Butler, F. A. & Stevens, R. (2001). Standardized assessment of the content knowledge of English language learners’ k-12: Current trends and old dilemmas. Language Testing, 18 (4), 409-427. Los Angeles, CA.
O’Malley, M. & Pierce, L. V. (1996) Content area assessment
Some of the similarities between the two readings involve ELL’s being tested using the old system of standardized approaches which we have learned and discussed innumerably this quarter is not valid. Some of the reason to test in content areas includes accountability, continued programs for funding, and to see how schools are doing across the board. This process seems helpful in a way that school are accountable for their learners, however the way in which testing is carried out proves invalid for several reasons stated in both readings, such as: students are more diverse that come in speaking another language other than English, testing is usually standardized, little or no accommodations are made to meet individual needs, these assessment are mostly one time deal and so often is not a valid measurement, and do not test in language of the ELL’s.
In Butler’s article some solutions were suggested such as to look into accommodations for the ELL’s and to provide a measure of growth in English. Accommodations would be in the area of test and procedural modifications and Measures of growth is screening students to see if they are proficient enough to participate in high stakes testing.
O’Malley and Pierce suggested authentic means of testing such as scaffolding to show if students can respond to tasks, such as Graphic Organizers to help thinking skills, problem solving, and strategic approaches to learning.
Further it has always been suggested to include the learners in the process through their prior knowledge, self-assessments, and empowerment of their educational process by setting goals. This can mean that the teacher include and not exclude learners in assessing and or creating rubrics so that learners know and understand the criteria.
One thing I will remember from this reading is the differentiated scoring. My district does encourage us to differentiate instruction as we teach in multilevelized classrooms. It does make sense that we should also differentiate scoring. A good example is differentiating writing from the grammatical and the concepts. I will try to include more writing in their Math, which I seem to shy away from as compared to other Content Areas. One example I have begun to use is for them to explain in their own words how they came to this conclusion or to explain their results.
Thursday, December 4, 2008
Wednesday, November 26, 2008
Writing Assessment O'Malley & Valdez Pierce Chapter 6
This is by far the one subject that I really do not like assessing and in general I would rate myself a 4 on a scale from 0-10. Looking at the instructional uses found on page 160, here is the make up of that:
1. I rate myself a 4 in assessing the stages of writing development. I do have a little idea, however, it is something not fully documents, other than their first written piece in their Journals when school begins. We have this journal all year so I see their beginning entries, but I have not implemented a more formal documentations as in Figure 6.3.
2. I rate myself a 7 in assessing writing in the context of other language skills, and integrated languages assessment such as Reading, Social Studies, Science, Employability Skills, PE/Health, and Yup'ik. I do well integrating Writing to other Content Areas. Writing can be use in almost every part of their education, so I plug this into those outlets.
3. I rate myself a 7 in assessing all domains of writing, especially composition, in addition to sentence construction, word usage and mechanics. I use a program called Daily Language Practice everyday as guided instruction. This helps the grammar and language usage. However I do not make that connection of grammar and language usage in their paragraph writing or report writing, and letter writing.
4. As far as self assessment of writing I rate myself as 1, sharing scoring rubric rate is 1, and involving students in setting criteria is 1. I do like the student to pick their writing topics so that is a 5. This is my area needing improvement.
5. In assessing the writing process, I rate a 4 because I do let the students rewrite when necessary, however I do not follow the 6 Trait Writing Process. I do let the students publish or hang their written pieces.
6. I rate a 5 in using Multiple assessments of writing across various purposes, genres, and content areas. including written summaries and learning logs. As stated before I do include writing across the board, but I do not include rubrics other than the one needed in the Writing Level 2 assessment (not one we created -students and I), and I need to have them begin logging this process.
7. Including writing samples in their Portfolios, I rate a 5 because I do save written samples and add it to their thematic unit folders for parents to see. I do not further this as Writing Portfolios go, by having them self -evaluate or peer assess, and I have not had them make Table of Contents for their Portfolios, it is just some assignments they have completed in my classroom selected by me.
8. I do use results to begin planning so that I meet some needs of the student so I rate a 6. I do not have the students write personal goals and that needs to be in place.
In looking back since the beginning of the school year, one of fourteen of my students was able to write in a paragraph, stay on topic, and use proper grammar. Since then I have noticed another who has developed as a writer, shes now able to write a complete paragraph, complete with end marks, capitals, and stay on topic. So I do have a lot of room for improvement. I need to work to becoming a more student and portfolio friendly writing teacher. I need to begin to involve the students in their writing.
Some new terms after reading this chapter are on pages 142-144 the types of scoring. New to me are the Holistic Scoring and I like Figure 6.1 which is an example of a Holistic Rubric and primary trait which focuses on scoring one trait at a time in a written piece. I am familiar with Analytical scoring and that is represented in Figure 6.2. I have seen rubrics similar to this for 6 Trait writing.
Where to go from here? I have included some of these in my Assessment Portfolio and I do want to begin by having the students rate themselves as writers, and I want to document their development by using Figure 6.3 so that their stage or development is clear.
1. I rate myself a 4 in assessing the stages of writing development. I do have a little idea, however, it is something not fully documents, other than their first written piece in their Journals when school begins. We have this journal all year so I see their beginning entries, but I have not implemented a more formal documentations as in Figure 6.3.
2. I rate myself a 7 in assessing writing in the context of other language skills, and integrated languages assessment such as Reading, Social Studies, Science, Employability Skills, PE/Health, and Yup'ik. I do well integrating Writing to other Content Areas. Writing can be use in almost every part of their education, so I plug this into those outlets.
3. I rate myself a 7 in assessing all domains of writing, especially composition, in addition to sentence construction, word usage and mechanics. I use a program called Daily Language Practice everyday as guided instruction. This helps the grammar and language usage. However I do not make that connection of grammar and language usage in their paragraph writing or report writing, and letter writing.
4. As far as self assessment of writing I rate myself as 1, sharing scoring rubric rate is 1, and involving students in setting criteria is 1. I do like the student to pick their writing topics so that is a 5. This is my area needing improvement.
5. In assessing the writing process, I rate a 4 because I do let the students rewrite when necessary, however I do not follow the 6 Trait Writing Process. I do let the students publish or hang their written pieces.
6. I rate a 5 in using Multiple assessments of writing across various purposes, genres, and content areas. including written summaries and learning logs. As stated before I do include writing across the board, but I do not include rubrics other than the one needed in the Writing Level 2 assessment (not one we created -students and I), and I need to have them begin logging this process.
7. Including writing samples in their Portfolios, I rate a 5 because I do save written samples and add it to their thematic unit folders for parents to see. I do not further this as Writing Portfolios go, by having them self -evaluate or peer assess, and I have not had them make Table of Contents for their Portfolios, it is just some assignments they have completed in my classroom selected by me.
8. I do use results to begin planning so that I meet some needs of the student so I rate a 6. I do not have the students write personal goals and that needs to be in place.
In looking back since the beginning of the school year, one of fourteen of my students was able to write in a paragraph, stay on topic, and use proper grammar. Since then I have noticed another who has developed as a writer, shes now able to write a complete paragraph, complete with end marks, capitals, and stay on topic. So I do have a lot of room for improvement. I need to work to becoming a more student and portfolio friendly writing teacher. I need to begin to involve the students in their writing.
Some new terms after reading this chapter are on pages 142-144 the types of scoring. New to me are the Holistic Scoring and I like Figure 6.1 which is an example of a Holistic Rubric and primary trait which focuses on scoring one trait at a time in a written piece. I am familiar with Analytical scoring and that is represented in Figure 6.2. I have seen rubrics similar to this for 6 Trait writing.
Where to go from here? I have included some of these in my Assessment Portfolio and I do want to begin by having the students rate themselves as writers, and I want to document their development by using Figure 6.3 so that their stage or development is clear.
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Peregoy & Boyle: Reading Assessment & Instruction: Ch. 10.
The assessments methods here were more analytical approaches to Reading Assessment as compared to Alternative Assessments of Reading as suggested in Valdez chapter 5. The approaches here were more teacher directed as opposed to the Reading assessments in Valdez where the learners were empowered to self-evaluate, document or chart their progress to show growth , and worked toward a goal or goals. One thing remains same in any situation is that teachers and or assessors need to learn more about their test takers and language learners such as gaining background knowledge and language knowledge. When a teacher gains new students he/she quickly tries to learn everything they can learn about the learners like what do they already know, what their strengths and weaknesses are. With this knowledge of the learners are a set of words they might already know, and possibly if the learner can comprehend. The data maybe attained through an "infinite variety" (as in Shakespeare's Cleopatra). Some of the ways to gain access to what the learner is able to do or lacks are through the tools such as the Informal Reading Inventory (IRI), Running Record, Miscue Analysis, and Guided Reading. Running Records, Miscues, and IRI are related in a way that they are testing fluency. Miscues and IRI's go further than Running Records to test comprehension as well as fluency. IRI's go further to test if the student has "tapped the ceiling" or tested as high as he/she can test to the point at which the learner has difficulty.
The levels stated here in this article are a little too broad for me. I would use this as another means (to see if the learners are at Independent, Instructional, or Frustration Reading levels), however I like the one Valdez has in Figure 5.18. The Assessment that I use monthly is a Running Record called AimsWeb where I assess the fluency of the child and count the words read per minute and note the errors he/she makes. I do that for three readings and then take the median of each ( middle # of words correct and # of errors). This does not test comprehension. The LY end of level test for Level 2 does provide a short Miscue Analysis where the students read a short story and then aswer 2-3 comprehension questions. This is a hit or miss since the comprehension part is in standardized format and students get only 2 questions.
I think my strengths as a reading teacher are the number of times I read aloud to the class, and mediate the process, I explain and have little discussions as we go along. I read aloud non-fiction, fiction, and chapter books daily. Some of these books are picture books and some are Alaskana books, or books that originated elsewhere. I strive to expose the class to a wide range of literature genres, and discuss these often. The authors here stressed Read Alouds. The other strength here is Silent Sustained Reading. They stressed it's best used after lunch and uninterrupted, and unreported, where learners self select their reading material from books, newspapers, magazines, and other fun literature. This works well because the students are engaged, they usually select a wide range of books, and they want to share a vocabulary they found that we have discussed before. This happens daily!
One thing that sounded interesting is the Echo Reading. I have done something similar to this but not for assessing purposes. I would like to try that. One chart that I liked here is Figure 10.9 the one about Guided Reading. I have thought about this but have not had time to begin to have small reading groups. It's a lot to prepare for since I am the only adult being in my classroom so it's a lot of training, and instructing students on how to work constructively in small groups. That is something I can try if I needed to. Right now, we seem to be getting along fairly well without. (No Barking At Print Here!):D
The levels stated here in this article are a little too broad for me. I would use this as another means (to see if the learners are at Independent, Instructional, or Frustration Reading levels), however I like the one Valdez has in Figure 5.18. The Assessment that I use monthly is a Running Record called AimsWeb where I assess the fluency of the child and count the words read per minute and note the errors he/she makes. I do that for three readings and then take the median of each ( middle # of words correct and # of errors). This does not test comprehension. The LY end of level test for Level 2 does provide a short Miscue Analysis where the students read a short story and then aswer 2-3 comprehension questions. This is a hit or miss since the comprehension part is in standardized format and students get only 2 questions.
I think my strengths as a reading teacher are the number of times I read aloud to the class, and mediate the process, I explain and have little discussions as we go along. I read aloud non-fiction, fiction, and chapter books daily. Some of these books are picture books and some are Alaskana books, or books that originated elsewhere. I strive to expose the class to a wide range of literature genres, and discuss these often. The authors here stressed Read Alouds. The other strength here is Silent Sustained Reading. They stressed it's best used after lunch and uninterrupted, and unreported, where learners self select their reading material from books, newspapers, magazines, and other fun literature. This works well because the students are engaged, they usually select a wide range of books, and they want to share a vocabulary they found that we have discussed before. This happens daily!
One thing that sounded interesting is the Echo Reading. I have done something similar to this but not for assessing purposes. I would like to try that. One chart that I liked here is Figure 10.9 the one about Guided Reading. I have thought about this but have not had time to begin to have small reading groups. It's a lot to prepare for since I am the only adult being in my classroom so it's a lot of training, and instructing students on how to work constructively in small groups. That is something I can try if I needed to. Right now, we seem to be getting along fairly well without. (No Barking At Print Here!):D
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
Valdez-Pierce & O'Malley:Chapter 5, Reading Assessment
Basic points in reading assessments (p. 132):
(BTW-thanks Quana I'm rating myself on a scale 0-10 in everything) :D
1. I do focus on validity when assessing reading. If I am going to teach reading activities, I focus on testing those activities taught. An example would be if I am teaching basic site words, I have them read them and use them in sentences. I rate myself an 8 in this.
2. In planning, timing, and experience of assessing reading, there are certain activities I have learned based on my experiences: these are the activities I use every year: introduce themed vocabulary based on reading, mutltiple choice tests on these, flash cards with themed vocabulary (just started during the SIOP lessons last spring) and have student read aloud and say in sentences, Miscue analysis to record reading fluency done per month, use of graphic organizers like Story Outlines for comprehension, reading journals, use both themed fiction and non-fiction, Home Reading ,and provide Silent Sustained Reading time daily. I rate myself an 8.
3. As stated in the previous, students are assessed in decoding and in fluency, and some comprehension assessments strategies include graphic organizers, reading journals, multiple choice, true/false, and some short questions.
4. As far as students attitudes and feelings toward reading, I rate myself as a 5 (0-10) because I am not consistent in this. I would like to begin using reading attitude surveys, and my short term goal is to begin having the students say how the story makes them feel.
5. Again as stated in the previous (#4), I am not consistent in making assessment accountable for students time management. I can say though the time they spend in school is quality in general, however there is always room for improvement.
6. I rate myself as a 9 in that assessment is on-going and regular. Althought this is not a 10, I do see some little areas where I can improve as in the areas of self and peer assessments, peer or shared reading, and students expressing how they feel about the stories.
7. I rate myself a 2 for students being actively involved in their own assessment, setting criteria, and engaging in self-assessment or peer evaluation. I have done pieces of these but not enough for the students to have that confidence in their own assessment. They would not be able to orally tell about these.
8. This is an interesting reading assessment tool that states teacher should be recording observations of reading systematically. I can say I am about a 6 in the scale. I do write my plans to reflect needs of students, based on standards not met yet. My plans are visible and printed, copies of my plans are in the computer so I can check back. Each student has a score summary sheet and a check off report card that is computerized, so records are on-going. But I do see where I can improve is maybe an activity like an anecdotal record and to actually print reports of their fluency reports for them to see. This is where I can have students write reading goals too and work toward that goal so that they can become fluent readers.
9. I would say I rate a 7 in using multiple assessments. I can alwasy use more like the reading portfolios complete with attitudes, peer assessments, and self assessments. I also like the idea of students being constructive with their reading logs like charting how many books read per month. That is something I would like to start.
10. So far I rate myself in using reading assessments to inform students, parents, and teachers as a 6. I do inform parents, and some teachers if they request info. But I do not use it as a means to inform students. I need to become more balanced to involve student in their own process and make them more aware, and more responsible for their reading.
