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 One
ReplyDeleteThis chapter covers a lot of the research and data on adolescent literacy: reading comprehension strategies and models, and instructional strategies and developments. The chapter begins by covering a few facts and observations such those who drop out of high school are more prone to lack basic literacy skills and studies show that comprehension scores too often do not increase as curriculum text becomes more complicated. With statistics showing teachers are averaging only 3% of instruction time on students’ comprehension of text; it is obvious that methods addressing literacy being used and taught in the classroom need to be reconsidered. On top of this educators are need to spend more quality instruction time on reading methods and comprehension – especially considering so much of what we learn in school is done through the process of reading.
Words used in disciplinary texts can be difficult for two reasons; 1) Words used in everyday language have specialized meaning in disciplinary texts. 2) Disciplinary text contains highly specialized texts relevant to that specific discipline. This chapter lists a few tactics for teaches to help students with reading comprehension:
1) Early readers need more exposure to expository tests. They also should learn how to deconstruct and paraphrase sentences.
2) Teachers should provide students with requisite prior knowledge to read dense text.
3) Students need to learn how to interact with text – noting important headings, subheadings, confusing or surprising information, important terms, etc.
4) Teachers need to provide adequate scaffolding for effective comprehension.
These suggested tactics are reiterated in study after study where different models of effective literacy comprehension methods are implemented into a learning environment and student outcomes are measured against students using tradition learning methods. Effective literacy comprehension strategies – determining importance, summarizing, making inference (applying previous knowledge), student-generated questions, and comprehension monitoring (knowing when one is understanding and not understanding text and taking action) – are needed to be taught inside the classroom in all areas of curriculum. Different successful instructional models have been developed to guide teachers in teaching this process. One example has the teacher demonstrate the reading process to students – a method known as guided practice. Through this process the teacher also helps students activate their prior knowledge. It is important to point out the difference between reading strategy and instructional strategy because teachers have confused the two in the past. It is important for students to learn and understand reading strategies, not instructional method in which that strategy is taught. Studies show that instructional strategies such as Reciprocal Teaching drastically effects student reading comprehension for the better. Studies also show that high and low functioning students need to have and improve with learning goals, interesting texts, opportunities for collaboration, along with strategy knowledge – CORI.
cont...
ReplyDeleteThis chapter also touches on some issues surrounding digital literacy. With digital literacy students are able to have more choice in navigational path allowing for a more personal reading experience. However, without having clear goals, it is easy for a student to get lost in the text. Students must also be able to be more analytical and critical of the material they can find online – the resources can be much less reliable than those form school textbooks.
The most important information I walked away with from this chapter was the emphasis put on creating rich discussion inside the classroom in order to support the dense curriculum text students will have to read. This discussion needs to include embedded instruction that asks students questions that force them to pull on prior knowledge, envision the text they read, and make inferences about text comments – these questions should force the student to grapple with the text.
Chapter 2
This chapter begins by explaining the drastic difference between literacy construction in elementary and secondary classes, and how this is a major source of reading difficulties for secondary students. This difference is not only apparent in the parallels of the individual curriculum, but in the comparisons of the different subject areas and how they relate (and don’t relate) to one another. There is also discussion on how language is a principle resource for making meaning. I’ve heard other school of thoughts take that argument even further and claim language is the most important element in developing deeper meaning and understanding – with language thought is allowed to develop and take form. Although a part of me agrees with this, as a visual artist I can’t help but wonder if this is an over-statement. Nonetheless, it is obvious language plays a key role in meaning, and therefore literacy plays a key role in learning.
As this chapter carries on giving examples of literacy differences between elementary and secondary and explains the technicalities of secondary literacy comprehension requirements I can’t help but see a disconnect between the scaffolding teachers are told to offer students inside the classroom, and the lack of that same scaffolding when it comes to the levels of literacy we present to students from elementary to secondary. It is apparent that the transition from elementary to secondary is missing a few steps, and therefore fails to allow the student to continue with the scaffolding methods taught to them.
I could go into a little rant about how this chapter mentions nothing about the visual arts and the role of literacy in this subject area(as a matter of fact, from looking in the glossary, visual arts is not mentioned much at all). But I won’t because the real problem with the lack of visual arts in this discussion is its inability to link visual concepts and understanding with literacy. For example, the text discusses the importance of rich discussion to back up difficult literacy, but forgets the importance of strong visual cues and discussion that can occur around visual imagery to enhance ones knowledge base that in return, as the text stresses, can overall increase literacy comprehension. I think this lack of holistic/dialectical thinking is consistent in our evaluations of academic issues – especially when we are focusing on one specific topic such as literacy. We forget just how connected all areas of academia are, and we are so focused on core curriculum we forget how different learners use different areas of academia to make sense of others.
