COMMUNICATING "BEST PRACTICES IICommunicating Best Practices 1. Memorandum to Division of Instruction, Sept. 18, 1998, establishing procedures for the publication of Learning Links, a weekly publication for principals from the Division. Literacy 1. Memorandum to selected staff from Bonnie Lesley, Aug. 26, 1998, on development of the literacy plan
attached article, Urban School Development: Literacy as a Lever for Change. 2. Memorandum to middle school principals in Dec. 9, 1998, Learning Links with references to three books providing the research base for the middle school Reading/Writing Workshop program. w 3. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to principals in Jan. 6, 1999, Learning Links with suggested books that outline best practices in the development of literacy. ^25 4. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to middle school principals in Jan. 13, 1999, Learning Links advising them of multiple copies of books they will receive on best practice in teaching middle-level literacy. 5. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to principals in Jan. 21, 1999, Learning Links on potential programs to remediate reading problems. ^77 6. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to elementary principals in July 21, 1999, Learning Links advising them they will receive an additional book on development of literacy. 7. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to middle and high school principals in August 4, 1999, Learning Links relating to remediating reading problems at the secondary level
attached article from Harvard Education Letter. Johnny Still Cant Read? 8. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to middle school principals in Aug. 25, 1999, Learning Links on teacher participation in training and on strategies for developing vocabulary
attached article, Six Whole Class Vocabulary Strategies for the Content Areas by Hanus, et al and Teaching Vocabulary in the Subject Areas by Karen Wood. 9. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to middle school principals in September 1, 1999, Learning Links on teaching reading to students performing at the lowest levels
attached articles. A. A research synthesis on what works in restructuring urban middle school reading and writing programs.B. C. D. E. Reading Comprehension Instruction for At-Risk Students: Research-Based Practices that Can Make a Difference Teaching Them All to Read: Results of a Nationwide Study of Successful Literacy Programs for Young Adolescents Alternatives to More of the Same for Poor Readers Students at Risk: The Slow Reader in the Middle Grades 10. Memorandum to SEA principals from Bonnie Lesley, Nov. 15, 1999, on evaluation research on SEA
attached article, Success for All: A Summary of Evaluations by Jeanne Weiler. 11. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley in Nov. 17, 1999, Learning Links on early literacy
summary of research on what works in high-poverty schools
characteristics of effective teachers
attached article, Study Details Effectiveness of High-Poverty Schools in Reading Education During Early Grades from Michigan State University. 12. Memorandum to principals in Dec. 8, 1999, Learning Links from Bonnie Lesley on how to teach vocabulary
attached article, Making Vocabulary Development Manageable in Content Instruction by Katherine Misulis. 13. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to elementary principals, Dec. 17,1999, requesting information on the implementation of Animated Literacy at the kindergarten level. 14. E-mail from Bonnie Lesley to elementary and middle school principals, Jan. 11, 2000, with suggestions for the next years Title I budget
potential changes in SEA. 15. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to elementary principals in Jan. 12, 2000, Learning Links with research on Direct Instruction and Success for All
attached article, Prepackaged School Reform by Jay Mathews. 16. Memorandum to elementary principals and brokers in Mar. 22, 2000, Learning Links on research-based reading program
attached research summary, Improving the Reading Achievement of Americas Children: 10 Research-Based Principles. 17. Memorandum to high school principals in Apr. 12, 2000, Learning Links on the research base for the ninth grade English I Workshop program
attached chapter from Best Practice: New Standards for Teaching and Learning in Americas Schools. 18. E-mail from Kathy Lease to middle and high school principals. May 30, 2000, advising caution in using only one set of data to make decisions about program changes. 19. Memorandum from Bonnie Lesley to reading staff. Mar. 19, 2000, on evaluating the content of the professional development program for teaching reading. 20. Memorandum to Suzi Davis and Barbara Brandon, March 26, 2000, asking them to develop a program to address needs of middle and high school students with low performance in reading. 21. Research Report, Every Child Reading: A Professional Development Guide, November 2000 22. Research base for Early Literacy Learning in Arkansas (ELLA) 23. Report: Early Literacy Learning in Arkansas, General Information. 24. Research Report from Educational Research Service, How Children Learn: What Cognitive Research Tells Us About Effective Instruction. 25. Research Report from NCREL, Meaningful, Engaged Learning and Components of a Learner-Active, Technology Infused Classroom: What It Looks Like. 26. Research Report from National Reading Panel, Teaching Children to Read: An Evidence-Based Assessment of the Scientific Research Literature on Reading and Its Implications for Reading Instruction. April 2000. 27. Whats the Big Idea? Integrating Young Adult Literature in the Middle School, from the January 2001 English Journal. 28. To Grammar or Not to Grammar: That Is NOT the Question, from Voices from the Middle: Contextualizing Grammar by Constance Weaver, Carol McNally, and Sharon Moerman. 29. Just the Facts: Research and Theory about Grammar Instruction, from Voices from the Middle: Contextualizing Grammar by Constance Weaver, Carol McNally, and Sharon Moerman. 30. Developing Students Textual Intelligence Through Grammar, from Voices from the Middle: Contextualizing Grammar by Constance Weaver, Carol McNally, and Sharon Moerman. 31. The Evolution of Middle Schools by Paul George in December 2000 Education Leadership. 32. Holding Sacred Ground: The Impact of Standardization by Carl Glickman in December 2000 Education Leadership. 33. Response to Literature as a Cultural Activity, Reading Research Quarterly, January/ February/March 2000. 34. Reading AloudAre Students Ever Too Old? from Education World. LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 September 18, 1998 TO: Division of Instruction Staff Dr, Kathy Lease Gene Parker Dennis Glasgow Vanessa Cleaver Carol Green Debbie Milam Pat Price Marion Woods Marvin Schwartz Catherine Gill Marian Shead-Jackson Leon Adams Paulette Martin Linda Young Marion Baldwin Dr. Patty Kohler Marie McNeal Mable Donaldson FROM: Dr. Bonnie LesleyyAssociate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT: Learning Links" Attached you will find a copy of "Learning Links which list the definition, objectives, process, distribution, and archives of how Learning Links will work. The first publication of Learning Links will be sent out on Wednesday, October 7. This means that all information to be included in this first publication must be in my office no later than noon Tuesday, October 6,1998. Also, attached for your information is a copy of the Superintendents Cluster Groups that lists the meeting dates and times. Please distribute this information to your staff. Thank you all for the wonderful job that you are doing. BAL/adg Attachments Learning Links LRSD Division of Instruction Definition Learning Links is a weekly, consolidated mailing to principals that includes all communication from the Division of Instruction to the schools. The packet will include the following: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. All memoranda to principals or groups of principals (e.g., high school, junior/ middle school, elementary school. Incentives schools. Magnet schools, clusters, etc.) Copies of memoranda sent to school-level staff, which are provided to principals for their information (e.g., memoranda to English teachers, first grade teachers, counselors, etc.) Information about professional development opportunities Information from federal and state officials relating to curriculum/instruction/ assessment issues Suggested readings Updates on our steps toward implementation of the Student Success Model (standards, assessments, professional development, personalized education, building community support, and communication) Objectives 1. To provide a higher quality of service to one category of primary customers, principals. 2. To improve communication from the Division of Instruction to principals. 3. To improve communication within the Division of Instruction through the distribution of Learning Links to Instruction staff and members of the Superintendents Cabinet. Process All memoranda and other information to be sent to principals are to be delivered to Bonnie Lesleys office by noon on Tuesday of each week. These documents can be in the form of hard copies, faxes, or through attachments to e-mail. Confidential communication sent to individual principals or to a small group where there is no need for others to know should continue to be sent outside the packet. Each item must include at the top or in the subject line a phrase or sentence that describes the content. Examples follow
Kathy Lease attaches a summary of the school climate survey responses. Marion Woods provides information about a conference in Little Rock on school restructuring. Vanessa Cleaver sets up meetings to organize Vertical Teams as a part of the NSF project. All Division of Instruction secretaries shall receive information on the deadlines for submission, the expectations for format, and on the requirements for describing the item.Items submitted past the deadline or that do not include the required information shall be returned to the administrator submitting the item. Principals shall be instructed to IGNORE any information from Division of Instruction staff sent to them outside the packet unless it contains the initials and approval of Bonnie Lesley or Kathy Lease (these approvals will be given for emergencies only). Principals receiving any communication from outside the packet from Instruction staff are requested to send the items to Bonnie Lesley so that the rules relating to communication from this Division can be reinforced. When Bonnie Lesley or Kathy Lease approve an item to be sent outside the packet, a copy of that item shall be included in the next weeks packet for everyones information. Staff from the Division of Instruction are NOT to duplicate through separate mailings to principals any communication included in the packet. Staff from the Division of Instruction are NOT to require principals to duplicate materials and distribute them to teachers. Rather, a copy of memoranda distributed to teachers or other staff shall be included for the principals information. The graphic used by the Superintendent in the 1998 Principals Institute shall be used on the cover sheet, and the color of the cover sheet shall remain the same throughout the year in order to give identity to the publication. An index of each packet shall be compiled on the second page that includes the one-sentence or phrase description of each item. This index helps people decide which items they must read and also facilitates locating an item in a past issue that needs to be referenced. Distribution Learning Links items shall be screened, organized, and indexed by designated staff, then copied and-distributed, as follows: 1 copy to each elementary school and each secondary school under 500 2 copies to each secondary school over 500 1 copy to each department head in the Division of Instruction 1 copy to each member of the LRSD Cabinet The packet shall be distributed on Wednesday afternoon of each week. It is the responsibility of each person receiving the packet to read it promptly and then to route it or pieces of it to other appropriate staff working in the school or in the department. Archives The Associate Superintendent for Instruction, the Assistant Superintendent of PRE, and the Coordinator of Professional Development shall maintain a complete set of the packets for future reference. SCHOOL CLUSTER GROUPS A B C D E Central High Dunbar Jr. Henderson Jr. Pulaski Hts. Jr. Badgett Bale Forest Pk. Jefferson Fair High Mabelvale Jr. Southwest Jr. Booker Magnet Garland King Mabelvale Meadowcliff Hall High Forest Heights Jr. Brady Carver Magnet Fair Park Franklin Fulbright McDermott McClellan High Cloverdale Jr. Chicot Cloverdale Geyer Springs Rightsell Rockefeller Wakefield Parkview High Metropolitan ALC Mann Magnet Jr. Baseline Dodd Gibbs Magnet Terry Mitchell Otter Creek Romine Washington Western Hills Pulaski Hts. Administrators: Wilson Administrators: Williams Magnet Administrators: Watson Administrators: Woodruff Administrators: To be assigned. To be assigned. To be assigned. To be assigned. To be assigned. * * REVISED * * SCHEDULE OF CLUSTER MEETINGS A B C D E Monday, 09-14-98 1:30-3:30 p.m. Tuesday, 09-15-98 1:30- 3:30 p.m. Wednesday, 09-16-98 1:30- 3:30 p.m. Thursday, 09-17-98 1:30- 3:30 p.m. Monday, 09-21-98 1:30-3:30 p.m. Monday, 11-16-98 1:30-3:30 p.m. Tuesday, 11-17-93 9:30- 11:30 a.m. Tuesday, 11-17-98 1:30-3:30 p.m. Wednesday, 11-18-98 9:30-11:30 a.m. Wednesday, 11-18-98 1:30-3:30 p.m. Wednesday, 02-17-99 1:30 - 3:30 p.m. Thursday, 02-18-99 9:30- 11:30 a.m. Tuesday, 02-16-99 1:30-3:30 p.m. Tuesday, 02-16-99 9:30-11:30 a.m. Wednesday, 02-17-99 9:30-11:30 a m Thursday, 05-06-99 9 30 - 11:30 am. Wednesday. 05-05-99 1:30 - 3:30 p m. Wednesday, 05-05-99 9:30-11:30 a m. Thursday. 05-06-99 1:30 - 3:30 p.m. Tuesday, 05-04-99 1:30-3:30 p m Cluster Assignments Cluster A - Area
Quality IndexCustomer Service & School Climate Kathy Lease (Lead) Linda Watson Suellen Vann Junious Babbs Debbie Milam Pat Price Doug Eaton Darrel Paradis Mike Martello Morlin McCoy Terrence Roberts Cluster B - Area: Quality IndexStudent Achievement & Value Added Incentive Bonnie Lesley (Lead) Gene Parker Dillingham Marie McNeal John Ruffins Dick Hurley Stephen Ross Cluster C - Area: Quality IndexAttendance & At-Risk I Drop Out Sadie Mitchell (Lead) Jo Evelyn Elston Carol Green Lloyd Sain Bobby Jones Paulette Martin Valerie Hudson Mark Milhollen Brady Gadberry Cluster D - Area: Campus Leadership Guidelines, Administrative Policy 4 Campus Report Card Les Gamine (Lead) Marion Woods Brady Gadberry Dennis Glasgow Patty Kohler Linda Young Mona Briggs Cluster E - Area
Campus LeadershipPlanning & Campus Goals Marian Lacey (Co-Lead) Frances Cawthon (Co-Lead) Mable Donaldson Lucy Lyon Leon Adams Ed Williams Vanessa Cleaver TO
