5+Feb+10+MHTC+Session+3+Log

=**SESSION #: 3 (February 5, 2010)**=

Reflections:
Each member reflected on the group reading of chapter 5 and put their notes on their wiki page. The following are the highlights of the discussion that ensued after reviewing each other comments:


 * Both Janine and Neil tried the technique “make your own questions” to help students connect with the text. Both liked the technique but need more work with it. One problem is the time recommended to teach the questions is too long for a content classroom. Just giving the students the assignments without teaching the process didn’t develop the higher level responses as was hoped. Janine didn’t like the name of the higher level questions and Laura felt like it would be best to name the questions after Bloom’s taxonomy, since that is the type of thinking they illicit. Most students did very well with the right there questions but had more difficulty developing author and me and on my own questions.
 * Nicole found the summarizing an excellent technique for a content classroom. The scaffolding is great – good to incorporate reading strategies into journaling – 5 paragraphs each group did one then join together.
 * Laura particularly liked predicting with content area. She has found KWL charts can continue misconceptions rather than dispel them. Students don’t easily move past what they think they know even if it is incorrect. Janine also like predicting but used it as tool to engage students with the text. They would predict what they thought the article was about and then read to see if the article met predications. She used this with a Scientific American article on Linnaeus. The discussion was very good from this technique.
 * Sally also used predicting with her Math class. The results were not as good as hoped but did create a way for students to engage with text.
 * Ellen used the fishbowl and reciprocal teaching technique with Sally’s math students. The technique did seem contrived in the beginning but has benefit in the modeling it provides. She found the best application of the fish bowl was with peer leadership and team building. It is not as effective with content material as it is with interpersonal. The technique was eventually effective in math but it took multiple uses of it. Each time the group did better with the technique. The students used the technique with Prime factorization. The main draw back with the technique was that students were so attentive to steps of fish bowl that math content got lost but as they become more comfortable with fish bowl the content rose to the front.

New Work:

 * Ellen and Sally showed flip videos of the fish bowl technique and reciprocal teaching they used to teach the method of prime factorization to their 5th grade students.
 * One piece of evidence that the technique was effective was that after they did the fish bowl and the students were sent home with home work to use prime factorization, no parent notes were sent in the next day saying students could not do the homework.
 * They used the technique in a 5th grade math class – Sally’s class. This the first year she is using a serious math textbook. There are lots of words, symbols, highlighted words… She and Ellen have used techniques with the text they have demonstrated with the students in the other nonfiction reading. Can’t skim math.
 * She began the reciprocal teaching and fishbowl as a demo with her modeling how to be the discussion leader. She listed the steps the students would follow and then they did groups of teaching. The first group videoed was long but each successive group became more efficient and concise with the technique. Students on the outside of the fishbowl were able to hear the technique modeled and discussed a few times.
 * 2nd video – Student discussion leader – students look at books, not much talking – all reading. Outside group very attentive. (What was the role of the observers – saw some writing things down). Level of questions by discussion leader – “what did you find interesting? “
 * 3rd video – questioning got better. “Did anyone think something is confusing? Any words you need to know?” Conversation about math not just about feelings- how did the essays teach the prime factors but the discussion was not always accurate. Sally hoped someone would correct the leader, but that needed to be coached by her.
 * Time spend on the process was about 60 minutes.
 * Ellen also briefly showed guideoramas. The purpose of these is to chunk reading. The text book is not student friendly and students are not textbook savvy so not using their brains to read. Chunking material is good and uses many levels of questions – right there questions, draw an answer. She first models the guideorama with the class, and then moved to small groups. She thinks the technique works well because it engages the social aspect of learning. She uses it for science and social studies.


 * //**Interesting notes about this demo:**//
 * Student work is the flip video. In the video we noticed students facing each other, books open – model this is a discussion so don’t have to raise your hands. Made some of the more talkative students quiet – too much attention. Students noted that the text used color and font used to make things stand out.
 * All of the class was engaged (unlike a typical math class), both those on the outside of the fish bowl and those on the inside.
 * The process does take time – not covering as much content because process is long.
 * Nicole felt that the time might be justified because in the end student learn to read for information. Could just have one group for each topic – and not all groups do it.
 * Sally mentioned adding an empty chair so students on the outside of the fishbowl could step in and ask a question and then leave as it was answered. Also slipping the discussion leader a question when math content was not as great.
 * Eric noted that this is really two strategies. One is a fish bowl – metacognitive and the other reciprocal teaching a reading strategy.
 * Guidearama would work with older students – they make the questions – tie it in with the level questions of the text (Eric). Janine – also could have students have another student do their guidearama. This gives an authentic use of the textbooks (Eric).
 * Eric named the strategies that these techniques addressed, using books trying to improve reading and writing instruction – how to engage students with text book reading. America’s choice also uses guidearama (Nicole). Might even say to skip sections when reading. Can also do a scavenger hunt (Sally). The take away lesson is that content teachers do address reading and writing strategies as a means to help students master the content.
 * We discussed the method of using the flip camera to document work and learning. Eric suggested that watching the flip video of a fishbowl might allow an even deeper discussion of both the process and the content with the class. Eric borrowed the MHTC flip camera to experiment with his class. Neil is interested in using the flip video as a way to critique student developed arguments. This way students would be able to think metacognitiviely about their work. They see and discuss the choices they made when developing their agreement.
 * Ellen felt a strong point for using student generated videos and the fishbowl is that students are learning from other students. Students modeling comprehension strategies is more engaging for other students.

Next Steps:

 * Neil, Nicole, and Paulette will present their content literacy work at the next session. Nicole is working with journals and has some findings she would like to discuss with group.
 * Due to life conflicts, Lisa has pulled out of the group but hopes to continue the work in the future.
 * Read and be prepared to discuss text chapters 6 and 7.