When and Where Did I Find It: I found this term in section of McKenna and Robinson's (2002, p. 45) book, Teaching Through Text: Reading and Writing in the Content Areas.
What It Means: This is a specific type of assessment tool used to judge how well the (possible) assigned textbook passages and the students' reading abilities are matched.
McKenna and Robinson (2002) state, "The content literacy inventory, at its core is a series of questions posed over a small section of the textbook. The student's success at answering these questions after reading the section is used to predict probable performance on the text as a whole" (McKenna & Robinson, p. 45, emphasis added).
An example of this type of assessment tool would be the Strategic Content Literacy Assessment (SCLA) tool the LTED 625 students created as part of their Strategic Content Area Teaching Project-Part I assignments.
Level of Familiarity: I have a well-developed understanding of this type of classroom based assessment tool.
Do I Want to Know This Word Well and Why? Yes. I think this is an important tool to know in order to provide teachers with alternatives to the traditional readability measures as well as to be able to design a tool that would serve as the best way to match the specific students being taught.
Do I Think Others Should Know This Word Well...if so WHO and WHY?: I certainly think Literacy Specialist, particularly my LTED 625 students need to know how to design and implement this type of tool (which is why it is one of the required components of SCATP Part I).
Sunday, October 24, 2010
8:2 Point of View Reading Guide
When and Where Did I Find It: I found this term in the Wood (1988) article that was assigned for our LTED 625 class readings.
I found this term in the Wood (1988) article that was assigned for our LTED 625 class readings.
What it means: This is a specific type of reading guide, designed and assigned by the teacher to aid students reading comprehension both during reading and after reading. As Wood (1988) describes,
The point of view reading guide uses questions in an interview format to allow students to experience events from alternative perspectives. Instead of just reading about a particular character, students actually become that individual...The interview questions elicit both text based and reader based contributions from the reader. Because readers must essentially assume the schemata or more simply "get inside the head" of the character, their comprehension and subsequent recall are positively affected. (Wood, p. 913)
Level of Familiarity: I have a fairly well-developed understanding of this instructional strategy, although I rarely use it myself.
Do I Want to Know This Word Well and Why? Yes. I guess what I want is to remember this type of guide. I often consider creating anticipation guides, interactive guides, or QtA guides when designing instructional activities for my students, but I often forget about this particular type of guide Wood suggests.
Do I Think Others Should Know This Word Well...if so WHO and WHY?: I think this is certainly another type of instructional strategy I want my LTED 625 students to know well, but whether or not they need to develop beyond a Level 4 expertise (Mehigan) is highly dependent upon what their specific content literacy instructional goals are as well as who their students are.
8:1 Content Literacy
When and Where Did I Find It: This is a term I have come across in many sources, but I particularly like the definition I found in McKenna and Robinson's (2002, pp. 8-11) book Teaching Through Text (3rd ed.) I had first read this source ten years ago (the second edition was published in 1997), but I revisited this discussion in thinking about how to help my students understand how this type of learning objective would be distinct from general literacy objectives or from content knowledge.
What it means: McKenna and Robinson (2002) detail eight key features of content literacy:
1. Content literacy is not the same as content knowledge. The term content literacy is NOT merely a synonym for content knowledge. Instead, it represents the skills and strategies needed to acquire knowledge of content.
2. Teaching content automatically makes students more content literate. Whether they know it or not, content area teachers enhance their students' ability to read and write about content simply by teaching it....Enhanced prior knowledge always enhances subsequent reading and writing germane to that knowledge.
3. Content literacy is content specific. While a general ability to read and write obviously bears on one's success in reading about writing about a specific subject, prior knowledge of the specific topics involved is a vital variable of content literacy.
4. In content literacy, reading and writing are complementary tasks. While reading and writing an serve well enough as alternative means of enhancing content learning, the greatest gains can be expected when the two are used in tandem.
5. Content literacy is germane to all subject areas, not just those that rely heavily on printed materials. Students' understanding of the content presented in all subjects could be substantially enhanced through appropriate writing assignments [since we know that] content learning invariably includes the understanding of key concepts and their interrelationships.
6. Content literacy does not require content area teachers to instruction students in the mechanics of writing. (NOTE: This feature generates the most contrasting opinions.) As Myers (1984) put it, 'Writing to learn is not learning to write' (p. 7). While mechanical problems in students' writing may be severe enough to distort meaning and may require a teacher's attention, especially in subjects like mathematics, in which precise usage is an absolute necessity (Orr, 1987), but the focus should be meaning, not mechanics.
