You are on page 1of 3

InTASC STANDARD Three: Learning Environments: The teacher works with others to create

environments that support individual and collaborative learning and that encourage positive

social interaction, active engagement in learning, and self-motivation.

Name of Artifact: FL 694 Self-Analyses A

Course: FL 694 Practicum in Foreign or Second Languages

Date: 23 September 2017

ACTFL Standards Addressed: Interpersonal Communication: Learners interact and negotiate

meaning in spoken, signed, or written conversations to share information, reactions, feelings, and

opinions.

Rationale:

In the class I taped, we started class with an opener. This was a vocabulary activity that

they could complete without assistance while I took attendance and other administrative tasks.

Next, we used the vocabulary structures in context. We were co-constructing the story. I had a

basic outline of the story, but students decided the details. When they did not agree, I combined

their answers or the class voted on the answer. As we were creating our narrative, the bell rang

for lunch. When we returned from lunch, we continued our narrative. As we were creating our

story, I asked questions. Some of the questions were comprehension questions. Other questions

were requests for clarification about details in the story. After we concluded our story, I asked

the five questions to which the students wrote the answers on piece of paper and turned in at the

end of class.

The questions served several purposes. The first purpose was to keep our narrative

comprehensible. If the students could not answer the compression questions, I knew that they

did not understand. When this happened, I would repeat the detail slowly while I pointed to
vocabulary structures on the board. Ensuring that the input was comprehensible increases the

likelihood that the input would become intake (Brown, 2014). The second purpose was to

request clarification and negotiate meaning. While I had a basic outline of the story to ensure

that we worked with our targeted structures and vocabulary, the class could choose most of the

story. I had part of the information; the students decided the other parts. This negotiation of

meaning encourages meaningful communication and serves to increase motivation (Gass,

Behney, & Plonsky, 2013).

Some of the questions are not authentic since I know the answer, but my purpose in

asking the question is not to receive an answer. My purpose for asking these questions is

assessing whether or not the students understand the narrative. Other questions are authentic

since I do not know what details the students will choose (Cazden, 2001).

At the end of class, the students had an exit ticket. This class the exit ticket was five

questions that I asked orally, and the students wrote the answer on a piece of paper. This allows

me to assess how well my students learned the material from that class. It allows me the

opportunity to reteach the content the students did not learn during that class. The exit ticket also

reinforces what we learned in class.

References

Brown, H. D. (2014). Principles of language learning and teaching A course in second language

acquisition (6th ed.). White Plains, NY: Pearson.

Cazden, C. B. (2001). Classroom discourse The language of teaching and learning (2nd ed.).

Potsmouth, NH: Heineman.


Gass, S. M., Behney, J., & Plonsky, L. (2013). Second language acquisition An introductory

course (4th ed.). New York, NY: Routledge Taylor & Francis Group.