Well...here is the reason for
our shift. Guided Reading is out of the door because we guided students to look
at the picture and make guesses. So we do not do GR anymore because poor
readers make guesses. We are doing "differentiated" literacy instruction with
the premise that we push phonics....(decoding, blending and nonsense
words...which should enhance fluency if the kiddo can decode quickly in their
head). So now we are being asked to express "descriptors" (Common Core...Big
Ideas) and not reading levels to parents. Why? Well the thought is that not
all Level D students are the same... so why level them?
So now what is going on is
teachers are doing running records anyway...to get an even level of descriptors
and making an attempt to avoid gut feelings. I am attaching what most districts
are using for this reason. The thought is that every teacher in your grade
level uses the same test/assessment to avoid "loosey-goosey" results. Now these
do NOT have to be used b/c grade levels should "agree" on same assessment for
uniform results.
Okay so we are not the
researchers of the world who are making millions on their literacy programs.
BUT we are experienced enough to know that the levels in Reading Street are
loosey-goosey on the first grade level...what the claim is that it should not matter. At the same time,
you need to know what to pull for the kiddo who can't practice decoding b/c
on-level is too easy and advanced is too difficult.
What I would say is do a sight
word assessment (you should do this anyway). Kiddos who can read 60 sight words
are usually D-E, 80 F-G, 100 H-I, 120 J. Sight Words are a good assessment to
do regardless because SW will effect fluency because those words "have" to be
memorized.
Our running records from the
Wright Group are worthless in the sense that they would not give you descriptors
because most words in text are not decodable. What those RR are good for is for
using our Wright Group books. The attached RR are good for determining you
descriptors because they are decodable text.
Running Records were developed
by Marie Clay with the purpose of analyzing miscue analysis or why the child is
making errors (vowel sounds, does not know sight words, guesses, can't blend,
etc.). The Wright Group took it one step further and said now you can get these
levels. However when a parent takes a child to a book store, they use Lexile
Levels but the issue becomes these levels do not exist for K-1 reading levels.
So why does a parent need a level that means nothing to the library or book
store? (Hey...not saying we are agreeing but this is the conflict).
This is a lot to take in and
this is not the final say...this is just why we are going in this direction.
Reading Street is a very comprehensive program and it has flaws...ALL programs
will. What we have to do as teachers is look at these descriptors and determine
"where" is this kiddo lacking? Is it fluency? Nonsense word, sight word
phrases, books on tape, Dick and Jane or something with repeated text. Is it a
sight word problem? Check out Heidi Songs for jingles, sight word games, sight
word rings. Is it a phonics issue? letter sounds/blending games, word sliders,
making words, letter chants, vowel practice, etc. With knowledge of these so
called "descriptors" you can the info to know how to differentiate your
instruction.
What I do not like as a
teacher...is the fact that we are not showing parents with a "picture" how their
child did/did not progress. Is there a way to do so? Should sight word count
be used in a graph instead? Second what bothers me is this above, on or below
level nonsense. Does Reading Street determine this or the teachers? What does Common Core say? Perhaps there needs to be a discussion on
this. Maybe grade levels could select the same "cold" reads to determine what
means below, on level or above and to go along with this the child needs a
certain sight word score. This is something that should be tabled before report
cards. All I can say is that grade level need "uniform" assessments because my
gut feeling differs from yours and vice versa.
We are sharing this "drama" with you...our virtual friends because we want your comments/suggestions! How is your school leveling first graders who have the widest span of readers on-levels or 6 levels (Wright Group calls them E, F, G, H, I, J). We are struggling because our "on-level" books are too easy for some readers and then the "above level" are too difficult due to this wide span in first grade. What does "on-level" first grade text look like? What is your district doing? Is anyone using Reading Naturally to level? What do you think?
Here is the link to RS Running Records that can be used to get Descriptors: http://www.firstgradebrain.com/2011/07/scott-foresman-reading-street-running-records-unit-1-5-1st-grade.html
FYI: Descriptors are determined by analyzing miscues...so yes we will do a running record or cold read but NOT to get a level. Instead we will analyze miscues.