7. Content literacy is relative to the tasks expected of students. The literacy requirements of a classroom, like those of a workplace or of an entire culture, readily define who is literate and who is not (Guthrie, 1983; Hadaway & Young, 1994; Mikulecky, 1990; Moje, 1993; Rafferty, 1992 Wedman & Robinson, 1990). In an effort to reduce or eliminate the :illiterate: in their classes, teachers all too frequently resort to...circumventing reading assignments, while writing assignments are completely ignored. [However,] students at even a rudimentary level of general literacy are equipped to advance their understanding through literacy activities whenever (1) reading materials are commensurate with ability (or steps are taken to facilitate comprehension of more difficult material) and (2) writing assignments are within the range of student sophistication.
8. Content literacy has the potential to maximize content acquisition. Students who have received opportunities to become content literate will be better able to use content literacy as a means of extending their knowledge of a discipline even after they have completed a given course.
(as cited in McKenna & Robinson, 2002, pp.9-11)
Level of Familiarity: While I am very familiar with this term and how it is related to but distinct from content knowledge and general literacy skills/strategies, I find myself often revisiting this discussion, particularly when I am evaluating my students' explication of the content literacy learning objectives they include in their unit. I review this knowledge as a means to cross-check the validity of my evaluation of their work.
Do I Want to Know This Word Well and Why? Yes. I think having a clear and distinct understanding of what content literacy is helpful. I think this is most true when considering McKenna and Robinson's statement that content literacy is content specific. This is why simply learning an instructional strategy well (e.g., KWL) is not enough. In order for me to be prepared to select the appropriate strategy for content learning and for developing content literacy abilities, I have to have a well-conceived understanding of what it is I want my students to learn as well as who my students are.
Do I Think Others Should Know This Word Well...if so WHO and WHY?: I certainly think LTED 625 students should know this concept --particularly because it will help them be more purposeful in their instruction. Content Area Teachers often are in love with the facts, dates, places, events, calculations, processes, or phenomena of their content area. However, to best teach their students they must think carefully about the specific reading and writing abilities they and their students must acquire and hone in order to be deemed "an expert" (Alexander & Jetton, 2000).
Monday, October 18, 2010
7:2 Guided Discussion
When and Where Did I Find It: I found the term guided discussion when re-reading our text, Teaching Reading in the Content Areas: If Not Me Then Who? (Billmeyer & Barton, 1998, pp. 49-50).
What it means: The authors give a very detailed definition of the term: "In guided discussion,the teacher uses tquestions or teacher-developed study guide materials to direct student thinking. In addition to designing and posing questions, the teacher's role is to encourage student questions about the content and to provide additional information and clarification when needed (Vacca & Vacca, 1993)" (as cited in Billmeyer & Barton, p. 50).
Level of Familiarity: I am very familiar with this concept, but what I find interesting is that even though I would place my level of familiarity at a level 6 (Mehigan, 1995), I still have to re-evaluate my ability to use this instructional strategy based on the specific students I am working with and the information I want them to know well.
Do I Want to Know This Word Well and Why? Yes. My rationale is similar to my position on Writing-to-Learn Activities. I do not see how I could be qualified as a teacher of literacy (or a teacher of teachers, teaching literacy) if I do not have a principled understanding of what a guided discussion looks like and the reason why to use such an instructional strategy.
Do I Think Others Should Know This Word Well...if so WHO and WHY?: I certainly think LTED 625 students should know this concept --especially since they noted in their Content Interest Inventories that they wanted to further develop their abilities to engage students in discussion. I think part of knowing how to engage students in a STUDENT-led discussion requires having a detailed understanding of what takes place in a TEACHER-guided discussion and how to help the students take on the "traditional responsibilities" of the teacher.
Level of Familiarity: I am very familiar with this concept, but what I find interesting is that even though I would place my level of familiarity at a level 6 (Mehigan, 1995), I still have to re-evaluate my ability to use this instructional strategy based on the specific students I am working with and the information I want them to know well.
Do I Want to Know This Word Well and Why? Yes. My rationale is similar to my position on Writing-to-Learn Activities. I do not see how I could be qualified as a teacher of literacy (or a teacher of teachers, teaching literacy) if I do not have a principled understanding of what a guided discussion looks like and the reason why to use such an instructional strategy.
