And, again, with the math manipulative issue.  My favorite thing to remember
there is Hands-On, MINDS-On.  The problem has come when children manipulate
in a rote fashion without engagement and continued learning.  In my
experience, that happens most if the end result is some worksheet, which may
or may not be appropriate.  It happens less if manipulatives are used for
instruction, not practice.  But...the real issue here was what someone
stated back a few posts--if an intelligent, thoughtful, observing,
reflecting-teacher is teaching, it's not a bit hard to tell who who is
moving objects around with a glazed look in their eyes, and who is
constructing their own understanding from the concrete to the symbolic to
the abstract.  Manipulatives are entirely appropriate when a child(ren) are
building their knowledge base.  When manipulatives are no longer necessary
is when that knowledge base has proceeded to the symbolic and possibly the
abstract.  I think we all get impatient with textbook companies suggesting
"silly" things in order to sell books (like using manipulatives for everyone
all the time), but, to be fair, I'm sure that they are once again trying to
be all things to all people to sell the books, but really count on a living,
breathing human to decide what should be done and what doesn't make sense.
 Also, I know that it's really hard for teachers to find the time to read
ALL the guide, but sometimes we can really get off-base if we don't get the
whole picture.  If there's a little boxed place named "mathematical
understandings" or a little boxed place named "why we __________", it is
usually wise to read it.  It might make all the difference.

So why am I writing all this on the Mosaic listserve?  Because
constructivism and strategy development and application are the same, no
matter what the content.  Back in "The Day", math programs asked children to
memorize, but never understand, formulas and "gimmicky tricks" and then
wondered why they couldn't apply anything or retain the "instruction" that
they'd given.  If children consistently use math manipulatives, and then
sometimes graphic organizers (self-designed often) along with their
brainpower, they often learn how to problem-solve:  guess and check, draw a
diagram, work backwards, look for a pattern....  A lot like determining
importance, inferring, monitoring understanding....  A lot like
hypothesizing, questioning, analyzing data, replicating experiments....
 What do all of these have in common?  Of course...strategies!!  What are
strategies (in any content)?  *Strategies are what we do when we don't know
what to do.  *If children continue to use manipulatives or copying formulas
and inserting "data," then there is no gradual release to independence and
the children don't know what to do when they don't know what to do.

So I think the discussion about math manipulatives is grounded in
educational psychology and viewpoints about learning, which is exactly what
all the posters on this threat are wondering about as they've mulled over
direct teaching and application of comprehension strategies.  I've always
said education is all about balance, and it's the most difficult balancing
act there is.  That's why we somehow have to lift the "silly" burden on our
teachers or anyone with intellect, curiosity, and integrity will bail out.
 Preparing a living, breathing lesson/conversation about strategy use is
vital; making 24 worksheets a day is not!!

All this reminds me that I still have Arthur Hyde's book, Comprehending
Math-Adapting Reading Strategies to Teach Mathematics, K-6 waiting forlornly
on my shelf until I have time to read it!  And I'm so looking forward to
doing so...sometime.

On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 9:46 AM, <[email protected]> wrote:

> I've waited a long time to respond to this post because I've been mulling.
> My first instinct was to lash out with the wisdom of strategy instruction,
> but I decided to hold my tongue and consider.
>
> But thinking hasn't changed my mind. I still believe strategy instruction
> is a brilliant way to teach reading. When you say reading strategies are
> aimed at struggling readers, I cringe. I firmly believe that I am teaching
> ALL readers to deepen and appreciate their reading through strategy
> instruction and I am giving them the gift of a common language for
> discussion.
>
> Here's a story. I moved from 3rd grade to 5th grade this year. A few weeks
> ago our Lit Coach came for a surprise visit to observe reading. She later
> told me she was "shocked at first" to see that we were studying Schema and
> Connections in 5th grade; she thought they would be well past that. Then she
> took in the lesson, the depth of their understanding and discussion, and she
> was amazed by their engagement and insight.
>
> When you say that you think reading strategies are intuited and
> internalized, you may be correct. However, how far superior to learn
> strategies as youths and build as we delve! Like you, I am an avid reader.
> But I know I am a better reader now that I consider strategies. Sure, I
> could connect text, but I did not do everything Keene suggests in "key
> ideas." For example, how wonderful to help your kids to this key idea BEFORE
> they magically intuit and internalize: "Proficient readers adapt their
> schema as they read, converse with others--they delete inaccurate
> information (naive conceptions), add to existing schema, and connect chunks
> of knowledge to other related knowledge, opinions, and ideas." I broke this
> down into several lessons, but you should know that it is a key idea I come
> back to all year.
>
> This is, of course, just my opinion. But I wholeheartedly believe that
> strategy instruction is the best gift I can give my readers.
> Judy
>
> P.S. I agree with you about math manipulatives; they need a great deal of
> consideration and research.
>
>
>
>
> At 12:41 PM -0500 11/8/09, Stewart, L wrote:
> >I love teaching, but lately I have been questioning the way I teach,
> >particularly reading. I am an avid reader. Reading is an integral
> >part of my adult life. I was never taught any reading strategies.
> >I have children in my classroom who love to read and read way above
> >grade level. I feel that they, like me, have already internalized
> >the strategies and yes they can be strengthened but probably that
> >will happen naturally as well. The more they read, the stronger
> >they will become. It seems that we are prescribing medication
> >whether the child is ill or not. It's like using manipulatives in
> >math. Our new math program requires the use of manipulatives all
> >the time. It used to be that you used maniuplatives when you
> >differentiated for the child who was having difficulty with a
> >concept. It seems like we are heading back to a one-size-fits-all
> >mentality which scares me. I sometimes think the reading strategies
> >were meant for educators so that we could become better teachers of
> >reading, particularly for our struggling readers, and I think we
> >have taken it too far and use it in all cases. When I look at the
> >current guided reading models it is so prescribed: everyone is in a
> >quick guided group with the teacher drilling a skill or they are
> >reading independently. I am having a difficult time seeing the joy
> >in that model. Where do the rich conversations that connect
> >children to each other and to literature take place in this current
> >model? Was the model intended for accomplished readers?
> >
> >Leslie R. Stewart
> >Grade 3 Teacher
> >[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>
> >203-481-5386, 203-483-0749 FAX
> >
> >To feel most beautifully alive means to be reading something
> >beautiful, ready always to apprehend in the flow of language the
> >sudden flash of poetry. ~ Gaston Bachelard ~
> >
> >
> ><http://thinkexist.com/birthday/september_24/>
> >_______________________________________________
> >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.
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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.
>
>


-- 
"There is nothing so unequal as equal treatment of unequals."    Chief
Justice Oliver Wendell Holmes
_______________________________________________
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.

Reply via email to