Elaine Vazquez

Education 574
Research Paper

Introduction

In the course of this class, I have taken the time to peruse several

recent articles that touch upon different facets of recent research in

literacy practices. Within this paper I will speak directly to the use of

varied grouping options, instructional practices, varied curriculum

materials, differentiated instruction, and motivational strategies. In

addition to a brief summary I will provide a short reflection on how I

can connect the information to my own practice as a Literacy Coach in

the context of my particular school, Dr. Pedro Albizu Campos Puerto

Rican High School.

Grouping Options

The most instructive information I found regarding grouping

options was a study conducted in 2003 entitled Reading Instruction

Grouping for Students with Reading Difficultiesi. The study examined

the effect of different teacher to student literacy instruction group size

ratios, namely 1:1, 1:3, and 1:10. The researchers included a wide

variety of instructional elements such as phonological awareness, word

study, reading fluency, and comprehension. They also examined the

use of group size for both native English speaking and Spanish

speaking, English language learning (ELL) students. In their

discussion, they write, For reading comprehension, both the 1:1 and
1:3 groups were superior to the 1:10 group. The 1:1 group was not

superior to the 1:3 group on any outcome measure. It thus appears

that both 1:1 and 1:3 are highly effective intervention group sizes for

supplemental reading.ii This finding is important to note, as I work in

a school whose resources are limited, and a 1:3 teacher student ration

would allow us to cover much more ground in a much shorter amount

of time.

Additionally, the authors discovered that while a 1:1 grouping for

Monolingual speakers was significantly better than the 1:10 setting, for

Latino participants the 1:3 ratio was most significantly different from

the results in the 1:10 group. This is particularly interesting to me in

the work I do at my own school since our population is almost entirely

Latino. Although the Latino students cited in the study were ELL and

the majority of our students are not ELL, the argument could be made

that an element of familia or comunidad may have played a role in the

relative success of the 1:3 grouping for Latino students. Yet another

reason why 1:3 reading instruction group size would be ideal for our

Puerto Rican-centric school.

Culturally Responsive Literacy Instruction: Instructional

Practices and Varied Curriculum Materials.
The type and kind of instructional practices and curriculum

materials for literacy are mindboggling. Rather than attempting to

summarize or even seek out some of the latest and greatest

instructional practices for literacy, I chose instead to focus on

Culturally Responsive Literacy Instruction.iii Tandria Callins article of

the same name does a wonderful job discussing the latest information

regarding the multicultural educational movement, specifically as it

relates to literacy. Callins defines culturally responsive literacy

instruction as instruction that bridges the gap between the school and

the world of the student, is consistent with the values of the students

own culture aimed at assuring academic learning, and encourages

teachers to adapt their instruction to meet the learning needs of all

students.iv With this definition in mind, Callins cites five specific

categories to be mindful of in the attempt to create a culturally

responsive literacy program.

Importance is placed on (1) the teacher, (2) multiple forms of

literacy, (3) early reading success, (4) culturally responsive pedagogy,

and (5) skills, reading for meaning, and the use of multicultural

literature. The main focus of this section is on methods and materials,

so I will look most closely at the latter two categories.

Callins lists a set of pedagogical practices commonly

demonstrated by culturally responsive teachers: Communication of

high expectations, use of active teaching methods, facilitating

learning, maintaining positive perspectives of students and parents,

demonstration of cultural sensitivity, reshaping of the curriculum to

students interests, promotion of student-controlled classroom

discourse, and the inclusion of small group instruction and cooperative

learning. I was pleased to feel as though I could check off each

practice as I read down the list, however I was particularly pleased to

note that I do make use of active strategies and methods of

instruction. I regularly get students out of their seats for role playing,

image theater, cooperative activities, walking museums, etc. We

use a plethora of engaging learning techniques and evaluations like

song, drawing, making collages, writing poetry, using charts and

graphs, etc. While many of the characteristics listed are not

methods in the traditional sense, they are teaching methods and

ways of teaching that work for my students nonetheless.

Finally, Callins recommends the use of multicultural literature

and the acquisition of reading skills through multiple mediumsnot

just text. I deliberately try to include multicultural literature from a

broad sample of backgrounds. Not simply Puerto Rican literature, but

literature from Black, Asian, Native American, White, LGBTQ, and those

with backgrounds of multiple religions and physical/mental abilities, as

well as from different periods of history and different regions of the

globe. I try to vary the type of readings I include in my classes from

books to poetry to magazine articles to newspapers, etc. We learn to

read public spaces for meaning, and interpret advertisements based

on how exactly they work to persuade us to buy their products. The

recommendation for the use of varied materials in a multicultural world

is clear, and I am happy to say I do my very best to rise to the

challenge.

While cultural diversity behooves every teacher to modify their

curriculum in this day and age, I have the special task in my school of

catering my methods and materials to a largely Latino, mostly Puerto

Rican group of students. Studies focusing on the literacy needs of

Latino students are few and far between, so I was happy to find an

article focusing exclusively on those needs in Robert T. Jimnez

Fostering the Literacy Development of Latino Studentsv. Jimnez

writes, The literacy achievement gap between White and Latino

students has remained relatively static, as has progress in literacy for

Latino students.vi Although this article focuses largely on Latino

students who struggle with the transition from Spanish to English, it

remains relevant to most Latinos who inevitably live in an environment

swimming with messages in both Spanish and English. Regardless of

whether students are monolingual, bilingual, or transitioning between

the two, using both languages in the classroom is a wonderful way of

using students language wealth to improve literacy. One method I

took away from the article that I would like to try using in my own

classroom is the concept of language brokering. Most of my

students are fluent in English, and many of those are bilingual.

