EDRD 7717 - Module 1 Video

Watch & Learn: Assessing Reading Skills

      The YouTube video showed a struggling reader getting the extra support that she needed to be successful in reading.
      My takeaway from the video was the emphasis on frequent and ongoing assessment to guide instruction.  I believe with my school's new direction with using the Daily 5 and Fountas and Pinnell that we are heading that way.

EDRD 7717 - Module 1 Activity #4

      This year, I am teaching a third grade advanced reading/language arts class.  As it is only going on the tenth day of school, the only reading that I have had a chance to observe has been with the Fountas and Pinnell word lists.  While administering the word lists, I observed the following behaviors from Table 1.1, "Summary of Proficient and Less Proficient Reading Behaviors":
      - Attempt to make what is read sound like language
      - Use a variety of strategies: reread, skip, sound it out
      - Attempt to correct miscues
      - Attempt to identify all the word correctly
      - Rely heavily on graphemes, graphophonemics, and morphemes

      For example, a lot of students miscued on the word lunar by pronouncing it "lun-are".

EDRD 7717 - Module 1 Powerpoint

1. What is the difference between a bottom up and top down approach?
The bottom-up approach focuses on a letter/sound correspondence to construct meaning while the top-down approach focuses on a reader's prior knowledge (background and experiences) to construct meaning.

2. What is the main goal of Title 1 Legislation?  What is the program called?
The main goal of Title 1 Legislation is to make sure that all students are given equal opportunities to learn.  The program is called No Child Left Behind.

3. Why is it necessary to assess a student's home and school life in order to design the most effective program for each special needs student?
It is necessary to assess a student's home and school life in order to design an effective program because you need to gauge the amount of support that the student (and you) will receive.

4. Why is it important to know if an ELL student struggled to read in his or her native language?
It is important to know if an ELL student struggled in his or her native language because it may indicate an underlying learning disability.

5. Why does RTI sometimes replace the discrepancy definition of reading difficulty?
RTI sometimes replaces the discrepancy definition of reading difficultly because it is based in prevention, not diagnosis, of problems.

EDRD 7717 - Module 1 Text & Article Comparision

      Compare the text and the article. Where do the ideas seem to merge? What differences can you discern?

      In my readings for module one, I found a few similarities between the text and my article.  Opitz, Rubin, and Erekson touch on the different models of the reading process in chapter one (2001).  In his article, although Kesler does not implicitly state he uses an interactive model of reading, it can be inferred through the vocabulary building strategies he discusses that he uses a model that emphasizes vocabulary acquisition through multiple encounters with text.  Another similarity between the text and the article is the belief that ELLs need assistance in acquiring academic language (Opitz, Rubin, & Erekson, 2001), which can be done in other modes than language (Kesler, 2010).  Lastly, the text and the article seem to merge ideas over explicit instruction.  Opitz, Rubin, and Erekson define explicit instruction as, "guided by a teacher, who uses different kinds of strategies to help students gain understanding of what they are reading" (2001).  Kesler uses explicit instruction as he does not rely on one strategy to teach vocabulary to his students (2010).

      Aside from the similarities, there were also differences between the text and the article.  The text is geared more toward reading diagnosis and improvement, while the article just reported on four shared reading strategies to build comprehension.

 

References

 

Kesler, T. (2010). Shared Reading to Build Vocabulary and Comprehension. Reading Teacher, 64(4), 272-277. doi:10.1598/RT.64.4.5

 

Opitz, M., Rubin, D., & Erekson, J. (2001). Reading diagnosis and instruction. (6th ed). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.

Module 6: Instructional Challenge

            To ensure my students success, I would do several things in and out of my classroom.  For starters, I would immediately implement a Comprehensive Literacy Program.  This would give my students ample authentic experience with text.  Next, I would make sure that my classroom library was well stocked with age-appropriate books.  Of course, these books would also be available for the students to “check-out” and take home.  Lastly, to encourage literacy outside of my classroom, I would use age-appropriate books as birthday gifts, incentives, and rewards.  In my current classroom, my winter and end of the year gifts are books, but for children with limited access to books, this would help them start their own library at home.  

Module 6: Reading Reflection

            As I had already written my second personal model of reading theory before reading Chapter 15, it was eerie to see some of the conclusions I had drawn printed in our textbook.  I agree with Moustafa that “reading is more that decoding (pronouncing) print.  It is making sense of print” (Weaver, 2002).

