This week's reading is all about lesson planning and curriculum design. I am not entirely comfortable with the idea of designing a curriculum all by myself, although technically, I've done it for my comp class, but I guess I would manage it if need be.
I think no one would argue about the necessity to have a lesson plan and be prepared for hard day's work. At least, I wouldn't. I would like to note on a couple of things that our books modestly keep from mentioning.
First of all, it's the need to have a back-up plan. Yes, sometimes that would mean a full-lesson back up. Second of all, I think that teachers should be trained to improvise. Just today I had to produce an hour-long tutoring session, like a rabbit out of a hat. And I don't wear hats, so that was quite a feat in itself. And all events leading to this unfortunate circumstance happened well outside my sphere of control. I know that different people deal with stress (and an impromptu lesson/activity facilitation is a stress) in different ways. Some work well under pressure, others don't. Given the likelihood of having to improvise an activity somewhere in the career, I think that improvisational planning skills should be another standard we have to meet.
Monday, October 27, 2008
Reflection
The highlight of the class was the multi-genre paper workshop. I am still not fully confident with it, so it was very helpful to see the work of the other group.
We also had a great discussion about what a teachable moment is. To me, a teachable moment is when a student brings up something I did not plan to talk about, but feel that it would be beneficial if we did. It can be a cultural issue, a job-related tip, personal experience etc. Although, teachable moments tend to have a reverse side as well. Last year one of the students asked me practically mid-class: You know, my colleague is always telling me something, and I don't understand the meaning. Could you help me? Since we were in a job-interview unit, I felt it was a perfectly teachable moment and encouraged the question. Turned out that the co-worker hated her and the utterance was totally obscene. I had to explain the meaning to the giggling of those, who already knew it, and curious stares of those, who didn't. After that, all such questions (and you can't imagine how many people are irritated by ELL at the workplace) were discussed on breaks, and one-on-one. Conclusion - be careful of seemingly perfect teachable moments.
We also had a great discussion about what a teachable moment is. To me, a teachable moment is when a student brings up something I did not plan to talk about, but feel that it would be beneficial if we did. It can be a cultural issue, a job-related tip, personal experience etc. Although, teachable moments tend to have a reverse side as well. Last year one of the students asked me practically mid-class: You know, my colleague is always telling me something, and I don't understand the meaning. Could you help me? Since we were in a job-interview unit, I felt it was a perfectly teachable moment and encouraged the question. Turned out that the co-worker hated her and the utterance was totally obscene. I had to explain the meaning to the giggling of those, who already knew it, and curious stares of those, who didn't. After that, all such questions (and you can't imagine how many people are irritated by ELL at the workplace) were discussed on breaks, and one-on-one. Conclusion - be careful of seemingly perfect teachable moments.
Monday, October 20, 2008
Readings
Most of this week's reading focused on the actual application of theories and methods, i.e. the teaching. The apple book talked about lesson planning, designing curriculum, and choosing textbooks.
I am not very diligent in writing lesson plans, although I know how to do it and have done it quite a lot. Most of the time, I just have a list of things I want to do in my head, and then I try to follow it as much as time/situation/students would allow.
Choosing textbooks is a painful subject for me at the moment. Last year we were given the textbooks, but we also had several shelves full of class copies, so following a specific textbook was not really obligatory. This semester we were given a textbook, too. It is my first time teaching composition, so I first decided to go with the book we had and follow it as closely as I can. I held through the entire first assignment. Now I use some of the readings, but do everything else on my own. The big problem on my mind now is choosing the textbook/handbook/reader for the next semester. There are so many options!!!
I am not very diligent in writing lesson plans, although I know how to do it and have done it quite a lot. Most of the time, I just have a list of things I want to do in my head, and then I try to follow it as much as time/situation/students would allow.
Choosing textbooks is a painful subject for me at the moment. Last year we were given the textbooks, but we also had several shelves full of class copies, so following a specific textbook was not really obligatory. This semester we were given a textbook, too. It is my first time teaching composition, so I first decided to go with the book we had and follow it as closely as I can. I held through the entire first assignment. Now I use some of the readings, but do everything else on my own. The big problem on my mind now is choosing the textbook/handbook/reader for the next semester. There are so many options!!!
