Reading Every Single Day

530

RE ADI NG E V E RY SI NGLE DAY A Journey to Authentic Reading Alida K. Hudson ■ Joan A. Williams Reading workshop can increase student motivation to read and build a community where readers support one another. These authors share the impact that reading workshop had in one primary classroom.

I

t ’s the last week of the school year. The grades are entered. The projects have been sent home. The decorations are starting to come off the walls. Summer is on everyone’s mind. While some classes are filling the time with end-of-schoolyear activities, I (Alida, first author) announce to my second-grade students that we will be doing lots of independent reading time in this final week of school. A resounding “Yes!” fills the room. Michael (students’ names are pseudonyms) even shouts out, “Books are amazing!” This is music to my ears. Most teachers are frantic during the last few days, but my class looks and sounds much like it has all year. Children are spread out all around the classroom: lying under desks, sitting in beanbag chairs, stretched out on the carpet, even swaying steadily in the rocking chair. The room is filled with a quiet hum of students reading or discussing a book with someone around them. There is no behavior redirection needed because the students are engaged in their reading. They truly are a community of readers. My diverse classroom, which included students with special education needs, extra gifts and talents, English learners, and dyslexia, has not always been the reading sanctuary I just described. My students have not always been as enthusiastically engaged in reading as they were this past year. It has taken me many years to get to this point, and

The Reading Teacher

Vol. 68

Issue 7

pp. 530–538

DOI:10.1002/trtr.1349

reading workshop played a significant role in the transformation. The five components of reading workshop—time to read every day, choice of what to read, response to books, community, and structure (Atwell, 2007)— provided a strong foundation for independent reading for my students. Unlike other reading activities, such as literacy stations and test preparation reading passages, reading workshop successfully challenged my students to develop the critical thinking and problem-solving skills addressed in many of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) for English language arts (National Governors Association Center for Best Practices [NGA Center] & Council of Chief State School Officers [CCSSO], 2010). With the reading workshop format and support from me, my students were thinking carefully about what they read, comparing characters’ points of view, detecting details and main points, and asking questions. It is important to note here that the CCSS set goals but are not a prescription for how to teach (Taberski, 2011). Reading workshop provided the framework for achieving those goals.

Alida K. Hudson is an ESL specialist in Tomball ISD, Tomball, Texas, USA; e-mail [email protected]. Joan A. Williams is an associate professor at Sam Houston State University, Huntsville, Texas, USA; e-mail [email protected].

© 2015 International Literacy Association

531

R E A DI NG E V E R Y SI NG LE DAY: A JOU R N E Y T O AU T H E N T IC R E A DI NG

Why Reading Workshop: What the Research Tells Us The reading workshop approach is nothing new; it was first brought into the spotlight with Atwell’s (1987) book In the Middle. Numerous studies over the years have further supported the workshop model; yet, even after 26 years, many teachers do not actually use this model completely and may not be aware of its valuable benefits for students. For example, it has been documented for many years that the amount of time students spend reading real books is the most reliable indicator of students’ reading achievement and growth (Anderson, Wilson, & Fielding, 1988), but this practice of giving students time to read is often left out of many classrooms and instead replaced with test preparation activities. Revisiting reading workshop reminds us of its strengths and will further enhance a connection between this literacy framework and the CCSS.

Choice Choice of what to read is the heart of reading workshop. Krashen (2004) found that no single literacy activity has a more positive effect on students’ comprehension, vocabulary knowledge, spelling, writing ability, and overall academic achievement than free voluntary reading. In addition, Allington and Gabriel (2012a) found that students’ volume of reading and understanding of text read are increased by being able to choose what they read. Studies have also shown that providing choice of what to read is about twice as effective at developing literacy skills as teacher-selected reading (Lindsay, 2010). The same cannot be said about skill-based practice or test preparation passages. Providing students with choices not only helps to improve their literacy ability but also has been shown to increase student engagement. Motivation to

read, time spent reading, and comprehension of the text have been shown to improve when students are allowed to choose what they read (Gambrell, 2011). Atwell (2007) believes that it is every student ’s right, not privilege, to have free choice of books to read. Furthermore, Guthrie asserts that student motivation is the key to achieving the CCSS goals (Craig & Guthrie, 2014).