Laura made a lot of good points here, so as the responder I’m going to try to focus on a few of the main points.
DeleteFrom Chapter One - Disciplinary text (and any academic text) can be difficult for students to comprehend, so we as teachers need to spend time on teaching reading methods and checking for comprehension through scaffolding.
The reading offers a lot of good examples of methods to use to do this more effectively, so I will offer another from my own experience. In the AVID program, part of what the students learn is how to take more effective notes in order to gain more understanding from their readings which in turn helps them better understand the overall content. This is especially important with disciplinary texts that may offer different literary meanings depending on the content area. The process we teach is known as Cornell notes (it was originally created through a study done at Cornell University). In this process, students take notes while they are reading text or listening to instruction. The notes are split into two separate columns with a footer on the bottom. These notes focus on main ideas and key words and then after the student is done, they “chunk” similar concepts together and on the left hand column create an “essential question” that each chunk helps to answer. The go back through their notes, highlighting key words or concepts and also putting question marks by any point of confusion they still have about the text. In the footer, they then write a summary of what they have gone over, in their own words, along with any questions so that they have a clear point of confusion question to bring to tutorials or back to their teacher. They are told to go over these notes about 10 times in total between the time they take the notes and when they are expected to show understanding (i.e. on an assessment/test/quiz). This note-taking strategy helps to incorporate some of the literacy strategies mentioned in the book as well as giving us as teachers a more focused idea of where our students are struggling to understand concepts.
From Chapter Two – There is a big jump in literacy construction between elementary and secondary.
I saw this first-hand as a student, as I’m sure almost all of us did. So how can we learn from that experience in order to break the cycle as teachers? I think it comes down to communication – with each other and with our students. First, we as teachers need to have conversations about this between the different grade levels to make sure that we are doing the best we can to give our students an opportunity to learn. This goes back to discussions we have had about differentiated learning and figuring out how each of our students learns best. As Laura mentioned, this may mean we need to incorporate visual aspects into our lesson, but it may also mean offering more group discussions, more time for individual research topics, or more projects that relate to the “real world” (everyday life). For a visual learner like me, reading/literacy is only part of the puzzle. Being able to see and touch something helps complete that puzzle and gives me a better understanding of a concept (more than words can do on their own). This is why it is important for us to also communicate with our students more, to get a better idea of what they know or what they can explain, so that we can determine what they are still missing or what they need help with. This ties back to the first chapter, but in chapter two we see that it is an issue that won’t get any better if we are unable to bridge the gap in literary understanding from elementary to secondary.
I'm so glad you brought up AVID - I did AVID tutoring for one semester at the beginning of KSP. I love the focus on the "point of confusion" this program highlights. It occurred to me while doing this program that you have to teach students to figure out what they don't know. It doesn't work for a student to simply say I don't understand -they have to know what they don't understand so they can ask the right questions when getting help. It seems sorta simple, but it's really not for some people.
DeleteIn Chapter One of Adolescent Literacy and the Academic Disciplines,
ReplyDeletewe are introduced to the many challenges adolescents are faced with in reading disciplinary texts. The chapter opens with comparative statistics around literacy scores in the past twenty years. The lack of teaching around comprehension seemed to be the underlying reason for the plummet in the scores, spurring researchers to find some answers for how to better understand how adolescents learn from text. As students advance in education, the texts grow more and more advanced, more differentiated with elite and specified vocabulary that is not readily grasped. “Disciplinary texts can be daunting to adolescents because of the impersonal and authoritarian tone taken by the authors in order to lend credibility and an objective stance to their texts.” (p. 3) Chapter One then dives into an array of instructional strategies that have evolved to support student comprehension. Chapter two takes us into a view of what happens when students cross from elementary to secondary reading texts. Language accelerates and vocabulary takes a big leap in complexity. Language construction in secondary texts differentiating greatly from those found in elementary texts can throw students into a tailspin, finding themselves to be unable to grasp the meaning of the content, and shutting down from the discipline altogether.
In reading these chapters, what comes to mind for me personally is sitting in my PLC (professional learning community) at the school where I teach. I am in an ELA (English Langue Arts) PLC and sit for an hour each week hearing about the struggles our middle schoolers are having with comprehension. I know that this comprehension is across the board, in other disciplines, too. Teachers are frustrated, they feel their hands are tied. They are being forced to teach FI (focused instruction) on a certain timeline, but can see clearly that the students are not learning nor retaining information on the timeline on which they are being asked to teach. Weekly, I hear of their frustrations, and unfortunately, their attitudes does often (though not always) spill over onto a perception of our students being “unable to learn.” This is what concerns me the most. If teachers are indirectly blaming the students for the lack of “proper pacing” how can the students possibly learn? In my own discipline, Theatre I find that students in a school setting need all the support possible as mentioned in Chapter One to develop an accurate understanding of a story we are working on in a scripted version for a production. Often, students get stuck in the view of their character’s point of view only (which does have some value) and are unable to comprehend the overarching purpose and plot of the story.
