What next?

This post is long overdue. I'm not really sure I have an excuse. Anyway ... despite a surprise visit from my methods prof, teaching last week (yikes ... 2 weeks ago??) was mostly fun. I think I've realized, at least from the few times I actually taught this semester, that I don't really like lecturing very much. I know it is sometimes necessary, and often the most efficient way to deliver content, but I think I'd rather be facilitating/overseeing group work. I can't ever tell if students are really internalizing much when they sit and copy notes. Then again, I'm not entirely convinced they are truly learning during group tasks, either. These students did seem very intent upon getting the correct answer, but not always on understanding that answer. They tend to ask more questions when the classroom is more informal, and it's kind of fun to answer their questions with questions. Yet, if I gave them a completely hatstand answer to their question, would they dutifully accept it, merely because I am the (student) teacher? I'm not exactly sure how best to teach critical thinking skills, but I guess it comes with practice.

In retrospect, I know I made a huge mistake which is primarily no one's fault but my own. Even though I have semi-accurate seating charts, I have yet to learn every name of every student in every period. Actually that's incorrect. I know their names (thanks to copious amounts of grading), but I still haven't connected each name to the appropriate face, which is essentially due to the fact that I sit at the back of the room & therefore do not always see their faces. I'm probably 90% sure of names so far, but that still leaves a 10% void in my head.

Anyway, after giving instructions, I attempted to catalyze their mobilization into assigned groups, which seemed to be occurring at less-than-optimal speed. (I should have allowed much more transition time in the majority of my unit plan lessons, based on this day!!) I was trying to assist students in finding their other group members, and approached one student who was largely reticent when questioned. She eventually joined a group and began working with them, but because these students didn't really question me much, I didn't monitor them very closely; I gave more attention to the groups that asked for help (which is another issue entirely, I know). I later had the sinking realization that the student I previously interrogated happens to be one who cannot read. This explains why she didn't answer questions about her group members - she didn't know who they were, because she couldn't read her group assignment.

I feel horrible, because I should have been more sensitive to her situation. However I also feel a bit of outrage and consternation as to how this student could possibly make it to ninth grade without being able to read!? My mentor teacher said that EOC scores have nothing to do with whether a student is promoted to the next grade level. It seems sensible to me that a student should not leave elementary school without mastering basic reading skills. I realize I don't know this student's complete situation, but it still shocks me that schools & teachers could let someone like this slip through without attention. Does reading recovery exist in high schools? How do you teach kids who can't read? How do you teach a kid to read? I think I'm okay with the fact that not every student will go to college, but literacy is a clear advantage in society. If a student graduates and has learned nothing else, he should at least be able to read. Is that too much to ask of public schools? Are my expectations too high? I'm sure I'll be faced with many more shocking truths, but I don't think I ever anticipated this. And I wish I had handled the situation differently, but ... live & learn, I guess.