I would like to know how to read...but can at you least let me succeed?

         Every year it happens without fail. No matter how we change our approach or our teaching style, utter the word SpringBoard, children run.  The love/hate relationship between students and the curriculum has increasingly grown sour over the last couple of years as it becomes apparent they detest SpringBoard.  I find this so unfortunate, because in my opinion, the curriculum works. While scaffolding is needed in every aspect,  SpringBoard represents an opportunity for students to work at a higher level and to think about higher level concepts in a very unique way.  It allows them to develop as readers and writers alike, but there are times where you have to get inventive.  I often feel that whenever I tell students to take out their SpringBoard books, the eyes of detest and boredom stare me down, as if to say…ok white guy what are you going to attempt now? If I’m teaching reading and writing skills, am I really giving students the chance to succeed?

            This week, we would look at readings that focused on creating authentic assessments that allow students to succced. As mentioned in the last blog post, we often design curriculums with literature that is out of touch with students both in skill and in content. As Allington (2002) shows, books/texts with “more specialized technical terms… and abstract ideas…The  syntax of texts becomes more complex and demanding. The reasoning about information in texts also shifts, with a greater emphasis on inferential thinking and prior knowledge” (p.16-17). For a lot of students, building such prior knowledge within the classroom is available but once they leave the class, the resources aren’t there. As Allington shows, we are simply not creating chances for students to succeed.

            The question then becomes, if we are preparing students to enter our society as prepared citizens, should we be giving them skills that we already do as adults. In a follow up study, Allington (2013) shows how we use reading in our adult lives, emphasizing “if adults typically read texts at this level of difficulty, that would mean they would encounter…words…they had not seen before” (p. 525). As adults, we don’t read things with words we don’t know. Instead, we switch to a text with words we can easily access and still create the same kind of meaning. Allington’s point to teachers is to create authentic assessments that help students build this type of skill, while also challenging them to use familiar texts to build up to more complex texts. In a manner of speaking, give them chances to succeed.

            This would only work if students only worked on a singular profile. But as a teacher with limited experience, I can tell you that students don’t all come from the same sheet. Often, we have to design assessments with various outputs for different learners. This can often be very frustrating given the fact that every different learner has a different way of wanting to be assessed  (Applegate, et. al, 2006). When designing assessments, its so hard trying to make sure that you are covering both the standards and the curriculum selected by the district. But everything gets complicated when we consider the FSA assessment or any computer-based assessment. I find that computer assessments often are not realistic because if we teach decoding skills, its hard to transition those skills to a computer (Robinson, et. al, 2002).

            With all of this thinking behind instruction in general, I still am troubled by not finding the silver lining between instruction and assessment. Designing assessments that give my students an equitable chance at success often frustrates me.  I feel that I accomplish something for the district but I don’t help my students out in the long run. As Dennis (2009-2010) shows, “‘it becomes critical to reconsider how we conceptualize the ways teachers might think about reading instruction, struggling readers, and the multitude of influences that can affect student learning and growth” (p. 289).  When Dennis (2009-2010) talks about the multitude of influences, I keep thinking how many influences are in terms of students’ reading lives. I want to decrease it. But at the same time honor my commitments to the curriculum but also make sure with the students they actually succeed.

References

Allington, R. (2002). “You can’t learn much from books you can’t read”.  Educational
     Leadership. Retrieved from EBSCO. Pgs. 16-19.

Allington, R. L. (2013). “What really matters when working with struggling readers”. The Reading

     Teacher. 66(7). Pp. 520-530.

Applegate, M.D., Quinn, K.B., Applegate, A.J. (2006). “Profiles in comprehension”. The Reading

    Teacher. 60(1). Pp. 48-57.

Dennis, D.V. (2009-2010). “I’m not stupid”: How assessment drives (in) appropriate reading

     instruction”. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy. 53(4). Pp. 283-290. 

Robinson, R.D., McKenna, M., and Conradi, K. (2012). Issues and trends in literacy education (5^th

     ed.). Boston: Pearson