(BTW-thanks Quana I'm rating myself on a scale 0-10 in everything) :D
1. I do focus on validity when assessing reading. If I am going to teach reading activities, I focus on testing those activities taught. An example would be if I am teaching basic site words, I have them read them and use them in sentences. I rate myself an 8 in this.
2. In planning, timing, and experience of assessing reading, there are certain activities I have learned based on my experiences: these are the activities I use every year: introduce themed vocabulary based on reading, mutltiple choice tests on these, flash cards with themed vocabulary (just started during the SIOP lessons last spring) and have student read aloud and say in sentences, Miscue analysis to record reading fluency done per month, use of graphic organizers like Story Outlines for comprehension, reading journals, use both themed fiction and non-fiction, Home Reading ,and provide Silent Sustained Reading time daily. I rate myself an 8.
3. As stated in the previous, students are assessed in decoding and in fluency, and some comprehension assessments strategies include graphic organizers, reading journals, multiple choice, true/false, and some short questions.
4. As far as students attitudes and feelings toward reading, I rate myself as a 5 (0-10) because I am not consistent in this. I would like to begin using reading attitude surveys, and my short term goal is to begin having the students say how the story makes them feel.
5. Again as stated in the previous (#4), I am not consistent in making assessment accountable for students time management. I can say though the time they spend in school is quality in general, however there is always room for improvement.
6. I rate myself as a 9 in that assessment is on-going and regular. Althought this is not a 10, I do see some little areas where I can improve as in the areas of self and peer assessments, peer or shared reading, and students expressing how they feel about the stories.
7. I rate myself a 2 for students being actively involved in their own assessment, setting criteria, and engaging in self-assessment or peer evaluation. I have done pieces of these but not enough for the students to have that confidence in their own assessment. They would not be able to orally tell about these.
8. This is an interesting reading assessment tool that states teacher should be recording observations of reading systematically. I can say I am about a 6 in the scale. I do write my plans to reflect needs of students, based on standards not met yet. My plans are visible and printed, copies of my plans are in the computer so I can check back. Each student has a score summary sheet and a check off report card that is computerized, so records are on-going. But I do see where I can improve is maybe an activity like an anecdotal record and to actually print reports of their fluency reports for them to see. This is where I can have students write reading goals too and work toward that goal so that they can become fluent readers.
9. I would say I rate a 7 in using multiple assessments. I can alwasy use more like the reading portfolios complete with attitudes, peer assessments, and self assessments. I also like the idea of students being constructive with their reading logs like charting how many books read per month. That is something I would like to start.
10. So far I rate myself in using reading assessments to inform students, parents, and teachers as a 6. I do inform parents, and some teachers if they request info. But I do not use it as a means to inform students. I need to become more balanced to involve student in their own process and make them more aware, and more responsible for their reading.
Sunday, November 9, 2008
Ochoa, S. H. (2005). Disproportionate representation of diverse students in special education:Understanding the complex puzzle.
In three years since this book was written and finding these appalling data, I wonder how much of the data has changed to the betterment of the native and diverse students who were labeled all these such as Limited English proficiency, mental retardation (MR), learning disabled(LD), seriously emotionally disturbed(SED), and all the other names and labels mentioned here. I almost was convinced that I am "poor with low birth weight, to have poorer nutrition, and to have home and child care environments that are less supportive of early cognitive and emotional development than their majority counterparts" (p.4). But, I am much too proud of my heritage, language and culture to let these findings and labels get the best of me. It was hard to read this and I found myself searching for solutions. It is good that included were a set of possible conclusions to this horrid chapter. This is not to say that all natives are not and do not qualify for special education, some do. On the other hand this article states most diverse students are special education students. What's wrong with this picture? (first display question of this blog).
Some suggested solutions to this include Teacher Training, Early Intervention, and Research.
My connections to this reading is how Hollywood has displayed minorities in movies and shows. One example are the old westerns like the cowboys and the Indians. All this "disproportionality"has crept onto the big screen in that sense that white is the ideal and any other culture is below. There is an excellent book that explains some of this oppressiveness called "Off White: Readings on Race, Power, and Society" by Michelle Fine, Lois Weis, Linda C. Powell, and L. Mun Wong. So I will look for more solutions to all this and not revel in the negativity.
Some suggested solutions to this include Teacher Training, Early Intervention, and Research.
My connections to this reading is how Hollywood has displayed minorities in movies and shows. One example are the old westerns like the cowboys and the Indians. All this "disproportionality"has crept onto the big screen in that sense that white is the ideal and any other culture is below. There is an excellent book that explains some of this oppressiveness called "Off White: Readings on Race, Power, and Society" by Michelle Fine, Lois Weis, Linda C. Powell, and L. Mun Wong. So I will look for more solutions to all this and not revel in the negativity.
Poehner & Lantolf (2005) Dynamic assessment in the language classroom. Language Teaching Research, 9(3), 233-265
This article forced me to use my noodle! It entailed what Dynamic Assessment is and is not! So I will take a stab at it, please correct me if I am wrong. Just off the top of my head, DA is the process that a teacher and learner undertakes in the classroom together, it is the gradual release of responsibility from teacher to learner, it involves learners' self-corrections therefore may lead to grasp or mastery of concepts, it is scaffolding, however all scaffolding may not qualify as DA, and it is more Formative Assessment than it is Summative Assessment.
Some of my initial thoughts here include teaching in response to data or results. The teachers seemed to be more in tuned to the learner's weaknesses and/or strengths, therefore they were able to navigate or lead the process in the direction that students begin to master the skills or areas needing improvement. One other thought regarding this is teachers teaching to the test, so correct me if I am wrong in thinking this. It seemed that direct focus was on students mastery of skills at hand and where ever the teacher directed the learners was toward mastery of that skill based on test criteria. Although this happened discretely, learners were focused or geared toward mastery. The second thought that came to mind is the gradual release of responsibility, could be from teacher to learner, peer to peer, until the learner was able to work or master as an individual. I just received a student from another grade lower and as I read this, I was thinking of how she did this past week as it was her first week in my class. Especially in the beginning of the week, I am display more responsibility as I guide the students in their lessons such as guided practiced on the board. By mid week the students work more in peer-to-peer situations where scaffolding is taking place. Fridays are my assessment days like spelling tests, vocabulary quizzes, and other little quizzes where students work individually hence the gradual release of responsibility is individualized at this point. The new student did not do well on the spelling test and the quizzes and I was thinking it was because she was not used to my methods, she still needed the guidance from another, and/or she was not use to taking tests as the ones I give. The students who have been with me since the beginning of the school did fairly well. This was just one thing that was on my mind as I read this article. The third thought that came to mind was the way the teachers interacted with the learners as hit or miss, this helped define DA clearly. To be called a DA teacher , you must interact with the child in a way that promotes self actualization's and provide opportunities for the learners' correct their errors as opposed to providing the answers. I also thought about the questioning techniques here by the teacher and it seemed most were display questions rather than genuine questions so that the learners internalized the lessons and made personal connections.
My final thought here is if this is an assessment, how is it recorded? If we (students and I) wanted to include this in the portfolios, what will it look like (DA material)? I thought about recordings and transcriptions and/or field notes or observations. This was an interesting take on assessment!
Some of my initial thoughts here include teaching in response to data or results. The teachers seemed to be more in tuned to the learner's weaknesses and/or strengths, therefore they were able to navigate or lead the process in the direction that students begin to master the skills or areas needing improvement. One other thought regarding this is teachers teaching to the test, so correct me if I am wrong in thinking this. It seemed that direct focus was on students mastery of skills at hand and where ever the teacher directed the learners was toward mastery of that skill based on test criteria. Although this happened discretely, learners were focused or geared toward mastery. The second thought that came to mind is the gradual release of responsibility, could be from teacher to learner, peer to peer, until the learner was able to work or master as an individual. I just received a student from another grade lower and as I read this, I was thinking of how she did this past week as it was her first week in my class. Especially in the beginning of the week, I am display more responsibility as I guide the students in their lessons such as guided practiced on the board. By mid week the students work more in peer-to-peer situations where scaffolding is taking place. Fridays are my assessment days like spelling tests, vocabulary quizzes, and other little quizzes where students work individually hence the gradual release of responsibility is individualized at this point. The new student did not do well on the spelling test and the quizzes and I was thinking it was because she was not used to my methods, she still needed the guidance from another, and/or she was not use to taking tests as the ones I give. The students who have been with me since the beginning of the school did fairly well. This was just one thing that was on my mind as I read this article. The third thought that came to mind was the way the teachers interacted with the learners as hit or miss, this helped define DA clearly. To be called a DA teacher , you must interact with the child in a way that promotes self actualization's and provide opportunities for the learners' correct their errors as opposed to providing the answers. I also thought about the questioning techniques here by the teacher and it seemed most were display questions rather than genuine questions so that the learners internalized the lessons and made personal connections.
My final thought here is if this is an assessment, how is it recorded? If we (students and I) wanted to include this in the portfolios, what will it look like (DA material)? I thought about recordings and transcriptions and/or field notes or observations. This was an interesting take on assessment!
Thursday, October 30, 2008
O'Malley/Pierce Chapter 3 Portfolio Assessment
This chapter described Portfolios are and aren't. I have heard of the Whole Language Programs since the 1990's and I was surprised to read here that there is little research done on use of Portfolios. It was interesting to read that the Portfolios evolved out of the arts. In reading about this I couldn't help but to evaluate my teaching styles and techniques as it related to Whole Language approach. Some of the ideas here that I follow in the Whole Language approach is my use of thematic curriculum, using other books other than basal readers, learner-centered ( as we approach responses and critical pedagogy in response to data), meaningful (relevant material), and authentic literature ( Multicultural literature both fiction and non-fiction). Prior knowledge (funds of knowledge) is attained, engagement in oral and written language and to some extent some use of rubrics and/or checklists.
On the other hand, I have not used the Portfolios the way they were meant to be used as a means of alternative assessment. Here I would say that the type of Portfolio that I have used is between a Showcase and a Collections. I have collected students tests in Math, writing, and samples of Reading vocabulary and Fluency tests. Other assignments in the Portfolios are final products and not so much of things in progress. Some of the rubrics if any used are the ones that I am to use in assessing their writing for the end of level assessments in reading and writing, but nothing that we as a class (students and teacher) have created. It seems to me just a jumble of assignments placed in a folder, and the only system in place here is that its all thematic, other than that it's a pile of work the students completed, good work and not so good, selected by just me the teacher.
It seems to me that the underlying purpose of Portfolios are meant to be that of Assessment Portfolios. In this format the contents show growth, contents selected by both student and teacher, criteria specified by both students and teacher, can be made into a rubric or checklist, assessed by the student, peers, and teacher, and goals are made and/or met. This seems to be the ideal Portfolio, one which I have not implemented in all my teaching experiences.
Some of the ideas in this chapter I would like to try is to become more systematic in the use of Portfolios. I would like to begin by having students self assess and I liked the Figure 3.4 on page 44 where students were asked Reading and Writing questions to reflect on themselves. But, the most important part of Portfolios would be to begin with a goal in mind. I would have to begin with setting the purpose. My only weakness here is that I would be the only one in my site to use this. This is not used in our school and I don't know about the school district. So it is up to each individual teacher to use as his/her discretion.
What I would like to share with my coworkers are some of the Figures here so that this can get the ball rolling toward a more systematic Portfolio use for the whole school.
On the other hand, I have not used the Portfolios the way they were meant to be used as a means of alternative assessment. Here I would say that the type of Portfolio that I have used is between a Showcase and a Collections. I have collected students tests in Math, writing, and samples of Reading vocabulary and Fluency tests. Other assignments in the Portfolios are final products and not so much of things in progress. Some of the rubrics if any used are the ones that I am to use in assessing their writing for the end of level assessments in reading and writing, but nothing that we as a class (students and teacher) have created. It seems to me just a jumble of assignments placed in a folder, and the only system in place here is that its all thematic, other than that it's a pile of work the students completed, good work and not so good, selected by just me the teacher.
It seems to me that the underlying purpose of Portfolios are meant to be that of Assessment Portfolios. In this format the contents show growth, contents selected by both student and teacher, criteria specified by both students and teacher, can be made into a rubric or checklist, assessed by the student, peers, and teacher, and goals are made and/or met. This seems to be the ideal Portfolio, one which I have not implemented in all my teaching experiences.
Some of the ideas in this chapter I would like to try is to become more systematic in the use of Portfolios. I would like to begin by having students self assess and I liked the Figure 3.4 on page 44 where students were asked Reading and Writing questions to reflect on themselves. But, the most important part of Portfolios would be to begin with a goal in mind. I would have to begin with setting the purpose. My only weakness here is that I would be the only one in my site to use this. This is not used in our school and I don't know about the school district. So it is up to each individual teacher to use as his/her discretion.
What I would like to share with my coworkers are some of the Figures here so that this can get the ball rolling toward a more systematic Portfolio use for the whole school.
Sunday, October 26, 2008
Who is given tests, & Making assessment practices; Articles for 10/28/08
There have been very similar discussion topics from both articles that spoke to things that worked and things that hindered assessment of Native students. I will begin here with my reflections of the articles in general before I begin the positives and negatives. I really liked the suggestion that Nelson-Barber and Trumball make on page 142 in their Discussion and Conclusions when they said that "In the best possible situation, the school staff would include Native teachers who can help non-Native teachers understand and judge student work. As in any community, continuous information flow between parents and teachers is also critical to understanding students' school performance." This was a very bold and strong sentence to make. I agree with the authors that Native teachers are the go-to experts of their own people. This is not to say only Native teachers are experts and can non-subjectively judge student work and progress, but that we are familiar and are aware, education in the village and in the area. My concern here is that current staff here in my site believe or display actions which hinder and impede Native teachers' knowledge and expertise. It's been a challenge to read all these articles of testing validity, reliability, and funds of knowledge, even Multimodality and Multi education, when I am constantly reminded at work that I am not an asset. I have worked hard and studied more, to be treated as such. It feels like I have not gone far, and I do hear my Native co-workers that feel the same as I do. I am seen but not heard, and my voice and ideas mean nothing. So , what's an educated Native teacher to do? The articles here hit home and I am confronted with constant bombardment of this at work and in my studies.
Moving along to the current assessment situations that hinder native and/or ELLs. These seem to be represented in both articles so I will list them: testing is usually standardized tests, which do not reflect the language, culture and local knowledge of ELLs, students are not able to be creative in such tests, in other words the test answers, content, and administration are predetermined, tests content are written elsewhere, does not take into account context of students current language strengths, does not account for dialect differences, tests are not always on-going often just a snapshot of one given week in the given year (as in high stakes tests), and students are given status of LEP because they may be viewed as "silent", which means students' heritage and cultures are not seen as relevant. I think the list would go on. These are some examples from the two articles.
The positives here is that more and more research is showing that culturally relevant material are proving to be an asset in high scores among Native students. Another is that more researchers and educators are reaching out to Native languages and cultures to find answers and to help create programs such as the Math in the cultural context creators, and the Linguistics department of UAF. Alternative methods of assessment other than standardized testing are areas being researched and sought after for a more balanced snapshot of student and ELL progress, and that progress and assessment is on-going. Native teachers are being trained in these particular areas so that the areas in assessment can produce culturally relevant curricula and matching forms of assessment which are reliable and valid.
