Brown Ch. 23 & 24 and Shohamy

Under ethical issues in Brown’s chapter 23 there is a quote by Shohamy which states “texts represent a social technology deeply embedded in education, government, and business; as such they provide the mechanism for enforcing power and control. Tests are most powerful as they are often the single indicators for determining the future of individuals.”

That quote alone depicts something that makes me so nervous. In regular English classes I struggle with creating test questions that are clear and concise, and can only be interpreted one way for the students. Tests are something so important to the future of my students, so being that I lack skills in creating meaningful tests is something I need to focus on to improve as a teacher. Thinking about creating a test for second language learners, most of which are all at different proficiency levels and whom all have different preexisting knowledge to help them interpret what is being asked of them, truly scares me.  I know that for this skill much experience is needed, but I often wonder how to create the most effective and appropriate test questions for second language learners, and which form of testing works best.

Research Progress Report

So far for my research paper I have looked into how to give a student the most effective written feedback so that they will help foster growth, progress, and confidence in our student writers.  I believe that I truly understand how to respond most effectively for L1 students, so I am beginning to take a closer look into how to respond to L2 students in order to give them the best feedback as I can.  I have also begun looking into genre-based approach like you have suggested, and began looking into Dana Ferris.

My overall research question is going to be something along the lines of whether teacher response and feedback for L2 student writers should be much like the response and feedback teachers should give L1 students, or if we need to approach L2 student writers completely differently.

Three articles that I have looked at are:

Gocsik, Karen. “Diagnosing and Responding to Student Writing.” Dartmouth Writing Program. Dartmouth College, 18 Dec. 2007. Web. 9 Sept. 2012.

This article shows teachers how to be effective responders and gives a variety of strategies to think about and implement when responding to student writing. She helps the teachers to get to know the student through writing and take who the student is into consideration upon reading the drafts of their work.

Greenhalgh, Anne M. “Voices in Response: A Postmodern Reading of Teacher Response.” College Composition and Communication 43.3 (1992): 401-410. Print.

This article discusses the task of advising students about their work-in-progress, and how a teacher must make it possible for a student to take control of their own writing, be a responsive reader, and yet avoid appropriating the draft by identifying and solving writing problems. This article emphasizes the role of the teacher as a reader and not an evaluator. This piece is different from any of the other articles that I found because it uses voice as a tool to understand teacher response.

Sullivan, Patrick. “Responding to Student Writing: The Consequences of Some Common Remarks.” English Journal 75.2 (1986): 51-53. Print.

The beginning portion of this article uses a commonly spoken quote “your ideas are good but…” as a set up for teachers to then speak their own thoughts about the students writing.  This article discusses how teachers console poor writers or how teachers immediately try to assist students in developing ideas and critical thinking. Furthermore, this article talks about how teachers set students up for a false sense of achievement, and make them less willing to accept criticism. Sullivan demonstrates how to praise ideas, and how to efficiently give students the teacher response they need by demonstrating exactly what they need to work on individually. The main point of this article is to help teachers learn how to critique student writing and how to offer instruction and suggestions for improvement by encouraging them to improve, and guiding them to how without developing students’ ideas for them.

Brown Ch. 9-11 and Kumar Ch. 13

When looking at the chapter “Mentoring Teacher Acts” in the Kumar textbook all I could think about was my meeting with the two cooperating teachers I will be student teaching for next semester. When Kumar says “these partners, by virtue of their prior experience and exposure, bring with them their own perceptions and prescriptions about what constitutes learning outcomes. Therefore, one and the same classroom event can be, and in fact is often, interpreted differently by different participants” (290). One of the first things that the two teachers I met with said to me at our meeting was “we each teach very differently; we have different teaching philosophies and you will more than likely be getting conflicting advice from the two of us.” Thinking about this, I believe this is one of the most intimidating factors when it comes to student teaching. Which teacher do I listen to? Which perspective do I follow when it comes to these classroom events? Should I listen to my mentors, or figure out different situations for myself?

Brown Ch. 26 and Kumar Ch. 11& 12

I find chapter eleven of Kumar to be extremely important when working with students who have English as their second language. I feel that it is tremendously important to make all the students feel comfortable and special, especially when it comes to sharing their own cultures with the class. Ensuring social relevance is something students definitely need in order to develop and succeed as learners. Something Kumar draws attention to is the use of appropriate teaching materials. I too think that this makes a huge difference when trying to teach students who speak English as a second language. It is so important that by your teaching materials you can incorporate specific student cultures, or do some type of activity where students can share a piece of their culture and make relevant the material they are learning in class. By giving students this opportunity it helps them to feel comfortable, connected, and like their cultures each matter; sharing students’ cultures makes them feel proud of where they came from and by making connections can help materials easier to understand. 

