The Facts:
- In the Introduction to the ELA (English Language Arts) standards, the following chart is given showing the breakdown of Literary and Informational Texts at each grade level:
Distribution of Literary and Informational Passages by Grade in the 2009 NAEP Reading Framework
Grade Literary Informational- 4 50% 50%
- 8 45% 55%
- 12 30% 70%
- Source: National Assessment Governing Board. (2008). Reading framework for the 2009 National
- This paragraph immediately follows the above table:
Assessment of Educational Progress. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
"The Standards aim to align instruction with this framework so that many more students than at present can meet the requirements of college and career readiness. In K–5, the Standards follow NAEP’s lead in balancing the reading of literature with the reading of informational texts, including texts in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. In accord with NAEP’s growing emphasis on informational texts in the higher grades, the Standards demand that a significant amount of reading of informational texts take place in and outside the ELA classroom. Fulfilling the Standards for 6–12 ELA requires much greater attention to a specific category of informational text—literary nonfiction—than has been traditional. Because the ELA classroom must focus on literature (stories, drama, and poetry) as well as literary nonfiction, a great deal of informational reading in grades 6–12 must take place in other classes if the NAEP assessment framework is to be matched instructionally. To measure students’ growth toward
college and career readiness, assessments aligned with the Standards should adhere to the distribution of texts across grades cited in the NAEP framework."
My Opinion / Realizations:
My first realization was that the breakdown between Informational and Literary Texts was not created by the Common Core Consortium. Instead, they copied the breakdown from recent the breakdown in recent NAEP tests. And while it is clear in the above paragraph that the intention is to increase the emphasis on informational texts from what it has previously been, the above breakdown is not stated as a breakdown of exactly what percent of instruction should be geared toward each type of reading, but the breakdown in what should be tested. Now, obviously, what is going to be tested is likely to be reflected in the curriculum, but in the ideal classroom, how much time is spent on each type of reading should reflect the abilities and needs of the students in the class. If a student or group of students is already proficient at reading and analyzing informational texts, then more emphasis should be placed on literature in order to meet the standards and vice versa. In short, the breakdown of informational versus literary texts should be whatever is needed to meet all of the required standards.
My second and (to me) more groundbreaking revelation occurred when I began thinking about the breakdown in high school to try to determine how much of an English class would have to consist of non-fiction reading if one were trying to mirror the above chart in the curriculum. I considered the number of classes a high school student takes. I would say six is about average. Some students take before or after school classes and others take fewer than six classes (particularly senior year), but six is likely a pretty accurate average. Next I made some educated guesses as to the average student schedule. Assuming two non-academic classes (music, sports, PE, drama, etc.) which require little or no reading, one math class, one social studies class (history, government, economics, etc), one science class (most commonly Biology, Chemistry, or Physics), and one English class we can look at where most reading will take place. Originally, I considered little or no reading taking place in math classes, but when I thought of my experience in tutoring and how much students struggle with word problems, I realized that there were important reading comprehension tasks that do indeed take place in math classes. Social studies classes, I think most would agree, should require a considerable amount of reading - perhaps as much as English. Science, depending on the class, will certainly require some reading, but less for Physics or Chemistry than for Biology. My guess, then, as to the percent of reading that takes place in each class would be as follows:
Non-academic classes: ~ 0%
Math: ~ 10%
Science: ~ 20%
Social Studies: ~ 35%
English: ~ 35%
Now, obviously, these calculations are not precise, but even if they are substantially skewed, I believe they will illustrate my point. If you add up the reading that occurs outside of English, it totals about 65% of all reading. I doubt there are many occasions where any of this reading would be fictional texts. Rare exceptions are likely negligible. Assuming an instructional team is attempting to mirror the NAEP framework, only 5 of the 35% of reading done in English class would need to be non-fiction. That is 5/35, 1/7, or just under 15%. If you consider non-fictional reading already occurring in English classes, that percent should be easy to accomplish: looking up definitions of unknown words, reading texts on appropriate methods for citations, researching for persuasive writing assignments, reading about authors and historical events significant to the literature being studied, etc. I don't know that these percentages represent any increase in the amount of informational texts used by high school students. The significant difference is not how much of these texts must be used, but the emphasis on complex texts and ensuring that students learn to independently read, comprehend, and make use of these texts.
After considering the above realizations, I fail to see that there is any attack on the reading and studying of the classics. I think a well thought-out curriculum should be able to include all of the classics previously studied. The key is to ensure that the texts being used to teach other subjects are indeed appropriately complex for the grade level using them and that reading comprehension is being encouraged and supported throughout all subjects. This will make our students not only better readers, but more capable learners. This is what I want for my kids and for the children in my community - students that finish school not just stuffed with facts of varying levels of importance, but young people who have learned how to learn and will continue doing so for the rest of their lives.
No comments:
Post a Comment