One thing I also noticed that seem to be reflected in both articles is Solano-Flores' conclusion is that "Valid testing can not be achieved if we focus solely on the proficiency of ELLs in English but fail to examine linguistic factors involved in the development, adaptation, administration, and scoring of the tests."(p. 196). This brings me back to my opening where Native teachers are important part of the rating process. It's amazing how one person can make or break how others feel and perform in school and work.
Moving along to the current assessment situations that hinder native and/or ELLs. These seem to be represented in both articles so I will list them: testing is usually standardized tests, which do not reflect the language, culture and local knowledge of ELLs, students are not able to be creative in such tests, in other words the test answers, content, and administration are predetermined, tests content are written elsewhere, does not take into account context of students current language strengths, does not account for dialect differences, tests are not always on-going often just a snapshot of one given week in the given year (as in high stakes tests), and students are given status of LEP because they may be viewed as "silent", which means students' heritage and cultures are not seen as relevant. I think the list would go on. These are some examples from the two articles.
The positives here is that more and more research is showing that culturally relevant material are proving to be an asset in high scores among Native students. Another is that more researchers and educators are reaching out to Native languages and cultures to find answers and to help create programs such as the Math in the cultural context creators, and the Linguistics department of UAF. Alternative methods of assessment other than standardized testing are areas being researched and sought after for a more balanced snapshot of student and ELL progress, and that progress and assessment is on-going. Native teachers are being trained in these particular areas so that the areas in assessment can produce culturally relevant curricula and matching forms of assessment which are reliable and valid.
One thing I also noticed that seem to be reflected in both articles is Solano-Flores' conclusion is that "Valid testing can not be achieved if we focus solely on the proficiency of ELLs in English but fail to examine linguistic factors involved in the development, adaptation, administration, and scoring of the tests."(p. 196). This brings me back to my opening where Native teachers are important part of the rating process. It's amazing how one person can make or break how others feel and perform in school and work.
Tuesday, October 21, 2008
Carol's Discussion Topic!
I couldn't add a thread to the Discussion Board, for some reason there was no message panel for me to write in. I tried writing it on a WD and added as an attachment, but when I hit submit, it asked me to write a message, BUT I had no message panel to write on. I know the message is under the writing tools, but there was nothing for me there! So here it is!
Discussion on Test Methodology
Throughout the semester as in previous semesters, we have discussed triangulation, multiple modes or multimodal, and this fall the theory of multiplism. So what teachers and Language testers need to keep in mind is if you teach in multiple modes, you should test in each of the modes or a majority of the modes. A discrepancy arises when you teach in multiple modes and assess in only one, which is usually paper and pencil
Discussion on Test Methodology
Throughout the semester as in previous semesters, we have discussed triangulation, multiple modes or multimodal, and this fall the theory of multiplism. So what teachers and Language testers need to keep in mind is if you teach in multiple modes, you should test in each of the modes or a majority of the modes. A discrepancy arises when you teach in multiple modes and assess in only one, which is usually paper and pencil
Oral Assessment Ideas! WOW!
Often my students in my classroom say that they are lost and need help pinpointing where we are at given time and that given lesson, so we stop and redirect each other. Then I ask them what's the opposite of "lost" they say "found", "I'm found!". I think this is the cutest expression from them, when they are not lost anymore. :)
This is exactly how I am beginning to feel in finding this excellent website on Oral Assessment. I was doing a search on Oral Assessment Rubrics, I had one by the way, but I did not want to type it all, I wish I had a scanner. Perhaps, I can fax a copy of it to Marilee and she can post it on blackboard. However, I have found this website in my searches, and I don't feel so lost anymore. I now have an idea of where I want to take my research as I tailor this to fit my research question. Here it is:
This is exactly how I am beginning to feel in finding this excellent website on Oral Assessment. I was doing a search on Oral Assessment Rubrics, I had one by the way, but I did not want to type it all, I wish I had a scanner. Perhaps, I can fax a copy of it to Marilee and she can post it on blackboard. However, I have found this website in my searches, and I don't feel so lost anymore. I now have an idea of where I want to take my research as I tailor this to fit my research question. Here it is:
: (http://www.cal.org/twi/rubrics/oraltask.html)
Sample Tasks To Elicit Oral Language
Interviews
20 questions
interview a classmate
interview a community helper
interview a person asking biographical information
do a survey
Discussions
calendar activities
daily news/current events
book discussion
language experience- retelling
be a "person" and speak to the class
class debate
Sequencing pictures and discussion
Presentations
show and tell
puddle or math problems
rhymes w/question and answer
adapt jazz chants and songs
share knowledge about exploration and experimentation
book review
advertisement
Dramatization and Role playing
acting out stories/plays
take a character and act it out
act out your own story
TV show
be a reported and broadcast the news
Oral Rubric:
This is the website I found that I plan on using the Oral Rubric from for 2nd grade.
http://www.cal.org/twi/rubrics/oral1-5.pdf
Friday, October 17, 2008
McNamara Chapter 5-Validity:testing the test
Well hey! This is what I spoke to earlier in the semester. There are tests that test tests and the world goes around! It makes sense that tests should be valid especially when creating High Stakes Tests. This is where the goals from the curricula are highlighted and taken into account. There should be a clear focus in the test content, method, and construct since these are the areas that can make or break test validations. If tests are carefully constructed then the rating process can be smoother. However , on the other hand, if tests are questionably created, then is that valid? (that's my display question of this blog).
What I attained from the Bethel trip is that validity is if you are teaching orally, you should test orally. I try not to use validity and reliability together too much, however, they seem to be related in a sense that both are involved in testing. My personal gain from this chapter is to become a more valid teacher, creating valid tests, either in the areas of content, method, and construct. I want to see actual data or evidence of my students, shouldn't that be valid test data? (next display question).
In terms of my colleagues here, I trust they are level headed and aware of testing issues; however if I can choose one aspect of this chapter to share, I would share them the definition of validity and differentiate it with the definition of reliability. Often, like here, people use them interchangeably and fail to see the differences. Thank you for last weekend. It was an a nice get away and the little break this week. It was a good refresher, now I can complete the second half of the semester feeling like I am rested.
What I attained from the Bethel trip is that validity is if you are teaching orally, you should test orally. I try not to use validity and reliability together too much, however, they seem to be related in a sense that both are involved in testing. My personal gain from this chapter is to become a more valid teacher, creating valid tests, either in the areas of content, method, and construct. I want to see actual data or evidence of my students, shouldn't that be valid test data? (next display question).
In terms of my colleagues here, I trust they are level headed and aware of testing issues; however if I can choose one aspect of this chapter to share, I would share them the definition of validity and differentiate it with the definition of reliability. Often, like here, people use them interchangeably and fail to see the differences. Thank you for last weekend. It was an a nice get away and the little break this week. It was a good refresher, now I can complete the second half of the semester feeling like I am rested.
Tuesday, October 7, 2008
Skype Dialogue Focus!
1. Here are the topics of discussion. Each partner can discuss these points in their chats. Then after about 15 minutes I call each group back and have each group talk about their findings in their chats and update what was discussed.
· How do I interpret data? Am I alone, do I ask coworkers, do I involve students?
· How do I report results? Do I send progress reports to parents, is it ongoing?
· What if any do I show at Parent Teacher Conferences?
· What would I like to try from this article?
· How do I interpret data? Am I alone, do I ask coworkers, do I involve students?
· How do I report results? Do I send progress reports to parents, is it ongoing?
· What if any do I show at Parent Teacher Conferences?
· What would I like to try from this article?
Monday, October 6, 2008
Please add comment to this blog!
Self reflection, classmates take a few minutes to comment answers to the following:
- Why do I assess, list all reasons.
- What tests (authentic assessments), methods of assessments have worked well for me, & why.
- What assessments (authentic assessments )have not worked well, & list reasons.
Please feel free to add anything else you would like to!
Something to keep in mind as we begin to conduct research and collect data!
"The Scientific mind does not so much provide the right answers as ask the right questions."~ Claude Levi-Strauss
LING 612-Dr. Coles-Ritchie; Authentic Assessment and Multiplism
Valdez-Pierce & O'Malley: Ch.2, Designing authentic assessment
Shohamny, E. & Inbar, O. (2006), The language assessment process: A "multiplism" perpective, (CALPER Professional Development Document 0603). University Park, PA: The Pennsylvannia State University, Center for Advanced Language Proficiency Education and Research.
These two articles beautify the notion of authentic assessment and rightfully so. If we are striving to gain access to valid and reliable data, then the test tools used should be carefully constructed so that the results display exactly what we are testing for. As previously discussed my working definition of authentic assessment is triangulation. The idea of multiplism lends itself to all and any areas in planning, implementation, teaching, and assessment. What you do after assessment furthers the variety of things that are available to you as a rater and researcher. I do agree that the standardized assessment and paper and pencils are not working for the most part in language assessment. We have learned that in language acquisition and learning, receptive skills such as reading and listening skills were the primary focus in any testing. This has evolved into further tests needed to assess productive skills such as speaking and writing. So standardized tests were not testing all the skills in ELL.
The Shohamy article was a great review on the process of constructing language assessments. All areas of language assessment should be clear and concise when planning, implementing, and analyzing ELLs. This provided me some ideas to work on in my own research. So far I am having trouble with creating questions or prompts for my pre and post tests . I am planning on collecting data through audio tapes and so far I have done a pilot test. However all my components are not yet cleared. I have my hypothesis and research questions. But where it gets foggy for me is designing some questions that would help me understand where the students are. So for example, I would like to know what the students think of themselves as Yup'ik people. I would like to see and understand where they are in that process before they begin to compare themselves to other cultures and languages. So the pretest that I want to do is more of a dialogue where the learners tell about themselves and what they think it means for them to be Yup'ik. As the year progresses I would also do a post test so that they can compare themselves to other cultures and languages they might be studying. I am still collecting data on the pretests. So far the data I have gathered does not provide me with clear and concise answers about where the learners are in terms of how they view themselves. So, I will go back to this article to see if I can find a possible solution. What I take from this article is the process in creating language assessments and my tool options. I need to revisit my research question and the tools I wanted to use to collect this. I also need to come up with working questions that would elicit the kind of responses I am looking for.
The authentic assessment chapter by Valdez was a great opener for me to fully understand the options in assessment other than standardized tests. I like how the author creates tables and charts to show examples of. What I would find useful is defining what type of assessment I would like to make. Why use this, what are the best methods and tools for achieving this information, and how would i score the data, what will the data and what should the data show. Those are some of the key questions I need to begin asking myself. I am suppose to begin using teacher observations in my class this fall, so far it seems like a tedious task and I can't seem to get started. Joan has given us some ideas on how to go about beginning this. but the hardest part is beginning this on-going teacher observations journal. Hmmm. So far in my research I will be using oral interviews, writing samples, and teacher observations. For the oral interviews I will break that into pre/post tests and oral interviews. I just need to clearly state my goals for the pre/post test and make that more clear for me and my research. I have already listed my interview questions, so that's easy. I still need to get the ball rolling on my observations.
As I read the two readings, these were on my mind; my research and my methods for gathering data. Hmmm!
Shohamny, E. & Inbar, O. (2006), The language assessment process: A "multiplism" perpective, (CALPER Professional Development Document 0603). University Park, PA: The Pennsylvannia State University, Center for Advanced Language Proficiency Education and Research.
These two articles beautify the notion of authentic assessment and rightfully so. If we are striving to gain access to valid and reliable data, then the test tools used should be carefully constructed so that the results display exactly what we are testing for. As previously discussed my working definition of authentic assessment is triangulation. The idea of multiplism lends itself to all and any areas in planning, implementation, teaching, and assessment. What you do after assessment furthers the variety of things that are available to you as a rater and researcher. I do agree that the standardized assessment and paper and pencils are not working for the most part in language assessment. We have learned that in language acquisition and learning, receptive skills such as reading and listening skills were the primary focus in any testing. This has evolved into further tests needed to assess productive skills such as speaking and writing. So standardized tests were not testing all the skills in ELL.
The Shohamy article was a great review on the process of constructing language assessments. All areas of language assessment should be clear and concise when planning, implementing, and analyzing ELLs. This provided me some ideas to work on in my own research. So far I am having trouble with creating questions or prompts for my pre and post tests . I am planning on collecting data through audio tapes and so far I have done a pilot test. However all my components are not yet cleared. I have my hypothesis and research questions. But where it gets foggy for me is designing some questions that would help me understand where the students are. So for example, I would like to know what the students think of themselves as Yup'ik people. I would like to see and understand where they are in that process before they begin to compare themselves to other cultures and languages. So the pretest that I want to do is more of a dialogue where the learners tell about themselves and what they think it means for them to be Yup'ik. As the year progresses I would also do a post test so that they can compare themselves to other cultures and languages they might be studying. I am still collecting data on the pretests. So far the data I have gathered does not provide me with clear and concise answers about where the learners are in terms of how they view themselves. So, I will go back to this article to see if I can find a possible solution. What I take from this article is the process in creating language assessments and my tool options. I need to revisit my research question and the tools I wanted to use to collect this. I also need to come up with working questions that would elicit the kind of responses I am looking for.
The authentic assessment chapter by Valdez was a great opener for me to fully understand the options in assessment other than standardized tests. I like how the author creates tables and charts to show examples of. What I would find useful is defining what type of assessment I would like to make. Why use this, what are the best methods and tools for achieving this information, and how would i score the data, what will the data and what should the data show. Those are some of the key questions I need to begin asking myself. I am suppose to begin using teacher observations in my class this fall, so far it seems like a tedious task and I can't seem to get started. Joan has given us some ideas on how to go about beginning this. but the hardest part is beginning this on-going teacher observations journal. Hmmm. So far in my research I will be using oral interviews, writing samples, and teacher observations. For the oral interviews I will break that into pre/post tests and oral interviews. I just need to clearly state my goals for the pre/post test and make that more clear for me and my research. I have already listed my interview questions, so that's easy. I still need to get the ball rolling on my observations.
As I read the two readings, these were on my mind; my research and my methods for gathering data. Hmmm!
Monday, September 29, 2008
LING 612-Dr. Coles-Ritchie
Abedi, J., (2004). The no child left behind act and english language learners: Assessment and accountability issues. Educational Researcher, 33(1), 4-14.
This is a tough article for me to respond to. As I read it last night and reread again just now, the only question that came to mind what how long do they store their data? This article has a lot of data and I am sure that data collected from other years are stored somewhere in files. I was just wondering how long documents are kept and do they ever dispose of any? I am wondering that because I read somewhere along the way that after 7 years it is safe to destroy personal documents. This assessment data is a lot and sensitive material collected since this act was first established. That was my question, how long is data kept and stored? I am trying to keep my data and materials locked and organized. Sometimes I'm not always organized, but I do lock material.
