The overall thought that kept occuring to me as I read the four chapters in the Strategies that Work book was that I rarely read out loud and model my thinking as I do so. I have gotten so used to reading to myself for enjoyment and reading out loud to my kids as a form of entertainment that I need to focus more on the teaching aspects of sharing books with my class. I had an opportunity to read a book to my class on the first day of school. My initial thought was that I did an awsome job of presenting a book to the class. The next day my mentor read a story to the class and I got a real treat of watching someone who really knows how to model his thinking while still making the book entertaining. My worry right now is: How do I learn how to model my thinking while still making the story special?
Another worry of mine is how I reach those kids who just aren't that into reading. I love books and can often make great recommendations on things that kids might like to read. However, there still often seems to be that kids or two who takes the book, gives it a cursory glance, and discards it. My ability to connect in that situation is hindered and I often don't know where to go next or how to get even a little excitement going.
The second reading by Kersten and Pardo reminded me of the conversations teachers seem to always have about the reading curriculums that are so popuar now. Our school uses Reading Street and it seems that the teachers don't know exactly how they're going to use that with what they know works. It seems that the hybridization that the article talks about is going to be the route that most of these teachers go for. The other main complaint I hear is that these lessons take up too much time and don't leave time for the teaching of other subjects like science and social studies. I have had limited opportunities to explore Reading Street, but it seemed to me like there were ways to combine what was in the stories with the science and social studies curriculum so that both can be studied at once. One of my goals for this year is to delve into that thought more to see if there are any ways that I could think of to combine subject areas. Especially since I know I will encounter one of these readers in my future job.
This isn't to say that I don't feel confident in some aspects of literacy that I know I can use in the classroom. I know that I can model fluency, expression, and parsity. My excitement for reading will help some kids make that transition to excitement themselves. Finally, I will build on my experience of reading books to my kids by being able to recommend several books that others may enjoy. I do look forward to watching my mentor and learning from his style in teaching literacy.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWith being at the same school we have similar experiences and hear similar heartaches with the Reading Street curriculum and the limitations it places on the teachers. After reading the Kerston and Pardo article I found it very interesting how Emily and Celina overcame the stress of the basal readers, standards, and being a reading first school to help integrate their own instruction in such a heavy curriculum atmosphere. In reading this article it made me think back to our placements with Reading Street and think about how our teachers can do this, and if I were in my mentor teacher’s shoes how I would be able to obtain this same level of success that Emily and Celina had.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you that hybridization seems to be the best method to implement in creating a rich learning experience for our students, especially with being interns and in the next up in coming years as new teachers. I feel that utilizing this method is a lot safer than Emily’s fines approach, because we would still be adhering to all of the requirements, while adding our own spin to the curriculum to improve our students’ learning experience.
I plan on attempting to do this through adding both writing and book clubs to the Reading Street curriculum. I agree with Celina that writing goes hand in hand with reading and don’t really see why they would be separated. In many of my Language Arts classes at MSU we have discussed how these two skills go hand in hand and strengthen one skill by using the other. I also plan on adding my own spin to Reading Street by implementing book clubs where the kids can pick their own stories (within levels) and comprehensibly discuss the books in depth where they can learn more about how to be better readers, something that Reading Street does not provide.
I really enjoyed reading about your read a-loud experience and where you need to improve because I fall short of that too. While I was reading our assigned chapters I realized that I do not model enough for students. I especially saw the importance in remembering to be a good model while reading. I realized this when I read chapter 1 which discussed becoming proficient readers through asking questions, visualizing, drawing inferences, determining important ideas, and synthesizing information all of which can be modeled through thinking aloud while you read to your students. I feel that the more I can do this for my students the more they will remember to do it on their own, and ultimately like the teachers in the article their test scores will go up, because they will become critical, comprehensible readers.
I feel that through creating active readers through modeling good reading skills to your students will help students become more interested in reading. In chapter 2 of Strategies that Work, it talks about building a literate community through introducing different genres, having ample opportunities for reading, large blocks of reading time, and a lot of peer to peer and peer to teacher interactions about texts. While teachers are limited by Reading Street curriculum I feel that there is opportunity to supplement the material by providing times for the students to engage with non-fiction texts, poetry, and stories of their choice by adding an extra piece that piggy backs off of the curriculum. This could possibly be done with social studies and science.
I hope after reading the chapters and the article that I can be a teacher that hybridizes my own pedagogy with the required curriculum to provide a rich reading environment.
I had similar thoughts about the numerous strategies for comprehension presented in the first 4 chapters of the Strategies that Work book. These past two weeks have involved me reading a story to the children in my placement once a day. While doing this, I try to engage the students in conversation about the text as I am reading it, in order to check that they understand what the story is about or how one event relates to another event in the story. However, this is different from the mind-frame that is mentioned in the chapters, as I am providing them with prompts to gain understanding, but am not revealing my own way of thinking or encouraging true comprehension strategies, such as drawing inferences, asking questions of themselves, or forming self-connections or connections between background knowledge and new information. In other words, I am not teaching them or modeling how to comprehend, but am instead asking them to recall events from the story, which is certainly not equivalent to the development of a deep understanding. This is easily relatable to Joel’s realization that our real-alouds need to incorporate this type of modeling in order to give students an adequate example upon which to base their own readings off.
