Page #

NYS TESOLAnnual Conference Oct. 28-29 Marriott Hotel Melville www.nystesol.org/annualconf/

IDIOMINTHIS ISSUE 2 4 6dkjhfksadf-

hjsadchksd-ksdkjfhajd-sjjkdsakjaksj

dkjhfksadf-hjsadchksd-ksdkjfhajd-sjjkdsakjaksj

dkjhfksadf-hjsadchksd-ksdkjfhajd-sjjkdsakjaksj

Vol. 41, No. 3

Page #

Dear Colleagues,

I hope you have been enjoying a happy, healthy and restorative summer. I would like to update you on some changes and challenges facing educators. On July 13, I attended the Bilingual/ESL COP (Committee of Practitioners) meeting at Teachers College, Columbia University. The most major changes include the New Evaluation Law for K-12 teachers and principals:

You can view all documents discussed at the COP Meeting at the following link: http://www.p12.nysed.gov/biling/bilinged/BilingualESLCOP.html. For more information about the Common Core Standards, please consult the website at: http://www.corestandards.org/ and see the article in this issue.

Though it was not considered at this meeting, the 14 Bilingual/ESL Techni- cal Assistance Centers (BE-TACs) across New York State closed permanently on June 30, 2011. This puts both our schools and our LEP/ELL populations at risk of not having the appropriate resources to meet their educational and program- matic needs over the next five years.

Our new Commissioner of Education, Dr. John B. King, Jr., may not be familiar with the importance of the resources offered by the BETACs. You may e-mail him directly at: jking@mail.nysed.gov. In addition, you may email the NYS Board of Regents on this issue at: RegentsOffice@mail.nysed.gov.

At the Melville Marriott October 28-29th, I will be passing the gavel to our incoming President, Re-bekah Johnson. I would like to thank the many wonder- ful members of my Executive Board and the many SIG and Region Leaders for their service to the organization. Special thanks to Cornelia Randolph, a constant support and inspiration, and Fran Olmos, for her guidance.

You will be receiving ballots for the Executive Board slate in the mail shortly. Thanks to our Nomi-nating Committee, led by Cornelia Randolph and Terri Brady-Mendez, for their time and efforts. Members, please do not forget to vote for your new leadership in our organization by returning your ballots. As always, please continue to keep in touch with issues, concerns, and ideas on how our organization can best serve you. Best wishes for a great school year to all.

Peace and blessings to you, Nanette Dougherty, President, NYS TESOLP.S. We’re so very excited to be launching our new Members Only website - please read more about it in this issue and log in soon to check it out. Please contact us with ideas!

President’s deskFro

m th

e

by Nanette Dougherty, NYS TESOL President

1. Annual evaluations for all teachers and principals 2. Clear, rigorous expectations for instructional excellence, prioritizing student learning 3. Multiple measures of performance 4. Multiple ratings: Four performance levels to describe differences in teacher effectiveness 5. The new system should encourage regular, constructive feedback and ongoing development 6. Significance: results are a major factor in employment decisions.

Vol. 41, No. 3

Page #

Conversations in suPPort oF high sChool ells

by Victoria Pilotti

Adolescent ELLs are second language learners who are still devel- oping their proficiency in academic English. Moreover, they are learn- ing English at the same time they are studying core content areas through English. Thus, English language learn- ers must per-form double the work of native English speakers in the coun- try’s middle and high schools. At the same time, they are being held to the same accountability standards as their native English-speaking peers (Short & Fitzsimmons, 2007, p. 1). Conversations with ELLs and colleagues are viable ways for ESL teachers to help their students navigate academic challenges. My short time at Jamaica High School has been filled with conversa-tions that have driven my instruction to best support the ELLs in my charge.

