Group
|
Initiators
|
Summarizers
|
Responders
|
Illuminators
|
1
|
Michael Gillis
|
Karin Logerquist
|
Molly Nelson
|
Ian Gorton
|
2
|
Nicholas Gaudette
|
Jesse Vavreck
|
Nancy Nair
|
Laura Mayo
|
3
|
Kaylee Wiens
|
Kris Latcham
|
Paul Garlock
|
Jonathan
Reeves
|
4
|
Sara Stein
|
Erik Krueger
|
Michelle O’Connor
|
Sean Johnson
|
E. In this last small discussion group, you will begin the study of adolescent readers.
Preparation for the discussion: Please read:
- Adolescent Reading: position statement of the International Reading Association. https://docs.google.com/viewer?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.reading.org%2FLibraries%2Fresources%2Fps1079_adolescentliteracy_rev2012.pdf
- Delbridge, K. (2008). What we know about the teaching of adolescent reading. In what research really says about the teaching and learning to read (pp 158-175). National Council of Teachers of English. Urbana, Illinois.
- To access the Delbridge article (article listed above) you can locate it on D2L-Content-Readings OR under Forms and Doc on the Website OR use the link below:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3RBFhdurd8ec0Vac2xQTEZiQWs/edit?usp=sharing
- To access the Delbridge article (article listed above) you can locate it on D2L-Content-Readings OR under Forms and Doc on the Website OR use the link below:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B3RBFhdurd8ec0Vac2xQTEZiQWs/edit?usp=sharing
Roles:
There are 4 people in each conversation group. You only respond to those in your own group.
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.
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).
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).
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.)
Respond at least once to another member of your group with questions, clarifications, or other ideas. You will not likely be able to respond to the summarizer, as they will be summarizing all ideas and discussion at the end (Sunday). The Summarizer will need to respond to at least one person during the week before you summarize. This would be a good time to ask for clarification on ideas to help write the summary at the end. Make your response postings before Sunday, November 3.
Adolescent Literacy Reading:
ReplyDeleteI found this document to be extremely thorough in supportive documentation. What I really identified with was the attention brought to the need to prepare the global citizen. I can relate to the text when it stated that "Students navigate cities on public transportation, participate in slam poetry events, engage in instant messaging, play videogames, look up information on the Internet, read and write on the job as well as for pleasure, and so on." (Pg. 3)
The reflection of the 1999 text recognizes that “Students of the 21st century will read and write more than any other time in human history” is spot on now that we are inside the first decade of the century. Students are surrounded by literacy every where they turn. The internet and the progress of technology has brought us to this place. From my own understanding, I use the dictionary on a daily basis when reading, writing, or decoding a document I trouble understanding. The fact that this little dictionary is accessible on a screen at any time is invaluable to my personal progress in literacy.
I am in total agreement with the text, however I do have one portion that I would like to dissect. On Pg. 6, the text states “IRA suggests teachers with expertise in literacy collaborate and work with all content area teachers inclusive of the academic disciplines, the performing arts, and the technical subject areas.”
I agree that the performing arts can help improve literacy in content areas. Is this type of content integration at the expense of learning the literacy of the content craft and training? I understand that we need to improve literacy so that our students can compete globally in the 21st century. If the arts were more than just a “tool” perhaps we should view the arts as a door to cultural understanding not just through text, but throughs sound, creation and performance. I personally believe that we have devoted so much attention to giving students so many opportunities, that we have failed to recognize the possibility of giving the students really intense and focus training on just a few opportunities.
My personal thoughts are that if we expect kids to compete nationally and internationally with college tuition, maybe we should offer a 2 year specific training program for a content field they wish to study, a content field that can be introduced while they are in high school. What if a physics of sound was the math credit you needed to complete while enrolled in a music program fro your final two years of high school. Or a nutrition class as a science credit if you were enrolled in a school dedicated to the sports. I believe we need reverse curriculum integration. Although, we would have to rewrite the Common Core Standards in order to make the process transparent from school to school.
