Jennifer Jones
Chapter 10-11: Learning Log
Page 161: “As all teachers discuss and reflect on reading instruction, they develop a community of practice. In a community of practice, literacy teachers have an identity defined by a shared interest: to teach children to read. Within the community of practice, the teachers add to their shared knowledge base.”
I found Walker’s discussion of “communities of practice” especially interesting due to the fact that she is talking in terms of an educational community of practicing teachers, but using a phrase I had only previously associated with business. There are many reasons why I think a CoP can be very useful but among them is the fact that fosters collaboration because a group of committed individuals. CoPs are interesting because they are for the most part a self-organized group of people, who share a common passion and desire for growth. All too often when teachers are “forced” onto a committee there is not the same focus on practicality and solutions as there is in this type of structure. I have more often heard as these in the field of education being referred to as PLC (Professional Learning Communities) but essentially they are the same idea.
Page 162: “As this roaming time is occurring, the coach and teacher discuss the class’s individual difference and what could possibly improve student learning. After a few weeks, the coach and the teacher sit down for a preconference that occurs before a formal observation.”
I think the notion of a preconference between literacy specialists and classroom teachers is critically important, especially if the literacy model is to work effectively. I think without the formal meetings (with the purpose of helping students), literacy teachers may be viewed as “strangers” or “guests” by the students and primary teacher not the valuable resource that they are. I also think that the notion of formal observations can be intimidating for teachers (especially novice teachers) so a clarification of expectations and roles beforehand could be very important.
Page 165: “Usually teacher action research begins by studying innovative ideas. In these groups, the teachers actually try out the procedures or techniques and collect student data.”
Action research, in my experience, is one of the most useful and fairly straightforward types of research practicing teachers can do. Last semester as part of a research and statistics course I took for my masters program, I did action research on my use of non-instructional time during the school day, with the expectation that I would come up with a plan to more efficiently and appropriately use my planning periods and lunch. I noticed some very interesting trends after keeping an extensive journal for four weeks and made some “resolutions” so I would have less work materials to bring home each night. The reason I think this research improved my effectiveness is because it was specifically tailored to fit my professional concern (use of free time) in the situation where I teach everyday.
Page 169: “Diagnostic teaching techniques from different views of reading have been classified according to these key questions so that they diagnostic teacher can match the students’ strengths and needs and design lessons that mediate learning for each student.”
After reading this passage, I am still wondering how to apply this sort of intense differentiation in my own classroom. Walker states that lessons should be designed to match the needs and strengths of each student, however I question how this is possible to implement in a classroom of 25 students. Perhaps this statement is aimed more at the special education teacher who is working one on one or in a small groups setting, but I would love to hear how other teacher differentiate lessons both by content and interest to better fit the needs of individuals not in terms of class periods.
Page 191: “Passive learners, however, learn by watching how other students and the teacher solve the problem. They have difficulty distinguishing between the situational context of learning (such as teacher praise and peer approval) and the task of learning.”
I picked this passage from chapter 11, due to the fact that when I initially read this portion I was confused by Walker’s point, and so to clarify it in my own mind wanted to write about it. What I think Walker is saying is that learners (struggling learners) often fail to separate what they learn (the concepts) from how they are learning. I think her ultimate argument is that passive learners are not able to transfer their knowledge from a piece to text to other dissimilar situations such as reading a website or newspaper. I think the “task of learning” she is talking about is the strategies for reading while the “situational context of learning” is the classroom when the strategies are being used. I think one of the major points Walker is dancing in this case is the notion of engagement- that students would stop “watching” others learn and try if themselves if they had sufficient motivation.
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Monday, March 23, 2009
Chapter 9: Learning Log
Jennifer Jones
Chapter 9: Learning Log
Page 148: “Teachers have a myriad of materials available, including basal readers, trade books, predictable books, magazines, skills books, computer software, Internet information, video tapes of classic stories/songs and student-produced work”
I think Walker makes a brilliant insight in this selection about the variety of reading material available for teachers to use in their classrooms. In my opinion, many teachers get “stuck in the rut” of using the same pieces of literature (mostly non-fiction) in their classrooms partly because of ease (completed lesson plans etc.) but all the while limiting their students’ in -school accessibility to other types of media including video tapes, songs and computer software. In my opinion, students should receive formal instruction in deriving (useful) information from websites, newspapers and other print and non-print sources as they could potentially be more useful life skills. I also like Walker’s suggestion of student-produced work. Not only does that build a sense of community (sharing in the accomplishment of a fellow student) but it also stands to legitimize students’ own work as important pieces of writing.
Page 149: “Major basal reading and structured literature based programs are published by the following companies: Houghton Mifflin Reading, Harcourt Trophies, Scott Foreman Reading, Macmillian/McGraw- Hill Reading, Kendall-Hunt Pegus II, SRA Open Court Reading.”
The reason I picked this passage from the text is because of the wide variety of reading programs (curriculums) available to purchase. My question while reading this section is: Does purchasing a district-wide curriculum help students build English- Language Arts skills any better than a teacher created and implemented program? I also wonder how schools/school districts judge the success of one program over another and what process there is to abandon a reading program to adopt another. My limited experience with reading instruction comes from my AIS work in Niagara Falls most recently discarded Open Court after only several years implementing it. I wonder that effect switching programs has on student achievement.
Page 150: “These books are stories that would appeal to an older student but are written at an easier level to provide interesting stories that help improve literacy.”
The reason I picked this passage is because it is a very big concern of mine (especially with working middle and high school level) that students do not become so overwhelmed by the extent of their reading difficulty as they get older, being their reading/language deficient swells in comparison to their peers. I have spoken in earlier learning logs about providing students with ample (and meaningful) success experiences to ensure continued motivation and effort, but in this passage Walker presents a great forum for achieving that end. A high interest (perhaps even student selected) text can be extremely worthwhile, especially in a classroom where many students are disinterested or disengaged.
Page 151: “Poetry is a type of material that is effective for developing readers. Many poems have rhyme and rhythm that invite students to read them again and again. An easy poem is a good way to begin tutoring sessions for older readers. When read chorally the poems provide a successful experience that starts off a session well.”
