Category: Uncategorized

The section in chapter four titled “Interpretation in Language Arts” prompted me to consider the ways in which I will approach “interpretation” in my teaching, as it is such a major component to any English literature class. Zwiers reminds us that “[s]tudents are still apprentices in the types of thinking needed to read between the lines and interpret deeper meanings. We must be creative at scaffolding the complexity that has now become automatic to us” (72). After spending so many post-secondary years in English and theatre classes, I need to be constantly aware of my “interpretive” discourse that has become a second nature to me, recognizing that my students are in the early stages of developing this form of dialogue as well as understanding all of the jargon that can be used to interpret.

I could appreciate the text’s example of scaffolding through a conversation in which the teacher discusses interpreting the story with a student (72, 73). I find that interpreting and textual analysis through discussions such as this one are tremendously helpful to the learning process. When teachers ask questions to break down the “hidden” meanings in a text it enables the students to come up with the answers themselves rather than the teacher providing the answers. Also, it models the thinking process for the students, so that they will eventually be able to ask the critical questions themselves when trying to interpret meaning from a text. This method is also directly relatable to interpreting in a drama class, as the teacher will often prompt students with a variety of questions so that they can interpret certain characters or derive meaning from the scene they are rehearsing.

Sara Martens

Now that I am no longer working everyday after class, I have regained my sanity  and have some time to go back and reflect on various topics we have gone through as a class.

I would first like to discuss about chapters 1 and 2 about building academic language together with the group presentation on those chapters. Through my experience as a tutor and coach, I love to teach through colloquialisms and metaphors since it’s easier to retain less abstract information so I wasn’t too sure where I stood with my opinion on this chapter. I think a nice mix of both is good; initially introduce concepts using as few new academic words as possible, then once the students are familiar, formalize the concepts by using academic language and teach the meanings of new ‘bricks’. I guess in a metaphorical sense, I like to cover my bricks with mortar before I assemble my walls. Maybe I’m still slightly insane.

Regarding the presentation, I really enjoyed the example of teacher paraphrasing what the student says, as this connects a colloquial word (what the student said) with academic language (what the teacher paraphrases). I also enjoyed the concept of the in-class exercise, as it really demonstrates how important mortar is when instructing and teaching. Unfortunately, I got paired up first with a home-ec teacher whose parents were both math teachers, and I love to cook. So when I was instructed to draw a sieve, santoku knife, mortar and pestle, and spring-form pan (which I knew but my partner didn’t!), these were all items with which I had experience. And needless to say, my partner’s mathematical background was strong enough that she didn’t need much from me to solve the equation; thus we were both already fairly proficient in the ‘bricks’ of each other’s disciplines. But the second time around, when we were allowed to do anything, it was still easier to communicate!

-Linh

The perspective of Fang and Schleppegrell (2010), who point out to the changes in literacy demands imposed by secondary schooling, can be directly linked with Chapter 2 of Zwiers’s book. The reason for this connection is that both works view the challenges that secondary students face as a result of their immersion into academic language, which is qualitatively distinct from the previous language foundations they had. This immersion must not be abrupt, because academic language requires the development of new capacities from students in a process that should be stimulated and directed by teachers. In light of this, the Functional Language Analysis can be a valuable approach to help teachers outline their methodology to guide students in becoming literate in this level of language. Nonetheless, I personally found such a strategy rather intricate and challenging to be fully comprehended in a few pages. Even though the article is very well-written and presents a compelling introduction to the Functional Language Analysis, it certainly condensates many aspects of the approach, and therefore incites further research on the matter for educators who want to use it.

Vitor Giberti

The acquiring of vocabulary comes quite naturally to many people. For these people it can be very difficult to remember the particular moments that solidified ones knowledge and “ownership” of a new vocabulary word.  In fact, it is hard to remember how or when we learned most words at all!

