Prominent Theorist Paper

Link to my Prominent Theorist Paper:
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B-CKV1z55O8fZ1lQcWEyeF9qTGc

Personal Model of Reading Theory

Personal Model of Reading Theory

            Looking over my previous Model of Reading Theory paper written at the beginning of this semester it seems that my beliefs and views on reading were not far off from the sociolinguistic approach that we have discussed and learned throughout this semester. From the beginning I have always viewed and taught “reading as thinking”. In fact, I even stress this to my students when teaching reading. Throughout this semester I have developed this idea even more and opened my eyes to even more evidence of this theory. 

            At the beginning of this semester we looked through chapters in Constance Weaver’s Reading Process & Practice. These chapters stressed the importance that reading is no longer just being able to put together sounds of letters. The strategy of putting together sounds to make words we find is the “skill of reading”. This skill is important when reading but not the end all to gain meaning or to “read”. In fact, we learn in later chapters that there are times we do not pronounce words correctly yet we still understand what we are reading. Thus, this skill is not as important as most teachers stress when teaching reading. Rather, the process of gaining meaning is the ultimate ability or skill to reading and what teachers should focus on.

There are many ways in which we gather meaning when reading. The ultimate way we discover meaning is through reader and text transactions. These transactions are connections to schemas within each individual reader. Schemas are experiences or knowledge that one has stored within them. When reading we make connections to these different social and situational schemas thus providing us with a transaction between reader and text and ultimately leading to understanding which translates into what we now understand as reading. Another way in which we discover meaning is through context. Like stated earlier, we may not know the correct pronunciation or sound sequence of words. However, with the use of surrounding context whether before or after words or sentences we can gather enough information to gain meaning of the words or sentences. This is also true for grammatical sequencing of words and sentences as well. The way in which sentences and words are grammatically arranged has a major influence on the ability to gain meaning from the text. Consequently, the theory still stands that the ability to read is more focused on the ability to gather meaning rather than the skill of putting sounds together.

So my big question that has been lingering over me throughout my first year of teaching is what is the best way to teach that reading is thinking? This semester we took a closer look at the comprehensive literacy approach. When compared to the teaching practices that I used throughout my first year of teaching I feel that ultimately I taught through a comprehensive approach, however, there were a few misconceptions that I had. For example, I am a big advocate for readers and writer’s workshops which include mini-lessons, group collaboration time, and individual reading and writing time. One thing that really sparked my attention this semester is the approach to teaching reading. Traditionally we would teach backwards to what a comprehensive literacy approach does beginning with phonemic awareness, phonics, word recognition, and then meaning. However, in a comprehensive approach this design is backwards beginning with meaning, word recognition, phonics, and then phonemic awareness. This was a major eye opener for me and a design that I will definitely implement within my future classrooms. It makes sense that in order to teach the theory that reading is thinking that we must model this through our teaching. Thus, before students’ even beginning recognizing letters and words we can begin teaching these thinking reading strategies of sequencing, predicting, problem, solution, etc. Teaching these strategies early will help the transition from learning to read to reading to learn go more smoothly.

A final major ah-ha moment I had was the implementation of phonics instruction. Previously in my teaching I had taught phonics separately from reading and writing instruction. However, there was always a struggle within me that felt that this wasn’t the correct approach. After analyzing the comprehensive literacy approach I have found that we do not need a separate phonics instruction. Rather, phonics instruction, spelling, grammar, etc. all should be incorporated into reading and writing instruction. This can be done in numerous situations. We can incorporate phonics instruction into whole group mini-lessons when referring back to a book that students are familiar with. Word patterns and sounds are easily detected and revealed when students are familiar with and understand the reading. Phonics instruction is extremely helpful during individual reading and writing conferences. This is the time to differentiate instruction and to really focus in on students’ individual needs. Overall, phonics instruction does not need to be an individual component of teaching reading. Rather, phonics should be incorporated within the different components of a comprehensive literacy approach.

