Just a Play Away

Kids like what they like...and when we encourage them to pursue their interests, they feel validated and are engaged in the learning process.  Whether what fascinates them is the latest muscle car, the new champion on League of Legends, a Disney princess' fate, or something from amid this array nearly as vast as the number of individuals, we are all students of something.  And when parents and teachers tap into the interests that children bring with them, we can engage them where they are with what they like in the manner they prefer, which results in more children being more wholeheartedly engaged with what's around them.  So what does this look like?  It looks like engaging in play with them.  It looks like asking good questions and then listening to their answers.  It looks like encouraging them to pursue research about and saturation in their topic(s) of choice.  And it looks like supporting them in these pursuits with the resources that you have at your disposal, whether that’s a trip to a field museum, the local library, or a couple minutes of focused time in meaningful conversation.

Play's Place? In the Classroom!

It was so refreshing to read about the success of a class in which play is a focus!  All too often, it seems like the “c[h]ool” is being taken out of school, leaving behind assessments and the rigorous curricula deemed necessary to prepare students for them.  As recess shrinks to an infinitesimal speck on the daily schedule and the so-called “specials”—music, gym, art, library—disappear altogether, children spend an ever-increasing amount of time in an environment in which they’re expected to sit quietly and focus on whatever task is at hand, be it listening to the teacher, working on projects or worksheets alone or in a group, reading, or writing.  And teachers are told that this is what we have to do in order to keep up with the expectations laid out by the standardized tests of the hour.  But is it really?  Is sitting in straight rows, silently listening then working on assignments really what’s best for our students?  Is that how they learn most effectively and engage best with the material?  Karen Wohlwend’s (2011) book Playing Their Way into Literacies:  Reading, Writing, and Belonging in the Early Childhood Classroom makes a case for play as a frame for early childhood learning, and makes it quite convincingly.  In the second chapter, Wohlwend cites multiple instances from her case study of a class taught by Abbie Howard, and focuses on a group of students styled the “Abbie Wannabes”:  these students routinely choose to participate in teacher/student modeled play during choice time, drawing on the strategies they have been explicitly taught or have picked up on from their surrounding contexts in order to help themselves and their playmates successfully engage in their play.  And perhaps most heartwarming for me, the students were able to help each other to become better navigators of the literacies surrounding them.  Even students who were independent readers in the kindergarten context could learn from their peers who may not have been reading as readily, but who were experienced and confident storytellers.  This kind of natural give-and-take and sharpening of skills by peers is something exciting to see.

What's in a question? More than you may've thought...

          According to Dr. Diana Leyva, it turns out that while book-reading is important, it may not be the most vital thing.  Yep, that’s what I said…you read it right!  Book-reading is important, but Dr. Leyva advocates for the significance of reminiscing and especially of asking your children or students open-ended questions to positively impact children’s phonological awareness.  Why open-ended questions?  Because if I ask, “Did you go to the park yesterday?” the child responding has a lot less mental processing to do than if I query instead, “Where did you go yesterday?”  To answer the second question, the child has to recall what s/he did yesterday and where it took place.  And the child may even inform me that s/he went to a whole list of places, instead of only responding that, “Yes, s/he went to the park.”

          So where does reminiscing come in?  Well, that’s where parents who are uncomfortable reading aloud or don’t have the resources to do so can still immerse their children in a narrative structure and where parents can pick up a productive conversation while in the middle of other activities, like eating or while in the car.  This reminiscing can be as simple as asking and answering the question above, “Where did you go yesterday?” or could be something more involved, such as a parent sharing stories from 

his/her childhood and interacting with the listener(s), for instance, asking children to connect with the stories or say what they may do in a similar situation.  The engagement with vocabulary helps children to become more comfortable more words, increasing their phonological awareness as they encounter more words and sounds.

A Call to Speak Out!

When I read the comments of one primary teacher, "I know it's developmentally inappropriate, but I've got to do it" (Wohlwend, 2009, p. 345), my immediate response was to be moved nearly to tears of empathy and frustration.  How can the mandates handed down to teachers be in favor of teaching writing as merely a "task through which children demonstrate skill competency or display content knowledge, rather than communicate personal meanings or carry out social functions" (Wohlwend, 2009, p. 344), when writing can be something so much richer and more fulfilling?  Something that can give voices to students' imaginations and let them express themselves.  So what can we do, the concerned adults who see the children around us going through an educational system where mandates trump children's needs?  Dr. Caitlin Dooley makes a case for advocation, saying that if we--parents, teachers, and concerned citizens--don't speak out, how can we hope that change will happen spontaneously (Baker & Dooley, 2010)?  She calls for teachers and parents to work together and speak out about what's best for students.  And she asks for principals and administrators to tell the policy-makers when they feel that mandates aren't helping students.  Policy-makers she recommends to discover what achievement really is so that they can truly create an innovative way of assessing it.  And what might this assessment look like?  Well, Dooley mentions the video games that her children so enjoy and questions why assessment can't be more authentic, perhaps built into games that are engaging.  So what's our starting point?  Parents:  a good place might be to find out what your children know and what they're learning...and how they're learning it.  Teachers:  take note of where your students are and what practices are helpful--and which ones aren't--and ask parents to get involved with speaking up about what's good for the children you all care about so much.

Baker, E. A., & Dooley, C. (2010, March 1). "Teaching language arts in a high stakes era." Voice of Literacy. Retrieved from http://voiceofliteracy.org

Wohlwend, K. E. (2009, May).  "Dilemmas and discourses of learning to write:  Assessment as a contested site."  Language arts, 86(5), 341-351.

Dibs on Not Using DIBELS!

As we learn more about how ineffectual many of the “pop” reading assessments based on the “National Reading Panel’s (NRP) five pillars (phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension)” that seek to boil down “reading to a narrow set of skills that can be easily tested” (Wohlwend 2012, pg. 117) really are, what should we turn to instead?  We know that such assessments as DIBELS (Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills) aren't cutting it, with their emphasis on constrained skills and lack of focus on comprehension.  So a turn to something more complex that measures comprehension and how it’s reached is necessary; something that incorporates not only an inquiry into how readers combine print and image information, but also how they navigate the interactive process of constructing meaning from what they read and how they navigate different cultural language patterns.  Simultaneously, there should be a restructuring of Reading First, based on more than the NRP’s five pillars, that would encourage teachers to teach not only fundamental skills, but also growth processes, such as reading comprehension and composition in writing (Baker & Pearson  2010).  Why are these changes so vital?  Because while being able to turn the text on the page into a mental or spoken stream of language is important, it doesn't do a student much good unless s/he is able to understand and manipulate what s/he’s reading.

Sources Cited:

Baker, E.A., & Pearson, PD.  (October 18, 2010).  “Reading first: Hard to live with—or without.”  Voice of literacy podcast.  Podcast retrieved from http://voiceofliteracy.org

Wohlwend, K. (2012).  “A new spin on miscue analysis:  Using spider charts to web reading processes.”  From Language Arts, 90(2), (pg. 110-117).

More than 100 Little Things...and "More Like 'Guidelines'"

Despite the popularity of leveled reading instruction, there's a real possibility that it will become a one-size-fits-all instructional method that doesn't really fit anyone.  When students with very different instructional needs--but who have similar quantitative data on reading analyses--are grouped together and taught as though they all have the same needs, it can easily turn into a time in which none of them receive the instruction they actually need.  Furthermore, leveled readings often fail to take into account what will actually interest the students reading these texts, and particularly students who are reading below-grade-level.  When a third-grader is asked to read a highly repetitive book with little plot and no character development, it is little wonder that s/he becomes frustrated and bored; and when a child is denied access to a text simply because it is beyond his/her reading level (but would, in all actuality, be within reach with help), it seems counter-intuitive:  why would we ever discourage reading?  As Kath Glasswell and Michael Ford discuss in their article, "Let's Start Leveling about Leveling" (2011), the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction has developed a model of reading that identifies 100 possible combinations of factors to which children may be exposed while reading:  5 major reader factors (motivation, subject knowledge, background experience, vocabulary, and purpose); 5 major text factors (content, format, concepts, organization, and author's purpose); and 4 major contextual factors (physical setting, activity, outcome, and emotional climate) (pp. 209-210).  With all of these factors to keep in mind, how can we possibly expect leveled reading to effectively guide us?  Especially in light of Glasswell and Ford's assertion that leveled reading:  1) oversimplifies text selection (by focusing on oral reading accuracy to match students to texts), 2) overly complicates text selection (which should be focused on providing students with materials that they're able to read), 3) results in teaching to levels, not to needs, 4) targets progress without aiming for proficiency (looking for results, rather than to catch a student up to his/her peers), and, 5) has the possibility to limit students' exposure to stimulating, challenging, and grade-appropriate learning (pp. 209-214).  Yet despite these objections, it can be quite detrimental for students to struggle through books that are too difficult for them, or to be bored to distraction by texts that are too easy, and--in theory, if not always in practice--leveled reading  is supposed to remove that possibility.  When treated as guidelines rather than as the final word on the matter, leveled reading can be a helpful tool to give parents and instructors both a general idea about what sorts of books may be suitable for an individual child...but it's important to remember that they are "more like 'guidelines!'"

Teaching Explicitly

When teachers use explicit language strategies--I mean, really share in adult language what is going on in their heads as they read and think--it helps students catch on.  Whether the teacher is talking about making connections with a text (text-to-self, text-to-text, or text-to-world) or helping them learn vocabulary, getting down to the nitty-gritty and authentically modeling and sharing makes it possible for students to do the same. In chapter 5 of her book Reading with Meaning:  Teaching Comprehension in the Primary Grades, Debbie Miller relates her struggles and successes with teaching kids how to access their schemas (the background knowledge they have available to them) as they read and think; she shares how every year it's a struggle and she's not sure they'll make it this time around...but they always do.  From simple connections like, "...my cousin's name is Eve" (p. 59) to more sophisticated ones such as being lost in a mall and the feelings associated with that (pp. 60-61), her students grow in their understanding of what it means to make solid connections to the themes and emotions within a text, and in their ability to discuss them.  But Miller’s careful preparation and explicit modeling go a very long way toward making these things possible.

On a somewhat related note, Dr. Susan Neuman talks about “Using Categories to Teach Vocabulary to Preschoolers,” and how creating themed vocab lists around a certain topic is useful not only for vocab-retention itself, but also for the discussions that can happen because of the categories.  For instance, she talks about how you can build the category of “fruit” from a discussion about apples, and you can incorporate into that a talk about how fruit is healthy and what it does for your body.  Neuman also points out that when doing this, you can use category games like BINGO or Jeopardy! to model strategies for organizing words, as well as to have some fun in your classroom.  Finally, a point where Neuman and Miller really agree is on their stress of adult-level conversation with kids:  without exposure to the words and patterns of speech that adults use, kids can’t pick up on them, which only holds them back.  So it’s vital to not only use sophisticated language with kids, but to explicitly express what it means and how concepts and strategies can be applied.