CoL: Evaluation Of My Intervention After The First Year

This Evaluation looks at the different parts of our inquiry into creating a culturally responsive intensive oral language programme across the Junior School. It reflects on the three hypotheses developed at the beginning of this inquiry. 

Utilising the student's strengths in their first language, working in bilingual and multilingual ways, creating Talanoa, and working in partnership with families will help build students English language and literacy.

Developing oral language through short high-interest topics and real-life experiences, with a focus on intensive oral language acquisition, will create an environment of language in abundance.

A collaborative inquiry across the junior school (Years 1-3) will grow professional capital across the school. The shared inquiry will allow all students across the junior school to benefit from the effectiveness of changed practice and allow teachers to learn from and with each other. It will hopefully also enable an effective changed practice to become sustainable.

Student Voice

Student voice shows that there has been a shift in students feeling comfortable using their first language at school and that the target students see their heritage language as a way to communicate effectively with their peers and family and value themselves as experts when it comes to teaching their teachers their first language. Whereas previously the target students said that they just spoke their first language at home and with friends. They also see changes in my teaching practice such as collaborative learning opportunities, turn taking when talking and using language acquisition activities as ways in which they learn best.

Comparison of student voice survey Term 1-4 

Pasifika Early Intervention Programme (PELP)

After one Term of the Pasifika Early Literacy Programme (PELP) our Target Students made significant progress in the number of words spoken during the PELP oral language assessment, with the exception of Student 3 who already had a higher English oral language level than the other students. Student 4 didn't speak their heritage language at home which accounts for there low level of heritage language pre and post intervention.

This data shows the increase of students confidence speaking their first language at school alongside the increased acquisition of English within that one term.

The above graph shows the average amount of words spoken during the Pasifika Early Literacy Programme language test pre PELP intervention and post intervention (one school term).

The graph indicates that on average Junior students increased their oral language after one term of PELP. During this time we changed our teaching practice to incorporate students first language into our teaching programmes, encouraged students to use their first language, used dual language books in class and at home, and connected with families about the importance of students using and learning their first language.

The graph also shows that those students who were also in the Target Group, participating in small group oral language acquisition activities  (Dr Jannie Van Hees) went from having a below average oral language level below level to an above average level. These students participated in all Dr Van Hees modelling sessions and classroom sessions lead by the teachers exploring hands on oral language activities, insisting on use of new oral language, picture talk and shared writing sessions using new vocabulary. This shift is far greater than those students not participating in the programme.

It is therefore my conclusion that although we would probably see shift in students oral language through the use of PELP alone we see a far greater shift when we combine this programme with the teaching strategies that make up the Oral Language Intervention Programme designed by Dr Jannie Van Hees.

Combilist Data

The Combilist was used to measure language development factors of all students within my class.
Factors important in language development are rated below using the scale Yes/Sometimes/No.

C1-2 indicates willingness to communicate
C3-4 indicates communication with teacher/adults
C5-9 indicates participation in discourse
C10-13 indicates contribution to the discussion or discourse
C14-16 indicates benefits from feedback

Areas that target students made the most gains where: 

C2 Keen to express meaningfully and well.

C4 Expresses responses as clearly as he/she can.

C5 Takes the opportunity to speak.

C8 Gives elaborate responses to open-ended questions from the teacher/adult

C9 Reacts and responds spontaneously and on own initiative to teacher.

C12 Thinks before he/she speaks so as to express at a higher cognitive level.

C14 Continues his/her meaning and intentions, and picks up and uses teacher examples and models later.

Areas for continued development are:

C10 Sustains expression of his/her meaning, ideas and intentions.

C15 Meanings and ideas logically developed and expressed.

The rest of the class still struggle with giving elaborate responses and thinking before they speak to express at a higher cognitive level. The gains the target group made in this areas I feel is reflective of my change in practice, pushing students to use more words, new vocabulary, modelling responses and to think before they speak. The graphs show that those students that were 'No' in many categories all shifted to 'Sometimes'. This was not the case for many of the other students within the class that made comparatively little gain in these areas.

These results show that Dr Jannie Van Hees programme does have a substantial impact on oral language acquisition and using Dr Van Hees teaching strategies across the Junior school would benefit all students.

Transference Into Reading

The below graphs show the little progress students made within their first year at school (40 weeks). The graph also shows the progress that was made during the last 20 weeks of which these interventions took place. Although three of the students are working well below the expected level, all have made progress. However, it is hard to say whether this progress would have been made due to changed oral language programme or whether it is due to the normal classroom reading programme.  