In conclusion I believe that my theory of reading has not really changed. Rather, my theory has been provided with more evidence and insightful conclusions that support my belief that reading is thinking. This semester has opened my eyes to new evidences that reading is the process of gaining meaning from text. However, the biggest eye opener was how to effectively teach this theory. I have gained much knowledge of the comprehensive literacy approach that will greatly enhance my own literacy instruction and go hand in hand with my theory of reading.

Module 5: Reading Reflection

Where does phonics instruction fit within a comprehensive literacy program? When and how would you teach phonics?

My interpretation of phonics instruction in a comprehensive literacy program is that phonics is NOT its own subject. Rather, phonics is intertwined within the programs different aspects such as the read aloud, guided reading, individual reading and writing conferences, write a loud, etc. There was a lot on emphasis on the fact that phonics should not be taught separately but rather incorporated within these different areas. This makes sense with a sociolinguistic approach because meaning is where teaching reading begins, not with phonics instruction. Phonics instruction comes after students are familiar with the text and can see and hear the changes in sounds and letter formation. Last year I did a lot of individual reading and writing conferences. This was where most of my phonics instruction took place because I was able to really focus on my student’s individual needs. This brings me to another point when teaching phonics that not all students need the same instruction. Therefore how is it beneficial to teach phonics individually when not all students may be struggling in that particular area? I think the best time to teach phonics is within small groups and during individual conferences. This way you can have familiar text and also be able to pinpoint particular skills and strategies to work on.

Module 4: Instructional Challenge

Marcus is a student who very frequently miscues by substituting words that start with the same letter or first few letters of the word in the text, but his substitutions often are not syntactically or semantically acceptable (they neither sound right grammatically nor make sense). What possible teaching strategies would you suggest to help Marcus?

After skimming back through chapter 10 I feel that this situation that Marcus is in is similar to the first reader characteristic that chapter 10 presents on page 244. My initial thinking to help Marcus would be to have him listen and follow along with books on tape. It seems that he needs to have several repeated readings to become familiar with the text. By listening and following along with the text he can easily hear and see the correct pronunciation of the words. I would also do a lot of individual conferences (both reading and writing) with Marcus. During this time I would have Marcus read aloud to me and whenever he had a miscue we would stop and discuss if the word he put in made sense based on the surrounding context of the text. This would help my judge if the miscue was semantic or syntactic. Then I could better design my instruction based on whether he needed more phonics work or additional work with discovering meaning. I would also have Marcus work within small groups or read with a partner and stop after each page to discuss what was read and record thinking. Mostly I think that Marcus needs more time just reading as much as he can. The more exposure to text and sustained reading the better reader he will become.  

Module 4: Reading Reflection

After reading chapters 10 and 11 I found that in many cases I was incorporating most of the components of a Comprehensive Literacy Approach within my classroom. For example, I am a big advocate for mini-lesson which include the read-aloud and I myself model thinking while reading and also including the students by getting students opinions and thinking as well. I use shared reading a lot during poetry units but I definitely see how shared reading should be incorporated several times a week. I tried to get guided reading groups in everyday or at least have my students work with their literature groups. I started literature groups the second half of the year but next year I believe I will start them earlier because my class had a lot of success with literature groups. I luckily had a huge chunk of my day that I was able to have my reading and writing time at once. Because of this I tried to teach reading and writing as one so that they weren’t separate subjects. I feel that in a comprehensive literacy approach reading and writing go hand in hand and should be considered one rather than two separate subjects. Within my writing time my students spent a lot of time with independent writing or sustained writing. I tried really hard not to give them too much control over what I wanted them to write because I feel that the best writing comes when the students have control over what they want to write about. Also, going back to the reading, I wanted them to try a strategy that the author we were reading was using. For example, if the author used a lot of figurative language I would guide my students on how to incorporate figurative language within their writing. I was also big on reading and writing individual conferences. This was where I differentiated my instruction the most because I could really focus in on my students individual needs. In conjunction with reading mini-lesson I would also do writing mini-lesson where I would demonstrate the write-alouds as the comprehensive literacy program puts it. Here I would model the writing strategy that we were focusing on. This was always fun because as a class my students and I would write a story or poem together. Of course I would guide their responses but ultimately we were writing a piece together.  Each day I would try to incorporate an “authors chair” as I called it so that students had the opportunity to share their writing whether complete or not. I found this to be really helpful because the students LOVED sharing what they had written. It was also good for collaboration because students were able to comment on each other’s papers with a glow (something good about their paper) and a grow (something they could improve within their paper). I think one of my biggest weaknesses or area to improve would be in the reading to learn and writing to learn. This I feel I did mostly in my informational unit but with common core we will be incorporating this a lot more. Therefore I enjoyed reading more about how to use this within the classroom. Overall I feel that for the most part I have been utilizing the comprehensive literacy program but it was great to see how I can enhance my program.

