AARRRGGGHH! I'm having to use the public library because the Internet in our area is being worked on. I was almost finished, did a spell check, and it kicked me out completely! and I only have 14 minutes left!
Sigh!
Let me see if I can reconstruct this....
First, I loved the article. It was quite refreshing to see people actually understand adolescents are NOT the kids we knew in elementary school. They are developing independence and will often not just blithly follow all intructions given by the teachers. Parents of teens know they often buck mom and dad's way of doing things, why should teachers be any different? There was a real, excuse the expression, "DUH!" comment on page 379: "...understanding what motivates teens to read could be the key to improving reading instruction at the secondary level." You think?
The second thing I noticed was when they administered the reading inventory, they had re-written it for older students. Nothing will turn an older student off as quickly as you treating them like they are still in elementary school! This demonstrated an understanding of the age group.
Next, I was concerned when I saw the written survey had been given to 384 students, but the much more revealing oral interview was only given to 100 of the 384. I didn't see where a reason for this was given, but I did notice the reaearchers said they would do it differently if given a chance. I would also like to see many more students surveyed than jsut 384.
In the oral interviews, students who labeled themselves as "poor readers", " uninterrested in reading", etc. were actually revealed to be quite competant. There was a disconnect between fact and the classroom. What the old teacher observations used to call "building for transfer". Such things as "media literacy" and "technical /instructional writing" were actually revealed to be quite high when oral interviews were done, but those same students rated themselves low, and scored low grade-wise, in those very areas.
I guess this is one thing I did right - when I was teaching ELA / English I would require a reading log, but by minute, not page. And I didn't care WHAT they read - it could be magazines, Internet, newspaper, owner's manuals, class notes, textbooks, whatever. I was trying to show them there were different kinds of literacy besides just reading a library book. Also, I would read our assignments to the students, because I knew I didn't have students who could read well on their own. And I took the time to paraphrase the works, often in a humorous way. I would change the tone of voice, and in the case of To Kill a Mockingbird I would use a VERY deep Southern drawl. They liked it, and they listened.
Sometimes it's nice to know you haven't been completely wrong!
* Let me apologize now for any misspelled words - I'm not about to use the spellcheck and have to re-write this again! Thank goodness for unoccupied computers on a Sunday afternoon - it kept offering me extra time!
I love this article! The authors acknowledge the need to go further while giving teachers something valuable to use. I prefer the oral questions. Discusssion shows students their perspective matters. It also gives us insights into where to start with reading instruction. In middle and high school accessing the info in a text often doesn't require reading every word. I always started the year with listening activities. Remind me to bring them in. I then moved to strategic reading of social studies books. I wish I had been brave enough to start with science, but felt I didn't have sufficient background to teach it. Processes for reading textbooks help the students pass classes while we teach them to read. Finding time for explicit fast paced reading instruction is another secondary challenge. Hopefully during the endorsement we will puzzle it out!
ReplyDelete