C. What Role Does Writing, Speaking, and Listening Play?
Reading is just one part of the equation when considering the improvement of student literacy needs. In building the whole package we must consider students’ abilities to also:
- write fluently
- speak clearly
- listen intently
After all, learning is language based and in order to learn we must be able to use all these processes concurrently.
Unfortunately when middle schools were developed, in a switch from the junior high format, there was a fundamental shift in the emphasis placed on the amount of time that was being spent teaching reading to fifth and sixth grade students. In theory, this shift to having an integrated language arts program resulted in reading and language arts being combined into one class, requiring teachers to instruct students in each of the four areas mentioned earlier: reading, writing, speaking, and listening during a single 45 to 50 minute time block rather than as separate entities of reading and English (Kirk). Understanding when and for what purpose this shift occurred can help us understand what steps may need to be taken to improve our ability to better facilitate student literacy needs.
So far we have a pretty good understanding of what literacy is and what skills a student needs to be literate. We also know a little about what we have been doing to promote those skills in the classroom, but what other factors affect student literacy?
II. The “T” Factor
Most of us have probably heard of the The X Factor, the UK’s largest talent search competition as a result of watching America’s version of the popular television show American Idol. A phrase you may not have heard, however, is the “T” Factor – this author’s coined phrase for an opportunity that should be sweeping our nations classrooms. Linguistic literacy skills developed as a result of reading books and writing papers have long been the standard by which teachers have measured students’ comprehension and application skills; invaluable tools used to sustain and build intellect. However, the use of technology in the classroom to promote the skills of reading, writing, speaking, and listening has grown in recent years compelling educators to reevaluate curriculum programs that focus solely on reading books and writing papers. Despite data reports that 70% of American K-4 educators are teaching reading more than six hours per day, a statistic significantly higher than the international average of 25%, reading literacy has not improved (Fahser-Herro and Steinkuehler 55).
Could it be that the students we teach today are not the same students that teachers have been teaching for generations? Some researchers believe so! In fact, children growing up today, the so called “digital natives”, have become so accustomed to communicating with the use of digital technology it is essential that our educational system evolve to meet their needs (Fahser-Herro and Steinkuehler). One problem associated with this shift towards technology based learning is the gap that is left between the students’ abilities to assimilate new skills utilizing technology and the abilities of teachers to develop innovative methods of teaching these students and challenging their abilities.
A. What the Statistics Say.
A research study conducted in North Carolina involving 4,000 middle school students in grades six through eight in the states after school program produced some interesting facts about the student/technology relationship. The results cannot be generalized to all middle school students because of the nature of the population chosen, but they do yield some interesting facts. Some of the facts concerning the studies reliability giving it considerable credibility include:
- Students from all North Carolina counties completed one of two questionnaires.
- 63% of students received free or reduced lunches compared to a statewide average of 39%.
- The sample included 49% females and 51% males.
- 49% of the participants were African American; 40% were Caucasian, 11% Hispanic, Asian, and other ethnic groups.
- More than 85% of the students scored at or above grade level on standardized reading and math tests (Spires et al. 498).
The following is a summation of some of the results:
- Students reported significantly more computer usage at school than at home.
- Students reported significantly more computer usage at home than in their after school program and more at the program than the public library (Spires et al. 500).
- Basic Computer Skills (the use of a word processor and spreadsheets):
- Students were significantly more knowledgeable than not in the following word processing abilities:
- write and compose a paper
- find and replace text
- use automatic spell check
- make a word bold or italicized
- change page margins
- Students were significantly more likely to have learned these skills in the classroom with the exception of bolding or italicizing text.
- Students were significantly more knowledgeable than not in the following spreadsheet abilities:
- creating a file and entering data
- using formulas
- copying formulas from one row to another
- using a sort feature
- changing column widths
- Students were significantly more likely to have learned these skills in school than not (Spires et al. 500-02).
- Technology Use for Storing Work and Productivity:
- 79% of students reported they used PowerPoint to create or share information.