Module 3: Activity 2

I definitely agree that phonics and phonemic awareness are very important aspects that contribute to successful reading and readers. However, I do not agree that just because a child or student can phonetically read are they actually reading. Reading, in my opinion, is the combination of phonemic awareness and metacognition, or the thinking while reading. It is great to hear the student in the video can “crack the code” of the sounds, however, is he reading if we don’t know if he understands what he is reading or what he is thinking or connecting to? I feel that this student is only half way reading because we are unsure of his thinking process. As teachers, especially in the primary grades, we focus a lot on phonemic awareness and not so much on the strategies of reading (i.e. retelling, summarizing, visualizing, predicting, connecting, etc.). This, as I have experienced from teaching 3^rd and now 4^th grade, has caused some issues within the intermediate grade levels because the students lack the foundation of gaining meaning from reading. Thus, as teachers, we are not building proficient readers by just teaching phonemic awareness. In order to successfully teach reading I believe we need to have a balance between teaching phonics and reading strategies. When students are exposed to both strategies then they will have the necessary foundation to become proficient readers.  

Module 3: Instructional Challange

To 5^th grade Teacher,

After observing some of your students read and then answer comprehension questions I found that most of the students were having difficulty with the comprehension of the passages. Although these students are seemingly reading above grade level based on fluency requirements I am concerned with their comprehension ability. Reading is not just about sounding out the words phonetically and in a set amount of time. Rather, reading is being able to understand the text though obtaining meaning. This can be done through making connections to schemas and using the context to gather meaning. I find that your students are struggling in this area. I would suggest moving away from the fluency practice and working on reading strategies. One way I love to monitor the use of reading strategies is through sticky notes. To begin with I would have the students read one page of their book. Then, on their sticky note have them show the use of a reading strategy (retell, summarize, make connections, predict, visualize, question, show their thinking, etc. ). You may need to demonstrate your expectations for a quality sticky note before having students do this. This strategy will really get the students to begin thinking while they read, which is what reading is all about. “Reading is Thinking” is my motto.  Have students record their sticky notes on a piece of paper and keep in their readers’ notebooks or folders. Monitor their progress through individual conferences. Note changes in their comprehension levels. Over time you will notice quality notes from your students. This will lead to better comprehension rates within your classroom. Then, when the students combine their above grade level reading fluency skill with their improved comprehension ability, you will then have a classroom of true readers!

Sincerely,

Ms. Bruce

Module 3: Reading Reflection

Do you agree with Marilyn Adams (1990, p. 108) who argued that rather than relying on context, “Skillful readers of English thoroughly process the individual letters of words in their texts?” Why or why not?

