This big experiment on teaching disenfranchised readers...this thing with Tremaine Brown and The Vessel...we met last night to discuss and plan the first interaction with students. I want to write and let you know what's happening. To document the process. To seek your involvement and support.
As we work through building our response to learners, there are many components. Gee describes important theoretical foundations that serve as our framework. The book covers 36 principles of learning situated in 3 areas of current research. We are using these three areas of research to ground our decision making. Basically - we are asking ourselves: How do we USE these "central truths about the human mind and human learning" in our instructional design and approach to the learners we will serve? (Gee, p. 9).
Situated Cognition: Learning happens individually, "inside people's heads" (Gee, p. 9). But it also happens while that person experiences a "material, social, and cultural world" (Gee, p. 9). As we design, support, and respond to each other, we will need to think deeply about how that kid is seeing the world and thinking through how they are living and surviving it.
New Literacy Studies: Reading and writing are more than "mental achievements" that kids experience alone or in the way we experienced them (Gee, p. 9). And it's serious stuff. The mental achievements have consequences: "social and cultural practices with economic, historical, and political implications" (Gee, p. 9). Y'all. The people who have joined us believe in what we are doing with literacy as a moral imperative.
Connectionism: Honestly, this theory points out what I think causes the kids we are working with to struggle with reading and writing. It's the way we are teaching them. It's our system's fault. Hate me if you want - but we have to make some serious shifts in what we think it means to teach. Gee explains that people really aren't good with logical reasoning. You think? Sarcasm overt right there in case you didn't hear it in the font. Gee also explains that we really aren't good with "general abstract principles detached from experience" (Gee, pg. 9). Yet - isn't that exactly what we teach? General abstract principles. We tell kids what the principles are. We wade in abstraction and textual interpretations that begin with logical reasoning and never show how one actually comes to abstraction, principles, generalizations. We give instructions, telling kids what to do, but we never really tell them how to come up with their own ideas or thinking processes. Instead of instruction - actually teaching - we are bossing kids around as if they were some kind of cognitive automaton receiving our programming. Scary stuff. Read James Clavell's The Children's Story if you think that's not what we are doing.
The Learning Pit: A Common Language
To really teach, we must help students look at their experiences in the world, seek their own patterns, and come up with generalizations that govern the experiences as personal truths, cognitive idiosyncracies, and lives. J.E. Dennis described how we cause "epiphany" in our lesson design. I look forward to sharing his thoughts with you soon. James Nottingham describes the concept as "Eureka" in his video on The Learning Pit.
The Learning Pit concept will be a component of how we talk about learning with the readers and writers we serve. You see, a lot of kids think there is something wrong with them because they struggle. S. Carr wrote about an experience with a child she tested for GT and his response. I can't wait to share her writing with you. E. Madrano shared and experience with supporting a new teacher in the classroom management pit. You'll enjoy that one as well.
Turns out, the pit is a universal experience (Thanks Mouserat!)
Each Thought Partner (which is what we call those who directly support learners) will develop their own way of teaching the Learning Pit to their groups. Stay tuned for their approaches. Ultimately, teaching is an individual sport - the way the teacher puts the lesson together changes how students uptake and use the ideas. Thought Partners will share their approach at the next meeting on November 21st.
The First Challenge: Process over Content
After we discussed the theoretical underpinnings, we participated in the first challenge Thought Partners will lead with their groups of three learners. Throughout the experience, the Thought Partners were to consider four purposes and five principles to evaluate and refine the lesson.
It has been said by many that ELAR has no content. After learning phonics, a bit of grammar, and continued vocabulary studies...there's really only process. Video games are like that too - no content. Seems like a waste of time? Not really. Gee points out these important ideas on pages 37 and 38. I added the stuff in the parenthesis relative to our cause.
The Four Purposes
1. Learning to experience (see and act on) the world in a new way. (This is not to get a job or pass STAAR.)
2. Gaining the potential to join and collaborate with a new affinity group. (You belong where you didn't think you could. We are all here to help you do more.)
3. Developing resources for future learning and problem solving in the semiotic domains to which the game is related. (Learn how to play the literacy "game" with skills and processes that make sense to you now and later.)
4. Learning how to think about semiotic domains as design spaces that engage and manipulate people in certain ways and, in turn, help create certain relationships in society among people and groups of people , some of which have implications for social justice. (Learn about what is being done to you and for you and with you that makes yours and other lives better.)