Curriculum Experiments Based on Conversations with ELLs s- sary skills; did not teach idioms; and, upon careful review of re-cent living- environment Regents exams, added an ecosystem unit, a lesson on pH, and group activities on bar and line graphs. I replaced the formal versus informal English lesson with daily academic Eng-lish and everyday English ex- planations and definitions. Students assessed their multiple intelligences (Gardner, 1983; Gardner, 1993, 2996; McKenzie, 1999), and learning styles (Dunn & Dunn, 1993; Dunn & Griggs, 2003, 2004, 2007; Missere & Dunn, 2005). I added native-language trans- lations of key content vocabulary to my stu-dent notebook grading rubric. Groups researched continents and explorers and presented their Pow- erPoint slide shows to ELLs in other classes. TeenBiz3000 was replaced by Study Island, Web-based instruction built on New York State standards, that provided all Ja-maica High School students practice for English, math- ematics, science, and social studies Regents exams; and for national Scho-lastic Achievement Test (SAT) and Advanced Placement (AP) ex-ams. Based on requests from Experiment I participants for Internet resources for speaking practice, I created lists of Web sites and links with podcasts and speaking exercises.

As I gear up for Experiment III in the 2011-2012 school year, I plan to devote more time to diction-ary skills, such as alphabetizing, and content- area textbook structure, with special attention to textbook glossa-ries and indices; the participants in Experiment II were lacking in dic-tionary/textbook research skills and did not make opti- mum use of these resources. I pro- vided a list of Web sites and links for Regents practice and bilingual glos- saries, and will again provide copies of bilingual glos-saries in Experiment III. I have de-cided to step up test-taking strategies and content writing practice in the zero period support class begin- ning in September.

Conversations with Families

Individual writing confer-ences often involve reinforcing the student’s strengths and discussing specific areas in need of improve-ment (Fountas & Pinnell, 2001). I had conversa- tions with each student about his/her multiple intelligences and learning style profiles generated from the Dunn and Dunn Learning Style Model high school assessment Learning in Vogue: Elements of Style (LIVES) (Missere & Dunn, 2005) and suggested indi- vidual study and homework strategies. My students

Vol. 41, No. 3

had critical conversa- tions with their families about their personal preferences, strengths, and areas for improvement. Some students discussed their need for a quiet, cool, and brightly lit place to study and complete homework assignments. One student, who was not a morning per- son, discussed her need for an alarm clock to wake her so she could arrive to class on time. Sadly, her family did not want to be disturbed by the sound of an alarm clock so early in the morn- ing and the student’s guidance coun- selor suggested dropping her from this sup-port class.

Conversations with Colleagues

My fellow ESL teachers, bilingual guidance counselor, and department supervisor met regularly to discuss parent outreach, truant students, mis- placed students, overcrowded classes, credit accumulation, and NYSESLAT schedul-ing, among the numerous challenges facing our ELLs. These conversations led to solutions and consensus on major decisions and new initiatives. Colleagues who shared students would (a) discuss divisionof language skill focus—one would emphasize the writing process, vo- cabu-lary, and grammar, while the other would provide readings of a broad range of literary genres, teach literary terms and vocabulary, and emphasize listening and speaking, (b) collaborate and share data for each student before making arrangements to call parents on each other’s behalf—each teacher relayed mes-sages of both teachers, and (c) preview and review each other’s lessons so we could reinforce what was learned in each other’s classes.

Much to our dismay, we discovered that students often did not transfer learning between ESL classes and teachers—somehow, the learning re- mained in the classroom environment and was forgotten in a new setting. Conversations with mainstream English colleagues centered on imple- mentation of TESOL strategies to meet the needs of transitional and post- ELLs. Conversations with mathemat- ics, science, and social studies assis- tant prin-cipals and teachers helped me focus on topics that they found were the most problematic for ELLs.

