With Michael turning 6 in June this year and only one more year of preschool to go, the time has come to make a decision about elementary school enrollment and settle on a broad vision of how we want to school our kids.
The default choice for primary school is our local public Japanese school, Nishi-Mitaka Gakuen, which is a model program of sorts and seems to have a good reputation in the area. Unless we come up with a better option, Michael will enroll there in April 2010. Basically, I feel very comfortable with allowing Michael to enter Japanese elementary school. He already is forming an identity as a local Japanese kid, many of his friends will be going there, and Japanese primary school education has many strengths in helping students form good learning habits and basic literacy. It will be a good educational experience for him. Megumi and I both went through Japanese public elementary schools and we have good impressions of it.
The biggest drawback of going to a Japanese school, of course, is that his identity as an English speaker will weaken, so we need a plan for English. Even now, after two years in yochien, he is starting to refuse to reply in English when I try to talk to him. He can converse in English at an OK level for a 5 year old, but English communication is getting more and more frustrating for him as his Japanese communication ability develops at a much faster rate from interaction with local kids, media input, and talking with his Mom. I've taught him to read almost at the first grade level already and he can write his alphabets too, but since I'm basically the only English speaker he talks with, I'm feeling the limits of what I can do through communication and schooling at home.
So...what are we going to do about his English academic ability? First of all, I think our main goal is to make sure Michael has enough academic ability in English to go where he wants for college. However we get there, through Japanese schools or international schools or schools in the U.S., we just need to be able to keep his options open. How can we do that? Here are some methods we'll eventually need to choose from:
Option 1. International schools
Use international schools in Japan at some point, switching over from Japanese public schools sooner or later. ASIJ is close to ICU but would be close to impossible financially, especially for two kids (2.5 mil per kid). I went to CAJ and enjoyed my years there; it is more reasonable but still expensive at 1.5mil per kid. Enrolling in international schools for many years is tough financially, but the more we delay, the more difficult it will be to keep the kids' English levels high enough to get in. Here's a long list of international schools in Japan. Should we start from 1st grade somewhere? If not, at what point should we switch over? Can we maintain English levels until 5th or 6th grade and switch over, for example?
Option 2. Japanese public or private schools,
(with just enough English study on the side)
If our goal is to help our kids get into English language universities abroad, one way is to graduate from Japanese high school and apply as an international student using TOEFL scores etc. Basically, academic ability will be developed in Japanese, going through the Japanese system of taking examinations to get into decent schools, hopefully with good English programs suited to the level our kids will have. Some place like Kato Gakuen in Numazu?
2009年3月6日金曜日
2009年3月5日木曜日
Getting up to speed on TBLT
TBLT, or task-based language teaching has been a buzz word in foreign language teaching for a while now, but I've never done a systematic examination of the concept. A lot of the teaching I do is probably "task based," but I don't do it with any explicit theory of task design. The March '09 edition of the The Language Teacher focuses on TBLT, so I've decided to educate myself.
The Willis and Willis article has a reader friendly Q&A format and here are the highlights:
http://jalt-publications.org/tlt/resources/2009/0903a.pdf
Q. Why do we need TBLT?
A. Many language teachers become preoccupied with teaching grammar rules and other parts of the language and forget that the main purpose of learning a language is to communicate effectively and confidently. Tasks help learners engage primarily in wholistic meaning focused activities in the classroom rather than form-based activities that teach the items that compose a language.
Q. What's the difference between TBLT and Communicative Language Teaching?
A. Nothing. Task-based learning has the same goals as CLT, but puts the "task" at the center of the learning process explicitly.
Q. What's a task?
A. According to Willis and Willis, the main characteristics of a good task are 1) Does it engage the learner's interest? 2) Is there are primary focus on meaning? 3) Is success on the task measured in non-linguistic outcomes rather than accurate grammar, and 4) Does it relate to real-world activities (not artificial exercises just to ingrain grammar).
Task-based lessons can be divided into 3 parts Pre-Task, Task Cycle (do the task, plan a report, make the report), and Language Focus (analyze the language they produced and then practice focus areas found in the data). A typology of tasks includes Listing, Sorting, Comparing, Problem-solving, Sharing personal experiences, and other creative projects.
