Chapter
4, 6 & 7 – focus on reading
What
do you see that might be engaging to many different students?
The
conclusion of chapter 4 noted that “how we orchestrate classrooms” has more
affect on achievement than “how we teach phonics”. This supports consistent research over the years which indicates
that the teacher makes more difference in a classroom than any other single
aspect; and that specifically, it is
the relationship between teacher and student that makes the most difference. i.e. it is teachers that engage
students in learning, not curriculum.
Of
course, the most effective teachers are found to incorporate various
combinations of best practices…and so we are reading this book which offers a
number of techniques ( for phonics, for reading comprehension, and for fluency
development) that reflect best practice.
By offering a number of techniques, authors model the need to try a
number of different approaches in order to find what is engaging and effective
for each unique class of children a teacher may have during his/her career.
What
do you see that might meet more than one learning modality?
Patricia
Cunningham (chpt 4) offers some powerful phonics activities that would
primarily appeal to auditory and visual learners. Most of the activities described involved talking about words,
listening to words, and looking at words.
There is some physical involvement included by manipulating cards. but
this may be minimal tactile involvement for the truly tactile or spatial learner. More tactile involvement could be included
by sky-writing, raised letters on cards, movement to act out words, and
specific attention to how sounds are formed in the mouth and how they feel when
being produced. Both right and left
brain thinking is included in her activities since each part of a word is
always considered in context, and there is focus on patterns among the pieces.
The
use of hand gestures in chapt 6 to signal use of reading strategies would help
to make hidden strategies more evident to both visual and kinesthetic
learners. Graphic organizers that
reflect the connections in the first pages of text are described in chapter 6
as diagrams. This process appeals to
visual learners and students who are left-brain thinkers. Right-brain thinkers may see this exercise
as unnecessarily dissecting the text.
The
activities for developing fluency that are offered in chapter 7 are all
integrated activities and, as such, incorporate all modalities at some
point. Of particular benefit to all is
the practice of pre-reading with the teacher followed by multiple reader on the
part of the student individual, in pairs, and in groups which builds
familiarity with the text and increases comprehension.
What
do you see that might support/hinder students
·
with special needs?
Offering
extensive reading practice and repeated exposures (chapter 7) to connected text
are instructional strategies that should benefit special needs students. However, their need for this kind of instruction may extend past the
need of other students so the teacher needs to monitor progress. Students with language processing problems
(either auditory or visual) are the most likely to struggle with both fluency
and comprehension since they are challenged to “both decode the words present
in a text AND AT THE SAME TIME construct that text’s meaning.” (pg 130,
emphasis mine). Their processing will
be slow, and their skill development in managing the multi-process task of
reading is likely to require special attention.
·
English Language Learners?
ELL’s
would benefit from systematic phonics instruction that is offered in the
context of real language use, such as Patricia Cunningham describes in chapter
4. They would also benefit from an
extended period of phonemic awareness development – perhaps in both languages,
to build upon prior knowledge. ELL’s
would also benefit from Reader’s Theatre and any sort of repeated exposure to
text in order to increase reading comprehension and fluency.
What
do you see that might be bias in the language used in the assignments discussed
in this chapter?
There
is a strong bias against phonics instruction which is out of context and
offered as the single necessary instructional tool for literacy
instruction. There is also a bias
against using restricted, decodable text, though they do make a slight mention
of its possible limited benefit for emerging readers.
What
do you wonder about with respect to equity (in regard to what you’ve read in
the chapters)?
I
see a lack of equity in research and reporting of research. So much of the research that is informing
current literacy instruction is based on analyzing what “good readers” do. While I think this research has offered
valuable insight to practitioners, it would also be useful to pay some more
attention to what the struggling, poor-er readers are doing. Questions I keep
wondering about include: Are there common points at which poor readers falter
in the process of learning to read? And
if so, what strategies are effective in helping them to compensate or overcome
their problems? I ask these questions,
because I’ve noted with at least a couple of students I’ve had that some need
more specific attention to specific skill development, especially when all of
the emphasis is on comprehension. It
seems like building on prior knowledge, developing comprehension strategies,
and reading to read are pushed so much that the smaller sub-tasks and skill
development can be lost. There may need
to be more emphasis on “knowing your students” than on “knowing your techniques/methodology/curriculum”.
