Blog Entry 10: Homework Structure

Homework Structure

Rationale/Purpose for Homework and Independent Work:

Students will occasionally ask, “If we’re in school all day, why do we also have to do homework?” In fact, parents may be wondering the same thing. As teachers, we must make sure we effectively communicate the purpose for our homework assignments. First, Hill and Flynn (2006) state that students spend only 13% of their waking hours in their first 18 years of life. So, it seems reasonable expectation that students do some work on their own time. Also, students need to be developing this work ethic because the simple truth is that every year their teachers will expect them to do increasing amounts of homework. They need to develop this work ethic to succeed in the school system. But the most important reason for assigning homework and independent work is to give students the opportunity to practice and apply the new skills learned in class (Hill and Flynn, 2006). Hill and Flynn (2006) cite research to show that on average native speaking students need to practice a new skill 24 times before they gain proficiency; ELL student often need even more practice. Homework and independent work are an excellent way to provide students with such an opportunity for practice and application. The teacher teaches the students a new class in class. Students begin practicing the new skill in the classroom, while the teacher observes and offers help to students as needed. Then, the students go home and spend a little more time practicing the new skill by themselves.

What Constitutes Meaningful Homework?

 For homework to be meaningful, it must meet 3 criteria. First, it must either be practice or application of a new skill that has been learned in class, or it must prepare students for future learning, such as having students read a brief article on a topic they be examining in class in much more depth (Hill and Flynn, 2006). Students should be able to complete the homework assignment by themselves; since it is practice or preparing for new learning, students should not need their parents’ assistance (Hill and Flynn, 2006). Because students should be able to complete the homework assignment independently, homework assignments may need to be differentiated to the level of different students, especially ELL students (Hill and Flynn, 2006). Perhaps most importantly, students must understand the purpose of the homework assignment. The teacher must explain that the homework is assignment with the purpose of giving the students the opportunity to gain mastery of the new skill they have learned (Hill and Flynn, 2006).

Intended Objectives:

The assigning of homework can actually serve three objectives. First, It is a way of letting students gain first-hand experience of the connection between effort and success. Hill and Flynn (2006) state that for many students this connection--that many teachers might take as a self-evident truth—needs to be explicitly taught to many students. When students practice newly learned skills, they will see that gain greater mastery of that skill, perform better on assessments, and earn better grades. The assigning of homework also prepares students for future in success in school. I teach 7^th and 8^th graders. When they reach high school, their teachers will certainly be expecting them to do a certain amount of homework each week. They need to start building this work ethic now. The primary objective for homework, however, is to provide students with the opportunity to master the skills they learn in class (Hill and Flynn, 2006). My primary homework assignment is for students to create a reading-response journal taken from a book they are reading outside of class. If we are working on supporting interpretations of the text based on specific textual evidence, for example, student’s homework will be to support interpretations of their outside reading based on specific textual evidence. The homework, then, provides the opportunity to practice this new skill and even apply this skill to another text.

Providing Specific Feedback:

Providing feedback on student’s homework is crucial. First, students need to know that their homework is valuable enough for the teacher to spend time assessing. Even more importantly, if the objective of homework is for students to gain mastery of the skills taught in class, then the teacher needs to know where students are excelling in terms of the new skill and where the students may need further instruction and assistance. Furthermore, the students themselves need to know where they are excelling and where they can improve.

I will provide feedback in at least three different ways.  First, I will assess each student’s reading journal for the quality in which they apply the skill to their outside reading. I will write my comments next to their entries, explaining their strengths and areas of improvement. Occasionally, I will have students assess each other’s reading journal. They will not give a grade, or course, but they will explain where they think their classmate did excellent work and where they might still improve. Finally, I will also provide an overhead example of student’s work (making sure to gain permission first) and have the class break into small groups to assess the strengths and areas for improvement of student work. When I see a common pattern among a number of students (either strengths or areas for improvement) I can also create my own journal entry from these common patterns to have the class discuss.

 Using Technology in the Communication Process:

It is important to communicate general and specific homework requirements along with the purpose and rationale of the homework to both students and parents. Harry Wong (2009) provides many helpful strategies for such communication. Before school even begins, I will send a letter and email to each family explaining my purpose and rationale for homework and general requirements, such as students will need to do about an hour a week of outside reading and responding. I will also create a class webpage which will contain each week’s homework assignment, so that both students and parents have access to all class assignments, including homework. 

Reference List

Hill, Jane D., & Flynn, Kathleen M. (2006). Classroom Instruction that works with English Language Learners. Alexandria, VA. ACSD.

Wong, Harry K. and Rosemary T. (2009). The First Days of School: How To Be An Effective Teacher. Mountain View, CA. Harry K. Wong Publications.

Week 6. Blog Entry #9: Fiction and Non-Fiction

Discussion Accompanying Contrasting of Textbook and Fiction

I created a “double-bubble” thinking map to compare and contrast fictional books and textbooks. The two large bubbles on the left and right represent textbooks (left) and fictional books (right). The three center bubbles are used for things each of these genres have in common. I have placed the “Title Page” and “Table of Contents” as similar features. Both textbooks and fictional books have a title page that contains the title, author, and publisher. Both also have a table of contents that lists things in the order of presentation. After these two areas of similarity, I saw many differences between the two genres.

I used the upper left bubble (textbook) and upper right bubble (fictional books) to show what each genre covers. The fact they this information is presented in opposite boxes shows that there exists a similarity in the major category under examination, namely “what each genre covers.” But the fact that this information is presented in opposite bubbles instead of the three interior bubbles shows that there is a major contrast. Fictional books cover character development, plotline, and theme. These categories are usually not addressed in a textbook. A textbook usually covers content and vocabulary.