Brown Ch. 17 and Kumar Ch. 9 & 10

In chapter nine of Kumar there is a quote that says “successful language communication is a manner of realities coming together that make up linguistic, extralinguistic, situational, and extrasituational contexts…using language for effective communication integrates contextual factors, and, therefore, teaching it for effective learning must invoke contextualization of linguistic input” (213). I think one of the best ways to tie all of these contexts together and make students recognize context as well as integrate language skills like chapter ten depicts is metacognition.  I think the most beneficial way to teach language skills and to see these skills across different contexts is to get students to think about their own thinking and recognize what they are doing in their thinking to make sense of the language communication they are doing. It is important to provide students with a context but to also take it one step further and have them think about the context or contexts in which we are asking them to think. I feel that having students think about their own thinking and the way that they contextualize their communication and their language skills will give them a true understanding of language and a great foundation to build upon. 

Brown Ch. 22 and Kumar Ch. 7 & 8

In chapter seven of Kumar the entire first paragraph was so captivating to me especially because I have read one much like it, but with even bolder statements.

In the article “Warriors with Words: Toward a Post- Columbine Writing Curriculum” by G. Lynn Nelson, Nelson says “language is both the source of much violence in our society—and its potential cure” which reminds me much of the first paragraph in Kumar’s chapter, and how fostering students awareness of the role played by language is so important (42). Rhetoric and the power of speech is an incredible tool and one students should both recognize and understand.

Another reason I think language awareness is so important in a more specific sense comes down to language awareness in writing. A huge part of writing is voice and finding our own identity—identity especially being an element that is so important to L2 learners. In Nelson’s article she says “deny me my stories, as the modern dominant culture does, and I will eventually turn to the language of violence,” and although I question the validity of that statement, it also makes me nervous to think about my L2 learners since writing and understanding language is already a struggle for them (42).  Is this why motivation is sometimes low for learners? Do they feel denied of their stories and identity? If L1 students are acting out because of this wont the effects of this on L2 students be even worse because they struggle in writing?

Writing makes both the writer and the story meaningful. Just as we want our students to be aware of language, we also want our students to be aware of their own language as much as we are aware of their language. After all, language is the awareness of it is power.

Brown Ch. 20 & 21 and Myth #5: Students Must Learn to Correct all their Writing Errors

The Ferris article was one that I could relate to very closely being that I am an English teacher. As an English teacher I am constantly teaching, reading, and responding to student writing. Throughout my experience I found that when I place the biggest emphasis on correcting student writing often times it does not help to better the student writer.  Upon teaching writing and giving students feedback to writing it is very important to actually teach. I love that in the Ferris article one of the main points in the what can we do section is to “teach students to take the time to write,” which seems like a no-brainer.  Writing is not a simple lesson—writing is a process, and it is important for our students to see that. It is not all about correcting so that students’ writing is 100% accurate, but instead it is about progressing as a writer holistically so that a student can achieve accuracy in the big picture. Knit picking each error will not help students develop any confidence as a writer, or foster autonomy in student writing which should be a goal any writing teacher has for her students.  It is important for a teacher to praise the student for their writing and nurture ideas before going about the writing in a “what’s wrong with this paper” type manner; a student must be comfortable and confidence enough to receive corrective type criticisms to their writing.

Brown Ch. 18

Upon reading this chapter of Brown on teaching listening, there were many aspects and elements of teaching listening that I have never thought about—I guess to be honest, I have never really thought about teaching listening at all; listening just seems like a natural concept like breathing—everyone knows how to listen right? This chapter really made me think about listening from the learning perspective instead of what comes natural.  A part of the chapter that really made me think was what teachers should consider about listening comprehension, and then it listed things like: what are listeners doing when they listen, what factors affect good listening, what are the characteristics of “real-life” listening, what are some principles for designing listening techniques, how can listening techniques be interactive, what are some common techniques for teaching listening, etc. These were all great and important questions to think about, and ones that will help me to better understand my students and their individual needs.

