DOCSLIB.ORG

Structured Literacy and Typical Literacy Practices

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Structured Literacy and Typical Literacy Practices TCXXXX10.1177/0040059917750160<sc>Council for Exceptional Children</sc><sc>TEACHING Exceptional Children</sc> 750160research-article2017 Structured Literacy Structured Literacy and Typical –11. Copyright 2018 The Author(s). DOI: 10.1177/0040059917750160 Literacy Practices Understanding Differences , Vol. XX, No. X, pp. 1 to Create Instructional Opportunities Louise Spear-Swerling TEACHING Exceptional Children Isabelle Rowe is an elementary-level services as a student with a learning Key Features special education teacher who is disability in the area of reading. beginning her second year of teaching. Although Ms. Rowe had had good Explicit means that important skills and A third grader named Curtis was preservice preparation with considerable concepts are taught clearly and directly recently placed on her caseload after exposure to evidence-based instruction by the teacher; students are not being identified with dyslexia at the for students with reading difficulties, expected to infer them simply from end of Grade 2. In preparation for her experience with specific intervention exposure or incidental learning (Archer working with him, Ms. Rowe read his programs for students with dyslexia & Hughes, 2011). Systematic and file. She knew that difficulties with was limited. Ms. Rowe was determined sequential means that skills and phonemic awareness, decoding, and to find the details of Curtis’s previous concepts are taught in a logical order, spelling are central to dyslexia, and as interventions, so that she could use that with important prerequisite skills she anticipated, Curtis did have a information to help design more taught first (Torgesen, 2006). For history of these kinds of problems. As a effective special education instruction. example, before teachers expect beginning third grader, Curtis should be She also did some reading on evidence- students to decode two-syllable words, able to decode most one-syllable and based interventions for students with they teach decoding of common one- two-syllable phonetically regular words; dyslexia. As part of her research, she syllable word patterns as well as how he also should be starting to read more repeatedly encountered the term to divide two-syllable words to complex types of texts, such as chapter structured literacy (SL), so she decided facilitate decoding them. The books, written at an early-third-grade that she needed to find out more about sequential nature of SL means that level. However, assessments in Curtis’s those instructional approaches. teachers require students to practice file showed that he had difficulty only what they have been explicitly decoding many one-syllable word SL approaches are often taught. Again, before teachers expect patterns, such as unfamiliar silent e recommended for students with students to practice decoding specific words (e.g., tame, stripe), but his dyslexia and other poor decoders (e.g., phonics word patterns (e.g., short- ability to read common sight words was International Dyslexia Association, vowel words with consonant digraphs) relatively good. He also had poor 2017). These approaches are well in reading text, or to recognize specific spelling skills, and because he often supported by research evidence (e.g., irregular words in text, they directly omitted sounds in words or substituted Brady, 2011; Fletcher, Lyon, Fuchs, & teach those skills in isolation first. SL other sounds that did not belong, Ms. Barnes, 2007; Foorman et al., 2016; approaches also build in cumulative Rowe often could not even recognize the National Reading Panel, 2000). practice and ongoing review of intended word in Curtis’s misspellings. Examples of SL approaches include the previously learned skills, so that Ms. Rowe was not surprised to Wilson Reading System (Wilson, 1988), students retain these skills and develop discover that Curtis had an excellent Orton-Gillingham (Gillingham & automaticity. oral vocabulary and good listening Stillman, 2014), the Lindamood An additional feature of SL, and of comprehension, because she knew that Phoneme Sequencing Program explicit teaching approaches in general such strengths are found in many (Lindamood & Lindamood, 1998), and (Archer & Hughes, 2011), is a high degree students with dyslexia. However, when Direct Instruction (e.g., Carnine, of teacher–student interaction, with she reviewed his history, she was Silbert, Kame’enui, & Tarver, 2009). considerable time spent in direct somewhat puzzled to see that Curtis Although these programs vary in some teaching. In these approaches, was perceived as doing well in reading ways, they all share several key instruction requires frequent responses as a kindergartner and throughout first features. from students, and the teacher provides grade. He was not identified as needing immediate feedback with clear intervention until the beginning of Key Features of Structured correction as needed. The teacher Grade 2. Literacy Approaches provides step-by-step demonstrations