Before reading this chapter I had forgotten the importance and power of using poetry with struggling readers. The reason I picked this passage is because I really like the suggestions Walker provides for reading teachers who want to the predictability and rhythm many poems contain. One idea for using poetry Walker did not mention but that I think might be very appropriate would be to consider the ambiguity and images of poems. Often struggling reading face very direct, expository pieces so a carefully chosen piece of poetry (that while accessible had some more figurative components) could be a very powerful tool for sparking the creativity of reluctant readers.
Page 155: “To evaluate the reading ease of the text, the diagnostic teacher can use a readability formula for textbooks and chapter books or leveling system for predictable books.”
The reason I picked this passage is because the notion of readability of textbooks is a tremendously important issue I face with my students as seventh graders. The current science text, the science department uses is particularly challenging, not in content but the complex sentence structures, use of long words and the fact that there is often too many new ideas presented at once. As educators we talk about schema formation and the notion that student learn best when their ideas are connected to what they already know and have experiences (when they have a hook) but the text is presented simply as facts. I think Walker’s point here is well taken and something that should definately be discussed and critically examined as school districts look to adopt texts.
Chapter 9: Learning Log
Page 148: “Teachers have a myriad of materials available, including basal readers, trade books, predictable books, magazines, skills books, computer software, Internet information, video tapes of classic stories/songs and student-produced work”
I think Walker makes a brilliant insight in this selection about the variety of reading material available for teachers to use in their classrooms. In my opinion, many teachers get “stuck in the rut” of using the same pieces of literature (mostly non-fiction) in their classrooms partly because of ease (completed lesson plans etc.) but all the while limiting their students’ in -school accessibility to other types of media including video tapes, songs and computer software. In my opinion, students should receive formal instruction in deriving (useful) information from websites, newspapers and other print and non-print sources as they could potentially be more useful life skills. I also like Walker’s suggestion of student-produced work. Not only does that build a sense of community (sharing in the accomplishment of a fellow student) but it also stands to legitimize students’ own work as important pieces of writing.
Page 149: “Major basal reading and structured literature based programs are published by the following companies: Houghton Mifflin Reading, Harcourt Trophies, Scott Foreman Reading, Macmillian/McGraw- Hill Reading, Kendall-Hunt Pegus II, SRA Open Court Reading.”
The reason I picked this passage from the text is because of the wide variety of reading programs (curriculums) available to purchase. My question while reading this section is: Does purchasing a district-wide curriculum help students build English- Language Arts skills any better than a teacher created and implemented program? I also wonder how schools/school districts judge the success of one program over another and what process there is to abandon a reading program to adopt another. My limited experience with reading instruction comes from my AIS work in Niagara Falls most recently discarded Open Court after only several years implementing it. I wonder that effect switching programs has on student achievement.
Page 150: “These books are stories that would appeal to an older student but are written at an easier level to provide interesting stories that help improve literacy.”
The reason I picked this passage is because it is a very big concern of mine (especially with working middle and high school level) that students do not become so overwhelmed by the extent of their reading difficulty as they get older, being their reading/language deficient swells in comparison to their peers. I have spoken in earlier learning logs about providing students with ample (and meaningful) success experiences to ensure continued motivation and effort, but in this passage Walker presents a great forum for achieving that end. A high interest (perhaps even student selected) text can be extremely worthwhile, especially in a classroom where many students are disinterested or disengaged.
Page 151: “Poetry is a type of material that is effective for developing readers. Many poems have rhyme and rhythm that invite students to read them again and again. An easy poem is a good way to begin tutoring sessions for older readers. When read chorally the poems provide a successful experience that starts off a session well.”
Before reading this chapter I had forgotten the importance and power of using poetry with struggling readers. The reason I picked this passage is because I really like the suggestions Walker provides for reading teachers who want to the predictability and rhythm many poems contain. One idea for using poetry Walker did not mention but that I think might be very appropriate would be to consider the ambiguity and images of poems. Often struggling reading face very direct, expository pieces so a carefully chosen piece of poetry (that while accessible had some more figurative components) could be a very powerful tool for sparking the creativity of reluctant readers.
Page 155: “To evaluate the reading ease of the text, the diagnostic teacher can use a readability formula for textbooks and chapter books or leveling system for predictable books.”
The reason I picked this passage is because the notion of readability of textbooks is a tremendously important issue I face with my students as seventh graders. The current science text, the science department uses is particularly challenging, not in content but the complex sentence structures, use of long words and the fact that there is often too many new ideas presented at once. As educators we talk about schema formation and the notion that student learn best when their ideas are connected to what they already know and have experiences (when they have a hook) but the text is presented simply as facts. I think Walker’s point here is well taken and something that should definately be discussed and critically examined as school districts look to adopt texts.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Learning Log: Chapter 7
Jennifer Jones
Chapter 7: Learning Log
Page 121: “Therefore, the diagnostic teacher establishes the highest difficulty level at which the student profits from instruction.”
A very interesting point is made in this section of chapter 7 when Walker talks about challenging students to read (and think) at a level that is both accessible and realistic for them. I think the author makes a good point in this passage about the importance of determining the level at which students “frustrate” out and then working at a level that will stretch them academically but not them give up. My question how ever in regarding how to do this in a large (or even average sized) classroom. How does a single teacher differentiate reading levels in a classroom that is 25-1? I know in the primary grades reading group and small group learning is essential but what does that look like at the middle and high school level with more difficult texts?
Page 123: “A third consideration is the amount of teacher investment necessary to engage the student in an active interpretation of text. As she teaches, the diagnostic teacher adjusts her instruction to the needs of the student.”
I think this passage speaks to the importance of spontaneous intervention in the constructivist classroom. Especially in my position as a novice teacher, I often have a hard time anticipating where my students will have difficulty before actually teaching the lesson. I think Walker’s syntax of “teacher investment” is so interesting here because I do feel as though it takes a commitment to growth and professional development to react and reflect to student needs. I think it is far easier to just accept the confused stares than try and do something about it which is why some (bad) teachers choose to not differentiate for different classes of learners.
Page 124: “The diagnostic teacher evaluates her investment or the changes she makes regarding her interaction with the student, which includes an array of interaction possibilities, such as prompting, rephrasing and feedback.”
