Linguistic Variety Unit Reflection

Caroline Lin

One of my favorite takeaways from this semester is that I can think

outside of the box and design units around really unique and different ideas,
like Linguistic Diversity, that will probably not traditionally be part of a
curriculum packet. I loved the tiny feeling of rebellion in challenging the
notion of proper English, as an English teacher no less, and I think that
teenagers would really resonate with that kind of pushback against a system
(CO 2.6). I also loved stretching my concept of texts to include nontraditional language use like Spoken Word (CO 2.1). This project was so
useful in having me engage in creative designdesign that thinks beyond
standards and requires human innovation to plan and execute. Its been
rewarding to see how rich the product can be (CO 1). I hope that in my
future job that I am given the freedom to design my own units, and even unit
concepts, so that I can develop an ELA practice that reaches beyond reading,
writing, and speaking/listening into the realms of social justice (Tough Talk,
Tough Texts by ODonnell-Allen).
I was surprised how seamlessly I could connect my objectives to
Common Core standards and VSOLswith the right amount of thought and
time. What I realized is that the Unit Concept does not serve as the content
of the learning, but the context of the learning. This makes backwards
design possible within this framework (CO 2). For example, if I had tried to
focus the majority of my unit objectives on learning about Linguistic Variety, I
would only cover one Common Core and one VSOL objective. Thinking about
what the larger 21st Century skills and applications that the concept required
opened up a plethora of connections to standards (namely Register,
Audience, and Purpose). Concept-based instruction brought to life register,
audience, and purpose in a way that far exceeds giving definitions and
practicing writing without any conceptual framework (CO 2). This kind of
thinking will be even more important in my future classroom because it will
be Common Core standards rather than VSOLs. The Common Core is less
specific than the VSOLs, which is freeing for concept based planning in some
ways, but also challenging because you have to then think about how to
connect abstract objectives to abstract concepts.
Over the course of the semester, I struggled with the balance of
teacher-centric instruction versus cooperative learning (CO 2.3). This was
particularly evident in my 4882 lesson plans! In practice, it feels more
challenging for me to manage small-group and individual work time than
direct instruction. I value cooperative learning immensely, but have trouble
executing it in practice and planningor more particularly, scriptingthis

style of instruction. Workshop environments and conferencing is very

difficult for me to script, and requires on-the-spot decision making and
creative problem solving that most likely cannot be predicted without being
an actual teacher with detailed knowledge of their students. My scripted
lesson plans included plenty of varied groupings and structured cooperative
learning (CO 2.2), but not necessarily workshop models. I saw growth in
my lesson planning when I moved into summary lesson planning, because it
was here that I felt more able to articulate various modalities of learning
without having to hash it out in scripting. Summary lesson planning was
hugely helpful for me in making a transition from novice to developing
teacher. I also began growing more in questioning strategies, which was a
hang up for me last semester. The scripting of lesson plans helped me
thinking this through, and each time I edited the first four lesson plans, I was
able to include better questioning and shift some deductive learning to
inductive learning.
This semester was huge for me in terms of developing a belief system
about assessment (CO 2.5). As my Unit Plan shows, I did not include any
homework beyond go home and think about your topic. This does not
mean that I will never assign homework, it only means that I focused very
hard on maximizing instructional time so that students worked hard from bell
to bell in my class. There were times when I thought, this is a lot of focus to
expect for 8th graders in one class period, but I reminded myself that
students should work harder than teachers, and that sometimes the obvious
alternative to working hard in class is assigning homework. Additionally, our
course readings about assessments made me rethink the math behind giving
zeros. I intentionally worked to keep my grading on a scale of 6-10 rather
than 0-10, and will try to apply this in my future classrooms. The math is
tricky. I benefited hugely from designing rubrics and grading scales for this
project, and I am proud of what I designed! On the other hand, I did struggle
with articulating my formative assessments (those that are not paper-based
like Exit Tickets). English teachers do a lot of observing and qualitative data
gathering, and it felt clunky to write this into lesson plans. This may show up
in my unit in the Methods of Assessment sections of my lesson plans, though
I did make a solid effort! After discussions with Dr. Heny, I realized that a
great way to make this a principled approach in my future classroom is to
carry a roster with space to constantly take notes. Qualitative assessments
are only as good as my memory, after all.
I am so proud of my instructional planning in my unit (my actual lesson
plans, text choices, and materials), because I feel that I made evidencebased choices for each instructional step, text choice, and material design.
For example, in all of my unit readings (which happen in class), I carefully
considered what I knew about best practices for reading in a mixed-ability
classroom. The best example of this in my unit are my Reading Experiences
(plural), which included various levels of Reading Guides (which I created!)

and intentional pre, during, and post-reading strategies to both assist ELLs
and students struggling with literacy AND gifted students. I did the same
with my writing assignments, often citing Gallagher and Anderson, though I
felt stronger in the reading category due to my Content Area Reading course.
I have a good grasp on teacher modeling of writing, writing to think, and
writing to read. I have a weak grasp of how to teach revision, editing, and
syntax. This is reflected in my unit by the fact that I did summary lesson
plans for almost all of the units final writing project. I could certainly grow in
my writing instruction, which I look forward to doing more of in my student
teaching. I have already started by purchasing Mechanically Inclined by Jeff
Anderson (recommended to me by Kelly Gallagher via Twitter #starstruck).
I am also very proud of my instructional alignment and backwards design
document. I was absolutely fastidious about my unit objectives and making
sure they were both iterated and assessed in the lessons in which they were
included.

Overall: Refer to Course Objectives.

Indicates growing understanding of your belief system related to
assessment
Explain how and 1 reference
Indicates growing understanding of your belief system related to
instruction
A few specific areas of growth, one reference

Indicates growing understanding of your belief system related to

creative design (what you love about ELA!)
A few specific areas of growth, one reference

Connection between (project, other class) experiences and course

readings - practical applications
Thoughtful consideration of how you plan to apply what youve
learned through this project to your future teaching endeavors
Be explicit
Identify and explain the aspect(s) of the unit you are most proud of
Identify and explain the aspect(s) of the unit that demonstrates
your greatest growth/learning
Connects learning to intended goals and objectives of the course:
Strengths and weaknesses, referring to class objectives.