Date: Mon Sep 27,
2004 10:10 pm
Author: Barney,
Katherine <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Book
Club - Gentry
I agree about the
emphasis on reading to read to the exclusion or minimal attention on what
basic skills are
being missed and why. Obviously drill sheets don't help or making the students
do more of what they
can't do. There are a few inovative reading programs that target struggling
readers. I saw one
that worked quite well a few years back. It was developed for students who
had dyslexia or
something close to it. It was quite expensive, over 500.00 per student. I can't
remember the name.
kat
Have you heard of
tied anything new lately that helped with this area?
Date: Tue Sep 28,
2004 1:19 am
Author: Gentry,
Pamela <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Book
Club - Gentry
Not too recently,
since I'm not teaching right now. A couple of years back I looked into
Phonographix
(avilable also as Reading Reflex for parents). There are some really good
things
about this approach.
Namely, that they take the best parts of systematic phonics and phonemic
awareness technique
and combine it with quick transition to real reading. Lots of emphasis on
applying the process
of reading. One of the beauties is that they reduce the memory load of
sound-symbol
correspondence, and ALWAYS put the decoding into context of words,
sentences, and
paragraphs. Problem with the program, IMHO is the authors who want to call it a
unique program unlike
any other. (I think this may be to protect their copyright.) Enough said on
that - I disclose my
prejudices! Any teacher could just buy Reading Reflex and adapt the
procedures very
easily to the classroom context quite easily without going through their
training
(propaganda? after all,
they are trying to run a business) program. So it is potentially cheap. But
watch carefully for
copyright protection. Most LD kids would benefit from some one-to-one time
practicing the
decoding and encoding processes in the context of real reading.
My daughter, who
teaches 2nd grade in public school is using a district mandated program from
Saxon. Can't remember
the name, but she is pretty impressed so far. We are going to look at
her results together
and evaluate the program.
How about comprehension
development? What practices have you found helpful for facilitating
this at the level you
teach? Have you done the modeling of reflection that they describe in our
text? I don't have
much exposure to this outside of textbook descriptions, and am really
wondering about how
much all of this reflection discussion potentially INTERFERES with
comprehension. It
seems to to interupt the text flow, and might be a hindrance rather than a
help, especially to
those with short term memory problems. What do you think?
Date: Tue Sep 28,
2004 5:06 pm
Author: Barney,
Katherine <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Book
Club - Gentry
Well as far as
comprehension and reflection go, I only have students reflect after the
reading,
not during it. I plan
to work with ut more because I think it will improve metacognition and then
comprehension. I am
only familiar with Saxon math. I know it follows a scripted lesson plan k-8.
Students who move in
late have to catch up with what they missed. It does appear to improve
scores, but I don't
like scripted teaching. I would be interested in what your daughter thinks in a
couple months. I
teach 2nd also (in Texas). kat
Date: Wed Sep 29,
2004 3:12 am
Author: Gentry,
Pamela <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Book Club
- Gentry
My daughter is in
Texas, too: Frenship ISD in the Lubbock area.
*****************
Barnet to Gentry
posting
Date: Fri Oct 1, 2004
6:43 pm
Author: Barnett,
Latonya <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: To
Pamela
I am trying to
understand your comment about research being based on "analyzing what
"good
readers"
do." So are you saying that our instructional books should focus more on
poorer
readers and provide
more strategies to help teachers help these kids? If this is the case than I
could see where you
are coming from.
Date: Fri Oct 1, 2004
10:34 pm
Author: Gentry,
Pamela <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: To
Pamela
Thank you for asking
me to clarify this comment. I'm sort of referencing lots of research that the
whole language
methodology is built upon. Researchers in this area have come up with
statements like,
"good readers read with comprehension" "good readers are fluent
and read with
voice
inflection". They've also looked at mistakes (miscue analysis) that poor
readers make and
compared them to good
readers, so "good readers re-read for meaning, while poor readers will
just move through the
text". "good readers read whole words, while poor readers focus on
the
parts".
What I was trying to
suggest is that we need to know more than what a good reader looks like.
We need to know
specific things we can do to help a struggling reader become a good reader.
Maybe poor readers
are just in a stage of development toward good reading. We need to have
ways to support them
in the process forward - not just try to make them practice good habits.
Does this make sense?