FROM
SUBJECT
LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 S. PULASKI LITTLE ROCK, ARKANSAS 72201 August 26, 1998 Pat Price Gene Parker Dr. Patty Kohler Kris Huffman Judy Milam Judy Teeter Dr. Bonnie Lesley,Associate Superintendent for Instruction Urban School Development
Literacy as a Lever for Change See the attached ,nformation from the Internet. This program was the one I was trying to think of. It sounds exciting, doesnt it?! 20/20 Analysis sounds good too! Maybe we should create a LRSD literacy model that is a hybrid of the best from the best external models. BAL/adg AttachmentTools for Schools - Urban School D...nt
Literacy as a Lever for Change http://www.ed.gov/pubs/ToolsforSchools/usd.html Tools for Schools - April 1998 Urban School Development: Literacy as a Lever for Change What Is It? For the past 5 years, the Center for School Improvement has collaborated with a number of Chicago elementary schools on an initiative called Urban School Development: Literacy as a Lever for Change. Each school in the collaborative serves an impoverished community where student achievement is very low. The network includes two "continuing" schools that have been collaborating with the Center for several years, and five "new" schools (including two "probation" schools) that joined the network 2 years ago. The clustering enables schools to be a resource to each other. Additionally, to break down schools' isolation from outside expertise, the program also partners with the Martha L. King Early Language and Literacy Center at the Ohio State University. This is the National Center for Reading Recovery. Why Did It Get Started? The Center for School Improvement was initiated simultaneously with the enactment of Public Act 85-1418. This legislation sought to enhance children's learning opportunities in the Chicago Public Schools, and reconnect local schools with their communities. Toward these ends, principals were placed on performance contracts, each school elected a parent-dominated local school council, teachers' voices were amplified by virtue of their seats on the local school council and also by the creation of a professional personnel advisory committee, and local schools were given much more fiscal authority. As a university- based, external partner, the Center for School Improvement's mission is to promote each school's comprehensive development. How Does It Work? At present, all of the schools have made significant progress toward restructuring. They are deeply engaged in a comprehensive school development process that aims to: Enhance the leadership capacity of staff and parents
Strengthen school committees (the local school council, the professional personnel advisory committee and other committees) such that schools become responsive to the needs of their communities and self-guided
Develop professional expertise and practice such that a professional community develops, teaching and learning is enhanced, and all students have the opportunity to attain the highest academic standards
and Build local capacity so that evaluation and accountability is rigorous, and decision- making is democratic, data-dnven, strategic, and focused on the needs of children. The Literacy as a Lever for Change initiative is organized around four programmatic areas: leadership development, literacy, social services, and building local capacity for strategic planning and evaluation. We summarize our strategies and core activities below. 1 of 4 8/25/98 5:25 PM Tools for Schools - Urban School D...nt: Literacy as a Lever for Change http
//www.ed.gov/pubs/ToolsforSchools/usd.html Literacy Initiative At the primary level, the Center for School Improvement's literacy initiative is a collaboration with Ohio State University. At the intermediate and upper grades, we collaborate with the Chicago Area Writing Project and Writers in Schools. These partnerships enable schools to draw on the principles of literacy instruction and teacher professional development that have been evolved in these programs over more than two decades. The program aims to ensure the equity goal of success for all students by creating differentiated services that include intensive tutorials, small group instruction, and enriched literacy classrooms. Teachers are coiuiected with outside expertise and each other through a year-long workshop. Follow-up support is provided from Ohio State University, the Center for School Improvement, and the school's literacy coordinators. A local assessment system is also developed by teachers to ensure that assessment is authentic and always coimected to meaningful instruction. Family literacy programs round out the initiative. Through a home-book program and other parent education activities, the program seeks to meaningfully engage all parents as full partners in their children's education. Social Service Initiative The Center for School Improvement's social service initiative coordinates and develops services for children, and better connects each school to its community. Most importantly, it engages all of the adults in the school community in sustained discussion about the kinds of citizens they would like their children to become, the joint responsibility that parents and professionals must take fo" children's well-being, and the norms of discipline and behavior that must be established to recreate schools as caring, personal environments that best promote children's development. Specific activities include the development of a social service team at each school. These teams meet and deliberate on a regular basis, visit community agencies, and problem solve across communities. The aim is for school decision-making to become deliberative, strategic, and fully inclusive. The social service aspect of the model is viewed as prerequisite to any meaningful academic change. It ameliorates parents' and professionals' isolation from each other, creates time and a safe environment for adults in the school community to discuss children's needs, and establishes a social service team whose job it is to coordinate and personalize services around those needs. Leadership Development The aim of the Center for School Improvement's leadership activities is to develop the capacity of the entire professional staff to work together and with parents. This is the only viable path toward creating school communities that can become self-guided and act in the best interests of children. Center for School Improvement senior staff mentor principals on a continuous basis. The program encourages the formation of a leadership team at each school. Staff from the Center regularly meet with this team to jointly evaluate school plans, budgets, programs, staffing, and ties to external expertise. The aim is to develop a team that broadly represents the school community and can share responsibility with the principal and local school council for budget and school improvement planning. Network schools are also asked to fund a role for at least two full-time, freed literacy coordinators. These individuals receive intensive training and mentoring from Ohio State University and Center for School Improvement staff. The job of these teacher leaders is to teach a small group of students, and individually mentor the efforts of classroom teachers as they implement the literacy framework. 2 of 4 8/25/98 5:25 PMTools for Schools - Urban School D...nt: Literacy as a Lever for Change http://www.ed.gov/pubs/ToolsforSchools/usd.html Building Analytic Capacities The aim of these activities is that schools develop the capacity to collect good information, then analyze and use it for programming, planning, evaluation, and budgeting. Schools are encouraged to engage in self-analysis, and together with Center staff, surveys, needs assessments, interviews, and classroom visits are conducted. Feedback is provided to the schools by Center staff. Students' test scores are analyzed and findings are shared with school staff. Implications for staff development and strategic planning (school improvement planning, budgeting, and personnel selection) are also pursued. Additional documentation and evaluation activities include aimual testing of a sample of students engaged in the initiative and the development of a local assessment system for instructional guidance. These assessments provide the public evaluations that can document both progress and problems. Most importantly, substantive feedback to schools opens up discussion about what the tests are measuring, as well as the resources that teachers need in order to promote the kinds of quality instruction that will enhance student learning and performance. What Are The Costs? Network schools are asked to enter a cost-sharing arrangement with the Center for School Improvement. The bulk of this sum pays for the two literacy coordinator positions. Support for Center for School Improvement staff, research, and program development comes from the Center for Research on the Education of Students Placed At Risk, the Chicago Community Trust, the MacArthur and Joyce Foundations, the Annenberg Challenge Grant, and also contributions from two private philanthropists. How Is The Model Implemented In A School? Network schools must be amenable to a multi-year collaboration and be willing to allocate the necessary funding to support this comprehensive initiative. What Is The Evidence That The Model Is Successful? The Literacy as a Lever for Change initiative is in a pilot stage. To date, implementation of the program is showing classroom effects, that is, teachers who are actively implementing the literacy framework are showing statistical and educational improvements in student learning as measured on standardized tests and local assessments. In addition, there have been positive changes in school culture and climate, a pluralization of leadership, and enhanced parent involvement in both governance activities and support for children's learning. Where Can I See It? A limited number of site visits can be arranged by contacting the Director of Research of the Center for School Improvement. Whom Do I Contact? Sharon Rollow, Director of Research Center for School Improvement 1313 East 60th Street Chicago, Illinois 60637 Telephone: 773-702-4472
Fax: 773-702-2010 E-mail: rollow@,consortium-chicago.org The Research Base 3 of 4 8/25/98 5:25 PM Tools for Schools - Urban School D.,.nt: Literacy as a Lever for Change http
//www.ed.gov/pubs/ToolsforSchools/usd.html The Center for School Improvement's literacy initiative is grounded in more than 20 years of research on children's learning and teachers' professional development at the National Center for Reading Recovery at the Martha L. King Early Language and Literacy Center at the Ohio State University. The leadership initiative is based on theories of democratic governance. The literature on organizational development grounds the Center for School Improvement's work with schools around strategic planning and building analytic capacity. -###- [Urban Learner Framework] IF [Adaptive Learning Environments Model] 4 of 4 8/25/98 5:25 PM Tools for Schools - 20/20 Analysis
A Tool for Instructional Planning http
//www.ed.gov/pubs/ToolsforSchools/20_20.html Tools for Schools - April 1998 20/20 Analysis: A Tool for Instructional Planning What Is It? 20/20 Analysis is a planning tool for developing an integrative service delivery plan that focuses on giving students who show the least and most progress on significant outcome variables intensive instruction and related service support. The goal of the program is to provide an analytic procedure for identifying students most in need of special help, based on student achievement and other outcome data routinely collected by schools and school districts. By identifying students in the lowest 20th and highest 20th percentiles, 20/20 Analysis pinpoints those students for whom the existing instructional and related service program delivery is least effective, so that it can be adapted to suit their individual needs. Why Did It Get Started? Current categorical programs designed to serve students with special needs are ineffective and cause a number of problems. In many schools, 50 percent or more of all students are placed in special categorical programs at some point between kindergarten and grade 12. The time and cost involved in such categorical evaluations and placements are staggering, and implementation of the categorical programs tends to be disjointed and ineffective in meeting students' needs. How Does It Work? 20/20 Analysis consists of a two-phase process: 1 of 4 8/25/98 5:30 PM Tools for Schools - 20/20 Analysis: A Tool for Instructional Planning http://wwi\:-.ed.gov/pubs/ToolsforSchools/20_20.html Needs Analysis Administrators and educators select an area of learning outcomes such as reading, math, attendance, or disciplinary incidence and assess students' performance within that area. For example, using existing data from standardized achievement tests, and/or curriculum-based assessment and teacher evaluations in reading achievement, the school staff then examine grade- wide or school-wide achievement levels to identify students who require "special' interventions. Achievement levels for students below the 20th percentile or above the 80th percentile are identified as "low 20" or "high 20" groups for whom curriculum adaptation and/or intensive instruction are needed. By focusing on both the lowest and highest ends of the achievement continuum, findings from the 20/20 Analysis provide a broad, systematic, outcome-based approach to identifying students requiring special educational and related service support. 20/20 Analysis provides an alternative to the current practice of identifying or "certifying" students for the existing narrowly framed (and mostly disjointed) categorical programs, which tend to result in child labeling and program segregation. Implementation Plan Phase two identifies and analyzes alternative ways to modify curriculum and instructional and related service delivery practices to the learning needs of individual students in the high- and low-20 groups. Emphasis at this phase of the analysis centers on programmatic implementation concerns that address the needs of the individual students and the development of individual program plans. What Are The Costs? The cost requirements vary, depending on the scope of analysis and need for follow-up activities (e.g., staff time to compile school district-collected data for analysis
staff time to develop an implementation plan for improving instructional and related service delivery
