Textbook Reading

September 26, 2010 at 8:19 pm | Posted in uncategorized | 2 Comments
Tags: ,

Posted by Jennifer Yu

In this GMST program, we are taught that traditional ways of teaching does not work. It doesn’t interest, engage, or motivate students to learn. Students aren’t retaining any of the information they are taught. Chapter three talks about how textbooks are hard to read, badly designed, and are inaccurate. Our inquiry textbook, Constructivism edited by Catherine T. Fosnot, there’s a chapter by von Glaserfeld (2005) who talks about “illusions of fixed meaning.” Students construct their own knowledge based on their perceptual and conceptual experience. When teachers teach out of a textbook, students don’t get the inquiry experience. They don’t get explore and investigate what they are interested in. They only get he experience of learning from a textbook. If they are solely taught with textbooks, that is the only experience that they can associate learning from, and that it is boring and irrelevant. Why should they care? I agree that we should not be teaching students out of the textbook. From my personal experience, textbooks were full of facts, nothing that I can connect to. I didn’t see the purpose of using textbooks, unless I was referencing something from it. We should engage students in more current reading, such as articles from magazines, newspaper, or from the internet. This way we are keeping the literature more current and relevant to the students.

In chapters 5 and 6, the book gives us examples of literacy techniques that can help students learn how to read better and we went over these techniques in class. These techniques focuses on the before, during, and after reading so that students understand the text. What I am trying to figure out is, are these reading activities part of the inquiry? It is not inquiry if we give students readings to practice reading techniques. Does it make it inquiry if I let my students chose their own reading? Are students constructing knowledge when we are teaching these reading strategies in the traditional way, where we are telling the students this is what you should do before reading, during reading and after reading? We are providing an opportunity for students to learn how to read content literature, but what about the students that are not struggling with reading? How are we keeping them engaged?

Who is Responsible for Literacy?

September 26, 2010 at 7:49 pm | Posted in uncategorized | 2 Comments
Tags:

Posted by Micah Moore

In this Literacy class, the majority of our time is devoted to going over various reading strategies teachers can employ to help students engage with whatever they are reading. There are all types of very useful strategies that can be used before, during, and after reading. But, when it all comes down to it the teacher seems to be the only one responsible for a student’s literacy after a certain point. If the student is having trouble reading, the teacher is often first to be blamed by the public. But, who else is responsible for that student’s literacy?

Donna Main of the Worchester County Times says in her article, Literacy is a shared community responsibility , that literacy is not just the responsibility of schools but the whole community. Main writes, “In fact, I believe that the success of our nation relies on strong reading skills, making literacy a shared responsibility for us all.” She talks about how a school in her area has very strong connections with the local libraries, and that they also participate in larger book clubs.

So I think as teachers, or future teachers, we should reach out and get the community involved with student literacy. Perhaps bringing up the overall community literacy will bring up student literacy levels as well. It would also give the community more of a stake in the education and literacy of young people in their community.

So my question is: What are some good ways of getting the community involved in student literacy? Are some ways more appropriate, or better than others?

Content Area Writing

September 26, 2010 at 7:43 pm | Posted in uncategorized | 1 Comment
Tags: ,

Posted by Lindsay Rusnak

My brother just started his freshman year at Villanova University. Last Tuesday, I got a text message asking me to proofread a paper for him. I ended up going through a five page paper from a class called “Traditions in Conversations.” Basically, it was a philosophy paper. Philosophy is not my area of expertise, but as a strong reader and writer, I was able to plow through it and make (hopefully) helpful contributions to his paper. Proof-reading his paper made me realize, that writing is every bit as important as reading within a content area. Writing is a main way of communication our thoughts. With this blog assignment, I wanted to focus on the idea that literacy is both reading and writing, but it seems to me that writing has fallen by the wayside in the world of text messages, Twitter, and Facebook statuses. As a Biology person, my writing assignments were always lab reports with a very strict protocol to follow. The reports remained similar throughout my education, just becoming more and more elaborate as time went on. I do not relish writing a lab report as when I got to college and my graduate work, my typical protocol was no longer applicable. However, I do believe that being able to express scientific thoughts in a cogent manner is critical to a science education.

