Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2
MODULE 1: ADOLESCENT READING, WRITING, AND THINKING
Adolescent Literacy – Professional DevelopmentUnit 3, Session 2
Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2
ADOLESCENT LITERACY:THE CRISIS AND THE SOLUTIONS
1.3.2
Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2
The State of Reading, Writ Large
Its importance is heavily emphasized in policy
Considerable attention from the federal government to the details of practice
Lots of funding, relatively speakingFocus on assessments/accountabilityThe scores that count are not improvingDemands for improved literacy outputs are
rising3
Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2
What’s the Crisis?
Academic achievement depends on better literacy skills
But the data are alarming:International comparisons of 15 year olds’
literacy: PISA (A. Schleicher)NAEP scoresDropout ratesPostsecondary remediation
4
Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2
NAEP 12th Grade Reading Assessment Results
37% of students scored at Basic level & 23% at Below Basic level for reading
Fewer than half of twelfth graders perform at or above the level expected by NAEP standards
Source: National Center for Education Statistics, U.S. Department of Education, NAEP 1998 Report Cards, 1999
5
Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2
Drop-Out RatesNearly half of African-American and Latino
students fail to graduate from high school in 5 years (Greene & Forster, 2003; Orfield, Losen, Wald, & Swanson, 2004)
High school drop-out rates among 16 to 24 year-olds in 2000:10.9% overall13.1% among African-Americans27.8% among Hispanics
44.2% among immigrants born outside the U.S.15.9% among second (or greater) generation immigrants
Source: U.S. Department of Commerce, U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, October 2000
6
Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2
Post-Secondary Remediation
Only 30% of high school students graduate as proficient readers who are college-ready (Greene & Forster, 2003).
35 - 40% of high school graduates do not have the sophisticated reading and writing skills that employers seek (Achieve, Inc., 2005; Kaestle et al., 2001; National Commission on Writing, 2004).
Half of all high school graduates or GED recipients exhibit the lowest levels of literacy (Kaestle et al., 2001).
7
Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2
Two Adolescent Literacy Challenges Dealing with struggling readers
Wide array of skills present in the post-primary classroom
Some students need intensive re-teaching Some need serious remediation All strugglers need help to make up for missed
learning opportunities Teaching normally-developing readers new
skills: New vocabulary and academic language Content-specific literacy skills New purposes for reading
8
Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2
The Price of Success: Reading Excellence and Reading First
Inoculation has become the default model —focusing efforts exclusively on the early grades
“Research-based practice” can mean we are like the drunk looking under the streetlamp for his keys E.g., we interpret adolescent literacy problems as primary reading problems,
postponed E.g., we implement phonological awareness interventions rather than struggling to
teach comprehension 9
Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2
What Can We Learn from Reading Excellence?
10
Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2
PRD Starting PointsPrevention, not instruction
primary, secondary, and tertiarystructural as much as instructionalimplies assessment to guide
decisionsEmergent literacy, not readiness Research consensus about
skilled reading 11
Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2
PRD Recommendations
Instruction to promote:Language and metalinguistic skillsUnderstanding the functions of
written language Both grasping and mastering the
alphabetic systemMotivation and positive affect
around literacy
12
Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2
The Accomplishments of Reading Excellence: Agreement that…
Excellent early reading instruction is part of a solid foundation for ongoing achievement.
Investing time in effective teaching and not wasting time on ineffective teaching are key.
Literacy instruction should be coordinated across the preprimary, primary, and later grades.
We can identify and correct weaknesses in early literacy programs.
13
Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2
Reading FirstFocus on instruction, not preventionMandated use of assessments for
accountability Presumption regarding central role of
teacher/school expectations in influencing student achievement
Perverse incentives regarding high standardsImportant but tricky disaggregation strategyAttention to AYP rather than growth
14
Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2
National Reading Panel Report Recommendations about Instruction
Phonological awareness (15-18 hrs)
Systematic phonics instruction
Fluency Vocabulary Comprehension strategies
15
Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2
What’s Missing? For post-primary grades:
Other kinds of comprehension instruction Classroom discussion Content-area-specific literacy skills Writing Motivation and interest Establishing a purpose
for reading
16
Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2
Reading ComprehensionThe goals of primary reading
instruction are really high school academic achievement.
