Task 1:
Pre-Posting – Read all of the Freeman & Freeman, Chapter 4 (How Do People Learn and How Do They Acquire Language?)
Posting – From all of the questions at the end of the chapter (pg 101), Key Points, identify 2 you would most want to explore/take up/discuss. What theories or research supports resonates and could be used to bolster your teaching philosophy? What is your own personal and professional rationale for choosing these questions?
The first key point I will discuss is, language learners use various strategies to communicate in a second language. I found this section interesting because I haven't been in many situations where English wasn't the main language. So it was interesting to me to see how those who are in a situation where their language is not their first language and what they do to "survive" I was not surprised that the natural response is to use nonverbal strategies. I find that I use nonverbal strategies a lot when I am explaining something even though I am in a situation where I am familiar with the language. I believe that using those nonverbal strategies really help emphasize or clarify what you are talking about. When I teach, I will remember this and try to use nonverbal strategies to help those students who are ELL. Another strategy is to paraphrase, using a word or phrase they hope is equivalent to the word they lack. I have seen this a lot with my nieces and nephews. They describe things and then I have to think what they are describing and then ask them if such and such is the word and they say yes or no. So I would see how someone learning a language would use this. They would have an idea of what the word is, but just can't remember what the word is. I think its a great start though that they can explain the word; shows they aren't just giving up. I think the strategy of avoidance is important. If the students avoid using those words, then they won't learn the words or will miss out on other important topics because they avoided the word that is used in the new definition. In math, a lot of the times vocab words are used within other vocab words. So if a students avoids a word, they may then have difficulty for other words. So it will be important to try to help students to not avoid words. I would hope I would be able to help the students feel confident and comfortable with me to use the strategy of asking how do you say....? This will help them learn the word and help them be successful in the future.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeletethe second key point I will discuss is, Vygotsky distinguishes between spontaneous concepts acquired through everyday experience and scientific concepts developed in school. In our classes we have talked about how students have difficulty reading content readings because the language becomes so rich and different than every day things they can relate to. I found this section interesting and thought of literacy when I was reading this. how we discussed students can read well in their early years because they can relate and is everyday examples, but when they get into the content, literacy becomes more difficult and words mean different things depending on the subject. I found the example of adults who had schooling and adults who didn't and their responses when asked which word doesn't fit. I can see both examples and how someone would think that way, but really showed how spontaneous and scientific concepts differ. So I think it is important for us as teachers to help the students learn the scientific concepts to help them be successful. It will be important to help them see how they can use their everyday concepts though to help them with the scientific concepts. A question though I would have is, would these scientific concepts be difficult for ELL students or regular students to fully understand knowing that many of the scientific concepts may vary depending on the subject and they may vary from the everyday concepts?
ReplyDeleteYou ask a great question, Sara. I think the scientific concepts, and academic language in general, would be especially difficult for ELL students simply because in English, there are so many multiple meaning words. These words often vary across content area. One example in one of my TESL textbooks was the word "table," which has a totally different meaning in English class (the thing we eat at) than it does in science or math class (a chart full of data). There are lots of examples of these multiple meaning words, so teachers in different content areas should be aware (or at least patient) when their students don't understand right away.
DeleteSara and Rachael,
DeleteContinuing the discussion of the question Sara posed, one idea that teachers/schools could use is to create a basic list of the most commonly used academic language in their discipline, and what it means. If teachers could provide students with a general terminology vocabulary list (with definitions/examples) at the beginning of a course, it would likely make the rest of the course go more smoothly for all involved. Also, if ELL students know that their teacher understands that sometimes the language just doesn’t make sense to them, they might feel more comfortable asking questions about other words that aren’t on the list.
You three make some great points! This key idea is my third choice for this discussion post. I definitely agree with David's idea and I think this is why we had to include a vocabulary list or glossary with our thematic unit plan. New scientific concepts, communications class vocabulary and mathematical equations are all different types of "language". I agree with Rachael in particular that we as teachers need to be patient with our students as they learn these new "languages", as well as be aware of the similarities and differences between them.