of Ms. Rowe’s school uses a multitiered- Key features of SL approaches include skills and leads students in guided systems-of-support model, with (a) explicit, systematic, and sequential practice. Explicit instruction also uses universal screening and tiered teaching of literacy at multiple levels— nonexamples as well as examples. For interventions as part of the general phonemes, letter–sound relationships, instance, if teachers want students to education system. Unfortunately, syllable patterns, morphemes, learn the vowel-r (VR) syllable pattern although Curtis had received tiered vocabulary, sentence structure, (words that have a vowel followed by an interventions throughout Grade 2, he paragraph structure, and text structure; r, which changes the vowel sound), they had not made good progress in those (b) cumulative practice and ongoing present both VR words (e.g., barn, short, interventions. Because of his review; (c) a high level of student– urn) and non-VR words (e.g., trip, rag, inadequate response to tiered teacher interaction; (d) the use of brush) for students to distinguish from interventions, he was referred for a carefully chosen examples and each other. Examples and nonexamples comprehensive evaluation for special nonexamples; (e) decodable text; and would be carefully chosen to ensure that education. He was found eligible for (f) prompt, corrective feedback. students learn the concept being taught, 2 COUNCIL FOR EXCEPTIONAL CHILDREN in this case, that the r in a VR syllable an intrinsic learning problem in those of these types of programs was not must come immediately after the vowel, areas. likely to benefit Curtis. She went to her not before it. Many commercial programs school principal, Ms. Watkins, and In the early stages of instruction, exemplify SL and research has asked to participate in professional when students’ decoding skills are generally focused more on effective development in an SL approach. Ms. relatively limited, most SL approaches features of instruction than on Rowe pointed out that this professional have students read decodable texts, comparing specific commercial development would enable her to help those constrained mostly to the specific programs. For example, Kilpatrick both Curtis and other students in her phonics patterns that students have (2015) reviewed evidence suggesting class more effectively. Luckily, Ms. been taught (e.g., consonant-vowel- that SL programs that emphasize Watkins had the funds for Ms. Rowe’s consonant words with a, i, and o). Just development of phonemic awareness to professional development and approved as when students read words in an advanced level (e.g., programs that the request. isolation, SL teachers would provide train students to manipulate, delete, prompt corrective feedback to students’ and substitute phonemes rather than Typical Literacy Practices (TLP) decoding errors during oral text only to blend and segment phonemes) Just as the SL approaches described reading. Table 1 provides some may be more effective than other SL previously vary from each other in some examples of the kinds of explicit programs in helping poor decoders ways, so, too, does the TLP commonly instructional activities that are common attain automatic word recognition. In used in schools. Examples of these in SL programs. any case, all SL programs have marked non-SL literacy approaches include differences from the type of reading Guided Reading (e.g., Burkins & Croft, instruction that is common in Tier 1 Fit for Students with Dyslexia 2010), Reader’s Workshop (e.g., Calkins, general education instruction and, 2000), Balanced Literacy, Four Blocks SL is especially well suited to students often, even in tiered interventions Literacy (Cunningham, Hall, & Sigmon, with dyslexia because it directly (Moats, 2017). 1999), Reading Recovery (Clay, 1994), addresses their core weaknesses in and the Leveled Literacy Intervention phonological skills, decoding, and In her readings on SL, Ms. Rowe found (Fountas & Pinnell, 2009). TLP do not spelling (Moats, 2017). Although most studies showing that SL interventions include most of the key features of SL. students with dyslexia do not have core clearly improve the reading achievement Table 2 summarizes some important weaknesses in higher levels of literacy, of students with dyslexia (e.g., Simos differences between SL and the ways that such as vocabulary, text et al., 2002; Torgesen et al., 2001). She literacy skills are more commonly taught. comprehension, and broad language also visited a special education class in TLP for Reading
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Scientific Evidence for Effective Teaching of Reading