The rest of the information presented in my thinking map is all listed under the textbook genre and does not have a corresponding category in fictional books. In sharp contrast to fictional books, textbooks usually have heading and subheadings, appendixes, graphic features, a bibliography, and a glossary. Also, textbooks tend to be structured differently than fictional books. Textbooks are usually structured chronologically, of course there are some exceptions. Textbooks can be structured chronologically, especially history textbooks. But textbooks can also be structured topically, by comparing and contrasting things, in a cause and effect manner, and even in a problem and solution manner.

I believe most features of texts will support English language learners. There are less text features in a fictional book, but those present will only support an English language learner. The table of contents will be very helpful, especially if it gives names to each chapter. The reader can look at the chapters and get a general idea what happens. The reader can even look at the entire list of chapters, if they have names, and get a sense of the entire flow of the story; the reader may get a sense of some of the events in the book and the different places in which these events may occur. Such previewing can only help an English language learner, or any reader for that matter. The back of the book may also provide the English language learner with additional support. The back of the book often gives a brief summary of the synopsis of the book, which would help the English language learner get an overall sense of the plotline, the major characters, and even the setting. The title page might offer some support. The English language learner could certainly develop an idea about the story by the book’s title. He might even recognize the name of the author and thereby anticipate a certain style of writing or genre. I doubt the name of the publisher would either provide support or cause any additional difficulties.

Textbooks generally have more features than fictional books—and most of these features will provide added support for an English language learner, or any reader for that matter. The title page will give the English language reader a sense of what topic the textbook covers. The table of contents will provide a big help to the English language learner.  He can preview the overall scope of material covered in the book. He can also get a sense of what he can expect to be covered in each chapter before he actually begins reading the chapter. The progression of the chapters presented in the table of contents will even tell the reader in what manner the book is structured, such as chronologically, topically, cause and effect, problem solution.

There are several features commonly seen in textbooks that will also provide support for the English language learner. Most topics have headings and sub-headings. While this language may be academic and, therefore, cause some difficulties, such language cannot be avoided in textbooks. Once the English language learner can grasp the meaning behind this language, heading and sub-headings are very helpful. They help the reader keep his thinking focused only on the material under consideration. The reader knows that all the information they read should fit under the broad heading or slightly less broad sub-heading. Graphic features are also very helpful. Pictures, graphs and photos can be very helpful for and ELL student struggling with some of the language to make sense of the material. A glossary is also very helpful for the ELL student. Textbooks by nature are academic—and this is usually the last type of language developed by an ELL student. The ELL student may know the word under consideration in his native language—he may know the concept. But he may not know the word in English. The glossary will allow the ELL student to look up the definition of an academic word he does not know.

A couple features of a textbook will probably not be that helpful to an ELL student, but neither will they cause difficulties. Textbooks often have a forward. It could help, if the student even reads the forward. I must admit, I often do not read the forward. If the student reads the forward, he may indeed get some meaning from the forward. If he is only confused by the forward, however, this will not interfere with his reading of the text, as the text can certainly stand on its own independent of the forward. I also think the bibliography will offer little in the way of support and nothing in the way of difficulties. The bibliography could provide some support if a student was really passionate about a subject and wanted to do some additional research. But it will not provide any difficulties because, like the forward, it is really independent from the meaning of the text itself.

The main difficulty I see for the ELL student reading a textbook is the academic language, which is typically the last part of language developed, and the academic content and concepts, which may entirely new to the ELL student, or for any student.

 

Week 5: Blog Entry #8. Sheltered Instruction

Due to difficulties in accessing this week's video, I am reviewing an article on sheltered instruction that I found on EBSCO. This article Teacher Learning and ELL Reading Achievement in Sheltered Instruction Classrooms: Linking Professional Development to Student Development examined the effectiveness of Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol (SIOP) on student achievement.

The SIOP model is built upon the sociocultural theory of Lev Vygotsky, who emphasized the role of culture in learning. The SIOP model has eight components: preparation, which include preparing both content and language learning objectives, building background knowledge, comprehensible input, strategies, interaction, practice/application, lesson delivery, and review/assessment.

This study began by training 21 teachers in the implementation of these eight components. The training was fairly extensive. It occured over 18 months and totalled 50 hours. The researchers wanted to ensure that the classrooms they were examining were in fact thorougly implementing the SIOP model. In fact, of the 21 teachers who went through this training, only 7 were included in the final study because only these 7 were seen by the researchers an fully implementing the SIOP model. By including only these 7 teachers, the researchers were doing everything they could to ensure they were actually testing the success of the SIOP program.

The research experiment compared the students of the 7 teachers who were selected to participate in the final study against a random set of students in other classrooms across the district. The findings seem to me to be less than overwhelmingly persuasive. The first variable used to test the achievement of the two sets of students was the PAS Reading test. McIntyre states, "Importantly, however, results indicated no statisically significant differences in PAS Reading test scores" (2010, p. 344). Its seems because the first variable (the PAS Reading test) showed no significant difference, the researchers then implemented a second test. It seems that they used the same PAS Reading test, but this time they considered student's pre-test scores (before the SIOP instruction) and post-test scores (after the SIOP instruction). This time the researchers did find a significance difference between the treatment group and non-treatment group. As I am not an expert in conducting research experiments, I am not sure why they did not consider pre-test and post-test scores from the outset, but I assume they--the experts--had their reasons. But even the significant difference caused by the second test did not result in great optimism of the researchers. In the section labeled "Discussion and Conclusions" McIntyre states, "This study illustrates that the SIOP model at least does not appear detrimental to reading achievement and may even support it, i f it is fully implemented as intended by the model authurs" (2010, p. 346).