I chose this passage because I think it does a good job at addressing the variety of interventions which maybe necessary for different students. I find that even in my own experience student confusion or frustration is often not regarding the mathematics we are doing but the directions of the task or confusion about how to get started. If I were Walker I think I would have divided the interaction possibility of “feedback” even a little further, differentiating along the lines of Fleming and Levie, in talking about confirmative feedback vs. corrective feedback
Page 127: “Prior to instruction, the diagnostic teacher selects a technique to promote active learning. She determines how she is going to promote active reading. She decides whether the reading task will be silent or oral and whether the story will be read as a whole or in segments. She decides whether she will introduce new vocabulary words and how to do it. As she teaches the lesson, the teacher modifies these original plans so that the students can construct meaning with text. It is these modifications that the teacher records and evaluates.”
I really liked this passage because of its reference to the many decisions teachers make not only in the course of a day but in the course of a single class period. I think this model shows teacher reflection in three distinct phases (1) before a lesson (2) during a lesson and (3) after a lesson (a model which Walker herself supported in an earlier chapter). I also liked the fact that Walker says the effective reading teacher “evaluates” the result of his/her decisions because as in my case, then I make changes to my worksheets and plans for when I use them next year. I think the author is pointing to the fact that not all interventions work, not all modifications help students reach a desired end, but that effective teachers consider the result of their decisions and act accordingly.
Page 127: “The teacher concluded that the passive reading behavior was due to a lack of experience with the task. It was evident that Luis had not transferred his active stance in other problem-solving situations to silent reading behavior.”
The reason I picked out this passage (and the reason I really like the way this book is written so far) is because of Walker’s intervention/solution based approach to identifying and solving reading problems. Perhaps it is my unique experience, but by the time students are at middle and high school levels I see less and less investigation into the root of avoidance behaviors (in this case passive reading) and more labeling of students as “illiterate”. I like how this text encourages teachers to ask questions, get to the root cause of reading problems, try interventions and even if they do not work learn from them. In this case, now that the reading teacher has identified Luis’ inability to transfer active reading to silent reading behaviors she can work to develop specific strategies for remediating this challenge.
Chapter 7: Learning Log
Page 121: “Therefore, the diagnostic teacher establishes the highest difficulty level at which the student profits from instruction.”
A very interesting point is made in this section of chapter 7 when Walker talks about challenging students to read (and think) at a level that is both accessible and realistic for them. I think the author makes a good point in this passage about the importance of determining the level at which students “frustrate” out and then working at a level that will stretch them academically but not them give up. My question how ever in regarding how to do this in a large (or even average sized) classroom. How does a single teacher differentiate reading levels in a classroom that is 25-1? I know in the primary grades reading group and small group learning is essential but what does that look like at the middle and high school level with more difficult texts?
Page 123: “A third consideration is the amount of teacher investment necessary to engage the student in an active interpretation of text. As she teaches, the diagnostic teacher adjusts her instruction to the needs of the student.”
I think this passage speaks to the importance of spontaneous intervention in the constructivist classroom. Especially in my position as a novice teacher, I often have a hard time anticipating where my students will have difficulty before actually teaching the lesson. I think Walker’s syntax of “teacher investment” is so interesting here because I do feel as though it takes a commitment to growth and professional development to react and reflect to student needs. I think it is far easier to just accept the confused stares than try and do something about it which is why some (bad) teachers choose to not differentiate for different classes of learners.
Page 124: “The diagnostic teacher evaluates her investment or the changes she makes regarding her interaction with the student, which includes an array of interaction possibilities, such as prompting, rephrasing and feedback.”
I chose this passage because I think it does a good job at addressing the variety of interventions which maybe necessary for different students. I find that even in my own experience student confusion or frustration is often not regarding the mathematics we are doing but the directions of the task or confusion about how to get started. If I were Walker I think I would have divided the interaction possibility of “feedback” even a little further, differentiating along the lines of Fleming and Levie, in talking about confirmative feedback vs. corrective feedback
Page 127: “Prior to instruction, the diagnostic teacher selects a technique to promote active learning. She determines how she is going to promote active reading. She decides whether the reading task will be silent or oral and whether the story will be read as a whole or in segments. She decides whether she will introduce new vocabulary words and how to do it. As she teaches the lesson, the teacher modifies these original plans so that the students can construct meaning with text. It is these modifications that the teacher records and evaluates.”
I really liked this passage because of its reference to the many decisions teachers make not only in the course of a day but in the course of a single class period. I think this model shows teacher reflection in three distinct phases (1) before a lesson (2) during a lesson and (3) after a lesson (a model which Walker herself supported in an earlier chapter). I also liked the fact that Walker says the effective reading teacher “evaluates” the result of his/her decisions because as in my case, then I make changes to my worksheets and plans for when I use them next year. I think the author is pointing to the fact that not all interventions work, not all modifications help students reach a desired end, but that effective teachers consider the result of their decisions and act accordingly.
Page 127: “The teacher concluded that the passive reading behavior was due to a lack of experience with the task. It was evident that Luis had not transferred his active stance in other problem-solving situations to silent reading behavior.”
The reason I picked out this passage (and the reason I really like the way this book is written so far) is because of Walker’s intervention/solution based approach to identifying and solving reading problems. Perhaps it is my unique experience, but by the time students are at middle and high school levels I see less and less investigation into the root of avoidance behaviors (in this case passive reading) and more labeling of students as “illiterate”. I like how this text encourages teachers to ask questions, get to the root cause of reading problems, try interventions and even if they do not work learn from them. In this case, now that the reading teacher has identified Luis’ inability to transfer active reading to silent reading behaviors she can work to develop specific strategies for remediating this challenge.
Friday, February 6, 2009
Learning Log Chapters 5 and 6
Jennifer Jones
Chapter 5 and 6: Learning Log
Page 77: “The range of performance between frustration level reading and independent level reading is called the instructional level or more appropriately, the instructional range.”
I really liked Walker’s notion of instructional range as a more appropriate term than instructional level to describe the intensity students should be working at when under the watchful supervision of an adult. The Vygotskian notion (that what is done with others (including a teacher) today can be done alone tomorrow) rings very true in this instance. Though many novice reading teachers (myself included) could potentially fall into the trap of giving students in class lessons at a level they are already competent in to “boost their self esteem” or “perfect their skills”, Walker makes a compelling and intelligible argument for teaching at that level between independence and frustration. Also in regards to the use of the word range rather than level I think it is important to remember as educators that learning is not “all or nothing” and that differentiation means teaching at an appropriate level for each child (which is enviably a flexible and fluid).
