Tags: goals, strategies
I like to begin the school year with helping my students to set some goals. As the year progresses, we do more and more goal setting and continue our discussions about goals and objectives until all of my students have internalized their own academic goals and breathe it everyday.
This year, we begin with a quickwrite about what they want to learn in third grade. It was the very first thing they did, before I even introduced myself as their teacher.
To make it interesting, we put it in the form of a peek over book. The kids love it.
At this point, I don’t know who’s behavior is worse, the students or the teachers!
Now is not the time to slack off. For the last few weeks, I noticed a definite pattern. When I feel tired and plan for “fun” activities so that kids are “enthusiastic” about school is when I have the most behavior problems. When I plan and execute rigorous lesson plans, my kids revert back to their pleasant, well-behaved student mode.
Here’s a link to a Responsive Classroom strategy, Interactive Modeling, that I’ve been using to remind my students of proper behavior. I’ve noticed a significant difference in my students behavior after I’ve started using this strategy. At the very least, my students don’t act as if I’ve never taught them rules and routines before.
Interactive Modeling uses several forms of modeling to teach rules and routines. The teacher models, the students model, and then the students practice. The interactive and physical modeling is far more successful at teaching rules and routines than simply telling students what to do. This is particularly true of inner city kids, many of whom are English Language Learners and Standard English Learners and need the scaffolding that Interactive Modeling provides.
I’ve only discovered this strategy in April when this article came out, but I have added it to my repertoire of teaching skills. I definitely intend on using this strategy repeatedly at the beginning, middle, and end of the next school year.
My previous post explores some of the philosophy behind Culturally Relevant Teaching (CRT), or the whys. This post, I want to explore some of the hows. That really is what we need.
If you are reading Part 2 of my posts, then I assume that I am preaching to the choir. You already intuitively know why CRT is a good thing and you want to do it. So how do we go about integrating CRT into our daily instruction to maximize student learning?
High Expectation – from Can’t to the Absolutely Can
Do you have high expectation of your diverse students? Do you really believe that everyone can learn and succeed? OR Do you answer, “Yes, but ______.” If you qualify your answer with “but” then you do NOT have high expectations for your diverse students. You can stop reading this post right now and go pick up some books with researches that prove again and again that ALL students can learn, regardless of color, ethnicity, gender, socio-economic background, parental involvement, whatever. Until you believe absolutely that all of your students can learn, can be the A student, then nothing that you read or try will help your students any. I don’t know how else to put it. The anonymity of the internet blog allows me to write this, “If you don’t have high expectations for all your students, then you SUCK as a teacher compared to what you can truly do.” (I just know I’m about to get another slew of e-mails attacking me. *ducks*)
What does high expectation look like in the classroom setting? Here is another real life example from my school.
All teachers are trained to use Thinking Maps, targeted graphic organizers. In particular, all teachers are trained to use these graphic organizers along with sentence frames to help students communicate orally and in writing. All teachers. I took a walk with many other teachers, just to see examples of writing in the classrooms, as part of our professional development. With one exception, all first grade teachers had their students copy teacher created writing samples from the board. By this I mean in all subject areas, in all topics, just all writing samples were teacher created, student copied. These teachers expected that their students can not write and so do not even give them the opportunity to try. The one exception is a first year teacher who doesn’t have that low expectation. In fact, she has high expectation. She expects her students to write coherently and she gave them the support they need to do so. She gave them the sentence frames, without filling it in for them. She gave them Thinking Maps from which they can pull words and ideas. She lets them go at it. Some students made mistakes and she helped correct the mistakes without taking over the students’ writings. High expectation.
Having high expectation is probably the most difficult part of being culturally responsive, because it’s just so easy to blame the students for failure, and so hard to say, maybe I’m not teaching very well.
If you answer with an unqualified yes, then let’s move on to other, easier strategies for integrating culturally relevant teaching.
Part 3 – We Communicate Differently – Coming soon to a blog near you!
Our dominant, white culture communicates very differently from the cultures of our diverse students. Visit my post on how we organize our communication differently. Next post will go more in depth into this and how to utilize this difference in the classroom.
As a teacher, we’ve all heard the terms. We’ve all been told to use it. We’ve all been trained. I know I have. We’ve even piecemeal integrated one or two strategies into our teaching. Many of us are still VERY confused as to what it is and how it’s any different from what we’ve been doing. I know I was!