I found this article* helpful because it broke down the learning of vocabulary into its smallest parts. After reading this, I can better identify the ways in which I acquired vocabulary and this helps me to gain insight on the experiences that my students may have.

I learned a great deal of vocabulary through my reading, as I loved to read in my spare time (“incidental word learning through reading”)*. I also learned much of my most sophisticated vocabulary from conversing with my parents and older sister (“oral language experiences at home”)*. They used more complex words and I incidentally and incrementally formed understanding and eventually took ownership of this vocabulary for myself. I also loved watching television shows that showcased lawyers, as well political debates and I loved anything that involved people with British accents (usually in the form of Public Broadcasting programs). This viewing exposed me to many terms and that were academic and were in contextual settings. I had the added resource of my parents (watching with me) to ask questions about vocabulary that I could not quite grasp. My parents also taught me a number of skills to help me decipher vocabulary for myself. They showed how to find the “root” word and also how to use contextual clues to interpret meaning. I also had regular access to the internet and attended thriving public schools, where my teachers used many methods to introduce us to words, from spelling tests to reading novels out loud as a class.

Looking back, I realize that I grew up with the opposite experience of “word poverty”*. I had a wealth of words. I remember sometimes being insulted by peers because I used too many “big words” and I was always surprised by their accusation, as I had acquired them incrementally and incidentally in my word wealthy life, and was shocked that they could not understand me. It didn’t occur to me at the time that I was incredibly privileged to be in this kind of vocabulary rich environment. Now as I think about my current and future students, I wonder what kind of language environments they are being exposed to outside of school and how I can use my influence to create the kind of environments that will help them to succeed.

In some ways, the study of theatre makes the language “playing field” a bit more even. This is because many of the theatrical terms are taken from languages from all over the world. For instance, Bertolt Brecht’s word “Verfremdungseffekt ” is of German origins and in clowning (commedia dell’arte) much of the language comes from Italy, such as a comedic “lazzi”. These terms will be a challenge for mainstream English speakers as well as ELLs and this may help to bridge the gap between their language learning experiences and make ELLs more comfortable as they see their English speaking counterparts having to work from a place of less privilege. However, this stresses the importance of the skills around teaching vocabulary for theater teachers, as we will sometimes be working with much less commonly known terms.

*Lehr, Osbourne & Heibert. A Focus on Vocabulary.http://vineproject.ucsc.edu/resources/A%20Focus%20on%20Vocabulary%20PREL.pdf

Melanie Reich

Class discussions and assigned readings have collectively highlighted the increased difficulty that English Language Learners encounter compared to their peers. In addition to  having to master the vernacular language in order to understand, be understood, and be accepted into social dynamics, ELLs must also incorporate academic language as used in the classroom.

Each subject area either introduces new vocabulary, offers alternative definitions and connotations to familiar language, or both. The shear amount of information that students are expected to retain can be overwhelming and discouraging. As an English learner I can be challenged and feel intimidated by unfamiliar fields. The examples and scaffolding described in the text struck me with the idea that subject specific classroom environments should then try to create a “practice arena” for students instead of a delivery system. Exposing students to language, its use, and encouraging students to engage and not be afraid to manipulate the terms creates a safer space. Combine this with being as aware as possible of the limitations that the accepted language of our academic fields present can optimize the goal of having students feel accepted into the subject’s community. Common transition words, expressions, attached significance to the weight, and use of a word need to be articulated and explained. The use of such terms can then be encouraged and used as often as it remains relevant. Language is like a muscle as it can only become stronger and more developed through use and exercise.

Besides familiarity with a language, the types of thought that exist for different cultures and families must be taken into consideration. Being Canadian, I often take for granted how society has shaped my values, flexibility to express myself, and my thought processes developed through parental influence and my education experience. How I choose to explore material, question information, and challenge my surroundings, whether it be academic sources, my peers, teachers, parents or role models, have been intrinsically shaped by the society and culture by which I have been surrounded. As a teacher, if I continuously bring these ideals and expectations into my classroom, then there are may diverse students that may struggle with this type of encouraged critical or creative thinking as it has yet to have been introduced within their own family and cultural circles, and vice versa.

