Fluency vs. Comprehension

In one of my other education classes we are reading this article on a fluency and comprehension. The article examines a study conducted in Pennsylvania, New Jersey and Delaware in which 171 children from grade 2 to grade 10 were tested for reading fluency and comprehension. All of the children selected were deemed to be strong readers according to their teachers and parents. The children were first tested for fluency to ensure the students were fluent readers. The children were then test at his or her grade level on two narrative passages, on read orally and the other read silently. The passages were selected from a program that is designed to test reading comprehension. The results of the study found that approximately one third of the readers were advanced comprehenders, another third were proficient comprehenders and one third were struggling comprehenders. Therefore, even though these students were determined to be strong readers, one third of them struggled to understand the passage they read. Why? Well it turns out that there has been a large push in the United States to focus on reading fluency. Many theorists believe that “fluency is a facilitator of comprehension and precedes its development” so basically if a child is reading fluently then you can work on developing comprehension. Other theorists believe that “fluency is an outcome of comprehension” so when you understand what you are reading your reading become more fluent.

I think the first theory makes more sense. If you are struggling to read a passage, then the meaning of that passage becomes lost in the words. I found this simulation that I think helps illustrate how fluency affects comprehension. So I agree that we need to develop fluency first BUT we can’t forget about comprehension. When students are reading fluently, teachers need to help develop comprehension. Part of the problem with the results of this study is that 30% of the struggling comprehenders were already in middle school or high school. In these upper grades, I don’t think teachers spend that much time helping students with reading comprehension. Sure we spent time going reading passages and answering multiple choice questions on them (similar to what you would find on the diploma exam) but the teachers never really taught us how to critically examine the passages we read. It seemed like you got it or you didn’t. (Or at least it seemed like this for my class)

So how will the results of this study impact us as teachers? Well, I think we need to continue to develop fluency with students, as this is probably the first step in developing comprehension, but we also need to help students understand what they are reading at an early age. Get the students to think about and reflect on what they are reading and have them write or draw or somehow show you what they understand from what they read. I don’t want to say the dreaded word, journals, but it could be a great way for students to express what they know…just don’t make them write in their journals all the time.

To relate this to our sociology class, it makes me think about the conflict theory and how the people at the top determine what is important to focus on and study. The items that the dominant group are interested in get all the attention and everything else gets pushed by the wayside. So perhaps in the United States someone said that we should focus on fluency in reading, and so all the teachers started focusing on fluency and all but ignored comprehension. And now a group of researchers are saying “hey, what about understanding what you are reading? Isn’t that important too?” Perhaps we will see a shift towards an emphasis in reading comprehension in the future.

Reference:

Applegate, M. D., Applegate, A. J., & Modla, V. B. (2009). "She's My Best Reader; She Just Can't Comprehend": Studying the Relationship Between Fluency and Comprehension. The Reading Teacher , 512-521.

Functionalism

In yesterday’s class we continued to learn about the history of sociology and education. In particular we examined the theory of functionalism and how functionalists view society as a machine or living organism. This type of view means that society works together to fulfill the societal needs in order for society to function. You are always working for the needs of society and although individuals have needs they are always in line with all the other individuals and society as a whole. In this way, if society is functioning then the system as a whole must work otherwise the system would fall apart. Let’s see if I can use the analogy of a machine to illustrate functionalism….one machine is made up of multiple parts. Each part has an individual function but all of the parts work together to make the machine run. Along with individual functions, all of the individual parts have their own needs. For example one small part may need grease to work properly but the grease this one part receives is not only for this one specific part but also for the entire machine to function properly. Therefore, every part has a specific function and all of the parts are working together to make the machine run.

Perhaps it is just the scientist in me thinking but this sort of makes sense! Just like a machine needs all of its parts to function, society needs all the individuals to work together so the system does not fall apart. A downside of this theory is inequality. For functionalists, inequality is functional. It serves a purpose for society in that the most talented and hard working individuals get the better jobs and those that are less talented get the jobs that are not as prestigious. Does this not make sense?? Don’t we want those that are most qualified and talented to be our doctors and lawyers? I personally would not want a lazy, untalented doctor. I want a doctor that will use their knowledge to determine the best way to make me well. In terms of education, I don’t think anyone would question that we want talented and hard working teachers to teach our students. We want the teacher that is best suited to instruct the students to be in the front of the class. And talent and hard work have a lot to do with that but I think the class you are born into still has a lot to do with where you end up in life. To become one of the most prestigious individuals in society often requires more education than the initial 12 years of public school and unless your family or you have the money to send you to college or university, your talent and hard work will not take you beyond a high school diploma. So perhaps in a perfect society, functionalism would work and the most talented and hard working individuals would be at the top of the pyramid, however in today’s society this does not work too well. There are other factors involved.

I am looking forward to tomorrow’s class to find out more about functionalism and investigate the problems associated with the theory!

The first eight pages….