The First Five Principles
Gee explains at the end of the chapter on Semiotic Domains that causing reflection is key to learning (p. 41-42). As such, these first five principles guide how we develop lessons that change the learner experience and impact. I added the stuff in ending parenthesis.
1. Active, Critical Learning Principle: All aspects of the learning environment (including ways in which the semiotic domain is designed and presented) are set up to encourage active and critical, not passive learning. (All lessons must include listening, speaking, reading, writing, thinking, collaboration, arts, movement, trauma informed components.)
2. Design Principle: Learning about and coming to appreciate design and design principles is core to the learning experience. (I don't get this one yet. We are still thinking about what this means with the experiences we are designing for the learners.)
3. Semiotic Principle: Learning about and continuing to appreciate interrelations within and across multiple sign systems (images, words, actions, symbols, artifacts, etc.) as a complex system is core to the learning experience. (Connectionism/constructivism will be key components along with ZPD.)
4. Semiotic Domains Principle: Learning involves mastering, at some level, semiotic domains, and being able to participate, at some level, in the affinity groups connected to them. (We will be building a community and identity different than the one we all hold at school and in the community. And we will be learning about how literate folks navigate and participate in the world.)
5. Metalevel Thinking About Semiotic Domains Principle: Learning involves active and critical thinking about the relationships of the semiotic domain being learned to other semiotic domains. (Nothing we are ever doing will be about a single text or content. We will be learning about systems that relate to all other systems and living a powerful life.) T. Simms discussed connections she saw through her background in Math and Science. I look forward to sharing her ideas as well.
Experiencing and Refining the Challenge
Together, we experienced the first challenge with a powerful text, audio performances, role-play, annotation, graffiti, symbols and anchor backgrounds. Throughout the experience, we modified, debriefed, and discussed experience, processes, design, revisions, etc.
We plan to employ the revisions and lessons with a target group of learners, filming the event, and refining the lesson more fully for final implementation when the project goes live next semester. It is our hope that through collaboration, we embody the same principles of design we seek to create in the relationships and experiences with the learners. These videos will provide training for participants not able to be present.
Documenting the Process
I'm keeping a researcher's notebook during the events. Afterward, I am using the notes to write up what happened and document changes. Using member checks, participants will have access to the summaries and opportunities to revise/comment on the process. Since the blog is public facing, community comment and input is also possible at each phase.
References:
Parlow, A. (2024). Video Games Could Save the World. Unpublished works.
Clavell. J. (1981). The Children's Story. Delacourte Press. Accessed from: https://www3.uwsp.edu/cnr-ap/UWEXLakes/Documents/programs/lakeleaders/crew7/greenlake_may_2008/the_childrens_story_becken_presentation.pdf
Gee, J. P. (2007). What Video Games Have to Teach Us about Learning and Literacy. St. Martin's Griffin.
Mouserat. (2021, June 2). Mouserat - The pit (Official lyric video) [Video]. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2lhFFXNBh5c
Nottingham, J. (2025, November 23) The learning pit [Video]. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3IMUAOhuO78
When I was a little girl, we lived down the street from a Baptist church. Mom and I would walk there each Sunday, trying to avoid the cracks in the sidewalk so I wouldn't break her back. It was the same place where mom found me on the preacher's lap (with the little red wagon she helped me pack abandoned in front of his desk) the day I decided to run away from home. The same place where mom showed up early to church unaware of the time change and thought the rapture had occured. (A quick run home (sobbing all the while) and a call to Aunt Lucile resolved her fears that we'd been left behind.) The same place where I could hear-feel the organ under the floorboards and into my toes and up into my chest and out my mouth in praise. Where I sang my first solo, Away in a Manger. It's the same place where I squirmed and made noises, played with mom's golden filigree owl necklace until mom pinched me under the arm because the old lady next to her said it would make me still. The same people who heard me screach, "Ouch, you pinched me!" and laughed also watched my baptism. I remember peeking over the water and glass to wave at mom where she sat in our pew. And at 5, I began a life seeking love and service to make the world better.
Church was where I learned about Jesus and love. Where I memorized Bible verses in Vacation Bible School. It's where we read about the end times that mom thought we'd entered way back in the '69 because our clocks didn't automatically change. It's when I didn't know a thing about abortion, gender issues, divorce, disease, war, poverty, or politics of any kind. I just knew my momma loved me and made the world a better place.
Church is also where I learned about persecution of the Christians. That little girl who sat in those pews just couldn't understand why or how folks would want to be mean to people who were to be known by their love.
