I am working with two oung teachers working in outlaying schools, nearly 40 miles away from one another, to develop an inquiry based unit of study that will involve 'lit cirlce discussions' that will be facilitated using Blackboard. Both teachers have small classes, children who have known each other since birth (or darn near) and are reluctant readers. Our hope is that a different approach, choice in reading and the opportunity to mix things up a bit in terms of grouping will help. I have been reading Jeff Wilhelm's new book on inquiry, which I highly recommend, and he discusses the skills students need to have meaningful discussions, actually classifying the different types of responses. We feel that the kids do not have the skills to have meanigful conversations, so I have suggested that we try something quite different. Having found essays and short stories which also support the inquiry question, I scripted discussions which we will model for the kids--role playing--and the kids will have the scripts. We will be working to help the kids code the conversations, moving them towards independetly code the discussions. I am hoping this analysis will support higher quality discussions online.
Lori On Thu, 21 Dec 2006 22:33 , Teresa Terry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> sent: >Ellin, > > Is there any part (chart/page) that you can release from your up and coming > book/presentations that would further our thinking??? I don't think I can wait until 2007! > > As far as...to comprehend, I'm thinking that just like there are different > levels of understanding vocabulary, there are also different levels of comprehension. That is why it is only through reading, reflection, social interactions/discourse with peers and a more knowledgeable person, reflection on social interaction/discourse, addtional rereadings/further reading on the theme/subject matter, and if approriate, application in ones life, does one really understand. > > As far and discourse prompts, I'm thinking that Linda Dorn and Carla Soffos > believe they are to be used as self destructing scaffolds. For the children that I am teaching it appears that they really lack experience with literate conversations. The transcript that follows is of a group of sixth grade, low socioeconomic, ELL students who were participating in a literature discussion group and are nearing proficency levels on our state test this is how a discussion began. > > The book for this discussion was When the Earth Shakes. > > T- So who wants to start our conversation? > E- In this book it is about earthquakes, tsunamis, and what to do when an > earthquake hits. In the first chapter it tells you about, um, what the earthquakes did in California and I forgot what it is called but it runs through California and > Ed-It said that a woman went to sleep in her bed and when she woke up she > was on the other side of her house. Thats when a man and a boy were in a car and the car just starting jumping, again, I didnt know they jumped. > D-On p. 16 it says, In 1985 a powerful earthquake knocked down buildings > in Mexico City. The epicenter was more than 200 miles away! I didnt know what that means; but, I thought it was like the earthquake was more than 200 miles. > T-um-hum > D-Like knocked down more than 200 miles. > T-So, they are quite destructive, arent they? If they are taking people > and bouncing them around like you (Ed) were talking about and now we are finding out the epicenter is more than 200 miles away and they were still feeling the affects in Mexico City. What is an epicenter? > Notice that after students seemed to be going around in the circle sharing > what the text was about rather than expanding upon anothers thoughts, the teacher synthesized the information and posed a convergent question that she felt was an important vocabulary concept for the discussion. > > The following portion reflects the depth of thinking throughout the majority > of the text. As stated before, the students seemed to share information at random and interrupted one another in the stream of speech. Students were not using a co- constructed conversational moves chart that was hung near the discussion meeting place. Instead, students supported and added to anothers thoughts with, It says On page __ and I think I know why. Although a student shared a poorly constructed inference and activated her schemata concerning earthquakes, the majority of the discussion was at a literal level. Example 2 resents a passage that reflected the literalness of the students conversation. > > E-I think it means where the people are. Where they have the Richter > scale. I think it is that.. > D- (Interrupts E) On the front cover, did the earthquake knock down half of > the road or something like that? > E-It looks like a freeway. > T-Can it do that? > All-Yes. > E-When there is an earthquake the ground like > D-(interrupts E) Shaken. > E-And, sometimes it separates or it makes it. When there is a bunch of > earthquakes the ground starts getting like (searching for a word) No, like, its not strong anymore. When there is another earthquake I think it > F-They say the Native Americans, there were turtles that every time they > argued they > E-separate > Three weeks later, the teacher was moving towards self-regulation in her use > to Text Talk prompts (Dorn and Soffos, 2005). Notice that the students were also taking them on or were using their own language to produce discourse chains. > Zacharys Ball > > T-(having recorded the students co-constructed focus questions) asks, > What does Zacharys Ball have to do with dream? Or does it? If so, what? > D-I thought he was dreaming. He said, he said, hold