“…emphasizes the importanceof speaking, reading, and writing in the learning of all students”(The Access Center, 2012, p. 3).
According to Janice Almasi “we teach students, not “Highly motivated readers texts” (Laureate Education Inc, 2010) are self-determining and generate their own reading opportunities”“Students use cognitive (Gambrell, Palmer, Codling, and metacognitive and Mazzoni, 1996, para 2). strategies for thinking”(Tompkins, 2010, p. 12)
Cognitive Assessment Helps measure a students success academically Non-Cognitive Assessments measure a students Examples Include motivation Running Records Spelling Inventory Examples IncludeWord Recognition List Parent/Teacher Survey Reading Inventory Informal Interview Elementary Attitude Survey
My Assessment Student 1:I chose a running records assessment. I wanted to hear how the student’s oralreading skills were, along with his ability for word identification and readingfluency. Student 2:The activity I chose was a reading comprehension activity where I had the studentre-tell what had occurred in the book she was currently reading. Student 3:The activity I chose for the student was the running records assessment. I chose achapter book because it correlated more with the level of reading she should be at.By choosing this book I could test her reading fluency, word identification, herability to use context clues, and her re-telling ability.
Analyzing and Selecting Texts Linguistic Narrative Informational Semiotic
Text Structure Informational Descriptive Cause/Effect According to Visual Problem/Solution Janice Almasi Compare/Contrast Support (Laureate Poetic EducationInc, 2010), seve ral steps need to be Text Length implementedwhen selecting texts such as: Size of Difficulity Considerations print Readability Sentence length Number of syllables Concept density
For each student I chose texts that were appropriate for their age and grade. I focused on texts that would help me determine whether or not findings were accurate.Student 1: is in the first grade and Student 2: is a sixth grade Student 3: is a ninth gradeis a beginning reader. He is “aware fluent reading student. student that falls intoof the alphabetic principle” Through the assessment beginning/emergent/fluent(Tompkins, 2010, p. 119). He is Motivation to Read Profile reading category. Shedeveloping “phonic by struggles with punctuationskills, recognizing high-frequency Gambrell, Palmer, Codling recognition when reading.words, applies reading and Mazzoni (1996), we She can recall events ifstrategies, can write learned that reading is prompted, but cannot seemsentences, spells “kind of easy” for her; she to remember a significantphonetically, identifies punctuation is an “ok reader”; but amount of detail. The unit Iand uses capital letters to begin when reading by herself chose is poetry, and thesentences” (p. 119). she is able to understand theme would beOther books that would aid with “almost everything I read” adolescents.this students beginning reading (p. 521). The genre Ilevel are the Basal books. The chose for her is Sciencebooks contain “authentic literature Fiction. She is interested inselections that celebrate diverse topics such as ghosts, andcultures, and they emphasize an she likes the books by R.L.organized presentation of Stine.
According to Janice Almasi (Laureate Education Inc., 2010), there are five pillars that overlap in order for strategic processing to be implemented: Fluency ComprehensionPhonemic Awareness Phonics Vocabulary
My planEach of the three students I have been working with has strengths and weaknesses. Individual lesson plan formats have been designed with a targeted theme, and strategy. does not likestruggles with reading to read out loud comprehension Sight word identification strategies
Rosenblatt speaks of the efferent and aesthetic “stance” of reading.– During an efferent stance the reader may “be stimulated to remember a related personal experience”.– Whereas during an aesthetic stance a reader may briefly focus on analyzing the techniques interacting in a text” (Gladdys, 1997, p. 2).– She notes that readers switch back and forth between the two stances while reading. Probst (1987), further explains the efferent and aesthetic stances in the article Transaction Theory in the Teaching of Literature.
“Reading from a “Critical critical stance literacyrequires the reader to focuses on analyze and evaluate issues of books, meaningfully power and questioning the origin promotes and purpose” Rosenblatt states reflection, tr that the (Molden, 2007, p.52).“transactional theory ansformatio The aesthetic stance “is where thewhich proposes that reader comes to the text in a less and n,the meaning of a text derives from a action” directive frame of mind, seeking not particular information or thetransaction between (Molden, 20 the text and reader accomplishment of an assigned within a specific 07, para 1). task, but rather the full context” emotional, aesthetic, and intellectual(Glaydds, 1997, p. 3). experience offered by the text”(Probst, 1987, para 9).
References• The Access Center. (2012). The purpose of literacy rich environments. Improving outcomes for all students K-8. American Institute for Research: Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://www.k8accesscenter.org/training_resources/literacy-richenvironments.asp• Gambrell, L. B., Palmer, B. M., Codling, R. M., & Mazzoni, S. A. (1996). Assessing motivation to read. The Reading Teacher, 49(7), 518–533.• Laureate Education Inc., (2010). Analyzing and selecting texts. Dr. Douglas K. Hartman [Webcast]. Baltimore, MD: Author.• Laureate Education, Inc. (Executive Producer). (2010). Critical perspective. [DVD]. The Beginning Reader, PreK-3. Baltimore, MD: Author• Laureate Education Inc., (2010). Assessing Work Knowledge. Dr. Donald Bear [Webcast]. Baltimore, MD: Author.• Laureate Education Inc., (2010). Virtual Field Experiencs. Leigh Ann Hildreth [Webcast]. Baltimore, MD: Author.• Glaydds, W. C. (1997). The Significance of Louise Rosenblatt on the Field of Teaching Literature: efferent and aesthetic stance during reading. Abstract retrieved from Inquiry, Volume 1, Number 1: Virginia Community College System.
• Molden, K. (2007). Critical literacy, the right answer for the reading classroom: Strategies to move beyond comprehension for reading improvement. Reading Improvement, 44(1), 50–56.• Probst, R. E. (1987). Transactional theory in the teaching of literature. Resources in Education, 22(12).• Tompkins, G. E., (2010). Literacy for the 21st century. New York: Macmillan.