Student 1

Student 2

Student 3

Student 4

Collaborative Inquiry Into Changed Practice Across The Junior School

The collaborative nature of this inquiry is harder to evaluate however a survey completed by the Junior teachers showed that they all had a clear understanding of the 'why' behind the change in practice and held a shared vision. As a team, we have undertaken a vast amount of PLD this year with DR Jannie Van Hees, the Pasifika Early Literacy Programme and ENGAGE, and shared our new learning with the rest of the school Staff meeting slide deck. 

We soon realised that creating changed practice across the Junior school would take longer than anticipated and extended the length of the inquiry from 1 year to 2 years, dedicating the first year to professional development and exploring changes in teaching practice. Teachers were at differing stages of uptake of this new learning due to two teachers being beginning teachers and experiencing all the new learning that comes with teaching your first class. What was important to me was the openness all teachers had to the PLD and that all teachers tried some of the teaching strategies learned.

We began collecting data on all junior students but then realised that it would be more significant to focus on a target group that would participate in all small group intensive oral language activities  (Dr Van Hees), PELP and ENGAGE taught by me. Next year as we all implement the new learning we will take data across the Junior School.

During the second year,  the aim is for all Junior teachers to fully implement the changes to practice, creating a Junior curriculum that focuses on a culturally responsive intensive oral language acquisition programme.

The Introduction Of ENGAGE

One of the factors that became apparent throughout the inquiry was the impact students low levels of regulation had on students ability to uptake new oral language. 

ENGAGE seemed to be the missing piece and when offered the opportunity to participate in the programme starting Term 4 we as a team jumped at the chance. 

It is hoped that through the games based programme students will develop self-regulation skills that will help them to uptake new learning. 

Data will be used from this programme to support our inquiry moving into its second year. 

Comparison of Student Voice Responses Term 1-Term 4

In order to get a deeper understanding of how students perceived both themselves as learners and the effectiveness of my teaching practice. I conducted a student voice survey in Term 1 and Term 4.

Term 1 Responses	Term 2 Responses	Reflection
I am good at reading/ writing - yes/sometimes/no?
S3- ”Sometimes I don’t do well because I'm tired.” S1-” I’m good I write on the word.” S4 - "I write my sister’s names.” S1- “I can write it good, my pirate one. I could write so many words.” S4- “I need the word card.”	S4- "No I don't write properly and then I fix it. My sister helps me.  S1- "Yes I'm good. I know all the words." S4- "Yes I sound out the words." S2- "No I suck, I don't know how to spell ...my family say it."	This tells me that some of my target students have low self-esteem when it comes to writing. This is something I need to address within my teaching moving forward.
When I can't do something it is easy to ask my teacher for help- yes/sometimes/no?
S1- “Ask 3 people before the teacher, ask your friend then you go ask the teacher.” “Ask your friend (repeated by all 4)”	S1- "No you have to ask 3 people before you."	Is my classroom management system of students asking 3 peers for help before approaching the teacher while she is taking a small group impacting them feeling they are able to gain the help they needed at other times of the day? I will need to explore this further as it is interesting they gave the same response twice.
My teacher listens to my ideas - yes/sometimes/no?
S2- “Everyone always talking, she picks the people who are listening, who get to talking.”	S4- “Yes” S1- “Yes: S2- "No, you don't listen during mat time."	This child constantly calls out during mat time and talks over other students. Interesting to see that he feels like he isn't being listened to.  How can I address this issue so that he feels that he has a voice and that he is listened to?
Do you feel okay to talk in your own language at school? Why or why not?
S2- “No I want to practice my language at home, I have to learn it from my mum. It is hard to write in Tongan. I would like to talk more in Tongan at school.” S1-"No because people are Maori. People keep saying Maori to me.” S3- “I speak Samoan with my friends.”	S2- “Yes, so teachers can speak in Tongan. She (pointing to me and laughing to his friends) is a bit good. The Tongan kids are her teachers.” S1- “I like to talk, yes. All the Tongan students can listen and my Dad.” It’s cool speaking at school. When I speak to H (a Tongan girl from the class) she talks to me in Tongan. We play together.	This was a significant shift in students responses from not feeling like they could speak their first language at school to feeling comfortable speaking it. They talk of teaching their teachers and of being able to communicate with friends and family. These responses show the success of having a more culturally responsive classroom and using PELP to change teacher practice.
What do you want your teachers to know about you and how you learn best?
S2- “Tell my teacher about at writing, about pirates” S4- “I like maths, soccer, cooking.” S3- "Bikes” S1- "I like to cut coconuts.”	S2- :I can go outside and speak in Tongan.” S4- “We both take turns to talk”. S3- I work with my buddy- say the sentence and write it.” S1- I like the Tongan game putting the words with the pictures. I do it at home.”	This time students could articulate the emphasis they put on working collaboratively as well as the importance of learning in their first language. S1 is referring to a sequencing game whereby they had to sequence the pictures from a dual language book and match it to the text. This was an activity they got to take home to do with their families.

