For Thursday: Read the chapter I gave you in class from Jay McTighe and Carol Ann Tomlinson’s book “Integrating Differentiated Instruction and Understanding by Design.” Then go to the page above – “Grading Book Chapter” – and add your comments via Diigo.

The chapter adds a lot to our discussions, I think, and is not terribly long or difficult to read. However…

The book is not written for a general audience but for professional educators. And, like many professions, teaching has its own vernacular that sounds like gibberish to outsiders (and, often, to us as well). So before you read, some terms defined:

--  Differentiated Instruction refers to teaching that is designed to meet the needs of a variety of different kinds of students within the same classroom. Think Modern Global. Here’s a link to a bit more detailed explanation from Wikipedia.

--   Understanding by Design is McTighe’s term for planning lessons with the final student learning in mind. So a teacher would decide what she wants kids to know, then design a unit that reached that goal, rather than doing a bunch of stuff then designing a test based on what happened. More info here.

--   Standards-based education is the broad movement over the last 30 years or so to devise broad student learning goals then test to find out whether students have met those goals. Think MCAS. More details, again from Wikipedia.

Hope that helps. Just drop me an email if you encounter some bit of edubabble that is impossible to figure out.

For Thursday -- Respond to the three other members' of your writing groups' initial Heintzelman scenes on Turnitin.
For Friday -- Upload a full Heintzelman rough draft;
Watch the last 20 minutes of Killing Us Softly;
look at the outline of her points on the main page for this class. Add your comments/reactions to that site using Diigo.

Read the chapter from Susan Linn's book that I gave you in class and respond as a comment on this message. What points does she make that resonate with your own experience? Which don't? Which points have previous commenters made that you agree/disagree with?

So for Monday: write and upload your honesty editorial to Turnitin; watch the video at this link and be ready to talk about it on Monday.

A 1984 Reagan ad, after my somewhat nonensical Reagan jag this morning. Similar to the Eastwood spot? In some ways...

Here's the link. Take it for homework tonight.

For Tuesday: "Why Johnny Can't Tell Right from Wrong" by Christina Hoff Sommers.
For Thursday: "Something Borrowed" by Malcolm Gladwell

The NPR show This American Life did one of the best pieces I've seen on teen drinking a couple of years ago, and you might enjoy it in the wake of our somewhat abbreviated discussion this week of the proper place for our drinking age. Here's a link. (It was recorded well before recent events have made the school synonymous with a different kind of debauchery, but TAL went back late last year and did a followup. Here's a link to that one. You can download both for free in iTunes and listen to them on your MP3 player of choice).

1) Watch three television commercials (I understand that there is a sporting event scheduled for this weekend that may allow the opportunity to view said commercials, but you can use your regular Saturday morning cartoon viewing if so desired). For each, in your journal, list a) the central claim of the commercial (ie, "If I drink this particular alcoholic beverage I will become the kind of person who spends his time on beaches surrounded by attractive people"). Then b) list just one logical fallacy contained in the commercial (there will likely be more than one, but you have to pick).

2) Watch the video below (you may find the topic funny at first, because it's not a word you're used to being taken as seriously as this guy does, but he does have an argument worthy of serious discussion, I assure you). As a comment on this message: What is its central claim? Do you find it convincing based on your own experience?