KaiserScience

Home » pedagogy (Page 4)

Category Archives: pedagogy

Close Reading Strategies

Close reading strategies

Please note – what we read below is not what a teacher should do all in one class, or even in one week. What see below is, rather, a menu of possibilities.

Beware going overboard. Close read small passages, not entire texts.

Photo by Ariel Castillo, Seville, https://www.pexels.com/

“The Close Reading Protocol strategy asks students to carefully and purposefully read and reread a text. When students “close read,” they focus on what the author has to say, what the author’s purpose is, what the words mean, and what the structure of the text tells us.”

“This approach ensures that students really understand what they’ve read. We ask students to carefully investigate a text in order to make connections to essential questions about history, human behavior, and ourselves.”

  – Close Reading Protocol: Facing History

“Close Reading of text involves an investigation of a short piece of text, with multiple readings done over multiple instructional lessons. Through text-based questions and discussion, students are guided to deeply analyze and appreciate various aspects of the text, such as key vocabulary and how its meaning is shaped by context; attention to form, tone, imagery and/or rhetorical devices; the significance of word choice and syntax; and the discovery of different levels of meaning as passages are read multiple times.”

 – Brown and Kappes, 2012, Implementing the Common Core State Standards: A primer on “close reading of text”

Also see

What is close reading?

Slow Reading Makes You Smarter, James Kennedy

How does this work? Words

Choose an article or book chapter, or read the one assigned by your teacher.

At the most basic level of reading we must first understand what all the words within it mean.

Be careful: Sometimes you think that you know what a word means, but perhaps you don’t. How do you know if you really understand it?

If you really understand it then you can clearly explain what it means to someone else – in a complete sentence – without using that word. If you can’t do this then you don’t really understand the word.

So – for any words that you don’t understand –

Use a highlighter to highlight such words

On a separate piece of paper, write each highlighted word.

First, without looking them up in a dictionary, try to figure out what it means by context. Write what you think the definition is.

Next, use a dictionary to look up the meaning of the word.

Compare the dictionary definition to the one you inferred through context.

How does this work? Sentences

Once we are confident we know what the words mean, we read them together as sentences. This requires comfort with grammar and the parts of speech.

(This image from Sentence Basics: Subjects, Verbs, Objects, Adjectives, and Adverbs, A Magical Hour.)

C. A. T. C. H. (Circle new words, ask questions, talk to the text,

Gifted and talented education

Reading instruction with gifted and talented readers.

Reading instruction with gifted and talented readers

But Why Can’t I Read A Book From the Other Shelf? Challenging Talented Readers

Modeling for our students

As teachers we should create opportunities to model close reading for our student. Skills that we should be demonstrating may include –

annotating

  • highlight in different colors

  • circle words/phrases

  • put question marks by things you don’t understand.

making notes in the margins

James Kennedy Annotated notebook

An annotated textbook, by James Kennedy . https://jameskennedymonash.wordpress.com/2014/10/18/how-to-use-a-textbook-6-rules-to-follow/

What does the author mean?

In any book or article we try to understand the author’s thought process.

Questions that good readers ask

Close Reading Technique 1

from Educational Leadership, Dec. 2012, Vol 70 #4. Common Core: Now What? Closing in on Close Reading, Nancy Boyles

Don’t read it all literally: Analogies, metaphors, similes

Analogy

An analogy is a comparison that explain a thing or idea by comparing it to something else.

There are many different types of analogies. We see them in anatomy, evolution, law, and imathematics. In writing and literature the most common types of analogies are metaphors and similes. Those are what we’re focusing on. Here are some examples of analogies.

Bacterial chromosomes are like spaghetti.

Blood vessels are like highways.

A cell is like a factory.

DNA is like a spiral staircase.

A nuclear reaction is like falling dominoes.

Electricity is like flowing water.

Ogres are like onions.

For more details see  https://www.litcharts.com/literary-devices-and-terms/analogy

Metaphor

A figure of speech, which states outright that one thing is another thing.

It equates those two things not because they actually are the same, but for the sake of comparison or symbolism.

If taken literally then it will sound very strange (are there actually any sheep, black or otherwise, in your family?)

If you’re a black sheep, you get cold feet, or you think love is a highway, then you’re probably thinking metaphorically. These are metaphors because a word or phrase is applied to something figuratively: unless you’re actually a sheep or are dipping your toes in ice water, chances are these are metaphors that help represent abstract concepts through colorful language.