This research project took volunteers, who presumably were encouraged by the model under consideration, provided ongoing professional development in how to implement the model for 18 months; they the researchers selected on 1/3 of the participants--those who they deemed most successful at implementing the model into their classrooms--for the final study. And then they get mixed results. The first method of analysis showed no significant difference between students exposed to the instruction and those who were not. And while the second method of analysis did show a significant difference, the researchers themselves conclude the model "at least does not appear to be detrimental to reading achievement..." Indeed, the model does not appear to be detrimental; and many of the practices seem like common sense teaching strategies that should work not only for ELL students but for all students. But before I can determine that research demands this approach, I will need to examine more research. It seems as though this particular study does not definitively establish the SIOP model as the best method of instruction for ELL students.

Week 4: Blog Entry #7. Running Record

This past week I conducted a running record/miscue analysis on two seventh grade students in my general population class. Saul is a native Spanish speaker and Andrea's first language is Korean. Both students, however, seem perfectly fluent in English and are excellent students. Both Saul and Andrea would certainly fit under Hill and Flynn's (2006) category of "advanced fluency." It is interesting that one of our readings stated that ELL students who tend to the best in English also have complete fluency in their native language. Both Saul and Andrea said they still speak and read in their native languages and consider themselves to be fully fluent in their native language.

I began by having each student read a 600 word passage from The Outsiders. This did violate the protocal I found in my research because they have both read this book in class and they did not choose this book themselves. Both students did exceptionally well. Saul seemed very relaxed and consciously not trying to read too fast. His reading was fluent and not overly rapid. Saul made one mistake in 600 words of The Outsiders. The protagonist says “but I usually lone it anyway.” Saul read “but I usually if anyway. This does qualify as a miscue; I interpret this as being a miscue resulting from graphic similarity. But, as in Gunther’s model, this is a miscue that did not result in a loss of meaning. Saul had an error ration of 1:600 for The Outsiders. From both a running record perspective and a miscue analysis perspective, this book is too easy for Saul. He only made one miscue, and it did not result in any loss of meaning. As a measure of fluency, this book is too easy for Saul. But I do think this book still provides Saul with numerous opportunities to further develop his reading skills. This book would offer a rich field for Saul to explore thematic and character development, just to name a few.

Andrea had an experience very similar to Saul in reading from the The Outsiders. Andrea read 600 words from The Outsiders and only made two miscues, for an error ration of 1:300. She substituted “moving” for “movie” and “getting” for “being.” Her substitution of “moving” for “movie” seems to have been due to graphic similarity. I suspect her substitution of “getting” for “being” was just one of those miscues we all make when reading orally for someone else. I do not think either of these mistakes resulted in a loss of meaning. While a running record assessment would say this book is too easy for Andrea, I do think, as in the case with Saul, this book still offers many learning opportunities, such as in terms of literary devices like thematic and character development.

Saul next read 600 words from Into Thin Air, (written at an 8th grade level) which tells of a disaster that occurred on Mount Everest in 1996. Saul had 5 miscues and one self-correction with this passage. Saul had a miscue ration of 1:120. One miscue seems to have resulted from graphic similarity. Saul read “invisibility” instead “visibility.” A couple of the miscues seem to have been nothing more that the occasional miscue we all make when reading orally for someone else. For example, Saul read “was" instead of “had” and he read “and” instead of “or.” I do not think any of these miscues resulted in much loss of meaning. One miscue he made did, I believe, resulted in a loss of meaning. The main character tells how he was leaning over and “retching.” Saul read this a leaning over and “reaching.” I think this was a new word for Saul. He did not self-correct and read the word wrong. By substituting “reaching” for “retching,” I do not think Saul grasped that the character was violently ill. Again, based on a running record analysis, this book is too easy for Saul. A miscue analysis would be more helpful. Although Saul’s oral reading resulted in very few miscues, there were places in the text that I could tell Saul was not following the action. Miscue analysis’ category of intonation could come be helpful in considering how to help a student like Saul reading this book. From my observation of Saul’s reading this text, he could benefit from work on separating dependent clauses from sentences. Saul could also benefit from activities that ask him to monitor his comprehension and strategies that help him repair meaning when it breaks down.

Andrea also read 600 pages from the 8^th grade text Into Thin Air. Even though the reading level increased from 7^th grade to eighth grade, Andrea’s number of miscues was still very low. Andrea had three miscues and one self-correction for an error ratio of 1:200. One miscue seems related to graphic similarity; she read “us” instead of “up.” But this did not seem to cause any loss of meaning. The other two miscues were words Andrea did not seem to know and could not sound-out. She could not pronounce the word “methodical” and did not seem to know what it meant. She also could not pronounce the rather technical word “crampon,” which are metal spikes climbers fasten onto their boots to help them navigate the ice. Andrea did seem to lose meaning because of these two miscues. As was the case with Saul, I think a miscue analysis would be an effective tool to diagnose Andrea’s instructional needs. While her error ratio was very low—well beyond the dependent level—she clearly had portions of the text where she lost meaning. There were a number of words she was able to sound-out, but she did not seem to know them. She seemed to struggle maintaining understanding throughout as she had to sound-out words she did not know and also work through longer sentences with frequent dependent clauses. Much like with Saul, I think Andrea could benefit from activities geared to becoming more comfortable with dependent clauses, self-monitoring practice, and strategies for when meaning breaks down.