Continued on page 11

Page #

That effective collaboration ben- efits students (and teachers alike) is affirmed by the well-deserved at-ten- tion it has received most recently in the professional literature (see, for example, DelliCarpini, 2008, 2009; Honigsfeld & Dove, 2010; NACTAF, 2009; NEA, 2009; Pawan & Ortloff, 2011) and in the TESOL education-al community (e.g., themes of 2011 New York State and Kentucky TESOL conferences). Acknowledging the im-portance of collaborative exchanges among teachers is not a completely novel idea, though. Close to three de- cades ago, Judith Warren Little (1982) examined the differences between more and less effective schools and found that the more effective ones had a greater degree of collegiality. She noted four unique characteris-tics of collegiality (or collaboration) in successful schools, where teachers participate in the following activities:

ReferencesDelliCarpini, M. (2008). Teacher collaboration for ESL/EFL academ-ic success. The Internet TESL Jour-nal, 14(8). Re- trieved from http://iteslj.org/Techniques/DelliCarpini-TeacherCollaboration.html

• Teachers engage in frequent, continuous, and increasingly con-crete and precise talk about teach-ing practice.• Teachers are frequently observed and provided with useful critiques of their teaching.• Teachers plan, design, evaluate, and prepare teaching materials to-gether.• Teachers teach each other the practice of teaching (pp. 331– 332). Consider what Warren Little’s (1982) frequently quoted

by Andrea Honigsfeldfour key ideas could mean for ELLs in today’s schools. What if we translated her seminal findings into a contempo- rary framework of four Cs, in which “collaborative” serves as a defining adjective, followed by a key activity or desired teacher behavior necessary for improved student learning?

• Collaborative Conversations:Through enhanced communica- tion, all teachers have the oppor- tunity to develop ownership and shared responsibility for ELLs’ learning.

• Collaborative Coaching:Through an encouraging school climate and supportive frame-work, teachers offer and receive feed- back on their teaching prac-tices.

• Collaborative Curriculum Development: Through curriculum mapping and alignment and col- laborative materials development, teachers match both their long- term and day-to-day instructional goals and activities.

• Collaborative Craftsmanship: Through conscious efforts for con-tinuous improvement of the craft of teaching, teach- ers explore ways to enhance instructional time, language development, and

Collaborative Conversations

Vol. 41, No. 3

Table 1 shows how the concept of collegiality and collaboration may of-fer a system of support in a linguistically and culturally diverse school context by including the four Cs with ample ex-amples.

Collaborative Conversationscontent area resources, and offer sup-port for each other.

Collaboration may start out as a small, grassroots effort, involving only two or three teachers who share the responsi- bility for some of the same ELLs and are concerned about their students’ progress. It may involve an entire grade level. Some examples include grade clusters working together to develop or enhance curricula in elementary schools; an inter- disciplinary team of math, science, social studies, English, and ESL teachers (sharing responsibility for a cluster of classes in middle schools); or a discipline-specific department (focus-ing on preparing all students to meet graduation requirements of high schools). Regardless of the local context, all these collaborative efforts start with profes-sional conversations, through which teachers collaboratively explore their stu-dents’ needs and responsive practices.

Page #

let’s talk about it!ELLs respond well to lessons in the form of conversations as another way to incorporate some of the same strate- gies and scaffolds used for writing. As an example, I often give students a prompt of 5-10 words. For all grades I have used “My greatest surprise.” Fourth graders write about justice.The students use the prompt as a starter and begin writing, eventually producing a well-developed paragraph. These same prompts can be used to maintain intel-ligent discourse among students. The difference with mak- ing conversations the major goal in a lesson is that the discussion will not be based on previous reading and/or writing, but strictly on the present con- versation. Self-expres-sion, thoughts, ideas, and opinions will begin and end with clarification through conversa- tion only. Making this an integral part of lessons will address the chal-lenges faced by our ELL population in verbal communication, and can enhance the student’s listening and speaking skills.

