Task 1: Jetton, T. L., & Shanahan, C (2012). Adolescent Literacy in the academic disciplines. Ch. 1 & 2 pp. 1-68 (Essential Question A)
Pre-Posting -- Reviewing what you read on Learning from Text: Adolescent Literacy from the Past Decade & The Challenge of Reading Disciplinary, Chapters 1 & 2, think about the theoretical underpinnings for each chapter’s concepts AND think about how the role that written and oral texts need to play in the learning of your specific discipline. (Disciplinary literacy is perhaps in many respects a reconceptualization of what it means to teach an academic subject. Disciplines are organized ways of thinking about the world, and learning within a discipline involves more than becoming merely knowledgeable. Learning must also encompass how scientists, mathematicians, historians, and others read, write, and think. This is the difference between covering a subject and teaching a discipline.)
I strongly recommend having the readings read by Tuesday, November 12
Postings: Reading your reflections and interactions about the readings is the only direct way I have of assessing the quality of your understanding of — and engagement with — the assigned readings. See the expectations that follow for the more directed kinds of responses you would make according to the role you are assigned for this week.
Roles:
There are 4 people in each conversation group. You only respond to those in your own group.
Day 4 (Second online meeting day)
Group
|
Initiators
|
Summarizers
|
Responders
|
Illuminators
|
1
|
Ian Gorton
|
Michael Gillis
|
Karin Logerquist
|
Molly Nelson
|
2
|
Laura Mayo
|
Nicholas Gaudette
|
Jesse Vavreck
|
Nancy Nair
|
3
|
Jonathan Reeves
|
Kaylee Wiens
|
Kris Latcham
|
Paul Garlock
|
4
|
Sean Johnson
|
Sara Stein
|
Erik Krueger
|
Michelle O’Connor
|
Initiators start the conversation. They must do the reading immediately and get their entries in during the first day or two so others have material to respond to. Grading will be based on the quality of questions, speculations, and thought-provoking prompts that will get people really considering the ideas presented in the content. You must include your own responses to the ideas as well. If another Initiator has already posted his/her ideas, the next Initiator to post must enter new ideas. In other words, don't repeat what's already posted.
Initiators posts are due: Wednesday, November 13 before 5:00 PM
Responders directly address and extend the ideas that the Initiators have thrown out for consideration as well as adding your own unique responses to the readings. It is not enough to say, "I agree", or "That was a nice idea." Responders need to enlarge the conversation, make connections to their own experiences, and draw from other material in the readings to expand on the conversation. Responders need to get their ideas in at least 48 hours before the due date so the Summarizers can do their work (below).
Responders and Illuminators posts are due:
Friday, November 15 before 5:00
Illuminators teach, guide, edify, and enlighten. They take their own and other people's ideas beyond surface statements to broader and deeper ground. They pull from other sources, such as pertinent internet sites, they have encountered to shed light on questions or confusions. They clarify. Illuminators add their contributions after the Initiators, before or after the Responders, and before the Summarizers (i.e., before the last day).
Responders and Illuminators posts are due:
Friday, November 15 before 5:00
Summarizers pull together and consolidate all the key ideas from the group. They are the last to make their entries, probably best done in the evening of the deadline day. Every participant (except fellow Summarizers) should be named, and the contributions of each acknowledged in the summary. Summarizers should be organized and concise. Capture the essence. (If there are any group members who have not submitted by 8:00 p.m. of the deadline day, you do not have to wait for them — just summarize those who have submitted up to that time.)
Summarizers posts are due:
Sunday, November 17 before 5:00.