Anyway, back to the real issues in this article. First off it starts by explaining the 6 LEP assessment issues as they relate to AYP reporting: Inconsistencies, Sparse LEP populations, Lack of LEP subgroup stability, Measurement quality of AYP instruments, LEP baseline scores, and LEP cut off points. There has always been discrepancies in any form of standardized tests when testing students of a different culture and language. The assessment for the NCLB act is no different in that sense that it is culturally biased and not a valid way to test students of a diverse nation such as the US. Especially now , we are in need to change and culturally relevant material. But who's to say this is the only means to test our youth? I know educators are educated enough to know and understand critical pedagogy in multiple means and furthering that in assessments in different modes. This is just one assessment in one time of the year with the students who happened to be present. We all hope that the planets are aligned at this given time. I do like how this article suggests and provided effective ways to help LEP students. I do think that further studies and discussions are in order for this assessment. Some topic ideas are :other methods of assessment such as authentic assessment to show what each child is really capable of , revisiting this assessment to meet LEP needs, or staff development training on language sheltering. I saw that as one of the suggestions and I agree that we do need more qualified staff especially language specialists.
This is a tough article for me to respond to. As I read it last night and reread again just now, the only question that came to mind what how long do they store their data? This article has a lot of data and I am sure that data collected from other years are stored somewhere in files. I was just wondering how long documents are kept and do they ever dispose of any? I am wondering that because I read somewhere along the way that after 7 years it is safe to destroy personal documents. This assessment data is a lot and sensitive material collected since this act was first established. That was my question, how long is data kept and stored? I am trying to keep my data and materials locked and organized. Sometimes I'm not always organized, but I do lock material.
Anyway, back to the real issues in this article. First off it starts by explaining the 6 LEP assessment issues as they relate to AYP reporting: Inconsistencies, Sparse LEP populations, Lack of LEP subgroup stability, Measurement quality of AYP instruments, LEP baseline scores, and LEP cut off points. There has always been discrepancies in any form of standardized tests when testing students of a different culture and language. The assessment for the NCLB act is no different in that sense that it is culturally biased and not a valid way to test students of a diverse nation such as the US. Especially now , we are in need to change and culturally relevant material. But who's to say this is the only means to test our youth? I know educators are educated enough to know and understand critical pedagogy in multiple means and furthering that in assessments in different modes. This is just one assessment in one time of the year with the students who happened to be present. We all hope that the planets are aligned at this given time. I do like how this article suggests and provided effective ways to help LEP students. I do think that further studies and discussions are in order for this assessment. Some topic ideas are :other methods of assessment such as authentic assessment to show what each child is really capable of , revisiting this assessment to meet LEP needs, or staff development training on language sheltering. I saw that as one of the suggestions and I agree that we do need more qualified staff especially language specialists.
Friday, September 26, 2008
LING 612-Dr. Coles Ritchie
Cloze test!!! Just for fun.
Key Vocabulary:
fixed response format, test item, multiple choice format,
paper-and-pencil language, performance
In terms of method, we can broadly distinguish traditional___________ tests from ___________ tests. Paper-and-pencil tests take form on the familiar examination question paper. They are typically used for the assessment either of separate components of language understanding(listening and reading comprehension). _______in such tests, particulary if they are professionally made standardized tests, will often be in _________ in which a number of possible responses is presented from which the candidate is required to choose. There are several types of fixed response format, or which the most important is _______, as in the following example from a vocabulary test (pp. 5-to check your answers)
Key Vocabulary:
fixed response format, test item, multiple choice format,
paper-and-pencil language, performance
In terms of method, we can broadly distinguish traditional___________ tests from ___________ tests. Paper-and-pencil tests take form on the familiar examination question paper. They are typically used for the assessment either of separate components of language understanding(listening and reading comprehension). _______in such tests, particulary if they are professionally made standardized tests, will often be in _________ in which a number of possible responses is presented from which the candidate is required to choose. There are several types of fixed response format, or which the most important is _______, as in the following example from a vocabulary test (pp. 5-to check your answers)
Thursday, September 25, 2008
LING 612-Dr. Coles-Ritchie
McNamara, T. (2008). Language testing. (pp. 13-22). Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-437222-7
This chapter introduces the history of language testing. First this talks about test construct in which the tests focus on specific skill and knowledge being measured. Language testing begins to take aim at speaking and communication skills. In reference to this change in test format comes discrete point testing, where specific areas (skills and knowledge) are targeted such as grammatical structure or vocabulary knowledge. Test constructs narrow in on speaking, listening, writing, and reading. To further the language testing, integrative tests were constructed for their practicality such as speaking for oral interviews. Some of the early language tests spoke to the cloze paragraph tests in which readers and learners selected a from a set of vocabulary words and completed a written piece by placing these words in blank lines. This was just a little twist to the classic multiple choice test in which answers were given and learners had to select the correct ones. Then came the communicative language tests in which gave light to the communicative competences. That meant language is more than knowing the grammar but the social roles under which language was used. Some testing constructs in this setting were of job analysis such as in a hospital setting. By the 80s models or communicative competences were identified as grammatical, sociolinguistic, strategic, and discourse. Identifying the models have helped in test constructs in language testing. An interesting point made here for me is that knowledge of the social dimension is important as the grammatical knowledge of the language. This is where the question what should be taught culture or/and language derives from. I believe they are both important. I know we have discussed communicative competences and culture and language, for me my language is my culture and visa versa. An 'aha' moment for me here is the part about the cloze tests. I have used this with my students and many do not really read the meanings and seem to just place any word there in the blanks. Can that be a valid test? It can be one form, but not the only. I have found that for lessons to be effective and any tests given should be followed up with feedback. So if that is one form, I will follow up on the cloze tests.
This chapter introduces the history of language testing. First this talks about test construct in which the tests focus on specific skill and knowledge being measured. Language testing begins to take aim at speaking and communication skills. In reference to this change in test format comes discrete point testing, where specific areas (skills and knowledge) are targeted such as grammatical structure or vocabulary knowledge. Test constructs narrow in on speaking, listening, writing, and reading. To further the language testing, integrative tests were constructed for their practicality such as speaking for oral interviews. Some of the early language tests spoke to the cloze paragraph tests in which readers and learners selected a from a set of vocabulary words and completed a written piece by placing these words in blank lines. This was just a little twist to the classic multiple choice test in which answers were given and learners had to select the correct ones. Then came the communicative language tests in which gave light to the communicative competences. That meant language is more than knowing the grammar but the social roles under which language was used. Some testing constructs in this setting were of job analysis such as in a hospital setting. By the 80s models or communicative competences were identified as grammatical, sociolinguistic, strategic, and discourse. Identifying the models have helped in test constructs in language testing. An interesting point made here for me is that knowledge of the social dimension is important as the grammatical knowledge of the language. This is where the question what should be taught culture or/and language derives from. I believe they are both important. I know we have discussed communicative competences and culture and language, for me my language is my culture and visa versa. An 'aha' moment for me here is the part about the cloze tests. I have used this with my students and many do not really read the meanings and seem to just place any word there in the blanks. Can that be a valid test? It can be one form, but not the only. I have found that for lessons to be effective and any tests given should be followed up with feedback. So if that is one form, I will follow up on the cloze tests.
Saturday, September 20, 2008
LING 612-Dr. Coles-Ritchie
McNamara, T. (2008). Language Testing. (pp. 3-11). Oxford University Press. ISBN 0-19-43222-7.
First of all I wasn't aware of the importance of language testing. McNamara describes this importance issues in language testing as gateways to transition from country to country, placements and to measure language proficiency. I can see how language testing fits into this process of not just data gathering but to aide us into deciding the future and fate of ELL. This seems to be a huge reason and I would hope that language teachers all are aware of these life changing tests.
The chapter describes two general types of tests. The first being fixed response formant assessments in which the learner takes pencil and paper tests and the most common example of this is the multiple choice test. The strengths of this is its easy to administer. The caveat is that this test does not show speaking and writing skills, further the teacher may want to test for speaking and writing, but this format is not conducive to those skills. Performance assessments can assess their communicative skills where a speaker is recorded and raters analyze their data. This would provide better language skills in speaking and writing.
Purposes of tests differ also. Some reasons to test languages include distinguishing between achievement and proficiency. Achievement tests include end of the course, portfolio and observation assessments. Achievements assessment coincide with their education progress and process. Some strengths in achievement test is that they see the progress from begin, middle and end of the sessions. A caveat to achievement testing is that it may not directly show evidence of language use. Proficiency tests are tests that measure what students are capable of and not as a result of what was taught as in the achievements. The strengths of criterion tests are that it tests the language and communicative abilities. A caveat of criterion testing is the data is not an actual representation of the real life event they may be applying for. An example may be a nurse applying and show casing her communicative abilities to a recorder, but not an ideal hospital situation where she would converse with real patients and staff
What I take from this chapter is that I am aware now of the impacts of language testing as it relates to learners' future. Obviously it is encouraged to test language in the most neutral situations where ELL are not under scrutiny and they feel a sense of comfort, but keep in mind that any test taking situations may not be ideal or practical in real life unless of course it is real life situations. So I am thinking of ways I can address this within my classroom where students are aware they are being assessed but show no indifference to learning and testing, they are completely comfortable and confident. I hope that makes sense!
First of all I wasn't aware of the importance of language testing. McNamara describes this importance issues in language testing as gateways to transition from country to country, placements and to measure language proficiency. I can see how language testing fits into this process of not just data gathering but to aide us into deciding the future and fate of ELL. This seems to be a huge reason and I would hope that language teachers all are aware of these life changing tests.
The chapter describes two general types of tests. The first being fixed response formant assessments in which the learner takes pencil and paper tests and the most common example of this is the multiple choice test. The strengths of this is its easy to administer. The caveat is that this test does not show speaking and writing skills, further the teacher may want to test for speaking and writing, but this format is not conducive to those skills. Performance assessments can assess their communicative skills where a speaker is recorded and raters analyze their data. This would provide better language skills in speaking and writing.
Purposes of tests differ also. Some reasons to test languages include distinguishing between achievement and proficiency. Achievement tests include end of the course, portfolio and observation assessments. Achievements assessment coincide with their education progress and process. Some strengths in achievement test is that they see the progress from begin, middle and end of the sessions. A caveat to achievement testing is that it may not directly show evidence of language use. Proficiency tests are tests that measure what students are capable of and not as a result of what was taught as in the achievements. The strengths of criterion tests are that it tests the language and communicative abilities. A caveat of criterion testing is the data is not an actual representation of the real life event they may be applying for. An example may be a nurse applying and show casing her communicative abilities to a recorder, but not an ideal hospital situation where she would converse with real patients and staff
What I take from this chapter is that I am aware now of the impacts of language testing as it relates to learners' future. Obviously it is encouraged to test language in the most neutral situations where ELL are not under scrutiny and they feel a sense of comfort, but keep in mind that any test taking situations may not be ideal or practical in real life unless of course it is real life situations. So I am thinking of ways I can address this within my classroom where students are aware they are being assessed but show no indifference to learning and testing, they are completely comfortable and confident. I hope that makes sense!
Friday, September 19, 2008
LING 612-Dr. Coles-Ritchie
O'Malley, M.J. & Pierce, L.V. (1996). Authentic assessment for english language learners: Practical approaches for teacher.(pp. 1-8). Addison-Wesley Publishing Co.:ISB4: 0-201-59151-0.
Testing, testing, and more testing! That is my impression. In creating the effective tests and tests that test exactly what you are searching for, some get lost in the process of person to person interactions. BUT tests are here to stay and there are tests to assess validity of tests! So the world goes round! This chapter was easy reading and I skimmed at the contents of this book and many of the material looks practical enough for teachers. I like how this book is outlined and does not forget to include assessment ideas for other subject such as Math, Science, and Social Studies.
I have heard the term Authentic Assessment and whole language programs and schools. So the idea is not so new, but the book makes it seem effective and presents multiple forms of assessment instead of the generic multiple choice, true/false assessments that are limited and show no creativeness in each students. My own definition of Authentic assessment would be triangulation. A great teacher would be multimodal in her approach to teaching and assessing.
As far as assessing ELL students I like how this chapter identifies the following reasons for this; screening and identification, placement, reclassification or exit, monitoring student progress, program evaluation, and accountability. This presents a sense of focus for me now as I think about writing assessments and creating a better student repertoire when show casing their progress to their parents.
Under the umbrella of Authentic assessment are performance assessment and portfolio assessments. Performance assessments are written and created by the learners. Some strengths of Performance assessments are constructed response, higher order thinking, authenticity, integrative, process and product, and depth versus breadth. The other form of assessment is portfolio assessment in which students collect and display their progression from the beginning. They are free to add to or take out material as they see fit. This process speaks to the students evaluating their own efforts and they begin to show ownership in their education.
As far as assessment and ELL, my personal connections and thoughts about this is that I would like to be a more well rounded teacher where I teach multimodally and assess multimodally. Students should be able to express themselves in many methods and showcase themselves in authentic forms. Some of the things I would like to try is to engages students by having them create meaningful products so that we (teacher, students, and parents) are able to see what they are capable of.
One thing I am struggling is I am responsible for 8 subject areas and standards for each subject and each level that the students are at, these numbers add up and like I stated before I am striving to be Superwoman. I would like to find a win win method for all so that I am not recreating the wheel. This year is the first year I am alone without a teacher aide, so I am forced to rethink my schedule and my methodology and therefore my assessment techniques.
Testing, testing, and more testing! That is my impression. In creating the effective tests and tests that test exactly what you are searching for, some get lost in the process of person to person interactions. BUT tests are here to stay and there are tests to assess validity of tests! So the world goes round! This chapter was easy reading and I skimmed at the contents of this book and many of the material looks practical enough for teachers. I like how this book is outlined and does not forget to include assessment ideas for other subject such as Math, Science, and Social Studies.
I have heard the term Authentic Assessment and whole language programs and schools. So the idea is not so new, but the book makes it seem effective and presents multiple forms of assessment instead of the generic multiple choice, true/false assessments that are limited and show no creativeness in each students. My own definition of Authentic assessment would be triangulation. A great teacher would be multimodal in her approach to teaching and assessing.
As far as assessing ELL students I like how this chapter identifies the following reasons for this; screening and identification, placement, reclassification or exit, monitoring student progress, program evaluation, and accountability. This presents a sense of focus for me now as I think about writing assessments and creating a better student repertoire when show casing their progress to their parents.
Under the umbrella of Authentic assessment are performance assessment and portfolio assessments. Performance assessments are written and created by the learners. Some strengths of Performance assessments are constructed response, higher order thinking, authenticity, integrative, process and product, and depth versus breadth. The other form of assessment is portfolio assessment in which students collect and display their progression from the beginning. They are free to add to or take out material as they see fit. This process speaks to the students evaluating their own efforts and they begin to show ownership in their education.
As far as assessment and ELL, my personal connections and thoughts about this is that I would like to be a more well rounded teacher where I teach multimodally and assess multimodally. Students should be able to express themselves in many methods and showcase themselves in authentic forms. Some of the things I would like to try is to engages students by having them create meaningful products so that we (teacher, students, and parents) are able to see what they are capable of.