ReplyDeleteIn regards to Joel’s worry about modeling his thinking while still making the story special, I can certainly see how this would be a concern. Teachers want to instruct through their reading, but still want to be able to capture the joy of reading for itself. I think that this goal can still be achieved. As the book points out, modeling your thinking can be engaging to the students, allowing them to become investigators. Assuming this holds true, modeling your thinking may not only preserve the story’s special element, but also greatly enhance it. By having students recognize your thinking and how you form self-to-text connections, students may not only use your connection to form a mental representation (which enhances comprehension), but this may also get them thinking about their own experiences, making the story even more special as they personally relate to it. (continue below)
I also worry about reaching students who just don’t seem to enjoy reading. Just this past week, the students in my placement had a chance to rent out two books each from the library. I had one student who traveled from shelf to shelf for the whole 30 minutes and never settled on a book, which resulted in her not renting a book at all. I was puzzled by this as there were tons of books available for her to choose from! When asked what sort of books she was interested in or what she had read previously, she replied that she does not read books much. This led me to conclude, at least partially, that maybe her prior experiences with reading have not been fostered towards enjoyment enough to the point where she sees this benefit of reading. Perhaps the majority of her reading experiences were from those in school, where she may have felt like it was more of a chore. In this instance, I think that having parents, grandparents, or other people that the child sees as enjoyable, spend more time reading together so that the student may look at reading from an entertainment perspective. For other children, with whom this is not the case, I struggle as well to pinpoint just why they don’t pursue a book that at least initially engages their attention.
ReplyDeleteIn relation to the Kersten and Pardo article, teachers should be aware of the benefits of finessing and hybridizing their literacy practices, especially when it comes to something like Reading Street, as Joel mentions. I agree with you when you suggest that most teachers will pursue the hybridizing route when faced with the popular reading curriculums, such as Reading Street. Maneuvering and manipulating a teaching context, such as Reading Street can prove to be complicated, but by integrating and hybridizing the strengths of the mandates and curriculum with the strengths of a teacher’s own practice, success can be achieved and has been documented to be the most beneficial than just either alone (as the article pointed out). I imagine it is especially difficult to find middle ground for experienced teachers, who have been teaching for 20+ years, and have been able to form stable and concrete ideals of what has worked with their students based off of their many years of experience.
Reading Joel’s initial post made me feel like I was reading some of my own thoughts. Like Joel, one of my concerns is finding a way to effectively do a read aloud. The chapter readings highlight the importance of modeling strategies to children. This way, students are able to see how the strategies will positively affect their own reading. Visualizing, making connections, and making inferences are three strong components to my reading. With that being said, I tend to use these a lot in my lessons. I want to be able to use all strategies effectively so that my students are able to pick up on the importance of each and every strategy. How can I do this? I am not exactly comfortable with sharing ideas that I have trouble using because I feel that I am not teaching the strategy the correct way. I would love to find more ideas to perfect the active reading as a whole.
ReplyDeleteAs I went on to read, some of my questions were quickly answered. Strategy instruction is not simply teaching strategies for reading. It is used to show students that strategies are great tools for purposeful reading and to help them make new understandings. I really enjoyed reading chapter three because it talks about how important it is to value students thinking. Like Joel mentioned, how are we supposed to make a student love reading? Well, one way is allowing students to think and reflect on what we read. Students love getting a word in, and sharing their ideas, but they need structure to how this thinking can come about more easily. Workshops are a perfect place for students to take what a teacher has modeled and use it to their advantage.
Kersten and Pardo do a great job of describing the importance of having teachers use their own ideas and goals to keep control of curriculum. As future teachers, we are beginning to see this control in the classroom. My experience includes a Basal, but my teacher is able to include her own ideas to achieve the goals mentioned within the text. It is used as her guideline, yet she is able to take objectives to the next level and elaborate on them (when need be) for her students. I am also not familiar with Reading Street, but from what I hear, I do not agree with the program. Teachers should have a playbook for their year objectives, but I feel that teachers NEED the flexibility to elaborate on topics or make their own lessons including the objectives. Reading Street may be taking away from the creativity that teachers need to make the classroom environment a fun and interesting learning space for children. Finally, the article made me realize how focusing on test scores can take the fun out of learning. Teachers need to see improvement and should base their teaching on their student needs, by using their playbook. Testing should not be the final say of how a student is doing. I mean think about it, not all students are good test takers.
I am very impressed with the level of conversation in your blog entries this week. You are making connections between your own experiences and the ideas in the readings, and comments are extending the conversation in new directions. You are off to a great start with your blogging!
ReplyDelete