- 83% of students used Paint/Drawing/Design Programs to create or share information.
- 86% of students used the Internet to find information instead of trying to find a book with the same information (Spires et al. 502-06).
This last statistic provides a glaring look at the differences that exist between the students today and those in the classroom just 25 years ago. The North Carolina study further reported on student technology use for communication and entertainment with the results shown in Figure 1.
Figure 1: Student Usage of Technology for Entertainment and Communication
Percentage of Respondents
Very Not
Often Often Often Never M SD N
How often do you use technology for the following types of entertainment?
Playing video games 44.8 27.6 19.6 8.0 1.91 0.98 2111
Playing Web-based games 38.0 29.8 23.3 8.8 2.03 0.98 2108
Getting or listening to music 58.6 24.0 11.3 6.2 1.65 0.91 2097
How often do you use the following types of technology for communication?
E-mail 34.6 21.4 19.7 24.2 2.34 1.19 2050
Non-e-mail Internet technologies (e.g.,
chat room, instant messaging, etc.) 46.9 20.8 12.2 20.1 2.06 1.19 2042
Cell phones 47.8 22.9 14.5 14.8 1.97 1.11 2046
(Spires et al. 504).
To further probe and examine student responses to the question, “Which activities do you like best?” t-tests, a test used to assess the means of two groups statistical differences, were conducted using the following variables:
- working on projects by themselves
- doing research on the Internet
- listening to the teacher explain things
- working on projects in a group
- using computers
- doing worksheets (Spires et al.505).
The results of this test are shown in Figure 2.
Figure 2: Mean Scores and Standard Deviations of Activities Most Liked in School by
Respondents
(Spires et al. 505).
C. What Students are Saying.
As a result of this study four broad interpretive themes emerged from the student perspectives survey and include:
- “Do U Know Us?”
- “Engage Us”
- “Prepare Us for Jobs of the Future”
- “Let’s Not Get Left Behind” (Spires et al. 506).
Some of the highlights from those themes are:
-
What researchers learned is that students use a variety of technologies outside the classroom in authentic personal and social ways. These students viewed their activities as integral to developing skills they would need to pursue employment that utilized 21st century skills and that because their needs were not being met in school to reinforce and improve those skills they felt alienated to some degree. Students expressed their desire to explore more opportunities as well as some concern in reference to teachers who did not understand what a big part technology played in their lives outside of school. Although students complained about their inability to utilize technology for entertainment in the classroom, it is important to note that these same students on occasion used programs like Internet Messenger to access help on homework assignments or to download music they feel helps them concentrate on the task at hand (Spires et al.).
- Students want to be engaged and reported that in some instances they feel disengaged and un-stimulated by both the content that was presented to them and the manner in which it is presented. One area that students feel helps them maintain engagement is using technology for project based learning to learn new information. Students provided the following ideas for integrating this type of learning into content areas:
- language arts ~ writing and research
- social studies ~ research projects
- math ~ problem solving
- science ~ science fair projects (Spires et al., "Having Our Say" 508).
An interesting sidebar that was noted by researchers was that several students viewed the use of technology as an enhancement to the writing process because it eliminated sloppy writing that many teachers complain about. Additionally, students realize some of the problems associated with doing research in unstructured web-based environments, noting such problems as a slow system speed and restrictions relating to Internet security and safety (Spires et al.).
- “Prepare Us for Jobs of the Future”
- Along with engagement students cited relevance to their lives as being an important reason why they wanted classroom instruction to focus on the use of technology. Students realize that technology will be an integral part of the job market and desire to have classroom instruction practices prepare them for life beyond the classroom (Spires et al.).
- “Let’s Not Get Left Behind”
- Students understand how technology enhances their lives and their productivity in all academic areas, but concede there seems to be a lag between technological advances and getting those advances into the classroom where they can be utilized. Of particular interest is the ability to utilize laptops throughout the school day and surprisingly the desire to utilize a manufacturing principle called Just in Time (JIT) to access information on an as needed basis (Spires et al.).
Clearly those students who were engaged in this study are not only aware of who and what they are, but also where they want to go in terms of building the skills they feel are necessary to move forward utilizing 21st century skills and the technology they will be using in their future. They understand that in order to be engaged in the classroom they need schools that are aesthetically pleasing to motivate their desire to learn, and at the same time meet the functional needs of current technological demands. Obviously students are way ahead of teachers in terms of understanding those skills needed to make them more technologically literate and what they need to compete in the job market and outside the classroom, but teachers can and must employ strategies that address their need to use technology in order to become more literate.
Applying the skills of reading, writing, speaking, and listening and incorporating them into the curriculum that also addresses 21st century skills and technology will certainly provide for more active engagement that is student driven rather than motivated by educators that are behind the times.
III. In the Classroom – What Works?
Based on the North Carolina research findings it is obvious that incorporating technology in the classroom in an effort to build student literacy is one key component teachers must employ when making curricular changes. But what else works? For starters, teachers need to get to know their students well enough to develop a rapport that allows them to understand their students’ literacy needs so that any growth and its causes can be documented (Brozo and Hargis). This can be difficult given the fact that class sizes seem to be growing and teacher/student contact time seems to be shrinking, but nonetheless it deserves every consideration for inclusion into a comprehensive plan that addresses student literacy needs.
Based on the case study read earlier in this paper another important part of increasing student literacy rates is the inclusion of a strong Sustained Silent Reading (SSR) program. Once students have mastered basic reading skills (and they should have by the time they reach middle school) the best way to increase their vocabulary skills and expand those skills needed to read, write, speak, and listen is to expose them to as many opportunities to read interesting and relevant texts as possible. Eliminating the SSR program as seen in the earlier example is proof that reading – any reading, that interests and engages students provides growth in areas of vocabulary and reading achievement. Paramount to the success of the program teachers must act as role models to impress upon students the importance of the SSR program. Nothing will deter a student faster than a “do as I say not as I do attitude” if teachers are using this time to grade papers or prep for other classes (Brozo and Hargis).
Success stories abound concerning the use of SSR in the curricula as evidenced by Doug Williams, Principal of Hoover High School. Williams implemented a program that provided students with 20 minutes of SSR time per day and provided staff with the necessary resources needed to make the program meet student needs. The results were an astonishing rise in Gates-MacGinitie reading test scores from 4.3 to 7.2, and although the program cannot take full credit for this rise in scores, teachers at the school credit the majority of progress to the SSR program (Fisher and Ivey, "Learning From What" 1). Common sense tells us that the SSR program works, but what else should we be doing to improve student literacy rates?
A. Elements of an Effective Adolescent Literacy Program.
Much research lately has focused on the Reading First Initiative; unfortunately a lot of that research focused on early reading programs – an area that certainly needs attention, but is not at the heart of the problem in schools today. “Many excellent third grade readers will falter or fail in later grade academic tasks if teaching of reading is neglected in the middle and secondary grades” (Biancarosa and Snow 1).
One way to look at the problems facing students today is to understand our past. During the 1950’s it was not uncommon for a student to drop out of school, and although unfortunate, it was not the end of the world. Without a high school diploma that student still had a reasonable chance of finding a good job and maintaining a comfortable lifestyle for his/her family. However, that same student in 2004 will likely be faced with few employment opportunities, minimum wage jobs, and welfare. Obviously we need to find a solution to helping our students become literate members of society and in doing so keep them engaged in the educational process. The results of the Reading First Initiative provided researchers, policy makers, and educators with fifteen elements that are necessary to the development of an effective adolescent literacy program. They include:
1. Direct, explicit comprehension instruction, which is instruction in the strategies and
processes that proficient readers use to understand what they read, including summarizing, keeping track of one’s own understanding, and a host of other practices.
2. Effective instructional principles embedded in content, including language arts teachers using content-area texts and content-area teachers providing instruction and practice in reading and writing skills specific to their subject area.
3. Motivation and self-directed learning, which includes building motivation to read and learn and providing students with the instruction and supports needed for independent learning tasks they will face after graduation.
4. Text-based collaborative learning, which involves students interacting with one another around a variety of texts.
5. Strategic tutoring, which provides students with intense individualized reading, writing, and content instruction as needed.
6. Diverse texts, which are texts at a variety of difficulty levels and on a variety of topics.
7. Intensive writing, including instruction connected to the kinds of writing tasks students will have to perform well in high school and beyond.
8. A technology component, which includes technology as a tool for and a topic of literacy instruction.
9. Ongoing formative assessment of students, which is informal, often daily assessment of how students are progressing under current instructional practices.
10. Extended time for literacy, which includes approximately two to four hours of literacy instruction and practice that takes place in language arts and content-area classes.
11. Professional development that is both long term and ongoing.
12. Ongoing summative assessment of students and programs, which is more formal and provides data that are reported for accountability and research purposes.
13. Teacher teams, which are interdisciplinary teams that meet regularly to discuss students and align instruction.
14. Leadership, which can come from principals and teachers who have a solid understanding of how to teach reading and writing to the full array of students present in schools.
15. A comprehensive and coordinated literacy program, which is interdisciplinary and
interdepartmental and may even coordinate with out-of-school organizations and the local community (Biancarosa and Snow 4-5).
Based on these findings, one of the things researchers felt was important was that practitioners and programs designers needed to be flexible in their attempts at implementing a program to increase student literacy rates. They felt that at the very least implementing only one or two of the elements would have little effect and that it would be necessary to try various combinations and include any combination of professional development and formative and summative assessments, because no program targeting older students is likely to show improvement without them (Biancarosa and Snow).
Furthermore, many students have no clue about what it means to comprehend or learn from their reading. “Many students think that learning happens almost magically by glossing over material” (Santa 468). This is especially true of older, struggling readers who do not read words with enough fluency to facilitate comprehension. Others merely lack the strategies to help them comprehend.
In each of these cases additional time reading multiple texts that are relevant, alternative texts that replace content texts, reading from a resistant perspective, producing counter texts, and providing students with the opportunity to conduct student choice research projects engage students in actively pursuing a way to become more literate individuals. For those who lack the strategies necessary to pursue an end to the problem additional time spent modeling strategies that help students better comprehend text can be used to fill the void until they have the skills to do so themselves (Behrman).
B. Engagement and Meaningful Content.
From the North Carolina study we already know that students have a strong desire to be engaged in work that they feel prepares them for life beyond the classroom. Two effective ways of doing that, evidenced by the Reading Next Initiative are through:
- motivation and self-directed learning
- text based collaborative learning (Biancarosa and Snow).
Providing students with the opportunity to work in collaborative learning communities (CLC) not only builds interpersonal working skills that every student needs both in and out of the classroom, but based on findings from the North Carolina study these types of activities build motivation and the desire to learn. Students who are struggling need these types of additional supports to bridge the gap created by their inability to adequately comprehend text. In a small group setting students begin to see the individual trees rather than just a forest.
Another finding presented by the Reading Next Initiative is the implementation of a technology component to generate the excitement that has left many of our schools classrooms today and mentioned earlier in this paper. Providing students with the ability to utilize technology presents them with content that is relevant to the societal changes we are seeing and further engages them in meaningful content. Our goals for improving literacy in schools today is not about graduating more students; instead we must focus on helping our students build the skills they will need and be using 20 or 30 years from now (Biancarosa and Snow). Many are wondering how that is even possible given the changes that have taken place in technology in the last 20 to 30 years. The best way to do that is by structuring curriculum in such a manner that students are able to build critical thinking skills.
