Krista Lara, and I discussed the
ideas from the Allington and Valencia/Buly articles this week. We discussed how Allington “concludes
that enhanced reading proficiency rests largely on the capacity of the classroom
teachers to provide expert, exemplary reading instruction-instruction that
cannot be packaged or regurgitated from a common script because it is
responsive to children’s needs”.
When I first started teaching, I was given scripted math and phonics program
and it was difficult for me to deviate from my norm when we adopted our Scott
Foresman reading series a couple of years later. But I really had to step out of my comfort zone when we
started guided reading. I think
guided reading has helped me become a better teacher all around not just in reading. I am now able to be more flexible and
be more “responsive to children’s needs”.
I can no longer look at my class as a whole I can see what each of my
students need individual and use that information to help them all progress
accordingly. Time: “reading and
writing versus stuff”-effective teachers had their students reading and writing
for as much as half of the day (we have allotted more time at our school for
reading and writing as well). We
have been doing more guided reading, independent reading, and adding more
science and social studies to our curriculum J. But the instructional planning of the
reading and writing is what makes the use of this extra time so
beneficial. Texts: “a rich supply
they can actually read”. Through a
grant we have received, we were able to purchase these types of books. We discussed how we have more resources
to where we could have books for their instructional level as well as their
independent level (more texts will be added to our book room as well). This will help with both their
comprehension and fluency. I told
my group that now when I send my students to read-to-self, I know they have a
book box on their level and they are actually reading. In the past they would just
"pretend" to read.
“One-size-fits-all” does not work and the lowest achievers are the ones
that will benefit most from a rich supply of books. Teaching: “active instruction, explicit explanation, and
direct teaching”. Model, model,
model! You cannot expect a child
to understand how to do something unless you show them how to do it. We talked about how assign-and-assess
does not work. We have to have
active instruction in our classrooms.
How if we give our students a missing vowel worksheet, the ones that
will be able to complete it will be the ones that already know that skill
(basically just another assessment).
I have found myself become frustrated in the past if a child could not
complete a worksheet but now I know that I have to model and demonstrate those
skills multiple times prior. Talk:
great teachers generate more student talk. The one doing the most talking is doing the most learning
(so we need our students talking more).
As teachers we need to use more “open” questions with more than one
answer not interrogational questions with only one answer. Classroom talk should be more
conversational and not interrogational.
The idea that "thoughtful" classroom talk leads to improved
reading comprehension, especially in high-poverty schools” which is just like
our own school with 70% of our students on free/reduced lunch. We may be the only people that talk to
them and use meaningful words they can add to their limited vocabulary. Tasks: “longer assignments and less
emphasis on filling day with multiple, shorter tasks”. It is definitely true that students
become more engaged in longer tasks because they have more time to think deeper
about the task at hand. Student
choice is also very beneficial. Also it makes it more difficult to see which of
their peers is high or low achieving.
Testing: “more on effort and improvement than simply on achievement”-we
always need to look at where a student began and how far they have come. Parents need more explanation about
this because they want to see a numerical grade (especially when we started
using our standards based report card).
Teachers and parents can actually see what a student needs to do to
achieve a better grade.
In the article by Valencia &
Buly, we discussed the in-depth study of 108 and the six-prototypical types of
students. “A test score is like a
fever, it is a symptom that needs more specific analysis for the problem. We need to stop buying in to all
special programs and figure out what is going on with each child. Assessing students is time consuming
but like they recommend we need to go beneath the scores on state tests by
conducting additional diagnostic assessments that will help identify students'
needs. We have recently been trained by Dr. Allington on the Woodcock-Johnson
Revised (WJ-R) and it was interesting to see it used in this study. This study just shows that we may think
a child is strong overall but unless we pick it apart we may not see their
weaknesses because they have strength in other areas. We must break it down to see what they need. We need to match assessments to a
student’s needs. Long-term
professional development and time to implement great assessments is
beneficial. Just like we have at
our school, you need “multilevel, flexible, small-group instruction”. I feel like our school is moving in the
right direction to help our students become strong, independent, life-long
readers.
No comments:
Post a Comment