Comprehension articles...

While we read parts of the Tompkins chapter this week for our readings I would like to specifically engage with the two articles we had to read on comprehension: "Kindergarteners Can Do It Too" by Cahill and Gregory and "Profiles in Comprehension" by Applegate et. al

I loved the article by Cahill and Gregory! Not only did it stress something that I think is really important to stress (how younger ed. students view the world) it also specifically talks about the age group in which I am very curious to work with. Ever since I started substitute teaching back in 2008 I have enjoyed working with younger students over older students. There is something about their positive energy, the way they can encourage each other and the way they have not yet been tainted by the desire/ability to treat each other cruelly as I have seen happen in the older grades that I genuinely gravitate towards/respond to.

That aside, I know there are many different "pratfalls" or challenges that come in teacher lower grades, especially in implementation of literacy or basic skills across the disciplines. I question my patience many times with younger students and knowing myself well enough, I wonder whether or not really young children would be the most ideal match. If I were to venture a guess I would say that kindergarten-2nd grade teachers have the hardest job in education. So much of their time is spent implementing and checking for understanding that one of the downfalls is never really expanding.

All this aside, what I loved about the Cahill article is that Mrs. Hope's class gave a lot of different really cool ideas for implementing comprehension in the stories that were being read. Being the literally movie-minded guy that I am, my favorite, of course, was mind movies. Once the students had a visualized representation of what they were hearing in the story they would raise their hands in a 'V' and Mrs. Hope would call them out and they got to share their mental videos. The article says:

“As part of the introduction to this strategy (mind movies), Mrs. Hope asked the students to close their eyes and listen to the story Fireflies by Julie Brinckloe (1985). After reading two pages, Mrs. Hope asked the students to describe their mind movies. Later, they were asked to draw their mind movies and then to compare their drawings to the illustrations in the book...This provided Mrs. Hope and the students with the opportunity to discuss why some things were included in their pictures but not in the text.” (pg. 2)

What I like about this article - and how it segues nicely into the next article - is that it asks the students to use their imagination rather than simply answering call and response questions ad tedium. This kind of memorization does very little to nothing for their actual comprehension other than recitation of meaning. What the visualizations or mind movies do is to make the students engage with the text and its comprehension on a level that is much higher than what questions ask them to do.

While I didn't like the next article as much (it was ok, still, though) I thought that it also presented some interesting ideas on comprehension. I liked when the article said:

“There is, however, a widely used alternative to factual recall and recitation questions and that is the type of questioning that encourages students to engage in discussion. These questions have been variously designated as higher order, inference, scriptal, implicit, or aesthetic. No matter what their label, these kinds of questions have several common characteristics: They do not lend themselves to a single correct response, answers to them must be justified logically by readers, and they encourage discussion and the acknowledgment of multiple viewpoints.” (pg. 1)

The article then goes on to talk about the different types of comprehenders and I couldn't help but see many of the students from my field placement as what are described as "Fuzzy Thinkers." Fuzzy Thinkers: "...are characterized by their vague and imprecise concepts that are frequently reflected in vague and imprecise language. Fuzzy Thinkers can give you an answer to any type of question you ask, but the thinking behind their responses will be elusive and ambiguous. When we follow up on their initial responses with questions designed to clarify their thinking, we find that they are often unable to explain what they meant. In general, they cannot explain because they never had a clear idea of the significance of their original answer.” (pg. 51-52)

My CT spends a very large amount of her time reading to her students from books of all different genres and grade levels. I LOVE this about her. Reading is essential and I like that while certain books that she chooses might be deemed "too young" or not age appropriate, she still incorporates them into her daily life as a teacher because they not only give her a chance to read to her students but they also are covering material that is appropriate to her other disciplines. But, I see Fuzzy Thinkers ALL THE TIME in her class. What I find interesting is that it is generally the female students that she has. They will timidly raise their hands, and then, when they can't rearticulate their answers for them to make more sense they shake their heads and get nervous smiles and blush and hid in their hands and say "nevermind" or something of the like and act giggly and silly as if by laughing at themselves first they've beaten everybody else to the punch.