[Understand] More thinking about understanding

[Palmer, Jennifer]

Phyllis
I think you are very much on the right track!  I am beginning to think that all of the language arts curriculum (the worthwhile stuff!) could just about fit within the 3 deep and 3 surface structure systems. Your little first grader, I think, was operating in his pragmatic system...revisiting the text in his conversation with you and so developed a deepened understanding. (I KNOW these bear books and kids do love them, but they aren't exactly fodder for deep thinking. This kid did a great job!) 
 
With your Coke example, I think semantics is part of it, but I also wonder about syntactic. Ellin talks about the syntactic system...the mind's ear. It doesn't sound right exactly to us because we expect it to say two pieces of bacon...but it says two bacon and that doesn't sound right.
Jennifer
 
 
Jennifer Palmer
Reading Specialist, National Board Certified Teacher
FLES- Lead the discovery, Live the learning, Love the adventure.
"Children grow into the intellectual life around them."
                                                               -Vygotsky
 

________________________________

From: understand-bounces at literacyworkshop.org on behalf of Phyllis Hinerman
Sent: Sat 8/2/2008 11:20 AM
To: understand at literacyworkshop.org
Subject: [Understand] More thinking about understanding



Ever since beginning Ellin's book, I've been thinking deeply about the 6 cognitive systems (is there anyone out there who isn't???).  I've been looking closely at 'thinking' or 'processing' and therefore I've found myself 'assigning' it to one of those systems - usually not out loud - and that has led me to new levels of thinking.  Guess I've been dwelling in these ideas.

Anyway, here are two examples.

First: in the spring I was working with a first grader who was considered at risk of not learning to read in his first grade year.  He had read several books about a family of bears.  The plot of the latest book involved the family looking for a new place to live because Mother Bear had decided their house was too small.  When he finished his first reading of this book he looked at me and said, "They all got something they wanted."  When I asked what he meant he explained, "Well, Baby Bear likes honey and there's honey at this house, Father Bear likes to fish and there's the river, and Mother Bear wanted a bigger house.  So, they all got something they wanted." 

To reach that conclusion he'd drawn on his memory of 2 previous books about this family.  One revolved around Baby Bear's search for honey and the other about Father Bear going fishing.  Before Ellin, I'd have recognized this as insightful thinking, and now I believe he was operating in the pragmatic system (and he was an at-risk first grader).  If I'm on the right track, the pragmatic system became a little more understandable for me. 

The second example happened just this morning at breakfast.  I read the advertised specials on a board at the entrance of the restaurant:  Farmer's breakfast, 2 cokes, 2 eggs, 2 bacon.  It didn't fit, so I reread looking more closely.  And I'm thinking, it wasn't the misspelling that stopped me, after all, 'cokes' is a meaningful word, it was the semantic system - 'coke' didn't fit the context.

So, I'm growing in my belief that if I can understand and use Ellin's cognitive systems, my own teaching will be more focused.  All those indicators and benchmarks developed by the state will make more sense when viewed as part of these cognitive systems.

Am I on the right track?  What do others think?

Phyllis


     

_______________________________________________
Understand mailing list
Understand at literacyworkshop.org
http://literacyworkshop.org/mailman/listinfo/understand_literacyworkshop.org