I walk away with this article with a few final thoughts. I really appreciate that this article talks about the integration of the content areas. I think this is a key conversation that is often left out of our text that we have encountered thus far in this class. I also appreciate that the IRA has only suggested these types of integration, and that school leaders need to be spearheading these conversations in their own schools.
The other content I reflect on is the importance of creating the global citizen of the 21st century. However I would like to comment that we should also start the conversation of the demographic shift of 2050 and how that will effect our classrooms (http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2008/02/11/us-population-projections-2005-2050/). The 2050 demographic shift projected numbers reflect that over 50% of our population will be of color or will identify with a race other than white. We must keep this information, the challenges and successes, on the forefront of our conversations as we continue to create learners of literacy in the 21st century
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIllumination: Post 1 of 2
ReplyDeleteIt is clear that the goal of literacy in our schools does not end with students being able to read, write, and comprehend. With modern day technology, and information streaming from a multitude of sources the ability to critically analyze is a must for today’s student. “Reading” does not only insist you posses the technical abilities of literacy, it requires you to examine and question the information being handed to you. This is where areas such as the arts come into play. As the text states, literacy beckons our students at every turn, but where will they learn to question information and examine the knowledge held within literacy? Literacy, in all its strengths, is nothing without reasoning. The arts (visual, music, performing) teach our students to look at and understand information in new ways – from a standpoint not yet explored. In the arts, information handed to the students is done so with only the intention of them taking it to new levels – rules are written only to be broken, and opinions are formed only to be challenged. Boxes of thought are constantly broken down, and it is through this learned process of thought that the students can not only posses the strength of literacy, but the strength of higher cognitive thinking processes.
On page 9 of Adolescent Literacy the author mentions that “sadly” most students who enter ninth grade with a reading problem leave school with a reading problem. I challenge individuals not to look at this as “sad”. The truth is it takes many sorts of intelligences to make the world go around, and some of the most successful, inventive individuals were not high academic achievers. We need to continue to study, understand, and even more importantly learn how to teach to different learners. Who knows, there may be day we realize many of the people we have labeled with learning disabilities really didn’t have a disability at all – the just learned in a method our schools have been failing to teach to. After all, my guess is if you were to take a handful of straight A students in a standard school and throw them into a visual arts centered school, or a performing arts centered school their grades wouldn’t be so impressive.
In Teaching the Adolescent Reader the author tells the story about Pedro, and how he brought knowledge of his culture (ie his own life experiences) to construct meaning to what he had read. If Pedro had not had life experiences to coincide with what he was reading his literacy would have been limited. He may have understood all the words, and even comprehended what the words met, but because he had a personal, intimate experience that he could connect to while reading the material, a deeper contemplation took place – and often that deeper contemplation is just a first step to thought process the serve one beyond expected educational goals. These connections can be cultural as this reading and many readings mention, but it can also be individual and specific to a personality type. Keeping this in mind, it is important that after understanding cultural context and connection, teachers remember to always look deeper into the individual before them – the picture of what is before you can change drastically.
Illumination: Post 2 of 2
ReplyDeleteWhen literacy can be built around areas of interest, even struggling students can find the difficult reading process worth the trouble. When I was allowed the opportunity to read materials the fed my interests and points of knowledge that I deemed dear my reading comprehension grew. And when I was able to intertwine my newly found knowledge in reading to my art work a beautiful dance between literacy, comprehension and creativity emerged. One of the biggest mistakes we may make regarding literacy in our schools is our insistence that students learn literacy by reading the materials teachers, and the teachers before them, and the teachers before them deem important. It is true that history repeats itself, and it is therefore true that the importance that lies within a story lies within anther story – being willing to step outside the norm for reading material is a step worth taking.
