Paraphrasing and Comprehension

Question: How can teaching young students to paraphrase help them to comprehend?

 Answer/Quote: “Paraphrasing is different from retelling as well. In retelling, readers are invited to use the words of the author in explaining  a passage. In fact, as we work with readers in the reading center, we are interested in whether they use the phrasing and wording of the original text in retelling. In paraphrasing, however, we encourage readers to use their own words and phrasing to ‘translate’ the material to their own way of saying it. Readers may be able to retell without ever actually engaging the content of the  passage: they must engage the content if they are paraphrasing.” P. 73.

Quote: “With careful instruction and modeling, focusing on what the strategy is, how to do it, when it is useful and why it is important, children can learn to monitor their comprehension and take steps to correct it, if needed.” P. 77.

Comment: Teaching students to paraphrase makes a great deal of sense. When they paraphrase they demonstrate their comprehension. I like this idea. And it has many applications in reading and writing as the student progresses through the grades. RayS.

Title: “Paraphrasing: An Effective Comprehension Strategy.” Sharon B. Kletzien. The Reading Teacher (September 2009), 73-77.

Web 1.0 vs. Web 2.0

Question: What are the differences between Web 1.0 and Web 2.0 tools for learning?

 Answer/Quote: “Whereas Web 1.0 tools allow only website owners (not users) to collaborate or manipulate the information or text displayed, Web 2.0 tools enable  users to create, edit, manipulate, and collaborate online. As Hedberg and Brudvik (2008) explained, ‘the social software supported in Web 2.0 enables consumers to become producers. Learners can contribute to the resources and not just consume them’ (p. 140).” P. 40.

Quote: “Thus, unlike Web 1.0 tools, Web 2.0 tools ‘belong’ to the collective, or to all collaborators. Some examples of Web 2.0 tools used in classrooms include blogs, digital storytelling (e.g. VoiceThread.com), and wikis (e.g., pbwiki and wikispaces). P. 40.

Comment: I’m learning this as well as my readers. Don’t understand it all that well, but hope to as I read more about it. The whole concept of “wikis” is not yet in my vocabulary. And I did not know that blogs (which I use regularly) are Web 2.0 tools. I guess they are. RayS.

Title: “Becoming Critical Consumers and Producers of Text: Teaching Literacy with Web 1.0 and Web 2.0.” LJ Handsfield, et al. The Reading Teacher (September 2009). 40-50.

Good Teaching

Question: What are the characteristics of good teaching?

Answer/Quote: “If it is true that learning is best facilitated through active involvement and by thinking about and discussing what is being learned, then this constructivist approach should apply to teachers as much as to any other group of learners….” P. 14.

Comment: Okay, we already know this. But how does one make learning active? Begin literary discussions with students’ questions about the literary work. Begin lessons with intriguing questions. Even the most mundane topics can activate students with real questions to which students want real answers: Why is the comma important in clear written expression? What are the most frequent uses of commas? Which uses of the comma can be relegated to a list of models?

And then, when the lesson is completed, spend fifteen minutes in writing, reflecting on what happened and possibilities for changes in the lesson. The “basics” in good teaching. RayS.

Title: “Fulfilling the Promise of Literacy Coaches in Urban Schools: What Does It Take to Make an Impact?” Barbara Steckel. The Reading Teacher (September 2009), 14-23.

Fluency: A Review of Methods

Question: How help student improve fluency in reading?

Answer/Quote: “Research and scholarly literature support several specific methods to promote fluency in reading…. Among these are modeling fluent reading for students, assisted reading and repeated readings. Modeling fluent reading involves listening to a text read fluently by another. Although modeling fluent reading does not involve the student actually reading, it does provide the student with a clear model of what fluent oral reading sounds like. Assisted reading involves a reader reading a text while simultaneously listening to a fluent rendering of the same text. Repeated readings involve the reading of one text until a level of fluency is achieved in the reading.” P. 4.

Comment: FYI. RayS.

Title: “Implementing Readers Theatre as an Approach to Classroom Fluency Instruction.” Chase Young, Timothy Rasinski. The Reading Teacher (September 2009), 4-13.

Fluency

Question: How define fluency in reading?

 Answer/Quote: “With the report of the National Reading Panel (National Institute of Child Health and Human Development [NICHD], 2000, reading fluency has once again, after a long absence…become a critical goal in the elementary reading curriculum. Most literacy scholars define reading fluency as the ability to read the words in a text with sufficient accuracy, automaticity, and prosody to lead to good comprehension…. Accuracy in word recognition refers to readers’ ability to read the words in a text without error in pronunciation. Automaticity refers to the ability of proficient readers to read the words in a text correctly and effortlessly so that they may use their finite cognitive resources to attend to meaning while reading. Prosody refers to the ability of readers to render a text with appropriate expression and phrasing to reflect the semantic and syntactic content of the passage. Fluent oral reading should simply sound like natural speech.” P. 4.

Comment: FYI. RayS.

Title: “Implementing Readers Theatre as an Approach to Classroom Fluency Instruction.” Chase Young, Timothy Rasinski. The Reading Teacher (September 2009), 4-13.

Basics in Writing

Question: What are the basics in writing?

Answer/Quote: “Yet teachers need to remind themselves that analyzing and explaining the components of successful writing are no substitute for helping students discover a reason to write, nor for acknowledging what motivates their uses of and attitudes toward written language.” P. 260.

 Comment: Purpose. In giving students assignments, it’s easy to forget why students should want to complete the assignment, other than to earn a grade. Helping students to find purposes other than grades is not easy. I write this blog because I want to share ideas with other English teachers. I think professional journals in teaching English have interesting and helpful ideas for solving problems in teaching. Why should students want to complete your assignments? That’s another way of saying, how can you make your writing assignments “authentic.” RayS.

Title: “Individual Goals and Academic Literacy: Integrating Authenticity and Explicitness.” Sarah W. Beck. English Education (April 2009), 259-280.

Writing Teachers Write

Question: Teachers of writing should write. But what should they write?

Answer/Quote: “The notion that ‘teachers of writing must also write’ has been pervasive since the 1970s. But what should they write? On this question, the consensus has been less clear. In the National Writing Project (NWP), a professional network focused on the improvement of writing instruction and featuring summer institute in which teachers engage in writing of their own as well as demonstrations of effective teaching practice, tradition has usually favored personal writing, particularly memoir, poetry and fiction.

“This emphasis on personal writing has, at times, left the NWP vulnerable to criticism that the writing occurring in its summer institutes is too self-focused, characterizing the personal or creative writing done by teachers during the summer as insufficiently focused on classroom problems and practice. In fact, professional writing has been part of the writing teachers have engaged in at NWP summer institutes since 1974…but the relative emphasis that NWP summer institutes should place on these two kinds of writing has been a point of friendly contention among those involved in NWP, with some NWP site directors arguing for the importance of personal writing, others requiring that teachers also undertake some professional writing, and still others going so far as to insist that most, if not all, writing at the summer institutes take up professional topics.” P. 235.

Comment: I too have been critical of teachers’ writing in National Writing Project summer institutes. I have categorized in disgust such writing as “gush” writing. I like the idea of teachers writing for professional purposes and dealing with classroom problems. And attempts to publish. RayS.

 Title: “Writer, Teacher, Person: Tensions Between Personal and Professional Writing in a National Writing Project Summer Institute.” Anne Elrod Whitney. English Education (April 2009), 235-258.