Finding the "MVP" Phrase

One of the features of the CCSS standards is the call to close reading of complex texts with students, even when the text is beyond that of the students' independent or instructional reading level. Many educators hear this call, but find it difficult to find ways to truly help students "unlock" and make meaning of such complex texts. (To hear more about the shift to close reading and text complexity, listen here: http://www.npr.org/blogs/ed/2014/11/11/356357971/common-core-reading-the-new-colossus)

In her Reading Teacher article, "Designating the MVP: Facilitating Classroom Discussion About Text," Carolyn Strom shares a strategy that teachers can use to help students unpack the meaning of complex texts to promote reading comprehension. After reading the text through on a first read to gain the literal meaning of the text, Strom suggests asking students to read the text again, this time looking for the "MVP" phrase to help them unlock the overall main idea or central argument of a text. She shares that by students assigning the phrase to their previous knowledge of the "MVP" or most valuable player on sports team, they will also gain understanding that by reading closely we can find words and phrases that help convey the author's central message.

As students search for the "MVP" phrase, they can also use "MVP" as a mnemonic device helping them to find a phrase which does at least one of the three:
M-conveys the main idea of the text
V-provides a vivid visual image for the reader
P-is a "phrase that stays" because it adds to the reader's overall thinking about the passage

Using this strategy might provide a useful way to help students work through the difficulty of texts that are often beyond their independent reading level, as it would allow them to think critically about the meaning of the text. Through thoughtful discussion with their peers, using this strategy might unlock key ideas that will help them better infer the meaning of the text, and what the author is trying to convey. This might even be a great way to do some re-teaching with students in small or guided reading groups when they just didn't fully understand a whole-group read-aloud or focus lesson.

Works Cited:

“Designating the MVP: Facilitating Classroom Discussion About Text” by Carolyn Strom in The Reading Teacher, October 2014 (Vol. 68, #2, p. 108-112),

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/trtr.1287/abstract

Personalized Learning

You don't have to be in the field of education for very long to become familiar with the term "differentiation." In every school, district and state teachers are asked to differentiate for their students, making teaching and learning meaningful and inclusive for all students. Unfortunately, while the term is shared with many educators, often ideas for how to make differentiation a regular part of your classroom routine are much harder to come by.

In his article, "Personalized Learning' Eludes Easy Definitions" in the October edition of Education Week, Sean Cavanagh shares real ways that teachers can begin to tackle the most difficult challenge of personalizing learning for student and differentiating for the unique individuals that our students are.

Cavanaugh argues that personalized learning can be seen as differentiation, with the added element of students unique interests and providing them with agency, “giving students more power through either digital tools or other means, accounting for how they learn best, what motivates them, and their academic goals.” While no piece of software can replace the teacher, he argues that there are many ways to motivate students using software and increase academic engagement. Suggested are four main ways in which teachers can think about how to personalize instruction for their students:
learner profiles (records of students strengths, needs, interests etc.), personal learning paths (students are held to high standards, but each student has their own unique goals customized to their own personal progress), flexible learning environments (the ways in which classroom space and school structure(s) are used support students' meeting of their goals), and competency based progression (students are assessed regularly based on their path and move on when they reach mastery).

A lot of what Cavanaugh argued can also be achieved through non-digital learning--for example, using a leveled classroom library for independent reading and allowing the readers' choice in what they select is one excellent way of meeting some of the criteria for personalized learning. Still, many digital tools could enhance this approach in teachers classrooms. I'm interested to see how teachers continue to differentiate and personalize instruction for students, as technology advances and as education continues to evolve.


Works Cited:

“‘Personalized Learning’ Eludes Easy Definitions” by Sean Cavanagh in Education Week, October 22, 2014 (Vol. 34, #9, p. S2-S4), www.edweek.org

Why Students Struggle with Reading Comprehension

As a literacy support coach, when working with teachers in my schools, and we look at literacy diagnostic data, we focus on getting our students in the emergent grades (K, 1) to master decoding skills. We look at measures like phonological awareness, site word recognition, and nonsense word fluency to ensure they are make adequate progress as decoders, while simultaneously looking at their progress and growth in terms of reading comprehension. Somewhere around 2nd or 3rd grade, we see that many of our students have essentially "mastered" decoding, but still struggle with reading comprehension. We often ask ourselves, why is it that many of our students can learn to decode, but not to comprehend?

In a recent Teachers College Record article titled "Are We Spending Too Much Time Teaching Reading Comprehension?" researchers Willingham and Lovette make the claim that the reason that some students aren't comprehending after they learn to decode come for three reasons which aren't mutually exclusive:

1.) These students are struggling with vocabulary and understanding the meaning of words within the text.
2.) These students are failing to stop and summarize as they read, or are not recognizing that they aren't comprehending, and they keep plowing ahead.
3.) They are failing to make inferences.

