Over the past few weeks I've learned a bit about my buddy's needs, abilities, and interests. My buddy, whom I'll continue to call Katie, seems to genuinely enjoy reading. She particularly enjoys her reading textbook. During one of our informal reading conferences she neatly summarized what had been happening in one of the stories, highlighting both explicit and implicit details. For instance, she inferred why the main character, Maria Isabel Salazar Lopez, disliked being called Mary Lopez, a conclusion supported, but not directly stated, by the story. Katie's comprehension of the two assessment readings, Amelia Earhart and Early Railroads, was fairly good. She did miss some explicit supporting details, such as the sentence that told the reader who Tom Thumb was in the Early Railroads piece. This affected her comprehension of the analogy being made between the engine and Tom Thumb, and she stumbled on the comprehension questions that dealt with that analogy.
Additionally, Katie's reading of the assessment pieces was slower than average. She read Early Railroads at 93 words per minute - nearly 20 words per minute slower than an "average" 4th grade peer. In all her reading aloud for me, however, I noted a particular difficulty with names that really slows her down. Katie had a bit of trouble with the name Tom Thumb in Early Railroads and it almost felt like the name was a bit of a tongue twister for her. It took her a while to move on with the reading. At other times, though, Katie will elide an unknown word. That said, Katie generally reads in larger, meaningful chunks, until she gets to a section that trips her up. Occasionally she missed punctuation, too. Katie had 12 miscues during her reading of Early Railroads, which indicates that the text is at instructional level for her.
Given the results of the reading assessments and my findings during our informal reading conferences, I would say that Katie is at level 3 on the NAEP Oral Reading Fluency Scale. Katie sometimes read with meaning, but at other times read inexpressively and missed punctuation and phrasing. Although she sometimes read larger phrase groups with correct expression for long stretches, these stretches were punctuated by shorter word groupings and groupings that missed words and/or punctuation. She might be just a bit higher than a 3 with an instructional text.
Overall, I think Katie needs work on fluency. While fairly good, her comprehension would improve if she had better fluency. This week, I plan to have Katie read the level 3 texts.
Showing posts with label literacy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label literacy. Show all posts
Sunday, February 6, 2011
Sunday, January 23, 2011
writing analysis and lesson plan: draft
Analysis
This analysis of Katie's (pseudonym) writing and spelling development is based on the rough draft of a short story about a treasure hunt and her spelling inventory.
Katie's short story is about finding a treasure map, following it, and discovering gold at the end. While Katie told me that she loves to make up stories in her head, she also told me that she doesn't view herself as a "good writer." Katie was proud of several elements in her story, but stated that she is primarily motivated by a desire to set a mood of mystery or suspense in her writing. Katie clearly modeled the protagonist on herself. Katie's story began with the main character waking one morning with a sense of foreboding but dramatically switched gears after a treasure map was discovered. Katie tried several times to use a sense of foreboding in her story, but couldn't quite seem to make it fit in with her main storyline.
Six Traits
Ideas & Content
Katie's idea for her story -- a mysterious treasure hunt -- was good but incompletely executed. While her story stayed on topic for the most part, it meandered off in parts. Katie also could have included much more detail and personalization. In one part of the story, she is traveling through states marked on the map, but we don't get a very good sense of what any of this part of her journey is like. The journey ends up feeling like the trajectory line drawn on a map in movies. You pass though many places, but don't stop or linger at any one of them. Katie's story has a good foundational idea that could be expanded.
Organization
Katie's story would benefit from some organzational work. She may have found it easier to focus if she had defined a title for her story and worked on an idea map of some kind. Her transitions sometimes work, but her lead feels completely disconnected from the body of her story. In her first paragraph, the main character wakes up at home with a sense of foreboding, eats breakfast, and feels quite sick. In the next paragraph, she discovers a treasure map in a bottle and heads off on a treasure hunt. Her story generally moves along the treasure hunt theme, but in an "and then" way that sometimes only loosely connects ideas.
