The best piece of advice Schmoker gives us throughout this entire chapter is that all teachers must incorporate reading, discussing, and writing into their discipline.
This chapter focuses on the importance of literacy and how our current English Language Arts standards are preventing our students from becoming literate adults.
“Adolescents entering the adult world of the 21st century will read and write more than at any other time in human history. They will need advanced levels of literacy to perform their jobs, run their households, act as citizens, and conduct their personal lives” (Schmoker, 93).
The first part of this chapter deals with the life changing power of broad, abundant reading. Schmoker defends reading and says “wide, abundant reading is the surest route out of poverty and the limitations that impose themselves on the less literate” (Schmoker, 95). When I read this quote, I made an instant connection to our school because we do have a high poverty rate of students who come into our building, and we have all seen them succeed in not just reading, but math and science also. This just proves his statement. People cannot use poverty as an excuse why students cannot perform. What can we do to ensure our current and future students have as much growth as our past students?
Schmoker then goes on to discuss the different forms of reading and why they are all equally important.
1. Literature: Schmoker introduces the concept of using literature to seek out understanding of ourselves and the world around us, not to recognize tone or structure.
2. Nonfiction and Literary Nonfiction: “Nonfiction books are among the richest sources of knowledge” (Schmoker, 98).
3. Newspapers and Magazines: He goes on to reiterate his passion for reading, discussing, and writing about current articles and opinion pieces.
How can we, as a leadership team, encourage the rest of our staff to incorporate literature, nonfiction, and newspapers into their curriculum whether it’s on the pacing guide or not?
The next part of this chapter talks a lot about reading in elementary and how it is hindering our students’ ability to read for learning, and is instead focused on learning to read. We must provide opportunities for our students to learn to read well by reading a lot for meaning.
Schmoker believes that the killing of reading will continue unless we take a hard look at the standards we have in place now, and minimize them. He suggests we adopt four key standards that could be used in all disciplines and at all levels: argument, drawing inferences and conclusions, resolving conflicting views and documents, and problem solving. “We need clear, simple standards that sensibly specify how much reading, writing, and speaking they will do” (Schmoker, 115).
He ends the chapter by again stressing the importance of reading, discussing, and writing. He describes three schools and explains how they have been successful with student achievement by using minimal standards that everyone can digest and adopt.
Looking at the four standards, is this the direction that we want to go? We have worked so hard at narrowing our focus on summarizing and even though these standards seem easy enough, I am reluctant to throw something new at our staff and not give what we are doing a chance to grow even more. However, I do know that our English Language Arts standards are too much. Looking at the new Common Core for grades 6-12, there are close to 30 pages of standards for English Language Arts. How do we begin to narrow the standards to fit our schools needs?
Before my son wakes up and my day becomes consumed by him, I just wanted to comment on Amanda's post real quickly ...I find it interesting that Schmoker time and again brings up the fact that Language Arts standards are poorly written across the board - it isn't just the ones that we use; this could possibly be an area of focus for us when we begin to unwrap the standards.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with the statement that adults will read and write more than ever in the 21st century. It is my belief that people ARE reading and writing more than ever before it just is being done differently from traditional forms of reading and writing. We, as educators, must embrace these new venues of reading and writing that our students actively pursue. By doing this, we will more easily be able to connect the reading and writing that we have students do to their interests. And that will allow them to enjoy reading and writing, which Schmoker says is vital.
Eric consider yourself lucky that it was 7:44 when you posted and your kid was still asleep....all three of mine were up before 6!!!
ReplyDeleteI think focusing on just a few standards will help us across the board!! Let's start with LA and then go from there. I love the idea of focusing on a few standards and making sure our students are kick @$$ at those important standards. I don't think it seems like more work. I think it goes with our whole "narrowing the focus thing!!
As far as Amanda's comment about getting more authentic literacy into the classroom...is there anyway we could ditch the pacing guides?? If we find our standards we want to focus on, we would be able to do so much more. At least we could ease up on the pacing guides a bit. What is the point of them?? I'm not being a smartass, I just don't know why we have them. Is it researched based?
Oh, I like this.
ReplyDeleteThirty pages of standards is ridiculous. Four may be a little light. I do think that this could be the right way to go...and the timing could be perfect. (New language arts teacher in sixth grade, myself, and our eighth grade language arts teacher...I think we could sit down and make this work.) Perhaps we at least narrow it down to a number closer to four.
I don't think we'd be straying far from summarizing. We would be narrowing our focus in language arts to create better writers/learners!
I had a zillion questions about these pacing guides when I came in to DCSD. I finally understood the reasons behind them when I realized just how many students transfer in and out and in again in our district. All teachers do the same thing so the transferring students don't miss out on anything. I would really like to see the research behind this though. Is it really helping the 75% (or maybe 60%) of our student body who stay with us? Is the percentage of students who move around our district really benefiting from the pacing guides or are they also the students who miss an abundance of school for other reasons? Or maybe that percentage is largely based on students who are out of district?
I'll post more later based on the reading...just had to throw that out there.
I agree with all of you that Schmoker offers some great narrowed standards. I think they are easy to understand and would be a great starting point for data teams next year. I am excited to read about the other content areas. I think once we read those chapters – we will have better ideas of how to “sell” all of this to the rest of the staff. Honestly – his points are pretty difficult to argue with!
