I agree that some kids need explicit instruction. I just think the
explicit instruction should come after, not before, a more
discovery-based approach. That doesn't mean that I always adhere to
that philosophy, and in fact I think modeling is very important in some
situations. It's just that I am very wary of showing kids so much what
to do that they get into a place where they can't function unless
somebody models for them first.
I'm just sayin'
Renee
On Jun 13, 2009, at 12:30 PM, [email protected] wrote:
Renee
You bring up an interesting point and one I have been thinking about
too.
My first thought was...it depends! Some kids may need explicit
instruction...others will remember and internalize the strategy better
if they discover
it for themselves. Before I read Mosaic or Reading with Meaning, my
first
exposure to the teaching of comprehension strategies was though a
presentation by Roger Farr. He had a lesson design where he modeled
thinking during
reading ... but asked the kids to notice and name the strategy
themselves.
If you google Roger Farr, I wouldn't be surprised if he still had the
Think
Along lessons on his website.
Anyway, when I tried his lessons, they were pretty effective...but not
for
everyone. Now I am using more explicit modeling with a gradual release
of
responsibility...much like in the Comprehension Toolkit and those
lessons
are also pretty effective...but not with everyone.
I wonder how we could combine approaches to hit the needs of more
learners.
Interesting thoughts, Renee, as usual!
Jennifer
In a message dated 6/13/2009 10:22:58 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
[email protected] writes:
While following this discussion, I have begun wondering something.
First, I will say that I have little personal schema for explicitly
teaching the strategies, partly because I've not been teaching in a
regular classroom for the last four years or so. But I am wondering
whether, especially with confident readers, the strategies can be
*taught* largely through the kinds of questions we ask children, so
that they are pushed to use the strategies. For example, in a book
discussion with a child, if we ask, "what did you see in your mind's
eye while you were reading this section" would/could/should inherently
push a child to learn to visualize. I guess I am looking at more of a
natural and constructivist direction. And I am talking especially
about
readers who are basically fluent and already have adequate/good
comprehension abilities.
Whatcha think?
Renee
**************A Good Credit Score is 700 or Above. See yours in just 2
easy
steps!
(http://pr.atwola.com/promoclk/100126575x1222377049x1201454365/aol?
redir=http://www.freecreditreport.com/pm/default.aspx?
sc=668072&hmpgID=62&bcd=
JunestepsfooterNO62)
_______________________________________________
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.
"Learning isn't a means to an end; it is an end in itself."
~ Robert A. Heinlein
_______________________________________________
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.