But I get it now. Here's a test:
They will know you are Christians by:
a. your vote
b. your political party and candidate
c. your financial contributions
d. your stance on governmental and societal issues
e. none of the above
Are we ripe for persecution?
Religion. The church. Government. The Republican Party. The Democratic Party. Christianity. None of these common and proper nouns are recognizable to my child mind or my adult one. And I can't diagram any sense into it. None of these concepts are what I thought they were supposed to mean...or how I thought I was supposed to behave and act. I recognize nothing.
But here we are. Persecution? Why would anyone want to talk ugly or repress folks whose main objective is to love others? Because we are no longer seen as loving. Something I couldn't imagine - persecution of the saints - seems a probable prediction. Voters for Trump have somehow become synonymous for Christian beliefs. Ripe for criticism and attack. And the media - something else I couldn't ever understood is how we'd get to a place where even a child can't tell right from wrong? We are there. I can't make heads nor tails of truth from any of the sources. It's bad fruit not worthy of eating. But shall I starve?
I have friends on both sides of the political and religious spectrums. Friends with folks who don't believe in the magic fairy book or even god of any kind. Family to those alienated by and harmed by the church. All of it...devastating. But I still love them and seek to do good.
At one point in my learning, a teacher explained that Christians were Jesus with skin on. Flesh not spirit. Not a Hannibal Lecter kind of grossness...but a demonstration of love that would show people what God was really like. That's the kind of Christian I want to be...not what I'm seeing described and rightfully mourned out there in reaction to the perceeption of what "Christians" have turned into. I want nothing of that. I hope that my friends can see a better picture of the world through how I'm choosing to live. And love. I hope I can love you like my momma loves me. It's the best kind of Christ-likeness I've ever encountered.
She: Do you have ideas or a resource for revising? I've been recommending Grammar Keepers for editing but I'm not not sure how to help with revision. This is in elementary. And they have Patterns of Power.
Me: The sentence sections in Keepers are also effective for revision. But: the best source of revision is their own papers and ratiocination. There isn't anything out there you can buy. I mean - you can find practice stuff...but there's nothing really out there that tells you how to teach it.
So we talked back and forth for a while. We landed on a purpose, prompts, and source texts. And I found a lot of problems. And I swear, if someone tells me the answers are about diagramming sentences and knowing parts of speech, I'm gonna puke. Try diagramming some of the messes or naming the function and parts of speech that are posed as answer choices. Those old ways ain't gonna work or be a productive use of time. We have to go waaaay beyond naming grammar crap and 1)into how the grammar crap is used to convey meaning 2)and to name what causes the meaning to be obscure because of sentence construction 3)and the function of how words/parts of speech are used in the semantics, syntax, and overarching author's purpose and craft.
The Texts:
Students are reading articles from HMH: Coral Reefs by Erin Spencer, Mariana Trench by Michael and Mary Woods, and 7 Natural Wonders by Raymond Coutu.
The Prompts:
I used a Chart of STAAR Prompts Grades 3-10 by Rene Jackson on Trail of Breadcrumbs to help craft prompts. It was important to generate prompts that used the right genres, correspondence, purposes, and the source texts meaningfully. Originally, students were going to write to experts of the texts to ask questions...but that wouldn't really have been a match to the TEKS. Great idea...worthy of doing. But not really preparation for what they will have to do on STAAR.
I also used CHAT GPT to make some prompts. It was important to write two kinds of prompts - one from the comprehension strand and one for author's purpose.
Comprehension: Write a letter to a friend explaining the importance of coral reefs. Describe what coral reefs are, their role in marine ecosystems, and the various species that live there. Share any interesting facts you learned from "Coral Reefs" by Erin Spencer, and explain why protecting coral reefs is crucial for the environment. (Chat GPT)
Author's Purpose:Examine the key characteristics of how the writers organized the information in x text. In a letter to your teacher, explain how the writers used these characteristics to effectively communicate their main points and make the text interesting to children. (me)
The Problems during the Process:
The process: I began by collecting samples from the STAAR 2024 release. I wrote down the sentences and analyzed what was wrong with them. I'm writing out what the problems are in case others aren't as big of a grammar geek as me. Then I'm going back to add in the solutions.
So...as I am writing these lessons...I'm on answer choice b right now for the first item in the release test...I realize that NONE of this stuff is in our TEKS. None of it. And it's going to take a lot of time. But the work is really about comprehension...deep sentence comprehension and the impact we have on the reader if we are to communicate meaning. And it's about why we struggle with texts when they aren't written well.
