adapted from Judith Gray, Seattle, WA 2005
One of my professors introduced this method of attacking text a few weeks ago. It has helped me tremendously in terms of how I approach and interact with the selections I'm asked to read. I feel like it also prepares me to better contribute to discussions. That, by itself, is huge because I'm usually one to be timid in class, especially when I'm intimidated by my classmates. In the case of what we were given (the handout says that we can add out own As), we looked at
**Author's assumptions,
**Where I agree with the author,
**What I want to argue with, and
**The parts of the text I aspire to.
My hope is, and my reason for writing this here, that I'll remember this strategy and continue to apply it to my reading.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad
Showing posts with label reading strategy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label reading strategy. Show all posts
Thursday, February 3, 2011
Saturday, December 25, 2010
R5:The sustained silent reading makeover that transformed readers
Kelley, M. & Clausen-Grace, N. (2006, October). R5:The sustained silent reading makeover that transformed readers. The Reading Teacher, (60)2, pp. 148-156. doi:10.1598/RT.60.2.5
This article was written in response to disengaged readers during Sustained Silent Reading (SSR). Initially the teacher was concerned because research shows that there is a connection between time spent reading and reading achievement, so disengaged learners aren’t building fluency. They cite Nancy Atwell as a major player in their creation of the R5 strategy for SSR. R5 builds in a social aspect to SSR, and requires students to fill out a log sheet detailing the reading strategies they’re self-monitoring during their reading.
I like that the social aspect is built into SSR, however I have concerns about the idea of the reading log. Because the researchers designed the log in such a way that readers are almost forced into becoming metacognative, I wonder how much readers pay attention to the reading strategies they’re using when they’re not in that particular class or once they have moved up a grade level.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad
This article was written in response to disengaged readers during Sustained Silent Reading (SSR). Initially the teacher was concerned because research shows that there is a connection between time spent reading and reading achievement, so disengaged learners aren’t building fluency. They cite Nancy Atwell as a major player in their creation of the R5 strategy for SSR. R5 builds in a social aspect to SSR, and requires students to fill out a log sheet detailing the reading strategies they’re self-monitoring during their reading.
I like that the social aspect is built into SSR, however I have concerns about the idea of the reading log. Because the researchers designed the log in such a way that readers are almost forced into becoming metacognative, I wonder how much readers pay attention to the reading strategies they’re using when they’re not in that particular class or once they have moved up a grade level.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad
Revisiting cognitive strategy instruction in culturally and linguistically diverse classrooms
Handsfield, L. J., & Jimenez, R. T. (2008, July). Revisiting cognitive strategy instruction in culturally and linguistically diverse classrooms: Cautions and possibilities. Language Arts, 85(6), pp. 450-458.
Handsfield discusses the use of cognitive strategies (see also: Strategies that Work, [Harvey & Goudivis, 2007] for information on cognitive strategies) with students who are culturally and linguistically diverse. She cautions against focusing solely on these strategies, citing observations from a classroom that uses primarily cognitive strategy instruction with culturally and linguistically diverse third graders.
Handsfield’s criticism of cognitive strategy instruction seems to be focused primarily on the implementation and the pedagogy of the classroom teacher. For example, one caution involves literacy as a solitary activity existing mostly in the mind. However, other research suggests that literacy development is a social process, and I believe that is what Handsfield is trying to caution users of cognitive strategies against.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad
Handsfield discusses the use of cognitive strategies (see also: Strategies that Work, [Harvey & Goudivis, 2007] for information on cognitive strategies) with students who are culturally and linguistically diverse. She cautions against focusing solely on these strategies, citing observations from a classroom that uses primarily cognitive strategy instruction with culturally and linguistically diverse third graders.
Handsfield’s criticism of cognitive strategy instruction seems to be focused primarily on the implementation and the pedagogy of the classroom teacher. For example, one caution involves literacy as a solitary activity existing mostly in the mind. However, other research suggests that literacy development is a social process, and I believe that is what Handsfield is trying to caution users of cognitive strategies against.
- Posted using BlogPress from my iPad
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)