Reading Philosophies
Reading Philosophies
Katy J. Kaldenberg
Grand Canyon University:
EED-470 Curriculum, Methods and Assessment: Literacy and Language Arts K-3
Monday, March 11, 2013
Reading Philosophies Chart Reading Philosophy | Brief Description | Reading Activities | Reading Assessments | Constructivist Reading Instruction | Constructivists view the student as an active participant in the learning process who constructs a personal meaning from each experience (Ying-Tien & Chin-Chung, 2005). | One Constructivist reading activity for teaching a student a new word is that the student is taught to use picture cues to learn to read (Ying-Tien, & Chin-Chung, 2005). For example, if the student cannot read a word, he or she is taught to look at the picture then go back and to the word and guess the meaning. Another activity for constructivist reading instruction would be that the teacher would have students work in small groups to discuss a book that was read to the class. The small groups of students may then also create their own story. | Constructivist reading assessments would include the teacher collecting daily performance samples of work, observing and recording student’s behavior, audio and videotaping students in different situations, and building a portfolio filled with information about each student (Ying-Tien & Chin-Chung, 2005). The evaluation process is for the teacher, parent, and child. Conferences can also be held to discuss progress. | Explicit Reading Instruction | Explicit reading instruction is teacher directed (Goeke, 2009). The teacher uses explanation and demonstration to teach specific reading skills and strategies (Goeke, 2009). The teacher also provides corrective feedback to his or her students as the students attempt to apply the new knowledge (Goeke, 2009). | An example of explicit reading instruction would be that the teacher would state the sound and spelling of a specific letter-sound correspondence and then demonstrate by
Katy J. Kaldenberg
Grand Canyon University:
EED-470 Curriculum, Methods and Assessment: Literacy and Language Arts K-3
Monday, March 11, 2013
Reading Philosophies Chart Reading Philosophy | Brief Description | Reading Activities | Reading Assessments | Constructivist Reading Instruction | Constructivists view the student as an active participant in the learning process who constructs a personal meaning from each experience (Ying-Tien & Chin-Chung, 2005). | One Constructivist reading activity for teaching a student a new word is that the student is taught to use picture cues to learn to read (Ying-Tien, & Chin-Chung, 2005). For example, if the student cannot read a word, he or she is taught to look at the picture then go back and to the word and guess the meaning. Another activity for constructivist reading instruction would be that the teacher would have students work in small groups to discuss a book that was read to the class. The small groups of students may then also create their own story. | Constructivist reading assessments would include the teacher collecting daily performance samples of work, observing and recording student’s behavior, audio and videotaping students in different situations, and building a portfolio filled with information about each student (Ying-Tien & Chin-Chung, 2005). The evaluation process is for the teacher, parent, and child. Conferences can also be held to discuss progress. | Explicit Reading Instruction | Explicit reading instruction is teacher directed (Goeke, 2009). The teacher uses explanation and demonstration to teach specific reading skills and strategies (Goeke, 2009). The teacher also provides corrective feedback to his or her students as the students attempt to apply the new knowledge (Goeke, 2009). | An example of explicit reading instruction would be that the teacher would state the sound and spelling of a specific letter-sound correspondence and then demonstrate by
References: Adams, G. and Engelmann, S. (1996). Research on Direct Instruction: 25 years beyond DISTAR. Seattle, WA: Educational Achievement Systems. Brooks, J.G. & Brooks, M.G. (1994). In search of understanding: The case for constructivist classrooms. Alexandria, VA: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development. Brown, A.L. (1994). The advancement of learning. Educational Researcher 23: 4-12. Bruning, R.H., Schraw, G.J. & Ronning, R.R (1995). Cognitive psychology and instruction, 2nd ed. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall. Baumann, J. F., & Duffy, A. M. (2001). Teacher-research methodology: Themes, variations, and possibilities. The Reading Teacher, 54, 608-615. Confrey, J. (1990). What constructivism implies for teaching. In R.B. Davis, C.A. Maher & N. Cunningham, D.J. (1992). Beyond educational psychology: Steps toward an educational semiotic. Educational Psychology Review 4: 165-194. Goeke J. L. (2009). Explicit instruction: Strategies for meaningful direct teaching. Goodman, K., Goodman, Y. & Hood, W. (1989). The whole language evaluation book. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Hall, T. (2002). Explicit instruction. Wakefield, MA: National Center on Accessing the General Curriculum. Retrieved Wednesday, March 13, 2013 from http://aim.cast.org/learn/historyarchive/backgroundpapers/explicit_instruction. Pressley, M., Harris, K.R., & Marks, M.B. (1992). But good strategy instructors are constructivists! Educational Psychology Review 4: 3-31. Rosenshine, B. (1995). Advances in research on instruction. Journal of Educational Research, 88, 262–268. Stanovich, K. E. (1994). Constructivism in reading education. Journal of Special Education, 28(3), 259. Taylor, B. M., Peterson, D. S., Pearson, P. D., & Rodriguez, M. C. (2002). Looking inside classrooms: Reflecting on the “how” as well as the “what” in effective reading instruction. The Reading Teacher, 56, 270–279. Wittrock, W.C. (1985). The generative learning model and its implications for science education. Studies in Science Education 12: 59-87. Ying-Tien, W., & Chin-Chung, T. (2005). Effects of constructivist-oriented instruction on elementary school students ' cognitive structures. Journal of Biological Education (Society of Biology), 39(3), 113-119.