Balanced Instruction

 

Response to Literature

 

One aspect of the curricular content that has been central to debates about literacy instruction is how do children respond to literature.  This dimension of content balance has created a debate stemming from complex issues related to readers' individual interpretations of text and the contrast concerning social and cultural values that arise in literature discussions.  This has been a two-part debate - reader-driven versus text-driven understandings, and conventional versus personal interpretations.  As the basis for our reading programs move toward authentic literature, teachers must meet the challenge of students' response to the content literature.  For example, themes of the human experience such as: love, hate, prejudice, friendship, religion, and human rights.

 

Balancing response to literature actually involves balancing two goals of schooling - connecting to the past and preparing to meet an uncertain future.  On one hand, schools are under the obligation to teach students the traditions of our society, our history, our cultural and linguistic tools, and our norms for interaction.  On the other, schools must help students become adults capable of functioning in the world we live today.  This tension between reader driven and text driven curriculum must be addressed through a curriculum that balances the individual with the culture.

 

The Open Court Reading Program Minibooks lessons present a challenge to any instructor who desires to engage his/her students in critical thinking, and debate because the program success is based on timely scripted material which leaves hardly any room for classroom creativity, and interaction.

 

 

The Role of Text Genres in Balanced Instruction

 

The debate over balanced instruction has been going on for decades.  The debate has been over which is more important to teach in beginning reading, breaking the code or understanding what we read (Pearson & Raphael, 1999).  Those that believe that students should be taught the code argue that it is the code that the students don’t know.  The sooner they learn it the quicker they can read regularly.  The other side argues that since reading is a meaning making process it is better to teach students how to do this from the beginning of their reading instruction.  According to Pearson and Raphael there are four contextual aspects that literacy teachers balance in their daily teaching activities.  They are authenticity, classroom discourse, teachers’ roles, and curricular control.  Within the content of curriculum there has been debate regarding skill contextualization, text genres, and response to literature.  For the purpose of this paper the importance regarding text genres will be discussed.

            Genre refers to the types of texts in the literary curriculum.  Stories, personal narratives, poems, essays, and descriptions are examples of different forms of genre.  Test results have found that students have difficulty reading and understanding expository texts (Pearson & Raphael, 1999).  When balancing the curriculum it is important to note that students must make meaning from different genres. 

The genre debate also involves authentic versus instructional texts.  Some educators argue that children learn best when reading and responding to authentic literature, real-world literacy activities (Pearson & Raphael, 1999).  When it comes to acquiring the skills necessary to read these authentic texts relying on literature alone may not be the answer.  It is important for students to be able to read across many different types of books but these may not be the best source from which to teach the skills that students need.  On the other hand the easy decodable texts may reinforce certain reading skills but may not expose students to the different levels of thinking required from expository texts.

            The Open Court reading program states that children are more successful when they learn to read through a balance of literature and explicit phonics skills instruction (Open Court, 2000).  Open Court claims that they balance phonics and literature through their systematic program.  One of the features they claim their program includes is engaging students in constructing meaning from text.  Mastering phonics skills enables students to focus on the goal of reading: comprehension.  Within the program are the student anthologies.  These book selections include realistic fiction, historical fiction, poetry, nonfiction selections, drama, and full-length trade books (Open Court, 2000). 

Open Court does value instruction through different genres however, the skill and drill of the lesson is predetermined and scripted in the teacher’s edition.  The phonics skill instruction is taken from a source other than the literature.   During the daily independent work time when students demonstrate their knowledge, the activities are a review of the skills covered in class.  Authentic experiences with literature that include phonics instruction are not the focus of the program.  Learning phonics skills first to enable the students to read the literature later are. 

 

Teacher Roles and Classroom Discourse

 

As I discuss the teacher's role and classroom discourse my goals are to describe it as an element of a balanced approach to literacy, explain the importance, and then discuss the degree to which it is evident in the Open Court Reading Program.

 

According to authors P. David Pearson and Taffy E. Raphael (1999) in "Toward an Ecologically Balance Literacy Curriculum" in Best Practices in Literacy Instruction, classroom discourse is the amount of control that is established by the teacher and allotted for the students in a learning environment. They define the teacher's role as the specific part a teacher plays in providing instruction (Chapter 2). The teacher's role and classroom discourse can be described in turns of a continuum or balance scale. At certain times during a lesson, the teachers may possess more control and occupy a more essential role specifically when a new concept is being taught. Once the students have grasped the concept, the teacher is able to redistribute control which maybe shared equally by both the teacher and the students or the students may process more control than the teacher depending on the nature of the lesson.