ReplyDeleteIn response to Amanda’s question – I think teachers would be more willing to incorporate authentic text if we had a good way of providing that text to the teachers. Honestly, I don’t think they will seek them out on their own. But – if we found a good way to provide them – I really do think most of them would use them. Also – to respond to the question of continuing growth – I think we really need to continue asking students to write frequently. I think teachers are starting to use the writing pieces as formative assessment and to modify their teaching. (Some more than others of course.) I think this is why we have seen success.
I also was interested by his comments on student presentations. I know Amanda and I tried this at the end of last year and it was a mess! Our students simply don’t know how to present. I do not think this is ok. Perhaps this is because we are not doing enough discussion – but I think it is something worth thinking about. I also liked his main message that if students don’t get an opportunity to read – they will never improve! This is true of so many kinds of texts. We must make sure we are giving students an opportunity to read in every core area so they can read to learn.
“It all starts with reading” (p. 94). I remember going into JB as a part of the first real team of reading teachers in the district. I also remember thinking how easy I thought it was incorporate reading and writing into all curriculum areas. With an elementary background, that is just the way of thinking. This quote reminds me that things are changing - and not just at JB!
ReplyDeletePage 98 - I like how Schmoker brings up the fact that reading (actual) books, newspapers and magazines increases vocabulary knowledge. Amanda and Becky mention that this is important, and Becky says we need to make it easy for teachers. I agree, but then again I think - Are WE making teaching too easy for them? It’s like teaching out of a basal reader or any scripted “curriculum program” for that matter - anybody could do it, but is that really implementation? Is that really teaching? Is that teacher buy-in?
Page 100 - If there is something we could provide, could it be materials like The Week that he talks about? Or would that be a waste of money?
I think this chapter has some good ideas to keep in mind (p. 126 about specific literacy activities that need to occur throughout a week) but I am not sure that we are ready to head there yet. We don’t want teachers to feel like we are doing one more thing. Even narrowing the standards as a whole staff might seem crazy. (Too many cooks in the kitchen.) My suggestion would be that our data teams and Wednesday meetings are focused by a few writing/literacy standards that we (the DRT) decide upon. Make what we are doing business as usual - then we can move on.
I agree. Authentic reading and writing (and discussion) should be easily incorporated into any content area. Those are three main concepts needed in any subject as well as in the real world. However, there is a lot of resistance in incorporating them in all classrooms.
ReplyDeleteI have wondered about some of these texts and programs we have that are so scripted. Personally, I am not a fan of these and while I can see their place (giving first year teachers some guidance, keeping everyone on track with the pacing guide), I wonder why so many rely so heavily on them. Is this something the district has mandated? I'm not saying to go completely away from the text, but to incorporate a human personality to the presentation of the curriculum and the ability to tweak things depending on the students in the classroom.
I also wonder if part of the reason so many teachers rely so heavily on the scripts is that they don't feel confident enough to move away from it. Is this the problem? If so, how could we help this?
We ordered lots and lots of great resource books for science and social studies at the end of the year that I am really excited about. (Just wish I had thought ahead and ordered some for my own classroom!) I think that these books, which go along with the curriculum, will help our staff and students. But I do worry that it may keep Rachel extremely busy showing teachers how to effectively use them in the classroom so they don't just sit on a shelf for students to look at during free time (or that PAT thing?).
Following reading this chapter I checked out others comments to stray from duplication. I came across Becky talking about presentations. I began to think why don't I ever use presentations in my math class? It is a great way of incorporating many skills. Then it came to me......because it would take to much class time and I would fall further from the pacing guide! This should not be a reason
ReplyDeleteI thought that a quote from Daniel Willingham a cognitive scientist was very interesting, he said, "The problem is that teachers and administrators are likey to read the standards and try to teach them, but reading comprehension is not a skill that can be taught directly." He goes on to say that we learn to read well from reading more for meaning.
I agree with what everyone has to say. I think we need to be careful when talking about pacing guide. I think there are a few teachers that if we said didn't have to follow the pacing guide that they wouldn't teach what they are supposed to and could result in wasted time.
ReplyDeleteI think we should have an "expert" in each subject area that is comfortable and effective in implementing the reading, writing, and discussions in their classrooms. We could video tape lessons, have other staff observe them, or if possible have them co-teach a lesson with other teachers to help them implement these.
I wonder if we could implement the reading, writing, and discussion in advisory. One year during advisory everyone in the building was reading. This gives the students a chance to read for pleasure.
I like the simple discussion rubric on p. 117.
This is a side thought...we used to be able to get newspapers at school for free. Is that still available? If so, how do we sign up for them?
This chapter makes me reflect on our current practice in reading and language arts. Our strength for our current reading program is the effective teachers teaching it! Amanda, Becky and Rachel I am sure you are already thinking of changes, but my concern was the amount of time in some programs spent on skills (p. 102)...how do we balance program requiremnts with what Schmoker defines as authentic literacy experiences? What great books should we have students read? How many? Do we emphasize reading to learn enough with our lowest readers? In language arts Scmoker suggests Conley's four standards on p. 112...something to consider. Scmoker suggests we identify the number of quality core texts for every grade level on which students learn to master the core skills of annotation and close reading (p.115)...most of their reading in argumentative/interpretive mode. We should look into the resource "They Say, I Say": The Moves That Matter in Persuasive Writing. Do you think we could implement the suggestion for colossal impact on p.127?
ReplyDelete-Marianne