I'm realizing that we don't often know why a sentence is all these good things - clear, correct, coherent, effective. Really, those things are about NOT having the things that are unclear, incorrect, incoherent, ineffective...and there's so many ways to be wrong. But are we naming those things for kids? I think we are in editing because that's easy - capitalization, spelling, usage, punctuation...But are we naming those things for kids in revision? It gets messy because what we are presented with in the samples have MANY problems.
I'm going to go ahead and send this part because I want you to have a beginning. I still have 8 more lessons to create from the samples I derived from the released exam. Geeze. It's overwhelming. I feel like this kind of work needs some serious modeling. I've tried to write it out to plan...but what would happen in class after the modeling is up for grabs because you have to take what kids are telling you?
I can't create responses in a meaningful way because I don't know what they have written or what they would say or how they would struggle. I don't know what they would suggest or notice that I have not found by myself. And they always notice stuff and add to the conversation in ways I can't predict. That's why this work is so messy. That's why there is no script or curriculum. There isn't anything out there that can replace the negotiated construction of meaning with learners in the writing process itself. But...how do we teach people to do this kind of work? And what I've created here might miss some important considerations...or be too complicated...
What I Sent Her
Below - I describe three lessons derived from two answer choices from one question on the STAAR test. These lessons represent MULTIPLE concepts for instruction in the revising process and are very complex for 4th grade. Heck. The sentence revisions are complex for me.
Lesson One: When sentences get it right
2023 4th Grade Release Samples from the Revising Section
Target Sentence: Night after night, he just kept coming back.
This sentence is correct, coherent, clear, and effective. Why? What do you notice? Use processes created by Jeff Anderson.
Lesson Two: Problems with order, pronouns, be verbs, and repetition
It was night after night, and he just kept coming back again.
Grammar/Meaning Background and Context
Problem One: Any time you say "It was..." you're beginning a problem with the reader about clarity. What is "it"? We don't know. And, was is a really passive verb - now we know only that something, /it/, /was/exists. This story - the source text - is about a stray cat who shows up and ends up being a pet. Usually, we'd be talking about the pet as the /it/...but that's not what is happening here in the messy answer choice we are given to evaluate.
Problem Two: the focus in the source text is that the cat keeps coming back. The sentence "it was night after night" and the conjunction and dictate that both that sentence/clause and the next one are of equal importance. But that's not true - the importance is on the second clause - that he just kept coming back again. The clause /it was night after night/ is to emphasize how often the cat returned. It's an adverbial in nature and not needed to be a complete sentence that would cause confusion. The important parts of the phrase are /night after night/ while the /it was/ segments add nothing of value and are best deleted for clarity.
Solution: After kids and teachers have a sample essay, it's time for revision. This happens before anything is edited, by the way. We are only working with changes to meaning.
Step One: Take a highlighter and mark any places where you see that you have used a pronoun and a be verb.
Step Two: The teacher shows her writing and makes this statement: "When the reader comes to sentences with "it was," they may have difficulty understanding what /it/ is talking about because the word could mean anything that has been talked about earlier in the text. The reader can have just about anything in their mind - and they could be wrong. When paired with /was/ or other be verbs, the reader only knows and understands that the pronoun and the be verb mean that something (pronoun) exists (be verb). The writer must be careful that their words express their purpose and meaning. It's ok to use /it was/ if the writer means that something exists. But if the writer means something (subject/actor) specific acts in a certain way...then a common or proper noun must be used instead of a pronoun and an action verb is needed instead of a be verb."
Step Three: The teacher models in their own writing. "Let me show you how."
Here's my paper:
Some may think that places like The Great Pyramids or the Taj Mahal are impressive wonders of the world, but the natural wonders are even more impressive. They are made by "forces of nature, such as blowing wind, shifting glaciers, and flowing water" (p.2).
I can do several things to repair possible confusion.
1) I can make a new subject using the quote: "Forces of nature, such as blowing wind, shifting glaciers, and flowing water" (p.2) create naturally occuring wonders that man had no part in creating.
2) I can use specific verbs to replace the be verbs. Notice that I also used a new verb instead of /are/. I used /create/. I had to use the thesaurus to find a new word phrase for /natural/ that fit with what I am trying to explain in the introduction.
3) I can use proper or common nouns to replace the pronoun: Natural wonders are made by "forces of nature, such as blowing wind, shifting glaciers, and flowing water" (p.2).
The teacher makes an anchor chart of solutions for reducing reader confusion:
*Use common and proper nouns to replace pronouns in the subject position in sentences.
*Use action verbs when possible
*Reverse the sentence order to get the main points up front for the reader.
