Sunday, 16 June 2019

What kinds of playing and games can we play with books?



On Facebook, I asked:
What kinds of playing, jokes, games, challenges can you do with books which have succeeded in getting children and young people reading?
Freeze frames?
‘What would YOU do if you were (the character)’?
Prequels/sequels?
Comic strip retelling?
Make up a dance/take a photo/compose some music/do a picture to go with a book?


Here are the replies:
  • Bonnie Craven I used to read stories to my ks2 classes and ask them to sketch whatever they were inspired to do as a result of the words they were listening to.
    1
  • Debbie O'Brien I love using "conscience alley', which is an idea in CLPE Power of Reading. When a character faces a dilemma, the class form 2 lines facing each other. One side thinks of reasons for and the other reasons against a choice. A child role plays the character and walks through conscience alley slowly. As they do, the children lean in and whisper advice to them. At the end, they share some of the advice and which they might take.
    1
  • Rita Chakraborty Hot-seating as characters - especially the less vocal/visible side characters - has worked really well. Acting out a scene, or re-telling a scene the way you would have liked it to play out, with children assigning roles and lines themselves has been lots of fun when I’ve done it in the past. Also, just a good old-fashioned craft activity based on the book...a collectively built robot or spaceship is what we’re planning for the upcoming SRC...
    1
  • Marcus Moore Getting kids to act out a book never fails, in my experience - whether it's a simple re-telling of the story, or using the actual text as a hand-held script, with one (or more) child(ren) narrating and others in the group (of 3 or 4) doing the actions etc.
    2
  • Jane Bernal My step-daughter, who will not do FB had the whole class making snacks and sending them across the class-room on a pulley for the Lighthouse Keepers Lunch.
    1
  • Suzie Phillips I’ve taken random images/illustrations from picture books/film/animation for younger pupils - or wordless books by Shaun Tan for older students, and asked them to order the images and create a narrative, to get them to begin to analyse and infer, and t…See More
    3
    • Dawn Louise Hulland We love Shaun Tan. His textless illustrations are fabulous for inspiring writing and boys are truly engaged!
      1
    Write a reply...

  • Rowan Mcmanus I put books in different areas of the classroom based on their content i.e. Maths corner. I ask the children to tell me what topic they're interested in and buy books related. Last topic was Superheroes and I put Supertato, other fun superhero books and some comics in the reading den. I also do hot seating which they love. I have S class of boys who are not reluctant readers any more. ðŸ˜ŠðŸ˜Š
    1
  • Nicky Hopkins I did a 100 book challenge with some of the children who raced through the Summer Reading Challenge. I included lots of different things they had to cover - new book, non-fiction, a cover that intrigued you, a cover that put you off, a book to read out loud, a book to be read to you that kind of thing. Plus a book version of consequences is always fun
    3
  • Lizzi Roche I used to play a game with my class and small groups (creatively called The Reading Game). With any genre of text, I'd pick a child to start and then at any point after a few words or longer I'd say a different child's name and they'd have to continue straight on, no long pause, no repeats. It massively encouraged them all to follow along the text and engage. They got passionate about not "getting out" (for pausing or repeating, even though nothing happened if they did haha). It also really encouraged my reluctant readers to read aloud as I would switch it to someone else quickly to gradually build their confidence. They got so good at I introduced them saying the next child's name when they wanted. I expected the most reluctant readers to opt out quickly but was actually pleasantly surprised they remained engaged and read more then I expected! It was awesome! I started having children who "hated reading" asking me all the time if we could play The Reading Game. 
    1
  • Amanda Reed I knew a boy who wouldn't willingly look at a book until he got a personalised book with him, his friends and dog as main characters. 30 years later he still names it as his favourite book ever
  • Clarina Mascarenhas They used to teach us Shakespeare by having us paraphrase scenes (we were only 7 at the time) and kill eachother with rulers and pencils it was pretty dope.
  • Debby Thacker You really need to find out about Reading Teachers = Reading Pupils, Michael! So many ideas in that network....
  • Arnton Fell I don't suppose it counts, but I had a shelf of 'forbidden books' - all of which were quickly read!
    4
  • Pat Parr As a primary school librarian I either see for myself in the library or find out from teachers who the reluctant (for whatever reason) or 'stagnant' (ie. they've hit a reading wall) readers are. Also for those who are voracious readers but don't know …See More
    1
    • Pat Parr I've also done lots of activities over the last few years to promote reading for enjoyment, as opposed to reading for the curriculum. Probably one of the best a few years back was a fun Doctor Who event after school: lots of new books on display to borrow, take a selfie in front of the Tardis (huge cardboard cutout), write a postcard home from space, make alien masks, make Dr Who/space badges, Dalek colouring, etc. Theme overlapped with time travel, science fiction & space so we had a great selection of books.

