What does your mentor teacher do to facilitate or inhibit student talk? What steps will you take to generate substantive academic language use among students?
My mentor teacher asks students to look up vocabulary words for the daily DoNow a week before the word will be introduced in class. For our genetics unit we posted vocab terms all over the front wall so that kids could reference them throughout the unit.
Strategies that I can employ in my teaching are: 1. Cognate Identification- I can search for an in-depth list of cognates in the primary languages of my students (e.g. Haitian Creole, Spanish, and Portuguese). Does anyone know a good resource for this? 2. Lexical Homographs- Again a list of common lexical homographs would be helpful. 3. I can expose students to scientific academic print as Duke (2000) recommends for their tier 2 and tier 3 words and exciting content.
My mentor teacher follows a very teacher-centered model when leading discussion. Although he frequently "leads" discussion, he rarely insists on hands being raised and usually only hears the students who speak the loudest/say the answer he wants to hear. Students are rarely encouraged to talk to one another about the topics and texts we study. I aim to structure a lot more group work (in part because students have requested it, not simply because the "research" says it's helpful) that will encourage students to become fluent with one another. My students respond well to games, and I have considered giving them word use goals for parts of each class/discussion (i.e. they have to see how many times they can use words from the daily list in their discussion correctly in order to get the prize, etc).I've also been collecting various ways to lead conversations and discussions so as to hear more student voice and more in-depth thinking. Finally, I am very eager to work collaboratively with other content area teachers who teach my students to ensure to target students with the academic vocabulary that spans different classes. For instance, each week we choose as a team a particular set of words to focus on--such as synthesis, compare, analyze, infer--in all of our classes so that we can ensure that students have multiple opportunities and contexts in which to practice/be exposed to academic language.
So, in our module today Suzannah brought up a highly relevant concern that we didn’t really get a chance to address by the end of class—how is the instructional conversation relevant and/or useful for (fact-driven) disciplines such as science or math? I, of course, and as you all are well aware I’m sure, am no expert on the matter, but I would like to take a stab at beginning to answer the question even though that is not our task for tonight (I will get to that in due time).
Also, I apologize for wasting reading time if you aren't interested and for taking up space here, but I didn't want to send out a 3rd mass email in 1 day. :-)
First, I would direct people to Ch. 7 of the Echevarria & Graves, which has a few random prompts in there for the non-humanities folk. If, however, you have no time or inclination to do the reading, feel free to peruse my thoughts and to continue this inquiry with me (if you can’t tell, I’m fascinated by this topic—yes, I’m sometimes a nerd at heart, and I'm an excellent digression artist).
My thoughts—IC and IRE differ in two basic ways, and there is 1 strategy that I think can get teachers to think better about how to do IC. It is also important to keep in mind what Jen said—that there is a time and a place for BOTH types of conversations/questioning. I don’t think anyone is saying that IC is the only appropriate way to teach. The ways I see IRE and IC differing: (1) IRE focuses on “what? when? and where?” questions, while IC focuses on “how? and why?” questions. I don’t mean “how do you do this lab that has specific steps outlined for you?,” but “how does this lab matter to your life?” The other (2nd) difference between the two is that IRE has this atmosphere/tone of “I know the answers; what are they” while IC tries to get students to speculate and tries to send a more collaborative, investigative vibe.
So how do science and math teachers do this? (Another aside: I won’t address history because I feel it’s more similar than dissimilar to the humanities/ELA field and that it’s easier to see how IC can work easily in history/social sciences.) I think one strategy is by asking yourself: How do I make this relevant to students’ lives and why does this topic/knowledge matter, in general, to me & my life? Why do students (or I) need to know about acids and bases—who cares? (Maybe because pharmaceutical companies’ mixing things incorrectly can result in the wrong medication that, if you take, will kill you) How does it matter to students’ lives that whales eat plankton? (Because if there were not enough hungry whales and too many plankton, they’d suffocate all of the fish that students like to eat at home) Who cares about how you find the volume of a cylinder? (Because if you are interested in going into x field, or if you want to be a cocktail waitress, this is information that is relevant so you can fill a glass). Ok—so I’m guessing, and being somewhat facetious in my exemplars—I don’t really know. The point is, I think, that if you brainstorm situations in which these facts that you want students to know actually matter somehow to the “bigger picture,” then when you’re trying to elicit responses from students that answer how or why questions, you have some ideas yourself and you can lead students to them even if students don’t see them at first themselves. Whew.
So if anyone is interested in talking more with me—cross content or otherwise—I would like to strategize. As I mentioned, I am very interested in this issue. Even though IC is something that is supposed to be more conducive to the ELA classroom, I feel my students don’t engage in it that often because we spend so much time just nailing down plot / facts of whatever text we’re reading. That said, you know where to find me.
So then, regarding the provocation of student input:
My mentor teacher, as I’m sure all teachers experience, has some days when she really facilitates student talk and other days when students facilitate their own talk rather than paying attention.
Actions that promote: Both of us try to ask IRE and IC questions. She sometimes calls on students who do not contribute or if they appear zoned out / exceedingly sleepy (although sometimes I think this ends up humiliating them if they aren’t paying attention, but I’m not sure if that’s her purpose). I try to ask a lot of clarifying questions when students use ambiguous pronouns, and I often ask students for text/experience-based reasoning for something they say, especially if their contribution appears off topic or I don’t understand. Both of us tend to summarize or paraphrase students. My mentor verbally affirms students who remember and use vocab that has been given.
Actions that inhibit: Our classroom design is not text rich, and I want to try to remedy that when I take the lead in my two classes this semester. Vocab instruction (e.g. on cognates or morphological analysis) is not explicit enough; it’s disembodied from the general context of the class in that it is not generated from texts we are studying, but is provided from a workbook. Sometimes we do not give enough wait time for student responses; as I mentioned before, it is all too easy to pick up on one student’s astute observation and to keep the ball rolling so as not to lose momentum, but you don’t realize until later that you were rolling too quickly and that students were left behind. Also, we sometimes do not scaffold enough, and sometimes we do not ask enough IC questions, so students who already get all of the facts are bored and/or will disrupt the class.
Suzannah’s post mentioned collaborating with other teachers on vocab instruction, which I think would be interesting to try. One of the positive aspects of what I have seen of Word Generation is that the words taught are cross-content areas, so kids are repeatedly exposed to the same vocabulary. I love the idea of being able to collaborate across content areas, but it’s certainly difficult (for me anyway) to feel that you have to seek out colleagues to do this kind of group effort when there are not always structures in place at the institutional level for teachers to cooperate with one another (e.g. common planning times across content areas, team-teaching, or a structure I have seen in some middle schools in which 1 group of students is shared among the same four content teachers, who then are better able to address student needs because they all see the exact same population in varying contexts).
My mentor teacher is not overly concerned with facilitating student discussions surrounding the material presented in our math classes. He is, however, particularly concerned with ensuring that students pay attention to the words that they use when explaining or sharing solution strategies. His concern for correct vocabulary use is connected to facilitating a proper understanding of concepts and problem solving skills.
When I begin teaching trigonometry, there are numerous new vocabulary words that will appear with the new concepts that we address. In addition, there are also many vocabulary words that students will need to recall from previous math exposure. To generate substantive language use among students, I plan on emphasizing correct vocabulary usage through modeling and revoicing student remarks and responses. Furthermore, throughout our unit we will apply trigonometry concepts when solving word problems. This will require that I provide students with tools to not only read the problems within our context, but also with tools that allow them to speak about their approaches to solving the problem. Even more importantly, I will need to provide avenues for students to build off of the comments and strategies of their peers as they work collectively to solve new and challenging problems.
My mentor teacher is very good at ensuring that both types of questions are employed in discussion, both the ones that try to pin down what happened and who it happened to, and the others that require that students bring something to the table in the form of creativity and original thought. Where I think we could improve a lot is in the way vocabulary is taught. I think I posted on this before, but as of now it has been presented as lists of words to be looked up and then memorized. Students are very much on their own, and though the words tend to come from the texts we're reading, that link is never made explicit, nor do students get a chance to practice using the words or an opportunity to hear them in different contexts that matter and mean something to them.