Here is an exploration of Culturally Relevant Teaching from the perspective of one teacher who is beginning to take ownership and really see direct impact in his classroom.
Primary Resources: Culturally Responsive Teaching by Geneva Gay and How to Teach Students Who Don’t Look Like You by Bonnie M. Davis. Geneva Gay’s book really explores the theory and the whys of CRT(Culturally Relevant Teaching). Bonnie Davis’s book explores YOUR experiences and gives practical strategies.
What is Culturally Relevant Teaching?
It goes by a few name. Culturally Responsive Teaching. Culturally Relevant Pedagogy. Variations thereof. In a nutshell, CRT is respecting the student’s complex culture and individual strengths to teach in a rigorous manner that will lead to academic success. That’s a mouthful.
We want all of our students to be academically successful. Every year, the faces that look back at us in the classroom is more and more diverse. The numbers from standardized tests tell us that there is a persistent “achievement gap”, meaning students of color are not doing as well as white American students. The students are becoming more and more disconnected from education, with worsening behavior problems, and less and less motivation to succeed in school, or so it seems. Many teachers feel frustrated, some even hopeless.
CRT proposes a very convincing argument as to why that achievement gap persists and how we can change our teaching so that our students of color has the best chance of academic success.
Culture counts. That is a premise of CRT and two powerful words that truly affected me. Culture counts. The culture of the diverse students, absolutely, but also the culture of our educational institution and the teachers teaching.
The American educational institution was built by and for the dominant culture, white, middle class, Anglo-Saxon, Protestants. That culture has been entrenched into education to such a degree that we, as fish, don’t see the water through which we swim, nor do we see the cultural norms that exist and force upon our students who DON’T in fact, come from a white, middle class background.
We expect students to sit and listen attentively. That sounds perfectly logical to those of us raised in a middle class educational environment. It is, in fact, logical in all culture. It just looks different. When we say “sit and listen attentively”, we mean sit straight up in the chair, eyes on the speaker, hands still, mouths quiet. In many other culture, African American culture for one, “sit and listen attentively” means moving, nodding and clapping in agreement, yelling out encouragement, nudging the person sitting next to you, and quite often, being really attentive means standing up, not sitting at all. So, when our little black students start moving in class when we speak, we yell at them to sit still. We’ve also just told them to stop listening.
We expect, and teach our students from a young age, to raise their hands and take turn to speak so that it is fair to everyone. Conversation in the classroom is between the teacher and one other student only. Everyone else is expected to listen until it’s their turn. In our individualistic society, that makes sense. In other, more communal society, it doesn’t make sense at all. Everyone is expected to contribute to the conversation. In the classroom, what this looks like is that our students of color call out to the teacher and to each other during discussions. Once again, we tell our students to raise their hands before speaking…and we’ve also told them to stop contributing to the conversation.
Two of our most basic assumptions about teaching clearly clashes with the cultures of our diverse students and tell our students to stop learning! And our students obey. They stop learning. A little at a time until, by fourth and fifth grade, teachers throw their hands up in despair, wondering what they could do.
How to Teach Students Who Don’t Look Like You by Bonnie M. Davis does a great job of helping us to examine our cultural lenses and then readjust our teaching so that we can actually teach our students. Do take a look at it and see what other assumptions about teaching that we hold as logical norms, when in fact it is detrimental to our students of color.
Why should we be mindful of CRT and actively seek to integrate it into our daily classroom instruction? I won’t go deep into this discussion. I figure, if you’ve read this far, then you already want to do it, you just want to know how. Culturally Responsive Teaching by Geneva Gay does a fantastic, and thorough job of discussing why we should use CRT. I highly recommend that every teacher should read Geneva Gay’s book.
I won’t go in-depth into culturally responsive/relevant teaching right now, but I just want to go on record as saying I just finished it and wow! What an amazing, deep, though-provoking book examining different aspects of culturally relevant teaching. I have a deeper understanding of what it is on a theoretical basis and am quite happy that I have included many features of culturally relevant teaching in my classroom instruction already. I am prepared to do more.
If you haven’t already, pick up a copy and read it for yourself.
Again, that’s Culturally Responsive Teaching by Geneva Gay.
