1. Module 1: Unit 2, Session 3 MODULE 1: MODULE 1: ADOLESCENT READING, WRITING, AND THINKING Adolescent Literacy – Professional Development Unit 2, Session 3

2. Module 1: Unit 2, Session 3 USING DISCUSSION STRUCTURES TO ENRICH STUDENT ACADEMIC LANGUAGE 1.2.3

3. Module 1: Unit 2, Session 33

4. Essential Questions  Module 1 Question  What do we know about how teens learn from text and how can we use that knowledge to improve our practice?  Unit 2, Session 3 Questions  How does peer conversation support reading comprehension?  How can we have and support good discussion in our classes? 4

5. Module 1: Unit 2, Session 3 How Much Discussion Is Really Going On?  How much real discussion do you think happens per 60 minutes in an “average” content area academic class session in middle schools and high schools? 5

6. Module 1: Unit 2, Session 3 How Much Discussion Is Really Going On?  How much real discussion do you think happens per 60 minutes in an “average” content area academic class session in middle schools and high schools? Applebee, A., Langer, J., Nystrand, M., & Gamoran, A. (2003) 6

7. Module 1: Unit 2, Session 3 Discussion Predicts Improved Learning  Discussion time and small-group time correlated with incidence of authentic reading and writing tasks (Nystrand and Gamoran, 1991)  Authentic teacher questions, open discussion, and curricular conversations predicted higher literacy scores (Applebee, Langer, Nystrand, and Gamoran, 2003)  How do we support rich student to student academic talk related to content texts? 7

8. Module 1: Unit 2, Session 3 Discussion Structures AspectKey Question Topic What are students supposed to be talking about? What is the guiding question for the group? Air TimeHow much time is each student allotted to talk? Is there a timer? Talk OrderIs there a designed order for contributing to the dialogue? Cognitive Perspective Do students have assigned roles (such as making predictions, summarizing, word catching)? 8

9. Module 1: Unit 2, Session 3 Example: Debate vs. Open Discussion AspectDebateOpen Discussion TopicAssigned by teacherOften assigned with a guiding question Air TimeAssigned time limits for members of each team Often none; some students can dominate discussion Talk OrderAssignedNot Assigned Cognitive Perspective Can Be AssignedNot Assigned 9

10. Module 1: Unit 2, Session 3 http://myamazingfact.blogspot.com/2009/12/10-pics-of-historys-most-influential.html http://picdit.wordpress.com/2008/11/22/the-messy-desk-of-albert-einstein-1955/ 10

11. Module 1: Unit 2, Session 3 Debrief Continuum Dialogue  What aspects of topic, air time, talk order, or cognitive perspective did the facilitator control?  How would this conversation have been the same or different if we had an “open discussion”? 11

12. Module 1: Unit 2, Session 3 Looking into Classrooms  Here is an example of how a teacher begins a debate by having students signal their position on the topic with the position they take in the room… 12

13. Module 1: Unit 2, Session 3 Looking into Classrooms  Here is an example of how a teacher begins a debate by having students signal their position on the topic with the position they take in the room…  What aspects of topic, air time, talk order and cognitive order does the teacher control or distribute? 13

14. Module 1: Unit 2, Session 3 Gradual Release of Responsibility ( Campione, 1981) Week 1Week 2Week 3Week 4 Think about conversational register as a class. What is appropriate with friends? In the gym? In the classroom? Create classroom guidelines for respectful conversation and cooperation. Facilitate a highly- structured discussion protocol like “Turn and Talk” or the “Continuum Dialogue.” Debrief it with your students, referring to the classroom guidelines. Do a brief mini- debate between small teams of students with the majority of the class acting as the judges. Collect their decision at the end of class with a paper ballot. Hold a classroom debate with multiple positions available for students to take. There are many resources for different discussion ideas in the Participant’s Resource Packet. Remember to go slowly and debrief each structure with the students; often they are not used to holding academic discussion and they need time and support. 14

15. Module 1: Unit 2, Session 3 Further Study  Additional Video Footage of debate http://www.wordgeneration.org/observe/hibbsW1.html 15

16. Module 1: Unit 2, Session 3 References Applebee, A., Langer, J., Nystrand, M., & Gamoran, A. (2003). Discussion-based approaches to developing understanding: Classroom instruction and student performance in middle and high school English. American Educational Research Journal, 40(3), 685. Campione, J. (1981). Leaning, Academic Achievement, and Instruction. Paper presented at the second annual conference on Reading Research of the Center for the Study of Reading. Gamoran, A., & Nystrand, M. (1991). Background and instructional effects on achievement in eighth- grade English and social studies. [Article]. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 1(3), 277-300. Langer, J. (1985). Levels of questioning: An alternative view. Reading Research Quarterly, 21(5), 586-602. Lawrence, J., & Snow, C. (2010). Oral discourse and reading comprehension. In M. Kamil, D. Pearson, E. Moje, P. Aflerback & P. Mosenthal (Eds.), Handbook of Reading Research (Vol. IV). London: Routledge. Nystrand, M. (1999). Classroom language assessment system (CLASS 3.0). Madison, WI: Center on English Learning and Achievement. Nystrand, M., & Gamoran, A. (1991). Instructional discourse, student engagement, and literature achievement. Research on the Teaching of English, 25(3), 261-290. Pearson, D. (1985). Changing the face of reading comprehension. The Reading Teacher, 38(8), 724-738. 16