A California State University Initiative to Improve Adolescent Reading in All Content Areas.
Denise Fleming, Norman J. Unrau, Jamal Cooks, John McE. Davis, Nancy Farnan, Dana L. Grisham
Abstract
Denise Fleming, Norman J. Unrau, Jamal Cooks, John McE. Davis, Nancy Farnan, Dana L. Grisham
Abstract
In Single Subject preservice programs across the nation, literacy professors are coping with the demands of preparing their candidates to teach and writing across the content areas. The professors are challenged to establish a credible rationale for why teachers in content areas such as physical education, art, and music should be required to take a course in content literacy. And, while many candidates wonder why they must take a course in reading, many professors wonder how that course can be optimally structured to adequately teach a vast array of literacy-related processes and content literacy methods. Thus, professors must make a series of curricular decisions: What kind and how many literacy strategies should be taught? What assignments and examples should be used to reflect the range of content areas represented by candidates? How can course content and delivery positively affect candidates' attitudes about literacy instruction? As these new teachers enter middle and high school classrooms, they will discover that many of their students rarely tackle assigned readings and, of those who do, a substantial number struggle to comprehend the material. Large classes and diverse learning needs sorely tax new teachers' emerging skills and knowledge; a growing number of students who are apathetic or struggling readers further complicates the situation. In his study of over 100 reading of middle and high school teachers in all content areas, including science, math, social studies, English, and art, Bintz (1997) found that teachers were perplexed by classroom teaching dilemmas such as how to make factual more interesting, help students understand what they read, and find time to teach skills without compromising subject matter instruction. When asked to express a wish that, if it were to come true, would rid them of their nightmares, the teachers expressed hopes such as, wish I knew how to teach and math together; wish that every teacher regardless of the content area would recognize the importance of reading; and, wish I could stop time so I could catch all kids up in reading. Preparing candidates to avoid nightmares and realize their hopes for student literacy has become a guiding purpose for a group of university professors and classroom teachers in California. As the world's largest public university system, the California State University (CSU), with its 23 campuses, trains approximately 60% of California's teachers. Among the many credentialing requirements is a single course in for those who will become middle or high school teachers (as opposed to the two or three courses that most elementary candidates take). In 2001, the CSU began conducting annual surveys of first-year teachers and their immediate supervisors to determine the efficacy of credentialing programs and the degree to which the CSU is meeting the needs of California's public schools. The new teachers and supervisors surveyed were asked to indicate how well prepared they believed new teachers were to teach skills, including vocabulary and comprehension, in their primary subject area. While the percentage of those satisfied with preservice preparation for elementary teachers, those usually teaching grades K-5, has steadily risen over the three years in which the survey has been administered, the percentage for new secondary teachers has shown a decline. In particular, the survey results show that a significant percentage of these new secondary teachers, as well as their supervisors, believe the teachers are not adequately prepared to help their middle and high school students learn requisite vocabulary and comprehend subject area texts. The Single Subject Reading Task Force To address this challenge, the CSU Chancellor's Office, working through its Center for the Advancement of Reading (CAR), assembled the Single Subject Reading Task Force (SSRTF), a group of 14 members: 12 faculty from various CSU campuses across the state and the two co-directors of CAR, one of whom was also a CSU literacy faculty member. …
OpenAlex reports 9 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
In Single Subject preservice programs across the nation, literacy professors are coping with the demands of preparing their candidates to teach and writing across the content areas. The professors are challenged to establish a credible rationale for why teachers in content areas such as physical education, art, and music should be required to take a course in content literacy. And, while many candidates wonder why they must take a course in reading, many professors wonder how that course can be optimally structured to adequately teach a vast array of literacy-related processes and content literacy methods. Thus, professors must make a series of curricular decisions: What kind and how many literacy strategies should be taught? What assignments and examples should be used to reflect the range of content areas represented by candidates? How can course content and delivery positively affect candidates' attitudes about literacy instruction? As these new teachers enter middle and high school classrooms, they will discover that many of their students rarely tackle assigned readings and, of those who do, a substantial number struggle to comprehend the material. Large classes and diverse learning needs sorely tax new teachers' emerging skills and knowledge; a growing number of students who are apathetic or struggling readers further complicates the situation. In his study of over 100 reading of middle and high school teachers in all content areas, including science, math, social studies, English, and art, Bintz (1997) found that teachers were perplexed by classroom teaching dilemmas such as how to make factual more interesting, help students understand what they read, and find time to teach skills without compromising subject matter instruction. When asked to express a wish that, if it were to come true, would rid them of their nightmares, the teachers expressed hopes such as, wish I knew how to teach and math together; wish that every teacher regardless of the content area would recognize the importance of reading; and, wish I could stop time so I could catch all kids up in reading. Preparing candidates to avoid nightmares and realize their hopes for student literacy has become a guiding purpose for a group of university professors and classroom teachers in California. As the world's largest public university system, the California State University (CSU), with its 23 campuses, trains approximately 60% of California's teachers. Among the many credentialing requirements is a single course in for those who will become middle or high school teachers (as opposed to the two or three courses that most elementary candidates take). In 2001, the CSU began conducting annual surveys of first-year teachers and their immediate supervisors to determine the efficacy of credentialing programs and the degree to which the CSU is meeting the needs of California's public schools. The new teachers and supervisors surveyed were asked to indicate how well prepared they believed new teachers were to teach skills, including vocabulary and comprehension, in their primary subject area. While the percentage of those satisfied with preservice preparation for elementary teachers, those usually teaching grades K-5, has steadily risen over the three years in which the survey has been administered, the percentage for new secondary teachers has shown a decline. In particular, the survey results show that a significant percentage of these new secondary teachers, as well as their supervisors, believe the teachers are not adequately prepared to help their middle and high school students learn requisite vocabulary and comprehend subject area texts. The Single Subject Reading Task Force To address this challenge, the CSU Chancellor's Office, working through its Center for the Advancement of Reading (CAR), assembled the Single Subject Reading Task Force (SSRTF), a group of 14 members: 12 faculty from various CSU campuses across the state and the two co-directors of CAR, one of whom was also a CSU literacy faculty member. …
Key concepts: Literacy, Mathematics education, Reading (process), Wonder, Pedagogy, Psychology, Political science, Social psychology