This chapter prompted me to stop and think critically about the materials I use in my own classroom, and to identify the factors that influence decisions regarding classroom materials.
As a new 5th grade teacher, most of the materials I use in my classroom are commercially produced, and they are recommended by the school district. Although, I do not believe that commercially produced materials are the way to go all of the time, this is the best I can do with the time I have right now. Currently, the majority of my non-instructional time is spent familiarizing myself with the 5th grade curriculum and getting to know what my students are expected to learn. The thought of developing authentic materials to teach a curriculum I am not familiar with is more than I can handle, because there is only so much time in a day. However, I am confident that the more time I spend teaching 5th grade, the more likely I will be to develop and implement authentic teaching materials. I view this year as a starting point, and my goal will be to make each successive year better than the year before.
This whole discussion about authentic materials and commercially produced materials raises a debate in my head. Here, I am a first year 5th grade teacher using commercially produced materials that are recommended by our district. I know that these materials are designed to meet the academic needs of various populations (“one size fits all”). I am pretty confident that by using these materials I am preparing students for “success.” (They will be exposed to and taught the subject matter necessary to pass the spring testing). However, I also know that authentic materials are generally more specific to a particular cultural group. Authentic materials are generally more meaningful and appropriate, because they take the students specific backgrounds into consideration. To me, this results in a better education because the learning is more likely to be defined by the members of that specific group. The learning that must occur is not coming as an order from somewhere outside. These statements lead me to question my decisions about which classroom materials I use. Right now, it appears that my classroom materials are closely related to the standardized tests my students will take in the spring. That’s scary!
I realize that my teaching materials will become more integrated (a mixture of commercially produced and authentic materials) as I become a more experienced teacher, and spend more time getting to know the individuals who live in this community
Monday, October 27, 2008
Monday, October 20, 2008
Assessment
I believe assessment is an important part of learning, but that the purposes for assessment (the why) and the processes in which assessments are carried out (the how) are open to discussion. Often, the term “assessment” is associated with the high-stakes tests that our students must take: SBA’s, HSGQUE, Terra Nova, ACT, and SATs. These assessments are only part of the assessment process, and they only provide a partial picture of our students as learners.
As teachers, we are assessing our students’ learning on a continuous basis whether we realize it or not. We employ a wide variety of assessments to help us determine if our students are “getting it.” These strategies include: observations, anecdotal notes, chapter tests, quizzes, facial expressions/body language, etc. We use these strategies to increase the effectiveness of our teaching the overall success rate of our students as learners. Our assessments help us determine if our students are “getting it,” and to make modifications as needed.
Likewise, assessing a language curriculum is an essential part of the language program. We need to know if the goals of our language program are being achieved. If our goals are being achieved, we continue to make or program stronger, and if our goals are not being achieved we work to make our program better. The success of our students is at stake.
Assessment serves a purpose, but that purpose should not be to communicate to the stakeholders (students, teachers, parents, etc.) that they are failures. Assessment should be used to lead to changes that will result in the increased effectiveness of whatever is being assessed. Assessment should not be the end result, but a gateway to more effective teaching and learning.
As teachers, we are assessing our students’ learning on a continuous basis whether we realize it or not. We employ a wide variety of assessments to help us determine if our students are “getting it.” These strategies include: observations, anecdotal notes, chapter tests, quizzes, facial expressions/body language, etc. We use these strategies to increase the effectiveness of our teaching the overall success rate of our students as learners. Our assessments help us determine if our students are “getting it,” and to make modifications as needed.
Likewise, assessing a language curriculum is an essential part of the language program. We need to know if the goals of our language program are being achieved. If our goals are being achieved, we continue to make or program stronger, and if our goals are not being achieved we work to make our program better. The success of our students is at stake.
Assessment serves a purpose, but that purpose should not be to communicate to the stakeholders (students, teachers, parents, etc.) that they are failures. Assessment should be used to lead to changes that will result in the increased effectiveness of whatever is being assessed. Assessment should not be the end result, but a gateway to more effective teaching and learning.
Monday, October 13, 2008
Chapter 6
This chapter discussed different syllabus types. After reading about each syllabus type, I immediately thought that an integrated syllabus would be the best approach to syllabus design. However, as I started to construct my reasons for choosing an integrated syllabus, I realized that an integrated syllabus might not be the best choice for all language classes.
The majority of my language teaching experience has been with young learners (6th grade and under) at beginning to intermediate language proficiency levels. Thus, my experience has helped me construct the belief that all domains of language are important in language instruction. In my mind, the best way to incorporate all of these things would be through an integrated syllabus design, one that stresses the importance of reading, writing, listening, and speaking. I believe this would be best achieved through incorporating: context, grammar, and opportunities to use the language, etc., because all these things are interconnected.
However, as I started to think about how proficiency levels and purposes for learning the language differ among students, I realized that it was too simplistic to say that an integrated syllabus would be the best choice for all language classes, and that it would be better to say that the type of syllabus used in language teaching should reflect the purpose of the language class and the proficiency levels of its learners. For example, if the focus of the language class is to improve the writing skills of businessmen with advanced language abilities, then perhaps grammar would be a key area of focus. Maybe, a focus on grammar would be just what the learners would need to become even more proficient in their language abilities.
The majority of my language teaching experience has been with young learners (6th grade and under) at beginning to intermediate language proficiency levels. Thus, my experience has helped me construct the belief that all domains of language are important in language instruction. In my mind, the best way to incorporate all of these things would be through an integrated syllabus design, one that stresses the importance of reading, writing, listening, and speaking. I believe this would be best achieved through incorporating: context, grammar, and opportunities to use the language, etc., because all these things are interconnected.
However, as I started to think about how proficiency levels and purposes for learning the language differ among students, I realized that it was too simplistic to say that an integrated syllabus would be the best choice for all language classes, and that it would be better to say that the type of syllabus used in language teaching should reflect the purpose of the language class and the proficiency levels of its learners. For example, if the focus of the language class is to improve the writing skills of businessmen with advanced language abilities, then perhaps grammar would be a key area of focus. Maybe, a focus on grammar would be just what the learners would need to become even more proficient in their language abilities.
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Chapter 5
Although, I feel confident in being able to identify aims and objectives, I had a difficult time giving an example of an aim and an objective. I found this somewhat ironic because I am a teacher and I deal with standards and objectives constantly. In my own mind, I equate aims to what I know or identify as standards and I equate objectives with what I know as objectives. Once I had cleared up the definition of an aim and an objective in my own mind, I found myself questioning whether or not my aims were to broad (not specific) and whether or not my objectives were centered enough on learning outcomes. My question is how does one know when they have written good aims and/or objectives? Does practice help?
I believe in order to write aims and objectives proficiently, I would need to practice. In addition, I think it would be helpful to work in a group and have the input of several experts. I think these two things would help me write reliable aims and objectives.
I believe in order to write aims and objectives proficiently, I would need to practice. In addition, I think it would be helpful to work in a group and have the input of several experts. I think these two things would help me write reliable aims and objectives.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)