Do I Think Others Should Know This Word Well...if so WHO and WHY?: I certainly think LTED 625 students should know this concept --especially since they noted in their Content Interest Inventories that they wanted to further develop their abilities to engage students in discussion. I think part of knowing how to engage students in a STUDENT-led discussion requires having a detailed understanding of what takes place in a TEACHER-guided discussion and how to help the students take on the "traditional responsibilities" of the teacher.
7:1 Writing-to-Learn Activities
When and Where Did I Find It: I was re-reading our Teaching Reading in the Content
I was re-reading our Teaching Reading in the Content
Areas: If Not Me, Then Who? textbook (Billmeyer & Barton, 1998) last week as I was revising our PART II and PART III sections of the Strategic Content Area Teaching Project and I came across a very concise, yet descriptive explication of what a writing-to-learn activity is on page 48 (as part of a larger discussion of reflective writing, pp. 47-49).
Areas: If Not Me, Then Who? textbook (Billmeyer & Barton, 1998) last week as I was revising our PART II and PART III sections of the Strategic Content Area Teaching Project and I came across a very concise, yet descriptive explication of what a writing-to-learn activity is on page 48 (as part of a larger discussion of reflective writing, pp. 47-49).
Level of Familiarity: I am very familiar with what this particular type of writing activity is and how it aids the learning process.
Do I Want to Know This Word Well and Why? Yes. I can't imagine being a teacher of literacy (or a teacher of teachers teaching literacy) and not having a deep and principled understanding of writing-to-learn activities. In fact, I think these last two prompts in this VSS activity are designed to "engage the learner in reflecting on what has been learned" and to provide the writer with an opportunity to make "meaningful, personal connections between in and the writer's life experience."
Do I Think Others Should Know This Word Well...if so WHO and WHY?: Just as I state above, I believe all teachers -- not just NYS Literacy Specialists -- need to understand what writing-to-learn activities are and they should have a Level 6 (Mehigan, 2005) ability to utilize these "tools" as a part of their teaching practices.
Thursday, October 7, 2010
6:1 Vilify
When and Where Did I Find It: This is going to sound odd, but as I was driving to work this morning this word actually popped into my mind as I was thinking about how the political candidates talk about each other. As a way to try and describe their tone, attitude, and message about each other, the word vilify popped into my head. But I realized, that even though it sounded right, I wasn't sure it was the correct usage of the term.
This is going to sound odd, but as I was driving to work this morning this word actually popped into my mind as I was thinking about how the political candidates talk about each other. As a way to try and describe their tone, attitude, and message about each other, the word vilify popped into my head. But I realized, that even though it sounded right, I wasn't sure it was the correct usage of the term.
What it means: When I got to my office, I looked up the word on Dictionary.com and I found that I had used the word correctly. The word vilify means "to speak ill of; defame; slander" (dictionary.reference.com, n.d.).
Level of Familiarity: I guess I would say that I was at the level of "knowing it when I saw it in context" prior to taking the time to look it up, but I feel confident in saying because I took the time to include this word as a focus for one of my journal posts, it will remain with me.
Do I Want to Know This Word Well and Why? Yes. It is funny, I like knowing this word partly because I like the way it sounds -- it even sounds like a vicious word. I also like knowing this word well because it really does capture the mean-spiritedness of some of the people I was trying to describe.
Do I Think Others Should Know This Word Well...if so WHO and WHY?: Of all the words I have posted thus far, I am not sure this is a word I would suggest others need to know well. At the same time, it might be one of those words that would "woo the crowd" at a cocktail party.
Level of Familiarity: I guess I would say that I was at the level of "knowing it when I saw it in context" prior to taking the time to look it up, but I feel confident in saying because I took the time to include this word as a focus for one of my journal posts, it will remain with me.
Do I Want to Know This Word Well and Why? Yes. It is funny, I like knowing this word partly because I like the way it sounds -- it even sounds like a vicious word. I also like knowing this word well because it really does capture the mean-spiritedness of some of the people I was trying to describe.
Do I Think Others Should Know This Word Well...if so WHO and WHY?: Of all the words I have posted thus far, I am not sure this is a word I would suggest others need to know well. At the same time, it might be one of those words that would "woo the crowd" at a cocktail party.