Page 78: “While analyzing the student’s performance using the traditional criteria on the informal reading inventory, the diagnostic teacher can also evaluate the student’s fluency as she listens to him read orally. To do so, she asks herself three questions (1) Is the student’s reading fairly smooth? (2) Does the student read words in meaningful phrases? (3) Does the student’s pitch, stress and intonation convey the meaning of the text?”
While reading this passage, I was thinking about how critically important assessing (and improving) the fluency of a struggling reader is, whether that person be an adult non reader or a child. It was interesting to me the strong relationship between fluency and increased reading comprehension achievement, the fact that as choppy or delayed reading can hurt a students’ ability to make/ retain meaning. Though the book did not specifically say (yet) I think one of the best way to achieve fluency is probably to have students repeatedly read a passage aloud (a mastery learning model). I also think it is likely fluency would increase as students read more (even silently) as they will be exposed to more diverse vocabulary, sentence structures and writing styles.
Page 87: “One of the best ways to evaluate phonic knowledge is to analyze children’s spelling. As they spell words, children must think about each letter and its sound and then synthesize these sounds into words. Thus, spelling is closely linked to phonic knowledge.”
In this passage Walker makes the argument that phonics knowledge can be assessed by analysis of a learner’s spelling, but my question is “Can strengthening spelling skills (through use of spelling tests) be valuable in strengthening phonic knowledge?” It seems to me that spelling is very much tied to writing competency since students who are restricted to a limited vocabulary are limited in the words they can write. This means students face aggravation and frustration when they get stuck trying to spell a word, however my question is, does the same relationship hold true for spelling/reading competency?
Page 111: “Some students refuse to predict because they don’t want to be wrong. Often their instruction has focused on getting the correct answers.”
I think this passage regarding prediction making and perfectionism speaks wonders to the nature of American schooling- the right or wrong, black or white mentality school age children are brought up in. I think it is so interesting that the author would publish this disclaimer because I can have definitely could see some of my students being very concerned about a “wrong” prediction. Though I didn’t see it at the beginning of the course, I am seeing more and more similarities between reading and math instruction, since, as a math teacher we also make predictions as a pre-calculating strategy. It is the same “I don’t know”, “I can’t make a guess” avoidance technique that I have to teach my students to overcome in the beginning of the year (mainly though practice and praise).
Page 117: “Returning to the extended passages, the diagnostic teacher uses the answers to the first question “How close is the reader’s interpretation” to assess general knowledge. He must judge whether the reader changes the meaning of the selection because she has no similar experience.”
The idea that students will struggle at making meaning from ideas that are not culturally relevant (familiar) to them is a tremendously important idea for teacher and pre-service teachers. Walker’s discussion of the importance of considering a students “general knowledge” reminded me of the work by Gloria Ladson-Billings in her text “The Dreamkeepers”. Her general thesis is that African American children learn best when their new ideas are connected to what they already know and/or have experienced. It is no wonder to me that (in the case of reading comprehension) students can not remember information they have no schema for. I think it is important teacher pick reading material that is both age and culturally appropriate when assessing student’s reading comprehension as to insure difficulty is not due to lack of prior general knowledge but an actual reading disability.
Chapter 5 and 6: Learning Log
Page 77: “The range of performance between frustration level reading and independent level reading is called the instructional level or more appropriately, the instructional range.”
I really liked Walker’s notion of instructional range as a more appropriate term than instructional level to describe the intensity students should be working at when under the watchful supervision of an adult. The Vygotskian notion (that what is done with others (including a teacher) today can be done alone tomorrow) rings very true in this instance. Though many novice reading teachers (myself included) could potentially fall into the trap of giving students in class lessons at a level they are already competent in to “boost their self esteem” or “perfect their skills”, Walker makes a compelling and intelligible argument for teaching at that level between independence and frustration. Also in regards to the use of the word range rather than level I think it is important to remember as educators that learning is not “all or nothing” and that differentiation means teaching at an appropriate level for each child (which is enviably a flexible and fluid).
Page 78: “While analyzing the student’s performance using the traditional criteria on the informal reading inventory, the diagnostic teacher can also evaluate the student’s fluency as she listens to him read orally. To do so, she asks herself three questions (1) Is the student’s reading fairly smooth? (2) Does the student read words in meaningful phrases? (3) Does the student’s pitch, stress and intonation convey the meaning of the text?”
While reading this passage, I was thinking about how critically important assessing (and improving) the fluency of a struggling reader is, whether that person be an adult non reader or a child. It was interesting to me the strong relationship between fluency and increased reading comprehension achievement, the fact that as choppy or delayed reading can hurt a students’ ability to make/ retain meaning. Though the book did not specifically say (yet) I think one of the best way to achieve fluency is probably to have students repeatedly read a passage aloud (a mastery learning model). I also think it is likely fluency would increase as students read more (even silently) as they will be exposed to more diverse vocabulary, sentence structures and writing styles.
Page 87: “One of the best ways to evaluate phonic knowledge is to analyze children’s spelling. As they spell words, children must think about each letter and its sound and then synthesize these sounds into words. Thus, spelling is closely linked to phonic knowledge.”
In this passage Walker makes the argument that phonics knowledge can be assessed by analysis of a learner’s spelling, but my question is “Can strengthening spelling skills (through use of spelling tests) be valuable in strengthening phonic knowledge?” It seems to me that spelling is very much tied to writing competency since students who are restricted to a limited vocabulary are limited in the words they can write. This means students face aggravation and frustration when they get stuck trying to spell a word, however my question is, does the same relationship hold true for spelling/reading competency?
Page 111: “Some students refuse to predict because they don’t want to be wrong. Often their instruction has focused on getting the correct answers.”