I guess, coming originally from a speech therapy orientation, I'm always
looking for methods
of intervention and strategies for remediation...something concre
**************
Brewer to Gentry
posting
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004
8:47 am
Author: Brewer, Julie
<[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Book
Club - Gentry
Thank you for your
assertion that the entire focus of reading instuction should not be on what
good readers do. I teach
many struggling readers. Both they and their parents are frustrated. I
can tell them about
what proficient readers do until both they and I are blue in the face, but we
all are still left
wondering, "Why is it so hard for this student?" Have you found
research that
focuses on what poor
readers do? Where could we begin our search?
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004
8:10 pm
Author: Gentry,
Pamela <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Book
Club - Gentry
I would really like
to hear from you and others, 'cause I don't claim to hold the answer to this
one. I've done a lot
of observing and reading and experimenting over the years ...but with a
small population. One
of the reasons for me starting this graduate course was a hope to answer
your question :-)
My best guess at the
moment is that we have to pay attention to the struggles that those little
strugglers are having
and not just have a program or a method to do. A friend just lent me a
book that is a bit
old, but seminal in the field of learning disabilities: Common Sense about
Dyslexia, by Huston.
There is a very good section in there about what happens in the brain
during language
processing .... i.e. all the little steps that happen in a nano-second. I'm
guessing
that keeping this
process in mind can help us figure out some ways to help those struggling
readers be more
efficient. But that is today's guess. What do you think? It should would be
nice
to be able to do more
than carry around a "little bag of tricks" and try them until I find
one that
"works".
*********
Gallo to Gentry
posting
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004
1:34 pm
Author: Gallo,
Annabelle <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Book
Club - Gentry
I agree with you that
they do focus on how "good readers" function and learn, rather than
paying
attention to the
struggling readers. In one of the articles I read for this session, it talked
about
how sonme teachers
took a survey of 1,200 students and asked them how they learned, what
they liked, what was
confusing, what worked, what didn't, etc. The article was great because the
teachers realized
that kids are a great source to go to for teaching instruction(this may vary
depending on age!.
They gleaned some great insughts into their students' minds and found out
what worked and what
didn't.
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004
8:20 pm
Author: Gentry,
Pamela <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Book
Club - Gentry
I'll have to go back
and look that article up for a deeper read. thanks.
***********
Gentry to Brown
Posting
Date: Thu Sep 30,
2004 10:35 pm
Author: Gentry,
Pamela <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Book
Club Ch 4, 5, 6
Great questions about
phonics Teena. Do you know of any resources that would help
communicate your very
real concerns to administrators? to the public? I seem to recall reading
somewhere in the last
couple of weeks that there isn't a lot of research comparing different
programs of phonics
... this is too bad. Are you aware of any such informal research?
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004
11:22 am
Author: Brown, Teena
<[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Book
Club Ch 4, 5, 6
I believe there has
been substantial research on different phonics programs. Page 71 in the text
states "The
National Reading Panel (2000) reviewed the experimental research on teaching
phonics and determined
a that explicit and systematic phonics is superior to nonsystematic or no
phonics, but that
there is no significant difference in effectiveness amond the kinds of
systematic
phonics
instruction."
Information about
this panel and report can be found at the following websites:
National Reading
Panel
http://www.nationalreadingpanel.org/Publications/publications.htm
Report of the
National Reading Panel: Teaching Children to Read.
http://www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/nrp/smallbook.htm
Current Forum:
Session 5 Book Club Ch. 4 & 6
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004
8:29 pm
Author: Gentry,
Pamela <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Book
Club Ch 4, 5, 6
OK. That's their
conclusion. But I guess I'm stubborn. I'd like to see someone take the time to
line up all the
programs side-by-side with descriptors of their significant components and
publish
the comparisons for
the rest of us to evaluate. Maybe this has been done? I'd love to know a
source.
***********
Gentry to Barney
Posting
Date: Thu Sep 30,
2004 10:30 pm
Author: Gentry,
Pamela <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: BC 4, 5,
& 6
I like this 4-block
model. It offers simple structure to the whole language approach. I've seen you
discuss this in the
Listserve postings. Have you used this method yourself? If so, how does it
work for you? It
sounds a lot like what they've been doing in England for the last couple of
years
where there has been
an effort in setting national standards. The whole country now has what
they call "The
Literacy Hour" and basically - it is to make sure that all four of the
blocks are
covered in everyclass
for at least 15 minutes ... a kindi teacher that told me about this said she
liked the concept and
it ensured that there was more balance, but it is still woefully short on time
investment. How much
time would the 4-block approach to LA involve?