Reading and Writing in the Science Classroom, although geared for an elementary school teacher, does give several relevant ideas that can be applied in a science classroom in high school. I’d like to call attention to the table in the article on science and communication skills. These skills rely on inferring, comparing and contrasting, experimenting, and drawing conclusions. The table introduces several key writing skills that can be addressed while developing these skills, such as outlining, creating lists and charts, and writing up experimental results. I think the article makes a good start at how to integrate content literacy into science, but I feel that it can be taken a step further. Integrating a lesson for students should almost always include some relevant written component. It is the struggle for the teachers to choose an appropriate assignment and offer the assistance needed to help students with their writing.

Connecting Reading and Writing has excellent resources for educators with a focus on writing resources. Many of them seem to focus on content literacy for an English teacher, but several of the links would be helpful to any teacher who wants to assign more than a lab report for their students to complete. There are many forms of writing that are appropriate in a science and/or the math classroom setting.

I was interrupted from writing this blog by a phone call from my sister. My sister was a math major in college, so I took the opportunity to grill her about her math writing. She told me the story of a paper that she wrote with a friend doing statistics on the prices of different grocery stores. She was very proud of the paper and ended up still using that information when grocery shopping. I was reminded that math is not just numbers and symbols, but is also words. I was actually surprised by how much math writing she did in college, but it seemed to me that she failed to do any of that kind of writing in high school. Students today are bombarded with a lot of work, but I think that it is worth it for students to do appropriate writing in all of their courses. Strengthening a student’s communication skills can only strengthen the student. Students need to be prepared with writing skills, not only for college, but for whatever path the students take as they walk out of our doors.

Where does science and/or math writing fall into the spectrum of literacy? If students are writing in other courses, is it acceptable to just focus on a lab report for the writing requirements in a science classroom? How does one “write” in mathematics? How can content area writing benefit our students, when we need to take so much time to work on content?

Are Schools Ready for e-Readers?

September 26, 2010 at 7:27 pm | Posted in uncategorized | 2 Comments
Tags: , ,

Posted by Maia VanBeuren

Harvey Daniels and Steven Zemelman’s Subjects Matter’s chapters on textbooks seem to mention the weight and cost as some of the biggest limitations of textbooks. The first thing that came into my mind was the use of e-readers as a possible solution to that. Now, it is likely that I thought of this because I have been debating whether or not to buy one for months now, but after some quick research, it seems that I am not alone in this consideration.

In fact, a school in Clearwater, Florida just outfitted over 2,000 students with Kindles that are personally tailored to their course load. Instead of having to carry around multiple textbooks, plus any paperbacks they are reading, they only have one electronic device.

So e-readers are lighter. What else can they do for students? Most of the information I found relates to Amazon’s Kindle , but I can imagine that other e-readers have similar features. With the Kindle, the user can make notes as they read, look up words in a built-in dictionary, highlight, share via a built-in integration with Twitter and Facebook, and have English text read aloud. It can be synced with up to four other devices, meaning that the user can pick up where they left off on their personal computer.

Also, as Cool Cat Teacher’s blog post points out, imagine being able to update textbooks without having to throw all the old books away.

A Science Daily article claims that an e-reader is engaging for students and make encourage even the least motivated readers to interact with text. And the reactions from the students in Clearwater are positive so far.

Not everyone who has tried using a Kindle academically has had a positive experience. Amazon’s pilot program with MBA students resulted in most students enjoying the Kindle for personal use, but preferred paper books for academic use . And keeping all those Kindles organized, identified, and located is a huge task for schools (as Cool Cat Teacher points out).

And that’s before you even get into challenges that I barely understand, such as pricing and availability, formatting for different devices, and other copyright issues.