This data shows the areas I still need to work on, evident within the responses to the first three questions. These will help to guide changes to my teaching practice moving forward from here.

• developing students self efficacy in writing.
• ensuring all students can gain the help they need from me when they need it, being clearer about using terms like 'see 3 before me' during small group teaching, so that they don't interpret that as being all times of the day. 
• finding ways to ensure that all students are listened to while at the same time helping them develop turn taking while speaking. 

This data shows strengths in the areas of

• creating a culturally responsive learning environment whereby students feel confident using their first language.
• the use of collaborative learning, students taking turns to speak and students working with buddies. 
• The use of resources that encourage literacy in students first language, and the power of having these resources available to go home with the students for home learning with families.

These three areas I see as evidence of the effectiveness of changed practice moving from relatively non-culturally responsive teaching practice to a creating a culturally responsive classroom that embraces the use of student's first languages so they can learn in their first language and make connections between their first language and English. Collaborative learning and students turn-taking when talking are mentioned as ways students learn best, therefore me changing my practice to incorporate these aspects into my teaching has had a positive influence on student learning. 

Bursts and Bubbles

ENGAGE

ENGAGE is a programme designed to teach self-regulation skills through games. After mastering the game of Simon Says we extended it by playing the game in Tongan. Students soon realised that watching and thinking was an important part of listening so they could understand the instruction. 'Simon' pointed to the parts of his body as he said the instruction in his first language so non-Tongan speakers could understand. This extension raised the cognitive level, the challenge and engagement.



ENGAGE has been the missing piece in our Inquiry into creating an intensive oral language programme for our Juniors.

We were struggling implementing changed practice due to many students low levels of self-regulation. Unable to slow their bodies and minds down and engage with what was being said by the teacher and peers it made uptake of new oral language difficult.

ENGAGE uses common language taught through games e.g. when playing 'Silence' where children complete a challenge in 'Silence' the teacher says "It is important that you listen carefully to the instructions so you know what to do." This phrase is then repeated by the teacher in other areas of the curriculum or parts of the day when students are needing to use the same skills in a different context.

Initially students find the games challenging, this was something we had not anticipated as they seem like simple games. However sticking with the same game over a few weeks the children do gain the skills needed and the game can then be extended to up the challenge and sharpen their self-regulation skills.

Being strategic about implementing the skills and common language across the curriculum has already shown itself to be working. It is giving student cues to use the needed skills and has helped them to get themselves ready for learning.

Next year we will be fully implementing this programme across the Junior school from day one of the Term and sharing the programme with parents at the start of the year.

CoL- Sharing Our Changes of Practice

CoL: Checking In - How is our collaborative approach to teaching as inquiry going? Is our shared vision clear?

One of the key aspects of my with CoL Inquiry was to take a collaborative approach. Instead of inquiring solely my own change of practice I wanted to take this further by hopefully creating effective change across the whole of our Junior school. I have therefore been taking my team with me on the journey of inquiry, together we have been implementing new pedagogy learned from working with the PELP (Pasifika early Literacy Programme) and Jannie Van Hees to develop an intensive oral language acquisition programme. 
It is easy to make assumptions that everyone is on the same page and we all have a shared understanding but is that really the case? Also what changes can we make so that we are effectively working together to create change that will best develop our student's oral language? 

I created a Google Form to gain a better understanding of how we are going. 

Here are the responses:

What is your understanding of the 'why' behind our PELP project? Why are we doing this?

To use heritage languages as a tool to accelerate learning. Realising first languages are a powerful tool - an advantage rather than a hindrance.

The school has encouraged us to take part in this programme. The workshops and whanau meetings that we have already had have definitely proved the significance of recognition of the children's family first language in their learning. Coming from a culture and language other than English myself, I know how valuable it is to be able to communicate in more than one language both verbally and in writing. Though we are still fresh in this learning process and just trying it out, I can see how significantly it is increasing children's confidence in their learning. It is giving them a sense of belonging, courage and joy as well as leadership in leading others including their own teacher.