When I start teaching, I'd like to introduce more visual on our classroom walls. The unit I've been planning deals explicitly with the importance of words, and the difference between just 'knowing' a word, and actually 'appropriating' it, making it your own, so that you know how to use it. I hope to introduce an element of choice to our vocabulary learning, and a meta-awareness of language and its importance. I want it to be fun, playful almost, and like Suzannah I have been thinking about how to possibly make games a regular part of vocabulary learning. For my unit, I am trying to link and make analogies between vocabulary and visual images, conceptually and productively, and to go along with that I'd like to start both a word wall and a wall for the accompanying images. Hopefully, we will get to the point where there are enough words so that we can have a secret 'word of the day' and if I hear it, and that student has used it effectively and can explain it, some kind of delicious or minor and awesome prize will be awarded. We will focus on academic language, and also words chosen purposefully from the texts we are reading in a way that will hopefully maximize their understanding of it.
My mentor teacher has an interesting combination of leading conversations, IRE stlye, and allowing students to lead their own smaller discussions in group or pair work. Although students have opportunities in both contexts, I feel like they are mostly in the mindset of looking to the teacher for a definitive right answer, when in fact, our purpose is to find out what they are thinking. As has been said above, there are times for both types of conversations, IRE and IC; having students realize that they have an active and meaningful role in creating knowledge, not just receiving it from an elder is, a work in progess. I am thinking about how I want to convey those different purposes to my students, so I can employ both styles without diminishing their confidence as learners. One strategy I am trying to use more is having students change their response of "I don't know" to "this is why I'm not sure" to make them more aware of their thought process.
One thing my mentor does that does promote student talk is putting the objectives on the board and having a student read them at the beginning of class. She has a "bowl of fun," which contains all the students names, and a student picks a name to start class. Since it is random, and everyone ends up doing it, there is very little pressure or judgment in the interaction among students. They get to try out words that will be at play in the lesson. In addition, we use the bowl of fun when it is appropriate in class, not to put people on the spot, but to give students a nudge to engage in meaningful and minor risk taking, like reading out loud or modeling something with the teacher. Although we do not have ELL's, there is a range of fluency in reading (including students with LD's that affect their processing), but those who read slower or with more difficulty seem comfortable, and their peers certainly do not make fun of them for it.
I wanted to pick up on Jean's discussion of IC and IRE in math and science. I think IC can also be a space for students to wonder. I feel like part of figuring out why a certain operation works or theory holds is making mistakes, thinking up explanations that don't work and figuring out why they don't work.
My mentor teacher is very good at facilitating student talk in her middle school science classes. She is aided, I believe, by the type of curriculum materials she uses, but I think that even if she did not have them she would find a way to get students to share their thoughts. The classes generally use FOSS kits, which really emphasize constructivist learning and therefore build in a lot of opportunities for sharing observations and making temporary connections and theories (which may or may not end up becoming permanent or “correct”). Students are really encouraged to share half-baked ideas or questions, and other students know how to respond appropriately. Establishing a welcoming and respectful atmosphere where this kind of conversation and questioning is expected was key to getting the kids to share their ideas with one another. My mentor has to remind the students to be respectful here and there when things get a little lively, but nothing more than would be expected in a 7th or 8th grade classroom.
As for specific strategies she uses day-to-day, she does many of the things we listed in class: listens, does not cut people off, faces them when they are talking, encourages other students to face the speaker, and will explore an answer even if it is at first confusing or seems incorrect. As I am a more literal and straightforward thinker who has found facilitating open-ended discussions really challenging, this has been an incredible learning experience. I think there are a few key components to doing this well (my working hypothesis!). There are certain types of experiences (hands-on discovery labs, for example) that generate original ideas and really motivate students to want to talk. When it comes time to discuss, there are certain types of questions that seem to work well (Jen’s sheets give some good examples). Lastly, practice leading these types of discussions seems really helpful.
I am most certainly a novice, but I feel like I’ve made progress just identifying some things that seem to work for my mentor teacher. Now I need to practice…a lot.
My mentor is very good at basic IRE and involving the students in class discussion. It is exclusively teacher led and teacher-student. He is also good at that might be termed follow-on IRE where he develops a topic in geometry a little further than was the case in the initial question. Most of the answers though call for fact recall.
It is my wish to develop a more inquiry based instruction style in the class where students will suggest mathematical solutions. If I am successful at this (which will require engineering a notable culture change)IC questioning will play a significant role in learning and students will participate to a greater degree, especially between themselves, than is currently the case. The nature of mathematical thought evolution may be helpful to ELLs in this environment as there is a natural repetition and development to the learning process in many cases.
I wanted to add something since there was some discussion (and confusion) in class today on language objectives. In the MA DOE Language Arts Frameworks, there are Language "Standards" which I think are very adaptable and good foundations from which to form language objectives if you want to specify them for your lessons but don't know where to begin, and/or if your content area frameworks don't include language standards. Furthermore, I believe the ELA standards are applicable across content areas; they are all things you likely want your students to be doing anyway. These frameworks/standards are available on the web, but for ease of dissemination & general knowledge, I will reproduce the general standards here. Each general standard has anywhere from 6 to 30 subtopics which you can read if you look for the document on the internet. Effectively, I think several of the subtopics or the general standards can be used as language objectives, depending on what your purpose for your lesson/unit is.
1: Discussion -- Students will use agreed-upon rules for informal and formal discussions in small and large groups. 2: Questioning, Listening, and Contributing -- Students will pose questions, listen to the ideas of others, and contribute to their own information or ideas in group discussions or interviews in order to acquire new knowledge. 3: Oral Presentation -- Students will make oral presentations that demonstrate appropriate consideration of audience, purpose, and the information to be conveyed. 4: Vocabulary and Concept Development -- Students will understand and acquire new vocabulary and use it correctly in reading and writing. 5: Structure and Origins of Modern English -- Students will analyze standard English grammar and usage and recognize how its vocabulary has developed and been influenced by other languages. 6: Formal and Informal English -- Students will describe, analyze, and use appropriately formal and informal English.
My mentor teach generally incorporates a lot of space for students to engage in discussion and grapple with open ended questions. She does this a bit more in her honors elective course on Modern World History, however, she does include a fair amount of discussion based activities in the other two World History CP courses.
Discussions take place in a variety of formats. Some of them have very tight protocols that limit who can talk, when and the amount of time alloted for each person to speak. Also there are some discussions in which student are given a stance and must prepare to defend it. Other times students have discussions more like the one that we had yesterday in class, where students are offering personal opinions rooted in topics related to issues we are covering in class. Simulations are also used quite a bit in class. For instance, the students engaged in an Enlightenment thinker panel and a forum on what type of government Iran should adopt post-1979 Iranian Revolution.
I plan on making discussion a mainstay of my classroom. I also want to focus more on vocabulary with students, which will enhance the level of conversation students can have. In order to accomplish this in the curriculum I will use for next semester one of the three buckets of skills that students will work on continually is "communication skills." Under this umbrella students will work on the more specific goals of "using high tiered language" and "articulating arguments in writing and orally."My mentor teacher currently does not have a formal way of teaching vocab nor does she have a word wall. I would like to incorporate some routinization of vocab teaching/use, although I am still debating over how to do this on a weekly basis. A word wall, as Alex mentioned, maybe one mechanism I use.
My mentor teacher is good at generating student talk. Since students are reluctant to participate, she asks a lot of factual and straightforward questions that does not require much thought. I find that there is a lack of true discussion going on in our class, and I feel that the students are not being challenged to think more deeply or talk at length about the material that we study in class. However, I really admire her style of encouraging students to speak up. When they say respond to her in anyway, she always praises them for their comment or insight. She takes a very factual response and elaborates it in her own words, and channels student thought.