Time Another key component of reading workshop is giving children ample time to read daily. Atwell (2010) concludes that reading books every day is the only activity that reliably relates to proficiency in reading and that it is frequent, wide book reading that creates avid readers. Furthermore, voluminous reading has been proven to be an effective intervention for struggling readers as well as the most effective test preparation for all students (Allington & Gabriel, 2012b). Access to books and time to read can even lessen the effects of poverty on literacy development (Krashen, 2011). If students are to become avid readers, teaching decoding skills and comprehension strategies are not enough (Craig & Guthrie, 2014; Gambrell, 2011). Time to apply this knowledge of comprehension strategies to authentic text is vital to their becoming motivated readers. Some teachers may believe that primary students are not capable of reading independently for an extended period of time each day. Mounla, Bahous, and Nabhani (2011) negate this concept, noting in their research that first graders on various reading levels were capable of reading independently for 30 minutes each day.

Response, Community, and Structure The final components of reading workshop are response, community, and

structure. Calkins (2010) proposes that through reading workshop, students can “become avid, reflective, critical readers who comprehend with depth and vigor and who construct richly literate lives for themselves in and out of school” (p. 107). This expectation aligns well with the CCSS, but it cannot be done without holding students accountable for their reading by teaching them to respond to the text through conferences, discussions, and written journal entries. Reading workshop provides a consistent daily structure that allows students time to read and time to respond to what they are reading (Mounla, Bahous, & Nabhani, 2011). Allington and Gabriel (2012a) assert that when students have time to talk about the books they are reading, their comprehension, motivation, and language development increase. This discussion creates a community of readers in which students become encouraged to read and share with their peers the reading and comprehension strategies that worked well for them (Mounla, Bahous, & Nabhani, 2011).

Implementation of Reading Workshop My journey to creating an environment of more authentic reading began when I read The Book Whisperer (Miller,

Pause and Ponder ■

Do your students read for authentic purposes every day?

■

How do the benefits of reading workshop connect to the CCSS?

■

How do you set up a reading workshop in the primary grades?

■

Are students doing productive work in your literacy stations? literacyworldwide.org

532

R E A DI NG E V E R Y SI NG LE DAY: A JOU R N E Y T O AU T H E N T IC R E A DI NG

“I realized that my students were not spending enough time reading and I was not encouraging or providing the time for them to do so.” 2009) and Mosaic of Thought (Keene & Zimmerman, 2007). Keene and Zimmerman ask, “Are we comfortable with classrooms where students follow directions, complete assignments, and sit at literacy centers doing activities but aren’t asked to read broadly and think deeply?” (p. 29). This question made me examine very carefully what was happening in my classroom. My daily literacy instruction included a shared reading of a poem, a brief phonics lesson and word study activity, a read-aloud with a minilesson to model a comprehension strategy, writers’ workshop, and literacy stations while I pulled small groups of students for guided reading. I realized that most of my daily instruction was meaningful, but I found a major weakness in the literacy station time. My students participated in literacy stations daily but were not expected to think critically about the texts that they were using during this time. At other times, they completed required test passages and associated questions in order to get ready for the state standardized tests. I realized that, during literacy stations, my students were spending more time completing tasks that “proved” they were engaged instead of spending time actually reading for authentic purposes. Authentic reading, as defined by Duke, Purcell-Gates, Hall, and Tower (2006), is that which mirrors the reading activities that occur in the daily lives of people outside of a school setting. I agree with this definition and personally view authentic reading as providing students with the tools that I use as an

