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.