My understanding of PELP is that it will increase the engagement of students with their own language in school.

To utilise students first language and culture within the classroom and encouraging parents to share stories language and culture with their children at home. We are doing this to raise Pasifika student achievement through teaching in culturally responsive practices.

What is your understanding of the 'why' behind our Intensive Oral Language Acquisition project? Why are we doing this?

To aid literacy and vocabulary development.

Oral language or speaking is the main key to read and write. It has been identified in our school that students are making slower progress than expected in reading and writing. We know how important the early years are in building the foundation for learning in any curriculum areas. So I believe that our students in the first couple of years at school need to be exposed to a very rich oral language and vocabularies to support them in expressing themselves orally first and then gaining fluency in reading and writing. However, it is quite challenging to implement a fully intensive oral language approach considering our ratio as well as other curriculum requirements to be met. Yet, it is very valuable if we can manage to implement it holistically across all our teaching blocks.

Our students will benefit with more oral language being introduced into the classroom. This will, in turn, help them with their writing and reading.


To build our students oral language through creating an intensive oral language programme. Our students come to school with extremely low oral language.

What changes could we make to our collaborative approach to teaching as inquiry so we are effectively working together towards a shared vision of raising student's oral language?

None - all is well

May be to set a goal as a team to implement some specific teaching ideas and strategies within a set timeframe; share ideas and plan, seek for help from one another, share our attempts, celebrations and challenges and give feedback.

By incorporating more intensive oral language into all subject areas we will enhance the children's abilities. A collaborative approach to this in the subject areas e.g. topic - living/non-living, will enable us to work together to help our children develop in all areas.


Sharing our inquiry with the whole school.

I normally find it hard to refer back to our Teaching as Inquiry doc to add onto it. I'm sure we all take part in implementing the ideas we have discussed. However, it is challenging to manage time to update the notes and findings on the doc. Yet, I am very happy that we are doing this together as a team as it motivates us to keep going.

Reflection: So what does this tell me? And how can I tweak what I'm doing to make our collaborative approach to teaching as inquiry more effective?

• The team has a clear understanding of the 'why' behind the new pedagogy. They see the vision and feel it is important. This is exciting!
• Acting on this response 'set a goal as a team to implement some specific teaching ideas and strategies within a set timeframe; share ideas and plan, seek for help from one another, share our attempts, celebrations and challenges and give feedback.' Making this more specific, we should be talking the walk. I love this response as it challenged my assumptions that this is something we were already doing. 
• We can share what we have been doing with the rest of the school through a staff meeting.

COL - Teaching Chunks Of Words

Articles, determiners and quantifies precede and modify nouns and pronouns replace nouns.  These are often used incorrectly or omitted in my Student's oral language which of course is then reflected in their writing.

What have I learned from the Pacific Early Literacy Project (PELP) and My Work With Dr Jannie Van Hees regarding the use of structural words?

• Instead of teaching bilingual learners individual words, teach words in meaningful chunks by teaching the words within the other words surrounding it. Bilingual students may understand lexical words but don't know the structural words that go with them such as pronouns and articles. Therefore, build these structural words into oracy programmes. Instead of using nouns in mind maps and think pair share activities build both the nouns and the articles that proceed them. Display the words within meaningful chunks for students to see and revisit.
• Insisting students use correct sentences through listening, thinking about what they are going to say, copying and repeating is a way of practising using the structural words surrounding new vocabulary e.g. say and do- "I am placing the tuatara on top of the log." "I am tieing an apron around his waist." 

What am I doing differently in my practice?

• I'm insisting on the correct use of pronouns and articles, I am doing this through modelling and gifting correct use and I give them multiple opportunities to practice. This can be done through hands-on 'say and do' activities like exploring floating and sinking I am picking up the stick and placing it on top of the water."  or "These objects float and those objects sink.
• Using mind maps that include the pronouns and articles that go with nouns.

How is it going?

It sure isn't easy for the students to use these words and this can seem laborious, but students amaze me with their perseverance working hard at correct speech. We talk a lot about how talking and listening are helping our brains grow.  One thing that I have noticed is the children finding it difficult to calm their bodies and minds down so that they are able to listen to others talking including me modelling the correct speech.  

What am I noticing?