Saul next read 600 pages from His Excellence, a biography on George Washington. This text is written for an adult audience. Saul made 16 miscues. Saul had an error ration of 1:37.5 A couple of his miscues were again those miscues that anyone could make while reading orally for someone else. For example, he read “of” instead of “at.” But 13 of his miscues came from words he did not know and had trouble sounding-out. For example, Saul had miscues around words like “canonization,” “idolatry,” “cadences,” and “providential.” From a running record perspective, I would determine this text was too difficult for Saul and would guide him a lower reading level. Miscue analysis would also help me further understand Saul’s difficulty with this text. First, many of his miscues were based on his unfamiliarity with these words and an inability to even sound-them-out. Also, I could tell by his pacing and intonation that he was not understanding much of what he was reading, even if he was pronouncing the words correctly. I believe a “retell,” in which Saul retold what he just read would have confirmed my suspicion that he did not grasp much of this text. But even though this text was so difficult for Saul, a miscue analysis could provide me with the strategies to help Saul better grasp this text. I would begin with building the vocabulary necessary for Saul to understand this passage and then I would build background knowledge.

Andrea also had a much more difficult time with the George Washington biography His Excellency. She had 12 errors for an error ration of 1:60. She had a few simple mistakes that did not seem to have arisen from graphic similarity but rather from feeling the stress of reading this difficult material out loud to another person. For example, she substituted “couple” for “few.” The majority of her miscues were on difficult words she did not seem to know and was trying to sound-out, such as “posterity,” “designation,” and “chroniclers.” From a running record perspective, this book is too hard for Andrea and should be abandoned for a lower leveled text. From a miscue analysis perspective, I might gear instruction (if we decided to continue with this book) toward vocabulary, background information, continued work with dependent clauses and longer sentences. I could also create instructional activities for Andrea to monitor syntax—does her reading sound right; and activities for Andrea to monitor semantics—does her reading make sense. This could also provide a opportunity to design instruction around using context clues to determine meaning of unknown words.

Week 3. Learning Activity: Blog 6

The Students:

1. L: Look up words in the dictionary to wrtie definitions. This is a method that adheres to the "learning model" because the assumption is that by looking up the word, the student will consciously learn the meaning of the word. The "acquistion model' would advocate developing vocabulary by encountering word in the context of reading. 
2. A: Make a venn diagram to compare two stories. This is a method supported by the "acquistion model" because this excercise assumes that meaning is created by something more than word recognition. 
3. L: Practice sounding out words. This activity is supported by the "learning model" because it assumes that by being able to decode the word the student will be able to understand the word. The "acquistion model" would want to make sure there was sufficient context and background knowledge to make the new word meaningful.
4. L: Read in a round-robin fashion. This activity is supported by the "learning model" because the oral reading allows the teacher to help students identify words and phrases students do not know. The "acquisition model" advocates silent reading and reading strategies that help students construct meaning from the text.
5. L: Correct peers when they make a mistake during reading. This activity is supported by the "learning model." Even though it is students correcting their peers, the focus is still on decoding and pronounciation--and this a focus of the "learning model." The "acquisition model" is not as concerned with decoding and pronounciation as it is with creating meaning. 
6. L: Identify words on a big book page that start with the same sound. This is also an activity supported by the "learning model." This is a phonics activity. The "acquisition model" would not rely solely on phonics but would create meaning from letters (graphophonics) order of langauge (syntax), and knowledge of the world (semantics).
7. Group cards with classmates' names by a criterion on such as first or last letter. This is an activity supported by the "learning model" because it is focused on letters. It is an inductive approach that begins with letter recognition. This activity might be more alligned with the "acquisition model" if the cards were grouped not by letters but rather by student's characteristics or qualities.
8. A: Write rhyming poetry and then discuss different spellings for the same  word. This activity is supported by the "acquisition model" because it begins with the actual creation of a piece of writing and only then looks at further developing more specific skills like spelling. A more "learning model" activity would be to first learn how to spell all the words and then write the poem.
9. L: Ask the teacher how to spell any word they don't know. This is a strategy supported by the "learning model" because it is more concerned with learing a new piece of information--in this case how to spell a word--than it is with acquiring an understanding of strategies. An activity more alligned with the "acquistion model" would teach students strategies to use when they do not know how to spell a word, such as learning how to use a dictionary to spell unknown words. 
10. A: Read a language experience story they have created with the teacher. For starters, the very term "language experience story" reeks of the "acquisition model." But more importantly, this fits the "acquisition model" because the students have created the story. The fact that the student and teacher examine and critique the story together is alligned with the "acquistion model," in which the primary goal is always the creation of meaning. In a "learning model" classroom the teacher would read the story by himself and simply assign a grade to it. 
11. A: Work in pairs to arrange words from a familiar chant into sentences. This activity is supported by "acquistion model" because it is not so much concerned with decoding and recognizing words as it is with creating meaning. The goal of the activity is to create meaning, and this the primary goal of the "acquisition model."
12. L: Divide words into syllables. This activity is supported by the "learning model" because it is ultimately focused on decoding and pronouncing words instead of constructing meaning. Furthermore, this is not an authentic activity one normally encounters in reading and writing. Its highly manufactured nature also puts it in the "learning model" camp.
13. L: On a worksheet, draw a line from each word to the picture that starts with the same sound. This activity is supported by the "learning model" becuase, first of all, anything using something as artificial as worksheets is in the "learning model" camp. More importantly, it is primarily concerned with phonics and decoding words rather than creating meaning.
14. A: Make alphabet books on different topics. This activity is supported by the "acquistion model." Even though it is using letters, the point is not to simply practice sounding-out the letters but rather to find meaning associated with each letter. Because its primary concern is with meaning, it is an "acquistion" activity.