Another value with conversations as a major focus is that the vocabulary challenges faced by many of our ELLs will be considered. Our students may have divided language skills. They are comfortable with a specific lexicon from the home language, but use a different second language lexicon. A stronger em-phasis on classroom con- versations will allow for a balance and exchange of word comprehension of similar vocabulary in both languages. Conversations will be a major theme in my ESL classrooms this school year in support of en-hancing my students’ oral language skills.

Further ReadingBeck, I., McKeown, M., & Kucan, L. (2002). Bringing words to life: Ro- bust vocabulary instruction. New York: Guil-ford.

Gordon, T. (2007). Teaching young chil-dren a second language. West- port, CT: Praeger.

by Yanick Chery-Frederic

Yanick Chery-Frederic is an elemen- tary school ESL teacher for grades 2-4 in Central Islip, as well as an adjunct professor of ESL at Suffolk County Community College. She has also taught a Methods undergraduate course in TESOL at St. Joseph’sCollege in Patchogue. <yanick1530@yahoo.com>

Vol. 41, No. 3

The manner in which lang uage and writing are understood and misun- derstood promotes success or failure. Understanding what is said is the key to communicative compe-tence.

Explicit communication is dialogue that is clear, sure, and restat-ed when necessary. Crawford (1993) states that the processes of literacy and language learning require learn-ers to be im- mersed in meaningful, relevant, and functional situations. In this way, stu- dents can learn to han-dle themselves in various situations.

Let’s begin with a kindergar-tener meeting an instructor for the first time. If the child is asked to de-scribe some- thing, perhaps drawing it is a much better way of communi-cating what happened. Description may not simply be done by talking. The explicit com- munication would require that the teacher talk and dem-onstrate so that this student knows what to do.

Middle school students who do not speak English can benefit from explicit communication as well. Classmates might offer to translate for this student, but that means that every

ReferencesCrawford, L. W. (1993). Language and literacy learning in multi- cultural classrooms. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.

utterance requires assistance. When I write the aim and other particulars on the board (I verbally explain to the rest of the class), I open a newcomer’s notebook and write a few of the words from the board in his or her notebook, giving the student explicit communi-cation for instruction by demonstra-tion. The stu- dent copies what is on the board. Then I say “Copy.” From that time on, this student knows what the word “copy” means and can copy.

Explicit communication with parents is one of the most impor-tant types of communication. After all, the parent(s) or caretaker is the first teacher and the one who can do the most to facilitate a student’s aca-demic success. In parent meetings, I combine simple words with academic language and have the requisite bilin-gual dic- tionaries. By explaining and demon- strating slowly and carefully, explicit communication and a good dialogue can be created.

When one speaks with humil-ity and caring, the communication is explicit. Explicit communication is the key to all forms of dialogue; if one method does not work, just keep on trying.

exPliCit CommuniCation

Ellen Terry Vandrew-Wald was born in the Bronx into a multicultural, reli- gious background. Barry Wald, her husband, encouraged her to become a teacher. She got her B.A. from Marymount Manhattan College in 1999 and M.A. in TESOL from Hunter College in 2004. She is a NYC public school K-12 teacher, and also an adjunct. <ilanawald@yahoo.com>

Page #

The field of ESOL has lost one of its most revered members, Jeanette D. Macero, who died May 9, 2011. Jeanette was passionate in her dedication to non-native speakers of English as exemplifi ed by her teaching, mentoring and participation in professional organiza-tions. Jeanette, one of the founders of NYS ESOL BEA (now NYS TESOL—see note below), was a leader in that organization nonstop until her retirement from Syracuse University in 1998, as associate professor of English and TESOL coordinator of languages, literatures and linguis-tics. She moved to Medfi eld, MA to be near her family.

Many NYS TESOL members will testify to the mentoring they received from Jeanette, who held leadership positions in the organization for her entire career. Jeanette gradu-ated with a BA in English from Barnard College, an MA in linguistics from Columbia University, and did doctoral study in linguistics at the University of Michigan. She was

president, second vice president twice, and chair of various TESOL committees: publications, paper selection, awards and nominations. Twice, she received the NYS TESOL DistinguishedService Award.