Examples of metaphors

The cosmos is like a string symphony.

Genes are selfish.

There is an endless battle between thermodynamics and gravity.

There are various types of metaphors

Allegory: An extended metaphor wherein a story illustrates an important attribute of the subject.

Hyperbole: Excessive exaggeration to illustrate a point.

Metonymy: When we use the name of one thing, in reference to a different thing, to which the first is associated.  Example: “Lands belonging to the crown”, the word “crown” is metonymy for ruler.

Parable: An extended metaphor told as an anecdote to teach a moral lesson, such as in Aesop’s fables or Jesus’ teaching method.

Pun: Word play that exploits multiple meanings of a term, or of similar-sounding words, for an intended humorous or rhetorical effect. For example, George Carlin’s phrase “atheism is a non-prophet institution”.

https://www.grammarly.com/blog/metaphor/

Similes

Describes something by comparing it to something, and uses connecting words (such as like, as, so, than, or various verbs such as resemble.) Some examples:

You were as brave as a lion.

They fought like cats and dogs.

He is as funny as a barrel of monkeys.

This house is as clean as a whistle.

He is as strong as an ox.

Your explanation is as clear as mud.

From the webcomic XKCD.

from XKCD

Irony

We also need to understand the technique of irony.

TDQs

TDQs are an unnecessary acronym for common sense ideas, created by publishers who repackage elementary school level material, and resell it as “Common Core aligned reading strategies.”

TDGs stand for “Text-Dependent Questions.” What is this amazing new strategy? It literally only means that “these are questions that we can only answer if we read the text.”

The idea that this is a new pedagogical strategy – or any strategy at all – is silly Of course one must read a text to answer questions about the text. What other method does one use? ESP? Divination? Consulting the stars?

Here is an example from a corporation selling educational products:

“Text-Dependent Questions are those that can be answered only by referring back to the text being read. Students today are required to read closely to determine explicitly what the text says and then make logical inferences from it.”

Sure. Well, no kidding.

Books

Here is a book that some teachers have recommended to me: Readicide: How Schools Are Killing Reading and What You Can Do About It , by Kelly Gallagher.

Reading is dying in our schools. Educators are familiar with many of the factors that have contributed to the decline—poverty, second-language issues, and the ever-expanding choices of electronic entertainment. In this provocative new book, Kelly Gallagher suggests, however, that it is time to recognize a new and significant contributor to the death of reading: our schools.

In Readicide, Kelly argues that American schools are actively (though unwittingly) furthering the decline of reading. Specifically, he contends that the standard instructional practices used in most schools are killing reading by:

· valuing the development of test-takers over the development of lifelong readers;
· mandating breadth over depth in instruction;
· requiring students to read difficult texts without proper instructional support;
· insisting that students focus solely on academic texts;
· drowning great books with sticky notes, double-entry journals, and marginalia;
· ignoring the importance of developing recreational reading; and
· losing sight of authentic instruction in the shadow of political pressures.

Kelly doesn’t settle for only identifying the problems. Readicide provides teachers, literacy coaches, and administrators with specific steps to reverse the downward spiral in reading—steps that will help prevent the loss of another generation of readers.

Learning Standards

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RST.9-10.1 – Cite specific textual evidence to support analysis of science and technical texts, attending to the precise details of explanations or descriptions.

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RST.9-10.2 – Determine the central ideas or conclusions of a text; trace the text’s explanation or depiction of a complex process, phenomenon, or concept; provide an accurate summary of the text.

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RST.9-10.4 – Determine the meaning of symbols, key terms, and other domain-specific words and phrases as they are used in a specific scientific or technical context.

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RST.9-10.5 – Analyze the structure of the relationships among concepts in a text, including relationships among key terms (e.g., force, friction, reaction force, energy).

CCSS.ELA-LITERACY.RST.9-10.6 – Analyze the author’s purpose in providing an explanation, describing a procedure, or discussing an experiment in a text, defining the question the author seeks to address.

Tier I, II and III vocabulary

What are the critical words in our lessons? These include not only new terms that we introduce in that topic, but more importantly, all of the common words that students supposedly “already know.” The problem is that many students don’t always know what these words means.