The Teacher:

1. L: Preteaches vocabulary. This activity is supported by the "learning model" because it artificially teaches vocabulary independent of actual reading. The "acquistion model" would develop student's vocabulary in a fashion intimately linked with reading.
2. A: Does a shared reading of a big book. This activity is supported by the "acquistion model" because it provides students the opportunity to acquire an understanding of literacy through the teacher's modeling of the reading process. This activity does not explicitly instruct students how to read in an inductive manner. Freeman and Freeman (2004) state that through the shared reading of a big book students acquire the knowledge necessary for them to begin reading independently.
3. L: Makes sure students read only books that fit their level. This activity is supported by the "acquistion model." The "Input Hypothesis" put forth by Krashen states that ideal learning situation is actually when material is slightly beyond a student's independent level. The "Input Hypothesis" states that learning activities and learning materials should be set at "input + 1" or at a level just beyond the student's grasp. Assigning only reading books that are actually at a student's level would reject the "Input Hypothesis" which is championed by the "acquisition model."
4. L: Has students segment word into phonemes. This activity is firmly entrenched in the "learning model" because it is focused on decoding and word recognition instead of creating meaning.
5. A: Writes words the students dictate for a story and has students help with the spelling of difficult words. This activity is supported by the "acquistion model" because it begins with students creating a story. It's main focus is creating meaning.  Furthermore, unlike the "learning model," there is not an undue amount of emphasis placed on the form. The students are doing the central work of creating meaning. The teacher is just helping by writing the words given to him by the students. Finally, the focus on spelling develops quite naturally as an outgrowth of the production of a text. 
6. A: Asks students to look around the room and find words starting with a certain letter. This activity is supported by the "acquistion model." Although it does contain work with letters, this  acitivity deals with letters in a more authentic manner. While the "learning model" might just teach the sound of each letter in an artifical manner that is devoid of any connection with the world, this "acquisition model" approach seeks to link letters with meaningful things. Rather than "learning" something utterly abstract, students in this activity are "acquiring" an understanding of the world around them and making connections to letters.
7. L: Uses decodable texts. This is a "learning model" activity because the focus is decoding words rather than creating meaning. A teacher in the "acquistion model" would instead give an authentic piece of literature and help the students use graphophonics, syntax, and semantics to construct meaning.
8. A: Sets aside time for sustained silent reading each day. This is an acitivity supported by the "acquisition model" because the focus is on students reading and using reading strategies to construct meaning.
9. L: Teaches Latin and Greek roots. This is an acitivity supported by the "learning model." It is artifical in nature, divorcing vocabulary development from the act of reading. This activity seeks to consciously "teach" students new information. The "acquistion model," on the other, always seeks to let vocabulary development grow naturally out of reading. If a teacher in the "acquistion model" did teach Greek and Latin roots, it would only because the words came up in authentic reading.
10. A: Has students meet in literature circles. This activity is supported by the "acquistion model" because the focus is again on students using reading strategies to create meaning. In fact, the very nature of the "literature circle" is itself a strategy for constructing meaning because it provides the opportunity for students to create meaning through collaboration.
11. L: Conducts phonics drills. This activity is supported by the "learning model" because its focus is on decoding and only focuses on graphophonics to create meaning; whereas, the "acquistion model" would use graphophonics, syntax, and semantics to create meaning.
12. L: Chooses predictable texts. This activity is supported by the  "learning model." This activity lacks the authenticity to be in the "acquisition model." The "acquistion model" is concerned with authentic reading and unpredictability is part of the world in which we live. 
13. A: Does a picture walk of a new book. This activity is supported by the "acquistion model" because its focus is on creating background knowledge to make help students gain a deeper understanding of the book. This acitivity is rooted in semantics, whereas the "learning model" is only concerned with graphophonics.
14. L: Uses a variety of worksheets to teach different skills. This activity is supported by the "learning model." The "learning model" uses worksheets to consciously teach new skills; indeed, the "learning model" is not overly concerned that worksheets are not part of the authentic world. The "learning model" assumes that even if skill are taught in a way that seperates from the real world, students can still take that new knowledge and apply it back into the world. The "acquisition model" does not allow for such a transfer of knowledge from the inauthentic and the abstract to the real world. If learning is acquired, it can only be acquired through the real and authentic world.

One closing thought, if the above thought is true, it places restrictions--perhaps even very powerful restrictions--on the acquistion model. It seems to me that we "acquire" learning in real situations and not in hypothetical situations. Does this put a limit on the situations in which we can gain learning. It seems that there is an advantage to being able to gain knowledge in an utterly abstract realm and then taking that knowledge and applying it back into the real world and real world situations. But it seems like the "acquisition model" does not allow this. Isn't that why the "acquistion model" would not study Greek and Latin roots outside the context of the actual reading? I clearly do not have this thorougly thought-through. Any thoughts?

Week 2. Learning Activity 4: Translating

Well, this was painful. In preparation for this learning activity, I went to our school library and checked out a couple of books written in Spanish. I should say, I have taken French, Greek, and Hebrew (I stink at all of them), but I have never taken any Spanish. For my more advanced reading, I checked out the Spanish version of the book Holes, written by Louis Sachar. For my easier read, I checked out the book Magic Gods Of The Volcano, written by Escrito por Malio Argueta.

