CCBC-Net Archives
Reluctant readers
- Contemporary messages sorted: [ by date ] [ by subject ] [ by author ]
From: Sherryl Clark <sherrylc1_at_optusnet.com.au>
Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2011 19:29:02 +1100
406 ==.ALT
I write books for what we call (in Australia) emerging readers, but have also written for "remedial" readers. I also teach creative writing. I'm finding the discussion very interesting - when I did the required training here to teach adult learners, we talked a lot about learning styles - and there were simple tests on the internet that my students could do themselves.
Basically, the test showed whether you were better at learning orally (by listening to the teacher), visually (by reading texts and notes) or kinesthetically (the student needed some kind of practical action associated with the learning). These seemed to be very basic categories that helped me as a teacher to vary the way I taught and to use a range of materials. Not all books, not all videos, not all practical hands-on stuff.
To me, a reluctant reader (once you get past obvious disabilities like dyslexia) surely is likely to fall into a category of learning style other than visual? If you know that these learning styles exist in all learners of all ages, then audio books as a supplement will assist some kids, with kinesthetic learners you might need to be more lateral (I heard of a teacher who got her kinesthetic student to learn to read while on an exercise bike!).
My question to you teachers and school librarians in the US (based on what I hear from friends who have been teaching for a long time) is this - has No Child Left Behind had a major negative impact on reading abilities in your students? Has your ability to try other tactics been reduced? If you have no time to enjoy reading together in the classroom, has this relegated reading for enjoyment to the bottom of the pile for your students? One reason I ask is because our government here is moving towards national testing, despite a lot of protest and evidence that it creates a negative school experience for many children. Sherryl Clark
406 ==.ALT
Received on Sat 05 Feb 2011 07:29:02 PM CST
Date: Sat, 05 Feb 2011 19:29:02 +1100
406 ==.ALT
I write books for what we call (in Australia) emerging readers, but have also written for "remedial" readers. I also teach creative writing. I'm finding the discussion very interesting - when I did the required training here to teach adult learners, we talked a lot about learning styles - and there were simple tests on the internet that my students could do themselves.
Basically, the test showed whether you were better at learning orally (by listening to the teacher), visually (by reading texts and notes) or kinesthetically (the student needed some kind of practical action associated with the learning). These seemed to be very basic categories that helped me as a teacher to vary the way I taught and to use a range of materials. Not all books, not all videos, not all practical hands-on stuff.
To me, a reluctant reader (once you get past obvious disabilities like dyslexia) surely is likely to fall into a category of learning style other than visual? If you know that these learning styles exist in all learners of all ages, then audio books as a supplement will assist some kids, with kinesthetic learners you might need to be more lateral (I heard of a teacher who got her kinesthetic student to learn to read while on an exercise bike!).
My question to you teachers and school librarians in the US (based on what I hear from friends who have been teaching for a long time) is this - has No Child Left Behind had a major negative impact on reading abilities in your students? Has your ability to try other tactics been reduced? If you have no time to enjoy reading together in the classroom, has this relegated reading for enjoyment to the bottom of the pile for your students? One reason I ask is because our government here is moving towards national testing, despite a lot of protest and evidence that it creates a negative school experience for many children. Sherryl Clark
406 ==.ALT
Received on Sat 05 Feb 2011 07:29:02 PM CST