Tier Vocabulary

Tier One – These are everyday words – including nouns, verbs, adverbs, and adjectives – that are learned in the early grades. By the time we get to high school classes, teachers shouldn’t even need to think about teaching such vocabulary.

Tier Two – Here we go! These are high frequency words, used across content areas, that are key to a student understanding directions, understanding relationships, and for making inferences.

The problem with tier two words is that although all students read and use them, some don’t fully understand how they function.

High school teachers thus need to carefully examine student reading and verbal comprehension early on in the year, and take care to explain and model how these terms are used.

Tier II Words list

Academic language from resources.successforall.org

Tier Three – These are low-frequency, domain-specific words. These words only come up in certain subjects, or certain topics.

Tier III Words list

External resources

Worksheet: Three Tiers of Vocabulary and Education

Declining Student Resilience

It has been widely reported that middle and high-school age students are suffering from much more depression, anxiety, dysphoria, and dysmorphia. Why is this?

Some social media posts suggest that this is related to the school closures due to the Covid-19 pandemic, and temporary social isolation that resulted. But numerous studies have shown that these massively increasing psychological problems among youth began a decade before this. Covid-19 only made these already existing issues more visible.

Studies show that declining student mental health and resilience is linked with the rise in use of social media, and the corrosive way that people use it and are affected by it.

Students who spend more time on social media, instead of interacting in the real world with peers, report more anxiety, depression, body dysmorphia, gender dysphoria, and symptoms related to anorexia.

Students who spend more time with friends and family, and community groups in the real world, report much less of this. Let’s be honest and ask two questions:

How many hours a week do typical students spend on cell phones and social media?

Pay attention closely – many kids underestimate the number of hours.

How many hours a week do typical students engage in healthy fun such as 

playing outdoors at recess; playing outdoors after school and on weekends

Participating in the Boy scouts, Girl scouts, 4 H club, etc.

Helping neighbors at the senior center; spending time with their grandparents

Playing a musical instrument; being in a band or chorus

spending time with friends at church or synagogue youth groups

hanging out with friends at the beach, parks, or mall. Roller skating. Anything fun in a group.

I have many years of experience as a teacher; I’ve spent a lot of time listening to students about such things. Growing up, my friends and I spent well over 20 hours a week, collectively, on these things. To my dismay, in recent years most of my students report spending almost no time doing this. Rather, it’s mostly homework, social media, or social media-via-video gaming online.

As the articles below clearly show, human beings evolved outdoors as social beings. Nothing in our evolution prepared us for sitting still seven hours a day in school without recess, or sitting still for hours each day listening to toxic messages on social media.

This realization is not old people being grumpy, not keeping up with the times. The socially indoctrinated behaviors of today’s young people are demonstrably psychologically unhealthy.

I urge teachers, school counselors, and parents to read these articles –

Declining Student Resilience: A Serious Problem for Colleges

By Peter Gray, Psychology Researcher at Boston College, September 22, 2015

A year ago I received an invitation from the head of Counseling Services at a major university to join faculty and administrators for discussions about how to deal with the decline in resilience among students.

At the first meeting, we learned that emergency calls to Counseling had more than doubled over the past five years. Students are increasingly seeking help for, and apparently having emotional crises over, problems of everyday life.

Recent examples mentioned included a student who felt traumatized because her roommate had called her a [bad name] and two students who had sought counseling because they had seen a mouse in their off-campus apartment. The latter two also called the police, who kindly arrived and set a mousetrap for them.

Faculty at the meetings noted that students’ emotional fragility has become a serious problem when it comes to grading. Some said they had grown afraid to give low grades for poor performance, because of the subsequent emotional crises they would have to deal with in their offices. Many students, they said, now view a C, or sometimes even a B, as failure, and they interpret such “failure” as the end of the world.

Faculty also noted an increased tendency for students to blame them (the faculty) for low grades—they weren’t explicit enough in telling the students just what the test would cover or just what would distinguish a good paper from a bad one. They described an increased tendency to see a poor grade as reason to complain rather than as reason to study more, or more effectively.

Much of the discussions had to do with the amount of handholding faculty should do versus the degree to which the response should be something like, “Buck up, this is college.” Does the first response simply play into and perpetuate students’ neediness and unwillingness to take responsibility? Does the second response create the possibility of serious emotional breakdown, or, who knows, maybe even suicide?

