October 26, 2018
Literacy Theories and Models
| Literacy Models and Theories |
In the class session, you and your peers shared the big ideas of the learning models and theories you read in Chapter 2: Literacies and Their Investigation Through Theories and Models, from Theoretical Models and Processes of Reading. For each theory and model that was discussed, you took notes on the worksheet that was provided during the class session. For this discussion blog, review those notes and identify one theory that you feel reflects your beliefs about teaching. This discussion is important as you begin to consider how theory will be reflected in your teaching practice. In Topic 14, you will share your Beliefs Statement, articulating your beliefs about teaching literacy, supported by research and theory, as one of your final projects.
For this discussion, complete the following steps:
- In your initial post identify one major theory or model of literacy that resonates with you. Describe how the theory might provide evidence for one of your beliefs about literacy.
- Respond to at least one of your peers with a thoughtful comment or question about the theory and belief he or she has described.
| Criteria | Grading Scale | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Content of Initial Post |
|
||||
| Content of Response
(at least one reply is required per discussion) |
|
||||
| Composition |
|
||||
| Timeliness |
|
The theory that I find resonates with me the most is the Reading for Motivational theory. One of the primary reasons that I chose teach science was because of the limitless possibilities that I imagined I could make the topics interesting to my scholars. I knew from my own experience that the most productive learning takes place when the learner is genuinely interested in the subject. In the section titled Reading Motivation Theory it states, ““motivation is the foundational process for reading engagement and is a major contributor…to disengagement from read-ing” “(Literacies and Their Investigation Through Theories and Model).
Much of what we do in Earth and Space Science much of what we do requires scholars to read different leveled texts. With some of the readings being more challenging than others, it is crucial that scholars are interested in the topic so that they do not become disengaged during the more challenging sections of the text. I believe I mentioned in class once an analogy of how being disinterested can directly correlate to disengagement. In an episode of Arthur, Buster (his best friend) was having trouble in class because he wasn’t reading any books for an assignment they had. Arthur and his friends tried giving Buster easier books to read, however, it appeared that he could not read these books either. It wasn’t until Buster picked up Arthur’s book on Robin Hood (a book much longer than anyone thought he could handle) that he finally read his first book. Making the material that scholars read more interesting can be just the catalyst needed to motivate scholars to learn the content.
I always enjoy reading your thoughts, Brandon! I think it’s great that you are so mindful of the importance of literacy in a middle school science class, and the ways in which you can motivate and scaffold your students to read at a level that supports the content. I agree that if you can get students interested and engaged in what you are teaching, they are much more likely to be successful.
Brandon, I agree with you 100%. I am able to focus better on material I am interested in. For example, I am way more inclined to pay attention and engage during a social studies or literacy class than a math class just because I enjoy those subjects more. I honestly believe children should have the opportunity to read whatever appeals to them in school because that is the only way the will engage and comprehend. Being able to relate to a character, or apply any personal experience to a text makes it way more meaningful. Interesting texts support motivated readers.
Fletcher, you might be interested in this just-released position statement from the National Council of Teachers of English (NCTE) about the students’ right to read and free access to all texts. http://www2.ncte.org/statement/righttoreadguideline/
Yes, we’ve read that motivation can be a great scaffold for student understanding. If the student is interested and engaged, she can read text that might otherwise be too challenging. Your comments reminded me of this quote from the article “Revisiting Key Assumptions of the Reading Level Framework” by Juliette L. Halladay, “Students reported that their chosen frustration-level texts were equally as enjoyable as their independent level counterparts. In other words, students did not find their frustration level texts to be frustrating. It is important to note that this finding was true not only for students’ actual reading performance, but also for their perceptions of their own performance—students enjoyed texts that they struggled with and that they perceived as difficult. One possible explanation for this finding is that students enjoyed the texts despite their struggles because they had chosen to read them” (p. 60).
While I found that all the literacy theories and models we studied in class on Thursday are important, I really resonated with Vygotsky’s theory regarding development. While he has many theories, he claims that child experience heavily influences development, which I couldn’t agree more with. My biggest belief about education is that school should be an equal balance of academic and social emotional instruction. By understanding that a child’s experiences influences the way they learn, the way the think, the actions they take, we as teachers can be better able to teach not only literacy and other academic skills, but use these experiences to teach students how to be competent, empathetic, understanding and diverse people.
I connected with Vygotsky’s theory of reading development as well. I agree with his belief that child experience heavily influences development. We as teachers should cherish all the stories that our students bring into the classroom and encourage them to share these stories in order to promote learning. I also agree with your statement that school should be a balance between academic and social emotional instruction. Especially at the younger age, students are doing as much growing emotionally as they are academically; therefore, we should make sure that we are teaching within a student’s ZPD.