Based on Brain Research: "Google" Dr. Louisa Moats
Based on Brain Research: "Google" Dr. Louisa Moats
7 comments:
Dear Kindergarten Goonies,
I admire your willingness to air your leveling issues out there for everyone to hear and be a part of. You are definitely not alone in your "struggle" with how leveling, guided reading and balanced literacy all fit into to the new standards. Since you asked me to comment, I will share my own opinions regarding your post. I do not think the Common Core is saying that guided reading should go away. I do think the standards and shifts of the common core would have more "balance" between guided reading, reading conferences and whole group read-alouds and think-alouds. I was just emailing back and forth last week with Jan Burkins, author of Preventing Misguided Reading and co-blogger at Thinktank for 21st Century Literacy. (I realize we all have our favorite researchers out there). I happen to agree with Burkins and Yaris that guided reading should be kept to text that is on the child's higher end of instructional...like around 95% accuracy, and like Marie Clay would say, children should be doing most of the reading and strategy work in guided reading. For the times that we as guided reading teachers need to swoop in and assist, which shouldn't be very often, we need to provide scaffolded cues from least supportive instructional moves first before trying most supportive instructional moves, always giving students the opportunity to make the strategy move first. Students should be having lots and lots of reading success during guided reading and students are guessing at every tricky word then we are either not cueing students to self-monitor when guessed words sound wrong and they keep reading anyway, or we are having them books with too many tricky words, in other words, it's too hard for guided reading and more on their frustrational level. If you have to help students more than 5 times on one book of a 100 words or so, than the book is too hard for guided reading. Guided reading is the time of day where we as teachers provide minimal amount of reading support, it is their chance to prove to you that they can do it on their own *most* of the book but are not 100% independent. This notion of guided reading has not changed with the Common Core. What the Common Core has done,at least in grades 1 and up, however, is added the text complexity dimension, but the task of reading complex books, according to the common core, should be provided with the *most* amount of support, not the least amount of support like in Guided Reading. Therefore, students would be supported to read, comprehend and become proficient in complex texts through the support of the teacher through read-alouds/think-alouds, novel studies and teacher led literature circles.In most classrooms now, (and this is a broad generalization) most read-alouds/think-alouds and group novel studies diminish after the primary grades, and the Common Core would say we need to bring the balance of both guided reading and shared reading through read-alouds of complex texts back to at least a 50/50 split, where the 50% for guided reading is even split again between small group guided reading and individual reading conferences. Burkins and Yaris would even say, and I love this, that with the dimension of text complexity, now there should not such thing as "too hard" of a text. They propose that it will all be hard and that the gradients should go something like, "sort of hard, really hard, super hard and diamond hard." Anyway, it's all food for thought and a great conversation nonetheless. Thanks for asking for my input. Jen
Jen,
Thanks so much for your input. We love hearing what other educators are doing. So this text level business sounds like it is a struggle for everyone. Noone has the answer...then why say let's get rid of something that teachers know??? Whether using letters or numbers...I think text has to be leveled in a grade such as: first because it is the widest span. Perhaps one of our million dollar bloggers will come up with a solution! Kudos to Deanna Jump!!! I think what is going on is our district is just not using the term Guided Reading because we have eliminated "look at the picture and guess". Some people are calling it Reader's Workshop and others Differentiated Literacy Instruction. What is sounds like you're saying is that the term GR is defined differently by different people. We hope you stop by and chat with us again! We LOVE reading your blog!!! Check out Hello Literacy if you have not been there bloggers!!!
Have a good one!
XOXO
The Goonie Gals
I don't believe anybody's calling Guided Reading Reading Workshop, but Reading Workshop includes elements of small, flexible group and individual instruction. You can do Guided Reading and not do Reading Workshop and you can do Readers Workshop and find plenty of teachers that don't ever meet in small groups during that time. Regardless of *what* structure you use to teach students reading, I believe the key word is "balance" between all structures that emphasis all elements of effective reading instruction. I recommend you check out the book, Preventing Misguided Reading by Jan Burkins. It's a quick and interesting read by a researcher, and former teacher herself. Good luck on your "teaching reading" journey and finding your million dollar solution.
My school collects running records data but I do not use levels personally in my classroom to group my students. I have two students who decode on an N and with nonfiction can use background knowledge to answer basic questions but not necessarily find text support or many other comprehension skills. Last week, I met with them and a student who scored a B on her running record. Why you ask mix those leveled students? Why not? The level B student could follow along and read some of the level I text I chose and more so she has great listening comprehension. Yes, she used cues from the pictures like facial expression to enrich her answers. Because she wasn't focused solely on the text, she foudn deeper meaning. Thats a skill I want the others to acquire and she helped me model it. She was also exposed to more words in print and read separately with me. When I mentioned it to her parents they were in support of her working with that group part of the time and she took the text home to share with them. I teach Guided Reading but to me it is about the whole package - phonemic awareness, grammar/language, text, comprehension, thinking maps and writing. I also blur the lines between groups. I may have one child stay after their group for the beginning of the next to "play" a phonics game because they need that skill more than the rest of their group. I continually assess my students informally. I look for those miscues.
Hey Jen,
Thanks so much for posting our thoughts on your blog. This is the kind of conversation that we just can't get anywhere else but online. We want to hear what other literacy teachers are doing all over the world because we want to be better teachers. We don't ever want to the best teachers...we know at that point...it would be time to retire!!! We will check out that book! Right now, we are getting into Fran Kramer's (Kindergarten Crayons)recommendation...The Book Whisperer. Awesome Fran!!!
Again THANK YOU Hello Literacy! We are itching for some intense talk!!!
XOXO
The Kindergarten Goonies
Kindergarten Myles,
Analyzing miscues!!! Yes... that's where it is at. We are looking into K-2 Multi-Age Classrooms for the same reason you posted...learning from one another. What literacy program do you use? Such good thoughts and THANK YOU!!!
XOXO
The Kindergarten Goonies
I believe that GR is an important part of a balanced literacy approach. However, I think we have taken the leveling too far and have guided our students too much. Students must be exposed to complex texts and have the opportunities to discuss stories and write about their reading. I just posted something about this topic on my new blog and I would love to get your feedback. http://hitechcoach.blogspot.com/2012/10/language-workshop-technology.html
Post a Comment