onaclairadeluna
-
Posts
492 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Blogs
Classifieds
Store
Posts posted by onaclairadeluna
-
-
Thank you for the information.
I'd love to hear more about the conference, when you get a chance.
-
Is this what you meant? Thanks for sharing.
http://drbabs.wikispaces.com/file/view/RtI+and+the+Gifted+Child.pdf
-
http://www.learner.org has great some interesting videos and teacher development courses that might be useful. They have a constructivist bent and some of their teacher courses have interesting hands on activities. I particularly like this for younger students but it's a great site in general if you don't know about it.
Lori, I have found og to be the best thing for my dyslexic son. It's strange because in all other content areas he is way out of the box but for spelling he needs systematic instruction.
You might want to look at apples and pears which isn't og but based on morphemes. If I was starting to remediate spelling with a Senior I'd start there, I think they have placement tests on their website.
-
It's a lot of writing, especially after lesson 15. That might deter some.
You might split the lessons up. Do one lesson over two (or more) days.
-
I'm not sure that "obligation" is the right word as it sounds somewhat negative. It seems that it will enrich anyone's life to be able to better understand people who are thinking differently than themselves in many ways. To me it would be part of being "mature" and would greatly enhance communication in families and groups of any kind.
This actually closer to what I meant than what I actually wrote. Thanks.:)
They learn initially from breaking down writing from examples I find. They have to learn to find the topic sentence and supporting details. Sometimes I cut copied paragraphs into pieces and they have to reassemble them into logical order. I give them details and they have to come up with a topic sentence or I give them a topic sentence and they have to come up with the details. We work side by side together doing this until they can construct a paragraph independently.
Once they are writing somewhat on their own, the pattern is writing assignment given on Mon. They have to research their topic, collect notes, and write their contention. Tues and Wed are rough draft days. Thursday we revise and improve together (Thursday is a high instruction day......revising and editing is one of the main ways I teach my kids), Friday final copy due.
I have no idea if any of that is helpful or not. :tongue_smilie:
Oh yes for me it is.
The rest of your post was very similar to how we roll over here. Math geekiness galore. My son actually does study mathematical logic, but I can't report on it because it's not something we do. It's something he does on his own. But it's not just mathematical logic that has that formality of thought. Like you say AOPS classes are great for this too. Anything that inspires a high level of thought. If the material is hard enough it seems to encourage my son to be organized in his thinking and also in his corresponding output.
Writing is something I am still figuring out how to teach. I don't make explicit connections between mathematical writing/logic and writing and yet mathematical writing does seem to help his other writing. I think the reason for this is that my son's biggest struggle is just getting pen to paper. He could dictate a pretty amazing essay. It's the getting ideas on paper part that he has issues with. His biggest issue is that he often forgets to write down words/phrases. I thought that perhaps dictation might help but he can remember entire paragraphs from Dickens, so unfortunately I don't think dictation is really what he needs. From what I understand omissions are common in dyslexics. He has to edit by rereading everything out loud. When he writes math he has to concentrate on not leaving out ideas. I think this is why it helps him. I don't think this would be an issue for VSLs in general, it is more of a dyslexic thing. So perhaps this is peripheral to the discussion but I really enjoy hearing ideas about teaching writing and this is why.
The other thing I would love to hear about are out of the box ways that folks work on Science. What I would love to find is a science curriculum that is analogous to AOPS. Though I imagine if this existed someone would have mentioned it already. I want my son to be able to think and wonder and problem solve on his own before he reads about a Science topic. Since this thread started out talking about this type of inquiry I hope to hear more ideas on this. What I'd really love is to have Richard Feynman take my son on nature walks.
Ha, so I googled this idea and of course I found...
http://www.feynmanlectures.info/
Which has a list of great exercises. And the links page is great too.
What about Biology, Chemistry?
-
I think one of the interesting aspects of the blog link with which I opened this thread was its discussion of the fact that conventional textbook-based course, lectures, and other forms of direct instruction may also be limiting many kids' understanding (as measured in test scores) -- as well as their ability to apply their knowledge in novel circumstances -- in college.
Right. I think what I meant is that elementary texts and curricula have the added problem of being awful (with a few notable exceptions). So you haven't missed out on too much.
http://www.veritasium.com/2011/03/khan-academy-and-effectiveness-of.html
According to this one direct instruction is also not so great at imparting information. Though they do offer some handy suggestions to get around this. Ultimately this video isn't so much geared towards creative thinking but it does offer some interesting ideas on effective teaching. They are still employing direct instruction but have found ways to do it more effectively.
