Please, let's not go completely crazy over close reading! I have
always advocated for students providing evidence to support their responses, as
evident in my prior posts; however, there are a multitude of texts and
strategies that provide those experiences.
I am disturbed when I search for appropriate examples of literacy
lessons aligned to CCSS, and I read sample questions with predetermined
responses for students. Now, don't get me wrong, I believe in text dependent
evidence; but why are we ignoring responses that perhaps combine text evidence
and the student's prior knowledge and experience with the content. Are we not
beyond the day when we assumed there was "a correct answer?" What happened to beyond the text questions?
I so remember the days when I integrated the arts into literacy lessons
for the purpose of supporting literacy processes and skills. We valued Howard
Gardner's "Theory of Multiple Intelligences" and Harvey Silver's
"Learning Styles." I used
music, visual arts, movement and drama to reinforce important literacy concept
and skills.
It’s a great big world out there!
The world is a laboratory for inquiry every day, based upon, not only
what we read, but what we experience, what we observe, what we create…and so
on.
I am also reminded of Art Costa’s Three
Levels of Inquiry. The third level
states:
Readers
think beyond what the text states.
Answers are based on
reader’s prior knowledge/experience and will vary. Words
found in these questions include:
•
evaluating
•
judging
•
applying a
principle
•
speculating
•
imagining
•
predicting
• hypothesizing
In education we seem to live and die by the latest
trends. Just because close reading is
the “strategy du jour” does not mean it is exclusive. Everything should be in balance. Let’s remember all the reasons we read to
students and ask students to read, including reading solely for enjoyment. Whatever the purpose, let's enjoy!