When pondering about this quote I really considered the wording that Adams used. Throughout his book, Weaver discusses the “skill of reading” verses the “process of reading”. The “skill” of reading is processing the individual letters of the words whereas the overall process of reading is discovering meaning through a combination of schema, context, and grapho/phonemic cues as discovered in Chapter 3. If I were to only focus in on her wording I can see where she could be considered correct because the skill of reading is to be able to process the individual sounds. However, from my general understanding of her quote I believe she is talking more along the lines of the overall reading process and this is where I would have to disagree with her. My understanding of reading, as built upon prior knowledge and what I have gathered from this book, is being able to discover meaning and make connections with the words on the page rather than just being able to sound the words out correctly. As we discovered in the last chapter, we rely heavily on context to obtain meaning and make connections. In fact, there were studies proving that students were more likely to correctly pronounce words within text because they were able to use the context that surrounded the word. With that alone I think Adams’ understanding of the reading process is a little misguided.  

Module 2: Activities 1 & 2

Activity 1:

Definitions BEFORE reading the text:

Creech- an obstacle

Droogs- an animal

Glazzies- glasses

Goloss- type of food

Malenky- something outrageous and ridiculous

Messel- a muscle

Millicents- a unit of measure

Poogly- type of food

Razrez- type of sauce

Skorry- a story

Spatted- to spit or the act of spitting

Zoobies- chills through your body

When trying to come up with a definition for these words I really found myself thinking out a familiar word that these unknown words sounded or looked like. Some of them are just a wild guess but for the most part I really think I was trying to make a connection with the words, however, I was not very successful!

Definitions AFTER reading the text:

Droogs: I am thinking this means friends because the character gives names to the “droogs”.

Skorry: Fast or quickly. The text says “things changing so skorry these days…” I am connecting this to my knowledge of our world today.

Glazzies- I am assuming this means eyes. I was close in my assumption of glasses. However, in context the author is talking about the girls’ make-up. He says “rainbows around the glazzies” which when I think of make-up you add color in your eye shadow.  The word is also mentioned a little further “with his glazzies glazed…” I connect this with glazed eyes or eyes staring.

I am discovering the meaning of these words because I am using the context within the sentences that these words are being used and also in the sentences before and after the words.

Activity 2:

I tried to read the words mostly by chunking them into syllables. I think this is just out of habit and didn’t realize I was doing it until I actually thought about it.

I have no idea what the meanings of any of these words are.

Pronouncing the words did not help me at all. Even using the pronunciation guide doesn’t give me any insight into the meaning of these words.

When I am reading and I come to a word I do not know I first try to sound it out. I then, reread the sentence to try to gain any meaning from the surrounding context. Most of the time I can use the surrounding context to help me with the meaning of the word, however, I am never certain whether or not I am pronouncing the word correctly.

I think this experiment brings up several good points. The first thing is that we rely on context to help us identify and understand words. I have no idea the meaning of any of those words in that list. However, if I were to see the word in context I could use the clues around the word to help me discover the meaning of the word. Also, we do NOT have to correctly pronounce the word to get meaning. Instead we use the surrounding context to help use identify the meaning of the word even if we are unsure of the pronunciation.  I feel this way because I do this ALL the time when I am reading. And, I probably would not pronounce those words correctly, even after reading in a sentence, until someone verbally told me the correct pronunciation.

Conclusion:

Overall, I believe these activities really help me understand that in many cases we don’t need to rely on correct pronunciation to understand or comprehend the text. There are many times when students may stubble on words and NOT correctly pronounce them but are able to understand the text. This is possible because students (and us) are relying on the surrounding context. As readers I think, as these activities have proven, that we mostly rely on the context to help us “read”.

Module 2: Instructional Challenge

I am honestly really torn between whether I would call these children proficient or non-proficient readers. I am leaning more towards non-proficient readers because there are a lot of syntactic and semantic errors within these miscues. Also, I am leaning towards calling these children non-proficient readers because there is no evidence of their understanding of the meaning of these sentences. However, I can see how these children’s miscues could have meaning for them. I find this a lot within my classroom as well that home dialect is very different from school dialect. Some of these miscues indicate to me that these children are using the context to determine words and also making a connection with the text to their personal dialect. Thus, resulting in a miscue, but, still able to make sense of the sentence. So again, I feel as if we need more to determine whether these children are proficient or non-proficient readers.