Two weeks ago, that head of Counseling sent us all a follow-up email, announcing a new set of meetings. His email included this sobering paragraph:

“I have done a considerable amount of reading and research in recent months on the topic of resilience in college students. Our students are no different from what is being reported across the country on the state of late adolescence/early adulthood. There has been an increase in diagnosable mental health problems, but there has also been a decrease in the ability of many young people to manage the everyday bumps in the road of life. Whether we want it or not, these students are bringing their struggles to their teachers and others on campus who deal with students on a day-today basis. The lack of resilience is interfering with the academic mission of the University and is thwarting the emotional and personal development of students.”

The full article is available here Psychology Today: Declining student resilience, by Peter Gray

Decline of Play and the Rise of Psychopathology in Children and Adolescents

Over the past half century, in the United States and other developed nations, children’s free play with other children has declined sharply. Over the same period, anxiety, depression, suicide, feelings of helplessness, and narcissism have increased sharply in children, adolescents, and young adults. This article documents these historical changes and contends that the decline in play has contributed to the rise in the psychopathology of young people.

Play functions as the major means by which children (1) develop intrinsic interests and competencies; (2) learn how to make decisions, solve problems, exert self-control, and follow rules; (3) learn to regulate their emotions; (4) make friends and learn to get along with others as equals; and (5) experience joy. Through all of these effects, play promotes mental health. Key words: anxiety; decline of play; depression; feelings of helplessness;
free play; narcissism; psychopathology in children; suicide

The Decline of Play and the Rise of Psychopathology in Children and Adolescents

Helicopter Parenting & College Students’ Increased Neediness

In my last post, I summarized reports from directors of college counseling services concerning college students’ rising levels of depression and anxiety; declining abilities to cope effectively with problems of everyday life; and increasing feelings of entitlement … A common theory is that these changes may be at least partly attributable to a rise in “helicopter parenting”

… The theory makes sense, logically, but is there any empirical evidence? A first step in testing the theory is to look for correlations between the style of parenting and students’ emotional and behavioral well-being. Are students whose parents are highly controlling and intrusive more likely than others to manifest the kinds of problems reported by college counselors? A number of studies have examined this question, and the results of all that I have found indicate that the answer is yes.

Helicopter Parenting & College Students’ Increased Neediness
Researchers link helicopter parenting to emotional fragility in young adults.
Peter Gray, Psychology Today, Oct 23, 2015

The Many Shades of Fear-Based Parenting

I have long been advocating, on this blog and elsewhere, for what I refer to as trustful parenting. Trustful parents allow their children as much freedom as reasonably possible to make their own decisions. They trust their children’s instincts, judgments, and ability to learn from mistakes….

The enemy of trustful parenting is fear, and, unfortunately, fear runs rampant in our society today. It runs rampant not because the world is truly more dangerous than it was in the past, but because we as a society have generated dangerous myths about dangers. We are afraid that strangers will snatch our children away if we don’t guard them constantly and that our children will be homeless, or in some other way life failures, if they don’t get all As in school, do all the proper extracurricular activities, and get into a top-ranked college…

Fear-based parenting comes in various shades, depending partly on the types of fears most prominent in the parents’ minds and partly on the parents’ personalities and economic means. Here is a list.

The Many Shades of Fear-Based Parenting, Peter Gray, Psychology Today, Mar 25, 2019

Doing More Time in School

Those who want more forced schooling ignore students’ opinions.
by Peter Gray

Kids aren’t learning much in school, so let’s make them start school when they are younger; let’s make them stay more hours in school each day and more days each year; and let’s not allow them to leave until they are at least 18 years old. Let’s do all this especially to the poor kids; they are getting the least out of school now, so let’s lengthen their time in school even more than we lengthen the time for others!…

Doing More Time in School

School districts now go so far as to ban ‘tag’

Schools are contributing to mental health problems in children by banning normal, healthy forms of play and social interaction. Many now claim that even tag is too emotionally and physically dangerous to kids.

http://www.freerangekids.com/school-district-bans-tag-for-students-physical-and-emotional-safety/

Children are literally not free to play outside

From the article

As if parents don’t have enough to worry about in the midst of a pandemic, last week, I got a terribly upsetting email from a dad who wrote to say that Child Protective Services, or CPS, had come to investigate him. Not because his kids weren’t social distancing. Not because of any beatings or starvation or deliberate exposure to dangerous germs.