I think this passage regarding prediction making and perfectionism speaks wonders to the nature of American schooling- the right or wrong, black or white mentality school age children are brought up in. I think it is so interesting that the author would publish this disclaimer because I can have definitely could see some of my students being very concerned about a “wrong” prediction. Though I didn’t see it at the beginning of the course, I am seeing more and more similarities between reading and math instruction, since, as a math teacher we also make predictions as a pre-calculating strategy. It is the same “I don’t know”, “I can’t make a guess” avoidance technique that I have to teach my students to overcome in the beginning of the year (mainly though practice and praise).
Page 117: “Returning to the extended passages, the diagnostic teacher uses the answers to the first question “How close is the reader’s interpretation” to assess general knowledge. He must judge whether the reader changes the meaning of the selection because she has no similar experience.”
The idea that students will struggle at making meaning from ideas that are not culturally relevant (familiar) to them is a tremendously important idea for teacher and pre-service teachers. Walker’s discussion of the importance of considering a students “general knowledge” reminded me of the work by Gloria Ladson-Billings in her text “The Dreamkeepers”. Her general thesis is that African American children learn best when their new ideas are connected to what they already know and/or have experienced. It is no wonder to me that (in the case of reading comprehension) students can not remember information they have no schema for. I think it is important teacher pick reading material that is both age and culturally appropriate when assessing student’s reading comprehension as to insure difficulty is not due to lack of prior general knowledge but an actual reading disability.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Learning Log: Chapter 4
Jennifer Jones
Chapter 4: Learning Log
Page 60: “Effective diagnostic teaching allows students to demonstrate their strengths (what they already know and can do) by overlapping what is known and done with new information and new strategies.”
In a previous learning log, I mentioned the importance of students (especially struggling learners) assimilating new ideas into their preexisting schema so that new ideas are not provided lip service and forgotten, but transferred to various new contexts and situations. In this passage, Walker is urging teachers to not only accept but embrace whatever prior knowledge, successes and experiences a child has as a starting point for growth. I like the term she picks (overlapping) as it provides the reader to visualize the interaction/ intersection of new strategies with the existing information. I think it is interesting that Walker points out that effective reading teachers continuously pursue and perfect simplistic reading strategies as they help students build and perfect new ones.
Page 61: “Allowing the reader to choose what she will read increases engagement. By choosing the reader establishes reason for reading the selected text.”
The reason I selected this passage is because I imagine this is an area of contention for reading teachers (especially at secondary levels) who know that student ownership leads to increased engagement, but at the same time are required to “cover” certain classic pieces of literature which may be unpopular with teens. I think this passage ties directly to Glasser’s theory of motivation and though it is not unique to reading- makes a lot of sense. Though Walker does not explicitly say it, interest is the reason why struggling readers will spend hours surfing the internet (reading web pages), sifting through magazine and comic books but are reluctant and unmotivated to read in school. Though I would be interested in knowing how reading teachers provide their students with choice, I think giving students a choice between options, a class vote or a free reading day occasionally will certainly increase student motivation (and morale).
Page 66: “For Mary, therefore, an effective diagnostic technique would be an adapted repeated reading that incorporates the strategy instruction of self talk.”
I think this notion of self-talk is very interesting and potentially powerful reading strategy for readers of all skill levels. One of my primary goals in working with my middle and high schoolers is to teach them how to be life long learner- to give them the tools and strategies they need to learn on their own without the assistance of an adult. This self-talk strategy seems to be a very powerful way to achieve that end as (in the example of Mary) it seems to be an example of self- reflection and self-coaching. I would like to know more about developing self talk in children in the upcoming chapters.
Page 67: “(Self assessment) helps students draw relationships among their strategy use, skill knowledge and personal effort.”
I think the portion of this sentence about “personal effort’ is one of the most important components of self assessment. I know I wrote about self assessment in a previous learning log, however I had not considered how reflection can empower students to consider how their efforts are effecting (negatively or positively) their academic accomplishments. Especially at the middle school level (the students I teach) being “smart” is not enough; students at this point in their academic careers also must exhibit some effort to be successful. I think that giving students the power to pinpoint how strategy, skill and effort can effect their achievement is not only a reading skill but a life skill.
Page 68: “For personal writing, the students and teacher communicate through writing. During each session students write to the teacher about anything of interest or importance to them… the focus is on communication between students and teacher.”
In this passage, Walker makes a tremendous point about the importance of allowing students to write about topic of interest as a way to increase motivation and engagement in writing tasks. For struggling readers/writers to have an outlet where they will not be judged is extremely important, especially given the fact that it is likely an atypical experience. Though I teach math, my very first homework assignment of the year is to have my students write a letter (journal entry) to me introducing themselves to me, after I write one to them. Though I provide guidelines it is largely an open ended assignment, which gives the students an opportunity to write about their favorite topic (themselves). Not only does this task give me the opportunity to get to know them better (thus guiding my instruction) it is also a terrific way to build community and relationships. Though in my example the letters are not continuous, the model Walker provides is certainly a tool which will help build and strengthen teacher-student relationships.
Chapter 4: Learning Log
Page 60: “Effective diagnostic teaching allows students to demonstrate their strengths (what they already know and can do) by overlapping what is known and done with new information and new strategies.”
In a previous learning log, I mentioned the importance of students (especially struggling learners) assimilating new ideas into their preexisting schema so that new ideas are not provided lip service and forgotten, but transferred to various new contexts and situations. In this passage, Walker is urging teachers to not only accept but embrace whatever prior knowledge, successes and experiences a child has as a starting point for growth. I like the term she picks (overlapping) as it provides the reader to visualize the interaction/ intersection of new strategies with the existing information. I think it is interesting that Walker points out that effective reading teachers continuously pursue and perfect simplistic reading strategies as they help students build and perfect new ones.
Page 61: “Allowing the reader to choose what she will read increases engagement. By choosing the reader establishes reason for reading the selected text.”
The reason I selected this passage is because I imagine this is an area of contention for reading teachers (especially at secondary levels) who know that student ownership leads to increased engagement, but at the same time are required to “cover” certain classic pieces of literature which may be unpopular with teens. I think this passage ties directly to Glasser’s theory of motivation and though it is not unique to reading- makes a lot of sense. Though Walker does not explicitly say it, interest is the reason why struggling readers will spend hours surfing the internet (reading web pages), sifting through magazine and comic books but are reluctant and unmotivated to read in school. Though I would be interested in knowing how reading teachers provide their students with choice, I think giving students a choice between options, a class vote or a free reading day occasionally will certainly increase student motivation (and morale).
