I think Peregoy and Boyle's point that we should integrate many aspects of language into a lesson, including reading, listening, and speaking, is so true. This suggestion fits into the current model of education, which seems to be context, context, context. Whether grammar lessons, history, or math, everything should be taught in context, especially when teaching to ELL students. Developing a framework for students' knowledge is imperative for helping them to retain information. This is why it is important to have culturally fair assessments. For example, that "social cultural profile" we looked at in class on Monday demonstrates the importance of creating a framework that incorporates all the different cultural backgrounds. The framework has to be explicitly taught and built in a unit plan. That is what I am working on in my unit plan right now. I am trying to figure out what the best way is to teach about Martin Luther King Jr. Most of my students do not have any background in learning about MLK. Maybe they learned about him from a different high school they were at, but I can almost guarantee that they didn't learn about MLK in elementary and middle schools like a lot of American students. I am trying to connect the assessments and teaching to their own experiences so they can make sense of the information.
The importance of context is also highlighted in chapter 5. The book discusses using holistic strategies, specifically reading and writing whole texts rather than single sentences. I wonder how this holistic strategy can be scaffolded for ELL students? It just isn't possible for ELL students to begin by writing whole texts. In the 1c class I am in, students read "whole texts" but each page is one sentence. I can actually quote verbatim the text we read on Monday in my reading group. "This is ice. Ice is water. This is snow. Snow is water. This is rain. Rain is Water." Would this count as a "whole text"? The sentences seem quite isolated from each other. In my classroom, I would need to consider how to present a holistic method in bite sized pieces. It seems like an oxymoron to me.
I have also been thinking a lot about how to group widely different students. I started thinking about this with the leveling system, but I also have seen a similar interest in trying to group all students under different theories. For example, the reading readiness perspective assumes that kids (on average, of course) are not ready to read until the age of 6.6. I realize that in Public school you have to come up with theories and solutions that will fit the most number of students, but I wonder if this clumping is beneficial for students. I hear a lot in my ed classes that it is important to differentiate instruction, but I feel like if I truly "differentiated" I would have a different lesson for each student. No two students are the same. To make the blanket statement that almost all students will be the same way seems foolish to me. At the same time, I dont know what the alternative would be. It is impossible to create an individual lesson for each student. Maybe the solution is something like Ms. Quest does. She teaches a lesson, but then explains the concept in different ways to different students when they ask her questions. For example, she might show the student the word "wobbles", using a wobbly table, but then might explain the concept of "wobble" differently to another student. She is always differentiating, but she doesn't necessarily differentiate the lesson itself for all students.
Yes it is important to have contextually appropriate and culturally sensitive assessments. Don't stress too much about the assessments, because you be assessing the students learning of the material you're introducing/teaching. You're assessments won't need to rely on prior knowledge. However, your lesson design most certainly will.
ReplyDeleteIn having looked at your MLK Jr. lesson, I believe that you've done a good job of balancing past knowledge with future learning. And, have created an assessment appropriate to the students ELL level and the content presented.
The "this is ice" example doesn't quite meet the whole language definition. Whole language focuses on written text that is relevant, meaningful, and which fits a given context. Often whole language (for level 1 learners) involves writing a book together as a class, then reading the book. Whole language focuses intensely on encountering new words in text only and not in isolation. It tends to work well with level 2A-4 learners at LEAP. However, students must have substantial inferencing skills in order to fully be successful with the whole language technique. (Note: teachers can guide the learning of the new vocabulary as students encounter the words in the text. However, they teach the skills to determine the meaning, not the meaning.)
What you've noticed with Ms. Quest's teaching is true. Many teachers differentiate through individual instruction after group instruction has been given. Teachers also create adjusted/modified worksheets, texts, and activities for some groups, when the class is working in small groups.
Differentiation is the hardest task for any teacher. Your job as an ELL teacher will be to help content teachers create objectives, lessons, and activities that reach ELLs as best as possible. No teacher is perfect in teaching to every student. However, we can try to help every teacher be better at teaching our students (the ELLs). You will also likely be providing supportive pullout time for the ELLs, in which you provide the content differentiation for them before they rejoin their class.