In addition to Jeanette’s full-time teaching at Syracuse University, she published skill books for be-ginners of English through Laubach Literacy (now known as ProLiteracy), as well as a number of scholarly papers and addresses,edited books of readings, and acted as consultant to many groups. All those who knew Jeanette are aware of her many accomplishments in professional organizations and her skillful teaching, but those closest to her will remember most her kind and compassionate manner to all she metand worked with, her hearty laugh, and her engaging personality. Jeanette’s friends and colleagues have lost a treasure. Vel Chesser, retired from Syracuse University, can be reached at vfchesse@syr.edu

Editor’s note: With thanks to NYS TESOL historian George Morris: Thevery fi rst organization was called NY TESOL (No “S” for State), then NYSESOL BEA. The founding date is 1970 (hence our 40th anniversary in 2010). The split into NYS TESOL and NYSABE was in the early 1980s

nYs tesol remembers Jeanette d. maCero

Vol. 41, No. 3

Page #

More Grammar Games: Cognitive, Affective and Movement Activities for EFL Students. By Mario Rinvolucri and Paul Da-vis. Cambridge University Press. Cambridge. UK. (2010).176 pp. ISBN: 978-0-521-46630-1

Mario Rinvolucri and Paul Davis’ More Grammar Games: Cog-nitive, Affective and Movement Ac-tivities for EFL Students provides a revamping of their earlier work Grammar Games, which was origi-nally published in 1984. The authors designed the text to provide EFL/ESL teachers with a framework for games that can be modifi ed to be appropri-ate for different age groups and varied English profi ciency levels. Therefore, while the usefulness of the book as a supplemental text in the adult ESL classroom is the main purpose of this review, its utility can be applied to various teaching scenarios. The text is divided into nine sections including “Competitive Games,” “Cognitive Games,” “Feelings and Grammar,” “Listening to People,”“Movement and Grammar,” “Meaning and Translation,” “Problem Solving,”“Correction” and “Presentation,” for a total of 81 games, or mini-lessons. As the titles suggest, many lessons are rooted in the principles of well-known English language learning methodol-ogies including the Silent Way, as wellas Counseling-Learning/CommunityLanguage Learning (CLL). The bookbegins with a table of contents notingthe games and page numbers. This is followed by a detailed map of the book with the game titles, grammar topics covered, and levels and time needed. The introduction also includes com-

mentary from the authors on howthe book can be used and their ratio-nale for the methodologies utilized bysection. Each game begins with the title of the game and a box restating the details from the map of the book. If the game can be adapted for other-structures and levels, a sub-box statesthis. To start the main portion of themini-lesson, the authors note any preparation required before class. This is followed by a breakdown of thein-class procedures of the game. Theauthors also include examples, varia-tions, a rationale overview, and notesor acknowledgements when neces-sary. Lastly, any required handouts are provided. On a minor note, the examples and handouts are written using British English vocabulary. In the case of classes in the United States, instructors will need to rewrite these in Standard American English.

The first section includes com-petitive games, which are designed toincrease motivation by fostering col-laboration within groups while creat-ing a safe, spirited environment. Manyof the games in this section focus onthe correction of material provided bythe teacher. This, of course, means that the instructor must devote time to the preparation of the game. For some this could be less than ideal.

book reviewReviewed by Kathryn North

This is an ongoing column, featuring reviews of books and other materials for ESOL teachers and students. Please send article submissions to the column editor, Nanette Dougherty (contact information ison page 22).