Since I find my students to be a little daunted at the aspect of speaking up in class. I hope to form smaller groups to allow them to participate in discussion. When I read their written work, I see that they have so much to say and contribute. I think that when I take over the class, I will start with encouraging academic talk in a small environment first, then move on to something bigger. Also, I will introduce academic vocabulary to the students and encourage the use of those certain words when we talk or discuss class material. I will be explicitly pointing out these words as something that we have already learned, and remind students of how we could use them in our dialogue.
Aaron, I really liked the idea of not allowing the "I don't know." response in your classroom. Often that omission is usually made up for by the addition of, "but I will find out," or something like that. I like your idea of making students think about why they are unsure.
My mentor teacher bases our class in discussion everyday. She began the year by placing students in small groups and have them discuss there and then share out with the class, which scaffolded them to be able to contribute effectively as individuals in a whole class discussion. When there are silences, she has students pair and then share out. All of these structures were in place so that students could take on the role as discussion leader. For the rest of the year, the bulk of the classes will be led by students.
Obviously this approach is much easier in a literature class... Our discussions always start with a question that will engage the students and start to think about themselves in relation to the piece of literature we are reading, we then proceed to look closely at the text, and then usually end with another question that broadens the conversation to connect to the real world.
Students in our class are routinely expected to write definitions of mathematical terms in their notebooks. Students are also frequently asked to restate and apply definitions on exit tickets. Unfortunately neither of these activities are structured in a way that it is easy for students to ask questions about the definitions or receive immediate feedback on their usage. This is something that we could improve upon.
My mentor is quite good at identifying words that will cause students trouble during a lesson and stopping to define those words. My lack of experience hampers me in this regard but I am getting better at it.
Compared to my own middle school math classes there is a lot of student talk. Many of the ELL students however experience little peer support when they speak up. One student in particular gets teased a lot for a speech impediment. Others are reluctant to talk at all. My mentor and I do make a point almost every day of saying that it is important to respect the speech of peers, but our efforts have not had visible results.
Some of this post is a little tangential, but I think useful and ultimately relevant.
People have mentioned putting language on the walls of the classroom. My mentor put up this gigantic flow chart which includes 24 key terms for rhetorical analisys. That number on its own is daunting. Presented as a list, it would be unbearable, but the flow chart shows the relationship between terms, and I was surprised to see how many there were. We often refer to this chart during conversations, for instance to help a student articulate a point they are dancing around by indicating that they are talking about a basic idea of the course. I think having the key terms of the course (or unit) visually available makes a big difference.
Our weekly vocab words are also on the board all week. A note on teaching vocab. Our words either come from texts we are reading, or from students, who encounter them in other classes or the world. When we present vocab at the beginning of the week, FIRST the teacher uses it in at least one context. THEN he asks the students what they think it means, and either provides another example, or refines their meaning. THEN a student will try to use it in a new sentence, and we'll work with that. Finally, we ask what part of speech it is and why. On the quiz, students simply generate sentences using the vocab.
This process has two strengths. One, it's a routine, so students no longer need to think about how the lesson is happening. Two, we emphasize the use of vocab in context, which is how it is learned in real life. We rarely go to the dictionary -- an often confusing source. Also, my mentor has let students know that research shows it takes 3-5 years to truly learn a word, and this is an introduction.
Ok, on student talk per se. He is good at IRE v. IC, and talked to me about not pretending it is the latter when it is the former. Generally, if students make assertions, he revoices, and will often ask if anyone else agrees or can challenge what they have to say. The emphasis on rigor shows a great deal of respect for their thoughts. There is also an overt message that "If you don't know, we'll figure it out. We are here to think and work together." Actually saying this makes a difference. He is also good about keeping track of hands, and letting people have their full say. Our kids tend to be into talking in the first place, compared to some people I've spoken to.
I will be teaching a unit on gender, and I think that I will make use of the vocab quiz to drive home important points. Generally, I am learning to differentiate, using visuals and repetition, pre-learning activities etc. in such a way that I think ELLs will be pretty well covered. Maybe that's naive or lazy. Thoughts?
My mentor teacher attempts to facilitate student talk during class-work and cooperative learning assignments. She models for the students what it should look like – a dialogue about the information but she does not explain nor model what the question should sounds like, what the response should be, nor what type of language students should use. When she is presenting new information by giving the students notes, she does not try to initiate student talk at all. She wants the students to copy down what she writes and if they have questions they can ask her.
This semester in Algebra I, I hope to create a word wall with the math vocabulary. This will allow students to visually see the words which will help when they need to explain. I am going to attempt to write out a list of questions, containing both IRE and IC questions, similar to the sheet we received yesterday. I hope this will encourage me to ask a variety of questions and keep the questions connected.
My mentor teacher tries to promote good math discussion by using the physical classroom setup. We have round tables in our room, which allows students to collaborate and ask each other questions when working on problems. However, I think my mentor's lack of wait time sometimes inhibits students from figuring out how to correctly express their math language.
When I begin teaching Algebra 2, I want to emphasize strong math language, since the first unit is devoted to Algebra skills review. I hope to develop a classroom environment where students do not speak over one another and learn to become active listeners. I think active listening is just as important as speaking the language. You cannot have one without the other.
My mentor teacher has taught the students about 'accountable talk' and whenever they are in small group situations they are reminded of what accountable talk means (and there posters up reminding them as well). These seem to have gone fairly well when then they have occurred. However, small groups are quite rare in the class. Large group discussions are almost non-existent, when they do occur they center largely on IRE. I hope to expand upon the good foundation of accountable talk and have the students spend a lot more time in small groups discussing. In addition, later in the semester we will be doing a unit on drama and I will use that opportunity to also emphasize speaking in class and practice having a few large group discussions.
As for the use of academic language, which wouldn't necessarily occur just by having students talk more often, our current use of vocab has been very sporadic. I hope to take a more systematic approach, introduce words of the week that are used on a consistent basis. I think just making things routine will significantly improve the vocab instruction in class.
My mentor teacher does not incorporate an extensive amount of class discussion, however when she does, the topic is always about trying to relate content material to student lives - asking students what they think about certain issues or asking them what they would do in a given situation. That type of conversation (where knowing content material is important but not essential for participating) provides a lot of different entryways for students to participate. Like Suzannah's mentor, however, much of discussion is teacher led and students rarely talk amongst themselves without a "prober."
In my classroom I plan to incorporate many techniques to facilitate student talk. I think it is important to have whole class discussions as well as small group discussion. As a high school student, I often did not want to talk in front of a large class, but had a lot to say and welcomed the opportunity to have conversations with small groups of students. I want to afford that opportunity to my students as well. Also, I think activities where students are moving around - like human barometer or four corners - is a great way to prompt class discussion because it uses student opinion as a catalyst. These types of activities are great for visual learners as well because they allow you to see a spectrum of ideas. Also, it helps solve Aaraon's "I don't know" problem because students HAVE to take a stand and choose a corner - "I don't know" is not an option.
The phrase "student talk" is so huge. My mentor teacher leads a lot of class discussions and creates an open learning environment where everyone can speak. She also acknowledges the fact that most of her kids are Spanish speakers and incorporates that into class discussion. She does not know Spanish, however, so I try to do a bit more to bring it into the classroom since I took Spanish in college.
As for steps to generate substantive academic language, again, this is an enormous question. The teacher has to model the way one would be expected to speak in a college classroom and avoid oral traps and crutches, just as we expect of our students when speaking before a group.