About two weeks ago, I had the opportunity to visit a high school American History class and what I saw shocked me.
On the board was listed 10 weeks worth of homework assignments by due dates:
- Chapter 1
- Chapter 2
- Chapter 3
- Q&A, pg blah blah
- Chapter 4
- Chapter 5
- The Constitution
Well, at least there was clear expectations…for the materials that the students need to cover. What exactly are the students supposed to learn of American History? I don’t know, but I do know they need to read a chapter a week, who cares what the chapter’s about.
Perhaps I’m alone in looking at the list and feeling outraged.
Somehow, I thought History class should be more interesting, more involved, more though provocative given the state of our country today.
Now, keeping in mind that I’m a second grade teacher and that MY American History teacher taught in the EXACT same manner as above and I don’t remember a THING about American History, here’s a proposed list of assignments that I would have liked to have seen on the board.
- Who lived in pre-colonial America? Choose one people to read up on, create an artifact relevant to these people and be prepared for show-and-tell.
- What happened to indigenous population once European settlement of the Americas began? Choose a side, pro or con, and be prepared for a debate on the benefits of European settlement.
- Could colonial America be built without the use of slavery? Be prepared for a debate on the pros and cons of slavery. You will be assigned a side at the time of the debate.
- Was it ethical for colonial America to declare independence from Great Britain? Write a Declaration of Independence to secede California from the U.S. You may work with partners or alone.
And so on.
It’s not as if as a teacher you would need to create new materials. The mandated textbook could be used to find all this information. Of course, some students might decide it’s worth their time to look up the information on the Internet, maybe even a library search, or a discussion with their parents…
I don’t know. I’m not a History teacher. Maybe you History teachers can weigh in on this. What do you think?
One of the tenets of Culturally Responsive Teaching is that students from different cultural background would have different communication styles which may clash with the communication style of the teacher. So, how do we teach students who communicate differently from us?
In America, the dominant way to organize communication is “topic-centered”. We focus on one topic at a time and logically follow through to a conclusion in an orderly manner. It’s very linear. If we are part of the dominant culture, we automatically think this is the correct way of organizing our thinking, our speech, and our writing.
Research have shown that Latinos, African Americans, Native Americans and Hawaiians are inclined toward topic-associative style of organizing communication. This style is thematic, associative, and integrative. A topic-centered communicator would view this form of communication as rambling, straying off topic, and not organized, when in fact, the topic-associative communicator is giving you ALL the information, ALL the associations, EVERYTHING relevant to the topic.
In the Classroom
Be honest, in the classroom, particularly in a culturally diverse classroom, how many of you teachers think that your ethnic students are ramblers and don’t communicate well and that their writing is awful and disorganized? I can point to each child and give an illustration of how the child is a topic-associative communicator in my classroom, and if I didn’t know about the difference in communication style, I would have immediately said my students are disorganized thinkers. In actuality, they are organized in an associative manner, not topic-centered.
Here’s an anecdote. My grandmother would try to tell these stories about her past. However, for us young grandkids, she never quite got to the “point” of the stories. She never gave us a plot with a problem and a solution or a punchline. We never got to hear the ending of the stories because we got impatient and walked away. Why? She would spend all her time talking about the people and places related to the stories. “Once, your grandfather took me to visit Uncle so and so. Remember Uncle so and so? He had that daughter who married so and so. What was her name? I think her name was so and so. He gave her a pig for her wedding day. That was a great day. Your aunt so and so was there…” We missed the entire point of why grandmother was talking with us..she was talking about people, not plotlines. Grandmother was very much a topic-associative communicator.
How to Bridge the Styles in Writing – An Example
As a culturally responsive teacher who wants to use the students’ strengths to build a bridge to academic success in a dominant culture that IS topic-centered, what do you do?
Well, I’ve been thinking about why the way I’ve been teaching writing has been such a success with my inner city students. I build in all sorts of scaffold. I give them all sorts of graphic organizers. I expect and receive successful writings. All this and more.
But, looking at it through the lens of communication styles, I can clearly see now that I have created a bridge from one style to the other for my students, using the strength of one and carefully teaching my students how to do the other. Or, to be more precise, “Write from the Beginning”, the writing program, has built this bridge. I merely strengthen it.
