the other thing I constantly find shocking is that we don't seem to have mentor teachers

They actually are trying to push for that in my area.

PS. Catherine, I sent you an email from the other thread, just in case you're wondering why I'm not answering you.

-- SusanS - 06 Feb 2006

btw.....I mentioned in a comment somewhere that, as a writer, I assume 'all reader criticisms are correct'

I assume that the response of any 'cognitively intact' person who chooses to read something I've written is true, at least in the sense that it's true for that person.

If 2 people have the same reaction, it's true, period.

That second proposition is an ironclad rule. If two people have the same wrong or negative reaction to something I've written, I'm rewriting. Period.

This is especially true when the issue is clarity.

If a reader gets a meaning different from what I intended, that's a problem in the writing, not the reader.

For instance, Amazon has some negative reviews from people who think ANIMALS IN TRANSLATION is hostile to dogs.

Of course, ANIMALS IN TRANSLATION is not intentionally hostile to dogs or any other animal. I love dogs & so does Temple. We probably said so in the book, in so many words.

But I'm pretty sure I know exactly why some readers are getting the impression the book is hostile to dogs — and it is a mistake in the writing.

Writing nonfiction and teaching are in the same category.

You're trying to transfer information from your head to someone else's.

If the reader ends up with a completely different message, you have to figure out what you did wrong.

It's true that you can't 'please all of the people all of the time.'

BUT you can try to make yourself crystal clear to all of the people all of the time.

The only way you can do that is to assume that the problem is on your end.

Which it is.

When most or all of a class of children fail a test, the problem is the teaching and/or curriculum.

-- CatherineJohnson - 06 Feb 2006

If the reader ends up with a completely different message, you have to figure out what you did wrong.

Sometimes this is true. Other times, you are dealing with a person who actively chooses to misinterpret what you say. I'd bet dollars to doughnuts some of those commenters are dog nuts (not lovers, nuts) who read the words on the page and send them through their little food-processor brains until the soupy mass comes out saying what they want it to say.

I have dealt with people like this IRL (not about dogs). They have made up their minds, and nothing -- not reality, nor truth, nor common sense -- can penetrate their fortresses of self-delusion.

Sometimes, you haven't done anything wrong. 98% of your readership understands what you were trying to communicate. But a certain small portion of that 98% dislikes what you said so much that they twist it to make it seem worse.

-- BrendaM - 06 Feb 2006

Hey folks -

If you have something to say about the article - you shoud say it to the author.

Go to her site. She's left a response about your taking her to task. She's also emailed the person who initially posted the link. She has received no response. You want to take her on - or take on her teaching methods. Then go and take her on. Don't bash someone when you clearly do not have the full story.

-- KtmGuest - 06 Feb 2006

ktm guest: I'm deleting most of your comment, for obvious reasons.

-- CatherineJohnson - 06 Feb 2006

Other times, you are dealing with a person who actively chooses to misinterpret what you say. I'd bet dollars to doughnuts some of those commenters are dog nuts (not lovers, nuts) who read the words on the page and send them through their little food-processor brains until the soupy mass comes out saying what they want it to say

I like dog nuts!

I've semi-forgotten the problem.....but I think I focused too much in ANIMALS IN TRANSLATION on dog aggression and dominance - which are qualities I like in dogs - without making CLEAR that I like dogs.

In other words, the words I wrote could be easily interpreted in the way some readers interpreted them.

-- CatherineJohnson - 06 Feb 2006

Dear Guest,

I have the story she chose to tell. She sounded pretty clear to me. Now who's being disingenuous.

If being critical of a teacher's methods is "bashing" then I suppose it goes that none of us should ever say one thing about what a teacher does in a classroom unless it's positive.

And I have no desire to "take her on," as you put it since, judging by your reaction, she probably wouldn't be able to accept it as anything short of "bashing."

But as the parent of a "low" student I would have been royally ticked off if my son's teacher decided to just give up on him for the rest of the year.

On the question of tone, which is what I mostly took issue with, while this kind of brutal honesty may be enlightening to some, it is more than a little aggravating to others. Perhaps at the very least this teacher could announce her plans to the parents so that they at least have a fighting chance to get their kids away from her.

-- SusanS - 06 Feb 2006

all

This is actually an excellent Object Lesson in my 'ironclad' rule of writing.

The fact is that, regardless of what the teacher who writes 'The Art of Getting By' meant when she wrote her post, it affected at least two of her readers - Susan & me - badly.

I'm sure that 'Art of Getting By' is a dedicated teacher who worries about her kids and tries to think of new ways to teach them.

But to parents who are just seeing her site for the first time, that's not what comes across. We interpreted her post exactly the way many parents of special needs kids would interpret it.

Writers have to anticipate such responses and head them off.

My Thought Experiment:

Suppose she had written the exact same post, but framed it with statements that these are great kids, they have a lot of energy (or curiosity or some good quality) - and, after she finishes blowing off steam on her blog, she's going to figure out what to try next.

I don't think I would have reacted as I did.