Vol. 41, No. 3

The cognitive games in sec-tion two are unique in their structure as, according to the authors, the exer-cises are mostly open-ended ones: this differs from many grammar exercises that require one correct response. The fl exibility of the activities allows stu-dents to discover various aspects of the language without the direct infl uence of the instructor. While these types of activities can be very cre-ative and have their place in certain contexts, giving students unlimited control over the types of sentences produced can cause the direction of the lesson to be diverted. For this rea-son, although this section follows the Silent Way method in its purest form (Larsen-Freeman, 2000), the lack of fi nal language destination does not fol-low the integrated and pragmatic way that the Silent Way is often practiced in the classroom.

Sections three and four, which deal with feelings and listening to others, respectively, are arguably the strongest chapters. Here, games are designed to promote healthy inter-personal discussions, which require speakers to make use of a specifi c grammar structure. Many teachers can attest to the positive infl uence that mutual understanding, respect and personal investment in the class-room can have on productivity (e.g., Counseling Learning and Commu-

nity Language Learning—see Larsen-Freeman, 2000).

Section five is made up of games that incorporate grammar and movement. While there is a modicum of Desuggestopedia in-herent in games throughout the text, this section explicitly focuses on the usage of movement to instill language concepts. The rationale seems to be that students are more open to language learning when the preconceived mental and emotional barriers to learning are “de-suggested” through lighthearted activity (Larsen- Freeman, 2000).

In the meaning and translation games found in section six, the minilessons focus on having students develop a deeper grasp of the nuances and root meaning of language by linking English with their mother tongue. While the debate over the use of translation in the ESL classroom continues, using native languages as a resource in the foreign/second language classroom can help to build linguistic abilities in both languages, bridge existing knowledge to the acqui-sition of the new language, and give validity to the first language (Baker, 2006; Gibbons, 2009). Therefore, if instructors use these mini-lessons, they may find that when properly administered, deep learning can take place during games that use translation. The last three sections are less substantial. Section seven deals with problem solving. Section eight offers techniques for self, peer and teacher corrections. Finally, section nine recommends al-ternatives for the presentation of new grammar topics to a class.

Both students and teacher have much to gain from More Grammar Games. The authors offer ideas for games that appeal to many different learning styles. With the exception of musical and natural intelligences, this book contains games that promote all the multiple intelligences (Gardner, 2006). The book also lists games specifi cally designed to strengthen receptive skills to help students become more active listeners and readers. Furthermore, utilizing grammar games, an instructor can adeptly introduce grammar top-ics without the use of overt grammatical language. Although the dis-cussion of teaching grammatical form vs. focusing on communica-

Page #

by Laura Van TassellNYS TESOL SIG Coordinator

In coordination with the 2011 NYS TESOL annual conference, “En-hanc- ing English Learning: Connect-ing Communities through Collabora-tion,” the topic for this year’s student essay contest, “How has your com-munity helped you learn English?,” revolved around communities and the role that living, working, and in-teracting in them plays in the English language learners’ (ELLs) acquisition of English.

The essay contest was held for students who are current or former ELLs within three categories: students in grades four through eight; students in grades nine through twelve; and students enrolled in a university or an adult education program, including students enrolled in Intensive Eng- lish programs, community colleges,

ReferenceDunn, R., & Dunn, K. (1993). Teach- ing secondary students through their individual learn-ing styles: Practical approaches for grades 7-12. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.Dunn, R., & Griggs, S. A. (Eds.). (2003, 2004, 2007). Synthesis of the Dunn and Dunn learning-style model research: Who, what, when, where, and so what? Jamaica, NY: St. John’s University’s Center for the Study of Learning and Teach- ing Styles.Fountas, I. C., & Pinnell, G. S. (2001).Guiding readers and writers grades 3-6: Teaching comprehen- sion, genre, and content lit-eracy. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Gardner, H. (1983). Frames of mind: The theory of multiple intelligenc- es. New York: Basic Books.Gardner, H. (1993, 2006). Multiple intelligences: New Horizons. New York: Basic Books.McKenzie, W. (1999). Multiple Intel- ligences Inventory. Retrieved from http://surfaquarium.com/MI/in- ventory.htmMissere, N., & Dunn, R. (2005).Learning in vogue: Elements of style (LIVES). Retrieved from www.learningstyles.netShort, D., & Fitzsimmons, S. (2007).Double the work: Challenges and solutions to acquiring language and academic literacy for adoles- cent English language learners—A report to Carnegie Corporation of New York. Washington, DC: Alli- ance for Excellent Education.