Looking carefully at how I teach writing using Thinking Maps, we can see that we start with my students’ strength, topic-association, by using a Circle Map. First in conversation, then in the graphic organizers, my students are encouraged to think about and write down everything that is associated with and related to the writing topic. Because we are using a circle to organize our thinking, everything is related and nothing is more important than the other. We honor all associations.
Next, we start making decisions about what we need to focus on, beginning the bridge to a topic-centered piece of writing. We do this through a Tree Map, picking out three main ideas. We then move to a Flow Map and piece, by piece, organizing our ideas in a topic-centered sequence, moving from one completed idea to the next and coming to a conclusion.
Our final writing is very much topic-centered and would please any topic-centered communicator.
When I remove this bridge, my second graders immediately produce writing that is topic-associative because that is their communication style. That bridge is clearly not solid yet and my students still need scaffolding, but as we continue working together throughout the year, my students will become more adept at crossing that bridge independently.
My goal of course is for my students to be able to use two styles of communication and be able to make decisions about when is appropriate to use one or the other. Already, I see two students who are able to do this by themselves, with minimal guidance.
Lately, this topic has been on my mind. I would like to examine a “case study” to illustrate how physical space and what I jokingly call psychical space must align in order to produce real learning.
In this real classroom at my school, a teacher arranges the tables and chairs into groups of six students. The students face each other. The table groups are arranged throughout the overall classroom. The teacher explains that this fosters collaborative group learning.
On the surface, this sounds like a good idea.
The table groups are arranged in such a way that there is no “carpet space”, a place for the students to come together on the carpet throughout the day to interact as a whole class. The students are expected to remain at their tables and not interact with students at the neighboring tables. The teacher has a desk at the front of the class and stays there. He does not rotate or walk among the students. Students in the “collaborative” groups are expected to work quietly at their individual work, with very little small group work assigned. In reality, the students are isolated from each other and from the teacher. There is no real collaborative learning going on. (Also, because I’m nitpicky, a third of the students face the back of the class, a third face the sides, and only a third face the front where the teacher is and where instruction takes place.)
Almost any physical arrangements in the classroom can work to enhance learning, so long as teacher thinks through what the goals are in the classroom.
This teacher wanted a physical space that fosters collaborative group learning. To make it work, he needs to arrange his teaching to foster collaborative group learning as well. He needs to teach students how to work in groups in a focused manner and then have students actually work in groups in a focused manner, not just do quiet individual work sitting in a group. He needs to collaborate with the students as well by interacting with them, moving among them, having conversations with each group and each student. To further enhance collaborative group learning, he can change the groups for different activities, have students present to each other, have different groups converse with each other. While not necessary, I prefer a carpet space where all students can come together and discuss as a whole group in close proximity to each other and with the class. If the arrangement of the tables don’t have all students facing the “front” of the class, then have instruction take place all over the classroom.
So, what’s your physical space and psychical space like?
Please leave comments with your reflection or link back from your blog.
For this coming week, I will be participating in Unit Opener Planning Week (and hope you will be too!). This is primarily geared toward Open Court units, but always take ideas that you like and tweak them to suit your needs!
Okay, here’s my first idea which I heard through a colleague and hope to implement at my school.
Have collaborative unit openers among your grade level.
Among your grade level, have each teacher create one truly exciting 30 minutes unit opener lesson, rather than plan for an entire day of unit openers. On the day of the unit opener, each teacher will teach the one lesson to each class, rotating from one classroom to the next. The benefits are many. Teachers collaborate. Teachers are only responsible for planning one 30 minutes lesson, but students benefit from 3 or 4 or 5 excellent lessons. Students get to meet and experience being taught by different teachers, different modalities, different styles. On a more selfish level, because teachers are teaching someone else’s students and know that other teachers will be teaching your students, you tend to feel competitive and want to create the “best” lesson, pushing your unit openers to a higher level of rigor and fun.
I can’t wait to try this at my school!
Please visit Creating Lifelong Learners by Mathew Needleman this coming week to participate in or get ideas for opening up a learning unit. This is geared toward Open Court units, but I say, you can always get ideas for your own units and anthologies! So come along for this exciting collaboration!
I will be participating as well and posting my ideas here on this blog, but there will be many, many teachers and coaches creating excellent ideas all across the web. Please do consider joining in!