[etni] Re: HOTS

  • From: tessa shrem <tessashrem@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: debora.siegel@xxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Thu, 5 Aug 2010 15:50:04 +0300

Kol hakavod for your suggestions, Deborah.  There is so much common sense in
what you wrote, that it is amazing that the whole thing has degenerated into
a "you will" - "no, we won't" struggle.
AS we have so often said, we are in favour of literature, and even , believe
it or not, in favour of getting our pupils to think, whether you call this
HOTS or anything else.  What we are against is the program IN ITS PRESENT
FORM!  We, and you, and a few other teachers on ETNI have made
logical suggestions, which are simply ignored.  Why?  Everyone knows this
program will not succeed if so many teachers feel so negative about it.

Tessa


On Thu, Aug 5, 2010 at 8:40 AM, debora Siegel <debora.siegel@xxxxxxxxx>wrote:

> Dear ETNIERS,
> We were asked to post our opinion of HOTS.
>
> Although I have taken the  HOTS course, I still have not implemented the
> program in my classroom.  I will begin doing so in September with a very
> weak 4 Point class, and then I will be wiser.
>
> Although I believe making literature a "standarized" element of the English
> bagrut exam may have positive repercussions; I am not happy with some of
> the
> details of the HOTS program as I understand it.
>
> I think there is a consensus among experienced English teachers that making
> literature a compulsory part of the overall English Bagrut grade is a
> positive step.  Note that literature always has been part of  English
> yearly
> grade (once known as Magen) but it hasn't been part of the MOE exam grades
> (in recent history).  However, when teaching oversized heterogenus
> classes, it is to instill the importance of English literature as
> the actual exams approach, because the kids focus is naturally (and
> unfortunately) on doing well on the exams rather than enriching their
> knowledge of English language culture. Most probably, making literature a
> standardized element of the English Bagrut grades, will enhance the
> significance of English literature in the eyes of the students.
>
> So if my assumption is correct that there is a consensus among English
> teachers that literature should be a central element of the English Bagrut,
> then what is at issue is the specifics of the HOTS program and not the idea
> of a standardized literature program. Knowing this fact, and hearing how
> many experienced teachers are upset by the program, if I were MOE, I would
> take a step back and say to myself: either the program is indeed faulty or
> teachers are just afraid of change (I believe the former is true). In
> either
> case, it would be  best not to force the program on them, because that will
> ensure its failure, but to coax them into it, while listening carefully to
> their feedback; adjusting the program to meet the actual needs of the
> varying kinds of classroom situations and most importantly, making sure
> English teachers are paid for any extra work involved in the program.
>
> I would have instigated the program as follows:
>
> Steo Zero: Add teaching hours to anyone implementing the literature
> program--my suggestion would be an extra hour in the classroom and an
> extra hour gmul (for one year).
>
> Step One: Create a high quality in-service course that focuses on teaching
> English literature in the EFL classroom. Include the importance of
> stressing
> Higher Order Thinking Skills (explicitly and implicitly) when teaching
> literature but don't make it the foucs of the course. Require anyone who
> does not have a degree in literature or a certain number of academic
> literature courses to take such a course.
>
> Step Two: Require every student to complete a literature log that includes
> a
> given number of literary pieces; require five point students need to
> include
> a literature related research project as part of their log.  The Oral
> Bagrut
> exam will focus on the log in much the same way it focused on the Bagrut
> Project.
>
> Step Three:  Explore additional possibilities of changing the structure
> of Module D and Module F so that they are literature related but not
> necessarily related to specific texts. For instance  the essay question
> could be related to the literature Log or include writing a formal letter
> to
> the author of a text read; five point students can be asked to compare a
> piece of literature they read to a literary UNSEEN.
>
> Step Four: Evaluate Steps one, two and three and try to improve the
> program.  At this stage, consider reducing the English Bagrut to two
> modules
> and an oral exam.
>
> To summarize what I have written--sorry for being so long-winded--focus on
> what is most important: teaching literature effectively and don't focus on
> the explicit teaching of HOTS.
>
> Debora
>
>
> -----------------------------------------------
> ** Etni homepage - http://www.etni.org
> ** for help - ask@xxxxxxxx **
> ** to post to this list - etni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx **
> -----------------------------------------------
>
>


----------------------------------------------- 
** Etni homepage - http://www.etni.org 
** for help - ask@xxxxxxxx **
** to post to this list - etni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx **
-----------------------------------------------

Other related posts: