R
rockdrummer
Guest
Source: Considering Methods and Approaches--Planning for Literacy Instruction-- Gallaudet University
In reality, any one approach or method can either work in ways that benefit students in their pursuit of literacy or can serve to work against their development. Take, for example, the following list of approaches that might be used to improve instruction for literacy:
Select the best curriculum or commercial reading and writing program.
Hire the best teachers.
Focus more instructional time and energy on reading and writing.
Use better diagnostics and remedial strategies to improve reading and writing skills.
Immerse children in good literature.
Spend more time on the direct instruction of English language and reading skills.
Converse with students in American Sign Language (ASL) socially and in academic contexts.
Develop bilingual programs (ASL as the first language, written English as the second).
Benefits and Cautions
Each of the above approaches, as described below, has potential merits and drawbacks, depending on how it is applied.
1. Select the best curriculum or commercial reading and writing program.
Benefits: Commercial materials and curricula can be a source of information for instructional guidelines and ideas for activities. Furthermore, many commercial programs now include excellent children's literature, with the stories arranged according to approximate grade levels. This information is helpful in matching materials to a child's appropriate reading level.
Cautions: When programs invest heavily in finding the "best" program to use, they may be perceiving these materials as the primary source of instructional information and the "answer" to their instructional difficulties. This often leads to doggedly following the program's sequence of skills for instructional goals, rather than using assessment information about students' developmental strengths and needs. As discussed in Starting with Assessment, relying on commercial or other curricular materials as the primary source of instructional goals may present problems for the following reasons: 1) there may be a mismatch between individual development and these goals; 2) commercial materials base instruction on assumptions about children—their communicative competency, background knowledge, and early experiences in literacy (in other words, many students, deaf and hearing, do not fit the implied profile); and 3) commercial materials represent a skill-sequenced view of learning that does not accurately reflect the complexity of literacy-both the interdependency of multiple areas of development and the holistic nature of that development.
2. Hire the best teachers.
Benefits: Certain teachers seem to stand out for their instructional expertise. These teachers usually have high expectations for their students; implement well-structured, creative, programs; and tend to bring out the best in their students. There is no doubt that a child benefits from having a teacher like this—one who knows how to capitalize on his or her students' strengths and effectively address instructional needs.
Cautions: Teachers' styles and personalities vary, often making even the "best" teachers more effective for some students than for others.
These differences should be taken into account. Teachers' effectiveness, however, ultimately should be measured according to the goal of facilitating students' long-term development—the cumulative effects of years of teaching and planning—rather then the degree of success any one teacher has within a single year. Within the same program, teachers bring to the task of instruction different paradigms about learning and the development of literacy-beliefs that influence the way they teach and assess. As a result, teachers may be considered "good" at their job to the degree that they share paradigms with those passing judgment. Consequently, it is possible for a student to have a good teacher one year and a good teacher the next year, according to different opinions about teaching and learning, and yet experience vastly different approaches to instruction. When that happens, instructional inconsistency within a program can fail to build students' development over time. It is hard for students to make gains over time, or beyond the current year, if there is little continuity within the program in its approaches to instruction.
3. Focus more instructional time and energy on reading and writing.
Benefits: There should be a well-balanced program for reading and writing for all students, with structured activities occurring daily. The form of these activities will change as students mature, gradually incorporating more guided instruction in reading and writing within the context of authentic reading and writing tasks. Students need more time on these tasks and less time on isolated skill exercises.
Cautions: There are at least three ways in which this approach can ultimately fail students. First of all, it could represent an approach that narrowly defines literacy as text-based skills, or competence in reading and writing. Focusing literacy instruction on reading and writing alone will defeat the purpose of spending more time developing these skills if related areas of development (e.g., conversational language, motivation, etc.) are neglected. A second way this approach might fail is if large blocks of time are devoted to instruction in reading and writing, but the instruction is devoid of subject matter from other curricular areas. A third way of misusing this approach is by increasing time spent on paper-and-pencil exercises that do not involve students in the actual tasks of reading and writing.
