Search This Blog

Saturday, July 30, 2016

Beliefs, Theories, and Practices

This summer, I have been enrolled in a reading specialist graduate class. Supervision and the Teaching of Reading is the most challenging course I have every taken, and that includes six and a half years of undergraduate work (hey, I kept changing my major, had a baby and then moved to a different state) and two and a half years of an already earned Masters of Education in Teaching. One of the biggest mental challenges was having to prepare a reflection paper on my literacy beliefs, supported with theory and practice. Who knew that there is more to beliefs in teaching other than breaking into a blood-curdling rendition of
?

After preparing my reflection, I definitely believe every teacher should have to go through this process every few years simply to be aware of their role in the classroom. Why are you there? What is it that you really want kids to learn from your content (and if you say TEKS or Common Core standards, POO!)? What are the experts in your field putting out there that is important for what you do? 

I do great deal of independent studying to be the best possible teacher, but I had never put any of that knowledge into a personal belief system - until now. So I share with you my reflections. They are lengthy, as I was heavily invested in this work, so I will not be insulted if you click off this blog post. But if anyone is interested or needs a springboard for their own work, I present to you my literacy beliefs (please don't plagiarize, but if you do, I will have to consider it an unknown compliment):



The AVID system defines all students as Academic Language Learners (ALL) (Bennett, Nagle, Scerrato, Castruita, & Platts, 2016). When we talk about reaching ALL students, we need to keep this definition in mind. Every student in every classroom is an Academic Language Learner, regardless of background. Although literacies in the 21st century are changing rapidly, many literacy definitions connect back to reading, writing, listening, speaking, and critical thinking. As literacy learners, ALL students are entitled to rigorous instruction within a premier educational setting that addresses reading, writing, listening, speaking, and critical thinking practices and routines in all areas of disciplinary study. The NCTE Guidelines on the Essentials for English state that literacy skills are lifelong processes that allow us to become self-sufficient, productive, and participatory communicators and thinkers. I believe that the components of literacy, including communication and thinking skills, fit into all content areas and should be emphasized just as much as the content itself. Literacy is what builds thinking, and students need to be taught how to think critically about the world they live in. It is the responsibility of every teacher to provide opportunities to write and converse to build literacy skills and to do so through explicit instruction and modeling.
Writing is a vital component of literacy. In thirteen years of teaching, I have seen a decline in students’ ability to write, not just with proper grammar and sentence variety, but in their ability to put thoughts and ideas onto paper. Graham and Perrin state that “writing skill is a predictor of academic success and a basic requirement for participation in civic life and in the global economy” (2007), yet many students are struggling with basic writing proficiency. Because “poor writing should be recognized as an intrinsic part of this national literacy crisis” (Graham & Perrin), students need opportunities to write in all content areas to build and enhance their critical thinking capabilities in addition to reading comprehension and writing literacy skills.