Voice
I can feel Katie really trying to find a way to impart a sense of mystery in this piece, but in a way that's disconnected from her main story line. For instance, while she's traveling through the states on the map, she eats some food and it makes her sick. This anecdote doesn't support the story. These interjections distract from Katie's purpose, leaving the reader a bit confused.
Word Choice
Katie's word choice and phrasing is mainly basic and functional. However, she has some nice touches in her writing. I particularly liked the language she used to describe the treasure map. "It was as soft as old leather," Katie writes, "but on the other side it as as rough as sandpaper." In another part of her story, she colorfully describes arriving in Alaska as though through chattering teeth. "I-i-i-t's s-s-s-o c-c-cold."
Sentence Fluency
Katie's sentences are largely adequate and generally correctly structured, but could do more to support the story. In places, her "and then" style of telling events lends itself to overuse of connectors and rambling sentences. "I enjoyed the food I was eating until I began to feel sick then I heard the doorbell ring." At other times, sentences feel abrupt and the reading feels choppy. "I heard so many languages. I ate so many different foods. Some of the food made me sick." A few sentences, though,are expressive, such as the description of the cold mentioned when discussing word choice.
Conventions
With a little work, this piece could be revised to be conventionally correct. Katie seems to have a bit of difficulty matching verb tense correctly. "I thought if I eat some food, I'd feel better," she writes in one place. In another she writes, "I open the door and saw a bottle." Punctuation and capitalization is generally correct, and some paragraphing is present. Spelling is quite good, with only a handful of misspellings in her four page draft. Most of these involved doubling a consonant, such as "runing" for running and "carefuly" for carefully.
Spelling
The results of Katie's spelling inventory place her in the late within word pattern phase of the developmental continuum (Bear & Barone, 1989). The majority of her misspelled words occurred in this section and included "surving," "cattel," and "plesher." Katie clearly has not yet had much, if any, experience with affixes or bases and roots. Katie wrote "slevies"for civilize and "confend" for confident. In her writing sample, the most common misspelling involved consonant doubling, as mentioned in my discussion of conventions. On the spelling inventory, however, all the double consonant words were correctly spelled or contained the doubled consonant, including shopping, "cattel" (cattle), and "carrires"(carries). I am not sure exactly what to make of this, except perhaps thoughts were flying fast when she was writing her story, and she was simply writing too fast.
Conclusion
As stated in my introductory paragraph, Katie expresses a strong preference for mysterious or suspenseful writing. I believe if she spent more time organizing her ideas, she could experience more success injecting a sense of mystery in her writing. Her floundering for direction at times impacted her ability to successfully flesh out ideas. She has the beginnings of an engaging story with some creative sparks. I would work with her on organization, with a focus on leads. A story's lead is what propels it forward, and since Katie's lead and storyline weren't well connected, exploring how leads draw readers in, make them want to know more, and bridge ideas (Spandel & Culham, 1994, p. 3) might help her restructure the entire piece.
Lesson Plan
Samples of well-written and engaging leads, eg. Because of Winn-Dixie by DiCamillo and Your Name in Gold, by A.F. Baumann. Samples of peer written leads, such as from previous years' students. Student's rough draft to examine. Writer's notebook or paper, pencil.
This analysis of Katie's (pseudonym) writing and spelling development is based on the rough draft of a short story about a treasure hunt and her spelling inventory.
Katie's short story is about finding a treasure map, following it, and discovering gold at the end. While Katie told me that she loves to make up stories in her head, she also told me that she doesn't view herself as a "good writer." Katie was proud of several elements in her story, but stated that she is primarily motivated by a desire to set a mood of mystery or suspense in her writing. Katie clearly modeled the protagonist on herself. Katie's story began with the main character waking one morning with a sense of foreboding but dramatically switched gears after a treasure map was discovered. Katie tried several times to use a sense of foreboding in her story, but couldn't quite seem to make it fit in with her main storyline.
Six Traits
Ideas & Content
Katie's idea for her story -- a mysterious treasure hunt -- was good but incompletely executed. While her story stayed on topic for the most part, it meandered off in parts. Katie also could have included much more detail and personalization. In one part of the story, she is traveling through states marked on the map, but we don't get a very good sense of what any of this part of her journey is like. The journey ends up feeling like the trajectory line drawn on a map in movies. You pass though many places, but don't stop or linger at any one of them. Katie's story has a good foundational idea that could be expanded.
Organization
Katie's story would benefit from some organzational work. She may have found it easier to focus if she had defined a title for her story and worked on an idea map of some kind. Her transitions sometimes work, but her lead feels completely disconnected from the body of her story. In her first paragraph, the main character wakes up at home with a sense of foreboding, eats breakfast, and feels quite sick. In the next paragraph, she discovers a treasure map in a bottle and heads off on a treasure hunt. Her story generally moves along the treasure hunt theme, but in an "and then" way that sometimes only loosely connects ideas.
Voice
I can feel Katie really trying to find a way to impart a sense of mystery in this piece, but in a way that's disconnected from her main story line. For instance, while she's traveling through the states on the map, she eats some food and it makes her sick. This anecdote doesn't support the story. These interjections distract from Katie's purpose, leaving the reader a bit confused.
Word Choice
Katie's word choice and phrasing is mainly basic and functional. However, she has some nice touches in her writing. I particularly liked the language she used to describe the treasure map. "It was as soft as old leather," Katie writes, "but on the other side it as as rough as sandpaper." In another part of her story, she colorfully describes arriving in Alaska as though through chattering teeth. "I-i-i-t's s-s-s-o c-c-cold."
Sentence Fluency
Katie's sentences are largely adequate and generally correctly structured, but could do more to support the story. In places, her "and then" style of telling events lends itself to overuse of connectors and rambling sentences. "I enjoyed the food I was eating until I began to feel sick then I heard the doorbell ring." At other times, sentences feel abrupt and the reading feels choppy. "I heard so many languages. I ate so many different foods. Some of the food made me sick." A few sentences, though,are expressive, such as the description of the cold mentioned when discussing word choice.
Conventions
With a little work, this piece could be revised to be conventionally correct. Katie seems to have a bit of difficulty matching verb tense correctly. "I thought if I eat some food, I'd feel better," she writes in one place. In another she writes, "I open the door and saw a bottle." Punctuation and capitalization is generally correct, and some paragraphing is present. Spelling is quite good, with only a handful of misspellings in her four page draft. Most of these involved doubling a consonant, such as "runing" for running and "carefuly" for carefully.
Spelling
The results of Katie's spelling inventory place her in the late within word pattern phase of the developmental continuum (Bear & Barone, 1989). The majority of her misspelled words occurred in this section and included "surving," "cattel," and "plesher." Katie clearly has not yet had much, if any, experience with affixes or bases and roots. Katie wrote "slevies"for civilize and "confend" for confident. In her writing sample, the most common misspelling involved consonant doubling, as mentioned in my discussion of conventions. On the spelling inventory, however, all the double consonant words were correctly spelled or contained the doubled consonant, including shopping, "cattel" (cattle), and "carrires"(carries). I am not sure exactly what to make of this, except perhaps thoughts were flying fast when she was writing her story, and she was simply writing too fast.
Conclusion
As stated in my introductory paragraph, Katie expresses a strong preference for mysterious or suspenseful writing. I believe if she spent more time organizing her ideas, she could experience more success injecting a sense of mystery in her writing. Her floundering for direction at times impacted her ability to successfully flesh out ideas. She has the beginnings of an engaging story with some creative sparks. I would work with her on organization, with a focus on leads. A story's lead is what propels it forward, and since Katie's lead and storyline weren't well connected, exploring how leads draw readers in, make them want to know more, and bridge ideas (Spandel & Culham, 1994, p. 3) might help her restructure the entire piece.
Lesson Plan
Objective
Student will understand the elements of a lead that draw the reader in and set the stage for the story.
Standards
EALRs:
- 1.3. Revises to improve text.
- 4.1.1. Analyzes and evaluates writing using established criteria.
- Identifies professional authors styles and techniques (e.g., word choice, introductions, endings, points of view).
- 4.1.2. Analyzes and evaluates own writing using established criteria.
Samples of well-written and engaging leads, eg. Because of Winn-Dixie by DiCamillo and Your Name in Gold, by A.F. Baumann. Samples of peer written leads, such as from previous years' students. Student's rough draft to examine. Writer's notebook or paper, pencil.
Instructional Strategies
In a writing conference with the student, read several mentor text leads. Together, construct a list of characteristics found in the leads that make you want to read more, such as action, description, sound effects, and dialogue. Discuss what it is about the mentor text leads that sets up the story and makes you want to read more.
Select one or more samples of student writing (such as from past years' students) that could use editing for teacher facilitated editing. Together with student, examine lead(s) and edit them to include elements you discovered after reading the mentor texts in previous step. Discuss how leads provide direction for the rest of the story and how changing the lead can change the whole story.
Once student seems to get the hang this, have her try editing one of her own leads. Have her analyze how (if) her revisions affect the rest of her story. Does it make what follows more compelling? Is the remainder of the story now in need of revision?
Assessment
Teacher will assess student understanding of how an engaging leads grab the reader by listening for accurate descriptions of the elements of a good lead and looking for incorporation of these elements in student's revision of own writing.
Monday, November 22, 2010
chunking
While we're having a great time with our second grade buddy, Lisa*, Susan's and my session with her didn't go as smoothly as it could have last week. Our buddy just doesn't seem to enjoy reading. She likes books, loves talking about books, and clearly enjoys being read to. However, when reading a book herself, she frustrates easily and doesn't make sustained attempts at decoding unknown words. After a sentence or two, she's ready to move on to something else and has an arsenal full of diversionary tactics waiting to be deployed. As a result of this, our attempt to do a running record with her wasn't successful -- even though we had selected easier books for our session than the ones we looked at the week prior. Lisa was still struggling or still reticent to read, or a little of both.
On more than a few occasions, when encouraged, Lisa would try chunking the words she didn't know. She wasn't always successful, even with words that seemed particularly amenable to a chunking strategy, like compound words. Reading Fox, and looking back at a specific instance where Lisa was trying to decode by chunking, I think I might see why she was unsuccessful. On one occasion, she wanted to decode a word by chunking it, and wanted Susan to cover one portion while she decoded the other. I can't recall the exact word, but her strategy progressed along the lines of taking a word such as "nothing" and trying to chunk it into "not" and "hing" or "no" and "hing," ignoring the "t". (Susan, if you're still reading my blog, correct me in the comments!) Fox said something that seems to make sense of what was going on here.
Fox (2008) states that using "the multiletter strategy hinges on identifying chunks" in words (p. 180). However, when using this strategy, readers have to know which letters form viable chunks and which do not. Readers, Fox tells us, "use their knowledge of letter-sound patterns to determine the letters in new words that are most likely to belong in groups" (p. 180). This is a skill that must be practiced. I had a bit of an "aha moment" when I read this, because it seemed to identify why Lisa was struggling when attempting a chunking strategy. Either she has not had enough practice honing her chunking skills, or she hasn't yet mastered letter-sound and analogy strategies.
I am curious whether Lisa receives extra reading help. It's clear she's been taught strategies to help her decode new words, and while she both tried and experienced a level of success with of some of these strategies during our time together, her stamina is low. I am not sure if offering an even easier book to read will spark a desire to read more, but I'm hoping so, and will try some easier books when we meet tomorrow.
*pseudonym
On more than a few occasions, when encouraged, Lisa would try chunking the words she didn't know. She wasn't always successful, even with words that seemed particularly amenable to a chunking strategy, like compound words. Reading Fox, and looking back at a specific instance where Lisa was trying to decode by chunking, I think I might see why she was unsuccessful. On one occasion, she wanted to decode a word by chunking it, and wanted Susan to cover one portion while she decoded the other. I can't recall the exact word, but her strategy progressed along the lines of taking a word such as "nothing" and trying to chunk it into "not" and "hing" or "no" and "hing," ignoring the "t". (Susan, if you're still reading my blog, correct me in the comments!) Fox said something that seems to make sense of what was going on here.
Fox (2008) states that using "the multiletter strategy hinges on identifying chunks" in words (p. 180). However, when using this strategy, readers have to know which letters form viable chunks and which do not. Readers, Fox tells us, "use their knowledge of letter-sound patterns to determine the letters in new words that are most likely to belong in groups" (p. 180). This is a skill that must be practiced. I had a bit of an "aha moment" when I read this, because it seemed to identify why Lisa was struggling when attempting a chunking strategy. Either she has not had enough practice honing her chunking skills, or she hasn't yet mastered letter-sound and analogy strategies.
I am curious whether Lisa receives extra reading help. It's clear she's been taught strategies to help her decode new words, and while she both tried and experienced a level of success with of some of these strategies during our time together, her stamina is low. I am not sure if offering an even easier book to read will spark a desire to read more, but I'm hoping so, and will try some easier books when we meet tomorrow.
*pseudonym
Saturday, November 6, 2010
the zombie zapped the zebra's head
One of activities we chose for our kindergarten buddy was Silly Sentences, found in chapter four of Fox's Word Identification Strategies. When we administered the emergent literacy profile to our buddy, there was some confusion around the beginning sounds section. When we asked him to identify the beginning sounds of the listed words, he named the beginning letters rather than the sounds. For example, when given the word "more" and asked "What sound does more begin with?," he answered "m". He even offered the letters "c-h" instead of naming the beginning sound for the word children.
Given his responses, we thought that Silly Sentences exercise could help reinforce the concept of beginning sounds. We came up with a half dozen or so silly sentences, crafted with his interests in mind - like many meerkats munch on millipedes - and wrote them on index cards. We had our buddy read each card and identify the common beginning sound. He caught on quickly and enjoyed the exercise, which also included illustrating each silly sentence. After we went through the prepared cards, we encouraged him to craft his own silly sentences on blank cards. This is when he really showed us that he "got it." One of his silly sentences was "The zombie zapped the zebra's head." Wow!
Another strategy identified by Fox that really struck me was that of using rimes to sidestep exceptions. For example, in a short word with one vowel followed by a consonant, the vowel is usually short. We can teach it this way and then start addressing all the exceptions, one of which is the word "find." Fox points out that given the vowel/consonant rule, the i in find should be pronounced like the i in dish, but isn't. It certainly seems like this could be a point of serious confusion for kids, hence Fox's assertion that teaching rimes is preferable. It seems much clearer to teach a child that -ind makes the sound found in find, kind, and rind and that -ish makes the sound found in dish, wish, and fish. I really liked this strategy and the way Fox described it.
I'm a little sad our time with our kindergarten buddy is at an end for now, but I'm excited to meet our second grade buddy next week.
PS Please think twice about using plastic baggies for the "Baggie Book" activity on page 165. There has to be another way to accomplish the desired effect without using a large quantity of environmentally un-friendly ziploc plastic bags. It's just wasteful.
Given his responses, we thought that Silly Sentences exercise could help reinforce the concept of beginning sounds. We came up with a half dozen or so silly sentences, crafted with his interests in mind - like many meerkats munch on millipedes - and wrote them on index cards. We had our buddy read each card and identify the common beginning sound. He caught on quickly and enjoyed the exercise, which also included illustrating each silly sentence. After we went through the prepared cards, we encouraged him to craft his own silly sentences on blank cards. This is when he really showed us that he "got it." One of his silly sentences was "The zombie zapped the zebra's head." Wow!
Another strategy identified by Fox that really struck me was that of using rimes to sidestep exceptions. For example, in a short word with one vowel followed by a consonant, the vowel is usually short. We can teach it this way and then start addressing all the exceptions, one of which is the word "find." Fox points out that given the vowel/consonant rule, the i in find should be pronounced like the i in dish, but isn't. It certainly seems like this could be a point of serious confusion for kids, hence Fox's assertion that teaching rimes is preferable. It seems much clearer to teach a child that -ind makes the sound found in find, kind, and rind and that -ish makes the sound found in dish, wish, and fish. I really liked this strategy and the way Fox described it.
I'm a little sad our time with our kindergarten buddy is at an end for now, but I'm excited to meet our second grade buddy next week.
PS Please think twice about using plastic baggies for the "Baggie Book" activity on page 165. There has to be another way to accomplish the desired effect without using a large quantity of environmentally un-friendly ziploc plastic bags. It's just wasteful.
Sunday, October 24, 2010
writer's workshop
Coincidental to this week's assigned readings -- chapters 1-3 of Regie Routman's Writing Essentials -- I received an e-newsletter from Edutopia (is it clear by now that I love this site? ;)) about the writer's workshop as an excellent tool for differentiation. Similar lines of thinking are pursued in both Routman and in the Edutopia article, titled The Writing Workshop: A Valuable Tool for Differentiation and Formative Assessment. The author of the Edutopia article, Todd Finley, states that we need to get students past a fear of not writing correctly and to instead write from a place where right and wrong aren't the ultimate criteria. Like Routman, Finley asserts the need for students to experience false starts, make mistakes, collaborate, and adjust. Both authors see good writing as the result of this process, which doesn't start and end with skills formation.
The writer's workshop is used in my own main placement classroom. The ideas contained in Routman's first three chapters -- about simplifying the teaching of writing, celebrating student writing, and showing students your own writing life, respectively -- were all clearly modeled by my master teacher. As I was reading Routman's ideas, I found that for most of them I could point directly to an example in my main placement classroom. Writing small moments? We did that. Modeling the writing process for students on the overhead? My teacher did that, too. Open sharing? Celebration of writing? De-emphasizing "skills" like spelling everything right the first go? Yes, yes, and yes. So far, I like the writer's workshop and see it as a great tool for inspiring our kids to view themselves as writers and enjoy writing.
My nascent understanding of the writer's workshop leads me to believe that differentiation should more or less naturally happen -- it seems inherent to the model. To an extent, that is what I see in my 4th grade classroom. Everyone's writing at their own level, and everyone has both their own strengths and areas they could work more on. However, I am also noticing some kids shutting themselves out of the process entirely. One boy, in particular, didn't write more than a few lines in his writer's notebook the entire four weeks I was there. I know, as Routman says, that for some kids simply getting down a title is an achievement. We've celebrated that for this boy. No technique seems to help this boy see himself as a writer, though. He's so set against the notion of writing that sometimes he literally rolled around on the floor to avoid it. I'm very curious to see what he's doing -- whether he's writing more, less, or the same amount -- when I return in January. If he's blossomed, I'll definitely want the low down on what my master teacher found to inspire him.
The writer's workshop is used in my own main placement classroom. The ideas contained in Routman's first three chapters -- about simplifying the teaching of writing, celebrating student writing, and showing students your own writing life, respectively -- were all clearly modeled by my master teacher. As I was reading Routman's ideas, I found that for most of them I could point directly to an example in my main placement classroom. Writing small moments? We did that. Modeling the writing process for students on the overhead? My teacher did that, too. Open sharing? Celebration of writing? De-emphasizing "skills" like spelling everything right the first go? Yes, yes, and yes. So far, I like the writer's workshop and see it as a great tool for inspiring our kids to view themselves as writers and enjoy writing.
My nascent understanding of the writer's workshop leads me to believe that differentiation should more or less naturally happen -- it seems inherent to the model. To an extent, that is what I see in my 4th grade classroom. Everyone's writing at their own level, and everyone has both their own strengths and areas they could work more on. However, I am also noticing some kids shutting themselves out of the process entirely. One boy, in particular, didn't write more than a few lines in his writer's notebook the entire four weeks I was there. I know, as Routman says, that for some kids simply getting down a title is an achievement. We've celebrated that for this boy. No technique seems to help this boy see himself as a writer, though. He's so set against the notion of writing that sometimes he literally rolled around on the floor to avoid it. I'm very curious to see what he's doing -- whether he's writing more, less, or the same amount -- when I return in January. If he's blossomed, I'll definitely want the low down on what my master teacher found to inspire him.