It is interesting how everyone talks about different levels of student participation in the classroom when most classrooms consist of very little large scale participation. Usually teachers put forth questions for volunteers, as my mentor teacher does, and then a select group of a few students answer the vast majority of the questions on a daily basis. Teachers often take this to mean the class as a whole understands the topic they are talking about and can therefore move on. Only the problem is, the minority of the students are participating and it is completely unclear how well or poorly the other students in the classroom understand the material. This played out yesterday in our class as the English teachers were the only ones who volunteered to contribute. The other students it is hard to know how much they did or did not know other than guessing. I try to include a lot more students in my discussions by first establishing early on in the class that when I pose a question I am not looking for an immediate answer of confirmation so that I can move on. I also establish that it is okay to get things wrong, it is not a test or exam. Getting things wrong or not knowing lets me know that we need to review the material before moving on rather than being left in the dark. Once this type of scenario is created I then call on students to answer questions, read aloud, or whatever the task may be through pulling names out of a container. All of the students have their names in the container and their name is never removed. This way students pay attention as they could be called on at any time and I make sure not to choose students because they look particularly interested or disinterested. It keeps everyone honest and focused without singling out anyone as the selection of the names is random. Students at first are pretty filled with tension but I throw some snowballs at them to make sure kids know them and they get more comfortable speaking. The emphasis of understanding that a wrong answer is not the end of the world is also an important concept here.
1) have the opportunity to speak - This requires including discussion opportunities into the lesson plan and she does this very well.
2) visualizing who has and has not spoken during the discussion - T***** spends the first week of class mastering students and the ways in which students respond during discussion so that for the remainder of the school year she can assure that the dominant speakers have their voices heard yet are not stealing the shine from the more quite students.
I will do the same as my mentor teacher as I have seen how productive the procedure can be. I also plan to create a vocabulary list of at least 5 words that I plan to introduce each day (may every couple of days) so that my students will be able to further develop their vocabulary in my class.
My mentor teacher asks a lot of questions, but I would still say her style is very IRE. She doesn't have just one particular answer in her head, but she is also reluctant to acknowledge responses that are completely out of the ballpark. Like Suzannah, I am eager to learn more about how other teachers balance directing the conversation with allowing student talk.
What my mentor teacher is really good at is working one on one with students during independent work time. I feel she really gets students to open up about whatever is troubling them regarding work (or if something personal is holding them back). Presumably, when she leads class discussions, she is able to capitalize on these individual relationships to engage students more in classwide discussions. However, I'm not sure I've seen evidence of this.
My mentor teacher has two methods to introduce vocab to our students. One method is guided readings. She utilizes this method often. As student work is reviewed, the students don't have an active voice, rather the discussion is my mentor asking for the answer and two or three students responding. If students are unable to complete this work in a useful fashion, they have no opportunity to learn the context of the reading. However, guided reading allows for ELL student support by showing the students what to attend to as they read the text. I am unsure if I will use this method in my classroom as much as mentor teacher does. While I see its benefits, I also have witnessed how students disregard it as it becomes commonplace.
My mentor is very adept at allowing students to converse with her and other students as new material is presented. As others have already blogged, this could leave some students out. I am struggling with this method and when to use it. I think that it has to serve a purpose and students need to be guided very effectively for successful exploration.
my mentor teacher is extremely invested in letting the students speak openly to discover the mathematical concepts for themselves. He always talks about planting "seeds" in the discussion which the students will then sort throught via verbal communication with each other in order to arrive at the correct formula or conclusion instead of simply telling them what they need to know.
Although he pushes for class discussion on a high level, he does not demand it from everyone and therefore the students who would be best served by actively speaking in class often are not required to do so and might even tune out because they know they will not be called upon to talk.
I like both bestys and daves comments. Betsy mentioned a word board of sorts and dave specified his desire to make sure that correct language it being used in the classroom. I think these two suggestions work well with each other and are integral to learning the concepts of mathematics more thoroughly. I also think the math staff at East Boston High School should commence for a meeting about correct language and how to maintain consistency as the students graduate from each course and move on to the next one
My mentor teacher is VERY big on discussion. Just today, nearly one hour of class was discussion of a reading...this is a 7/8 grade Humanities class! However, I have seen through the first semester that students are building stamina, and being more engaged. I do worry that she is the "always deep literary analysis type" which is more difficult for some ELLs. On the other hand, when we begin to discuss the bigger ideas from the reading, student who are struggling readers can still participate...they certainly have things to say about societal pressures (something that was talked about today, based on the reading).
While some students participate more than others, she does a good job of getting all students involved one way or another. She doesn't, however, do a lot of small group discussion which may help students who are worried about their English proficiency.
One of the things my mentor is known for is her approachability and how much student input we have in the classroom. We do many group and share out activities, which I have also adopted when lesson planning, where every student has to participate. She believes that through conversation and discussion, students will be able to think better when writing, and vice versa. The issue we have, however, is that we only have a 40minute class period, most of which gets eaten up by mini-lessons, making it difficult to ensure 100% student participation and voice all of the time.
As I mentioned in my previous post, my mentor does mainly lecture with some labs. There is virtually no student talk in the classroom.
As a teacher, I am more inclined toward group work and creating a collaborative community. I hope to build this community from day one, using rotating groups to facilitate student interactions with most or all their peers. Students will work together on inquiry activities, problem solving, and projects. I hope this, as well as frequent class discussions, will encourage students to speak up in class and feel comfortable sharing. I'd also like to have online discussions, but I don't know how feasible that will be with limited technology access.
Word walls are awesome. My students refer to it frequently. If they have time left over on tests or other classwork, you can ask them to make a visual representation of a word.
My teacher uses PowerPoints to always have visual cues of the question at hand. Since we have students with IEPs and ELLs, we move toward universal design rather than targeting ELLs specifically.
Next semester I would like to rethink the questions I ask of my students. I would also like to set up and sustain an environment where students listen to one another. Right now, students have the tendency to tune each other out.
My mentor teacher often spends a lot of time in class reading texts aloud. In terms of soliciting student talk, her style sounds a lot like Hilary's mentor teacher. She focuses a lot on IRE questions, and often there is no time for in depth discussion.
However, as I read a short story out loud with the students today, I tried to skimp on the IRE questions in order to leave more time for in depth discussion. However, the result was that the students ended up confused about what was happening in the story. It turns out they appear to rely somewhat heavily on those IRE questions in order to interpret texts. As I take over, I intend to keep an emphasis on IRE questions while striving to find some other way to stimulate student voice in the classroom.
My mentor teacher--through practices I attempt to imitate--facilitates student talk in by both allowing anything that can be explained, revealed, or verbally supplied in any way by a student to come from a student. He also, during discussion or when questioning students, demands their reflections and answers be proffered in precise, meaningful language. He also insists upon correct grammar.
I assume that these practices are helpful to any ELL students in that they foster an atmosphere of formal diction and clear language. Such an atmosphere will inevitably tend to steep ELL and other students in academic English.
My mentor is fantastic at facilitating conversation and encouraging student talk. She begins just about every discussion with some sort of review to activate prior knowledge and often encourages choral responses. Students become a lot more comfortable sharing in this first minute or two and feel safety in providing a correct or incorrect answer in company. As students move on to answering higher-order questions, she always pushes them on their meaning (for example if they use a pronoun without a subject) and she never dismisses an idea. Even it seems disjointed and potentially off topic she will probe the meaning until a salvageable comment emerges. Students always know that their questions and comments are welcomed and will be taken seriously.
My mentor teacher is excellent at promoting student-student talk in his ocean science classroom but has been much less successful in our biology classroom. The ocean science curriculum is highly engaging and students often are asked to work in groups to complete assignments or labs. In contrast, our biology classwork mostly revolves around book work, videos, and lectures. During lectures in both classes my mentor teacher engages student in a question and answer dialogue where there is a definite right and wrong answer. While he encourages participation, he rarely explores students' ideas that are not "correct". During lecture and other teacher-led activities, students are rarely provided the opportunity to work together to discuss their understanding.
My mentor teacher asks students to look up vocabulary words for the daily DoNow a week before the word will be introduced in class. For our genetics unit we posted vocab terms all over the front wall so that kids could reference them throughout the unit.
ReplyDeleteStrategies that I can employ in my teaching are:
1. Cognate Identification- I can search for an in-depth list of cognates in the primary languages of my students (e.g. Haitian Creole, Spanish, and Portuguese). Does anyone know a good resource for this?