From the very first page Holes   I knew I was in trouble. There were a few words I knew. I suspected that "En" meant "in." and I was pretty sure "verde" was green. I believe it is the same in French. I was also sure that "grande" meant "big." I also recognized the word Texas. So, in the first paragraph I had some vague idea that there was something big and green in or around Texas. The second paragraph did not go any better. I was fairly sure that "pueblo"  meant town; and I again was pretty sure that "verde" meant green. So, all I could glean from the second paragraph was that there was a green town; however, that did not really sound reasonable, so I was pretty sure I was hopelessly lost.

The only way I knew how to at least try and make sense out of this incomprehensible text was to look on-line for a Spanish to English translator. I found such a device and then translated every word in the first two paragraph. This actually worked fairly well. I know think I have a fairly good understanding of these first two paragraphs. The story opens something like this: "In the Camp Green Lake, there are no lakes. There used to be a very big lake there, even bigger than Texas. (The next sentence still baffles me. It seems to say that there are--or used to be--more than 100 anus." But I'm pretty sure this isn't correct)
But now it is just dry land. The story continues in the second paragraph by saying, "There used to be a town in Green Lake. The town is faded and withered together with the lake and people who used to live there."

Left on my own without any outside resources, I was hopelessly lost. But, once I accessed a Spanish dictionary, I was able to make sense of the text. Even though, as I mentioned above, that I have done poorly at every language I have studied, these previous exposures to language did help. First of all, my grammar is very strong, so I recognized articles, prepositions, nouns, and verbs. I also have some understanding of how flexible syntax can be from one language to the next, so I did not get hung up on words that did not follow the pattern one would expect in English. I also have some experience parsing verbs, so I was able to parse verb forms so they better fit the context of the story. Armed with a Spanish dictionary, I think I could comprehend this book at a fairl high level. But I have a better grasp on grammar and syntax than most ELL students who would be in my room. I do not think I would have been able to get this much out the dictionary had it not been for my previous language course. Of course, this a long time. I only translated the first two paragraphs of the book, which probably took 30 minutes. Looking up every single word is a painstaking endevor. Hopefully, my next go-round with a chidren's book will be a bit easier.

OK, that did not go any better. The Magic Dogs Of The Volcanoes is a children's picture book; it's only 30 pages in length; half of the book is pictures, and the print is very big. But I had no more luck with this book than I did with Holes. In the first paragraph I could understand that they were talking about what happens either in or on the volcanoes in El Salvador. I also knew that lobos meant either wolf or dog and I was able to figure out that "magicos" meant magic. So, I figured out that there was something about magic dogs or wolves either in or on the volcanoes in El Salvador. After looking up every word in this paragaph, I concluded that there are or were magic dogs on these volcanoes. The dogs looked like wolves, but they were not wolves. I also figured out that they eat seeds of the morning (this must be a poetic phrase) these are the beautiful flowers that cover the volcanoes.

I did no better with the second paragraph. I thought "La gente" must mean man, person, or even people. I was also pretty sure that "vive" meant live. Of course, I also recognized the word volcano, which occured twice in this paragraph. So, I figured the second paragraph must mean something remotely akin to: "Somebody lived or  lives in or around a volcano." After looking up every word in a Spanish dictionary, I was able to develop a more satisfactory translation. I think the second paragraph reads something more like: "The person or peole who live in the village on the slopes of the volcanoe love the magic dogs. They say they are the great grandchildren of the volcanoe. They say the magic dogs protect them from danger." Again, the use of a Spanish dictionary, along with a strong grasp on grammar and snytax allowed me to make sense of this text. But it sure took a long time. Not all ELL students in elementary school or even middle school will have the degree of skill I have with grammar and syntax.
It must be frustrating for ELL students to try to create meaning from such seemingly confusing texts.

Week 2. Learning Activity 5: Children's Books

I rumaged through my seven year old son's books and pulled out Diary of a Whimpy Kid: The Ugly Truth by Jeff Kiney and Captain Underpants Dav Pilkey. My son loves both these series and laughs outloud while reading them. As I perused through these books, I found events that an ELL student may not appreciate due to a lack of cultural understanding. For the humor in these scenes to be fully appreciated, someone would need to provide an ELL student with a background schema through which to contextualize these episodes.

 The story opens with the main character, Greg, having no one to play with over summer vacation. This is an issue with which most kids raised in the suburbs can relate. My son Davis has had to battle this. Greg is in a fight with his best friend, and many of the other kids are not around due to summer vacations. An ELL student from another country might not fully appreciate how desperate Greg is for someone to play with. If one does not understand this desperation, one will not understand the next few pages. To bridge this gap in understanding, I could have students share experiences they have had when kids in thier neighborhood have gone off on vacations. I could even have kids draw maps of how far they had to go for a "play-date."

Next, Greg explains how his old best friend, Rowley, does not appear to need him becuase he is hanging out with a highschool kid (Greg and Rowley are in middle school). Greg then tells us the Rowley's new best friend works for a company who mentors younger kids. An ELL student, and many of the students, for that matter, might not appreciate that Rowley's new friend is a real friend but someone his parents have hired to hang out with their awkward son. To fill in this gap, I could search YouTube for commercials of "Big Brothers."

In another scene, Greg is at first upset that Rowley was going to a "rock concert." But when he found out that "rock concert" was really a sappy teen singer loved only by elementary school girls, Greg was no quite as upset. This scene has an illustration. The signer's name is "Joshie" and a bunch of girls are at the stage practically fainting. An ELL student unfamiliar with American pop culture might fail to realize this performer appeals only to girls and, frankly, a boy would be a bit embarressed being seen at this show. To help fill in the cultural gap, I could show brief clips of Justin Beiber and possible even "High School Musical."

