1 / 38

Creating a Sense of Wonder by Engaging all Readers in High-Level Discussions about Text

Creating a Sense of Wonder by Engaging all Readers in High-Level Discussions about Text. Janice F. Almasi, Ph.D. University of Kentucky Janice.almasi@uky.edu. Goals. What does high-level talk look like in discussions? (How does peer discussion differ from teacher-led discussion?)

aden
Télécharger la présentation

Creating a Sense of Wonder by Engaging all Readers in High-Level Discussions about Text

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Creating a Sense of Wonder by Engaging all Readers in High-Level Discussions about Text Janice F. Almasi, Ph.D. University of Kentucky Janice.almasi@uky.edu

  2. Goals • What does high-level talk look like in discussions? (How does peer discussion differ from teacher-led discussion?) • How do we create a culture for high-level talk in discussion? • How do we assess and evaluate discussion? Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky

  3. National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers (2010). Common core state standards English language arts. Washington, DC: National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers. http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky

  4. National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers (2010). Common core state standards English language arts. Washington, DC: National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers. http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy

  5. National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers (2010). Common core state standards English language arts. Washington, DC: National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers. http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky

  6. What We Know • Type of discussion can determine children’s responses and focus their interpretations in particular ways (Many & Wiseman, 1992) Many, J. E., & Wiseman, D. L. (1992). The effect of teaching approach on third-grade students' response to literature. Journal of Reading Behavior, 24(3), 265-287.

  7. What is Peer Discussion? How do you define peer discussion? Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky

  8. As you watch try to notice: What did the teacher do to the environment to foster comprehension? By what social rules did the group function? What topics were discussed? What questions were asked?

  9. Example: Teacher-led Discussion IRE Participant Structure (Cazden, 1988; Mehan, 1979 Teacher: They were at camp and what were they going to do there at this camp? Yes? Student: They were going to have a contest. They have a map and a compass and they have to find stuff. Teacher: Does anyone know the name of the camp? Yes? Teacher: Alright, um, who is Bobbi? Student: Bobbi was the girl. Teacher: The girl, the character in our story. What other characters were in our story? Yes? Student: Jamie Teacher: Alright. Where were these characters? Yes? Student: They were at camp. Initiate Respond Evaluate Initiate Respond Evaluate

  10. Defining Peer Discussion • Dialogic classroom event in which students are cognitively, socially, and affectively engaged in collaboratively constructing meaning or considering alternate interpretations of texts to arrive at new understandings (Almasi, 2002) • Students gather to talk about, critique, and understand texts with minimal teacher assistance. Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky

  11. Peer Discussion: A Different Type of Post-reading Discussion • Peer Discussion • Decentralized Context • Teacher facilitates group as a momentary scaffold • Student Goals include: • Interacting with others in a manner that fosters meaningful interpretation • Using strategies for interpreting literature and constructing meaning • Setting agendas and group norms for discussing literature independently • Conversational Discussion Group format (O’Flahavan, 1989) O'Flahavan, J. F. (1989). An exploration of the effects of participant structure upon literacy development in reading group discussion. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois-Champaign.

  12. Participant Structure in a Discussion Decentralized Centralized An authority takes responsibility for: Deciding who may talk Deciding what to talk about Deciding how the conversation proceeds Determining the nature of future conversations • All participants take equal responsibility for: • Deciding who may talk • Deciding what to talk about • Deciding how the conversation proceeds • Determining the nature of future conversations Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky

  13. A Discussion Continuum Instructional Conversations Questioning the Author Peer Discussion Teacher-led Discussion Decentralized Minimal Teacher Scaffolding (Ontogenetic) 0-10% Teacher Talk Centralized More Teacher Scaffolding (Microgenetic) 60-75% Teacher Talk Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky

  14. Creating a Culture that Fosters High-Level Talk Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky

  15. Creating Groups(adapted from Wiencek & O’Flahavan, 1992) Wiencek, J., & O’Flahavan, J. F. (1994). From teacher-led to peer discussions about literature: Suggestions for making the shift. Language Arts, 71(7), 488-498.

  16. Decentralized Structure:Introducing Conversation • Establish Social and Cultural Norms • What is the goal? • What is peer discussion like? • What do you do in it? • How do you act/participate? • What do you say? Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky

  17. First Grade Discussion Reminders 1. You don’t have to raise your hands to speak. 2. Call each other by your names. 3. Take turns speaking. 4. Don’t interrupt each other. 5. Use you’re inside voice, but talk loud enough so everyone in the group can hear you. 6. Don’t use bad words or talk mean. 7. If someone is doing something they shouldn’t be doing ask them to stop. Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky

  18. Decentralized Structure:Model Questioning Behaviors Learning to think and talk while reading • Book Buddies • During teacher read aloud • Teacher stops at various points in the text • Poses thoughtful, open-ended questions • What might happen next? • What are you wondering? • What do you think the author meant? • Turn and talk to your buddy Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky

  19. Decentralized Structure:Model Questioning Behaviors Learning to think while reading leads to interesting topics for discussion I wonder . . . I wish . . . I worry . . . I don’t understand . . . Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky

  20. Decentralized Structure: Learning to Talk with One Another Respectfully If you start with Book Buddies . . . Have two pairs of students turn and talk to each other Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky

  21. If you start with small groups Decentralized Structure: Learning to Talk to One Another Respectfully Group B Observers Group A Fishbowl • Prior to the next peer discussion have students watch a videotape of their previous discussion and look for ways they could improve their own participation • Fishbowl by watching another group live or on video and critiquing Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky

  22. Peer Discussion Format Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky

  23. Peer Discussion:5 Minute Introduction • Teacher functions as facilitator to remind students of group norms for interaction and to foster substantive interpretation Scaffolding Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky

