<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0">
   <channel>
      <title>Reading Resource Response by Jessica DiTullio</title>
      <link>https://padlet.com/jessicaditullio/6c1pbyuq9ywh6mdt</link>
      <description></description>
      <language>en-us</language>
      <pubDate>2020-06-28 18:17:27 UTC</pubDate>
      <lastBuildDate>2020-06-28 18:31:09 UTC</lastBuildDate>
      <webMaster>hello@padlet.com</webMaster>
      
      <item>
         <title>Ebook, Audio Or Paper Book? What&#39;s Best</title>
         <author>JessicaDiTullio</author>
         <link>https://padlet.com/jessicaditullio/6c1pbyuq9ywh6mdt/wish/642301898</link>
         <description><![CDATA[<div><strong>Takeaways:</strong><br> - reading paper books requires deep reading, whereas reading a screen uses "non-linear" reading<br>- reading on paper results in better retention<br>- reading on paper is better before bed to avoid blue light<br>- ebooks can benefit poor eyesight, reading disorders such as dyslexia, and language learners<br>- audiobooks can help those who struggle reading on paper and are more likely to allow the brain to create imagery<br><strong>Conclusion:</strong> <br>Students today should be exposed to a variety of book types. Paper books are important for deep reading and retention, but ebooks and audiobooks can provide benefits for readers with unique needs.</div>]]></description>
         <enclosure url="https://interestingengineering.com/ebook-audio-or-paper-book-whats-best-according-to-science" />
         <pubDate>2020-06-28 18:20:25 UTC</pubDate>
         <guid>https://padlet.com/jessicaditullio/6c1pbyuq9ywh6mdt/wish/642301898</guid>
      </item>
      <item>
         <title>Limiting Children to Books They Can Already Read</title>
         <author>JessicaDiTullio</author>
         <link>https://padlet.com/jessicaditullio/6c1pbyuq9ywh6mdt/wish/642302640</link>
         <description><![CDATA[<div><strong>Takeaways:</strong><br>- Fountas and Pinnell approach amended to sometimes move students up even when assessment does not show improvement so they do not get stuck at a certain level<br>- text level/readability based on vocabulary and sentence complexity and predicts comprehension, not progress<br>- F &amp; P expanded to include 10 factors, and point out that leveling may not be completely accurate<br>- leveling creates a gradient and place for students, but does not determine from which texts they learn best<br>- Betts claimed three reading levels: independent, instructional, frustration<br>- Powell claimed some students could comprehend with higher levels of disfluency<br>- another study claims students learn more from frustration texts<br>- further research showed that students learned more from texts above their instructional level, however, teachers must facilitate this learning <br>- Common Core State Standards of 2010 led to purchase of harder texts, teachers saw students struggle and relied on instructional level texts to teach reading<br>- author proposes mixing in grade level texts and teaching students skills needed to navigate them<br>- students deserve the opportunity to learn from books at their grade level even if not their reading level<br><strong>Conclusion:</strong> <br>This article was especially relevant for the grade levels that I teach - 4 to 6. Students are still developing comprehension skills, but also reading to learn new material. I agree that students must  work with a range of text levels. I believe that when students read independently, they need texts they can comprehend on their own. Teachers can help them build comprehension skills by guiding them through instructional level texts. And for grade level material, the teacher can facilitate learning for most students. When a student's independent level is significantly below grade level, however, I think modifications must be made. For example, a fifth grade student reading at a second grade level will struggle to learn from or feel success with grade level text. In these cases, teachers need to make instructional decisions based on goals for the student. </div>]]></description>
         <enclosure url="https://www.aft.org/ae/summer2020/shanahan" />
         <pubDate>2020-06-28 18:22:19 UTC</pubDate>
         <guid>https://padlet.com/jessicaditullio/6c1pbyuq9ywh6mdt/wish/642302640</guid>
      </item>
      <item>
         <title>For the Love of Reading</title>
         <author>JessicaDiTullio</author>
         <link>https://padlet.com/jessicaditullio/6c1pbyuq9ywh6mdt/wish/642303120</link>
         <description><![CDATA[<div><strong>Takeaways:</strong></div><div>- teens spend an average of only 6 minutes a day reading!</div><div>- rewards for reading can backfire</div><div>- praise can be better, but only if the child engages in reading on his/her own</div><div>- classroom displays emphasize finishing books rather than the act of reading</div><div>- rewards should be temporary and hopefully lead to reading for pleasure</div><div>- teachers can distinguish between academic and pleasure reading</div><div>- recommendations for pleasure reading: devote class time, offer choice with guidance, book access, sense of community, teacher is active</div><div>- technology has lowered our threshold for boredom and may cause children to think leisure activities should be instantly gratifying</div><div>- parents can appeal to the child's interests, make reading social, and help with access to books</div><div>- teachers can help parents by offering workshops, providing books, and promoting literacy whenever there is an opportunity</div><div><strong>Conclusion:</strong></div><div>This article made me think of Donalyn Miller's books: <em>The Book Whisperer</em> and <em>Reading in the Wild</em>. Many of my students do not begin intervention groups as engaged readers. They see reading as a chore, not a pleasure. For them, reading is a school task that is challenging. By supporting independent reading, I try to build their confidence and help them see that reading can be enjoyable. I follow many of Miller's suggestions in an attempt to accomplish this. Although I provide parents with information, I have never held a workshop. This is an idea I would like to explore with my colleagues. </div>]]></description>
         <enclosure url="https://www.aft.org/ae/spring2015/willingham" />
         <pubDate>2020-06-28 18:23:31 UTC</pubDate>
         <guid>https://padlet.com/jessicaditullio/6c1pbyuq9ywh6mdt/wish/642303120</guid>
      </item>
      <item>
         <title>Teaching Reading Is Rocket Science</title>
         <author>JessicaDiTullio</author>
         <link>https://padlet.com/jessicaditullio/6c1pbyuq9ywh6mdt/wish/642305020</link>
         <description><![CDATA[<div><strong>Takeaways:</strong><br>- reading achievement could be greater if we applied research evidence<br>- students with fewer resources are at greater risk for reading difficulty<br>- Simple View of Reading: word recognition and language comprehension combine for reading comprehension<br>-  these 2 skills are complex and comprised of sub-skills<br>- article calls for systematic research-based instruction, especially for readers who struggle<br>- teachers must: 1) know the basics of reading psychology and development 2) understand language structure 3) apply best practices and 4) use assessments to inform teaching<br><strong>Conclusion:<br></strong>Reading instruction is incredibly complex. As a teacher, it can often feel overwhelming to address all facets of literacy. I appreciate that the article points out the need for quality teacher education and professional development. If we have research to guide practice, we should be using it to help readers succeed.</div>]]></description>
         <enclosure url="https://www.aft.org/ae/summer2020/moats?fbclid=IwAR3yFRcdZzBwOBElbw96-0KLwcIENbf9KTnMGzAmLTWRhk8o6wkCfMukC0s" />
         <pubDate>2020-06-28 18:27:52 UTC</pubDate>
         <guid>https://padlet.com/jessicaditullio/6c1pbyuq9ywh6mdt/wish/642305020</guid>
      </item>
   </channel>
</rss>