LOL - yet again I have to be different and backwards. The rhythm is fairly intuitive for me - it's the darn notes. I know it's FACE and EGBDF. But I cannot figure this out in real time. I still have to look at it and think. .How does this not surprise me? My next guess would be to teach you solfege (do re mi fa sol) and how to apply this to note reading. Suzuki is a good choice, I am all for sound before sight in music teaching. The other way around puts the cart before the horse.
I am a VSL and my dh has learned not to send me into the gas station for directions:tongue_smilie:
Funny you should mention directions but I have this uncanny ability to always know which way I am going when I am on foot. I am absolutely horrible at following directions though. I tend to find strange short cuts that noone knew existed. This doesn't work nearly as well in a car because they don't fit on the little paths.
-
Here's another cool video on creative thinking and how to encourage it. Perhaps it's one reason why student driven learning can be helpful for our students.
The point in this video is creative thinking is discouraged my extrinsic motivation and that creative thinkers are more productive when they are internally motivated.
Both MCT and AOPS worked very well for DS. I showed him the books and said "what do you think?" and he said "yay, I love this", and off he went into happy student land.
If he didn't bite or take an interest, I would have found something else. I suppose I just got lucky.
This sort of thing is the reason that we tend not to base her work on textbooks or published curricula, except for math. We may refer to them on occasion, or use them for brief periods, but they're not our foundation. Dd consistently discovers or makes her own.
Textbooks and curricula pretty overrated, especially for the younger grades. They make a handy checklist of potential skills but there is a whole wide world of learning out there.
Here is another cool video comparing education to learning skateboard tricks. He has a great analogy at the end of the video that I think you might relate to.
Another thing that confuses me about my brain is that even though I taught myself to read spoken language so effortlessly, I find it extremely difficult to read music fluently (I know all the pieces, but I can't seem to put them together in real time). But I play very easily by ear.
Language is story based and you can more or less take your time when reading. Music exists within temporal parameters. I would guess that you are having trouble coordinating the rhythms while you are reading (though it could be other things too, rhythm is the most common issue). If you were my student I would have you separate rhythm reading and tonal reading to see which one was your issue in fluency and have you practice this separately.
matroyshka, I too don't fit in the dichotomy of VSL/AS. Both DS and me are strongly non linear, intuitive types, but we are completely auditory and language oriented so neither of us are really VSLs. He is dyslexic, I am not (I am more like you, the ADD type). I think VSLs are only one type of "crow". Perhaps there are more dimensions to this (like the Myers Briggs personality types).
Since 8fill gave an example of spelling I will too, for contrast. My son is dyslexic but unlike many dyslexics he has fairly weak visual skills but an almost perfect auditory memory. I had access to Barton and it was a major lightbulb for him. But interestingly enough he had no use for the tiles and instead insisted on watching the tutor videos with me. After one viewing he basically taught me the lesson since he had everything memorized. The tiles were pretty useless for him.
I think what has worked best for DS is when I help him remediate his weaknesses by using his strengths. While allowing him to develop his strengths to his hearts content. What helps with this is that he actually wants to be able to spell etc. Probably because I keep things light and don't bombard him with too much. Also he has intrinsic motivation to develop both strengths and weaknesses. I think without this motivation it might indeed be impossible for any real learning to take place. I am not sure.
-
Some more thoughts on creative vs. linear teaching.
She kind of disses Sal Khan and I think he doesn't deserve it. Nevertheless Vi Hart is a genius. If you haven't seen her work you should check it out, right now.
-
the vid claire de lune (my *favorite debussey piece*) posted in the Eides blog post is brilliant. Really. I think the answer to this thread is there.
My whole name is "Ona Claira De Luna See Forever" but you can just call me "OCD":lol:
-
As some of you know, I teach physics at a university, and reading your descriptions makes me suspect that I may have the occasional student who thinks "differently".
With the insight you have into your children's learning process, is there any advice you could give a college instructor how to work with this kind of student?
Apologies to those of you who are following both threads. I wanted to repeat my referral to the Eides and their work as I think the referral might be applicable to the OP's original question.
http://eideneurolearningblog.blogspot.com/
Coincidentally this very relevant video was one of the more recent posts on their blog.
