Elevating the Profile of Literacy Improvement

By Wendy Vaulton, Assistant Director of Research, Center for Reading Recovery and Literacy Collaborative

wendy-vaulton“So, what do you do?” For years I envied people with job titles that were easy to convey in casual conversation—nurses, spy novelists, dog groomers.  My stock answer involved so much detail that by the time I finished, any sane person would have nodded off or fled for the bean dip. Enter the elevator speech.

Used in the corporate world to promote good and services for years, the elevator speech (or elevator pitch) can also promote your school’s literacy efforts. The elevator speech is intended to be brief (imagine the length of time it takes to ride up a couple of floors), and the primary goal is to interest someone in learning more, rather than deluging them with information.

Developing an elevator speech is not easy.  You want your speech to be simple but not simplistic, and rehearsed but not canned.  Start with a “hook” to peak the listener’s interest and motivate them to continue the conversation. Your hook might change depending on who you’re talking to, but two of the most memorable hooks shared by Literacy Coaches during trainings were:

  • “I help teachers make better decisions in the classroom”
  • “I’m the literacy quarterback at my school”

Follow your hook with that which is most difficult of all…a pause. Give that school board member a moment to ask a question or respond. Then, be prepared to answer those questions simply. You have already learned something valuable about that stakeholder’s point of view just by the nature of his or her question. It helps if you have a few “headlines” in your back pocket about results or needs that are relevant to different interest groups (parents, school board members, central administrators).  It takes practice and a lot of thought to get there, but when you can explain your literacy improvement efforts in 30 seconds, you’ve got it.

Assuring a Standardized Comprehension Conversation with the Fountas and Pinnell Benchmark Assessment System

By Irene Fountas, Center for Reading Recovery and Literacy Collaborative Director/Author/Professor

irene_fountas_2.JPGAs you use the Fountas and Pinnell Benchmark Assessment System, do you and your colleagues have common understandings so you will have accurate information on your students? Think about how you are providing a standardized comprehension conversation and scoring it in a standardized way. The following suggestions may be helpful:

Before the Assessment:
* Be sure you have read and thought about the information in the book. When you know the text well, it will be easier to facilitate the conversation.

* Read the key understandings and prompts prior to the assessment so you are familiar with them.

* Explain to children beforehand that you are going to meet with each of them to listen to them read so you will be able to help them as readers. Explain that you will ask them to read a short book and then you will ask them to share their thinking about what they read.

During the Assessment
* Use an encouraging tone when inviting the student to talk more.

* Avoid repeating what the student says.

* Give wait time instead of jumping in to ask the question again.

* Be concise in the language of your prompts.

* Don’t ask leading questions.

* When the student has indicated some knowledge of an answer but uses only one or two words in a superficial way, you must respond with “Say more about that.” or “Talk more about that.”

* If a student is simply pasting sentences from the text together, or reading them, it shows the student knows where to find evidence; however, the student needs to be able to articulate, understanding independently. You might say, “Can you say that in your own words?”

* Try not to repeat a question or prompt unless it is necessary. Repeating a question several times can make a child confused or become “a lead” to an answer.

* Paraphrase a prompt only once. Doing so multiple times may lead the student to an answer.

* Avoid asking a question in a way that “gives” the answer. A leading question might be, “And how do these adaptations help this animal?”

* Be careful not to change the intentions of a prompt or question. For example, “What is the writer’s message?” is different from “What is the writer’s message about extinction?”

* Do not direct the student to a particular part of the book unless the prompt requires it.

* Allow the student to look back in the book if they initiate it. If the student starts to read from the book, you should say “Can you say that in your own words?”

As you become very well versed with the books and the prompts, your comprehension conversation at the lower levels will only take about 2-3 minutes and the upper levels about 4-5 minutes. Remember, an assessment conference is the time for you to gather good information, so resist the urge to teach! Discuss these points with your colleagues so your team can assure that each student is engaged in a standardized comprehension conversation that gives good data to inform teaching and document profiles through time.

Learning Places: Shifting from School Change to Fostering a Culture of Growth

By Irene Fountas, Center for Reading Recovery and Literacy Collaborative Director/Author/Professor

As we contemplate the improvement of our craft to benefit the children we teach, it can be useful to reflect on the language we use to describe the journey. Recently, I began to notice how often I read the term or use the term “school change” and began to think about a needed shift in language.

irene_fountas_2In a culture where all professionals are committed to the learning of their students, every teacher uses the knowledge they have to provide the most effective teaching they can. Every teacher is doing what he understands. So I began to think, the goal is not to change, but to grow. Nothing we do as teachers is wrong. Our teaching actions represent our best understandings at a particular point in time. Instead of spending time feeling badly, we need to focus our efforts on growing and supporting the growth of all members of the school community.