He was being investigated for allowing his kids, ages 6 and 3, to play on their own front lawn.

The email came to me from a dad in Texas. He wrote, “While letting my kids play in my front yard, I got CPS called on me. I wasn’t out there with them but I was going out every 5 to 10 minutes and watching through the window between checks.”  When the caseworker arrived, his son made some popcorn, and the caseworker commented on how self-reliant he was. But self-reliant or not, the caseworker added, Dad had to be by his kids’ side at all times.

That is simply not true.

“Misstatements of law like this happen all around the country,” says longtime Chicago-based child welfare lawyer Diane Redleaf. “Neglect laws are intended to protect children from serious harm. That’s why it is more important than ever to get child protection policy right.”

The idea that kids can’t play on their own lawn, lightly supervised, is nonsensical in the best of times. When there’s a pandemic and kids are cooped up 24/7 for weeks at a time, it is even more important that we all understand: Kids need some play time. Parents need some work time. Even if helicopter parenting was the crazy norm before, it’s impossible now.

From Kids Deserve Playtime Without Their Parents Getting Arrested, Lenore Skenazy, The Sun (newspaper) 4/27/2020

Scientific studies of cell phone usage and mental health

Excessive Smartphone Use Is Associated With Health Problems in Adolescents and Young Adults
Yehuda Wacks and Aviv M. Weinstein*

They report that excessive cell phone usage leads to depression, anxiety, OCD, ADHD, alcohol abuse, cognitive-emotion regulation, impulsivity, impaired cognitive function, addiction to social networking, shyness and low self-esteem, sleep problems, reduced physical fitness, unhealthy eating habits, pain and migraines, reduced cognitive control and changes in the brain’s gray matter volume.

Cell phones, Teens and Mental Health

Two recent studies shed light on the negative psychological consequences of social media use.

There is no doubt that smartphone use has become pervasive in our society. In a 2018 Pew Research Center poll, 95 per cent of teens reported having access to a smart phone. Some 45 per cent of teens reported using the internet “almost constantly” (a number that has doubled compared to the 2014-2015 survey), while another 44 per cent said they go online multiple times per day.

The negative potential for social media was highlighted in two recent studies. In the first, researchers found that in a cohort of 6,595 U.S. adolescents, those who used social media more than three hours per day were at increased risk for developing mental health problems. The risk was principally seen for internalizing problems such feeling lonely, sad, depressed or anxious rather than for externalizing problems like acting out or behaviour difficulties.

The second study was an analysis of more than 12,000 teenagers in England. English teenagers were even more active on social media than their American counterparts. Two in three teens ages 15 to 16 used social media multiple times per day.

The researchers also found that teens who used social media multiple times per day were more likely to report psychological distress, less life satisfaction, less happiness and more anxiety than those who used it only weekly or less often. An interesting aspect of the study was that the negative effects of social media were more prominent in girls than boys. While both boys and girls showed an increase in psychological distress, the magnitude of the increase was higher in girls (18 per cent) than in boys (5 per cent).

Cell phones and mental health of students

Internal reflection

Physics is a deeply conceptual class. It’s not like English or History, where everyone already knows vast amounts of content before even entering. Students entering high school already knowing what a story is, what characters are, what a theme is, and what a moral is.

The human themes discussed by Shakespeare or Homer are universal. They are intuitively understood by even the least prepared of readers. Students may not know much about Elizabethan England, or ancient Greece, but they know what it means to be happy, sad, angry, or jealous. They know what it means for a character to fall in love, or to flee from their home.

When they read about a King entering a castle, and making a pronouncement to the citizens, students get it right away. Does any student ever erroneously think that “the pronouncement” is a person? That “the King” is a large object built out of wood and stone that someone lives in? That “the Castle” is a letter to be read? Of course not.

This is not so, however, with concepts in physics. Student entering a physics class often have no meaningful understanding of conservation laws, or Newton’s laws of motion. Most don’t understand why it is essential to differentiate between conservation of energy and conservation of momentum. When someone doesn’t know if a problem requires conservation of energy concepts, or kinematic equation concepts to solve a problem, that’s a like a person not knowing the difference between a King and a Castle. It is that basic.

Outside of AP Physics we usually are teaching from the ground level upwards.