DeleteThe first point I strongly support from the Freeman and Freeman reading is the idea of personal invention when it comes to ELLs producing language. This is Goodman and Goodman’s theory, and it is something I am always excited to observe in my students. Language invention happens when students have observed a lot of language that is either written or spoken by native or high proficiency non-native speakers, and have figured out the language patterns, and try to apply their observations to a new context. This is great progress! Even if they are incorrect, their creative constructions show that they are engaged in language learning because they are trying to make deductions on their own. If this occurs in my classroom, I will encourage it by asking them why they made that language choice and what they learned and were trying to emulate. Then I might recast the correct use of the language (through modeling) or explicitly correct their error and give them the reason for why the language is constructed in that way. The feedback I give them would depend on the context of the error. If the student’s goal was to practice fluency or to make themselves understood when explaining something, I probably would not correct the error explicitly but rather recast it to model correct use so they can continue to get their point across. If the goal of the student was to practice a certain language form, then I would more explicitly correct it.
ReplyDeleteThe second main point I took away from this chapter was Chomsky’s distinction between language competence and language performance. From my TESL classes, experiences in the classroom with ELLs, and own language learning experience, I have deduced that it is much easier to understand/comprehend language than to produce it, especially at first. Therefore, even though students may struggle to produce language in the classroom (written or spoken), it does NOT mean that they do not understand what is going on in the classroom. It is important for teachers to understand that to STAY ENGAGED with the ELL and not just leave them to flounder because “they don’t understand what’s going on in the classroom anyway.” The best way a teacher can approach an ELL is to understand this discrepancy and continually check in with the student to ensure their understanding, even if the teacher thinks the student won’t be able to produce the language well.
Rachael,
DeleteI am not familiar with a lot of the material that we read. I found it opened my eyes for a lot of it. This is one area that I worry about when I will start teaching, how I can work with them to help them be successful in my classroom. I like that you mention that it is harder to produce language and easier to understand/comprehend. Thinking about it, I agree! This will be something that I will need to remember when I am teaching. It will be important to keep working with the student and finding ways that we can work together to help the student be successful.
Rachael,
DeleteI like that you make the point about it being important to understand why the student is using the language before stepping in to correct their error. In my foreign language teaching classes, error correction was always one of the main subjects. I agree with you that it is important not to correct errors explicitly if the goal of the student is simply to communicate. Too much error correction can quickly lead to students not wanting to try speaking at all.
I also agree that it is important to make an effort to keep checking in with students to make sure they’re understanding. Thank you!
Wow! Rachael, you create such a great explanation of why this key point is so important. I agree with Sara that lots of this material was new to me. It was so nice to think about many things we've already discussed through the eyes of an ELL student. I will definitely remember these points you made while I'm student teaching.
DeleteThanks!
The first key point that I would like to elaborate on is the third on the list. Goodman and Goodman argue that teachers should support personal invention in the context of social conventions. Their argument is somewhat exciting to me because I strive to do this every day in the classes I teach. To be fair, this seems to be much more easily applicable on a daily basis to language arts classrooms than to others such as math, science or history. Personal invention strikes me as quite similar to creating, which is the highest level of Bloom’s Taxonomy. Continuing onto the second portion of the Goodmans’ claim, “in the context of social conventions”, we find the portion that reminds me most of language arts classrooms. Without other people to talk to (or to read writings from), language serves no purpose. In a language classroom, then, our goal is to get students to a level in which they are able to use the language appropriately and comfortably. I find this argument especially applicable to the beginner-level language classrooms that I am used to because we focus more on simply being able to communicate (socially) in various situations, than on studying the grammatical aspects of the language itself.
ReplyDeleteIn classrooms that do not revolve around language acquisition, I think this statement would mean that we should strive to give students opportunities to use the concepts we’re teaching them in a personalized way. For example, in a mathematics classroom a teacher could have students in groups use new formula’s they have learned to design personalized building plans/dimensions for their dream homes.
In short, if Bloom’s Taxonomy shows us that the goal is to guide students to a level at which they are able to create using the content we’re teaching them, Goodman and Goodman add to this by saying that students need to create with others.
The second key point that I see as very important for educators to remember is that language competence is not the same as language performance. In many cases students know or understand much more than they are able to demonstrate. For example, in Spanish students often know the rules for conjugating verbs in the past, present and future, but struggle to use them correctly when telling a story or giving a presentation. As discussed in the chapter, there are a variety of factors that influence language performance. The reason that it is so important for educators to remember this in all subject areas is that students need to be given the opportunity to demonstrate their knowledge and abilities in a variety of ways. Just because a student does not use the proper academic language in an essay or a presentation does not mean that they don’t know the proper language. Just as we believe that students should be presented the information in various ways and given multiple opportunities to work with it, so also should we plan to assess and evaluate their knowledge and abilities about it in different ways.
