Life in a Day (Planning Stages)

Posted on by
Reply

For our project we are going to film Sam and several of her friends’ days from waking up in the morning to going to bed at night, while asking various questions to guide the movie along. Sam’s movie is based off of a Sundance Festival movie in which people from all over the world filmed their days and sent in their footage to a director. The director edited over 4,500 hours of footage together to make a meaningful movie, titled Life in a Day.
Today we brainstormed the following questions:
1. What did you dream last night?
2. What’s in your backpack?
3. What are your pet peeves?
4. What are your dreams/goals in life?

We also thought about the kind of music we will be using. We tried to pick a variety of music genres to portray different emotions and feelings that Sam and her friends feel throughout the day.

Karen

Posted on by
Reply

Happy Valentine’s Day!!!

Hi, my name is Karen and I go to P.M.S. (Poughkeepsie Middle School). I love Social Studies and reading. My favorite colors are purple and red. I read my favorite book, The Forest of Hands and Teeth every day after I finish my homework. My dog’s name is Foxy and she loves to listen to music with me. She runs into my room when I’m listening to music and she snuggles up against me and doesn’t leave until my dad gets home from work.

Here’s my favorite song:

Treating a second language as a second language

Posted on by
Reply

While reading the Harper and Jong article on Misconceptions about English Language Learners, the overall idea of treating a second language learner as a first really resonated with me. Of course it does not make sense to treat both the same, but what is the solution here? As Calvin noted in an earlier post, the article does not offer much in this respect. However, on a basic level, why is it that when a non-English speaker is trying to learn English in school, we treat it so differently from an English speaker trying to learn, say, French or Spanish? I guess the easy answer is that there is more pressure in the former situation. There is an urgency around getting ELLs up to grade level in all courses, and up to testing level. But if we disregard pressure as a culprit, is there perhaps another idea present–the idea that English is the norm, and that the onus is on ELL’s to meet that norm. This is not intended as a negative generalization; there are many wonderful educators who do not take this view. But it is certainly something I have seen in classrooms where “ENGLISH!”  is the frequent command to students chatting in any other language.

On that note, I wonder if there is a way we could treat English more like any other second language. When middle schoolers learn French or Spanish, they are not taught at their grade level in that language, even if they have had some slight prior exposure. Nor are all their other classes taught in that language. They begin with the basics and progress towards fluency. I realize this model does not work for foreign language speakers in an English speaking world. However, I’m thinking about an experience one of my friends had at a later age, when she studied in Germany last year. While there, she took all her classes in German at a German university. But before she reached that point, she had several weeks of a daily intensive language course, meant to boost her fluency level in German so that she would not fall behind once her real courses, in different disciplines, started. Could we come up with a system that had ELLs spend their first year as English learners taking courses at their grade level in their native language, while doing an intensive English course?* The students could integrate English into other disciplines at a more gradual rate this way. There are potential problems here, of course–students might work at different rates and come out at the end of the year with different fluency levels. But surely treating English as the second language it is will have more a success rate than expecting exposure to do the job. Or perhaps this idea is still too limiting, and something that incorporates English and native languages into the “mainstream” curriculum is of greater value. This idea certainly doesn’t fit into the testing system–the system itself would have to change for something like this to work. Sorry, I’m sort of brainstorming into the blog post at this point. But I just think that a school system that allowed students to take the time to really focus on English as a second language, rather than as an expectation, could be worth the year “behind” for the amount it would put students ahead. Students could maintain grade level knowledge while really working toward English fluency. And, of course, they could continue to expand literacy skills in their native language, working ultimately towards a bilingual education–as stated towards the end of Rubenstein-Avila’s article, “educators at all levels ought to realize that alllanguages are assets to be built upon, often simultaneously, in an additive—not subtractive—manner. Once students are becoming more proficient in English, their native language should not just be dropped–it should still be a part of the curriculum, so that they can learn to express themselves in two equally valid ways. We do not assume that teaching native English speakers another language will damage or hold back their performance in English, so why should we assume that working with speakers of other languages in their native tongue will prevent them from learning English?