Resources: http://www.jalt-publications.org/tlt/files/98/jul/willis.html
http://www.willis-elt.co.uk/documents/AThreeWayDisntinction.doc
Q. According to Willis, what is important in acquiring a foreign language?
A. A three way distinction between a focus on meaning, language, and form seems needed.
A. The debate seems to still be on-going. Everyone agrees that the process of language acquisition is a complex cyclical combination of comprehensible input (exposure), use of the language for meaningful communication (use/engagement), and noticing features of the language that help meaning become more accurate and pragmatically appropriate (autonomous noticing =focus on language/teacher induced noticing = focus on form). The debate is on the weight that should be given to those components. TBLT argues that "use" of the language for meaningful communication by the learner should be primary, with support by the teacher for input and focus on form. Ellis and others may disagree, saying that some systematic instruction or drilling of grammar forms can be helpful. My view is that the weighting of meaning vs. form focused instruction may have to vary by individual needs and goals. My leaning is toward the task-based, meaning focused approach. Plenty of input (with some focus on form in the input stage), engaging tasks, and due treatment of form-after the task. One important step in TBLT seems to be to accept that fluency and confidence in the language are more important than grammatical accuracy.
Q. Can TBLT work in Japan?
A. Not as long as Japanese teachers are preoccupied with teaching accuracy. Textbooks in Japan are designed for grammar structure presentation, practice and production (PPP) rather than for meaningful functions or skills. Tests are based on knowledge, not ability. However, seeing how everyone accepts the sad reality of the failure of the current system - that the majority of Japanese high school graduates are remedial beginners in English after hours and hours of form instruction which mainly only succeeds in producing an inferiority complex and fear to communicate, Japan obviously needs a fundamental change of approach in how it sees language learning.
Q. How can TBLT be assessed?
A. The key is "What can they do?" The Common European Framework for Languages and ACTFL Guidelines use "can do" statements for learners to show their competence in various functions, with evaluation of fluency, appropriacy, and achievement of outcome.
Q. How can TBLT concepts be used to help ICU ELP students?
A. Many classes at ICU are skill or content-based, and consist of a communicative "task" such as a discussion about a reading text. However, as the Pre-Task, Task Cycle (do the task, plan a report, make the report), and Language Focus (analyze the language they produced and then practice focus areas found in the data) model of TBLT shows, "doing the task" is only a very small part of the task-based learning process. The pre-task stage is important for input (discussion phrases, skills, models of good discussion debate), some type of report on the task is needed after planning time, and analysis of the report/output language and practice based on it are needed. More care on those missing components seems needed in my classes and probably many classes in the ELP.
Little and Fieldsend in the same TLT argue against Willis and Willis, saying that a "reactive approach" to language difficulties is not enough. Targeting language difficulties of the learners in a proactive way in advance through "form-focused tasks" is more efficient and practical. They recommend, citing Samuda's model, a sequence of meaning - > form focus (giving phrases, grammar practice) - > back to meaning in the task cycle. Hmm...sounds quite reasonable, but which is better? difficult point to determine unless I try both ways with learners.
The final article is by O'Dwyer introducing how a European Language Portfolio (ELP-not to be confused with English Lang. Program) can supplement a task-based curriculum.
Language Portfolio = 1) Language Passport (summary of linguistic identity and current competency), 2) Language Biography (learning goals set and reviewed), and 3) Dossier (Samples of work and evidence of achievement). Cool stuff! Need to harness this for EAP for ICU students-much of the portfolio process can be used for Academic Speaking and they should be trying to build a speaking portfolio.
http://jalt-publications.org/tlt/resources/2009/0903a.pdf
The Willis and Willis article has a reader friendly Q&A format and here are the highlights:
http://jalt-publications.org/tlt/resources/2009/0903a.pdf
Q. Why do we need TBLT?
A. Many language teachers become preoccupied with teaching grammar rules and other parts of the language and forget that the main purpose of learning a language is to communicate effectively and confidently. Tasks help learners engage primarily in wholistic meaning focused activities in the classroom rather than form-based activities that teach the items that compose a language.
Q. What's the difference between TBLT and Communicative Language Teaching?
A. Nothing. Task-based learning has the same goals as CLT, but puts the "task" at the center of the learning process explicitly.
Q. What's a task?
A. According to Willis and Willis, the main characteristics of a good task are 1) Does it engage the learner's interest? 2) Is there are primary focus on meaning? 3) Is success on the task measured in non-linguistic outcomes rather than accurate grammar, and 4) Does it relate to real-world activities (not artificial exercises just to ingrain grammar).
Task-based lessons can be divided into 3 parts Pre-Task, Task Cycle (do the task, plan a report, make the report), and Language Focus (analyze the language they produced and then practice focus areas found in the data). A typology of tasks includes Listing, Sorting, Comparing, Problem-solving, Sharing personal experiences, and other creative projects.