I could not agree with you more, I was also inclined to write about this but instead chose constructivism. I think that school is about teaching students how to be well-rounded people, in academics and as well as socially. I agree with Vygotsky that children’s experiences influence their development, thus we should absolutely have them be apart of the student’s curriculum. By acknowledging a students experiences, you allow them to express themselves through the content.
After doing some more research on Vygotsky and his theory in class, I have further solidified my belief that his theory will fit perfectly with the philosophy that I want to instill in my future classroom. Vygotsky believes that we as teachers need to understand a student’s experiences in order to understand his or her development. I strongly agree with this part of Vygotsky’s theory. In my future classroom, I want to encourage students to share their personal experiences in order to enrich learning. I want my students to be able to learn from each other’s experiences. As a teacher, I also want to be extremely conscious that there is another side to students besides the one side that I will see of them in school. It will be important for me to get to know my students outside of school in order to understand why they are the way they are. Furthermore, Vygotsky explains that a child’s learning happens through dialog and this is how they become culturally aware. Therefore, my classroom will involve a lot of discussion based activities in order to create dialog between my students.
I totally agree! Learning from each others experiences is so so important in education, especially in building a classroom community and a community of diverse learners.
The theory that really resonates with me is Gee’s work on Discourse. I think that understanding student’s backgrounds and home lives is fundamental to implementing effective instructional practice. Teachers should never take for granted the experiences of their students. I think being a teacher requires a high degree of humility to truly be able to format the classroom and instruction to meet to unique needs of each individual student in the room. To be culturally responsive is necessary in today’s diverse classrooms. Teachers can implement this theory by not only incorporating, but by celebrating the unique experiences and backgrounds of each students. Having diverse texts, learning about influential people from all types of backgrounds, including parents in creative and engaging ways, and simply giving students a platform to speak and write about their own background, interests and experiences can help bridge the gap between a home discourse and the academic discourse.
I also wrote about Discourse and I love the way you phrased your thoughts. I agree that humility is key and not something that we often talk about in teaching. I wonder what ways there are to incorporate those values into my classroom (maybe visually?) to convey to students that there perspectives are welcome and that I don’t hold my own values or background as “superior” to theirs.
This reminds me of the Funds of Knowledge Luis Moll describes here https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aWS0YBpGkkE (This video was in Topic 7 and there is additional information in Chapter 4 of your textbook about this idea.)
I totally agree with your thoughts. I appreciate this theory’s explicit focus on the cultural background, and I think it makes it a theory that can be applied in many different subjects and contexts, especially literacy. The window and mirror texts we discussed I think could be an example of this theory in practice.
I think another key idea in Gee’s theory of Discourse is that each of us have an “identity kit” that we carry around, and our overlapping identities are a huge influence on the ways in which we use language. So beyond just our students’ cultures and experiences, we as teachers need to consider the ways in which our students are comfortable using language. I think this could have a huge impact on our writing instruction and students’ understanding of story structure, for example.
Based on the knowledge I gained from class, I think I really resonate with the Critical Pedagogy and Critical Literacy reading theory for a number of reasons. The theory basically says that reading can be used as a vital tool to analyze the world students are living in with the hopes to empower those students to make social change. The body of research says that critical literacy aims to help students develop five skills, “interrogating the everyday world, questioning power relationships, appreciating multiple realities and viewpoints, analyzing popular culture and media, and taking action to promote social justice” (Unrau and Alvermann, 2013). These skills are meant to help the students live freely in a democratic society. I personally believe that it is so important to tie all learning in the classroom back to what the students experience. This theory of literacy perfectly aligns with the idea that what students learn in the classroom can impact the world they live in. The theory also empowers students and promotes agency, which is another aspect of my beliefs of literacy learning.
Unrau, Norman & Alvermann, Donna. (2013). Literacies and Their Investigation Through Theories and Models. 47-90. 10.1598/0710.02.
Emily, that was very well written and well stated post. I too enjoyed the Critical Pedagogy. In the words of Nelson Mandela, “Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world”. Outside of life experience, I don’t believe that there is any better method for educating someone other than reading. If we can help cultivate scholars thinking by applying what they learn through literacy to their everyday lives then we not only make the content more relatable, and interesting, we are also giving them a foundation for changing the world they live in. This is especially attainable when the focus is the five skills aimed at development that you mentioned.
I agree with you, Brandon! And your argument provides a very solid case for thinking about reading as a civil right.
Emily, this is a well-written post. I wonder how this theory will impact the materials you choose to use in your classroom. Will this be a consideration as you choose books to read aloud, books you keep in your classroom library, articles you have students read? What are some other ways your classroom will reflect this theory?