4. Use better diagnostics and remedial strategies to improve reading and writing skills.
Benefits: Most of the book from which this paper is derived (see "There's More" on p. V for details) stresses the concept that assessment is important to instruction in literacy. The first chapter points out that assessment should find out what a student knows, what skills he or she has, and what his or her instructional needs are in order to plan effective instruction.
Cautions: The words used in this assumption connote the need for caution. The terms "diagnostic" and "remedial" often represent approaches to instruction based on the view that if students do not have certain skills and knowledge by a certain grade or age, then something is wrong with them—they have a problem that must be diagnosed and fixed (Johnston & Allington, 1991). Such approaches are not developmental and may be counterproductive to instructional efforts. Developmental perspectives view growth in literacy as a matter of individual course, varying in pattern according to a student's strengths and needs at any given time. Assessment focuses on determining these instructional strengths and needs rather than "diagnosing" the problem. While this may seem like a matter of semantics, the developmental perspective carries a more positive outlook that is likely to filter down to the student, influencing his or her own self-perceptions and motivation to learn.
5. Immerse children in good literature.
Benefits: Independent reading-reading for pleasure-is a critical factor in helping many children learn to read and write, whether they are deaf or hearing. What children learn as a result of developing this habit will far outweigh any amount or kind of instruction they receive. Independent reading provides students with abundant comprehensible input about written English—more than they can ever hope to learn through instruction (Krashen, 1992). The development of this habit starts early when young children experience the pleasures of looking at books and being read to by others. Emphasizing a love for good literature, both at home and in school, facilitates the acquisition of this habit.
Cautions: Many readers are aware that this assumption has been taken to the extreme in some instructional programs for deaf, and even hearing children. Often children do acquire a knowledge of reading and writing naturally—in fact, all do to some degree—but most do not learn to read and write this way exclusively. They need guided instruction in these skills. Instruction, moreover, is a matter of finding the right balance between creating conditions that foster acquisition (such as immersing children in good literature) and learning through purposeful demonstration and explicit explanation of the features of language and concepts of literacy.
6. Spend more time on direct instruction of English language and reading skills.
Benefits: Research has indicated many areas and contexts in which direct instruction can improve areas of development in literacy. For example, the literature on strategy use, described later in this paper, indicates there are strategies that good readers use to comprehend text that can be made explicit to poor readers with direct explanation (e.g., Baker & Brown, 1984; Garner, 1987; Paris, Wasik, Turner, 1991; Pressley, Johnson, Symons, McGoldrick, & Kurita, 1989). Also, deaf students who have not acquired competence in conversational language during early childhood need instruction in language in addition to continued efforts that support acquisition.
Cautions: Just as there is research indicating the benefits of direct instruction, there is also research indicating situations in which this is not the case. When rules about language-grammar instruction are taught out of context and assumed to transfer to reading and writing, for example, this transfer does not appear to occur (Krashen, 1984). Demonstration and direct instruction are most likely to be effective when used to teach skills and strategies as needed (e.g., developmentally appropriate) and within the context of authentic reading and writing activities. Furthermore, instruction must include the application of learned skills and strategies in multiple contexts. Direct instruction involves thoughtful consideration of what to teach, when, and how.
7. Converse with students in ASL socially and in academic contexts.
Benefits: Conversing with students in ASL for social and academic purposes has become increasingly recognized as being important to the education of many deaf children (e.g., Israelite, et al., 1989; Johnson, Liddell, & Erting, 1989; Lane, 1992; Mahshie, 1995). As the natural language of deaf people in this country, ASL—its acquisition and use—allows deaf children, the majority of whom need a visual language, to experience conversational language for all the purposes for which language is intended. In addition, the early acquisition and use of this language builds a knowledge base, both of language and concepts, that supports further learning. The use of ASL also represents cultural recognition for many students, undoubtedly boosting self-esteem and motivation—critical affective variables in the development of literacy. Those who need a visual language and grow up in an environment that is rich in the conversational use of ASL are likely to have language skills and knowledge that will assist their development in many ways.