    Read About It: Scientific Evidence for Effective Teaching of Reading Kerry Hempenstall Edited by Jennifer Buckingham Research Report | March 2016 National Library of Australia Cataloguing-in-Publication Data: Creator: Hempenstall, Kerry, author. Title: Read about it : scientific evidence for effective teaching of reading / Kerry Hempenstall ; edited by Jennifer Buckingham. ISBN: 9781922184610? (paperback) Series: CIS research report ; 11. Subjects: Effective teaching. Early childhood education--Research--Australia. Literacy--Research--Australia. Teacher effectiveness. Other Creators/Contributors: Buckingham, Jennifer, editor. Centre for Independent Studies (Australia), issuing body. Dewey Number: 371.10994 Read About It: Scientific Evidence for Effective Teaching of Reading Kerry Hempenstall Edited by Jennifer Buckingham Research Report 11 Related CIS publications Research Report RR9 Jennifer Buckingham and Trisha Jha, One School Does Not Fit All (2016) Policy Magazine Spring Issue Jennifer Buckingham, Kevin Wheldall and Robyn Beaman-Wheldall, ‘Why Jaydon can’t read: The triumph of ideology over evidence in teaching reading’ (2013) Contents Executive Summary ...............................................................................................1 Introduction ..........................................................................................................3 The power of improved instruction ...................................................................4 Effective, evidence-based reading instruction: The five ‘keys’
    [Show full text]
  • Literacy in India: the Gender and Age Dimension
    OCTOBER 2019 ISSUE NO. 322 Literacy in India: The Gender and Age Dimension TANUSHREE CHANDRA ABSTRACT This brief examines the literacy landscape in India between 1987 and 2017, focusing on the gender gap in four age cohorts: children, youth, working-age adults, and the elderly. It finds that the gender gap in literacy has shrunk substantially for children and youth, but the gap for older adults and the elderly has seen little improvement. A state-level analysis of the gap reveals the same trend for most Indian states. The brief offers recommendations such as launching adult literacy programmes linked with skill development and vocational training, offering incentives such as employment and micro-credit, and leveraging technology such as mobile-learning to bolster adult education, especially for females. It underlines the importance of community participation for the success of these initiatives. Attribution: Tanushree Chandra, “Literacy in India: The Gender and Age Dimension”, ORF Issue Brief No. 322, October 2019, Observer Research Foundation. Observer Research Foundation (ORF) is a public policy think tank that aims to influence the formulation of policies for building a strong and prosperous India. ORF pursues these goals by providing informed analyses and in-depth research, and organising events that serve as platforms for stimulating and productive discussions. ISBN 978-93-89622-04-1 © 2019 Observer Research Foundation. All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, copied, archived, retained or transmitted through print, speech or electronic media without prior written approval from ORF. Literacy in India: The Gender and Age Dimension INTRODUCTION “neither in terms of absolute levels of literacy nor distributive justice, i.e., reduction in gender Literacy is one of the most essential indicators and caste disparities, does per capita income of the quality of a country’s human capital.
    [Show full text]
  • Recharging Reading Success Getting Struggling Readers Back on Track
    —Graeme Sloan/Education Week Braydan Finnerty, 2nd grade, chooses letter magnets off the board while doing a spelling exercise in front of the rest of the class at Beverly Gardens Elementary in Dayton, Ohio. Recharging Reading Success Getting Struggling Readers Back on Track EDITORS NOTE How Do Kids Learn to Read? What OPINION How can educators optimize literacy the Science Says ..........................................2 education among students who struggle to Connecting Reading & Writing ‘Is a read? In this Spotlight, learn how teachers These Schools Filled Vending High-Leverage Move’ .............................12 are implementing scientific research on Machines With Books. Will It Motivate Reading? .....................................6 Why I Created Book Groups for My reading into curriculum, how schools are Students ........................................................15 helping students foster a love of reading, A Look Inside One Classroom’s and how teachers are using writing to Reading Overhaul ......................................8 How to Make Reading Instruction compliment reading instruction. Much, Much More Efficient ................16 ‘Decodable’ Books: Boring, Useful, or Both?.............................................................. 10 Recharging Reading Success Published on October 2, 2020, in Education Week’s Special Report: Getting Reading Right How Do Kids Learn to Read? What the Science Says By Sarah Schwartz and Sarah D. Sparks ow do children learn to read? For almost a century, re- searchers have argued over the question. Most of the dis- agreement has centered on Hthe very beginning stages of the reading process, when young children are first starting to figure out how to decipher words on a page. One theory is that reading is a natural process, like learning to speak. If teachers and parents sur- round children with good books, this theory goes, kids will pick up reading on their own.