Ask the kids which sentence seems the most vivid and effective in helping the reader understand the meaning. Which one do they like the best? The teacher will then explain which one of the revisions they will keep and use for the paper.
Step Four: Interactive writing with the whole group: Who has a sentence that they would like us to help revise for clarity? Select a student's paper and project. With the class, read the sentence before, the sentence, and the sentence after to get the gist. Use the anchor chart of solutions to help create several revision options. As a class, select the most effective revision. If there is a new solution, name the solution and add it to the anchor chart.
Step Five: Small group collaboration: In small groups of two or three, students craft revision options and select the most clear and effective option. They are using their own papers.
Step Six: Small Group Debrief: Students visit other small groups to see the original and final revised sentences.
Step Seven: Large Group Debrief: What did you learn in your groups about writing with clarity? What was the most common revision technique? Did you see anything new that we need to add to our chart?
Lesson Three: Awkward order, subject placement, concepts, pronouns, be verbs, and general sentence messes
Sample Sentence from answer choices on 2023 4th grade release: Night after night, coming back is what he just kept doing.
This one is a mess.
Grammar/Meaning Background and Context
Problem One: Inaccurate subjects. Coming back serves as the subject of the sentence which makes it confusing. Are we talking about /coming back/ as a concept? No. The cat is coming back.
Problem Two: Awkward construction with word order. We have a verbal as a subject/concept followed by a passive be verb and then added to a clause that is supposed to give another name (predicate nominative) to the subject /coming back/. What's awkward is that /what he just kept doing/ is also vague because /what/ is the connector. I mean...what does /what/ mean in that instance? Not much. Problem Three: Awkward Order and repetition: In prose, we use subjects and then verbs. He just kept coming back. In poetry, we might say, coming back...he just kept coming back. The repetition serves a purpose and adds tension. But just kept doing is...well, weird. Doing what?
Solution: Enter your writing. Check to make sure you are using conventions of prose writing for verb order. A lot of this is fixed by looking for be verbs and how they are presented. We'd follow the same steps as above. Sometimes we have to engineer this crap because nobody really writes like that. (But after practicing...I realize that I did. Weird. See the draft below.)
Dear Jason,
Remember when we went to Moab, Utah? I just read about similar landforms in Raymond Coutu's book, 7 Natural Wonders. Some may think that places like The Great Pyramids or the Taj Mahal are impressive wonders of the world, but the natural wonders are even more impressive. "Forces of nature, such as blowing wind, shifting glaciers, and flowing water" (p.2) create naturally occurring wonders that man had no part in creating. Some of what I read in the book made me rethink what we saw on our trip.
Modeling: The big idea here is that I'm rethinking our trip. But I have other stuff before the big idea. I can reverse the sentence order, or I can make a phrase to introduce the topic. I can even use a complex sentence to show the relationship between the ideas. Add these options to the anchor chart.
Option One: Coutu's book made me rethink what we saw on our trip. or I'm rethinking our trip after reading Coutu's book.
Option Two: After reading Coutu's book, I'm rethinking what we saw on our trip.
Option Three: Because I read about The Grand Canyon in Coutu's book, I'm rethinking what we saw on our trip.
Invitation to notice order: Look over your sentences and the order of your writing. Is your main point the main clause? Can you reverse the order of the clauses? Can you use an introductory phrase? Can you create a complex sentence to show the reader how your ideas are connected?
Invite students to interactive writing...small group collaboration and debrief...then whole class debrief.
The Ending
Basically - I was overwhelmed and too angry to keep writing. And my fingers are cold because I need to get up and turn on the heater in the sunroom. The squirrels are jumping on the roof and continue to bury their nuts alongside the bluejays just outside the window as if I'm not here gutting it out over grammar and how to help our kids and teachers. Journey, ZZ Top Screamers, and old 80's songs are playing on the Alexa behind the empty crock pot. And the water fountain for Youglie is gurgling in the background peacefully. (Youglie refused to get up this morning and demanded the heating blanket to be cranked up to high. What's he going to do when it snows?)
Y'all. The kind of thinking I've described in the three lessons above takes a lot of time. And it takes a lot of analysis and understanding. And, it takes a fundamental pedagogical shift away from a lot of the scripted crap teachers are supposed to love because they won't have to plan lessons - or that they are provided because people think the field is too stupid and unprepared to really teach. Grrrrr.
I wanna come try out these lessons. I wanna see what kids do. But I'd really love to see what a teacher could do with what I've written...I want to see the kind of impact you'd have on your kids and their writing and engagement in school with this type of approach. I dare you. Then we will celebrate positive impact together.