The Reading Teacher

Vol. 68

Issue 7

April 2015

adult reader: real books rather than passages, time to enjoy a text without being bogged down by question-and-answer tasks, choice of what to read, and conversation with peers about books read. I realized that my students were not spending enough time reading and I was not encouraging or providing the time for them to do so. While The Book Whisperer (Miller, 2009) helped me understand why I should include reading workshop in my classroom, I was not quite sure how to get started until I read The Daily 5 by Boushey and Moser (2006). The section on “Read to Self” explained in detail how to introduce independent reading time in my classroom. Using this model, I implemented reading workshop beginning on the first day of school by talking about what a reader looks like and people that we know who read. I also assessed the students’ initial attitudes toward reading using the Elementary Reading Attitude Survey (McKenna & Kear, 1990). This simple survey evaluates students’ feelings toward reading at home, reading at school during free time, and reading at school for instructional purposes. I will discuss the results of this initial survey later in the article. As The Daily 5 (Boushey & Moser, 2006) suggests, my students began with three minutes of independent reading time daily. During these first days of reading workshop, the children did not have much choice yet. I placed them in spots around the classroom to read and I filled their book boxes each morning with three to five well-known series

books, such as Arthur, Clifford, and Fly Guy. My main emphasis during the first week of school was to get the students used to spending time reading every day. Not every day went perfectly. Some days, students were restless, peering around the room at others, or blatantly fake-reading by resting their books on their faces; I did as suggested by Boushey and Moser (2006) and stopped the reading time. The next day, I would again emphasize the expectations and importance of independent reading time and try again. Slowly but surely, the students began to rise to my expectations. As they became more successful at reading independently, I added minutes, one at a time, to the reading workshop. By January, my second graders read for 30 minutes each day, and sometimes they even begged for more time. This uninterrupted reading time became a nonnegotiable classroom practice for both me and my students. It was a safe haven during the hectic school day. Once the foundation for reading independently every day was established, I introduced the element of choice. During the second week of school, I discussed how to choose an appropriate independent book to read. Again, I followed the suggestions outlined in Boushey and Moser’s (2006) book, which begins by discussing one’s purposes for picking a book and interest in a text selected. After selecting a book and beginning to read, we discussed how to monitor our comprehension while reading. I modeled that if you do not understand what the book is about, it is probably too challenging. Finally, we discussed that you should be able to read most of the words in the book without a struggle. The biggest obstacle I encountered during my initial year of reading workshop was helping my young, emerging

533

R E A DI NG E V E R Y SI NG LE DAY: A JOU R N E Y T O AU T H E N T IC R E A DI NG

“I wanted their notebooks to be an insight into what they were thinking.” readers learn to select good-fit books. Some students had great difficulty in choosing books that were at their independent reading level. Many struggling readers often wanted to read thick chapter books because they believed it made them look like a “good reader.” I addressed the situation by teaching my students the five-finger rule. Using this rule, the child opens to a page in the middle of a book and begins to read, raising a finger each time he or she encounters an unknown word. If five fingers are raised before the page is complete, the book is probably too challenging for the child to read independently. I also supplemented the rule with conferencing, conferencing, and more conferencing. In these conferences, I would emphasize the importance of reading appropriate books and recommend books for the student to try out. I would constantly refer back to the initial lessons on choosing books. I was relentless in this task, and by the end of the school year, the problem was resolved. Once time and choice were established, I introduced response to reading workshop. I wanted my students’ written journal entries to be meaningful and productive rather than just another task to complete. I wanted their notebooks to be an insight into what they were thinking as they read. In a previous year, this was one of the most difficult tasks for me as a teacher. I struggled with how to introduce reading response

notebooks, and I believe that I did not scaffold students’ learning enough for their responses to be truly meaningful. Therefore, in order to accomplish this task, I began by modeling written entries in a large notebook before, during, and after read-alouds around the third week of school. I did not yet ask students to complete their own entries because I wanted to ensure that they fully understood my expectations prior to their writing in their own journals. My journal entries were all based on the reading skills that we were teaching during a given week. For example, when we were learning about making connections, I modeled writing what I expected of my primary students in my large notebook: “Today I read the book The Relatives Came by Cynthia Rylant (1985). This reminds me of when my family and I would drive to visit our relatives every summer, just like the family in the book did. I felt excited to see my family, just like the characters in the story.” Through minilessons each day, I showed students how to go back into the text and find evidence to support their thinking. I emphasized that I wanted students to go beyond just stating their prediction, connection, or question and tell me why they were thinking that way. This practice supports the CCSS’ first anchor standard for reading, which states that students should be able to “cite specific textual evidence when writing to support conclusions drawn from the text” (NGA Center & CCSSO, 2010, p. 10).

