I always enjoyed
reading textbooks in school and often found them helpful and interesting. So, either text books were better when I went
to high school, or I am in the minority of students who like textbooks, or both. My favorite texts were history books (of course,
hence my chosen path) and I would often flip through them, sometimes a chapter
or two ahead looking at the pictures, reading the captions, and looking at
maps. I’ve always been fascinated with
maps. So I was employing Daniels’ and
Zemelman’s technique of pre-reading years ago and didn’t even know it.
I can also vividly recall the first time I
realized how to use a math text book, and that I could use it effectively to
help me when I got stuck. For many
years, when learning math, the teacher would explain the concept in class on
the chalkboard and then I would go home and use the text book to do the
homework assignment. I would never read
the lesson part of the math text, I would only use the book for the
problems. Teachers never encouraged, and
at times actually discouraged, students from trying to learn from the
book. They preferred to teach the lesson
in class and we were to make sure we grasped the concept and learned the skill
in class so we could do the homework the way they showed us. If the text book showed another way to get
the right answer, they did not want us to use it but instead to solve the
problem the way they showed us. In the
eleventh grade, I became prone to excessive absences that hindered my academic
achievement and I was in an advanced math class. I was often behind and had little to no clue
what was going on. That’s when I
realized that I could indeed use the book to learn the concepts and skills to
solve the problems. It worked to some
degree and I think I got a C in that class after earning Es and Ds for most of
the year.
So that’s my
personal text book experience but as far as Daniels and Zemelman are concerned,
I like their emphasis on heavily supplementing text books because, especially
in history texts, there is just not enough depth there in any specific
topic. A lot of it is superficial
coverage of many areas and to dig deeply into one specific area that you feel
deserves the extra attention, supplemental materials are required. They have a lot of useful strategies for
using text books that I like and will use in the future. However, I am not too sure about the jigsaw
technique. I think that is probably best
used sparingly and in select circumstances with readings that are best suited
for it. On the contrary, I really like
the idea of making reading guides to help students get the most out of a
text. It might take some extra time up
front but if you are using the same text over a span of years it would be well
worth it and if you are already familiar with a certain text it shouldn’t be
too difficult. The SQ3R method also
seems like a very effective tool for helping students remember and interpret
important texts.
No comments:
Post a Comment