From Slate - New data on child well-being released Tuesday by the Annie E. Casey Foundation make for depressing reading on many levels, not least because the findings are so deeply unsurprising. The basic gist is that, despite the economic recovery, more kids are living in poverty...
Great post by Kristen Wideen on using Explain Everything to teach reading
Part 1 of 5 on Daniel Willlingham's Book - Raising Kids Who Read
Part four in Grant Wiggins' series on teaching students to be better readers
The extent to which children slow down their reading on encountering inconsistent information is a significant predictor of comprehension.
If strategies are taught with too narrow a base of content or text, then students do not have a chance to learn how to transfer them to new reading situations (Rosenshine & Meister, 1994). The optimal balance enables students to learn that strategies are an important means for understanding but are not the main point of reading activities.
found that third graders’ conception of a good reader was one who reads quickly without making mistakes, replicating the findings of Myers and Paris 30 years earlier
Many students think comprehension is “knowing what the words mean” and “what the author said”
The key “strategy” is metacognitive self-monitoring because without it, there is no awareness of misunderstanding and thus no need for the strategies.
Far greater attention has to be placed on getting readers to feel the lack of understanding/slow down in the face of the realization that they do not get it.
Part 5 of great series on reading by Grant Wiggins
I took no steps to converse with the text. Slowly but surely my reading improved by following their advice, the gist of which was to force oneself to ask and answer certain probing questions of the text, in writing, in the margins. To comprehend better is, in part, to force oneself to think more effectively.
I would venture to hypothesize that for many HS students their reading strategy is “Read on, then, oh well.” But let’s find out.
The “re-reading” strategy is a perfect example of our failure to understand the problem. Why would “re-reading” a passage, by itself, clear up what was confused in the first place? All the re-readers are doing is – re-reading. They aren’t thinking differently about what they are re-reading. As Tovani says, telling someone to “think harder” is useless advice. Yet, “Re-read!” is the same unhelpful advice if we don’t know how to re-read or whether we are re-reading “properly.” Too much of the reading-strategy literature amounts to such glib advice.
The strategies – e.g. visualize, predict, connect, re-read, infer, etc. – may only be correlated, not causal.
That is the paradox of reading, to me: you cannot understand the part until you understand the whole and the “great conversation”; but you cannot understand the whole unless you understand the parts through close reading.
What do you think? Is it not possible to deep read in an electronic book format? I find that reading on the iPad may come with a few distractions, but I also really enjoy being able to quickly look up related information to further explore ideas, facts, words, and so on.
More thoughts on the fact that there is still a place for physical books
When discussing the Common Core State Standards’ most challenging standards, CCSS Reading Anchor Standard 7 is often cited. CCSS R.7 states that students are expected to “integrate and evaluate content presented in diverse media and formats, including visually and quantitatively, as well as in words.”
Click in to find related links.