I also like the research strategy outlined - very simple but seemingly effective
Once again I am wondering if the TL is going to become a thing of the past. The article makes great reading and sheds a lot of light on TL role for me. BUT I can imagine a great number of classroom tchrs who would say that they are capable of planning/implementing RBL in their own classrooms without the need for TL cooperation other than organising resources. I can literally name a dozen off the top of my head who I currently work with. When I do work as a TL I can see now that a lot of time has to go into self-promotion. This is something I am not terribly good at. I can see that I am going to have to learn to sing my own praises, because let's face it no-one else will do it for the TL.
Ramblings now need to comne to an end. Wonder if this post will make sense to me down the track?!?!?!?!?!
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
Tuesday, March 23, 2010
Skrzeczynski - great article
Read the article by Skrzeczynski as part of our readings. LOVED IT :)
It was essentially a case study of OLR - a school in Kenmore, Queensland. I would love to go to this school and actually spend a week there seeing everything in action.
The article was a real 'how to' for teacher librarians -
how to organise the physical space of the library
how to timetable the classes
how to teach information literacy ie giving an information skills model that they find successful
It gives details about the scope and sequence of computeers throughout the school and how computer use is maximised.
A grat resource for the future
It was essentially a case study of OLR - a school in Kenmore, Queensland. I would love to go to this school and actually spend a week there seeing everything in action.
The article was a real 'how to' for teacher librarians -
how to organise the physical space of the library
how to timetable the classes
how to teach information literacy ie giving an information skills model that they find successful
It gives details about the scope and sequence of computeers throughout the school and how computer use is maximised.
A grat resource for the future
Monday, March 15, 2010
de Bono article
http://www.smh.com.au/national/schools-must-teach-thinking-20100313-q53b.html
Read the article about de Bono in SMH. Some was really relevant to my thoughts at this time.
No idea how to attach the article to my blog which is a shame casue it really is interesting.
He discusses how the 'education revolution' at it is being touted, is really just the same old thing. I love the part where he says that in England they teach their children all about the Battle of Hastings and the War of the Roses but not about how to get a mortgage or go to the corner shop.
Am so in agreement with him. I am really concerned about NAPLAN and the effect it is going to have on education. Parents are competitive enough nowadays without having to add in formal nationwide testing from a really young age. Do parents really thing that scoring high in Year 3 or 5 is going to set their child up for life? How many times have you heard of the school dux who has gone on to have an 'ordinary' job? Was at a party recently when this was being discussed. One lady there was telling me about a family she knew that had a bright daughter, and her parents decided quite early on that she was going to be a lawyer. Sure enough she went on and did her law degree, and excelled at her studies. On the day of her graduation, after the family celebration, she handed her degree to her parents apparently saying "Here's the law degree you wanted. Now I'm off to do what I want". She went back to uni and studied nursing. She has now finished that and is loving her career as a nurse.
My point is that there is going to be even more pressure on children from such an early age. Education will essentially become about teaching to the test (as it already is in many schools). How is this going to benefit childrenin the long run? Teaching life skills, problem solving etc is what needs to be taught, but is really neglected. These skills can't be tested in Year 3 and as such are not valued by parents.
As a parent I don't care how my two precious little people go in formal testing. I am with de Bono on developing life skills. This is what will ultimately make them a happy and successful person. NB by successful I mean that doing well in their chosen career, whatever that mighe be.
As a future TL I am afraid that the role will become redundant because it is already not valued by principals and will become even less so. TLs will end up teaching library skills in an information age that is more reliant on technology than books.
Read the article about de Bono in SMH. Some was really relevant to my thoughts at this time.
No idea how to attach the article to my blog which is a shame casue it really is interesting.
He discusses how the 'education revolution' at it is being touted, is really just the same old thing. I love the part where he says that in England they teach their children all about the Battle of Hastings and the War of the Roses but not about how to get a mortgage or go to the corner shop.
Am so in agreement with him. I am really concerned about NAPLAN and the effect it is going to have on education. Parents are competitive enough nowadays without having to add in formal nationwide testing from a really young age. Do parents really thing that scoring high in Year 3 or 5 is going to set their child up for life? How many times have you heard of the school dux who has gone on to have an 'ordinary' job? Was at a party recently when this was being discussed. One lady there was telling me about a family she knew that had a bright daughter, and her parents decided quite early on that she was going to be a lawyer. Sure enough she went on and did her law degree, and excelled at her studies. On the day of her graduation, after the family celebration, she handed her degree to her parents apparently saying "Here's the law degree you wanted. Now I'm off to do what I want". She went back to uni and studied nursing. She has now finished that and is loving her career as a nurse.
My point is that there is going to be even more pressure on children from such an early age. Education will essentially become about teaching to the test (as it already is in many schools). How is this going to benefit childrenin the long run? Teaching life skills, problem solving etc is what needs to be taught, but is really neglected. These skills can't be tested in Year 3 and as such are not valued by parents.
As a parent I don't care how my two precious little people go in formal testing. I am with de Bono on developing life skills. This is what will ultimately make them a happy and successful person. NB by successful I mean that doing well in their chosen career, whatever that mighe be.