and staff time for implementation training). However, a central premise of the 20/20 approach is that the starting point for improvement is more efficient and effective use of current resources and finding creative ways to redeploy existing resources, including personnel to support implementation. How Is The Model Implemented In A School? Implementation of Phase I, the Needs Analysis Phase, can be carried out by using school-collected data with very minimal staff time. This aspect of the analysis can be done by the district-level evaluators in the district's "accountability" or evaluation office. Phase n involves the thorough examination of Phase I findings and active participation of teachers, parents, and related service providers to develop an implementation plan. This plan calls for a collaborative and coordinated appeal to service delivery to enhance learning opportunities for each student, focusing particularly on those in the bottom and top 20 percent group for whom adaptations of the curriculum and instructional and related services support are needed. Specifically, 20/20 Analysis provides schools with the information necessary for developing service delivery plans that encompass a full range of coordinated approaches to meet the individual needs of all children, including and especially those at the margins of the achievement continuum. 20/20 Analysis is intended to facilitate program implementation efforts in integrated ways to reduce fragmentation and improve program effectiveness. What Is The Evidence That The Model Is Successful? 2 of 4 8/25/98 5:30 PMTools for Schools - 20/20 Analysis: A Tool for Instructional Planning http://www.ed.gOv/pubs/ToolsforSchools/20_20.htinl 3 of 4 20/20 Analysis has gained increasing support among schools interested in implementing comprehensive school reform, particularly in light of the Title I schoolwide program provisions of the Improving America's Schools Act of 1994 (IAS A) and the 1997 reauthorization of the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA, Part B). 20/20 Analysis directly addresses many of the current problems in the delivery of special or categorical programs through a variety of vehicles, including those discussed below. Providing a reliable, accountable, and cost-effective process for identifying instructional and related service needs of the students in a given school or district. The current practice for identification and classification of students for special programs has become an increasingly costly venture. Program categories are ill defined, and classification is unreliable. The 20/20 procedure seeks to appropriately adapt school programs according to simple yet comprehensive and systematic procedures. This allows schools to quickly identify which students need extra support, without having to use costly and stigmatizing identification and classification methods in order to access services. Schools can then apply the money they would have spent on testing and categorization toward much needed services. Redesigning demeaning labels (e.g., learning disabled, attention deficient, or emotionally or educationally disturbed) that have no currency for instructional or learning improvement. The current classification and labeling system not only fails to provide any specific and practical interventions that can be used to meet the needs of the individual student, but is likely to generate resistance from parents and have deeply stigmatic effects on children. With 20/20 Analysis procedures, the first step in diagnosis is lot labeling, but direct assessment of the learning needs and progress. Focusing on individual needs of students, especially those whose learning progress is marginal. This adds important dimensions of student achievement in ways that are instructionally relevant. Implementation of the second phase of 20/20 Analysis has consistently brought about collaborative efforts among professionals with specialized expertise who sometimes operate in disjointed and competitive ways, and encouraging school- and district-wide coordination of programs. By concentrating on the important outcomes or goals of education and the basic components of student learning, such as reading, quantitative thinking, and classroom behavior, implementation of 20/20 Analysis has resulted in significantly improved student outcomes for children at the margins and students in the middle of the achievement distribution. In 20/20 Analysis learning difficulties are indicators of intervention needs rather than student deficits. Greater efficiency and effectiveness in the delivery of special services can be accomplished through early detection, description of learning needs, and interventions. Where Can I See It? 20/20 analyses are being carried out in selected schools in a variety of settings. Contact the Laboratory for Student Success for schools and school districts using 20/20 Analysis as a planning- and instructional-related service delivery tool. Whom Do I Contact? Dr. Margaret C. Wang, Professor and Director Laboratory for Student Success at Temple University Center for Research in Human Development and Education 1301 Cecil B. Moore Avenue Philadelphia, Peimsylvania 19122 6091 Telephone: 215-204-3000
Fax: 215-204-5130 Toll-free Telephone: 800-892-5550 E-mail: lss@,vm.temple.edu'. Website: http://www.temple.edu/LSS 8/25/98 5:30 PM Tools for Schools - 20/20 Analysis
A Tool for Instructional Planning http://www.ed.gOv/pubs/ToolsforSchools/20_20.html The Research Base Approximately 80 percent of the students now served in "special" categorical programs such as Special Education, Title I, as well as others who are in a variety of remedial and compensatory programs, show poor achievement in basic literacy skills. Findings from research demonstrate quite clearly that these students do not need different kinds of instruction, but more intensive quality instruction. 20/20 Analysis is a planning and program monitoring tool. It provides a systematic way of developing informed decisions utilizing existing school data. 20/20 analyses have been carried out in schools varying in geographic and socioeconomic characteristics. Feedback from these schools has indicated that the analysis is a feasible process and provides useful indicators for identifying students whose needs require greater-than-usual instruction and related services. Furthermore, the school staff sees 20/20 Analysis as a useful process for fostering a non-categorical approach to achieving targeted learning outcomes for individual students. By assembling data over successive years, the 20/20 approach is useful in showing how successful individual schools are in improving the learning progress of low- and high-20 groups, as well as for average students. Longitudinal data show that some schools are consistently successfill in increasing the process of low-20 pupils (e.g., the data show low-20 pupils in first and second grades who rank significantly higher in terms of achievement by grades five and six). Data are also assembled to show characteristics of schools that are successful in increasing achievement at one or both margins (low-20, high-20, or both). Charting progress by various subgroups of students (e.g., Afncan- Americans, Latinos, Native Americans) has been greatly facilitated without the use of labeling or separations of students by category. IIIIII -###- [Introduction] PREV HEXT l[Advancement Via Individual Determination (AVID)] 4 of 4 8/25/98 5:30 PM BD % L- I. I 'I i f LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 SOUTH PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 December 9,1998 TO: Middle School Principals FROM: Dr. Bonnie Lesley/Associate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT: Reading/Writing Workshop The two books most referred to for reading/writing workshop strategies follow: In the Middle: New Understanding About Writing, Reading and Learning by Nanci Atwell, Boynton/Cook. ISBN: 0867093749. Cost is $32.50. Seeking Diversity: Language Arts with Adolescents by Linda Rief and Nanci Atwell. Heinemann. ISBN: 0435085980. Cost is $25.00. I recommend also to everybody the second edition of Best Practice: New Standards for Teaching and Learning in Americas Schools by Steven Zemelman, Harvey Daniels, and Arthur Hyde, published by Heinemann, 1998. The chapters on "Best Practice in Reading and Best Practice on Writing are both excellent, and they refer to Nanci Atwells work. BAL/adg I // 6/^^ LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 January 6, 1999 TO: Principals u FROM: SUBJECT: Dr. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for instruction Resources for Literacy Teaching Strategies Several of you have asked me about "best practice strategies relating to literacy. Each school should have in its professional development library the journals published by the National Council of Teachers of English and the International Reading Association. These organizations a so publish wonderful monographs and books, as well as newsletters of interest to teachers. Subscription information for NCTE and IRA are attached. One of my favorite publishers of books by teachers for teachers is Heinemann. I am attaching a copy of their catalog for ydur convenience. Youll see many books you want. Elementary principals - please note pp. 3, 4, 5, 9, 30, 35, 36, 37 - just to get started. Middle school principals - please note pp. 12, 13, 46, 47, 48, 49 - again just as a start! There are wealths of other books too that will help in social studies, science, and mathematics. f I I have seen teacher study groups work powerfully to change instructional practice. You may wish to consider such a strategy to support Campus Leadership. BAL/rcmL.L I /I 3/^ 7 I I LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 (501) 324-2131 i I January 11,1999 TO
Middle School Principals i FROM: SUBJECT
Dr. Bonnie Lesley, Associate Superintendent for Instruction I Professional Development Resources So that you and your Reading and Writing Workshop teachers can get started in thinking about next years new course, we are sending under separate cover the following resources: 4 copies of 4 copies of 4 copies of In the Middle by Nancie Atwell Seeking Diversity by Linda Rief 1 set of Side by Side The Workshop Series by Nancie Atwell You may wish to begin study/discussion groups on these materials. Please call Gene Parkers office if you need assistance. BAL/rcm i j I j cc: Gene Parker L. Z_ LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 (501) 324-2131 July 16. 1999 TO: Principals FROM: SUBJECT: Dr. Bonnie Lesley,"Associate Superintendent, for Instruction Remediating Reading Problem Some of you have asked me about remedial programs for kids who cant read. At the elementary level we have recommended ResKting Recovery, Success for All, and the Reading Clinic. Two of our middle schools are implementing new programs this fall: Project Read at Mablevale and the Scottish Rite program at Pulaski Heights. You may want to take a look at the attached information on a program called Read Right. I am not recommending it because I have no first-hand knowledge about it, but the attached information certainly looks good! We are going to need an effective program if you are to improve your literacy scores. Well look into it some more, but in the meantime I wanted to share what I have. If you know people in any of the districts using the program, please give them a call. Attachments BAL/rcmLITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 July 19,1999 TO
J -A'fe FROM
SUBJECT
Elementary Principals Dr. Bonnie Lesiey.\^sociate Superintendent for Instruction Intermediate Reading and Writing Ai' f Under separate cover I am sending you one copy of another book by Lucy Calkins called Living Between the Lines. Please make it available to your teachers. I think it will be helpful in creating a culture that supports the development of literacy. t. 4 BAL/adg 1' I fit ll 1 15a VO. . A little rock school district instructional resource center 3001 PULASKI STREET little rock, ar 72206 (501)324-2131 July 29, 1999 TO
Middle and High School Principals FROM: ichoo W( , MOOv Dr. Bonnie Lesley,'Associate Superintendent, for Instruction SUBJECT
Reading at the Secondary Level We all feel frustrated at the low reading skills of many of our secondary students. Please read the attached articles carefully. There are some ideas here that we should consider. Attachment BAL/rcm Published by the Harvard Graduate School of Education july/August 1999 Volume IS,Number4 HARVARD EDUCATION LETTER N S D E Reading Success at Boys Town 5 Johnny Still Cant Read? Why high school students arent developing the reading skills they need__ and what some researchers suggest to solve this growing problem By Peggy J. Farber Each fall Anna Lobianco, a reading specialist at Bread and Roses Integrated Arts High School in New York Qty, gives a reading test to the 90 incoming 9th-gradeis. As part of the assessment, she inter-students are lagging. Fewer high schools today have reading support stafflike Lobiancothan at any time in the past to instruct students in advanced reading processes. In fact, experts say that secondary teachers views the students about their attitudes toward reading and should just assume that most of their students cannot how they handle problems that arise while reading I get the exact same responses from kids every year, says Lobianco. They hate reading. Its just a labor. Of the students Lobianco screens, almost one-third are identified for inclusion in her remedial reading class. A question I always ask kids is what do you do when you come to a word you dont know, she continues They all say the same thing: T look it up in the dictionary. They dont have any [other] strate-read at grade level In practical terms, they say, this means that high school teachers will have to train stu- A new survey shows only 40 dents in reading at the same time they teach content That challenge is especially fotmidible considering percent of adolescents read well fbat high schoolers enough to comfortably manage standard high school texts. gies for reading. They dont have the skip it, try to figure it out and come back to it later* type strategies Lobiancos observations are echoed by results of the with reading problems may have gotten sidetracked at different stages in their development. According to Catherine Snow, professor at the Harvard Graduate School What Secondary Teachers Can Do to Teach Reading 4 The Brain-Based" Ballyhoo 5 Breakfast for the Brain 6 Segregation: Stepping Back in Time? 7 What Teachers Know and Dont Know Matters Dennis Sparks 8 -OurNew^ebsIte www.edletteRorari^Q ____________________ ______ failed to learn fundamentals of reading in the primary -V- 3? nova-..fl. .. J , .L.-:yersfQns.ofo&Are^cte^ iireadingfinclU^fn^.uSeMlrnksitoT the researchers and programs A - : menoonedias^weH &addltfonal . links andiresourcesl^tfbcus.1%. .on seconA^,schook^dlng.A. The Forum- Feature^^i-tife::, / V A transcnpt-ofrBoys to Mend an-HGSE.Forunj'dlscussion.y/itbi-.' Carol Gilligan, James Garbarlno,: land James' Qlllgan about the . r emotional struggles and violence
.'i
ln/boys.
