I focused on the article “A New View of Discussion” by Janice F. Almasi. I thought this article was very interesting. I never thought about the differences between discussion and recitation. I sort of thought they were one in the same. When I thought of the word discussion, I correlated it with the I-R-E approach that was mentioned in the text. I-R-E (Initiate-Respond-Evaluate) falls under the category of recitation mainly because it does not elicit any meaning. The teacher asks students summary questions, the students respond, and the teacher evaluates their answers. I feel this sort of approach is found in most classrooms. However, I feel it’s found in most classrooms because it is found on most standardized tests as well.
A new definition of discussion is given in this article. The author defines it as a “collaborative attempt to construct meaning” (Almasi 4). Students take on certain roles such as inquisitor, facilitator, respondent, and evaluator which allow them to take responsibility for their own learning. Students are more engaged because as a collaborative whole they assign different meanings to the text. Students take on more of an active role because they are learning from each other. The article discusses the cognitive, social, emotional, and affective growth that takes place during appropriate discussions.
In terms of discussion, one of the most important roles to recognize, however, is the teacher’s role. As we have learned throughout our teacher education courses, the teacher’s role is the facilitator. The teacher only asks groups minimal questions, just to keep them on track if necessary. They should encourage interaction amongst students; they should not be the center of interaction which is what takes place in recitation. While reading this, I thought the only problem found with this new definition of “discussion” would be assessment. I was confused as to how a teacher would assess small groups of students informally discussing text. After further reading, the author listed many ways to assess if students accurately displayed knowledge of the text. For example, knowledge can be displayed in students’ abilities to communicate ideas, initiate questions, challenge their peers, question their own way of thinking, respond to others, ability to make text to text connections, or connect events, characters, problems to those of their own lives. Overall I really liked this new view of “discussion” and feel it would be extremely beneficial to a classroom.
2 comments:
I like how Erin made the connection between teachers using IRE and standardized tests. It makes me believe that while a lot of teachers would rather have discussion based classrooms, if they want their students to pass all of the district and state tests, they have to follow an IRE approach. It is sad that many teachers know the benefits of using discussion in their classrooms, but are forced to use a less beneficial method in order to prove that their students are learning the material. I know from personal experience that I understand material much more thoroughly if I talk it through, but when taking a test that is not an option for answering questions.
I also think that the difference between recitation and discussion is interesting. I also agree with you that in the majority of schools recitation is taught rather than discussion. I think that clarifying the difference between the two is also important because they are two completely different concepts.
I also liked how you defined discussion as a collaborative attempt to discuss meaning where students take certain roles during the discussion. I think that either having kids take roles or as a teacher assigning them roles is a good strategy to make sure that every child is involved in the activity you are addressing. It takes away from one student controlling the whole discussion and it promotes other students to get involved when they may have not otherwise.
I’m glad that you learned that there are several ways to assess students during a discussion. I think that assessing students during a discussion is more helpful then assessing them anywhere else. Formal assessment usually just requires memorization in the sense that you don’t really apply the information all that often. In discussion however you see how your students are thinking, what type of effort they are giving, and how they are applying what they are learning to what they already know. The only difficulty is that there is no way to really classify one kids thought process as an A- and another kid at a D+. It sounds like you took a lot out of this chapter of the book and have a pretty good understanding of how it applies to a classroom. You should think about whether your teacher uses discussion or recitation in their classrooms now that you know the difference. To much recitation can be a bad thing.
Post a Comment