Blog Post 5 - Discipline Specific Reading

As I have taken countless history and government classes in my educational lifetime, I obviously cannot remember all of the texts I have read or examined. However, some do stick out to me, because they were either really good or down right horrible. Obviously, the standard or typical text for social studies are the non-fiction texts. Specifically, textbooks are used quite often and in higher levels, non-fiction narratives and biographies are utilized often. I have never really complained about this, I thought that that is just the way it is. I didn’t really realize there was any sort of alternative. In fact, I have quite enjoyed the texts I have encountered in my discipline. I love a good non-fiction book. I actually rarely even touch a book that is fiction. I feel that there is so much truth out there to be learned and history is more compelling that a story someone made up. (Excuse my cynicism) My wife of course has her own theory to why I am not interested in fiction, she thinks I have no imagination. (There is probably some truth to that)

A few examples come to mind when I think of memorable texts that instructors have used in the past. I remember in high school, Mr. McLeod (my biggest teacher influence) did a great job at introducing different texts in our US History class. I remember reading historical fiction concerning the early days of America and watching films depicting the Civil War. I also remember back in 6^th grade learning about the Egyptians with Mrs. Russell. She brought hieroglyphics and we even made signs with our own names using hieroglyphics. That was very memorable. Recently, I took a Supreme Court class here at Utah State and the instructor, Judge Stewart, had us examine the opinions passed down by the Supreme Court. This was very valuable to be able to interpret and examine these opinions. I’m sure he could have gotten a text book that summarizes the opinions, but he found it important to teach us that skill.

The most unpleasant experiences I have had with text in my discipline almost all have to do with the dang textbook. Teachers would assign us to read straight from the textbook. That was just always so awful and dry to me. Other times when I have not enjoyed the text is when a teacher assigns a dry reading that has nothing to do with the content covered in class. It seems just like busy work. This past Monday night, a polisci professor of mine emailed us with a link to a reading we were to complete by the next morning’s class. The text was very long and very hard to understand. I struggled through it, but in the end I had no idea what it meant and why I was reading it. The next morning in class, the instructor didn’t even address the reading and the reason of why he assigned it. This gives me even less motivation to read the stinky old texts he assigns.

The previous example is in contrast to the Supreme Court instructor mentioned earlier. He assigned very difficult readings, but along with them he also assigned us to create outlines with very specific parameters. This helped us read for understanding. Also, we knew that we would be going to class and we would be called on to discuss the text. This was a very useful strategy to help us read for understanding and to instill some accountability.

As a think about what kind of teacher I will be, I think of these examples. I have come up with a couple of conclusions. First of all, there will always be a reason for examining a certain text. It will not be used to fill time or to keep the students quiet. Secondly, I will help students examine the text while striving for understanding. This can be done in a number of ways including assessments, outlines, cooperative learning activities, etc. Additionally, I will often give students some choice in what they read. I hope this will help them gain interest and examine the text with the right kind of motivation.