However, considering Daniels and Zemelman’s claim that students today read too often from textbooks and would benefit from reading a variety of sources (such as books, newspapers, magazines, and websites) the perhaps there may be a place for an e-reader in schools. Teachers could still use a hands-on paper textbook in the classroom as a reference, but student could have an electronic copy to use as a reference at home as needed. It would also be a great way to include all these other sources of reading. Students would be able to write all the notes they wanted as they read, and the school wouldn’t have to worry about the books being defaced. They would only have to remember to bring one device in, rather than up to a half a dozen heavy books.

So I wonder, is it too soon or too absurd to start thinking about integrating e-readers into the classroom? Do the positives out-weight the negatives? Can an e-reader reach students better than normal paper text? Or will it just add a new source of drama to the classroom?

Reference:
Daniels, H. & Zemelman, S. (2004). Subjects matter: Every teacher’s guide to content-area reading. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Challenge Your Thinking

May 16, 2009 at 3:00 pm | Posted in Content Area Literacy | 8 Comments
Tags: , ,

Yesterday we used an 11 question anticipation guide to spark discussion on the key topics and concepts we will be exploring during this weekend course. It was interesting to hear the conversations, especially focused on the following statements, because of the opposing viewpoints presented.
• It is the job of all teachers to create lifelong readers. (Agree or Disagree)
• Teaching reading strategies in the content areas will take away valuable teaching time. (Agree or Disagree)
• All teachers are responsible for learning and using Web 2.0 tools for their own personal learning and for classroom experiences. (Agree or Disagree))
• On-line reading requires the same strategies as traditional text resources. (Agree or Disagree)

All of the statements were meant to help us formulate what it means to be literate in our content areas and how we, as teachers, can support and enhance content knowledge and skills through a focused and purposeful approach to teaching reading and writing strategies. The discussions yesterday about these statements reflected personal experiences, both in and out of the classroom.

Let’s expand our personal thinking beyond the traditional approach to content area literacy. Read Angela Maiers’ post, The Changing Rules of the Literacy Club, and her reflection on literacy evolution. Angela writes,

“In an era of new literacies, we are in a simultaneous state of learning to read and reading to learn.”

What is the impact of this statement on content area teachers?

What do these new literacies look like? Read Will Richardson’s post, New Reading, New Writing. Will states,

“But there are skills here that if developed with some intention (read: taught and modeled) can improve literacy in interacting with texts and people in these digital spaces.”

How does this post challenge your thinking about the statements on our anticipation guide? How do you feel about teaching and learning in a digital world?

WEB 2.0 – WIDENING THE LITERACY GAP?

June 8, 2008 at 10:26 pm | Posted in ICT, literacy, Technology | 1 Comment
Tags: ,
Authored by Chris Woods
(Each student in GMST has written their own post for our class blog.)

The Thornburg Center blog quotes Chris Dede, who In a 1997 statement to the Public Communication of Science and Technology Panel says,

The most dangerous experiment we can conduct with our children is to keep schooling the same at a time when every other aspect of our society is dramatically changing.
Although this was penned in 1997, it perhaps rings more true today than ever, considering the prevalence of the idea of Web 2.0. The tools available to classroom teachers are more powerful than ever before, and without any doubt, more and more educators will begin to take advantage of these tools, providing great long-term benefits to their students.

One unfortunate aspect of the Web 2.0 concept that exists is its availability, or the lack thereof. As a prospective urban teacher, how can I be excited about the use of Web 2.0 in my classroom when my district’s resources are a mere fraction of surrounding districts? Will Web 2.0 simply widen the literacy gap between students in high-needs districts and those who are not?

State of Change

February 1, 2008 at 12:06 pm | Posted in uncategorized | 11 Comments
Tags: ,

Literacy is in a constant state of change.  Go to the K12 Online Conference site and watch the presentation by Clarence Fisher  entitled “Globally Literate”.  After watching, read through the discussion comments.  Respond to the following either directly on the K12 blog site (preferred) or here.

  • What is your reaction to this view of literacy?
  • What connections are you making to your content area?
  • How are your experiences meshing together? (class discussions, assignments, Educon, reading blogs, etc.?)

Blog at WordPress.com.
Entries and comments feeds.