![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
The discussion with the literacy teacher
Oct. 21st, 2005 04:47 pmIt is her opinion that asking them to read something that is at their independent level (i.e. that they won't have to struggle with) for forty or fifty minutes a week is not going to hold them back or bore them significantly, considering that they will take other opportunities to read books that they choose, regardless of level. Asking them to do things with these books that they haven't done yet, such as book talks, book reports, etc, will still enhance their reading, even if the book is at or below their level.
At least two of the things she said don't add up in my mind. First, she said that independent reading was for having fun, reading books that they would not struggle with, maybe even reading books that were way below them, and for talking about and learning every little particle of language or content knowledge held within those books. Now, I don't know about the rest of you, but I read books that stretch my vocabulary and knowledge and still have fun with them, even if they're beyond my level. More important to this discussion, I always did. I don't see why my students can't do the same with books outside their level.
Second, she reminded me that oral language develops first, followed by reading, followed by writing. Most people talk more fluently than they read and read more fluently than they write - and pretty much all learners will do so. Then she went on to say that I should have my advanced kids work with their books at their levels until everything they produced and thought about that book was at an A level before moving them on.
Hold on a sec. Writing is generally behind reading, but I have to make them write at an A level about a book before I can let them move on from that book? Doesn't that mean the books they can write about at an A level are those that are BELOW their reading level? Their language output has to be very high before I can allow them to up their receptive language level? That doesn't mesh, somehow.
My feeling is that we're pushing the higher levels of Bloom's Taxonomy on these kids before their brains are ready for it. Most grade two kids aren't ready for much in the way of analysis; certainly not beyond a literal level. That's simple developmental psych. Most grade four kids are only starting to get there. Yet we have a curriculum and a teaching methodology that requires us to push high-level problem-solving on kids before the developmentally appropriate age to do so.
If research is driving our teaching, we missed a really big chunk of it somewhere.
I'm still not at all sure about this, and I'm still going to allow those kids to read whatever book they bring into class during that time.
At least two of the things she said don't add up in my mind. First, she said that independent reading was for having fun, reading books that they would not struggle with, maybe even reading books that were way below them, and for talking about and learning every little particle of language or content knowledge held within those books. Now, I don't know about the rest of you, but I read books that stretch my vocabulary and knowledge and still have fun with them, even if they're beyond my level. More important to this discussion, I always did. I don't see why my students can't do the same with books outside their level.
Second, she reminded me that oral language develops first, followed by reading, followed by writing. Most people talk more fluently than they read and read more fluently than they write - and pretty much all learners will do so. Then she went on to say that I should have my advanced kids work with their books at their levels until everything they produced and thought about that book was at an A level before moving them on.
Hold on a sec. Writing is generally behind reading, but I have to make them write at an A level about a book before I can let them move on from that book? Doesn't that mean the books they can write about at an A level are those that are BELOW their reading level? Their language output has to be very high before I can allow them to up their receptive language level? That doesn't mesh, somehow.
My feeling is that we're pushing the higher levels of Bloom's Taxonomy on these kids before their brains are ready for it. Most grade two kids aren't ready for much in the way of analysis; certainly not beyond a literal level. That's simple developmental psych. Most grade four kids are only starting to get there. Yet we have a curriculum and a teaching methodology that requires us to push high-level problem-solving on kids before the developmentally appropriate age to do so.
If research is driving our teaching, we missed a really big chunk of it somewhere.
I'm still not at all sure about this, and I'm still going to allow those kids to read whatever book they bring into class during that time.