Reading the Reader | Academic Commons - 2 views
-
These comments reveal the student doesn’t have the background knowledge to make sense of the letter.
-
But that is precisely what I am asked to do: it’s my job to shift the focus from product to process and look at the connections between the two.
- ...21 more annotations...
-
With digital annotations the deconstructionist distinction between “strong misreadings” and “weak misreadings” seems a pragmatic one
-
Electronic annotations confirm what research tells us about proficient readers, that they 1) clarify their purpose for reading; 2) activate relevant background knowledge; 3) allocate attention to the important ideas; 4) evaluate content for internal consistency and compatibility with prior knowledge; 5) self-monitor to verify comprehension; and 6) draw and test inferences.1
-
Most reading process analyses incorporate the following three components: pre-reading, during reading, and post-reading. Pre-reading is the foundational stage.
-
Digital annotations are pedagogically flexible and portable. They can be used as a method of inquiry, diagnosis, and instruction. Texts can be annotated individually or in groups, at home or in class. These products can be easily transported from person to person and location to location and, unlike written annotations, are harder to lose.
-
-
How then do we evaluate whether students have successfully read a text?
-
-
a way of seeing reading as socially constructing meaning and engagement, rather than as employing a set of discrete skills.3
-
I confirmed for myself the utility of asking students to commit to the Critical Inquiry annotation method
-
They help me diagnose reading strengths and weaknesses around a given text and decide where to place the focus of discussion and assignments.
-
“Ignorance is not so much not knowing an answer as not knowing that there is a question, not being able to think when thinking is required. Ignorance is a blind dependence that someone else will be able to tell you what to do.”5
-