In their book Learning Places, Fullan and St. Germain describe schools as “learning places” or places where learning thrives.

  • Educators recognize that school improvement is complex.
  • Teachers are supported to engage in ongoing critical inquiry.
  • Educators have a shared purpose, a common base of knowledge and develop a common language.
  • Working as a team to recognize problems and plan actions, educators engage in a variety of collaborative activities.
  • Educators take shared responsibility for student learning.
  • All members seek to expand their knowledge through professional reading, study groups, conferences, research, affiliation with universities, professional organizations, coaching sessions and professional development sessions.
  • All members of the school community are invited to pool their knowledge and experiences to make informed decisions that best serve the school.

These critical elements should resonate with you as you think about your schools’ journey of growth.  As you think about the culture of your particular school, contemplate the factors that will support a culture of teacher growth – one that honors everyone’s efforts, but also brings energy and passion to the goal of continued learning. In the words of Fullan and St. Germain, think about whether your school is a “learning place.”

Fullan, Michael and St. Germain, Clif. (2006). Learning Places: A Field Guide for Improving the Context of Schooling. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.

Why Literacy Educators Need to be Advocates for Science and Social Studies Education

nell-duke

by Guest Blogger Nell Duke, Professor at the University of Michigan, Author, and 2016 Literacy for All Conference Keynote Speaker

Time devoted to science and social studies in elementary schools has been on the decline for some time (e.g., Blank, 2013; Center on Education Policy, 2008; Heafner & Fitchett, 2012). As citizens, there is little doubt that we should be concerned about this, but in this post, I argue that we should also be concerned about it as literacy educators.

Consider the following passage (Tierney & Pearson, 1981):

The batsmen were merciless against the bowlers. The bowlers placed their men in slips and covers. But to no avail. The batsmen hit one four after another with an occasional six. Not once did a ball look like it would hit their stumps or be caught.

Many readers, including myself, find this passage difficult to comprehend. But if you know the game of cricket, I’m told it is quite easy to understand. This example illustrates the important role that knowledge plays in reading comprehension. In a classic study, Recht and Leslie (1988) studied seventh and eighth graders who were either good or poor readers as determined by a standardized test of comprehension achievement. Some of the students in each group were knowledgeable about the game of baseball; others were not. All students were asked to read a passage that described a half inning of a baseball game and then to reenact and describe what they read. The researchers found that poor readers with high knowledge of baseball actually displayed better comprehension than good readers with low knowledge of baseball—such was the power of relevant prior knowledge.

Having knowledge related to a text seems to support text comprehension in a number of ways, such as through facilitating recognition of words, processing of known vocabulary, handling of existing vocabulary, and generation of inferences (e.g., Elleman, Lindo, Morphy, & Compton, 2009; Fincher-Kiefer, 1992; Kaefer, Neuman, & Pinkham, 2015; Priebe, Keenan, & Miller, 2011). As probably does not surprise you, general knowledge is a strong predictor of later comprehension achievement (e.g., Grissmer, Grimm, Aiyer, Murrah, & Steele, 2010). One study even found that students learned a new comprehension strategy better when it was taught in the context of texts for which they had a lot of relevant content knowledge (Gaultney, 1995).

As literacy educators, one of our major goals is to support comprehension development—and content knowledge supports comprehension development. Therefore, we should be advocates for considerable attention to content area education. We should resist the temptation to think that more time on literacy is always better. That may be true in the short term, but in the long term it could backfire. Students’ comprehension may suffer from a lack of content knowledge relevant to the texts they are reading. The problem may be particularly acute for students who rely heavily on school to develop content knowledge relevant to the texts they encounter in school.

Fortunately, we do not have to choose between attention to literacy and attention to content area education. Through content-rich approaches to literacy education and integrating literacy in science and social studies, we can support development of literacy both directly and through content knowledge-building (e.g., Guthrie, McRae, & Klauda, 2007; Strachan, 2015). In other words, by advocating for science and social studies, we can have our cake and eat it too. Let’s eat up!