According to Graves, “‘Children want to write’” (2004), but Applebee and Langer say that “...the overall amount of time devoted to writing remains distressingly low” (2011). This is distressing because the consensus among many is that writing is an act of making sense of our learning and showing our thinking (Albers, 2014; Graves, 2004; Fountas & Pinnell, 2006; Kidd & Burns, 2014; Murray, 2007; Schmoker, 2007).  Students need to be writing as often as possible for these reasons. Graves suggests a minimum of three days; Albers, Steineke, and Kidd and Burns suggest daily writing in all classes. Whether through informal assignments such as reflections, learning logs, and exit tickets, or formal assignments such as short essays and research papers, students have the ability to create physical evidence of their thinking by putting their thoughts on paper. Brooks-Yip, Andrew-Vaughn, Grant, Conklin, Putnam, and Kwok describe shorter writing assignments as writing-to-learn tasks that allow students to focus on their thinking regarding the content and “to reason, to problem solve, and to comprehend disciplinary problems” (2016). With numerous classes per day, students are being asked to take in and remember large quantities of information. By putting thinking into words on paper, students have the opportunity to look back upon those ideas to review and to reflect upon the learning, and in turn, “have a better chance of remembering that material than by just listening or reading” (Kidd & Burns).
In addition to creating a record of their thinking, students need chances to engage in extended writing. When students have more formal opportunities to write, they are building their writing proficiency by practicing conventions (Graves) that will improve their abilities to communicate in writing, regardless of the content area. Grammatical elements are important for improving writing proficiency, but as noted in the observations of my own teaching, students often struggle to get ideas on paper. Thompson noted that when teachers focus too heavily on grammar, the quality of the work decreases (2011). Exposure to authentic texts provides students with models of good writing and provides them with content from which to develop their own extended writing assignments. Using text as a springboard for extended writing helps students “explore ideas or develop arguments in depth” (Applebee & Langer, 2009) and refine “critical reasoning capacities even further” (Schmoker).
Writing in classes is for more than thinking, however. Sharan and Fullan posit that “...knowing how to write is powerful evidence of knowing how to read” (2009), and Bean states that “...evidence indicates that writing promotes ability in reading” (2014). It has been established that writing puts thinking into the written word. By writing about reading, students have the ability to make sense of their texts, regardless of the content. Writing in response to text “incorporates both the thinking readers do as they read and the ability to compose text in a way that both captures and furthers that thinking” (Serravallo, 2015). Initial writing in response may include reflections, connections to the text, notes to keep track of the information, or summaries. This thinking can then be developed further into extended writing that deepens reading comprehension as “...it provides students with a tool for visibly and permanently recording, connecting, analyzing, personalizing, and manipulating key ideas in text” (Graham & Herbert, 2010).
Literacy acquisition is also enhanced through the explicit instruction and modeling of literacy skills in all content areas.  Particularly in secondary education where classes become more isolated from one another, teachers are focused on the content presented in the Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills (TEKS) and not necessarily the literacy skills needed to support the TEKS.
“If we want students consistently using the language of math, science, or any other content in their active listening, daily speaking, reading, and writing, then we must ensure that they acquire academic language and literacy. That happens through explicit instruction in language functions as they relate to the content, through learning and then using precise vocabulary, through reading rigorous texts, through writing to express complex thought and ideas, and through engaging in rich academic discussions” (Bennett, Nagle, Scerrato, Castruita, & Platts, 2016).

Content area teachers need to understand that students do not come along pre-packaged with those skills. They need to understand that students need to be shown how to think in order to become thinkers. Students need strategies. Ogle expresses that teachers need to provide specific strategies that help students think about the content they are focusing upon and teach them to think deeply about those strategies (D’Arcangelo, 2002), and Beers notes that “we’ve got to be very direct and explicit in strategy instruction” (2003). This includes integrating modeled reading and writing practices and routines (Holloway, 2002), “direct explicit demonstrations of the cognitive strategies” (Allington, 2002), and the teaching of how to “read and write and communicate like mathematicians, historians, scientists, literary critics, and educated members of society” (Heller, nd).
Teachers also have to be aware of the unique literacy challenges their content presents to students and present and model strategies that assist with literacy acquisition, many of which are cross-curricular. “During whole-class instruction, teachers model behaviors, skills, and strategies that they expect to see from their students...this modeling is based on an established purpose and provides students with a mental model for completing tasks they will encounter in another phase of instruction” (Fisher, Frey, & Rothenberg, 2008).  Beginning with steps like previewing the text allows students to see how more proficient readers acquaint themselves with unfamiliar readings. Teachers can demonstrate their thinking with graphic organizers or Thinking Maps. Marking the Text strategies help students learn how to identify important aspects of the text. Modeling writing furnishes students with a visual of what is expected from them. “...how can middle and high school students learn the strategies…” (National Association of Secondary School Principals, 2005) if we, the teachers, do now show them what those strategies are and how to use them?
According to Joellen Killion, forms of literacy other than reading have been neglected in the national focus (2003), but that does not make them any less important. “Reading, writing, and oral language instruction must be integrated” (Fisher & Frey, 2007) to give ALL students an adequate literacy foundation to function in life outside of school. Today’s generation of children is living in a world of constant communication, much of which is not taking place orally. Guided practice in academic conversations helps students to develop speaking, listening, and critical thinking skills that will help them communicate effectively in the world at large.
In many classrooms, students only have opportunities to speak one at a time and in response to a teacher question. This practice disengages other students and limits “the amount of time each student gets to talk (Zwiers & crawford, 2009). Anyone who stands in the classroom long enough doing nothing but lecturing is likely to notice students tuning out. Discussion brings about engagement. Allowing students to take part in guided, collaborative conversations assists them in “processing new content and concepts”, and just like writing, “[c]onversation helps immensely when processing new content and concepts” (Alber). Talking to others means students have opportunities to clear up misconceptions, ask questions, and develop broader views. Ketch says,
“Conversation helps individuals make sense of their world. It helps to build empathy, understanding, respect for different opinions, and ownership of the learning process. It helps students sort out their ideas of the world and begin to understand how they fit into it. Used as a connection to cognitive strategies, conversation fosters comprehension acquisition” (2005).
Oral conversations also benefit teachers immensely by allowing them to hear what their students are thinking. Regardless of content, teachers are able to incorporate speaking sentence stems into lessons that model and teach more formal conversational skills to students.Less formal conversations can take place through Think-Pair-Share and small group discussions. As speaking, listening, and critical thinking skills develop, teachers can try out Socratic Seminars and Philosophical Chairs to engage students in more rigorous conversations. In these discussion formats, formative assessment can occur quickly and immediate feedback provided to correct misconceptions in learning.
All of these elements of literacy are not independent of one another. Graves asserts that research shows that we currently underestimate what students are capable of doing and that it is possible to raise expectations (2004). We must challenge students to consciously read, write, listen, and speak, as they develop critical thinking skills that we know they will need to make sense of the world and all the information they receive on a daily basis. We must make conscious decisions to incorporate all elements of literacy into every content area classroom and to show our students how to think.






Resources
Alber, R. (2014, January 15). How important is teaching literacy in all content areas? [Web blog post]. Retrieved July 4, 2016, from http://www.edutopia.org/blog/literacy-instruction-across-curriculum-importance
Allington, Richard. What I've learned about effective reading instruction from a decade of studying exemplary elementary classroom teachers. Phi Delta Kappan 83.10 (2002): 740-47. Print.  
Applebee, A. N., & Langer, J. A. (2011, July). A snapshot of writing instruction in middle schools and high schools. English Journal, 100(6), 14-27.
Applebee, A. N., & Langer, J. A. (2009, May). What is happening in the teaching of writing? English Journal, 98(5), 18-28.
Bean, Rita M. “Developing a comprehensive reading plan (pre-K - Grade 12)”. The Administration and Supervision of Reading Programs. Ed. Shelley B. Wepner, Dorothy S. Strickland, and Diana J. Quatroche. 5th ed. New York: Teachers College, 2014. 11-29. Print.
Beers, Kylene. When Kids Can't Read: What Teacher's Can Do. Portsmouth: Heinemann, 2003. Print.
Bennett, S., Nagle, J., Scerrato, A., Castruita, J., & Platts, K. (2016). AVID Academic Language and Literacy: A Schoolwide Approach. San Diego, CA: AVID Press.
Brooks-Yip, Melissa, Sarah Andrew-Vaughan, Aimee Grant, Heather Conklin, Daw Putnam, and Michelle Kwok. "Content area collaboration: How teachers can work together this school year to improve student writing." Literacy Today July-Aug. 2015: 12-13. Print.
D'Arcangelo, M. (2002, November). The challenge of content-area reading: A conversation with Donna Ogle. Educational Leadership, 60(3), 12-15.
Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2007). Implementing a schoolwide literacy framework: Improving achievement in an urban elementary school. The Reading Teacher, 61(1), 32-43. doi:10.1598/rt.61.1.4
Fountas, I. C., & Pinnell, G. S. (2006). Teaching for comprehending and fluency: Thinking, talking, and writing about reading, K-8. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.  
Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). Writing next: Effective strategies to improve writing of adolescents in middle and high schools. Washington, D.C.: Alliance for Excellent Education.
Graham, S., & Hebert, M. (2010). Writing to read: Evidence for how writing can improve reading. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.
Graves, D. (2004, November). What I've learned from teachers of writing. Language Arts, 82(2), 88-94. doi:https://pwpresearch.wikispaces.com/file/view/What I have learned from Teachers - Graves.pdf  
Guideline on the Essentials of English. (n.d.). Retrieved July 23, 2016, from http://www.ncte.org/positions/statements/essentialsofenglish
Heller, Rafael, Ph.D. "All about adolescent literacy." Teaching reading and writing in the content areas. AdLit.org, n.d. Web. 12 July 2016.
Holloway, J. H. (2002, November). Research link/Integrating literacy with content. Educational leadership, 60(3), 87-88. Retrieved July 5, 2016, from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/nov02/vol60/num03/Integrating-Literacy-with-Content.aspx
Jacobs, V. (2002, November). Reading, writing, and understanding. Educational leadership, 60(3), 58-61. Retrieved July 5, 2016, from http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/nov02/vol60/num03/Reading,-Writing,-and-Understanding.aspx
Ketch, Ann. "Conversation: The comprehension connection." The reading teacher 59.1 (2005): 8-13. Print.
Kidd, Julie K., and M. Susan Burns. "Promoting writing with reading and learning." The administration and supervision of reading programs. 5th ed. New York: Teachers College, 2014. 167-79. Print.
Murray, Donald M. "Teach writing your way." Adolescent literacy: Turning promise into practice. Ed. Kylene Beers, Robert E. Probst, and Linda Rief. Portsmouth: Heinemann, 2007. 179-187. Print.
National Association of Secondary School Principals. Creating a culture of literacy: A guide for middle and high school principals - Executive summary. (2005). Retrieved July 5, 2016, from http://www.pdst.ie/sites/default/files/Creatingacultureofliteracy.pdf
Schmoker, M. (2007). Radically redefining literacy instruction: An immense opportunity. Phi Delta Kappan, 88(7), 488-493. doi:10.1177/003172170708800705
Serravallo, J. (2015). The reading strategies book: Your everything guide to developing skilled readers. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Sharratt, L., & Fullan, M. (2009). Realization: The change imperative for deepening district-wide reform. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Steineke, N. (2016, May/June). Writing about our reading: Strategies for increasing engagement through reading and writing. Literacy Today, 33(6), 32-33.
Thompson, C. L. A dose of writing reality: Helping students become better writers. Phi Delta Kappan 92.7 (2011): 57-61. Print.   
Zwiers, Jeff. "Developing the language of thinking." Educational leadership 65 (2008): n. pag. Print. Online only.
Zwiers, Jeff, and Marie Crawford. "How to start academic conversations." Educational leadership 66.7 (2009): n. pag. Print.