Page 66: “For Mary, therefore, an effective diagnostic technique would be an adapted repeated reading that incorporates the strategy instruction of self talk.”
I think this notion of self-talk is very interesting and potentially powerful reading strategy for readers of all skill levels. One of my primary goals in working with my middle and high schoolers is to teach them how to be life long learner- to give them the tools and strategies they need to learn on their own without the assistance of an adult. This self-talk strategy seems to be a very powerful way to achieve that end as (in the example of Mary) it seems to be an example of self- reflection and self-coaching. I would like to know more about developing self talk in children in the upcoming chapters.
Page 67: “(Self assessment) helps students draw relationships among their strategy use, skill knowledge and personal effort.”
I think the portion of this sentence about “personal effort’ is one of the most important components of self assessment. I know I wrote about self assessment in a previous learning log, however I had not considered how reflection can empower students to consider how their efforts are effecting (negatively or positively) their academic accomplishments. Especially at the middle school level (the students I teach) being “smart” is not enough; students at this point in their academic careers also must exhibit some effort to be successful. I think that giving students the power to pinpoint how strategy, skill and effort can effect their achievement is not only a reading skill but a life skill.
Page 68: “For personal writing, the students and teacher communicate through writing. During each session students write to the teacher about anything of interest or importance to them… the focus is on communication between students and teacher.”
In this passage, Walker makes a tremendous point about the importance of allowing students to write about topic of interest as a way to increase motivation and engagement in writing tasks. For struggling readers/writers to have an outlet where they will not be judged is extremely important, especially given the fact that it is likely an atypical experience. Though I teach math, my very first homework assignment of the year is to have my students write a letter (journal entry) to me introducing themselves to me, after I write one to them. Though I provide guidelines it is largely an open ended assignment, which gives the students an opportunity to write about their favorite topic (themselves). Not only does this task give me the opportunity to get to know them better (thus guiding my instruction) it is also a terrific way to build community and relationships. Though in my example the letters are not continuous, the model Walker provides is certainly a tool which will help build and strengthen teacher-student relationships.
Saturday, January 24, 2009
Learning Log: Chapter 3
Jennifer Jones
Chapter 3: Learning Log
Page 44: “The reflective diagnostic teacher considers and selects among instructional alternatives and at the same time anticipates the consequences of differing decisions on student learning. This reflection helps teachers know why they teach and facilitates their explanation to others.”
The notion of teacher reflection and reflective action is really interesting to me and the reason why I picked this passage out from page 44. In my experience (and this idea is one Dewey’s great contributions to educational literature) there are two types of reflection: reflection for the sake of thinking and reflection for the sake of acting. In other words, it is one thing to informally think about how a class responded to a certain experience or what information an assessment provided you with but it is another to turn those observations into action and actually modify your behavior (and classroom instruction) based on critical reflection. It is this sort of active, problem-solving sort of reflection that I think Walker is getting at on page 44. I think that she is saying here that good reflective practitioners are those who are intentional in their actions. They are educators that have many instructional options at their disposal and deliberately choose the one that is most appropriate for their learners at a given time.
Page 45: “After analyzing the characteristics described in the research literature, she felt she knew enough to identify one of her students as a passive reader.”
I thought this portion of the vignette on page 45 was particularly interesting because Walker had the “master” teacher consult a body of educational research before taking action in the classroom (in this case identifying one of her students as a passive reader). I think she makes a very good (but subtle) point about the importance of educational theory and practice, hinting at the age old disconnect between education and educational theory. Since (especially pre-service teachers) educators bring such a tremendous amount of innate knowledge about both pedagogy and content, it can be difficult for some teachers to accept/consult new research supported ideas. Shifts in educational research do not always result in shifts in practice and so I was very pleasantly surprised at her consultation of research to inform/drive classroom instruction.
Page 47: “Reading is an active problem solving strategy. The diagnostic teacher engages students in this active problem-solving process so they can construct meaning as they read.”
The reason I picked these sentences out of chapter three is because of the tremendous connections I see between what the author is describing in terms of developing reading competency and my job as a mathematics teacher. It was especially interesting that Walker describe reading as “active problem solving” because the course I teach is called “problem solving” and it is entirely math based. Constructing meaning from text (as Walker describes) is analogous to how I teach my students to attack word problems. We (the PS teachers in Lockport) teach our students a process called UPS check, which stands for “Understand the problem”, “Plan”, “Solve” and “Check”. I wonder how these could be translated from an approach to solving word problem to an approach to reading text since essentially in both instances students need to make meaning from a passage and apply the ideas to a new situation.
Page 54: “Many struggling readers do not recognize their effective strategy use. These readers need more than teachers evaluating their performance and strategy use orally. Thus, the diagnostic teacher encourages self assessment.”
On page 54, Walker discusses the importance of self assessment, not from the perspective of a teacher (as she did on page 44) but on the part of students. I tend to disagree with Walker when she says a diagnostic teacher encourages self assessment, because I think a truly effective diagnostic teacher does more than encourage reflection- she plans for it, making it an integral component of her instruction. I think when we can teach our students to reflect on their performance (whether it be in reading or any other subject), over the course of a school year it is the type of competency which can become an anticipated, habitual activity. I think teaching students to self assessment, helps learners students value their own learning (and their responsibility for their learning) as well as identify their own learning gaps and eventually can teach students to solve their own academic/learning needs (or learn how to ask for help solving them).
Page 57: “Finally, the diagnostic teacher engages students by personally responding to literature, discussing her own personal change as a result of reading and writing experiences.”
I think this quotation makes such an important point- it is something I wish every member of my faculty could read and employ in their classrooms. Every Friday during 9th period study hall is “reading day” where students are expected to bring a book, magazine or newspaper and read silently at their desk for the entire 45 minutes. Students are not permitted to do homework, computers or any other activities (including talking). While many teacher struggle to get their study halls to comply I think the biggest factor determining whether or not students participate is whether or not the teacher herself reads during the allotted time. Modeling desired behaviors is so critically important (especially at the middle and high school levels) that I think teachers would have far more success getting students to read on reading day if they did so themselves and had an open conversation with their study halls about what each person learned (themselves taking a turn). If reading day (and reading in general) were of observable importance to each educator, I think students would not only comply but also find it a worthy activity.