 

Also in redistributing the control, the teacher's role is redefined. Instead of being the primary source of instruction, the teacher now plays the role of facilitator. The teacher's new role gives students more control by allowing them to take an active role in their learning. Examples of students taking an active role include allowing students to choose topics they are interested in writing about and discussing, peer tutoring, and delegating responsibilities in a cooperative learning activity. 

 

The primary goal as facilitator is to play a minimal role to give students opportunities to exert a sense of ownership (Harp, 1995, Chapter 8). Some of the responsibilities include monitoring learning, deciphering when to intervene, and keeping students focused on the desired objective. In contrast, when students have not completely mastered a particular concept such as vowel sounds, or they need additional modeling of how to conduct a specific activity, for instance literature group discussions, the teacher may be forced to regain a certain degree of control to provide further instruction or remediation. In addition to regaining more control the teacher's role is also altered and he/ she is no longer taking on the role as facilitator, but has direct control. Once the students illustrate that they are able to successfully function with minimal teacher intervention, the teacher's role and degree of classroom discourse needs to be redefined and redistributed. If a balanced approach to literacy instruction is the primary goal, the teacher's role and classroom discourse will vary greatly depending on various factors such as the nature of the lesson and the amount of control that is deemed most beneficial for the student’s success.

             

The teacher's role and classroom discourse is a very essential element in a balanced approach to literacy instruction. The amount of control that is exercised or the role that is occupied by the teacher determines the amount of ownership given to the students. When a teacher shares control with students, they are given instructional responsibilities. According to Bill Harp (1995) in order for students to take true ownership "they must be empowered to evaluate their own learning" (p. 132, Chapter 8). When students are granted various roles in the learning process they establish a partnership with the teacher in becoming self-directed learners. Teachers, who maintain sole control of the learning environment, force students to become reliant on the teacher rather than independent learners. Shared roles and control aid the teacher in building a community of learners where everyone is an active participant in the learning process.

 

In striving to achieve a balanced approach to literacy instruction as it relates to teacher roles and classroom discourse, teacher and student interaction is imperative.  When the teacher has established a classroom environment which prevents students from freely participating in their learning and thinking creatively, the students are striped of their sense of ownership. For example when a teacher conducts a classroom discussion and does not allow for a variety of responses then the students becomes limited in their thinking.

           

Many of the lessons in the Open Court teacher's manual for 1st grader were structured very similar.  There were several activities in one lesson that fell into two categories, reading and writing. They all begin with a Getting Started activity for the purpose of reviewing previous concepts and building interest for the activity that followed. The reading section focused on activities that promoted phonemic awareness, phonics, and fluency skills, while the writing section provided opportunities for students to practice writing.  I specifically focused on lesson 19 in the Open Court Teacher's manual for 1st graders (1995) to analyze if a balanced approach to literacy instruction was evident.

 

Throughout most of the activities in this lesson, the teacher processes the most control. The lesson begins with oral blending activities where the teacher introduces the concept of oral blending using final consonant sounds, one-syllable words and segmentation of final consonants. The teacher is basically instructed what to say to introduce and review various skills and how the students should respond by the teacher's manual. For example, in one of the blending activities the teacher begins the exercise by saying a variety of words and encouraging the class to repeat them. After the teacher has discussed the targeted sounds to blend words, the students are asked questions to assess whether they have grasped the concept. The questions do not allow the students to apply any critical thinking skills because the teacher is only looking for one answer. The students are never presented with an opportunity to conduct their own discussion with other students or expand their thinking.

 

The only part of lesson 19 where I observed possible opportunities for the expansion of student roles and increased student control involved the Exploring the Writer's Craft section. This section encouraged students to work in cooperative groups to complete a writing project.  The writing topic was geared around animals but the students were given the choice to write several short books about different animals or write one book with different parts i.e. my favorite animals, where it lives, and what it eats. They are also given independent time to work in their groups to discuss and prepare the project. This cooperative writing activity presented students with choices and opportunities to take active roles in their learning.

