Stirring Up Justice: Writing and Reading to Change the World, by Jessica Singer

This book is a high school English curriculum outline for the implementation of an 11 week unit on social justice. The reading and writing of the unit takes many forms including narratives and expository texts which are intended for a “real audience.”

Chapter 1: Stories of Justice: Collaborative Writing

Singer states that the purpose of this curriculum is to demonstrate how high school students can use reading and writing to learn about and participate as agents of change.

Instead of finding causes for students to fight for, causes that Singers describes as ones on her agenda, she allows students to learn the skills, literacy practices, support networks to support change in their own areas of interest.

1. Starting with children’s books—Singer began the unit with an introduction to many children’s books that deal with issues of social justice.
2. Students analyzed the content of the books discussing elements of fiction: plot, character, important details and language, comparisons to other works of literature.
3. Students brainstormed lists of experience with social injustice.
4. Students wrote a story describing as vividly as possible the incident.
5. Students shared these stories with their classmates.
6. Audience and Product: writing children’s books for a 5^th grade class—interaction with this class as they offered advice.
7. Learning new skills: dialog, setting, etc.
8. Illustrations
9. Revision with the class, individually, peers, and with 5^th grade readers.
10. Production of a final product—shared with the audience.
11. Student product reflections
12. Extensions of the assignment.

Chapter 2: Book Choice

Chapter 2 tracks the evolution of learning about social justice as the high school students move away from children’s literature to activist biographies. In this lesson students pick a biography on a social activist of their choice and begin the reading process. This chapter discusses reading strategies and the purpose of the assignments related to this book in Chapters 3-5.

1. Book Choice Philosophy—Singer believes that the classical body of literature is important. She sees it as a kind of “cultural currency,” a means by which a student can be admitted to the academic community through experience with a shared body of texts. For this reason, canonical literature is important and even essential. However, Singer believes that the classroom needs to use these classical works to move beyond them as a means to understand issues of social justice throughout the modern age.
2. Students choose a biography of an activist of their choice—a list is provided to the class and the persons are introduced and discussed.
3. As students read, they record their first impressions and use reading strategies and organizers to record their daily insights.
4. Students are asked to create a “literary timeline” marking important events in their subject’s life.
5. Students are given time to read.
6. When students complete their own books (approximately 3 weeks), they share their text with the class during a book hunt.

Chapter 3: Writing into Activism

“Thinking about how and why people are moved to act as agents of change” (70)

• Identify what turning points really mean with examples.  One example came form a former student and his path of seeing himself as a writer.  “I felt better.  I wanted to re-write it later ‘cause it was saturated in tears and very sloppy.”(70)

• Looked for a turning point in the activists life.  (Each student chose an activist that interested them)

• Students write a turning point essay on their activist.

• Studied  and practiced different genres with activism in mind.  Made a bulletin board of activism in the news.

• Wrote an expository article based your activist

• Article reflections

Chapter 4: Songs of Activism

• Read article in the New York Times that talked about the controversy of the DIxie Chicks.

• Discussed the role of music musicians play in provoking political conversations and actions. (99)

• Introduce songs that described critiques of society.  Discussed the issues described in the song.

• Wrote responses to songs Prompt is on page 103

• Students chose a song of social change to share with the class and discussed them as a class

Chapter 5: Culminating Project—Choosing Issues of Activism

Culminating Project: Choosing Issues of Activism

“I designed the final activism project as an opportunity for students to dive into an issue and project that mattered to them deeply. I wanted to give students an opportunity to use what they had learned through al their hard work surrounding this unit to become both experts and teachers about a particular issue.”

Stem Cell Research

Discrimination Among Teens

Teaching Tolerance

Against Gangs

Keeping Oceans Clean

Animal Testing

Improving Treatment of Skaters

Public School Funding

Etc.

Culminating Project: Becoming Experts

Students gather information about their chosen issue inside and outside of class. “Inside Time” is done in class; “Outside Time” is done outside of class. Uniformity of projects is not required; diversity of projects is encouraged.

Culminating Project: Checking In

“Most mornings I arrived in my classroom early to lay papers on the desks, which explained or set up the assignments for the day. I wrote, ‘This is what you need today,’ with a list of supplies, books or projects on the chalkboard.” Ms. Singer meets with each student to check-in and support the development of each student’s project.