Brown Chapters 6, 7, & 8 & Kumar Chapter 6

Upon reading chapter eight of Brown one thing that popped out to me was when authors stated how well over one-half of the one billion English speakers of the world learned English as a second language, and how most English language teachers across the globe are nonnative English speakers. This fact really shocked me-- not because I don't believe it, but just because I have never thought about this, nor have I heard about it. I remember in one of the first days of class we posed questions about if we should we able to teach students when we have no background in their native language. Also, the book asks the question of how important is it that a teacher of a language be a native speaker of the language instead of a nonnative speaker. I find it so interesting that the book demonstrated how nonnative speakers offer as many or even more advantages to students, and that no-- native speaking teachers are not always best for students to learn from. Being that I am an English teacher, and I originally would have said that yes, it is important that a teacher be a native speaker of the language to teacher students, now I am not so sure. I have never thought about the different legitimate and acceptable English dialects that nonnative speakers take on, nor any of the other difference between NEST and NNEST that can be seen as advantages when it comes to teaching language. This is very interesting and has given me much to think about.

Brown Chapters 4 & 16 & Kumar Chapter 3

Something while reading Kumar chapter three that I was so interested in, and really questioned was when he says, “One crucial way to ensure the accomplishment of lessons is for the teacher to show a willingness to utilize learning opportunities created by the learner, even if the learner talk, from the teacher’s point of view, is not highly relevant to the task at hand” (54). I do not really understand this. I completely understand the importance of learning opportunities that are made by the learner, and the importance of interaction, but should we always continue to let our students take advantage of these opportunities time after time when it takes us off task? I know that it is so important to not be a prisoner of my agenda, and it is important to make changes as class progresses for it to be most meaningful and effective, but what if we cannot let learners take advantage of these learning opportunities and bring it back full circle to relate to class? When do we stop taking advantage of these learner created opportunities to focus on the curriculum? Do we?  The textbook tells us that learning opportunities in the classroom are most effective when teachers and learners are engaged in a joint exploration of learning and teaching and I agree with this; I just do not know how to ensure that my students are learning what the curriculum and standards asks me to teach if many of our learner created discussions are not relevant to our task. 

Potential Cultural Resistance to Pedagogical Imports by Guangwei Hu

Task-based Instruction by Peter Skehan

The End of CLT: A Context Approach to Language Teacher by Stephen Bax

Upon reading the articles for class I could not stop thinking about the way I go about teaching both literature and writing to my students, and how much it is like the Context Approach instead of the CLT.

One aspect I loved about the Skehan article was that he brings up interaction and how “interaction, in itself, is not enough, and insinuation of a focus on form into interaction is very vital” (2). This reminds me so much of how I would go about teaching writing. In the teaching of writing both form and interaction with peers is so important to help a writer progress. Both form and interaction as well help the student to focus on meaning and to convey information to one another which is another aspect Skehan discusses. Like the article says feedback arises when meaning is problematic—this cannot be truer when it comes to reading students papers and making comments. My comments on students’ drafts are usually comprised of questions I have for them. Also I love that he brings up the issue of planning. Planning is another huge aspect of writing and the teaching of writing. Some of our best ideas and best writing comes from the prewriting or planning stage.

Looking at the Stephen Bax article though, when he talks about the differences between the CLT and the Context Apporach this is where our readings really grabbed the attention of my inner English teacher. The main components of the Context Approach as discussed by Bax are:

o   Consider the whole

o   Methodology is just one factor in language learning

o   Other factors may be more important

o   Other methods and approached may work

I feel like this is the mindset of English teachers. As an English teacher I am constantly considering the whole and the big picture. I look at things much more subjectively than teachers in other content areas.  These articles and the Context Approach really made sense to me and I could definitely see the issues with CLT.

Kumar Ch. 2, Brown Ch.3 & TESOL Methods

I love the way that our readings really focused on the word method and its complexity; like William Mackey states the word method really “means so little and so much,” or how our text says “the term method is a label without substance” (Kumaravivelu, 23 & 29). I can really agree with these two statements.  Sometimes when thinking of the word method not everything that goes into its meaning is thought about. For example our text reminds us that method does not refer to what teachers actually do in the classroom, but established methods by experts, and what appears to be a new method is more so an old method with new elements.

Something I have an issue with however, is how our text says that language learning is a linear process when speaking about language-centered methods. I think that much like writing, language learning is not a linear process. I feel like there is a lot of going back and forth with language learning, and in order to truly understand a new language our minds must be flexible. I like the section about learner-centered methods much more and can see how they work when trying to teach a learner another language. I feel like the focus of learner-centered methods really include what is important like being grammatically accurate and communicatively fluent.

Moving forward though, I like the idea of postmethod pedagogy and the use of particularity, practicality, and possibility. I feel like this model brings everything full circle and shows how the whole is greater than the sum of its parts. In language learning especially many components are interweaved with one another and must interact with one another in order to learn a new language efficiently. 

