I observed an ESL class in an elementary school. The majority of the children in the classroom
spoke Spanish as their home language.
There was one girl who spoke Russian and one boy who spoke a Chinese
dialect. I observed a reading
lesson. The class is taught in English,
with many visual and auditory cues given as needed. The children have attended this school for
over a year, so they are becoming much more comfortable with the English
language, but as I observed, I was able to identify a few errors. I noticed meaning errors, syntax errors, and
visual cue errors.
I noticed that overall, the children made more errors in syntax
and visual cues than they did in meaning.
I noticed that the Chinese speaking child made several syntactic errors,
mostly with tenses. When reading, the
child would tend to read words in the present tense. I noticed that this child struggled with
tenses even when speaking. The Spanish
speaking students struggled more with the visual errors. I noticed that words that began with “B” or
“D” were often misspoken. I could
attribute this to the difference in the pronunciation of letters in the Spanish
alphabet and that of the English alphabet.
Words with vowel teams and diphthongs were also more difficult for the
children to sound out. I would expect this error from most children at their
age (1st- 2nd grade).
One of the more fluent speaking
students in the class made some meaning errors.
The child would miscall a word in the sentence, but the sentence would
still make sense. During the lesson, the
children were reading a story about owls.
The child miscalled the word owl, and replaced it with the word
bird. The book did not have pictures, so
the child had created enough meaning to understand what the story was
about.
Because most of the errors were syntactic or visual in nature,
I would wonder if the children are making much meaning of what they are
reading. I would not worry too much
about the child making meaning errors.
The child is reading with errors, but the errors are not changing the
meaning of the story. In fact, the child
is gaining enough meaning from the words, that that child is able to switch
words and still keep the meaning the same.
As the teacher, I would focus on helping the children making visual errors. These children are at the basic level of
sounding out words. Because the children
are so focused on decoding, and still making errors, I would imagine that very
little comprehension is taking place. As
the teacher, I would start teaching strategies such as skip and reread, rather
than sound out each sound. If the child
can skip the word they don’t know and gain enough meaning to fill in the gap,
they will gain the needed comprehension.
After they have an idea of what the word should be, they can go back and
figure the word out. For example, “The
_____ rises in the east and warms the earth during the day”. Even without the word in the sentence, most
students could figure out what was missing based on the meaning of the
sentence. I would recommend the teacher
focus on comprehension strategies rather than spending so much time trying to
decode each and every word.
For the students making syntax errors, I would repeat what
they had said, correctly. This way the
children are hearing the correct usage of the verb tenses. I find this error hard to correct, but I find
setting a good verbal example to be one of the most useful strategies. For example, I heard one child read “The owl
flewed over the field looking for food”.
I would have repeated, “Oh so the owl FLEW over the field . . . What did
the owl do?” The trick is to be
consistent, but not make a big deal about the mistake. The child needs to hear the write tense
several times before it clicks.
Overall, the teacher had some really good strategies in
place. I admired the fact that all
children in the class were participating, and even though they were all making
different errors, she was able to generalize and support the children as
needed. My biggest recommendation would
be to focus more on comprehension. I
felt the children were focused on reading the words correctly, but when the
teacher was asking questions about the reading, all the children
struggled. I still believe that decoding
is very important, but I think comprehension is the ultimate goal, and needs to
be addressed at an early age as well.
Hi Jennifer,
ReplyDeleteWhat a great class to observe; very diverse. I really like your strategy for syntax errors. I use this with my students, and my own kids, and it makes all the difference in the world. I find they correct their own sentence before I can ask them to repeat in a form of a question. I like your suggestion of focusing on comprehension. Did the teacher do a read through before the students read? This would be a great way for the students to focus on comprehension.
Thanks for sharing!
Jennifer,
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that comprehension is the goal of reading. With the extensive explicit phonics taught to students at my school, supported with lots of decodable texts, I have often encountered students who decode without giving much thought to comprehension. I agree that teaching phonics is effective when taught logically. However, students need to make meaning from what they read from their earliest experiences with reading.
Cheryl Schall
Cheryl -
DeleteThis is interesting as one of the things stressed at the secondary level is the fact that comprehension is so important for students. Since I have nearly ZERO experience in elementary, I am not sure how this revelation that you make impacts teaching ELL students at the elementary level. Do all students learn decoding without some form of comprehension? If we teach English speaking students decoding skills that do not include comprehension, how do we do the same with ELL students? Are we skipping steps here? It is tough at the high school level to cover all the curriculum and students having the intellectual foundations of the native language do provide some assistance to using comprehension as the primary target. But i wonder if the same can be stated at the elementary level? Thanks for making me think. :-) - Matt
I think it is interesting that you noticed the students seemed to be picking up enough meaning to replace the word "owl" with "bird." That shows that they also have a general understanding of sentence sturcture, if they are able to replace a noun for a noun. I am surprised that it seems the child didn't even try to sound out the correct word. I think this must be an age thing. Younger children seem to rely on memory and prior knowledge more than older students. Since they rely on these things, they "imagine" the story better. My middle school students will struggle with pronouncing a word correctly, or ask for the correct way to pronounce the words they don't know, but they don't seem to comprehend what they are reading that way. I wonder when that perspective changes.
ReplyDeleteLindsay
Thanks for the comment. I was surprised when the children started replacing words as well, but after talking to the teacher, she had said that they had worked with the story before. My guess is that they were remembering prior vocabulary lessons about the word owl. I didn't realize at the time that the children had heard the story before. I also think the children relied heavely on the pictures, and since I am guessing most middle school text does not have pictures, maybe thats why the younger children can imagine the stories better, they are using other supports to make since of things.
Deletethanks~Jen
Great insights about the connection between miscues and the home languages of Chinese and Spanish. You also made an excellent point related to the fact that miscues reflected oral language errors as well. It sounds like the classroom teacher has a good program in place.
ReplyDelete-Deb