Review often happens at the end of the unit.  However, teachers are often surprised when ELs don’t perform well on summative assessments.  That’s possibly because we haven’t weaved in opportunities to meaningfully review content throughout the unit.  We can use the SIOP model to stay on track as we teach new content.

In Making Content Comprehensible for English Learners: The SIOP Model (5th Edition) (SIOP Series), Echevarria, Vogt, and Short recommend including 4 things when reviewing and assessing ELs:

  1. A comprehensive review of key vocabulary
  2. A comprehensive review of key content concepts
  3. Regular feedback provided to students on their output (e.g. language, content, work)
  4. An assessment of students’ comprehension and learning of all lesson objectives (e.g., spot checking, group response) throughout the lesson (29).

SIOP Model

 

1. + 2. Reviewing Key Vocabulary and Content Concepts

The word “review” comes off a bit too teacher-centered sometimes. Instead,  think of the word “create”.  Memorizing doesn’t work to engage the brain but creating with content knowledge does. When students use the vocabulary and content concepts, they are reviewing content knowledge. Our job is to design various opportunities for ELs to use key content vocabulary and concepts beyond simply memorizing.

For example, Mr. James’s 7th grade class is currently learning about rivers.  They were introduced to words such as “mouth”, “estuary”, “tributary” consumer”, etc.  However, without a context, these words didn’t really make sense to them.  

Therefore, we had students label these terms on the rivers they were studying for their free inquiry (self-selected topic).  As they created their Google Drawing, they cemented their understanding of the concept of parts of a river basin.  Below is an example of EL’s Google Drawing for his particular river.

Using tech to learn SIOP sheltered instruction

As much as the Google Drawing was a way for ELs to review key vocabulary words and content concepts, it also served as a way for us to gather formative assessment data of their understanding.  The Google Drawing activity was a more authentic assessment because it didn’t ask students to regurgitate information in isolation. It wasn’t a matching activity of vocabulary words and their definitions.  Students had to apply their understanding of the vocabulary words and concept of river terminology to create a properly labeled diagram.

3. Providing Regular Feedback

Hattie suggests that regular feedback on students’ progress is one of the most effective things that teachers can to boost achievement (2009).  Therefore, we need to shift away from waiting to give feedback until summative assessments, such as final exams or reports.  Instead, we can better serve ELs by providing feedback on formative tasks that develop the skills needed for successful completion of summative, graded tasks.

For example, a Beginning, EL Ryan was expected to write an academic essay that describes the impact of damming in Laos.  In order to be successful, however, I had to walk him through various learning experiences that developed his skills for the final report. Each learning experience provided opportunities for informal, formative feedback.

After Ryan viewed resources related to damming in Laos (an Al Jazeera video and an NPR article), I had him mind map different concepts related to this topic. Each of these resources would be mini-writing experiences where Ryan practiced his writing skills and received feedback on his skill development.

Mind mapping as a pre-writing tool

As he wrote, I provided feedback on the structure of his paragraphs (ie: start with a topic sentence, provide evidence, explain the evidence).  Waiting to provide feedback on the structure of his writing until the final report would have been too late. After Ryan completed a paragraph, I provided grammatical feedback using Screencastify, a program that lets me record my screen as I offer commentary.

Zooming out to analyze this process, Ryan received continuous feedback on his structure and grammar usage 4 times before being formally evaluated because he wrote 4 more paragraphs. That’s a lot of feedback!

But it is feedback that I provided exactly when he needed it. He didn’t have to feel bad about a poor grade on a final assessment after thinking he was on the right track the whole time because I helped him stay on the right track from the start.

I think of feedback like the flight path of a plane.  As passengers, we barely feel the plane making minor adjustments to stay on course.  However, the pilots are continuously reading the monitors and course correcting.  We need to provide frequent, minor feedback so that students stay on the correct flight path instead of ending up at the completely wrong destination.

4. Assessing Objectives Throughout the Lesson

Assessing students’ understanding throughout the lesson is just like pilots checking their monitors throughout a flight.  Checking the monitors only towards the end of the flight will most likely result in a plane veering off course.  

Similarly, checking students’ understanding only during a final test or report means we have no time to pivot our instruction to bring students back on track.

The two strategies that I use most consistently to assess students’ understanding are:

Turn-and-Talk

In this structure, one student shares their synthesis of the concept while the other person listens.  After the first student has shared, the person listening responds to what was shared.  They can either:

  • Restate what was said
  • Agree to what was share
  • Disagree to what was said
  • Add to what was said

Then, the students switch roles to give the listening student the opportunity to share their thinking and give the other student the chance to respond.

Though this strategy seems collaborative, the other person is actually practicing the passive role of listening – often waiting to give their own synthesis of the same information.  To develop true listening and discussion skills, I recommend upgrading this beloved strategy to Turn-Talk-and-Respond (TTR).  In TTR, students must respond to what was said and not just wait for their turn to give an answer.  This makes talking more authentic as there’s an expectation that the listener will evaluate a classmate’s idea.

This simple, no-prep strategy encourages students to collaboratively construct and synthesize information.  With it, ELs are able to internalize the information more because they use their own words to understand a concept.

Quick Write

A Quick Write is the written version of a Turn-and-Talk.  However, instead of talking, students write; instead of turning to another student, they independently write a synthesis of the concept.  In a Quick Write, the bullseye we’re aiming for is comprehension of the content – not grammar, structure, or organization.

Though not as collaborative as Turn-Talk-Respond, Quick Writes still nurture critical thinking and cement concepts into students’ understanding.  Like Turn-Talk-Respond, this requires no prep on part of the teacher, but it does demand that they purposefully pause during key parts of the lesson to allow students to synthesize knowledge.

Takeaways

Reviewing students’ understand should be done throughout the lesson, not at the end of the unit.  Assessment done just at the end of learning often leads to surprises, mostly unwanted ones.  Just like how it will be too late for pilots to adjust their flight path upon landing, it’s too late for teachers to make shifts in their instruction during the final exam. Instead, we need assess students’ learning throughout the lesson plan and provide timely feedback as they go.

 

Echevarria, J., Vogt, ME, & Short, D. (2017). Making Content Comprehensible for English Learners: The SIOP Model. Fifth Edition. New York: Pearson. 

Hattie, J. (2009). Visible learning a synthesis of over 800 meta-analyses relating to achievement. London: Routledge.

Nora, J., & Echevarría, J. (2016). No more low expectations for English learners. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.