This is a GREAT assignment. Don't get the wrong picture. What we have to consider is the POINT of using the activity. And we have to consider the little people, the audience.
/ed/ does say three sounds. And there is a reason. There are rules. All kinds of them. And all kinds of oddballs that don't follow rules. (Should I dress as an oddball for Halloween? Oh - I'd look like myself. Nevermind.)
Teaching and Leaving Breadcrumbs:
Gretchen Bernabei knows the importance of leaving breadcrumbs. So did Hansel and Gretel. But like Hansel and Gretel - we have to use something more permanent than bread. The cues have to remain so learners can use the ideas when we aren't there anymore.
Here's a story to explain. I had a hard time with Algebra. Dutifully, I took notes. Wrote down all the teacher had chalked onto the dark green board at the front of the room. I could do a problem or two of the even numbers while I was in class. But when I got home, my notes were no help. I could no longer remember, hear, or see what had happened between the lines in the notes. And I didn't really understand what was happening on the lines in the notes.
The instruction on the process was gone. And I was lost. There were no breadcrumbs for me to follow. And I couldn't look up the answers because only the odd ones had the answers in the back of the book. And I still wouldn't know how to get there.
Many times, we are teaching the WHAT. But we leave out the why and the how.
Teaching the Why and How: Point One about Phonics Rules
A group of English I one experts helped draft an example of how they will help students with inferences, text evidence, and writing.
The heart is our brainstorming for WHY we are teaching the lesson and WHY students should care.
The details/means/matters chart is the WHAT, the answers for ELAR.
The arrows below are the brainstorming for future questions and bullet items that will go on the anchor charts and modeling books.
The reason that we knew to do this is that all of us were working with targeted students - observing them during the activity. We asked four questions:
What are you doing?
Why?
Where are you stuck or struggling?
How are you fixing that?
H, the kid I was working with was having no trouble in reading the text or understanding it. But he was struggling about how to tell where his ideas went - "Does this go in the means or matters box?"
In the video at the end, I'll ineloquently. and in terrible handwriting, model the same kind of thing for the phonics lesson on /ed/ sounds. I'll post the video later...still rendering.
Back to /ed/ Phonics Example
So, when teaching phonics lessons, the student I was working with struggled with how we discern the patterns in the words. They could divide the words into the right columns by sound - but they didn't know WHY the words HAD those sounds.
So let's stop and think here for a moment...The student was successful with the phonics activity sort because they already knew how to say the words. Isn't the point of phonics to be able to decode the words? Erm...yes.
The point of this activity is to help with critical thinking and analysis - to infer the pattern or rules that govern the sounds. It's not really phonics anymore.
And...I was wrong about my hypothesis in the video. In looking at the sounds and letter patterns, I tried consonant and vowel patterns, short vs long patterns, and consonant pair patterns. Turns out that the rule is even more/less nuanced. The /ed/ says /t/ when the word is a verb that ends in consonant that has an unvoiced sound. See here for a more detailed explanation.
Playing Out the Rule in Context: Point Two
So let's imagine a kid is reading some words they don't know. Let's say it is even a list and not really reading a real book.
twisted
wished
asked
banged
pressed
Here's what they'd have to think:
1. Take off the ed.
2. Is the word a verb? Yes
3. Is the last sound of the verb an unvoiced sound? Yes - Say /t/ for the /ed/ sound
4. Is the last sound of the verb voiced? Yes - Say /d/ for the /ed/ sound
5. Is the last sound of the verb a d or a t? Yes - Say /ed/ or /id/ for the /ed/ sound. (Depending on your dialect, you say /id/ or /ed/. As if that's not already confusing enough.)
And really. Is that sequence of thinking and questioning what we want kids to do when they are reading words or anything else? Did you even know or realize the three sounds and the rules that govern them? Did your teacher ever tell you that? Did you remember the rules if you did learn it at some point?
No. If you did - you are a linguist. A scientist for language.
2nd Graders aren't Linguists
And shouldn't be. And we, teachers and literacy leaders, shouldn't be using or promoting linguistic pedagogy in the name of "Science of Reading."
Is there value in understanding patterns? Yes. But it's not singularly about reading words and comprehending.
Is there value in understanding and knowing rules. Yes. On the playground for most of them.