Sunday, October 19, 2008
CASAS-continued
Thea's post made me realize that I have probably concentrated too much on the positive sides of CASAS. Partly, it was my intention, as I did not want to transfer my own judgment to the innocent people. The truth is, that in the year I worked in CASAS-served program, I was its most ardent opposer. There are several things about CASAS that seem weird and/or unfair to me, so now I will try to present a more balanced account.
- As all standardized tests CASAS fails to capture a lot of things (writing and speaking, to start with). And, of course, there are people, who just don't do well on the tests, no matter what kind of songs and dances you do as a teacher to relieve their anxiety. On the other hand, CASAS is mostly used in state-funded programs and the state wants to know if the money was put to a good use. The teacher's "Oh, now they make less mistakes and actually understand instructions" is no less subjective than the bland score on the test sheet and I am not even entering the field of statistical implications of comparing "They are doing so well" with "They are making adequate progress", and "Gosh, they finally learned something". Finally, if the rest of US education is dominated by SATs, ACTs, GREs, TOEFLs, GMATs and other devilish contraptions, why should ESL be different? Standardized tests are evil, but they are the best we've come up with so far.
- I have not really discussed it in class, but the way things work between CASAS, programs, and states is that the state usually gives money to the programs based on the number of gains shown on tests. In Kansas, the program is required to have 65% of gains on participants to receive the same funding it did the year before. First of all, let's talk about the term "participant". If the person has 12 hours with the program - they are it. What are 12 hours? 2 days of testing/orientation and 2 class days. If the person went to the orientation, visited your class for a week, and then disappeared (a VERY frequent situation) you are screwed. Or, to put it in different words, you now need to have a 70% gains rate to cover for that idiot, who could not decide that they didn't need ESL before they were on your balance sheet.
So, we need 65% of gains on participants. Great! What is a gain? CASAS has a system of levels, based on the person's test scores. So levels are, for example, 160-185, 185-200, 200-210, 210-225, 225-250 etc (I don't remember the exact numbers, so :)). A gain is jumping from one level to another, and here several problems come up.
1. Students need gains in their lower score, so if someone has 180 in reading and 187 in listening they need a gain in reading. Even if their next listening test is 211, they still need the gain in reading, no matter what.
2. A gain is only jumping from one level to another. So, if student A had a score of 186 and now has a score of 199 it is not a gain, although t is an amazing progress. If student B had a score of 184 and got a score of 185 - GAIN. Although, there is probably zero progress involved.
3. Theoretically, all test scores are commensurable. Meaning that a 210 on an A-level test is equal to a 210 on a D-level test. It is not so. Yes, you need to answer 90% of A-level test questions to get the 210 score, and about 10% of D-level questions, but they require totally different levels of vocabulary, reading and analytical skills. So, moving from 220 on a B-level test to 220 on a C-level test IS a big deal.
The issues with teaching to the test, irrelevant vocabulary (aerogram) are also a big part of the problem.
- As all standardized tests CASAS fails to capture a lot of things (writing and speaking, to start with). And, of course, there are people, who just don't do well on the tests, no matter what kind of songs and dances you do as a teacher to relieve their anxiety. On the other hand, CASAS is mostly used in state-funded programs and the state wants to know if the money was put to a good use. The teacher's "Oh, now they make less mistakes and actually understand instructions" is no less subjective than the bland score on the test sheet and I am not even entering the field of statistical implications of comparing "They are doing so well" with "They are making adequate progress", and "Gosh, they finally learned something". Finally, if the rest of US education is dominated by SATs, ACTs, GREs, TOEFLs, GMATs and other devilish contraptions, why should ESL be different? Standardized tests are evil, but they are the best we've come up with so far.
- I have not really discussed it in class, but the way things work between CASAS, programs, and states is that the state usually gives money to the programs based on the number of gains shown on tests. In Kansas, the program is required to have 65% of gains on participants to receive the same funding it did the year before. First of all, let's talk about the term "participant". If the person has 12 hours with the program - they are it. What are 12 hours? 2 days of testing/orientation and 2 class days. If the person went to the orientation, visited your class for a week, and then disappeared (a VERY frequent situation) you are screwed. Or, to put it in different words, you now need to have a 70% gains rate to cover for that idiot, who could not decide that they didn't need ESL before they were on your balance sheet.
So, we need 65% of gains on participants. Great! What is a gain? CASAS has a system of levels, based on the person's test scores. So levels are, for example, 160-185, 185-200, 200-210, 210-225, 225-250 etc (I don't remember the exact numbers, so :)). A gain is jumping from one level to another, and here several problems come up.