            From this course, I have come to realize that a Comprehensive Literacy Program is what students need to become successful readers and writers.  Originally, when I took the DeFord TORP, I scored a 65, which put me right at Phonics/Skills.  Honestly, I don’t think that would be a true reflection of my feelings at this time.

            Students learn from experience, plain and simple.  As teachers, we need to provide authentic experiences for them to learn from.  Teaching a phonics or skills lesson out of context does not make sense.  By incorporating it with reading and writing instruction, this provides a more realistic experience for the students.

Weaver, C. (2002). Foundations for Universal Literacy. In Reading Process and Practice (3^rd),

(pp. 373). Portsmouth, New Hampshire: Heinemann.

Personal Model of Reading Theory Two

“A reader lives a thousand lives before he dies,” said Jojen. “The man who never reads lives only one.”

-  George R.R. Martin, A Dance With Dragons

            In her book Reading Process and Practice, Constance Weaver outlines the three views on learning to read:

            “View 1: Learning to read means learning to pronounce words.

             View 2: Learning to read means learning to identify words and understand their meaning.

            View 3: Learning to read means learning to bring meaning to a text in order to get meaning from, or understand, a text” (2002).
After a semester of graduate work, I can without any hesitation dismiss the first two views as I feel that they do not adequately describe what it means to read.  Being able to read is more than just being able to pronounce words.  It is more than identifying and interpreting the words in context.  Reading is being able to do all that plus see the big picture – to make a personal connection to the text.

            In my first personal model of reading theory assignment, I stated that in order to be able to read children needed to be fluent, comprehend what they were reading, and make connections to what they read.  I still believe that, however, my attitude about how they get to those places has changed.  Now, I feel that a Comprehensive Literacy Program is definitely the way to go. 

Over the course of this semester, I have learned about the different aspects of a Comprehensive Literacy Program and I feel that this design is incredibly beneficial to the students.  For starters, take the read-aloud part of the program.  It is so important for readers to hear proper modeling of texts so that they start doing it themselves.  Another piece that I think is crucial is sustained reading.  Unfortunately, most schools have moved away from any kind of sustained reading in the name of time, but I remember as a child looking forward to that time where I could “escape” into my current book.  Lastly, take the individual conferencing piece.  While this is something that I had not considered using in the past, I am now looking forward to using in the future.

Reading is a magical experience.  It is also one of those things that is hard to explain to someone else.  Sure, I can summarize a book for you, but that would not be the same as you having read the book for yourself.  I want my students to have those firsthand experiences and live those thousands of lives.  I want them to want to read and not think of it as just something they are doing for school.  To instill this passion, I believe, is where those pieces of a Comprehensive Literacy Program come in.   If I read-aloud a book and show emotion, if I let them read something that interests them, and if I show genuine interest in what they are reading during our individual conferences, I feel, they will develop a lifelong love of reading.

Reference

Weaver, C. (2002). Schemas and Transactions in the Reading Process. In Reading Process and

            Practice (3^rd), (pp. 14). Portsmouth, New Hampshire: Heinemann.

Module 5: Instructional Challenge

A Comprehensive Literacy Program is a great way to address the needs of ELLs.  The components of a Comprehensive Literacy Program provide great scaffolding to support these students’ needs.  For example, during the read-aloud component, the teacher can encourage the students to interact and respond to the text while modeling phrasing.  During shared reading, the teacher can demonstrate the key concepts present in the large texts.  Guided reading time allows the teacher to select texts that are developmentally appropriate for the students.  For independent reading, the teacher can provide books for the ELLs at their level and help them understand if it is too easy or too hard.

This scaffolding also applies to the writing components of a Comprehensive Literacy Program making this a great strategy for working with ELLs.

Module 5: Reading Reflection

After completing the reading for the week, I do feel that phonics plays a small part in the Comprehensive Literacy Program.  I would not have a separate time period allotted for phonics, but I would embed the teaching of phonics within my shared reading time.  During shared reading, phonics instruction could be used to help predict or identify words.  Students that needed extra support with any specific phonics skill could be re-taught during individual conferencing.

Module 4: Activity 1

What an inspiring video!

Robin used several strategies to learn how to read.  He began by making words from phonograms.  He then applied this during reading in the form of “chunking.”  Next, he began writing to read.  After that, Robin got lots of exposure to text in many different ways.

I really think that Robin’s chunking strategy helped him the most.  He used that in addition to his prior knowledge when he encountered words he did not know (i.e. Congratulations).

Module 4: Instructional Challenge

Marcus is a student who very frequently miscues by substituting words that start with the same letter or first few letters of the word in the text, but his substitutions often are not syntactically or semantically acceptable (they neither sound right grammatically nor make sense).