    [Show full text]
  • Some Issues in Phonics Instruction. Hempenstall, K
    Some Issues in Phonics Instruction. Hempenstall, K. (No date). Some issues in phonics instruction. Education News 26/2/2001. [On-line]. Available: http://www.educationnews.org/some_issues_in_phonics_instructi.htm There are essentially two approaches to teaching phonics that influence what is taught: implicit and explicit phonics instruction. What is the difference? In an explicit (synthetic) program, students will learn the associations between the letters and their sounds. This may comprise showing students the graphemes and teaching them the sounds that correspond to them, as in “This letter you are looking at makes the sound sssss”. Alternatively, some teachers prefer teaching students single sounds first, and then later introducing the visual cue (the grapheme) for the sound, as in “You know the mmmm sound we’ve been practising, well here’s the letter used in writing that tells us to make that sound”. In an explicit program, the processes of blending (What word do these sounds make when we put them together mmm-aaa-nnn?”), and segmenting (“Sound out this word for me”) are also taught. It is of little value knowing what are the building blocks of our language’s structure if one does not know how to put those blocks together appropriately to allow written communication, or to separate them to enable decoding of a letter grouping. After letter-sound correspondence has been taught, phonograms (such as: er, ir, ur, wor, ear, sh, ee, th) are introduced, and more complex words can be introduced into reading activities. In conjunction with this approach "controlled vocabulary" stories may be used - books using only words decodable using the students' current knowledge base.
    [Show full text]
  • Literacy UN Acked: What DO WE MEAN by Literacy?
    Memo 4 | Fall 2012 LEAD FOR LITERACY MEMO Providing guidance for leaders dedicated to children's literacy development, birth to age 9 L U: W D W M L? The Issue: To make decisions that have a positive What Competencies Does a Reader Need to impact on children’s literacy outcomes, leaders need a Make Sense of This Passage? keen understanding of literacy itself. But literacy is a complex concept and there are many key HIGH-SPEED TRAINS* service that moved at misunderstandings about what, exactly, literacy is. A type of high-speed a speed of one train was first hundred miles per Unpacking Literacy Competencies hour. Today, similar In this memo we focus specifically on two broad introduced in Japan about forty years ago. Japanese trains are categories of literacy competencies: skills‐based even faster, traveling The train was low to competencies and knowledge‐based competencies. at speeds of almost the ground, and its two hundred miles nose looked somewhat per hour. There are like the nose of a jet. Literacy many reasons that These trains provided high-speed trains are Reading, Wring, Listening & Speaking the first passenger popular. * Passage adapted from Good & Kaminski (2007) Skills Knowledge Dynamic Indicators of Basic Early Literacy Skills, 6th ed. ‐ Concepts about print ‐ Concepts about the ‐ The ability to hear & world Map sounds onto letters (e.g., /s/ /p/ /ee/ /d/) work with spoken sounds ‐ The ability to and blend these to form a word (speed) ‐ Alphabet knowledge understand & express Based ‐ Word reading complex ideas ‐ Recognize
    [Show full text]
  • Dr. Diane L. Fine
    DR. DIANE L. FINE CALIFORNI A UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION 250 UNIVERSITY A VENUE CALIFORNIA, P ENNSYLVANIA 15419 KEYS TONE 323 OFFICE PHONE (724) 938-4495 FINE@CALU .EDU EDUCATION Ed.D. Curriculum & Instruction, Literacy Studies, 2015 West Virginia University Morgantown, WV research interests include: young adolescent literacy development, word study, emergent literacy, adolescent literacy, teachers’ perceptions of literacy, reading comprehension, new literacies, digital literacies, metacognition, strategic comprehension instruction, balanced literacy, STEM education M.A. Reading, 2008 West Virginia University Morgantown, WV Reading Specialist Certification Graduate Certificate in Integration of Technology in Schools, 2001 George Mason University Fairfax, VA Certification in Technology Integration K – 12 M.Ed. Special Education, 2001 California University of Pennsylvania California, PA Certification in Mentally and/or Physically Handicapped B.A. Elementary Education, 1989 West Virginia Wesleyan College Buckhannon, WV Minor: Teaching of Reading Initial Teacher Certification K – 8 PROFESSIONAL LICENSES & CERTIFICATIONS Virginia Department of Education Early Education NK – 4 Gifted Education Middle Education Grades 4 – 8 Reading Specialist West Virginia Department of Education Early Childhood 0K – 04 Early Education PK – K September 2020 Diane Fine 1 of 10 Elementary Education 0K – 06 English 05 – 09 General Science 05 – 09 Gifted 01 – 12 Mathematics 05 – 09 Multi-Categorical (LD, BD, MI) 0K– 06 Multi-Categorical (LD,
    [Show full text]
  • Reading in the Twentieth Century. INSTITUTION Center for the Improvement of Early Reading Achievement, Ann Arbor, MI
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 479 530 CS 512 338 AUTHOR Pearson, P. David TITLE Reading in the Twentieth Century. INSTITUTION Center for the Improvement of Early Reading Achievement, Ann Arbor, MI. SPONS AGENCY Office of Educational Research and Improvement (ED), Washington, DC. PUB DATE 2000-08-00 NOTE 46p.; CIERA Archive #01-08. CONTRACT R305R70004 AVAILABLE FROM CIERA/University of Michigan, 610 E. University Ave., 1600 SEB, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1259. Tel: 734-647-6940; Fax: 734- 763 -1229. For full text: http://www.ciera.org/library/archive/ 2001-08/0108pdp.pdf. PUB TYPE Information Analyses (070). Reports Research (143) EDRS PRICE EDRS Price MF01/PCO2 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS *Educational History; *Educational Practices; Futures (of Society); Instructional Materials; *Reading Instruction; *Reading Processes; *Reading Research; Reading Skills; Teaching Methods IDENTIFIERS *Reading Theories ABSTRACT This paper discusses reading instruction in the 20th century. The paper begins with a tour of the historical pathways that have led people, at the century's end, to the "rocky and highly contested terrain educators currently occupy in reading pedagogy." After the author/educator unfolds his version of a map of that terrain in the paper, he speculates about pedagogical journeys that lie ahead in a new century and a new millennium. Although the focus is reading pedagogy, the paper seeks to connect the pedagogy to the broader scholarly ideas of each period. According to the paper, developments in reading pedagogy over the last century suggest that it is most useful to divide the century into thirds, roughly 1900-1935, 1935- 1970, and 1970-2000. The paper states that, as a guide in constructing a map of past and present, a legend is needed, a common set of criteria for examining ideas and practices in each period--several candidates suggest themselves, such as the dominant materials used by teachers in each period and the dominant pedagogical practices.
    [Show full text]
  • Dyslexia and Structured Literacy Fact Sheet
    Dyslexia and Structured Literacy Fact Sheet Written by Belinda Dekker Dyslexia Support Australia https://dekkerdyslexia.wordpress.com/ ​ ​ ​ ​ Structured Literacy • Structured literacy is a scientifically researched based approach to the teaching of reading. Structured literacy can be in the form of teachers trained in the use of structured literacy methodologies and programs that adhere to the fundamental and essential components of structured literacy. • Structure means that there is a step by step clearly defined systematic process to the teaching of reading. Including a set procedure for introducing, reviewing and practicing essential concepts. Concepts have a clearly defined sequence from simple to more complex. Each new concept builds upon previously introduced concepts. • Knowledge is cumulative and the program or teacher will use continuous assessment to guide a student’s progression to the next clearly defined step in the program. An important fundamental component is the automaticity of a concept before progression. • Skills are explicitly or directly taught to the student with clear explanations, examples and modelling of concepts. ‘The term “Structured Literacy” is not designed to replace Orton Gillingham, Multi-Sensory or other terms in common use. It is an umbrella term designed to describe all of the programs that teach reading in essentially the same way'. Hal Malchow. President, International Dyslexia Association A Position Statement on Approaches to Reading Instruction Supported by Learning Difficulties Australia "LDA supports approaches to reading instruction that adopt an explicit structured approach to the teaching of reading and are consistent with the scientific evidence as to how children learn to read and how best to teach them.