One thing I am struggling is I am responsible for 8 subject areas and standards for each subject and each level that the students are at, these numbers add up and like I stated before I am striving to be Superwoman. I would like to find a win win method for all so that I am not recreating the wheel. This year is the first year I am alone without a teacher aide, so I am forced to rethink my schedule and my methodology and therefore my assessment techniques.
Sunday, September 14, 2008
LING 612-Dr. Coles-Ritchie
Newspaper article: Teacher Refuses to Give Test
My overall impression of this is if you are passionate about something you believe in , don't ever hesitate to do what is in your heart. I am not brave enough in most cases to do what I feel in my heart, therefore if I felt so strongly about High stakes tests as he did, I would not have the strength to do what he did. I'm sure he weighed his options and thought about the long term effects of such decisions. For me I would decide that I would be more helpful in the classroom and with my students to decide to do that even if it meant I had to administer a test I did not believe in. I've come to believe in the things I have control over within my life and the things that I can't control, I try to focus on what's here in front of me. I would find alternatives to show parents progress that the students have gained even if the student may not have met the requirements to graduate. It's not the end of the world if the student does not graduate with his classmates that year. I have seen several of my nieces and nephews here in this town come back the next year and passed the test a year later.
The quote he said, "All we have to do is have faith in these kids and work as hard as we can with these kids and their families and they're going to do fine." suggests that he does feel for the kids, but his choice was poor because now he is not working for the school and the kids he talked about. Looking at the long term effects of his choice, he talked about good weather for gardening, what about the students he said he said he has faith in? This statement is rather contradictory of what he is doing now.
My overall impression of this is if you are passionate about something you believe in , don't ever hesitate to do what is in your heart. I am not brave enough in most cases to do what I feel in my heart, therefore if I felt so strongly about High stakes tests as he did, I would not have the strength to do what he did. I'm sure he weighed his options and thought about the long term effects of such decisions. For me I would decide that I would be more helpful in the classroom and with my students to decide to do that even if it meant I had to administer a test I did not believe in. I've come to believe in the things I have control over within my life and the things that I can't control, I try to focus on what's here in front of me. I would find alternatives to show parents progress that the students have gained even if the student may not have met the requirements to graduate. It's not the end of the world if the student does not graduate with his classmates that year. I have seen several of my nieces and nephews here in this town come back the next year and passed the test a year later.
The quote he said, "All we have to do is have faith in these kids and work as hard as we can with these kids and their families and they're going to do fine." suggests that he does feel for the kids, but his choice was poor because now he is not working for the school and the kids he talked about. Looking at the long term effects of his choice, he talked about good weather for gardening, what about the students he said he said he has faith in? This statement is rather contradictory of what he is doing now.
LING 612-Dr. Coles-Ritchie
Pierce, V. (2006). Assessment and evaluation. In Ovando, C.J., Combs, M.C. & Collier, V. (Eds) Bilingual and ESL Classrooms, (pp.305-357). Boston: McGraw Hill.
My overall impression of this article is that it is a little summary of President Bush's NCLB act of 2001. This article begins with school and assessments at the National level then begins to break down the effects to the state and local levels. How this article influences me and my students is by providing useful guidelines such as the Guidelines For Teachers found on page 315. The one item in this chart I found helpful is #2 in the appropriate test uses states that tests are not perfect, nor are they exact measure of student learning. Therefore, no single test score can be considered a clear measure of a student's knowledge. This is where I as a teacher and researcher would triangulate knowledge using different modes of data gathering techniques. Another useful chart is found on page 348 where a list of common standardized key words are outlined. I would like to share this information with my co-workers so they can focus on how to ask and familiarize their learners using this methodology. The last item I found especially useful is found on page 353 the Guidelines For Teachers and Getting Started. This makes me rethink how I have set up my room. I am now rethinking how I can tweak my own classroom to make it assessment friendly scheduling activities where I would be able to assess and gather data within the daily schedule and make it routine. Assessment should not be something isolated otherwise students results may be invalid , but part of the learning process so that data can show a better and valid representation of their true abilities.
There is one thing I would like to address with my school here and that is to form cohesive staff development training so that we can hear what works and what doesn't. So far this is a need in our site. It would be nice for the staff to work more together and synthesize so that students can be placed in efficient and effective programs based on their needs.
One surprising information from this article is that withing the U.S. there are only 2 states that require project portfolios and writing samples as part of their assessment process. I have developed generic idea of what assessment is and that it is usually multiple and true/false paper and pencil assessment. This is a deficient idea and I am thinking of having my students create portfolios complete with writing samples.
In closing what I take away from this article is to rethink and restructure my own classroom so that I can create instances throughout the week for assessment so that students are not surprised but more comfortable about the process. The other idea I want to implement is using portfolios so that parents can see the process and progress of their child.
My overall impression of this article is that it is a little summary of President Bush's NCLB act of 2001. This article begins with school and assessments at the National level then begins to break down the effects to the state and local levels. How this article influences me and my students is by providing useful guidelines such as the Guidelines For Teachers found on page 315. The one item in this chart I found helpful is #2 in the appropriate test uses states that tests are not perfect, nor are they exact measure of student learning. Therefore, no single test score can be considered a clear measure of a student's knowledge. This is where I as a teacher and researcher would triangulate knowledge using different modes of data gathering techniques. Another useful chart is found on page 348 where a list of common standardized key words are outlined. I would like to share this information with my co-workers so they can focus on how to ask and familiarize their learners using this methodology. The last item I found especially useful is found on page 353 the Guidelines For Teachers and Getting Started. This makes me rethink how I have set up my room. I am now rethinking how I can tweak my own classroom to make it assessment friendly scheduling activities where I would be able to assess and gather data within the daily schedule and make it routine. Assessment should not be something isolated otherwise students results may be invalid , but part of the learning process so that data can show a better and valid representation of their true abilities.
There is one thing I would like to address with my school here and that is to form cohesive staff development training so that we can hear what works and what doesn't. So far this is a need in our site. It would be nice for the staff to work more together and synthesize so that students can be placed in efficient and effective programs based on their needs.
One surprising information from this article is that withing the U.S. there are only 2 states that require project portfolios and writing samples as part of their assessment process. I have developed generic idea of what assessment is and that it is usually multiple and true/false paper and pencil assessment. This is a deficient idea and I am thinking of having my students create portfolios complete with writing samples.
In closing what I take away from this article is to rethink and restructure my own classroom so that I can create instances throughout the week for assessment so that students are not surprised but more comfortable about the process. The other idea I want to implement is using portfolios so that parents can see the process and progress of their child.
Saturday, September 13, 2008
LING 612-Coles-Ritchie
Rameka, L. (2007). Maori approaches to assessment. Canadian Journal of Native American Education, 30, (1), 126-144.
My overall impression of this article is that it is fully loaded of practical and meaningful ideas for assessing native students. I like the fact that the whole process from traditional to modern assessment form were reforms by the Maori. Who better than to educate and assess the Maori children but the Maori educationists and their own language experts. It makes sense that the empowerment of their people begins with their own leaders taking charge of their curricula and assessment. Another strength in their process to education and language reform was the fact that they begin in the early childhood at the zone of proximal development of the children.
There is much that I would like to share from this article with my coworkers. One idea is to form committees to evaluate what is working and to create little programs to address needs and areas needing strengthening. I see the need in my site however, I am not in the position to suggest the need and if it doesn't come from this particular Instructional Leader and his own creative ideas, other ideas coming from me or another native teacher tends to be dismissed, disregarded, and in most cases ignored.
One quote that I really connected with in this article is, "I come not with my own strength, but bring with me the gifts, talents, and strengths of my family, tribe, and ancestors."(p. 9). This speaks to the funds of knowledge that student come in with. A great point in chapter one of McNamara's book Language Testing stated that assessment has evolved more into a humanistic approach and less impositional. This article confirms that notion that students here are assessed to show what they know and not focused on the "deficiencies" that assessments have emphasized.
I did not struggle with any concepts here, but it was a little hard to keep up with the Maori words and their meanings as they related to certain aspects of the assessment process. I do understand that each component was related to the Maori as a person and not just a student in school. That was more of the funds of knowledge being addressed.
In closing this was a great beginning article to read as we begin this Assessment class. I like how this article sets the purpose of me as a reader, linguist, educator, and researcher. I take from this article a more centered approach to assessment in terms of meeting the needs of the human and not to view results as "deficiencies" but to highlight their strengths and their funds of knowledge.
My overall impression of this article is that it is fully loaded of practical and meaningful ideas for assessing native students. I like the fact that the whole process from traditional to modern assessment form were reforms by the Maori. Who better than to educate and assess the Maori children but the Maori educationists and their own language experts. It makes sense that the empowerment of their people begins with their own leaders taking charge of their curricula and assessment. Another strength in their process to education and language reform was the fact that they begin in the early childhood at the zone of proximal development of the children.
There is much that I would like to share from this article with my coworkers. One idea is to form committees to evaluate what is working and to create little programs to address needs and areas needing strengthening. I see the need in my site however, I am not in the position to suggest the need and if it doesn't come from this particular Instructional Leader and his own creative ideas, other ideas coming from me or another native teacher tends to be dismissed, disregarded, and in most cases ignored.
One quote that I really connected with in this article is, "I come not with my own strength, but bring with me the gifts, talents, and strengths of my family, tribe, and ancestors."(p. 9). This speaks to the funds of knowledge that student come in with. A great point in chapter one of McNamara's book Language Testing stated that assessment has evolved more into a humanistic approach and less impositional. This article confirms that notion that students here are assessed to show what they know and not focused on the "deficiencies" that assessments have emphasized.
I did not struggle with any concepts here, but it was a little hard to keep up with the Maori words and their meanings as they related to certain aspects of the assessment process. I do understand that each component was related to the Maori as a person and not just a student in school. That was more of the funds of knowledge being addressed.
In closing this was a great beginning article to read as we begin this Assessment class. I like how this article sets the purpose of me as a reader, linguist, educator, and researcher. I take from this article a more centered approach to assessment in terms of meeting the needs of the human and not to view results as "deficiencies" but to highlight their strengths and their funds of knowledge.
Sunday, July 27, 2008
WebQuests and Triadic Scaffolds
Dodge, B. (1997). Webquests. Retrieved July 22, 2008, from San Diego State University WebQuest site: http://webquest.sdsu.edu/about webquests.html
This article defined WebQuests as an inquiry-oriented activity in which some or all the information that learners interact with comes from resources on the internet, optionally supplemented with videoconferencing. It also described two kinds of Webquests Short term and Long term. Short term meaning it can be completed in one to three class periods. Long term can take between one week and a month in a classroom. In my own words WebQuests are kind of like Websites that are focused on critical pedagogy and a central theme. It is interactive and hooks the WebQuester. Some of the benefits of WebQuests include skill in Comparing, Classifying, Inducing, Deducing, Analyzing errors, Constructing support, Abstraction, and Analyzing perspectives. Whew!
I have made a WebQuest before and I have it saved on a CD. It was based on a book called Kumak's House by Michael Bania. I remember it took a long time much like the Website I'm making now and then I was a little more energetic. I haven't had too much thought or need to create another one. That was my personal connection to this reading. When I get back I will take a look at the WebQuest. Hmmm!
My question is what are the differences between Websites and WebQuests. I had thought about that in my personal definitions of WebQuests. If I had made this WebQuest on Yup'ik Level 1 Standards instead of a Website, I am trying to think how much of a difference they would be.
Meskill, C. (2005). Triadic scaffolds: Tools for teaching english language learners with computers. Language Learning & Technology, 9, 46-59.
This research article is about study done on triadic discourse (teacher, learner, computer). This article emphasizes that computer use in language learning situations and especially with ESOL students captures, motivates, and anchors learners attention to and render comprehensible the target language they hear and see on and around the computer screen (p. 46). Data collecting techniques used here were audio recorded interviews, informal conversations, and field notes on non-verbal cues. So this research resulted in showing that teachers make all the difference in the classroom setting. Although the use of computers enhances the learning outcomes and language, teachers have a critical role in meeting the needs of children. Language learning can be assisted through careful planning and this article also made reference to CALL.
I hope this is what we have been planning for in this class. I like how this article talks about the teacher being vital in success in student language learning, but also to use computers in a way that would benefit the learners.
My question here is what is the research question? Sabine, did I miss it? I wanted to know that.
This article defined WebQuests as an inquiry-oriented activity in which some or all the information that learners interact with comes from resources on the internet, optionally supplemented with videoconferencing. It also described two kinds of Webquests Short term and Long term. Short term meaning it can be completed in one to three class periods. Long term can take between one week and a month in a classroom. In my own words WebQuests are kind of like Websites that are focused on critical pedagogy and a central theme. It is interactive and hooks the WebQuester. Some of the benefits of WebQuests include skill in Comparing, Classifying, Inducing, Deducing, Analyzing errors, Constructing support, Abstraction, and Analyzing perspectives. Whew!
I have made a WebQuest before and I have it saved on a CD. It was based on a book called Kumak's House by Michael Bania. I remember it took a long time much like the Website I'm making now and then I was a little more energetic. I haven't had too much thought or need to create another one. That was my personal connection to this reading. When I get back I will take a look at the WebQuest. Hmmm!
My question is what are the differences between Websites and WebQuests. I had thought about that in my personal definitions of WebQuests. If I had made this WebQuest on Yup'ik Level 1 Standards instead of a Website, I am trying to think how much of a difference they would be.
Meskill, C. (2005). Triadic scaffolds: Tools for teaching english language learners with computers. Language Learning & Technology, 9, 46-59.
This research article is about study done on triadic discourse (teacher, learner, computer). This article emphasizes that computer use in language learning situations and especially with ESOL students captures, motivates, and anchors learners attention to and render comprehensible the target language they hear and see on and around the computer screen (p. 46). Data collecting techniques used here were audio recorded interviews, informal conversations, and field notes on non-verbal cues. So this research resulted in showing that teachers make all the difference in the classroom setting. Although the use of computers enhances the learning outcomes and language, teachers have a critical role in meeting the needs of children. Language learning can be assisted through careful planning and this article also made reference to CALL.
I hope this is what we have been planning for in this class. I like how this article talks about the teacher being vital in success in student language learning, but also to use computers in a way that would benefit the learners.
My question here is what is the research question? Sabine, did I miss it? I wanted to know that.
Saturday, July 26, 2008
LING 695- Annotations, Rationale (For Dr. Webster)
Annotations: (children book)for my thematic unit
Sloat, T. & Huffman, B. (2004). Berry magic. Portland: Alaska Northwest Books.
This is a retelling of an old story about picking berries in the tundra. The main character is Anana and how she uses magic to plump and make the berries juicy. This fictionalized book uses some Yup’ik words such as pelatuuk, akutaq, and qaspeq. The book displays page after page of colorful illustrations and is in context with the Yup’ik community of readers.
I would use this as a literature for a Berry Picking Unit that I created. Some of the key vocabulary within the book include the Yup’ik words pelatuuk, akutaq, and qaspeq. I would use this book as my Alaskan and Yup’ik Eskimo Multicultural Literature and connect this reading to other Circumpolar cultures such as Eskimos from Siberia, Canada, and Greenland. I would find other literature that are similar to Berry Magic from each country mentioned and create a multicultural comparison between these cultures and the Yup’ik.