Continued from page 5 As the ESL teacher component in a collaborative team teach-ing mathematics class, daily co-teaching experiences and collab-orative conferences led to differentiated tutoring and small-group instruction. I reinforced basic math skills to the students who did not know simple addition, subtraction, multiplication, and division, while my math colleague reinforced higher-level math skills and concepts.

Conclusion These conversations take time and energy. High school teachers of ELLs may find they, too, are performing double the work to support adolescent ELLs in meeting the challenges of second language acquisition in an academic environment. This increased responsibility, however, may prove worthwhile when the result-ing conversations lead to targeted instruction and interventions as teachers collaborate in assessing ELLs and planning instruction for their students.

student essaY Contest20

11 n

Ys t

eso

l

degree-based programs, and ESOL programs.

The student essay contest was very successful, with 113 essays received from throughout New York State. A winner and an honorary mention were chosen from each of the three categories. The names of the winners and honorary mentions will be an- nounced during the Friday luncheon at the annual conference and their es- says will be printed in the conference booklet. The winning essays will also be included in the winter edition of Idiom as well as be posted on the NYS TESOL Special Interest Group (SIG) Student Essay Contest page.

Please join me in thanking all of the students who submitted essays to the sixth annual student essay contest! Watch for news about the 2012 contest in an upcoming issue of Idiom, as well as on our website.

Vol. 41, No. 3

Page #

small talk:a meaningFul Conversation

by Joy Scantlebury

Engaging English Language Learners (ELLs) in a few minutes of small talk prior to the start of ESL class can be a very useful strategy. The purpose of small talk is not about gauging how grammatically correct my students can speak in English -- although I do make mental notes of students’ grammatical diffi culties for subsequent lessons. It provides the opportunity for my students to be heard in a very relaxed setting, while allowing their English to emerge. It certainly can be a challenge to insert those few minutes during the fast-paced schedule of a typical school day, but I have found it to be a source of valuable information. I often begin the small talk session with an informational “wh” question such as “How was your ap-pointment at the dentist?” or “What did you do after school yesterday?” The responses are quite revealing. Some students, especially those in middle school, are initially guarded, while others seem surprised that I want to know more about them. Gradually as they learn to trust me as well as their classmates, the students slowly open up. It is gratifying to see a once painfully shy kindergarten student now coming to class with daily announcements such as, “You know what? Yesterday, I lose(sic) a tooth.” There are other times when students express more sensitive issues, which we discuss further in pri-vate. One example of this occurred when an ELL in third grade told me during our small talk session that one of the other students in the mainstream class made fun of his speech and called him “stupid.” Neither his classroom teacher nor I had noticed any tension between these two students. The fact that the ELL who men-tioned this incident had always felt self-conscious about his ability to speak English prompted my immediate arrangement of a meeting with his teacher and the other student. Fortunately, we were able to resolve the situation, but it taught me to become more vigilant when working with ELLs in the mainstream classroom. It is impressive to listen to a student retell a story or incident, but the most gratifying part is when he or she is able to connect it to a new concept. When studying the concept of cause and effect during a read-ing lesson, I sensed that only a few students understood this concept, while many did not. Suddenly, one student announced, “Do you remember when I told you the story about how I accidentally spilled water on the kitchen fl oor?” He proudly continued, “That was an example of cause and effect. The cause was when I spilled water on the floor. The effect was when my mom became angry.” His classmates nodded their heads in agreement. It was as if a light bulb had been turned on! I could not have provided a better example of cause and effect! As ELLs become more confi dent in speaking English, more of their personalities emerge. Dur-ing one of our small talk sessions, I asked a beginning ELL in the fi rst grade, “Where does your brother go to school?” Without hesitation, she stated, “My brother go (sic) to Sleepy Hollow School. Zzzzzzzz. Sleepy School. I am soooo sleepy!” as she put her head on the desk and pretended to sleep. Prior to that comment, I had not seen that humorous side of her. I noticed how thrilled she was that she had made me laugh. I then decided to follow her quip with another “wh” question. I tapped her on the shoulder as her eyes snapped open and her head bobbed up from the table. “What does your brother like to do at school?” I asked. She smiled and impishly replied, “He like (sic) to sleep.” How clever this little girl was! I realized several thingsduring our small talk exchange. This student demonstrated that she understood the word “sleepy”, she con-nected that understanding to a different context, and she found a way to make it humorous. None of these is

