Wednesday, September 26, 2012
Blog Topic #6 Reviewing the Tape
The participation of the boys was varied this time. Some hands shot up immediately and eagerly participated the whole time, while there were a few that we did not hear from at all. All boys sat quietly, though, and listened to one another.
Right away the boys noticed that the picture was about a game about to be cancelled by rain. I thought it was interesting that it wasn't until about half way through the discussion that someone actually identified the three central figures as umpires. There was a fair amount of discussion about what was going on with the figures just behind the umpires and others noticed more players in the distance, although, rather than describing them as far away, they described them as small.
There wasn't much interaction among the boys in terms of linking, agreeing, or disagreeing this time around. Most boys just offered their own observations independently of others. Toward the end, one student identified the protective equipment that had previously been identified as perhaps a potato chip or a pork chop. Reactions from the crowd seemed to indicate corroboration with this observation.
One thing I learned from facilitating this lesson, is to take all comments seriously with neutrality. When the boys began identifying what to me was clearly baseball equipment as potato chips and porkchops, I was tempted to assume that they were just goofing around. But upon watching the video, I think there was more sincerity in their uncertainty about those objects than I realized. And they did succeed at providing visual evidence for their assertions, so fair enough, I guess.
I think I stuck to the question format fairly successfully. I don't usually have too much trouble with that aspect of the method. Watching myself on video, though, I can see the subtleties in my responses and my paraphrasing and how much of an impact that can have on the discussion.
I was surprised that I felt more nervous in front of the students than I have practicing with my peers. I feel more pressure to really get it right for the boys than I do when with my fellow practitioners in training. I was also surprised that some of the comments that seemed silly and off the wall were really more sincere than I realized. I'm learning to follow their lead, and not the other way around.
I want to continue to work on my neutrality and not give the impression that some answers are more right than others. I think I can achieve this by keeping an open mind.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I've been thinking about the pork chop and potato chip comments for weeks now, and I think it might be valuable in our introduction or our paraphrasing to mention something about an observation "making sense" based on the evidence in the work. We might even reassert question 1 after paraphrasing such unusual comments to remind students of what they are looking for. My experience with the student who suggested the pork chop idea is that he does enjoy entertaining his peers. We need to see if we can gently coach him past that to change the objective of his looking; to look not for "pictures in the clouds," but narratives based on evidence that makes sense. I'm not sure exactly how to do that; we'll have to brainstorm approaches and field test them. This is certainly an interesting conundrum.
ReplyDeleteAs you mentioned the 3 central figures (I'd love to see this image) I too find it interesting that students will pick out every object and detail besides what I think to be the most obvious. I show the same images to 3 different groups of kindergarten students and it always fascinates me how differently each group will discuss the image.
ReplyDeleteOkay...I found the image below. My computer is being slow. :)
ReplyDelete