Being consciousness of the level and type of language chosen within a classroom setting, the abstract themes and modes of thinking we choose to encourage require equal amounts of consideration. Being open minded and flexible are key features to lesson structures. Without these qualities, students that lie outside the traditional societal framework, linguistically or by customs, can be left behind unintentionally. Now, when I am faced with having to discuss the concepts of function, rational, prime, and integer in math classrooms, I must specifically acknowledge all of the extra baggage that is tied to each of these terms. All of the reflection, scaffolding, and self-expression that has been introduced and continuously revisited over the last month are going to become essential tools.

Vocabulary can be a huge part of ELLs’ struggles in the classroom, especially since most subject areas have highly specialized terminology specific to that field. In English, one of my teachables, ELLs have to deal with many brick terms that pertain to both language and literature. Because of this divide, it is almost like there can be two registers used in English, and these students may have a hard time distinguishing which register to use. For instance, they may be more familiar with terms like noun, verb, clause, and paragraph, but become confused and even disengaged when they find out their English class is studying alliteration, assonance, personification, and meter in poetry. To make matters more difficult, often English teachers will throw in grammar lessons between larger literature units. This means ELLs must quickly learn to switch registers back and forth.

Another interesting point about English relates to this week’s article by Lehr et al. They make note that many vocabulary words actually mean different things depending on the subject. They give the example of the word “volume,” which refers to a book or set of books in English class, but loudness in Music, and an amount of space in Science. We can actually take this example one step further in the sense that certain words have multiple relevant definitions within the same subject. For instance, the term “genre” has at least two uses in English. Genre can refer to the form of text, such as novel, short story, play, or poetry. Yet, genre can also be used to classify texts based on content, such as comedy, tragedy, dystopian, etc. Hence, as teachers we must be aware of not only how our subject’s vocabulary can be used in other subject areas to mean different things, but also how some words can have more than one definition within our own field.

Jessica L.

Initially, I found this article very dry. I also found it a little disheartening as it seemed to only point out problems and no solutions. Don’t use big words your students won’t understand, but don’t use easy words so your students aren’t challenged! I had to really think about practical examples before I saw how it could really be helpful in a classroom. Overall it reinforces the general themes we’ve been covering in this and other classes and makes some key points:

1. Vocabulary is key to comprehension – If you’re students can’t understand the words, the won’t understand the ideas.
2. Students are more likely to learn if they feel they can be successful – If they’re barraged with words they can’t understand, but are expected to know, they may just give up.
3. Students are more likely to learn if they’re at least somewhat enjoying themselves – Having a bit of fun with words can keep students hooked longer, and they’re more likely to learn.
4. Students are more likely to learn vocabulary (and really any subject material) if they are asked to engage with it in a variety of ways – Written, verbal, broken down into parts, used in a sentence, explained through pictures, general exposure, activities within the classroom, self-directed learning at home, etc.

I also liked how the article explicitly pointed out that people have larger receptive vocabulary than productive vocabulary. So students may be able to understand a word when it is read or heard, but they may not be able to think of that word when speaking or writing. However, when speaking or writing, students have the opportunity to find alternate ways of showing their understanding, whereas when they read they do not. I think it’s just a matter of keeping all this in mind and preparing to support our students if they are having difficulties in any of these areas.

Worth checking out:
Mysteries of vernacular: Bewilder – Jessica Oreck and Rachael Teel

I thoroughly enjoyed this reading. I think it reinforces the importance for us teachers to be cognitive of the words we use and more importantly, how they are received. The article made me more aware of how we should not assume that our students, that we ourselves too, have a full grasp of the language we use in the classroom. From my experiences, some teachers gave a list of words with their definitions and expected students to memorize that list. I remember countless vocabulary quizzes throughout high school. Looking back, those tests were not always the most effective way to introduce new terms or help me remember those terms. Through this article, I gleamed some new, practical, and integrated methods for approaching vocabulary.

