The Almasi reading and the Weinstein reading pretty much say the same thing: teachers need to start steering away from IRE instruction and more toward discussion based instruction when dealing with literature. I also decided to jigsaw McGee article which was more focused on creating discussions with younger students. What I loved in particular about the readings is that they give tips as to how to lead these discussions. The Weinstein reading suggests using "pick me" sticks in order to ensure everyone is getting involved. It also suggests possible probing questions to ask the students to keep them involved and interested in the discussion such as "What do you think" or "Do you agree with what [insert name] said?" The McGee article also makes some good suggestions why encouraging us to find good books that "suggest possible interpretations." But most importantly, it suggests that teachers establish rules and routines for their response-centered discussions. This struck a cord with me because I know I mentioned something about this a couple of blog posts before this about losing control of the classroom while having discussions. Setting rules and routines will help prevent things from getting out of control. This is especially important for the younger students, who usually need routines in order to function.
Again, while reading, I am reminded of TE 348 when I see in the Almasi article the designated jobs for the students to maintain discussions. When we read books in 348, we would hold discussions in a small group where a facilitator would ask questions that could be up for interpretation, much like the INQUISITOR's job in the Almasi article. Having someone ask these questions helps the student construct meaning and begin to see other student's point of view. We used to have some great discussions in that class.
One thing that I feel I need to challenge in the reading is that, as I interpreted it, teachers must rid of IRE and switch completely to discussion. I'm don't agree with this route because I feel that IRE has its benefits too. I think it's a great way to assess whether the students are actually reading and are comprehending what they read. My suggestion would be to not rid of IRE completely but to spend less time on it and more time on the discussion.
Something that I picked up on in your post that I couldn't quite put my finger on when I was doing the readings was the wording used by teachers to promote certain types of discussions. I knew that I saw some slight differences in the styles of discussions but I was stuck on what it was, but your post really helped me realize what it was. I think that the way teachers phrase thing makes all the difference when trying to get students discussing. Phrases such as "What do you think?" instead of questions that mirror fill in the blank prompts seem to draw out more of the students opinions which I personally think cause for better discussions. I also agree with you on having a routine for students because it could be really easy for the discussion to loose focus and for the teacher to loose control of her class. I would also agree with you on not completely getting rid of IRE, but teachers need to use discretion when choosing to use that method because I personally think that it is only beneficial for assessing and not at all to promote any type of deep discussion.
ReplyDelete