on > M-Because his dad just gave him a ball. Just to give it to him and he had > dreams. > D-He said his ball was magic. > E-Yeah. > M-Yeah, it was magic. > E-And then they won their game. > M-Yeah, at the end when the ball disappeared supposedly he found it again. > E-It was confusing. > D-The part where he lost the baseball. > M-Yeah. > D-He says (reads) Then one day my baseball was gone finally gave up who > took the ball? > M-Yeah, and then there was this other part where the ball just comes from > the sky. > This portion of the transcript below reflects the depth of the students > thinking and the inferential nature of the students conversation. Also, notice how students connect their discourse with on another. They primarily use their connections, text evidence, and questions about the text or to clarify others' thinking, > Zacharys Ball > > > M-And I feel, like yeah, I suppose it was his imagination. Ok. How come > the girl has an imagination too? > E-Because probably the little kid when they dreamed of catching the ball or > something and when they give it to them they think about. > M-(over talks E) and well the girl was looking at Zacharys ball. And > Zachary notices that and he gives her the ball. > E-And the girls says its magic. > D-I think he well you know that his dad had the ball before but when he > E-It said that he catched it. > D-I want to say that his dad probably had the ball a long time ago but when > he was young. > M-When he was young? > D-When he was young. > F-What if Zacharys dad played baseball for the Red Soxs? > D-But when he was young when his dad probably caught the ball for him and > gave it to him and he thought it was magic and that is why he gave it to his son. > M- So you think it is going from along time ago until now? > D-Yeah, thats what Im thinking. > T-So why would the ball come back to him and why did he give it away? > D-He probably felt sorry for her. > V-Because she was poor. > T-Lets go back to the part in the book. > M-(reads) I remember the gift he had given me a moment later. > T-So, he handed it to her. Was he just giving her a ball or more than a > ball? > D, V, M, & E-More than a ball. > E-Imagination. > Lastly, this portion reflects the depth of the students ability to use > inferential and evaluative thinking. Notice how the teacher uses Text Talk prompts lengthen and deepen the chains of conversation. Notice how the kids' language and behaviors contributed to the conversation. > Zacharys Ball > > > T-So, why do you think the author wrote this book? What was he trying to > tell us here? > E-Probably his dad catched the ball for him. > T-Do you think this book is really about catching a ball? > M-I think it is really about imagination. > T-Tell us more about that. > M-I think the author wrote this because some kids imagine that they are in > some special place or they wish what they could be (inaudible) and I think the author wrote this because the boy wants to be a baseball player. > T-Ok. Do you agree or disagree? Or do you want to elaborate on your own > thoughts? > D-I agree because, could you repeat what you said? > F-Please. > M-I think that the author wrote this book because most of the kids our age > have imaginations of going someplace special and I think this boy was imagining that he was a baseball player and I think thats why. > E-I agree with M because my little nephew imagines too much. > (laughing) > D-I imagine everything. > T-Tell us more about the types of things he imagines. > E-He says that he has a friend that his name is Superman and that he is > going to turn him into Superman. > T-And why do you think he imagines that? > E-Probably because I dont know. He doesnt have any brothers to play with > and he imagines things. > M-Id like to add that because he, > F-He watches way too much cartoons. > M-He probably had a dream of having a friend that could help him and be > somebody he likes. > E-He doesnt have any brother and he mostly lonely at home and he doesnt > have anyone to play with. > T-So, it makes him feel special? > D-Like my baby sister imagines that she plays with dolls sometimes. And, > she says her dolls name if April and sometimes Mave. > M-But, dont you imagine sometimes too? > D-Yeah, I do. > M-Everybody imagines, even grown ups can some. > T-So, was __ a good author? > M-Yes, I like how the book had me feel the exact excitement when he got the > ball. > D-He gives you a lot to think about. > The level of talk may not be as deep as I wish for it to be; but, the > students are now having literate conversations about books. Additionally I am seeing huge differences in comprenhension when I hold individual reading conferences before lit. group and ask students to record in their reading/writing notebooks their post lit group reflection. > > Ellin and others, help me grow in my thinking and stretch me to new places. > Your ideas/suggests are welcomed. > > Teresa T. > Literacy Coach > Arkansas > > __________________________________________________ >Do You Yahoo!? >Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around >http://mail.yahoo.com >_______________________________________________ >Mosaic mailing list >Mosaic@literacyworkshop.org >To unsubscribe or modify your membership please go to >http://literacyworkshop.org/mailman/options/ mosaic_literacyworkshop.org. > >Search the MOSAIC archives at http://snipurl.com/MosaicArchive. > >
_______________________________________________ Mosaic mailing list Mosaic@literacyworkshop.org To unsubscribe or modify your membership please go to http://literacyworkshop.org/mailman/options/mosaic_literacyworkshop.org. Search the MOSAIC archives at http://snipurl.com/MosaicArchive.