Resources: http://www.jalt-publications.org/tlt/files/98/jul/willis.html
http://www.willis-elt.co.uk/documents/AThreeWayDisntinction.doc
Q. According to Willis, what is important in acquiring a foreign language?
A. A three way distinction between a focus on meaning, language, and form seems needed.
- A focus on meaning, in which participants are concerned with communication.
- A focus on language, in which learners pause in the course of a meaning-focused activity to think for themselves how best to express what they want to say, or a teacher takes part in an interaction and acts as a facilitator by rephrasing or clarifying learner language.
- A focus on form in which one or more lexical or grammatical items are isolated and specified for study or in which teacher comments on student language by drawing attention to, problems. (Willis and Willis 2007: 5)
A. The debate seems to still be on-going. Everyone agrees that the process of language acquisition is a complex cyclical combination of comprehensible input (exposure), use of the language for meaningful communication (use/engagement), and noticing features of the language that help meaning become more accurate and pragmatically appropriate (autonomous noticing =focus on language/teacher induced noticing = focus on form). The debate is on the weight that should be given to those components. TBLT argues that "use" of the language for meaningful communication by the learner should be primary, with support by the teacher for input and focus on form. Ellis and others may disagree, saying that some systematic instruction or drilling of grammar forms can be helpful. My view is that the weighting of meaning vs. form focused instruction may have to vary by individual needs and goals. My leaning is toward the task-based, meaning focused approach. Plenty of input (with some focus on form in the input stage), engaging tasks, and due treatment of form-after the task. One important step in TBLT seems to be to accept that fluency and confidence in the language are more important than grammatical accuracy.
Q. Can TBLT work in Japan?
A. Not as long as Japanese teachers are preoccupied with teaching accuracy. Textbooks in Japan are designed for grammar structure presentation, practice and production (PPP) rather than for meaningful functions or skills. Tests are based on knowledge, not ability. However, seeing how everyone accepts the sad reality of the failure of the current system - that the majority of Japanese high school graduates are remedial beginners in English after hours and hours of form instruction which mainly only succeeds in producing an inferiority complex and fear to communicate, Japan obviously needs a fundamental change of approach in how it sees language learning.
Q. How can TBLT be assessed?
A. The key is "What can they do?" The Common European Framework for Languages and ACTFL Guidelines use "can do" statements for learners to show their competence in various functions, with evaluation of fluency, appropriacy, and achievement of outcome.
Q. How can TBLT concepts be used to help ICU ELP students?
A. Many classes at ICU are skill or content-based, and consist of a communicative "task" such as a discussion about a reading text. However, as the Pre-Task, Task Cycle (do the task, plan a report, make the report), and Language Focus (analyze the language they produced and then practice focus areas found in the data) model of TBLT shows, "doing the task" is only a very small part of the task-based learning process. The pre-task stage is important for input (discussion phrases, skills, models of good discussion debate), some type of report on the task is needed after planning time, and analysis of the report/output language and practice based on it are needed. More care on those missing components seems needed in my classes and probably many classes in the ELP.
Little and Fieldsend in the same TLT argue against Willis and Willis, saying that a "reactive approach" to language difficulties is not enough. Targeting language difficulties of the learners in a proactive way in advance through "form-focused tasks" is more efficient and practical. They recommend, citing Samuda's model, a sequence of meaning - > form focus (giving phrases, grammar practice) - > back to meaning in the task cycle. Hmm...sounds quite reasonable, but which is better? difficult point to determine unless I try both ways with learners.
The final article is by O'Dwyer introducing how a European Language Portfolio (ELP-not to be confused with English Lang. Program) can supplement a task-based curriculum.
Language Portfolio = 1) Language Passport (summary of linguistic identity and current competency), 2) Language Biography (learning goals set and reviewed), and 3) Dossier (Samples of work and evidence of achievement). Cool stuff! Need to harness this for EAP for ICU students-much of the portfolio process can be used for Academic Speaking and they should be trying to build a speaking portfolio.
http://jalt-publications.org/tlt/resources/2009/0903a.pdf
2009年3月3日火曜日
Review of "The Constant Gardener" (2005) 邦題「ナイロビの蜂」
I picked this up at Tsutaya in the Academy Awards corner that always gets set up this time of year. Rachel Weisz won best supporting actress for this in 2005 and somehow I had missed seeing it until now. The bland title (in both English and Japanese) may be to blame, or the cover photo with Ralph Fiennes who has never quite been a compelling must-see draw for me.
Not knowing what to expect, I stayed engaged watching the story unfold and appreciated the realistic no-winner ending.
