Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
Jessica LinParticipant
I wrote in Chinese and I felt there were certain challenges. Although I was born in the US, I attended public school in China up until 3rd grade and while my Chinese is much stronger than many of my Chinese American peers, I still had a lot of limitations when doing the assignment because it required a great deal of academic vocabulary. I have always known that I had limited academic Chinese vocabulary because my Chinese education was only up until 3rd grade. Therefore, like many ELLs, I can speak and write simple sentences in Chinese, but struggle with formal academic writing because my exposure was very limited. Like Deonna, I also had to frequently consult google or a dictionary when I came across words I didn’t know in Chinese. It was very frustrating and made my writing process very slow, which I imagine many ELLs also feel. Sometimes I also felt that google/the dictionary didn’t have the right words or phrases I needed so I tended to simplify what I wanted to say or skip the whole idea altogether, which many ELLs also do.
Jessica LinParticipantI think the articles had a lot of great suggestions on how to better teach expository writing to students. Teaching writing is probably the most challenging part of literacy instruction. I think the first article correctly pointed out that there is often a focus on quantity over quality in writing. When I was student teaching a 3rd grade class that had many ELLs in Chinatown, I found that my mentor co-teachers were often more focused on having students complete a certain amount of pages “due to standards.” The effect was many students were repeating similar sentence structures and ideas just to “fill up space.” Furthermore, there were so many areas in their essays that needed work that often my mentor teachers were pretty much re-writing their essays in the “editing” portion of the process and then posting them outside of classrooms as “students’ finished work.” Many parents and administrators then incorrectly thought that students had mastered writing skills when in fact it was mostly teachers writing most of the essays for them. Over time, I can see how many students would continue to struggle in middle and high school.
The main challenge with teaching writing is that it takes A LOT of time and it is probably the most time consuming aspect of literacy instruction because there are so many steps and students need a lot of individual feedback. The lack of time is probably the largest challenge elementary and preschool teachers face because in many schools, they are also in charge of teaching other subjects (i.e. math, science, social studies, etc.), which greatly limits their time to plan and conference with students individually to help them improve. This lack of time also makes many schools and teachers prioritize formal writing over informal writing. In addition, students in school are exposed more to fiction readings than to nonfiction readings, but yet are expected to do more nonfiction writing. This is especially true for the lower grades. The nonfiction readings that students do get exposed to in the lower grades also tend to be fact driven (i.e. books on animals, weather, places, etc.), not opinion-driven. In short, students need to also read a wider variety of quality nonfiction before engaging in quality nonfiction writing.
For my early childhood students, I plan on exposing them to a wide range of nonfiction readings via read alouds and engaging them in conversation about various topics to help them develop their oral language. As mentioned throughout the sessions in this course, having strong oral language skills is the key foundation to writing well. Furthermore, I would not be afraid to expose them to sophisticated texts (i.e. newspapers, magazines, etc.) in read alouds so students can get used to hearing the language and engage them in conversations about those texts. I once did come across a first grader whose father read very advanced texts to him on a regular basis in the mornings (i.e. Harry Potter, adult books) before school. I found that he had a lot of wonderful ideas when it came to writing (although he was limited in mechanics and spelling). I think his father’s method of exposing him to sophisticated texts at a young age was very helpful in developing his thought processes and background knowledge on many subjects, which is an important precursor to writing.
In addition, I also plan to have my early childhood students engage in pre-writing skills such as working with playdough, drawing, and doing art projects. I think a wide range of art activities is very important in early childhood because it helps students develop many fine motor skills needed in writing. Furthermore, it will also help them regularly practice how to express their ideas, which will also be useful in writing since writing is also a form of expression.
Jessica LinParticipantMy first take away from this article is that teachers need a much stronger understanding of the language they’re teaching in order to teach it well to students. The challenge is that many teachers don’t necessarily have a strong background. This may stem from their own inadequate educational experiences growing up (i.e. k-12 schooling and teacher prep programs) and lack of time once they start work to continue learning in addition to few professional development opportunities offered in schools. This seems to be a structural issue and there needs to be more support for teachers to gain a stronger understanding of the language their teaching so they can better support their students.
My second take away from the article is that balanced literacy is very multifaceted and needs have a systematic approach. In my experience working in a wide range of grade levels and different schools, I’ve found that the literacy instruction across grade levels is not very systematic, which is a significant problem. Sometimes the school does not provide a detailed literacy curriculum and other times teachers struggle with how to teach the curriculum properly.
My third take away from the article is that vocabulary is very important for young learners and drives much of their reading comprehension. This again highlights why we have to do a lot of vocabulary work in early childhood, which gives them a strong foundation for reading comprehension later on.
This article was informative and discussed literacy instruction very in-depth. Going forward, I will definitely make an effort to create a more balanced approach with young learners.
Jessica LinParticipantIn general, I don’t think there’s much of a focus on explicit syntax instruction for early chidhood. Again, I think for this age group, it’ll be more about modeling conjunctions in oral language so students get exposure to how they’re used and they can eventually internalize it later on. For elementary students, I think focusing on how conjunctions are used would be helpful and can help them better understand texts. When I previously taught conjunctions in 1st and 3rd grades, it was mostly for writing. The curriculum didn’t mention teaching conjunctions much in reading so I did not think much about it. For my young students, I will continue to orally model conjunctions to connect ideas and help students orally use conjunctions to better clearly express their ideas.
