Teaching Reading: Methodology January 14, 2007
Posted by waldrup49 in English311.trackback
I am taking this class at the same time I am taking a taking a Ed. Psych. class. In that class we are talking about scientific based research, NCLB, etc. Pretty much what you would expect at the beginning of this type of class. In an example that is used in that class they talked about the “whole language” method of teaching reading. This has got me very interested in the subject matter of the different methodologies of teaching reading. I should say at this point that I know very little about this subject and I don’t have a stance on it at this point (knowing myself, a great big “yet” should be added) but it interests me greatly. I should also add that I am a social studies major with an english minor so some of you English majors will have to be patient as I post and work through the concepts.
As I said I have just barely begun to investigate the surface of this subject but as I researched whole language I stumbled across this article about the reading program in the Butte, MT schools:
“We were consistently in the 80th percentile and suddenly we were in the 60th percentile,” said Judy Jonart, the district’s curriculum director. The statistics showed many of Butte’s students were struggling with reading, a building block for all other subjects. So began a dramatic shift in the way the district’s nearly 4,600 students attacked reading: They hired an outside consultant, used a different curriculum and added reading coaches in every school. More time was devoted to the subject: teachers and students spent at least two hours of every school day learning and practicing reading.
New system Just a few years ago, the buzz word in reading was the “whole language” method. Whole language devotees believe all children can learn to read naturally, encouraged by immersion in good books and literature that will make them lifelong and eager readers.”You couldn’t find anything that wasn’t whole language,” Jonart said of the materials available to districts.But Butte statistics showed whole language wasn’t working and parents complained the system did not emphasize phonics and “drill and kill” methods with which they learned to read.In 2001, the district started a pilot program in five classrooms using a program called Reading Mastery, which emphasized phonetic awareness – especially in the younger grades – and fluency, comprehension, vocabulary and other skills.Developed by a scientist, Reading Mastery was resisted by teachers who weren’t sold on the new curriculum. “It’s scripted and it’s very strict,” Jonart said. The system provides a script from which teachers read and lessons are plotted, leaving some teachers feeling robbed of creativity and spontaneity. The program also requires total devotion or “fidelity,” meaning teachers must not stray from the boundaries.
Reading earlier, faster But the latest batch of numbers offered encouragement.Not only are kids reading earlier, they are advancing faster. By fourth grade, some students have tackled high school material from 20 years ago with Homer’s “The Iliad” and “The Odyssey.”To be sure, in Shannon Tregidga’s class on a recent day, about 20 students sat in front of a board filled with small words as Tregidga – who had perfect command over squirming bodies – practiced each word, taken from their reading, in rapid-fire fashion.Weeres encourages teachers to put their mark on the system, even though it is scripted, paced and repetitive. “I say you can’t take anything away, but you can add (to the lesson),” she said.
Reading this article left me with many different feelings. None of which reduced my interests on the methodology of teach reading. First and foremost I think that the article leaves me with a great sense of hope. That a school district could come to this point from where they were is exciting. It proves that it can be done. At the same time it is discouraging to think that the art or craft of teaching has been taken away from these teachers. Their personal teaching style has been replaced by a system that does not allow for modification. No matter what the success rate is these teachers have to feel less personal satisfaction. There experience and insight has been replaced by specific inflexible modules.
This article also leaves me with some serious questions. What is the background of the teaching system/methodology? Was it studied/researched/published? While the success rate of the whole district went up, were there instances of children that had trouble learning this way? For those children, does the school allow for different methods to be tried? While these children are learning to read, do they understand the meaning, concepts of text or literature at later ages?
There are just so many questions that this article has left me with. I look forward to investigating and researching about “Reading Mastery” (phonics based) and about other methods such as whole language. I plan to move from this whole language vs. phonics debate to literary theory. I hope to touch on some of Jeff Wilhelm’s articles and books besides “”You Gotta Be the Book” and use this as a base to explore other theorist to iclude competing points of view. This is the beginning of this trip but hopefully by the end of the semester I will have a much better view and stance on the subject.
As sources for this blog I am using the education feeds from the Washington Post, New York Times, and the Seattle Times. I am using a number of search quesries to include “Whole Language Methods”, “Reading Mastery”, “Teaching Reading”, and “Literary Theory” with these leading me to other searches at times. I also am using the blog “Phonics – The resource for teaching children to read”. As they sources change as my subject changes i will be sure to update them.
Strict reading program puts Butte schools in spotlight
1/9/2007 at 12:18 am
By Leslie McCartney
Montana Standard
First of all, I love the title of your blog! Now for my real comment:
I like idea behind this post of debating whether or not teachers should be so heavily restricted in their curriculums required by their school districts and whether or not this is actually helping or hampering students’ reading. In my own experience with high school teachers, one main point that they always stress is that they “have to teach the curriculum” or teach to the standardized test to which their school complies. This lack of academic freedom for teachers surely seems like it would discourage creativity not only for teachers, but for their students as well. One could assume that the teachers would become just as bored with their lessons year after year as their students are.
On the other hand, strict curriculum guidelines like those mentioned in your article/post also prove to be helpful for those teachers who are not as academically inclined, to put it nicely. This requires teachers to actually teach a lesson plan throughout the year, but also reinforces their laziness by not requiring them to create new lessons. A creative teacher is a passionate teacher, and if they are passionate then their students are much more likely to pick up on it and catch it: its contagious.
P.S. Great article!
I think the issue you raise is very interesting and relevant! As a future teacher I like to think that my personal style and enthusism will shine through as I teach, however that should not be top priority. If these kids, in the article, are improving and it is due to this ’system’ methodology then should it be questioned? If student success and knowedge-gaining are the primary goals of teaching then should our personal teaching styles be envoked if a ’system’ can do a better job? I am not taking a side on this because, like you, this is a new subject area for me; however, I think we would all agree that student sucess comes first and foremost in the educational society. This is a topic that could be highly controversial which in some cases is a good thing- nice job! It will be interesting to see what you come up with if you continue to delve into this particular topic area.
As a teacher of ESE in middle school, I have many sad tales of students who were victems of Whole Language. For a students with learning differences, not having the framework of a solid phonics base caused them to build up enormous banks of sight words, but they had no word-attack skills. As they his middle school, and the content subject vocabularies included more words of three or more syllables, they fell behind their peers. The very scripted SRA books bore them to death, and to them, seem to have no end.
I went to a workshop for a system that is aimed at middle-schoolers, and teaches the basics of phonics, and what to do if the word doesn’t sound right after trying phonics. The course is only 20 lessons long, and it is very scripted. The students were not happy to begin with, but after about 5 lessons, they found themselves actually reading long words, and suddenly, they could not get enough of it.
I’ve been using it for 3 years now, and have scores of students who went from below 3rd grade level to 6th & 7th grade level in 9 weeks.
I’ve written grants to buy the books, but now my district has adopted the system. We are now using it for all 6th graders who are reading below level.
I promise, I’m not working for the company! The system is called REWARDS by Sopris West. It really works.
Interesting comments..
[...] Teaching Reading: Methodology: Waldrup49 [...]
thank you, brother
Прикольно