Chapter 3: Learning Log
Page 44: “The reflective diagnostic teacher considers and selects among instructional alternatives and at the same time anticipates the consequences of differing decisions on student learning. This reflection helps teachers know why they teach and facilitates their explanation to others.”
The notion of teacher reflection and reflective action is really interesting to me and the reason why I picked this passage out from page 44. In my experience (and this idea is one Dewey’s great contributions to educational literature) there are two types of reflection: reflection for the sake of thinking and reflection for the sake of acting. In other words, it is one thing to informally think about how a class responded to a certain experience or what information an assessment provided you with but it is another to turn those observations into action and actually modify your behavior (and classroom instruction) based on critical reflection. It is this sort of active, problem-solving sort of reflection that I think Walker is getting at on page 44. I think that she is saying here that good reflective practitioners are those who are intentional in their actions. They are educators that have many instructional options at their disposal and deliberately choose the one that is most appropriate for their learners at a given time.
Page 45: “After analyzing the characteristics described in the research literature, she felt she knew enough to identify one of her students as a passive reader.”
I thought this portion of the vignette on page 45 was particularly interesting because Walker had the “master” teacher consult a body of educational research before taking action in the classroom (in this case identifying one of her students as a passive reader). I think she makes a very good (but subtle) point about the importance of educational theory and practice, hinting at the age old disconnect between education and educational theory. Since (especially pre-service teachers) educators bring such a tremendous amount of innate knowledge about both pedagogy and content, it can be difficult for some teachers to accept/consult new research supported ideas. Shifts in educational research do not always result in shifts in practice and so I was very pleasantly surprised at her consultation of research to inform/drive classroom instruction.
Page 47: “Reading is an active problem solving strategy. The diagnostic teacher engages students in this active problem-solving process so they can construct meaning as they read.”
The reason I picked these sentences out of chapter three is because of the tremendous connections I see between what the author is describing in terms of developing reading competency and my job as a mathematics teacher. It was especially interesting that Walker describe reading as “active problem solving” because the course I teach is called “problem solving” and it is entirely math based. Constructing meaning from text (as Walker describes) is analogous to how I teach my students to attack word problems. We (the PS teachers in Lockport) teach our students a process called UPS check, which stands for “Understand the problem”, “Plan”, “Solve” and “Check”. I wonder how these could be translated from an approach to solving word problem to an approach to reading text since essentially in both instances students need to make meaning from a passage and apply the ideas to a new situation.
Page 54: “Many struggling readers do not recognize their effective strategy use. These readers need more than teachers evaluating their performance and strategy use orally. Thus, the diagnostic teacher encourages self assessment.”
On page 54, Walker discusses the importance of self assessment, not from the perspective of a teacher (as she did on page 44) but on the part of students. I tend to disagree with Walker when she says a diagnostic teacher encourages self assessment, because I think a truly effective diagnostic teacher does more than encourage reflection- she plans for it, making it an integral component of her instruction. I think when we can teach our students to reflect on their performance (whether it be in reading or any other subject), over the course of a school year it is the type of competency which can become an anticipated, habitual activity. I think teaching students to self assessment, helps learners students value their own learning (and their responsibility for their learning) as well as identify their own learning gaps and eventually can teach students to solve their own academic/learning needs (or learn how to ask for help solving them).
Page 57: “Finally, the diagnostic teacher engages students by personally responding to literature, discussing her own personal change as a result of reading and writing experiences.”
I think this quotation makes such an important point- it is something I wish every member of my faculty could read and employ in their classrooms. Every Friday during 9th period study hall is “reading day” where students are expected to bring a book, magazine or newspaper and read silently at their desk for the entire 45 minutes. Students are not permitted to do homework, computers or any other activities (including talking). While many teacher struggle to get their study halls to comply I think the biggest factor determining whether or not students participate is whether or not the teacher herself reads during the allotted time. Modeling desired behaviors is so critically important (especially at the middle and high school levels) that I think teachers would have far more success getting students to read on reading day if they did so themselves and had an open conversation with their study halls about what each person learned (themselves taking a turn). If reading day (and reading in general) were of observable importance to each educator, I think students would not only comply but also find it a worthy activity.
Wednesday, January 21, 2009
Learning Log 1 and 2
Jennifer Jones
Chapter 1 & 2 Learning Log
Page 6: “In this book reading is viewed as a constructive process that involves making meaning with text within a situation. Students employ strategic processes that help them monitor and elaborate their understanding. As they actively use these processes, they combine resources like their prior knowledge, the information they are reading and their prior and recent reading situations to construct meaning.”
I think this passage is so important because it speaks to the tremendous role the reader plays in the actual reading process. It sounds almost like an absurdity to say “readers must play an active role in their reading” but this passage poignantly details reading as a dynamic, fluid process. In thinking about the “self” portion of reading I tried to make a list of factors that impact reader success. Though the passage mentioned issues like prior knowledge, textual information and recent reading experiences, I might also add the ability to accurately self assess, personal interest and motivation, self esteem, cultural background, personal reading style, comfort level with innovation and reading culture. It seems to me there are tremendous amount of personal competencies which contribute to success in reading.
Page 9: “After an extended period of failing to combine sources of information or elaboration strategies, struggling readers become accustomed to understanding only bits and pieces of what they are reading. They refrain from monitoring and passively read words without constructing meaning.”
I chose this passage because I think it speaks to the feelings of defeat many struggling readers feel after years (even an entire lifetime) of being illiterate. It makes tremendous sense to me that after a while readers give up the struggle to understand the entire meaning of a piece of text, instead “accepting” that they will only understand a fraction of the information presented. This passage made me think about (especially in higher grade even adult non readers) whether or not it is appropriate to simplify materials for struggling learners. On the one hand, simplifying text ideally would make the information more comprehensible, thus only using vocabulary the learner knows and using it repeatedly, but does the redundancy and reiteration just make struggling readers more frustrated by hurting their self esteem and motivation. I can think with my students who are struggling readers given them an oversimplified passage (one completely different from their peers) would make them more anxious, feeling as though they are being singled out from their literate peers.
