Reciprocity of Reading and Writing

There is a reciprocal relationship between reading and writing.

In any discussion of a processing system for reading, we must remember that we are really talking about a larger literacy processing system, one that includes both reading and writing of continuous text. While reading and writing are different processes, they are complementary. Readers and writers use the same sources of information and integrate them:

• In reading – to recognize written signs (visible information) and connect them to the invisible information.
• In writing – to use invisible information in a constructive way, producing a text of visual signs that will communicate to others or to self.

The process is not even as separated as those two bulleted points make it seem. Readers often think like writers. They notice how writers use language or give attention to new words and remember them later while writing. They may take notes or extend their understanding through writing. Writers reread what they have written so they can experience it another way and often revisit texts for ideas or to notice the writer’s craft. Through instruction, we can take advantage of this reciprocity, achieving higher-quality processing in both reading and writing.

Adapted from Teaching for Comprehending and Fluency: Thinking,

Talking, and Writing About Reading

Reciprocity of Reading and Writing

There is a reciprocal relationship between reading and writing.

In any discussion of a processing system for reading, we must remember that we are really talking about a larger literacy processing system, one that includes both reading and writing of continuous text. While reading and writing are different processes, they are complementary. Readers and writers use the same sources of information and integrate them:

• In reading – to recognize written signs (visible information) and connect them to the invisible information.
• In writing – to use invisible information in a constructive way, producing a text of visual signs that will communicate to others or to self.

The process is not even as separated as those two bulleted points make it seem. Readers often think like writers. They notice how writers use language or give attention to new words and remember them later while writing. They may take notes or extend their understanding through writing. Writers reread what they have written so they can experience it another way and often revisit texts for ideas or to notice the writer’s craft. Through instruction, we can take advantage of this reciprocity, achieving higher-quality processing in both reading and writing.

Adapted from Teaching for Comprehending and Fluency: Thinking,

Talking, and Writing About Reading

Do You Know What Makes an Effective School Team?

It’s not a secret that when people collaborate and work together, the whole is more effective and efficient, right?  Well, if it’s not a secret and we all know this, then why aren’t we putting those thoughts into action at our school sites?  Don't we owe it to our students to do absolutely everything to be effective and efficient?  Michael Fullan calls it our “moral imperative” and that we owe it to not only to every individual student, but to every individual in our society!  If we want to thrive in our democracy, our educational system must work together to be successful.

I felt charged up again about the need for effective teaming when I read a recent Edutopia.org blog post from Elena Aguilar.  Again, Elena has reminded us of how important it is to TEAM. 

Strong teams within a school are essential to retaining and sustaining teachers. In schools with low staff turnover (even in challenging urban contexts), teachers report feeling connected to colleagues and supported by them. They also describe feeling that they belong to a team whose members are fulfilling a mission together. The emotions activated in this context are those which keep us engaged in a difficult endeavor for a long time. Public education is a hard place to be these days -- we need structures (such as strong teams) that cultivate our emotional resilience.

If a team is effective, then people learn from each other. They accomplish far more than would be possible alone. They inspire and challenge each other. An individual's strengths can be exploited, and we don't have to do the stuff we're not so good at. Again, this is an efficient approach to undertaking a huge project (transforming a school, for example), and it feels good.

What Makes a Good Team?

1. A good team knows why it exists.

It's not enough to say, "We're the 6th grade team of teachers" -- that's simply what defines you (you teach the same grade), not why you exist. A purpose for being is a team might be: "We come together as a team to support each other, learn from each other, and identify ways that we can better meet the needs of our sixth grade students." Call it a purpose or a mission -- it doesn't really matter. What matters is that those who attend never feel like they're just obligated to attend "another meeting." The purpose is relevant, meaningful, and clear.

2. A good team creates a space for learning.

There are many reasons why those of us working in schools might gather in a team -- but I believe that all of those reasons should contain opportunities for learning with and from each other. I have met very few educators who don't want to learn -- we're a curious bunch and there's so much to learn about education. So in an effective team, learning happens within a safe context. We can make mistakes, take risks, and ask every single question we want.

3. In a good team, there's healthy conflict.

This is inevitable and essential if we're learning together and embarked on some kind of project together. We disagree about ideas, there's constructive dialogue and dissent, and our thinking is pushed.

4. Members of a good team trust each other.

This means that when there's the inevitable conflict, it's managed. People know each other. We listen to each other. There are agreements about how we treat each other and engage with each other, and we monitor these agreements. There's also someone such as a facilitator who ensures that this is a safe space. Furthermore, in order for there to be trust, within a strong team we see equitable participation among members and shared decision-making. We don't see a replication of the inequitable patterns and structures of our larger society (such as male dominance of discourse and so on).

5. A good team has a facilitator, leader, or shared leaders.

There's someone -- or a rotation of people -- who steer the ship. This ensures that there's the kind of intentionality, planning, and facilitation in the moment that's essential for a team to be high functioning.

While this is not an exhaustive list of what makes up an effective and efficient team, it does remind us of the mindset we must have as we sit down with our fellow educators.   We must remember that its not about US, its about the STUDENTS and we have a “moral imperative” to do everything we can to work collaboratively for student success.

Thanks to Elena Aguilar (again) for reminding us of the power of teamwork.  You can read more fantastic ideas and insight from Elena at her blog, https://www.edutopia.org/users/elena-aguilar.

Do You Dialogue?

