Topic: Code of Ethics for the International Reading Association

10-second review: Includes ethical standards in professional relationships and ethical standards in reading services.

Title: “IRA Code of Ethics.” Reading Teacher (October 1979), 56-57.

Ethical Standards in Professional Relationships.

.Strive for harmonious relationships with other professionals.

.Report results of research and other developments in reading.

.Don’t claim affiliation with the International Reading Association as evidence of competence.

Ethical Standards in Reading Services

.Must possess suitable qualifications for engaging in consulting, clinical or remedial work. Unqualified persons should not engage in such activities except under the direct supervision of one who is properly qualified.

.Information derived from services must be confidential.

.Recognize boundaries of competence.

.Referrals to specialists in allied fields and pertinent information made available.

.No guarantees.

.Fees agreed on in advance.

Comment: It’s good to have a code of ethics in any profession. Somewhere I read, however, that there is no code of ethics for English teachers. Is this true? RayS.

Topic: Teachers and Errors in Writing

10-second review: 30% to 40% of teachers did not recognize mechanical errors in a writing sample.

Title: “Annotated Bibliography of Research in the Teaching of Literature and the Teaching of Writing.” DJ Dieterich and RH Behm. Research in the Teaching of English (May 1984), 201-218.

Quote: Error tallies on the evaluation of a writing sample by 33 trained teachers indicated that 30% to 40% did not recognize mechanical errors.” L Fearn, 1982, 203.

So what? Teachers recognize and jump on what they are looking for. I think we should list the major mechanical errors by degree of importance or degree of disruption to the reader, i.e., run-ons; fragments; agreement of subject and verb and pronouns and antecedents; commas for introductions, interrupters, and afterthoughts; dangling modifiers;  parallel constructions. And ask teachers to look for them when evaluating any student writing—depending, of course, on grade level. RayS.

Topic: TV Language

10-second review: Language of TV consists of short, simple sentences and largely unsophisticated language structures.

Title: “Annotated Bibliography of Research in the Teaching of Literature and the Teaching of Writing.” DJ Dieterich and RH Behm. Research in the Teaching of English (May 1984), 201-218.

Quote: “An examination of the language used in eight TV programs popular with teenagers indicates that viewers are exposed to short, simple sentences and largely unsophisticated language structures.” M Lieberman, 1983, 203.

So what? Popular TV is not going to help students expand their vocabularies. Might be interesting to study  the vocabulary expansion capabilities of different genres on TV—local and national news, documentaries, talk shows, etc. RayS.

Topic: Testing and Graduation

10-second review: No single test should ever be used to decide on promotion, graduation, etc.

Title: “A Position on Minimum Competencies in Reading.” Adopted by the Board of Directors of the International Reading Association, April 1979. Reading Teacher (October 1979), 54-55.

Quote: “No single measure or method of assessment of minimum competencies should ever be the sole criterion for graduation or promotion of a student. Multiple indices assessed through a variety of means, including teacher observations, student work samples, past academic performance and student self-reports, should be employed to assess competence.”

Comment: There seems to be a pattern developing against the use of a single test for such important milestones as promotion from a grade or graduation from a school. What is suggested is multiple assessments. Single tests can be useful in tracking a student’s progress, determining weaknesses, and providing assistance. RayS.

Topic: Vocabulary--How to Teach It

10-second review: This research suggests that studying list of words is not useful. Suggests that words are best studied in real texts written for the level of the intended audience.

Title: “On the Wording of Texts: A Study of Intra-Word Frequency.” KS Goodman and LB Bird. Research in the Teaching of English (May 1984), 119-145.

How should authors and editors deal with vocabulary?

Quote: “Authors and editors would do better to focus on relating the content of texts to the audience rather than to focus on controlling vocabulary…. New words are learned and definitions are broadened in the transactions between readers and appropriately worded texts. Then vocabulary results from reading….”

Quote: “Teachers concerned about vocabulary development would do better to focus on functional use of words and terms in the context of real texts than to resort to decontextualized lists or dictionary exercises.”

Comment: Vocabulary grows from reading natural language geared to the audience. Vocabulary will stagnate when authors use controlled vocabulary. I think that is the essence of what this study means. RayS.

Topic: A Theory about Language Experience.

10-second review: Students who speak a different English dialect (non-standard) will have success in learning to read with language experience in which students dictate stories, the stories are recorded and the children read them back.

Title: “Initial Reading experiences for Linguistically Diverse Learners.” TE Wheat, et al. Reading Teacher (October 1979), 28-31.

The Problem:

Quote: “a major concern among educators, linguists, parents, and society at large is why many children who speak so-called nonstandard dialects have difficulty learning to read. A great deal has been written concerning children’s language differences and possible effect on academic performance. The tendency in the past was to indict the child with a divergent dialect as one who spoke incorrectly. It was felt that non-standard dialects were inferior English.”

Consider:

Quote: “Most children come to school speaking language which differs from that found in published reading materials.”

A Possible Solution:

Quote: “While there is no one universally accepted approach for teaching reading to linguistically diverse learners, the language experience approach appears to be most sensible Since this approach capitalizes on the child’s language competence and experiences, interest and motivation will exist. With these factors present, success in reading is likely. Because the child’s language and experiences are respected, self-image is strengthened. The child’s sense of worth is also enhanced by success in learning to read.”

Comment: Language experience, while an attractive supplement, is not enough to teach the child, any child, to read. A systematic program in phonics, high-frequency words not susceptible to phonics, vocabulary development, comprehension and fluency is also needed. RayS.