Page 12: “In diagnostic teaching, assessment is continuous. As the student learns, diagnostic information is immediately incorporated into the lesson. The teacher thus deals with the problem as she teaches, not after she has gathered all of the facts.”
One reason I like this passage is because it talks about the continuous nature of effective teaching. I think it is widely held misconception (especially among the pre-service teachers I work with) that teaching is stagnate. Not a process of continuous change and reflection but more of a mentality of “one and done”. This passage emphasizes the fact that effective teachers must have both spontaneous and planned interventions available to suit students’ developing needs. Whether the subject be reading, math or any other topic it is the data received both formally and informally from students which should drive instruction, in this case reading instruction.
Page 17: “Teachers need to choose activities that will show children the variety of functions that reading can serve: reading for pleasure, reading for information and reading to remember.”
I never really thought about the nature of reading tasks until coming across this passage on page 17. I think these distinctions ((1) reading for pleasure, (2) reading for information and (3) reading to remember) relate directly to the contextualized nature of literacy with direct applications for the teaching of reading. Literature is automatically made relevant (and therefore meaningful) to a students who derives pleasure or importance from a task, as is done in the “real world” when adults read to make decisions or form opinions. I also think the last function of reading (reading to remember) is directly the result of the first two. If text is pleasurable it will be remembered as if it is viewed as important by the student. Therefore it is not as though we should encourage students to remember if the form of memorization but rather in the way of “big ideas”.
Page 21: “The diagnostic teacher thinks about what he asks students to do when they read. Then he formulates tentative decisions about the students’ reading processes.”
I think this statement speaks to the importance of a student centered reading classroom. Rather than a directive role, I think the best reading teachers (the best teachers in any subject) are those who act more as a facilitator- guiding and coaching students in ways that best fit their needs and strengths. Though I didn’t pick that passage, one of the major themes for me in chapter two was the idea of using student strengths (and curiosities I would add) as a springboard for learning- starting where the students are and setting direction. Student motivation, “enticing effort” is so important to facilitating growth in reading that building confidence from student strength is critical.
Chapter 1 & 2 Learning Log
Page 6: “In this book reading is viewed as a constructive process that involves making meaning with text within a situation. Students employ strategic processes that help them monitor and elaborate their understanding. As they actively use these processes, they combine resources like their prior knowledge, the information they are reading and their prior and recent reading situations to construct meaning.”
I think this passage is so important because it speaks to the tremendous role the reader plays in the actual reading process. It sounds almost like an absurdity to say “readers must play an active role in their reading” but this passage poignantly details reading as a dynamic, fluid process. In thinking about the “self” portion of reading I tried to make a list of factors that impact reader success. Though the passage mentioned issues like prior knowledge, textual information and recent reading experiences, I might also add the ability to accurately self assess, personal interest and motivation, self esteem, cultural background, personal reading style, comfort level with innovation and reading culture. It seems to me there are tremendous amount of personal competencies which contribute to success in reading.
Page 9: “After an extended period of failing to combine sources of information or elaboration strategies, struggling readers become accustomed to understanding only bits and pieces of what they are reading. They refrain from monitoring and passively read words without constructing meaning.”
I chose this passage because I think it speaks to the feelings of defeat many struggling readers feel after years (even an entire lifetime) of being illiterate. It makes tremendous sense to me that after a while readers give up the struggle to understand the entire meaning of a piece of text, instead “accepting” that they will only understand a fraction of the information presented. This passage made me think about (especially in higher grade even adult non readers) whether or not it is appropriate to simplify materials for struggling learners. On the one hand, simplifying text ideally would make the information more comprehensible, thus only using vocabulary the learner knows and using it repeatedly, but does the redundancy and reiteration just make struggling readers more frustrated by hurting their self esteem and motivation. I can think with my students who are struggling readers given them an oversimplified passage (one completely different from their peers) would make them more anxious, feeling as though they are being singled out from their literate peers.
Page 12: “In diagnostic teaching, assessment is continuous. As the student learns, diagnostic information is immediately incorporated into the lesson. The teacher thus deals with the problem as she teaches, not after she has gathered all of the facts.”
One reason I like this passage is because it talks about the continuous nature of effective teaching. I think it is widely held misconception (especially among the pre-service teachers I work with) that teaching is stagnate. Not a process of continuous change and reflection but more of a mentality of “one and done”. This passage emphasizes the fact that effective teachers must have both spontaneous and planned interventions available to suit students’ developing needs. Whether the subject be reading, math or any other topic it is the data received both formally and informally from students which should drive instruction, in this case reading instruction.
Page 17: “Teachers need to choose activities that will show children the variety of functions that reading can serve: reading for pleasure, reading for information and reading to remember.”
I never really thought about the nature of reading tasks until coming across this passage on page 17. I think these distinctions ((1) reading for pleasure, (2) reading for information and (3) reading to remember) relate directly to the contextualized nature of literacy with direct applications for the teaching of reading. Literature is automatically made relevant (and therefore meaningful) to a students who derives pleasure or importance from a task, as is done in the “real world” when adults read to make decisions or form opinions. I also think the last function of reading (reading to remember) is directly the result of the first two. If text is pleasurable it will be remembered as if it is viewed as important by the student. Therefore it is not as though we should encourage students to remember if the form of memorization but rather in the way of “big ideas”.
Page 21: “The diagnostic teacher thinks about what he asks students to do when they read. Then he formulates tentative decisions about the students’ reading processes.”
I think this statement speaks to the importance of a student centered reading classroom. Rather than a directive role, I think the best reading teachers (the best teachers in any subject) are those who act more as a facilitator- guiding and coaching students in ways that best fit their needs and strengths. Though I didn’t pick that passage, one of the major themes for me in chapter two was the idea of using student strengths (and curiosities I would add) as a springboard for learning- starting where the students are and setting direction. Student motivation, “enticing effort” is so important to facilitating growth in reading that building confidence from student strength is critical.
Friday, January 16, 2009
Introduction
Hello! This is Jennifer Jones. I am a seventh grade math teacher in Lockport, NY. I am looking forward to learning more strategies and interventions to help my struggling readers.
http://jjones-jjones.blogspot.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)