While focusing on building vocabulary and helping students to stop and summarize as they read are skills that can be taught in a relatively straightforward way, teaching students to make inferences as they read is much more difficult and complex, as it requires them to synthesize their experiences with hints that the text gives as to the underlining meaning of sentences.

Willingham and Lovette argue that in light of this information, teachers can best spend their time teaching vocabulary, and building background knowledge which will in turn help students start to put the pieces together in making inferences as they read. They also argue that teachers need to help students understand that reading is much more than just trying to read as many words on the page as fast as possible, but to actually try to understand what the author is trying to help you understand with their words and sentences. They argue that shifting students mindset in this way, paired with hundreds of hours of reading practice, is what will help struggling comprehenders become more proficient.

When I read this article, I got to thinking about the emphasis we often place on fluency and decoding with our younger readers, and wonder if that is having a negative impact on their ideas behind why we read text. I like the idea of constantly reminding students of the purpose of why we read--to undersand what the author is trying to convey, to learn, and to enjoy our new knowledge.

References:

“Can Reading Comprehension Be Taught?” by Daniel Willingham and Gail Lovette in Teachers College Record (online), September 26, 2014,

http://www.tcrecord.org/Content.asp?ContentID=17701

Education Researchers and Innovators

After listening to several presentations from my colleagues on some of the most influential educational researchers in the field of education/literacy, I got to thinking about how much our field has been shaped by the important research that has been done before us; allowing us as practitioners to rely not only on our instincts, but also on what research has proven to be effective. With so many new challenges on the horizon, and a global market that is ever changing with advancements in technology, I wonder what new research we need to develop and take part in to ensure that new methods we use in the future and proven effective as well.

While I was thinking about this research,  I came across a popular article titled The 30 Most Innovative People Alive in Education Today (http://www.topeducationdegrees.org/30-most-innovative-people-in-education-alive-today/). The article discusses individuals whose impact is currently shaping the national dialogue and research around everything from teacher recrutitment and retention, to using technology to enhance classroom practice, to teacher compensation and the future of unions. While I find myself applauding some of the folks on this list (I've always been a huge fan of Linda Darling Hammond), others on the list raise an eyebrow to many of us in the field. More well designed and carefully planned research, emerging in the field, needs to be done to prove that many radical philosophies and approaches currently shaping the conversation are indeed helpful, and not harmful, to the success of our students in the long run.

Colleauges, what do you think? Which of these current innovators do you think will have the most positive impact in our field? Who do you want to learn more about?

I'd like to learn more about Conrad Wolfram and how he got started with the inspiring and empowering TED talks, as well as Sebastian Thrun and his brilliant idea to bring free courses to all through his Udacity site. Here's to more reading on our favorite researchers!

Toggling Between Home and School Dialects

The idea of code-switching has long been something that has fascinated me as an educator. Teaching and working with students in Baltimore, we often hear students come to school with complex home dialects, whether they are native English speakers or ELL students. Particularly, I've found that students who speak using African-American English struggle to comprehend and and use Standard American English proficiently--which often affects their ability as a reader and their self-efficacy as a writer. This has been something that I've noticed in my experiences, and research shows that nationally this a trend that persists with many of our students.

In the September 10th issue of Education Week the article “Language Program Focuses on Dialects” by Sarah Sparks explores a new program that tackles the issue of students who struggle with toggling between home dialects and academic English. In the article, Sparks shares that fifteen years after the heated debate over “Ebonics” in the Oakland, California schools, studies have shown that the sooner elementary students learn to “code-switch” or toggle between their dialect and academic English, the better they do in school – however unfortunately it usually takes three or four years to master this. "The more you used dialect features, the more difficult it was for you to do well…,” said Jan Edwards of the University of Wisconsin/Madison, author of a 2014 study. 

The new program that Sparks highlights is called ToggleTalk and focuses on working with Kindergarten and first grade students who are in need of learning Standard American English.  The program focuses on 20 minute lessons offered 3-4 times per week on various parts of speech Standard English learners typically struggle with. Some of these features include plurals, tenses, subject-verb agreement, supporting verbs and articles.

As an educator, I am interested to see if this program has success with students where it is being piloted. It seems to me this might be a friendlier approach to what California Public Schools attempted to do with getting ELL funding for students who speak "Ebonics" as their home dialect. Since language is acquired at home, it's natural for students who speak non-standard English when they begin school to have greater needs than their Standard English speaking peers.

References:

“Language Program Focuses on Dialects” by Sarah Sparks in Education Week, September 10, 2014 (Vol. 34, #3, p. 1, 14), www.edweek.org