I have to admit that this is the second time I read these first eight pages. The first time I read them, nothing really stuck. I came to class last Tuesday thinking “what were in those eight pages that I remember” and the answer was “not much!” so I determined that before I attempted to blog about my reading I would have to re-read those pages to fully understand what I read.

The first couple of pages focus on defining sociology, sociology of education and many other terms that I believe will help to further my understanding of the course material. The remainder of the first eight pages is dedicated to defining the function of school, both intended functions and unintended functions. While defining the intended functions of school, Barakett and Cleghorn (2008) outline common myths associated with popular beliefs associated with the school system. For example, “one myth states that those who achieve well in school have done so through hard work and by being evaluated according to objective and “fair” (universalistic) principles. (Barakett and Cleghorn, 2008)” This means that an individual’s effort will lead to higher academic success and ultimately a higher social status (Barakett and Cleghorn, 2008). I believe this can be true, however it can also be very false. I personally have worked hard and in turn received a high grade on an assignment or test. However, I have also experienced times in my school career when I have heard someone say “I barely studied at all”, or “I didn’t even look at the material” and those students have received very high marks on their tests, whereas other students that had spent hours looking over the material barely scraped by with a passing grade or did not even pass the test. Therefore, there must be other underlying issues. There is not simply one thing that dictates academic success, but a multitude of items that contribute to one’s success. Race, gender and social class all have an influence on the success or failure of a student.

I also enjoyed the discussion of the unintended functions of schools. I think it is important to be aware of the activities that occur in a school that are not directly linked to the formal purpose of the school. These unintended functions include social control, custodial, establishment of social relations, and promotion of critical analysis. The first three of these functions occur regularly. Teachers establish rules and procedures to help mould students into functioning members of society (social control and establishment of social relations). The custodial function means that students are looked after while they are at school; they have a safe environment where they can learn and grow. The fourth unintended function, critical analysis, may not be as common of a function as the other three. Although I think most teachers have a desire for their students to think critically about what they are learning, I would doubt that many students enter into this type of analysis. I would argue that not too many students think about what they are learning and how it might impact their lives or the lives of others or the environment. I wonder how many teachers strive to engage their students into higher level of Bloom’s taxonomy or whether teachers are more focused on completing the knowledge and comprehension components of Bloom’s to fulfill the curriculum components. One of my goals as a student teacher is to increase my students’ ability to think beyond the knowledge and be able to analyse, synthesize and evaluate what they are learning.

Reference: Barakett, J. & Cleghorn, A. (2008) Sociology of Education: an Introductory View from Canada. Toronto: Pearson Education Canada

Welcome!

Welcome! This blog is for my education & society class and it will provide an outlet for my thoughts and opinions on education-related item from a sociological perspective. My blog entries will include items discussed in class, assigned readings, student presentations, current education-related news items, and comments on my classmates’ blogs.

To briefly introduce myself, my name is Sheri and I am in my second year of a two year after degree program in Education at the University of Lethbridge. I received my first degree in Environmental Science from the University of Calgary and worked in that field for three years before I discovered that that was not the career for me and returned to school to pursue my education degree. As far as sociology is concerned, I have only taken one introductory course in sociology and found the course material quite interesting. I am taking this course to fulfil my foundations requirements and I thought this course would increase my understanding of important issues for teachers, students, parents and society in general and would help in future years as I delve into the world of teaching. I also hope that this course will help me to develop my own opinions on educational issues, however continue to be open to other points of view.

In this first week of class, we discussed what sociology can do for you as an educator. The sociological perspective (these four bullets were taken directly from Runte’s slides):

1. helps you to see the ‘big picture’ – place one’s classroom within a larger social context
2. counteracts the over-emphasis on the individual when analyzing social phenomenon
3. helps educators to see beyond immediate consequences of policy decisions to question their unintended consequences
4. helps educators to anticipate trends and so formulate a response before the issue comes crashing into their classroom

For the ‘big picture’ we talked about the big push for math and science in the schools and what impact that has on the arts. I remember experiencing this push when I was in school. When I was in middle school we had a large band program, home economics program, metal and wood shop and art program. However, just before I got to the high school, the school board had decided that our high school would focus on academics rather than the arts. I was crushed that they had removed the shop from the high school as it was one of my favourite options and I was looking forward to continuing with it in high school. We still had a small band and choir program, drama and art program but the focus was definitely on completing the academic courses and the funding for the options had been greatly reduced. I have wondered if the lack of arts forced me to complete all my sciences or if I would have completed it that way regardless of the options available to me. But I do know that I would have enjoyed having more art options throughout my high school years. And I also know that those students that had a definite interest in arts or trades or anything that was not considered the ‘core’ academic areas left our high school to find a high school that would encourage their interests. I also wonder if the academic focus has changed the way I view the arts. I find that I am not too interested in going to plays or seeing concerts (I suppose, this could also be from the lack of funds associated with being a student). As was mentioned in class, could this focus away from the arts change the way society feels about going to the theatre and seeing concerts? I definitely think so!