OK. I’ve promoted the idea of Independent Reading (not SSR, etc.) for over a decade until recently finding the practice is going out of favor with reading gurus (Shanahan has always been against it) but have never found a practice that would stimulate a love of reading until this article. Read Alouds using narrative stories that also includes non fiction/expository material to capture a student’s interest seems like a good (even better) substitute to independent reading. That said, we’ll still need to find time for students to read on their own...perhaps as a homework assignment.
Yes, students do still need to read on their own. But what I've heard from teachers is that after they read aloud from engaging novels or nonfiction, students often want to read MORE by that author or about that topic on their own. School librarians have asked to be alerted to what books or topics are coming next in a curriculum, so they can stock up on books they know kids will be coming in and asking for. So there's evidence, at least anecdotally, that read-alouds can spur kids to read independently.
Love this. As a school child we read Jane Eyre by going around the class and each child reading aloud one page. Most of the class were not confident at reading aloud and stumbled over every other word. Perhaps it was good practice for them, though they certainly seemed to hate it. And it made the book absolutely deadly.
I am happy to see reading for pleasure reintroduced as a best practice in literacy. I'm curious. With technology such as Kindle Immersion Reading that pairs audio books with with an endless selection of ebooks, why are educators not taking advantage of technology to give greater access to independent reading experiences? Why are whole class readalouds preferable?
Audio books can be helpful, but they're not necessarily a substitute for whole-class read-alouds. It's not just a matter of the teacher reading a book aloud. Ideally, it's also checking to make sure students are following the story or understanding the text, plus asking questions/guiding a discussion among students about what they think about what they've heard.
It might be possible to do that after students have listened to an audio version (preferably recorded by a human being), but they would all need to have listened to the same book. And even then, I'm not sure the shared experience would be the same.
Honestly, I think this has been a problem for even longer. We usually read whole books when I was a kid in school in the 90s and early 00s, but had to answer these same sorts of questions and generally beat the story to death... I didn't know very many kids who read for fun in those days either. I did (still do) and hated English class most of the time anyway.
The first book I remember LOVING was Mark Twain's "Tom Sawyer," which I believe I received as a gift at the age of 10. There were two things that endeared me: 1) Twain's brilliant writing, and 2) the hero, namely a boy a few years older than me engaging in adventures well outide the scope of my boring suburban life. Later I enjoyed "Peck's Bad Boy and his Pa," now unfortunately out of print but still available as a reprint. In this book, yet another boy somewhat older than me had adventures that I could never dream of - he constantly pulled tricks on his parents. The book is a series of short stories framed as a series of visits by the boy himself to the corner grocer, in which the boy relates the tricks and their outcomes to the proprietor, who listens with dubious amusement. Adding to the allure, I believe, is that both these books are set in the 19th century, another world apart from mine. Pop stars in their 20s attract audiences of children ten years younger, children who aspire the the stars' impossibly adventurous lifestyles. Based on my own experience with books, this is a great formula for inspiring interest in a young person.
OK. I’ve promoted the idea of Independent Reading (not SSR, etc.) for over a decade until recently finding the practice is going out of favor with reading gurus (Shanahan has always been against it) but have never found a practice that would stimulate a love of reading until this article. Read Alouds using narrative stories that also includes non fiction/expository material to capture a student’s interest seems like a good (even better) substitute to independent reading. That said, we’ll still need to find time for students to read on their own...perhaps as a homework assignment.
Yes, students do still need to read on their own. But what I've heard from teachers is that after they read aloud from engaging novels or nonfiction, students often want to read MORE by that author or about that topic on their own. School librarians have asked to be alerted to what books or topics are coming next in a curriculum, so they can stock up on books they know kids will be coming in and asking for. So there's evidence, at least anecdotally, that read-alouds can spur kids to read independently.
Love this. As a school child we read Jane Eyre by going around the class and each child reading aloud one page. Most of the class were not confident at reading aloud and stumbled over every other word. Perhaps it was good practice for them, though they certainly seemed to hate it. And it made the book absolutely deadly.
Try looking into Scaffolded Silent Reading by Reutzel et al.
I am happy to see reading for pleasure reintroduced as a best practice in literacy. I'm curious. With technology such as Kindle Immersion Reading that pairs audio books with with an endless selection of ebooks, why are educators not taking advantage of technology to give greater access to independent reading experiences? Why are whole class readalouds preferable?
Audio books can be helpful, but they're not necessarily a substitute for whole-class read-alouds. It's not just a matter of the teacher reading a book aloud. Ideally, it's also checking to make sure students are following the story or understanding the text, plus asking questions/guiding a discussion among students about what they think about what they've heard.
It might be possible to do that after students have listened to an audio version (preferably recorded by a human being), but they would all need to have listened to the same book. And even then, I'm not sure the shared experience would be the same.
Please see our Deep Reader launching soon. You can sign up early here:
https://studyhall.ai/deepReader
Honestly, I think this has been a problem for even longer. We usually read whole books when I was a kid in school in the 90s and early 00s, but had to answer these same sorts of questions and generally beat the story to death... I didn't know very many kids who read for fun in those days either. I did (still do) and hated English class most of the time anyway.
The first book I remember LOVING was Mark Twain's "Tom Sawyer," which I believe I received as a gift at the age of 10. There were two things that endeared me: 1) Twain's brilliant writing, and 2) the hero, namely a boy a few years older than me engaging in adventures well outide the scope of my boring suburban life. Later I enjoyed "Peck's Bad Boy and his Pa," now unfortunately out of print but still available as a reprint. In this book, yet another boy somewhat older than me had adventures that I could never dream of - he constantly pulled tricks on his parents. The book is a series of short stories framed as a series of visits by the boy himself to the corner grocer, in which the boy relates the tricks and their outcomes to the proprietor, who listens with dubious amusement. Adding to the allure, I believe, is that both these books are set in the 19th century, another world apart from mine. Pop stars in their 20s attract audiences of children ten years younger, children who aspire the the stars' impossibly adventurous lifestyles. Based on my own experience with books, this is a great formula for inspiring interest in a young person.