Vol. 41, No. 3

easy to do, especially at the beginning of thelanguage acquisition process. Later in the day, I had this student retell the joke to her teacher and some of her classmates. This small talk session was a pivotal moment for this student because she was clearly pleased to see that she could be funny in English. I have noticed that ELLs have the capacity to dissect words in interesting ways, especially when these words are spoken. When native English speakers think about words, we tend to focus on the sum and not the parts. When a student was beginning ELL in second grade, I recall his reading a passage out loud. After encountering the two-syllable word, “awesome”, he pronounced it as if were a threesyllable words, “a – we—some”. Prior to that day, I had never realized that the word “awesome” is comprised ofthree smaller words: “a”, “we” and “some”. That was a revelation for me. How awesome! I am sure that many ESL teachers utilize small talk or some variant of it in their classrooms. It is not a novel concept, but I fi nd that it is valuable during a limited amount of time. Conversations, which on the surface may appear superfl uous, are in actuality a gold mine of enriching and relevant information.

Page #

Vol. 41, No. 3

Page #

tive interactions is still very predominant in the ESL teaching fi eld, research has shown that the integration of grammar with contextual-ized language creates the most effi cient mode of learning(Larsen-Freeman 2001).

To offer some criticism, the organizational structure of the text can be challenging. For those who normally organize lessons in a progression of scaffolded topics, the division by underlying peda-gogical approaches may be less intuitive. In addition, the organiza-tion within the sections is unclear and finding a game for a specifi c grammar topic or level requires some hunting within the map of the text. Further, many of the games, especially in sections one and two, require a fair amount of setup. While an instructor may hope to use a book of games as a quick reference for lesson ideas, the time required for fi nding an appropriate lesson and setup prevent the book from being used in that manner. Finally, while one would assume that all of the games are related explicitly to grammar, some have a more semantic focus. This does not deter the student from gaining knowl-edge but should be noted.

Baker, C. (2006). Foundations ofbilingual education and bilingualism(4th ed.). Toronto: MultilingualMatters.Gardner, H. (2006). Multiple intelligences:New Horizons. New York:Basic Books.Gibbons, P. (2009). English LearnersAcademic Literacy and Thinking:Learning in the Challenge Zone.Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.Larsen-Freeman, D. (2000). Teachingand Principles in LanguageTeaching (2nd ed.). New York:Oxford University Press.Larsen-Freeman, D. (2001). Teachinggrammar. In M. Celce-Murcia(Ed.), Teaching English as a Secondor Foreign Language (3rd ed.)(pp. 251-266). Boston: Heinkle &Heinkle Thomson Learning.Rinvolucri, M., & Davis, P. (1995).More Grammar Games: Cognitive,Affective and MovementActivities for EFL Students. NewYork: Cambridge University Press.

References

book review

Vol. 41, No. 3

Page #

Vol. 41, No. 3

Page #

Vol. 41, No. 3

Page #

Vol. 41, No. 3

Page #