::&^X' of Education, some older students struggle because they 1998 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) on but never progressed in fluency and comprehension in reading, released in March by the U.S Department of ~ Education. The new survey shows that although virtuaUy all adolescents are able to carry out simple reading tasks. sufficiently to read the texts encountered after 4th grade. Still others developed reading skills up to, say, a 6th-only 40 percent can read well enough to comfortably manage standard high school texts or 8th-grade level, but havent actually read enongi develop fee vocabulary or general knowledge that Ino more ____________ _ advanced reading requires Although most high school Only 6 percent of American 17-year-olds read at what ets may be able to read the words on the page, many ii .u..:----------- do not have the skills that allow them to synth^^^r summarize information, draw conclusions, make general- L izations, or relate information drawn from texts to their 1^ NAP designers deem an advanced levelthat is, can syn-thesize and learn fi-om specialized reading material. That age group is the only one showing lower scores today than when the NAEP was first given in 1971, which begs the question, Why are the reading skills of older students not showing more improvement? While the nation has concentrated much needed attention on beginning readers, efforts to help high school own knowledge. Secondary school students are expected to learn independently from print, but no one shows them how, says Arlene Barry, an assistant professor of curriculum and instruction at the University of Kansas We start to Also-visitounpase research ' features Jndndlng those on retention, successfufminontyL'/. students, and science
educadonr -chi&mW work with kids on stories from the time I irvard Letter TOWAL DIRECTOR . ing you how to tangle with the text, how to construct meaning. Reading experts say another factor theyre infants. We read stories to them, and feev know the pattern
theres going to be an ending and a resolution. The kind is fee publics mispercepuons about of texts kids are reading at higher levels- literacy. Across the states, governors and teachers engage students in a dialogue (thus, reciprocal) at employs four thinking strat^ generating questions based on what the students already know, pre- I >? 4 -.5 J y- GrMS-OMi- 3 iOCIATt EDITOR MGonton 3DUCT1ON EDITOR dy.WalS.-. ... [TORIALASSISTAMT jIkednoand EB manager g) Goman '*' the informational, technical textsthere are patterns in them, too, but the kids are not aware of that and nobody walks them through it, Common Mistakes Mature readers might find it perplexing ^ltyedtor . . that adolescents fail to stop reading and legislatures pour public resources into intervention programs for young children dBng what is about to happenjnthe text, summartTing what students have lUSt remand storing to clarify when students and fail to fund any literacy programs for hit confusing material. secondary students Their mistake: assuming that reading develops automatically once a child masters the fundamentals Were seduced by this notion that if we could just teach the basics by 4th Another effort gets teachers them-chirdFBmora jrrORlALADVISORir BOARD Diracton Priraa^ eftwf.HGSfe Katherine C Boies, jcorenHGSUnda Dariing-jntnoftd. Professor. Columba achera College
Saly Dias, jperintendent'Afetertown (MA) ubScSchoolsHaroldHowB ll, - ecturer. Emeritus, HGSE
Susan - loora Johnson. Professor and academic Dean, HGSfc Robert :epivProfes$or.HGS& eegy Kemp. Office of School irtnenhips, HGSE Marya jverson. Superintendent. North _ Colonie Central Sdiool District. Mewtonvile. NY
Deborah Meier, , MndpaL Mission HUI School. 8<t>n. MA: John Merrow. Presi-dentlhe Merrw Rexxt Jerome T Murphy, Profesiorand Dean, HGSEAnhuf-J. RosenthaL PubBsh-l Cowutant
Cadierine Snow. Professor,HGSEJay Sugarman., Teadw. Riride School BrookAne. MAiArtadneVabamis, Diractor of take Stock when they become confused, . grade kids would be able to handle the but reading specialists report that this is complex demands of literacy that are one of the most common mistakes young required of middle and high school s^ adults make Teachers dont realize that kids can read something and say the words okay, but not understand what theyve reada^not even know th^ dont undead, Barry saya In secondly sdiool, teaching shifts from the process of learning to the content students should learn, leaving teachers with little time to address reading. Even teachers who know how to teach reading in their content areas rarely do so. Thirty-seven states require second-dents, and thats just not going to happen, ary school teachers to take at least one Governors and legislatures pour public resources into intervention programs for young children and fail to fond any literacy programs for secondary students. Pu^ WonTBOon,HGSE Htfvod Eitonon Later (ISSN 87SS-37I6) b pufaitfitd bffwmWy b)f Hvwd Graduate School of Education. 6 Appan*^. Canixidjt. MA 011 38-3751 Sccond-daa poR>|* Boston, MA. and addtional mailing oAces. Posonaster Sand address dwi|(s) to Harvard Eduadon Lkct. 8 Appiw Vfey, Cambridge. MA 02138-3751 Slpied articles in Horvord EiAMOtion - Later raprasenc the views of the uxhorsJMkirass editorial corra-jpondance to effitora. Harvard . E****^?^ Lcoer, Gutman Library. 6 Appian Cambridge, MA 011 3^3752: phone 617-495-3431
fex817496-35B4: emal edicor^edieoerorg
web: www,cdlcter.orx. I W by the President and FeBowi Harwd Coll^ PuUislwd as a non-profit service. ' Al rights reserved. Special permission is required to reproduce in any manner, n whole or in part
. die rraterial herein contained.
',,Cal 617^95-3432 fer reprint. ^'penmslon infonnatiork HOWTO SUBSCRIBE - Send $32 for in^viduab. $39 for * s bwitutions ($40 (or Canada/Mex- C0b$49 other fereig^ In LLS. finds hfervarti Uuation Letter. Appan VWy, Cambfk^ MA
.01I3^3752
orallusat8l7-495- 'i-f3432 h Manachusets or' f,.''^flpO-5I3-O7i3 outside Massachu- A sitt Subscription prices subject ^*^Co dngi without notice. Siri^ edpiat $5.00. Back issues and bulk ^:."ajbeaiptiora available at spedal ". nnc oil 800-513-0763. course in reading, yet studies show that only a small percentage of teachers actually use the strategies they leam. And recent sure trends are making it tougher for teachers to stray from content instruc-tion. Thirteen states have recendy instituted exit exams that require students to meet high standards that emphasize selves to think about how they read and then try to pass those skills on to kids. Cynthia Greenleaf director of research at the San Francisco-based WestEds Strategic Literacy Initiative, and her colleague, Ruth Schoenbach, are collaborating with secondary school teachers to bring insights from cognitive research into classrooms. Greenleaf says fee first stepjn^r work with high school teachers is always to get them to recognize what they do when feev read. We have groups of social studies teachers sit together and read a history analysis, and chemistry teachers read a Scientific American article, Greenleaf says. And we have them list their reading moveswhat they pay attention to. Inevitably, teachers discover feat advanred reading in one disaplirie is nothing likeTt is in another.Teachers need tn unrover such hidden, or veiled. Richard Vacca says. We have 30 years of procesvss and make them apparent to statistics that show the problem isnt only with beginning literacy, yet we front load everything and then the funding just stops. students, says Greenleaf We need to try to figure out ways of helping our kids into 1 content knowledge, and more states are in the process of rolling out such exams. Teaching adolescent literacy is not supported from the top down, says Richard Vacca, former president of the International Reading Association and co-author of a respected textbook on secondary school reading. The oidy thing Thinking About Thinking There is a considerable body of experimental research demonstrating that when that masked world of how you do literary readings, science readings, historical readings, she says. Next Greenleaf and Schoenbach introduce teachers to research-based tech- adolescent students are shown how to tTuiqiquueess ssuucchh aass_ rreecaipprroocaarl, tteeaacchnmingg tmhadti
^
rimreir own thinking, they able help students expandto^epertoue of ____ "* ' . . - - J__ flAvCKililn to get more from their texts and to per-fotm mote complicated operations with the information.Thinkingabout think-ing or metacognition is a hallmark of thats important is a score on a state profi- ea^dolescent developmenUn^e dency t,estt, aAnndd tthhaattss ccoonntteenntt ddrriivveenn.. backboned adolescent readingexpen- Harvard lecturer Vicki Jacobs says secondary school teachers who neglectto address literacy explicitly may be add^ to the problem by sending stud^an inaccurate message about how mature 'reading works IflMy to students, Go home and read a book chapter and come meats Several experimental regimens train students to think while they read. However, little work has been done to move these protocols out of laboratories and into secondary classrooms back tomorrow and Ill give you a quiz, says Jacobs, then Im implying that good Developed in the early 1980s by reading is like a fairy landing on your researchers Ann Brown and Annemarie shoulder and you just get it Im not show- Palincsar, this approach has content-area thinking strategies and develop flexibility in using them. They also urge teacheg_to make use of the developmental strengths of adolescents At Thurgood Marshall Academic High School in San Francisco, Greenleaf and Schoenbach developed a mandatory literacy course for all incoming 9th-gtaders in 1996 that emphasizes adolescents Amerging abilities to think about thinking and to be retrospective about themselves One model feat has been tried in I-n the first unit. Reading Self and Society, classrooms and is favored by several read- students explore their own readmg iden-ing experts is^pro^ teaching''! hues, including their histones as readers - and what kind of problems they have experienced, as well as what kind of role reading will likely play in their intended career goals During the course, which met for two Furthermore, when the same students were tested again at the end of 10th 90-minute block periods and one 50-minute grade, a year after the course had ended, period per week, students also read narra-rives from authors such as Malcolm X, Explaining the results of her work with the San Francisco 9th-grade teachers, Greenleaf voices a complaint heard their gains not only held but even acceler- repeatedly in conversations with literacy Qaude Brown, Frederick Douglass, and oers. They read silently in class for 20 to 25 minutes each block period, kept, logs describing e reading problems they encountered, and got explicit instruction in self-help cognitive spategies, such as predicting questioning and clarifying At the end of the 1996-97 academic year, students showed significant gains in ated. By the spring of 1998 the group had gained approximately four years reading ability in two academic years. More significantly, perhaps, is at students perceptions about reading, as measured by open-ended surveys conducted at the beginning and end of the year, changed dramatically. More students not enough reported that they liked reading, that they purposefully decided which books to reading achievement, moving from the 47th read, had favorite authors, and understood to the 50th percentile in national ranking. what they read. experts. This is exactly why we need to do e work at the secondary level, she says, why we cant just say, Oh. e kids got it in K through 3. they know how to decode and they know how to approach words that are unfamiliar, and how to chunk text and read fluently. That is Peggy J. Farber is a freelance educarion reporter based in New York City For Further Information Notfiihg^SwesB KidsiF^I Better than Learning* KiRi^ihBSbccess'^^iB6]^TGwhW^^|'5SgO^< ..... Mi't -IJhffieETilana^'s^q^^^inN^i&a
. X- '3' __________ ifmiQfmtoe^bhis&tic^lsiie'Mj^AfBd^^TO^ Boys Town Reading Center, Fadier Ranagans Boys' Home, Boys Tosvn. Nebraska 68010:402-498-1155 M Cums and AM. Longo. When Adoiescens Cant ReodrAlethocis ok Matends that VMxk. Cambriage. MABrooldine Books, 1999. C. Czfl<a "Reading Happens in Your Mind. Not Your Mouth." CoSfijma EngSsb 3. no. 4 {Summer 1998): 6-7 R Donahue, K.VoelW,J. Campbell, and J. Maneo. NAEP 1998 Rep^ Card for dK Notion and [he States. V^^ngion. DC US. Deoarnnenc of Education. Office o' Educational Research and Improvement. March I999
www.nces. ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pubs /mainl998/l999S003html. Guide to the Reading Wars, a collection of documents and articles on the MiddlcVYeb site. Funded By the Edna McConnell Clark Foundation, MiddleWeb provides information on middle school r^orm. www.middleweb.com /Reading.htmi. D. G OBrien. R. A Stewart, and EB. Moje-'Why Content Literacy is Difficuit to Infuse into the Secondary Schooh Complexities of Curriculum. Pedagogy, and School Culture." Reading Research Quarurfy 30, no. 3 (Juiy/Augusi/' September 1995): 442-463. Project WebSIGHT provides a practical introduction to reciprocal teaching, and includes sample lessons and researcn results. The site was created by the Miami-Daae County Public Schools, tne University of Miami, and the Florida Department of Education, www.miamisci.org/tec /indexhcml. The Strategic Literacy Initiative, WesiEd, 730 Harrison Street, San Francisco, CA 94107:415-565- 3000: www.westedxrg/stratiic: send e-mail to Ruth Schoenbach at r5choen@wested.org or Cyndnia Greenleaf at cgreen@wes^.org. R.T, V^cca-'tet's Not Marginalize Adolescent Literacy." Jqumol of Adolescent and Adult Liieracy 41, no 8 (May 1998): 604-609. '7:1/is event iitndenty
hob^^^MStf^ :'seyereeinoB6^:Mi^riaafe^^l^^@^^Mlm&s4|J^.h^SMnfehyjiS^terii^td'B^:r^^na
t^ng#Ji: .yeaiSfofkfi&^eS^^roaBu&^Sbys^^'^^ral^'^ tt severe eniQtioM^4soaan^^^0^ei^pjdent^^ 'iii ^t&e^^5^.^^n^ou3Egetlriils^o:i^^ ^^^^Mfc&old^adoi^n^^fSiriisSa^g^^^^^^liJ' ^edmtoffiifrisen^tdp)^^ Isfoaehts in.her,p'rt^i7injljgOTng hdtttSSfowibeM^^^de. * ft tll ft - ytrJtH .t Ifanaawve
SO*J J-W: fei -^-3y:We^canft,afi - -. ___________________________ i_______________ ........ Ml level wtGk^e'StruggfingMti^
3S iffijgmdelCTbVftiGUse^ 3
i*Smgfie^Teafing$bfweSi'fiie6ffi-5i&&@ffi^ w^tem^Jioving'fiiOTkno^^ iffEj^tetit^
sriidenfa a^vifittgradd iwel^fe^^ lihfemtifigSormatiori&uhdmtiejS, '' <uyW
kevs fo'-the progranis siicceaafeits highlyvfiS":
{StriiSiir^ criuises pt^ctablfton^aapd'hhilfe grni^j ifjfcmBSysjCiiifejThe-ygmflenfagmt^ "
t^SmiSw^^cld^fqqiari^nl^pnf&^51alls~ifiafiyieariij^pnfi^sa^f9SiS:ffi6Westj^t^^ larejiecessaEigf^riwistudegtjft^eirn|g[tktgge:aOj6^^8f^^eyare^atje^^iear^gfsfQge^ SaeveIopm^beeaoseStl^MevfccatcliSRiif7^onli<^O^i^M-jMcfa&^bi^fhm^1he
^ffi^ j&uaallfii5t5te{frss^giiflSs:^^g]adgm^ j^^wjth^ja^ieadmg-iKoass^JllS^ i^' i dentsinifaeEiirogramgaitLabotititwD
-37< 5-1^3 k'la'iv. j.^wsK^m sir yeais foreveiv^ear of ipsEactionrand^jtfreag^ave? WfebeenfrepiieaSd-iri'sav^idc^isecim^ ^'ftaroiihdtlieicdiaf^tTlie-B^Tliwri^R^ain^C^^