2. Lexical Homographs- Again a list of common lexical homographs would be helpful.
3. I can expose students to scientific academic print as Duke (2000) recommends for their tier 2 and tier 3 words and exciting content.
My mentor teacher follows a very teacher-centered model when leading discussion. Although he frequently "leads" discussion, he rarely insists on hands being raised and usually only hears the students who speak the loudest/say the answer he wants to hear. Students are rarely encouraged to talk to one another about the topics and texts we study. I aim to structure a lot more group work (in part because students have requested it, not simply because the "research" says it's helpful) that will encourage students to become fluent with one another. My students respond well to games, and I have considered giving them word use goals for parts of each class/discussion (i.e. they have to see how many times they can use words from the daily list in their discussion correctly in order to get the prize, etc).I've also been collecting various ways to lead conversations and discussions so as to hear more student voice and more in-depth thinking. Finally, I am very eager to work collaboratively with other content area teachers who teach my students to ensure to target students with the academic vocabulary that spans different classes. For instance, each week we choose as a team a particular set of words to focus on--such as synthesis, compare, analyze, infer--in all of our classes so that we can ensure that students have multiple opportunities and contexts in which to practice/be exposed to academic language.
ReplyDeleteSo, in our module today Suzannah brought up a highly relevant concern that we didn’t really get a chance to address by the end of class—how is the instructional conversation relevant and/or useful for (fact-driven) disciplines such as science or math? I, of course, and as you all are well aware I’m sure, am no expert on the matter, but I would like to take a stab at beginning to answer the question even though that is not our task for tonight (I will get to that in due time).
ReplyDeleteAlso, I apologize for wasting reading time if you aren't interested and for taking up space here, but I didn't want to send out a 3rd mass email in 1 day. :-)
First, I would direct people to Ch. 7 of the Echevarria & Graves, which has a few random prompts in there for the non-humanities folk. If, however, you have no time or inclination to do the reading, feel free to peruse my thoughts and to continue this inquiry with me (if you can’t tell, I’m fascinated by this topic—yes, I’m sometimes a nerd at heart, and I'm an excellent digression artist).
My thoughts—IC and IRE differ in two basic ways, and there is 1 strategy that I think can get teachers to think better about how to do IC. It is also important to keep in mind what Jen said—that there is a time and a place for BOTH types of conversations/questioning. I don’t think anyone is saying that IC is the only appropriate way to teach. The ways I see IRE and IC differing: (1) IRE focuses on “what? when? and where?” questions, while IC focuses on “how? and why?” questions. I don’t mean “how do you do this lab that has specific steps outlined for you?,” but “how does this lab matter to your life?” The other (2nd) difference between the two is that IRE has this atmosphere/tone of “I know the answers; what are they” while IC tries to get students to speculate and tries to send a more collaborative, investigative vibe.
So how do science and math teachers do this? (Another aside: I won’t address history because I feel it’s more similar than dissimilar to the humanities/ELA field and that it’s easier to see how IC can work easily in history/social sciences.) I think one strategy is by asking yourself: How do I make this relevant to students’ lives and why does this topic/knowledge matter, in general, to me & my life? Why do students (or I) need to know about acids and bases—who cares? (Maybe because pharmaceutical companies’ mixing things incorrectly can result in the wrong medication that, if you take, will kill you) How does it matter to students’ lives that whales eat plankton? (Because if there were not enough hungry whales and too many plankton, they’d suffocate all of the fish that students like to eat at home) Who cares about how you find the volume of a cylinder? (Because if you are interested in going into x field, or if you want to be a cocktail waitress, this is information that is relevant so you can fill a glass). Ok—so I’m guessing, and being somewhat facetious in my exemplars—I don’t really know. The point is, I think, that if you brainstorm situations in which these facts that you want students to know actually matter somehow to the “bigger picture,” then when you’re trying to elicit responses from students that answer how or why questions, you have some ideas yourself and you can lead students to them even if students don’t see them at first themselves. Whew.
So if anyone is interested in talking more with me—cross content or otherwise—I would like to strategize. As I mentioned, I am very interested in this issue. Even though IC is something that is supposed to be more conducive to the ELA classroom, I feel my students don’t engage in it that often because we spend so much time just nailing down plot / facts of whatever text we’re reading. That said, you know where to find me.
So then, regarding the provocation of student input:
ReplyDeleteMy mentor teacher, as I’m sure all teachers experience, has some days when she really facilitates student talk and other days when students facilitate their own talk rather than paying attention.
Actions that promote: Both of us try to ask IRE and IC questions. She sometimes calls on students who do not contribute or if they appear zoned out / exceedingly sleepy (although sometimes I think this ends up humiliating them if they aren’t paying attention, but I’m not sure if that’s her purpose). I try to ask a lot of clarifying questions when students use ambiguous pronouns, and I often ask students for text/experience-based reasoning for something they say, especially if their contribution appears off topic or I don’t understand. Both of us tend to summarize or paraphrase students. My mentor verbally affirms students who remember and use vocab that has been given.
Actions that inhibit: Our classroom design is not text rich, and I want to try to remedy that when I take the lead in my two classes this semester. Vocab instruction (e.g. on cognates or morphological analysis) is not explicit enough; it’s disembodied from the general context of the class in that it is not generated from texts we are studying, but is provided from a workbook. Sometimes we do not give enough wait time for student responses; as I mentioned before, it is all too easy to pick up on one student’s astute observation and to keep the ball rolling so as not to lose momentum, but you don’t realize until later that you were rolling too quickly and that students were left behind. Also, we sometimes do not scaffold enough, and sometimes we do not ask enough IC questions, so students who already get all of the facts are bored and/or will disrupt the class.
Suzannah’s post mentioned collaborating with other teachers on vocab instruction, which I think would be interesting to try. One of the positive aspects of what I have seen of Word Generation is that the words taught are cross-content areas, so kids are repeatedly exposed to the same vocabulary. I love the idea of being able to collaborate across content areas, but it’s certainly difficult (for me anyway) to feel that you have to seek out colleagues to do this kind of group effort when there are not always structures in place at the institutional level for teachers to cooperate with one another (e.g. common planning times across content areas, team-teaching, or a structure I have seen in some middle schools in which 1 group of students is shared among the same four content teachers, who then are better able to address student needs because they all see the exact same population in varying contexts).
My mentor teacher is not overly concerned with facilitating student discussions surrounding the material presented in our math classes. He is, however, particularly concerned with ensuring that students pay attention to the words that they use when explaining or sharing solution strategies. His concern for correct vocabulary use is connected to facilitating a proper understanding of concepts and problem solving skills.
ReplyDeleteWhen I begin teaching trigonometry, there are numerous new vocabulary words that will appear with the new concepts that we address. In addition, there are also many vocabulary words that students will need to recall from previous math exposure. To generate substantive language use among students, I plan on emphasizing correct vocabulary usage through modeling and revoicing student remarks and responses. Furthermore, throughout our unit we will apply trigonometry concepts when solving word problems. This will require that I provide students with tools to not only read the problems within our context, but also with tools that allow them to speak about their approaches to solving the problem. Even more importantly, I will need to provide avenues for students to build off of the comments and strategies of their peers as they work collectively to solve new and challenging problems.
My mentor teacher is very good at ensuring that both types of questions are employed in discussion, both the ones that try to pin down what happened and who it happened to, and the others that require that students bring something to the table in the form of creativity and original thought. Where I think we could improve a lot is in the way vocabulary is taught. I think I posted on this before, but as of now it has been presented as lists of words to be looked up and then memorized. Students are very much on their own, and though the words tend to come from the texts we're reading, that link is never made explicit, nor do students get a chance to practice using the words or an opportunity to hear them in different contexts that matter and mean something to them.
