![]() This memory reading jump-start to later reading proficiency is like using training wheels for riding a bike. The emergent-reader text is first modeled by the teacher for the students, then joyfully read over and over with the students until eventually the easy book is independently read by the students with great joy and confidence. This teaching method has been used successfully in kindergartens for decades. These books are often mastered through memory reading in guided reading lessons for kindergarten developed by New Zealand educator Don Holdaway’s classic “for-with-by model” to simulate “lap reading” with babies and toddlers. In other words: At the end of kindergarten, a child is expected to have a repertoire of Level-C or D easy emergent-reader texts that he or she enjoys reading fluently, purposefully, and with understanding. Let’s consider each “harmful” kindergarten standards one by one I’ll interpret it for you, and you decide if it’s appropriate for your child.ĬCSS language: Read emergent-reader texts with purpose and understanding. Students advancing through the grades are expected to meet each year’s grade-specific standards and retain or further develop skills and understandings mastered in preceding grades. To set the context, the Reading Instruction in Kindergarten report reminds us how CCSS standards are supposed to work with a quote from the Common Core website: Two higher phases align with first grade. The first three phases applied below align with expectations in kindergarten. Observable and quantifiable reading and writing skills are byproducts of each phase. Rather, it hews to the idea that each child’s thinking and likely brain-reading architecture goes through five phases in learning to read and write, from non-reading to proficient end-of-first-grade reading and writing. It is not geared to a particular pedagogy or ideology. ![]() ![]() Phase Observation has been used successfully by teachers in Montessori kindergartens, in play-based kindergartens, and even in so-called “academic” kindergartens. Not only are my interpretations based on cognitive development and socio-cultural theory, but also on a tried and true research-based strategy for monitoring beginning reading and writing development called Phase Observation. You may find that the standards are reasonable and desirable once they are demystified and interpreted correctly. Six of the literacy standards are deemed “harmful.” In this post, I un-complicate the six CCSS kindergarten standards and ask you to decide if each of the standards would be an appropriate expectation for your child in kindergarten. What’s the Harm in Common Core Kindergarten Literacy Standards?īoth the Washington Post report and the research report, which was issued jointly by the Defending the Early Years and the Alliance for Childhood organizations, call for the kindergarten Common Core State Standards (CCSS) to be withdrawn. While well intended, both the media report and the recommendations of the early childhood experts lead us down the wrong path. The position paper, written by early childhood experts, states that many kindergartners aren’t developmentally ready to read. Here’s how the literacy standards can be interpreted to support reading and writing in kindergarten without harming any child.Ī recent report by early childhood experts amplified by the Washington Post says that “requiring kindergartners to read-as Common Core does”-may harm children. If interpreted correctly, the Common Core standards for literacy enable us to help enhance the kindergarten experience for all kindergarten children-from the underprepared to the most gifted and advanced. There is much wrong with American kindergartens-but the Common Core State Standards are not to blame. This post originally appeared in a slightly different form at Psychology Today.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |