Transcript of an Online Discussion About “Teaching Readers Who Struggle,” an Article by Gwynne Ellen Ash

The following comments were posted to ROL’s Online Communities bulletin board between April 15, 2002, and September 25, 2002. They are presented here without editing, as they were posted by ROL readers.

Are there any good computer programs or games that you could recommend that would help her with reading comprehension and give her that immediate feedback that she is improving.

Any help would be appreciated.

Although I am no technological guru, I do not know of any computer programs that can provide instruction in comprehension strategies for your daughter. Most programs, like workbooks, provide practice rather than instruction.

I am guessing (and I hate to do so without doing an assessment) that what might help your daughter's reading is some explicit instruction in comprehension strategies. If you are willing to do a little reading, you might want to look at Strategies that Work by Harvey and Goudvis. This book outlines what strategies good readers use while reading, and it includes lessons for teaching the strategies.

I would like to think that your daughter's English or language arts teacher might be teaching her these strategies as well. Perhaps after reading the book you could talk to her teacher about what strategy instruction she offers and how you could complement it with work at home.

I wish you the best of luck with helping your daughter with her reading. She's already a step ahead by having a parent who's willing to work with her.

Reading partnerships do seem to increase motivation for reading not only with EL students but with reluctant readers. I have seen several struggling readers who do not choose to read independently become actively involved in reading with a partner or small group. While this is a significant result, I'm still struggling with the quality of the talk that surrounds the reading. I know that Literature Circles (Daniels) trains students to discuss their reading, however, my students' talk continues to be sparse and very literal.

I'm writing this reply for a second time becasue I had forgotten to enter my name so the !@#(& computer made me go back. Of course when I went back it erased my entry (can we work on that, tech guys?). I hope I'm half as coherent this second time as I was the first time.

I have found that Raphael and McMahon's model of fishbowl discussions are a great way to have kids start to think about what makes a good discussion. One group has a discussion while the rest of the class watches, takes notes, and critiques their performance.

I saw another valuable technique used in Gay Ivey's college classroom once. Sha had had her students trying to have discussions of children's books they had read. No luck, very superficial, so she grouped students together by the movie they'd seen most recently and told them to start talking. They went on to have deep meaningful converstations about the movies. Then she had them share what kinds of things the groups talked about. They created a list of good discussion topics (what they liked/dislked, favorite characters, how they might have changed the plot, how it reminded them of other movies/books, etc.) and then they talked about how they could talk about their books in the same way. They went back to their discussion groups and had agreat discussion.

I've had teachers do very successful combinations of the two techniques. In a fishbowl arrangement, select the students for the fishbowl group based on a shared favorite tv show (e.g., Malcom in the Middle, the Simpsons, The Ozzbornes, etc.). Ask the students to talk about the show. Have the other students record what KINDS of things they talk about. Then debrief as a class about what kinds of things they talked about and how you can talk about a book in the same way.

I think that Jo Worthy's work has been key in showing us how important the social element is in kids bonding with literacy. I hope that these ideas might be helpful in encouraging your kids to moving on to deeper discussion.

I am a literacy support teacher who tutors 7th grade students who have been retained at Roosevelt Middle School in San Diego. The majority of these students are learning English as an additional language.

I recognize Gwynne Ash's 5-strand framework for teaching reading to struggling middle school readers because it so closely resembles the approach of San Diego City Schools' in the classrooms of the 6th and 7th graders retained by the district. Within a daily 3-hour literacy block, teachers are attempting the 5 classroom practices recommended by Ash: daily oral or shared reading; guided reading in flexible groups (teacher-led); word study in guided groups; independent reading and writing; and explicit comprehension strategy instruction. The district has been experimenting with format, but generally aims to have these practices occur within a workshop structure: 1-hour Reader's Workshop; 1-hour Writer's Workshop; and 1-hour Word Study Workshop. Each classroom received $5,000 to finance a classroom library.

Because the program is new this year, because the structure has changed along the way, and because professional training is occurring simultaneously, it is much too soon to ascertain the effectiveness of the program. However, anecdotally, based upon my interaction with these students, I am seeing progress: students with histories of chronic truancy and disengagement from school attend regularly, read independently for up to an hour, become engaged in books, talk about books, and improve both their comprehension and fluency. The guided reading groups appear to be particularly beneficial.

If the program is deemed "successful", it will be difficult to identify the specific factors that led to the success; this group of students receive (in addition to the 3-hour literacy block) regular tutoring in reading and some counseling for the myriad of social challenges they contend with.

Moreover, I cannot help but recall the insight the Benchmark School has been able to provide in helping older students whose reading skills significantly lag behind their peers' skills---the intervention needs to come early, for an extended period of time, and in conjunction with significant social and emotional counseling. Otherwise, any gains seen early on WON'T TRANSFER to students' academic lives later on.

So, I worry that we're not doing nearly enough to promote lasting, meaningful changes in our students' lives. Doing less would obviously be unacceptable. Yet, perhaps our efforts might only provide students with a short-term benefit (if that.) So where does that leave us? Where does that leave our kids?

Thanks so much for sharing your response and your knowledge with me. Your program sounds wonderful, and I would love to see it in action. As I say at the end of the article, there's nothing particularly new in the framework; many teachers are already doing many if not all of the types of instruction discussed. However, as you point out, for teachers to meet the needs of struggling readers, we need commitment, consistency, continuance, and comfort. Your school's program seems to provide all of these things for the students, and unlitmately I think it is only the synthesis of all that you are doing that will prove successful (none of the components alone would be enough).

Hearing about programs like yours is inspiring to me because it demonstrates that good programs for readers who struggle, like the framework, grow out of a combination of teachers' experiences, students' needs, and community and school contexts. Ultimately, there is no one-size-fits-all solution. As I say in the article, students need "literacy instruction in a systematic way, but a way based on the students and their needs, not a predetermined instructional sequence applied homogeneously to a heterogeneous class of students."

When I was writing this piece, I hoped that the framework might serve almost as a final checklist for planning, so that teachers could check their plans and say to themselves, "Did I include fluency instruction? Did I include some work study? Did I include time for kids to talk about their reading with other kids (without me poking my nose in)?" etc., etc., etc. In a sense any type of instructional program (basal-based, literature-based, inquiry-based) could still do a gut-check to make sure that all of the bases are getting covered. And I just to simplify that process for teachers a little bit; goodness knows all teachers could always use a little more time.

Initially, I chose to read "Teaching Readers Who Struggle: A Pragmatic Middle School Framework," because I was curious. I wanted to compare my district's Workshop model with the ideas presented in this article, but as I read I questioned a few things. The framework presented by Ash suggests teachers have autonomy to create their own instructional activities and to allocate time for instruction based on students needs. How do you meet the needs of your students if you are required to confer with your students daily? Daily, student-teacher conferences impacts how much time can be allocated for strategic reading instruction. I would like some suggestions for this issue.

Additionally, I was wondering what support is given for 1st year classroom teachers who are expected to use the workshop model? As teachers of reading do we need more instruction in assessing struggling readers and learning what instructional activities will address their specific needs? Is the quality of teacher professional development a key factor for implementing effective instructional practices in a workshop framework? What is the standard for quality professional development?

As a teacher, I agree with the idea of being pragmatic. In order to meet the many needs of our students, many ideas and theories must be explored to develop curriculum for literacy instruction. Maybe, I like the workshop framework because it facilitates the opportunity of presenting varied instructional activities.

I thank you for sharing your concerns (and I'm glad that you were curious).

As I understand your first question, you wonder how can you meet the students' needs when you are conferencing all the time? Your concern that "Daily, student-teacher conferences impacts how much time can be allocated for strategic reading instruction. I would like some suggestions for this issue." is exactly why the teachers I was working with were dissatisfied with the workshop model. They felt there were many strategies that many kids needed more intesive and longer lasting instruction on (often, even the "gifted" readers needed this instruction for more difficult texts). So we went to a small group organization which gave them more instructional contact time with each kid (more time even that solely whole class instruction with lots of guided practice).

In the framework as suggested, teachers would not engage in regularly scheduled individual conferences. Instead they would meet with students in flexible instructional groups for guided reading instruction. Unlike the workshop model, the focus would be on working with 4-5 students with shared needs or interests (depending on the organization of the group).

I think your concerns regarding professional development are particularly meaningful. I think that good literacy professional development (1) grows out of teachers' concerns, (2) is based on students' needs, (3) is longterm and connected to the school and its context, and (4) develops relationships among teachers that fosters collegial planning, support, and instruction.

In all of my school situtations, I was/am working with experienced teachers who were/are unsatisfied with their instruction and with their knowledge of reading assessment and instruction, so professional development was/is a big component in helping them revise their instruction to meet the needs of their kids better.

For example, the group of teachers who I work with here in Delaware meets twice a month for three hours after school (we've been meeting for over a year and a half now). We read professional books and articles (based on their interests for improving their instruction). We sometimes read shared texts (like Strategies that Work), but we also do book clubs where teachers are free to pursue their own individual interests. Sometimes the professional development meetings are very inservice-like (I teach a three-hour class on using instructional strategies); other times they are a time for planning and reflection (teachers share their failures in attemtpting a new strategy or activity, other teachers brainstorm possibly solutions, and we plan how to try it again in a different way). Sometimes we just talk about what we're learning and how we think it might (or might not) fit into our instruction. In addition to this afterschool time, I go into the teachers' classrooms as coach, mentor, model, co-teacher, observer (whatever they would like). We're currently trying to work with the principal so that next year they can do the same for each other as well. All of the teachers may enroll with me (at the University) as an independent study to earn graduate credit if they choose to do so. Almost all have. This group is professional development that is TEACHER-driven, and ultimately, I think all professional development that is teacher-driven is really driven by students' needs. And that makes it pragmatic 'cause it focuses on making things work!

So the first year teacher? Great question. Without a mentor, first year teachers might be more comfortable with a structured approach (such as using a basal/literature anthology), but even within that approach, he/she can use the framework to try to balance all of the five instructional components because the teacher's guide will offer too much, and taking pieces often results in not covering all of the students' needs.

I believe, and I hope the framework promotes, that teachers are all very different, as are students. Some are very comfortable designing everything from scratch; in fact it's the only way they'd want to teach. Others feel secure in well-designed lessons from others that they can adapt to their children's needs. Recognizing teachers as professionals means that recognizing their professional decision-making capability. That capability grows with experience and professional and practical knowledge. Shouldn't teachers be scaffolded too?

I hope this response wasn't too long, and I hope that I addressed your concerns in a meaningful way. The more I talk to teachers, the more I realize that the teachers in my dissertation study are not as alone as they think they are. Many people are concerned about teaching struggling readers, and there are no easy answers. However, we seem to be more alike in our perceptions of our kids and their needs (and our own as teachers) than we are different.

I read with interest the article posted by Gwynne Ellen Ash regarding struggling middle school readers (Teaching Readers Who Struggle: A Pragmatic Middle School Framework), as I work as a reading specialist with a small class of retained 8th grade students. I thought the article offered several variations of useful teaching strategies, i.e., Reciprocal Teaching Plus, as well as the comprehension strategies of Harvey, and the lit club model. Although I have not used the Reciprocal Teaching Plus, I have used most of the other strategies mentioned in the article and I agree that a varied approach addressing the needs for word study, guided work, independent reading time, fluency building activities, and comprehension strategy instruction is appropriate. I do all of this within the workshop model. I think the workshop model is effective, and in fact the only part of that model that Ms. Ash does not seem to feel works for classroom teachers is the conferring. I agree that trying !

to confer with 150 students daily is impossible. It is necessary to prioritize by need, so that those with the greater need are seen more often. For those students the one-on-one can be very important. The others I group in guided groups of similar need. It is difficult, but I don't think it is any more difficult than the rather complicated schedule used as an example in the article. I think the main problem for most English teachers is trying to do any of this, especially with struggling readers, in a one-hour block of time. English classes should be at least 90 minutes, and preferably two hours every day, something which our site provides for those classes of significantly below grade level readers. Another point I wish to make about this article, as well as several other articles I have read recently regarding struggling readers, is the need for some sort of definition of what a struggling reader is. When I read the list of books provided in the exemplar in this article, !

I wonder what grade level this is, as most of these texts are at a

seventh grade reading level, or higher. My struggling readers are eighth grade second language students reading mostly around third and fourth grade level at best, despite attending schools in the U.S. all of their lives. While I still do all of the activities mentioned in the framework, the progress is very slow, and the needs for one-on-one are much greater. In our district, San Diego Unified, a struggling reader is one who is reading three or more grade levels below where he/she should be reading. It would be nice to have a better sense of what is meant by struggling readers, not only regarding grade level discrepancies, but also second language issues. It is great to see any article that zeroes in on the needs of this grade level group that is often missing in discussions of remedial reading.

First thank you so much for taking the time to read my article and to provide such a thoughtful response. I was so interested in having this online discussion because I wanted to hear what teachers (other than those I was working with directly) thought of the framework. Your comments were very helpful in having me think about the piece.

I agree to that part of the issue with teaching reading effecdtively in the middle school is time, and if I were king (or Queen) of the world all middle school kids would have at least a two-period language arts block where they would take integrated language arts instruction. Unfortunately Irving and Connors middle school survey indicated that less than a third of middle schools provide such instruction to their kids.