No teaching method, homework assignment, or pedagogical technique has much effect on student performance – unless that student takes time to engage in internal mental reflection.

When students review at home what we learned in class,

When students think about what happened, and why it happened,

When students compare their preconceptions to what they have observed

only they are engaging in internal mental reflection.

If a student chooses not do this, then there is little a teacher can add. We can explain it for you, but we can’t understand it for you.

This is one reason why some students struggle. Doing classwork has only limited usefulness, unless one internally reflects on the subject.

How to be a good student

Chapter 12. Learning Through Reflection, by Arthur L. Costa and Bena Kallick

Learning Through Reflection

Google Scholar Search

Scholar.google.com Learning internal reflection

Scholar Google: Mental reflection

The Thirty Million Word Gap

AFT American Educator

The full article is available here: The Early Catastrophe: The 30 Million word gap by age 3. and at http://www.aft.org/periodical/american-educator/spring-2003

Betty Hart and Todd Risley entered the homes of 42 families from various socio-economic backgrounds to assess the ways in which daily exchanges between a parent and child shape language and vocabulary development. Their findings showed marked disparities between the sheer number of words spoken as well as the types of messages conveyed.

After four years these differences in parent-child interactions produced significant discrepancies in not only children’s knowledge, but also their skills and experiences with children from high-income families being exposed to 30 million more words than children from families on welfare.

Children's vocabulary differs greatly

Follow-up studies showed that these differences in language and interaction experiences have lasting effects on a child’s performance later in life.

The Early Catastrophe
Betty Hart & Todd R. Risley

Mission:

Betty Hart and Todd Risley were at the forefront of educational research during the 1960’s War on Poverty. Frustrated after seeing the effects of their high quality early intervention program aimed at language skill expansion prove unsuccessful in the long-term, they decided to shift their focus. If the proper measures were being taken in the classroom, the only logical conclusion was to take a deeper look at the home.

What difference does home-life make in a child’s ability to communicate? Why are the alarming vocabulary gaps between high school students from low and high income environments seemingly foreshadowed by their performance in preschool? Hart and Risley believed that the home housed some of these answers.

Experimental Method:

Hart and Risley recruited 42 families to participate in the study including 13 high-income families, 10 families of middle socio-economic status, 13 of low socio-economic status, and 6 families who were on welfare. Monthly hour-long observations of each family were conducted from the time the child was seven months until age three. Gender and race were also balanced within the sample.

Results:

The results of the study were more severe than the researchers anticipated. Observers found that 86 percent to 98 percent of the words used by each child by the age of three were derived from their parents’ vocabularies.

Furthermore, not only were the words they used nearly identical, but also the average number of words utilized, the duration of their conversations, and the speech patterns were all strikingly similar to those of their caregivers.

number of words addressed to children

After establishing these patterns of learning through imitation, the researchers next analyzed the content of each conversation to garner a better understanding of each child’s experience. They found that the sheer number of words heard varied greatly along socio-economic lines. On average, children from families on welfare were provided half as much experience as children from working class families, and less than a third of the experience given to children from high-income families.

Families's language and use differ

In other words, children from families on welfare heard about 616 words per hour, while those from working class families heard around 1,251 words per hour, and those from professional families heard roughly 2,153 words per hour. Thus, children being raised in middle to high income class homes had far more language exposure to draw from.

In addition to looking at the number of words exchanged, the researchers also looked at what was being said within these conversations. What they found was that higher-income families provided their children with far more words of praise compared to children from low-income families. Conversely, children from low-income families were found to endure far more instances of negative reinforcement compared to their peers from higher-income families.

Children from families with professional backgrounds experienced a ratio of six encouragements for every discouragement. For children from working-class families this ratio was two encouragements to one discouragement. Finally, children from families on welfare received on average two discouragements for every encouragement. Therefore, children from families on welfare seemed to experience more negative vocabulary than children from professional and working-class families.

The authors conclude:

We learned from the longitudinal data that the problem of skill differences among children at the time of school entry is bigger. more intractable. and more important than we had thought. So much is happening to children during their first three years at home, at a time when they are especially malleable and uniquely dependent on the family for virtually all their experience. that by age 3, an intervention must address not just a lack of knowledge or skill, but an entire general approach to experience…

…Estimating, as we did, the magnitude of the differences in children’s cumulative experience before the age of 3 gives an indication of how big the problem is. Estimating the hours of intervention needed to equalize children’s early experience makes clear the enormity of the effort that would be required to change children’s lives. And the longer the effort is put off, the less possible the change becomes. We see why our brief, intense efforts during the War on Poverty did not succeed. But we also see the risk to our nation and its children that makes intervention more urgent than ever.