The best part was the acting by Weisz, who plays Tess, a save-the-world activist who is murdered after uncovering a conspiracy by a major drug firm to use Kenyans to illegally trial a risky TB cure and trusting the British embassy to act on it. Awareness that free drug provisions to African countries by big pharmaceutical companies could be abused seemed to be a valuable message to send as well. The directing of the film by Fernando Meirelles seemed smooth enough to keep the drug company conspiracy and the romance of Tess and her diplomat husband played by Fiennes engaging to the end.
Regrettable was the lack of African actors/characters developed in major roles and a lopsided white-centric scenario of white heros (especially Fiennes the gardener diplomat, who is less than compelling) solving problems in Africa caused by white corporate and government greed with the African locals only shown in a peripheral, helpless assistant-to-the-whites sort of way. The D+ review by Schager on Filmcritic.com gave a good critique of that weakness of the film, an insightful balance against the overwhelmingly good reviews given by Ebert and many others.
2009年3月2日月曜日
Reflection on Winter 2009 - AASP (fall/winter both)
I taught Advanced Academic Speaking for the first time this year and worked as coordinator at the same time. Fall term is basically 8 classes of presentation skills and Winter term is 8 classes of discussion and debate skills.
Fall Term AASP
What was good?
Winter Term AASP
What was good?
Fall Term AASP
What was good?
- My class rocked! The traditional syllabus was largely usable with some good improvements. The group presentation project gives the course a sense of purpose and intensity. In only 8 class meetings, we need to form groups, choose topics, teach outlining skills, teach presentation skills, do rehearsals, do the final presentations for two classes, and do some reflection and self-analysis. It is a very busy class, but very rewarding. I think almost all of my students liked how it went, with only some frustration about putting together a research-based presentation as a team with so few meetings.
- One minute speeches each week help students get used to being on their feet and communicating without any notes. The last one of the one-minute speeches gets videod for a self-analysis, which the students seemed to find very beneficial.
- The "no reading" rule for the final presentation was important. Most groups had good presentation styles, even if their content was not strong.
- Got videos of all of the group presentations and distributed them on the net via email links.
- The course is too short for a fully researched, thesis based presentation and I don't want my students using up the limited amount of energy they can spare for this lab course digging up detailed research. The presentation topic/content needs a template or a few templates that can be followed. This idea came up from veteran teachers of this course, but I didn't follow through due to a lack of time and just let my students fight it out with "Choose any topic you like". I propose a survey based presentation focusing on one aspect of ICU life. No library research should be required. Coordinators should make a sample with one or two focused but meaningful research question such as "What are ICU students' perceptions of the SEA program? How can it be improved?" That will lead to a thesis and an outline that describes and analyzes the data obtained from interviews.
- Systems for dealing with delinquent group members are needed.
- A clear breakdown of grading would be nice so that students know what is expected.
- Getting OYR students or other guests (students from other AASP sections?) to listen to the presentations or some other "audience" system (put on web?) is needed to make the presentation an authentic experience. Making a video and making the room presentation face-to-face should BOTH be required.
- Making the videotaping a standard part of the curriculum, with a system that is doable for teachers of all tech proficiencies, and making sure students do self-analyses. We want students to build confidence by seeing themselves improve step by step in their oral communication ability, like a portfolio.
- Getting feedback from students. Need to pass out paper questionnaires on the final class - web based feedback through email doesn't get enough response (Don't they check their emails?)
- Phrases, skills, more web-based materials, hopefully for a unified curriculum used by all teachers.
- Going to individualized presentations is also one possible direction.
Winter Term AASP
What was good?
- Homework was very light-probably just right for a CS class, which is a lab class and technically is supposed to have less than one hour of preparation for each class. I am absolutely sure that no student can complain of having too much homework in that class. Just a few worksheets for preparing a short opinion about a bioethics issue or a short dialogue to think about how to facilitate a discussion.
- Many students mentioned that the course supported their efforts in ARW well. The P&Ds we did in class helped them get ready for their presentations in Winter Project.
- P&Ds are an excellent way to maximize speaking time (15 minutes per student for presenting/facilitating, 30 minutes for participating, 15 minutes for observing a peer to give feedback). No student can say they didn't get enough speaking time in AASP.
- Debates were very popular with my class. They were being challenged, obviously needed the practice, and many of them requested that we spend more time for debating, which is excellent practice for critical thinking and deserves a bigger position in the ELP curriculum. All students should be able to see issues in terms of pros/cons, arguments for/against a proposition (thesis).