Saturday, October 16, 2010
fun with phonemes
Last week we had our first literacy class in the elementary school we'll be working at for the rest of the quarter. My cohortmate, Amelia, and I met our kindergarten reading buddy, Nathan*. What a fantastic little boy Nathan is! I was quite astounded by Nathan. We had great fun filling out our "getting to know one another" questionnaire. Once we got started on it, Nathan insisted on writing down everyone's answers all by himself. I was quite impressed with his thoughtful concentration and ability to spell out words phonetically. I didn't realize until yesterday, when I read Fox's chapters on phonemic and phonological awareness in her book Word Identification Strategies, that we were being wise when we let him try to spell out words phonetically. Apparently, this exercise built up his phonemic awareness as he tried to identify the sounds he heard in the words and write them down. This seems a particular skill of Nathan's, as he came very close to correctly spelling a lot of the words he was recording for us.
His ability to identify sounds in words became even more apparent when it was time for us to read him our book selections. Nathan turned the tables and insisted on reading to us! My book selection, The Very Busy Spider, had some words in it that were pretty sophisticated for a kindergartner, and so did Amelia's. However, I can't recall more than a few words that Nathan couldn't manage to sound out correctly on his own. He also recognized word patterns in the book, such as phrases that regularly repeated and he surprised me when, a few pages into his reading, he announced the connection between The Very Busy Spider and another book, The Very Hungry Caterpillar - both were written by the same author. I was quite impressed with Nathan. As precocious as he is, he will need to allow us to read to him in the future, in order to practice his comprehension skills. Although he could sound out words, he didn't always understand them and he wasn't really reflective in his reading because he was too focused on sounding out the words correctly. I am not sure how well he could have summarized or re-told the stories he read to us.
In all, I think it's going to be an absolute pleasure working with Nathan (and with Amelia, too!). It's clear his kindergarten teacher has done an excellent job promoting literacy in her classroom. Literacy was highlighted in many ways that spoke to its importance, such as the alphabet charts on desks and on the walls, a lite brite for spelling out words, and signs and sight words posted throughout the room. I'm excited for next week.
*name changed to protect privacy
His ability to identify sounds in words became even more apparent when it was time for us to read him our book selections. Nathan turned the tables and insisted on reading to us! My book selection, The Very Busy Spider, had some words in it that were pretty sophisticated for a kindergartner, and so did Amelia's. However, I can't recall more than a few words that Nathan couldn't manage to sound out correctly on his own. He also recognized word patterns in the book, such as phrases that regularly repeated and he surprised me when, a few pages into his reading, he announced the connection between The Very Busy Spider and another book, The Very Hungry Caterpillar - both were written by the same author. I was quite impressed with Nathan. As precocious as he is, he will need to allow us to read to him in the future, in order to practice his comprehension skills. Although he could sound out words, he didn't always understand them and he wasn't really reflective in his reading because he was too focused on sounding out the words correctly. I am not sure how well he could have summarized or re-told the stories he read to us.
In all, I think it's going to be an absolute pleasure working with Nathan (and with Amelia, too!). It's clear his kindergarten teacher has done an excellent job promoting literacy in her classroom. Literacy was highlighted in many ways that spoke to its importance, such as the alphabet charts on desks and on the walls, a lite brite for spelling out words, and signs and sight words posted throughout the room. I'm excited for next week.
