Module 1: Reading Reflection

Dayna Harkey
6/12/13
Module 1: Reading Reflection

 

Module 1: Reading Reflection (Chapters 1&2)

 

This was a very interesting two chapters for me. It made me self-evaluate in many ways. We just switched to the “Recipe for Reading Program where we teach phonics sounds, fry words, and other screens. I thought it was the best way to teach students, but after reading this I am not sure which approach is the best.

There are a few major differences that I learned between a skills approach to literacy and a comprehensive approach to literacy. The first is when literacy is approached more as the skill approach, the teacher is focusing more on the different methods and step by step skills that the students learn to connect to reading. It goes again the ideas of schemas and our prior knowledge on information that we learn from everyday life. They focus on the beginning steps on breaking down the sounds in words. They emphasis on isolation the different sounds that are found within a word. The skills approach reminds me of building block to literacy. It starts with the smallest blocks and stack them on top of each other, one by one, to develop their understanding with reading. The students focus more on the individual sounds in the word. The skill approach is like a phonics approach with zero concentration on comprehending anything that is read.

            If they truly just make a connection to understand what the word is saying within the sentence, then they will have a stronger comprehension level. The comprehensive or sociopsycholinguistic approach is different. Unlike the skills approach, it doesn’t break down the different skills with reading. It is taking the skills but using them in different strategies. It is using prior knowledge or making connections to construct meaning of what they are reading. It is having the literature discussion about the books and making predictions by looking at the pictures. It is based more on the student’s emotions and beliefs rather than the “chunking” of the phonic sounds with in a word. If a student spends so much time thinking of phonetically saying a word, they lose all comprehension within the story they are reading.
           Connie Weaver points out many instances how sociopsycholinguistic is better for the student because it is teaching them to blend sentences and comprehend sentences they are reading. I agree that the comprehensive approach is better. I never saw comprehension from this point of view and will have to do some evaluating within the classroom on how to help my students comprehend what they are reading.