WHAT?
As part of my writing development, I took part
in the PD from Terry Locke provided during the Lockdown. I was very apprehensive
due to the quality of the other staff members who took part as well. I don’t consider
myself a good writer although I know since doing blog posts and working with
Verity Short, there has been some improvement.
We were given the Powerpoint and exemplars
before the writing lessons with Terry at 7.30 – 9.30pm on a Thursday night via
a Zoom conference. The team of teachers had some management, beginning teachers,
and even the principal. We also were put into peer groups to discuss our
thoughts and findings during the PD. The main aim of the sessions is that the
teachers were to become the writers so that we could experience the feelings
and anxieties that the children experience during writing.
In the first
half of our first lesson, Terry asked us to complete a questionnaire about our
own writing apprehension and asked us to share if we wished what sort of
results we had. These were to include our positive and negative experiences
(mainly from school) around our own experiences as developing writers. Terry asked
us to connect our feelings about ourselves as writers to these experiences. I totally
got it, not that I shared my experience I was able to align myself with the feeling
of others in the group.
The next part
of the lesson was where Terry asked and explained what poetry is and how it
transforms the reader to ‘see’ what the author sees through their choice of
words and create a picture for the reader. Terry explained that our central
role as teachers had some aspects to think about:
· Can we connect this
issue with our previous sharings around our experiences of learning to write?
· Most teachers don’t
know how to respond to pupils’ writing, in part because they are not writers
themselves.
· They are insecure in
their knowledge of what to say.
Terry then
went on to say that he would facilitate our confidence in using metalanguage related
to poetry over the next four sessions. He went on to discuss what ‘concrete and
abstract’ vocabulary is and that we were to complete a writing task.
Concrete
language refers to words that enable a reader to respond sensuously to an
experience. Sensuous experience can be visual (sight images), aural (hearing
images), tactile (touch images), gustatory (taste images) or olfactory (smell
images).
Example: The
old man lay huddled on the pitted surface of the dusty and rutted road. His
skinny arms clasped a ragged and dirty child. Its head lolled back and its eyes
had a marble stillness. Near its open mouth, buzzed a large, blue fly.
Abstract
language: The language of ideas or concepts. Its main purpose is to reason
through generalization and argument.
Example: There
is no such thing as a just war. There may be just causes. But there can be no
justification for the notion that arguments can be solved by force.
Our task was to write about a place, there
weren’t any parameters but to write to describe for 20 minutes uninterrupted and
then before sharing underline or highlight the concrete and abstract language
we used. We were put into break out rooms to share with others in our teams. I
wrote mine by hand out the swimming pool but I was awe struck by the cleverness
of the others.
Our session finished with Terry outlining the
homework task which was an outline a brief ( a set of instructions) to complete
a writing task. My breakout team met on the Tuesday before to create a brief in
preparation for the following Thursday session. Also as part of the small group
meeting we had to decide who would share their writing with Terry for feedback.
SO WHAT?
I experienced some doubts and uncertainty of my
abilities to write considering the calibre of my colleagues but Terry had set
up guidelines for peer responses and how that we were to respond to the work of
others. I found this easy as a responder as I was amazed what my colleagues
could write in such a short time.
When it came
for me to share, I feel that my piece was clunky compared and I had possibly
missed the main intention of the writing task set by Terry. I was blown away by
what the others could ‘see’ in my writing. I struggled with the rule – During
these responses, for at least the first round, the writer does not say anything
and should let the writing stand alone and speak for itself. The writer may
take notes. I really wanted to say “thank
you”.
NOW WHAT?
This has made me
think about my responses to my children’s writing and how simple but effective
specific feedback can be. As part of the Lockdown I am swapped by the children’s
work on Seesaw and now I need to use this platform to create writers who want
to write.
Also I happier to
share in my next session of writing with Terry. I do find his voice very
droning but I will make myself listen. I really enjoyed the break out sessions
where I could bounce back ideas with my colleagues.