C. Critical Thinking = Application.
Part of any good plan to build literacy skills in middle and high school students is the need to implement curricular changes that embrace a bottom-up approach and utilize those elements of the Reading Next Initiative, the results from the North Carolina study, and a clearly defined understanding of what critical thinking is and how it is applied in the classroom. Ask anyone responsible for research in the field of adolescent literacy to define critical thinking and you will likely get as many different responses as you have researchers. For our purposes the definition of critical thinking is the ability to identify a problem, utilize prior knowledge schema to develop an understanding of how to solve that problem, and then transfer the knowledge gained to other similar problems (Orlich et al.).
So what is the big deal about critical thinking? For starters, students who have the ability to use critical thinking skills have the ability to apply the strategies that we teach them to educational problems beyond the language arts classroom. It can be argued all day long that every teacher is a reading teacher, but the reality is the problem is irrelevant if students can utilize critical thinking and apply it to outside endeavors. An example of how important developing critical thinking skills are can be seen in our earlier case study with Anthony. Despite having an expensive computer program at the schools disposal to help Anthony overcome his difficulty with reading comprehension and despite having a reading specialist available, the true nature of the problem had yet to be addressed. Beyond his reading comprehension problem was the fact that he likely had no ability to utilize prior knowledge to solve a current problem and apply it to future problems without using the process of elimination.
One of the ways to teach students how too critically think is to utilize Bloom’s Taxonomy as part of a teachers planning guide for unit and lesson planning. Getting students beyond the ability to memorize facts that in many ways are meaningless (moving beyond the knowledge and comprehension level presented by Bloom) provides students with the opportunity to tackle more complex cognitive skills such as application and analysis that students need to understand in order to become critical thinkers (Orlich et al.). Accomplishing this task requires teachers to take a threefold approach to teaching these skills. The first step is to develop an overall awareness; thinking must become the primary goal of your curriculum. Activities and lessons should focus on developing problem solving skills across all subjects and grade levels. “Teaching students how to think is a journey not an event” (Orlich et al. 286).
Once an idea has been presented to the class they must have the ability to implement it at sometime during the process so that they can see the correlation between concept and application. Secondly, implementing an inquiry-based teaching strategy in which students are asked to pose questions, analyze data, and develop conclusions is important to building critical thinking skills. If students are asked to write a paper they need to understand the purpose in what they are doing and how it relates to what is being taught. One of the best ways to do that is to provide them with state academic standards for learning. When they understand “why”, they are more likely “to do” according to the results of the North Carolina study. Thirdly, teachers need to know how to use specific methods and teaching techniques such as the ones found in the Reading Next Initiative that will build student literacy skills and their ability to think critically (Orlich et al.).
The Reading Next Initiative is quite clear on the role that teachers and administrators play in building effective long-term and ongoing professional development. Professional development does not ensconce the age old idea of one-time workshops or short mini-courses on specific subjects that promote teacher growth. Instead, faculty and administration must accept that in order to remain on the cutting edge of research data that proves to be useful in the classroom, they must accept that long-term professional development programs become a part of their lives and a part of the school calendar of events. Orlich states that “The most effective instruction emanates from a teacher who is knowledgeable about both subject matter and thinking processes, who continually demonstrates the skills and attitudes involved in thinking, and who demands systematic, rigorous thought from students – both in speaking and writing” (289).
Critical thinking should be the milestone that every literacy program utilizes to measure its success. Students who have the ability to apply learned concepts from one subject or topic to another have obviously closed the comprehension gap that has developed between the elementary and secondary school levels that experts are concerned about. When these students are supported by faculty that has made a commitment to building curricula that supports literacy through ongoing in-depth professional development, success is measured by students who are highly engaged in meaningful content and who have the ability to think critically.