But when we are reading words like "wish," we are reading them in sentences and stories to make and use ideas. If the word is "wished," a kid is going to know that the text is probably a fairy tale from the context and genre characteristics. If they say /wishid/, then they are having a vocabulary problem not a phonics problem. And who cares if they say /wisht/ or /wishd/? The way the sounds come out in the mouth, the right thing will probably happen because of physiology or dialect. NOT because the kid knows the word ends in an unvoiced pattern.
Y'all. We need to really examine the purpose of our lessons: HOW we teach them and the impact of our actions.
Making /ed/ words about rules is about word calling. That's not READING. And it damages how kids think about what it means to read.
We should NOT be teaching linguistic science to little kids. We should be teaching them how to make meaning from and with the symbols as they appear in context and use.
It seems like a lot happens around the dinner table, coffee tables, and gatherings of folks.
The summer after third grade, I sat at the formica and chrome table to watch my mom teach my brother David how to read. The harvest gold refrigerator hummed nearby. The same one under which I used to hide my HILCOA vitamins.
By fifth grade, I was assigned a first grader to help learn to read. At the antique dining room table we bought from an estate sale from down the street, Mom helped me create manipulatives, handwriting paper, and flash cards from a book called Recipe for Reading. I still have the book...tattered and faded.
During college, I heard a sermon on Romans 1 after the Lord's Supper Table. Reprobate minds and stuff. I remember thinking about what this meant for reading and reasoning. As I pondered, all the ideas were the same ones we saw in Figure 19 many years later and all the things in the Comprehension Strand beginning in 2019. Comprehension became a lifetime obsession.
Doneice Ray allowed me to teach a first grade class as a long term sub when I graduated in '91. Wow. What an experience. Did I really know how to teach a person how to read? Did I even know about the Guided Reading table? Nope. The next semester, I was honored to teach for her in fifth grade. I stayed long enough to have those former first graders in my fifth grade class. By that time, I was figuring out a few things.
Thirty three years later sitting at the granite bartop next to stainless steel appliances that don't last 10 years, I'm still figuring things out and the search continues for supporting comprehension in all readers and thinkers.
Since retirement...I've been struggling. There's this scene at the end of Saving Private Ryan that summarizes my thoughts. Have I been and done what I've been gifted and charged to be? Have I earned it?
And then this summer... Tremaine Brown, Jacob Breeden, and I put our heads together on a project over a piece of brown butcher paper in the dining room at Shi Lee's Soul Food. You see, Tremaine tries to make The Heights a better place for his daughter and all those around him. He's fed people so their tables and tummies are full. He's made sure they have clothes. He makes sure they have school supplies. He makes sure they have fun at holidays. But how could he help them with literacy? And we all know that success in school is complicated. Lots of reasons kids and teachers struggle. With the Vessel and Unity Learning Communities, we want to tackle all the barriers to literacy.
In January, we'll begin with 12 kids. 5th and 6th graders that struggle with reading and writing. A counselor will lead a group of four teachers - three kids per adult. And a "grandma" figure will be the mentor for all of them. The community at the Warford will partner with us.
As students of AISD, they've had all the literacy interventions. Powerful initial instruction and remediation. But yet, there are those that still struggle and aren't qualified for services like special education or emerging bilingual support. And there are those that have struggles related to society and living life in this century. We'll dig into those issues together, solving and supporting the struggles together.
Honestly, it's a giant experiment. The Amarillo Area Foundationhas funded a portion of what we need to begin...and we are honored by their investment in our children's future. This month and the next, we are meeting with teachers and counselors to collaborate on a set of challenges, processes, and key vocabulary and theoretical underpinnings for our approach. In January, we'll begin meeting with kids...thought partners and co-creators with them to cause their own success and growth.
Along the way, we'll all be writing and documenting the process and outcomes...telling the story of what happens around these new tables. Won't you join us? Learn more, connect, and join us here: https://www.beblessedbythevessel.org/home
I've been meaning to write about this for a while. But by now, many people have seen the scores and papers on STAAR exams. Very few essays have needed rescoring. Everything is going to be ok for both content scoring and mechanics. The scoring machine isn't the problem. Instructional relevance is.
Yes - there are many things we still don't know about the language models used and how machine scoring actually works. That IS a problem but one of transparency from the agency, not for instructional implications.
So let's think about how we can USE scoring realities to help make the process meaningful to those we serve. Here are five points that explain why we directly teach why machine scoring is relevant to daily life:
1. All social media works with algorithms. You want to be seen and heard? You use terms and structures that the algorithm values. The scoring machine is looking for key terms from the text and prompt.