Sunday, 12 May 2019

Let's not take education international league tables lying down

I'm guessing that it'll soon be time for international education tables  to be published. These league tables rank countries according to the scores of some school students sitting exams in the 'main'  subjects. These are taken up by politicians as evidence that the education service is doing badly, better, worse, really well etc etc. and is used for election purposes as a judgement on how well (or badly) a political party is doing.

I'm going to suggest that it's dangerous to get mixed up with this, even when the data appears to support something that we believe.  As others have pointed out, there are a lot of problems with these international tables, particularly in the matter of how the exam candidates in the different countries are selected, how significant, relevant, reliable or valid the tests themselves are, and how relevant or significant 'place' is in a league table because it can mean that there is a huge difference between 'places' or a tiny one - as with football league tables. 

However, there is yet another problem: these tests end up being statements on a country's education system and yet they omit key questions on this matter of how a country's education system fits a country. A country's education system is to a great degree a product of what those in power in a given country want it to be. Those in power want the education system to produce a set of finished students (school graduates, if you like) in a shape that suits their vision of society. We are entitled to ask several questions about this: is this vision of society worthwhile, valid, fair, just, equitable? If it is, fine - we can ask whether the education system really does match these high standards? If the society fails in key areas of fairness, justice, equitability, we can ask if the education system sustains this lack of fairness, lack of justice and inequitability or whether it challenges it? In other words, we reframe a view of education as have 'values'. Not in an abstract sense, but judged according to some external minimal values around e.g. democracy, freedom, freedom of expression, equitable material levels of existence. We could be more precise and talk about rights to do with the availability of cheap or free health care for all, an equitable taxation system, free or cheap child care and care of the aged, a fair benefits system for the disabled and so on. 

So, then we could ask a whole set of different questions about the worth or value or use of an educational system in relation to something other than itself.  

None of this is 'revolutionary' - some might say it should be. It's totally within the paradigm of a kind of UN view of what countries and the world might be like. 

I've summarised it like this:

Imagine if there were criteria other than PISA exams by which to judge internationally an education system! How about eg best able to support and extend democracy? Best able to hold government to account? Best able to develop a critical public discourse? Best able to stimulate and sustain a strong arts-in-society scene? Best able to sustain nationwide fitness? Best able to deal with climate change, urban and rural planning? Free and cheap transport, health, social services? All requires ‘education’!

At the moment we are channelled into accepting that a country’s ‘education’ is judged on exams in a few subjects and not on what society asks education to do for that society. What’s a ‘good’ education if it eg supports a tyranny?

In a purely theoretical sense, couldn’t you have Nazi Germany coming out of the present international education league tables, top?

Wednesday, 1 May 2019

Anyone up for 'endorsing' Thackeray?

On Oct 22 2013 the Guardian cited Thackeray with great approval:
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/oct/22/beheading-videos-facebook

This Thackeray? 
(pssst just because people in public like one bit of what a person has written, it doesn't always follow that they 'endorse' all of it. )

THE WHITE SQUALL
by William Makepeace Thackeray

On deck, beneath the awning,
  I dozing lay and yawning;
  It was the gray of dawning,
    Ere yet the sun arose;
  And above the funnel’s roaring,
  And the fitful wind’s deploring,
  I heard the cabin snoring
    With universal nose.
  I could hear the passengers snorting—
  I envied their disporting—
  Vainly I was courting
    The pleasure of a doze!