Wednesday, June 29, 2016

Kernel Essays and Source Documents: Tutoring D. - Part 2

In the month that I have been out of school, I have had five full days of professional development, including a day and a half of focused writing PD. I had the opportunity to attend a session with Stephen and Kayla Briseno, who work with Gretchen Bernabei, as they presented information from Text Structures from the Masters (you can find sample lessons here). 

I immediately knew that I was going to incorporate this information into my lessons for next year (I have attended a  Gretchen Bernabei before, and I love everything she creates). The lessons tie together writing with cross-curricular critical reading and analysis. Tutoring this summer has given me a guinea pig. Since D. has not been in public school for four years, he is the perfect learner to experiment with. 

Today we completed Lesson 17: Tour of an Unfamiliar Place.  We meet at one of our public library branches, a new place for D. to frequent. I had him take a tour of the library on his own, getting a feel for the environment. When he sat back down with me, we discussed the kernel essay. Taking a page from the Brisenos, we began by discussing what a kernel is. D. did have some confusion about colonel versus kernel, providing us with an opportunity to addressed frequently confused words.We then walked through each kernel, allowing D. to write a short essay: 


Our next step was to read the source document "Factory Life" from 1846:
  • I am not a history teacher, but we discussed what source documents are and why they are important. 
  • For our first read, I had D. read to me, as I am trying to help him find some confidence in his voice as he prepares to enter high school. 
  • For our second read, I had D. identify words that he was unfamiliar with. Due to the age of the document, I was expecting him to identify far more words than he did. I was not expecting him to know the meaning of loom or din, but he had those down. Atrocious and retirement were a bit more of a struggle. 
  • We walked through the passage line by line to paraphrase to show understanding (that's pretty easy when it's one-on-one). 
  • Our last step was to go back to the kernel essay pieces and identify them within the passage.
 As a whole, I was quite pleased with the practice-round lesson. This August, we will have a back-to-school camp for incoming seventh graders at my school. I am going to use this same passage with them, as the middle school will be a new environment that we can tour and write about. I plan to modify my steps for partner work with the reading to include some collaboration and allow the students to start building some new relationships. I have also shared this with a new seventh grade English teacher and an eighth grade history teacher, both of whom see opportunities for reading and writing opportunities in their classrooms with these materials. 

If you have used these before, share your successes. If not, how can you use these in your classroom?  

Tuesday, June 21, 2016

Tutoring D. - Session 1

As I am working on my reading specialist certification, I have been given the opportunity to tutor a young man this summer. There are extreme circumstances as to how this has come about. In addition, this young man has been homeschooled for many years and is now preparing to enter public high school next year. He has missed most of the fiasco known as STAAR testing, yet he will be entering into its chaos. 

Today we met at the public library. I choose this location because of the availability of resources for all content areas. I know that background knowledge is an issue for kids who have been in public schools since the began their educational careers. How does one help bridge that gap with a student who has been out of that environment for years? My solution - books for kids! 

One of the reasons I participate in the Twitter #bookaday challenge is for the opportunity to learn news things in a simple format. Trade books and children's nonfiction provide lots of information to provide an introduction to events, history, cultures, information, and stories. 

We started our first session with discussing elements of characterization, protagonist, antagonist, and dialogue, using resources from Read Write Think regarding the use of picture books in teaching these elements. To this, I added a Tree Map (Thinking Map) to categorize elements of characterization. 



I read Ella Sarah Gets Dressed to D. Initially, he looked at me like I was crazy for pulling out a little kid book to teach to him, but he warmed up to the idea (although I did have to cover up the page where Ella is in her underwear). We went page by page, discussing the pictures in association with the text, the differences in repeated text (capitalization, punctuation), and how Ella was being characterized. D. was able to make inferences without much prompting, and he showed that he possesses a strong vocabulary with the words he used to describe Ella. He also started discussing theme without my even mentioning it, so we added it to the Thinking Map.




 As a follow-up, I had him choose another trade book to read to me, walking me through the same process. He ended up choosing a book written in verse, allowing us to continue our discussion, as well as discuss some elements of poetry (line, stanza).



Although the focus of our session today was reading comprehension with fiction, we also practiced a bit of grammar to feel out what D. does and does not know. [I taught him the importance of the Oxford comma, preaching not to listen to the naysayers who feel it is no longer necessary.] I followed this up by asking him to write a short passage for me to get a feel for his writing skills, and he automatically employed a few of the elements we had discussed. He truly impressed me by adding a nonrestrictive clause to explanation of why anime is more appealing to watch than other types of TV programming. 

I have never tutored anyone before in this capacity, and I have to admit that I am also using him to try out some things to take back to my classroom next year. Ella Sarah Gets Dressed is most definitely coming back to class with me in the fall, and D. is definitely going to be rock star in high school with his knowledge of the Oxford Comma. 