Culminating Project: Artist Statements

“Along with the final project, I wanted students to write an explanation of their project’s purpose so that an audience could read the reasoning behind the work. I thought that a written explanation of some kind would allow students to teach others about the issue they cared about.”

Culminating Project: Final Gallery

“In the last part of the class, students had time to circle around the room—as they would in any art gallery—and observe the projects. I laid out blank pieces of paper next to each project so that students could give one another positive feedback. The gallery format and artist statements emphasized the individual creativity in student work and the community.”

Chapter 6: Discoveries, Lingering Questions, and Conclusions

Discoveries, Lingering Questions, and Conclusions

“I realize that in many departments, schools, and districts, teachers do not have the freedom to push aside certain texts and replace them with others. In these times of standardization and accountability, making changes to a curriculum can feel like a risk. I maintain that the skills that need to be addressed in high school language arts courses can be taught and practiced through an innovative social justice curriculum.” (138)

Appendices 1 and 2: Supplemental Materials and Timeline

I have had some close personal contact with the Jane Schaffer approach to teaching writing as I have supported my students to meet the requirements of their general education World History class.  In a way, students were comforted by the rigid structure because at least they knew exactly what the teacher wanted – right down to the word count.  I have found that using the formula seemed helpful when students needed to gather and organize facts to support a claim for these assignments. The rub is that students were made to use this formula for independent research papers and because they did not have in-class prewriting discussions about the implications of the facts they were finding, they were stumped when it came time to write the required two lines of commentary for each fact.  So, thesis: The artists of the Renaissance were painting to depict nature and architecture in a realistic way. Fact: DiVinci painted to Mona Lisa which was a realistic portrait of a woman. Comment: this shows that….. uhhh .  The students did not really have enough contextual information, opportunity to engage in discussion, etc to really know how to comment on the facts that they were finding.  It bothers me that the formula comes first and the thinking is secondary and is in fact merely a requisite to meeting the criteria of the formula.  I would like to see writing scenarios in which the thinking is primary and the writing comes out of the thinking and can be revised later to best show what the writer is hoping to communicate in a structured way. Thinking first, writing second- it just makes more sense to me.

Mark Wiley brings up some interesting points in his article addressing formulaic writing.  He claims that desperation is causing teachers to reach for canned writing programs, such as Jane Schaffer’s.  I can relate.  I’ve been desperate.  Although it is clear from the get go that Wiley is against formulaic writing programs, he is also careful to note their strengths as well as suggest a way to incorporate this type of writing as one of many strategies to be used in comprehensive writing instruction.

Let’s begin with the strengths.  Wiley noted that Schaffer’s program creates a common language, allowing students and teachers to more easily discuss essay structure.  He also noted that students using programs like Schaffer’s were able to distinguish opinion from fact.  Struggling students often demonstrated rapid improvement.

While these are indeed strengths, there were multiple weaknesses as well.  Students found the format to be stifling.  There was little room for exploration, reaction, and interpretation within the structure.  Teachers, too, feared that their students might become too dependent upon the format.  Wiley also noted that this type of writing only accounted for declarative knowledge, that is a relaying of facts.  Students also need procedural and conditional knowledge.  Procedural knowlege meaning how to use strategies and conditional knowledge meaning when to employ various strategies.  The usage of all three types of knowledge facilitates thought, questioning, and deeper understanding.  Wiley suggests using rigid writing formats, like Schaffer’s, after students write and only for those in need of direction regarding organization.  It is a small piece of writing instruction, that when used as the bulk of instruction leaves a lot to be desired on the part of the author and the instructor. 

Much of the article “Promoting Academic Literacy” was met with a “duh” for me.  My training in TEFL/TESOL and my experience with adult ESL students has confirmed a lot of this research.  My query in reading this was about the way some of the changes they suggest are funded and implimented.

At the community college level we have a large amount of money granted from the state Chancellor’s office designated as a Basic Skills Initiative (BSI).  The initiative (over several years) is supposed to focus on just the things the author’s describe in “Promoting Academic Literacy.”  It allows money for committees to re-evaluate the assessment process for ESL as well as “basic skills” students, including those who cannot pass their high school exit exam.  It also provides money for professional development opportunities, so that faculty outside of LEAD and English have more tools for helping basic skills students in their classrooms.  (Kyra, for example, is using BSI money to open the first college writing center at Yuba College.)

