Thoughts on Brown Chapter 4 & 16 and Kumar. Chapter 3

Learners need to feel "invested" in their learning for any long-term retention of knowledge. They must feel an urgency to learn and take responsibility and ownership of that. The teacher must do several things in order for this transfer or sharing of responsibilty to take place. One thing the teacher must do is to make the learning meaningful to the student. I thought of this as activating prior knowledge and building background for them if they do not have sufficient schema going into the lesson. The teacher must also promote autonomy and encourage students taking initiative towards constructing knowledge and extending their thinking. Teachers should also be communicating different strategies to their students that they can use on their own to make meaning. For example, students should be made aware of cognates and to look out for them, how to learn from their mistakes, they should reference what they know from their native language to help them with their target language, using context clues, etc. Teachers should help develop students metacognitive abilities. I was left wondering about two things after reading however. The first thing I am pondering is, how valid are the points about learning styles? Recently, there was an articl eby a group of four psychologists, including professors from UC San Diego and UCLA, that reviewed historical data. That concluded that there is little scientific evidence to support the learning-styles theory and it remains a theory.This article can be found at http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/09/26/learning-styles-theory_n_981845.html They next thing I wondered about was the emphasis Brown put on left- brain and right-brain. This came up recently in a discussion for my graduate curriculum course. My professor for that class said that left-brain right brain theory is extremely inaccurate and over-emphasized. It is simply a metaphor that self-help books blew up and took literally and got translated into truth. Personally, I'd have to do more research on it only because it is still talked about and reference in education. What is the truth related to this issue? I found the following articles related to it but would love to know more. http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/brain-myths/201206/why-the-left-brain-right-brain-myth-will-probably-never-die http://rense.com/general2/rb.htm

Week 4 Post

Kumar Chapter2 I felt truth in the quote, “the term method is a label without substance.” At times it feels so vague or as though it encompasses so much that it is hard to define. It is used so widespread and for so many different things. So, I can understand why there was dissatisfaction and why the postmethod condition arose. It almost seems like opting-out of the “alternative methods” that cannot realistically be applied to a classroom of learners for instruction. Everyone learners differently and many of the methods seem to be extreme for practical and realistic instruction. Brown Chapter 3 I connected with the section discussing the dysfunction of the theory-practice dichotomy. The author did a great job describing the relationship between theorist and practitioner. They described it as that of a producer of goods and a consumer. Also, theorists are regarded more highly than practitioners. I completely agree. I love the district for which I work but disagree with one of their “pushes.” We are told to teach the curriculum or from the “basal” with 100% integrity because it is research based and based on theories. However, as a teacher if you do not see it working and your students are not being successful following that model, why continue it? Teachers input and classroom research should be valued more. I was glad to read that newer work views teachers as researchers and encourage action research and classroom based research. I happen to do this in my classroom for reading instruction. I am trying to collect data to support a different approach to reading than the basal in my bilingual classroom. The next thing I was reminded of when reading was of the SIOP method. I thought of this while reading about Task based language teaching (slightly) and when reading about Content Based Instruction. Content Based Instruction also reminded me of thematic units/plans. Would thematic units fall under that?

Chapter 1 - B. Kumaravadivelu

As I read through this chapter I began to reflect. What metaphor would I use to describe what the teachers' role in the classroom should be? I believe a teacher should be a facilitator and guide their students. However, with so many different teaching philosophies and beliefs it would be impossible, in my opinion, to say a teacher is like a "director" or some other moniker. Personally, I do not like the role of "passive technician." I wouldn't want to be a student in a classroom of the type either. It sounds very traditional and boring. I believe teaching and learning should be fun and interactive, collaborative and meaningful. As far as being reflective practitioners, I do see truth in that. Teachers need to reflect and think critically of what they are saying and doing. They need to examine if they are being efficient and effective. I found Zeichner and Listons quote interesting. They said that, “not all thinking about teaching constitutes reflective teaching. If a teacher never questions the goals and the values that guide his or her work, the context in which he or she teaches, or never examines his or her own assumptions, then it is our belief that this individual is not engaged in reflective teaching.” I agree with them. It is more than, “How did my lesson go?” It is deeper than that and utterly important. And the idea of teachers as transformative intellectuals I love. I find that I agree with a lot of critical theorist and pedagogists.

Brown: Chapter 1 & 2

I appreciate how Brown began the book by creating a context that readers could relate to. He set up the first chapter with an observation and view into a lesson in a classroom. This was a nice way to start and build conversations from. As far as the observation, I felt the teacher did something’s well and others things could have been executed better. For example, the audio dialogue on the CD. I was bothered by the sample the teacher chose to use. She chose a conversation with improper English and idioms. I would not have chosen a sample saying “Well, that’s what makes the world go ‘round.” Also, idioms are fine if you make a teaching point with it but to present it and not address it, I believe is a mistake. Then, the choral drilling that followed. If the teacher had a good speaking sample and made a point to instruct students to carefully listen to the speaker’s accents and try to emulate it that would be fine but she did not. She simply had the students repeat it two times without clearly stating a teaching objective. It felt as if the teacher was going through the motions. As a student, I would be bored and not understand the point of it if the teacher did not explain the purpose for the activity. I also felt certain parts of the lesson were very teacher centered. When she was explaining the “would rather” statements the students were not engaged at all. Then the parts that were student–centered, they were not provided clear instructions. It was admirable that she moved beyond the textbook and into collaborative work where they could use the knowledge and practice with it. However, the purpose and instructions for the activity were unclear. Obviously, I became frustrated with this teacher as I was reading this chapter. Something else that bothered me was the t-chart, where it was labeled “Would you rather see it?” It didn’t make sense. It was not clear. The teacher needs to model English correctly! Another moment that I did not agree with was when the teacher reverted to the L1 to explain. It does not help the students (in this case). The teacher should have rephrased herself, explained it differently, or provided a model in the L2. It was lazy of her. If the teacher makes a habit of reverting to L1 to explain, students will stop trying to understand in their L2 if it’s difficult because they know their teacher if just going to explain in their native language in a moment anyways. Also, when the teacher asked if they understood, her students clearly did not, but she moved on anyways. She should have done some further questioning to see if they understood or to see what part needed more clarification. Or she could have employed another formative assessment like showing a thumbs up or down to get a good read for their understanding. When reading about the history of language teaching I found I was able to make a lot of connections to things I had learned previously about affective filters, TPR, classical method, the natural approach, Krashens’ theories, the WIDA standards, and more. However with reading this chapter it was the background for the things I had previously learned. I found Gouin particularly interesting and sad that he was not as widely recognized. Unfortunately, that seems to happen to many bright theorists. They are overshadowed or society just isn’t ready for their way of thinking and way of seeing things. I can see how approaches seem to take some things from another, change it a bit, and create a new approach. It does seem cyclical. It’s interesting to read about. I can say that one of my language classes in high school was very much like the grammar translation method. It was the most boring thing on Earth. I am glad to read it “theoryless” but saddened that some teachers still employ this approach to their instruction.

About Me

Hello! My name is Nicole Gonzalez-Milligan. I am the first grade teacher at Bent Schools' developmental bilingual program in Bloomington. In our program we build a strong foundation in our students' native language, Spanish, and transition teaching so by fifth grade students are fluently bilingual. I am proud to work in a school where we value and respect our students native language and culture while introdcuing them into a new one. I got my bachelors at the University of South Florida in Elementary Education with a TESOL endorsement in 2008. I am now working on my masters at ISU for Curriculum and Instruction. However, I need this course to complete my bilingual teaching certificate.