ReplyDeleteWhen I start teaching, I'd like to introduce more visual on our classroom walls. The unit I've been planning deals explicitly with the importance of words, and the difference between just 'knowing' a word, and actually 'appropriating' it, making it your own, so that you know how to use it. I hope to introduce an element of choice to our vocabulary learning, and a meta-awareness of language and its importance. I want it to be fun, playful almost, and like Suzannah I have been thinking about how to possibly make games a regular part of vocabulary learning. For my unit, I am trying to link and make analogies between vocabulary and visual images, conceptually and productively, and to go along with that I'd like to start both a word wall and a wall for the accompanying images. Hopefully, we will get to the point where there are enough words so that we can have a secret 'word of the day' and if I hear it, and that student has used it effectively and can explain it, some kind of delicious or minor and awesome prize will be awarded. We will focus on academic language, and also words chosen purposefully from the texts we are reading in a way that will hopefully maximize their understanding of it.
My mentor teacher has an interesting combination of leading conversations, IRE stlye, and allowing students to lead their own smaller discussions in group or pair work. Although students have opportunities in both contexts, I feel like they are mostly in the mindset of looking to the teacher for a definitive right answer, when in fact, our purpose is to find out what they are thinking. As has been said above, there are times for both types of conversations, IRE and IC; having students realize that they have an active and meaningful role in creating knowledge, not just receiving it from an elder is, a work in progess. I am thinking about how I want to convey those different purposes to my students, so I can employ both styles without diminishing their confidence as learners. One strategy I am trying to use more is having students change their response of "I don't know" to "this is why I'm not sure" to make them more aware of their thought process.
ReplyDeleteOne thing my mentor does that does promote student talk is putting the objectives on the board and having a student read them at the beginning of class. She has a "bowl of fun," which contains all the students names, and a student picks a name to start class. Since it is random, and everyone ends up doing it, there is very little pressure or judgment in the interaction among students. They get to try out words that will be at play in the lesson. In addition, we use the bowl of fun when it is appropriate in class, not to put people on the spot, but to give students a nudge to engage in meaningful and minor risk taking, like reading out loud or modeling something with the teacher.
Although we do not have ELL's, there is a range of fluency in reading (including students with LD's that affect their processing), but those who read slower or with more difficulty seem comfortable, and their peers certainly do not make fun of them for it.
I wanted to pick up on Jean's discussion of IC and IRE in math and science. I think IC can also be a space for students to wonder. I feel like part of figuring out why a certain operation works or theory holds is making mistakes, thinking up explanations that don't work and figuring out why they don't work.
yours truly,
Aaron
My mentor teacher is very good at facilitating student talk in her middle school science classes. She is aided, I believe, by the type of curriculum materials she uses, but I think that even if she did not have them she would find a way to get students to share their thoughts. The classes generally use FOSS kits, which really emphasize constructivist learning and therefore build in a lot of opportunities for sharing observations and making temporary connections and theories (which may or may not end up becoming permanent or “correct”). Students are really encouraged to share half-baked ideas or questions, and other students know how to respond appropriately. Establishing a welcoming and respectful atmosphere where this kind of conversation and questioning is expected was key to getting the kids to share their ideas with one another. My mentor has to remind the students to be respectful here and there when things get a little lively, but nothing more than would be expected in a 7th or 8th grade classroom.
ReplyDeleteAs for specific strategies she uses day-to-day, she does many of the things we listed in class: listens, does not cut people off, faces them when they are talking, encourages other students to face the speaker, and will explore an answer even if it is at first confusing or seems incorrect. As I am a more literal and straightforward thinker who has found facilitating open-ended discussions really challenging, this has been an incredible learning experience. I think there are a few key components to doing this well (my working hypothesis!). There are certain types of experiences (hands-on discovery labs, for example) that generate original ideas and really motivate students to want to talk. When it comes time to discuss, there are certain types of questions that seem to work well (Jen’s sheets give some good examples). Lastly, practice leading these types of discussions seems really helpful.
I am most certainly a novice, but I feel like I’ve made progress just identifying some things that seem to work for my mentor teacher. Now I need to practice…a lot.
My mentor is very good at basic IRE and involving the students in class discussion. It is exclusively teacher led and teacher-student. He is also good at that might be termed follow-on IRE where he develops a topic in geometry a little further than was the case in the initial question. Most of the answers though call for fact recall.
ReplyDeleteIt is my wish to develop a more inquiry based instruction style in the class where students will suggest mathematical solutions. If I am successful at this (which will require engineering a notable culture change)IC questioning will play a significant role in learning and students will participate to a greater degree, especially between themselves, than is currently the case. The nature of mathematical thought evolution may be helpful to ELLs in this environment as there is a natural repetition and development to the learning process in many cases.
One more thing: LANGUAGE OBJECTIVES.
ReplyDeleteI wanted to add something since there was some discussion (and confusion) in class today on language objectives. In the MA DOE Language Arts Frameworks, there are Language "Standards" which I think are very adaptable and good foundations from which to form language objectives if you want to specify them for your lessons but don't know where to begin, and/or if your content area frameworks don't include language standards. Furthermore, I believe the ELA standards are applicable across content areas; they are all things you likely want your students to be doing anyway. These frameworks/standards are available on the web, but for ease of dissemination & general knowledge, I will reproduce the general standards here. Each general standard has anywhere from 6 to 30 subtopics which you can read if you look for the document on the internet. Effectively, I think several of the subtopics or the general standards can be used as language objectives, depending on what your purpose for your lesson/unit is.
1: Discussion -- Students will use agreed-upon rules for informal and formal discussions in small and large groups.
2: Questioning, Listening, and Contributing -- Students will pose questions, listen to the ideas of others, and contribute to their own information or ideas in group discussions or interviews in order to acquire new knowledge.
3: Oral Presentation -- Students will make oral presentations that demonstrate appropriate consideration of audience, purpose, and the information to be conveyed.
4: Vocabulary and Concept Development -- Students will understand and acquire new vocabulary and use it correctly in reading and writing.
5: Structure and Origins of Modern English -- Students will analyze standard English grammar and usage and recognize how its vocabulary has developed and been influenced by other languages.
6: Formal and Informal English -- Students will describe, analyze, and use appropriately formal and informal English.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMy mentor teach generally incorporates a lot of space for students to engage in discussion and grapple with open ended questions. She does this a bit more in her honors elective course on Modern World History, however, she does include a fair amount of discussion based activities in the other two World History CP courses.
ReplyDeleteDiscussions take place in a variety of formats. Some of them have very tight protocols that limit who can talk, when and the amount of time alloted for each person to speak. Also there are some discussions in which student are given a stance and must prepare to defend it. Other times students have discussions more like the one that we had yesterday in class, where students are offering personal opinions rooted in topics related to issues we are covering in class. Simulations are also used quite a bit in class. For instance, the students engaged in an Enlightenment thinker panel and a forum on what type of government Iran should adopt post-1979 Iranian Revolution.
I plan on making discussion a mainstay of my classroom. I also want to focus more on vocabulary with students, which will enhance the level of conversation students can have. In order to accomplish this in the curriculum I will use for next semester one of the three buckets of skills that students will work on continually is "communication skills." Under this umbrella students will work on the more specific goals of "using high tiered language" and "articulating arguments in writing and orally."My mentor teacher currently does not have a formal way of teaching vocab nor does she have a word wall. I would like to incorporate some routinization of vocab teaching/use, although I am still debating over how to do this on a weekly basis. A word wall, as Alex mentioned, maybe one mechanism I use.
My mentor teacher is good at generating student talk. Since students are reluctant to participate, she asks a lot of factual and straightforward questions that does not require much thought. I find that there is a lack of true discussion going on in our class, and I feel that the students are not being challenged to think more deeply or talk at length about the material that we study in class. However, I really admire her style of encouraging students to speak up. When they say respond to her in anyway, she always praises them for their comment or insight. She takes a very factual response and elaborates it in her own words, and channels student thought.