Each week, I began by thinking aloud and modeling my expectations. As the week progressed, we completed shared writing activities where the students helped me to create the written notebook entry. Finally, on Friday, students had the opportunity to develop their own written entry for the given reading skill based on the book that they heard read aloud. Minilessons, modeling, and practicing written entries continued in this fashion for about four weeks, until we had thoroughly covered making predictions, asking questions, and making connections. Once written journal entries had been introduced and practiced as a whole group, I gave each student their own reading response notebook, and they were allowed to choose which written entry they would complete for their own independent reading book. Each day I responded to a different group of students’ reader’s response notebooks. I found this targeted response to be the most practical way for me to both read and respond to all of the students each week. After the beginning-of-the-year reading assessments were completed, I began to hold conferences with individual students throughout the week. It was my goal to meet with each student at least once during a two-week time period. I wanted to ensure that students were truly reading and comprehending the texts they chose and setting goals to help them progress in their reading ability. To guide each conference, I used the framework for an informal reading conference described by Routman in Reading

“I wanted students to go beyond just stating their prediction, connection, or question to tell me why they were thinking that way.” literacyworldwide.org

534

R E A DI NG E V E R Y SI NG LE DAY: A JOU R N E Y T O AU T H E N T IC R E A DI NG

“Conferences gave me insight into the students’ thinking that might have otherwise gone unnoticed.” Essentials (2003). This framework asks the child to describe why he or she chose a book, identify whether the text is a good fit for him or her, tell you about the book so far, read aloud a selection of the text, retell the selection read aloud, and then discuss his or her strengths and goals for future reading. It was these reading conferences that truly helped me to get to know my students as readers. I learned their likes, their dislikes, and the specific strategies (or lack thereof) that each student used while reading. The conferences gave me insight into the students’ thinking that might have otherwise gone unnoticed. For example, while conferencing with Omar about The Chocolate Touch (Catling, 2006), he said, “I predict everything the main character, John Midas, touches will turn to chocolate since he has the same name as King Midas from The Golden Touch (Craft, 2003), and everything that he touched turned into gold.” This solidified the fact that Omar was truly comparing the texts that he was reading, which connects to part of CCSS 2.9, “comparing and contrasting different versions of a story,” and it set the stage for a discussion of the differences between the two books (NGA Center & CCSSO, 2010, p. 11). Other parts of the reading workshop developed as the school year continued. Around November, I realized that my second-grade students were discussing the books that they read independently with me through conferences and written entries in their reader’s notebooks,

The Reading Teacher

Vol. 68

Issue 7

April 2015

but they were not sharing these thoughts with their peers. The community portion of the workshop was missing. Because of this, I introduced student-led book talks in order to create more discussion among the students. In these book talks, students would briefly summarize and recommend to their peers a book they had enjoyed to inspire others to read the book. All students were expected to give at least one book talk a month, which was never an issue for my students. Students were excited to share their books with the class. Book talks allowed the students to learn about each other as readers, as well. Another addition that came later in the year was a vocabulary practice outlined in the article “Robust Vocabulary Instruction in a Readers’ Workshop” (Feezell, 2012). I introduced this practice around January after noticing that my students were performing poorly on the vocabulary portion of reading assessments as well as having trouble identifying the meaning of unknown words in texts they read. This method has students find interesting words in the books that they read during reading workshop. These words then became the focus of the classroom vocabulary instruction. This practice guided students to look more closely at the word an author chooses and think about the meaning of the word within the text. Many of the words that they found in their own books, including diabolical, nuisance, and commotion, became part of the classroom vernacular. For example, Alexander

came to class and enthusiastically stated, “My sister was being such a nuisance this morning!” This vocabulary focus correlates with CCSS language standard 4 regarding “determining or clarifying the meaning of unknown words” (NGA Center & CCSSO, 2010, p. 27), and it laid a foundation for more complex reading.