Cautions: Decisions about language use should always take into account the linguistic needs and preferences of the individual child. The goal of language choice is to provide accessible input and to facilitate early acquisition (Mahshie, 1995). Therefore, for each child with a hearing loss, assessment should aim to determine the language and conditions that will best meet that goal. In addition to whether the child needs visual access to language-which will be true for the vast majority of those with severe to profound hearing loss-two questions must be asked, "Is the child acquiring a solid basis in the intended language (whether it be ASL or spoken English)?" and "How can the conditions for providing the input necessary for early acquisition be provided?" The child's language and the environment must be continuously assessed in answer to these questions. Furthermore, decisions about the choice of language and conditions should be monitored routinely throughout the child's development in literacy—well beyond the preschool years. Significant delays in a child's development should be noted and prompt a review of the choice of language and the conditions for learning.
Even when students clearly need the visual input of ASL, this language—or any language—can be used in ways that are incomprehensible if individual needs are not taken into account. Language development varies greatly among deaf students, a fact that is influenced further by the diversity of language approaches used in the United States. For example, when students change programs or enter a program for the first time as older students, their language base may be very different from their new classmates, both in kind and degree of proficiency. These new students may have unique language needs that prevent them from coping with classroom conversations until they have further developed ASL through acquisition or instruction. Their language needs must be addressed with individual planning.
8. Develop bilingual programs (ASL as the first language, written English as the second).
Benefits: Bilingual programs have come about as a result of recognizing ASL as a true, visually accessible language and increasing its use in the classroom (e.g., Lane, 1992). Since there is no written form of ASL, however, students still need to learn to read and write English. This has led to the development of bilingual/ESL (English as a Second Language) programs based on the concept that students will learn ASL as a first language and English as a second language2. Many students in these programs learn English exclusively through print; others may learn spoken English as well, but ASL is the language of instruction for all. These programs are often referred to as bilingual/bicultural because of their strong emphasis on cultural affiliation. In fact, advocates of these programs may not view bilingual education as an approach to instruction, but instead as the natural progression of literacy development for deaf children (Hansen & Mosqueira, 1995).
In bilingual programs, ASL is used for social and academic purposes and as a linguistic support for learning English, the second language. Beginning very early, distinctions are made between the use of the two languages. With young children, this happens in developmentally appropriate activities that build language knowledge and skill indirectly (Erting & Phau, 1997). As students become older and better able to reflect on their knowledge of language use, the structures of each may be explored in more detail, typically using ASL to explain features of English, the lesser known language. Bilingual programs stress the need to develop competence in ASL before providing formal instruction in English. They do, however, advocate engaging deaf children in the same "literacy rich" early childhood activities that many hearing children experience (e.g., Erting, 1997; Mahshie, 1995).
These programs enable many students to use their conversational language strengths in ASL and their conceptual knowledge gained through this language to further their learning in literacy and all other curricular areas. The potential benefits of bilingual programming include early competence in conversational language, a more timely acquisition of knowledge in all areas, advancement in the written skills of literacy as a second language, and cultural identification which influences self-esteem.
Cautions: It is possible for a program to claim to be "bilingual" but still fail at instruction in literacy for a variety of other reasons, including its interpretation of bilingual instruction. For example, efforts to develop ASL prior to written English could be interpreted by some in ways that might limit young children's early, natural experiences involving print. Many concepts about the uses of print are acquired during the preschool years through these natural activities.
Other factors that must be in place before bilingual programs can reach their goals include: adequate numbers of staff who are fluent in both languages and knowledgeable of the structures of both; training for staff in second-language acquisition, steps to ensure congruence between instruction and cultural mores (Nover & Andrews, 1998; Woodward, 1978); and support for families-especially those that do not already know and use ASL—beginning with the birth of the deaf child.
Of major importance to the success of these programs, too, is continued research into the development and education of this unique group of students. No other group of students has the educational goal of developing competency in two languages used in different modes. Efforts such as the Star Schools Project, under the direction of Steve Nover (1998), are needed to define, implement, and test bilingual/ESL models of instruction in the United States. In fact, multiple projects of this kind are needed to study bilingual programs with different populations of deaf children in this county—models that prove effective for one group of students may prove less effective for another.