    [Show full text]
  • Students Who Are Highly Mobile and Reading Instruction
    Reading on the Go! Volume 1: Students Who Are Highly Mobile and Reading Instruction Prepared for the National Center for Homeless Education by Patricia A. Popp, Ph.D. The College of William and Mary December 2004 NCHE Profile The National Center for Homeless Education (NCHE) is a national resource center of research and information enabling communities to successfully address the needs of children and their families who are experiencing homelessness and unaccompanied youth in homeless situations. Funded by the U.S. Department of Education, NCHE provides services to improve educational opportunities and outcomes for homeless children and youth in our nation’s school communities. NCHE is housed at SERVE, a consortium of education organizations associated with the School of Education at the University of North Carolina at Greensboro. The goals of NCHE are the following: • Disseminate important resource and referral information related to the complex issues surrounding the education of children and youth experiencing homelessness • Provide rapid-response referral information • Foster collaboration among various organizations with interests in addressing the needs of children and youth experiencing homelessness • Synthesize and apply existing research and guide the research agenda to expand the knowledge base on the education of homeless children and families, and unaccompanied youth Website: www.serve.org/nche HelpLine: 800-308-2145 Contact: Diana Bowman, Director NCHE at SERVE P.O. Box 5367 Greensboro, NC 27435 Phone: 336-315-7453 or 800-755-3277 Email: [email protected] or [email protected] The content of this publication does not necessarily reflect the views or policies of the U.S. Department of Education, nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations imply endorsement by the U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Orton-Gillingham Or Multisensory Structured Language Approaches
    JUST THE FACTS... Information provided by The International Dyslexia Association® ORTON-GILLINGHAM-BASED AND/OR MULTISENSORY STRUCTURED LANGUAGE APPROACHES The principles of instruction and content of a Syntax: Syntax is the set of principles that dictate the multisensory structured language program are essential sequence and function of words in a sentence in order for effective teaching methodologies. The International to convey meaning. This includes grammar, sentence Dyslexia Association (IDA) actively promotes effective variation, and the mechanics of language. teaching approaches and related clinical educational Semantics: Semantics is that aspect of language intervention strategies for dyslexics. concerned with meaning. The curriculum (from the beginning) must include instruction in the CONTENT: What Is Taught comprehension of written language. Phonology and Phonological Awareness: Phonology is the study of sounds and how they work within their environment. A phoneme is the smallest unit of sound PRINCIPLES OF INSTRUCTION: How It Is Taught in a given language that can be recognized as being Simultaneous, Multisensory (VAKT): Teaching is distinct from other sounds in the language. done using all learning pathways in the brain Phonological awareness is the understanding of the (visual/auditory, kinesthetic-tactile) simultaneously in internal linguistic structure of words. An important order to enhance memory and learning. aspect of phonological awareness is phonemic awareness or the ability to segment words into their Systematic and Cumulative: Multisensory language component sounds. instruction requires that the organization of material follows the logical order of the language. The Sound-Symbol Association: This is the knowledge of sequence must begin with the easiest and most basic the various sounds in the English language and their elements and progress methodically to more difficult correspondence to the letters and combinations of material.
    [Show full text]
  • Balanced Literacy Framework for Wooster City Schools, Pre-K Through Fourth Grade
    Balanced Literacy “Creating a Culture of Literacy” Introduction The Wooster City Schools Literacy Committee frst met on May 19, 2015 with the goal of developing a Balanced Literacy Framework for Wooster City Schools, Pre-K through fourth grade. Committee members met monthly to review and recommend research-based best practices and resources. The team enlisted the guidance of State Support Team 9 and sent committee members to the Dublin and National Literacy Conferences in Columbus. Throughout the year, committee members shared progress and research with colleagues through professional development meetings, grade level meetings and building leadership team meetings. At the March 29, 2016 Board of Education meeting, members of the committee presented a proposal for the creation of fve literacy coaches for the 2016-2017 school year. The role of the literacy coaches will be to facilitate the ongoing professional development and support of staf as they implement the balanced literacy framework and build a culture of literacy within Wooster City Schools. The following document is a result of our research and defnes the Balanced Literacy Framework for Wooster City Schools, detailing what reading and writing will look like in our classrooms. COMMITTEE MEMBERS: • Carrie Gordon, Grade 4 • Haley Black, Grade 3 • Erin Hofstetter, Kindergarten • Jerren Howard, Title 1 Reading • Suzie Parker, Gifted Specialist • Bonnie Brown, Intervention Specialist • Kaelee Hendershott, Grade 1 • Karen Koontz, Grade 1 • Molly Richard, Preschool • Caty Sypherd, Grade
    [Show full text]
  • An Investigation Into Definitions of English As a Subject and the Relationship Between English, Literacy and ‘Being Literate’
    What is literacy? An investigation into definitions of English as a subject and the relationship between English, literacy and ‘being literate’ A Research Report Commissioned by Cambridge Assessment January 2013 Contents 1 Introduction ........................................................................................................................................................ 3 2 How definitions of English as a school subject have evolved ............................................................................ 4 2.1 English in the 20th century ........................................................................................................................ 4 2.2 The impact of The National Literacy Strategy ........................................................................................... 6 2.3 Current concerns about English ................................................................................................................ 6 3 Literacy ............................................................................................................................................................... 8 3.1 Definitions of literacy ................................................................................................................................. 8 3.2 Literacy across the world......................................................................................................................... 10 3.3 Literacy – a high-stakes issue in other countries ...................................................................................
    [Show full text]