When teaching these children I would definitely make it a point to say that there is home language and then there is school language. I believe I would begin with that and also provide some examples of home/social language verses school language. Then I think I would use the miscues to formulate my grammar lessons/ mini-lessons. I am not sure I would correct the students right away as this might leave them with the sense that they are wrong/ incorrect when if they are understanding the text how can I tell them they are reading incorrectly especially knowing that reading is thinking and understanding the meaning of the text rather than phonetically sounding out the words on the page. But I think my number one teachable moment would be the fact that there are social languages and school/ Standard English language.

Module 2: Reading Reflection

Before beginning this course and reading these chapters I think I would have considered myself one of the teachers that Harper and Kilarr are describing in their quote. I thought of course students need to correctly phonetically read to understand what they’re reading. It made sense to me that if you pronounce a word incorrectly you would more than likely not get the meaning of the word or the meaning of the sentences, thus, resulting in not gaining meaning from the text and ultimately NOT reading. Of course now my thinking has been majorly altered. I agree with Harper and Kilarr about this “folklore of reading being an exact process”. The truth is, that this chapter also points out, when reading we DO NOT have to pronounce every word and/or sound correctly to gain meaning from the text. In fact Weaver makes some great points in Chapter 3. Weaver states “even if you get the pronunciation correct, can we necessarily assume that you have identified the word in any meaningful sense, without prior knowledge or at least adequate contextual information” (Weaver, 2002, p. 47). This point that Weaver makes leads us to the understanding that even though pronunciation is correct there may or may not be meaning there. The chapter explains further that we don’t get meaning from grapho/phonemic cues alone, rather, we use a combination of grapho/phonemic cues, context clues, and prior knowledge to gain meaning. Ultimately as readers we use more context, whether within the sentences or around the sentence, to gain meaning. Weaver points out that “we use context to complement and reduce our reliance on grapho/phonemic cues” (Weaver, 2002, p.50). I found the study that Weaver did to prove this point. The study found that “beginning readers and nonproficient readers can often read words better in context than in isolation” (Weaver, 2002, p.50). This shows that readers use the clues or context around the words to help with the pronunciation of words because the word(s) are fitting within the text either syntacticly and/or semanticly. This brings us to another point from Weaver that “processing is easier when we have either normal word order [syntactics] or some semblance of meaning [semantics]” (Weaver, 2002, p.42). It was also interesting to me that Weaver discovered that “reading for meaning may have resulted in more miscues” (Weaver, 2002, p. 52). However, the readers were still gaining meaning from the text and proving this through their reading strategies. The readers were able to gain meaning through the context within the text. This was true for proficient AND nonproficient readers. “Contextual information speeds and facilitates reading for proficient as well as nonproficient readers; it also facilitates the understanding of many words that the reader may not be able to pronounce or identify. In conclusion, the idea that when reading you must read what is exactly printed on the page is kind of absurd. We don’t need to correctly phonetically make out ever sound on the page for us to gain meaning from the text. Really, our brains already comprehend the text before we read it because of the surrounding context clues. Thus, a combination of grapho/phonemic cues, context cues, and prior knowledge lead us to gaining meaning from the text.

Module 1: Activity 2

a. What is corandic?

Corandic is an emurient grof with many fribs.

b. What does corandic grank from?

Corandic granks from corite.

c. How do garkers excarp the tarances from the corite?

Garkers excarp the tarances by glarcking the corite and starping it in tranker-clarped storbs.

d. What does the slorp finally frast?

The slorp finally frast a pragety.

e. What is coranda?

Coranda is a cargurt, grinkling corandic and borigen.

f. How is the corandic nacerated from the borigrn?

The corandic is nacerated from the borigen by means of loracity.

g. What do the garkers finally thrap?

The garkers finally thrap a glick, bracht, glupous grapant, and corandic.

