Excerpts or whole novels - Tim Shanahan

 link to his article

How to Get High-School Students Reading More Closely

 How to Get High-School Students Reading More Closely

from Marshall Memo 1111 (Nov 3, 2025)

In this Cult of Pedagogy article, Jennifer Gonzalez says that with so much text reading
in schools, “sometimes, in some classes, with some students, it can get pretty boring. Pretty
dry.” She interviewed high-school English teachers Brian Sztabnik and Susan Barber, who
have an online presence (Much Ado About Teaching) and recently published a book of
strategies for getting students more engaged with texts. Here are three of their ideas:

• Reconstructing poems – A poem is cut up (into lines, phrases, or individual words)
and students put the poem back together, annotate their version, and compare it with the
original. “It’s forcing students to do a close reading of the poem,” says Barber. “If I would
have passed out this poem and said, I want you to do a close reading, their eyes would be
glazed over.” Putting the pieces together gets them slowing down and thinking about lines,
phrases, words, punctuation, and meaning.

• Inferential timeline – Each student is assigned a few pages from a section of the novel
being read by the class and writes on an index card or sticky note the most important thing that
happened on those pages, with a quote that illustrates it. “This is all about decision-making and
cutting out the extraneous details and just focusing on what’s really important,” says Sztabnik.
“Often it’s either character development or increasing conflict or maybe a symbol finally
emerges.” Students post their cards on a timeline on a wall.
Students then stand up, choose another student’s card, and add a new card under it with
an explanation of why they believe that moment was significant in the grand scheme of the
novel. Finally, students do a gallery walk of the whole timeline, taking notes on the inferences
their classmates made.

• Text rendering – The class reads a passage and each student chooses the sentence or
line they think is most important, then the most important phrase within that sentence, then the
most important word in that phrase. Students defend their choices to the full class, then small
groups work together to draw general conclusions about the passage. Barber says she came up
with this idea because students were often vague about where they got an idea from a text (It’s
just there, they’d say). Text rendering gets them reading much more closely and zeroing in on
specific language and meaning.

“3 Fresh Strategies That Get Students Engaged with Texts” by Jennifer Gonzalez, Brian
Sztabnik, and Susan Barber in Cult of Pedagogy, October 26, 2025; Gonazlez can be reached
at gonzjenn@cultofpedagogy.com . Sztabnik and Barber’s book is 100% Engagement.

Know the signs of AI writing

 

Know the signs of AI writing

from this website

There are telltale signs of AI writing. If you’re new to teaching or unfamiliar with AI, just knowing these can help grow your AI Spidey Sense. Here are some to look for:

• The Em Dash – AI, ChatGPT especially, loves to use the em dash (—). And it usually uses it incorrectly, substituting it for a comma. Students, however, almost never use an em dash, especially below 11th grade. (For lovers of the em dash, like myself, this royally sucks.)
• Parallel Structure – AI frequently leans on triplets or balanced phrasing (e.g., “She was strong, she was brave, she was determined”). Students usually don’t polish structure that deliberately.
• Empty language – AI was designed to fill a word count. It’s very good at using vague, meaningless, or unnecessary words, often culminating in a bland and empty essay.
• Overly tidy paragraphs: Each one often follows the same rhythm (topic sentence + evidence + conclusion) with no natural tangents, quirks, or false starts.
• Smooth but generic transitions: AI loves words like moreover, furthermore, consequently, in conclusion. Real students are more likely to mix “so,” “but,” or skip transitions entirely.
• Vague sophistication: AI favors slightly elevated but non-specific words (significant, crucial, deeply, inherently, resonates, underscores). Students tend to swing between too casual or too forced.
• Clichéd analogies: AI might drop clichés like “a double-edged sword,” “a beacon of hope,” “paints a vivid picture.”
• Balanced but bland tone: One nice thing about grading AI-generated work in upper level ELA classes is that it isn’t that good or interesting.
• Symmetrical answers (usually in 3s): If the writing prompt a 3-part question, the response will almost always have three neat sections, each similarly sized. AI loves 3s: three main ideas, three body paragraphs, or even just the number three.
• Perfect grammar: This may be dependent on your students’ grade level, but if a sixth grader writes a 4-page essay without a single error, I might be impressed…or suspicious.
• Impersonal responses: AI writing usually removes 1st person POV from student writing. If you required a personal response, AI writing might come off as a level or two removed from this.

How well does "Jigsaw Learning" work?

From Marshall Memo 1099

 Jigsaw Learning – How Well Does It Work?

In this Review of Educational Research article, Eva Vives (Ghent University) and six

co-authors report on their meta-analysis of jigsaw, a cooperative learning strategy developed in

the 1970s by Elliot Aronson and colleagues at the University of Texas (details at the Jigsaw

Classroom website ). Here is the most common jigsaw sequence:

- The class is divided into groups.