i&cuirently
l3e^iuSy^S!(iffifrafts^^i^^msl?S
j jCiiiS S S- .elX, -.t- -i- ^gideasiFl^istifets?^^
^^^^ii!&e^^sSS^yel^ ssounds and gomgifinotigfi^^ortsto construdtoowledge
>!ye ti,hJs=X!it Harvard Education Letter July/August 1999 3 What Secondary Teachers Can Do To Teach Reading A three-step strategy for helping students delve deeper into texts By Vicki A. Jacobs e You want me to teach reading? But I'm a content teacher. I don't have time to stop and teach reading. Besides, I wouldn't even know how to begin. by providing them wi& means to preview ry blossoms or whether there is a national 1 fe- T1 hese are typical concerns of secondary teachers when asked to take more responsibility for their students reading. One reason for their concern may be confusion about what secondary reading is and anticipate the text. Such preparatory activity is critical for comprehension to occur. the monuments or government buildings For example, a 9th-grade social stud- that a tourist would be interested in seeing, ies class may be planning to read about cemetery near Moscow as there is near Washington, DC They might also consider Moscow as an introduction to a unit on As a result, the students build on the knowl-edge they bring to a text while beginning to Russia. Depending on the purpose of the anticipate and pose questions about that text, reading (and it is important to be explicit to students about purposes), the teacher might have students brainstorm individually about what they already know about Simply put, if reading through grades a national capital that is more familiar to 3 or 4 is about learning to readacquiring them: Washington, DC Most likely, the the skills needed to decode the written word automatically and fluentlythen reading from about grade 4 on is about using those skills to comprehend what is writtenthat is, using reading to leam. Texts used in subject areas often employ language, syntax, vocabulary, and concepts that are specific to a particular field of study. Merely assigning reading does not help students leam how to tangle with these specialized texts to construct meaning teachers must help prepare students brainstorm will spark both common associations (such as the president, the Capitol, cherry blossoms, or Arlington Pre-reading requires considerable time but is a wise and critical investment. In addition to brainstorming and graphically organizing information, teachers can also instruct students to ask and answer questions before reading. These questions which can be supplied by the teacher or developed by students through directed writing or interactive discussion, might include, What do I already know and what do I need to know before reading? and What do I think this passage will be about, given the headings graphs or pictures? Teachers can also make use of clozethat is deleting important words or concepts from a passage and having students guess or choose the word that would best fit the blank. Pre-reading activity requires considerable time, for and guide them through the texts so that National Cemetery), as well as less com-they will learn from them most effectively, mon associations certain students might but that time is a wise and critical investment, for it prepares students to actively engage with the text Pre-Reading To avoid feeling that they have to stop have because of theirpwnknowledge and Guided Reading experience (say, the Holocaust Museum, or an anecdote about a visit to Washingteaching content in order to teach reading ton, DC). The class could then compile secondary teachers might think of reading and share their brainstorms, which the The second stage of the reading process is called guuied reading. During this stage, stu-dents need structured means to integrate the knowledge and information that they bring as a comprehension or understanding teacher can use to help the students grasp to the text with the new that is provided process that involves three stages. (These particular concepts or vocabulary that will by the text. Guided-reading activities should stages are derived from a model of learning be important to understanding the text teacher can use to help the students grasp called schema theory.! The first stage is The class might then organize their called pre-reading. One of the purposes of brainstorms into categories (such as mon-pre- reading is to acknowledge the different contexts, experiences, biases, and background knowledge (often called the given) of students that will influence how they read and learn from a text (the new). By knowing what students bring to their reading teachers can provide em with bridges, or scaffolds, between the given and the newclarifying unfamiliar vocabulary and concepts, and offering other necessary information in uments, government buildings, a tourists engage students in probing the text beyond its literal meaning for deeper understanding They should include multiple points of view, which is a requirement of higher stages of view of the city), or into webs, outlines, or reading Students should have the opportu-cluster sgraphic organ_iz_e_r_s _t_h_a_t _v_is_u_a lly nhy to revise their preliminary questions, illustrate the relationships among vocabu- search for tentative answers, gather, organ-lary or concepts The teacher could then divide the class into small groups and assign each group a category from the brainstorm, asking em to use the Wash-ington, DC, examples as a way to think ize, analyze, and synthesize evidence, and begin to make generalizations or assertions about their new understanding. A simple way to lead students beyond surface understanding is to reword the factual about Moscow. For example, a group that questions that texts characteristically pro-________________ __ _ is assigned a tourists view of the dt.y videat the end of a chapter into questions theprgggs Pre-reading activities also pro- might consider whether there are gardens that ask how or why. Such questions ask mote students eng-a -gement and inter estI it* Moscow that equal the beauty of cher- students not only to locate information, but J i also to apply that information in some sub- stage, teachers give students ways to artic-stantive way. For example, a social studies ulate their understanding of what they text mieht ask, What three rivers that flow through Russia are connected by canals? Only surface comprehension is required for students to find and copy the pie, students might be asked to discuss answer from the text (the Don, Dneiper, and Volga Rivets). In contrast, a guidedreading question, such as How would Russias transportation and trade be affected if there were no canals to link e transportation). They then might be asked Don, Dneiper, and Volga rivets? requires students to consider how facts from the text inform each other and help answer the question. Other common guided-reading activities include reader-response journals and study guides 1 i Post-Reading Stage three of the secondary reading process is called post-reading. During this ulate their undeisianding of what they have read, and then to test its validity, apply it to a novel situation, or argue it against an opposing assertion. For exara-how the United States and Russia are similar and different, given one aspect of Russian culture that they have studied (e.g, the people, geography, industry, or to argue what impact these similarities and differences might have when Russia and the United States need to come to some agreement of international consequence, such as the war in Kosovo. By engaging students in pre-, guided-, and post-reading activities, teachers not only support students understanding of content, but also provide them with opportunities to hone their comprehen-sion, vocabulary, and study skills without interrupting content learning. Teachers should make decisions about how they will use such activities, depending on their purposes for teaching, the difficulty of the For Further text, and how well their students can read Information the text Most teachers already employ H many of the principles and practices asso- dated with the reading process However, j. chait Stages of heading Develop-by becoming more aware of how they use them and to what end, teachers can become more confident about whether students comprehend both the word and the spirit of their texts. Mcfa' A. Jacobs is a lecturer on education and associate director of Teacher education Programs at the Harvard Graduate School Education. This article dransfrom her book. Secondary Reading and Writing: Issues and Opportunities, which will be published by Brookline Bodes later this year ment New Yoric McGnw-Hiil, 1983, D.W. Moore, j.E Readence. and R.J. PJekeJman. Prereoding Acwoej far Content Anw Heading and Learning (2nd ed.). Newark DE intemanon-al Reading Association, 1969. B.D. Roe, B.D. Stoodt, and PC. Bums. Secondary Schoo/ Reading InanjcDonilhe (^teni Areas (6ch ed.). Boston, MA
Houghton Mifflin. 1998. I The Brain-Based Ballyhoo New research on the brain may shed light on how kids leam, but should it change the way theyVe taught?The debate simmers... By Millicent Lawton j when Sarah Jerome, a Wisconsin says John Bruer, president of the James school superintendent, and her S. McDonnell Foundation in St Louis, colleagues read about a brainI 1 1 research study connecting keyboard music lessons to improved-skills in spatial and abstract reasoning in preschoolers, they didnt wax philosophic about the potential benefits of such research. They pul the new information into practiceand fast In 1996-97, Jerome and company added keyboard lessons to the elementary music curriculum in the 4,200-sludent Kettle Moraine school district in Wales, WI. When kindergartners showed better puxzle-solving aria block-building skills, Jerome plowed about $40,000most of it donatedinto buying 120 electronic keyboards for all grade levels in the districts four elementary schools. Today, teachers say the students who take keyboard lessons ence and the media hype surrounding have better concentration and discipline in them. Proponentsby and large consult-I the classroom. Are Jerome and others like her read- research about the brain can help K-12 ing too much into early results from brain research, a science still in its infancy? Fd be reluctant to invest substantial resources in a curriculum based on a single study, which funds research in neuroscience and psychology. Such reactions highhght the current the truth probably lies somewhere in tug-of-war over so-called brain-based education, a pedagogical bandwagon set Are Jerome and others reading too much into early results fixim brain research, a science still in its infancy? in motion by recent advances in brain sci-ants, not brain scientistsargue that educators know what and how to teach. But critics, mostly in the scientific commu-nity, question the accuracy of some of the and classroom practice. Education con-movements claims and argue that the breakthroughs it touts are little more than longstanding educational philosophy and common sense repackaged under a new, faddish name. As in many debates, the middle. One supporter of brain-based education, Eric Jensen, says learning about the brain can help educators make better decisions. Jensen, a staff developer and author of Teaching with the Brain in Mind, says he doesnt want brain biology to drive school policy and practice exclusively. StilL he says, there are a lot of important findings in the field of neuroscience that have some direct classroom applications Educational consultant David A. Souza, author of How the Brain Learns, agrees: Teachers are trying to change human brains every day. The more they know about how [the brain] works, the more likely they are to be successful. The secret, according to brain-based advocates, is in making the tight connections between new laboratory research suitants Renate and Geoffrey Caine, l-L LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 (501) 324-2131 August 24, 1999 TO: FROM
SUBJECT: Middle School Principals Dr. Bonnie Lesley,'Associate Superintendent, for Instruction Reading and Writing Workshop and Vocabulary Development We were generally delighted with teacher responses to the eight days of training we offered during the summer to prepare teachers to teach the grades 6-8 Reading and Writing Workshop. I know that Suzie Davis has already met with your teachers as well, and I know that she has scheduled a meeting with you soon to help you know what to expect when you visit those classrooms. So - we are off to a good start! Learning how to teach in this new way, however, will be difficult for some, so we want to ensure that the teachers are continually encouraged and supported. Meetings and additional training will be set up throughout the year. To assist all your teachers, not just the English teachers, in teaching vocabulary - one of our weakest areas on the SAT9 -1 am attaching copies of two articles you may find helpful. Teaching Vocabulary in the Subject Areas" by Karen Wood, Middle School Journal, November 1987, "Six Whole Class Vocabulary Strategies for the Content Areas by Karen Hanus, et al. Middle School Journal, January 1991. Vocabulary development is a great topic for team collaboration. Ill send other articles frequently that you can simply pass along
use in faculty, department, or team meetings
or simply read for your own use. Please feel free to let me know if there is something specific that you need. BAL/rcm cc
Suzi Davis Pam Persons - Cloverdale IiDULE School Journal f i Six whole class vocabulary strategies for the content areas Karen Stinson Hanus Margaret Mary Sulentic Richard Rebouche Sharon Smaldino S i I Middle School Journal . As students enter and progress through the Techiuque is one method to help students 'middle and secondary school, they face the efficiently preview their textbook for important increasingly more difficult task of bringing vocabulary prior to reading a unit or chapter, special reading skills to content area subjects. First, have students survey the unit and identify The reading skills learned in elementary grades -u/nrHs that- a written in italirc nr offer no guarantee of successful skill application in history, science, or any other field. In the upper grades, students must use the fundamental vocabulary and reading comprehension abilities already learned and apply them to increasingly more difficult materials. In addition, students must (a) learn the specialized vocabulary of vocabulary words that are written in italics or content areas, (b) find definitions of these specialized words in their text, and (c) be able to select and learn new words and meanings on their own in order to become independent bold face. Second, have students try to locate the definitions of the words from context in the text. Some texts define a specialized vocabulary immediately preceding the italicized word, others provide definitions in the margin or include a separate section on vocabulary. Have students go back through the text locating additional important vocabulary words and explain how the words were identified. Point out any additional vocabulary words and clues to locating them in the chapter. Third, let students learners (Readence, Bean, & Baldwin, 1981). Most examine the visuals and predict from the pictures students do not automatically acquire new and graphs what information the chapter will concepts and the ability to identify words that include about the vocabulary terms that have represent new concepts on their own. Therefore, been located. Fourth, determine the purpose attention must be paid to the special vocabulary and value of specialized vocabulary. Point out anH reading skills required in subject matter that the specialized vocabulary generally areas or students will fail to~~achieve as'they contains the major concepts of the unit or chapter. should (Herber, 1970