- With the current P&D based class curriculum, there is little time built in for the teacher to demonstrate useful phrases and oral communication skills. A least a little bit of this should be built in to each class. Most lessons already have a list of useful phrases, so it is just a matter of deciding what the teacher should do with them. Ideally....there should be a short video that shows the phrase or skill in action and it should be available on the web. Easier said than done. Need to put together a team of teachers to do it week by week.
- Need a system for teachers to give individual support/coaching. With P&Ds, it is easy for the teacher to end up with nothing meaningful to do--reading a book in front or just hovering meaninglessly from group to group. Instead, the teacher should work on a set schedule to shadow the P&D of each student at least once, purely for developmental purposes (not evaluative). The problem is the logistics of such a system. If a teacher sits through 4 P&Ds per hour, it will take 5 classes to shadow a class of 20. If the term only has 8 classes, it won't work. So...either shorten the P&D times to 10 minutes, which will allow 6 shadowings (groups of 6?) and get things done in 3~4 classes...but the only problem is that 10 minute P&Ds are not really satisfactory discussions...Hmm...but the focus is presenting/facilitating/participating, so maybe it is OK. The teacher will a RECORDER as well, using the new VADO - This will facilitate self-evaluation early in the term.
- Lesson 1 - Overview, Lessons 2,3,4,5 practice P&Ds (with instructor or peer shadowing), Lesson 6 rehearsal, Lesson 7 final eval, Lesson 8 -reflection/analysis.
- Topics should be debate-like. In other words, the facilitator is given a Proposition Card by the teacher such as "Surrogacy should be legal in Japan" or "The death penalty should be abolished in Japan"and then, after a few minutes preparation, gives a little background (a sheet is given), takes a position, and starts a discussion. In the discussion, the participants should split into pre-agreed sides and go at each other. The facilitator should try to mediate? or defend the position? Advanced preparation should not be needed. But...the problem with that is 10 minutes is not a satisfying debate time. Hmm...more thought is needed on this. How can debate be built into the class with good cyclic, weekly experience and practice. Not preparing for a big debate, but doing small size debates over and over.
- More discussion on this in the summer...
Reflection on Winter term 2009 - Theme Writing
1. What was good about TW this term?
- 18 out of 20 passed! A very good rate.
- Did "hand-back" tutorials for final comments. These work really well, especially if the student has written a nice self-evaluation and submitted it before the tutorial. Need to require that more clearly next time.
- Several mentioned that they discovered a "love" of research paper writing. That's my main goal.
- The 18 who passed stayed with the draft deadline schedule mostly very well. Nobody got lower than a C, and ended up with about six As Bs Cs. The 60% process, 40% final paper formula seemed to mostly work well, although I might go to a 50/50 system because I felt that I wanted to reward the result of the final paper more.
- Peer review should be done on a "writer requested" basis. In other words, the writer should ask a peer to read/review the paper. "Could you let me know what you think?" rather than a reviewer just writing unsolicited ideas on Moodle. So, the task will be for the writer to get one or more reviews from peers and attach it to the draft or final paper, not for the writer to just write two reviews of peers. This peer review can be done in class or outside class as preferred. In the end, it will be the responsibility of the writer to find one or two classmates to do reviews. The evidence I see will only be the peer review report. Will that work? That may allow some students to get away without ever Giving a peer review. Is that allowable? I'll give it a try next time.
- Self-evaluation with a detailed checklist...I want students to come up with their own score out of 40 or 50 points and just sign off that "I agree with your self-evaluation." Dave makes that part of the grade, and I want to do that too. That ought to be part of one of the final classes.
- Read/Analyze past student papers. Sonomi's paper is a good one.
- Put more self-study resources online - How to choose a topic, What is a thesis? How do organize sections of research paper...short slide shows with voice overs would be coolest. Coupling slide shows/demos with a checklist would be killer. Maybe I'll start one for Spring ARW and grow it for TW.
- Reserve computer lab early on to allow for research of databases in one of the earliest classes and also to introduce online resources.
- Consider Owen's Google Doc approach - All outlining and drafts done on one Google Doc - How did that go over with his class? I assume it could really turn off some students who prefer to do less on computers, but at the same time, most of TW is done on computers anyway, so nothing is lost. It would be really nice to be able to keep comments recorded on the draft and also to see the stage by stage developments of the paper.
Reflecting on ICU's Winter term 2009 - ARW
Submitted winter term grades on Friday last week, and today is a good day for reflection.
Academic Reading and Writing-Winter:
I was able to keep all of my students engaged (more or less) to the end. All passed and many did an excellent job to the end. Since I ran the structure of the course more or less the same as last year, I was able to make some good minor adjustments to how I helped students improve their skills for academic reading, writing and presentations.