- Curriculum content is split into the same number of segments as students per group.

- For example, with a lesson on Eleanor Roosevelt and 5-student groups: her childhood,

family life, life after FDR’s polio, as First Lady, and her career after FDR’s death.

- In each group, students are assigned different segments and silently study material on it.

- The class reshuffles into “expert groups” for the segments, and each discusses its

portion and rehearses how it will be presented back in their home groups.

- The original groups reconvene and each “expert” presents their segment in sequence.

- The teacher circulates to monitor and intervene as needed.

- If all students do their job, each group puts together the jigsaw of the whole lesson.

- All students are assessed on their knowledge of the lesson’s content.

Advocates of jigsaw learning believe it has these key attributes: students are more

actively involved than in a standard teacher-centered class; every student takes responsibility

for curriculum content; students teach each other; students work together to reach the learning

goal; and students get practice on collaboration and social-emotional skills.

How effective is jigsaw learning? Vives and her colleagues did a comprehensive review

of 40 years of research and found mixed results depending on the curriculum area and how

well it was implemented. Their conclusions:

• “The introduction of social interdependence in the classroom,” say the researchers, “can

have positive effects on both academic and psychological outcomes.” Students from

elementary grades through college liked jigsaw as a classroom process.

• The most positive academic results were in language arts and social sciences classes,

somewhat less positive in STEM and vocational classes. Academic gains from jigsaw lessons

were more long-lasting than from standard instruction. A key factor in stickiness seemed to be

the “desirable difficulty” involved in the expert phase – the challenge for students being

responsible for studying their content, understanding it, and presenting to peers.

• Some studies found that jigsaw resulted in a high cognitive load on students as they

studied their portion and presented it to peers. Interestingly, the cognitive load was higher in

jigsaw lessons than in a conventionally taught classroom, even though each student was

responsible for only a fraction of the lesson content. Learning depended on groupmates’ skill at

learning and presenting the material.

• Jigsaw lessons had positive psychosocial effects, including students’ motivation and

feeling of competence. Jigsaw’s impact was mixed on boosting student self-esteem and

reducing prejudice. Oddly, there has been little research on how well jigsaw lessons developed

cooperation skills.

“The jigsaw method,” say Vives et al., “confronts students with both a cultural and a

cognitive challenge that requires students to learn how to function in such a pedagogical

environment, in addition to learning their course materials. Such learning may take time.”

That’s why jigsaw is challenging for teachers. Many schools don’t have a culture of

cooperation, and students may not have the social skills to work cooperatively, aren’t used to

being dependent on one another, and may lack the cognitive skills to take responsibility for a

piece of the curriculum and teach it to classmates. Jigsaw lessons were most effective, the

researchers found, when teachers took the time to explicitly teach the cooperative and

cognitive skills involved in the process.

Vives and colleagues believe jigsaw learning may be especially important as digital tools

become more prominent. “Digital technologies,” they say, “offer unprecedented opportunities

for collaborative learning and real-time support for class management (e.g., forming student

groups, monitoring the engagement of learning, deciding when and how to intervene in their

learning activities…). However, as sophisticated as they can be, the digital tools in support of

collaborative learning methods can only be effective if the methods themselves are well

understood and guided by a detailed knowledge of the cognitive and socio-cognitive processes

they activate… We have never needed this knowledge so much.”

“Learning with Jigsaw: A Systematic Review Gathering All the Pieces of the Puzzle More

Than 40 Years Later” by Eva Vives, Céline Poletti, Anaïs Robert, Fabrizio Butera, Pascal

Huguet, ProFAN Consortium, and Isabelle Régner in Review of Educational Research, June

2025 (Vol. 95, #3, pp. 339-384); Vives can be reached at eva.vives13@gmail.com .

Harry Wong - First Days of School

 According to Harry Wong, the first days of school are crucial for setting the tone for the entire year and establishing a successful learning environment. 

1. Teach and Rehearse Procedures

Goal: Build routines through modeling and repetition.

• Activity 1: Procedure Stations

  • Set up “stations” around the room (e.g., turning in work, asking for help, group work norms). Students rotate in small groups, reading a posted scenario and practicing the expected procedure.

• Activity 2: “What Would You Do?” Scenarios

  • Project or hand out short “what if” scenarios (e.g., “You forgot your homework. Now what?”). In pairs, students decide the best response based on your procedures, then share with the class.

---

2. Establish Expectations and Consistency

Goal: Clarify classroom norms and make them stick.

• Activity 1: Co-Creating Norms

  • Ask students to brainstorm what a respectful, productive classroom looks like. Then share your own non-negotiables. Combine them into a class agreement you revisit often.

• Activity 2: “The Why Behind the Rule” Discussion

  • Instead of just listing rules, present each one with a short explanation or real-world example (e.g., “Why no phones during discussion?”). Invite student input and reasoning.

