How do you counter the ‘knowledge deficit’ in reading?
By Tyler on May 3rd, 2012
This is one in a series of posts examining the Common Core State Standards and the conversation surrounding their impact on teaching and learning.
The liveliest debate about the Common Core standards within the reading world seems to be around the issue of teachers using “prereading” activities to help prepare kids for what they are about to read.
Many educators are interpreting the standards and the controversial “Publisher’s Criteria” as saying that prereading activities are an ineffective instructional tactic, and distract from what’s important: the text. Those critical of the standards worry that “cold reading” of text disenfranchises students who don’t bring as much background knowledge to the task.
Putting aside who’s right and who’s wrong, the debate over “prereading” at least raises the question of how best to tackle the “knowledge deficit” in schools.
In most classrooms you’ll find students on vastly different reading levels and with very different backgrounds. They don’t all bring the same knowledge base to school everyday. And struggling readers are at an acute disadvantage because they generally haven’t been able to pour through (and learn from) as many books as other children.
So, in a classroom full of varying “knowledge deficits,” how do you level the playing field?
Doug Lemov of Uncommon Schools shared some interesting ideas with Ed Week on how the teachers at his schools use “embedded nonfiction” when students read novels — assigning nonfiction texts on the same topic as a novel students are reading to build background knowledge.
“Over the long haul, one of the biggest barriers to reading success and comprehension is the knowledge deficit. We need to close that knowledge deficit,” he told Ed Week.
How do you tackle your students’ knowledge deficits during reading instruction?
Posted: May 3rd, 2012 under Education. Tags: background knowledge, common core, prereading, reading.
4 comments
Comments
Doug lemov is right on the mark. The issues of text complexity will prove to be more problematic for teachers trying to implement the common core with fidelity. Janet Allen is taking the first bold step to challenge the common core developers ( in their ivy league ivory towers) and speaking to the need for pre reading strategies. Without good practice like what Doug lemov suggests, and without good intentional teaching that includes pre reading strategies, there will not be a level playing field. I expect once teachers understand the changes involved in the common core, push back will surface.
Comment on May 4, 2012 at 4:58 pm
The reading deficit in children is very simple. They are not being TAUGHT to read. Reading is a step by step process. It needs to be taught explicitly and systematically using phonics. Until this is done in ALL schools, you will continue to see our decline..
My one question to all of you. Why is cat spelled with a c and not a k?
Comment on May 5, 2012 at 3:43 pm
Cat is spelled c-a-t because it is not beside a watch out vowel…e, i,y . If you that is why kit is spelled with a k and not a c because then it would say “sit”.
I tutor and teach explicit phonics to all of my kids.
Comment on May 6, 2012 at 4:20 pm
While I believe that the development of a set of common standards is a good move (and I think that they are reasonable, both in number and scope), I have many concerns about the text selection.
The argument against “frontloading” reading neglects the difference between self-selected reading and “instructional” reading. When we choose to read, we often skim headings or read the back cover blurb to “prepare” for reading. Then, if we’re not interested or don’t have adequate background knowledge, we often choose not to read the text. In school, however, students often don’t have the option of not reading a selected text; failing to preview, establish prior knowledge and set purpose (the three Ps) doesn’t do justice to the reader or the text.
Comment on May 8, 2012 at 7:01 am