Nell Duke is speaking at the Literacy for All Conference on:

Tuesday, October 25, 2016

8:30 a.m. – 10:00 a.m.- Emphasizing Engagement: Why Literacy Engagement is More Important Than Ever and What We Can Do About It (Grades K-8)

10:15 a.m. – 11:45 a.m.- Projects for the Primary Grades (Grades K-2)


References

Blank, R. K. (2013), Science instructional time is declining in elementary schools: What are the implications for student achievement and closing the gap? Science Education, 97, 830–847. doi:10.1002/sce.21078

Center on Education Policy. (2008). Instructional time in elementary schools: A closer look at changes for specific subjects. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://www.cep-dc.org/publications/index.cfm?selectedYear=2008.

Elleman, A. M., Lindo, E. J., Morphy, P., & Compton, D. L. (2009). The impact of vocabulary instruction on passage-level comprehension of school-age children: A meta-analysis. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 2(1), 1–44. http://doi.org/10.1080/19345740802539200

Fincher-Kiefer, R. (1992). The role of prior knowledge in inferential processing. Journal of Research in Reading, 15(1), 12–27. http://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9817.1992.tb00018.x

Gaultney, J. F. (1995). The effect of prior knowledge and metacognition on the acquisition of a reading comprehension strategy. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 59, 142–163. http://doi.org/10.1006/jecp.1995.1006

Guthrie, J. T., McRae, A., & Klauda, S. L. (2007). Contributions of Concept-Oriented Reading Instruction to knowledge about interventions for motivations in reading. Educational Psychologist, 42, 237–250.

Grissmer, D., Grimm, K. J., Aiyer, S. M., Murrah, W. M., & Steele, J. S. (2010). Fine motor skills and early comprehension of the world: Two new school readiness indicators. Developmental Psychology, 46(5), 1008–1017. http://doi.org/10.1037/a0020104

Heafner, T. L., & Fitchett, P. G. (2012). Tipping the scales: National trends of declining social studies instructional time in elementary schools. Journal of Social Studies Research, 36(2), 190-215.

Kaefer, T., Neuman, S. B., & Pinkham, A. M. (2015). Pre-existing background knowledge influences socioeconomic differences in preschoolers’ word learning and comprehension. Reading Psychology, 36, 203–231.

Priebe, S. J., Keenan, J. M., & Miller, A. C. (2012). How prior knowledge affects word identification and comprehension. Reading and Writing, 25, 131-149. doi:10.1007/s11145-010-9260-0

Recht, D. R., & Leslie, L. (1988). Effect of prior knowledge on good and poor readers’ memory of text. Journal of Educational Psychology, 80(1), 16–20. http://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.80.1.16

Strachan, S. L. (2015). Kindergarten students’ social studies and content literacy learning from interactive read-alouds. The Journal of Social Studies Research, 39, 207–223.

Tierney, R. J., & Pearson, P. D. (1981). Learning to learn from text: A framework for improving classroom practice (No. 30). In E. K. Dishner, J. Readance, & T. Bean (Eds.), Reading in the content areas: Improving classroom practice (pp. 1–38). Dubuque IA: Kendall Hunt.

For a number of additional resources related to advocating for science, social studies, and arts education, see http://knowledgematterscampaign.org/.

Setting the Stage for ­­­­Joy and Independence in Reading

by Irene Fountas, Director of the Center for Reading Recovery and Literacy Collaborative, Author, and Featured Speaker at the 2016 Literacy for All Conference

A classroom is a place where children can thrive in a language-rich, print-rich, social environment every day of the school year. When you support continuous inquiry, children’s fascination with people and the world, and multi-text based learning, you engage the hearts and minds of your students. They learn how to learn and develop a sense of agency that will propel their literacy learning across the year.

2-kids-choosing-books

 

The foundation of growing up literate in our schools lies in authentic literacy learning that brings together children’s language and background experiences with the world of print and media. It begins with getting wonderful books in every child’s hands and selecting high quality complex texts that capture children’s attention with the language, craft and ideas of fiction and nonfiction texts. And it continues when the fabric of the classroom is reading, thinking, talking and writing about books.

The early milestones for developing students’ views of themselves as readers and writers include setting up an organized classroom library in a range of relevant and appealing categories, providing a variety of enticing book talks and teaching your students to do the same, teaching students how to select books that interest them and they can enjoy, teaching students how to talk to each other about books, and introducing the reader’s notebook as a place to reflect on reading through writing.

