The title of the article written by Kelleen Toohey accurately describes what I thought of the first grade observations made in the public school in Canada. The author uses the term, legitimate peripheral participation by which learners move toward “full participation” as they engage in community practices over time. The three main components of the author’s observations were the location of participants, the management of material, and the source of the intellectual resources needed to complete school tasks. From the evidence given in the article, I do not believe these students met the “legitimate” peripheral participation.
The first observation was the location of participants. The teacher assigned each student to a desk where most L2 learners of English were seated next to a native L1 English speaker. Most of the L2 learners of English were seated up front by the teacher. I believe this seating arrangement went well throughout the year because students could engage in conversation with native English speakers. The problem that I have is that the teacher did not allow the students to move around and speak to others. This could be problematic because it as if the teacher is inexplicably saying that the L2 learners of English are not capable to speak to others, only to the teacher herself or to the person next to them.
The next observation that was collected was the aspect of “using your own things.” Each student had to use their own things. Borrowing and lending led to a little social interaction, some conflict, and physical movement in the classroom. The problem was that some students were actively using the act of borrowing to sustain frequent interactions with one another. I believe the act of borrowing can help with conversing with one another, but with the assigned placement of seats, how could students lend or borrow materials without getting out of their seats to ask their peers? I believe the teacher put too much emphasis on the assigned seating and should adjust her ideas of “using your own things.”
Lastly, the author collected evidence of the source of the intellectual resources needed to complete school tasks. The author states that from time to time the teacher organized the children in small groups. In my opinion, the teacher should use an ample of scaffolding strategies such as, small groups, individual work, pairing, and choral. In a classroom where more than half of the students are L2 English language learners, it is imperative that the students are engaged in the curriculum at all times. In all, the teacher’s approach seemed to me a bit controlling. She should probably re-think in the organization of her classroom.
I agree with you when you say that the teacher did not alow the students to move around and frequently interact with other students. I feel that this should be key to encourage as much interaction as the students can get, thus in turn their English skills will greatly benefit. I also think that the way the classroom was set up made it hard for the students to interact. Instead they focused more on individual work, which I feel added to the negative atmosphere of competition. The author used some dialogue to show this when a Student One said: "Ms. Whatever, He's looking at my work." and then the teacher said, "Now lets keep our eyes on our own work and work alone.." or whatever blah blah blah.
ReplyDeleteIn my blog i said that I would have the desks be in a circle and I would base a lot of my instruction off of group work. The environment of the classroom is one of the key factors in how the students benefit. Obviously this teacher in Canada was blind to the negative effects her classroom was having on the students :/
I agree that she should definitely rethink her organization. She is stifling the opportunities her students could have by allowing these interactions. Learning English is not just academic, but also social (BICS and CALP!) The other problem I had with her organization, to add to yours, was the fact that some of the students were not paired with someone that they actually talked to. I understand that you cannot pair every student in the classroom with someone they are comfortable talking to, but because of this fact you should allow movement to compensate for it. You brought up some really interesting points. Also, was the school you observed in Canada dual language? It sounds like that was a great experience!
ReplyDelete