  So I lay, and wondered why light
  Came not, and watched the twilight,
  And the glimmer of the skylight,
    That shot across the deck;
  And the binnacle pale and steady,
  And the dull glimpse of the dead-eye,
  And the sparks in fiery eddy
    That whirled from the chimney neck.
  In our jovial floating prison
  There was sleep from fore to mizzen,
  And never a star had risen
    The hazy sky to speck.

  Strange company we harbored,
  We’d a hundred Jews to larboard,
  Unwashed, uncombed, unbarbered—
    Jews black, and brown, and gray;
  With terror it would seize ye,
  And make your souls uneasy,
  To see those Rabbis greasy,
    Who did naught but scratch and pray:
  Their dirty children puking—
  Their dirty saucepans cooking—
  Their dirty fingers hooking
    Their swarming fleas away.

  To starboard, Turks and Greeks were—
  Whiskered and brown their cheeks were—
  Enormous wide their breeks were,
    Their pipes did puff alway;
  Each on his mat allotted
  In silence smoked and squatted,
  Whilst round their children trotted
    In pretty, pleasant play.
  He can’t but smile who traces
  The smiles on those brown faces,
  And the pretty, prattling graces
    Of those small heathens gay.

  And so the hours kept tolling,
  And through the ocean rolling
  Went the brave “Iberia” bowling
    Before the break of day—

  When A SQUALL, upon a sudden,
  Came o’er the waters scudding;
  And the clouds began to gather,
  And the sea was lashed to lather,
  And the lowering thunder grumbled,
  And the lightning jumped and tumbled,
  And the ship, and all the ocean,
  Woke up in wild commotion.
  Then the wind set up a howling,
  And the poodle dog a yowling,
  And the cocks began a crowing,
  And the old cow raised a lowing,
  As she heard the tempest blowing;
  And fowls and geese did cackle,
  And the cordage and the tackle
  Began to shriek and crackle;
  And the spray dashed o’er the funnels,
  And down the deck in runnels;
  And the rushing water soaks all,
  From the seamen in the fo’ksal
  To the stokers whose black faces
  Peer out of their bed-places;
  And the captain he was bawling,
  And the sailors pulling, hauling,
  And the quarter-deck tarpauling
  Was shivered in the squalling;
  And the passengers awaken,
  Most pitifully shaken;
  And the steward jumps up, and hastens
  For the necessary basins.

  Then the Greeks they groaned and quivered,
  And they knelt, and moaned, and shivered,
  As the plunging waters met them,
  And splashed and overset them;
  And they call in their emergence
  Upon countless saints and virgins;
  And their marrowbones are bended,
  And they think the world is ended.

  And the Turkish women for’ard
  Were frightened and behorror’d;
  And shrieking and bewildering,
  The mothers clutched their children;
  The men sung “Allah! Illah!
  Mashallah Bismillah!”
  As the warring waters doused them
  And splashed them and soused them,
  And they called upon the Prophet,
  And thought but little of it.

  Then all the fleas in Jewry
  Jumped up and bit like fury;
  And the progeny of Jacob
  Did on the main-deck wake up
  (I wot those greasy Rabbins
  Would never pay for cabins);
  And each man moaned and jabbered in
  His filthy Jewish gaberdine,
  In woe and lamentation,
  And howling consternation.
  And the splashing water drenches
  Their dirty brats and wenches;
  And they crawl from bales and benches
  In a hundred thousand stenches.

  This was the White Squall famous,
  Which latterly o’ercame us,
  And which all will well remember
  On the 28th September;
  When a Prussian captain of Lancers
  (Those tight-laced, whiskered prancers)
  Came on the deck astonished,
  By that wild squall admonished,
  And wondering cried, “Potztausend,
  Wie ist der Strm jetzt brausend?”
  And looked at Captain Lewis,
  Who calmly stood and blew his
  Cigar in all the hustle,
  And scorned the tempest’s tussle,
  And oft we’ve thought thereafter
  How he beat the storm to laughter;
  For well he knew his vessel
  With that vain wind could wrestle;
  And when a wreck we thought her,
  And doomed ourselves to slaughter,
  How gayly he fought her,
  And through the hubbub brought her,
  And as the tempest caught her,
  Cried, “GEORGE! SOME BRANDY-AND-WATER!”

