Student Motivation and Learner Differences

One of my favorite activities this week was one in which the students focused on orbits in relation to the solar system. With as hands-on as the lesson was, i also got the feeling the students thoroughly enjoyed it, as well! While I’d love to say I thought of this activity on my own, I cannot take credit. The activity came from Callella and Marks’ Integrating Science with Reading Instruction, a book full of third and fourth grade science units that involve reading comprehension strategies. I began a unit on the solar system, and wanted students to understand how orbits affect the various planets in our solar system, as well as their relationship to the sun.

This activity had the students tying a piece of string to a chalkboard eraser, and twirling it in the air to see what an orbit looks like. With the use of a ball rolling, it allowed students to see inertia (the force that keeps the planets spinning). It also demonstrated the force of gravity through having them hold a book for exactly one minute, with one hand. Aside from the hands-on activities in this lesson, we discussed (as a whole-group) each element the students were to become familiar with. I was nervous beforehand about only having 7 erasers and one kickball for 22 students. The lesson called for materials for each student, and a tennis ball, specifically. Therefore, I was anxious about having to put the students in small groups.

Turns out, because the students were able to test these things out in small groups, rather than independently, this may have been my best science lesson the entire semester. The elements this really illustrated were 4.1, 5.1, and 5.3, which all had to do with different approaches to learning, and group motivation. Although I was nervous about grouping the students, I am aware that many of my students learn best that way. While there are a few that learn best independently, they were also reached through the opportunity that every child received to conduct each part of the experiment. Visual learners were able to see gravity and inertia in action, kinesthetic learners could make those things happen, and auditory learners could benefit from the discussions following each experiment. Since students were able to start the lesson with what they knew, watch me conduct the experiment, and then build up to connecting that with new concepts, their thought processes really developed.

That was evident in their written and oral responses throughout the unit. As far as group motivation, students were required in the first few weeks of school to sign a “Science Conduct Contract.” That contract stated that inappropriate behaviors would not be tolerated, and result in the student being removed from the lesson, and given an alternate assignment. The students also agreed to complete “less-fun” work, along with all the fun activities held in class. Therefore, between students’ desire to remain in the classroom and participate in the lesson, being able to roll a ball off the desks, and the opportunity to throw an eraser across the room, I never felt as if the students were not engaged. I wish I had taped that lesson!

Teacher-Made Tests

Last week I began a unit on Stone Fox, in which I used a variety of assessment techniques. When planning the unit, I was given the materials my host teacher had used in the past. Between all the various questions/worksheets/activities found in those materials, I decided to use parts of each of them to “create” my own sheets. My reviews included the use of context clues to understand the definition of vocabulary words, as well as a variety of questions with regards to the main events in the story, sequencing, inferring, and recalling details. After the first five chapters, they were given a vocabulary matching test.

Upon grading that test, I realized that I had made a mistake. I felt it was good to test their vocabulary, specifically, aside from their comprehension and ability to recall details. While the testing was not necessarily the problem, I couldn’t help but feel I’d made a mistake in creating my own test, rather than listening to their invented definitions. Looking back, I should have had the students agree on a definition for each word, writing that definition on the board, and possibly doing some classroom activities to help the students better grasp those concepts. Instead, I just used definitions from the classroom set of Merriam-Webster Elementary Dictionaries to create my matching tests. While it would be good for students to be able to relate the two definitions, this was not a consistent measurement of their learning for that book. While they were told not to use the dictionaries, that’s exactly what I did, and that wasn’t fair. Next time, I will keep this in mind when creating my own assessments.

Cooperative Learning

This week my class began a reading unit on the children’s novel Stone Fox by John Reynolds Gardiner. In my plans, I wanted them to cover one chapter daily. This would result in the completion of the unit within 2-3 weeks. Since this book was on a 3rd grade reading level, and I am in a 4th grade class, I felt this would be adequate time. Looking back, I definitely misread the situation!

The instructions were to introduce the book to the students, reading aloud the title and author. They would be given their chapter review, and told a few things to look for within the chapter. The review included 3-4 vocabulary words, and approximately five questions that would have them looking for main events, the order of events in the plot, and various comprehension questions. They would be partnered up, giving mixed-ability pairs, given time to ask questions, and turned loose to read!

