No open-access location is known for this record yet.
No open-access location is known for this record yet.
Her seventh-grade language arts students didn’t ask, Why are we doing this? Why should I care about reading this? (most of the time), but Emily could read those questions in their writing. She could see it in the ways they did and did not participate in class discussions. Emily had become skilled at conducting read-alouds/think-alouds during her first year of teaching middle school English language arts (ELA). Her go-to phrase was “good readers . . . ,” as in, “good readers make inferences in order to glean fuller meaning from the text,” or “good readers use context clues to figure out unfamiliar words in a text.” Over time, she watched many students become more strategic in the reading they did in class. As her first and second years went on, however, she became increasingly dissatisfied with this type of instruction. It was not as rigorous as she (or the state) envisioned. It was not helping most of her students develop a love for literature. It was not helping them to critically analyze literary texts or to use language to communicate those analyses. And, it was not revealing to students what makes the work of ELA different from the work of science or history or other disciplines. Many students who came to her class were already making inferences and using context clues in their own reading. Strategy instruction just was not enough to build their academic literacy skills. To further complicate matters, Emily became increasingly aware of the challenges that students experienced when reading texts of other genres and disciplines. Though many students were competent readers of novels, especially ones that they chose, they struggled to read poetry. The
Loading…
Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 33 citations exist upstream.
Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.
Imported from OpenAlex (CC0) — nothing here is generated.