Sloat, T. (2006). Teri sloat: Author and illustrator. Retrieved July 21, 2008, from http://www.terisloat.com/.
This is a Website created by Teri Sloat, author and illustrator. Some of the features in this site are meet teri sloat, her book gallery, schools and conferences, fun and games, contacting teri, and art gallery. The Meet Teri Sloat is a written and illustrated autobiography of her upbringing, her personal education, her teaching in Alaska, and raising a family. It’s a neat timeline of her experiences. The Book Gallery are a list of books she’s written and illustrated with her short annotations of each. Schools and Conferences are a list of recommended conferences that she’s affiliated with and/or attended. Fun and Games are a set of different activities which she created. Viewers and net surfers have a choice of playing games and printing out color sheets.The Art Gallery displays her numerous talents and how to order these prints. Contacting Teri shows her email address.
This is a great resource to have because she show cases all her books and her art. I would use this site as a reference and resourse in teaching Multicultural Literature, especially utilizing her books Hungry Giant of the Tundra, Eye of the Needle, There Was An Old Lady Who Swallowed A Trout, and Dance On A Sealskin. The students would be able to paroose this site and get to know the author. The games would be fun for them to play and I am able to print coloring pages for the students.
Seale, D.,& Slapin, B. (Eds.). (2005). A broken flute: The native experience in book for children. Lanham, MD: Altamira. Berkley, CA: Oyate.
This book is a comprehensive resource that covers a wide range of Native American literary reviews. The content includes Living stories, Native American Poetry, Native American Literature reviews, and other reviews that incorporated Native American characters. Some of the topics and reviews covered here include biographies about Native Americans, Thanksgiving, Little House On The Prairie, Missionary Schools, and Reservations. The authors review many literature and present the flaws and provide actual events. This book is gives ideas on how to find great and not so great Native American books. Native authors of A Broken Flute corrects the many children and teenage books that have been written about or books with Native Americans context. They are straightforward and honest in every regard.
I would use this book as a reference and guide when I plan on using Multicultural Literature regarding Native Americans. I would use this to look for authencity and historical accuracy of any book here that is examined by Seale and Slapin. Since I plan on making a thematic unit on Native Americans as part of my thesis and research topic, I will use this to help select books appropriate and noteworthy. There are hundreds of books out there and even if the books are not represented here in A Broken Flute, I am able to question Multicultural Literature thanks to Seale and Slapins book. I know I need to check many ideas based on the appearance, content, and relevancy.
Webster, J., & John, A. (Eds). (2008). LING695: Multiliteraticies in second language classrooms (Course Pack).
This is a culturally appropriate and relevant set of Alaskan and Native American readings. Some include Qaneciit and some are Qulirat. These stories are traditional oral stories and accounts of native people. Also included are different articles on multimodal literacy approaches for teachers such as articles about digital or technological approaches. There is an annotation section included on books selected by the International Reading Association in 2007. Annotations are done for Multicultural Literature such as trade books.
How I would use this Course Pack is by selecting the Alaskan Native Qulirat and Qanemciit. In my school district we are required to expose and have students restate Qulirat and Qanemciit. This would be an excellent source for that because I do not have many written resources for this. Another way I plan on integrating this is by using the Literature Circles within my language program. I have not done much with this and I like how my instructor, Dr. Webster, emphasizes starting small by introducing one component of the Literature Circle. Like having student engage in Summarizing activities. This can be a great start for me.
McHenry, T. (2002). Words as big as the screen: Native American languages and the internet. Language Learning & Technology, 6, 102-115
This article talks about how much of the research and revitalization efforts of Native American languages were primarily conducted by non-native educators, linguists, and anthropologists studying native cultures and languages. This presented many problems given the history of Native American cultures and languages at the time of contact to present day. Given the need for Native American educators, linguists, and anthropologist, this article encourages Native Americans to pursue these roles and further create modes for Native Language Education. McHenry quotes Morrow (1987) by stating natives and researchers want Native Americans to make “the best of both worlds” by maintaining fluency in English while learning or maintaining the Native language. She suggests that Native Americans create Native WebPages as a means to help language revitalization efforts. The emphasis here is that Website promotes native authorship, authenticity, and factuality of the information.
As I read this article, I am forced to rethink my personal Webpage for this class and will visit this Tulalip Elementary School Website. This article hit the nail for me and made me rethink the direction, goal, and aim for my personal Website. I understand and the article points that Websites alone cannot save endangered languages, however can promote Native pride through self conservation, self knowledge, and just simply seeing your Native language online. This gives me a direction in creating my own Webpage, and I am thinking of some essential questions as I begin to create this site. Some questions to think about include: is the text manageable, easy to read, are vocabulary in context, what levels of lessons are presented, does audio match correct vocabulary, does this encourage TRP (Total Physical Response) or do I want it to, and is this Website reliant on English.
Lind, M. (Composer). How the crane got its blue eyes. [D. Olick, Conductor]. Fairbanks, Alaska, United States of America.
This story is a Qanemciq about a crane living on a tundra. This traditional tale is a common story heard among the Yup’ik communities. The crane takes out his eyes and loses them and tried several berries on for color to replace his lost eyes. The value here is to tell the truth. Maggie Lind of Bethel tells this orally.
I would use this recording with my berry picking thematic unit and for culture week. I would like students to become familiar with Yup’ik Qanemciit and Qulirat. These stories are integral parts of the Yup’ik history. Students need to be able to retell and respond to oral Yup’ik stories. I would like the students to compare and contrast written forms and these oral histories. Some of the activities I would like to use is to have the students dramatize How the Crane Got His Blue Eyes.
Sundown, J. (2008). How to Make Akutaq Power Point Presentation. Created University of Alaska Fairbanks, Summer.
Sundown, J. (2008). Berry Delicious Website. Created University of Alaska Fairbanks, Summer.
CU )curriculum use, general form can be use…take out “I”.
Pitka, M. (2008) Akutaq dance.
www.uaf.edu/jpw/NLLN.html
Sloat, T. & Huffman, B. (2004). Berry magic. Portland: Alaska Northwest Books.
This is a retelling of an old story about picking berries in the tundra. The main character is Anana and how she uses magic to plump and make the berries juicy. This fictionalized book uses some Yup’ik words such as pelatuuk, akutaq, and qaspeq. The book displays page after page of colorful illustrations and is in context with the Yup’ik community of readers.
I would use this as a literature for a Berry Picking Unit that I created. Some of the key vocabulary within the book include the Yup’ik words pelatuuk, akutaq, and qaspeq. I would use this book as my Alaskan and Yup’ik Eskimo Multicultural Literature and connect this reading to other Circumpolar cultures such as Eskimos from Siberia, Canada, and Greenland. I would find other literature that are similar to Berry Magic from each country mentioned and create a multicultural comparison between these cultures and the Yup’ik.
Sloat, T. (2006). Teri sloat: Author and illustrator. Retrieved July 21, 2008, from http://www.terisloat.com/.
This is a Website created by Teri Sloat, author and illustrator. Some of the features in this site are meet teri sloat, her book gallery, schools and conferences, fun and games, contacting teri, and art gallery. The Meet Teri Sloat is a written and illustrated autobiography of her upbringing, her personal education, her teaching in Alaska, and raising a family. It’s a neat timeline of her experiences. The Book Gallery are a list of books she’s written and illustrated with her short annotations of each. Schools and Conferences are a list of recommended conferences that she’s affiliated with and/or attended. Fun and Games are a set of different activities which she created. Viewers and net surfers have a choice of playing games and printing out color sheets.The Art Gallery displays her numerous talents and how to order these prints. Contacting Teri shows her email address.
This is a great resource to have because she show cases all her books and her art. I would use this site as a reference and resourse in teaching Multicultural Literature, especially utilizing her books Hungry Giant of the Tundra, Eye of the Needle, There Was An Old Lady Who Swallowed A Trout, and Dance On A Sealskin. The students would be able to paroose this site and get to know the author. The games would be fun for them to play and I am able to print coloring pages for the students.
Seale, D.,& Slapin, B. (Eds.). (2005). A broken flute: The native experience in book for children. Lanham, MD: Altamira. Berkley, CA: Oyate.
This book is a comprehensive resource that covers a wide range of Native American literary reviews. The content includes Living stories, Native American Poetry, Native American Literature reviews, and other reviews that incorporated Native American characters. Some of the topics and reviews covered here include biographies about Native Americans, Thanksgiving, Little House On The Prairie, Missionary Schools, and Reservations. The authors review many literature and present the flaws and provide actual events. This book is gives ideas on how to find great and not so great Native American books. Native authors of A Broken Flute corrects the many children and teenage books that have been written about or books with Native Americans context. They are straightforward and honest in every regard.
I would use this book as a reference and guide when I plan on using Multicultural Literature regarding Native Americans. I would use this to look for authencity and historical accuracy of any book here that is examined by Seale and Slapin. Since I plan on making a thematic unit on Native Americans as part of my thesis and research topic, I will use this to help select books appropriate and noteworthy. There are hundreds of books out there and even if the books are not represented here in A Broken Flute, I am able to question Multicultural Literature thanks to Seale and Slapins book. I know I need to check many ideas based on the appearance, content, and relevancy.
Webster, J., & John, A. (Eds). (2008). LING695: Multiliteraticies in second language classrooms (Course Pack).
This is a culturally appropriate and relevant set of Alaskan and Native American readings. Some include Qaneciit and some are Qulirat. These stories are traditional oral stories and accounts of native people. Also included are different articles on multimodal literacy approaches for teachers such as articles about digital or technological approaches. There is an annotation section included on books selected by the International Reading Association in 2007. Annotations are done for Multicultural Literature such as trade books.
How I would use this Course Pack is by selecting the Alaskan Native Qulirat and Qanemciit. In my school district we are required to expose and have students restate Qulirat and Qanemciit. This would be an excellent source for that because I do not have many written resources for this. Another way I plan on integrating this is by using the Literature Circles within my language program. I have not done much with this and I like how my instructor, Dr. Webster, emphasizes starting small by introducing one component of the Literature Circle. Like having student engage in Summarizing activities. This can be a great start for me.
McHenry, T. (2002). Words as big as the screen: Native American languages and the internet. Language Learning & Technology, 6, 102-115
This article talks about how much of the research and revitalization efforts of Native American languages were primarily conducted by non-native educators, linguists, and anthropologists studying native cultures and languages. This presented many problems given the history of Native American cultures and languages at the time of contact to present day. Given the need for Native American educators, linguists, and anthropologist, this article encourages Native Americans to pursue these roles and further create modes for Native Language Education. McHenry quotes Morrow (1987) by stating natives and researchers want Native Americans to make “the best of both worlds” by maintaining fluency in English while learning or maintaining the Native language. She suggests that Native Americans create Native WebPages as a means to help language revitalization efforts. The emphasis here is that Website promotes native authorship, authenticity, and factuality of the information.
As I read this article, I am forced to rethink my personal Webpage for this class and will visit this Tulalip Elementary School Website. This article hit the nail for me and made me rethink the direction, goal, and aim for my personal Website. I understand and the article points that Websites alone cannot save endangered languages, however can promote Native pride through self conservation, self knowledge, and just simply seeing your Native language online. This gives me a direction in creating my own Webpage, and I am thinking of some essential questions as I begin to create this site. Some questions to think about include: is the text manageable, easy to read, are vocabulary in context, what levels of lessons are presented, does audio match correct vocabulary, does this encourage TRP (Total Physical Response) or do I want it to, and is this Website reliant on English.
Lind, M. (Composer). How the crane got its blue eyes. [D. Olick, Conductor]. Fairbanks, Alaska, United States of America.
This story is a Qanemciq about a crane living on a tundra. This traditional tale is a common story heard among the Yup’ik communities. The crane takes out his eyes and loses them and tried several berries on for color to replace his lost eyes. The value here is to tell the truth. Maggie Lind of Bethel tells this orally.
I would use this recording with my berry picking thematic unit and for culture week. I would like students to become familiar with Yup’ik Qanemciit and Qulirat. These stories are integral parts of the Yup’ik history. Students need to be able to retell and respond to oral Yup’ik stories. I would like the students to compare and contrast written forms and these oral histories. Some of the activities I would like to use is to have the students dramatize How the Crane Got His Blue Eyes.
Sundown, J. (2008). How to Make Akutaq Power Point Presentation. Created University of Alaska Fairbanks, Summer.
Sundown, J. (2008). Berry Delicious Website. Created University of Alaska Fairbanks, Summer.
CU )curriculum use, general form can be use…take out “I”.
Pitka, M. (2008) Akutaq dance.
www.uaf.edu/jpw/NLLN.html
Rationale :
LYSD Standards:
Connecting Themes:
R2.9.1
Student makes relevant connections between text and personal experiences, experiences of others, and other texts [2] 1.10.1
R2.9.2
Student locates details in text to illustrate relevant connections between personal experiences, experiences of others, and other texts [2] 1.10.2
Y1.2.5
Student tells stories/illustrates qanemciq and quiliraq
SS1.1.1
Student presents ideas and information through writing, drawing, and discussions
SS1.1.2
Student restates information gained through listening, questioning, and visual comprehension
W1.1.1
Student writes a complete sentence with a subject and a predicate [1] 1.1.1
This thematic unit was created based on the Multicultural Literature and the context of berry picking. I wanted to link the Circumpolar north cultures that would be our, Yup’ik cultures, and the neighboring cultures of Siberia, Canadian, and Greenland. The connection here being that all cultures are related in their subsistence hunting and gathering activities. One such activity is gathering berries. This subsistence gathering activity has been past down from our ancestors and is part of our culture and identity. The Yup’ik in my village collect a number of berries which are blackberries (crowberries), cloudberries (salmon berries), lowbush blueberries, and redberries. The berry picking unit is planned for the fall semester e when the berries are ripe for the picking. Another reason for creating this thematic unit is that most students at this age level can relate to this activity. Many have parents, uncles, aunts, and grandparents who participate in this. This is part of their Funds Of Knowledge.
As you can see listed above are the Lower Yukon Standards that this unit will address. The first set of standards are the Reading . The first two reading standards are similar and how I will address this standard is by having students listen to two stories, one is fiction called Berry Magic by Teri Sloat, and the other is a Yup’ik Qanemcik called How the Crane Got It’s Blue Eyes. By reading these two culturally relevant texts the students will be able to make relevant connection and/or relate the reading to personal experiences through discussions, writing, and song. The story How the Crane Got It’s Blue Eyes will address the Yup’ik standard for Qanemciq and Quliraq. This story is an old story and I doubt that many students at this age level have heard this story which is why I would like to encorporate this in the thematic unit. The next two SS standards are the Social Studies standards which relates the output of the students after the Multicultural Literary input from the two mentioned stories. Students will respond through restating information t hrough song, speaking, drawing, dancing, and recordings these in their writing. The writing portion of the standards is infused throughout the thematic unit and a rubric will be posted for the students to continually use as a site reference so that they can be guided in their writing.
Some of the cultural Yup’ik concepts here in this Berry Picking Thematic Unit include celebrating their first picks, valueing the continuity of subsistence gathering, living healthy lifestyles through fresh subsistence foods, and how we are related to other cultures from Siberia, Canada, and Greenland.