            Based off the information given above, it sounds like Marcus is not using his prior knowledge and context to predict what it coming next.  To help Marcus, Weaver (2002) suggests the following strategies:

-          Book previewing

-          Read Alouds with Discussion

-          Literature Discussion Groups

-          Language Experience

-          Guided Writing

-          Tape recordings of books

-          Buddy reading with Discussion

-          Retrospective Miscue Analysis

-          Sustained Reading

Module 4: Reading Reflection

            In the past, I have utilized the Comprehensive Literacy Program strategies of modeled reading/writing, guided reading, and independent reading/writing.  However, I doubt that I was always using them true to the Comprehensive Literacy Program standard.

            This coming school year, my school has adopted a Balanced Literacy Program called Good Habits, Great Readers.  GHGR seems to have the same components as a Comprehensive Literacy Program (leading me to believe that the terms might be synonymous): read aloud/modeled reading, shared reading, guided reading, and independent reading.  GHGR’s format for writing is also similar: modeled writing, shared writing, guided writing, and independent writing.  Ongoing throughout these steps are assessment and conferencing.

            Although I am nervous about the change from what I have been using for the past three years, I am excited to see the difference with my students.  After attended several trainings this summer, I am looking forward to implementing GHGR in my classroom.

Prominent Theorist: Lucy Calkins

Below is the link to my paper on prominent literacy theorist Lucy Calkins.

https://docs.google.com/file/d/0Bz85o6-Mfa79VDRvc2lyaGpwOUk/edit?usp=sharing

Please forgive its tardiness.  I am a little behind due to my participation in the Fulton County two-day Summer Summit this past week and morning sickness.

Thank you for your consideration.

Module 3: Activity 2

                I do not think that tutoring students on individual letters and sounds is as beneficial as learning syllables and rimes.  While this may help with sounding out words, it is not helping to construct meaning, especially when using nonsense words.  These activities, in my opinion, do not contribute to proficient reading, but to fluency.

                To become a proficient reader, words need to be introduced in context.  Readers also need to be provided with ample exposure to new words and given opportunities to use them.  Comprehension should also be monitored through questioning and close reading.

Module 3: Mock Memo from a Reading Specialist

Erica’s Teacher,

It sounds like Erica and many of her classmates are speed readers!  Have you tried a more balanced instructional approach?  While fluency is important, it is only one of the key aspects of reading.  To help with their expression and intonation, I would suggest trying some Modeled Reading and Modeled Think-Alouds.  That way, the students can hear you read with the correct expression and intonation and also hear what you are thinking.  This might just cause them to slow down!  It might also be a good idea to have them try these strategies with a partner.  For the comprehension piece, I would break down what they are reading into smaller chunks and really have the students deconstruct them.  Close reading is a great strategy for comprehension because the students will look at the same passage several times and really get to analyze the fine details.  Please contact me again if these strategies do not work or we need to go back to the drawing board.

Thank you for all you do!
Reading Specialist

Module 3: Reading Reflection

No, I do not agree with Marilyn Adams (1990, p. 108) who argued that rather than relying on context, skillful readers of English thoroughly process the individual letters of words in their text.  Constance Weaver states that miscue research has shown that good readers do not read word for word and do not strictly read from left to right (2002, p. 109), which they would almost certainly have to do to process each individual letter of every word.  Instead, the brains of good readers are simultaneously looking at the present, back, and ahead to make the reading “flow”.  Take for example, the analysis of Erica’s miscues in Chapter 9 while she was reading a passage from Roll of Thunder, Hear My Cry, by Mildred Taylor (1976).  Her miscues indicate to me that her brain was “filling in the blanks” for her, whereas if she had been looking at the words letter by letter she would not have made such miscues as “don’t” for “you”.

Module 2: Activities 1 & 2

Activity 1 -  pg. 58 #3c:

(Before reading)

creech – a scratchy noise

droogs - drugs

glazzies - glasses

goloss – a type of coating

malenky – a feeling, like snarky

messel – a type of container

millicents – a small unit of measure

poogly - unattractive

razrez – a color

skorry - scary

spatted - spotted

zoobies – newbies

            To determine the meaning of these words, I found myself trying to pronounce the word and if it sounded like something else, using that definition.