Manzo, 1980
Olson & Fifth, from the information already generated in (Ames," 1972
Robinson, 1975). Failure to teach the survey of vocabulary, conduct a class specialized reading could lead to frustration and discussion of the important points of the chapter. decreased student motivation and achievement Next, help students ^oup the vocabulary terms JCleweU & Haidemos, 1983
Moore & Readence, into logical categories (Ausubel, 1968). Some B981). J Students learn in a variety of ways
therefore. specific categorization procedures will be explained later in this article. Finally, as a whole {successful vocabulary instruction calls for a class group, generate a phrase or sentence that {repertoire of activities including personal explains what the author was trying to say about {experiences with the word, categorizing words, the subject. (oral and silent reading of material containing the ------------------------ ----------- [words, and direct vocabulary practice (Moore. (^Z^emantic webbing Keadence, & Rickelman, 1982). Content area teachers need to teach (a) the specialized Also called mapping, semantic webbing is a yocabulary of their subject area, (b) techniques to popular content area reading strategy to help earn new vocabulary, and (c) the special features students learn vocabulary and relationships jf the textbook such as the glossary, italicized between concepts (Sinatra, Stahl-Gemalke, & words, and index. The following six strategies Berg, 1984). Whole class mapping requires ire intended for busy, content area teachers, students to interpret pre-exiting knowledge and These strategies will provide practical activities expenence while helping them recall and retain i :o use with the whole class to improve students' text information. In addition, maps help students :ontent area vocabulary and reading skills. extend vocabulary comprehension and expand 1. Survey texts ? students' intuitive notions about similarities and differences among concepts. A web or map is a graphic arrangement showing the major ideas I Students need to become familiar with their aanndd rreellaattiioonnsshhiippss aammoonngg wwoorrdd rmneeaanniinnggss.. FFiinrs t, :extbooks. Early in the year ask students all the important vocabulary of the unit needs to questions aimed at helping them remember how be identified by the teacher or the students. Then the index, glossary, typographical formats and a large circle is drawn in the center of the j^ther salient features of the textbook can help chalkboard or transparency. Students can then Sem learn (Maring & Furman, 1985). Regularly discuss and determine the vocabulary word main - 'eview with students the major features of the idea in the passage or unit. This vocabulary f xts as new chapters or units are begun. Give word is then written in the center circle. Second, ^dents practice in identifying and locating lines are drawn outward from the center pecialized vocabulary words in the text and in attaching circles to the end of each of these me glossary. spokes. Third, students locate related, I A modification of Aukerman's (1972) Survey subordinate vocabulary words to fill in the circles. January 1991 37 toDLE School Journal Continue this strategy until all ideas, space or need on their copy. Second, these words are time is exhausted. The final display will be in the presented one at a time to the students. Aseach shape of a spider web. It does not follow any word is presented, students discuss any rigid conentions and is formed as concepts are definitions or associations they have with the discussed. Arrows, shaded lines, squares or word. Students provide examples and try to rectangles can be used to illustrate special relate the word to previously discussed terms, relationships vyith the terms (e.g., cause and Third, the teacher adds information about the effect, comparison) in the text. If webs are written word and uses the word in spoken context, on transparencies and stored, they can be used to modeling vocabulary usage for the students, help students who have been absent from class This helps students infer meanings associated discussion and for reviewing at the end of a unit, with the word. This process is continued until aU Reviewing with the web will help students the words have been introduced. Fourth, prepare for tests by providing a visual students are paired and given a limited time representation of the important vocabulary and (three to five minutes) to use the words in concepts. conversation about the topic in which the words --------------------------------------- are related. Using a timer helps students stay on CX-The structured overview_J) task. Students can take turns recording the number of words that are meaningfully used in The structured overview (Dupuis & Snyder, conversation. Fifth, a brief discussion about the 1983
Vacca & Vacca, 1986) is one prereading uses of the vocabulary can ensue, or students can activity that can help students leam content area be instructed to immediately write a short vocabulary. It involves teaching new content paragraph using as many capsule words as area wc rds before the student is asked to read possible in five to ten minutes. Again, the use of them inTheir textbook (Tierney, Readence, & the timer helps students summarize and keeps Dishni ", 1985). the vocabulary lesson within available time Tc prepare a structured overview, first, locate constraints for the content teacher. Finally, the aU of the important vocabulary from a utut and teacher selects two or three paragraphs to read prepare them in chart form as a teacher's guide aloud to the class. Capsule vocabulary uses both for the lesson. Second, write each word on a the receptive and expressive modes to teach new separate sheet of paper asking students questions vocabulary and the relationships between these about each word as it is written. Ask questions vocabulary words. In addition, the word lists so that the words are defined individually and in provide excellent student references and review, relation to other words. Third, after all of the and involve students actively in the learning words have been written onto the sheets, process. encourage students to help construct a wall chart -------------------------------- by arranging the vocabulary sheets to show the 5. List, group, and label relationships of the words to each other. The chart of relationships can be left taped to the This is a classic strategy from Taba (1967) in wall, or can be thumbtacked to a bulletin board which students categorize vocabulary words for as graphic representation of the important a specific topic. Students can first orally read a concepts of the unit. The chart can also be typed passage or unit using an Oral Languaging and copied as a study or test aide. The advantage Strategy (Manzo, 1980) or discuss a silently read of this strategy is that students are provided an passage using a Questioning Strategy (Vacca & overview of what they are going to study and Vacca, 1986). Second, students brainstorm a list 4. Capsule vocabuL their active participation in building the overview of vocabulary words related to the topic area, will generate interest and tap their prior The brainstorming can be specific to a particular knowledge of the subject. passage or unit or can be used for a general overview of a topic This brainstorming is usually done with a whole class, but can also be conducted January 1991 38 ' in small groups. Disabled readers and The capsule vocabulary (Crist, 1975
mainstreamed students can be successful if the Cuimingham, Cunningham, & Arthur, 1981) is a teacher calls upon them first to suggest some of strategy in which students read, recite, and vyrite the words for the brainstormed list (Maring & important vocabulary words from their content Furman, 1985). As the vocabulary words are area. First, the teacher selects twelve to fifteen generated, the teacher or a student writes the specialized vocabulary words from the passage terms on the chalkboard, transparency, or a large or unit. These words are typed on a list and sheet of paper. Third, after twenty-five or thirty copied so that each student will have a vocabulary words are generated the students are instructed list. Students are given the list and instructed to to list the words into groups of four to six words write down any notes or definitions that they that they think go logger in some way. StudentsMiddle School Journal an be timed. Three to five minutes should be References ufficient. After students have formed their Au.'k.oTman,R.C. {WTr). Reading in the secondary school .... classroom. New York: McGraw-Hill. an ocabulary word groups, instruct them that they ave several minutes to devise a label or name Ausubel, DP. (1968). Educational psychology: A cognitine view. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston. Clewell, S.F., & Haidemos, J. (1983). Organizational strategies to increase comprehension. Reading or each group. Fourth, the teacher leads the tudents in sharing their groups and labels, writing some of them on the chalkboard as _______ xamples of vocabulary categories. Students are Crist, B.I. (1975). One capsule a weekA painless ncouraged to explain why they grouped and ...................................... .. ibeled the words as they did. A variety of World, 22,314-321. remedy for vocabulary iUs. Journal of Reading, 19, 147-149. jsponses need to be encouraged and regrouping Cunningham, J.W., Cunningham, P.M., & Arthur, xplored. The advantage of this strategy is that -------- udents will come up with many of the important rords associated with a particular topic and will DuPis, M.M & Snyder, SU. (1983) Developing , . . T'l rnnronK khpoiicrh vnranillflrv A cfraMcru Hr xpand their associations for termmology. This m also be used as a prereading diagnostic S.V. (1981). Middle school and secondary school reading. New York: Longman. concepts through vocabulary
A strategy for reading specialists to use with content teachers. Journal of Reading, 26,297-305. rtivity. Important vocabulary words about the Herber, H.L. (1970). Teaching reading in content areas. ipic that were not generated by brainstorming - *........... - - - re probably not well known. These identified rords can then be directly taught to the students.
. Words on the wall Visual representations of vocabulary are very ' elpful for students, but it is time consuming to i se transparencies or write words on the 5 lalkboard every day. Words on the wall Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall. Manzo, A.V. (1980). Three "universal" strategies in content area reading and languaging. Journal of Reading, 24,146-149. Maring, G.H., & Furman, G. (1985). Seven "whole class" strategies to help mainstreamed young people read and listen better in content area classes. Journal of Reading, 28,694-700. Moore, D.W., & Readence, J.E. (1981). Accommodating individual differences in content classrooms. High School Journal, 64,160-165. Zunningham, Cunningham, & Arthur, 1981) Moore,D.W.,Readence,J.E.,&Rickelnian,R.J. (1982).
roo vides a visual representation of important j OCi dn :abularv terms. Words on the wall visually iinforces the key vocabulary terms, and allows Prereading activities for content area reading and learning. Newark, DE
International Reading Association. le teacher to point out the terms as the Olson, A.y., & Ames, W.S. (1972). Teaching reading xabulary surfaces in discussion or lecture. First, skills in secondary schools. San Francisco: Intext. : le teacher previews the chapter or unit and lentifies the important vocabulary terms. :cond, each term, is written on a half sheet of mstruction paper. A picture, synonym. ntence, or some other aid to memory is included 1 the card. Third, before the term is discussed included in the assigned readmg material, the rm is presented to the class. Terms are defined Readence, J.E., Bean, T.W., & Baldwin, R.S. (1981). Content area reading: An integrated approach. Dubuque, lA: Kendall/Hunt. Robinson, H.A. (1975). Teaching reading and study strategies: The content areas. Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Sinatra, R.C., Stahl-Gemake, J., & Berg, D.N. (1984). Improving reading comprehension of disabled readers through semantic mapping. The Reading ecifically to the topic, in relation to other words Teacher, 37,22-29. 1 the wall and in context. The half-sheet with Taba, H. (1967). Teacher's handbook for the elementary le term and any added information is then social studies. Palo Alto, CA
Addison-Wesley. ped to the wall. Fourth, when the unit is Tierney, R.J., Readence, J.E., & Dishner, E.K. (Eds.). mcluded, label the list by the chapter name, tit heading or topic, and begin again with a (1985). Reading strategies and practices: A tw list. Students can use the wall list as a ference in writing assignments and in taking compendium (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn and Bacon. Vacca, R.T., & Vacca, J.L. (1986). Content area readmg (2nd ed.). Boston: Little Brown. Sts. Fifth, as new terms are added, update and Karen Stinson Hanus is on leave from the Cedar :pand the vocabulary on the wall This provides Falls, Iowa school system. excellent specific content area vocabulary ictionary for your specific class syllabus. t These six whole class strategies will not Margaret Mary Sulentic teaches at West Intermediate School, Waterloo, Iowa. gvide all the vocabulary instruction needed in Richard Rebouche is Principal at Castle Hill in content area. They are intended as a practical Waterloo Iowa. &rtmg point for busy classroom teachers in the needs of teaching specialized Sharon Smaldino teaches at the University of gcabulary of a content area to an entire class. - - - - January 1991 39 Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls, Iowa. fest- MIDDLE SCHOOL Journal- Teaching vocabulary in the subject areas Semantic mapping uses students background in learning new vocabulary KAREN D. WOOD i write down the first, or the shortest. TIhink back to teacher x whose primary approach to teaching science vocabulary was to list prior knowledge, including an captured or lost. Also, in this phase, thirty words on the board and have the class look them up in the dictionary.
Recall, too, how you and your partner divided the list in half and proceeded to definition available. Whether it fit the i context in which the word would appear was unimportant. Like most middle level : age students, the main concern was to get
the assignment finished.