Some of the modes I am planning to use in this unit include reading, writing, listening, speaking, singing, Eskimo dance, field trip to pick berries, art, and drama. Some technology involved will include computers to create Power Points, digital cameras to take still photos and record i-Movies, microphone to record audio, and Podcasts.
Connecting Themes:
R2.9.1
Student makes relevant connections between text and personal experiences, experiences of others, and other texts [2] 1.10.1
R2.9.2
Student locates details in text to illustrate relevant connections between personal experiences, experiences of others, and other texts [2] 1.10.2
Y1.2.5
Student tells stories/illustrates qanemciq and quiliraq
SS1.1.1
Student presents ideas and information through writing, drawing, and discussions
SS1.1.2
Student restates information gained through listening, questioning, and visual comprehension
W1.1.1
Student writes a complete sentence with a subject and a predicate [1] 1.1.1
This thematic unit was created based on the Multicultural Literature and the context of berry picking. I wanted to link the Circumpolar north cultures that would be our, Yup’ik cultures, and the neighboring cultures of Siberia, Canadian, and Greenland. The connection here being that all cultures are related in their subsistence hunting and gathering activities. One such activity is gathering berries. This subsistence gathering activity has been past down from our ancestors and is part of our culture and identity. The Yup’ik in my village collect a number of berries which are blackberries (crowberries), cloudberries (salmon berries), lowbush blueberries, and redberries. The berry picking unit is planned for the fall semester e when the berries are ripe for the picking. Another reason for creating this thematic unit is that most students at this age level can relate to this activity. Many have parents, uncles, aunts, and grandparents who participate in this. This is part of their Funds Of Knowledge.
As you can see listed above are the Lower Yukon Standards that this unit will address. The first set of standards are the Reading . The first two reading standards are similar and how I will address this standard is by having students listen to two stories, one is fiction called Berry Magic by Teri Sloat, and the other is a Yup’ik Qanemcik called How the Crane Got It’s Blue Eyes. By reading these two culturally relevant texts the students will be able to make relevant connection and/or relate the reading to personal experiences through discussions, writing, and song. The story How the Crane Got It’s Blue Eyes will address the Yup’ik standard for Qanemciq and Quliraq. This story is an old story and I doubt that many students at this age level have heard this story which is why I would like to encorporate this in the thematic unit. The next two SS standards are the Social Studies standards which relates the output of the students after the Multicultural Literary input from the two mentioned stories. Students will respond through restating information t hrough song, speaking, drawing, dancing, and recordings these in their writing. The writing portion of the standards is infused throughout the thematic unit and a rubric will be posted for the students to continually use as a site reference so that they can be guided in their writing.
Some of the cultural Yup’ik concepts here in this Berry Picking Thematic Unit include celebrating their first picks, valueing the continuity of subsistence gathering, living healthy lifestyles through fresh subsistence foods, and how we are related to other cultures from Siberia, Canada, and Greenland.
Some of the modes I am planning to use in this unit include reading, writing, listening, speaking, singing, Eskimo dance, field trip to pick berries, art, and drama. Some technology involved will include computers to create Power Points, digital cameras to take still photos and record i-Movies, microphone to record audio, and Podcasts.
Monday, July 21, 2008
Words As Big As The Screen: Native American Languages And The Internet
McHenry, T. (2002). Words as big as the screen: Native American languages and the internet. Language Learning & Technology, 6, 102-115.
This article talks about how much of the research and revitalization efforts of Native American languages were primarily conducted by non-native educators, linguists, and anthropologists studying native cultures and languages. This presented many problems given the history of Native American cultures and languages at the time of contact to present day. Given the need for Native American educators, linguists, and anthropologist, this article encourages Native Americans to pursue these roles and further create modes for Native Language Education. McHenry quotes Morrow (1987) by stating natives and researchers want Native Americans to make “the best of both worlds” by maintaining fluency in English while learning or maintaining the Native language. She suggests that Native Americans create Native WebPages as a means to help language revitalization efforts. The emphasis here is that Website promotes native authorship, authenticity, and factuality of the information.
As I read this article, I am forced to rethink my personal Webpage for this class and will visit this Tulalip Elementary School Website. This article hit the nail for me and made me rethink the direction, goal, and aim for my personal Website. I understand and the article points that Websites alone cannot save endangered languages, however can promote Native pride through self conservation, self knowledge, and just simply seeing your Native language online.
“If Native Americans can acquire the materials and skills needed to produce quality Web sites, they may introduce their language and culture to people whom they have virtually no chance of ever meeting in person.”(p. 110). I like how the author reviewed the Lushootseed page by looking at the Webpage for its technical aspects, linguistic aspects, and cultural aspects. This gives me a direction in creating my own Webpage, and I am thinking of some essential questions as I begin to create this site. Some questions to think about include: is the text manageable, easy to read, are vocabulary in context, what levels of lessons are presented, does audio match correct vocabulary, does this encourage TRP (Total Physical Response) or do I want it to, and is this Website reliant on English.
This article talks about how much of the research and revitalization efforts of Native American languages were primarily conducted by non-native educators, linguists, and anthropologists studying native cultures and languages. This presented many problems given the history of Native American cultures and languages at the time of contact to present day. Given the need for Native American educators, linguists, and anthropologist, this article encourages Native Americans to pursue these roles and further create modes for Native Language Education. McHenry quotes Morrow (1987) by stating natives and researchers want Native Americans to make “the best of both worlds” by maintaining fluency in English while learning or maintaining the Native language. She suggests that Native Americans create Native WebPages as a means to help language revitalization efforts. The emphasis here is that Website promotes native authorship, authenticity, and factuality of the information.
As I read this article, I am forced to rethink my personal Webpage for this class and will visit this Tulalip Elementary School Website. This article hit the nail for me and made me rethink the direction, goal, and aim for my personal Website. I understand and the article points that Websites alone cannot save endangered languages, however can promote Native pride through self conservation, self knowledge, and just simply seeing your Native language online.
“If Native Americans can acquire the materials and skills needed to produce quality Web sites, they may introduce their language and culture to people whom they have virtually no chance of ever meeting in person.”(p. 110). I like how the author reviewed the Lushootseed page by looking at the Webpage for its technical aspects, linguistic aspects, and cultural aspects. This gives me a direction in creating my own Webpage, and I am thinking of some essential questions as I begin to create this site. Some questions to think about include: is the text manageable, easy to read, are vocabulary in context, what levels of lessons are presented, does audio match correct vocabulary, does this encourage TRP (Total Physical Response) or do I want it to, and is this Website reliant on English.
LING 611- Reading for Monday- 7/21/08
Garcia, A. ( 2008, Summer).Rethinking myspace. Rethinking Schools, 22, 27-29.
Garcia entails the many possibilities of MySpace in the classroom context. Here he pilots the use of MySpace and expands his methodological repertoire by connecting to his learners outside of the classroom. Some of the ways he draws his learners in is by leaving messages on MySpace and using this as a form of communication to gain attention and instruct his learners outside of the classroom context. The drawbacks he sees is that students may be shy to interact with their teacher thinking he might invade their cyber and private space, however, Garcia concludes that so far this seems an effective tool to reach out to his cyber techno savvy learners.
This article made me rethink MySpace. As we discussion during the last class about many uses of Skype, I am infusing some ideas how MySpace may and may not be an effective method to use with my learners and/or their parents. As we reach this society of technology and networking via computers and other gadgets, it can be a form of indirect communication (indirect meaning not face to face) between myself and the community I serve (student, parents, staff). I do like how Garcia emphasis the context in which this may work. He says that students who are more introverted can use this form effectively and that students now are more technoliterate, so this means will work for that context. On the other hand, I still stress the direct interaction (face to face) so that I am not just an id online. I am more of a person and not a user id. I want to feel approachable socially by my students and less intimidating in person.
So far my use of MySpace is to keep in touch with family and friends who are elsewhere, and I have not thought of this as a tool for networking with my learners. However, I do see the potential here. If I do plan on creating one for my learners, I would have to come up with specific goals and aims so that the use and engagements in this activity are clear and precise to my clique of learners.
McFarlane, S. H. (2008, Summer). The laptops are coming! The laptops are coming! Rethinking Schools, 22, 22-26.
McFarlane expresses her personal accounts of the laptop usages among the students she serve. She encounters the time when the laptops came and stressed some negative and positive insights here. The negative notions here were the lack of direction and/or goals, user conduct, and evaluation process on the tech curricula. She ends the story with ideas and visions of instilling within the students the power student can have to help build a world they want to see (pp. 26)
I like how she comes up with a list of Notes for the next time. As we read in Richards in creating and planning curricula, many things need to be in place for the effectiveness and the on-going successes of such lessons. Here in this context there seemed to be no direction. I see this at my school where we are given a bunch of computers and are expected to be technoliterate. I do wish to be more tech oriented and have students become more in control of technology and hopefully able to see themselves as builders of the world they want to see. On the other hand, in my context I need more training and to also write a tech philosophy for myself. I have not incorporated the use of technology so much and it’s about time I do; technology is here.
I do have about 3 iMac in my classroom. So, where do I go from here? I’m fortunate to have this class where I am pushed to learn all the tech methods I can utilize. I do want to add that savviness to my resume`. When I get back I do want to do a little needs and situation analysis of what’s available at my site in terms of program in the iMacs, and a little inventory of what’s available at my site. Once that’s done, I can begin creating more activities with and for the students. This will be my start to conquering my digital divide!
Thorn, S. L. (2006). New technologies and additional language learning. CALPER Working Paper No. 7, 1-26.
This article reviews context and uses of CMC (Computer Mediated Communication) in regards to language education environments. Some key features in this article includes synchronous CMC (SCMC) modes or chatting, ICL2E (Internet-mediated Intercultural L2 Education) or SCMC between people of different cultures such as the Americans chatting with the German or French), and some of the results conclude that CMC is used more for intercultural competence. Other points in this review highlighted use of blogs and wikis and how it related to L2 developments, and more research was needed for these modes. As for MySpace, Facebook, and Friendster, no research has been done to see if L2 learning occurs.
This review article just backs up the notion that multimodal learning and multiliteracies enhance language in learners. My connection here is that I am encouraged to try and learn new avenues in L2 education and the world is full of these technologies as an asset in language development and learning. I can’t see my learners chatting with foreign students right away, however I can see them chatting with other students in different villages and that is generally what happened via Yahoo Messenger, MSN, and other IM network sites such as MySpace. I have not seen this use in the classroom context and perhaps this is where I would have to write goals and aims for the use of these modes. After reading Richards, I seem to go back to the essential questions needed in planning curriculum.
Final points for me are that I need to become accustomed to the changes in technological use and its potential in language education. I know that a lot of my learners are online at home and are technosavvy as compared to when I was their age. So, where do I go from here (I ask again)? The world is full of possibilities and through the correct and appropriate use of technology with clear goals and aims, I am positive that students can develop and progress in language. It’s just a matter of approaching it from an educator’s, researchers, and linguistic perspective.
Garcia entails the many possibilities of MySpace in the classroom context. Here he pilots the use of MySpace and expands his methodological repertoire by connecting to his learners outside of the classroom. Some of the ways he draws his learners in is by leaving messages on MySpace and using this as a form of communication to gain attention and instruct his learners outside of the classroom context. The drawbacks he sees is that students may be shy to interact with their teacher thinking he might invade their cyber and private space, however, Garcia concludes that so far this seems an effective tool to reach out to his cyber techno savvy learners.
This article made me rethink MySpace. As we discussion during the last class about many uses of Skype, I am infusing some ideas how MySpace may and may not be an effective method to use with my learners and/or their parents. As we reach this society of technology and networking via computers and other gadgets, it can be a form of indirect communication (indirect meaning not face to face) between myself and the community I serve (student, parents, staff). I do like how Garcia emphasis the context in which this may work. He says that students who are more introverted can use this form effectively and that students now are more technoliterate, so this means will work for that context. On the other hand, I still stress the direct interaction (face to face) so that I am not just an id online. I am more of a person and not a user id. I want to feel approachable socially by my students and less intimidating in person.
So far my use of MySpace is to keep in touch with family and friends who are elsewhere, and I have not thought of this as a tool for networking with my learners. However, I do see the potential here. If I do plan on creating one for my learners, I would have to come up with specific goals and aims so that the use and engagements in this activity are clear and precise to my clique of learners.
McFarlane, S. H. (2008, Summer). The laptops are coming! The laptops are coming! Rethinking Schools, 22, 22-26.
McFarlane expresses her personal accounts of the laptop usages among the students she serve. She encounters the time when the laptops came and stressed some negative and positive insights here. The negative notions here were the lack of direction and/or goals, user conduct, and evaluation process on the tech curricula. She ends the story with ideas and visions of instilling within the students the power student can have to help build a world they want to see (pp. 26)
I like how she comes up with a list of Notes for the next time. As we read in Richards in creating and planning curricula, many things need to be in place for the effectiveness and the on-going successes of such lessons. Here in this context there seemed to be no direction. I see this at my school where we are given a bunch of computers and are expected to be technoliterate. I do wish to be more tech oriented and have students become more in control of technology and hopefully able to see themselves as builders of the world they want to see. On the other hand, in my context I need more training and to also write a tech philosophy for myself. I have not incorporated the use of technology so much and it’s about time I do; technology is here.
I do have about 3 iMac in my classroom. So, where do I go from here? I’m fortunate to have this class where I am pushed to learn all the tech methods I can utilize. I do want to add that savviness to my resume`. When I get back I do want to do a little needs and situation analysis of what’s available at my site in terms of program in the iMacs, and a little inventory of what’s available at my site. Once that’s done, I can begin creating more activities with and for the students. This will be my start to conquering my digital divide!
Thorn, S. L. (2006). New technologies and additional language learning. CALPER Working Paper No. 7, 1-26.
This article reviews context and uses of CMC (Computer Mediated Communication) in regards to language education environments. Some key features in this article includes synchronous CMC (SCMC) modes or chatting, ICL2E (Internet-mediated Intercultural L2 Education) or SCMC between people of different cultures such as the Americans chatting with the German or French), and some of the results conclude that CMC is used more for intercultural competence. Other points in this review highlighted use of blogs and wikis and how it related to L2 developments, and more research was needed for these modes. As for MySpace, Facebook, and Friendster, no research has been done to see if L2 learning occurs.
This review article just backs up the notion that multimodal learning and multiliteracies enhance language in learners. My connection here is that I am encouraged to try and learn new avenues in L2 education and the world is full of these technologies as an asset in language development and learning. I can’t see my learners chatting with foreign students right away, however I can see them chatting with other students in different villages and that is generally what happened via Yahoo Messenger, MSN, and other IM network sites such as MySpace. I have not seen this use in the classroom context and perhaps this is where I would have to write goals and aims for the use of these modes. After reading Richards, I seem to go back to the essential questions needed in planning curriculum.
