The cloze procedure is an effective informal assessment tool used by teachers that “examines students’ understanding of a text” (p. 275). The teacher asks students to “supply the deleted words in a passage taken from a text they’ve read” (p. 275). While this may seem like a simple task, it is actually quite challenging because in order to find the correct words a student needs to have a strong understanding “of the content of the passage, vocabulary words, and sentence structure ” (p. 275). This assessment can be administered along with other informal assessments including story retellings, running records, and think-alouds at the beginning, middle, and end of the year and can serve as an excellent aid in developing the class curriculum. No matter what informal assessment is used, teachers need to “consider whether they’re assessing literal, inferential, critical, or evaluative thinking” (p.275).
According to “Instructional Strategies Online”, the cloze procedure can be administered by using a variety of techniques. For instance, a teacher should make sure the length of the blanks are the same in order to not include visual cues about the length of omitted words. Another good suggestion is to leave the first and last sentences intact with all punctuation to allow the student to grasp what the passage is about. In order to assess the student’s “knowledge of the topic or their abilities to use semantic cues, delete content words which carry meaning, such as nouns, main verbs, adjectives and adverbs. To assess students' use of syntactic cues, delete some conjunctions, prepositions and auxiliary words” (2009). The site also suggests omitting every fifth word to ensure the students will be challenged but also allows the student to succeed.
The teacher can adapt the cloze procedure for the class in a variety of ways. The first way can be used for beginning readers by offering two to three answer options for each blank. That way a beginning reader can assess what he or she knows about the passage and choose the right answer. Another option is to only give the first or last letter of the word in the blank. The student can run through the vocabulary he or she knows and come to the correct answer. The final suggestion is to simply offer a blank every five to ten words and allow more experienced readers a chance to come to the right conclusion.
Resources:
Tompkins, Gail E. (2010). Literacy for the 21st Century: A Balanced Approach.
“Instructional Strategeis Online” (2009) http://olc.spsd.sk.ca/de/pd/instr/strats/cloze/index.html
Saturday, October 30, 2010
Thursday, October 21, 2010
Vocabulary Building for Struggling Readers
Vocabulary knowledge is vital to reading comprehension. Even if a reader is able to decode words, his or her reading comprehension is impaired if the meaning of the words is unknown. Good readers tend to have large vocabularies because they expose themselves to print words. According to our text: “Students who exhibit reading difficulties don’t do as much reading as their classmates, and the books they read don’t introduce them to grade-level vocabulary words” (2010). Students will large vocabularies read more in and outside of school, and they “know more strategies for figuring out the meaning of unfamiliar words” than struggling readers (2010). Avid readers become better readers because they read more challenging books with refined vocabulary. Daily vocabulary activities that focus on word-learning strategies and direct instruction are vital to improving struggling readers’ vocabulary.
Perhaps one of the most efficient ways to improve a struggling reader’s vocabulary is through direct instruction of common morphemes (root words, prefixes, and suffixes). Morphemes are a great place to start because they are the “smallest units of a word that have meaning” (2009). Many English words are formed from mixture of the most general morphemes. “Teaching vocabulary with morphemes can enable students to expand their current vocabulary and to better determine the meaning of unknown words they encounter in the future” (2009). Teachers can use word walls when introducing morphemes, and can explicitly teacher a couple root words a week and add on prefixes and suffixes to enhance the students’ understanding.
In my future classroom, I plan to read stories aloud to my students everyday to provide incidental word learning and serve as a model for fluency. Perhaps I can focus on a few vocabulary words, and add these words to the class word wall. Then, when I re-read the story to the class the next day, I can ask them what the words mean and they can use the word wall to help them. I believe reading aloud is particularly important for struggling readers because they are exposed to fewer books with less sophisticated vocabulary. Our text states: “researchers report that students learn as many words incidentally while listening to teachers read aloud as they do by reading themselves” (2010). Another helpful strategy to increase vocabulary knowledge may be to have struggling readers and English language learners to listen to books on tape and have them follow along with the text in front of them.
Resources:
Hart, Lenzi (2009). Building vocabulary through morphemes. http://www.brighthub.com/education/special/articles/40828.aspx
Tompkins, Gail E. (2010). Literacy for the 21st Century: A Balanced Approach.
Perhaps one of the most efficient ways to improve a struggling reader’s vocabulary is through direct instruction of common morphemes (root words, prefixes, and suffixes). Morphemes are a great place to start because they are the “smallest units of a word that have meaning” (2009). Many English words are formed from mixture of the most general morphemes. “Teaching vocabulary with morphemes can enable students to expand their current vocabulary and to better determine the meaning of unknown words they encounter in the future” (2009). Teachers can use word walls when introducing morphemes, and can explicitly teacher a couple root words a week and add on prefixes and suffixes to enhance the students’ understanding.