The theory that resonates with my idea of education is Constructivism by Jean Piaget. Constructivism is the theory of learning that focuses on the students’ development and construction of knowledge. People gain information and construct their experience based on the information obtained and their sociocultural development. The process of gaining information is not only storing information, is doing something about it and making meaning of the information/knowledge increased. Teachers should always involve lessons that allow students to construct knowledge and learn by discovering new things and developing new understanding. Some examples of constructivism in a classroom are, Morning meetings, STEM curriculum, independent work and many other lessons that allow the students to develop specific skills that will help them construct new knowledge instead of storing new knowledge. Give meaning to the new information acquired.
I totally understand where you are coming from. Learning is not just about dumping knowledge into a student like a cup and this theory totally embodies that. How would you see this theory in use in terms of literacy development specifically?
like
All of the literacy theories we discussed in class on Thursday I found to be very interesting and equally important, though the one that resonated with me more than any other was Constructivism. Using a student’s existing schema to adapt new information is a great way to engage your students and begin building some intrinsic motivation towards learning. I believe teaching is about more than just content, it is about getting to know our students for the people that they are, and sharing in the learning with them. Constructivism provides evidence that if I get to know my students I can use the knowledge I acquire to help them create more meaningful pathways and hopefully a more intrinsic love for education.
I love that you said, “sharing in learning with them”. Teachers should see themselves as equals to their students, and that equality translates to intrinsic motivation like you just said! I think constructivism is a great way to make meaningful learning experiences.
I agree! constructivism is my favorite because it focuses on the development of knowledge and not just gaining new information. Students make meaning of the information rather than just storing new information. It is the opposite of oppression.
You raise some great points about this theory. Can you think about specific instructional decisions you will make, in terms of literacy, based on this theory? How will this influence the materials you choose? The lessons you teach? Your expectations of your students? The ways students will respond to reading and writing?
One of the literacy theories we discussed in class that resonated most with me is Gee’s theory of discourse. I like the idea of “big D/little d” and I think that having an awareness of both is crucial to meeting students where they are, and being able to diffferentiate instruction in a way that really reaches different students. For example, looking at language within a larger social and cultural context (Discourse) could help an instructor to effectively use and discuss mirror texts in the classroom. I think too often we are unaware of the misconceptions that can stem from the language we choose to use. I was once explaining the definition of a resume or a CV to a student and realized the gravity of the assumptions I was making, such as that both of his parents were employed and that he had some language familiarity with the concepts at play. I think the world of literacy becomes more attainable and accessible to students when you are deliberate and mindful with Discourse and the Discourse communities present in your classroom.
This is an excellent example of this theory, Lindsay. Can you think of specific literacy practices in your classroom that will be influenced by this theory?
I totally agree that literacy is such an important tool for all students. Literacy is a tool for agency and allows our students to move through the world comfortably. I think I’ll also use this theory in my education philosophy.
Reading for Motivational theory. In my practicum classroom, many of the students fall below their grade level reading level and are not where they should be at in terms of literacy rates. Many of the students do not like to read, and even will just put their heads down during guided reading time because they are not even remotely interested in their book. However, I just introduced the idea of a book club to my cooperating teacher, and the students seem extremely excited about this. Ms. Wallin leads the girl’s book club, and I lead the boy’s. We do it during recess twice a week, and the students get to sign up if they so chose. We had more than half of the class sign up. I believe these students signed up because they were excited to read a book that was interesting to them, and as long as they are engaged in their reading, why does it always matter what the context is. The Reading for Motivational theory stated that motivation is the foundational process for reading engagement; therefore it is crucial that students receive texts that are interesting to them to ensure engagement.
I love your book club idea, Fletcher! We do book clubs with our students and they are so successful. Students are not only excited to come to book clubs, but some of them are even slightly sad when it’s not their day to go. We do book clubs during our reading or library blocks so it’s still relevant to the schedule. The students help pick the books, and generally the “clubs” consist of students who are all at the same level so they are picking from the same pools of literature. Because we let them pick themselves (for the most part), they are really excited to come.
Just curious which books you chose for your book clubs? And in line with this theory, what would happen if you let the students choose the next book?
The theory that I related to the most was Reading for Motivational theory. Working in such a “liberal” classroom and school environment this semester, I have really been able to see that by giving students choice and picking materials based off their interests, students are more engaged in school, and reading presents itself as a choice rather than a chore. They are literally given “choice time” every day (think structured indoor recess), and there is always space open for quiet reading. The theory says that motivation is the foundation for reading engagement, and I agree with that completely. Giving students the ability to pick the texts they want and be able to motivate themselves in their own learning can only lead to positive feelings and in turn, intrinsic motivation.
Maddy, your experiences are a great reflection of this theory. Here’s a link you might be interested in as well: http://www2.ncte.org/statement/righttoreadguideline/