(After reading)

droogs – buddies

After the narrator uses droogs, he names three people.

skorry – rapidly

The narrator said that, “things (were) changing so skorry these days and everybody (was) quick to forget”.

glazzies – eyes

The narrator talks about the rainbow make-up around them.

messel – feeling, message

The narrator says that after you drunk something that you got the “messel” that everything was in the past.

goloss – voice

The text indicates that it belongs to a singer and moves up and down.

poogly – scared, uneasy

The narrator encounters a man who uses a teacher voice to show that he’s not “poogly”.

Activity 2 - pg. 85 #7:

1.)  I did not try to read the words letter-by-letter because that would make the process take longer.

2.)  I did try to read the words mostly by chunking them into syllables to make familiar sounds.

3.)  I did not try to read the words by sampling the letters all at once.

4.)  I know the meanings of sarsaparilla, sycophant, submandibular, and plesiosaur.

5.)  No, pronouncing the words did not give me insight into their meanings.

6.)  In normal reading, when I encounter an unknown word I either ask my husband or use my reference feature on my nook to look it up.

7.)  This experiment was used to show us how our students feel when they encounter an unknown word.  To help our students, I would model my strategies for what I do when I come to a word I do not know (i.e. ask a friend or look it up).  That way, unknown words do not discourage students from reading.

Module 2: Instructional Challenge

OR: It my little monkey here.	ER: Is my little monkey here?
OR: We got to tell.	ER: We've got to tell.
OR: Frog look at Toad calendar.	ER: Frog looked at Toad's calendar.
OR: A word what sounded good.	ER: A word that sounded good.
OR: hisself	ER: himself
OR: I can come to your party?	ER: Can I come to your party?

      Looking at the examples of children’s dialect-based miscues while reading, I would have to say that while their responses were not grammatically correct these children were still proficient readers.  As their miscues are dialect-based, they are still getting the intended meaning despite their informal English.  That being said, I would still offer them assistance by modeling the expected response.  My thought process behind this again goes back to writing.  If a student wrote, “We got to tell” I would guide them toward using “We’ve got to tell.”  Writing requires that they “code-switch” to a more formal form of English so that others can understand their writing.  “We got to tell” is not going to be acceptable in middle school, high school, college, and beyond!

Module 2: Reading Reflection

“The major folklore of reading instruction relates to “theory” that reading is considered an exact process.  In other words, the reader is expected to read everything exactly as printed on the page in order to understand the message of the author.  In general the consuming public, legislatures, courts and too many educators hold to this theory.  It is like the theory of the world being flat during the time of Columbus.”

-          Robert Harper and Gary Kilarr (Weaver, 2002)

After reading Chapters 3 & 4 in Constance Weaver’s Reading Process and Practice, I am going to have to say that I disagree with Harper and Kilarr’s quote.  This raises some concerns for me on many levels.  While I understand that readers do not have to fluently read a passage to understand the overall meaning, I feel that certain types of miscues alter the author’s message enough to cause readers confusion.  For example, take Danny’s sample on pages 78-79 (Weaver, 2002).  I read this passage twice: once with the miscues and once without the miscues.  I found that Danny’s miscues caused me some confusion while reading the passage (i.e. trumpets do not make tapping noises).  Yes, if you look at Danny’s retelling, he has the “gist” however, I feel doubtful that he would be able to answer detailed comprehension questions about the passage.

Also, what kind of examples do miscues create for writing?  Say a student wrote a story and wrote, “Prancing a mouthpiece of her tube to her lips, Emily puffed the keeth and began to play, softly at first and quiet loudly” (Weaver, 2002).  As a teacher, I would help this student make the necessary corrections to help make their writing clearer, so why wouldn’t I do the same for a reader?  If readers feel that miscues are acceptable in reading, I could see how writers would feel that miscues were acceptable in writing as well.

Lastly, as the author of a children’s book myself, why would I write something one way if I didn’t want it interpreted that way?

With the implementation of the Common Core’s rigorous standards and PARCC right around the corner, the students are going to have to answer some challenging reading comprehension questions, that I feel require their reading to be spot on with not a lot of wiggle room for interpretation.

References

Weaver, C. (2002). Reading Process and Practice. Portsmouth: Heinemann.

Module 1: Activity 2

Exercise #5:

a.       Corandic is an emurient grof with many fribs.  Corandic is a medicine with many uses.

b.      Corandic granks from corite.  Corandic comes from corite.

c.       Garkers excarp the tarances from the corite by glarking the corite and starping it in tranker-clarped storbs. Scientists extract the substances from the corite by purifying/refining the corite and sealing them in air-tight containers.

d.      The slorp finally frast a pragety, blickant crankle called coranda.  The intermediate finally yields a (words that describe the substance), called coranda.

e.       Coranda is a cargurt, grinking corandic and borgien.  Coranda is an mixture that contains corandic and borgien.

f.       The corandic is nacerated from the borigen by means of loracity.  The corandic is separated from the borigen by means of density.

g.      The garkers finally thrap a glick, bracht, glupous grapant, corandic.  The scientists finally get a (words that describe the substance), corandic.