Benefits of a Year Spent in Reading Workshop Since I continued to conduct my language arts instruction as I had in previous years, I believe the addition of reading workshop to my classroom schedule had a positive influence on my students’ reading abilities and motivation for this year. Observations and assessments from throughout the year supported my beliefs about this change. At the end of the year, I again assessed the students’ feelings toward reading using the Elementary Reading Attitude Survey (McKenna & Kear, 1990), just as I had at the beginning of the year. I also used an adaptation of the Endof-Year Reading Evaluation created by Miller (2009), which asks students to write responses to questions like “What is your attitude toward reading?” “What was the best book you read this year?” “What advice can you give to readers next year?” and “What do you think helped you most as a reader this year?” After analyzing student surveys, parental feedback, my own personal teacher journal, and formal assessments that I had kept throughout the year, several themes were readily apparent.

“Many of the words that they found in their own books including diabolical, nuisance, and commotion became part of the classroom vernacular.”

535

R E A DI NG E V E R Y SI NG LE DAY: A JOU R N E Y T O AU T H E N T IC R E A DI NG

Reading as a Purposeful and Pleasurable Activity First and foremost, my students developed a true love of reading and thus the desire to read more. On their beginningof-the-year reading interest surveys, many students expressed that they did not enjoy reading, especially at home or over the summer vacation. They viewed reading as an activity reserved strictly for school. By the end of the year, their views of reading had vastly changed. On her end-of-the-year reading survey, Lynne wrote, “I didn’t like reading in the beginning, but now I love reading!” This feeling was shared by many of Lynne’s classmates as well. Amy explained, “I did not read in first grade. Reading is my favorite subject now! It is so fun and awesome.” Students also voiced that they wanted more independent reading time in class and hoped that their third-grade teacher would give them time to read each day. Furthermore, the surveys revealed that students began to view reading as a purposeful activity rather than just a task for school. Nine out of 18 students believed that “Read to Self” time at school was the most important thing that helped them to become a better reader that year. My teacher journal revealed that the students began to view reading as not only purposeful but pleasurable. On several occasions, students requested to either stay in from recess or take their book with them. An excerpt from my teacher journal showed that Brittney, a struggling reader, saw another student from our class reading at recess and shouted, “I didn’t know we could bring books to recess. Awesome!” Parent feedback demonstrated that parents noticed the change in their students’ opinions of reading at home as well. Stephen, a student with special education needs who marked on

“The discussions that arose among the students were more enriched because of the amount of reading that was occurring on a daily basis.” his beginning-of-the-year survey that he hated reading, begged his mom to get him a library card at the end of the school year so that he could continue reading over the summer. Additionally, another parent stated, “At the beginning of the year, my son didn’t sit down and read for pleasure. He said that reading was boring and a waste of time. Now, he chooses to sit down and read a book.”

Choice as a Motivational Tool The power of providing students choice of what to read was apparent throughout my teacher journal. I realized that when I allowed the students to select their own books to read and conferenced with them about these books, I never heard the dreaded phrase “Do I have to read this?” In my teacher journal I wrote, “If you force students to read a book that they do not like, not only will they not be engaged in their reading but they may also start to dislike reading altogether.” When I met with Joshua, a struggling reader, for a guided reading group at the beginning of the year, I selected the books for him to read and it was always difficult to keep him focused on the text. I frequently had to redirect his attention back to the book. Yet, when Joshua was allowed to choose a book on his own and then conference with me about it, he was focused and engaged the whole time. The power of choice, I believe, had the greatest impact on some of my struggling readers like Joshua. They would find a series that they could read and then make a plan to read every book in the series. They had ownership

over the books they chose, which translated into confidence in their reading abilities. The parents of the students saw this newfound confidence in reading at home as well. One mother stated that her son’s level of confidence had increased dramatically and that he no longer felt any anxiety or frustration while reading. Similarly, Eric’s parents said that their son’s confidence in reading had significantly improved this year and that they cannot keep him from reading at home now, too. “That ’s all he does at home; he reads anything and everything all of the time,” Eric’s mother confided.