I have found their work extremely helpful in educating my 2e dyslexic child and also I have found it helpful as a professional educator in meeting the needs of other learners.
-
Thanks; I visited the neurolearning blog and had not spotted this one.
They have had the classical education blog since 2007. They don't post on it much but I had remembered seeing it from awhile back. I think the Eide's work is particularly relevant to this discussion because they both look at ways to change education to suit learners and they have very specific suggestions about how to help kids learn skills for which they are not naturally wired.
It was a complete coincidence that they would have a video talking about exactly what we are discussing though.
-
:iagree: I find their blog of great interests and loved The Mislabeled Child. Good resource to add here.
I must have missed that they were classically homeschooling, though. Do you remember where you found that?
-
I was on a walk and I realized that I should point y'all towards the Eide's and their work. They are both Neuroscientists and classical homeschoolers. They write about non-traditional learners and much of their writing is written not at a technical level but for educators.
http://eideneurolearningblog.blogspot.com/
One of the first posts just happened to be this video.
I highly recommend it. I think it is very relevant to this discussion.
I also recommend their book "The Mislabled Child"
-
But I find it very striking that with so few exceptions, the burden is always on those who are wired "differently" -- a term which came into being, and was defined, by and in relation to those who now call themselves and their way of processing "neurotypical." Usually, but not always, this puts VSL processors and thinkers out in the realm of the "different" or even the abnormal. And I think this is partly what causes a lot of people to believe those VSLs should be the ones to adapt and conform, and that indeed, it's in their best interests to do so.
Funny you should say this because I just peeked back at the beginning of the thread to remember what got this all started and it was about how direct instruction might not be the best way to teach. I don't think the author was saying this is true for just our kids but for all kids. Whether he is right or not is kind of beside the point but it is interesting how it turned into a discussion of what our kids need to learn to do in order to fit in.
Hypothesis I: Teaching and encouraging kids to learn by rote memorization and imitation shapes their brain and behavior, making them more inclined towards linear thinking, and less prone to original, creative thinking.
Nowhere in the editorial does the author claim that students should not be expected to communicate sequentially. His premise seems to be that perhaps always teaching things in a sequential manner can limit students ability to be creative.
My question is do people agree with this? I think I do.
I think there is a place for sequential teaching. When I teach music I make sure that the kids get started with good habits in the beginning because I want them to practice things correctly and not have to undo poor hand position or embouchure which can cause problems down the line.
In math however I have seen countless students that have problems because they are taught to see a math solution as a series of steps, a recipe, that they need to follow to pop out an answer. I am not saying that all students that are taught in a linear way have this problem but it is pretty common.
Hypothesis II: Teaching kids to ask questions and think about problems before receiving the solution encourages more non-linear, divergent and creative thinking, to produce better innovators, problem-solvers, and problem-finders.
Again I think there is a time and a place for this type of teaching. I wouldn't give a student a flute and say "mess around with it see what you come up with". As a matter of fact I was talking to DH about this a few days ago. He was wondering what would be wrong with this. My answer was "nothing at all". Tons of students learn music on their own by messing around. It is a perfectly legitimate way to learn. But if a student is learning this way then they don't really need my help. What I can do is show them how to make a good sound and how to hold the instrument so that their hand doesn't cramp up etc. Most of what I do is pretty linear. I do incorporate some creative elements in my teaching but I don't feel the need to apply this to everything I teach.
Back to math teaching. I am not going to wait for my son to invent calculus to show him how it works. That said I think it is just as problematic to teach it in an incremental step by step way. I think there really has to be some sort of problem solving or discovery involved. I think this is true of all students not just bright non linear thinkers.
I taught remedial math recently and I had a group of 9th graders who were flunking algebra. Why?
Why do you think...Fractions.
Why were they struggling? Well I would argue that someone at some point showed them a recipe. This is how you do it and this is why it works. And they nodded their heads and tried it a few times and got it right and then the school moved them up to algebra. But they didn't really understand what they were doing because they never had a chance to think about it on their own. It's like teaching a kid to ride a bike and never taking off the training wheels.
I have been mulling over the group of comments, here and on regentrude's spin-off, in which it is basically argued that kids with different wiring need to learn to conform to the norms of the academic and working world at all times and under all circumstances, to learn to "communicate" in accordance with the conventions of those frameworks.