Finally, there is a scene in which the teachers at school are all "freaking out" because the standardized tests are starting. The teacher threatened the kids that if they did not do well on the tests, the budget would be cut and they would have to replace classes like P.E. and art with detention. Again, an ELL student, espeically if he has not been in the United States for very long, might not appreciate this situation. To better understand the stress the teachers are feeling and threats made, students will have to have some idea of what standardized tests are and important they are. To build this background knowledge, students could share thier memories of previous CSAP tests. They might mention how much the teachers talked about their importance, how banners were made encouraging students to do their best; I could even bring in the newspaper article which documents how every school in the state performed to help students see their importance.

In Captain Underpants the two main characters--both little boys in about the fifth grade--decide to create a comic book. As simple as this seems, it occured to me that an ELL student from another country might never have seen a comic book or even a superhero movie. If a reader does not have this understanding, an understanding we simply might take for granted, the rest of the book might always be a little confusing. To build this background knowledge, I could bring in a bunch of comic books. Kids could select a comic book to read and then report back to the class what there comic book was about. This activity would allow an ELL student to understand what a comic is; he would understand what a comic book looks like, about how many pages are in it, and even the different genres.

The two protagonists tell us, the reader, that because all superheros run around in what looks to be their underware, they were going to create a superhero who actually did run around in his underware--Captain Underpants! Again, an ELL student has never seen a comic book nor a superhero movie, such as "Superman" or "Spiderman" will not get this joke. The previous activity in which students read a comic book and then report back to the class will provide an ELL student with the necessary background information to understand this part of the book.

In another scene, our two protagonists pull a big prank at the high school football game. To understand this scene, one would need to have a mental image of a big high school football game, complete with bleachers filled with parents, cheer leaders and even marching bands. To fill this cultural gap, I could show You Tube clips of high school football games, particularly in places like Texas and Oklahoma where these tend to be a real big deal. An ELL student, who may have never seen a big high school football game, could now get a mental image of the severity of the boys' prank.

Finally, the school principal learns that it was the boys who ruined the football game, so he puts them on permanant punishment at school. The boys' lives are miserable, and they do not know what to do. Then they order a hypnotizing ring through the mail and hypnotize their principal. They make the principal do all kinds of crazy things, like walking around like a chicken. An ELL student with little exposure to American culture might not know what it is to be hypnotized. I could again turn to You Tube and look for clips of people who claim to be hypnotizing someone. Whether the clip is even remotely legitimate does not matter, students will still come to understand the concept and, therefore, understand how the boys got out of trouble.

This learning activity was very enlightening. It certainly helped me to better anticipate cultural barriers an ELL student may encounter when reading a book; and it gave me at least some beginning ideas of how to create the schema necessary for such a student to be better able to create meaning. But as I was finding these issues in these two books, it occured to me how many other native speakers, raised their whole life in the United States, might still not possess the background information necessary to understand a particular book. It occured to me how much I have taken for granted.

Week 1. Learning Activity 3: Relationship Between Oral Language and Reading Process

I believe there is a significant difference between the development of oral language and the development of the skill to read. I agree with Freeman (p. 23) when he states that most children acquire their first langauge without much formal instruction. My son is seven years old, and I can still remember those years where his language ability just exploded, with very little formal instruction. But I disagree with the linguist's consensus that reading is also acquired. As I stated in my other post on writing, I am  not sure why there has to be these rigid schools of thought concerning reading. The "word recognition" school has its strengths and the "sociopsycholinguistic" view has its strengths. Indeed, I can't believe there are people in the one camp who reject the positions of the other camp.

Freeman states that in the "acquistion" model (I'm not going to spell out "sociopsycholinguistic" more than I have to) teachers read to students from big books, which then gives the students all the information they need to start reading on their own. This view is not supported by the National Reading Panel, which strongly supports the teaching of phonics. The National Reading Panel repeatedly states the effectiveness of phonics instruction: "Systematic and explicit phonics instruction significantly improves children's reading comprehension." "Systematic and explicit phonics instruction is effective for children from various social and economic levels." Systematic and explicit phonics instruction is particularly beneficial for children who are having difficulty learning to read and who are at risk for developing future reading problems." I think only academics could possible deny the common sense that phonics is a very important buiding block to successful reading. While there is a large portion of oral language that is simply acquired, I do not think reading works the same way. I believe there is a reading code that children must learn to decipher--and the best tool for this is phonics.

Again, I find it hard to belive that people actually belong to one camp or the other. And, of course, there is no logical reason why these two camps must be so rigidly seperated. Freeman (p. 26) states that those from the "acquisition" school of thought believe that reading is about constructing meaning. Does this mean that people in the "word recognition" school do not think constructing meaning is important? Again, the National Reading Panel states that "Systematic and explicit phonics instruction is most effective when introduced early." Once children have the phonics skill to decode words, of course they need to develop all those reading strategies that Freeman seems to say are the exclusive domain of the "acquisitionists." Cannot one believe that phonics instruction is essential and also that students must be able to context to help determine meaning, use background knowledge to construct meaning, and make inferences? How are these exclusive?

Week 1. Learning Activity 2: Writing Instruction (part 2)

So, I realized in my first post that I neglected to discuss whether my writing instruction was more "traditional" or "process" oriented. The writing instruction I discussed in my post was more "traditional" because it almost exclusively focused on the parts (grammar) of writing. This was exactly what I needed, however, because at the age of twenty-five I knew exactly what I wanted to say. My message was very clear to me. But my lack of grammatical proficiency got in the way of the message. Having said that, I must comment on my perception of this section of the Freeman text.