What is dialogue?  A dictionary definition of dialogue is “seeking mutual understanding and harmony”.  A thesaurus notes synonyms for dialogue as “argument, back-and-forth, conversation, debate, deliberation, discussion, and talk”.  While the definition seems clear, there could be confusion as to some of the synonyms.

If the point of dialogue to seek mutual understanding and harmony as a result of the interaction, the same can not always be said about the synonyms argument, conversation, debate, etc. The world is full of interactions.  Sometimes in those interactions people are just talking.  In others, there is a conversation.  And in others, there is dialogue.   Talking involves basic exchange of words and phrases not always tied to an intended outcome.  A conversation compounds upon talk and involves an informal oral exchange of sentiments, observations, opinions, or ideas between two or more people.  It becomes a dialogue when two or more people become more formally invested in the interaction; understanding not only what needs to be said, but also understanding and honoring the other participants’ needs, values, and convictions.

Generally speaking, simple talking does not incite a movement. Basic conversation does not spark innovation. It is dialogue that is truly impactful and creates transformational and lasting change.   Here are a few things to keep in mind when you desire meaningful dialogue.

15 Strategies for Meaningful Dialogue

1.     Err on the side of including people who disagree.

2.     Initiate dialogue through a sense of empathy.

3.     Ensure a presence of equality, empathetic listening, and surfacing assumptions nonjudgmentally.

4.     Minimize the level of mistrust before pursuing practical objectives.

5.     Keep dialogue and decision making compartmentalized.

6.     Focus on common interests, not divisive ones.

7.     Use specific cases and data to raise general issues.

8.     Bring forth your own assumptions before speculating on those of others.

9.     Clarify assumptions that lead to subculture distortions.

10. Identify mistrust as the real source of misunderstandings.

11. Expose old scripts to a reality check.

12. Focus on conflicts between value systems, not people.

13. Be sure trust and rapport exits before addressing transference distortions.

14. Express the emotions that accompany strongly held values.

15. Encourage relationships in order to humanize transactions.

Strategies adapted from Daniel Yankelovich, 1999.

Why Does Text Complexity Matter?

The American College Testing Service, in its influential study “Reading Between the Lines”, determined a proficiency level on their reading assessment. 51% of students taking the assessment in 2006 scored above this benchmark. These students were more likely to:

• ·      Enroll in college.
• ·      Earn a grade of B or higher in first‐year U.S. history and psychology classes.
• ·      Earn a GPA of 3.0 or higher.
• ·      Return for a second year at the same institution.

In addition, it was also found that 47% of students who met the reading test benchmark met the science test benchmark as well.  However, only 5% of students who did not meet the reading benchmark met the science test benchmark.

Student responses were analyzed with the goal of determining what patterns might distinguish students scoring above the benchmark from those below. The major findings follow:

·      Literal vs. inferential question type failed to differentiate students scoring above the benchmark from those scoring below.

·      Questions focusing on textual elements—main idea/author’s purpose, supporting details, meaning of words, and generalizations and conclusions—also failed to differentiate students scoring above from those scoring below.

·      The clearest difference of performance between the two groups was degree of text complexity, in the passages that acted as “sorters” within the assessment. This finding held true for males and females, all racial groups, and all socio-economic levels.

How did we arrive at a situation where so many of our students fail to understand complex text?

1.     School textbooks and reading demands K¬12 have become easier.

a.     Every year since 1962 the difficulty of text (vocabulary, word count, sentence length, sentence type) has declined.

2.     College books and college reading have NOT gotten easier.

a.     Reading levels of college texts have increased since 1962

3.     Curriculum and pedagogy has exacerbated the problem of declining K-12 text complexity.

a.     Texts are more heavily scaffolded in K-12, while not scaffolded in college or career text.

b.     Predominance of literature versus informational text in K-12.

What are the consequences of many students not being able to read complex text?

1.     Students entering college require remediation in reading.

2.     Those students that required remediation are 41% more likely to drop out of college.

3.     Adult literacy rates have dropped significantly over the last decade.

4.     Percentage of adults reading any book dropped by 7% in the last decade.

Being able to read complex text critically with understanding and insight is essential for achievement in college and/or career.  Moreover, if students cannot read challenging texts, they will read less in general, extending the societal effects on reading and literacy.  The problem of lack of reading and literacy is not only getting worse, it is doing so at an accelerated rate.  Although numerous factors likely contribute to the decline in reading, it is reasonable to conclude that the deterioration in overall reading ability, abetted by a decline in K-12 text complexity, is a contributing factor.

References:

Achieve, 2007 Closing the Expectations Gap. Washington, DC: Achieve, Inc.

Between Reading Skills and Reading Strategies. The Reading Teacher, American College Testing (2006)“Reading Between the Lines: What the ACT Reveals about College Readiness in Reading” American College Testing, Iowa City: Iowa.

Best Practices National Governors Association (2005) Reading to Achieve: A Governor’s Guide of Adolescent Literacy. Wasington, DC: National Governor’s Association.

Bradshaw, T., (2004)“Reading at Risk” Washington, DC: National Endowment for the Arts

Gioia, D., (2007)”To Read or Not to Read: A Question of National Consequence” Washington, DC: National Endowment for the Arts.

Hiebert , E. (Ed.),Reading more, reading better: Are American students reading enough of the right stuff? New York: Guilford Publications, 2009.

Hoffman, J. et al., (2004) Building a Culture of Trust. Journal of School Leadership