From an initial definition of literacy that involved the skills of reading, writing, speaking, and listening the definition has evolved into one that uses technology as a way to engage students in relevant and meaningful instruction that transfers to the world in which they will live and work. This ideal, based on student input from the North Carolina study, provides insight into what students feel are the most important goals they need to have a vested interest in their education. Research such as the Reading Next Initiative provides us with the structure to implement curricular changes that, with the help of students, can facilitate a more user friendly learning environment that meets state academic standards. Incorporating a shift from knowledge based instruction to one that embraces instruction utilizing critical thinking skills provides further engagement opportunities for students and challenges them to put into practice those skills learned in the classroom to real world scenarios.
Literacy is so much more than the ability to read, write, speak, and listen because students know how to do those things by the time they get to middle school classrooms. Implementing the curricular changes noted in this paper is merely one possible solution to solving the problem that seems to develop throughout the secondary educational years resulting in students who are not prepared for college or the challenges of working in the 21st century. “Teaching students how to think is a journey, not an event” (Orlich et al. 286), therefore the process of becoming a more literate member of society becomes a journey, not something taught during early primary developmental stages. Students in the twelfth grade require the same amount of effort provided to those in the third grade to continually build their literacy skills and prepare them so that no child slips between the cracks.
Works Cited
Alvermann, Donna E., Stephen F. Phelps, and Victoria Ridgeway-Gillis. “Content Literacy and the Reading Process.” Content Area Reading and Literacy: Succeeding in Today’s Diverse Classrooms. Ed. Aurora Martinez-Ramos. Boston: Pearson Education, 2010. 1-37. Print.
Behrman, Edward H. “Teaching About Language, Power, and Text: A Review of Classroom Practices that Support Critical Literacy.” Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy 49.6 (2006): 490-98. Education Research Complete. Web. 14 January 2011.
Biancarosa, Gina and Catherine Snow. “Reading Next - A Vision for Action and Research in Middle and High School Literacy: A Report to Carnegie Corporation of New York.” Alliance for Excellent Education. 2nd ed. Alliance for Excellent Education, 2006. Web. 30 January 2011.
Brozo, William G. and Charles H. Hargis. “Taking Seriously the Idea of Reform: One High School’s Efforts to Make Reading More Responsive to all Students.” Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy 47.1 (2003): 14-23. Education Research Complete. Web. 10 January 2011.
Fahser-Herro, Danielle and Constance Steinkuehler. “Web 2.0 Literacy and Secondary Teacher Education.” Journal of Computing in Teacher Education 26.2 (2009): 55-62. ERIC. Web. 13 January 2011.
Fisher, Douglas and Gay Ivey. “Evaluating the Interventions for Struggling Adolescent Readers.” Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy 50.3 (2006): 180-89. Education Research Complete. Web. 20 January 2011.
---. “Learning From What Doesn’t Work.” Educational Leadership 63.2 (2005): 8-14. College of William & Mary. Web. 15 January 2011.
Irvin, Judith L., Julie Meltzer, and Melinda Dukes. “Taking Action on Adolescent Literacy.” Introduction. Taking Action on Adolescent Literacy. Ed. Debra Siegel. Alexandria: Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development, 2007. 1-26. Print.
Kirk, Carol A. “A Response to the Adolescent Literacy Position Statement.” Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy 43.6 (2000): 573-75. Education Research Complete. Web. 13 January 2011.
Orlich, Donald C., Robert J. Harder, Richard C. Callahan, Michael S. Trevisan, and Abbie H. Brown. “Inquiry Teaching and Higher-Level Thinking.” Teaching Strategies: A Guide to Effective Instruction. Ed. Lisa Mafrici. Boston: Wadsworth, 2010. 284-318. Print.
Santa, Carol M. “A Vision for Adolescent Literacy: Ours or Theirs?.” Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy 49.6 (2006): 466-76. Education Research Complete. Web. 14 January 2011.
Spires, Hiller A., John K. Lee, and Kimberly A. Turner. “Having Our Say: Middle Grade Student Perspectives on School, Technologies, and Academic Engagement.” Journal of Research on Technology in Education 40.4 (2008): 497-515. Education Research Complete. Web. 14 January 2011.