Community as Sharing and Supporting Another observation was that the students became a true community of readers who recommended books to one another and discussed their favorite parts of a book. An example of how well my students knew each other’s reading interests came while a student named Sam was examining a group of books that I had suggested to him. As he was looking through the stack of books, Sam said, “I’m going to take both of these mysteries. I’ll keep one and I’ll give the other one to Alex because he really likes mysteries!” Students even started bringing their own personal books from home to share with one another. Never before had I seen students who knew so much about one another’s reading interests and tastes. The discussions that arose among the students were more enriched because of the amount of reading that was occurring

literacyworldwide.org

536

R E A DI NG E V E R Y SI NG LE DAY: A JOU R N E Y T O AU T H E N T IC R E A DI NG

on a daily basis. Students could often be heard saying “You’re going to be surprised at the end of that book!” or “You liked that book so much that I want to read it next.” These are phrases that I never heard prior to implementing reading workshop in my classroom. This community of readers grew out of our reading workshop time but extended beyond the four walls of our classroom. This can be seen though the comments made by Marco’s mom: “He now loves to switch books back and forth with his friends at home, and he even enjoys giving books as gifts to his family members who are readers as well.”

Response as a Means to Critical Thinking Students’ development of critical thinking throughout the year was evident when examining conferencing notes and student reading response notebooks. For example, Monica’s first journal entries were very limited in comparison to her later responses. In the beginning of the year, she simply stated, “I predict that Wemberly (Henkes, 2010) will worry a lot because of her picture on the cover.” But toward the end of the year, she wrote, “I predict that the five penguins will do the same thing as the five little monkeys jumping on the bed because the titles of the books are kind of the same. I think that the penguins will get hurt and their mom will have to call the doctor, just like the mom in the five little monkeys. The title reminds me of when I slipped on the ice and my mom told me not to go on the ice anymore.” Further evidence of deep thinking is provided through Alyssa’s entry: “The author wrote this book to inform us about dolphins because it tells me true facts about dolphins. I think that for the mother to find her baby, she would use her voice, because I read part of the book already and it talked about

The Reading Teacher

Vol. 68

Issue 7

April 2015

how dolphins can talk to one another.” Alyssa’s inference supports the CCSS for reading informational text, “Describe how reasons support specific points the author makes in a text” (NGA Center & CCSSO, 2010, p. 13), and it demonstrates how reading workshop can be effectively integrated with the CCSS.

Structure and Motivation as Behavior Tools Further examination of my teacher journal entries shows an immense difference in the students’ behavior between literacy stations and reading workshop. During literacy stations, which I had used prior to introducing reading workshop, students were often off task and disengaged. Guided reading groups were regularly interrupted because I had to redirect students at their stations. I noticed that through the routines and motivational tools of

reading workshop, the students’ behavior issues subsided significantly. Unlike the constant reminders to stop talking or get back to work during other times of the day, independent reading time needed no redirection.