ReplyDeleteSince I find my students to be a little daunted at the aspect of speaking up in class. I hope to form smaller groups to allow them to participate in discussion. When I read their written work, I see that they have so much to say and contribute. I think that when I take over the class, I will start with encouraging academic talk in a small environment first, then move on to something bigger. Also, I will introduce academic vocabulary to the students and encourage the use of those certain words when we talk or discuss class material. I will be explicitly pointing out these words as something that we have already learned, and remind students of how we could use them in our dialogue.
Thank you, Jean!
ReplyDeleteAaron, I really liked the idea of not allowing the "I don't know." response in your classroom. Often that omission is usually made up for by the addition of, "but I will find out," or something like that. I like your idea of making students think about why they are unsure.
My mentor teacher bases our class in discussion everyday. She began the year by placing students in small groups and have them discuss there and then share out with the class, which scaffolded them to be able to contribute effectively as individuals in a whole class discussion. When there are silences, she has students pair and then share out. All of these structures were in place so that students could take on the role as discussion leader. For the rest of the year, the bulk of the classes will be led by students.
Obviously this approach is much easier in a literature class... Our discussions always start with a question that will engage the students and start to think about themselves in relation to the piece of literature we are reading, we then proceed to look closely at the text, and then usually end with another question that broadens the conversation to connect to the real world.
Students in our class are routinely expected to write definitions of mathematical terms in their notebooks. Students are also frequently asked to restate and apply definitions on exit tickets. Unfortunately neither of these activities are structured in a way that it is easy for students to ask questions about the definitions or receive immediate feedback on their usage. This is something that we could improve upon.
ReplyDeleteMy mentor is quite good at identifying words that will cause students trouble during a lesson and stopping to define those words. My lack of experience hampers me in this regard but I am getting better at it.
Compared to my own middle school math classes there is a lot of student talk. Many of the ELL students however experience little peer support when they speak up. One student in particular gets teased a lot for a speech impediment. Others are reluctant to talk at all. My mentor and I do make a point almost every day of saying that it is important to respect the speech of peers, but our efforts have not had visible results.
Some of this post is a little tangential, but I think useful and ultimately relevant.
ReplyDeletePeople have mentioned putting language on the walls of the classroom. My mentor put up this gigantic flow chart which includes 24 key terms for rhetorical analisys. That number on its own is daunting. Presented as a list, it would be unbearable, but the flow chart shows the relationship between terms, and I was surprised to see how many there were. We often refer to this chart during conversations, for instance to help a student articulate a point they are dancing around by indicating that they are talking about a basic idea of the course.
I think having the key terms of the course (or unit) visually available makes a big difference.
Our weekly vocab words are also on the board all week. A note on teaching vocab. Our words either come from texts we are reading, or from students, who encounter them in other classes or the world. When we present vocab at the beginning of the week, FIRST the teacher uses it in at least one context. THEN he asks the students what they think it means, and either provides another example, or refines their meaning. THEN a student will try to use it in a new sentence, and we'll work with that. Finally, we ask what part of speech it is and why. On the quiz, students simply generate sentences using the vocab.
This process has two strengths. One, it's a routine, so students no longer need to think about how the lesson is happening. Two, we emphasize the use of vocab in context, which is how it is learned in real life. We rarely go to the dictionary -- an often confusing source. Also, my mentor has let students know that research shows it takes 3-5 years to truly learn a word, and this is an introduction.
Ok, on student talk per se. He is good at IRE v. IC, and talked to me about not pretending it is the latter when it is the former. Generally, if students make assertions, he revoices, and will often ask if anyone else agrees or can challenge what they have to say. The emphasis on rigor shows a great deal of respect for their thoughts. There is also an overt message that "If you don't know, we'll figure it out. We are here to think and work together." Actually saying this makes a difference.
He is also good about keeping track of hands, and letting people have their full say. Our kids tend to be into talking in the first place, compared to some people I've spoken to.
I will be teaching a unit on gender, and I think that I will make use of the vocab quiz to drive home important points. Generally, I am learning to differentiate, using visuals and repetition, pre-learning activities etc. in such a way that I think ELLs will be pretty well covered. Maybe that's naive or lazy. Thoughts?
My mentor teacher attempts to facilitate student talk during class-work and cooperative learning assignments. She models for the students what it should look like – a dialogue about the information but she does not explain nor model what the question should sounds like, what the response should be, nor what type of language students should use. When she is presenting new information by giving the students notes, she does not try to initiate student talk at all. She wants the students to copy down what she writes and if they have questions they can ask her.
ReplyDeleteThis semester in Algebra I, I hope to create a word wall with the math vocabulary. This will allow students to visually see the words which will help when they need to explain. I am going to attempt to write out a list of questions, containing both IRE and IC questions, similar to the sheet we received yesterday. I hope this will encourage me to ask a variety of questions and keep the questions connected.
Betsy
My mentor teacher tries to promote good math discussion by using the physical classroom setup. We have round tables in our room, which allows students to collaborate and ask each other questions when working on problems. However, I think my mentor's lack of wait time sometimes inhibits students from figuring out how to correctly express their math language.
ReplyDeleteWhen I begin teaching Algebra 2, I want to emphasize strong math language, since the first unit is devoted to Algebra skills review. I hope to develop a classroom environment where students do not speak over one another and learn to become active listeners. I think active listening is just as important as speaking the language. You cannot have one without the other.
My mentor teacher has taught the students about 'accountable talk' and whenever they are in small group situations they are reminded of what accountable talk means (and there posters up reminding them as well). These seem to have gone fairly well when then they have occurred.
ReplyDeleteHowever, small groups are quite rare in the class. Large group discussions are almost non-existent, when they do occur they center largely on IRE. I hope to expand upon the good foundation of accountable talk and have the students spend a lot more time in small groups discussing. In addition, later in the semester we will be doing a unit on drama and I will use that opportunity to also emphasize speaking in class and practice having a few large group discussions.
As for the use of academic language, which wouldn't necessarily occur just by having students talk more often, our current use of vocab has been very sporadic. I hope to take a more systematic approach, introduce words of the week that are used on a consistent basis. I think just making things routine will significantly improve the vocab instruction in class.
My mentor teacher does not incorporate an extensive amount of class discussion, however when she does, the topic is always about trying to relate content material to student lives - asking students what they think about certain issues or asking them what they would do in a given situation. That type of conversation (where knowing content material is important but not essential for participating) provides a lot of different entryways for students to participate. Like Suzannah's mentor, however, much of discussion is teacher led and students rarely talk amongst themselves without a "prober."
ReplyDeleteIn my classroom I plan to incorporate many techniques to facilitate student talk. I think it is important to have whole class discussions as well as small group discussion. As a high school student, I often did not want to talk in front of a large class, but had a lot to say and welcomed the opportunity to have conversations with small groups of students. I want to afford that opportunity to my students as well. Also, I think activities where students are moving around - like human barometer or four corners - is a great way to prompt class discussion because it uses student opinion as a catalyst. These types of activities are great for visual learners as well because they allow you to see a spectrum of ideas. Also, it helps solve Aaraon's "I don't know" problem because students HAVE to take a stand and choose a corner - "I don't know" is not an option.
The phrase "student talk" is so huge. My mentor teacher leads a lot of class discussions and creates an open learning environment where everyone can speak. She also acknowledges the fact that most of her kids are Spanish speakers and incorporates that into class discussion. She does not know Spanish, however, so I try to do a bit more to bring it into the classroom since I took Spanish in college.
ReplyDeleteAs for steps to generate substantive academic language, again, this is an enormous question. The teacher has to model the way one would be expected to speak in a college classroom and avoid oral traps and crutches, just as we expect of our students when speaking before a group.
