As discussed in the readings, there are many different types of classroom talk. One of the most important reasons for classroom talk (as discussed in the McGee reading) is to provide a time for students to express their thoughts and for the teacher to be able to assess the students comperhension. Unlike recitation talk, which is much like just letting the teacher know that your have memorized/mastered certian skills/infomation. Talk should be used more as a time for discovery and a time for a deeper understanding or connection to literacy. This type of talk is referred to response-centered talk. One reasoning behind using response-centered talk is so students will be able to gain that personal connection to the literature. When a student is emotionally connected to the literature, there is a better chance that the student will be become more interested/invested into reading that certian literature piece. One way to have the student become conntected to the reading is by having response-centered talk.
In order to successfully conduct response-centered talk, the teacher needs to be able to scaffold the students. As shown in the McGee article, the teacher was more of just a mediator and just called on the students and let the students do most of the talking. I think this is an affective way to scaffold the students in a response-centered talk. This way the students will be able to come up with their own ideas and make their own connections instead of the teacher doing this for them. When the students come up with their own understandings and connections, the more likely the student will become invested into the literature peice.
I have not really seen much discussion in my classroom. In the times that I am there is more for math and social studies the only discussion is when the students are answering the questions for the math work. My CT does encourage the studetns to raise their hands and share their ideas when they are reading out of the textbook or any activity that they are doing. What types of classroom talk are you guys seeing? Does your CT do much scaffolding in the classroom? For what activities are you seeing it used? :)
Erin,
ReplyDeleteI like how you emphasized the motivational aspects of discussion-based teaching. You are right, students can really be motivated by talking in-depth about a particular group with their peers. It sounds like most of the instruction you are seeing is recitation-based, which is okay, but hopefully the students in your class also get a chance to interact in different ways, as well. I'm curious to hear if anyone else in the group has seen discussion or talk-based strategies in their classroom.
I also read the McGee article and liked the idea of giving students enough time to get their thoughts out and express their thinking. I think this gives students the opportunity to talk through their thinking so the teacher can follow how they get to various answers or questions, but also gives the students a chance to express their inner thoughts. Many times in the classroom I see students pay really close attention the first two minutes of a lesson, then gradually one by one, students start to lose focus or interest. When they have had a substitute who calls on them randomly, they want to give their best answers so they pay closer attention for a longer period of time. Then they can give intelligent answers on the topic rather than being embarrassed or get into trouble for not knowing what to reply. Being patient and waiting for them to talk through their answers can certainly give teachers an idea of how students are thinking about the subject at hand and how they process it mentally. This can help show points of strength and weakness and aid the teacher with points to clarify.
ReplyDeleteMy class does not have discussions or talk based strategies in the classroom. Last semester we had to do the science talk which was a completely new and foreign concept for the first graders. They liked the idea of talking about a subject and telling their teachers what they already knew about it. And I think it switched up their everyday learning by listening to a lecture. My CT really doesn't see the advantages to class discussions however as she has a lot of material to get through and not much time.
I read the Goldenberg article, which was based on instructional conversations and found it very interesting. The article discussed how important a lot of teachers in the US agree that discussion in the classroom is, yet not many teachers use it effectively in the classroom. It stated that discussion is like 'weaving' individuals comments into a larger meaning. I find this to be a very important part of discussion. I've seen discussions before where the CT seems to be having a discussion with 4-5 students on individual levels instead of having a classroom discussion and bringing all the comments into a whole she's commenting individual to the students, but not connecting anything for them. This isn't very effective for the student's because they are not learning the other students view points or learning more about the context they're discussing they're simply raising their hand for gratification or daily participation from the teacher.
ReplyDeleteOur classrooms need to be less of a 'paint by number' and include more instructional conversations.
Elements of instructional conversation should promote a good learning environment, which every teacher strives for I just think that the discussion is not led correctly. A lot of people think of discussion as simply spontaneous and no plans needed. Yet, I believe as a teacher discussions need to be planned to. You need to not only be prepared to scaffold your students as Erin stated, but you also need to be prepared with all of the information to do so as well as knowing your children's prior knowledge to know where you need to begin the conversation.
Do you think your CT plans discussion or simply just ask 'random' questions that are connected somehow to the topic at hand? I think too often it's the later.