Language brokering is the act many young bilingual students engage

in when they help to read or translate materials for their parents or

peers. For those of my students who are bilingual but perhaps

struggling with reading, they might enjoy a little fieldwork visit[ing]

local businesses and not[ing] how written Spanish and English are used

in restaurants, travel agencies, beauty salons, and grocery stores.vii

Perhaps I could team up with the Spanish department, encouraging

such activities even for monolingual English speaking students who

wish to reconnect with Spanish in their transition towards greater

understanding of their cultural roots.

Differentiated Instruction
Ruthanne Tobins article Conundrums in the Differentiated

Literacy Classroomviii was incredibly instructive. Not only does she

provide a listing of examples of good Differentiation Instruction

practices (DI), (varied reading materials, literacy centers with varied

tasks, and meeting in small groups for re-teaching of various skills) she

also addresses two categories of conundrums that haunt the

implementation of good DI: foundational and instructional. Tobin

writes, Foundational conundrums include teaching for understanding

versus teaching skills; universal design versus differentiated design;

and assessing growth versus comparative assessment. She goes on

to define the troubles in instructional literacy practices as providing a

robust literacy program versus an activities-based program; flexible

small group instruction versus whole class approach; and literal

feedback versus validating feedback.ix The author describes the

pitfalls of each of these dilemmas at length and with care.

While a summary of this article would take more space than the
length of this paper permits, I would like cite a few bits of the text that

were particularly useful to me. After reading the article, the

importance of flexible small grouping within the whole-class setting

stayed with me. I know this is a weakness of mine, and as a result I

have selected it as my new goal for improvement. Id like to give

students the opportunity to work in small groups, sometimes ability-

based, and other times interest-based. Ive already spoken with my

Special Education teacher to employ her assistance as I begin to

implement these practices. I also need to seek out materials that will

help me teach my students how to work well in small groups, since

they often lack these skills during other activities.

Although I already practice modeling regularly, this article

reinforced its importance for me yet again. Tobin cites Allington

(2002) to inform the reader that [e]xplicit demonstrations of the

cognitive strategies that good readers use was found to be a key

feature among exemplary literacy teachers.x As it is my goal to

become an exemplary literacy teacher, I will continue to maintain

this practice as a mainstay of my daily literacy practices.

Motivational Strategies

In 2007, the National Institute for Literacy published an article

entitled What Content-Area Teachers Should Know About Adolescent

Literacyxi in an effort to assist reading specialists in the task of

integrating literacy instruction into the everyday practices of (mostly)

non-English/Language Arts subject area courses. Within the scope of

the article, they touch upon the importance of motivation and the use

of motivational strategies to encourage the skill development and

fluency of struggling readers. According to the article, An individuals

goals, values, and beliefs regarding the topics, processes, and

outcomes of reading affect students motivations for reading.xii The

authors stress that in order for reading skills to improve readers must

be motivated to read. Subsequently, the more a growing reader reads

the more motivated they become as they develop fluency and

facilitate their ease of comprehension and self-connection. The article

contains sections devoted to a listing of habits motivated readers

employ, roadblocks or challenges adolescents face finding

motivation, as well as suggestions for how instruction can assist in the

development of motivation for young developing readers.

In my own practice, I have taken much of the research to heart.

I have a Good Book Box in my room which I have filled with books

and magazines selected from a listing of students interests I surveyed.

I regularly provide students the chance to interact over reading,

whether in small or large group settings. I am always very clear what I

want students to focus on as they do their reading, whether it is

questioning, making inferences, predicting or previewing the text, or

even just reading to answer critical or specific questions. I try to

create a variety of activities for processing reading that cater to

multiple intelligences. So far, students seem engaged and

demonstrated a positive attitude about reading inside and outside of

the classroom.

Conclusion

This research paper gave me the opportunity to review a fair

section of recent literature on literacy. Although only a few articles

were cited in the interest of brevity, I still read well over ten articles on

various topics. The experience was enjoyable and I was able to link my

newfound learning with work in my own school. I look forward to

learning more as I continue my journey towards being the best Literacy

Coach I can be.

i
Vaughn et al., (2003) Reading Instruction Grouping for Students with Reading Difficulties. Remedial
and Special Education, 24(5), 301-315.
ii
ibid. 311
iii
Callins, T. (2006). Culturally Responsive Literacy Instruction. Teaching
Exceptional Children. 39(2) 62-65.
iv
ibid. 62
v
Jimnez, R. (2002) Fostering the Literacy Development of Latino Students.
Focus on Exceptional Children 34(6) 1-10.
vi
ibid. 1
vii
ibid 5
viii
Tobin, R. (2008) Conundrums in the Differentiated Literacy Classroom. Reading Improvement,
45(4), 159-169.
ix
ibid. 160
x
ibid. 165
xi
National Institute for Literacy (2007). What Content-Area Teachers Should Know About Adolescent
Literacy. http://www/nifl.gov.nifl/publications.html
xii
ibid. 34