Unfortunately, teacher x was probably taught using a similar method - more , evidence that poor teaching methods tend to perpetuate themselves. Such methods do : little to give students a conceptual understanding of subject matter : vocabulary. j Any go^ teacher is aware that students who know the vocabulary of a course tend to understand the content of the subject i matter as well. In fact, as early as 1944, Davis found that word knowledge is the most potent contributor to overall
comprehension. More recent research also supports this finding (Hayes and Tierney, 1982). Along with word knowledge, prior knowledge and experiences in general have also been proven essential to the comprehension process (Spiro, 1977
i j Rurnelhart and Ortony, 1977). In essence. O yocabulary is a means for labeling these I^Sxperiences stored in our minds^ ^^^^ccording to Johnston and Pearson (1982), understanding of the significant vocabulary background information for 'he selection in a lesson, is the best predictor of is presented, key concepts an introduced, comprehension - more powerful than prior knowledge is elicited and assessed, measures of reading ability or purposes for reading are determined. achievement. In the reading phase, purposes are Described in this column is a strategy followed as readers merge their precalled semantic mapping (Johnson and existing knowledge with the new Pearson, 1984) which uses students knowledge presented in the text. The background in the learning and retention postreading, or follow up, phase is the of new vocabulary. Semantic mapping has vehicle for thoroughly synthesizing the appeared under various names in the new with the known. Here, key terms are literature, for example, semantic webbing reviewed, major concepts are discussed (Freedman and Reynolds, 1980) and fact and summarized, and additional questions analyzer or FAN (Swaby, 1984), to name are raised. Further, the lesson may be a few. Regardless of the label enjoyed, it extended to include writing, illustrating. is essentially a representation of the key concepts in a unit of instruction. Semantic mapping can be used throughout diagrammatic developing or researching relevant topics. Prereading Phase Begin by asking students to contribute the three major phases of the instructional all they can about the given topic. This can lesson: prereading, reading and be accomplished by focusing their postreadmg. t he prereading phase of an instructional lesson may well be the most probes. For example, on the topic of associations through the use of question important phase of all for it is here that volcanoes, the teacher may write students interest in the material is either categories on the board such as Word knowledge is the most potent contributor to comprehension. Characteristics, Effects, Places Most Often Found or Names. Map categories, as supplied by the teacher, can often be derived from the headings given in the textbook selection to be read. These categories can be highlighted with a circle (see Figure 1). Then students can volunteer information from their background knowledge for each category shown, contributions are subsequently written on the board in NOVEMBER 1987 / 11 Vi _____ _ ________ _______ o -. Questions can be asked to determine the Another very thorough, but more time depths of the students understanding. To relation to the major categories. onsuming alternative is to list all of the further extend the activity, have the tudent contributions on the board in any students pose research questions which >uUUCUt CUilti iUUUVOia order given. Then the students can be may lead them beyond the information asked to group these concepts based on presented in. the selection read. For their common elements. The students example, questions may arise such as how do barnacles attach to ships? (see Figure 2) or What other mountains are in Alaska? (see Figure 1). Such probing can provide the impetus for interesting projects for library or community research. II I themselves come up with the categories or labels for the terms given. These labels and their corresponding terms can be arranged in a map or web like manner as decided by both teacher and the class. In either of the two alternative methods shown, the teacher may intervene by terms not high, steep lands . preteaching significant, mentioned by the students. After feeling comfortable that the class has adequately displayed their pre-existing knowledge on the topic, they can be assigned the reading of the selection. Reading Phase During the reading, the students should i h<. insfnictfid to use the map as their guide to the major concepts. They may be asked to make either mental or graphic notes of information relevant to the categories Mt. McKinley is highest longest chain is die rocides top is flat high area of land Plateaus Mountains Colorado Plateau body of land
displayed on the map. In this way, they KrToundedby know what to focus on while reading and what information is not pertinent to their purposes for reading. IPostreading Phase Direct the attention of e class to e semantic map by asking them what new knowledge they gained about each of the categories. This new information should be added to the map until each major heading or category contains a cluster of topically related associations. The teacher may choose to use different shades of chalk or, if an overhead projector is used, different colors of transparency pens to illustrate the growth in knowledge before and after the reading. Note the changes in the students knowledge base for the following example
Postreading Types of Volcanoes ! active extinct water .1 Islands Manhattan s presently erupting no longer erupts active 1 canenipt at any time Figure 1 Social Studies Landforms of the U.S. Ceonl Plains largest Hains CeotnJ wide area of flat land U.S. Landforms X Great I Coastal Peninsula Florida bamer coral Common Trails exoskeletoa jointed openings Crustaceans 5 prs. tegs 2 prs antennae crab, lobsters shrimp barnacles Prereading Types of Volcanoes intermittent 1 occasional eruptions dormant from French Word dotniir-to sleep-may eniptorbe donnant for many years volanic Figure 2 Science Arthropods Arthropods extinct I no longer dangerous land almost completely bound by water Continental Arachids 4 prs. leg* mites, tteks parasite scorpions spiders predaton Millipedes eat roots, stems baitnless 2 prs. legs pet segment Centipedes front claws poisonous predators 1 pr. legs per segment Insects Social insects butterflies, moths beetles 2 pn. wings 3 pn. legs I i i I i j I I S iI I : 1 j As a Stimulus for Writing Because semantic mapping presents the key concepts of a selection in an organized display, it is an excellent framework for 'a writing assignment. Working in pairs nr small groups, students can be asked to choose a cluster of information on which to write. Or, they may be instructed to write about the overall topic (Landforms of the U.S., Arthropods, etc.), merging the concepts for each of the subcategories into separate paragraphs. equal t not equal symbol As with any new lesson, it is imperative i that the writing assignment be thoroughly modeled at the onset. This can be accomplished by showing a completed paragraph and then enlisting the aid of the class in the composition of one or more ' sample paragraphs. Thus, the teacher is gradually releasing responsibility to the students before assigning independent practice. i As a Review Process t Semantic mapping can also be used 3 exclusively in the postreading phase rriMnc fnr rAuiMutnir as a I means for reviewing the content of lettm for numbers Figure 4 Algebra Variables and Equations Variables values of variable expression parentheses Qumerical expression numerals ! simplifying the _____ expression I evaluating or finding the value of grouping symbols I brackets fraction bar an instance, the class is actively involved i II ji i material just read or learned. Figure 3 shows the strategy as it can be applied to a math review lesson on variables. In such semantic mapping, the cliche we teach Spiro, Raad J. Remembering information from text: as we were taught* may soon become 'state of schema approach. In Schooling and positive one. aeguisirion of knowledge, edited by R.C. Anderson, K.J. Spiro and W.E. Montague. Hillsdale, N.J. Lawrence Erlbaum, 1977. taught a REFERENCES Davis, F.B. Fundamental factor of comprehension Swaby,B. FAN out your facts on the board." The Reading Teacher, 1984, 37, 914-16. in the review process by contributing what _ . __ Dr. Karen D. Wood is in the Department diey remember a^ut a recent passage read Lding."Instruction, College of or a lesson taught. The teacher aids this Freedman, F.G. and Reynolds, E.G. Enriching Education, University of North Carolina process by arranging the students* webbing." ot in reading." Psychometrika, 1944, 9 185-187 contributions in an organized manner. 5 Summary basal reader lessons with semantic webbing. The Charlotte. This column which presents Reading Teacher, 1980, 33, 677-684. InstTTictional Strategies based on research T* ,1^'ioping waders firuiings ig a regular Journal feature kknnoowwlleeddgcee throuegh aannaalloofgfvy.. RReeaaddminge RReesxneaarrechh ' I Semantic mapping represents a concept development approach to teaching vocabulary. Because students are actively Quaterly, 1982 , 77, 256-280. Johnson, D.D. and Pearson, P.D. Teaching reading vocabulary, second edition. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, 1984. it involved in the process by contributing Pearson P.D. Prior knowledge their pre-existing knowledge on given connectivity and the assessment of reading topics, their interest is heightened, their comprehension. Technical Report No. 245. Urbana, * ' ------------------- -Q.-wwwu XILX*.. Uwanuivrvexrosikitjyr yojif iIUllJinLUoUisia,, 117908.26.. : knowledge base broadened and their Rumclhart, D.E. and Ortony, A. The representation comprehension enhanced I Perhaps by including in our repertoire of teaching strategies methods such as of knowledge in memory. ' In Schooling and she acquisition ofknemdedge, edited by R.C. Anderson, K.J. Spiro and W.E. Montague. HiUsdale, N.J. Lawrence Erlbaum, 1977. I e TJie Idea Factory (Sm p. 10) also includes a column Short Stuff editor, Joel Turvey, presentea this example. successful practices in 75 words or less. The i My students keep Teaming logs to practice writing skills across the curriculum. The tooic Describe the frog that youth pAr efproarrte tdk otof iidzxitsi sejc:t_ in l*i fe sictj?ie* nc_ e yesterday...). ..i.s.. ..o..n.. e overhead classroom. Precious class time is saved as students begin to write while I take roll or question (for example, as they walk in the as soon as the bell rings. Joel Turvey NOVEMBER 1987 / 13 L-L ^Itl LITTLE ROCK SCHOOL DISTRICT INSTRUCTIONAL RESOURCE CENTER 3001 PULASKI STREET LITTLE ROCK, AR 72206 September 1, 1999 J TO: Middle School Principals FROM
Dr. Bonnie Lesley, AAssisociate Superintendent for Instruction SUBJECT: Teaching Reading I Several of you have indicated your interest in knowing more about how to teach reading to the students who are performing at the Below Basic or lowest quartile. I am attaching some articles that I hope will be helpful. 1. A research synthesis on what works in "restructuring urban middle school reading and writing programs. 2. Reading Comprehension Instruction for At-Risk Students: Research- Based Practices that Can Make a Difference by James Flood and Diane Lapp, Journal of Reading. April 1990. 3. Teaching Them All to Read: Results of a Nationwide Study of Successful Literacy Programs for Young Adolescents by Judith Davidson, Middle School Journal. May 1989. 4. Alternatives to More of the Same' for Poor Readers by Marjorie Wuthrick, Middle School Journal. January 1990. 5. Student at Risk
The Slow Reader in the Middle Grades by Leslie Ann Perry, Middle School Journal. January 1990. BAL/adg Attachments ISSUE 32 FALL 1994 Integrate Reading and Writing And Focus on Early Adolescent To Improve Urban Middle School Restructuring urban middle school reading and writing programs to capitalize on the unique abilities and perspectives of adolescents has paid off in higher student achievement, according to two separate studies by researchers at the Center for Research on Effective Schooling for Disadvantaged Students. The researchers, Robert J. Stevens and Scott Durkin, found that students in a program called "Student Team Reading" and Student Team Writing" had higher reading comprehension scores than students in control groups. In one study, reading vocabulary and language expression scores were also higher than among control groups. The Hopkins researchers note that several strategies contributed to these results. First, an emphasis on cooperative learning, such as pairing students for reading activities, takes advantage of the influence of peers on early adolescents. Integrating readingjind writing instruction to make it more meaningful for adolescents is another key component of the program. Having e same teacher for both subjects riiakes ifeasier to ensure that writing and reading Activities are linked. The atmosphere is also more personal when students have the same teacher for both subjects. This relaxed setting is especially important for middle schoolers, who often feel alienated by the impersonal atmosphere of the traditional middle school. Stevens and Durkin stress the importance of using good literature that interests . students for instruction instead of basal readers, following up with activities where students apply new knowledge, and providing instruction on reading comprehension strategies to develop students higher order thinking skills. Source Using Student Team Reading and Student Team Writing in Middle Schools: Two Evaluations is available from the Center for Research on Effective Schooling for Disadvantaged Students, The Johns Hopkins University, 3505 N. Charles St., Baltimore, MD 21218 (cite Report no. 36, 21 pages, $3.95 prepaid). NCREL Clipboard Page 23 I I I 490 1 Elood and Lapp are professors of Reading and Lan- wh2! State University f^here they vrork with preservice and in^^rvif^a preservice and inservice teachers (Coiiege of Education, San Diego CA 92182 USA) The^ research interests include effective comprehen- Sion instructional practices for dents. at-risk and reguiar stu- Reading comprehension instructiorr.for at-risk students
Research-based practices that can make a difference James Flood Diane Lapp In "statP n^fTJ ^htten about ^Jja^-of-the-art rearijng^comprehension instruc- tional practices for at-risk students in middle and students as well as regular secondary schoojmn?^ Durkin, 1978-79- Flood 1984a, 1984b
Guthrie, 1981
Pearson, son, Faraone, Hittieman, & Unruh JareeSS
.'?"' M-cators agree that effective comprehension 1984
Robin- 1990
Tierney & a ciiBciive comprehension results from the interaction of four sets of important variables z^aier vjvab/es (age, ability, affect, motivation), text varie- bles (genres, type, features, considerateness)
educa- lanal context variables (environment, task, social grouping, purpose)
and teacher variables (knowledge, experience, attitude proach). and pedagogical ap- Eacfi of these variables plays " ^htical role in the successful acquisition of comprehension anri Comprehension strategies ^'scussed as it relates to effective teaching practices for at-risk students. Two major questions will be discussed-in this article: (1) What do henders read texts?_(2) What do we know about teac^ ing at-risk students to comprehenders? become competent Journal of Reading April 1990 Competent comprehenders competent comprehenders exhibit a set of discernible characteristics. Research- st?u^r competent readers actively con- " meranT^^T-? they .^eract and transact" with the words on the oaoe^ integrating new information ---------on the page vyith preexisting knowl- edge-^wEt^Anderson^ieb-
^:^i7Wi-^ 1986
Rosenblatt, 1938, 1982). Further found that a readers 1986
Paris, it has been prior knowledge, experience titude, and perspective determine the lat- ways in which 77.i 5 I J f 5 J u J V 4 I I3 I information is perceived, understood, valued, and stored (Anderson et al.. 1985: Flood. igfl4a. i9R4h: Holbrook, 1987
Pearson, 1984
Rumelhart, 1981
Squire, 1983). The competent comprehender: A strategic reader Good readers are strategic readers who actively construct meaninq as they read
they are selfmotivated and self-directed (Paris, Lipson, & Wixson, 1983)
