Thanks so much to Elaine and Tim -- and to the list for pushing the conversation along with observations and questions. Fluency seems almost too hot to touch, which makes conversations about it difficult. And my impression after trying to read some of the research on my own is that the questions surrounding it are extremely complicated and that firm answers to many specific questions seem to be dependent upon so many variables, and thus elusive: What are the "best" ways to work on speed and/or accuracy and/or prosody? Which ways work best under which conditions for which readers? Just how far from inauthentic text and comprehension can you go and still be effective -- and what are the goals of "going inauthentic"? Are there any benefits to using inauthentic text? etc. In the end, the process of formulating conclusions appears to require one to dash through a mine field while making sausage. I hope the conversation continues. For now, at least, my questions are answered. Thanks.
Dave Middlebrook The Textmapping Project A resource for teachers improving reading comprehension skills instruction. www.textmapping.org | Please share this site with your colleagues! USA: (609) 771-1781 [EMAIL PROTECTED] _______________________________________________ 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.
