The rationale of why I teach how I teach and what I have changed due what I have read, observed and experienced as a result of literacy development and assessment inquiry.

 First and foremost I teach community and family. The centralization of the school system has led to the fragmentation of family ideals within the public schools. Therefore I believe the most important job I have is creating an atmosphere in which students help each other, feel connected to something bigger than themselves but that includes them in the success of the whole.

 It is only after the group, myself included, feels the togetherness along with the urgency of our goals that we can turn our attentions to the experience of learning new things and having horizon broadening experiences. With that accomplished one can turn attention and focus to the theories and curriculum.

 In the realm of literacy development, the core of my instruction is Free Voluntary Reading. I acknowledge the fact that there are no perfect models for all teachers, simply good fits on a teacher by teacher basis. Personally I need to know that what I am doing makes sense from a research point of view. That said, I read the book entitled, The Power of Reading: Insights from the Research, and immediately found a match in Krashen’s advocacy for reading without comprehension tests or concerns of discrete point test performance.

 According to Southgate, Arnold, and Johnson (1981), Elley (1983 & 1991), Anderson, Wilson, and Fielding (1988) and a laundry list of other researchers, the virtues of FVR and the presence of a high print environment are the best way to develop literacy. 

To me teaching reading / writing  / literacy is more about excitement than anything else. Showing your enthusiasm to the kids. They see how you respond and interact to books and they begin to feel the same way. Its like at first they don’t know how to react, but after awhile they just warm to it and the enthusiasm spreads and grows. They hear me talking about books, see me reading books, laughing mid-sentence, vocalizing my thoughts on the characters and plot line, they see my dismay when our FVR time is up and they start to feel the same way. My strength is my true love of reading, I don’t just say it is important to read I actually read in front of them. I read in FVR time, I read after school in tutoring, I read during lunch. Telling your kids that it is important to read is not enough, and pretending doesn’t cut it either. Kids spot insincerity pretty quickly. Not only do I love reading but I also feel the need to write poems and stories (as well as the occasional research paper). The enthusiasm I feel for literacy rubs off on my students.

 After and with the enthusiasm comes FVR time. My third graders know that they have 25 minutes every day in which they may read anything they choose. Nobody looking over his or her shoulder, no pressure to stick to a book, I believe it is a period of self-discovery. Some students, even after I model proper behaviors, dawdle while looking for books. I see that as not yet understanding their own reading interests or literacy level. They pick out a great deal of “wrong” books at first during this exploratory period. Some individuals spend their first 3-4 years of college finding out which are the “wrong” fields for themselves and yet nobody tells them after a couple of failed majors what they should study. Krashen talks about “homerun books”, talks about how nearly 50% of all readers point to a specific book that acted as a catalyst in their literacy development which led to a life long relationship with books. My students deserve to use their time to better understand their own likes and dislikes, with the understanding that I am casually observing them and have continuing one on one conversations with those who seem to struggle in picking a book and reading it. These meetings are very informal, more of a verbal Metalinguistic / interest inventory type of conversations as we walk down to get butcher paper or some other task at which I request help.

 Immediately after FVR time we progress into book club. Students gather into their self-made groups, each with a group-designated leader, and bring a few of the books they read either the night before or during the day. They get a chance to ask questions and retell the plot line of their story. This gets about 7-10 minutes of our reading time. I meet with anyone who doesn’t have a group or if everyone is grouped I float from club to club. They begin with round robin retell and then proceed to  questions and finally –time permitting- book trade, providing the club members an opportunity to preview other books deemed worthy by the group.

 Around the FVR core, my class uses modified “Shared Reading” for about 20 minutes per day. I read instructor or student selected books, the students gather around my feet, we activate background knowledge and use retelling strategies and components of K-W-L. Many times one book during our session leads to many other books either related by author or subject matter. Sixty percent of the time I read the book as a teaser, one or two chapters… 

 Class basil-reading follows. Using the school wide Success For All literacy program, we do rapid vocabulary exposure and background knowledge activation. As a class we look at the pictures and try to make predictions about the content, outcome and tone of the story. I read the first page, we discuss it, and the students read half the story to themselves and when finished, they read the same part again with a partner. There are sets of questions, which are discussed and answered in reading teams and finally discussed as a class the following day.

 After the basil reading we turn out attention towards writing.