2. Things like Netflix and Youtube give you content based on yourbehaviors. What you do changes what you are presented. You want to understand how to do the same for readers - even machines? Learn how to respond to reader needs with your text.
3. Search engines work on what is promoted and searched and clicked frequently. Want a high score? Write what the rubric promotes and seeks. Want a high score? Use what's in the source text that fits the prompt. Scoring works like a giant Family Feud. Other students have already responded to this prompt with the source text and answer. The scoring machine "surveyed" a BUNCH of student essays and knows what most writers said and how the people scored their responses. Comprehend the text and the prompt. Use the text stuff in the written response, summarize how it fits into the text, and say in original thoughts about the connection to the ideas in the prompt.
4. Search engines use key words to scan content and then matches those terms relevant to user's search terms. Want to be "seen" by the engine? Use terms that match what people want to see. For example, I've been writing for Sirius Education Solutions about thinking and reasoning in a project called Page to Pixel. There's a guy who reads over my stuff, restructures WHERE certain terms appear in the text, adds terms throughout, and chooses special search terms to embed in the code. I have no idea how the code works, but I can see that the key stuff goes in the intro, key connections to the topic are spread in each portion of the headings and body text, and the key stuff also goes into the conclusion. Sound familiar? We trace meaning and coherence through word choice and how we connect our topics through organizational structure. So, want a high score? Use key terms from the prompt and text in the intro and conclusion. Thread those ideas through each body paragraph with text that shares the same ideas/synonyms/textual context. The guy who edits my work for this puts these terms in bold so I can see how they thread through the text. I can see the connection and repetition of concepts through the entire text.
5. Companies use machine scoring to preview resumes, cover letters, and communications. Priorities are given to text that includes what the company is looking for in the match of personnel to the job description and company goals. Understanding machine scoring is intensely personal and relevant to all those who are seeking employment.
Machine scoring isn't new. Digital evaluation going on in the background of almost everything we do and see. And teaching without including explicit lessons on the relevance of these scoring machines isn't in the TEKS, but we'd be remiss if we didn't address the reality directly.
Who is sponsoring the content? How is the sponsor benefitting from the article or association with the author?
And questions to ask about the format:
Examine the title for loaded words and bias: Note the subtext after the colon in the title of the first article "Here's What's Really Going On." It hints at public deception at the worst and public ignorance at the least.
Examine sponsorship and ad placements: The first article is sponsored by "The Wellness Company." The video story thumbnail begins with a picture of the kit the company sells. Toward the end of the article, there is a large colored ad about the kit. The last paragraphs of the article discuss how to "thwart the plan" (to make you sick?) and that you are a fool if "hope" is your "strategy." Links are then given to provide a better strategy by buying the wellness kid. And at the end, the article concludes with a linked call to action to purchase the kit. Calls to action = persuasion. Commercials.
Examine citations and references: There are no citations or references to where we can find the data reported in the article. Note, there are hyperlinks that take you to a paper. And the steps for evaluating the source are critical here as well. Note that citations and references must also be validated for reliability, validity, and credibility. Note that the executive summary clipped into the article is on page 8 of the brief. But also note the end of pages 2 and 5. And note the language in the beginning of the article...it's an argumentative text - which changes how you read it. It's not purely informational.
Examine how other titles are referenced and when they change. The way the text is presented, the following text seems that it came from the NYT. But the article has only copied the font and headline with the introduction to the article and followed with their own text. An honest representation would have made this a different kind of graphic feature like a picture with a caption. The way it appears is misleading and an example of poor scholarship and attribution.
Examine links and referenced texts. Seek the original source. Note that the NTI paper references a "fictional scenario" that "unfolded in a series of short news videos that participants reacted to," (page 10). Note who the participants were on page nine. The article is about a roundtable discussions on a fictional scenario of a monkeypox outbreak and the suggestions for dealing with such an issue. Their findings aren't necessarily bad...but the way the data is used doesn't exactly match the original purpose.
Note the stuff at the bottom about how comments are used. Facebook. Algorithms driving folks to the site = more hype and more clicks for the advertiser. (I'm being biased here because I'm irritated.)
When we look at the NYT article...it's information that has quite a different stance and information than the first source. The experts mentioned are different and have different purposes. Note that links go directly to the CDC and the WHO, but also links to other NYT articles and Reuters.
All of the same steps for evaluating the source and genre need to be followed for the NYT article. But dang, guys...there's a lot to notice here about genre features, bias, author's purpose, rhetoric, logical fallacies...it's not just English Language Arts. Critical reading is a moral and international imperative.
