by Doris Andrews, Jan Eppler, and Sid Womack
Jim's problems were
apparent from the very beginning. He was one of 26 high school seniors enrolled
in an Upward Bound English course on a university campus in Oklahoma. He had
difficulty using the correct spellings of many words, and writing a sentence was
an almost unknown behavior. Jim would be a high school senior in the Fall, and
he had aspirations of going to college. It appeared that life was about to pass
him by.
The professor wasted
no time in identifying that a problem existed, and referred Jim to a tutor who
had been hired by the English department to give individual help. The tutor
soon realized that Jim's writing problems went back further to a reading
problem, and she asked a faculty person in elementary/special education for
some help.
The elementary/special
education professor was new on campus and did not have a lot of time for a long
involvement, so about three hours were spent training this tutor to be a
remedial reading teacher. Three hours! Most teacher educators would pale at the
idea. The tutor had had no courses in reading, elementary education, or special
education. But both Jim and the tutor seemed highly motivated. The advice
followed the lines of a psycholinguistic/diagnosis and remediation framework
generally. Language is used to describe experiences. The sequence of growth in
language is: experience, listening, speaking, reading, and writing. The writing
problems were therefore the tip of the iceberg. A balanced approach to word
attack should be taught~ sight words, phonics, structural analysis, context,
use of dictionary, and picture clues give us ideas about the meaning whic'h
should be brought to (not extracted from) print. The tutor was loaned Before
the Child Reads by James Hymes, Basic Concepts in Reading Instruction by Arnold
Burron and Amos Clayburgh, and the Analytical Reading Inventory by Mary Lynn
Woods and Aldin Moe in order to gain more background into the process of
reading. Both tutor and professor agreed that if a miracle didn't happen this
summer, the academic life Jim envisioned would never become a reality.
The following day, the
tutor administered the Analytical Reading Inventory (A.R.I.) to Jim. The tutor
and the professor evaluated the results together. Jim was reading at the second
grade frustrational level--first grade instructional by some stretch of the
imagination. He did equally poor on the isolated word lists and the graded
paragraphs.
He used practically no contextual clues or structural analysis. He did utilize what few phonics rules he knew. He pressed for a high oral reading rate, making many omission, insertion, and substitution errors. Miscues were common. For Jim, reading was the ordeal of raising a book and making oral sounds.
He used practically no contextual clues or structural analysis. He did utilize what few phonics rules he knew. He pressed for a high oral reading rate, making many omission, insertion, and substitution errors. Miscues were common. For Jim, reading was the ordeal of raising a book and making oral sounds.
That afternoon, the
elementary professor and tutor went to the university library to check out
books for Jim to read. The first grade instructional level was not followed
slavishly, but rather followed generally while his reading interests were
followed specifically. The readability of some books strayed as high as eighth
grade.
Instruction began the
following afternoon. A Directed Reading Approach (D.R.A.) was demonstrated to
the tutor with Jim by the elementary professor, and the format was followed
considerably during the six weeks that followed. Broadening the context of a story
seemed a bit strange to Jim at first; he hurried over or ignored the titles of
stories and paid little attention to the pictures that accompanied them.
Consideration time was spent talking about "big words and little
words" (structural analysis) and how word families operate. The tutor read
and recorded some stories, letting Jim follow along in his book. Gradually the
concept of reading as speech-on-paper began to emerge. Jim's morale improved
noticeably. He did not press so hard for a high oral reading rate, but began to
read more for meaning. Although some reading was done orally, not every story
was read out loud. "Reading does not have to be out loud to be
reading" was a message Jim joyfully accepted. The tutor used a lot of
patience with Jim, and he responded with a lot of determination. "I will
learn to read this summer," was his declaration.
The posttest given at
the end of six weeks by the elementary education professor showed that he had
very nearly done exactly that. The A.R.I. was once again used. Since Jim was no
longer striving for a high oral reading rate it took about two hours to reach
his frustrational level. One break was taken,more for the professor than for
the student. Jim scored higher on the graded paragraphs than on the isolated word
lists, showing that he had learned to use contextual clues. His instructional
level was seventh grade and frustrational level was eighth grade. He had gained
six years growth in reading in six weeks.'
Some modifiers and
disclaimers would be appropriate at this point. First of all, the eighth grade
frustrational level obtained may have been from shutting Jim down a little
early. He was not at frustration on comprehension and was actually one word
recognition error short of frustration at the eighth grade level. Given the
proximity to frustration, however, the testing was stopped. In fairness to
Jim's teachers of the previous eleven years, it may have been that the skills
that Jim evidenced on the posttest were skills that he had learned before, but
had forgotten in the rush to show a high oral reading rate in front of his
peers. The favorable affective climate generated by the tutor may have
unleashed some of this pent-up knowledge. His oral reading rate on the ARI
during the posttest rarely went above 100 words per minute. On the posttest,
Jim showed a much more balanced approach to word attack skills, trying sight
word recognition first, then phonics, then reading several words past the
problem word for context clues, and then using structural analysis. He was not
allowed to use a dictionary while taking the A.R.I. But now, at least, he has
more flexibility at word attack than he had had before.
It could not be said
that the things that worked so well for this Indian boy would work for every
student. But this incident does show what a little knowledge of the
language-acquistion process and a lot of motivation can do.
The above post was co-written some years ago, when I was teaching at SOSU. I was the tutor mentioned above. Having never taken any classes in teaching reading, or in elementary education, I was nevertheless able to work with this young man successfully, thanks to the help I received from my co-authors. While I was teaching full-time there during the school year, I worked during the summer as a tutor.
No comments:
Post a Comment