Chapter 4

Chapter four illustrates a common paradox in the educational system. We tend to encourage students to, "(1) answer questions (2) restate, retell, or summarize the text in some way, and (3) learn content-related vocabulary" in order to achieve understanding of the given material. When I read this, I think to myself that, "of course this is how we approach understanding, because this is how we can evaluate a student's efforts with the most ease and efficiency." Perhaps we approach understanding in this fashion because most standardized test approach understanding in the same manner. The easiest way to gauge a student's knowledge is by testing vocabulary and simply answering questions. However, this presents the issue that knowledge does not equate to understanding. We have to prepare for the world in which we teach. It doesn't make it "right" to teach in this manner, but it does make it acceptable given the current method of assessments utilized on the federal level.

The author does a wonderful job of defining the differences between how we currently perceive understanding, and how we should. The scenario given in the beginning of the chapter provides a snapshot of some VERY productive and thought provoking methods. Although, we should always be cautious of how much "fluff" or "reader response" type assessments we engage in within the classroom. I am always interested to hear someone's original and personal thoughts on literature. I also have to keep in mind that we cannot simply sit around and discuss how we feel, even though it's a "win" if students are talking at all. We must discuss the tougher concepts even when we do not want to.

This chapter presents many valuable suggestions in regards to understanding texts. In the example of reading at a graduate level, the author informs us that they, "reread portions aloud...and noticed small similarities and differences, and patterns..." to help enhance their understanding  of the texts. I myself have used these techniques in my brief relationship with Old English literature. I cannot simply read Chaucer and understand what is happening. I have to reread sections, use supplemental resources, and critically think about the grammar, vocabulary, and time period to fully understand what is being communicated. These are all valuable tools in any text that is utilized for any content area written in any era.

Also, "synthesize" is my new buzzword. Creating something out of our new (or old...or a combo perhaps?) understanding is the ultimate goal. How we can take information, make connections, and create something original in result is a great way to approach "intelligence" as well as "understanding."