When students spend their time reading books, thinking about books, talking about books, and writing about them, they build the stamina and independence that places books at the center and promotes a lifetime of joy in reading.


Irene Fountas will be speaking at the upcoming Literacy for All conference, October 23-25, 2016 in Providence, Rhode Island. Her sessions include:

Sunday, October 23, 2016

Celebrating the Twentieth Anniversary of Guided Reading: Elevating Teacher Expertise in Differentiated Instruction (Grades K-5) 

Irene Fountas, Author/Director, Center for Reading Recovery and Literacy Collaborative, Lesley University, MA
Gay Su Pinnell, Author/Professor Emerita, The Ohio State University, OH

 

Monday, October 24, 2016

Digging Deep: Teaching for Reading Power in Guided Reading Lessons (Grades K-5)

Irene Fountas, Author/Director, Center for Reading Recovery and Literacy Collaborative, Lesley University, MA
Gay Su Pinnell, Author/Professor Emerita, The Ohio State University, OH

Close Reading Workouts: 3 Engaging Strategies that Work!

 

headshot-lori-oczkus

by Guest Blogger Lori Oczkus, Literacy Consultant/ Author and Literacy for All Conference Featured Speaker

Is close reading the new black? Just like the trusty little black dress or classic dark blazer that become reliable staples in a wardrobe, close reading plays an integral role in our literacy instruction with students of all ages. Students rely on close reading to dig into challenging texts in a variety of settings; from eighth graders working in teams to scout out the tone of political articles, to fourth graders pouring over informational books about hurricanes for their blog posts, to first graders preparing to meet a guide dog by reading picture books about working dogs. Our students today need to carry a tool kit of effective reading strategies that they employ as they read a wide variety of texts. Close reading is one way for students to enhance and improve their comprehension when reading more rigorous texts.

Close reading involves rereading to highlight, underline, reconsider points, ask and answer questions, consider author’s purpose and word choice, develop fluency, and discuss the text with others (Oczkus & Rasinski, 2015). Instead of skipping over challenging texts, students need to develop strategies for digging into texts on their own (Fisher & Frey, 2012). Students also should learn to stick to the text at hand rather than going off topic. Close reading keeps students focused as they make meaning and dig deeper into texts for different purposes. Also, close reading helps solve the issue of spoon feeding students or constantly providing too much teacher support. Students learn to take responsibility and to attempt to tackle challenging texts on their own.

When close reading first came on the scene along with the Common Core Standards (2010), many teachers complained that close reading as an instructional routine was “boring” or that it took too long. Eyes rolled and students sighed with dread as they forced themselves to read passages multiple times. In my work in classrooms around the country, we decided to try an interactive lesson sequence that features practical ways to engage students in close reading lessons. The protocol features proven strategies from reciprocal teaching along with a dash of fluency (Oczkus & Rasinski, 2015). Here are some practical ways you can add some serious pep to your close reading lessons:

  1. Make Lessons Interactive
  • Mark It Up

Try making your close reading lessons more interactive by encouraging students to mark the text in a variety of ways, using colored pencils, highlighters, and crayons. Also, invite students to sometimes circle, box, or annotate in margins or on sticky notes with symbols. You might even assign each table just one of the symbols to look for in the text. So for example, one table rereads the text to underline sentences that are confusing while another puts exclamation points in the margins for surprising information. Then encourage students to share their markings.

  • Talk About It

Invite students to reread on their own and mark texts but to briefly discuss their findings after each rereading. Discussion promotes comprehension!

  • Let Students Choose

Allow students to select which passage or page from the book is worthy of a close read. Use the agreed upon portion of text to conduct a series of rereadings. Be sure to ask students to justify why they wanted to reread that particular text. Reasons for close reading might include: challenging vocabulary or concepts, confusing plot twists or character actions, or even well written text that warrants rereading for deeper enjoyment.

  1. Try the “Fab Four” to Dramatically Boost Reading

Reciprocal teaching (Palincsar & Brown, 1986), or the “Fab Four” (Oczkus, 2010) is an effective and research-based reading discussion technique that works well for a close reading routine and yields dramatic results. Research shows that students who participate in reciprocal teaching show improvement in as little as 15 days (Palincsar & Brown, 1986) and after three to six months they may grow two years in their reading levels (Hattie,2008; Rosenshine & Meister 1994). When we use reciprocal teaching as a close reading routine, comprehension improves and student reading levels soar!