they monitor their own comprehension by questioning, reviewing, revising, and rereading to enhance their overall comprehension (Baker & Brown, 1984). Good readers have learned that it is the reader in the reading process who creates meaninq, not the text or even the author of the text. There is some consensus among researchers that competent readers have a plan for comprehending
they use their metacognitive knowledges in an orderly way to implement their plan (Flavell, 1981). While each readers plan varies for each text and task, the following steps seem to be part of the competent readers generalized plan for many different kinds of texts: A PLAN FOR READING Before reading, the strategic reader
x Previews the text by looking at the title, the pictures, \ and the print in order to evoke relevant thoughts and memories Builds background by activating appropriate prior knowledge through self-questioning about what he/ she already knows about the topic (or story), the vocabulary and the form in which the topic (or story) is presented Sets purposes for reading by asking questions about 3 what he/she wants to learn (know) during the reading episode During reading, the strategic reader:' Checks understanding of the text by paraphrasing the authors words Monitors comprehension by using context clues to figure out unknown words and by imaging, imagining, inferencing, and predicting Integrates new concepts with existing knowledge, continually revising purposes for reading After reading, the strategic reader
- Summarizes what has been read by retelling the plot of the story or the main idea of the text Evaluates the ideas contained in the text Makes applications of the ideas in the text to unique situations, extending the ideas to broader perspectives , Teaching at-risk students If the preceding remarks accurately reflect the processes that the competent comprehender engages in, one might wonder: Is there a role for the teacher or does comprehension ability merely occur as a result of practice, of extensive and frequent reading? Are at-risk students at risk because they have not been taught how to comprehend or because they do not practice reading? Can comprehension be taught? Although some educators have suggested that the controvysial question Can comprehension be taught? is no longer a burning, lingering issue (Pearson, 1984
Tierney & Cunningham, 1984) it seems to have been re-ignited recently in both its old form and in a newer form. Carver (1987) in his article entitled "Should Reading Comprehension Skills Be Taught? argues that the evidence for teaching comprehension is "weak, nonexistent, or directly counter (to the data). He states: The evidence presented to support the case for teachers spending more time teaching reading comprehension skills is frail at best. Too often the Easiness Principle and the Reading Time Principle are not accounted for in research, and there is no solid evidence that gains due to the Reading Practice Principle will transfer to reading ability in general. It makes more sense to regard comprehension skills as study skills in disguise, and teaching them to unskilled readers is a questionable practice. However, Haller, Child, and Walberg (1988) in their article entitled Can Comprehension Be Taught? A Quantitative Synthesis of Metacognitive Studies" examined the results of 20 seminal studies (that included 1,553 students) on the effects of metacognitive instruction on reading comprehension performance. Although the exact nature of metacognition is still being debated, it was defined in their study as three mental activities that constitute metacoqnitipn: being aware, monitoring, and regulating in order to faltering understanding. Their results strongly suggest that comprehension v - can be taught. They found that there was ample evi-dence to encourage teachers to instruct students in reading comprehension from a series of research studies that were rigorously conducted. Three specific findings were highlighted in their analysis: (1) there were age effects especially for seventh/eighth grade and second-grade at-risk students: (2) reinforcement was the single most effective part of reading comprehension instruction
and (3) the more instructional features involved in the learning episode, the significant the results.' ' more It seems that the real answer to this question must be a qualified one in which definition and purpose are Reading comprehension instruction for at-risk students 491 -r: 78. 3 3 1 ii I i clearly explained. In asking the question Can comprehension be taught? one has to be careful to add Comprehension of what, by whom, under what conditions, and for what purposes? Although one has to attend to the possibility that the question is still open, there is ample and ever increasing evidence that comprehension instruction has been effective for many at-risk students. The purpose of this article is to review representative samples of these studies to determine elements of comprehension instruction that seem general and useful for teachers working with at-risk students at various grade levels in various settings. Naturally not all relevant studies can be included in this paper
rather only a modest number will be included as illustrations of what we currently know about comprehensign instruction for this population. their own experiences, knowledges, and valiiea , -Geven practices that hava haan proven to be si,r. ces^ in helping at-risk students develop their com-^ prehension abilities will be discussed. These include: /i\ z -wwu. I ucoe incluae: n^parmg for reading practices. (2) reciprocal ^aclTing practices. (3) understanding------------- knowledge of text structum practices, (5) information and using practices, (4) questioning processing practices. (6) reading practices. (1) Preparing for reading practices Two activities that help at-risk t .wu auuvu.es tnat help at-risk students ready themselves for reading are PReP and Previewing. s f I An instructional approach: Constructivism in practice J I } In recent years it has been argued that students develop comprehension skills and strategies most successfully through a process approach that emphasizes the underlying cognitive and linguistic skills that are prerequisites for understanding and appreciating texts. Just as has been the case for some time in writ- Prereading Plan (PReP). Langer (1982, 1984) proposed an activity that pre- pares students for reading by activatinq their prior knowledge through a series ' There are three stages to PReP: reflections about initial associations: and (3) series of prompt questions- (1) initial associa- i I mg instruction, reading instruction is u.
J^,..,uiim g rgfound change in its theoretical orientation and ensuing pedagogy. Educators are moving away from fragmented component skills approaches iFvB underqoinq a reformulation of knowledge In the initial association stage, the teacher selects a word, phrase, or picture about the key concept in the text and initiates a discussion related associations. For to induce concept- example, in teaching a les- - J . --in wnicn reading is taught as a series of subskills to a holistic _approach in which comprehension is vieweri a<
a nan. Prativo /P^u
____________- ___ erative process fRohingnn at ai igon) As a result, contemporary comprehension instruc- .. , . - I-------- J 'h*'jmiI tipn for at-risk students needs to be based on con- jy^truchvist principles that acknowledge role as tho t -- ---------- role as the meaning-maker 'S ____________ in the reading act.JDon- structivism calls for an understanding and implementation of the notion that the student takes for learning and the teacher provides appropriata di- rection and support. It requires a form of collabor^n between teachers and students in which teachers and students work toqether to ensure that students internalize rules and strategies for making meaning. ownership Seven practices that foster constructivist principles _ There are many teaching and learning activities that foster constructivist notions and lead to the development of comprehension abilities. These activities based on the premise that comprehension is cnn. are in which students grow in comprehension abilities bv processing texts in a generative manner, building on 492 Journal of Reading April 1990 American Revolution, the teacher might ask What comes to mind when you hear the words Revolutionary War? During the reflection stage students .. .y rerieciion stage students are asked to ex- plain their associations, e.g.. "Why do those ideas come to mind?" Langer (1984) found that the , udnger (iaa4) found that the social context of this activity advanced students understandingthey expanded or revised their knowledge through listening to and interacting with their peers. In the final stage, reformulation of knowledge students might be asked Have you gained any new in- .. , -------yameu any new in- formation about the Revolutionary War? She found that students knowledge was expanded through the generative processes in which they were engaged She found that students responses changed frorn remotely related personal experiences to an understanding of relations between pieces of knowledge. to an underPreviewing. Many researchers and educators have used pre- Graves, Prenn. and Cooke (1985) tested a specific procedure dents listened to a lengthy preview of text. in which stu- an assigned The preview was prepared by the teacher and its 79.t i i I i ( I i i purpose was to motivate students. It had three parts: (1) the activation of prior personal experiences that were relevant to the text
(2) the building of necessary background knowled^ for the text: and (3) the establishment of an organizational framework for the text that was consistent with the framework the author used to present information. Students who listened to the previews before reading the text significantly outperformed students who did not have previews on multiple measures of comprehension. i 1 i ! 5 ! I ! (2) Reciprocal teaching practices Palincsar and Brown (1985) and Palincsar (1984) have developed a paradigm that has been effective for developing constructivist, process-oriented reading comprehension abilities. In their methodology, students take turns assuming the role of the teacher through a structured dialogue. The teacher models four distinct comprehension strategies and the students have opportunities to practice these strategies. Students are asked to (1) summarize in a simple sentence the paragraph that was read, (2) generate a question about the paragraph that was read to ask a fellow student. (3) ask for clarity (or resolution) of anything in the text that was unclear, and (4) make a prediction about what will happen next in the text. In their studies, students were shown how to do this by teacher modeling. Adult support was withdrawn gradually as students exhibited their ability to perform the task independently. Palincsar (1984) reported gains of 35% and more on comprehension assessments after 20 days of instruction. Palincsar and-Bjown's original formulation was based on(yygotsky)s^1978) notions about the zone of proximal development which he described as: (3) Understanding and using knowledge of text structure practices Narrative texts Some researchers argue that explicit instruction of story structure is unnecessary because students will automatically acquire this knowledge indirectly as a by-product of story listeningZviewing (Moffett, 1983). Schmitt and OBrien (1986) argued against instruction in narrative structure, suggesting that this form of instruction was both unnecessary and counterproductive
it emphasized only one piece of a story and deemphasized story content. However, there are other researchers who have found that instruction in narrative structure positively affects student reading (Fitzgerald & Spiegel, 1983). Further, Buss, Ratliff, and Irion (1985) found that students who had little knowledge of story structure benefited considerably from direct instruction in text organization, specifically in story grammars. Information /expository texts Many researchers have reported that students at all grade levels can be taught the structures that underlie expository texts (Berkowitz, 1986
Peabody, 1984
Slater, Graves, & Piche, 1985
Taylor & Beach, 1984) and that the consistent use of this knowledge enhances recall and comprehension (Armbruster, Anderson, & Ostertag, 1987
Baumann, 1984), Further, students who had the knowledge but did not use it were more negatively affected when reading texts with unfamiliar material than texts with familiar material (Meyer, Brandt, & Bluth, 1980
Taylor & Beach, 1984), At-risk students particularly benefit from instruction in text structure because it becomes a useful aid when the content is unfamiliar (Palincsar & Brown, 1985). s J The distance between the actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance or In collaboration with more capable peers. t Reciprocal teaching is highly dependent upon discussions between students and teachers. Alvermann, Dillon, and OBrien (1987), Duffy and Roehler (1987), and Palincsar (1986) explain that discussion is a critical component of effective comprehension instruction because it is through discussion that the teacher learns what is in the students minds, and thereby can 'estructure the situation to aid the student in understanding. (4) Questioning practices Ouestion/Answer Relationships (QARs) In several studies, Raphael (1982, 1986) demonstrated that at-risk as well as regular students were capable of generating and answering questions that enhanced their comprehension and led to independent processing. She designed four tvoes of QARs: (1) text-based QARs in which the answers are right there," i.e., explicitly stated in the text
(2) text-based QARs in which the student has to think and search" for relevant information throughout the te^t: (3) knowledge- based QARs in which the reader has to read the text to understand the question, but the answer is not in the text
and (4) knowledge-based QARs in which the student can answer the question without reading j i ! Reading comprehension instruction for-at-risk students 493 ) i 80. I f j I I the text. In the beginning stage of this process, the teacher accepts total responsibility for the five key elements of the activity: (1) assigning the text, (2) generating the questions, (3) providing answers, (4) identifying the QAR, and (5) providing a justification for the QAR identified. Eventually, control is released to the student after guided practice is offered to the student Students who were trained in the QAR activity dem- ^onstrated significant gains in comprehension. Aimiu^s Sawisal i'&sarchers have demonstrated the effectiveness or' tusing analogies to enhance comprehen- (Hayes & Tierney, 1982
Peabody, 1984) Bean' Singer, and Cowen (1985) developer Study Guide to help students 40 Analogical 'understand the concepts that they were learning. In their study they used jhe analogy of a functioning factory to un^ ^er^,d the working of cells in the human hTrty -V. Students who were given the analogical guide signifU ~ candy outperformed students who were taught theV formation in more traditional ways. ID- (5) Information processing practices KWL: What we know, what we want to find out, what we learn and still need to leam The KWL procedure, developed by Ogle (1986), rests upon constructivist rincioles- it is the reader who ultimately must seek and find meaninn Initially, the student is shown how to use the guidethis is followed by the teacher's question How do you know that?" which reminds the student to seek evidence from the text or from previous knowledge. This procedure is intended to activate, review, and develop background knowledge and to set useful purposes that will enable the student to be an active, independent learner. (6) Summarizing practices Summary writing Concept- Task-Application (C- T-A) Wong and Au (1985) found that the asking of focused prereadinq discussion questions about critical concepts contained in the text enhanced students' background knowledge before reading During this first phase, students set purposes tor reading and the goals of the questions were twofoldto find out what students already knew about a topic and to determine what they still needed to know. . ^-[snswed interest in summarization as a means for
This project was supported in part by a Digitizing Hidden Special Collections and Archives project grant from The Andrew W. Mellon Foundation and Council on Library and Information Resoources.