---

3. Build Relationships

Goal: Create trust and emotional safety.

• Activity 1: “One-Pager” Student Profiles

  • Students create a simple page with their name, interests, goals, and a fun fact. Display them (with permission) or refer to them as you learn names and build rapport.

• Activity 2: “2-Minute Connections”

  • Spend 2 minutes with each student (over a few days) asking informal questions or following up on something they shared. This builds personal connection without requiring a whole class period.

---

4. Create a Positive Classroom Environment

Goal: Establish a space that signals purpose and belonging.

• Activity 1: Student Voice Wall

  • Reserve part of your wall or whiteboard for rotating student quotes, jokes, recommendations, or goals. It gives them ownership and keeps the space dynamic.

• Activity 2: Classroom Tour with Purpose

  • Walk students through the room as if it's a living system: where things are stored, how group work is set up, how to access resources, etc. Ask questions to engage them in the layout’s logic.

---

5. Start Teaching Right Away

Goal: Establish that learning begins on Day One.

• Activity 1: “Mystery Text” Engagement

  • Begin with a short, intriguing text (poem, paragraph, image, or artifact). Ask students to annotate or respond. This signals that your class is about thinking and curiosity.

• Activity 2: Low-Stakes Writing

  • Prompt: “What makes a great classroom?” or “What’s something you’re proud of learning?” Collect and read for tone and voice—not grammar—so you can begin to learn their skills.

---

6. Communicate That You Are Organized and Prepared

Goal: Show students that this is a high-functioning space.

• Activity 1: Syllabus Walkthrough with Purpose

  • Rather than reading your syllabus aloud, frame it as “Here’s how this class works best for you.” Emphasize supports, grading clarity, and why you designed it this way.

• Activity 2: Bell-Ringer Routine Launch

• Start a consistent beginning-of-class routine (e.g., “Do Now” or “Lit Lifter”). Train students how it works and why it matters. Use the same format daily from the start.\

 

Should We Use ChatGPT to Make Literature Accessible to Students?

            In this Boston Globe article, MG Prezioso (Harvard University) tees off on teachers who are using AI tools like ChatGPT to simplify texts for students. “As an education researcher, I understand the appeal of AI-adapted texts,” she says. “Classrooms play host to students with a range of language and literacy skills, and AI-adapted materials, which can be translated and tailored to each individual’s reading level, allow students to access the same content – along with supplementary resources, like discussion questions and vocabulary words – at their own pace. This is especially valuable in social studies and the sciences, where information is a prerequisite for conceptual understanding.” But Prezioso has several concerns:

            • Watered-down language – AI-generated text tends to be syntactically repetitive and stylistically flat, she says. Students need to read complex and varied sentences to develop reading comprehension skills. “Why not use authentic texts with additional instructional support, like drawing on background knowledge or helping students break down meaning-filled, ‘juicy’ sentences instead?”

            • Artistic integrity – AI-modified works of fiction, essays, and memoirs can do violence to the original authors’ integrity.

            • Bias – “Can we really trust AI,” asks Prezioso, “with its racial and gender biases, to adapt a novel like Beloved– one that embodies not only Toni Morrison’s lyrical, enchanting style but also the complexities of the black experience?”

            • Love of reading – AI-processed texts simply don’t have the same ability to develop students’ appreciation of authors’ word choice, imagery, and character dialogue. Reading will be a chore, not a joy. “Divorcing a story from its style is like separating humans from atoms,” says Prezioso. “You can try, but if you were to succeed, you would create something entirely different.” There’s already a trend of fewer young people reading for fun, and AI is likely to make things worse.

            As an example, Prezioso takes a passage from the end of The Great Gatsby, a novel often used in high-school English classes:

Gatsby believed in the green light, the orgastic future that year by year recedes before us. It eluded us then, but that’s no matter – tomorrow we will run faster, stretch out our arms farther… And one fine morning – So we beat on, boats against the current, borne back ceaselessly into the past.

Now here’s a ChatGPT rendition:

Gatsby believed in the green light, a symbol of the bright future he dreamed of. Each year, that future seemed to slip further away. It was out of reach then, but that didn’t stop him – tomorrow he would try harder, stretch further… and maybe one day, he would achieve it. So we keep moving forward, like boats trying to move against the current, always being pulled back into the past.

“The original is elegant, complex,” says Prezioso. “Its arrangement of words and syntax, from the expanded clauses to the ellipsis and dashes, embodies Gatsby’s yearning for the past, as well as our own faith in, and pursuit of, illusory dreams. The message is tragic, but its tone is  hopeful, leaving us to wonder: are we foolish for beating on, or is the honor in the attempt?” The AI-generated text, on the other hand, is rigid, mechanical, lacks complexity and tone, and distorts Fitzgerald’s message. 