David,
DeleteThank you for the example for a math class! I like that idea! I will keep that in mind for the future! I will try to allow the students to communicate with each other and work together during class on a project like the dream house so they get a chance to practice using the language. When I was in Spanish class, I would know words or how I would use the verbs, but I always struggled with putting them together to form a sentence. I could never remember how to structure it and make sure i was using the write form! Which is why it is important to remember that just because they don't use the proper academic language doesn't mean they don't know the proper language. I also agree that we should be presented the information in various ways and multiple opportunities to work with it. This is something I will try to do with my math lessons.
David,
DeleteHow funny that we chose the same two main points to discuss! I guess we have the same values when it comes to teaching language. I really like your explanation of language comprehension vs. production, especially when you point out that just because a student uses improper language in a presentation does not mean they don't know the proper language. That was a little different explanation than mine, but its important to make the distinction like you did that the student may very well have learned the correct language to use, but just hasn't internalized it enough to incorporate it in to their spontaneous speech. Thanks for making that distinction.
I also found it interesting that you and Rachael chose one of the same key points! I was glad to read about your explanation and views of language comprehension vs. production. It's so nice to read all of my group members' explanations, and hear your thoughts and opinions. Often times you three make many points I would not have thought of!
DeleteThank you!
First of all, I thought the information, theories and research given throughout this chapter was very helpful. It was nice to get a refresher on Vygotsky and other theorists. If I were to choose two key points from page 101 to focus on for further research, I would choose
ReplyDelete1) Fisher and Frey's model of teaching includes four stages: teacher modeling, guided instruction, collaborative work, and independent practice.
2) Vygotsky claims that people learn when instruction is targeted to their zones of proximal development.
While reading about these two ideas or philosophies, I could really relate the material to how I would teach a lesson in chemistry class. I also thought that these two philosophies intertwine very well. I've said this a million times, but so often in chemistry classes students automatically handicap themselves because their "parents were bad at chemistry" or their "friends had to drop the class because it was so hard". The excuses are endless and this causes many students to give up before even beginning the course. I think this is where Vygotsky's zone of proximal development comes into play, as well as Fisher and Frey's strategies. In order to be successful with a class, you need to determine at what learning level your students are at. I struggled with this skill this past semester as I taught AP Chemistry, as well as Practical Chemistry (a step below general chem). In order to help students succeed, I had to challenge my students, while also ensure I'm not pushing them too hard. You need to find a balance or this zone of proximal development, and this zone may be very different for each of your classes. Also, in order for my chemistry students to be successful, I needed to use the different teaching strategies that Fisher and Frey discussed. For instance, I would begin a difficult problem by walking through it myself on the board. I would then give the students another problem and we would walk through it together. Students might then work in pairs to complete a different problem, and eventually students should be able to complete a set of these same types of problems on their own. This gradual move from teacher to student independence is so important in the classroom, especially in my science classroom. Using these strategies can make something so daunting seem easy!!
This was great information and it was difficult to choose two pieces I would want to elaborate on.
Thanks!
Dani,
DeleteI like the key points that you chose. Modeling and the ZPD are two very important things for teachers to use and consider in all content areas. I think sometimes it can be difficult to try and find the zone of proximal development for a whole class because students vary so greatly. Hopefully, though, by following the modeling sequence you wrote about and working with their peers, students will bring their personal ZPD’s closer together while they learn in groups.
Thank you for your post, Dani.
Dani,
DeleteI have similar handicaps in math, students automatically think they are bad at it because of previous experiences or because of those around them. I think you bring up a good point that we need to find the balance for the zone of proximal development, we don't want to push them too hard but at the same time not push them hard enough. I also like how you model at the board then have them practice. This is something I do a lot during my lessons, I model how the students should be solving or how to write the process down and then have them work on an example by themselves and we double check what they got as a class.
Dani,
ReplyDeleteYou have a great approach to teaching chemistry! I think you're exactly right that students psych themselves out about your content area because of what they've heard about it or their perceptions about it, so it really is a challenge for you and all chem teachers to determine your students' ZPD to ensure they aren't bored because it's too easy, or frustrated because it's too hard which will lead them to give up. I like how you applied both of these theories specifically to your content area-- it shows your commitment to your students in your chemistry classes!