So my questions are political.  Why is it, as Rick Simpson is quoted as saying that “the 2/3 vote needed for budget issues in California” isn’t there?  Do high school level basic skills rely exclusively on legistlative funding?  (Sorry if this is a stupid question).  And why if the atmosphere is so positive at the community college level, is it so crappy at the high school level?  The answers to these will help me, I think, think more deeply (and talk more fluently) about the causes and effects of success for ESL/ELL students.

I did appreciate the authors’ somewhat resigned conclusion that administrators should be deviant and: “support strategies including the use of students’ primary language, that are perfectly legal but run contrary to current trends.”

I was interested in reading this article because I am so ready to break out of the formulaic writing that I’ve been clinging to for the past couple of years.  

“I do not believe formulaic writing is the actual villain in this classroom drama.  Rather it is the pedagogical blindness that formulaic wrting leads to that disturbs me and that seems to be the real culprit,…(p.61).  

The author doesn’t see formulaic writing as completely bad and he completely understands why teacher grab onto it.  Many teachers, even good ones are at a loss as to how to teach writing.  When an easy solution comes along, many instrutors take it.  Also, there are so many pressures and time constraints.  Time, time, time.  We live in a world in which what I call “speed teaching” is often demanded.   One cannot speed up good teaching–and certaingly one cannot speed up good learning.  Writing instruction in particular requires more time;and this is often forgotten in our test-laden environment.

When Wiley described the Jane Schaffer Approach, it so reminded me of Step Up to Writing.  The Step Up program just uses different labels:  greens, yellows, reds.   But it is not fair to teach students this method, especially the students with low skills.  Once these students learn a formula they “cling to it as a life raft from which they never want to embark.”  (Yesterday, I was just thinking of that very same metaphor.)  With formulaic writing students are robbed of the opportunity of exploring their own ideas, of developing their own inquiries, of the opportunity to study structures and craft.  Finally, the are not able to learn that different types of content require different types of form.  There is not one-size-fit-all when it comes to writing.   

“There is no next in the Shaeffer Approach.”  There is no next in formulaic writing.  We owe it to our students to allow them to experiment with their writing as we guide them in the writing process and the study of writing.

Response to reading article, “The Popularity of Formulaic Writing (And Why we Need to Resist)” by Mark Wiley

June 30, 2008

Wow!  Nicely said – and in 2000!  Makes me wish I’d seen this during my teacher training, though I have the feeling that I would have eventually come across it within my own search for response to the pressures we’re under in daily classroom practice.

I first came across formulaic writing in the science project; a well-respected teacher was presenting her way of getting summaries by using a method called “Four Square Writing,” which sounds like a version of the Schaffer method, in 6^th grade.  I was immediately horrified, for to me writing is a highly personal creative endeavor, regardless of genre, and I felt highly constrained by the fill-in-the-blank format of the process.  

True, none of us want our students to fail; all too true as well that it is simply easier to pick up the package, follow the script, score to the pre-arranged rubric.  But writing is so much more complex than that AND so much more personal that this necessarily leaves all the joy behind in trying to create the perfect pattern.  Even math when done well is highly creative; shouldn’t our writing, the reflection of our innermost thoughts and feelings, be even more so?

I came to a greater understanding of why I resist these formulas during the past year, when I taught 6^th grade and had both the lowest test-scoring students, (or intervention group), and the highest (or honors group).  These students came up through the “Step Up To Writing” process, another somewhat formulaic program used by my district.  We had a district-wide writing assessment with a “response to literature” prompt, and I saw the divergent use of the formula split into two problems:  the low group filled in the blanks and did only that, with no regard to personal experience (even though text to self is part of the formula) or voice – and many of them had GREAT wealth of experience to discuss, while the high group did the task as quickly as possible and were not, effectively, good critics of writing since their entire reason was driven by the formula.

I’d like to further take this article apart, for Wiley elucidates in detail some of the best pitfalls and challenges we all face as directors of writing experience.  I was very excited to see him discuss strategies, for I’m coming to believe that directing students to strategies in an explicit and supportive way has positive consequence to learning across the curriculum.  

As Alicia noted in today’s presentation, formulas get the product, but they also get many unintended by-products, such as “flavorless verbs” and writing for the very uninspiring audience of formula……  When your process turns out only things that are easy to score yet boring to read, it’s time to go back to the drawing board, find the fundamentals that matter, share with colleagues and re-invent your practice to expand and make writing truly reflect the discovery, joy and wonder of learning.

