![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
I am convinced--and it took me years--that there are indeed ways to form productive, collaborative groups. I saw evidence of it today. I had, in my 7th grade class, 3 out of four groups working VERY productively and, as a result, finishing their work in a timely fashion. One group sat together but did their own work by themselves individually and didn't get done. Since I haven't issued textbooks, I just had them draw a line where they got to and hand in the assignment.
The group didn't have academic unachievers; quite the contrary. But they have probably been burned by group work before and were determined not to have to look at the other people in their group. 1 kid is shy, 1 is academically/verbally not the best but sweet and outgoing, 1 has Aspergers so is lacking some social skills, and the last kid is a small boy who is used to not putting himself on the line, so to speak, though is also fairly outgoing. So this group gets broken up tomorrow. There has to be a willingness to TRY IT MY WAY. They have to also understand why a group is better. They weren't willing to try. I'm not trying to be authoritative; I'm trying to improve their all around academic performance.
Here's why it is better, certainly at this level (see description of my groups in previous blog entries): 1) The quality of the mechanics of work improves vastly because one person is on top of that, reminding the others of the required formatting, etc. 2) Simple mistakes are eliminated because there is discussion on why a certain answer would be right. 3) Peer teaching improves overall understanding and performance.
Otherwise, here's what you have: the academically prepared (NOT smarter, just better armed, so to speak) kids complete assignments easily and have successes; the unacademically prepared kids (NOT dumber, just not as mentally agile YET) have failures for a multitude of reasons that may have absolutely nothing to do with whether the basic concepts are grasped. The first group will continue to get positive reinforcement, the latter will get negative and lose interest and start to bomb out and not care.
No soldier left behind, that's my motto. I make it clear that I care about EVERY SINGLE PERSON'S grades. I don't see any reason why a bell curve should apply if I can teach everyone the skills they need to succeed.
And let me just add that just because a group worked together and worked well together doesn't guarantee that everyone got the same grade. And I do monitor the groups for blatant copying and put a stop to that. I want questioning, I want discussion, I want learning.
***
1st vocab quiz (in context; just the underlined word to be defined); one set graded and all A's and one B so far. (Well, the first quiz is easy as pie.) I've been setting students up to understand declensions via warm-ups. This will be important in the next chapter, but it never hurts to prime the brain, so to speak, so that it will stick when we get to it. So, for instance, today I had them sort words into three columns: -a, -us, any other ending. The words were like Metella, culina, servus, Caecilius, canis, Grumio and Clemens (not in that order). Once sorted, we talked about 1st, 2nd and 3rd declension. I really don't need to introduce that information yet, but I have found that if you are always thinking about what you will need ahead, then when you get to where it is REQUIRED, it is much easier.
And along the lines of that thinking, I have been forcing some conjugation sheets of my own design on my 8th graders as part of their beginning of the year review. I started these last spring in stage 12 and am working on them again. Truth be told, I could get away with all that I used to require for verbs for the rest of this year, but I had to tutor some of my former students last year who were using Unit 3. Unit 3 is mainly a multitude of new tenses and moods, with some participles thrown in for good measure (abl abs). My goal, then, is to have my current students so good with what we know of verbs currently that when they begin Unit 3 they will seem smarter than everyone else in the class.
ha.
The conjugation sheets I designed are made for each separate conjugation (1st, 2nd, 3rd, 3rd io, & 4th). On the front is a verb fully conjugated in present, imp and perf, Latin & English, with space to simply COPY. (Low cognitive level on Blooms taxonomy.) The back has a place to put in any verb I want of that particular conjugation and spaces to fill out. (Application: higher cognitive level.) There are additional hints on the back too for doing it right--which stem, etc. So, for instance, the front has ambulo conjugated, and on the back I assigned laboro (because I saw that collaboro was coming up in the first chapter of Unit 2). On the 2nd conj sheet, video is on the front, and I assigned teneo on the back for two reasons: 1) the Spanish connection and 2)retineo is in the first chapter of Unit 2. On the 3rd conj sheet, scribo is on the front, and I assigned dico for the back (once again, it's in the first chapter). They get 3rd io and 4th tomorrow.
Boring, yes, but I'm also complementing this with asking at the door (with my white board in hand with the question and answer choices), "perfecistine pensum?" "perfeci" "non perfeci"... I want to start hammering home more oral questions so the written and oral will work together nicely.
PLUS... stage 13 (the first chapter) begins with infinitives. Since we've been writing out the prin. parts on the conjugation sheets, this will seem a little more familiar. And they shouldn't recoil when I say they'll have to learn some principal parts. IN fact, they should see why because of these sheets.
It will all tie together. And I am thinking ahead.