In retrospect, one chapter daily was way too much for them. In fact, after getting about two days into the unit, they ended up covering about half of that material. This pushed the unit into a whole month, but gave them a little more time to absorb it. Previously, we had completed a whole-class unit on the book Winn-Dixie. In that first unit, the book was read to them aloud, and we covered several chapters daily. However, rather than being held accountable for independently making connections between what was asked and what was read, we held class discussions about that material. While I think having them read in pairs and discuss their “answers” before working independently helped with the actual reading of the text, I can’t say I was thrilled with how much it really helped their comprehension.

For some students, reading that novel alone would have taken twice as long. Some could have had it finished in half the time. By having the students read cooperatively, those rates were evened out a little more among the whole group. Still, for those slower readers, having someone to help read, but no one to help comprehend really put a kink in their ability to make connections to the text. Next time I do something like this, I feel it may be more beneficial to turn them loose one way or the other, consistently throughout the unit. In other words, I would have them read and work together, or read and work alone. Another solution I think may have been better for the students would have been to give them a small group (larger than pairs), or a classroom book discussion to talk with about what was read before moving on.

Parent-Teacher Conferences

Monday was my first parent-teacher conference night in this semester’s placement. Since it was an ISE day, parents were asked to schedule conferences throughout the afternoon and early evening hours. While all but a few of my twenty-two parents signed up, not all of them showed. As the other teachers predicted, the parents/families I was most interested in speaking with and meeting did not show up, even if they asked for a time-slot. While I cannot really say I was surprised, (that trend has been common throughout my placements) I was still hoping for a break in tradition.

Meeting the parents that did attend was a great experience, and I would not trade it for anything. Doing so really gave perspective into the students’ personalities, and sometimes tendencies. Not only did it provide a way for me to get to know the students better, it also gave me a chance to hear things from the students in the way they express them at home. For example, when directing comments like, “I will not repeat these directions again” to inattentive students, the attentive ones tend to hear it instead. Also, I figured out that those attentive students tend to pay more attention to the corrective comments than the ones those comments are directed toward. While I previously felt it was more considerate to make general comments than to point certain students out, I have now learned that may not always be the best way to handle certain situations. Along those same lines, attentive students need to feel certain they can ask for help when they need it without reprimand.

One of the biggest things I took home with me that night, was the reflection of how I interact with a certain student. After speaking with this student’s father during the conference, I wondered if I had been handling his behaviors correctly in the classroom. While I feel his disruptions in the classroom cannot be tolerated as they are, I also feel I may be too hard on him at times. With the child having a past I was not aware of, having him see me as “just another adult always on his back” is the last thing I want. This gives me a goal for the rest of the semester: Reach out to this child, while also decreasing his classroom disruptions. This also gave me a goal for the rest of my career: Get to know my students (especially those causing disruptions) better before allowing myself to get this far into the school year.

A Great Lesson

This week, I followed up the nouns from last week with a lesson on singular and plural nouns. This time, I had the students pass out the two-sided, dry-erase paddles, dry-erase markers, and paper towels. They were not permitted to have anything on their desks with the exception of those items, and a privacy folder. The sentences were displayed on the SmartBoard, and I used the “reveal” option to only show the part of the page I wished them to see.

This time, the class had averaged a 95% on their assignment! I think this was due to the fact that each of them was being held responsible for their participation in the lesson. While we did the activity as a whole group, I was able to assess their learning individually, because they had to provide individual answers. Not having anything else on their desk prevented them from being distracted by something else on the page in the text. If they did not have out pencil and paper, they could not begin to work ahead. The privacy folder made them give me their own answer, rather than their neighbor’s.

I felt really good about the lesson right after teaching it, but was nervous to “get my hopes up” after last week’s common/proper noun disaster. After grading their papers, I felt like I had a better handle on how to get their attention with language, even as abstract as it may be for them. Currently, I am trying to figure out other ways to teach those lessons in that style, but without the paddles. For now, the kids love them, but I fear there will come a time they will grow bored. This lesson has showed me that no matter what resources are used, the ultimate concern is how engaged each child is throughout the lesson, rather than how engaged one child is per problem.