Chapter 6

Oct 31, 2012

Benjamin chapter 6, Organizers: Frames, Clusters and Stems

I think the ideas presented in chapter 6, regarding how to organize writing assignments and how to write different types of paragraphs, will be particularly useful for science teachers. Organizing and categorizing information can help kids understand complex systems. Having a concept of what type of paragraph they want to write, and a structural knowledge of how to write it, will help students avoid turning in jumbled, unorganized writing assignments. 

The chapter starts discussing the ideal pattern for a category defining paragraph. We're told that the student needs to state the main category in its first sentence, then lists the subcategories and then briefly synopsizes the subcategories. This kind of writing exercise could be useful in earth science. We might assign students to write a paragraph summing up the different parts of the Earth’s interior. Here’s an example of what an assignment like this should look like: 

“There’s four distinct layers in the Earth’s interior: the inner core, the outer core, the mantle and the crust. The inner core is in the center of the Earth and is made mostly of nickel. Its solid and very hot, about 5430 degrees C. Next is the outer core, its also mostly nickel, but its molten. The largest layer comes next, its called the mantle, its solid but some of its rocks very slowly move or “flow” due to convection. The uppermost layer is the crust. Its relatively thin and cold in comparison to the other layers.” 

The chapter also talks about how to write a paragraph which compares and contrasts. This kind of paragraph is useful as well, though I was a confused about how and when to use semicolons, as they're not a punctuation mark I use much. 

The chapter takes us through a number of different types of paragraphs which all have different purposes. Although some of the advise is common sense, its still useful to specifically consider these different types of paragraphs, they include: descriptive paragraphs, chronological paragraphs, paragraphs which make assertions, and cause and effect paragraphs.  

Benjamin likes to focus of sentence stems. I had not previously heard of sentence stems, and again they seem a bit common sense to me, but they might be useful to a student who is really struggling. I think a science teacher could certainly make use of the suggestions in this chapter, particularly if students are handing work with organizational problems. Going over one or two of these examples prior to giving a writing assignment would no doubt be helpful to many students. 

October 23, Benjamin's Chapter 5, Vocabulary: word for word

As a future Earth Science teacher I found Benjamin's chapter on vocabulary particularly useful. There's a good deal of scientific vocabulary germane to my field, and Benjamin offers comprehensive strategies for helping kids gain ownership of these specific words. I particularly liked Benjamin's suggestion of writing two sentence definitions, with the first sentence emphasizing the facts, (left brain oriented), and the second sentence drawing a comparison, or using the word in a descriptive way, (right brain oriented.) 

The idea of engaging both the right brain and left brain in writing a single definition is brilliant. I'm wondering if the same idea couldn't be used in other writing assignments? So often in science we're focused on just the facts, (left brain.) But could there also be a place in a scientific writing assignment for imagination, whimsy, and creativity? It seems that Benjamin would argue that if you can use both the left and right brain in learning, the retention of the information and concepts is improved. She doesn't offer any real evidence that this is true, but it certainly seems logical to me.

Teaching specific vocabulary could be done in a number of ways, The basic assumption, that by learning a new word students also are learning a concept, makes sense. Benjamin breaks down definitions and offers a step by step approach to writing them. I'm not sure her formula has to be followed to a tee, but certainly its nice to have a clear understanding of a successful approach to teaching the writing of definitions.  

Regarding using vocabulary in lessons, I could conceive of unit on astronomy, for example, starting with the introduction of a list of vocabulary words such as: black hole, big bang theory, brown dwarf, virgo supercluster, extraterrestrial life, elliptical orbit, astroid field, magnetic field, solar nebula, galaxy, solar wind, corona, accretion and gas giant. Some of the students might have a vague idea of what some of these terms mean, but I think most wouldn't. The unit then could be an exploration to uncover the meanings of these words. This might be a different way to teach a unit, but it could work, and I think by focusing on words, we pinpoint and clarify ideas.    

I felt Benjamin's list of verbs, though interesting in theory, were less useful in practice. Do we really need to separate verbs from nouns? Although her idea of the importance of verbs is provocative I think teaching the noun "convection," works just as well as teaching the verb "convecting." 

In conclusion, I agree with Benjamin that teaching vocabulary is important. Not only does it help a student write, but it helps a student understand the major concepts that he or she is studying. As teachers we need to put some time and effort into helping students make new field-specific vocabulary part of a growing lexicon.  

Benjamin's Chapter 4, Stort Statements, Oct 16, 2012 

Benjamin makes a succinct case for concise writing, and she provides plenty of useful tips and examples along the way. (Even now as I write this I'm wondering how to make sentences denser with meaning!) 