This activity made me laugh! I laughed not only because the words were silly but also because this is exactly what some of the “comprehension” questions are like in reading workbooks and on standardized test. In fact when teaching reading comprehension, when we came across these type of questions we called them “literal questions” because the answers were literally right in front of you. There really is no thinking to these questions. You need to use the passage to get the answer but the answers are right in the passage and almost ALWAYS the wording is the same or very similar. This, to me, is NOT comprehension. Reading comprehension is the ability to understand the meaning of the passage. After completing this activity I found that I still had no idea what this passage was about. The words did not make any sense to me. I used my reading skills to phonetically sound out the words in the passage and to also answers the questions (because I was able to match the words in the questions) but I did not comprehend what I was reading. To me comprehension questions are questions where the reader can prove their thinking and understanding rather than just recalling word-for-word information.

Module 1: Activity 1

Habitats:

  Ocean    Forest   Swamp   Mountains   Plains   

Schemas for Forest	Schemas for Ocean
*On land *Lots of trees, bushes, plants *Animals such as deer, squirrels, bears, fox, etc. *Activities in a forest include camping, hiking, bike riding	*Large body of water *Plants include seaweed, coral *Animals include fish, dolphins, sharks, shrimp, clams, etc. *Activities on an ocean include boating, scuba diving, swimming, snorkeling

Module 1: Instructional Challenge

Hocked gems financing him, our hero defied the scornful laughter. “Think of it as an egg, not a table,” he said. Then three sturdy sisters sought proof, forging over vast calmness, and sometimes over turbulent peaks and valleys, until at last welcome winged creatures appeared, signifying monumental success.

1. What are the hocked gems?

I honestly have no idea what “hocked gems” are. However, by using my context clues I think I am going to come to the conclusion that the hocked gems are the enemy of the hero. I concluded this by reading the line “our hero defied the scornful laughter.” This told me that the hero was ignoring the insults which lead me to the conclusion that the hocked gems were somehow mocking the hero and therefore could be considered the enemy.

2. What should we think of as an egg and not a table?

I am not sure whether to think of this as an object or an idea. Nothing in the passage is giving me clues as to what they are trying to protect. Unless, the “egg” is the hero. I believe what they passage is trying to say is that we don’t want to break this because it currently cannot stand on its own (like a table); It is fragile like an egg.

3. Who are the three sturdy sisters?

Again, I am at a loss for what the sturdy sisters are. I am not really into Greek mythology which I believe this passage could be from. However, the sturdy sister must be some sort of protective transportation system. From my knowledge they seem to be the ones bringing the “egg” to its resting place. They were to think of whatever they had as an egg that is fragile and easily broken. Therefore, they must be really careful when seeking their proof. If I were to guess at what the sturdy sister were I were to guess they were some sort of flying creature because the passage is saying how they “[forged] over vast calmness and sometimes over turbulent peaks and valleys.”

4. What kind of winged creatures appeared?

Yes, still drawing a blank on this one as well. I am assuming that this winged creature signifies success in Greek mythology but I again have very little, almost no, schema on this. Im assuming these creatures are birds because I know birds have wings. However, I am not sure of the type or specific bird that appeared.


If I were to complete this assignment with my students I would feel that we would have to do a study on Greek mythology. From what little schema I have about Greek mythology I can speculate that this passage is taken from one of those myths. Greek mythology has a lot of symbolic creatures and my students would need to have the background knowledge of this in order to try to comprehend this passage. For me, I do not have much schema on Greek mythology so it was hard for me to get meaning out of this passage. However, I did use what schema I had in combination with context clues to gain the little understanding I could.
I feel that when students’ don’t have a certain schema is best that they be at least introduced. I know that a lot of lessons open with background knowledge that students MUST have in order to continue with the lesson. If they do not have this background knowledge the rest of the lesson will be difficult if not impossible for them to understand. Another way to bridge the gap with students who don’t seem to have the necessary schema is to always allow opportunity for research. They best way for students to learn is through curiosity and allowing students the opportunity to research about something they are unsure about will really help them.
I don’t feel that students need to spend a lot of time on text that they have little to no schema with. However, going back to the research, I definitely think students need the opportunity to dive into text they may or may not have schema about. Students need the opportunity for exploration and that chance for curiosity. If they are always exposed to text that they have the schema for then we are preventing them from building more.