            What makes the original meaningful is that it is “crafted by a person, a breathing, feeling person,” says Prezioso. “There is wisdom in human-crafted words, and it is hard-earned. We mustn’t overlook this wisdom. It’s why we read. It’s what we’ll lose. And it’s something AI will never provide.” 

 

“Teachers Are Using AI to Make Literature Easier for Students to Read. This Is a Terrible Idea” by MG Prezioso in The Boston Globe, April 13, 2025; Prezioso can be reached at mgprezioso@fas.harvard.edu.

NCTE: The state of literature

Texts Most Frequently Taught in US Secondary Classrooms Are Nearly Identical to List from Decades Ago

NCTE 07.24.25 NCTE NewsNCTE Publications - link

Nationwide survey of 4,000 English teachers funded by the National Council of Teachers of English finds that most secondary school English teachers value teaching diverse texts, but censorship and curricular limits can hinder their use 

Despite efforts to introduce texts offering a variety of points of view into American secondary English literature classrooms, the list of the most taught books remains largely unchanged from 35 years ago. While a majority of the nation’s teachers say teaching diverse texts is a goal, their ability to do so is influenced by factors including autonomy over text selections and censorship. 

These are among the findings from a survey representing more than 4,000 English language arts (ELA) teachers in public high school and middle school classrooms across the country. The findings were released today in a white paper, funded by the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE), featuring the most detailed insights into what students are taught in secondary English instruction since the 1980s. 

The State of Literature Use in US Secondary English Classrooms is the first study to survey a large population of current US secondary (grades 6–12) ELA public school teachers on their literature use, curricular autonomy, diverse book inclusion, and censorship perspectives.  

William Shakespeare’s Romeo and Juliet is the most taught text, according to the survey, followed by F. Scott Fitzgerald’s The Great Gatsby, and Arthur Miller’s The Crucible. The Crucible is one of just four texts—along with Elie Wiesel’s Night, Ray Bradbury’s Fahrenheit 451, and Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein—that were not on the 1989 list of 10 most taught texts. Shakespeare’s Macbeth, listed fourth in the recent survey, was among the top 10 in 1989 as well as in a 1964 survey of literature in American classrooms. 

“This survey is an important addition to previous research on book censorship and curriculum policies. It reflects the voices of teachers and their firsthand experience as professionals who have been prepared to foster student learning,” said NCTE President Tonya B. Perry, a former middle school teacher who serves as provost and vice president of academic affairs at Miles College in Alabama. “It’s encouraging that teachers want to honor students’ right to access outstanding literature that reflects their rich and varied experiences and sparks critical thinking around the complexities of the human experience. These survey results suggest, however, that diverse texts are still on the sidelines of the curriculum.” 

Key Findings: 

• Most Frequently Used Texts: All of the top 10 books found in this study were written by white authors, mostly men, and published more than 60 years ago.

• Freedom in Text Selection: Teacher autonomy in text selection ranged greatly. More than one-third of teachers noted using a scripted curriculum, and one in five had no choice in text selection. Teachers in the South are most likely to have a scripted curriculum.
• Most Commonly Censored Topics: The top reasons for censorship are content that is related to sex (ranging from handholding to actual sex), LGBTQIA+ representation, and topics of race and/or racism in a text. Many titles are censored with no reason given or for vague reasons like age appropriateness, politics, and controversy.

• Most Common Censors: Teachers reported that the four groups most often involved in the chain of censorship are parents, school boards, state legislators, and school districts.
• Diverse Literature Inclusion: When asked about diverse literature, nine in 10 teachers agree that it is important, express interest in using it more, and do use it in their classrooms. Yet a majority of teachers reported that less than half of their curricula includes diverse texts.
• Diverse Literature Topics: Teachers are most interested in teaching literature about people of color and least interested in teaching literature about the LGBTQIA+ community. They are the most comfortable teaching literature that addresses historical events, such as the Holocaust.

The survey was sent to every US public school secondary ELA teacher with a public-facing email address—more than 107,000 in all—between January 2023 and June 2024. The respondents, representing teachers in every state, collectively identified 5,108 unique titles being taught. The study defines “diverse literature” using the nonprofit, We Need Diverse Books’ definition: “We recognize all diverse experiences, including (but not limited to) LGBTQIA+, Native, people of color, gender diversity, people with disabilities, and ethnic, cultural, and religious minorities.” 

“NCTE funded this study to offer educators, policymakers, and the public data-driven insights into how literature is currently used in classrooms and to inform ongoing conversations at local, state, and national levels. In doing so, we reaffirm our commitment to supporting educators’ professional autonomy and informed decision-making,” NCTE Executive Director Emily Kirkpatrick said. “Ultimately, the findings raise important questions about the effects of censorship on students’ engagement with texts that they find interesting, which leads to lifelong reading and learning, as well as the development of critical thinking skills.”