The author states that at times we
tend to rely too much on scientific data and research to help define our
students and I tend to agree with her. How many times have we looked at a STAR
reading score for a new student and then decided on what we were going to do to
address their needs based on previous success with another student who had a
comparable score. She writes about getting away from programs and cookie cutter
strategies that are supposed to work for everyone and allow ourselves to use
more of our own judgement and common sense to make instructional decisions.
Another idea that falls under this same concept (that we all are guilty of) is
making teaching decisions for a student based on their label as opposed to
targeting their strengths and building around that. Too often do we look too
hard at their inabilities and weaknesses and use that to define what the child
can or cannot do. Hopefully moving forward I can allow myself to break away
from the programs and textbook assessments and build more reading instruction
around student interests and strengths.
This post goes directly along with your post about bonding with students. When we take time to get to know the whole leaner, we are equipped with far more information than a standardized test can tell us. It's such a difficult thing to move away from what seems easiest. Taking a computer generated number is easier and less time consuming that reading with a child or taking anecdotal notes. The question that remains is does that score really mean anything. I'm glad you see the need to look at more than one measure and to move beyond what students "can't" do. Instead we need to look at the whole child and build upon what they can do. Great points made here!
ReplyDelete