*name changed to protect privacy
Monday, October 11, 2010
reader's workshop
As I read the article Emergent Literacy: New Perspectives by Teale and Sulzby, I found myself noting parallels to the "Reader's Workshop" model that was implemented at my main placement school this year. Although the techniques in the article were generally prescribed for early childhood education programs, some of them were familiar to me as components of the "Reader's Workshop." One important aspect of the workshop is to clearly model a reading life for the kids. As teachers, we're encouraged to keep reading diaries right alongside the kids - noting books we've read, are reading, and want to read. This strategy is promoted to ensure that kids become aware of you as a reader with a reading life, and to let them see you reading and enjoying books. This sort of modeling is what came to my mind when Teale and Sulzby described the importance of encountering literacy at home, through having books around the house, through read aloud experiences, through seeing their family members engaged in reading activities, and through learning about and helping to construct shopping lists, to name a handful of ways in which literacy can be encouraged.
It appears to me that the backbone of the "Reader's Workshop" is a largely a continuation of some of the strategies described by our reading that encourage emergent literacy. I believe this approach will prove useful for developing strong readers, especially since many of the kids may not have, or have ever had, rich literacy experiences at home, nor may they have had beneficial early childhood experiences with literacy. I am interested to see how the workshop progresses over the year and whether it will engage the children effectively or prove beneficial, especially to some of our struggling readers. I believe the workshop's potential benefit will be enhanced by it's advice to have a wide variety of reading materials available in the classroom, dealing with diverse topics and at different reading levels, so kids can have books available that appeal to and are accessible to them. This may seem too common sense to mention, but it might be easy to overlook a genre that doesn't appeal to us when building classroom libraries. Also, kids need books with characters that look like them and reflect their own experiences.
Reading aloud seems another important component of the workshop, in the same way and for many of the same reasons given in Teale and Sulzby's article. I've noted most, if not all, of the read aloud strategies described by Teale and Sulzby implemented in my classroom, such as making predictions, drawing inferences, and examining vocabulary. However, I haven't really noticed that reading aloud to the kids is encouraging them to widen their reading horizons or to select books they may have otherwise passed over. Perhaps it's still too soon in the year for me to observe the benefits of reading aloud described by Ivey in her article The Intermediate Grades. Maybe the book we were reading last month just didn't grab them, or it could be that they were doing a lot of internal processing that wasn't apparent to me. At any rate, I am intrigued by the "Reader's Workshop" - and am interested to see how it unfolds over the year. My one concern is that I don't have a good feel for how scripted the curriculum is, and hope there is room to incorporate reading for other subjects, such as science and social studies. We'll see!
It appears to me that the backbone of the "Reader's Workshop" is a largely a continuation of some of the strategies described by our reading that encourage emergent literacy. I believe this approach will prove useful for developing strong readers, especially since many of the kids may not have, or have ever had, rich literacy experiences at home, nor may they have had beneficial early childhood experiences with literacy. I am interested to see how the workshop progresses over the year and whether it will engage the children effectively or prove beneficial, especially to some of our struggling readers. I believe the workshop's potential benefit will be enhanced by it's advice to have a wide variety of reading materials available in the classroom, dealing with diverse topics and at different reading levels, so kids can have books available that appeal to and are accessible to them. This may seem too common sense to mention, but it might be easy to overlook a genre that doesn't appeal to us when building classroom libraries. Also, kids need books with characters that look like them and reflect their own experiences.
Reading aloud seems another important component of the workshop, in the same way and for many of the same reasons given in Teale and Sulzby's article. I've noted most, if not all, of the read aloud strategies described by Teale and Sulzby implemented in my classroom, such as making predictions, drawing inferences, and examining vocabulary. However, I haven't really noticed that reading aloud to the kids is encouraging them to widen their reading horizons or to select books they may have otherwise passed over. Perhaps it's still too soon in the year for me to observe the benefits of reading aloud described by Ivey in her article The Intermediate Grades. Maybe the book we were reading last month just didn't grab them, or it could be that they were doing a lot of internal processing that wasn't apparent to me. At any rate, I am intrigued by the "Reader's Workshop" - and am interested to see how it unfolds over the year. My one concern is that I don't have a good feel for how scripted the curriculum is, and hope there is room to incorporate reading for other subjects, such as science and social studies. We'll see!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)