Author: bhfierro

A few weeks ago, one of my English 11 students commented that English is boring. “It’s not your fault, ” he quickly added, “It’s the curriculum.” I had been circulating for a few minutes, already drained and frustrated from keeping students on task. We had worked together through understanding irony in “The Story of an Hour” by Kate Chopin, and the students were now – in theory – working independently to answer a question about the purpose of Chopin’s use of irony. We would use this as a stepping stone to the major critical analysis paper now looming close in their futures. Wow. That is boring. But that’s not how I responded to my student.

What I said to him was, “Sometimes, yes, but when I’m teaching basic skills, most of you refuse to focus and engage with your task. You must master basic skills and show me that you can focus on simple activities – otherwise, why would I spend the extra time to plan more complex activities? My take away from your behaviors in class is that you won’t engage with that either, or that you may not understand it.” Not exactly the whole truth, but after the entire class sat in stunned silence for a few seconds, they got to work. They all finished by the bell. Those who finished early worked on their long-term reading or writing projects. The same thing happened the next day. And the next.

While I was pleased with the results of my mini tirade, I felt dishonest. Naturally, the answer to the question I asked is: I should spend extra time planning more complex activities in an attempt to engage reluctant and under-skilled learners and develop skills through these activities. Of course, the part of me who loves a debate that gets a bit too loud, that loves the passion that a controversial piece of nonfiction can bring to a unit, that loves the satisfaction of students engaging in real-world issues is continually at war with the reality of teaching students who are not at grade-level with many skills and have a benchmark test at the end of each marking period. I have struggled with this all year. Many of my English 11 students just do not have the skills to apply to more complex – more engaging activities. But some do. And didn’t my district eliminate tracking at the high school in order to inspire and challenge the students with lower skill levels? I decided to try something more interesting.

I had a ready-made discussion about the morality vs. the economics of trophy hunting in Africa (a successful discussion in my AP sections), so I set two days aside for English 11 to try out a student-led discussion not based on a literary text. They would still have to read, take notes, do their own research, and respond with text-supported claims as well as to respond to each other. They had one day for preparation and one day for the discussion. I kept the discussion available online after the discussion and even while we were in class for students who are shy, less confident, and of course – absent. At first, they were lost. they had no idea what to say or how to start discussing an issue.

Once the conversation got going, however, they did great. Many of the students who normally try to get away without working participated actively and thoughtfully – the entire class period. A number of students posted online and spoke up in class. The same thing happened in my other two sections. In fact, several students in my third period class who rarely participate and are often inattentive led the discussion in that class. Afterward, the student who first suggested that our curriculum is boring came to ask what I thought about their discussion. I said it got off to a rocky start, but I am pleased with how well it went. He said that the students are eager to have more discussions and asked if there were maybe a different format we could try to encourage more participation and avoid side discussions. He liked my suggestion of a student panel to act as moderators and keep the conversation flowing. The next discussion is later this week and the students are eager to be part of it.