It is interesting that at the beginning of the chapter, Gallagher states "Test scores may be rising, but that's at least partly as a result of states lowering standards to meet the law's demand that all students become proficient by 2014." This is crazy! How can you lower the standards from one year to the next and change the proficiency standards. How are they going to honestly say in 2014 that students are proficient when they've all been held to different standards? I find this interesting as well because this year the Math graduation test is changing to be based on the GPS standards. It has previously been mostly QCC and the students joke about it being so easy because it is math at a 7-8th grade level. Now this year all of a sudden it is going to be crazy hard. Well, from what I heard, in previos years students had to make an 800 to pass but this year (because it is going to be much harder) the students only have to make a 200 to pass. Hmmm, so we are making the questions harder so it looks like we are holding students to a higher standard but we are lowering the standard at the same time. I am very curious to see how this plays out at the end of the year.
The chapter also mentioned penalizing schools for not meeting proficiency and I honestly think this leads to more "cheating the system." I totally disagree with this. I also thought the statistics given throughout the chapter were pretty interesting and sad. The decline in literacy is not only going to hinder individuals but it is going to affect businesses and the direction of our Nation. The information given about Finnish education was enlightening. It makes you wonder how they make it work and if it works as well as indicated then why aren't we doing something similar? No more than 1/2 an hour of homework a night! I think even our students would buy into that :-)
I also thought it was neat that Gallagher gave a list of 101 books he found his reluctant readers like to read. This list can give ideas for books to have in the classroom and readily available to our students.
Sunday, November 7, 2010
Sunday, October 24, 2010
Readicide - Chapter 4
I like the "Big Chunk / Little Chunk" philosophy presented in chapter 4 of readicide. Having students read through a text first gives them the opportunity to get a general knowledge and understanding of the text and what it is about and it also allows them to form their own opinions and think about what they'd like to know more about. Then by rereading specific excerpts that the teacher thinks are important is good because it allows them to dive in and get a better understanding of something with help and guidance.
Although I can read and I can understand what I am reading, I am the world's worst at actually understanding what the teacher wants me to understand. I can read something and tell you the basic story line but I don't actually pick out all the details. I guess I lack in my comprehension skills. I found this especially true in our book clubs because I read the book but when we discussed the book as a group, the others in my group brought out things in the book that I remembered reading but I didn't think about it like they did and at the time didn't find it as important but when they discussed it, it had obvious value. It left me thinking, "how come I didn't get that when I read the book?" I guess that holds true to most of our students as well because although they can read something and know what they are reading, are they really getting out of the book or text what we want them to? That is why I like the "Big Chunk / Little Chunk" philosophy because it seems to have a good balance and it also holds the students responsible for the reading but then holds both the teacher and the student responsible for getting out of the reading something far deeper.
I also teach math so this is especially important because we deal with a lot of tasks (which are massive word problems) and the students have to be able to read it and figure out what we are actually asking them to do with the information. I think this is a good way to work through the tasks because the students can read the opening of it and then as a class we can discuss the "nitty gritty" pieces of it and if they aren't getting out of it what I want them to, then I can guide them in that direction.
Although I can read and I can understand what I am reading, I am the world's worst at actually understanding what the teacher wants me to understand. I can read something and tell you the basic story line but I don't actually pick out all the details. I guess I lack in my comprehension skills. I found this especially true in our book clubs because I read the book but when we discussed the book as a group, the others in my group brought out things in the book that I remembered reading but I didn't think about it like they did and at the time didn't find it as important but when they discussed it, it had obvious value. It left me thinking, "how come I didn't get that when I read the book?" I guess that holds true to most of our students as well because although they can read something and know what they are reading, are they really getting out of the book or text what we want them to? That is why I like the "Big Chunk / Little Chunk" philosophy because it seems to have a good balance and it also holds the students responsible for the reading but then holds both the teacher and the student responsible for getting out of the reading something far deeper.
I also teach math so this is especially important because we deal with a lot of tasks (which are massive word problems) and the students have to be able to read it and figure out what we are actually asking them to do with the information. I think this is a good way to work through the tasks because the students can read the opening of it and then as a class we can discuss the "nitty gritty" pieces of it and if they aren't getting out of it what I want them to, then I can guide them in that direction.
Saturday, October 2, 2010
Readicide - Chapter 3
Chapter 3 brought up the fact that serious readers want to be at "the reading flow." Gallagher also mentions that this is where we should want all of our students to be, where they have to "come up for air." I guess a lot of my responses go against what Gallagher has to say because I am not someone who enjoys reading. I certainly understand where he is coming from because I would much rather my students be reading for enjoyment than doing what they are doing. I don't entirely agree though. I've never liked to read and my older sister was an avid reader. I remember her getting in trouble because she would sneak her novels into her school books and pretend that she was reading the school book, but actually she was reading her novels. I would say this is an example of what Gallagher was mentioning because she would get so involved in reading that she didn't care about anything else. The problem was that she was she forfeited a lot while she was probably also gaining a lot. I know I am contradicting myself here because now that we are older, I know reading didn't hurt her. She has a tremendous vocabulary and still enjoys reading and has probably learned a lot about different cultures, etc from the books she has read. I do think though that she probably missed out on learning as well. She didn't pay attention in school so her grades suffered, she never learned how to read academically. I also think she missed out on other experiences. While I was getting involved in other activities and more involved socially, I think she missed out on that. She was always curled up with a book and by her self.
Although I understand the importance of reading I guess I also see the other side. I can't buy into the whole reading flow thing because in my mind I think when students get caught in the "zone" they are missing out on other skills that they need in life as well. I think there really needs to be a happy medium.
