ONE THING I'VE LEARNED IS TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IT MEANS TO BE RECURSIVE SO IT IS NOT LINEAR BUT AN ONGOING INTERWEAVING. IS THIS A HELPFUL WELL TO THINK ABOUT IT ALL?
Hey, Sally! Good to hear from you again. I agree with what Beverlee said about reading being expressive too. she and I got into a long dialogue off list and I think what we settled on is it comes down to (thanks to Beverlee's insights) whether reading is viewed as receptive or a combination of receptive and expressive depends on whether we use behaviorist versus a constructivist view of reading. If it's behaviorist, then the reader is the receptacle, the receiver. If it's a constructivist view, then the reading is also expressive because the reader doesn't just receive information but interacts with the text. We also pretty much decided that the lower two levels of comprehension on Bloom's taxonomy are pretty much just receptive. Just gathering and regurgitating facts is not expressive unless you're being forced to take some end of the chapter or other type of reading test and you're thinking "This is really boring and stupid"-- I guess in that sense then, even low level reading could be expressive too. In other words, reading from a constructivist perspective is interactive. I owe Beverlee Paul for that insight so don't credit me for it. I'D LOVE TO SEE SOME OF YOUR EXAMPLES. HAVE YOU WRITTEN THEM UP? As for my writing examples, I have them at the office but I don't have a scanner so there's no way I can send them. I have a couple in my second book (but it's not worth buying it for just those writing samples). Send me your address and I'll copy and send them to you. I'm trying to avoid the office because it's a tar pit. I can never just sneak in and get something and leave and it's going to be 105 here in Fresno today. I'm going to check to see if my article with Maria Ceprano is online. It was really pretty cool tracing back the style of the first grader to the style of writing of the university student. Sally if you send me your address, I'll send you the article if it's not online and I kind of think it isn't. I posted the citation for it so it is available in the library but who wants to go trudging out just for that. It is a really fascinating article. It also shows how using invented spelling helped kids write with more voice but we also traced the number of correctly spelled words from the pre to the post data analyses. Maria and I constructed rubrics for assessing voice and other aspects of writing too. I have an amazing article by Ann Dyson that is on line and I have on file. It traces the thinking of 2 little boys who alter and extend their thinking through art and conversation. She does such a clear job of documenting the process. I'll send you that whether you want it or not. Beverlee and I were also debating whether writing is both receptive and expressive. I thought of how it's recursive, but I think that refers to the act of rereading and revising. What I'm working through in my head but haven't settled on yet is that maybe the act of writing is receptive also (or maybe a better word is interactive) because-- and this to me is the big point-- the act of writing extends thinking as does speech. So we are not just constructing language, we are receiving or re-receiving those thoughts at some level and reordering and extending them. I haven't quite worked that out yet and I'm not ready to say "ta-dah" now I know.. but I'm easing toward that notion. > > CONNIE WEAVER SUGGESTS THAT THE DEVELOPMENT IN READING AND WRITING ARE > OFTEN > QUITE PARALLEL (WE PROBABLY KNOW THAT) BUT THAT SOMETIMES THE READING > LEADS > THE DEVELOPMENT AND WRITING FOLLOWS. AT OTHER TIMES THE WRITING LEADS > AND > READING FOLLOWS. I WENT TO A PRESENTATION AT THE CLAREMONT READING > CONFERNENCE WHERE(I'LL THINK OF HER NAME LATE THIS EVENING I'M SURE - > WHOOPS > I THINK IT'S SHARON ZINK - HOPEFULLY) DEMONSTRATED THIS WAS TRUE WITH > CONCRETE EXAMPLES FROM HER STUDENTS. SEEMS LIKE THIS WOULD B E > IMPORTANT > FOR US ALL TO CONSIDER. Oh, yes-- I agree-- that sometimes reading and writing are parallel and sometimes reading leads writing and vice versa-- but I do think that usually reading comes in advance of writing maybe because of the way it's traditionally taught. My little 5 year old grandaughter can write better than she can read. Maybe this is because she uses invented spelling and so can approximate while with reading she is more word bound-- or she should be-- except she memorizes text quickly and way too often looks at me instead of the words (and yes yes-- I have a Ph.D in reading and I know, I know- what to do about that but I live 6 hours from her. I didn't want to clutter up the list with a lot of theoretical ramblings but since a couple of people have responded it appears that there is some interest in thinking through these issues. Maybe Beverlee will post her views on this which are quite brilliant. WENT TO A PRESENTATION AT THE CLAREMONT READING CONFERNENCE WHERE(I'LL THINK OF HER NAME LATE THIS EVENING I'M SURE - WHOOPS I THINK IT'S SHARON ZINK - HOPEFULLY) DEMONSTRATED THIS WAS TRUE WITH CONCRETE EXAMPLES FROM HER STUDENTS. OH-- and Sharon Zinke-- she is amazing. She's so funny too, So exactly who she is, no pretext, no phoniness or wishy washing shifting with the political winds. She is a true original. Youi're lucky to have heard her. THANKS FOR THIS GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO THINk Back atcha! I think my IQ has gone up about 50 points since joining this listserve. On Monday, July 2, 2007, at 10:50 PM, thomas wrote: _______________________________________________ Mosaic mailing list [email protected] To unsubscribe or modify your membership please go to http://literacyworkshop.org/mailman/options/mosaic_literacyworkshop.org. Search the MOSAIC archives at http://snipurl.com/MosaicArchive.