Final points for me are that I need to become accustomed to the changes in technological use and its potential in language education. I know that a lot of my learners are online at home and are technosavvy as compared to when I was their age. So, where do I go from here (I ask again)? The world is full of possibilities and through the correct and appropriate use of technology with clear goals and aims, I am positive that students can develop and progress in language. It’s just a matter of approaching it from an educator’s, researchers, and linguistic perspective.
Monday, July 14, 2008
LING 611-7/14/08 Entry
1. What are you taking away form week1?
I think more than anything, I would want to find out where my students are in terms of technology use (like a needs and situation analysis) andysis from there use my constructivist nature to create a nice effective student and teacher friendly program for language teaching using the available technology (online and available equipment like digital cams, computers, mic, etc). Another personal goal is to become techno literate so that I can further operate as an effective and knowledgeable teacher that the students , staff and community can work with and come to for assistance.
2. What questions have been emerging for you?
Some of the questions have been that how would I create evaluations and assessments in using this form of technology? I see how convenient technology can be and I have commented that I like using them because they are environmentally friendly in that I do not have to use paper and turn in assignments. So my concerns are how to evaluate and assess progress of the students if they are using Wikis, and Blogs?
I think more than anything, I would want to find out where my students are in terms of technology use (like a needs and situation analysis) andysis from there use my constructivist nature to create a nice effective student and teacher friendly program for language teaching using the available technology (online and available equipment like digital cams, computers, mic, etc). Another personal goal is to become techno literate so that I can further operate as an effective and knowledgeable teacher that the students , staff and community can work with and come to for assistance.
2. What questions have been emerging for you?
Some of the questions have been that how would I create evaluations and assessments in using this form of technology? I see how convenient technology can be and I have commented that I like using them because they are environmentally friendly in that I do not have to use paper and turn in assignments. So my concerns are how to evaluate and assess progress of the students if they are using Wikis, and Blogs?
Sunday, July 13, 2008
LING 611-Erben & Sarieva Chapters 1-3
Erben T. (2008). Introduction : CALLing all foreign language teachers. In T. Erben & I. Sarieva (Eds), CALLing all foreign language teachers: Computer-assisted language learning in the classroom. (pp. 1-5). Larchmont, NY: Eyes On Education, Inc.
This chapter introduces the book from the authors’ backgrounds, the history of this book, and outlines the chapters. Prior to this the book introduces the people who helped create this book and their personal journeys into language teaching. A framework of this book coincides with the ACTFL(American Council for the Teaching of Foreign Languages) and the ISTE’s (International Society for Technology in Education, and NETS (National Educational Technology Standards).
It’s interesting to learn about all the resources that technology has to offer and how they can be integrated into language programs and teaching. I am glad to have this book as a resource so that I am better equipped. This book is an excellent resource and it also helps to define and explain some of the technology that is available either online and/or things that can be purchased.
I would use this book as a resource and hope to find some example projects where technology was used. I would use those project ideas when I create my own language learning programs using the available technology.
Erben T., & Zoran, A. (2008). Guiding principles: Second langauge acquisition, instructional technology, and the constructivist framework. In T. Erben & I. Sarieva (Eds), CALLing all foreign language teachers: Computer-assisted language learning in the classroom. (pp. 7-11). Larchmont, NY: Eyes On Education, Inc.
This chapter organized thoughts on why the use of technology would enhance language acquisition and instruction. Based on standard driven school societies, technology is a means of meeting these classroom goals. Technology would also help create critical thinkers and the constructivist view is that students will enhance and build upon their strengths through this process and the use of technology. With the change in society, meeting the literacy and foreign language needs of the 21st century, technology is a means to meet the students at their comfort zone with the needed compressible input and the output they create.
What type of 21st century teacher am I? I ask in reading this chapter. I would like to be more techno literate, especially now that everyone seems to be connected with media everywhere they go. If I had to rate my electronic literacy, I would say about 5 being the midway point from 1 being very ignorant to 10 being very comfortable. I would like to be able to use the available technology in the language programs and motivate the learners. This is in! If you’re not up to date in your technology as the rest of the world, how are you planning to meet the needs of the students?
So my goals for this class are to become familiar with some online programs such as Wikis, Blogs, and other electronic publishing programs that are available. I have had some ideas since I was first introduced to these last week, such as using Wikis for some of my notes taking during staff meetings. Another is using blogs for staff dialogue so that staff does not feel left out in the dark. These are just a couple of ideas. As I read this book and engage in on my classes here, I’m sure I will be enlightened with many more ideas. I do like how this is class is environmentally friendly where I am able to post my assignments and not waste papers by printing and turning in assignments, very electro literate!
Erben T., Ban, R., Jin, L., Summers, R., & Eisenhower, K. (2008). Using technology for foreign language intruction: Creative innovations, research, and applications. In T. Erben, & I. Sarieva (Eds.), CALLing all foreign language teachers: Computer-assisted language learning in the classroom. (pp. 13-31). Larchmont, NY: Eyes On Education, Inc.
This chapter outlines the history of CALL (Computer assisted language learning),talks about how this is student centered, and materials needed, and entails some risks about using technology in language learning. I do like how this chapter is organized. It is always helpful to know the advantages and caveats of any device and tools. It is always a goal of mine to research ways that would motivate and help enhance the critical thinking skills of every student. CALL seems to meet these aspects of students. Some of the rewards of CALL are that it’s challenging, utilizes best practice, and motivates students. Some risks include lack of latest technology, no teacher training, classroom control, and assessment.
More of my technology goals for this class are to become familiar with podcasts. I have not used this technology before, unless it was in a meeting with the district office and our staff. It is available at our site ,but that seems to be the only reason that is being used. How I would like to use this is through connecting my class to another class from another site or district. Some goals for this would be to have students connect to other students, enhance self confidence, and adding this program into their young experiences.
My concerns here are the availability of trained experts. I do think it’s important to learn by experience however, I would like to be able to ask questions as I come across difficulties and I do not want to begin anything unless I can answer and figure out possible problems that may arise from the use of these technologies. It seems that the students would benefit more if the teacher has many of the important points figured out. I would be able to help them and not be stuck trying to figure out the problem with the students.
This chapter introduces the book from the authors’ backgrounds, the history of this book, and outlines the chapters. Prior to this the book introduces the people who helped create this book and their personal journeys into language teaching. A framework of this book coincides with the ACTFL(American Council for the Teaching of Foreign Languages) and the ISTE’s (International Society for Technology in Education, and NETS (National Educational Technology Standards).
It’s interesting to learn about all the resources that technology has to offer and how they can be integrated into language programs and teaching. I am glad to have this book as a resource so that I am better equipped. This book is an excellent resource and it also helps to define and explain some of the technology that is available either online and/or things that can be purchased.
I would use this book as a resource and hope to find some example projects where technology was used. I would use those project ideas when I create my own language learning programs using the available technology.
Erben T., & Zoran, A. (2008). Guiding principles: Second langauge acquisition, instructional technology, and the constructivist framework. In T. Erben & I. Sarieva (Eds), CALLing all foreign language teachers: Computer-assisted language learning in the classroom. (pp. 7-11). Larchmont, NY: Eyes On Education, Inc.
This chapter organized thoughts on why the use of technology would enhance language acquisition and instruction. Based on standard driven school societies, technology is a means of meeting these classroom goals. Technology would also help create critical thinkers and the constructivist view is that students will enhance and build upon their strengths through this process and the use of technology. With the change in society, meeting the literacy and foreign language needs of the 21st century, technology is a means to meet the students at their comfort zone with the needed compressible input and the output they create.
What type of 21st century teacher am I? I ask in reading this chapter. I would like to be more techno literate, especially now that everyone seems to be connected with media everywhere they go. If I had to rate my electronic literacy, I would say about 5 being the midway point from 1 being very ignorant to 10 being very comfortable. I would like to be able to use the available technology in the language programs and motivate the learners. This is in! If you’re not up to date in your technology as the rest of the world, how are you planning to meet the needs of the students?
So my goals for this class are to become familiar with some online programs such as Wikis, Blogs, and other electronic publishing programs that are available. I have had some ideas since I was first introduced to these last week, such as using Wikis for some of my notes taking during staff meetings. Another is using blogs for staff dialogue so that staff does not feel left out in the dark. These are just a couple of ideas. As I read this book and engage in on my classes here, I’m sure I will be enlightened with many more ideas. I do like how this is class is environmentally friendly where I am able to post my assignments and not waste papers by printing and turning in assignments, very electro literate!
Erben T., Ban, R., Jin, L., Summers, R., & Eisenhower, K. (2008). Using technology for foreign language intruction: Creative innovations, research, and applications. In T. Erben, & I. Sarieva (Eds.), CALLing all foreign language teachers: Computer-assisted language learning in the classroom. (pp. 13-31). Larchmont, NY: Eyes On Education, Inc.
This chapter outlines the history of CALL (Computer assisted language learning),talks about how this is student centered, and materials needed, and entails some risks about using technology in language learning. I do like how this chapter is organized. It is always helpful to know the advantages and caveats of any device and tools. It is always a goal of mine to research ways that would motivate and help enhance the critical thinking skills of every student. CALL seems to meet these aspects of students. Some of the rewards of CALL are that it’s challenging, utilizes best practice, and motivates students. Some risks include lack of latest technology, no teacher training, classroom control, and assessment.
More of my technology goals for this class are to become familiar with podcasts. I have not used this technology before, unless it was in a meeting with the district office and our staff. It is available at our site ,but that seems to be the only reason that is being used. How I would like to use this is through connecting my class to another class from another site or district. Some goals for this would be to have students connect to other students, enhance self confidence, and adding this program into their young experiences.
My concerns here are the availability of trained experts. I do think it’s important to learn by experience however, I would like to be able to ask questions as I come across difficulties and I do not want to begin anything unless I can answer and figure out possible problems that may arise from the use of these technologies. It seems that the students would benefit more if the teacher has many of the important points figured out. I would be able to help them and not be stuck trying to figure out the problem with the students.
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Richards-Chapter 8-9
Richards -Chapter 8
This chapter talked about how materials fit into curriculum designs. Some forms of materials include authentic and created material. Depending on the curriculum and based on needs of learners, the material used should be used to meet goals of curriculum. If materials are not suitable, then they should be adaptable. The difference between authentic and created material is that authentic is not necessarily created for curricula and created material is. Examples of authentic material include: photos, magazine articles or clippings, and video clips. Created material includes text, workbooks, and other materials ordered by schools for student and/or teacher use.
This chapter helped differentiate the different material for me. It also gave some suggestions on how to use materials such as adapting them to fit needs of my learners. I especially like the evaluating textbook section here in this chapter. The section on the teachers in the program asked if teachers play a part in selection of the books they teach from. So far I do not know if teachers are asked to help select. I’m only aware of teacher committees to write and revise standards and assessments, but have not heard of committees that help in selecting material.
As for my connection and things I found useful in this chapter are the questions to ask to evaluate textbooks. I’m beginning to see how I can questions the curricula I create and/or use so that I meet the needs of my learners the best. This section provided some criteria and a checklist I can use that would help me focus on selecting material that best fits needs of the learners I teach. It also helps me in adapting material when creating lessons. Does this material meet the goals, aims, and objectives of the curriculum? Will the material stimulate and motivate? These are excellent questions to keep in mind as I spend valuable time piecing together material.
Richards, J. C. (2001). The role and design of instructional materials. In Curriculum development in language teaching. (pp. 251-284). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Richards- Chapter 9
This chapter talked about evaluation as a tool to see and rate how a program is doing in terms of doing what it was created to do from planning to implementation. There are three types of evaluations here which are Formative, Illuminative and Summative. Formative evaluation is a type of ongoing evaluation. Some questions to think about in this process include what is working, what is not, and what problems need to be addressed. Illumative evaluation is an action research evaluation and seeks to answer things like the different aspects of a program work or how they are being implemented. Summative evaluation seeks to evaluate programs after the implementations. Some questions this seeks to ask include how effective, what students learned, how well was program received by teacher and learners, and how appropriate were the teaching methods.
The section I most liked is the audience for evaluation. This provided a nice evaluation process or questions to ask from all interested parties, including students, teachers, curriculum developers, administrators, and sponsors. If anything I will remember to ask myself these types of questions when planning, while implementing, and after implementation of any programs I use and/or material used to carry out the lessons.
The other thing I liked from this chapter was a little refresher on the Qualitative and Quantitative types of research. This helped remind me of the types of methods I can use in research. This chapter outlines the advantages and disadvantages of the methodologies used. It was a nice blast to the past.
Richards, J. C. (2001). Approaches to evaluation. In Curriculum development in language teaching. (pp.286-309). New York: Cambridge University Press.
This chapter talked about how materials fit into curriculum designs. Some forms of materials include authentic and created material. Depending on the curriculum and based on needs of learners, the material used should be used to meet goals of curriculum. If materials are not suitable, then they should be adaptable. The difference between authentic and created material is that authentic is not necessarily created for curricula and created material is. Examples of authentic material include: photos, magazine articles or clippings, and video clips. Created material includes text, workbooks, and other materials ordered by schools for student and/or teacher use.
This chapter helped differentiate the different material for me. It also gave some suggestions on how to use materials such as adapting them to fit needs of my learners. I especially like the evaluating textbook section here in this chapter. The section on the teachers in the program asked if teachers play a part in selection of the books they teach from. So far I do not know if teachers are asked to help select. I’m only aware of teacher committees to write and revise standards and assessments, but have not heard of committees that help in selecting material.
As for my connection and things I found useful in this chapter are the questions to ask to evaluate textbooks. I’m beginning to see how I can questions the curricula I create and/or use so that I meet the needs of my learners the best. This section provided some criteria and a checklist I can use that would help me focus on selecting material that best fits needs of the learners I teach. It also helps me in adapting material when creating lessons. Does this material meet the goals, aims, and objectives of the curriculum? Will the material stimulate and motivate? These are excellent questions to keep in mind as I spend valuable time piecing together material.
Richards, J. C. (2001). The role and design of instructional materials. In Curriculum development in language teaching. (pp. 251-284). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Richards- Chapter 9
This chapter talked about evaluation as a tool to see and rate how a program is doing in terms of doing what it was created to do from planning to implementation. There are three types of evaluations here which are Formative, Illuminative and Summative. Formative evaluation is a type of ongoing evaluation. Some questions to think about in this process include what is working, what is not, and what problems need to be addressed. Illumative evaluation is an action research evaluation and seeks to answer things like the different aspects of a program work or how they are being implemented. Summative evaluation seeks to evaluate programs after the implementations. Some questions this seeks to ask include how effective, what students learned, how well was program received by teacher and learners, and how appropriate were the teaching methods.
The section I most liked is the audience for evaluation. This provided a nice evaluation process or questions to ask from all interested parties, including students, teachers, curriculum developers, administrators, and sponsors. If anything I will remember to ask myself these types of questions when planning, while implementing, and after implementation of any programs I use and/or material used to carry out the lessons.
The other thing I liked from this chapter was a little refresher on the Qualitative and Quantitative types of research. This helped remind me of the types of methods I can use in research. This chapter outlines the advantages and disadvantages of the methodologies used. It was a nice blast to the past.
Richards, J. C. (2001). Approaches to evaluation. In Curriculum development in language teaching. (pp.286-309). New York: Cambridge University Press.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)