1. Students need gains in their lower score, so if someone has 180 in reading and 187 in listening they need a gain in reading. Even if their next listening test is 211, they still need the gain in reading, no matter what.
2. A gain is only jumping from one level to another. So, if student A had a score of 186 and now has a score of 199 it is not a gain, although t is an amazing progress. If student B had a score of 184 and got a score of 185 - GAIN. Although, there is probably zero progress involved.
3. Theoretically, all test scores are commensurable. Meaning that a 210 on an A-level test is equal to a 210 on a D-level test. It is not so. Yes, you need to answer 90% of A-level test questions to get the 210 score, and about 10% of D-level questions, but they require totally different levels of vocabulary, reading and analytical skills. So, moving from 220 on a B-level test to 220 on a C-level test IS a big deal.
The issues with teaching to the test, irrelevant vocabulary (aerogram) are also a big part of the problem.
Monday, October 13, 2008
Natives vs. Non-natives
I think we already had this debate in both classes I am taking. Who is a better teacher -a native speaker or a non-native speaker? Interests and opinions clash. My answer is - a professional. If a person is a proficient English speaker, studied to be a teacher, and has a degree in TESL or a certificate such as CELTA or DELTA it does not matter what their first language is. Personally, I think that THE best teacher is a non-native with native-like fluency, experience of living in an English-speaking country and desired credentials. The only real advantage I see for the native speakers is the knowledge of slang/idioms, but that is easily corrected.
I found that students like it, when the teacher is a non-native speaker, because then you get the hardly refutable argument of "hey, I was able to learn that, so you should be too". It is also nice to share stories of your first mistakes, because then they feel that a) their mistakes aren't unique, b) making mistakes does not mean you won't be able to master the language. Finally, students feel sort of companionship with the teacher and know that the teacher is able to relate to their problems. An average native speaker hardly has an idea of what a mess English prepositions are :)
I found that students like it, when the teacher is a non-native speaker, because then you get the hardly refutable argument of "hey, I was able to learn that, so you should be too". It is also nice to share stories of your first mistakes, because then they feel that a) their mistakes aren't unique, b) making mistakes does not mean you won't be able to master the language. Finally, students feel sort of companionship with the teacher and know that the teacher is able to relate to their problems. An average native speaker hardly has an idea of what a mess English prepositions are :)
Class reflection
I really enjoyed the presentation, especially the database research part and the introduction of the notetaker site.
Rachel's presentation was also well thought-out, although it's a pity we didn't have time to go through the whole set of questions.
Re-writing someone else's lesson plan felt weird to me, maybe because of the fetus stage the plan we had was in. It is like reading a draft of someone's personal letter and making suggestions on how to improve the clarity or structure. I do enjoy writing lesson plans, as well as writing in general, but re-writing someone else's stuff is not fun. Being given a different topic and then having to invent our own plan (which we practically did) seems a lot more interesting.
Rachel's presentation was also well thought-out, although it's a pity we didn't have time to go through the whole set of questions.
Re-writing someone else's lesson plan felt weird to me, maybe because of the fetus stage the plan we had was in. It is like reading a draft of someone's personal letter and making suggestions on how to improve the clarity or structure. I do enjoy writing lesson plans, as well as writing in general, but re-writing someone else's stuff is not fun. Being given a different topic and then having to invent our own plan (which we practically did) seems a lot more interesting.
Monday, October 6, 2008
What makes a good learner and how to assess levels?
This week's reading is so stuffed with information that I literally don't know what to reflect on first of all.
1) The L&S chapter focused on the characteristics of a good language learner, covering it in a very similar way to last week's peanut butter chapter. I have a hard time relating my own experience to the chapter, because I learned English as a kid, so I don't remember most part of it. It is my personal, yet anti-scientific opinion that there is such thing as talent or inclination to a particular kind of cognition. I am a pretty good humanities learner. Languages, literature, history - I get it. It makes sense to me. Math/physics/chemistry - not so much. I can understand the simplest concepts, but it requires incommensurable amounts of effort on everyone's behalf. And by this I don't mean to undermine the importance of other factors. Even the most talented person in the world will never succeed without motivation, willingness to communicate and make mistakes etc, it's just that sometimes people with similar learning profiles have different progress patterns.