A. Reading Skills
This term, I eliminated for the first time ever my set of "reading comprehension questions" and moved to an open Summarize/Critique/Discuss format. This puts more responsibility on students to read for main points without guiding questions and to be critical and identify weaknesses or raise original questions about the texts we were reading. Students had to submit Discussion Preparation documents each class, which was excellent for making sure students were well-prepared for discussions, but a pain in the neck for me to check. When I do it next year, I wonder if I can delegate the checking process to students somehow...Also since the preparation seemed difficult for some students and lead to non-submission by some, I wonder if there are ways to help the struggling students who cannot spend enough time to read the text and prepare a good summary/critique of the text prior to class. For example, I might want to separate the text into parts and put students in charge of only one part. Each class I want students to come to class EXCITED about what they read or discovered or prepared...Adding audio to accompany the readings seems important too. Also, I need to give more examples of types of developed critical responses to texts such as not only just saying "Author gives no evidence" but also "Is there any evidence of.... The author should add more detailed evidence about... to make this point more persuasive." Not just saying "I disagree" but saying "I am not persuaded by this argument because..."
As a result of this term, do students feel more confident about their reading skills? Less confident? What do our end-of-term surveys show? If they feel less confident, what needs to be changed? Should some students be reading different texts? Should students be choosing their own in a workshop style? How should we be differentiating for different levels of reading ability and motivation? (At least prepare this....and if you finish, prepare this...and if you are really ambitious, prepare this...) Also, how can they be helping each other more-collaborating on grasping the meaning and practicing their critical reactions?
B. Writing Skills
Did two essays, one on "Should Japan allow reproductive cloning if the technology becomes safe?" and one allowing a free choice of topic. For the first essay, I was able to hand back my final comments in tutorials. I think that was good for dialogue. However, for the second essay, I gave it back to their mailboxes, and who knows how many will pick them up and actually read those comments. I feel like my efforts may be wasted. I want the dialogue to end with some sense of closure--for all students, not just the good students. The final essay should be submitted in a portfolio, with drafts/copies of sources, with a self-evaluation using the same form that I use, and with reflective comments on the paper writing process and goals for future papers. I want to be able to just sign off on their self-evaluation. I need to re-design the writing schedules in each term to include that more systematically. I want the writing to end with a tutorial that confirms the student's final reflection on the portfolio...
Many students were not able to submit drafts for the 2nd essay. That is a big problem because those students are the ones who need to most help with grammar, format, expressions, organization. They seem to get overwhelmed with the process of researching in English that they cannot write out their opinion on their topic. So...is the topic "propose solutions to a global problem" too difficult? How do I make the topic more manageable...In any case, I need to ensure that struggling students submit drafts and have a chat with me at an early stage in the writing process. The solution may be to have only one main essay. Also, I like Owen's idea of having a timed writing with just 1~2 sources in front. Giving students more support of "how to" do a research essay and avoid pitfalls like a monster topic is needed too.
C. Winter Project
Had 6 groups. 4 did a good job. 2 really struggled. For the four successful groups (Water Shortage, Food Shortage, Gender Discrimination, World Heritage), the project worked very well and seemed to be a productive experience--Starting in the end of January, the groups got their topic and outline started early on, had tutorials/rehearsals with me, and put together nice performances (Review video). The only thing I forgot was to build in group deadlines for some credit of points (outline submission, PowerPoint submission etc.).
For the struggling groups, I really needed a drop dead rehearsal deadline. In the end, the groups (Fair Trade, Obesity) pulled together a doable, but unorganized assortment of ideas for 15 minutes, but it was ugly to watch. I had a rehearsal with both groups, but neither were ready at that time. I couldn't give any support because they didn't have their ideas together yet, even just a few hours before the presentation. I should include a stipulation that only groups who have their rehearsal by the deadline can make the presentation. Other groups must...videotape their performance for submission so that they don't waste the time of the whole class listening to unprepared content.
Fundamentally, maybe it is best to just have one main essay about bioethics and let WP go without a new essay.
---------------
Overall, Winter Term should be a final confidence-building, skill-consolidating term. Based on skills learned in spring/fall, students should be finding that they are capable of doing work that would be acceptable by non-Japanese professors at ICU...but the reality is that many students are not at that level and many do not have the energy or motivation to push themselves. It is sad how Winter Term seems to only work for about half of the class...(and a good class I had in AA this term).
I really should get a few of my struggling students in for a chat in Japanese to listen to their account of winter term. Will they come?
