“Our most recent
study examining the self-teaching hypothesis involved providing 12 free
self-selected books every summer to children from low income families. What this study found was that we could
eliminate the summer reading loss that produces most of the reading achievement
differences found between the children of low- and middle-income families in
U.S. schools. The poor children to
whom we provided free self-selected books gained reading achievement during the
summer months, whereas the control group of children who did not receive the
books lost ground, or experienced summer reading loss.”
This quote from Richard L. Allington’s What Really Matters When Working With Struggling Readers gives
light on the generalizations about students who have trouble with “standard”
academic English in the U.S. classroom.
I feel there are simplifications in terms of which students are
struggling, how old they typically are, how research is used to help them (and
how effective that is), and how much this research actually pertains to all
struggling readers. Many questions
came from Allington’s two articles addressing these issues.
How does the evidence-based research being conducted show which
students are prioritized in the U.S. schooling system. Who is this
research being done upon? How is the
research being used to help only particular types of students?
-
How are the ways the research is being used highlight the focus of
the U.S. educational policy, and who has control over this policy?
-
How does Allington subliminally define “struggling readers” in his
texts? How are other students
defined? Does the interpretation
of research only pertain to specific types of learners?
-
How do these questions connect with Kumashiro’s ideas about “discourses
that shape public education”? How
will this impact our practice as teachers (especially when we are being
pushed/pulled in certain pedagogical directions)?
No comments:
Post a Comment