The four students I'm tracking are all using correct sentence structure after repeating these correct structures a few times. They are using words such as they, that, these more often and when asked to think about what they are going to say are able to use a greater amount of words. However, they still all revert to short word-groups or one or two-word responses when they are talking naturally. I feel that significant changes to their everyday speech patterns may take time and that the hard work students are putting into their speech in the above learning situations will eventually transfer into their day to day speech. The challenge of students gaining the self-regulation needed to calm themselves down enough to listen during oral language work is something I need to look into further as I feel that this is a barrier at the moment.

Teaching chunks of words PELP

Articles and pronouns are used to describe nouns and have a variety of formats. Correct use is important in writing.  Articles and pronouns are often used incorrectly or amitted in our student's oral language which of course is then reflected in their writing.

What have I learned from the Pacific Early Literacy Project and My Work With Dr Jannie Van Hees regarding the use of structural words?

• Instead of teaching bilingual learners individual words, teach words in meaningful chunks by teaching the words within the other words surrounding it. Bilingual students may understand lexical words but don't know the structural words that go with them such as pronouns and articles. Therefore, build these structural words into oracy programmes. Instead of using nouns in mind maps and think pair share activities build both the nouns and the articles that proceed them. Display the words within meaningful chunks for students to see and revisit.
• Insisting students use correct sentences through listening, thinking about what they are going to say, copying and repeating is a way of practising using the structural words surrounding new vocabulary e.g. say and do- "I am placing the tuatara on top of the log." "I am tieing the apron around his waist." 

What am I doing differently in my practice?

• I'm insisting on the correct use of pronouns and articles, I am doing this through modelling and gifting correct use and I give them multiple opportunities to practice. This can be done through hands-on 'say and do' activities like exploring floating and sinking I am picking up the stick and placing it on top of the water."  or "These objects float and these objects sink.
• Using mind maps that include the pronouns and articles that go with nouns.

How is it going?

It sure isn't easy for the students to use these words and this can seem laborious, but students amaze me with their perseverance working hard at correct speech. We talk a lot about how talking and listening are helping our brains grow.  One thing that I have noticed is the children finding it difficult to calm their bodies and minds down so that they are able to listen to others talking including me modelling the correct speech.  

What am I noticing?

The four students I'm tracking are all using correct sentence structure after repeating these correct structures a few times. They are using words such as they, that, these more often and when asked to think about what they are going to say are able to use a greater amount of words. However, they still all revert to short word-groups or one or two-word responses when they are talking naturally. I feel that significant changes to their everyday speech patterns may take time and that the hard work students are putting into their speech in the above learning situations will transfer into their day to day speech. 

COL- Teaching as Inquiry New Learning From Jannie Van Hees

Hypothesis 2: Developing oral language through short high-interest topics and real-life experiences, with a focus on intensive oral language acquisition, will create an environment of language in abundance.

Our Junior Team has been fortunate enough to enlist the help of Dr Jannie van Hees to help us develop an effective intensive oral language programme throughout our Junior School. 

Our Goal: For our children to have a large vocabulary and to be able to express their ideas in detail fluently.

Jannie has delivered both an initial theory session and workshop to train teachers and teacher-aides to conduct a hands-on language experience session which will become the basis for a three-day oral language intensive programme. The programme is designed to be used in small groups of 6-8 children.

Key Points from Dr Jannie van Hees Sessions which we will implement within our oral language programme:

• Tell the children why we are doing this and what it's about. Create a culture of talking in the classroom so that children understand that in our classroom we use lots of words.

Example:

“Our brain needs to be used, your voice and brain need to talk with each other - In our safe place, we push ourselves to talk because talking is your job. We need to push ourselves to use our brain and talk and to value that of others." -Jannie

"You have a clever brain. You need to think and think but there is something else you need to do and that's talking." - Jannie

• Give the meaning of new vocabulary.

Example:

"You are gardeners. Gardeners are people that grow and care for plants."

• Repetition! Students repeat new phrases and vocabulary multiple times over multiple days. This is the uptake. They need to hear it multiple times and use it multiple times for uptake to happen. Students are doing something with the new vocabulary pushing them to extend their language. Repetition and recycling of new words and phrases pushing them to the edge using complex language that they don't hear at home.

• Do it and say it. Children use new phrases and language in a hands-on context. Foster and encourage self-talk. Self-talk is a safe place to try out the language.

