Monday, July 9, 2012

Personal Model of Reading Theory 2


At the beginning of the semester, I scored a 68 on the DeFord TORP.  That score placed me in a Skills approach category.  When I completed the DeFord TORP again last night, my score rose from a 68 to a 106.  It was nearly shocking to me to see that my ideas had changed in less than six weeks.  A score of 106 is still within the Skills approach category.  However, it is four points away from coming closer to a Whole Language approach.  These scores make complete sense to me, especially after admitting that I have not much confidence of experience knowing the rules of or how to teach phonics.  The fact that my scores did not place me in the Phonics approach was not surprising at all.  But, what does my rise in score mean to me?

            Obviously, my thinking has changed.  In my first Personal Reading Theory assignment, I spoke of not knowing one specific way to teach literacy that guaranteed student proficiency.  I mentioned a small introduction of reading skills during my methods courses.  Last, I communicated that from my experience, I believed children learn to read and write by communicating with others.  I still agree with those beliefs now, but my theory has expanded into a much broader perspective. 

            How do children learn to read?  Children learn to read by communicating verbally with others around them.  The build schema through their experiences and rely on those schema when interpreting words or texts.  They are introduced to several literacy approaches throughout education, and those depend on the type of setting they are in.  Some teachers value a skills, phonics, or whole language approach.  Many pre-service educators (like me) have been instructed in a skills approach manner, learning to work with the smallest piece of language and working upward.  From class this semester, I gathered throughout the Weaver (2002) text that a skills approach is not as beneficial as a comprehensive literacy approach.  I can adamantly say that many educators do use strategies from a comprehensive literacy program such as reading or writing workshop or guided reading.  However, a comprehensive literacy program entails so much more than just those methods, especially an excellent foundation in understanding what is best for one’s class in terms of whole group, small group, or individual instruction. 

What are effective ways to teach reading? I value Harste’s (2003) theory of inquiry learning as well as Shannahan’s (1997) idea of integrating reading and writing throughout the curriculum.  I really appreciate Weaver’s (2002) strategies such as the developing a Reader Profile (p. 185), conducting a Retrospective Miscue Analysis (p. 221), designing a Comprehensive Literacy Program (p. 276) , and Phonics instruction strategies (p. 325).  Among all of these practices, the CLP is the most important to me.  In addition, I believe in building rapport and trust with my students, especially students from diverse cultures. 

As I was reading Chapter 14, I realized how much I do not know about shared reading.  I thought all of Mr. Peters’ ideas were fantastic.  I loved his ideas of working with one text for several days using several engaging activities.  He also incorporated phonics instruction into his lessons in a systematic fashion.  Unfortunately, after I finished the chapter, I felt a little uncomfortable.  I have used some strategies of a CLP in my last few years of teaching, but not to the degree that Weaver suggests.  I feel that reflects poorly on me even though this is a learning process.  I am also vexed over learning about and embracing the idea of a CLP’s components to then enter an environment in which I may not be able to practice those methods.  This could occur in any public school system under any bureaucratic principal.  My experience with Montessori classrooms is increasing, and I do believe there are whole language elements embedded, particularly using constructivist approaches.  Honestly, I feel that my theory may differ from my practices depending on the context, which is something I have had to get used to since I began teaching in the first place. 

Nevertheless, I have confidence in my organizational and philosophical beliefs and practices, even when I am not in a classroom setting.  These beliefs are a great place to start as transitioning educator and parent.  In terms of transitioning as an educator, I want to be reflective on my practices and develop convictions based on my beliefs, practices, and research-based strategies.  As a parent, I work with my daughter every day as she develops her literacy skills.  She interacts with technology, a variety of literature, and workbooks to strengthen her growing foundation.  I look forward to learning more about myself and literacy practices in the field of education as I move forward in my career and professional development. 

No comments:

Post a Comment