Module 1: Reading Reflection

What are some of the major differences between a skills approach to literacy and a comprehensive or sociopsycholinguistic approach?

From my Personal Model of Reading Theory you can see that I have always thought of “reading as thinking”. After reading these chapters I have not only furthered my argument that reading is thinking but also enhanced my argument. The skills approach to reading, from my understanding, is the phonetic process of reading. The ability to make out sounds of letters to form words and sentences. The skill to read is useful when reading but from these chapters we learn that “reading is a sociopsycholinguistic process” (Weaver, 2002, p. 26). I have learned that the argument that “reading is thinking” is very vague. From my interpretation of these chapters it explains that reading is a transaction that takes place between the text and the readers interpretation. This transaction is where the meaning takes place. The meaning is derived from the connections to schemas the reader has. These transactions are also based on social and situational contexts. Meaning, the connections that a reader may make can change based on the context of the text. Thus this is the meaning of the sociopsycholinguistic approach to reading. There was a great example in the book where a college student thought she was on track in her class but she found out she was failing. When the teacher asked her to read a section of the book she couldn’t recall any information from the text. She was not making any sort of transaction. There were no connections to any schemas for her. She was not getting any meaning from the text. Thus, she was not reading. (Weaver, 2002, p. 21)

Weaver, C. (2002). Reading Process & Practice. New Hampshire: Heinemann.

Personal Model of Reading Theory

Lindsey Bruce

EDRD7715

Dr. Ritchie

June 5^th, 2012

Personal Model of the Theory of Reading

I used to think of reading as being able to put together sounds into words. I quickly changed my thinking during my undergraduate courses. A saying I often refer to and tell my students is “reading is thinking”. The ability to put together sounds to form words is a major skill needed to read, however, true reading is being able to not only put together those sounds but also to comprehend the meaning or message of those sounds. When I think of a solid definition of reading I ask the question “why do we read?” In general, when we “read” we are looking for information or wanting some form of entertainment. Therefore, in order to “read” we must understand what is written on the page.

            Typically in the primary grade levels we teach the skill of reading. This includes the ability to sound out letters, digraphs, etc. and how to put together these sounds to form words and eventually sentences. As we move through the elementary grade levels we teach the strategies of reading. This, in my opinion, is where the real reading takes place. These strategies include summarizing, predicting, connecting, retelling, visualizing, and the list goes on. Each of these strategies provides evidence of the thinking or comprehension of the reading process.

            As elementary educators a major role we have is teaching this reading skill. Not only are we teaching the fluency and accuracy but we also model how to think as we read through the reading strategies. This combination of fluency, accuracy, and comprehension is the definition of reading. One must have all these skills to “read”. There is a lot of time spent on each of these skills. In the early grade levels most of the time is spent on learning the sounds and combination of sounds. As students progress through the grade levels the sounds form words and sentences. Then students begin modeling their thinking process through guided reading groups, book buddies, mini-lessons, post-it notes, book reviews, etc. At the upper grade levels students then really put their reading into action. They move from learning the skill of reading to using the skill to learn on their own. This is when they truly are reading.

            In conclusion, reading is merely not just sounding out letters on a page. In fact, sometimes I find myself doing this and then questioning what I just read. I was not “reading”. I was using the skill of sounding out words. However, I did not understand or comprehend the words or sentences. Therefore I must go back and reread. When I go back and reread thinking while I’m putting those sounds together and understanding what is written then I am reading. Yes, you need to be able to put together sounds to read. Yes, you need fluency and accuracy to read. And yes, you need to understand what is written. With this combination only then we truly are reading.

I am excited about taking this class! Hopefully we all learn soemthing new and exciting to share with our kids in the fall!