_______________________________________

A summary from “The Early Catastrophe: The 30 Million Word Gap by Age 3” by University of Kansas researchers Betty Hart and Todd R. Risley. (2003). American Educator. Spring: 4-9, which was excerpted with permission from B. Hart and T.R. Risley (1995). Meaningful Differences in the Everyday Experiences of Young American Children. Baltimore, MD: Brookes Publishing.

 

The Writing Revolution

The Atlantic, October 2012

By Peg Tyre

in 2009, when Monica DiBella entered New Dorp, a notorious public high school on Staten Island, her academic future was cloudy. Monica had struggled to read in early childhood, and had repeated first grade. During her elementary-school years, she got more than 100 hours of tutoring, but by fourth grade, she’d fallen behind her classmates again. In the years that followed, Monica became comfortable with math and learned to read passably well, but never seemed able to express her thoughts in writing. During her freshman year at New Dorp, a ’70s-style brick behemoth near a grimy beach, her history teacher asked her to write an essay on Alexander the Great. At a loss, she jotted down her opinion of the Macedonian ruler: “I think Alexander the Great was one of the best military leaders.” An essay? “Basically, that wasn’t going to happen,” she says, sweeping her blunt-cut brown hair from her brown eyes. “It was like, well, I got a sentence down. What now?” Monica’s mother, Santa, looked over her daughter’s answer—six simple sentences, one of which didn’t make sense—with a mixture of fear and frustration. Even a coherent, well-turned paragraph seemed beyond her daughter’s ability. An essay? “It just didn’t seem like something Monica could ever do.”

For decades, no one at New Dorp seemed to know how to help low-performing students like Monica, and unfortunately, this troubled population made up most of the school, which caters primarily to students from poor and working-class families. In 2006, 82 percent of freshmen entered the school reading below grade level. Students routinely scored poorly on the English and history Regents exams, a New York State graduation requirement: the essay questions were just too difficult. Many would simply write a sentence or two and shut the test booklet. In the spring of 2007, when administrators calculated graduation rates, they found that four out of 10 students who had started New Dorp as freshmen had dropped out, making it one of the 2,000 or so lowest-performing high schools in the nation. City officials, who had been closing comprehensive high schools all over New York and opening smaller, specialized ones in their stead, signaled that New Dorp was in the crosshairs.

And so the school’s principal, Deirdre DeAngelis, began a detailed investigation into why, ultimately, New Dorp’s students were failing. By 2008, she and her faculty had come to a singular answer: bad writing. Students’ inability to translate thoughts into coherent, well-argued sentences, paragraphs, and essays was severely impeding intellectual growth in many subjects. Consistently, one of the largest differences between failing and successful students was that only the latter could express their thoughts on the page.

If nothing else, DeAngelis and her teachers decided, beginning in the fall of 2009, New Dorp students would learn to write well. “When they told me about the writing program,” Monica says, “well, I was skeptical.” With disarming candor, sharp-edged humor, and a shy smile, Monica occupies the middle ground between child and adult—she can be both naive and knowing. “On the other hand, it wasn’t like I had a choice. I go to high school. I figured I’d give it a try.”

New Dorp’s Writing Revolution, which placed an intense focus, across nearly every academic subject, on teaching the skills that underlie good analytical writing, was a dramatic departure from what most American students—especially low performers—are taught in high school. The program challenged long-held assumptions about the students and bitterly divided the staff. It also yielded extraordinary results. By the time they were sophomores, the students who had begun receiving the writing instruction as freshmen were already scoring higher on exams than any previous New Dorp class. Pass rates for the English Regents, for example, bounced from 67 percent in June 2009 to 89 percent in 2011; for the global-­history exam, pass rates rose from 64 to 75 percent. The school reduced its Regents-repeater classes—cram courses designed to help struggling students collect a graduation requirement—from five classes of 35 students to two classes of 20 students.

…[Why were the students previously failing?]