Jessica LinParticipantI think this session is mostly geared towards elementary students although it does provide me with ideas on how to start building a strong foundation for syntax with young learners. I liked how Eberhardt and Schleppegrell’s articles mentioned specific strategies you can use with students to incorporate syntax instruction with content. I knew that grammar was important for writing, but hadn’t really thought about how grammar would help with comprehension. I think the idea of function-based instruction is very important because the goal is for students to understand the content of what they’re reading. Instruction on syntax and vocabulary are all part of supporting that larger goal. I think a lot of syntax instruction is very decontextualized and dry because many teachers, including myself, grew up with that type of instruction. When I was in school, grammar instruction was mostly worksheets with lists of sentences. We never did any grammar work with books and teachers never made it clear to us that grammar was connected with comprehension. I really liked how Prof. Heidrick’s close reading lesson connected grammar instruction with comprehension and it was very clear that highlighting certain syntax concepts would better support the students in their comprehension of the text and ultimately learn more about bullfrogs.
I think with my young learners, modeling via oral language will be the primary foundation for syntax instruction. I will definitely make an effort to continue modeling to students so they get used to how words are used in sentences. I know that we’re encouraged to frequently engage students in conversation in centers and sometimes young students have difficulty presenting their ideas coherently so we are encouraged to rephrase their sentences. For example, I once had a student try to tell me about his trains and how they were fast (i.e. “This train is fast. This train is fast. This train is fast”). So I rephrased his ideas as “This train is the fastest. This train is faster. This train is faster than that train.” After that, he started using comparatives more to describe his trains. I think I should continue doing this type of instruction more with students both in centers and with read alouds.
Jessica LinParticipantMy students would definitely fall under level 1. With Pre-k students towards the end of the year, I do work with them on identifying vowels and consonants and maybe some blends and CVCs for the more advanced students. I’m fairly confident with my abilities to teach simple phonics at this level. I think one of the challenges I have is finding enough time to work with students since I’m an itinerant teacher and depending on my cases, some of the students only get a couple hours a week of instruction from me and I have to work with them on a wide range of other skills with them depending on their IEP. Also, I have found that ALL students including those labeled as having speech disabilities benefit from phonics instruction and spelling and need additional support at school and from parents. I’ve found that the gen ed teachers at the younger levels sometimes are very quick to judge students with speech/learning disabilities and feel that 1:1 instruction is the only way for them to learn effectively even though in many cases, had the gen ed teachers done more explicit whole group or small group instruction with engaging activities, students with disabilities could engage and learn effectively as well. I guess it’d be nice have some suggestions on how to collaborate with gen ed teachers more on how to make their instruction more inclusive.
Jessica LinParticipantMy students don’t really spell much since they are very young, but I do work with them on letter sounds and associating them with common everyday words. I do believe explicitly teaching phonics and spelling is very important. I taught a little bit of 1st grade in the past using word study. Providing explicit spelling instruction did make a difference in students’ reading and writing abilities. I think Moates’ article gave a good overview about how English spelling and how it came to be. If I were to teach older students in the future, I would definitely incorporate more background and history regarding the English language to help students understand these words and why they are spelled the way they are. I’d appreciate recommendations for books about the history and background of English language (I wonder if there are any that I could use with elementary school students).
The spelling videos were informative and I agreed with the teachers that it’s important to do small group instruction for students when it comes to spelling. It’s important to individualize the instruction and group students accordingly to make the spelling instruction more effective.
Jessica LinParticipantMy current students are ages 3-5 years old so generally I’m working with them on a lot of pre-reading skills and sounds associated with letters. That being said, in the past, I did teach a phonics curriculum in China to students that ranged from as young as 2 years old up to 5th grade. With explicit instruction on phonics, students as young as pre-k and kindergarten could do blends and CVCs even though English was not their native language. Many students up till 2nd grade enjoyed the phonics, but a lot of teachers, including myself, did struggle with older students beginning in 3rd grade. I think the issue was the curriculum only focused on decoding words and there wasn’t too many other areas of literacy engagement so it wasn’t very balanced as a curriculum. Students became less engaged because it was just about decoding words without meaningful context. Overall, I agree with the lady in the podcast about explicit phonics instruction and that it is a very important piece of learning to read and that if it were taught well in the earlier grades, it would make a huge difference for a lot of students later on. It’s interesting that she brought up how a lot of teacher preparation programs don’t really teach how to teach literacy well. I personally found that the teaching prep program I graduated from also did not go over teaching literacy in depth (or as much as I thought it should have) and certainly did not cover much on teaching phonics.
Jessica LinParticipantLike Deonna, I also had significant difficulty understanding the text, but I did find going over the keywords ahead of time somewhat helpful because it allowed me to figure out some parts of the text and what it was perhaps generally referring to. What I found interesting was that as I was going over the text after listening to Ingrid’s reading, I could hear her voice as I was reading it silently and it continued to be the case when I revisited the text several days later. I think having a fluent reader model the language can be very powerful and I will definitely try to continue doing that with my students.