There is too little focus on comprehension during primary reading instructionAnd too little reading instruction of any
kind after grade 3
17
Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2
RAND Reading Group Study (RRGS) GoalsCreate agenda for R&D programs focused
on reading comprehensionPromote constructive debate about the
agendaIncrease communications among members
of reading research and practice communities
Submit agenda to U.S. Dept. of Education to support appropriations proposals
18
Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2
RRGS’s Definition of Reading Comprehension
The process of simultaneously extracting and constructing meaning through interaction and involvement with written language
19
Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2
A Heuristic for Thinking about Reading Comprehension
20
Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2
RRGS-Based Conclusions Comprehension can be taught starting in
preschoolAnd needs to be taught across all grades
Building oral language skills is a key component of reading comprehension instruction across the grades
Too much focus on print skills alone may decrease attention to
comprehension precursors21
Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2
Is a Focus on Comprehension by Itself Adequate to Solve the Problem?
Not really, because….
22
Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2
Adolescent Readers Have to Master…Word reading accuracyWord reading fluencyMaking inferences from the text Integrating new text-based knowledge with
pre-existing knowledgeUnderstanding the language of the textsHaving the background knowledge presupposed
by the textsMotivation and interest in the textEstablishing a purpose for reading
23
Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2
Successful Practitioners with Adolescent Readers Have To…
Integrate reading instruction with content learning goals
Manage the distributed structures of middle/high schools
Find a place in the curriculum to focus on readingEnglish teachers tend to focus on literature, not readingOther content-area teachers are rarely prepared, and
sometimes unwilling, to teach reading Design practice based on a relatively scanty
research base
24
Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2
Reading Next Challenges
New reading tasks, even for children prepared very well at pre-K – Grade 3
Components of pre-K – Grade 3 instruction key for comprehension are still not being adequately implemented
Too many 4th – 12th graders are struggling
25
Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2
The Problem of Comprehension in the Content Areas Among Grade 4-12 students
Widespread Inevitable if there is a mismatch
between reader and text, reader and activity, text and activity
A problem that should become a focus of instruction
26
Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2
What Do We Know from Work on Early Literacy?
Solid research provides a basis for making progress
Assessment is a key step in organizing instruction
Consensus serves the field better than dissensus
Models of excellent instruction should be studied
Wisdom of practice has been undervalued27
Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2
Steps to Helping All Students Read Better
Identify student literacy needs, at group and individual levels
Teach all students systematicallyTeach all students reading for learning
in every classGive struggling students extra help
designed to address their needs
28
Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2
http://www.all4ed.org/publications/ReadingNext/ReadingNext.pdf
READING NEXT
29
READING NEXTA VISION FOR ACTION AND RESEARCH INMIDDLE AND HIGH SCHOOL LITERACYA Report to Carnegie Corporation of New York
Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2
Fifteen Key Elements: Nine Instructional Improvements Direct, explicit comprehension instruction Effective instruction embedded in content Motivation and self-directed learning Text-based collaborative learning Strategic tutoring Diverse texts Intensive writing A technology component Ongoing formative assessment of
students30
Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2
Fifteen Key Elements: Six Infrastructure ImprovementsExtended time for literacyProfessional developmentOngoing summative assessment
of students and programsTeacher teamsLeadershipComprehensive and coordinated
literacy program31
Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2
15 – 3 = 0
Indispensable elements are:Professional developmentOngoing formative assessment
of studentsOngoing summative
assessment of students and programs
32
Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2
More Information
www.serpinstitute.org www.carnegie.org/literacy www.rand.org/achievementforall www.gse.harvard.edu/~snow
33
Module 1: Unit 3, Session 2
References
Biancarosa, G., & Snow, C. E. (2004). Reading next - A vision for action and research in middle and high school literacy: A report from Carnegie Corporation of New York. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development [NICHD]. (2000). Report of the National Reading Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction (No. NIH Publication No. 00-4769). Washington, DC: U.S.: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Perie, M., Moran, R., & Lutkus, A. (2005). NAEP 2004 trends in academic progress: Three decades of student performance in reading and mathematics. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics.
RAND Reading Study Group. (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward an R&D program in reading comprehension. Santa Monica, CA: Rand.
Snow, C., Burns, M. S., & Griffin, P. (1998). Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
34