            In conclusion, "it is just as mistaken to assume literacy learning is limited to situations in which the teacher is engaged in explicit instruction as it is to assume that learning is meaningful only when the teacher is our of the picture" (Pearson & Raphael, 1999, p. 27, Chapter 2). This statement indicates how imperative it is to distribute the roles and control among students and teachers in an effort to achieve a balanced approach to literacy instruction.

 

The Role of Authenticity in Balanced Instruction

 

Balanced instruction encompasses many different elements when viewed from a theoretical viewpoint. Many reading experts agree that authenticity should be included when considering a balanced reading program.  The argument supporting authenticity is that too many tasks in the school setting are unauthentic or unrealistic.  They are not useful tasks outside the classroom setting, making it difficult to transition into literacy activities necessary to function in the real world.  Pearson & Raphael (1999) argue that we, as educators, should be teaching kids how to "do life" instead of how to "do school." Where else (except in school) will a child encounter books that have controlled vocabulary or a worksheet with "fill in the blanks?"  Instead of teaching kids to read to be able to answer comprehension questions, we should be encouraging their reading to allow them to discuss what they have read with peers and their teachers in forums such as book clubs or literature circles.  These are "real life" activities, which will serve them well in future years. 

 Few would argue that children (as well as adults) prefer to do and learn things that they perceive as relevant to their lives or livelihood.  Children are more motivated to learn when they have ownership and are involved in tasks that are purposeful and authentic.  Beginning readers learn words more easily when they are presented in a context that is personally meaningful instead of in a workbook that attempts to "teach" isolated skills.  Such decontextualization appears to have little relevance to what the child wants to know about or is interested in learning (Gambrell & Mazzoni, 1999).  That is not to say that skills and strategies such as decoding and comprehension are not important or should not be taught.  Simply, they should arise from a student's own personal need for meaning making.  Instruction may occur within the context of reading authentic literature or as a "minilesson" related to the content from which they arose.  Each teacher should be aware of what his or her students need and deliver instruction according to individual needs. 

In the Open Court Reading Program, there does not appear to be an emphasis on authenticity.  In this phonics-based program, children learn to read words mainly by blending sounds, not exposure to readable, meaningful connected texts.  Lessons are followed by worksheets to practice and reinforce what was learned.  Among many other exercises, students fill in blanks and answer literal level comprehension questions to choose correct spellings of words.  More evident in the early grades, the stories that follow the phonics lessons contain mostly words that have sounds previously learned.  This systematic approach leads to the reading of books with very controlled vocabularies which, according to the authors, is to promote success.  In addition, there is a section titled writing in the teacher's edition.  However, the assignment is far from an authentic writing activity.  Students are given words to spell in an effort to practice what was previously learned.  There are also sentences that are dictated by the teacher which, again, stress the phonic elements learned.  Although this section might be more appropriately titled "dictation," it is Open Court's way of teaching beginning writing.  Teachers are encouraged to remind students how all of these skills will enable them to be successful in the future.  The teaching of skills in such an isolated contrived way does not represent authenticity as defined by most in the reading profession, and children feel little ownership of their work. 

  However, the program does include strands of authenticity.  There are journals that students write stories - many times in response to a story read aloud or in their readers.  Attempts are made to make these writing assignments more authentic.  For example, after reading about animals, students are given choices as to what animal they would like to write about in their journals.  According to the guide, there does appear to be much some choice.  However, it would be up to the individual teacher if she or he wanted to make the writing more meaningful such as writing a letter to the zookeeper in the story read or writing step by step directions on how to bathe or feed the gorillas!  The program also includes student anthologies that have authentic stories and known authors.  In addition, the publishers include lists of trade books (for reading aloud) that teachers may want to use to supplement a lesson.  There are also Big Books used periodically for shared reading.  In grades 3-6, there are more trade books that are "authentic" in nature, but most of these are not written by familiar authors.

When children themselves are not reading books that they can find in their local libraries, they may not see themselves as real readers like their teachers who are reading authentic literature.  It is possible that this personal perception may lead to hesitation in trying to read the books found in the home or library.  Students may become overly concerned about not knowing every word as they do in their phonics readers.

In addition, if children are not encouraged to take ownership and write for different purposes and audiences, they may not view writing as an activity that is done outside of school.  If students are to survive in this fast paced world, they must be encouraged to read and write in an effort to be able to "do life."  One of our jobs as professionals is to create independent strategic readers and writers who have had an abundance of these "real life" experiences and who can function outside the four walls of the classroom.

 

 

BACK