I am able to answers questions about the passage because I am using my schema and context clues to get a general meaning.  I do not have to understand what corandic actually is or how it is obtained to answer the questions.

This experience suggests that the kinds of comprehension questions found in workbooks and on standardized tests are not actually gauging comprehension, but how well a student can take a test.  If these questions also happen to be multiple choice where the right answer is present, then are the students really learning how to read?  Or are they becoming really good test takers?

Module 1: Activity 1

Module 1: Instructional Challenge

Hocked gems financing him, our hero defied the scornful laughter. �Think of it as an egg, not a table,� he said. Then three sturdy sisters sought proof, forging over vast calmness, and sometimes over turbulent peaks and valleys, until at last welcome winged creatures appeared, signifying monumental success.

Questions:

1. What are the hocked gems?  The hocked gems are jewels sold by someone in a hurry.
2. What should we think of as an egg and not a table?  We should think of the Earth as an egg and not a table.
3. Who are the three sturdy sisters?  The three sturdy sisters are ships.
4. What kind of winged creatures appeared?  The winged creatures that appear are birds.

If I were to use this passage with students, I would first need to activate their prior knowledge of Christopher Columbus and the ideas about the world at that time.  A great way to do that would be through a book or website.

I think that students should be introduced to everything.  Perhaps at first glance they may not be interested, but something might spark that curiosity that gets them interested.  Being introduced to everything also helps build their schema.  They may not become an expert on Christopher Columbus, but they may recall the teacher talking about him.

Module 1: Reading Reflection

Question: What are some of the major differences between a skills approach to literacy and a comprehensive or sociopsycholinguistic approach?

When looking at a skills approach to literacy and a comprehensive or sociopsycholinguistic approach it is important to note their major differences.  A skills approach to literacy groups reading into separate components: phonemic awareness and phonics, word recognition, and meaning.  In the skills approach to literacy, meaning just occurs.  A comprehensive or sociopsycholinguistic approach contends that all the components of reading are happening simultaneously.  In the comprehensive or sociopsycholinguistic approach, meaning occurs with consideration being given for the reader’s schema.

Personal Model of Reading Theory

             Imagine opening up a book, but understanding none of the words on the page.  If that is how we all start out, how do children learn to read?  My previous education courses have discussed in length the numerous theories on how children learn to read such as the bottom-up theory of literacy development, the top-down theory of literacy development, the whole language model of literacy development, just to name a few.  From these discussions and my own experience as a third grade teacher for three years, I have formulated my own personal model of reading theory that children learn to read by being fluent, comprehending what they read, and making connections to what they read. 

Fluency is how fast and how well a reader can decode.  While being able to recognize letters and blend them together to make high-frequency site words are necessary skills, the reader also has to be able to understand what the word means and in what context it is being used.  For example, this past school year, one of my co-workers had a student in her class that was reading over the 120 words per minute rate which used to be the ending requirement for third grade.  However, questioning the student afterward revealed that she did not comprehend a single word that she had read.  Fluency by itself is not reading.

            Comprehension is another key faucet of reading.  If the reader does not understand what he/she is reading, he/she is not reading.  This year I had a student who could have opened up the textbook for this class and read it fluently, but without understanding the text, he would just have been making noise.  Being able to grasp what the author is saying to you is critical for reading.

            Lastly, the ability to make connections is an important aspect of reading.  This scaffolding helps the reader interpret their own value from the text.  One of the books that I always read to my students is Andrew Clements’ A Week in the Woods.  Three years in and I am still being surprised by the connections that they make – things that sometimes I did not see or expect.  Making connections makes reading more personal and interesting to the reader.

            Like there are numerous theories on how children learn to read, there are numerous approaches to effective reading instruction.  In the past, teachers would read aloud the weekly story from the basal reader and then throughout the week pull three different guided reading groups (below, on, and advanced) to work on various skills.  Now, the movement is toward the balanced approach to literacy  In the balanced approach to literacy, students start out with a high level of support from the teacher through modeled reading and gradually move down to a low level of support from the teacher through independent reading.  While this type of reading instruction is still very new to me, from what I have seen it seems to be a step in the right direction.  Perhaps we will find out how children learn to read.