Respond to another member in our group. This response is due: Sunday, November 17, 11:59 PM
CHAPTER 1
ReplyDeleteThe chapters were pretty informative overall. The first chapter had a little too much statistic quoting and not enough application for my tastes, but it is commonplace in just about every assigned reading. Something that stood out among all that research was the percentages teachers actually teaching literacy at the secondary level. The text presents these as being too small and I agree. I wonder, however, what teaching composes the remaining percentage. Something like three percent seems like a small amount, but how large a percent are the other types of teaching? I suppose the ultimate question is what would be an appropriate percentage of class time spent working on literacy? Should the time spent on literacy instruction be calculable or should literacy instruction be integrated beyond clear distinction? Is making that distinction between literacy instruction and non-literacy instruction valuable?
Regardless of our stance on the time spent doing so, what the text makes clear is the importance of teaching students reading strategies. The chapter also stresses the distinction between these strategies and instructional strategies. Students need reading strategies to understand instructional strategies so the distinction is essential. Do you see yourself using any of the reading strategies presented in chapter one? For example: KWHHL, RAP, Word Maps, CORI, any other of the strategies detailed at the end of the chapter.
My favorite part of chapter one was the discussion on technology. It reminded me of discussions from Marty's class, specifically the role of teachers in relation to information and online literacy. The overall idea being that teachers now guide students to information instead of being the keepers of information. Our job becomes teaching students skills to "read" online texts to determine what is reliable information. Do you think this shift (from source of knowledge to guide) makes our job easier?
I think it isn't any harder or easier, but rather comes with its own set of challenges and benefits. One nice thing is the level of prior knowledge students can bring in regards to the system itself. Many of them already spend large amounts of time online so that potentially saves time spent teaching the tools themselves. On the other hand, things can be a bit trickier. Teachers need to find ways to differentiate between online/offline strategies (in addition to all the other ways we need to differentiate instruction) and accessibility can be an issue. Fortunately for accessibility I think this is improving and will continue to do so as tech costs become increasingly affordable.
As a side note, I liked the line about traditional textbook publishers trying to ensure information is from credible sources. Everyone knows textbooks are the most reliable sources of information (insert sarcasm). Not to say the reading isn't valid when talking about technology, but our level of interaction with the web has changed even in the last five years. A lot of the research cited regarding tech was between 2003 and 2007. That was pre-smart phone/tablet for a lot of people. The entire environment has changed since then.
CHAPTER 1 FINAL QUESTIONS
Not really any direct reference to visual arts, but some potential valuable applications either way. What did you find is helpful? Were there any valuable strategies for you ESL teachers? Any art ideas Karin?
In the chapter, some teachers spoke of lack of training and understanding involving literacy instruction. I suppose we are getting that now. Do you feel reluctant or unprepared to incorporate this into your content?
I appreciate that you bring up the fact that a lot of teachers spoke about lack of training and understanding literacy instruction. I mentioned in my "response" comments I think a lot of this has to do with just making sure we're being very explicit about what we're expecting from the students. Ian, remember on Wednesday when I was giving my unit presentation in Gina's class and out of all the possible things to talk about, we got stuck on the definition of a "study guide"? Frustrating! I think the biggest take away, is that it's important to be very CLEAR about what you are expecting students to understand. Be prepared to rephrase, re-word, and scaffold student questions. Ask a lot of "How come?" and "Why?" or "What makes you think that?" because no matter the discipline, these questions encourage students to think about what they're learning, and may help them realize they understand the content better than they would if we were continuously trying to spell it out for them.
DeleteIan, I think technology has made our jobs both easier and more difficult. As you discussed, we have to be careful what we access online because of sources that might be ill-informed or improperly researched. We also have to work towards helping our students develop the ability to discriminate between reliable and unreliable sources. However, our jobs are easier because there is so much out there, we have a plethora of sources to access. Our students will come to our classrooms with a lot of technological literacy already, so they should be pretty engaged and willing to learn how to differentiate between quality and junk; plus, they might even have already begun to develop this sense for themselves.
Delete
ReplyDeleteCHAPTER 2
My "initiation" for this chapter is significantly shorter so you can all relax.
Most of the chapter was examples of literacy in action within select classroom content. This content-specific thinking is reflected in a great quote near the beginning of the chapter. It is "no longer appropriate to talk about literacy across curriculum." What this means to me, is that it's ideal for students to be literate in as many curriculum as possible, but that literacy will look different in each curriculum. I think this goes back to our discussion on the first day of class about the nature of literacy. Do you buy into curriculum literacies as outlined in the chapter? Do you interpret the meaning of curriculum literacy differently than me?
As the text broke down into different content areas there were a few recurring components of literacy identified (technical vocabulary, long noun phrases, nominalization, metaphor, visual display, causality, and shifting texture). Are any of these components specifically tough for you? What do you think is hardest for students in your content area?
I personally have a tough time with technical vocabulary, which I think is true of a lot of academic adults. It makes sense that people wouldn't have knowledge of words or concepts specific to something they know little about. I think students in my content area have the biggest problem with metaphor. So many concepts have no tangible equivalent so artists rely on metaphor to communicate. For example, grasping sensory ideas that don't really exist is hard even for many adults.
Do you have a better understanding of these academic language components and how they relate to your content area after this reading? I know I feel a little better, but would still like some explicit art examples. I guess my content area is surprisingly related to the math entry. At least the part about it being multisemiotic.
Response Part I
ReplyDelete“A lot of the research cited regarding tech was between 2003 and 2007. That was pre-smart phone/tablet for a lot of people. The entire environment has changed since then.”
I adore this quote from Ian, because it targets one of the biggest issues we’re facing in the schools right now, where technology use is widespread, and deeply incorporated into our society, including our schools. Unfortunately, there are still plenty of situations in which teachers fail to recognize the usefulness of smart devices, because I think we get stuck in the “old fashioned” way of doing things. Remember when teachers used to stress the importance of addition facts and multiplication tables because realistically, we would never carry a calculator around with us? Phooey. Most of us currently carry a single device that encompasses televisions, computers, calculators, music players, GPS devices, telephones, etc., in our pockets on a daily basis. Of course it’s still relevant and important to be able to make quick calculations in yours head; reaching for a calculator every time you needed to add gratuity at a restaurant is unnecessary, but the fact is that these options exist, and are huge in our world. It’s our job as teachers to teach students how to be “technologically literate,” and like Ian mentioned, we need to guide students to the information rather than be “keepers” of information. Even with the wealth of information students have at their fingertips, I do not thing technology makes our jobs as teachers easier. If anything, it forces us to be more knowledgeable about our content areas than ever before, because we have to be able to weed through false information in order to guide students in the right direction.
Ian, you also asked about certain strategies we see ourselves using in our classrooms. I have yet to incorporate a KWL chart into an art lesson, but I think the general ideas that stem from all of these strategies are highly applicable in my classroom. EXPLICIT teaching is one of the most important things I’ve taken away from my graduate program. Make sure students know exactly what you’re doing, and exactly what’s expected of them. Find ways to rephrase, so they’re able to process information in more than one way. I truly believe that modeling is one of the most effective and important tools for the classroom. Modeling applies to everything: inferencing, understanding main ideas, applying new knowledge, learning new processes, etc. If you tell students stories and mention things that certain words or ideas remind YOU of, they’re more likely to draw on their own understandings, and process the information in a more meaningful way. Ever been in a classroom of kindergarteners? Each question you ask and every statement you make solicits a story or a personal connection from every single 5 year old in that room. Kindergarteners understand connections and relationships to content in ways that are meaningful to them. I think adolescents often look for these connections, but teachers sometimes fail to model ways in which the information connects to their everyday lives and previous experiences. Mentioning things like “this word reminds me of…” or “I always think about “x” when we discuss “x” because…” are much more meaningful to students because they connect on a much closer level, develop memory/mnemonic devices, and are able to process the information in multiple ways.
I still think it's important to teach the concepts behind strategies like addition facts and multiplication tables (addition and multiplication) it's the strategies themselves that have been outmoded. I think that is where a lot of teacher fear and apprehension towards technology comes from. Some teachers fear that by discarding strategies or methods that are less relevant, the concepts or content will be thrown away with them. For example, maybe they think that by getting rid of teaching multiplication tables we're getting rid of multiplication.
DeleteRelating this to the art, I see the same hesitation towards technology even among non-teachers. There is a fear that if people use technology as a medium they won't learn how to use traditional media. The difference here, between something like multiplication tables, is that traditionally media hasn't become irrelevant. Even if an artist paints digitally, knowing how to paint traditionally will inform their technique and make them better digital artists.
I guess my point is, teachers won't do away with something that is useful to teaching just because there is a new technology. Also, the multiplication table example could be a bad example. I am not a math teacher. Maybe it is still extremely relevant. I was just running with the idea established in your response. The point its technology doesn't lead to blind abandon.
Your comment on personal connections and kindergarten got me thinking of my own personal connection! I may have told you this already, but in my current field experience, the kindergarteners recently learned how to use paint brushes. The teacher introduces the paint brush as Pete the paintbrush. He doesn't like messy, frizzy hair and he likes to be clean. He is really popular so he gets invited to a lot of parties. Even though he goes to a lot of parties (sometimes on the same day!) he still goes home and takes a bath before going to the next party. The kids eat this story up and you never see them mess up Pete's "hair" or bring him from the "blue party" to the "red party" without a bath. With just a little personification the students have this meaningful connection to a paint brush of all things. That connection makes all the difference. They might forget to dip their brush in the water before using a new color of paint, but they would never forget to take their friend Pete home to take a bath or keep his hair nice and neat.
Response Part II
ReplyDeleteChapter 1 provides an example where a teacher is teaching about layers of the atmosphere and asking students to activate prior knowledge in order to have a discussion. The prompt the teacher provides is, “John, you just said that you thought the atmosphere might have more substances than just gases. Search your prior knowledge and try to think of what those substances might be.” Ok, seriously? This is the problem we’re talking about with adolescent literacy and the gap between academic and everyday language in the first place. In my experience, very few teenagers process information like this: oh yes, I’ll just activate my prior knowledge of the subject in order to make a connection and answer this question successfully. We can totally ask this question in a different way that makes it less intimidating. Something as simple as, “Give me an example, John,” or “How do you know?” ask the same thing, but phrase the question in a way that’s less academic and more easily manipulated and understood by students. I think it’s important for teachers to use these simple scaffolding words and questions in conjunction with re-phrased questions so students get used to academic vocabulary and terminology, but also have a strong understanding of what the academic language is asking in the first place.
In the art room there are a lot of strategies that focus on helping students interpret and understand “visual culture” which is the world of images around them, what those images portray, and what they mean to people individually. Understanding visual culture is the best example I can think of that leads to specific “art literacy” strategies in the classroom. Other comprehension/inferencing strategies I use in the art room include Feldman’s Critique (http://www-bths.stjohns.k12.fl.us/teachers/rizzol/078D56A1-0118C716.8/4%20Steps%20to%20Critiquing%20Art%20Work.pdf) and Terry Barrett’s art criticism technique. In each of these strategies, students have a good understanding of what they’re looking for (or listening for) BEFORE a text/video/lecture/image is presented. Knowing the questions and some initial information helps students pinpoint the things they’re looking for. Specifically mentioning, “Look for "X” gives students something to pay direct attention to.
I also feel like I have a better understanding of academic language after this reading. It's helped me recognize that everything I teach is language in one way or another, and has made me much more aware of the words I use when teaching, and the readings I choose for my students.
Haha Karin, I like that you brought up the unrealistic dialogue between the student and teacher. “Search your prior knowledge and try to think of what those substances may be”… couldn’t be more from the truth of how we interact with adolescents. It may be important for the student to know what it means to search through their prior knowledge, but I couldn’t agree more when you said we can simplify the statement by just saying, “Give me an example”, or “how do you know”. You went on to say that you, “think it’s important for teachers to use these simple scaffolding words and questions in conjunction with re-phrased questions so students get used to academic vocabulary and terminology, but also have a strong understanding of what the academic language is asking in the first place”. I honestly don’t have anything to add to that comment, because it couldn’t be more true. What a great way to turn an unrealistic textbook situation into something we could actually work with. Proves the textbook doesn’t always know best!
DeleteThat had me laughing too. I do think the phrasing needs to be different. I think the point that the text's use of that unnatural language is trying to make is it's specificity. The teacher is asking the student to think back to what they have already learned. That is where the "give me an example" is tricky, it doesn't provide any direction to the student as to where to get that example. It's moving towards the right direction though. The robotic, "activate your prior knowledge" becomes, "give me an example" which becomes, "Can you give me an example? Think about what we learned about the atmosphere yesterday" or something.
DeleteHowever, you mentioned rephrasing and scoffolding and I think that is the answer to successful instructions. "Give me an example" can be built upon while remaining natural. Using the atmosphere topic, here is my own example of helping a student activate prior knowledge using natural language and further questioning.
Teacher: Give me an example
Student: I don't know
Teacher: Well, what did we talk about last unit?
Student: Plant stuff
Teacher: Right, do you remember how they reproduce? How do they make more plants?
Student: I don't know. They make that dust stuff
Teacher: Pollen?
Student: Yeah, pollen.
Teacher: Okay, pollen needs to get from one plant to another. How does some pollen travel?
Student: Bees.
Teacher: Yeah, bee's is one way. How else does pollen travel?
Student: I don't know. In the air. Oh!? pollen is in the atmosphere.
Teacher: Yeah thats right, besides gas, there is pollen and other small plant material in the atmosphere.
Again, this approach is maybe a little more laborious than "activate prior knowledge" but I think it is the teachers job to guide the thought process down the right path. Maybe this is too directed and maybe the student still wouldn't have arrived where their prior knowledge was stored, but it seems okay to me.
Karin, I’m going to respond to both of your posts in one place. With respect to the importance of explicit instruction, I couldn’t agree more; in my own experience, I know how much I have come to rely on good examples and clear instruction. It’s really hit home for me now, because college professors expect us to be very independent, and many don’t spend much time thinking about whether their students understand the tasks they’ve been assigned. Ironically, it’s been worse in the teaching courses than in the non-teaching courses that I’ve taken throughout my academic career.
DeleteWith respect to the example about activating prior knowledge, like everyone else in the group, I agree that it was pretty ridiculous. I see the importance of teaching students the concept of “activating prior knowledge,” but to get them there we need to use the scaffolding that Karin describes. We need to teach them that APK is a concept, so that eventually they can use the term and know what it means when someone instructs them to activate their prior knowledge, but they need to understand how to do it before we just throw the term at them.
Ian, your sample dialogue is a great example of everybody's favorite teaching tool: scaffolding. Thanks for parsing it out so we could see it applied to another example! Way to process your previous knowledge in a meaningful way ;)
DeleteIn order to succeed in our country, the need to be an educated, literate citizen is crucial. Workforces place high demands on strong skills in reading, communication and math. To fit the needs of a growing economy, our country needs to produce educated and productive workers. But as we all know, the younger generations are struggling to read at a level that will help them succeed in school and eventually the workforce. Students that feel through the cracks in their elementary years need the extra help in their secondary education to be able to comprehend complex material, increase vocabulary and develop strong study skills. We need to focus on the fact that we (as teachers) will work with middle and high school students who are unable to read and comprehend text, but it’s not too late for them to start. Content teachers can create learning environments where students are expected to use all forms of academics (reading, writing, problem solving, conducting research, experiments, etc.) in the content areas. The difficult part is that many secondary schools do not have curriculum that adequately supports literacy development. So what can we do as teachers to support our students?