Assessments Reading assessments completed at the beginning and the end of the year demonstrated that my students made significant growth in their reading abilities while participating in a reading workshop. Table shows students’ beginning-of-the-year and end-of-theyear independent reading levels on the Developmental Reading Assessment (DRA; Beaver, 2006). As the data in the table demonstrates, all students increased their independent reading level over the course of the school year. On average, students increased their independent reading level by 45%, or

Table DRA Independent Level Beginning-of-the-Year and End-of-the-Year Results Student Number 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20

Beginning of Year 14 18 24 30 4 34 28 20 2 24 14 28 14 12 30 14 14 10 24 12

End of Year 28 28 34 40 20 40 40 34 16 38 40 38 34 24 40 28 24 30 34 24

537

R E A DI NG E V E R Y SI NG LE DAY: A JOU R N E Y T O AU T H E N T IC R E A DI NG

about five reading levels. This is compared to the expected four-level growth of students in second grade (Pinnell & Fountas, 2010). The data from the DRA demonstrates that reading workshop helped close the gap for the struggling readers. For example, student 5 entered second grade reading at level 4, a level for the beginning of first grade and well below the expected level 16. Through the reading workshop model, student 5 successfully narrowed the gap and left second grade reading at level 20. While this is somewhat below the level 28 goal for the end of second grade, it

still represents a significant increase. Also, as seen in Table, several students who entered second grade reading above grade level continued to show substantial growth over the course of the school year. The data collected from the Istation (n.d.) reading assessment also displays that the students made growth in all areas of their reading abilities, including comprehension, vocabulary, spelling, and fluency. As seen in Figure for overall reading ability, the number of students classified as Tier I, performing on or above grade level, increased from

TA K E AC T I O N ! Steps for implementation of reading workshop:

1. Start with reading a few minutes a day, and gradually increase this time.

2. Guide students in picking books on their independent level.

3. Teach students how to respond to their reading in a reader’s response notebook. Read and reply to a small group of students each day.

4. Show students how to do book talks to share their books.

Figure Istation Assessment Results

5. Eventually, find 30 minutes in your daily schedule for reading workshop.

45% at the beginning of the school year to 70% at the end of the school year. Additionally, the number of students identified as Tier III and in critical need of intervention decreased from 45% at the beginning of the school year to 15% at the end of the school year. The same positive results can be seen in each subcategory. For example, at the beginning of the year, 35% of students were considered Tier III for comprehension; by the end of the year, however, only 10% of the students were considered Tier III for comprehension. Similarly, in the area of vocabulary, the students in need of critical intervention went from 35% at the beginning of the year to 0% at the end of the year. While the gains seen in both the DRA and Istation cannot be attributed to reading workshop alone, the facts that students made more progress than expected and that I changed no other part of my daily literacy instruction support the use of reading workshop in the primary classroom.

literacyworldwide.org

538

R E A DI NG E V E R Y SI NG LE DAY: A JOU R N E Y T O AU T H E N T IC R E A DI NG

MORE TO EX PLORE Books ■

Miller, D. (2013). Reading with meaning: Teaching comprehension in the primary grades. (2nd ed.) Portland, ME: Stenhouse. ■ Orehovec, B., & Alley, M. (2003). Revisiting the reading workshop: management, mini-lessons, and strategies: a complete guide to organizing and managing an effective reading workshop that builds independent, strategic readers. New York, NY: Scholastic Professional Books.

ReadWriteThink.org Lesson Plans ■

Choosing the Right Books: Strategies for Beginning Readers by Julie Burchstead (www.readwritethink.org/classroomresources/lesson-plans/choosing-rightbook-strategies-916.html) ■ Supporting Students as They Read Independently by Jan Miller Burkins (www .readwritethink.org/professionaldevelopment/strategy-guides/supportingstudents-they-read-30817.html) ■ Literature Response in Primary Classrooms by Renee Goularte (www.readwritethink.org/ classroom-resources/lesson-plans/ literature-response-primaryclassrooms-30737.html)

Even More! ■

Reading Workshop: What It Looks Like in My Classroom by Beth Newingham (www .scholastic.com/teachers/top_teaching/ 2009/10/reading-workshop): This site includes a video clip of one teacher’s reading workshop and many resources to use when implementing reading workshop in your own classroom.