  And when, its force expended,
  The harmless storm was ended,
  And as the sunrise splendid
    Came blushing o’er the sea;
  I thought, as day was breaking,
  My little girls were waking,
  And smiling, and making
    A prayer at home for me.

  1844.

How selective outrage works: how about this for a bit of endorsing?



"Mr Gove praised the work of inner city primary schools like Thomas Jones in west London where pupils were reading “A Christmas Carol” and “Oliver Twist” by the age of 11" (Independent May 9 2013)



"The Jew stopped for an instant at the corner of the street; and, glancing suspiciously round, crossed the road, and struck off in the direction of the Spitalfields.
The mud lay thick upon the stones, and a black mist hung over the streets; the rain fell sluggishly down, and everything felt cold and clammy to the touch. It seemed just the night when it befitted such a being as the Jew to be abroad. As he glided stealthily along, creeping beneath the shelter of the walls and doorways, the hideous old man seemed like some loathsome reptile, engendered in the slime and darkness through which he moved: crawling forth, by night, in search of some rich offal for a meal."

Sunday, 28 April 2019

Ideas on how we can look at language-in-use

One of the tricks that people in authority work on us occurs when they impose on us a system that seems for a moment to be 'the only way'.

This has happened with what passes off as 'grammar' in primary schools. My argument has been that 
a) the 'grammar' on offer is only one form of several kinds of grammars that can be taught, 
b) this one is particularly narrow because it mostly leaves out the context and purpose of why and how we use language; one grammarian in particular tried to widen the discussion of grammar to include context and purpose, M.A.K.Halliday. He even co-produced a wonderfully accessible text book for schools called 'Language in Use'. The story of why and how Halliday's 'grammar' and this book in particular is not used reminds us that even something as supposedly objective as 'grammar' is in fact a matter of choice, bias and ideology. The point is the view that we should help children and students look at language-in-use was overthrown and another view, with an entirely different approach to language has been put in place.
c) This 'grammar' treats language as if it has rules that are single, correct usages. This is not true of language overall and isn't even true of 'standard English' which this grammar (as taught in primary schools) is concerned with. These rules are not derived from context and purpose. They are derived by means of a method which treats language as if it is an abstract 'system'.  Here's one example: we can say, 'I went for a walk after the match.' And we can say, 'I went for a walk after the match was over.' According to the 'grammar' being taught in primary schools these two usages of 'after' are 'different'. The first one is a 'preposition' and the second one is a 'subordinate' or 'subordinating' 'conjunction'. How is this distinction  derived? According to the internal 'system' rules of this kind of 'grammar'. In the first example, the phrase 'after the match' has no verb. In the second example, the phrase 'after the match was over' has a verb. So, according to this internal 'logic' of the sentence, the word 'after' in the two examples is deemed to be 'different'. But is it? In terms of language-in-use, the word 'after' in both cases is being asked by the speaker to do exactly the same job:  tell the listener something about time sequence of things 'I' did. You or I could make up another expression to describe it, an expression that wasn't tied to the internal-system approach to language-use. It's a 'time-sequence word'. It's a 'one-after-another' word. 
d) This 'grammar' was only introduced into schools because the committee that produced the 'Bew Report" on assessment and accountability deemed that 'grammar' produces 'right and wrong' answers and would be an ideal medium for testing whether teachers were teaching what the government wanted them to teach. In other words the justification for teaching grammar - and this form of grammar - was not because it's necessary or good for children but because it was, supposedly, a good way of testing teachers. (It's a form of 'output' testing. You test the input by testing the output. The input (the teachers' teaching) restricts ways of looking language enough anyway, but then to reduce it even further to the demands of right/wrong answers results in a false picture of how and why we use language. 

I, along with many others, have said that there are many other ways of talking about how we use language. People who listen to the radio programme that I present: BBC Radio 4's 'Word of Mouth' will each week hear how it's easy and possible to talk about and analyse how we use language in ways that don't involve the narrow 'rules' derived from what I'm calling the 'internal systems' approach. 