I found this section of the Freeman text to heavily biased. First of all, the very categories themselves seem to slant the discussion. The term "traditional" conjures up images of strict a schoolmarm hitting student's knuckles with a ruler. While the term "process" seems to illicit images of kind teachers kneeling next to their students, both engaged in intellectual advancement-- and done so in a very "nurturing" environment.

I accept the premise that a "traditional" approach is inductive and begins with the parts, while the "process" approach is more deductive and begins with the message. After that basic starting point, however, I feel as though the distinctions start to break down. In fact, I believe the "traditional" approach becomes a bit of a characture. First of all, the paragraph for "Goals and Methods" (Freeman, 30) is twice as long for the "process" method as it is for the "traditional" method. We are told that in the "traditional" approach that writing is done in a "fairly short time." They did not go through revising and editing? I find that hard to believe. Human beings have been editing and re-writing for thousands of years. We are also told that in the "process" approach, students "produce different kinds of writing." Is the implication that the "traditional" approach only writes in one style (probably a very boring style). Furthermore, those in the "process" school "set aside time on a regular basis for writing." Again, is the implication that those in the "traditional" model do not set aside time on a regular basis for writing? And my personal favorite (I appologize, as I can no longer contain my sarcasm), those teachers in the "process" model "realize that students must read frequently." Again, is the implication that teachers in the "traditional" model do not recognize that students need to read frequently? I found the teaching strategies discussed in the Freeman text to be very helpful. But I found the categories to be a bit silly.

Week 1. Learning Activity 2: Writing Instruction

My most profound writing instruction came a bit later in life. When I was seventeen, I dropped out of high school. At the age of twenty-five, I began attending a junior college--the only place that would accept a high school drop-out. My first semester I took a basic composition 100 course. Our first assignment was to write an essay about something we knew how to do well. I chose washing clothes. I was several years older than most of my classmates and living on my own. I thought this would be a humorous paper. I put so much care, love, and effort into this paper. It was descriptive. I had a light and humorous tone appropriate to the topic. I thought it was brilliant. I was shocked when my paper was returned to me with a big fat D- on it...But then I saw the comment on the back page. It said something to the effect of "This was hysterical--but you don't have a clue as to how grammar works. Come and see me after class."

I will never forget Mrs. Psomas--and I will always be deeply indepted to her. She persuaded me to work with her a few times a week on grammar. I did not miss one session that entire school year. By the end of the year I had learned all the grammar that I did not bother learning in middle school and high school. Then she reccommended a book: On Writing by Zinzer (I believe). The focus of this book was on getting rid of extraneous words to let your most powerful words have center stage. A year later I was in a full-fledged four year university, taking all liberal arts classes, where all I did was write papers, and enjoying great success.

My path to writing well might not be typical. I always had strong verbal skills. Even as a high school drop-out, I was rather well spoken. Describing something, starting with a broad point and supporting my claim with specific pieces examples came fairly naturally. The one big problem I had was the grammar, which seemed to get in the way and impede what I was trying to say, what I could hear in my head. Once I learned the rules of grammar, my writing quickly accelerated.

How can this help students? Well, I certainly would never advocate waiting until one is in thier mid-twenties to learn how to write. But I will certainly stress how important it is to learn some principles of grammar. In order to write well, in order to creatively and persuasively express your opinions, one must know a few simple rules: What constitutes a sentence? What constitutes a sentence fragment? What constitutes a run-on sentence? How does one use dependent clauses and phrases? This certainly seems boring and not nearly as fun as writing a fictional story, but it is essential not only to academic success but to simply being able to express yourself well.

Week 1. Learning Activity 1: Philosophy of Literacy

I asked, Irene, the head of the reading department at my school, about her philosophy of literacy. She began with a very broad statement. The first thing that came to her mind was that literacy must be made available to all and that everyone, without exception, can achieve. From this point, she then moved on to how we as teachers help make sure all our students achieve. She talked about a "path" we, as educators, must construct for our students. First, we must meet our students where they are at. Then, we must empower them to become responsible for thier own learning.

The two tools that Irene thinks are crucial to helping our students become independent learners are scaffolding and differentiation. The importance of scaffolding is also mentioned by Pauline Gibbons (2002), when she states that the only real learning occurs when the teacher guides a student to do something he would not be able to accomplish on his own. This statement does seem to hold-up to the scrutiny of simply logic. Irene's statement regarding the importance of differentition harmonizes well with her belief in meeting each student where is he is. Irene also thought relationships were an important ingredient in teaching.

Irene also thought it was important to expose students to whole array of literature, covering a multitude of genres. She thinks it is important to make sure much of the literature we, as teachers, give our students is relevant to their interests and backgrounds. They should be able to connect in some way to the literature they read. Although, when some literature may not seem to have an obvious and immediate connection to their lives we, as educators, must help them see the connections. She also thought that we must take advantage of mediums such as video and music to enhance student's connection to the material under examination.

I thought Irene's most profound point was is regards to the purpose of teaching literacy. Irene stated that literature is a way to allow students to be exposed to--to understand and appreciate--their past, their present, and even their future. Literacy enables students to better understand the world in which they live and their place in this world. Indeed, it even empowers students to dream of creating a new place in the world for themselves and, perhaps, even a new place for others. Literacy empowers students to gain knowledge, understanding, and even wisdom. Now, what will they do with that power?