Jessica LinParticipantI personally found Principles 2 and 3 to be the most interesting because I personally do not see morphology along with roots/prefixes/suffixes being taught extensively in early childhood and I think that it can be taught to younger students more so they have a stronger foundation to learn vocabulary going forward. I think there is a misconception that since students in early childhood cannot read, they cannot really learn about word parts. However, for students around 4 years old and older, I think it is possible to introduce them to common roots/prefixes/suffixes even if they do not read yet. Most students have strong oral language by that age and it’s possible to teach them roots and other simple word parts orally. I have done some of it myself in the past with young students so it’s definitely possible. For example, I have taught young students around 4 years old the prefix “re” and used common words like “repeat”, “rewind”, “return”, etc. to have them orally identify the prefix and figure out that it means “again/back.” However, I wish I had more time to do those types of lessons more systematically and that schools encouraged it more.
Jessica LinParticipantI currently use many of Neuman and Wright’s principles of vocabulary instruction with my students who are ages 3-5 years old. When doing read alouds, I often do go over key words ahead of time and during texts with students (principle 1). I think it will be beneficial to review those words again at the end of texts to reinforce definitions and I will make more of an effort to do that going forward. For many early childhood classrooms, units are generally thematic in nature (i.e. September is about School/Routines, October is about Fall, November is about Food, etc.) so it naturally lends well to principle 3 where many vocabulary are linked to the thematic unit being taught. Furthermore, I use centers, read alouds, and various activities related to the theme to highlight key vocabulary, which is related to principle 2. For example, if we’re learning about Fall, I will highlight key words such as “leaves,””tree,” “root”,”stem”, “bark”, “deciduous”, “evergreen”, etc. For Principle 4, we’re encouraged to frequently have conversations with students while they’re in centers about the unit being studied and I often try to model how to use the key vocabulary with students (ex. in art center, I can make leaves with students and verbally go over different parts of the leaf, or we can go out on walks to study trees and leaves, etc.). For ELLs, I have frequently used visuals as often as I can. When working with students from Chinese-speaking families, I try my best to also send home newsletters to parents highlighting the unit we’re doing for the month and key concepts and vocabulary to go over with their children at home in both Chinese and English. That way, they can help reinforce concepts and vocabulary in students’ native languages. For early childhood students, schools highly encourage teachers to work with parents and collaborate with them to reinforce concepts taught in school.
Jessica LinParticipantI found the oral German lesson very interesting. I found that the visuals (pictures and hand gestures) along with the frequent repetition of key words to be very helpful. I also noticed that Prof. Heidrick used very simple language, which was also helpful. The frequent repetition of key words and simplified sentences allowed me to build my understanding of the content gradually. That being said, I found that I understood the oral lesson much better than the written text and I can definitely see how oral language is a key foundation for ELLs to access information. While I was able to understand some words in the text, I found it was still very difficult to figure out what most of the article was about and it highlighted why having an instructor scaffold the information through an oral lesson is very useful. Both the oral lesson and text took a lot of mental effort and especially with the text, I found myself having difficulty staying focused and caught myself checking out midway through because it was hard to understand, which I’m sure many students also experience.
Since I’m working with very young children who do not read much yet, instruction is through a lot of play and the formal lessons that do happen are in oral form. There is definitely a lot of opportunities for me to engage students using oral language. Genishi’s article pointed the importance of frequent modeling and not over correcting the child too much, which sometimes many teachers and myself struggle with. I think I will try highlighting key words and using frequent repetition of those words to help students build a stronger vocabulary. Furthermore, Cardenas-Hagan’s article pointed out that many languages have similarities in how words sound so I can use that strategy as well to help solidify their vocabulary. Since I speak Mandarin as well, I can definitely find common sounds and words between Mandarin and English to link together for students to learn.
Jessica LinParticipantHi everyone! My name is Jessica and I currently work as a special educator and travel to a wide range of schools to service 3-5 year olds who have IEPs in NYC (aka SEIT). I previously also worked as a Lead Teacher and Director for a school that had a large Chinese population. I really enjoy working with young learners and personally find this age group to be very important. Many of these students are going to school for the first time where their foundational schooling experiences are formed and it can be extra challenging for ELLs and their families. For example, many young ELLs I’ve encountered often struggle with communication and culture shock being in school for the first time and develop behavior problems in school. Teachers often refer them to special education because they don’t have strategies to work with them or not aware of the linguistic and cultural challenges they face in school. In addition, for young ELLs with disabilities, the special education system in NYC is very difficult to navigate and it is very challenging for the families to get the services their children need in a timely manner. Furthermore, some families come from cultures that are not very knowledgeable about special education. They can be very resistant to having their child get services and are not aware of how early intervention can greatly help their children.
I decided to take this course for CTLE credits to maintain my certification and also learn more strategies working with ELLs since my students are very diverse. I’m really hoping to learn positive strategies to help young ELLs improve their acquisition of English while also affirming their own cultural backgrounds.
-
AuthorPosts