In my future classroom, I plan to read stories aloud to my students everyday to provide incidental word learning and serve as a model for fluency. Perhaps I can focus on a few vocabulary words, and add these words to the class word wall. Then, when I re-read the story to the class the next day, I can ask them what the words mean and they can use the word wall to help them. I believe reading aloud is particularly important for struggling readers because they are exposed to fewer books with less sophisticated vocabulary. Our text states: “researchers report that students learn as many words incidentally while listening to teachers read aloud as they do by reading themselves” (2010). Another helpful strategy to increase vocabulary knowledge may be to have struggling readers and English language learners to listen to books on tape and have them follow along with the text in front of them.
Resources:
Hart, Lenzi (2009). Building vocabulary through morphemes. http://www.brighthub.com/education/special/articles/40828.aspx
Tompkins, Gail E. (2010). Literacy for the 21st Century: A Balanced Approach.
Saturday, October 16, 2010
The Motivation to Read
According to the article Assessing adolescents’ motivation to read, “motivation is defined in terms of beliefs, values, needs and goals that individuals have. Thus, the closer that literacy activities and tasks match these values, needs, and goals, the greater the likelihood that students will expend effort and sustain interest in them” (2007). It is particularly important for teachers and school districts to examine the texts and techniques used to motivate children to read (especially in the earlier grades) to ensure children have choices, success is attainable, and the information is relevant. If students “judge reading and literacy activities to be unrewarding, too difficult, or not worth the effort because they are peripheral to their interests and needs”, the students may lose interest in learning all together (2007).
In the article Read motivation: what research says, researchers Linda Gambrell and Barbara Marinak claim “self-concept and value of reading, choice; time spent talking about books, types of text available, and the use of incentives” have been proven to increase a child’s motivation to read (2009). One method in particular that caught my attention is the impact of read-alouds on student motivation. Read-alouds can be used by teachers to interpret texts and ask students question they normally would not think to ask themselves. Read-alouds “allow children to take an active role in understanding text; and prompt children to begin using mental activities that will become automatic as they begin reading independently” (2009). Small group discussions are also important and can be rewarding when unique ideas are shared and expanded.
When I was in first grade, I remember having no motivation to read. I thought reading was too challenging and very boring. Nothing I was told to read in class had anything any relation to my interests, and I thought my time was better spent playing outside with friends. My parents decided to offer me rewards after every book I read and have me read out loud to them everyday. I read to receive rewards and as I read I improved my skills drastically. While I am not currently in a classroom, I feel rewards for reading are very beneficial. As I read for rewards, I discovered my love for reading and eventually became a fluent reader. At first my motivation stemmed from the opportunity to receive rewards, then shifted to a motivation to learn and explore new ideas and information.
Resources:
Gambrell, L. and Marinak, B. Read motivation: what research says (2009). http://www.readingrockets.org/article/29624
Pitcher, S. Assessing adolescents’ motivation to read. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy(2007).
In the article Read motivation: what research says, researchers Linda Gambrell and Barbara Marinak claim “self-concept and value of reading, choice; time spent talking about books, types of text available, and the use of incentives” have been proven to increase a child’s motivation to read (2009). One method in particular that caught my attention is the impact of read-alouds on student motivation. Read-alouds can be used by teachers to interpret texts and ask students question they normally would not think to ask themselves. Read-alouds “allow children to take an active role in understanding text; and prompt children to begin using mental activities that will become automatic as they begin reading independently” (2009). Small group discussions are also important and can be rewarding when unique ideas are shared and expanded.
When I was in first grade, I remember having no motivation to read. I thought reading was too challenging and very boring. Nothing I was told to read in class had anything any relation to my interests, and I thought my time was better spent playing outside with friends. My parents decided to offer me rewards after every book I read and have me read out loud to them everyday. I read to receive rewards and as I read I improved my skills drastically. While I am not currently in a classroom, I feel rewards for reading are very beneficial. As I read for rewards, I discovered my love for reading and eventually became a fluent reader. At first my motivation stemmed from the opportunity to receive rewards, then shifted to a motivation to learn and explore new ideas and information.
Resources:
Gambrell, L. and Marinak, B. Read motivation: what research says (2009). http://www.readingrockets.org/article/29624
Pitcher, S. Assessing adolescents’ motivation to read. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy(2007).