I never saw this argued as an absolute. I did see it suggested that she should expect this in her class. But that is university physics, not all circumstances. I am strongly non linear and would strongly disagree with indiscriminately requiring students to delineate their thoughts.
For me, there is an equally pressing question about to what extent so-called "neurotypicals" (like me -- more middle of the road neurologically, but also like many extremely linear, sequential thinkers) have an ethical obligation to learn at the very least to understand some of the basic ways that VSL brains operate, and the blocks they may hit if trying or required to explain the workings of their brains, the methods and the ways they arrive at their conclusions. At the very least.
I don't really think a non VSL person has any ethical obligation to think creatively. I just think it makes them a better educated person when they experiment with open ended questions. Just as a non linear thinker who learns how to make formal arguments is getting a more well rounded education.
I do think a teacher has an ethical obligation to teach their student in the best possible way. Sometimes this means adapting to their learning style and sometimes this means helping them in areas that they might not be naturally suited.
So I suppose as a mom of a VSL you would have this obligation. But I am not sure I would say everyone needs to. I think it's a great thing to learn, just not an obligation.
If I could rewrite the educational standards I would boil it down to two things.
1) Students should excel at something that they are good at.
2) Students should overcome a challenge.
I would argue that if a child can do each of these things then everything else will fall into place.
-
FWIW......my kids are convinced that I am one of the meanest teachers on the face of the earth. ;)
If you are anything like me, this is the highest compliment. I am like this when I teach classes too. Kids groaning in agony usually means the lesson is going well.:D
-
My experience -I was more like an ESL student and recorded the lecture then went home and figured things out, then bounced any remaining thoughts off my study partner or went to office hours. .
I have been taking a course on teaching English Language Learners and it's amazing how many of the techniques seem like they would be useful with my DS. It's not processing time he needs but retrieval. But it's the same idea.
The other thing that I found useful in College was working in groups. It's a fad now and I see it used in all the wrong ways and some kids just hate it. For me it was fantastic because I need to talk things out. It was an upper division math class and all the teacher did was suggest that we work on the homework in groups. He made the assignments difficult enough that the suggestion seemed like a good idea. It was very helpful to have a fellow math person to talk math with. There is a point in an undergraduate degree that I started feeling a bit isolated. You know, the point when you can no longer talk to the engineers about your homework. Anyhow that was something that helped me personally. I think opportunities to talk out ideas can help students get them on paper.
Regentrude, everything you are doing sounds great. I wouldn't worry too much or feel bad about not doing enough. Teaching is a constant learning process. We search for what works best and apply what we can. We experiment with new ideas and keep what works. It sounds like you are on the right track.
-
You're floating in the pool, watching the swallows in their evening dogfight, and out of left field, the answer is there in your head.
Or that way.
In college when I was facing a particularly stressful courseload I did my homework listening to christian radio...and I am not christian. The voices were so soothing and it helped me think. Floating in a pool would have worked too, unfortunately I was nowhere near nature and it was COLD.
-
This sounds sort of miraculous or something. Will you explain with words (notice I'm not asking for "steps"), since it's hard to draw pictures here, and since many humans communicate via words, how this happens? I'm wondering if this will help regentrude with the problem she described in her OP. But I'm also thinking that if it can't be explained, she won't be able to help those students.
Again I am going to attempt to answer a question which was aimed at another poster. I am absolutely an intuitive thinker. Sometimes things just come to me. If I am calm the answer can just manifest itself. If someone asked me to explain my thinking that would be very, very difficult for me. I just took a computer programming class which was very difficult for me. It was so picky and sequential. I don't find math nearly as difficult though. The proof comes to me in much the same way as any other answer. It literally just pops into my head. I am not sure if what I am explaining bears any resemblance to what the other folks are talking about though. But again I think there is a difference between your thought process (how an idea comes to you) and an explanation of why it HAS to be correct. Certainly you don't have to always have this ability and some people are better than others etc. But explaining a thought process that is essentially an AHA moment is almost trivial "it just came to me" but even here you can argue why your thinking is valid.
-
If writing it out is not necessary for Karen's DD to understand it; if she has written some proofs and therefore demonstrated that she's not incapable of it; if she's not in an institutional situation where she needs to show her work in order to earn "partial credit;" then how does not writing out every proof for every algebra problem interfere with her learning to communicate with others?
