Emily's Entry 1/28

After reflecting on our readings and class discussion from last week, I wanted to address one topic in particular. In the Almasi article, it is suggested that students have specific roles when partaking in a discussion or literature group. These roles are inquisitor, facilitator of interaction, facilitator of interpretation, respondent and evaluator (37). At first, I wasn't quite sure whether to fully believe this was best. However, after thinking about our discussion in math class about status, I came to the conclusion that it is probably best to have students have roles for literature discussions. I think there are a couple of benefits actually. The main one is to not give in to status. If there is one student in the group who does all the talking then they have the status of being the leader, being prepared, on task, right all the time, etc. Even though other students may have ideas, they cannot vocalize them because the dominant student is taking over. Another reason to have roles is so students stay on task. With everyone having a specific duty or responsibility they are more likely to stay on topic and work their way through a discussion. Lastly, each student feels valued and important to the discussion with roles. If they successfully do their job, then they feel as though they were represented and made contributions to the group. I think it is important to note that these roles should be rotated with each discussion. This way it allows students multiple perspectives of participating in a group. I am anxious to try this with my second grade students!