With that difficulty in mind, I am glad that you are able to make reading workshop work for you and your kids. You are obviously a very skilled and well-read teacher who commits a lot of time to planning and instruction, which is incredibly laudable. I hope that you do not feel that this model was meant to unseat workshops for teachers who find them successful. Instead, it was trying to offer a more structured alternative for teachers who, unlike you, did not feel that the worksop model helped them get to, "word study, guided work, independent reading time, fluency building activities, and comprehension strategy instruction...."

Research indicates that many teachers using workshops are incredibly uncomfortable with the lack of "instruction" they are providing their kids. That does not mean that workshops don't work; it means that they're not working for them. Remember the schedule shared was just one example of how teachers use the planning framework; it is not a program for teachers to implement. If teachers did find the "rather complicated schedule" overwhelming, it would not be useful for them, but the framework might still help them plan for all aspects of instruction in their teaching, whether in workshop, basal, or literature-based organization.

Sorry if this seems disjointed, I'm trying to make sre that I address all of your concerns. In my original draft, I defined a struggling reader as any student who was having diffculty reading school-based texts successfully, usually those reading at least two grade levels below expected level. However, as you point out, and as Gay Ivey found in her dissertation study, middle school readers are multi-faceted and some of their needs (such as language learning) may interfere with school-based literacies, but they may be very successful in literacies outside of the classroom.

I see struggling readers as those who, without instructional intervention by a committed teacher, will not be successful in academic literacy as older adolescents and adults. They will not complete high school or they wil have great difficulty in college. Perhaps they will have difficulty in the career of their choice because of their difficulties with more structured literacies, like those of the workplace (or worse they will have limited choices of a career becasue of their difficulties). That is my working definition, but I think you're right, it is something that we as educators need to talk about and agree on.

Finally, I am somewhat confused by your questions about the book sets provided in the article. You say that most of the books are above the seventh grade level; the text sets are supposed to be mixed sets that reflect the range of literacy development in a typical, heterogeneous middle grades classroom.

For example, two of the book groupings only had books BELOW the seventh-grade level (School Trouble, Fitting In), and other sets included books ranging from 4th-YA grade levels (New and Different Worlds), 5th-YA (Growing Up), and 6th-YA (Breaking the Silence and Violence and Responsibility). Although the books in Breaking the Silence and Violence and Responsibility are more difficult, they are also developmentally appropriate for 8th and 9th grade students, and therefore they still provide texts at least two grade levels below the expected instructional level. I would appreciate it if you would clarify your concerns, so that I can try to respond in a way that might be helpful to you and your students.

I hope that my response is not too piecemeal and that the pieces fit together in a coherent whole. I look forward to hearing your response to the response, and I hope that I can help clarify your concerns with the books sets.

Yours is a good question. I find, and recent research supports, that middle school readers who have difficulty with school-based literacies are usally very interested in becoming better readers, but they are often frustrated with the lack of instruction and support that they receive to become better readers. However, in my experience (as well as I think the experience of many of the authors below), students--who are given challenging instruction with high expectations that helps them become more independent as reader--are very excited to be involved. They relish opportunities to be experts (like my sixth graders who loved being peer tutors to the kindergarten students) and to demonstrate their knowledge/expertise in areas that might not be valued in school (like video games, sports, music, etc.). Roe has suggested that work with students who have dificulty reading must focus on enablement and engagement; that is, we need to interest these students, but most importantly we need to provide them with rigorous instruction that will enable them to become successful school learners.

Good luck with your program and with teaching in my old Tejas stomping grounds. Feel free to email with more questions.

Gwynne

References for more info:

Curtis, M. E., & Longo, A. M, (1999). When adolescents can’t read: Methods and materials that work. Cambridge, MA: Brookline Books.

Ivey, G. (1999b). A multicase study in the middle school. Complexities among young adolescent readers. Reading Research Quarterly, 34 (2), 172-192.

Kos, R. (1991). Persistence of reading disabilities: The voices of four middle school students. American Educational Research Journal, 28 (4), 875-895.

McCray, A. D., Vaughn, S., & Neal, L. V. I. (2001). Not all students learn to read by third grade: Middle school students speak out about their reading disabilities. The Journal of Special Education, 35 (1), 17-30.

Roe, M. F. (1997). Combining enablement and engagement to assist students who do not read and write well. Middle School Journal, 28 (3), 35-41.

Tatum, A. W. (2000). Breaking down barriers that disenfranchise African American adolescent readers in low-level tracks. Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 44 (1), 52-64.