find ReadTheWords.com to be one of the most useful services on the Internet today. Many LD (learning disabled)
students struggle with auditory processing.
these students are very capable,
they tend to favor auditory processing, versus the more common visual processing. It is important that these students
learn how their mind works and modify their learning techniques accordingly.
5 students incorporate this service for study of their weekly vocabulary words. We started by making an audio file of the words and definition, and turned it into an mp3 format. The students spent 10 minutes each day on the computer. Each student has averaged a minimum of a full letter grade higher. Two students have received perfect scores for the past 2 weeks.
ReadTheWords.com been created to cater to these students.
ReadtheWords.com is an AMAZING SERIVCE for young students.
ReadTheWords.com allows me to create listening material for some learners that struggle a little bit. It allows my
students to read along with the Virtual Avatar Reader. This saves a lot of time so I can focus on certain children
without slowing down the rest of the class.
We create links to audio files that read our
upcoming events, and we use it to help visually impaired patrons read anything - articles, letters they have received,
emails that can be copy/pasted from their email account...the possibilities are endless! On a personal level, I have been
using ReadTheWords toolbar plug in.
service with my university students who are learning English
brings the text to life, and stimulates my second language learners in a
dynamic way. I would recommend this program to all foreign language teachers,
I have been assisting students to create audio files of study review materials. This greatly helps them decode and
analyze the material for comprehension. I have seen a great improvement on test scores
Students listen to a piece of their own writing, so they can
hear if what they wrote sounds correct. It helps students with comprehension, spelling, grammar and structuring
sentences.
This service is godsend for many students, especially auditory learners. I cannot even begin to imagine how many people this will help in the future. We just received approval to offer this service to our entire school. (Email webmaster@readthewords.com to get a special deal like we did.
I believe that the audio could act as a reinforcer of the written word as students read. This could be helpful not only with students who are Language Impaired, but also for students who struggle with reading comprehension.
Something not mentioned by these teachers is the possible benefit to Autistic and Aspergers students. I can this being used as a reward or incentive because the work could be done independently. Since these students generally feel more at ease working independently, it would a motivator to them.
This could be a great tool for Language Impaired students, but also Learning Disabled in reading as well. The audio would act as a reinforcer of the written material. Even though this is learning or reading comprehension tool, students may see it as a reward thereby motivating them to read more. This could a aid to any teacher attempting to motivate reluctant or struggling readers.
Read The Words could be a beneficial tool to students who are Language Impaired and/or Learning Disabled in Reading. The audio can reinforce the written word and increase comprehension. Also, it could be a valuable tool for autistic students who prefer to work independently. They can use this to aid comprehension and also it could be a reward. This tool could also add interest to text for any student.
The reading process involves two separate but highly interrelated areas - word identification and comprehension. It is well established that difficulties in automatic word recognition significantly affect a reader's ability to effectively comprehend what they are reading (Lyon, 1995; Torgeson, Rashotte, and Alexander, 2001). Even mild difficulties in word identification can pull attention away from the underlying meaning, reduce the speed of reading, and create the need to reread selections to grasp the meaning. Many students who struggle to learn to read are able, with appropriate instruction, to compensate for initial reading problems by becoming accurate decoders but fail to reach a level of sufficient fluency to become fast and efficient readers. Thus, the development of techniques for improving automaticity and fluency is critical. Although the research is clear that a systematic alphabetic approach to teaching beginning readers is more effective than a whole word approach (Adams, 1990; Chall, 1996; Snow, Burns and Griffin, 1009), the most effect ways to develop fluency are less well understood.
..."students who are proficient online readers are not necessarily proficient offline readers and vica versa." I think this an interesting consideration that even our strong readers will still need good first instruction on how to read online. Also, those who struggle with the bound book may find more success with online reading is certainly a refreshing thought for those students.
the study found that explicit media literacy instruction increased both traditional literacy skills, such as reading comprehension and writing, and more specific media-related skills, including identification of techniques various media use to influence audiences.
Whether the feedback was in the observable effects or from other people, in every case the information received was not advice, nor was the performance evaluated. No one told
me as a performer what to do differently or how "good" or "bad" my results were. (You might think that the reader of my writing was judging my
work, but look at the words used again: She simply played back the effect my writing had on her as a reader.) Nor did any of the three people tell me what to do (which is what many
people erroneously think feedback is—advice). Guidance would be premature; I first need to receive feedback on what I did or didn't do that would warrant such
advice.