  24. How do we Assess and Evaluate Discussion? Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky

  25. 20 Minute Peer Discussion • Students collaboratively construct understandings of text. • Teacher takes anecdotal notes to inform instructional next steps that can be addressed in the debriefing or in a mini-lesson at a later time. • Teacher functions as momentary scaffold intervening only to refocus the group. • Goal is to help students learn how to recognize and resolve problems on their own. Discussion Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky

  26. Peer Discussion • The Teacher’s Role: • Trust students’ questions • Sit back and permit students to discuss • Scaffold for interaction and interpretation when needed • Observe group and record successes and areas for improvement Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky

  27. 5 Minute Debriefing • Teacher returns to help the group evaluate their discussion and set new goals for the next discussion. • Interpretive Goals • What can we do to help each other make sense of the text better? • Interaction Goals • What can we do to make the discussion run more smoothly? Scaffolding Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky

  28. Student Self-Assessment (from Garas-York, Shanahan, & Almasi, in press) Garas-York, K., Shanahan, L. E., & Almasi, J. F. (in press). Comprehension: High-level talk and about texts. To appear in B. M. Taylor & N. Duke (Eds.), Effective literacy instruction: Handbook of research and practice. New York: The Guilford Press.

  29. Teacher Eval/Long-term Planning (from Garas-York, Shanahan, & Almasi, in press)

  30. A Discussion Continuum Instructional Conversations Questioning the Author Peer Discussion Teacher-led Discussion Decentralized Minimal Teacher Scaffolding (Ontogenetic) 0-10% Teacher Talk Centralized More Teacher Scaffolding (Microgenetic) 60-75% Teacher Talk Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky

  31. For Further Information: Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky Janice.almasi@uky.edu Janice F. Almasi, University of Kentucky

  32. References Almasi, J. F. (2002). Peer discussion. In B. Guzzetti (Ed.), Literacy in America: An encyclopedia (Vol. 2, pp. 420-424). New York: ABC. Almasi, J. F. (1995). The nature of fourth graders' sociocognitive conflicts in peer-led and teacher-led discussions of literature. Reading Research Quarterly, 30(3), 314-351. Almasi, J. F., Cho, H., Garas, K., Shanahan, L., Ma, W., Yoon, B., & Augustino, A. (2003, December). The Genesis of Dialogic Inquiry: Phases of Language Development during Peer Discussion. In B. Palmer (Chair), Peer Discussion Ecosystems: The Impact of Identity, Power, Authority, and Scaffolding on the Development of Dialogic Inquiry. Paper presented at the 53rd Annual Meeting of the National Reading Conference, Scottsdale, AZ. Almasi, J. F., Garas, K., Cho, H., Ma, W., Shanahan, L., & Augustino, A. (2004). The Impact of Peer Discussion on Social, Cognitive, and Affective Growth in Literacy. Paper to be presented at the 54th Annual Meeting of the National Reading Conference, San Antonio, TX.

  33. References Almasi, J. F., Garas, K., Cho, H., Ma, W., Shanahan, L., Augustino, A., & Palmer, B. M. (2005, November). A Longitudinal Study of Development: Comprehension, Interpretive Strategy Use, and Language Use Among Children in Grades K-3. Paper presented at the 55th Annual Meeting of the National Reading Conference, Miami, FL. Almasi, J. F. & Garas-York, K. (2009). Comprehension and discussion of text. In S. E. Israel & G. G. Duffy (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Reading Comprehension (pp. 470-493). Mahwah: NJ: Erlbaum. Almasi, J. F., O'Flahavan, J. F., & Arya, P. (2001). A comparative analysis of student and teacher development in more proficient and less proficient peer discussions of literature. Reading Research Quarterly, 36(2), 96-120.

  34. References Almasi, J. F., Palmer, B. M., Garas, K., Cho, H., Ma, W., Shanahan, L., & Augustino, A. (2004). A longitudinal investigation of peer discussion of text on reading development in grades K-3. Final Report submitted to the Institute of Education Sciences. Almasi, J. F., & Russell, W. (1998, December). Scaffold to nowhere? Appropriated voice, metatalk, and personal narrative in third graders’ peer discussions of information text. Paper presented at the 48th Annual Meeting of the National Reading Conference, Austin, TX. Almasi, J. F., & Russell, W. (1999, December). An ecology of communication: Peer discussions as semiotic systems. In L. Galda (Chair), Classroom talk about literature: The social dimensions of a solitary act. Symposium conducted at the 49th Annual Meeting of the National Reading Conference, Orlando, FL.

  35. References Cazden, C. B. (1988). Classroom discourse: The language of teaching and learning. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Garas-York, K., Shanahan, L. E., & Almasi, J. F. (in press). Comprehension: High-level talk and about texts. To appear in B. M. Taylor & N. Duke (Eds.), Effective literacy instruction: Handbook of research and practice. New York: The Guilford Press. Many, J. E., & Wiseman, D. L. (1992). The effect of teaching approach on third-grade students' response to literature. Journal of Reading Behavior, 24(3), 265-287. Mehan, H. (1979). Learning lessons. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

  36. References National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers (2010). Common core state standards English language arts. Washington, DC: National Governors Association Center for Best Practices, Council of Chief State School Officers. http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy O'Flahavan, J. F. (1989). An exploration of the effects of participant structure upon literacy development in reading group discussion. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois-Champaign. O’Flahavan, J. F. (1995). Teacher role options in peer discussions about literature. Reading Teacher, 48(4), 354-356. Wiencek, J., & O’Flahavan, J. F. (1994). From teacher-led to peer discussions about literature: Suggestions for making the shift. Language Arts, 71(7), 488-498.

More Related