This article had lots of personal connections for me. I loved Dorothy Watson's quote about reading cohesive, high interest texts: "when proficient readers are presented with interesting, well-written text, they look like what they are--good readers reading good discourse. If these same readers are presented text that is unpredictable, lacks cohesion, is conceptually inappropriate, and holds no interest, the students will appear to be poor readers." I see this manifested in many first grade students. Often some of the better readers seem to lack a personal connection to some of the basal stories we read, and their behaviors, to a first time observer, would deem them poorer readers: not following along with the story, not tracking with their fingers (which not all readers need to do), and flipping ahead to find more challenging stories, illustrations/photographs, or texts of interest. This is when a good balance is needed and I realize I need to immediately find more challenging texts for guided reading groups, a good related story on Unite for Literacy or a nonfiction article on National Geographic Young Explorer. This is where we as teachers become "textwatchers."
Watson also noted that on the first days of school, teachers should spend their time having students listen to stories, predicting next ideas and sentences, or read repetitive phrases or complete last lines of predictable texts. This helps to build confidence in the early reader. While our first days are full of routines, rules and procedures, observing and learning has to take place immediately as well. I need to do a better job of this next year.
I thought that Watson's notes about miscue analysis were spot on. When she referenced an independent reading inventory between a teacher and a child named Mike. While Mike made several mistakes reading the text, they were higher level mistakes and still allowed him to glean overall meaning from the text. Often when we complete reading inventory/running records in class, students who miss words such as tricky or unfamiliar names (even if the teacher introduces the name once prior to the inventory), the reading process isn't always disrupted. Sometimes when we read aloud short paragraphs or math word problems using unfamiliar names, I give a little jump start to students: "Read to us about Carl, please." This way they can begin with confidence and still get meaning from the text. Watson states that miscue analysis "helps teachers look at what their children are doing 'right' while becoming aware of their problems in reading."
I loved your use of the word "textwatchers." It's so important that we give students high quality, high interest texts to read. I'm glad you pointed that out. I also liked that you pointed out how readers can make mistakes but they're still higher level mistakes that don't take away from meaning. This understanding is vital when it comes to assessing our readers.
ReplyDeleteHi Christina,
ReplyDeleteI appreciate you pointing out some of the very relevant arguments the article makes about traditional reading practices. When we only provide our students with "on grade level" basalized texts many times they are not engaged because they are not interested in the text and they can appear to be a poor reader due to the lack of interest, background knowledge, and overall relevance. I appreciated the support you provided for miscue analysis. I have felt this way many times when reviewing running record scores when the miscues weren't analyzed. Determining if meaning was preserved and if the student understood what they read makes all the difference in how we interpret the running record. Thank you for your thoughtful reading. Sincerely, Dawn