Advancing the Science of Teaching Reading Equitably

Abstract

Teaching Reading Is ComplexTeaching reading is an "outrageously complex activity" (Shulman, 1987, p. 11). Articles in Reading Research Quarterly's two special issue on the SOR identify various skills and capacities needed to read. The authors show how "reading is not a uniform activity but rather varies depending on purpose, skill, type of material, and con text" (Seidenberg, Cooper Borkenhagen, & Kearns, 2020, p. S121). Shaped by biological, behavioral, social, devel opmental, and cultural factors (Snowling & Hulme, 2005), models portray the act of reading with increasing complexity.Yet, "we know more about the science of reading than about the science of teaching based on the science of read ing" (Seidenberg et al., 2020, p. S121). Most models of reading are not pedagogical (Shanahan, 2020). Identifying the statistical significance of a cognitive skill in learning to read does not necessarily suggest that it should be taught or how. Debates about teaching phonological skill (e.g., Mathes & Torgesen, 2000) are illustrative of this. Models of reading " [do] not yet speak to what to teach, when, how, and for whom at a level that is useful for teachers" (Seidenberg et al., 2020, p. S121).Even SOR models that examine the meaning construc tion process among the reader, the text, and the teacher, such as Ruddell, Unrau, and McCormick's (2019) sociocognitive model, still focus on reading more than teaching reading. These models address a single reader rather than a class room of readers and do not account for the role of peer interactions (e.g., Palincsar, Brown, & Martin, 1987), cur riculum, lesson planning, classroom organization, affective support, questioning, personalized feedback, support mate rials, and myriad other factors that bear on teaching students to read in classroom settings (Grabe, 2004;Snow, Griffin, & Burns, 2005). Addressing the complexity of teaching read ing, Snow and Juel (2005) acknowledged that

Reading Without Words: Cultivating Bi/Multilingual Family Engagement

“…Negative perceptions also can stem from a mismatch between the literacy practices of bi/multilingual families and how literacy is taught in US schools (Lizárraga & Gutiérrez, 2018). Much of the reading curricula in the US is structured around a set of what Jensen (2021) calls “generic reading practices.” These include research‐based practices that have been identified by What Works Clearinghouse as significantly improving reading comprehension and focus on the acquisition and application of comprehension strategies such as visualization, inferencing, and monitoring, and are implemented systematically and consistently across grade levels (Shanahan et al, 2010). Researchers argue that these practices privilege the learning styles and experiences of monolingual, White, upper‐middle class students and do not necessarily equate to meaningful literacy experiences for bi/multilingual learners (Jensen, 2021; Skerrett, 2020).…”

“…Much of the reading curricula in the US is structured around a set of what Jensen (2021) calls “generic reading practices.” These include research‐based practices that have been identified by What Works Clearinghouse as significantly improving reading comprehension and focus on the acquisition and application of comprehension strategies such as visualization, inferencing, and monitoring, and are implemented systematically and consistently across grade levels (Shanahan et al, 2010). Researchers argue that these practices privilege the learning styles and experiences of monolingual, White, upper‐middle class students and do not necessarily equate to meaningful literacy experiences for bi/multilingual learners (Jensen, 2021; Skerrett, 2020). This is because generic practices tend to position reading as a hierarchical activity focused more on comprehension monitoring than enjoyment, socialization, and collaboration (Clarke & Comber, 2020).…”

“…This is because generic practices tend to position reading as a hierarchical activity focused more on comprehension monitoring than enjoyment, socialization, and collaboration (Clarke & Comber, 2020). By contrast, the home literacy practices of bi/multilingual families tend to be more focused on cultural aspects of learning to read (García & Kleifgen, 2020; O'Donnell & Kirkner, 2014) which include the exploration and valuing of student's home lives, making connections to community/family values and traditions, communal and social reading activities, opportunities for student agency in reading, and home language use (Jensen, 2021; McConnochie & Figueroa, 2017). These literacy practices, and particularly how language is used within reading events, are often in direct contrast to the monolingual view of literacy held by many educators which considers texts (and how they are read) to be static and bound to one language (García, 2020).…”

“…One of the many affordances of collaborative reading is that it fosters agentive young readers (Jensen, 2021). When students are given choice in how they participate in reading activities, they are positioned as knowers who are capable and successful readers (Jensen, 2021). Student agency in reading is developed not only through collaborative reading opportunities, but also through the ways that family members respond to their children within reading events.…”

“…Vanessa explained “… I think it kind of helps you…just see what your daughter or the person you are reading with comes up with .” Edie stated that the book allowed her family to be more open minded and creative. Amy explained that listening to her son craft the story gave her insight into his “ crazy ideas ,” stating that it was “ fun listening to the way he saw it .” Giving students agency and choice in how they participate in reading events is key to making meaningful reading experiences for bi/multilingual students, and is naturally facilitated through wordless picture books (Jensen, 2021).…”