Social Reading: Part II

My use of social annotation is the subject of Deerfield High School's Director of Instruction Technology's blog this week. In addition, our principal interviewed me about it. 

Social Reading

For the past twenty-some years, I have tried to find ways to help students become more active and engaged readers. Recently, I have been experimenting with some technological tools that have not only helped students to become better readers, but have helped them enjoy the process.

The most challenging text in Freshman English is Charles Dickens’ A Tale of Two Cities. The language is rich, the plot complex, and the pace slow. I have tried many techniques to help students appreciate and comprehend this novel. One of the best ways was I created podcasts in which I taught the text as they read with me. Listening to the text and using their computer, phone, or mp3 player has been a real game changer to help students understand the text and provide an alternative to the many summary websites on the web.

For teenagers, it is all about the people. They like social networks, social events, but perhaps not social studies – or English. So a solitary activity, like reading, might be more attractive if it involved their friends.

A technique I have used that creates a social component to their reading is to take the pages of the novel, enlarge them, and put them on giant pieces of paper and have the students collaboratively annotate them. When using the “big paper,” I asked students to be completely silent and communicate only through their written comments on the page. Students would make the usual annotations; they would note characters, make connections, identify literary devices, and so on. But they were also able to answer each other’s questions and respond to each other’s comments. The big paper sessions not only provided a critical second reading, but also created a silent and social discussion of the text, a kind of low-tech chat board!

Last fall, I attended the National Council of Teachers of English’s convention in Washington, D.C. In a session on reading and writing digital texts, I was introduced to an iPad app called Subtext. Subtext allowed students to do what I was doing with the big paper with any text – and it could do more than that.

The problem was that my students don’t use iPads; they have Chromebooks. Rats! However, I found a way to take one of the main features of Subtext and provide it to my kids using our equipment and software.

While reading Romeo and Juliet, and A Tale of Two Cities, texts that are in the public domain and are freely available online, I copied the night’s reading assignment into a Google doc. I then invited my students to annotate the text using the comment function; our online collaborative social annotating experiment was born!

Students have responded very positively to this new way of reading! Sometimes, students read the work at home, and then come to class and annotate the collaborative documents together in class. Sometimes, they read and collaborate as homework.

Several months ago, I read an article by Grant Wiggins’ daughter, Alexis. When she shadowed a student at her new school, she realized how passive students are in class. At the end of the article, she reflects on how she would change her teaching given what she observed. She says that she would, “[a]sk every class to start with students’ Essential Questions or just general questions born of confusion from the previous night’s reading or the previous class’s discussion. I would ask them to come in to class and write them all on the board, and then, as a group, ask them to choose which one we start with and which ones need to be addressed.”

The collaborative reading document gave me a perfect opportunity to do what Ms. Wiggins was recommending. When students come to class, they review the collaborative annotations and use a second group document to write questions, claims, note quotations and start the discussion. We then let those responses guide and shape our conversation about the text. This process also provides my students with a chance to read complex texts a second time guided by their peers’ annotations. I struggle with the expectation that young readers will have the insight and inferential ability to glean great meaning from texts they have read after soccer practice or between math and science homework. This process lets them help each other to more fully explore and understand the literature – and they do it socially!

Students get to teach each other. They see each other’s annotations, answer each other’s questions, and respond to each other’s claims. My job is to give them the tools to do this – and then stand back and let them read and discuss - together!

A “Good” School

I wince whenever someone talked about a "good" college. Parents and students say this all the time, "I want my child to go to a good school." Who doesn't? What is a good school? 

Some of us have been to college. Is a good school like the one we attended? Is it one we know by reputation? Is it one that will make our neighbors and friends jealous or impressed when they see it on our car’s bumper?

How about reversing the question: names some “bad” schools? Are bad schools the ones that have had scandals recently? Can you condemn the Biology Department because the football coach is doing bad things or the administration fails to properly handle allegations of sexual harassment? Is the school “bad” because there is a bad apple? Or is a bad school the one that admitted “that” kid?

The notion of a good school is conversation filler. If we are going to spend the time and energy to get our children into college, and then spend all that money for them to attend, many people want a clear and recognizable brand. That may be why a vast majority of the students in my community go to nearby universities and colleges; they have heard of them because prior students go to them. I see; good schools are schools people I know attend.

This may come as a shock, but there are no good schools. A good school is one that fits the student and his and her family and resources. What is a good school for my elder child may not be a good school for the younger.

We all have our biases, whether we are aware of them or not. Perhaps we follow college sports and judge schools based on the performance of their teams. While a sports culture may be a part of the college experience, is it a good indicator of the academics? I tend to judge schools based on the students from my school who are admitted and attend there. That is not entirely fair. I often know far more about these students than the schools do and that could bias me in favor or against a school that otherwise might be a good fit for my child.

I find that, when people use the term “good schools,” what they are really talking about is schools with snob appeal. They want that look of awe and admiration when they say, “My child is attending Stanford.” They want to be able to brag. Some of them are graduates of these highly selective colleges. Most are not.

Choosing a college based on this kind of reputation is akin to only purchasing clothing from high priced name brand stores. Yet, plenty of people do that. These clothes function as well or poorly as clothing without expensive labels. They also communicate a great deal about class and value. What is the message communicated by wearing clothing that advertises where it was purchased? What is the message communicated by selecting a college based on how others will perceive it?

What it comes down to is the question: why are we sending our child to college? Is it to move up in social status? Is it to mingle with the powerful and wealthy? Is it to look good? For me, the learning is more important the label! 

As I continue the process of searching for a college that is a good match for my son, I must avoid the superficial and tempting “good school” trap. I want to look at the real substance of what each institution offers and how my child will learn and live. While one can buy an expensive shirt with a designer label, one can also purchase a nearly identical product, without the logo, for a fraction of the cost and with far less fanfare and flourish. It will still look good, but some people may not be impressed. Screw ‘em; it fits!