Saturday, October 9, 2010
Inventive Spelling
Our short class discussion on invented spelling this past Wednesday sparked my interest in the topic and led me to explore the pros and the cons of allowing and even encouraging students to use this strategy. Inventive spelling is defined as “young children’s attempt to use their best judgments about spelling” (Hoffman 2006). A child’s spelling is evidence of his or her comprehension of the English language. According to our text, the words children “spell correctly show which phonics concepts, spelling patterns, and other language features they’ve learned to apply, and the words they invent and misspell show what they’re still learning to use and those features of spelling that they haven’t noticed or learned about” (Tompkins, 171). At first glance, I was critical of the idea of using invented spelling for fear that my future students would learn poor spelling habits. However, Tomkins states “researchers have confirmed that students grow more quickly in phonemic awareness, phonics, and spelling when they use invented spelling as long as they are also receiving spelling instruction ” (Tompkins, 171). Tompkins claims that students’ invented spelling will become more sophisticated and serve as a reflection of the knowledge they have acquired (even if the words are still spelled incorrectly). Students’ spelling accuracy will increase as they move through the various stages of spelling.
In the article, Pros and Cons of Invented or Inventive Spelling in the Elementary Classroom, Melissa Holman states that the majority of elementary school educators believe “invented/inventive spelling is the best way to give students ownership over their own literacy at as early an age as possible” (Hoffman 2006). Many researchers believe inventive spelling strategies encourage beginning readers and writers to get their thoughts on paper and to write in any way they want without having to focus on spelling words correctly. Many researchers believe that teacher generated word walls, lists, and workbooks can actually do more harm than good. “Many inventive spelling proponents believe that, in order to become good spellers, children need to learn to take responsibility for their own spelling; they need to learn how to proofread their own work and they need to realize when it is important to do so” (Hoffman 2006). Inventive spelling supporters feel that teachers marking wrong words are getting in the way of children becoming good editors and spellers.
Despite the recent support for inventive spelling, there are many who feel that “professional development for reading teachers must be limited to traditional phonics methods” (Hoffman 2006). Some researches claim that much scientific evidence shows that “children learn to spell correctly faster if they are taught in a direct, methodical way, and that there is a direct correlation between children’s ability to spell correctly and the quality of their work” (Hoffman 2006). Others feel that traditional forms of spelling instruction do not stifle students, but lay a strong foundation for future academic success. While I am not in a classroom, it is my personal opinion that there needs to be a balance in the curriculum. In kindergarten-first grade, children should be allowed to use invented spelling, but the teachers should encourage their students to correctly spell by the beginning of second grade. Thus children should reach a level of reading and writing fluency by the end of third grade.
References:
Hoffman, Melissa. (2006). Pros and Cons of Invented or Inventive Spelling in the Elementary Classroom. www.associatedcontent.com/article/25457/pros_and_cons_of_invented_or_inventive_pg6.html?cat+4
Tompkins, Gail E. (2010). Literacy for the 21st Century: A Balanced Approach.
In the article, Pros and Cons of Invented or Inventive Spelling in the Elementary Classroom, Melissa Holman states that the majority of elementary school educators believe “invented/inventive spelling is the best way to give students ownership over their own literacy at as early an age as possible” (Hoffman 2006). Many researchers believe inventive spelling strategies encourage beginning readers and writers to get their thoughts on paper and to write in any way they want without having to focus on spelling words correctly. Many researchers believe that teacher generated word walls, lists, and workbooks can actually do more harm than good. “Many inventive spelling proponents believe that, in order to become good spellers, children need to learn to take responsibility for their own spelling; they need to learn how to proofread their own work and they need to realize when it is important to do so” (Hoffman 2006). Inventive spelling supporters feel that teachers marking wrong words are getting in the way of children becoming good editors and spellers.
Despite the recent support for inventive spelling, there are many who feel that “professional development for reading teachers must be limited to traditional phonics methods” (Hoffman 2006). Some researches claim that much scientific evidence shows that “children learn to spell correctly faster if they are taught in a direct, methodical way, and that there is a direct correlation between children’s ability to spell correctly and the quality of their work” (Hoffman 2006). Others feel that traditional forms of spelling instruction do not stifle students, but lay a strong foundation for future academic success. While I am not in a classroom, it is my personal opinion that there needs to be a balance in the curriculum. In kindergarten-first grade, children should be allowed to use invented spelling, but the teachers should encourage their students to correctly spell by the beginning of second grade. Thus children should reach a level of reading and writing fluency by the end of third grade.