Jackie
I don't see any reason to make students write out all their work in algebra.
Writing proofs though is a different process. It's the art of making an argument. It's not documenting your thoughts really it is using theorems to prove that something is correct. It's more like what a lawyer does. It is a cool thing to be able to do. I don't think it is essential that everyone learn this skill but it is not necessarily a skill that sequential thinkers are better at. As a matter of fact I think most really great mathematicians are non sequential thinkers. So I wouldn't encourage a kid to not get into heavy math just because they are not good at showing their work in algebra and I don't necessarily think algebra is the best platform to teach mathematical writing. It's more something you would need in logic or geometry. I wouldn't worry about a kid not showing work in an algebra class.
-
So would you then insist that a student of any age, at any stage of learning, should be expected to write down a step-by-step working out of a problem (I'm thinking of algebra here), every single time?
Absolutely not. As a matter of fact I was saying quite the contrary, that even master mathematicians sometimes goof up and don't write things down in detail. However as you get more advanced, I think it becomes more important.
My son does not write down each step of an algebra problem BTW. Or at least he doesn't write down someone else's version of what the steps are. I think he does write down enough that someone can follow his logic. But whether or not a student develops this skill at the algebra level is unimportant. I just think they should develop this skill....eventually.
It sounds as though you're saying there is no point at which this kind of thing would work, for you as a teacher, and that "communicating" or proving an answer for both you and regentrude must take a particular specified form, each and every time, in every grade level? Please read my tone here as entirely neutral; I'm just wondering.
Again, I think you misunderstood. I am 100% with you. At least in the early years.
When my son was a totling we did math almost exclusively on walks. Putting anything on paper was excruciatingly difficult. I was not going to limit him by making him write things down when clearly he loved doing it in his head and on paper it was misery.
Getting him to write down just answers was huge. Forget about the steps, sheesh.
Even just getting him to articulate his thought process verbally is a challenge (still). We go on walks and I ask him questions. He wants me to understand his thinking so he has motivation, but it takes effort on his part and on mine. It's a work in process. We talk and he learns how to tell someone what he is thinking.
What really worked for him, as far as writing goes, was AOPS. He took just one class but it was a lightbulb for him. He all of a sudden was motivated to communicate his thoughts on paper. His mathematical writing is not mature but he is excited about showing his work and his steps in a way that he would have NEVER been had I forced it along the way.
Interestingly enough skill in math writing translated to increase writing skills in all content areas. Weird but true.
I am not saying that their is a magic grade or a magic math program that will miraculously help your child communicate. I am also not saying that this is the only goal. As a matter of fact there was a long time where I put off helping my son develop this skill because in my opinion he wasn't ready yet. I think forcing this inappropriately would indeed have harmed his soul or however it was put before. But in spite of this I still think that communication is a handy tool to have in your box, so I like to help him with this as I can and when he is ready.
I think I see why you misunderstood. I said "the goal is clear communication every time." by this I meant the ultimate goal. I am talking about long term objectives. Even with these objectives in mind I am not convinced that students always have to be working towards them. I suppose I should be working towards that goal too.:lol:
I am a music teacher so in my classes communication is everything. I am not going to have a student draw a picture of their interpretation of a Mozart concerto, that would just be silly. University physics is kind of out of my realm. I do have a math background and in university math it's all about proof which is a very formulaic method of getting your thoughts explicitly on paper. But it is WAY different than writing steps to an algebra problem. There are always different ways of going about a proof but some of these ways are considered better than others. It is it's own weird little language cult and it has it's own rules. Do we need to indoctrinate our children into this? I would say it depends on what their goals are (and perhaps your goals for your child). Certainly not every child needs to be able to write mathematical proofs. But if they are going to be a mathematician that might be a good thing to work on.
I hope I was a bit less unclear this time. I am having a jumbled day.
-
That sounds perfectly reasonable to me in terms of overall aims. But my question is: does it therefore necessarily follow that a student must do both these things you mention (draw and write a step-by-step process) every single time, for every single problem, to accomplish your aims?
I can't speak for physics but it is certainly true for math. If you say "I have this great proof but I can't fit it in the margins", the validity of your proof might be called into question. I think the question is not if a student should be expected to communicate their thinking in detail every time, but when we should expect them to do this. Clearly, as in my mathematical example, even world famous mathematicians don't always write out their thoughts. But I think this falls into the "nobody's perfect" category. Clear communication is something we should be striving for. That said, I know I have to adjust my expectations for the reality of my child (That umm thingamabober, you know...nevermind type kid.)
