Of the types of classroom talk discussed throughout the readings, I think that my CT engages her classroom in "response-centered talk." Every time she reads a story to them, conducts any type of reading and/or comprehension assessment, or wants her students to produce any type of response to the story, in order to assess this, she asks a lot of questions to produce the type of response she wants to receive. I think that while this can be productive, it also doesn't give the students the ability to freely discuss what they think was important about the story, what they liked and/or disliked, or how the story relates to them. In McGee's Response-Centered Talk article, she addresses the fact that at first, the response-centered talk does not seem productive, which is how I feel when my CT uses this approach. I do see how it can be effective though, especially because if students are unsure of how to respond to a story and/or comprehend it, guiding questions are beneficial. However, solely conducting conversations based on questions generated by the teacher isn't as productive for the students' ability to develop their own discussion, which is why I feel this approach isn't as creative as prompting the students and asking them to discuss. I don't think that my students have the ability as first graders to effectively have a structured conversation and respond to each other to continue a lengthy discussion, but my CT also asks repetitious questions that guide the students to responding in the way that she wants them to.
When McGee addresses what she calls the "hallmarks" of response-centered talk, it addresses exactly why I think this type of talk is most effective especially for our first grade students. She says that it doesn't necessarily evaluate the students' responses for "correctness," but provides an open-ended invitation for students to contribute to discussion and evaluate how the story relates to them and build a better understanding of the book. In addition, she compares response-centered talk to a "good dinner conversation," which is a great analogy and sums up the idea of response-centered talk to someone who may not know and/or understand the idea. I think that in order to scaffold students to participate in this type of talk, questions need to be thought of prior to the book in order to evaluate the effectiveness of the discussion. While I believe that my CT mostly tries to participate in response-centered talk, the questions that she sometimes asks make the process not effective. I think that questions need to be more specific than vague, such as what McGee provides, "Do you think Rosie knew the fox was behind her?" Later, the teacher asks the students, "Why?" which is also beneficial to discussion. My CT mostly vaguely asks for students' opinions of the story, such as if they liked or disliked the story, which not only doesn't assess students' understanding of the story, but doesn't further press their thinking by asking them "Why (or why not)?"
In my opinion, response-centered talk is most beneficial with younger grades, and is definitely something I would use in my classroom. It is a big help if discussion skills are lacking within the classroom, and provides the students with more opportunities to talk, and the teacher with more opportunities to scaffold the discussion if need be, but allows the students to begin to lead the discussion as they become more comfortable as well.
I found the assigned readings for today very interesting. Before reading the Almasi, Goldenberg and Weinstein readings I never thought of recitation in terms of an elementary classroom. Recitation has always been a term that I associated with a college level course. The readings helped to show me that the talk in relation to literacy in my placement classroom is mostly, if not always a recitation as opposed to a discussion.
ReplyDeleteIn relation to Kaitlin’s post, I agree with many of her statements. Although I didn’t read the same article as Kaitlin did for the jigsaw activity, as I read the Goldenberg article on instructional conversations and Kaitlin read the McGee article on response centered talk, I feel that in regards to literacy in my placement classroom my CT uses the same kind of talk that Kaitlin’s CT does. I have seen my CT carry out actual discussions as opposed to recitations, and instructional conversations as opposed to response centered talk in science, but not when it comes to literacy the talk is mainly response centered or a recitation. Similar to Kaitlin’s CT, my CT reads a story or does an activity where she looks for a one and only correct answer throughout the talk that accompanies reading the book or completing the activity.
I agree with Kaitlin in thinking that response centered talk has advantages along with disadvantages. I think that response centered talk is appropriate in many instances such as to check for students comprehension, for students to help each other put information together and to provide a teacher with the opportunity to interact with all of his/her students. But, I also think that there are many instances in which discussion should be used rather than recitation or response centered talk. Teachers cannot use response centered talk at all times, along with Kaitlin I feel that teachers can not solely depend on response centered talk as students will not develop critical thinking and reasoning skills though solely this type of talk.
While Kaitlin says that her CT usually asks questions such as whether her students like or dislike a story my CT asks students to make predictions or summarize with her questioning. I think that Kaitlin is right in saying that response centered talk is better for teachers to use with students in lower grades as this type of talk can be used to introduce students to the idea of academic discussion and gain experience in sharing their ideas with their teacher and peers out-loud. But, the shift needs to be made to more discussion as opposed to recitation, and more instructional conversation as opposed to response centered talk as soon as students can handle a more actual discussion type of talk to help students develop their critical thinking and reasoning skills.
Kaitlin and Jenn,
ReplyDeleteThis is really thoughtful posting. You both did a nice job laying out the differences between discussion (Almasi's definition, at least) and response-centered talk, another discussion-based teaching strategy.
I'm glad that you are both noticing the ways that your CT uses discussion vs. recitation and other approaches. I've found that most teachers use a blend of many of these strategies, including some direct instruction, throughout the day. But, often the discussion is the technique that gets overlooked. Some day, you might actually keep a log of the questions your CT asks after reading a book, or something similar. Charting the conversation can help to see the fine-grain differences between these different approaches.
After reading Kaitlin and Jenn's posts, I agree with many of the things that they have said. Kaitlin and I have the same placement classroom, so I can agree with everything that she has seen. Our CT does use response centered talk during most of her literacy time and does not really use the recitation method. However, after reading my article, the Triplett and Buchanan article, I can see how my CT uses book talks in her classroom.
ReplyDeleteIn the Triplett and Buchanan article, the authors discussed their research on book talks and how they improve comprehension, interest and keeping students engaged while reading. Book talks are mostly beneficial before reading, but they are also a helpful tool to use when adding on to the guided questions that are usually at the back of the teacher's edition of the book.
In the classroom, my CT uses book talks when she is using the class set of books that are used to work on specific elements of literacy. These books also include the spelling words for the week. When my CT introduces a new story, she asks the students to tell her the title and then to predict what might happen in the story. After she gets a few responses, she sometimes asks the students to go through the book and take a picture walk to see what happens in the story. Then she will ask the class what they think will happen, and then they start reading the book. I have also seen my CT stop while reading the story to ask the class what has happened thus far and if they can predict anything new.
Although my CT doesn't do this all of the time, I think it is a good start to improve comprehension and interest in reading. There are a lot of struggling readers in my class, and I think that if she did this more often, it would really benefit some students in her classroom. I think that for some of the students, asking them questions individually about their interests would help them be able to speak up more in class. There are a few students who do not raise their hands when my CT asks the class a question, but it would be interesting to see how they would react if they were asked individually.