 Success For All [SFA] stresses the need for constructing meaningful sentences to bring about better comprehension and word meaning strategies. This seems to be supported by research, i.e. giving learners strategies instead of discrete point skill instruction. My class accomplishes this through the use of mind mapping. We brainstorm any information we have on a certain word, we break the word down, look for root words or cognates we might link to from another language. The class does one as a whole and volunteer groups work on other targeted words.

 From this writing reading connection we flow into a guided writing workshop format.

 We start with journals, I offer a modeled journal entry on an example topic and they may either write on the same topic or something totally different. I especially like the thoughts and ideas of Natalie Goldberg, author of The Bones and Wild Mind, her belief is that people not only need to write everyday but that we always have things to write about if only we can get out of our own way. By tapping into the urgency of timed writings, she believes we can isolate the writer inside of us, keeping the editor at bay.  To that end we do timed writings, 5-10 minutes where I encourage continuous writing.

 These journals are read and shared in student made groups, some as big as 6 others with just 2 students. The group can recommend a class reading of a certain journal entry if they choose. We talk about the writing, what kinds of text to text, text to world, and text to self connections we can make.

 Writing roulette follows journal time. Usually we dwell on one topic or genre for at least two to three weeks, however within their groups they can alter the focus of the projects substantially. Our most popular writing roulettes are horror stories or action / fighting stories. Some so-called reluctant writers bring me 5-8 pages of text the day after beginning a horror or blood and guts unit. Some students get squeamish during these units and are allowed to deviate to a topic they can enjoy. These pieces of writing are given to the original writer to recopy and edit. This also takes place in their group circles to facilitate deciphering and editing. 

 We also write group stories, each person comes up with one story and the class listens and gives suggestions. We pick one at a time to write together, during these sessions I do mini lessons and model writer’s self talk.

 Finally we work on publishing some of our best work. Our medium so far has been notebook paper. However, in the coming term we will continue our project for a science journal.

What I have learned from the text Framing Literacy…

 It would be difficult to separate what I have learned from students, peers, books, journal entries, and yes even administration. Difficult because periods of growth and experimentation come from many different sources. If one day I read a chapter from Framing Literacy and then see a colleague and discuss what she does, compare it to what I read and then try a personal version out in the classroom, what source deserves the credit?

 Framing Literacy has acted as a catalyst for growth and peer dialogue. It has helped me focus and evaluate what I do and don’t do in the classroom concerning literacy. It has challenged me and strengthened my resolve to plan thoroughly, it has introduced me to miscue analysis and opened my eyes to the wealth of assessment options as well as the integration of instruction and casual assessment. But justified because I now know more of the research and types of assessment. 

 The study of reading assessment has led to the creation of this web-site. And while its current state is quite humble it does house certain worthwhile facts and entries. Most notably the assessment section on miscue analysis in which teachers and parents can experiment with the process and compare their analysis with my own, giving comments and constructive criticism.  

 What are my personal beliefs concerning literacy instruction?

 ·         Everything begins with a classroom community

·          Reading understanding is captured not directly taught

·          Enthusiasm and consistency are integral

·          Good writers read

·          Establish purpose

·          Allow for as much choice as possible

·         Self efficacy

·         Background knowledge

·         Literacy knowledge strategies

·         Reflection (both teacher and student)

·         Functional literacy

 What are the corresponding principles?

 ·         Developing readers and writers improve in a supportive, family-like community atmosphere.

·         Readers (and writers) need time to negotiate their own meaning through use of silent reading time.

·         Excitement is contagious, paired with instructional consistency    they drive students to learn.

·         Writers learn conventions of spelling, grammar and style by reading.

·         Establishing a purpose for reading and writing allows the learner to focus.

·         Giving writers and readers choice over what they do gives them ownership.

·         Proficient readers and writers see themselves as capable, in and out of school.

·         Proficient readers and writers know about their world.

·         Proficient readers and writers use a range of clues to make meaning.

·         Proficient readers and writers reflect on why and how they make certain reading and writing decisions.

·         Proficient readers and writers put literacy to work in their world.

 In conclusion the Framing Literacy text has led me to better teaching and more precise assessment / literacy development. I respect the process more, I see the larger picture and am less concerned with what I see as obstacles and more dedicated to teaching those who are present. As a teacher it has raised my self-efficacy through expanding my world / teaching knowledge base allowing me to take more risks by using more literacy strategies in the classroom. I also value my reflection time and allow it to gel and influence my informed action.