S&H 1
The chapter discusses the importance of young readers’
vocabulary knowledge. They cannot comprehend a text if they do not know the
meaning of 98% of the words in the text, even if they can decode them all. I
feel like this would be especially important for younger readers, since they
have the extra cognitive hurdle to overcome when they have to decode most of
the words without automaticity. More developed readers can often focus on word
part knowledge or context clues because decoding and word identification have
become automatic for them.
The vocabulary knowledge described above appears to be
referring to vocabulary breadth. Children need to have a general sense
of 98% of the vocabulary meanings to comprehend a text. Vocabulary depth seems
to be more likely to need teachers’ and
caregivers’ explicit instruction, modeling, and scaffolding to develop,
although it can also be fostered through exposure to some degree. Teachers
should support students’ vocabulary breadth to foster general reading
comprehension, but they should also help students gain vocabulary depth, since
depth requires more than mere exposure. One thing the book does not discuss much
is how to help students develop the skills that they need to acquire
vocabulary depth on their own. I would like to discuss this more if anyone has
any experiences or insights.
It is important that we do not “[leave] word learning until
children encounter words in text on their own” because it is ineffective (17).
This reminds me of the Marzano Building Academic Vocabulary program we have in
my district. It’s a six-step process that involves introducing the word through
actions, images, etc., and students are then exposed to it in various contexts
and work together to develop various aspects of vocabulary depth. I think this
is a useful approach to address the issue of leaving vocabulary instruction to
the initial reading of the text.
K 2
This chapter begins by discussing the necessity for a text
to form a “unified whole” in order to communicate meaningfully (22). This
connects to the S&H chapter’s emphasis on the importance of vocabulary
breadth and depth for comprehension. Semantics are one of the subsystems of
language that make up a text, and if a child cannot comprehend the words and
their relationships on a semantic level, they cannot construct meaning from the
text.
The physical properties of a text must be “identified and
explained,” and the “relationship of each property to all of the others must be
explained” in order for comprehension to occur. This is important for all texts,
but I think it’s especially important for two types of texts: 1.) Nonfiction
texts such as articles and textbooks, which require synthesizing print, pictures,
and graphs/charts. 2.) Other multimodal texts, such as digital texts, which
require synthesizing information from each mode present in the text.
This chapter effectively elaborates on what the S&H
chapter said about what it means to “know” a word. In addition to recognizing
the concept behind a word, children must know “how it is expressed in oral and
written language” (42). For instance, an
ELL might know a concept, but not the English label for it, or a young child may
know the meaning of a word when it is expressed orally, but he/she could not
write or recognize it in its written form.
K 4
I firmly believe that schools have a strong influence on
whether or not people perceive language variation in such a way that reinforces
social inequities. I have strived in my work with adolescents to avoid language
like “correct grammar” or “proper usage.” My students have meaningful
discussions about what it means to have grammatical conventions that adhere
closely to the language used more by certain groups than others. We talk about
the balance between learning how to “code switch” to advance
societally/academically and speaking up when people disregard the validity of
nonmainstream dialects. These are deep conversations that teenagers are capable
of participating in, understanding, and handling maturely. My concern, however,
is how to address these issues with elementary students. The issues are just as
relevant, but I’d be afraid that those sorts of discussions are less likely or
possible. I have a question below about this issue.
This chapter discusses the fact that “rules that govern the
language are human constructions” (91). This reminds me of one of the linguistics
classes I took during undergrad. We discussed the difference between “descriptive
grammar” and “prescriptive grammar.” Descriptive grammar looks for patterns in
people’s speech or writing and seeks to describe those patterns. Prescriptive
grammar seeks to use those observations as rules that users of a language must
follow. We teachers often abide by a prescriptive perspective, and as an
English teacher, I know that I must help students learn and practice the
grammatical rules of standard English. I think that we often, however, fail to
take into account a descriptive perspective. I think that if we did so, we would
be able to help our students develop skills related to examining syntax and
semantic relationships, which would in turn improve both their close reading
skills and their writing quality. I’d love to see what that looks like in an
elementary reading or writing lesson!
Questions
- The S&H chapter mentions that vocabulary “is central across the range of social and academic domains” (2). Would you argue that vocabulary is the most foundational aspect of literacy, or would it be something else?
- The S&H chapter describes the connection between decoding skills and vocabulary skills as helping children memorize the connection between the sound and the meaning of words. Based on this, as well as your own knowledge and experience, how important do you think it is for young children to read aloud? Would there be a situation in which they would benefit from reading silently?
- Many teachers help students who speak dialects that are not academically valued by helping them “code switch.” Do you think this sufficiently helps them succeed academically and socially? Why or why not?
- The pragmatic system of language “governs what forms of language are appropriate in particular contexts” (27). Teachers have a big impact on the pragmatics of the language that children are expected to use—how can teachers working with young children best approach this responsibility?
- Can teachers help foster all aspects of word knowledge simultaneously? Should they? For example, oral expression, written expression, word identification, conceptual knowledge, etc.
- Figure 2.4 on page 49 of Dimensions of Literacy outlines the relationships among texts and systems of language. Do you think there is a particular order in which these should be addressed with emergent and beginning readers?
- How can teachers working with young children avoid reinforcing the idea that nonstandard dialects are “wrong” or “improper”?
- Before reading chapter 4, did you perceive standard English as a dialect? How did the chapter change your perspective, if at all?