Monday, October 4, 2010
5:2 Information Literacy
When and Where Did I Find It: I guess this week is about rediscovery, as the second word
I want to record in my blog is also a term I know. I found the phrase informational literacy in the article Malena has shared with us for our Reciprocal Teaching discussion this week. Specifically, I found it on the second column, on page 284 of Sylvester and Greenidge's (2009) article, Digital Storytelling: Extending the Potential for Struggling Writers.
What it means: The authors give a very detailed definition of the term: "Informational literacy is the ability to find, evaluate, analyze, and synthesize information. The development of the World Wide Web dramatically changed the availability, method, depth, quantity, and sometimes quality of accessible information; consequently, the Internet has initiated critical reading skills not typically required in traditional texts." (Sylvester & Greenidge, 2009, p. 284).
Level of Familiarity: I am very familiar with this specific phrase, although I appreciate the way the author illustrates how this term is distinct from other types of literacy: technological literacy; visual literacy; and media literacy.
Do I Want to Know This Word Well and Why? Yes. I think this word is very helpful for me to be aware of, especially when I am trying to assess my own abilities as a literate person. Part of the reason why I am always becoming literate (Leu, 2000) is because my abilities to accurately and critically read texts on the WWW are always developing and refining as the Web itself continues to change and "refresh" itself.
Do I Think Others Should Know This Word Well...if so WHO and WHY?: I certainly think LTED 625 students should know this concept --perhaps along with the other types of literacy the authors mention in this article -- as it will help them be able to more specifically describe their own literacy abilities as well as their students.
Level of Familiarity: I am very familiar with this specific phrase, although I appreciate the way the author illustrates how this term is distinct from other types of literacy: technological literacy; visual literacy; and media literacy.
Do I Want to Know This Word Well and Why? Yes. I think this word is very helpful for me to be aware of, especially when I am trying to assess my own abilities as a literate person. Part of the reason why I am always becoming literate (Leu, 2000) is because my abilities to accurately and critically read texts on the WWW are always developing and refining as the Web itself continues to change and "refresh" itself.
Do I Think Others Should Know This Word Well...if so WHO and WHY?: I certainly think LTED 625 students should know this concept --perhaps along with the other types of literacy the authors mention in this article -- as it will help them be able to more specifically describe their own literacy abilities as well as their students.
.
5:1 Metacomprehension
When and Where Did I Find It: I rediscovered this word our first week of class in our Billmeyer and Barton text (1998, p. 42). I admit, I paid more attention to the spelling of this word at the start of this semester because I made a miscue when typing this word from memory.
What it means: "Various reading researchers (Gavelek and Raphael, 1985; Osman and Hannafin, 1992; Caverly, Mandeville, and Nicholson, 1995) have used the term metacomprehension refers to being strategic and reflective about reading comprehension" (as cited in, Billmeyer & Barton, 1998, p. 42).
Level of Familiarity: I am very familiar with this word and I appreciate that it is truly a technical term. Educators, specifically those in the field of reading comprehension coined it and use it to make distinctions between metacognition and the specific ability to reflect on one's comprehension processes and abilities.
Do I Want to Know This Word Well and Why? Yes. I think this word is very helpful for me to know because I need to be able to explain the uniqueness of this term to my students. I also think it is important for me to know that metacomprehension involves being strategic in particular ways: planning, monitoring and evaluating.
Do I Think Others Should Know This Word Well...if so WHO and WHY?: I certainly think LTED 625 students should know this concept well since it is a foundational concept for a Literacy Specialist to master.
What it means: "Various reading researchers (Gavelek and Raphael, 1985; Osman and Hannafin, 1992; Caverly, Mandeville, and Nicholson, 1995) have used the term metacomprehension refers to being strategic and reflective about reading comprehension" (as cited in, Billmeyer & Barton, 1998, p. 42).
Level of Familiarity: I am very familiar with this word and I appreciate that it is truly a technical term. Educators, specifically those in the field of reading comprehension coined it and use it to make distinctions between metacognition and the specific ability to reflect on one's comprehension processes and abilities.
Do I Want to Know This Word Well and Why? Yes. I think this word is very helpful for me to know because I need to be able to explain the uniqueness of this term to my students. I also think it is important for me to know that metacomprehension involves being strategic in particular ways: planning, monitoring and evaluating.
Do I Think Others Should Know This Word Well...if so WHO and WHY?: I certainly think LTED 625 students should know this concept well since it is a foundational concept for a Literacy Specialist to master.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)