There is a huge distinction between improving reading skills and mastering content area concepts. Learning a skill requires practice. It requires that I understand the cognitive and linguistic processes that take place as I am attempting a perceptively more difficult reading skill. English Teachers, bravely answering the call to assist students in this reading growth, know that strategies help students “get there.” These strategies become our arsenal as we attempt to embed scaffolds that allow students to develop and improve their reading skills.
Whether they are graphic organizers, mnemonics, discussion strategies , anticipation guides, repeated readings, etc, strategies ultimately do help students build or strengthen literacy skills. That’s what they are supposed to do anyway. Until they don’t.
Somewhere along the way, we have lost the intent that strategies serve. Strategies should serve to help students see the pattern of thinking/learning required in the skill attempted. Once this pattern or connection is identified through the use of the strategy, the student continues use of the strategy in order to build automaticity, so that he or she is able to transform the thinking process into a routine and, ultimately, a habit. They practice, monitor and reflect and adjust, and eventually master the skill.
What is happening instead, however, is that students are introduced to a myriad of strategies for one specific skill, and they are not allowed the opportunity to practice and perfect certain strategies in order to build proficiency.
Think of it this way. Reading is a skill - like walking or even like learning a skill within a sport. When a new basketball player, for example, is attempting a layup but is unable to make the basket, the coach will step in and probably model the strategy for layups. The coach will then teach the steps... How many steps? When do I switch the ball to the other hand? Where do I aim? How much force do I use? The student practices, using the strategy that is proposed by the coach. In their guided practice, the coach may suggest slight hand movements, or stepping procedures, etc to ensure the practice produces results. After a while, the student practices this monitored strategy and eventually his or her game will improve. Layups become mastered and predictable for this athlete.
What if, however, the coach showed up every day to practice and introduced a new layup strategy to this athlete. What if every time they interacted, there was a change in the steps, or a new target for which to aim, etc? This wouldn’t let the young athlete practice any one way over and over in order to build automaticity in his or her layup. It will take the athlete longer to master it. Sure, other strategies suggested on different days may be more creative, albeit more fun, but the effect of the initial strategy will be diminished because the athlete is not given ample opportunity to practice it. To own it. To build the habit. To master the skill.
How does this relate to the ELAR classroom and the strategies utilized for literacy? We have to think about our goal. Is it to engage students? Is it to invite creativity? Is it to master a reading skill? The goal and the strategy must be in direct alignment. The processes involved in the strategy must help students build a specific literacy skills. KWL, for example, works with background knowledge. If accessing background knowledge is a need for students, I wouldn’t use the Frayer Model as that addresses conceptual vocabulary development. I wouldn’t, additionally, use different strategies for background knowledge with students unless continued practice and differentiation necessitates it. Trying different strategies for the same skill for the sake of variety won’t allow students to build the effective thinking habits that only comes from continued practice.
What does this mean then? Choose a few strategies to really master in the classroom. Implement the researched practices as they were intended, and be aware how the alterations may affect the results. As students need increased scaffolding, a change in strategy may be merited, but we can’t assume that practicing a different way every time will lead to mastery. It’s quite the opposite. Practicing different ways may not lead to perfection.
No comments:
Post a Comment