I’m not saying any of what I’ve outlined above is perfect. I think it’s actually innately flawed, because I’m sort of trying to fit it into a system that is flawed–to truly make a change, I think more of an overhaul would be necessary. But I hope it’s a step in the right direction.

Understanding Language and Culture

Posted on by
Reply

Something that really resonated with me was an idea that Candace Harper brought up in her article, “Misconceptions about Teaching English-language Learners”. Harper brings forth a problem that teachers have with their ELL students and that is that they have trouble understanding the common struggles ELL students have when learning. She says, “Teachers need to be aware of common writing errors for ELLs, such as problems with verb tenses, plural and possessive forms of nouns, subject/verb agreement, and the use of articles, and they should realize that many of these errors are developmental and/or influenced by the student’s native language and are not equally responsive (or impervious) to correction” (Harper 3).

While I am not an ELL student, I have come across this problem in my Chinese class. Last year, my Chinese professor was abroad and my class had a visiting professor who had come straight from China. She had never had any experience in teaching native English speakers and had a difficult time communicating with us and understanding our common errors. My Chinese professors in the past had all been aware of the common mistakes English speakers make and addressed these problems as we were taught new grammar structures. Since the visiting professor had trouble understanding the roots of these errors that my classmates and I were frequently making, she did not know how to address it and struggled to teach the curriculum.

Another serious problem Harper addresses in this same argument is that often times, “Errors are seen as deviations from target language forms and may be interpreted as cognitive disorders instead of evidence of a learner’s interlanguage,” (Harper 3). If teachers are unaware of the cultural and linguistic background of their students, they may falsely identify these students with disorders when they are actually just struggling to adapt to a new and unfamiliar learning culture. Due to these reasons, it is essential that teachers are aware of a wide range of different ethnic learning styles, cultures, and languages in order to better understand their students and how to teach them.

Everyone is an English Teacher

Posted on by
Reply

When reading Harper and de Jong’s article on misconceptions about teaching ELL students, I got increasingly frustrated with what I perceived to be an overbearing repetitiveness of theme: Teaching content and teaching language skills are separate processes. I agree with the authors we read for this week about directly addressing the language learning needs of our students by taking on the role of English teacher even when teaching other content areas. The distinction Harper and de Jong make between learning a first language and learning a second language was something I had never considered before, at least explicitly. When kids learn their first language, they are just that: kids. They have the language skills of kids, but they also have the critical thinking ability of kids and life experiences of kids. ELL students are in a much different head space than little kids, and too often that isn’t recognized.

While I appreciated all of these points that they were making, I got frustrated that they seemed to address WHAT the problem is without discussing HOW to solve it. The recommendations they give are all theoretical. They say things like, “Teachers should include ways to reduce the language demands for ELLs (i.e. provide comprehensible input) while simultaneously providing opportunities for ELLs to develop the neccessary academic language skills” (158). Good to know, but what does that actually look like in the classroom? They say, “Teachers need to be aware of common writing errors for ELLs, such as problems with verb tenses, plural and possessive forms of nouns, subject/verb agreement, and the use of articles” (155). Even though they get more specific here, communicating common errors for ELL students, I’m left with more questions than answers. Which first languages correspond most often to which errors? What do we do with this awareness? I don’t mean to trash the article, but I think the authors stop one step short. They raise awareness of a problem, and then give theoretical solutions to that problem without getting into the tangible practical solutions. Leaving this article, I initially thought, “Wow, I feel like I know a lot more about teaching ELL students now than I did before.” Pretty quickly, though, I realized I hadn’t fully learned anything. I had a lot of great theories, but no idea how to actually put them into practice. This is something I feel about a lot of critical texts in education. Sometimes it feels like we identify a problem and figure out theoretical solutions, but we stop there. This kind of discussion gives the illusion of being prepared for the demands of the classroom, but don’t actually equip us with anything we can really use.