Decades of education research support the idea that by teaching less and providing more feedback, we can
produce greater learning (see Bransford, Brown, & Cocking, 2000; Hattie, 2008; Marzano, Pickering, & Pollock, 2001).
remember that feedback does not need to come only from the teacher, or even from people at all. Technology is one powerful
tool—part
of the power of computer-assisted learning is unlimited, timely feedback and opportunities to use it.
learners are often unclear about the specific goal of a task or lesson, so it is crucial to remind them about the goal and the criteria by which they should self-assess
I recommend that all teachers videotape their own classes at least once
a month. It was a transformative experience for me when I did it as a beginning teacher.
research shows that less teaching plus more
feedback is the key to achieving greater learning.
Even if feedback is specific and accurate in the eyes of experts or bystanders, it is not of much value if the user cannot understand it or is overwhelmed by it.
Adjusting our performance depends on not only receiving feedback but also having opportunities to use it.
Clearly, performers can only adjust their performance successfully if the information fed back to them is stable, accurate, and
trustworthy. In education, that means teachers have to be on the same page about what high-quality work is. Teachers need to look at student work together, becoming more
consistent over time and formalizing their judgments in highly descriptive rubrics supported by anchor products and performances.
Score student work in the fall and winter against spring standards, use more pre-and post-assessments to
measure progress toward these standards, and do the item analysis to note what each student needs to work on for better future performance.
Effective supervisors and coaches
work hard to carefully observe and comment on what they observed, based on a clear statement of goals. That's why I always ask when visiting a class, "What
would you like me to look for and perhaps count?"
. Less teaching, more feedback. Less feedback that comes only from you, and more tangible feedback designed into the performance itself.
how we are doing in our efforts to reach a goal.
get another opportunity to receive and learn from the feedback.
computer games
quickly adapt
ack, do you have some ideas about how to improve?" This approach will
build greater autono
ck, do you have some ideas about how to improve?" This approach will
build greater autono
Wiggins
Advice, evaluation, grades-none of these provide the descriptive information that students need to reach their goals. What is true feedback-and how can it improve learning?
Who would dispute the idea that feedback is a good thing? Both common sense and research make it clear: Formative assessment, consisting of lots of feedback and opportunities to use that feedback, enhances performance and achievement.
Yet even John Hattie (2008), whose decades of research revealed that feedback was among the most powerful influences on achievement, acknowledges that he has "struggled to understand the concept" (p. 173). And many writings on the subject don't even attempt to define the term. To improve formative assessment practices among both teachers and assessment designers, we need to look more closely at just what feedback is-and isn't.
The new standards instead propose that teachers move students purposefully through increasingly complex text to build skill and stamina.
higher-order thinking in reading depends heavily on knowledge of word meanings.
Students' ability to comprehend a piece of text depends on the number of unfamiliar domain-specific words and new general academic terms they encounter.
If students are to interpret the meanings such complex sentence structures convey, they need to learn how to make sense of the conventions of text—phrasing, word order, punctuation, and language.
Students who are aware of the patterns authors use to communicate complex information have an advantage in making sense of text.
A final determinant of text difficulty, however, depends on the reader's prior knowledge.
Students' background knowledge, including developmental, experiential, and cognitive factors, influences their ability to understand the explicit and inferential qualities of a text.
building skills, establishing purpose, and fostering motivation.
even students who have basic decoding skills sometimes struggle to deploy these skills easily and accurately enough to get a purchase on challenging text. To help these students develop reading fluency, teachers should give them lots of practice with reading the same text, as well as instruction to help them develop a stronger sense of where to pause in sentences, how to group words, and how their voices should rise or fall at various junctures when reading aloud.
maintaining understanding across a text.
pair repeated readings of the same text with questions that require the student to read closely for detail and key ideas.
Ongoing, solid vocabulary instruction
also on general academic words.
also explore the connections among words,
In contrast, in reading history and literature, readers need to be concerned with not just the causes of events, but also the human intentions behind these causes.
teachers should not convey so much information that it spoils the reading or enables students to participate in class without completing the reading; rather, they should let students know what learning to expect from the reading.
Teachers may be tempted to try to make it easier for students by avoiding difficult texts. The problem is, easier work is less likely to make readers stronger.
You need to create successive successes.
Students experience success in the company of their teacher, who combines complex texts with effective instruction.
Dr. Allington made the comment that he would ban computers from an instructional role and that they didn't have a significant effect on teaching students to read.
The second-year study included four reading software products for first grade, Destination Reading (Riverdeep 2008), the Waterford Early Reading Program (Pearson School 2008), Headsprout (Headsprout 2008), and Plato Focus (Plato Learning Corporation 2008).
