Significance:
From my findings, I think it important to realize that student progress is not linear. Rather, student progress and learning is a process in which at times there will be improvements and at other there will not. It is imperative to teach students how to tackle the daily challenges of the learning process and find joy in their accomplishments. One week, some did not produce very much writing as evidenced in the teacher conferences, but then they came back to improve during the next conference. It is important to recognize this process as a teacher and not get discouraged when students are not performing as expected. In fact examining student data and using that data to inform instruction should be a routine practice for all teachers
Students need to have background knowledge that is related to what they are learning in some way. This prior knowledge is what allows them to build their understanding. For example, I found that all of the students had difficulties articulating their rationale with the subtraction problem. This difficulty affirms assertions made by Elizabeth Fenema regarding the importance of background knowledge in Cognitively Guided Instruction. She and others view CGI as an approach that builds on what students know. Most of my students were not successful with the subtraction problem because they did not have the prior knowledge with which to figure out what had to be done to solve it.
Another significant aspect of my research was my inquiry into how students used language to solve math problems. The evidence revealed that students use language in different ways. They do the best they can with what the language skills they have in being able to piece together what the math problem is asking. Some students utilized verbs, others utilized concepts and others were able to produce multiple sentences. Students took what they knew and utilized in whatever way they could when I asked them to use their Spanish. I knew when I started this investigation that many students were not going to be able to produce very much writing. In fact, based on the research and my conversation with professors, I expected results such as an increase of 3 words produced during the investigation. My students more than surpassed my expectations by using every word that they could think of in Spanish. It is also important to note that I did not correct grammar because as a language teacher, we are taught not to correct grammar so that students can gain confidence producing the language. As they continue, correct grammar will be addressed, but not in the first year. They may have conjugated verbs incorrectly but they produced the verb independently and that was the goal. Their performance demonstrates that they are still at a “novice” level, as termed by the American Council on the Teaching Foreign Languages. Speakers at a Novice level will be able to communicate short messages through isolated words and phrases that they have frequently encountered and may be difficult to understand. This is exactly where my students are in their oral language development. They are able to be producing these terms because they are encountering them on a daily basis.
I also asked, “What happens when students are asked to collaborate and share their explanations to find solutions?” From analyzing the data, it appeared that kindergarteners have the ability to listen to each other and respond to one another in a productive manner. It may not always be in the nicest way, but they are learning to be critical and think about what another person is saying. They may respond with a “No! The answer is 7 because…,” instead of “I see what you did, but this is what I did,” however they are learning and developing. I found that students were thinking critically when listening to each other’s rationales because they could decipher what the other was saying and form an opinion about that answer.
My final question was about how what they learned transferred to other subjects. In my class we use the cooperative learning pedagogy of “partner-talk” to facilitate student collaboration. Since they were methodically going through partner talk during math and practicing how to have a conversation by taking turns, they were able to transfer that aspect of the investigation to other subjects. The investigation was very focused on math and how to explain rationale in those terms. So while I cannot be sure, I do not think that much of the vocabulary transferred very effectively into other areas of study. The students are still practicing their Spanish but I do not know if it is in the same way as how it was done during this investigation.
From my findings, I think it important to realize that student progress is not linear. Rather, student progress and learning is a process in which at times there will be improvements and at other there will not. It is imperative to teach students how to tackle the daily challenges of the learning process and find joy in their accomplishments. One week, some did not produce very much writing as evidenced in the teacher conferences, but then they came back to improve during the next conference. It is important to recognize this process as a teacher and not get discouraged when students are not performing as expected. In fact examining student data and using that data to inform instruction should be a routine practice for all teachers
Students need to have background knowledge that is related to what they are learning in some way. This prior knowledge is what allows them to build their understanding. For example, I found that all of the students had difficulties articulating their rationale with the subtraction problem. This difficulty affirms assertions made by Elizabeth Fenema regarding the importance of background knowledge in Cognitively Guided Instruction. She and others view CGI as an approach that builds on what students know. Most of my students were not successful with the subtraction problem because they did not have the prior knowledge with which to figure out what had to be done to solve it.
Another significant aspect of my research was my inquiry into how students used language to solve math problems. The evidence revealed that students use language in different ways. They do the best they can with what the language skills they have in being able to piece together what the math problem is asking. Some students utilized verbs, others utilized concepts and others were able to produce multiple sentences. Students took what they knew and utilized in whatever way they could when I asked them to use their Spanish. I knew when I started this investigation that many students were not going to be able to produce very much writing. In fact, based on the research and my conversation with professors, I expected results such as an increase of 3 words produced during the investigation. My students more than surpassed my expectations by using every word that they could think of in Spanish. It is also important to note that I did not correct grammar because as a language teacher, we are taught not to correct grammar so that students can gain confidence producing the language. As they continue, correct grammar will be addressed, but not in the first year. They may have conjugated verbs incorrectly but they produced the verb independently and that was the goal. Their performance demonstrates that they are still at a “novice” level, as termed by the American Council on the Teaching Foreign Languages. Speakers at a Novice level will be able to communicate short messages through isolated words and phrases that they have frequently encountered and may be difficult to understand. This is exactly where my students are in their oral language development. They are able to be producing these terms because they are encountering them on a daily basis.
I also asked, “What happens when students are asked to collaborate and share their explanations to find solutions?” From analyzing the data, it appeared that kindergarteners have the ability to listen to each other and respond to one another in a productive manner. It may not always be in the nicest way, but they are learning to be critical and think about what another person is saying. They may respond with a “No! The answer is 7 because…,” instead of “I see what you did, but this is what I did,” however they are learning and developing. I found that students were thinking critically when listening to each other’s rationales because they could decipher what the other was saying and form an opinion about that answer.
My final question was about how what they learned transferred to other subjects. In my class we use the cooperative learning pedagogy of “partner-talk” to facilitate student collaboration. Since they were methodically going through partner talk during math and practicing how to have a conversation by taking turns, they were able to transfer that aspect of the investigation to other subjects. The investigation was very focused on math and how to explain rationale in those terms. So while I cannot be sure, I do not think that much of the vocabulary transferred very effectively into other areas of study. The students are still practicing their Spanish but I do not know if it is in the same way as how it was done during this investigation.