I was thrilled to find a wealth of more practical solutions geared toward helping ELL students in chapter 8 of our Adolescent Literacy book. In that chapter, the editors and authors bring up the specific problems they have faced, discuss theoretical solutions, and then follow that up with real examples, diagrams, and figures.I wonder whether the chapter is more grounded because it is written by multiple authors in a dialogue. They don’t get a chance to over-talk anything, because the other contributors are right there to push the conversation forward or offer a fresh perspective.

Ultimately, chapter 8 is something I will definitely return to if/when I have ELL students in my classroom. Misconceptions About Teaching English-language Learners, on the other hand, feels like it has no more to offer me.

An Oppressive Environment for ELL Students

Posted on by
2

Reading all of the pieces regarding English Language Learners I began to reflect on an experience I had with such students this summer that seems to contradict all of the positive strategies that the readings espoused.  This past summer I worked on the residential staff at a summer boarding school with a student body of roughly 200.  A large number of these students were ELL.  I had three ELL students under my direct supervision, one from China and two from South Korea.  Additionally there were massive Arabic and Spanish speaking populations among the students at this school.  Looking back on that experience what really strikes me is how oppressive the school was of these students using their first language among themselves in conversation.  As a member of the residential staff I was told to both monitor and stop any and all conversations taking place in any language other than English.  The idea was that these students were here to learn English and speaking their native language was nothing but detrimental.  It seems that the school felt a greater responsibility to the parents’ paid tuitions than to the students themselves.

Unlike what was suggested in the readings, these students were not able to use their primary language as a scaffold for learning English.  They were discouraged from speaking in a language that made them comfortable when many of them were thousands of miles from home in a strange place.  How alienated they must have felt and the school’s policy of oppressing primary language use did nothing but enforce this alienation.  Following these readings I am frankly disgusted and very concerned by the oppressive policies I was tasked with enforcing.  Why not allow a student to use any tool at their disposal when trying to learn an unfamiliar language?  This response may have become more of a rant but I believe it gets to the point that there is absolutely no reason to discourage primary language use by ELL students, as literacy arises from any language not only from English.

Project Update: Isabella and Amanda

Posted on by
1

Isabella and I were both surprised when we found out that we were paired together because we had met previously: I participated in the Vassar After School Tutoring (VAST) program during freshman and sophomore years and she was one of the students in my knitting clinic. It was exciting to have an established bond with the student that I am working with in this class and I look forward to learning even more about her.

Because Isabella and I already knew the basics about each other, we jumped right into project brainstorming. Isabella had some really creative ideas that involved her interests, such as making a presentation that combines her athletic pursuits, swimming, crew, and outdoor activities, with poetry. Isabella is also interested in American History, such as the Salem Witch Trials, and loves to babysit, so these are also potential project choices – maybe we will make a digital story that combines historical fiction with babysitting, which sounds like a stretch but could be challenging and really entertaining. Clearly, we need to narrow our focus and attempt to come up with some more concrete ideas.

I hope that in our next meeting, Isabella and I will work together to determine the nature of a project that will be engaging for the entire semester. I hope that, in our future meetings, I will get to see some of her writing because I think that her voice as a reader and writer will play a significant role in the trajectory of the our work together – maybe she can even create a little piece of writing to post on the blog!