…. New Dorp students were simply not smart enough to write at the high-school level. You just had to listen to the way the students talked, one teacher pointed out—they rarely communicated in full sentences, much less expressed complex thoughts… Scharff, a lecturer at Baruch College, a part of the City University of New York, kept pushing, asking: “What skills that lead to good writing did struggling students lack?” …

Maybe the struggling students just couldn’t read, suggested one teacher.

A few teachers administered informal diagnostic tests the following week and reported back. The students who couldn’t write well seemed capable, at the very least, of decoding simple sentences. A history teacher got more granular. He pointed out that the students’ sentences were short and disjointed. What words, Scharff asked, did kids who wrote solid paragraphs use that the poor writers didn’t? Good essay writers, the history teacher noted, used coordinating conjunctions to link and expand on simple ideas—words like for, and, nor, but, or, yet, and so. Another teacher devised a quick quiz that required students to use those conjunctions. To the astonishment of the staff, she reported that a sizable group of students could not use those simple words effectively. The harder they looked, the teachers began to realize, the harder it was to determine whether the students were smart or not—the tools they had to express their thoughts were so limited that such a judgment was nearly impossible.

The exploration continued. One teacher noted that the best-written paragraphs contained complex sentences that relied on dependent clauses like although and despite, which signal a shifting idea within the same sentence. Curious, Fran Simmons devised a little test of her own. She asked her freshman English students to read Of Mice and Men and, using information from the novel, answer the following prompt in a single sentence:

“Although George …”

She was looking for a sentence like: Although George worked very hard, he could not attain the American Dream.

Some of Simmons’s students wrote a solid sentence, but many were stumped. More than a few wrote the following: “Although George and Lenny were friends.”

A lightbulb, says Simmons, went on in her head. These 14- and 15-year-olds didn’t know how to use some basic parts of speech. With such grammatical gaps, it was a wonder they learned as much as they did. “Yes, they could read simple sentences,” but works like the Gettysburg Address were beyond them—not because they were too lazy to look up words they didn’t know, but because “they were missing a crucial understanding of how language works. They didn’t understand that the key information in a sentence doesn’t always come at the beginning of that sentence.”

Some teachers wanted to know how this could happen. “We spent a lot of time wondering how our students had been taught,” said English teacher Stevie D’Arbanville. “How could they get passed along and end up in high school without understanding how to use the word although?”

…The Hochman Program, as it is sometimes called, would not be un­familiar to nuns who taught in Catholic schools circa 1950. Children do not have to “catch” a single thing. They are explicitly taught how to turn ideas into simple sentences, and how to construct complex sentences from simple ones by supplying the answer to three prompts—but, because, and so. They are instructed on how to use appositive clauses to vary the way their sentences begin. Later on, they are taught how to recognize sentence fragments, how to pull the main idea from a paragraph, and how to form a main idea on their own. It is, at least initially, a rigid, unswerving formula. “I prefer recipe,” Hochman says, “but formula? Yes! Okay!”

…Within months, Hochman became a frequent visitor to Staten Island. Under her supervision, the teachers at New Dorp began revamping their curriculum. By fall 2009, nearly every instructional hour except for math class was dedicated to teaching essay writing along with a particular subject. So in chemistry class in the winter of 2010, Monica DiBella’s lesson on the properties of hydrogen and oxygen was followed by a worksheet that required her to describe the elements with subordinating clauses—for instance, she had to begin one sentence with the word although.

Although … “hydrogen is explosive and oxygen supports combustion,” Monica wrote, “a compound of them puts out fires.”

Unless … “hydrogen and oxygen form a compound, they are explosive and dangerous.”

If … This was a hard one. Finally, she figured out a way to finish the sentence. If … “hydrogen and oxygen form a compound, they lose their original properties of being explosive and supporting combustion.”

As her understanding of the parts of speech grew, Monica’s reading comprehension improved dramatically. “Before, I could read, sure. But it was like a sea of words,” she says. “The more writing instruction I got, the more I understood which words were important.”

Classroom discussion became an opportunity to push Monica and her classmates to listen to each other, think more carefully, and speak more precisely, in ways they could then echo in persuasive writing.

PEG TYRE is the director of strategy at the Edwin Gould Foundation and the author of The Good School: How Smart Parents Get Their Kids the Education They Deserve.
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2012/10/the-writing-revolution/309090/