I love that Benjamin's gives us examples of wordy, inefficient writing, then points out the inherent problems, and re-writes the paragraph. Teaching by example works! Benjamin leads us through different types of writing assignments: the brief bio, contrast and comparison statements, and sentences that show cause/effect. She spotlights common writing mistakes and instructs us on questions of grammar such as how to properly use colons and semi-colons. (Never has anyone taught me when to use a colon or semi-colon, so this was a true revelation!) 

I think these suggestions are valid and that these types of writing errors will continually arise in the classroom. I'm hoping to teach earth science and I'm sure there will be plenty of badly organized, wordy assignment, essays, journals, observations, and the like, which will come across my desk. 

But do Writing Across the Curriculum programs intend science teachers to teach the use of semi-colons or not? I would love some clarification on this. Perhaps this is a question that is best asked your principal or school administrator. 

In my opinion not all of Benjamin's suggestions are useful. Her lists of action words seem a bit forced. Am I really going to post a list of action words for my students to keep in mind while their writing a paper or report? Other ideas, such as making an informational diagram or chart of what you know, before beginning to write, makes sense. 

I believe the goal of this chapter, this book, and this course in general, is to make future teachers aware of the kinds of mistakes we're likely to encounter, and to instruct us on how to straighten out those mistakes when they occur. By making teachers better writers, there's an improved chance that students will get meaningful writing instruction across the content areas. 

- Michael Kaas

Oct 9, Amy Benjamin's Chapter 3, Making the Case,

In chapter three of “Writing in the Content Areas,” Benjamin identifies a number of common writing mistakes made by students and then offers useful tips for fixing them. Benjamin teaches by example. She offers samples of weak writing, points out the problems inherent in the paragraph, and then shows how the paragraph should be rewritten. (This is a terrific technique which I think teachers should mimic!)  

A common mistake students make is not including enough detail. Benjamin teaches instructors how to spot generalities and then coach students get specific, by including dates, statistics, technical terminology, names, and other details. I loved this chapter! It made perfect sense to me and I could really see how adding specifics and avoiding vague generalizations improved writing. 

I did have some questions though. Benjamin suggests that instructors should be teaching lessons on how to use prepositional phrases, the difference between ordinals and comparatives, and how to make branch diagrams to display relationships. All this is great, but I wonder if an Earth science or math teacher has the time needed to teach grammar? 

Maybe this is now the job of all teachers, and if it is, that’s great. I’m just a little surprised that non-English content teachers are being asked to teach basic grammar, but I do understand the WAC program’s argument as to why its important.  

Chapter three points out that essays can differ in what they’re trying to accomplish, and that essays can persuade, inform, and show cause and effect. Benjamin also encourages teachers to have students learn subject specific vocabulary, and she offers numerous tips such as keeping a lookout for ambiguous words like “it,” and avoiding redundancy. 

I’ve said it before, but this book is making me a better writer. I’m not sure if I will really remember all of Benjamin’s writing tips and be able to use them someday when I’m teaching, but if all teachers embraced these suggestions American’s students would no doubt benefit greatly.     

Oct 2, Amy Benjamin's Chapter 2, Guiding principles for teachers

This week's reading brought the half full/half empty glass dichotomy into the classroom. Benjamin's deficit model of teaching is the half empty glass with the teacher focusing on students' mistakes. Conversely, Benjamin's resource model suggests teachers look first for the strengths found in a student's writing, with grammatical mistakes demoted to less important. This made total sense to me. 

Benjamin also dismisses as unnecessary many traditional writing rules like, never end a sentence with a preposition and never start a sentence with a "but" or "so." I also prefer informality in writing, and I think its all about just getting kids to write, period. Egregious mistakes should be noted, but I'm not sure you need to take off for them in content areas other than English. 

I'm studying to be an Earth Science teacher. I suppose that if a scientist is writing a research paper for publication formal english is used. But when he or she writes lab reports, scientific journals and observations, the writing is informal. I think science teachers should embrace informal writing as long as the rule bending isn't egregious. 

I'm taking a meteorology course this semester at Brooklyn College and every week the instructor assigns a good deal of written homework. I know what's he's doing. He's promoting learning by writing, and its working. The homework he gives is all essay questions and I think he knows that by making us write out the answers it helps us learn the material. He's not concerned with the grammar or if we're finding the right tone, as long as we answer the questions correctly.

My point is that my instructor is using writing assignments to help us learn science, but he's seems unconcerned about how we write. Would I model a class of my own on his teaching methods? Yes I would. Its great to have a powerful, witty of amusing writing style, but in some fields like science, style just doesn't matter much. 

Benjamin's chapter 2 also offers a ton a great advice, from how to turn long-winded paragraphs into dense powerful writing, to how to focus writing assignments. Its great, and I feel I'm not just learning how to teach writing, I'm learning how to be a better writer myself.