Conclusion When considering our full literacy curriculum, my students were very successful in their literacy development. The difference I noticed this year was

The Reading Teacher

Vol. 68

Issue 7

April 2015

that students who participated in reading workshop not only improved their reading skills but also developed a motivation to read. My students went from children who viewed reading as a task for school with no real purpose to real readers. Reading workshop also changed me. I realized that students do not have to complete a worksheet to prove they were engaged and reading; rather, all I have to do is have a conversation with them. I will never again deprive my students of the valuable reading time and critical thinking that occurs during reading workshop. My classroom is forever changed. R E F E R E NC E S Allington, R.L., & Gabriel, R. (2012a). Every child, every day. Educational Leadership, 69(6), 10 –15. Allington, R.L., & Gabriel, R. (2012b). The best way to prepare students for high-stakes reading assessments. New England Reading Association Journal, 47(2), 1– 3. Anderson, R., Wilson, P., & Fielding , L. (1988). Growth in reading and how children spend their time outside of school. Reading Research Quarterly, 23(3), 285 – 303. Atwell, N. (1987 ). In the middle: Writing, reading, and learning with adolescents. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Atwell, N. (2007 ). The reading zone: How to help kids become skilled, passionate, habitual, critical readers. New York, NY: Scholastic. Atwell, N. (2010). The case for literature. Education Week, 29(21), 32. Beaver, J. (2006). Developmental reading assessment: Teacher guide (DRA2, K–3). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson. Boushey, G., & Moser, J. (2006). The daily 5. Portland, ME: Stenhouse. Calkins, L. (2010). A guide to the reading workshop: Grades 3–5. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Craig , M., & Guthrie, J. (2014). Student motivation: The key to achieving CCSS goals. Reading Today, 31(5), 4 – 6. Duke, N., Purcell-Gates, V., Hall, L., & Tower, C. (2006). Authentic literacy activities for developing comprehension and writing. The Reading Teacher, 60(4), 344 – 355. doi:10.1598/ RT.60.4.4 Feezell, G. (2012). Robust vocabulary instruction in a readers’ workshop. The Reading

Teacher, 66(3), 233 –237. doi:10.1002/ TRTR.01087 Gambrell, L. (2011). Seven rules of engagement: What ’s most important to know about motivation to read. The Reading Teacher, 65(3), 172–178. doi:10.1002/TRTR.01024 Istation (n.d.). Computer-based assessment and intervention. Retrieved from www.istation .com Keene, E., & Zimmermann, S. (2007 ). Mosaic of thought: The power of comprehension strategy instruction (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Krashen, S. (2004). The power of reading: Insights from the research. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Krashen, S. (2011). Protecting students against the effects of poverty: Libraries. New England Reading Association Journal, 46(2), 17–21. Lindsay, J. (2010). Children’s access to print material and education-related outcomes: Findings from a meta-analytic review. Naperville, IL: Learning Point Associates. McKenna, M.C., & Kear, D.J. (1990). Measuring attitude toward reading: A new tool for teachers. The Reading Teacher, 43(9), 626 – 639. doi:10.1598/RT.43.8.3 Miller, D. (2009). The book whisperer: Awakening the inner reader in every child. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass. Mounla, G., Bahous, R., & Nabhani, M. (2011). “I am in grade one and I can read!” The readers’ workshop. Reading Matrix: An International Online Journal, 11(3), 279 –291. National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common Core State Standards for English language arts and literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. Washington, DC: Authors. Pinnell, G.S., & Fountas, I.C. (2010). The continuum of literacy learning, grades preK–2: A guide to teaching (2nd ed.). Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Routman, R. (2003). Reading essentials: The specifics you need to teach reading well. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. Taberski, S. (2011). Comprehension from the ground up: Simplified, sensible instruction for the K–3 reading workshop. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. L I T E R AT U R E C I T E D Catling , P.S. (2006). The chocolate touch. New York, NY: Harper Collins. Craft, C. (2003). King Midas and the golden touch. New York, NY: Harper Collins. Henkes, K. (2010). Wemberly worried. New York, NY: Harper Collins. Rylant, C. (1985). The relatives came. New York, NY: Bradbury Press.