***********
Barnett posting
Date: Wed Sep 29,
2004 5:40 pm
Author: Barnett,
Latonya <[email protected]>
Subject: Book Club
On page 72, it says
that “many children who come to school with well developed phonemic awareness
abilities have
usually come from homes in which rhyming chants, jingles, and songs are a part
of
their daily
experience. I disagreed with this statement because I don’t think that this is
true in
regard to a child’s
abilities at phonemics.
Gentry to Barnett
posting
Date: Wed Sep 29,
2004 9:40 pm
Author: Gentry,
Pamela <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Book
Club
I'm sure your are
right in that there is more to it than what they say in the book....
So what DO you think
contributes to children's phonemic awareness (i.e. awareness of the sounds in
words - how they are
the same, how they are different, sounds that come at the beginning, end, and
middle of words)?
Date: Fri Oct 1, 2004
6:52 pm
Author: Barnett,
Latonya <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: To
Pamela
I can't answer your
question based on experience teaching children using phonics. I just can't
believe you cant summ
up a childs abilities in a statement like that..it gives the wrong impression
to people like me who
haven't taught and used teaching strategies like those in the book. My
grandaughter who is
now five could speak in colet sentences by the time she was about 20 months
old.
I was suprised at her
ability to speak and repeat words she had heard but I was more suprised at her
ability to make
meaning and express her thought at such a young age. Her oral language skills
are
excellent and they
have been so even before she was two while my older grandaughter who is 8 was
very
slow at learning
speech proper speech and sntence structure. I am not a researcher, I just know
that
what the author said
is not the truth!
Date: Fri Oct 1, 2004
10:23 pm
Author: Gentry,
Pamela <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: To
Pamela
I can see your point.
Well developed oral language is certainly a building block for being able to
manage the written
form of language. And different children develop at different rates in
different
areas ... this does
not necessarily mean they are not ready to read.
I think you also make
a good observation that the author stated their point about phonemic awareness
way too simply.
Certainly phonemic awareness is more complicated than just being able to rhyme
words ... but I think
that the research shows that the ability to do this is consistently an
INDICATOR
of phonemic awareness
development ... and by extension, it is assumed, that involving the children in
lots of rhyme play
helps to develop their phonemic awareness.
This assumption is
probably the weakest point, in my opinion. I'm not sure that they've proven
that
by spending lots of
time playing with rhymes there is a direct link to improved phonemic awareness
in
a group of children.
***********
Dyer to Barnett
Date: Fri Oct 1, 2004
9:18 pm
Author: Dyer, Kellie
<[email protected]>
Subject:
Re: Book Club
Why do you not think
kids with rhyming skills will not have prior knowledge to phonics? I was also
wondering about this
statement. Hearing rhyming words and coming up with them and seeing a
connection
are really different
things.
Bynum to Barnett
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004
4:46 pm
Author: Bynum, Erica
<[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Book
Club
It seems as if we had
the same concerns regarding children and their phonemic awareness ability when
they enter school. I
want to know what about the children that lack home environments full of songs,
jingles, and chants.
I know they don't enter school with a strong phonemic awareness background. The
first years of school
is very crucial for children and I think that home environment plays a huge
role
in making sure that
students are knowledgeable regarding certain areas. In times like today, we
really
can't depend on home
environment as much. Therefore we have our jobs cut out for us and I hate it
when
people think of us as
babysitters.
Gentry to Discussion:
Date: Sat Oct 2, 2004
8:18 pm
Author: Gentry,
Pamela <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: Book
Club
Helping to
supplement/develop the home environment was supposed to be the purpose of
Project HeadStart
oh, so many years
ago. This program is still going, but I haven't read any recent studies about
its
effectiveness. I read
an article heading somewhere in the last week that stated something like,
"Studies
show that children's readiness scores upon
entering Kindergarten directly reflect mother's income and
education
level." The article also mentioned a newer preschool program for
inner-city children, but I
don't remember the
name...maybe someone else has info on all of this...
And I'm not sure that
just because a child doesn't grow up reading nursery rhyme books, they haven't
been exposed to
creative use of language. Look at what is in the popular media: advertising
jingles,
lots of music ....and
what about rap?