Breaking down text into bite sized pieces and using reading strategies that are explicitly modeled for students in a small group setting where they can ask participate freely, asking questions and offering ideas is the beginning of seeing growth in the comprehension break down.
When you mention the frustration you see in the PLC I can't help but think of some of the things I see with the teachers at the high school I am placed at. It seems when an overabundance of stressed is place into an environment decay begins to set in - a sort of destructive mentality that gets tossed around from all those being placed under stress. You can see this sort of thing happen really anywhere when extreme conditions set in. I'm seeing over-stressed educators + classrooms full of nearly 40 stressed students + a lack of support and materials = volatile environment in which learning is difficult. Then the question becomes, who do we reasonably hold accountable?
ReplyDeleteDon't get me wrong - I see amazing educators and students doing amazing things, but the darker side is definitely there and how do address it - because it has to be addressed, right!? How do we make sure we aren't beating down our students and educators?
In Chapter 1, Laura and Jesse both pointed out the importance of understanding disciplinary text. Chapter 1 addressed the issues of the difficulty of disciplinary text along with provided a list of strategies for teachers to follow in order to provide the scaffolding for comprehension. It is also important to note the difference between Reading Strategies and Instructional strategies for both teacher and student. Nancy notes that the lack of teaching around comprehension seemed to be the result in the decreeing of (plummet) of scores which sparked the research.
ReplyDeleteJesse and Nancy both included their personal experience. Jesse commented on the AVID program where students leaner how to take more effective notes in order to gain more understanding of their reading using the process by “chunking” similar concepts together and by continuously recalling the notes they take to help develop questions that they can bring back to the teacher. Nancy notes that her ELA PLC are often discussing the struggles of comprehension from middle school students. However, Nancy believes that the teachers hands are tied as they are forced to teach on a certain timeline - (Nick: Maybe this timeline, and the importance that we put on standardized testing has caused this lack of comprehension that we are unable to catch up with…the more advanced the text comes, the more danger there is of creating a bigger gap in our student comprehension?)
In Chapter 2, Both Jesse and Laura note the drastic literacy jump from elementary to secondary classes. Jesse note that this is a shift that we could all potentially relate to and points out that this conversation needs to start with the teachers of the different grade levels. I can personally see how this conversation could be crucial to ensure a smooth transition between elementary and secondary school. Laura suggests that we use more visual aspects into the lessons, group discussions, and individual research topics that relate to the every day life. Again, this is fought with frustration as Nancy mentioned the fact that teachers are expected to use Forced Instructions.
After all 3 group members posts, I can only agree with each person from a personal understanding. All three members stressed the importance of creating the conversation not just between the teachers, but with the students. Taken from Laura’s last comment, We should put emphasis in creating a rich discussion inside the classroom to help support of the dense curriculum text that students have to read.
I wholeheartedly agree with your comment about creating the conversation between teachers as well as students. In my experience, letting kids "in on" on the process of how they are educated is critical to their learning. It's such a no brainer - but I believe an enormous leap away from traditional educational styles and it still lingers intensely in most public institutions. If teachers AND students are overly burdened, learning is either done out of an over-achieving mentality and one that is difficult to sustain or they will shut down and choose failure. The latter is dominantly the case at the school where I teach. I see too many students who could care less if they get an 'F.' It means nothing to them - they are that disconnected from their learning. I see teachers (not all but many) who are so disgusted at the system but equally so at their disgruntled students. The wall between them is so thick that learning does feel predominately forced down the throat. I believe the best place to start is to promote student engagement through open discussion and being willing to honestly hear student feedback and act upon it.
DeleteHaving an open discussion seems like it should be common sense, so why is it so difficult in practice?? What better way is there to figure out where and what a student is struggling with so that we can narrow our focus? Like I mentioned with AVID, students are forced to find their actual point of confusion instead of saying, "I don't get it," that is their responsibility. I think we also have a responsibility to do a fair and honest assessment to check for understanding, which gets back to the point that literacy is not necessarily the entire solution but may be part of a larger solution for students to gain full comprehension of a text or a lesson. Knowing this, and being open and honest, I feel benefits us and our students and may give them some of the incentive they need to care about their learning.
Delete