When it comes to looking closely at language-in-use, in literary texts for example, I've suggested here on my blog and in my booklets that I've produced for teachers that there are many other tools we can use. The ones I've suggested, I argue, are much more fruitful in telling us what is going on in stories, poems, plays and ultimately in all texts. In the academic world, these 'tools' are quite hard to understand, but I've tried to break them down into much more user-friendly ways. These are:

narratology - the study of how we construct stories e.g. through 'flashback' or 'reveal-conceal', or e.g.  through 'red herrings', or how we indicate that a character is 'thinking' or how a story or poem is 'narrated' (e.g. first person, third person or 'omniscient' or a mix) and what shape or tone this narration uses (e.g. 'unreliable' or 'self-conscious'); how a text uses 'reveal-conceal' as a method, and so on;
prosody - the musicality of language and how this has meaning and pattern; 
intertextuality - how we use other 'texts' to create the text that we are speaking or writing;
rhetoric - how we use long-standing, historic strategies when we speak and write, and how these historic strategies are linked to desired 'effects';
stylistics - a bit of a catch-all term but one which looks at some of the above plus e.g. the use or non-use of figurative language (metaphor, simile, personification),  or the use of different 'registers'  - e.g. 'posh' or 'familiar'; 
pragmatics  is the study of dialogue, how we make conversation, what strategies we use when we talk to each other. We can adapt and use this when looking at how writers write dialogue for novels, plays, poems and stories;
lexical field - this focuses on the way that any passage or story uses clusters of words and expressions in a given 'field' of meaning e.g. lots of different ways of talking about 'light' or about 'water'; (I've added this to my checklist because I've been impressed by how my son's teachers have given him this tool when looking at texts. I think it's a good way to focus on how passages have fields of interest which they look at in different ways, creating patterns of meaning
flow - how our emotions and feelings change as a text proceeds and when we can encourage students to look at their reactions to characters, or to emotional states (e.g. tension) (some people do this with little graphs), it reminds us that texts have a time element in them ie the meaning comes in part from how one event (and its emotions) comes after another. Shakespeare is famous for this in 'Macbeth' for example with the Gatekeeper scene - great example of 'bathos' (see below for a book on 'Rhetoric'.)
ideology  - how all of the above contribute to producing in a text a viewpoint that belongs to a wider set of beliefs, attitudes and understandings. 

Though this sounds very technical. In fact, it's possible to break each of these down into very usable ways of talking about texts. I've often given the example I came up with of using 'secret strings' where the children look for the ways in which within any text there are invisible links between words on the basis that some sound similar (prosody),  some are linked by meaning (lexical field), some are linked by a particular metaphorical way of seeing things (stylistics) and so on. 

I don't suggest that this checklist has to be used all the time or that all of the points on the checklist have to be used each time. In any of this kind of work, any rigidity in method will reduce nuance and subtlety in how we respond to a text.  

My booklets are: 'Poetry and Stories in Primary and Lower Secondary Schools'; 'Why Write? Why Read?' and 'Writing for Pleasure'. 

They are available from www.michaelrosen.co.uk . Just click on 'Books'. 

While we're on this, please let me recommend for anyone interested in how and why we use language:  'You Talkin' to Me? Rhetoric from Aristotle, to Trump and Beyond...' by Sam Leith, published by  Profile Books.  

It's a fascinating example of how we can look closely at language-in-use without reducing it to a matter of naming of parts, supposed 'functions' (which are in reality just names for bits of the system derived from abstract rules not in how or why use language to make meaning). 

Here's one example of me using some of the above methods to look at the opening pages of 'A Christmas Carol':

http://michaelrosenblog.blogspot.com/2017/12/using-literary-methods-to-find-out-how.html







Saturday, 27 April 2019

I'm not making up this stuff to do with schools and 'data'



Comment from comments thread following my article in the Guardian on Tuesday:

"steve sanderson:

I had a visit from three DfE officials because my school was doing very well in challenging circumstances. When we were in Year 6 I explained to them that our results wouldn’t be as good this year as last because I had taken in three children who had been permanently excluded at other schools. They had missed 18 months of school so were unlikely to do as well as others in the class but were making rapid progress under an exceptional teacher.
The lead official then told me I had let the school down because our results and data would be a bit lower than the year before. It was typical of the DfE. Data before children. Those children were resolving their issues. We were working with Parents. That didn’t matter, it was only data that mattered."