210 likes | 220 Views
This workshop focuses on strategies for teaching about the Middle East in English and Social Studies classrooms. It explores the use of literature, nonfiction texts, and classroom discussions to engage students in critical thinking and develop literacy skills.
E N D
Teaching the Middle East: Engaging with Volatile Issues in English and Social Studies Classrooms
Today’s Agenda • Literature and the Middle East • Nonfiction and the Middle East • Strategies for classroom discussions and textual analysis.
Literacy Skills – Whose Job is it? • Writing Across the Curriculum • Reading Across the Curriculum
Turn and Talk: How can grappling with issues like terrorism help our students develop literacy skills?
Nonfiction: Current Events • Kelly Gallagher's Article of the Week • Smithsonian Tween Tribune • Newsela.com
Incorporating These Texts into your classroom • Book Clubs/Literature Circles • Mentor Texts + Secondary Texts • Article of the Week • Independent Reading • Extra Credit Assignments
Diving in • Set Your Ground Rules • Begin the discussion • Allow them to dig deeply into the text • Assessment
Silent Discussions • Read the question in front of you • 30 seconds: Write your response • SWITCH! • Read the new question in front of you • Read the already written response
Socratic seminar • Definition: A student-led discussion with the aim of helping students to understand the ideas, issues, and values in a specific text. • NOT the place to discuss opinions
Steps to a Successful Seminar • 1. Choose the right text • 2. Students prepare beforehand (keep them ACCOUNTABLE) • 3. Have your own list of questions ready • 4. Fishbowl! • 5. Begin
Your Turn • Bruce Hoffman chapter • Inside circle: Keep in mind rules for discussion • Outside circle: Track partner participation and write down observations
Look at the following quote from Hoffman (pg. 9): `The difference between the revolutionary and the terrorist,' Arafat stated, `lies in the reason for which each fights. For whoever stands by a just cause and fights for the freedom and liberation of his land from the invaders, the settlers and the colonialists, cannot possibly be called terrorist” What do you think? Do you agree or disagree? Why or Why not? If you disagree, how would you explain the difference between a terrorist and a revolutionary?
Hoffman says, “The terrorist will always argue that it is society or the government or the socio-economic `system' and its laws that are the real `terrorists', and moreover that if it were not for this oppression, he would not have felt the need to defend either himself or the population he claims to represent” (pgs. 12-13). What do you think of this? Are terrorists ever justified in their actions? Are there any modern “terrorist” groups that you think are justified?
On pgs. 13, Hoffman discusses disagreements that occurred in the UN in their discussion of terrorism. A minority of countries claimed that, “people who struggle to liberate themselves from foreign oppression and exploitation have the right to use all methods at their disposal, including force'” What do you think? Do you agree or disagree? Is there a line that even people struggling to liberate themselves from oppression should not cross?
Other Class Discussion Methods • Gallery Walk • Concentric Circles (Speed Dating) • Post-it Discussions
RAFT Assessments • Role • Audience • Format • Topic
To Close • Turn and Talk: • What is one thing you learned about today (from ANY SESSION) you can see using in your own classroom?