In the Age of Analytic Reading: Understanding Readers’ Engagement with Text by Colleen Pennell

Closing Thoughts

Throughout this process, I have attempted to show how readers who experience difficulty are capable of higher level thinking but need instructional environments that are dialogically organized, provide multiple access points to text, and sanction experiential knowledge. My interest in this study concerned not only discovering this intervention’s impact on reading comprehension but how other elements such as student epistemology and socially situated language practices influence learning. To that extent, I share the following findings.

To begin, each student demonstrated gains on the QRI-V (Leslie & Caldwell, 2011). Their instructional reading levels on narrative passages advanced from levels 2-3 for Jacob, Lucas, and Sean, and from level 3-4 for Michael. Pre assessments revealed that all students had few oral reading miscues but showed difficulty with elaborated retellings as well as explicit and implicit comprehension. Students’ comprehension errors on the post-assessment illustrated implicit comprehension, although improved, needed continued remediation. Retellings remained brief and demonstrated general text understanding. Pre-assessment data revealed that Sean incorrectly identified the setting of the passage but was able to successfully accomplish this task on the post-assessment. I attribute this growth to the story-mapping that occurred after each read aloud. These results are not generalizable due to the small sample size of participants and unaccounted for variables within this qualitative research study.

Additional observations noted over the course of the intervention revealed students engaged in lengthier and more frequent patterns of exploratory talk. Collectively, their use of reasoning words (Mercer, 2000) such as “because”, “but”, “I think”, and “so” increased which suggests greater engagement in cognitive reasoning. Moreover, towards the end of the intervention, I observed students appropriating a philosophic stance towards text by independently asking questions rooted in philosophical wonderings. Lastly, from an epistemic standpoint (Johnston, Woodside-Jiron & Day, 2000) my pre and post interviews with students suggested a shifting epistemology underpinning discourse as they began to view discussions as a tool to construct knowledge as opposed as a means to merely receive it.

Although this study employed small groups of students, philosophical inquiry can be accomplished with larger class sizes (see appendix for resources). I suggest teachers approach interactive read alouds through a philosophical lens and pose thought provoking questions regarding issues observed within the text. In order to foster meaningful language practices, provide small group lessons for students with language impairments or English Language Learners. Philosophy is a naturally inclusive discipline and flourishes with diverse cultural and social perspectives.

Moreover, when considering the prominent role of writing in the CCSS, philosophical inquiry is an excellent way to advance students’ argumentative writing. Using this approach as rehearsal for the writing process promotes students ability to reason through ideas, consider opposing viewpoints, and defend propositions with evidence. Collectively, these comprise a solid skill set for composing a written argument.

In closing, philosophical inquiry holds an important place in the classroom, academically and socially. Although the CCSS emphasize engagement in close, analytic reading, we must remember a broader yet equally important mission for literacy which is grounded in a human-centered approach to learning. As Wells (1990) noted, “To be fully literate is to have the disposition to engage appropriately with texts of different types in order to empower action, feeling, and thinking in the context of purposeful social activity” (p. 14). Ultimately, educators must adapt to the instructional shifts that are called upon by the CCSS yet continually remember that effective literacy instruction embraces the complex social, emotional, and linguistic practices that children interact with both in and outside of the school day.