RITELL

The Rhode Island Teachers of English Language Learners conference was very interesting.  Dr. Deborah Short is a sort of pioneer for teaching English to non-native speakers and she shared an enlightening presentation with us regarding SIOP, or Sheltered Instruction Observation Protocol.  Prior to the event, I had very limited knowledge of this topic.  I actually had an opportunity to experience it being employed while doing observations at Mt. Pleasant High School, but did not realize I had witnessed its utilization until attending this conference.  I have to admit, that my ignorance left me feeling a little bit lost at times during the presentation and that there was so much information in Dr. Short’s lecture did not help matters.  However, I do feel like I have a better understanding of some of the concepts related to English language learning. 

            I was very surprised to find out that the new Common Core State Standards do not address this issue at all.  Dr. Short informed us that the CCSS that is being adopted by 46 states does not provide standards for students who are not native English speakers, nor does it address special education.  Instead, it leaves decisions about these areas up to state and local school boards.  I find this surprising because if such a broad-based program that can be implemented nationwide is being proposed, I feel as though it should clearly be all-inclusive in consideration of the wide range of learners throughout public school systems. 

            Dr. Short presented some data of a study done between schools that employed the SIOP model and those that did not.  It showed that although achievement in the SIOP schools were not always greater than non-SIOP schools, the increases from year to year were much greater among SIOP schools and clearly showed an upward trend whereas non-SIOP schools figures were much more static and even throughout.  This is a promising study, however, I noticed that it was done several years ago, dating back to 2006, and I wondered why there is not more recent data and why the study stopped after three school years. 

            In my brief experience with this strategy, it seems as though it would be a much more effective one than traditional methods of teaching English to new learners.  It does not take away from other content in order to focus on teaching English but instead integrates learning English with learning content.  I witnessed it being effectively used in a 10^th grade World History class and the majority of students in that class displayed signs of understanding and making gains in both areas simultaneously.  In addition, Dr. Short advocates using a more complete method of learning a language, including cultural effects of language, beyond just vocabulary and grammar that sometimes do not adequately serve an English language learner. 

            I will be interested to continue to study and perhaps someday employ SIOP methods in a classroom.  I left the conference with a list of sources for more information on the topic and since I am now a member of RITELL, I will continue to receive their email newsletter.    

Observation #4

1)       The objective is:

Explain why Federalists opposed the Louisiana Purchase.

2)      Analysis

3)      I would have students write two short essays pertaining to the primary sources they read.

 

1.       What reasons do Alexander Hamilton, Rufus King, and Timothy Pickering give for opposing the Louisiana Purchase?

2.      To which political party did Thomas Jefferson belong and why is that significant?            

Observation #3

            As the students walked in to their AP US History class, they picked up their work folders from the bin on Ms. H’s desk that was marked with their period number and class title.  They sat down in their seats and immediately had a task to do.  Written on the white board on the side wall was their assignment.  It read: “Do Now.  Who fought in the Revolutionary War?”  It seemed like an easy question AP US History students to answer and Ms. H explained that she wanted to make sure all her students knew the answer because on her car ride in that morning, she had heard on the radio someone who did not answer the question correctly and had claimed to have been an AP student.

            The nine students in the class worked on answering the question on a small slip of paper and most of them did not take too long to do it.  One student came in a little late and when the question was posed to him he began answering aloud not realizing that it was a written “Do Now” assignment.  His classmates and the teacher quickly hushed him and explained he should write it down.  I am assuming the “Do Now” is a daily occurrence and it is a school wide theme.  Every class I observed had one posted on a board somewhere in the room.  This is great for making sure that students have something to work on immediately upon entering the classroom and do not have to wait for a lesson to begin.

            It seems the rules in Ms. H’s class were already understood and these students, having been in the class for a few months, did not need to be reminded of class room procedures.  I do not think anyone raised their hand to answer a question, they simply took turns speaking and no one interrupted anyone else.  When it was time to take notes from the overhead projector, students freely moved their seats to be in a better position to view the overhead.  When a question was posed by the teacher ad no one volunteered to answer, she called on someone.  All assignments were posted on a chart on the wall.  I observed Ms. H give an assignment and shortly thereafter she marked it on the chart.  I should have gotten a closer look at the chart to see exactly what information was on it but I did not want to hover over her shoulder as she wrote it in and then I forgot to look at it after class had ended because I was talking to her about the class.  I think she numbered the assignment, titled it, wrote the date it was assigned and possibly the date it was due.  This serves as an easy way for students to make sure they are up to date with assignments without taking time out of learning activities. 

            While students worked in groups reading primary documents and answering questions about them, the teacher went around checking the prior day’s homework assignment.  With grade book in hand, she went to each student to make sure they had completed it.  Some had not, and one student in particular who had been absent the day before had e-mailed the teacher to ask for any assignment he missed while out.  He had not completed the homework even though he had been proactive in asking for it.  He and Ms. H went back and forth a bit about it in a very calm, conversational way; she did not get mad at him and he did not get defensive.  She had him check his e-mail again on the computer in the classroom and reread the message.  After doing so he admitted he had not read the entire message and thus missed the assignment and that was that. 

            Ms. H managed her classroom effectively.  She was very even-tempered and had a calm demeanor about her.  She was assertive without being too hard on students.  She let them know what she expected of them and held them accountable but also treated them as adults capable of handling their own business.  She used subtle reminders when students did not follow procedures.  She must have heard someone say something inappropriate under their breath or to their neighbor as she walked by.  She did not get overly upset or berate the student.  Instead, she gave him a look of subtle disapproval and asked him, “What was that?”  When he said, “Oh, nothing,” she maintained eye contact with him and said, “I must have a ring in my ear, I thought you said something.”  She let the student know that she knew that he had misbehaved but without letting most of the other students know the student had done wrong.  The way in which Ms. H managed her classroom allowed for more learning time and less time correcting or supervising behavior.

Microteaching II comments

What did you think of my lesson?