Monday, May 16, 2016

Go Fund Me Campaign for Colleague

I have never used my blog for a purpose such as this, but as I am sure most educators can attest to, our colleagues are families. A woman I have worked with for thirteen years is dealing with a family emergency and is not on unpaid leave in order to deal with it. This is not a situation I would wish upon anyone. Please consider making a donation (even small one counts and giving up one frappe is not the end of the world).



Tuesday, May 3, 2016

Which questions are the right questions?

This semester, my campus leadership team has been studying what types of questions teachers ask in the classroom and how they ask them. Members of the leadership team, including teachers, instructional coaches, and administrators, were tasked with conducting ten to fifteen-minute observations, counting the number and type of questions being asked: level one, level two, and/or level three. Our purpose has been to determine if teachers are asking higher-level rigorous questions and, in turn, if they are teaching students how to ask their own higher-level questions. 



Based on the data collected, the leadership team determined that our campus is far too focused on lower-level questions and not making our lessons rigorous enough for our students. A committee was organized from within the team to create a professional development training on creating and asking higher-level questions. This session will kick off our 2016-2017 school year. 

Throughout this process, I was in full agreement. Yes, yes, yes. We need to create more rigorous questions. We need to ask better questions. We need! We need! We need! In the observations I conducted of my colleagues, I only heard lower-level questions being asked, predominantly focused on basic recall. 

For the past three years, I have been responsible for teaching our eighth grade reading Student Success Initiative intervention class for those students who fail the first administration of our state exam. This year, based on the work with our leadership team, I decided to look at how my co-teacher and I question the students in this particular student population. 


First, we had to determine our purpose with the students:


from "Classroom Questioning" by Kathleen Cotten
In our planning, I became concerned about how we were going to address higher-level questions with a population of struggling readers. Students who fail the test tend to have basic reading deficiencies. Is asking them higher-level questions beneficial in helping them prepare for a retest? Is asking them higher-level questions without filling in the gaps beneficial to helping them pass a multiple-choice exam?



Upon moving into the intervention class, my co-teacher and I have focused heavily on lower-level questions. If someone comes to observe and count, there will be very few higher-level questions marked on the tally sheet. According to Cotton, "Lower cognitive questions are more effective than higher level questions with young...children, particularly the disadvantaged." Although my students are young teenagers, I work at a Title I school and am dealing with many student who are labeled At Risk. We decided that deliberately asking lower-level questions and scaffolding to higher-level questions would benefit the student population more than focusing on solely higher-level questions. Cotton says that when a classroom setting is appropriate for a higher number of lower-level questions, a "greater frequency of questions is positively related to student achievement."

So we have been slowly climbing the ladder to get where we need to be. For example, we have been moving through the following steps to help students understand main idea and improve their basic comprehension:
  • What is a main idea?
  • Where do we find the main idea?
  • What is the main idea in the paragraph?
  • What is the main idea of the passage?
  • How do we determine main idea in more complex text (ex., paragraphs that consist of one sentence)?
We are currently on day seven, and the kids have expressed that they feel like they are better understanding the texts they are reading. Although it has been a short period of time, we are seeing them contribute more to conversations and answer more questions correctly - while also explaining their thinking. Many are quickly becoming more confident on a daily basis, exclaiming that they are finding the correct answers much more quickly. 


In reading's Cotton's research, my thinking began to change about my school's focus on higher-level questions. "Higher cognitive questions are not categorically better than lower cognitive questions in eliciting higher level responses or in promoting learning gains." Yes, we need to move toward them, but if we skip from level one to level three questions without scaffolding along the way, how can we expect our struggling students to understand how to think about the higher-level questions when they are still stuck on the lower ones?

_________________________


Cotton, K. (1988, May). Classroom questioning. School Improvement Research Series SIRS. Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory. Retrieved September 16, 2008 from: http://www.nwrel.org/ scpd/sirs/3/cu5.html de Jesus, H. P., Almeida, P.,