Two Birds, One Stone

Posted on by
1
I found Harvey Daniels’s chapter on letter exchanges between teachers and students to be extremely and surprisingly thought-provoking. It’s really such a simple idea, yet as Daniels cautions, it requires a lot of time and dedication. Nevertheless, Daniels provides a number of examples and explanations that demonstrate just how powerful a strategy letter writing and correspondence could really be.
From what I gathered from Daniels’s argument, the benefits of letter exchange for both teachers and students is twofold.
This form of communication between student and teacher is important for several academic-related reasons. First, it has the potential to teach what strong writing should look like. While it’s important that teachers use less formal, and therefore less distant, language to effectively communicate to their students through their notes, their writing style will ultimately convey to the students what forms of writing are appropriate within an academic setting/correspondence. Second, letter exchanges provide a means by which students could discuss what they understand, don’t understand, like or dislike about the content they are learning. While this shouldn’t replace extra face-to-face help from the teacher, this strategy would certainly illuminate the problems that individual students–or perhaps a group of them–may have in the classroom, thus making it possible for teachers to take further measures to ensure that their students are fully grasping what they need to know.
I guess that in high school, some of my teachers presented me with opportunities for written communication with them via weekly journals. But the emphasis was based primarily on the week’s content and not so much on open-ended musings. Furthermore, the teachers would clearly read through my entries–as I could tell from their markings–but would not provide constructive or particularly valuable comments. I didn’t find this particularly noteworthy then, but I can now see how my teachers may have missed an opportunity to develop a more academically and personally fulfilling relationship with my peers and myself.
That being said, what I found to be Daniels’s most compelling argument for the note-exchanging process is the more personal implication of letter correspondence: the connection that is allowed to develop between a teacher and his/her students. This form of communication allows for personal attention that can enhance a student’s–particularly a shy student’s–level of comfort and confidence. This would be especially important for ELL students who find it difficult to find a voice in the classroom!
Of course, this whole process requires a ton of time and dedication on the part of the teacher. And reading and writing letters will be especially hard when you’re teaching up to five classes a day. Unless an efficient system could be worked out, letter-writing could become extremely taxing. But it is of the utmost importance for teachers to know who they are teaching, what strengths and weaknesses could be focused upon, and what personal issues may require further attention. Daniels concludes with a powerful thought: “Could any teaching act ever be more important” than connecting with a kid who’s in trouble?

Epistolary Bonds with Students

Posted on by
Reply

Harvey Daniels’s article on exchanging weekly letters with his students really resonated with me.  Although the concept of reading and writing letters to 50 – 100 students is daunting, I was able to imagine myself undertaking this task even before I had finished reading the article. As I work towards my teaching certification, I frequently encounter new concerns about engaging my future students, but it is not often that I read about a strategy that I immediately want to try. Because my educational background and funds of knowledge derive from a white upper-middle class upbringing and private schools, one of my primary concerns as a future teacher is that I will not be able to connect with students from a variety of different backgrounds. The idea of forging bounds through writing letters seems like a viable solution to this concern because I can connect with my students by demonstrating genuine and sustained interest in their lives rather than through superficial similarities that may not exist.

As put forth by Daniels, other positive outcomes of this student-teacher correspondence are it “allows the teacher to model good writing, to create a just-right text for each child to read, [and] to see and assess each student’s writing skills” (Daniels 128). I imagine myself as a teacher being a stickler for grammar, so I see these letters as an opportunity to demonstrate proper grammar and punctuation while not having to edit the students writing. I also appreciated Daniels’s advice to “write informally” and allow students to see crossed out and misspelled words. I think that allowing the student to see the teacher’s thought process makes the teacher seem more human and less like a knowledge dispenser.

The final aspect of Daniels’s article that I appreciated was the strategies for giving students both positive and critical feedback within the letters. He makes the point that when students receive feedback in this private manner, “it is less likely the kid will react defensively or feel a need to act defiant in front of peers” (Daniels 140).  This also allows the student to reflect on his or her behavior and devise a strategy for improvement. In this way, the teacher gives a student agency over his or her classroom conduct; an individual’s behavior can consequently improve as a result of his or her own choices, not the reprimands of the teacher. I realize that implementing this program on a large scale may overwhelm teachers, but I definitely want to try it when I teach because I think that the rewarding relationships that emerge from these letters far exceeds the effort.

Hello, My names is Emmanuel but, everyone calls me manny.

Posted on by
4

I was born in Poughkeepsie, New York on 3/23/00 which makes me 11 years old.  I have two siblings. I have a 17 year old brother who is named Sebastian, and a 14 year old sister named Isabella. My favorite thing to do is to watch and play all kinds of sports except for the one that I don’t think should be considered a sport (golf). My favorite teams are Miami Heat (basketball),NY Jets (football), NY Yankees (baseball), and Real Madrid (soccer).