Example 1

Form: "*PACT - Elementary Literacy - 5. Reflection
Commentary Form v. 2009"
Created with: TaskStream - Advancing Educational Excellence
Author: Jerry Sithiphone
Date submitted: 04/10/2011 11:56 pm (PDT)
Write a commentary that addresses the following prompts.
(REQUIRED) 1.
When you consider the content learning of your students and the development of their
academic language, what do you think explains the learning or differences in learning that
you observed during the learning segment? Cite relevant research or theory that explains
what you observed. (See Planning Commentary, prompt # 2.) (TPEs 7, 8, 13)
In regards to the learning that I observed during this learning segment, I definitely would
say that Gardner’s theory of multiple intelligences and Swain’s work on comprehensible
output explain my observations. While the ultimate assessment for this learning segment
was the persuasive letters, as I read the letters, I could picture myself having conversations
with my students because while the overall writing could have used some additional
support, the ideas and thoughts were not lacking. The reason why their thoughts were so
evident was because they had numerous opportunities to discuss the topics with their peers,
so they were able to use their interpersonal skills (Gardner) and make comprehensible
output (Swain). Thus, it began with the conversations they had in their small groups, then
the discussions we had as a class stuck with them and all of the information came pouring
out in their letters. Without the conversations and discussions, they would not have been
able to retain the same about of information and knowledge had they solely been lectured
and asked to think about the topics individually and not asked to verbally produce anything.
(REQUIRED) 2.
Based on your experience teaching this learning segment, what did you learn about your
students as literacy learners (e.g., easy/difficult concepts and skills, easy/difficult learning
tasks, easy/difficult features of academic language, common misunderstandings)? Please
cite specific evidence from previous Teaching Event tasks as well as specific research and
theories that inform your analysis. (TPE 13)
Given the fact that over 90% of my students struggled with counterarguments in their
writing suggests that they could have benefited from more comprehensible input. Stephen
Krashen argues that in second language acquisition students need to acquire language
through direct and explicit instruction without necessarily having to produce language (as
opposed to Swain). While I believe that students should receive both comprehensible
in/output, in regards to counterarguments, I should have been more explicit in my
instructions before asking them to produce the language. Thus, with respect to literacy, I
should have given them more examples and opportunities to fully demonstrate their
understanding of counterarguments before having to identify and write them.
(REQUIRED) 3.
If you could go back and teach this learning segment again to the same group of students,
what would you do differently in relation to planning, instruction, and assessment? How