Kumar Ch.1

When reading one quote right from the start jumped out to me; it was the quote on page seven about the role of the teacher that said, “the teacher has been variously referred to as an artist and an architect; a scientist and a psychologist; a manager and a mentor; a controller and a counselor; a sage on the stage; a guide on the side; and more.” In my first teaching class ever at ISU, on the first day, my teacher began class saying that a teacher wears many different hats; meaning a teacher can be and is all of the various things mentioned in the above quote. A teacher’s role can never be distinctly defined; chances are it is always changing day to day since a teacher never knows what to expect, or what will happen. Like the chapter states, teachers can be seen as technicians focused on content knowledge, fact and rules; teachers can be reflective practitioners who are context-sensitive, and whose actions are grounded in intellectual thought, or they can be seen as transformative intellectuals where pedagogy is embedded in relations of power and dominance to create and sustain social inequalities. The point is teachers can be and are everything our text talks about; the proper phrase being having “relative tendencies, with teachers leaning toward one or the other at different moments” (17).  A teacher’s role is always changing to meet the changing classroom dynamic and needs of all the diverse learners. 

Prabu, “There is No Best Method” & Brown Ch. 1&2

When looking through the chapters in our textbook by Brown, especially chapter two, a common theme I found was how in almost all of the methods talked about throughout the chapter they all value comfort, relaxation, listening, and support.  When reading through Prabu’s piece then on there being no best method I could not help but think that comfort, relaxation, listening and support were all parts of a method that carries onto other methods like Prabu discussed.  Before even reading the piece, just from all the different classes that I have already taken, I knew the reason there is no best method is because there cannot be one single method for everyone or every context.  To me the best method, if there has to be one, is a mixture of all methods that include such things as comfort, relaxation, listening, and support, but then include what works within the context you are teaching. Everything in our learning differs depending on the person and the content. When in the article Prabu says “because it all depends,” it is true; it really does depend on a number of different factors (162).  First off, one of the main reasons I myself believe that one best method cannot be determined is because all the definitions, even ones as simple as motivation or environment, etc. all have very ambiguous meanings to different people depending on their context and content. There are numerous shades and layers to each term; our knowledge on how to define these terms is uncertain; again it all depends.  This is the reason so many different methods are constantly surfacing, teachers must use what works for us for each of our different contexts and what makes sense to us based on our definitions and what we know.

There is some argument on there being truth to every method, but how do we know what part of the method is the truth? Again, it all comes down to the teacher, students, and what is being taught. What works for one may not work for another. To me, I think each teacher just needs to worry about one’ own theory; that is what is most important for both teachers and their diverse learners and learning situations. If we are trying to make teaching not mechanical and have teachers instead be truly involved and engaged, they need to create theories that work for them.

At one point in our reading it says, “this implies that, for any single teaching context, there is in fact a method that is best and, further, we are able to determine what it is” (163). My question is after reading and using my prior knowledge and experience, why do we need to determine only one best method? And furthermore, why can’t we deem the one best method a mixture of methods that best work within each specific teachers content and context in which they teach?

Intro Posting

I am an English Education major. I wish to teach in a context much like my own high school. I am from a suburb of Chicago which is a fairly large town. My high school was pretty big; my graduating class had about seven hundred students in it.  I would love to teach in a high school about this size. I am not sure what schooling is like in a small school environment, or one that is too large. I feel, for me, that my high school was the perfect size. It was small enough to feel comfortable, yet big enough to feel like you have more freedom than when in a small school where everyone knows each other. My high school had a great social environment too.  I feel like we were very involved with everything that was going on in the school. If the football players were having a great season we would have weekly pep rallies celebrating their success. If even a small club had something great happen for them we would celebrate. My high school was so spirited and close knit. This is the kind of high school I wish to teach in in the future.  I feel economically we were well off, but not extremely wealthy like some of the other high schools around us. We had everything we needed, and the budget to get the things that we didn’t. I wish for it to be that way for me in the high school I teach at.  In addition, my high school was very culturally diverse, and I loved it. There were students with very various backgrounds and ethnicities. I feel this truly enriched our learning because we learned to work with different learners as well as students with different backgrounds and stories to share. I am comfortable in a culturally diverse environment and would really enjoy teaching in one as well.

As an educator some goals that I have are to really make an impression on my students and their lives. I want them to think of my class as somewhere safe and comfortable. Somewhere where they can come at any time and feel like they belong, and for my classroom to be a place students enjoy.  I want them to find me as a teacher they can trust, talk to, and be supported by. Another goal I have is to be positive always and constantly encourage my students. I want to provide them with an environment they can truly flourish and grow in. Throughout this course I hope to gain a better understanding of my diverse learners and the theories and practices I need in order to teach them best.