In Mark Wiley’s article, “The Popularity of Formulaic Writing (and Why We Need to Resist),” he begins by explaining the reasons why formulaic writing becomes so attractive to teachers. He explains that teachers face a myriad of problems “resources are scarce, buildings are in disrepair, classrooms are overcrowded, [...] scores of new teachers are needed[, and ...] teachers are poorly prepared to teach writing.” He adds, “Those few new teachers who are prepared [to teach writing] are eventually defeated by less than desirable classroom conditions.” He explains that these difficulties and thoughts of futility can lead to early burnout and/or corrosive cynicism which can eventually lead to a dependency on formulaic writing instruction. After all, formulaic writing  is easy to teach and easy for students to grasp and apply and will usually result in raising standardized test scores. Teachers aren’t bad–they’re just looking for a “quick fix.” Amen, Mr. Wiley! Isn’t this the truth at every level!

Wiley discussed the Jane Shaffer Approach to teaching writing. This is a highly structured approach to paragraph and essay writing that is typically employed through the 10th grade. Wiley’s explanation of the Shaffer approach demonstrated the rigidity and limitations that exist in such methodologies. His criticism of the approach showcased how writing to a form limits writers in real writing situations. This kind of writing instruction is especially prevalent in basic skills or remedial classrooms. As a teacher of “basic writing” myexperiences have been somewhat limited to the workbook writing expected by my department and even by the students. The pervading myth seems to be that these students are incapable of managing the complicated task of writing; and it, therefore, must be highly structured in such as way as to eliminate any confusion–or interest, or creativity, or relevancy, or engagement… I guess. The inevitable result of this is a student with such a structured way of thinking about writing that when they move into an advanced level they have to literally throw out everything they know about writing so far! Can you even begin to understand how lost and confused and ill-equipped these students must feel when theyfinished out that their college instructors don’t want a 5-paragraph essay?

This article was both interesting and frustrating.  As a teacher with a BCLAD certification much of the article was redundant and stated the obvious.  It sites reasearch that seems to me as common sense but I also forget that many don’t have the same training that I had.  These facts could serve as oppertunities for teachers to really reflect on their own abilities to teach ELL students.  I found the reasearch on the number of teachers that feel competant teaching ELL students very interesting and scary because they make up such a high percentage of our students in California.  I think that many teacher don’t even realize that they have english learners in thier classes because it is quite common for higher functioning students to speak English but their comprehension of content and academic abilities are lower that their English Only counterparts.  I often hear teachers talk about how they scaffold the content for their SDAIE classes (classes with lower level ELL students) but not for their mainstream classes because they don’t think they have ELL students.  This is where our EL students need the most support and are failing misserably.

Write about a time when you took a risk. What was the catalyst? Was the risk worth taking?

Post your response to today’s quick write by using the “comment” button below.

The only thing that comes to mind at this time is when I learned how to draw a flower with a lead pencil. I was in seventh grade at the time in an all-girl Catholic school. (That’s another story.)  Sister Mary Virginia had offered an after-school drawing class.  I took it, even though the good sister delighted in tormenting us.  That’s how badly I wanted to learn how to draw.  Honestly, I don’t remember the different steps in the lesson since this occurred several lifetimes ago.  However, I do remember that she did give clear, step-by-step instructions.  First, she showed us how to hold our pencils.  She explained how holding the pencil in that certain way enabled one to control the thickness and the curves or shapes of the lines.  She also explained how we could use the pencil for shading.  Then she modeled how to draw a flower.  It was a very simple process.  After that she had us hold our pencils for her before we began and she walked around the room to  make sure we were holding them correctly.  She then told us to go ahead and draw.  She again walked around the room so that she could help us individually.  We shared our drawings when we were done.  I remember feeling so successful and pleased.  I could draw!

Sister Mary Virginia did not torment us that afternoon.  Now, I realize, it was because she was teaching something that she herself loved to do.  In fact, I think she had really wanted to become an artist, but became a nun to please her father.  And the fact that she was teaching to a few of us instead of instructing a group of fifty girls probably had something to do with it.

I still  use that method to draw flowers; it’s one of my favorite doodling activities.  I also show my students how to do it.  They are always so impressed when I first draw a flower for them.  They think I am a great artist.  HA.