I also strongly support the theory about correlation of IQ to language learner success. It may not be such an important factor with children, but with adults, and the focus on abstract notions we have to make, it is certainly playing its role. I also found that the there was direct link between amount of formal instruction students had in their native language and their success in our project. It was a joy, if not a class holiday, to have people who actually know the difference between verbs and nouns, or *gasp* subjects and predicates. Students from Korea and Japan were a bliss in that respect.
2) The peanut butter book chapters focused on teaching strategies pertaining to certain ages and standards for determining levels. The project I worked for last year used CASAS system. CASAS stands for Comprehensive Adult Student Assessment System. It was developed in California, and the first "C" originally referred to the state. Anyway, California was one of the first states to get a big influx of non-English speaking population, so they had to design an assessment and instruction system to address the needs of these people. Hence, they developed a system of competencies that describe the functional command of English and tests to measure success of competence mastering. So far CASAS has tests for reading(30-s and 80-s series) and listening (50-s series). Last year we were piloting a new listening test series, with modernized content; the original tests required knowledge or words like "aerogram", which nobody uses now. CASAS is a really good system to rely on if you're teaching adults, who need functional language, and if you have a textbook to go with it (my personal favorite is All Stars).
1) The L&S chapter focused on the characteristics of a good language learner, covering it in a very similar way to last week's peanut butter chapter. I have a hard time relating my own experience to the chapter, because I learned English as a kid, so I don't remember most part of it. It is my personal, yet anti-scientific opinion that there is such thing as talent or inclination to a particular kind of cognition. I am a pretty good humanities learner. Languages, literature, history - I get it. It makes sense to me. Math/physics/chemistry - not so much. I can understand the simplest concepts, but it requires incommensurable amounts of effort on everyone's behalf. And by this I don't mean to undermine the importance of other factors. Even the most talented person in the world will never succeed without motivation, willingness to communicate and make mistakes etc, it's just that sometimes people with similar learning profiles have different progress patterns.
I also strongly support the theory about correlation of IQ to language learner success. It may not be such an important factor with children, but with adults, and the focus on abstract notions we have to make, it is certainly playing its role. I also found that the there was direct link between amount of formal instruction students had in their native language and their success in our project. It was a joy, if not a class holiday, to have people who actually know the difference between verbs and nouns, or *gasp* subjects and predicates. Students from Korea and Japan were a bliss in that respect.
2) The peanut butter book chapters focused on teaching strategies pertaining to certain ages and standards for determining levels. The project I worked for last year used CASAS system. CASAS stands for Comprehensive Adult Student Assessment System. It was developed in California, and the first "C" originally referred to the state. Anyway, California was one of the first states to get a big influx of non-English speaking population, so they had to design an assessment and instruction system to address the needs of these people. Hence, they developed a system of competencies that describe the functional command of English and tests to measure success of competence mastering. So far CASAS has tests for reading(30-s and 80-s series) and listening (50-s series). Last year we were piloting a new listening test series, with modernized content; the original tests required knowledge or words like "aerogram", which nobody uses now. CASAS is a really good system to rely on if you're teaching adults, who need functional language, and if you have a textbook to go with it (my personal favorite is All Stars).
09/29 Reflection
I really liked the opportunity to brainstorm a lesson plan for high school kids, as this is something I have absolutely no experience with. I have only taught adults, and can manage a lesson plan for an adult class pretty easily, but figuring out things that would work for 10th grade classroom was interesting and exciting. I think we came up with a pretty good plan overall!
It was also interesting to do a learning style test, I knew that I am visual learner, with audio not far behind, but I was surprised to score quite high on kinesthetic as well. I know that I memorize poems best if I do something at the same time. There was one long monologue we were supposed to recite in 8 grade. I started learning it walking in circles around the room, then I got 2 balls and started juggling. Then one of the balls landed under the couch and that was where I memorized the final part. I guess I drifted from kinesthetic approach a bit through my high school and college years, but I still like to lesson plan so that my students will have to do something TPR based.
It was also interesting to do a learning style test, I knew that I am visual learner, with audio not far behind, but I was surprised to score quite high on kinesthetic as well. I know that I memorize poems best if I do something at the same time. There was one long monologue we were supposed to recite in 8 grade. I started learning it walking in circles around the room, then I got 2 balls and started juggling. Then one of the balls landed under the couch and that was where I memorized the final part. I guess I drifted from kinesthetic approach a bit through my high school and college years, but I still like to lesson plan so that my students will have to do something TPR based.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)