As a future TL I am afraid that the role will become redundant because it is already not valued by principals and will become even less so. TLs will end up teaching library skills in an information age that is more reliant on technology than books.
Friday, March 12, 2010
Have I learned nothing!!!!!!
I am absolutely disgsted with myself. Today was library day and in the infants classes it really is like RFF - the TL takes the class for library skills and storytelling. Today the TL had to leave because her daughter was sick. For a fleeting moment I was annoyed because I had all my Literacy Groups for next week that I needed to organise - when was I going to get it done now??? Then I thought about all the reading I have been doing and realised that this attitude it what is killing off the TLs. Their library time is not release time and should not be considered so.
In my defense, there is no cooperative planning/teaching at our school, so library really is like release time
In my defense, there is no cooperative planning/teaching at our school, so library really is like release time
Thursday, March 11, 2010
Fiction vs Non-fiction
Having read an article by Herring (Teacher Librarians and the school library) I was astounded to realise that there should be more non-fiction than fiction books in a school library! I went into the library the next day and sure enough, that's what it is like. I had never realised before. It makes sense though. My perception of the school library being a place to encourage chn to be readers surely is being blown up - little bit by little bit.
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
RBL
I have spent the morning slogging away with the readings for Topic 1. I have put it off til today - my day off teaching and what is, to me, my first official day of study.
Thoughts at the moment?!
RBL sounds great. Is it really going to work though? Too much emphasis is placed on results drives tests such as NAPLAN. Even school reports have children graded from A - E from Year 1 onwards. (Which in my opinion is shameful - let's brand 6 year olds as incompetent from from the word go!!)
Also, I am looking at this very much so from the point of view of an infants teacher. RBL might be hugely successful with older children, but I think has lots of limitations in the younger years.
As I was reading Haycock, I started to get really excited about what was going on in my own classroom, particularly with regards to Literacy Groups and thinking that perhaps it is possible in 'the early years'. Reading through the behaviours exhibited by facilitators I started reflecting:
1. Teachers retain the responsibility for learning for ensuring learning occurs by structuring the learning environment
Tick. I do this
2. Teachers are actively involved in guiding student learning
Another tick and this time a pat on the back. Another thing done during Literacy Groups
3. Teachers are actively involved in tracking and assessing student learning
Once again, I can tick that box
Then I read the next page and realised that what I was actually doing was 'putting a bunch of students and a bunch of resources together'. While there is differentiation of tasks to allow for different abilities, I was not actually designing tasks that encourage problem solving or decision-making. I have activities that range from open-ended to very closed tasks that have a right or wrong answer. Is this okay? I think for my little Year 1 children it is.
Maybe this is an area I need to address in the classroom. However, I need to be mindful of the fact that I am teaching Year 1 children, and Literacy Groups is a time for implicit teaching. It seems to me that sometimes actual teaching goes out the window in favour of student-directed learning. In order to provide students with RBL, don't we need to teach them how to do this. And doesn't there need to be lots of actual 'teaching' particularly in the younger years when the children are learing essential skills eg how to read, in order to be able to participate in RBL.
Right or wrong this is where my current thinking lies. When I move to a Primary class my opinion will surely change. If it doesn't then I will need to take a good hard look at what I am doing.
Thoughts at the moment?!
RBL sounds great. Is it really going to work though? Too much emphasis is placed on results drives tests such as NAPLAN. Even school reports have children graded from A - E from Year 1 onwards. (Which in my opinion is shameful - let's brand 6 year olds as incompetent from from the word go!!)
Also, I am looking at this very much so from the point of view of an infants teacher. RBL might be hugely successful with older children, but I think has lots of limitations in the younger years.
As I was reading Haycock, I started to get really excited about what was going on in my own classroom, particularly with regards to Literacy Groups and thinking that perhaps it is possible in 'the early years'. Reading through the behaviours exhibited by facilitators I started reflecting:
1. Teachers retain the responsibility for learning for ensuring learning occurs by structuring the learning environment
Tick. I do this
2. Teachers are actively involved in guiding student learning
Another tick and this time a pat on the back. Another thing done during Literacy Groups
3. Teachers are actively involved in tracking and assessing student learning
Once again, I can tick that box
Then I read the next page and realised that what I was actually doing was 'putting a bunch of students and a bunch of resources together'. While there is differentiation of tasks to allow for different abilities, I was not actually designing tasks that encourage problem solving or decision-making. I have activities that range from open-ended to very closed tasks that have a right or wrong answer. Is this okay? I think for my little Year 1 children it is.
Maybe this is an area I need to address in the classroom. However, I need to be mindful of the fact that I am teaching Year 1 children, and Literacy Groups is a time for implicit teaching. It seems to me that sometimes actual teaching goes out the window in favour of student-directed learning. In order to provide students with RBL, don't we need to teach them how to do this. And doesn't there need to be lots of actual 'teaching' particularly in the younger years when the children are learing essential skills eg how to read, in order to be able to participate in RBL.
Right or wrong this is where my current thinking lies. When I move to a Primary class my opinion will surely change. If it doesn't then I will need to take a good hard look at what I am doing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)