Academic Reading and Writing-Winter:
I was able to keep all of my students engaged (more or less) to the end. All passed and many did an excellent job to the end. Since I ran the structure of the course more or less the same as last year, I was able to make some good minor adjustments to how I helped students improve their skills for academic reading, writing and presentations.
A. Reading Skills
This term, I eliminated for the first time ever my set of "reading comprehension questions" and moved to an open Summarize/Critique/Discuss format. This puts more responsibility on students to read for main points without guiding questions and to be critical and identify weaknesses or raise original questions about the texts we were reading. Students had to submit Discussion Preparation documents each class, which was excellent for making sure students were well-prepared for discussions, but a pain in the neck for me to check. When I do it next year, I wonder if I can delegate the checking process to students somehow...Also since the preparation seemed difficult for some students and lead to non-submission by some, I wonder if there are ways to help the struggling students who cannot spend enough time to read the text and prepare a good summary/critique of the text prior to class. For example, I might want to separate the text into parts and put students in charge of only one part. Each class I want students to come to class EXCITED about what they read or discovered or prepared...Adding audio to accompany the readings seems important too. Also, I need to give more examples of types of developed critical responses to texts such as not only just saying "Author gives no evidence" but also "Is there any evidence of.... The author should add more detailed evidence about... to make this point more persuasive." Not just saying "I disagree" but saying "I am not persuaded by this argument because..."
As a result of this term, do students feel more confident about their reading skills? Less confident? What do our end-of-term surveys show? If they feel less confident, what needs to be changed? Should some students be reading different texts? Should students be choosing their own in a workshop style? How should we be differentiating for different levels of reading ability and motivation? (At least prepare this....and if you finish, prepare this...and if you are really ambitious, prepare this...) Also, how can they be helping each other more-collaborating on grasping the meaning and practicing their critical reactions?
B. Writing Skills
Did two essays, one on "Should Japan allow reproductive cloning if the technology becomes safe?" and one allowing a free choice of topic. For the first essay, I was able to hand back my final comments in tutorials. I think that was good for dialogue. However, for the second essay, I gave it back to their mailboxes, and who knows how many will pick them up and actually read those comments. I feel like my efforts may be wasted. I want the dialogue to end with some sense of closure--for all students, not just the good students. The final essay should be submitted in a portfolio, with drafts/copies of sources, with a self-evaluation using the same form that I use, and with reflective comments on the paper writing process and goals for future papers. I want to be able to just sign off on their self-evaluation. I need to re-design the writing schedules in each term to include that more systematically. I want the writing to end with a tutorial that confirms the student's final reflection on the portfolio...
Many students were not able to submit drafts for the 2nd essay. That is a big problem because those students are the ones who need to most help with grammar, format, expressions, organization. They seem to get overwhelmed with the process of researching in English that they cannot write out their opinion on their topic. So...is the topic "propose solutions to a global problem" too difficult? How do I make the topic more manageable...In any case, I need to ensure that struggling students submit drafts and have a chat with me at an early stage in the writing process. The solution may be to have only one main essay. Also, I like Owen's idea of having a timed writing with just 1~2 sources in front. Giving students more support of "how to" do a research essay and avoid pitfalls like a monster topic is needed too.
C. Winter Project
Had 6 groups. 4 did a good job. 2 really struggled. For the four successful groups (Water Shortage, Food Shortage, Gender Discrimination, World Heritage), the project worked very well and seemed to be a productive experience--Starting in the end of January, the groups got their topic and outline started early on, had tutorials/rehearsals with me, and put together nice performances (Review video). The only thing I forgot was to build in group deadlines for some credit of points (outline submission, PowerPoint submission etc.).
For the struggling groups, I really needed a drop dead rehearsal deadline. In the end, the groups (Fair Trade, Obesity) pulled together a doable, but unorganized assortment of ideas for 15 minutes, but it was ugly to watch. I had a rehearsal with both groups, but neither were ready at that time. I couldn't give any support because they didn't have their ideas together yet, even just a few hours before the presentation. I should include a stipulation that only groups who have their rehearsal by the deadline can make the presentation. Other groups must...videotape their performance for submission so that they don't waste the time of the whole class listening to unprepared content.
Fundamentally, maybe it is best to just have one main essay about bioethics and let WP go without a new essay.
---------------
Overall, Winter Term should be a final confidence-building, skill-consolidating term. Based on skills learned in spring/fall, students should be finding that they are capable of doing work that would be acceptable by non-Japanese professors at ICU...but the reality is that many students are not at that level and many do not have the energy or motivation to push themselves. It is sad how Winter Term seems to only work for about half of the class...(and a good class I had in AA this term).