  • Natural 4 Steps for Close Reading Lessons

Reciprocal teaching is a scaffolded discussion technique that includes four critical strategies that good readers rotate through as they comprehend text– predict, question, clarify, and summarize (Oczkus, 2010). When rereading a text, these four strategies provide a practical protocol and can be discussed in any order. As students move through the strategies and reread for each, they can also mark texts by underlining, circling, and writing in margins. The students begin to use the strategies on their own as the process becomes second nature whenever they read!

Predict 

First the reader briefly glances over the text to make predictions and to consider the author’s purpose.

Read

Depending upon the grade level the students may read the first time through a text on their own. Then the teacher reads it aloud after they’ve attempted it. For younger students or struggling readers, the teacher reads the text first and students reread it.

Clarify 

Next the reader reads the text through identifying challenging words or ideas.

Question 

Then the reader and the teacher ask questions including text dependent ones.

Summarize 

During the final rereading of the text the reader summarizes the text and author’s purpose.

  1. Sneak Fluency into Close Reading Lessons

Close reading, by definition, requires that students read a text more than once and for different purposes. One purpose of repeated readings is to learn to practice reading a passage with fluency (Rasinski & Griffith, 2010). Since we are asking students to reread texts during close reading lessons, fluency instruction is a natural fit! Here are some easy ways to incorporate fluency into your close reading lessons.

  • Model the Three Aspects of Fluency

Fluency includes three important aspects that can be quickly highlighted during close reading instruction. The teacher reads aloud the passage fluently and can model and point out one aspect of fluency such as appropriate rate, accuracy, or prosody.

Rate:  Encourage reading with expression, volume and at a conversational pace.

Accuracy:  Praise self-corrections.

Prosody:  Point out during your modeling how to group words together to sound natural or how to read with expression and emotion.

Close reading lessons boost reading when you employ reciprocal teaching, engagement strategies, and fluency modeling.


Lori Oczkus is speaking at the Literacy for All conference on:

Monday (10/24)

10:30 a.m. – 12:00 p.m.- Close Reading Workouts With Paired Texts (Grades K-8)

3:30 p.m. – 5:00 p.m.- Guided Writing: Practical Lessons, Powerful Results! (Grades K-6)

Tuesday (10/25)

10:15 a.m. – 11:45 a.m.- Close Reading Workouts With Paired Texts (Grades K-8)- repeat session

References

Common Core State Standards Initiative. 2010. Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts & Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects. Washington, DC: National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and the Council of Chief State School Officers.

Fisher, Doug, and Nancy Frey. 2012. “Close Reading in Elementary Schools.” The Reading Teacher 66(3): 179-188.

Hattie, John A. 2008.  Visible Learning: A Synthesis of Over 800 Meta-Analyses Relating to Achievement.  Oxford, UK. Routledge.

Oczkus, Lori D. 2010. Reciprocal Teaching at Work: Powerful Strategies and Lessons for Improving Reading Comprehension.  2nd Edition. Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Oczkus, Lori D. and Timothy V. Rasinski. 2015. Close Reading with Paired Texts. Series K-5. Huntington Beach, CA: Shell Education.

Palincsar, Annemarie Sullivan, and Ann L. Brown. 1986. “Interactive Teaching to Promote Independent Learning from Text.” The Reading Teacher 39 (8): 771-777.

Rasinski, Timothy V. 2010. and  Lorraine Griffith. 2010. Building Fluency Through Practice and Performance.  Huntington Beach, CA: Shell Education.

Rosenshine, Barak, and Carla Meister. 1994. “Reciprocal Teaching: A Review of the Research.” Review of Educational Research 64 (4): 479-530.

Making Joy a Reading Standard

Mary Anne Buckley - low res

by Guest Blogger Mary Anne Buckley, Literacy for All Conference  Featured Speaker

I was on an interview a few years ago and the final question was a wordy jumble of educational buzzwords and teacher-ese lingo that left me questioning if I actually knew anything at all about literacy instruction. So I asked the panel to repeat it and when they did I was able to tease out their real question… what did I consider to be an essential component of a literacy program? Without thinking I answered, “Joy” and thought that would wrap up the interview and the job. The bemused chuckles and blank stares made me realize I had some explaining to do.