I think the article effectively argued that for students to “know” or better grasp words, they must come to experience these words incrementally, multidimensionally, and integrally. I think teachers cannot forgot that this requires time, patience, a natural approach, and one that is applicable and relevant to students lives. I think this is particularly challenging with discipline-specific words. I think we must emphasize the importance that vocabulary does not emerge from a vacuum, but is situated in context and relation to other words. Therefore accessing prior knowledge is crucial as it helps students learn from channels or avenues that they already possess––thus reinforcing those connections and memory access.

To take an example: as a social studies teacher, I may teach my students about the concept and policy of “multiculturalism.” There is already so much occurring in a word like this. The word can be broken down into its various elements: “multi”; “cultural”; “ism.” Each one of those parts are interrelated to other words they may encounter. It is also a term that has rich historical and societal weight. It used all the time, particularly in describing Canadian society. Therefore a word like this has great potential to explore related concepts like culture in general, but more importantly for my students––cultures represented in our classroom. It could be their own distinct culture, it would be a debate over the characteristic of a Canadian culture (whatever that may mean), it can even be a discussion about the culture of our class itself. Therefore by making these connections, this word is integrated into a whole slew of vocubalry regarding culture, society, history, backgrounds, politics, and more.

One final comment on the article. The sections on “word consciousness” and “computer-related instruction” I found highly relevant. I recently discovered these fascinating, informative, and useful TED Ed talks called “the mysteries of vernacular.” They can be found here: http://ed.ted.com/lessons?category=literature-language. These short videos can, I hope, help develop a curiosity in the stories and mysteries behind words. Often, these words can be quite confusing or appear out of joint with a majority of other words. It is a resource worth revisiting and perhaps adaptable to the classroom in various forms.

Michael Yang

It could certainly be a daunting task to try and bring students up to a certain level of vocabulary. What caught my eye while reading “A Focus in Vocabulary” was the idea of the “Matthew Effects” (2), that good readers read more and improve their vocabulary, while poor readers read less and develop a less extensive vocabulary. By the time students reach secondary school, they may have either had poor reading skills since elementary school, or, if an ELL, had less experience with English overall than their peers. In terms of students who are not ELL’s but lack effective reading skills, while the article may supply many tools and strategies, I wonder if these are enough to combat a way of reading that’s been ingrained into them, possibly for most of their lives?

I had an English teacher in grade 11 who gave my class weekly vocabulary quizzes, but I’m not sure if my classmates who did less well in school ever cared enough to learn the words. Based on my conversations with those I knew, they were not interested, and not concerned with their quiz marks. The quizzes were multiple choice, and therefore they would simply circle their guesses, hand it in, and forget about it. I’m sure my teacher meant well and was genuinely trying to improve the vocabulary of our class, but after reading the article I would be more inclined to try a different method and diversify my teaching. Rather than giving a vocabulary quiz that was the exact same format every week as my teacher did, I would try to vary my approach, with the hopes that every student would find at least one method effective for them.

After reading this week’s article and looking at some of the different blogs that have already been posted, I believe there is a little confusion. In the blog A Focus on Vocabulary, the author says that only eight to ten words can be learnt per week. The author did not understand how so few words could be learnt when students have so many different classes and life experiences occurring, where they are exposed to so many different words. After reviewing Lehr’s article, I believe that the blog author misunderstood parts of the reading. Lehr states that only eight to ten new words can be effectively taught each week, however there are other ways for students to learn more words. If we could only learn new words by being taught them, we would only learn approximately four hundred words per year, however Lehr states that humans learn two thousand to three thousand five hundred words per year. Therefore, students are able to learn more words through incidental learning, where they are exposed to other words through their own reading. The amount of words that students learn through this manner is indicative to the amount of reading and exposure students have to different vocabulary terms.