I really should get a few of my struggling students in for a chat in Japanese to listen to their account of winter term. Will they come?
2009年3月1日日曜日
RW/WW Atwell Chapter 5: Getting Started
Summary:
Atwell believes the first week of her writing/reading workshop is the most important to set the tone and get students started on their paths as a community of authors and readers. She starts by having students get to know each other with drama games and also to get to know her classroom's resources by scavenger hunts. Then, she introduces the idea of Writing/Reading Territories-a brainstormed list (that will grow) written in a notebook and covering all of the topics, genres, audiences, and book titles or genres a student has written/read or is interested in writing/reading. When a writer or reader runs out of ideas, they can go back to their "terrorities" list. The first week of the workshop method also includes getting students familiar with the "status of the class" report, which is a one-by-one sharing of what each student is working on, and with other aspects of the workshop such as mini-lessons, quiet writing time, sharing portions of one's writing to the class in a circle, and read-alouds by Atwell and quiet reading time.
参考になった点
今回特に印象に残ったのはAtwellから見て学生に「やって欲しくない」こと。
Writingに関してはp.142 "How I Spent My Summer Vacation"に象徴される"too broad"な題材、そして"safe subjects they don't really care about"というものを避けて欲しいとAtwellは書いてます。
Readingに関してはp.146 "My most important responsibility...is to make sure nobody is reading a book he or she doesn't like"
すばらしい考え方だと思う。従来の一斉教育だと"subjects they don't care about" "books they don't like"を押し付けることが教育になってしまっている部分がある。それを避け、学生がreal writers and readersとして開花するサポートをする教師の役割・手順をAtwellは書いてくれている。
その延長としてp.147もとてもいい文です。
"Reading becomes a whole, sense-making endeavor, and texts are open books--wide open to kids' opinions, questions, interpretations, and enjoyment. Writing becomes purposeful, personal, and world-changing--not the turf of a talented few but the domain of everyone who has something to say and someone to say it to."
自分のWriting/Readingの指導は上記を少しでも達成してみたいなと思う。
それにしても、AtwellのWriting/Reading Territoriesはすごい。自分がReader/Writerとしての自分を磨かないといけないと思わされる。
Workshop Methodではまず教師が自分の読み・書きを「本物」に変えなくてはいけない難しさがある。でもその中で得るものはとても大きい気がする。
以上、短くですが、Chapter 5のリアクションでした。
Atwell believes the first week of her writing/reading workshop is the most important to set the tone and get students started on their paths as a community of authors and readers. She starts by having students get to know each other with drama games and also to get to know her classroom's resources by scavenger hunts. Then, she introduces the idea of Writing/Reading Territories-a brainstormed list (that will grow) written in a notebook and covering all of the topics, genres, audiences, and book titles or genres a student has written/read or is interested in writing/reading. When a writer or reader runs out of ideas, they can go back to their "terrorities" list. The first week of the workshop method also includes getting students familiar with the "status of the class" report, which is a one-by-one sharing of what each student is working on, and with other aspects of the workshop such as mini-lessons, quiet writing time, sharing portions of one's writing to the class in a circle, and read-alouds by Atwell and quiet reading time.
参考になった点
今回特に印象に残ったのはAtwellから見て学生に「やって欲しくない」こと。
Writingに関してはp.142 "How I Spent My Summer Vacation"に象徴される"too broad"な題材、そして"safe subjects they don't really care about"というものを避けて欲しいとAtwellは書いてます。
Readingに関してはp.146 "My most important responsibility...is to make sure nobody is reading a book he or she doesn't like"
すばらしい考え方だと思う。従来の一斉教育だと"subjects they don't care about" "books they don't like"を押し付けることが教育になってしまっている部分がある。それを避け、学生がreal writers and readersとして開花するサポートをする教師の役割・手順をAtwellは書いてくれている。
その延長としてp.147もとてもいい文です。
"Reading becomes a whole, sense-making endeavor, and texts are open books--wide open to kids' opinions, questions, interpretations, and enjoyment. Writing becomes purposeful, personal, and world-changing--not the turf of a talented few but the domain of everyone who has something to say and someone to say it to."
自分のWriting/Readingの指導は上記を少しでも達成してみたいなと思う。
それにしても、AtwellのWriting/Reading Territoriesはすごい。自分がReader/Writerとしての自分を磨かないといけないと思わされる。
Workshop Methodではまず教師が自分の読み・書きを「本物」に変えなくてはいけない難しさがある。でもその中で得るものはとても大きい気がする。
以上、短くですが、Chapter 5のリアクションでした。
登録:
投稿 (Atom)