People who think you can just teach 1 chapter at a time, just barely being ahead oneself in one's preparation are fools. I am NOT the best at planning out the pacing for a year, I'll admit, but I have the big picture--and my big picture is not just what I do (units 1 & 2), it's what the other teachers SHOULD DO after me.
And I've rambled on enough.
The group didn't have academic unachievers; quite the contrary. But they have probably been burned by group work before and were determined not to have to look at the other people in their group. 1 kid is shy, 1 is academically/verbally not the best but sweet and outgoing, 1 has Aspergers so is lacking some social skills, and the last kid is a small boy who is used to not putting himself on the line, so to speak, though is also fairly outgoing. So this group gets broken up tomorrow. There has to be a willingness to TRY IT MY WAY. They have to also understand why a group is better. They weren't willing to try. I'm not trying to be authoritative; I'm trying to improve their all around academic performance.
Here's why it is better, certainly at this level (see description of my groups in previous blog entries): 1) The quality of the mechanics of work improves vastly because one person is on top of that, reminding the others of the required formatting, etc. 2) Simple mistakes are eliminated because there is discussion on why a certain answer would be right. 3) Peer teaching improves overall understanding and performance.
Otherwise, here's what you have: the academically prepared (NOT smarter, just better armed, so to speak) kids complete assignments easily and have successes; the unacademically prepared kids (NOT dumber, just not as mentally agile YET) have failures for a multitude of reasons that may have absolutely nothing to do with whether the basic concepts are grasped. The first group will continue to get positive reinforcement, the latter will get negative and lose interest and start to bomb out and not care.
No soldier left behind, that's my motto. I make it clear that I care about EVERY SINGLE PERSON'S grades. I don't see any reason why a bell curve should apply if I can teach everyone the skills they need to succeed.
And let me just add that just because a group worked together and worked well together doesn't guarantee that everyone got the same grade. And I do monitor the groups for blatant copying and put a stop to that. I want questioning, I want discussion, I want learning.
***
1st vocab quiz (in context; just the underlined word to be defined); one set graded and all A's and one B so far. (Well, the first quiz is easy as pie.) I've been setting students up to understand declensions via warm-ups. This will be important in the next chapter, but it never hurts to prime the brain, so to speak, so that it will stick when we get to it. So, for instance, today I had them sort words into three columns: -a, -us, any other ending. The words were like Metella, culina, servus, Caecilius, canis, Grumio and Clemens (not in that order). Once sorted, we talked about 1st, 2nd and 3rd declension. I really don't need to introduce that information yet, but I have found that if you are always thinking about what you will need ahead, then when you get to where it is REQUIRED, it is much easier.
And along the lines of that thinking, I have been forcing some conjugation sheets of my own design on my 8th graders as part of their beginning of the year review. I started these last spring in stage 12 and am working on them again. Truth be told, I could get away with all that I used to require for verbs for the rest of this year, but I had to tutor some of my former students last year who were using Unit 3. Unit 3 is mainly a multitude of new tenses and moods, with some participles thrown in for good measure (abl abs). My goal, then, is to have my current students so good with what we know of verbs currently that when they begin Unit 3 they will seem smarter than everyone else in the class.
ha.
The conjugation sheets I designed are made for each separate conjugation (1st, 2nd, 3rd, 3rd io, & 4th). On the front is a verb fully conjugated in present, imp and perf, Latin & English, with space to simply COPY. (Low cognitive level on Blooms taxonomy.) The back has a place to put in any verb I want of that particular conjugation and spaces to fill out. (Application: higher cognitive level.) There are additional hints on the back too for doing it right--which stem, etc. So, for instance, the front has ambulo conjugated, and on the back I assigned laboro (because I saw that collaboro was coming up in the first chapter of Unit 2). On the 2nd conj sheet, video is on the front, and I assigned teneo on the back for two reasons: 1) the Spanish connection and 2)retineo is in the first chapter of Unit 2. On the 3rd conj sheet, scribo is on the front, and I assigned dico for the back (once again, it's in the first chapter). They get 3rd io and 4th tomorrow.
Boring, yes, but I'm also complementing this with asking at the door (with my white board in hand with the question and answer choices), "perfecistine pensum?" "perfeci" "non perfeci"... I want to start hammering home more oral questions so the written and oral will work together nicely.
PLUS... stage 13 (the first chapter) begins with infinitives. Since we've been writing out the prin. parts on the conjugation sheets, this will seem a little more familiar. And they shouldn't recoil when I say they'll have to learn some principal parts. IN fact, they should see why because of these sheets.
It will all tie together. And I am thinking ahead.
People who think you can just teach 1 chapter at a time, just barely being ahead oneself in one's preparation are fools. I am NOT the best at planning out the pacing for a year, I'll admit, but I have the big picture--and my big picture is not just what I do (units 1 & 2), it's what the other teachers SHOULD DO after me.
And I've rambled on enough.
