Heather and I continue our discussion about Peer Editing. In this conversation, the topic of reading comprehension is explored.
Heather: One thing other lab instructor in my department and I are beginning to wonder is if our students comprehend what they are reading. Many in the same cohort I had last falll seem incapable of following instructions, let alone addressing feedback.
On Thursday when I was quietly doing some benchwork while an intro genetics lab was going on in the shared lab space, I heard my colleague, Lauri, explaining how to write a paragraph. Apparently in their results section her students would write 5-10 sentences detailing their data, and then in the last sentence got to the point. Is our writing guide that bad? http://urbiolabreports.wikidot.com
This trend worries me enough that I’m making short videos in which I run through the list of tasks for the upcoming lab. Previously, I posted the list, with no audio, and students still didn’t read/understand it.
John: I think you are on to something about comprehension. For most of my middle school career, I taught MORE language arts per hour per day than science. At that time, we had reading, English, spelling and writing instruction at the 8th grade level, all taught by me. Our students knew how to do all of them well. As instructional trends changed, we did less formal language arts instruction at the middle school level, expecting that kids coming out of elementary school had those skills. NOT! I recall doing an item analysis on a science unit exam that my 8th graders took, taking careful note of what I had covered in class, cross-coding evidence from student science notebooks, etc. to verify that I had thoroughly covered the material. The questions MOST missed by students were not the ones I hadn’t cover in class. Upon further investigation, it was the wording of the exam questions that the students could not comprehend. So, it was not a science content exam, it became a reading exam. I took the notes to my administrator and shared the results, telling her I had identified the non-readers in my class. I was not teaching reading at the time, only science, and the administrator hadn’t known me as a language arts instructor, and her comment was, “Why is my science teacher identifying the non-readers?” I recall from some of the earlier documentation in the Framework for K-12 Science Education the statement that 60% of a scientist’s workload is related to reading and language arts. That reminds me of a children’s story where the main character, a teenage boy, has been kidnapped by pirates, and they are teaching him pirate ways. When his mentor found out he couldn’t swim, all other instruction stopped until he learned to swim. I mentioned that to the principal I referenced earlier. In my opinion, if we have a non-reader in class, the BEST thing we can do for him/her is stop all other instruction and teach them to read. Then they can learn the other materials. Radical, I know, but I believe there’s merit. Without knowing HOW to read and comprehend, we are setting students up for failure in all subject areas.
“Learning to read is probably the most difficult and revolutionary thing that happens to the human brain and if you don’t believe that, watch an illiterate adult try to do it.”
― John Steinbeck
I agree, John; on my science tests I see more incorrect answers indicating poor communication skills than poor science skills. Reading and writing are key in any discipline.
To help them learn to write a decent science response, I teach my students to use the SEE model in their answers – Statement, Evidence, Explanation. Even 3rd graders can put together a few sentences this way. For example, “The bigger the water drop, the faster it flows downhill. The big drop hit the bottom of the tray fastest because the big drop is heavier.”
And yes, at least one someone is reading your blog posts.
Dale,
Thanks for reading…you made my day. I’d not heard of the SEE model, but I love it. In science we should be all about evidence, which really emphasizes the need to look for evidence. Once you have evidence, you can make logical claims…or in the SEE model, explanations. Thanks for sharing.
John
I’ll have to try the SEE method you mentioned, Dale. It does make me sad to think I’m doing this at the college level, however. I’m not playing the “let’s all blame the previous level of instruction” game. I just want my students to get through my lab having learned, or having started to learn, essential skills.
(And yes, John I do read your posts. Today from my phone, no less)
Heather, I teach the same kids from 3rd – 6th grade and although the 6th graders have been using the SEE model for 3+ years, some of them still need to be reminded…. every … single… time. Previous instruction helps, but doesn’t necessarily “stick.”
Elementary students are still learning how to learn and are developmentally immature, but I’m working on trying to make them take (age-appropriate) responsibility for learning. I’m working hard to teach them but they should be working to learn too, not only enjoying the investigations and scribbling down minimal answers, but thinking, making connections and then actually remembering and applying them to future situations.
We’re all in this together!
Where’s the “like” button?
🙂
Pingback: Daniel Beaulieu