-- CatherineJohnson - 06 Feb 2006

"We interpreted her post exactly the way many parents of special needs kids would interpret it."

Catherine: I agree, and I think that's what turned me off about that article. It was really difficult for me not to post a scathing, rude response to that, but I have never stooped to that level on blogs. I have seen many, many answers like that on Megan's papers. She misses the whole point of the question and writes something that my husband and I call a correct answer on "Planet Megan." We then go through the paper with her, explore how she got the answer she put down, and work with her so she can understand what is being asked.

But then I got the visual of a teacher reading or showing those answers to other teachers in the break room, or in a blog, and laughing about them, and making fun of the answers.

Those answers were given for a reason. It's hard to imagine a group of 3rd graders, who I think at heart still want to please the teacher, would consciously not try to succeed, as many of the commenters on that blog think they do (or they blame the parents).

This article also mentions how some of the incorrect answers, when shared with the class afterwards, made the kids laugh. That also made me cringe. Some of those kids thought it was the right answer. Or they thought, as I have seen often, that if they answer with a whole bunch of words they remember from the lesson, at least some of the answer may be right.

There are many references in the article and in the comments on how "easy" the questions were. Easy for you, maybe; but easy for a 3rd grader with no previous exposure to this kind of problem, and probably with reading comprehension difficulties as well? I think not.

-- KathyIggy - 06 Feb 2006

Kathy

So that makes 3 of us.....AND THAT'S A QUORUM!

She misses the whole point of the question and writes something that my husband and I call a correct answer on "Planet Megan."

I love it!

But that's exactly it - and of course, that's what I'm talking about as a writer: everyone has his or her own Planet Me - and if, on Planet Me, ANIMALS IN TRANSLATION sounds like a dog-bashing book, then, on Planet Me, it IS a dog-bashing book.

otoh, the folks who think I don't know what I'm talking about with Labs are just wrong.

-- CatherineJohnson - 06 Feb 2006

btw, that's not to say I 'have' to change everything I write to pass muster on a couple hundred thousand Planet Me's.

I don't!

BUT.....since my goal is to be as clear as I possibly can, and since my goal is either to persuade people I'm correct OR persuade people to help me figure something out, I always ask myself how I can write my next book without making dog-lovers feel attacked.

-- CatherineJohnson - 06 Feb 2006

But then I got the visual of a teacher reading or showing those answers to other teachers in the break room, or in a blog, and laughing about them, and making fun of the answers.

Right.

Exactly.

That's why I would never write a humorous blog post about someone else's child UNLESS I STUFFED IT FULL OF QUALIFIERS & PRAISE AS WELL.

(I just wouldn't do it.)

Those answers were given for a reason. It's hard to imagine a group of 3rd graders, who I think at heart still want to please the teacher, would consciously not try to succeed, as many of the commenters on that blog think they do (or they blame the parents).

This is what's disheartening. Since the LA Times article I've seen so many harsh Comments directed at children & teenagers.

Of course, harsh comments are practically the whole point of blogs....but still, when it comes to kids & to teenagers, I don't like it.

They're not 'fair game.'

-- CatherineJohnson - 06 Feb 2006

This article also mentions how some of the incorrect answers, when shared with the class afterwards, made the kids laugh. That also made me cringe. Some of those kids thought it was the right answer.

It's true.

references in the article and in the comments on how "easy" the questions were

This is the heart of the issue for me, and it's why I linked (which I think I WON'T do in the future.....I don't want to get into blog wars, etc.)

We've got teachers here who are working 24 hours a day, practically, devising ways to bring formative assessment into their courses, completely on their own, AND taking the time to share their experiences and thoughts with us.....

They're putting in all this time; they're not complaining; they're helping the rest of us.....I let myself get bugged.

I should add that 'Art of Getting By' is a new, young teacher, which makes things completely different.

Just as I want her to judge her students less harshly, I should (and actually do) judge her less harshly, too.

If she were a 30-year veteran....that would be bad.

But she's new, she's in a tough situation, she's feeling her way.

So: her post obviously got to me.

BUT I don't mean her harm, and am sorry I made her feel bad.

-- CatherineJohnson - 06 Feb 2006

So, you're a dog basher.

You obviously didn't see the 2nd annual Puppy Bowl on Animal Planet last night.

Kathy

Really well said. Thank you.

-- SusanS - 06 Feb 2006

Susan

You're welcome. I'd been wanting to comment on this all weekend and just figured out what I wanted to say.

I'm not saying the original article writer has an easy job, or that she's not justified in being frustrated. I get frustrated when I see those kind of answers on Megan's papers too. I was just trying to highlight that there's a young child behind those answers. And they may think they got an "A" for what they wrote. Or they may be very confused, and anxious, and just writing anything, hoping and praying it will be right this time.

-- KathyIggy - 06 Feb 2006

So, you're a dog basher

I have a lot to answer for....

-- CatherineJohnson - 07 Feb 2006

I get frustrated when I see those kind of answers on Megan's papers too.

yes, yes, yes

-- CatherineJohnson - 07 Feb 2006