Ch3 –
Learning to Read
As the title of this chapter says it is about learning to
read in a kindergarten or first grade class so the framing question it
addresses is about learning to read. The
authors discuss reading books to children, independent reading of familiar
text, shared reading, and guided reading in detail with examples of dialogue during
particular reading times. The examples
in the book make learning to read sound fun and enjoyable especially in the
eyes of children. At the beginning of
the chapter the authors discuss deficits versus strengths in teaching
reading. For struggling readers most
teachers teach based on what the students don’t know rather than what they know
which “is in direct opposition to what research tells us about how the brain
acquires information and then organizes related information into larger
networks” which means the old knowledge has the potential to activate new
connections and to stimulate higher-level process in the brain (p. 24). Dorn et al. (1998) further state that building
self-regulatory systems that enable young learners to use their current skills
and strategies to initiate new learning is imperative to higher-level
processing based on conceptual understanding.
In contrast, instruction that is grounded in a deficit model leads young
learners to rely on low-level processes such as memorizing basic information
that the brain does not understand when the reader has no background knowledge
of the topic to tap in to. These
statements justify our knowledge of the importance of building background
knowledge and knowing student’s strengths to create literacy activities.
Learning to read for independent readers requires attending
to many sources of information: meaning,
or semantic cues, structural, or syntactical cues, and graphophonetic
cues. A struggling reader has not
learned to integrate multiple sources of information but relies on one source
of information at the expense of others which lessons important information
from the other sources which lessons checking and confirming responses to the
text. Young learners need positive
experiences to become proficient at one of the sources of information to
increase learning and practice to the other sources of information. When I read this I realized that most reading
programs developed for struggling readers only work with one of the sources of
information such as the graphophonetic cues and accuracy in reading out loud. The program our school adopted was Reading Mastery
and Corrective Reading which we used for about a year and a half. Our reading scores did not improve because our
students did not have the opportunity to read grade level material where the
other sources of information would be needed – making meaning or using structural
or syntactical cues. The students were
grouped by their ability to read which was seen as a deficiency because it was
lower than their present grade level.
The students were grouped as Intensive, Strategic and Benchmark. Even the benchmark kids were placed in the
reading program designed for struggling readers. This was a directive from our agency office
without any input from the local school level mainly the teachers.
Responding to students’ miscues was another important aspect
in this chapter that made sense to me to support students as they learn to read.
Teachers have to remember that today’s prompts need to help with
tomorrow’s problem-solving actions. We
cannot correct or assist students at the expense of constructing meaning within
the text. We should create connections
through analogies based on what the students know. Other literacy activities include being read
to, rereading familiar books, shared reading and guided reading.
Read aloud: Listens to
complex language patterns and acquires knowledge of text structure vocabulary
and concepts above instructional reading level
Familiar Reading:
applies strategies in easy independent activity
Shared Reading: participates in group with teacher guidance
with selected material to promote early reading behavior
Guided Reading:
Problem solves with minimal help from teacher on text at instructional level
Shared reading involves using cloze procedures, reading
alphabet chart, cut-up poems, sentence strips and word cards, reading poetry
and reciting nursery rhymes. The
examples given specifically demonstrate teacher’s ability to help students “intuit”
problem-solving of words by having students figure out the words rather than
just giving them the word or giving an unrelated prompt.
I know we've discussed in the Elluminate sessions, but how can we expect students to gain meaning from a text, if they don't have any prior knowledge on the subject? Many of my students have never seen the ocean, yet every year we are expected to conduct a writing prompt asking students to pretend as if they were ocean explorers. Most of the time the intervention problems only focus on one thing and then we question why it's not working! Kudos for addressing this issue.
ReplyDeleteTotally agree with you. Building background is essential to create meaning.
ReplyDeletethis may be off the subject but it made me think of idioms. When my class discussed idioms we came across in our readings their thinking was totally literal and even with explainations their little minds were set on the literal meaning because it gave them a giggle. Plus I am finding out that Navajos don't use idioms in everyday language and if they do it is a joke.
We can never emphasize enough the importance of background knowledge to reading comprehension. To be able to utilize students' prior knowledge, teachers will need to carefully select their reading texts and make sure students can relate to the text somehow. It really makes a huge difference when students are sincerely interested in a reading compared to when they do not care about a reading because it does not mean much to them. Transactional theory says that a text is merely a piece of paper until the reader comes in. I realize that in my own teaching, sometimes I give more attention to teaching the text, rather than teaching the reader.
ReplyDeleteIsn't that true we tend to give more attention to teaching the text than teaching the reader. Our thinking is how can I fit the text to fit the students. this is probably where watering down the curriculum comes from.
ReplyDelete