I went on to describe how Read Alouds can promote fluency and reading rate, how Shared Reading can delve into word families and sentence structure, how Interactive Read Alouds can deepen prediction, inferring and comprehension strategies. I described how literacy workshops can reach all the benchmarks and standards of the Common Core, the DRA, the F&P, but without joy they won’t develop enthusiastic, independent, discerning readers.  It may, to quote G.M. Trevelyan,  “…[produce] a vast population able to read, but unable to distinguish what is worth reading.”

Today reading instruction in many classrooms has a narrow approach focused on checking off strategies and skills within specific book levels. These checklists then determine when a student can move forward in their reading and even what books they are allowed to read!  Teachers may mean well in following these programs but the formulas, the checklists, the assessments overtake their judgment and they lose sight of the bigger picture. When we put those directives aside for just a moment and focus on our students we discover something new. We see Carlos choosing books from several different levels and genres.  We ask why Anna loves chapter books as she organizes her post it notes and we listen to Ben and Simeon question each other as they read Open Wide: Tooth School Inside we find the purpose of our instruction. We find joy in reading and then we balance that with thoughtful, systematic, explicit instruction. This begins the development of readers who take risks, contemplate thoughtfully and question independently.

Joy is reading Leonardo the Terrible Monster by Mo Willems. It is a delightful tale that brings our classroom community together in silly joy. And when we look deeper and explore the tenderness Leonardo feels when he chooses to hug Sam instead of “scar[img] the tuna salad out of him” an opportunity is created for students to share times when they have offered kindness to someone and how it changed the situation. Or when they accepted kindness from a peer and how it changed them. As readers we begin to look for compassion in other characters, to find connections of compassion across genres and discover compassion in real world news.

Another joy is holding March Reading Madness this past year. Eight books were placed in a bracket and every Thursday three classes gathered together to read and vote for a favorite.  As a group we examined the cover art and made predictions, we paused and discussed the problems and possible solutions, and we shared out favorite quotes by referring back to the text. After the ballots were cast one class would tally the votes and announce the winner for that week. The final pairing was held in the auditorium with great fanfare and popcorn!

One class extended the learning by writing persuasive paragraphs about their book choice; another made short video book reviews. Some children made their own brackets with books from their reading bags. They read with great enthusiasm to one another attempting to convince the other that the cunning ways of Jack and Annie were superior to that of Nate the Great.

When our class read A Chair for My Mother by Vera B. Williams the children wondered why Rosa and her mother used all the money to buy a chair. After all a chair is a chair, right?  We read the book with a second grade class  and after many readings and discussions the students came to see how each one of them had a precious object that offered them safety and comfort. Together the students created posters of both the chair and their individual objects. The joy of the poster activity strengthened the students’ understanding of why we reread books, why we ask questions when we are confused, why we share ideas.

We read a slew of books about the power of words – Martin’s Big Words by Doreen Rapport, Trouble Talk by Trudy Ludwig, Sit-In: How Four Friends Stood Up by Sitting Down by Andrea Davis Pinkney, Mr. Peabody’s Apples by Madonna, Wangari’s Trees of Peace by Jeanette Winter and spent time thinking about the words we use and how they affect people. Then we brainstormed words that we could use to help make our community and the world a more peaceful place. As readers we began to discover the thoughtful and purposeful word choices authors make when describing a character, a setting, a gesture. We discussed words that carried powerful peace within them and wanted to be a class that spread peace.  We hung our mural in the hallway and students and adults alike stopped to read and enjoy our joy.

Joy is in listening to and being moved by words and joy is in crafting words that move others. Joy is in recognizing ourselves in characters as well as challenging ourselves to see things from a different perspective. Joy is connecting and reflecting with one another.  I wrote that I answered the last question from the interview panel without thinking but in all actuality I’ve been thinking about that answer for years. When we remember our own personal joy of reading and infuse that into our instruction the lessons themselves become joyful.

Focus on the journey, not the destination. Joy is not found in finishing an activity but in doing it.

– Greg Anderson


Mary Anne is speaking at the Literacy for All Conference:

Monday, 10/24

1:30pm – 3:00 pm- Friendship Workshop: How to Integrate Social, Emotional and Literacy Learning (Grades K-2)

Tuesday 10/25

10:15am – 11:45am-  Friendship Workshop: How to Integrate Social, Emotional and Literacy Learning (Grades K-2) (repeat session)

1:00pm – 2:30pm- It’s Not Education If It’s Not Mindful (Grades PreK-2)