Today’s ELA Students:
The world we live in today within Canada is one of diversity, and this is something that is very important to take in to consideration as a teacher. Diversity in the classroom does not just relate to the fact that some children will have different racial, cultural, or religious backgrounds from various parts of the world. It is important to keep in mind that diversity relates to socioeconomic status, gender, and the family environment. When mentioning family environment, I am referring to the fact that some children do not come from 2 heterosexual parents, or even live with more than 1 parent, or live with “mom” or “dad”, and this means it is important to be wary of our rhetoric and literature in class. With this all in mind it is imperative that as a teacher we try to create the best possible climate and curriculum to foster positive growth and development (Bainbridge, 2009, p. 15). As the IRP (2006, p. 25) rightly puts forth, with regards to diversity and teaching ELA, “One size does not fit all.” This requires teachers to be able to adapt their lessons and pedagogy according to the diversity and funds of knowledge of children. This entails that teachers who are sensitive to their own discourse patterns and to the discourse patterns of the students in the classroom, will be able to more effectively aid non-English speaking children, as well as those who may struggle in certain areas (Bainbridge, 2009, p. 44). Tailoring ELA for children of different backgrounds, genders, and socioeconomic status is all part of being a teacher.
How Do These Diverse Students in ELA Learn?
There are different ways a student may learn ELA. It is noted that people have different learning styles (maybe?) and thus the way a student will learn is varied and dependent on a learning style. However, there are some core components of teaching ELA that are important to keep in mind. These are from Cambourne’s conditions for literacy learning. They are: engagement, immersion, demonstration, expectation, responsibility, use, approximation, and response (Bainbridge, 2009, p. 23). If these conditions can be met by a teacher, a child should flourish in and enjoy ELA. Teaching ELA is not as simple as having the children read words aloud, or read a book quietly, or be able to spell/write; it is much more than that. ELA transcends the real world and it teaches children how to function in society. First and foremost, I feel, engagement and immersion is one the most important keys. Children usually learn better when they are having fun and immersed in the subject area. As a teacher, it is up to us to create this type of environment, whether it be through group work (such as literacy centres or Tea Party lessons), drama, art, etc. It is vital that students are able to make personal connections, and not just be able to read, write, and comprehend. What I also found very important was the release of responsibility from the teacher. Once we have laid the foundation, a teacher should give the children more freedom, as shown in the IRP (2006, p. 23). This would allow children to make choices and have a voice in what interests them in the subject of ELA, but to also allow them a chance to give themselves feedback and criticism. When teaching ELA, we must keep in mind the diversity of the classroom and funds of knowledge, but also recognize that students learn in different and unique ways and that it is important to use Cambourne’s conditions as a solid guideline to helping us to develop a pedagogy that will allow us to deliver ELA in an effective manner.
The IRP: Good or Bad, hmmmmm:
The IRP is a great resource for beginning students, as it lays the foundation for sound teaching and provides a guideline. The IRP allows an inexperienced teacher to be able to read into some of the concerns and considerations when teaching a specific subject. For example, the IRP for ELA, has a long and detailed list of considerations for teaching ELA, much of it might not be blatantly apparent to the new teacher. A couple that stood out to me was the dimensions of written language: cueing systems, the scale of most support to least support for writing, and beginning with the end in mind with students. These areas covered aspects of ELA that a new teacher would be unaware of and by learning these, we are able to form our own pedagogical ideas and thinking on the subject. The PLO’s are also of great assistance for the new teacher. They clearly show what children should be able to do, and how any lesson given, must fit into at least one of the PLO’s. The PLO’s also serve as a guide to understanding what developmental level a child is at in ELA, and what area a student is strong and weak in. Oracy is something often assumed, and the PLO’s in the IRP are an excellent reference point to judging a child’s interactive and social ability, and that a teacher can create lessons to help promote this.
Along with the good comes the bad or critical points of the IRP. The PLO’s provide a certain expectation of the skills the student’s will achieve and master over the year. But this standardization of skills/performance may be too high or low for students. Since children learn differently, and at different speeds, it almost seems inevitable that some of the skills will be forgotten or possibly never achieved. This brings up our own expectation levels and how this plays a role in deciding what PLO’s need to be covered and how quickly and well our students learn them. This might lead in to the issue of the Pygmalion effect in the classroom given the diversity of children, funds of knowledge, and also in how they learn? The IRP as good as it may be, comes with its faults. I feel as if it is an excellent foundation for new teachers, but it is our own responsibility to go out and figure out what works pedagogically; we need to build upon what the IRP has initially taught us. Possibly leads into alternative pedagogies and teaching (Montessori)?
No comments:
Post a Comment