I found all the readings this week to be particularly interesting, especially examining the differences between recitation and discussion. I had never considered there to be a difference before, but now it is quite obvious.
Looking back on my own education, I can safely say that I did not experience quality discussion until my senior year of high school. Up until then, even in honors English classes in high school, everything was merely recitation: we had to discover the "true interpretations" of the books, which really was what the teacher thought of the book. It wasn't until Modern Literature in 12th grade that we were finally able to discuss the novels as a class without the teacher interfering. Obviously by 18 years old we were capable of finding our own meaning - an opportunity we greatly appreciated.
The main concern I have for recitation vs. discussion is how to assess the students' knowledge or comprehension. Recitation seems much more straight forward for this: if they are able to answer the questions, you know that they read and are understanding the main points of the book.
However, Almasi stated that in order to assess students during discussion you need to look at the processes by which they come to their interpretations, which includes their initiation of topics, responding to others' comments, and how well they're understood by others. Their knowledge can be assessed by how they compare/contrast characters, examine the book from multiple perspectives, etc. I'm worried about setting up a quality discussion while still making sure that everyone is given the opportunity to speak and that they are providing quality responses.
I'm seeing discussion begin to take place in my kindergarten classroom. The teacher has begun "Reading for Meaning", where they are able to discuss their emotional responses to the book that is read to the class. Though it would be more simple (and more productive) in a small group setting, by doing it in large-group with partners allows every student to be heard by someone. I'm interested to see how well they'll do once I begin smaller reading groups where they are still expected to discuss the books with one another.
I really like the idea of getting kids started as early as Kindergarten on understanding the meanings of books, even if it's as simple as recognizing how the book made them feel. I think that this is a good step towards learning how to have a quality discussion. I also think that starting out as partners is a good idea since it will give them an opportunity to build up confidence talking about their feelings. I'm sure once you get into small groups it will be a challenge to get them in the types of discussion habits you want but I'm also sure they will pick it easier because of the practice as opposed to starting out in groups.
ReplyDeleteI am also in a kindergarten classroom and I would like to see something similar to the "Reading for Meaning" that your CT does in the classroom. I think that its so important that students start out young expressing their thoughts and feelings about the books they read. And like you mentioned its a great way for each and every student to be "heard." My CT discusses the book with the students but I feel like there needs to be more interaction and discussion with the students instead of my CT doing all the talking and discussing.
ReplyDelete