The chapter goes on to talk about To Kill a Mockingbird and Hamlet and The Grapes of Wrath. Not the most interesting of books to read but I do like that Gallagher states that a teacher "must create reading situations in which our students discover the reading flow they need to achieve while reading both academic and recreations works, assigned and self-selected." This is great because students do need to learn how to read things they don't necessarily want to read because unfortunately life is full of that (high school, college, work, etc) but they also need to be allowed to read the things that interst them. I am in total agreement with the 50-50 approach, but it doesn't seem like very many teachers actually use this approach.
Although I understand the importance of reading I guess I also see the other side. I can't buy into the whole reading flow thing because in my mind I think when students get caught in the "zone" they are missing out on other skills that they need in life as well. I think there really needs to be a happy medium.
The chapter goes on to talk about To Kill a Mockingbird and Hamlet and The Grapes of Wrath. Not the most interesting of books to read but I do like that Gallagher states that a teacher "must create reading situations in which our students discover the reading flow they need to achieve while reading both academic and recreations works, assigned and self-selected." This is great because students do need to learn how to read things they don't necessarily want to read because unfortunately life is full of that (high school, college, work, etc) but they also need to be allowed to read the things that interst them. I am in total agreement with the 50-50 approach, but it doesn't seem like very many teachers actually use this approach.
Saturday, September 18, 2010
Readicide - Chapter 2
I'm a little conflicted I guess about some things brought up in this chapter. Gallagher states
"Outside of school, many of our students are not partaking in those critical activities that stretch and deepen their brains. Instead, they often gravitate to those behaviors that offer instant gratification." (39)
A part of me says so what! I say this because I think that students gravitate to things like the computer, texting, video games, etc. I don't think this is such a terrible thing though. They are watching TV shows that may teach them more than they could get from a book. They could learn survival techniques, how to build a car / motorcycle, how to fix or build things at home, etc. Now let's face it... they are probably watching music videos and things like that. I guess I just don't think it is a bad thing for students to have some fun in their lives when at school they are sitting behind a desk for 7 hours a day so when they get home, maybe they do need a break.
Then.. on the flipside, Gallagher writes, "When we deny students the opportunity to read long, complex works, we are starving a part of thier brains, and we start producing kids like the students in my class who can read but who cannot get below the surface of what they read." (40)
Now here's the other part of me that says Oh No! It is also scary to think that students cannot comprehend what they are reading because if they can't comprehend what they are reading, what are they going to do when they have a job and cannot read the training manual or they buy a bookcase and cannot read the instructions to be able to put it together. How will they keep up with current events if they cannot read a newspaper and actually understand what they are reading? How will they hold a job? These are important questions.
I'm not sure though that reading a long, complex book is the answer though. I think if we give our students a variety of things to read, they would be more successful because they would learn skills on how to read a variety of things that would actually benefit them in life. Knowing the story of Romeo and Juliet or other classics is great but it is only that, they know a good book or a good story.
"Outside of school, many of our students are not partaking in those critical activities that stretch and deepen their brains. Instead, they often gravitate to those behaviors that offer instant gratification." (39)
A part of me says so what! I say this because I think that students gravitate to things like the computer, texting, video games, etc. I don't think this is such a terrible thing though. They are watching TV shows that may teach them more than they could get from a book. They could learn survival techniques, how to build a car / motorcycle, how to fix or build things at home, etc. Now let's face it... they are probably watching music videos and things like that. I guess I just don't think it is a bad thing for students to have some fun in their lives when at school they are sitting behind a desk for 7 hours a day so when they get home, maybe they do need a break.
Then.. on the flipside, Gallagher writes, "When we deny students the opportunity to read long, complex works, we are starving a part of thier brains, and we start producing kids like the students in my class who can read but who cannot get below the surface of what they read." (40)
Now here's the other part of me that says Oh No! It is also scary to think that students cannot comprehend what they are reading because if they can't comprehend what they are reading, what are they going to do when they have a job and cannot read the training manual or they buy a bookcase and cannot read the instructions to be able to put it together. How will they keep up with current events if they cannot read a newspaper and actually understand what they are reading? How will they hold a job? These are important questions.
I'm not sure though that reading a long, complex book is the answer though. I think if we give our students a variety of things to read, they would be more successful because they would learn skills on how to read a variety of things that would actually benefit them in life. Knowing the story of Romeo and Juliet or other classics is great but it is only that, they know a good book or a good story.
Saturday, September 4, 2010
More on Readicide
I wanted to add to my previous post about the first chapter in Readicide. I am someone who doesn't like to read and I certainly do not read for pleasure. To many people that may sound odd. I don't think reading is a waste of time but with everything else in my life that keeps me busy, I don't find it enjoyable to sit down and read a book when I actually have a little free time on my hands. I don't think that is a horrible thing. When I think of the definition given on Readicide, I think it is important to remember that when you ask students about their love for reading, they are so busy reading (or pretending to read) the books they are forced to read for class. They probably do enjoy some reading but not the reading they are made to do. When you really think about it.. how many of us like to be told what to do anyways?
Tuesday, August 24, 2010
Readicide – Introduction
I found it interesting in the introduction of Readicide to see the percentages of adult readers. I guess I really expected the numbers to be higher but then again when you think about how the numbers drop off so drastically from elementary school, then to middle school, and then to high school, I really shouldn't be so surprised.
I also found it interesting that they mentioned one of the four major contribution factors to readicide is that "schools value the development of test-takers more than they value the development of readers." (p5) I think this is very true because schools are so worried about making AYP and other national benchmark goals that they forget some of the basic skills (such as reading) that we need to function in society.
I also found it interesting that they mentioned one of the four major contribution factors to readicide is that "schools value the development of test-takers more than they value the development of readers." (p5) I think this is very true because schools are so worried about making AYP and other national benchmark goals that they forget some of the basic skills (such as reading) that we need to function in society.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)