I think the key word is student. Students are by definition learners and not final products. The goal is clear communication every time but students by definition have something to learn and as you stretch your mind to increasingly challenging concepts, communication becomes proportionately more challenging. And, as many of us know, some kids are able to tease out their thoughts and articulate them more easily than others.
I keep answering questions that are not directed at me. Sorry about that. I am just loving this discussion and I think I am missing my child who is away at math camp.
-
Am I interpreting these posts correctly? Expecting gifted VSLs to demonstrate sequential/linear answers as required by formal educational institutions is having to dumb themselves down?
I am reading it this way.
There is a point in one's education where expecting divergent thinkers to follow traditional curriculum would be detrimental to their growth.
Also the posts seem to be referring to the thought process not the product or demonstration of the thought process. I think in these threads there are two different issues coming up. How people think and how we express our thoughts.
It's very similar to second language learners, a language learner might be taught in a second language but process in the native language and then translate the output back into the second language. This takes some time to learn. Along the way a teacher may allow students to do some work in their native language as they are developing second language skills. You wouldn't want to force an English learner to think in English though, that could seriously impact the quality of the content that you are teaching.
I think that with certain kids it is valuable to honor how they think. I wouldn't want to change the way my son thinks just to get him to fit in. On the other hand, I do very much want him to be able communicate with other humans, so I go out of my way to try to help him understand how other people think. Not to change him or interfere with his thinking in any way but to help him express his ideas in ways that other people will understand.
I think this is an important distinction.
-
Dd also has the equivalent of a photographic memory in terms of auditory input, particularly if it's in the form of narrative. She learns really well from lectures in certain topics, but not in others. She learns really well from fiction; she can pick up all kinds of information that I totally miss when I'm reading.
Yes!
This is so true here as well. Same story. My son has an almost perfect auditory memory for anything in the form of the story.
It's amazing the similarity to VSL kids. My son though is not a visual learner. He is auditiory and verbal in nature.
BTW to highlight in bold, you just select the text you want to bold and then hit the bold key in the edit bar.
-
You have adults and you are preparing them for working in a field in which certain "rules" must be followed.no.exceptions. You might find a creative way to grade their work, but at the end of the day, if the employer needs the documentation to be x.y.z., then the adult must produce x.y.z.
Faith
Or else they may find themselves kicked out of university and working in the patent office?:tongue_smilie:
OK so I may not be the mother of Einstein but still I would think that in some fields rule breaking could be a helpful skill.
I am a music teacher and in my field I find grades somewhat counterproductive to the learning process. I am not saying at all that a professor should make exceptions or fail to make students accountable. But grades are grades. Good teaching is more than providing a good and fair evaluation of your students' skills. It seemed that way too much of my college teachers time and energy went into weeding out and evaluating students (in my first degree, my music teachers did a fine job). College is expensive! I am always very encouraged to see professors who are more interested in the process of education than the process of evaluation. I am not saying that evaluation doesn't have it's place, I just think that it should be subordinate to the learning process and not the ultimate goal.
Back to the question at hand. How do you deal with a student who seems to have the knowledge but can't communicate the information. I have a suggestion. What if you spend a small amount of your class time helping students with this skill. It is an undegrad class right? I would think this could be tremendously helpful for your students and it might save you some headache. Show the students examples of what a well written answer looks like and show them examples of what a poorly written answer looks like. Make the writing expectations clear. Also let students know that you are willing to help them in your office hours. This way a student who is motivated and needs a little extra help has an opportunity to work on this skill.
Really, I agree with the other posters. A child should have these skills prior to college. However, I am able to see instances where a child might not have had the opportunity to learn the great art of communicating in writing. Certainly it is their job and responsibility to learn this but as a teacher I find it an almost sacred responsibility to help my students on their path to success. So I think it is terrific that you are thinking about this. I hope you find something that works for both your students and you.
Russian resources
in High School and Self-Education Board
Posted
http://www.livemocha.com
Recently I was inspired to review the Russian I studied in college. I only completed one section however, I found that the Russian speakers were extremely friendly and eager to help. This wouldn't teach you the language but would be an excellent resource to practice speaking and listening to Native speakers.