We contend that student writers will see greater value in peer response if they develop tools that allow them to participate more actively in the feedback process. With teaching suggestions like those above, writers can learn how to re-flect on their experiences with peer response. They can also learn to identify their needs as writers and how to ask questions that will solicit the feedback they need.
We like to limit each mock session to no more than seven minutes of back and forth between respondent and writer.
This becomes a teachable moment. When the respondent asks for assistance from the class, this break in the session becomes an opportunity for the class to assist the writer and the respondent. The writer appears stuck, not knowing what to ask. And the respondent appears perplexed, too.
we follow Carl Anderson’s suggestion to teach students how to ask questions about their writing through role-playing.
dynamic list that students freely update throughout the semester on the class classro
organize the questions within categories such as tone, content, evidence-based support, style, and logistics
The end result is a robust list of questions for writers to ask of their respondents.
in-class discussion about effective and less effective questions for writers
raft three to five questions they have about the assignment to ask of their peers as they prepare to write or revise their assignment. When appropriate, we can direct our students to the course text, where there are
, “Feedback: What Works for You and How Do You Get It?”
Students’ comments often point to their struggle to position themselves in peer response.
“What would it take for you to be in-vested as writers in peer response?” Students’ typical responses include the following:>“I need to know what to ask.” >“I don’t know what to ask about my writing, except for things like punctua-tion and grammar.”>“Does the person reading my work really know what the assignment is? Bet-ter than I do?”>“I’m not really sure if I’m supposed to talk or ask questions when someone is giving me feedback about my work, so I don’t really do anything. They write stuff on my paper. Sometimes I read it if I can, but I don’t really know what to do with it.”
it is important to offer activities to ensure that both respondents and writers are able to articulate a clear purpose of what they are trying to accomplish. These activities, guided by the pedagogies used to prepare writing center consultants
devote more attention to the respondent than to the writer, we may unwit-tingly be encouraging writers to be bystanders, rather than active participants, in the response process.
: pointing, summarizing, and reflecting
highlight the value of both giving and getting feedback:In 56 pages near the end of this book, we’ve explained all the good methods we know for getting feedback from classmates on your writing. . . . The ability to give responses to your classmates’ writing and to get their responses to your own writing may be the most important thing you learn from this book. (B
Peter Elbow and Pat Belanoff ’s first edition of A Community of Writers published in 1995, in which eleven “Sharing and Responding” techniques, d
While such questions are helpful to emerging writers, who depend on modeling, they lack explanation about what makes them “helpful” questions. As a result, emerging writers may perceive them as a prescriptive set of questions that must be answered (or worse, a set of questions to be “given over” to a respondent), rather than what they are intended to be: questions that could advance the writer’s thoughts and agenda.
this information is limited to the instructor’s manual
llustrates the difference be-tween vague and helpful questions, pointing out that helpful questions
You will need to train students to ask good questions, which will help reviewers target their attention.Questions like “How can I make this draft better?” “What grade do you think this will get?” and “What did you think?” are not helpful, as they are vague and don’t reflect anything about the writer’s own thoughts. Questions like “Am I getting off topic in the introduction when I talk about walking my sister to the corner on her first day of school?” or “Does my tone on page 3 seem harsh? I’m trying to be fair to the people who disagree with the decision I’m describing” help readers understand the writer’s purpose and will set up good conversations. (Harrington 14, emphasis added
uestions” when soliciting feedback (like the advice we found in many textbooks), she also provides explicit examples for doing so
he most explicit advice for writers about ask-ing questions and, in effect, setting up good conversations is buried in an instruc-tor’s manual for The Allyn & Bacon Guide to Writing. In thi
“Getting Response” chapter later in the book, they will benefit from the textbook authors’ instructions that they should in fact use questions that will help them solicit their feedback
dependent on what parts of the textbook they choose to read
point writers to a specific set of questions that they should ask of their respondents. Such instructions take a notable step toward shifting the locus of control from the respondent to helping writers engage their peers in conversation.
there is no mention that writers might use them for purposes of soliciting feedback.
we see an opportunity for modeling that is not fully realized.
we argue that Faigley offers respondents specific examples that empower them to actively engage the process and give feedback. We contend that emergent writers need a similar level of instruction if they are to be agents in response.
textbook authors offer few examples for how to get specific feedback
we question whether textbooks provide emergent writers with enough tools or explicit models to engage actively in peer response conversations.
we worked to understand how textbooks highlight the writer’s role in peer response.
We wanted to know what books tell writers about asking questions
lthough we do not discount the importance of teaching respondents how to give feedback, we argue that writers must also be taught how to request the feedback they desire.