Reading Artifact Reflection- Standard 6

Artifact Title: Communication

Date Experienced Completed: April 2006; Fall 2014; Spring 2015

Artifact Description

This artifact consists of three documents: 1) Student Teacher Evaluation

Form, 2) Investigative Spelling Through Rhyme, and 3) a Web Quest Lesson Plan.

Wisconsin Standard Alignment

These documents best align with Standard 6 that states:

“The teacher uses effective verbal and nonverbal communication techniques as

well as instructional media and technology to foster active inquiry, collaboration, and

supportive interaction in the classroom.”

The Student Teacher Evaluation provides documentation of the effective

communication techniques I use with second language literacy students.

The second document demonstrates how I use rhyme to teach spelling

patterns and English pronunciation through fun interactions.

The third document is a “web quest” lesson plan that integrates technology

and multimedia into instruction to foster active inquiry and collaboration among

students.
 These documents align with UW-Platteville School of Education KSDs: 1c,

1d,1e; and 3b .

What I learned about teaching and learning from this experience:

My teaching experiences in a variety of settings with diverse students have

taught me that certain modes and styles of communication are more effective with

some students and less effective with others. Two examples will illustrate how I

have adapted my mode of communication, according to contextual factors. When I

taught ELL in a correctional facility, the students did not have access to computers,

and all instructional media --other than paper-- had to be approved. Therefore, I

used a lot of paper, print photographs, color-coding, and print cartoons in lessons.

In contrast, when I taught in a public high school, I had access to a smart board, and

the students were issued individual laptops. Therefore, I incorporated power

points, web quests, electronic texts and videos into instruction.

Context often determines what technology and media can be used to deliver

instruction; however, I can always communicate in a thoughtful and responsive

manner. I can use my voice—tone, volume, inflection, and pauses—to communicate

a message. I can use writing, drawings, pictures and graphs. I can use hand gestures

and facial expressions to illustrate meaning and to reinforce a verbal message.

Instructional media and technology can enhance students’ active inquiry in the

classroom, however I can always use verbal and nonverbal communication

techniques to create a collaborative and supportive learning environment.

 What I learned about myself as a prospective literacy teacher as a result

of this experience/artifact:

After multiple observations, my Viterbo University Student Teaching

Supervisor asked me if I consciously “talk with my hands” to enhance students’

understanding of the spoken message, or if I just did this naturally. Her question

helped me to understand more about myself as a second language instructor. I

consciously and deliberately use hand gestures and body language with second

language students in order to reinforce the spoken message; however, these

practices may also be “natural” since both of my great-grandparents were deaf. My

grandparents and relatives used sign language to communicate, so perhaps my

family uses more hand gestures than is typical, and I have been influenced by my

environment to do so as well.

In addition to using hand gestures and body language, I also use slower,

repetitive speech with second language learners. I enjoy rhyming and playing word

games, and frequently incorporate these practices in my “normal” speech with

family and friends. My “natural” communication preferences are effective for

second language instruction. Therefore, when someone comments: “You’re a

natural teacher,” or “Teaching seems to come so natural for you,” there may be some

truth to these observations. However, I believe that my “natural” inclinations have

been trained and refined through deliberate, effective instructional practices.