It is interesting how everyone talks about different levels of student participation in the classroom when most classrooms consist of very little large scale participation. Usually teachers put forth questions for volunteers, as my mentor teacher does, and then a select group of a few students answer the vast majority of the questions on a daily basis. Teachers often take this to mean the class as a whole understands the topic they are talking about and can therefore move on. Only the problem is, the minority of the students are participating and it is completely unclear how well or poorly the other students in the classroom understand the material. This played out yesterday in our class as the English teachers were the only ones who volunteered to contribute. The other students it is hard to know how much they did or did not know other than guessing. I try to include a lot more students in my discussions by first establishing early on in the class that when I pose a question I am not looking for an immediate answer of confirmation so that I can move on. I also establish that it is okay to get things wrong, it is not a test or exam. Getting things wrong or not knowing lets me know that we need to review the material before moving on rather than being left in the dark. Once this type of scenario is created I then call on students to answer questions, read aloud, or whatever the task may be through pulling names out of a container. All of the students have their names in the container and their name is never removed. This way students pay attention as they could be called on at any time and I make sure not to choose students because they look particularly interested or disinterested. It keeps everyone honest and focused without singling out anyone as the selection of the names is random. Students at first are pretty filled with tension but I throw some snowballs at them to make sure kids know them and they get more comfortable speaking. The emphasis of understanding that a wrong answer is not the end of the world is also an important concept here.
ReplyDeleteMy mentor teacher makes sure that all students:
ReplyDelete1) have the opportunity to speak - This requires including discussion opportunities into the lesson plan and she does this very well.
2) visualizing who has and has not spoken during the discussion - T***** spends the first week of class mastering students and the ways in which students respond during discussion so that for the remainder of the school year she can assure that the dominant speakers have their voices heard yet are not stealing the shine from the more quite students.
I will do the same as my mentor teacher as I have seen how productive the procedure can be. I also plan to create a vocabulary list of at least 5 words that I plan to introduce each day (may every couple of days) so that my students will be able to further develop their vocabulary in my class.
My mentor teacher asks a lot of questions, but I would still say her style is very IRE. She doesn't have just one particular answer in her head, but she is also reluctant to acknowledge responses that are completely out of the ballpark. Like Suzannah, I am eager to learn more about how other teachers balance directing the conversation with allowing student talk.
ReplyDeleteWhat my mentor teacher is really good at is working one on one with students during independent work time. I feel she really gets students to open up about whatever is troubling them regarding work (or if something personal is holding them back). Presumably, when she leads class discussions, she is able to capitalize on these individual relationships to engage students more in classwide discussions. However, I'm not sure I've seen evidence of this.
My mentor teacher has two methods to introduce vocab to our students. One method is guided readings. She utilizes this method often. As student work is reviewed, the students don't have an active voice, rather the discussion is my mentor asking for the answer and two or three students responding. If students are unable to complete this work in a useful fashion, they have no opportunity to learn the context of the reading. However, guided reading allows for ELL student support by showing the students what to attend to as they read the text. I am unsure if I will use this method in my classroom as much as mentor teacher does. While I see its benefits, I also have witnessed how students disregard it as it becomes commonplace.
ReplyDeleteMy mentor is very adept at allowing students to converse with her and other students as new material is presented. As others have already blogged, this could leave some students out. I am struggling with this method and when to use it. I think that it has to serve a purpose and students need to be guided very effectively for successful exploration.
my mentor teacher is extremely invested in letting the students speak openly to discover the mathematical concepts for themselves. He always talks about planting "seeds" in the discussion which the students will then sort throught via verbal communication with each other in order to arrive at the correct formula or conclusion instead of simply telling them what they need to know.
ReplyDeleteAlthough he pushes for class discussion on a high level, he does not demand it from everyone and therefore the students who would be best served by actively speaking in class often are not required to do so and might even tune out because they know they will not be called upon to talk.
I like both bestys and daves comments. Betsy mentioned a word board of sorts and dave specified his desire to make sure that correct language it being used in the classroom. I think these two suggestions work well with each other and are integral to learning the concepts of mathematics more thoroughly. I also think the math staff at East Boston High School should commence for a meeting about correct language and how to maintain consistency as the students graduate from each course and move on to the next one
My mentor teacher is VERY big on discussion. Just today, nearly one hour of class was discussion of a reading...this is a 7/8 grade Humanities class! However, I have seen through the first semester that students are building stamina, and being more engaged. I do worry that she is the "always deep literary analysis type" which is more difficult for some ELLs. On the other hand, when we begin to discuss the bigger ideas from the reading, student who are struggling readers can still participate...they certainly have things to say about societal pressures (something that was talked about today, based on the reading).
ReplyDeleteWhile some students participate more than others, she does a good job of getting all students involved one way or another. She doesn't, however, do a lot of small group discussion which may help students who are worried about their English proficiency.
One of the things my mentor is known for is her approachability and how much student input we have in the classroom. We do many group and share out activities, which I have also adopted when lesson planning, where every student has to participate. She believes that through conversation and discussion, students will be able to think better when writing, and vice versa. The issue we have, however, is that we only have a 40minute class period, most of which gets eaten up by mini-lessons, making it difficult to ensure 100% student participation and voice all of the time.
ReplyDeleteAs I mentioned in my previous post, my mentor does mainly lecture with some labs. There is virtually no student talk in the classroom.
ReplyDeleteAs a teacher, I am more inclined toward group work and creating a collaborative community. I hope to build this community from day one, using rotating groups to facilitate student interactions with most or all their peers. Students will work together on inquiry activities, problem solving, and projects. I hope this, as well as frequent class discussions, will encourage students to speak up in class and feel comfortable sharing. I'd also like to have online discussions, but I don't know how feasible that will be with limited technology access.
Word walls are awesome. My students refer to it frequently. If they have time left over on tests or other classwork, you can ask them to make a visual representation of a word.
ReplyDeleteMy teacher uses PowerPoints to always have visual cues of the question at hand. Since we have students with IEPs and ELLs, we move toward universal design rather than targeting ELLs specifically.
Next semester I would like to rethink the questions I ask of my students. I would also like to set up and sustain an environment where students listen to one another. Right now, students have the tendency to tune each other out.
My mentor teacher often spends a lot of time in class reading texts aloud. In terms of soliciting student talk, her style sounds a lot like Hilary's mentor teacher. She focuses a lot on IRE questions, and often there is no time for in depth discussion.
ReplyDeleteHowever, as I read a short story out loud with the students today, I tried to skimp on the IRE questions in order to leave more time for in depth discussion. However, the result was that the students ended up confused about what was happening in the story. It turns out they appear to rely somewhat heavily on those IRE questions in order to interpret texts. As I take over, I intend to keep an emphasis on IRE questions while striving to find some other way to stimulate student voice in the classroom.
My mentor teacher--through practices I attempt to imitate--facilitates student talk in by both allowing anything that can be explained, revealed, or verbally supplied in any way by a student to come from a student. He also, during discussion or when questioning students, demands their reflections and answers be proffered in precise, meaningful language. He also insists upon correct grammar.
ReplyDeleteI assume that these practices are helpful to any ELL students in that they foster an atmosphere of formal diction and clear language. Such an atmosphere will inevitably tend to steep ELL and other students in academic English.
-Matt
My mentor is fantastic at facilitating conversation and encouraging student talk. She begins just about every discussion with some sort of review to activate prior knowledge and often encourages choral responses. Students become a lot more comfortable sharing in this first minute or two and feel safety in providing a correct or incorrect answer in company. As students move on to answering higher-order questions, she always pushes them on their meaning (for example if they use a pronoun without a subject) and she never dismisses an idea. Even it seems disjointed and potentially off topic she will probe the meaning until a salvageable comment emerges. Students always know that their questions and comments are welcomed and will be taken seriously.
ReplyDeleteMy mentor teacher is excellent at promoting student-student talk in his ocean science classroom but has been much less successful in our biology classroom. The ocean science curriculum is highly engaging and students often are asked to work in groups to complete assignments or labs. In contrast, our biology classwork mostly revolves around book work, videos, and lectures. During lectures in both classes my mentor teacher engages student in a question and answer dialogue where there is a definite right and wrong answer. While he encourages participation, he rarely explores students' ideas that are not "correct". During lecture and other teacher-led activities, students are rarely provided the opportunity to work together to discuss their understanding.
ReplyDelete-Shannon