References:
Hoffman, Melissa. (2006). Pros and Cons of Invented or Inventive Spelling in the Elementary Classroom. www.associatedcontent.com/article/25457/pros_and_cons_of_invented_or_inventive_pg6.html?cat+4
Tompkins, Gail E. (2010). Literacy for the 21st Century: A Balanced Approach.
Friday, October 1, 2010
Round-Robin Reading
According to our text, round-robin reading is “an out modeled reading activity in which the teacher calls on children to read aloud, one after the other” (Tompkins, p. 213). Round-robin reading can be used in both an individual group and whole class setting, but this activity is not recommended today. Tompkins explains several problems associated with this practice. The first issue is “students may develop an inaccurate view of reading because they are expected to read aloud to the class without having opportunities to rehearse” (Tompkins, p. 213). Also, many students may change their silent reading speeds to match the speed of their classmates that are reading aloud. Teachers who use round-robin reading may spend the majority of class time disciplining students who become bored and misbehave. One of the most harmful affects of this practice is that struggling readers may become embarrassed and anxious if they are called to read to the entire class. Research claims that students should read books independently, but “ if the books are too difficult, they can read with buddies, participate in shared reading, or listen to the teacher or another fluent reader read aloud” (Tompkins, p. 213).
I recall using round-robin reading exercises from 3rd grade all the way through high school. I remember my 7th and 8th grade science teacher making each student read a paragraph from out textbook everyday. I used to frantically read my assigned paragraph to myself in an effort to rehearse while another classmate read aloud. I do not think I retained a forth of what was required of the class. The Ministry of Education claims that round-robin reading “prevents each student from processing the text and constructing meaning independently, distracts and bores other students, and obscures meaning” (Ministry of Education, 2006, p107). The Ministry of Education conducted a study involving 30 teachers and asked them why they use round-robin reading. Many teachers claimed they use it as a means of mixing up classroom activities and monitoring their students’ reading abilities.
While it is not advocated today, round-robin reading is still practiced in many classrooms. The Ministry of Education gives four reasons teachers revert to round-robin reading. The first reason is that some teachers have a lack of understanding the reading process (pre-reading, reading, responding, exploring, applying). They may not be aware of their students’ stage in the process, and may push them to read in front of the classroom before they have reached fluency. This may also be attributed to a lack of assessment data, and teachers may use round-robin reading to detect reading issues their students may have. Also, a major reason this outdated technique is still used today is a “lack of appropriate models for student teachers” (Ministry of Education, 2006, p107). Therefore, the Ministry of Education calls for improvements to teacher preparation courses and access to positive and suitable teacher mentors to encourage and suggest alternative forms of instruction.
References:
Ministry of Education. (2006). Annual Report 2006. http://www.minedu.govt.nz/theMinistry/PublicationsAndResources/AnnualReport/AnnualReport2006.aspx
Tompkins, Gail E. (2010). Literacy for the 21st Century: A Balanced Approach.
I recall using round-robin reading exercises from 3rd grade all the way through high school. I remember my 7th and 8th grade science teacher making each student read a paragraph from out textbook everyday. I used to frantically read my assigned paragraph to myself in an effort to rehearse while another classmate read aloud. I do not think I retained a forth of what was required of the class. The Ministry of Education claims that round-robin reading “prevents each student from processing the text and constructing meaning independently, distracts and bores other students, and obscures meaning” (Ministry of Education, 2006, p107). The Ministry of Education conducted a study involving 30 teachers and asked them why they use round-robin reading. Many teachers claimed they use it as a means of mixing up classroom activities and monitoring their students’ reading abilities.
While it is not advocated today, round-robin reading is still practiced in many classrooms. The Ministry of Education gives four reasons teachers revert to round-robin reading. The first reason is that some teachers have a lack of understanding the reading process (pre-reading, reading, responding, exploring, applying). They may not be aware of their students’ stage in the process, and may push them to read in front of the classroom before they have reached fluency. This may also be attributed to a lack of assessment data, and teachers may use round-robin reading to detect reading issues their students may have. Also, a major reason this outdated technique is still used today is a “lack of appropriate models for student teachers” (Ministry of Education, 2006, p107). Therefore, the Ministry of Education calls for improvements to teacher preparation courses and access to positive and suitable teacher mentors to encourage and suggest alternative forms of instruction.
References:
Ministry of Education. (2006). Annual Report 2006. http://www.minedu.govt.nz/theMinistry/PublicationsAndResources/AnnualReport/AnnualReport2006.aspx
Tompkins, Gail E. (2010). Literacy for the 21st Century: A Balanced Approach.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)