From the Literature Institute 2002
By Jamie Suehiro
2002 Literature Institute
Kalaheo High School
“Monday, Monday”
The alarm rings at 6:20 and after slapping the snooze bar a few times I climb out of bed. Like a child on the first day of school all the anticipation and expectations rush through my system along with my dose of morning orange juice. All set for the first day of class, I carry my lunchbox like a pro. I am the teacher becoming the student–an appropriate new role, and one that always better defines for me the relationship between the two. “Will I know anyone? Will there be a microwave? Will this change the way I do things?”
Getting Started
A class full of teachers learning about how to teach literature–sounds like a winner. Teachers who care about their own professional development are some of the most engaging, energetic and motivated people. Can’t go wrong. What do I like about summer institutes? We get to DO the stuff we try on our kids and we get to FEEL how the learning works.
Immersed and Enchanted
After a Monday of feet wetting, we jumped right into a lesson called “Poetry Immersion.” The assignment was to peruse through, and read from, several poetry publications copying down our favorite lines or passages from the texts. After about half an hour, most of us ended up with between 2-4 selections. We then used magazines, markers, scissors and glue to collage a depiction of the selected quotes we had chosen. Some incorporated text into their collage while others just used pictures. The finished products? Visual representations of the poems we connected with, each showing several levels of meaning, many varied interpretations, and a profound sense of understanding. These revelations we shared aloud to the large group, enriching the illustrations, deepening our sense of language and our level of comfort with one another.
I really valued this lesson because it allowed access to so many different types of poems. There must have been close to 20 individual poets and several anthologies available for browsing. Many of my students (and myself included) don’t feel as comfortable with poetry compared to other genres. The lesson was a non-threatening, verbal, tactile activity that involved exhibition and explanation. It stealthily drew us into analysis. We ended up practicing literacy skills: seeing what’s in the text, extracting stand-out passages from text, showing through language and image what those passages could mean, and relaying those ideas orally in an arena designed to support critical discourse. What a success. I plan to use this activity near the beginning of the school year for all of my classes.
Stone Boy
Junior Great Books–those were the days. I’d forgotten about some of those discussions we used to have as a child. I had no idea how they worked (my step dad volunteered to be our leader). All I remember was reading from those neutral colored books, sparse on pictures, and that some of the questions were really hard, especially for third graders! The Stone Boy as a story did not really catch my fancy as much as the discussion following our readings. Kathy threw out one question and as we contributed discussion, she proceeded to jot down what each of us said on a small seating chart map. She then used that information to feed the discussion, recalling ideas, asking certain people to elaborate on their responses–sometimes even after several minutes passed. I guess a food metaphor might be the pan of Jello, versus the Jello, fruit, pudding, whipped cream, sprinkle parfait; we spoke layer after layer of tasty discussion. Instead of going wider, this method allowed us to go deeper, in the end, addressing almost everything on the teacher agenda, but without the teacher dominance. Again, sneaky, but I liked it!
I really need to reconsider the way I arrange my desks in the classroom. After looking at Kathy’s notes in map form, I realize how important it is to try for the circle, even if it turns into a modified amoeba. I don’t think this discussion style would work as well in a traditional “row upon row” format. And I really want to do this with my students, especially with the Honors section early in the year when we review the summer readings. While listening to the Stone Boy discussion, I noticed the drawing out of ideas from the participant comments, and how ideas tended to emerge organically, like letting the cream rise to the top of the milk, naturally. As I listened, I noticed my tendencies. I felt them. I am a “whipper.” Sometimes I get impatient with the process and take a hand mixer to my students, creating peaks of artificially flavored, foamy meaning, relying on my own reading of what we study. I have to learn patience, trust, and become more skilled at leading (not dominating), because sometimes the best topping is a bit of pure, heavy cream, floating there for the taking.
Literature Circles
Our literature circle formed around The Tattoo, Chris McKinney’s locally generated novel. I was very happy with the selection. As we read we expressed our frustrations, asked questions, shared discoverles and stories. I think all of us
related to this novel closely, but in extremely different ways. Fay is Haole, Ray, Hispanic, Kara, Korean, and I’m Japanese and Chinese. Some of us have lived all over the place, some have been raised here. It was funny how our ethnic backgrounds aligned with many of the opposing perspectives represented in the Tattoo. I don’t think we ever addressed this in discussion, but it was there, and I think it allowed us to see the ourselves more clearly; to exam1ne our own stances regarding race, culture, resistance, and how we fit into the 1andscape of this place that we love.
I have tried to make literature circles a priority for certain units. I am beginning to ask myself: “Why not every unit?” This is the first time I have participated in a “circle” as a student. The experience has helped solidify their function and potential.
Changes and Goals:
When asked to jot down thoughts and feelings the first day, I think I said something terribly cheesy like: “I want my students to see truth and beauty when they read.” I have learned much about reading over the past two weeks. More than enough to think about and try to process before August. My initial goal, though sort of cute, was not very informed and relied on the assumption that good reading is taking away from text the ultimate kernel of meaning. This is fine, but it’s only one chunk of the literary casserole. I think my statement after the first week provides a more realistic take. “Interaction becomes the catalyst for making meaning in text—that it’s not so much about truth and beauty as it is about the reader and their readings—the transaction between text and what they bring to it becomes the benchmark.” I know my philosophy of teaching literature has changed for the better. I got a chance to participate in sound reading instruction. I have a book of readings and a list of resources about literacy, literature and learning. But really, the proof is in the practice, so I’m going to try hard not to eat my words.