Example: 

The children put on each other's gardening aprons to get ready to do gardening explaining what they are doing as they are doing it. The teacher models "Here is your apron. I'm going to put it over your head. I'm going to flatten out the front and tie it at the back" The children then copy the teacher 'doing it and say it' to their partner. The teacher insists that they talk as they do it.

• Insist on connected speech. Many of our students don't use connected speech. They don't have the word groups (also illustrated through our work with PELP), students are used to using cryptic talk. Supporting them to use connected speech through gifting, modelling then insisting they use complete sentences is really important. They are used to using a few words then letting us complete their sentence. If we don't insist on them using connected speech they will continue to get away with broken speech patterns. This may feel extremely uncomfortable for the student and the teacher as it doesn't feel natural. 

Example: 

Teacher models: We need the...(bean seed)...to put in the ...(soil)...so the seed can grow into a ...(little bean plant).

Students: Each student has a turn in saying the sentence. They repeat it with help until they are able to say it fluently.

• No questions from the teacher, no hands up. 

Example: 

Students choose equipment to use for planting seeds.

Teacher: "We are all going to pick something and say what it is and say why it is important."

Teacher models: "I'm going to pick a pair of scissors because we may need to cut something."

"We are going to give it a go and if you don't have the words we will help each other."

"Ben you go first."

How and why will this changed practice impact the specific learning outcome?

It is believed that this intervention will give our students the vocabulary and sentence structures that will allow them to express their ideas in detail fluently. We hope that this will transfer into reading and written language.  

What is different from what we were doing before?

Personally, although I have always tried to explain the meaning of new vocabulary and given them hands-on activities to connect new language to, I have not insisted on them using connected speech. I have modelled how complete sentences would sound but not insisted that they repeat it back or use it multiple times. As a teacher you are always in a rush to move on, slowing it down and taking the time to get students to talk in complex sentences is going to mean letting go of the rushing. Finishing students sentences or accepting broken speech is also something I need to let go of and accept that it is going to feel uncomfortable 'discomforting' the students through pushing them to extend their language instead of jumping in to save them. 

Tasks are going to have to be thought out ahead of time and well planned. Instead of giving children a hands-on activity to explore away from the teacher, with the notion that students will share their ideas, knowledge and vocab with each other, activities will need to be done with a teacher and expected vocabulary and prepositional noun groups will have to be anticipated, planned for and modelled. This is far more teacher-directed than the 'play-based learning' approach I have used in the passed.

How will we monitor the effects of our changed practice?

Each teacher will take notes anecdotally on the oral language uptake of their students. The combi list and ELLP forms will be a way of recording progress made by students and teachers will reflect on their own teaching of this programme in terms of what is working and what needs tweaking. These aspects will be shared at team meetings.

PELP - Retelling the story in my first language

The book 'Locked Out' was a guided reading book the students had been working with previous to this lesson. The students were very familiar with the story. As this book was one of the titles available as dual language copies I thought it was the perfect opportunity to have a play and explore using the dual language books with my students. The group of students I was working with were Tongan Samoan and Maori.

Day 1- The students were shown the Samoan, Tongan and English books and were asked what do you notice about the books. Is there anything different about them? Is there anything the same?
Students explored the books and after I read the title of each book to them they discovered that they were in different languages.
Students were each given a book in their first language and asked in small groups to retell (talk about what happens in the book) the story in language using the pictures.

Each group naturally started talking in their first language with parts of their dialogue in English the English parts being well-known phrases from knowing the English text. The older students naturally took the lead within the group (I teach a Year 1-3 class).

Day 2- We listened to the audio in Tongan and stopped it every now and then to talk about the story. The students told me what some of the words and phrases meant and I repeated them.

This was a beautiful session. All the students were engaged in listening to the text and were excited to be my teacher and correct my pronunciation. 

Day 3- The students listened/read along to the audio version of the story accessed through our class site as an independent reading activity. Then as a follow-up activity, they were given a sequence of pictures, and text, from the book that they had to put together and sequence.

Even though the students couldn't read the text in their first language they were looking carefully at the print to match it to the picture. The discussions they had around the retelling and sequencing of the story was brilliant and most of it done in their first language. They worked in groups with students with the same first language. I added that it was a competition to see who could get it correct which took it to another level of excitement.

Day 4- This book is now going home along with a set of pictures and matching text and a note to parents with ideas on how to use the book at home.

I'm excited to hear feedback from the parents.
My Maori students decided it wasn't fair that there was no book in Te Reo so connected with some of our older students to write their own Te Reo version using explain everything.