USING MULTIPLE TEXTS TO TEACH CRITICAL READING SKILLS TO LINGUISTICALLY DIVERSE STUDENTS

Kaemanje Thomas, Minkyung Choi

Abstract


Mastery of developmental reading courses offers both an opportunity for academic enrichment and a barrier to college completion. We examine what it means to use multiple texts in college developmental reading courses, the benefits of using them, and considerations that instructors may employ in their instructions. A review of the literature indicates Linguistically Diverse students (LDs) often lack the required critical thinking skills needed to tackle the rigor and demand of their college level courses. We conducted a study to tests whether using multiple texts improved LDs critical reading skills. Participants of 30 undergraduate students taking RDL 500 course were analyzed using pre and posttest results. Findings indicated that integrated use of multiple texts is a practical teaching approach for LDs improved their critical reading skills and their navigation of unfamiliar texts. This implies the use of the one size-fits-all approach may not be an effective pedagogical practice by instructors who teach the LD student.

Keywords:community college; critical literacy; cultural capital; developmental reading; language minority students; linguistically diverse students; multiple texts; sociocultural literacy.

Full Text:

PDF

References


Bailey, M., & Dynarski, S. (2012). Gains and gaps: Changing inequality in U.S. college entry and completion. Retrieved from http://www.nber.org/papers/w17633.

Bedore, L. M., & Pena, E. D. (2008). Assessment of bilingual children for identification of language impairment: Current findings and implications for practice. International Journal of

Bilingual Education and Bilingualism, 11(1), 1-29.

Brown, C., & Broemmel, A. (2011). Deep scaffolding: Enhancing the reading experiences of English language learners.The NERA Journal, 46, 34-39.

Bourdieu, P. (1977). Cultural reproduction and social reproduction, in J. Karabel and A. H. Halsey (Eds), Power and ideology in education (pp. 487-511). New York, NY: Oxford University Press.

Engle, J., & Tinto, V. (2008). Moving beyond access: College success for low-income, first-generation students. Pell Institute for the Study of Opportunity in Higher Education.

Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2014). Better learning through structured teaching: A framework for the gradual release of responsibility framework (2nd ed.). Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Flores, S., Batalova, J., & Fix, M. (2012). The educational trajectories of English language learners in Texas. Washington, DC: Migration Policy Institute.

Fullam, J. P. (2017). From seeing to believing: Using instructional video to develop culturally responsive teaching. Journal for Multicultural Education, 11(2).

Gee, J. (2015). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in discourses. London: Routledge.

Grant, M., Lapp, D., Fisher, D., Johnson, K., & Frey, N. (2012). Purposeful instruction: Mixing up the I, we, and you. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 56(1), 45-55. doi:10.1002/JAAL.00101.

Hammond, J., & Gibbons, P. (2005). Putting scaffolding to work: The contribution of scaffolding in articulating ESL education. Prospect, 20(1), 630.

Hull, G., & Schultz, K. (2002). Schools out: Bridging out of school literacies with classroom practice. New York: Teachers College Press.

Hussar, W. J., & Bailey, T. M. (2013). Projections of education statistics to 2021. National Center for Education Statistics.

LaRusso, M., Kim, H. Y., Selman, R., Uccelli, P., Dawson, T., Jones, S., ... & Snow, C. (2016). Contributions of academic language, perspective taking, and complex reasoning to deep reading comprehension. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness, 9(2), 201-222.

Lorch, R. F., Lorch, E. P., & Klusewitz, M. A. (1993). College students conditional knowledge about reading. Journal of Educational Psychology, 85, 239-252.

National Center for English Language Acquisition. (2011). The growing number of limited English proficient students 1998-96/2008-09. Retrieved from: http://www.ncela.gwu.edu/files/uploads/9/growingLEP_0809.pdf.

Robinson-Cimpian, J. P., Thompson, K. D., & Umansky, I. M. (2016). Research and policy considerations for English learner equity. Policy Insights from the Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 3(1), 129-137.

Rouet, J. F. (2006). The skills of document use: From text comprehension to web-based learning. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Samson, J. F., & Collins, B. A. (2012). Preparing all teachers to meet the needs of English language learners: Applying research to policy and practice for teacher effectiveness. Center for American Progress.

Smagorinsky, P. (2001). If meaning is constructed, what's it made from? Toward a cultural theory of reading. Review of Educational Research, 71(1), 133-169. doi: 10.3102/00346543071001133.

Spiro, R. J. (1988). Cognitive flexibility theory: Advanced knowledge acquisition in ill-structured domains. Technical Report, 441.

Sternberg, R. J. (1985). Beyond IQ: A triarchic theory of human intelligence. New York: Cambridge University Press.

U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2015). The condition of education 2015 (NCES 2015-144). Jessup, MD: National Center for Education Statistics.

Van den Broek, P., Lorch, R. F., Linderholm, T., & Gustafson, M. (2001). The effects of readers goals on inference generation and memory for texts. Memory and Cognition, 29, 1081-1087

Williamson, G. L. (2008). A text readability continuum for postsecondary readiness. Journal of Advanced Academics, 19(4), 602-632.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.25134/ieflj.v5i1.1626

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


View My Stats

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.