ReplyDeleteTeach the students effective reading and studying strategies for when they are not in class. The teacher cannot always be next to the struggling student, but if that student has the resources he or she needs to practice at home, the chance of improvement is high. Ian asked the question, “What is an appropriate percentage of class time working on literacy?” He then went on to discuss if teaching literacy should be calculable or integrated. My opinion? Integrated. Do you guys remember last year when we spoke (I think with Dr. Dahlman) about what literacy means and how MANY things have literacy? I was about to say that almost every aspect of school should have literacy integrated, but then I stepped back to think about Karin and Ian. However, I don’t think that step back was needed, because literacy CAN be incorporated into visual arts. Correct me if I’m wrong (obviously haven’t had an art class since high school), but don’t students learn about the history, meaning and why something looks the way it does when learning about visual arts? Those are literacy skills that can be incorporated into your classroom! Many of our students (mine being ESL) will differ and I think you two (Ian and Karin
) need to take those struggling literacy students who are SUPER interested in art and teach them why literacy is crucial by tying it in with their artistic interests.
I found this PDF http://www.reading.org/Libraries/position-statements-and-resolutions/ps1052_supporting.pdf that is basically a brochure of information on supporting young adolescents literacy learning. I found it to be helpful, for it states recommendations for not only teachers, but also policy makers, individuals in the community and families. The dropping rates of literacy is a national issue and should not be looked at on an individual basis, but as our society/community as a whole.
I think there's this stigma that art teachers have no interest in bringing "literacy" into the classroom. We do it constantly, and I easily demonstrate how every lesson I've taught since I've started school at MNSU has incorporated reading, understanding written language, and all of the "traditional" components of literacy, in less traditional ways. I think the part we're constantly defending, is that in the art room, literacy often takes on a less traditional form. Of course there's reading comprehension, and verbal literacy is crucial for critique, analysis, and communication. Students who struggle with literacy in it's traditional sense (reading, writing, and speaking language) have the opportunity to explore different elements of literacy in the art room. Problem solving, critical thinking, and communication are crucial in art class and naturally built into the discipline; all of these skills relate directly to literacy. In no way do we think we're "excused" from incorporating reading and writing into our curriculum, we just incorporate it using more alternative methods that may not seem so obvious right away.
DeleteThat's so great Karin! Thanks for sharing your experiences with literacy! Sometimes it's hard to think about literacy apart from sitting down at a desk with pencil and paper. I love that you brought up problem solving, critical thinking and communication as being crucial aspects in the art classroom. These are such important skills, and what a better place to learn them then the art room! I felt that I caught myself mid-post, realizing how art incorporates literacy in many ways and I appreciate that you expanded even further.
DeleteYou mentioned the inability of secondary students to read at the required level and that it is not too late for them to start learning. I agree wholeheartedly. Unfortunately, I think a lot of people (teachers, administrators, parents, the public at large) believe those students should be left by the wayside. These people think, "If they didn't get it in elementary then we shouldn't waste our time and resources on a lost cause."
DeleteI can imagine ESL teachers probably get a lot of flak from other staff/the public for "hand holding" when the ESL teacher is actually using the necessary and appropriate tools/methods to meet their student's needs. I feel this pressure especially being in art, as I think the general attitude is that it's a joke class. Have you experienced or do you think this opposition to literacy instruction exists?
Regarding Molly's comments on art and literacy, the two are absolutely related. Karin brought up some good points so I won't go into much detail as I'll probably just end up rewording what she already said. I want to make it clear that while I am an advocate for multiple kinds of literacy that doesn't mean I don't value the spoken/written word kind. My defense of visual literacy (from the first day of class) was more about the need to broaden our perceptions of literacy, not ignore non-visual types in the art room. Reading and writing is, and should be, a part of the art curriculum and anyone who says it isn't a possibility is full of it.
I think the reason it's assumed reading and writing can't be involved in visual arts is because a lot of time it isn't. In my experience, the "old guard" moves away from reading and writing in the art room because they believe they get enough of that in the regular classrooms. They don't have time to "make things" in their rooms so those teachers think that should be all their students do in the art room. However, art isn't just about "making things" is isn't a craft class. The point of making things is in its relation to larger concepts. Reading and writing inform and support those very same concepts. Thinking like that, it is detrimental to not have reading and writing be a part of art curriculum.
This is a response to Molly’s post, but it started when I read Ian’s first post and was reinforced when I read Karin and Ian’s take on literacy in the art classroom. Personally, I think that while literacy is specific to each content area, they are all part of the same whole, like pieces of a pie or a color wheel; they contribute to a well-rounded and complete person.
DeleteEach content area has its own specific vocabulary and concepts, like the visual culture that Karin has described for us in one of our other tasks for this week. However, when our students develop literacy (and knowledge, skills, and abilities) in one content area, it can only contribute to their development in other areas. Sure, it can be confusing at times, especially with regard to vocabulary (consider talking about “throwing” in ceramics versus phy ed), but ultimately our students will be the better for it.
It reminds me of the concept of a “renaissance (wo)man,” which was this notion, back in the day (the Renaissance, of course) of a person who was well-read and knowledgeable in all the different disciplines that there were: art, philosophy, economics, theology, etc. Although it’s arguably impossible to be an expert in all of these areas nowadays, we really are trying to help our students become modern day Renaissance men and women. They will be jacks- and jills-of-all-trades, without that silly “master of none” baggage that people always through in.
*throw in.
DeleteEngliiissshhh!! (shakes fist)
For Chapter 1, Ian wrote about the time spent on literacy education, and asked whether the time should be so separately distinct, or if it should be integrated into the whole. Regarding the strategies, he asked if we would use any of them. Regarding IT, he reminded us of the conversations we had in Marty’s class about how our jobs have changed from being the source of information to guiding students to information, and how we need to help them assess the reputability of the information they find online. He asked whether that makes our jobs harder or easier now. He pointed out that students have a lot of background knowledge in IT already, so that helps, and he also noted how much the world of tech has changed since the sources cited in the book were published. Finally, he asked if we found anything specific to our content areas, and how confident we felt about teaching literacy.
ReplyDeleteFor chapter 2, Ian explained how the authors described literacy as specific to each content area, and asked our opinions on whether we agreed with this notion. Ian asked what components of literacy were specifically difficult for us, as well as for students in our content areas. Finally, he asked how we felt about literacy in our content areas, and if we have a better understanding of it now.
In her response regarding the first chapter, Karin noted that technology makes our jobs more challenging, because we need to separate the good information and resources from the bad. She noted the importance of explicit instruction for teaching reading strategies, and providing clear instructions and guidelines for students. She also noted the importance of modeling when providing instruction and strategies, and helping students make meaningful connections to the instruction and content, so they can process the new information and access it when needed in the future.
In her response for the second chapter, Karin discussed the importance of using effective language in communicating with students, referring to a curious example in the text. She stated that it is necessary to use proper phrasing and lines of inquiry to get students to engage and respond appropriately. She described strategies that help students to better develop a personal connection to the visual culture that is so important in her discipline, as well as strategies that help students to understand a task or a concept in art before they are presented with it. Finally, she noted that she has a better understanding of literacy and language now, especially with respect to the importance of language and communication in the classroom, as well as the importance of choosing the right instructional materials.
In her illumination, Molly stated that we will be working with students across the spectrum of literacy skills. Some students will be struggling, needing remedial help, others will be at or above grade level. To reach them all, she stated we need to work to provide them the skills to read and learn independently, so they can take their skills beyond our classrooms into other classrooms and outside the school into their personal and eventual academic and professional lives. In an answer to Ian’s question whether literacy should be distinct or integrated, Molly stated it should be an integrated aspect of curriculum and instruction, as that makes for a stronger whole and a more educated student.