And now to take the conversation a little off course, but in a way I hope you will be able to tie back into this reading and other reading we have and will have down the road. If anything what I am about to say ties into discussion on core curriculum – which has been brought up in our discussions. In the beginning of Adolescent Literacy the author mentioned the 28 million youth enrolled in school around the world. I could help but think about the 72 million children around the world who go without education most all due to poverty. And then I couldn’t help but think about the 21% of American school kids who are impoverished (you can find more interested statistics at http://rt.com/usa/public-school-poverty-study-392/). We all know these kids are not distributed across the school system evenly - all you have to do is look at the high school I am teaching at right now where 87% of the students qualify for free or reduced meals. At the school I teach struggles of poverty are apparent at every turn and in every class. No matter what you do it is impossible to stop poverty at the school doors – it seeps through the cracks like water and affects everything. We (educators/academics/etc.) continually discuss curriculum, literacy, teaching to culture, etc, but the fact of the matter is we can never seem to solve the problems that, in my opinion are misrepresented through standardized testing (not to mention the fact that standardized testing reflects little in true knowledge, but I’m preaching to the choir here). I encourage you all to watch this little video clip. It is an interview Diane Ravitch did on the Daily Show. Now, I know the Daily Show is not a liable academic resource, but Diane Ravitch is a historian of education, an educational policay analyst, a research process at New York University’s Steinhardt School of Culture, Education, and Human Development, and previously served as U.S. Assistant Secretary of Education. She brings up some very interesting points, and she also dares to look at education in a holistic manner, something we don’t do enough of when trying to solve its problems. One of my favorite points she makes is when she points out "...the common core (curriculum) is an answer to a problem we don't have - we have a problem of poverty, and the common core does nothing to address that particular problem..."
http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/wed-october-30-2013/exclusive---diane-ravitch-extended-interview-pt--1
First of all I want to thank the group for giving me such a wealth of discussion points and opinions to work with. From this reading and the subsequent discussion posts, our group identified three main points: preparing 21st century students for a global society (and how technology fits into a changing understanding of literacy), creating an integrated curriculum in order to reach differentiated learners, and updating the core curriculum to address the cause of illiteracy rather than the symptoms.
ReplyDeleteOn the first point, Nick addresses the concept of preparing “global citizens” and how students of this generation will need to read and write more than any other in our history. He mentions that this is in large part due to the progress made with technology and internet use. Laura reiterate this sentiment by stating that these sources have made it more important than ever for students to be able to not only read and comprehend information, but also to analyze it critically in order to gain full understanding. In a global setting, it is important for students to be able to relate information they take in to their own personal and cultural experiences. As teachers, we must know our students – their background and experiences – in order to make sure their individual literary needs are met.
That brings us to the second point, integration and differentiation. Nick mentioned that rather than using arts as a literary tool, perhaps it could be viewed as “a door to cultural understanding not just through text, but through sound, creation, and performance.” Laura echoed this thought by saying that the arts can provide students with another perspective in order to understand information in a new way. This is true for multiple intelligences and learning styles and as teachers we need to understand the different ways that students learn in order to give them the best opportunity to do so. In relation to literacy, this may mean allowing students to choose texts that they find interesting or relevant so that they can create a deeper connection to it.
Lastly, both Nick and Laura pointed out the importance of updating the Core Curriculum/Standards in order to address issues of illiteracy and learning in general. The book gives ideas about types of integration, but leaves it up to the schools to start the conversations and take control in determining what will work best for them. In a different way, Laura brings up the fact that poverty is at the root of many issues in our schools (literacy among them) and that the Common Core Standards and standardized testing merely addresses the symptoms rather than the actual problem. In order to help students become 21st century literate, we must also do something to address the core issues.
I wrote a very long response and it posted Saturday, but I don't see it now. It had posted and now seems to have vanished. Did anyone else see it?
ReplyDeleteNancy,
ReplyDeleteI didn't see your post show up. I wonder if you were experiencing the same issues I was about post that might have exceeded the character limit....I had a similar issue on a different thread.
Laura,
That was an Amazing Daily Show snippet! What perfect timing as well! We should share this with the rest of the class!