Although I wouldn't necessarily classify it as a "favorite thing" I have come to passionately embrace the new Common Core State Standards. I think for me, I realized last year that I was in a position of influence and assumed a lot of responsibility in learning what it is it meant to teach "the Common Core way." I realize the Common Core standards are not perfect, but I do like that every state (with the exception of Texas and Virginia) has the same set of standards, objectives and literacy expectations when it comes to ELA, I also like that the Common Core doesn't seem to be a prescribed set of lesson plans nor does there seem to be an overemphasis on assessment. I also do not believe the Common Core standards to be all-inclusive. For example, I believe the Common Core lacks some heart, the affective domain of readers. The Common Core does not address the attitude, motivation and and passion necessary to be a lifelong reader and lover of books--that my friend, comes from YOU, their reading teacher. And guess what, from my experience, students' passion for reading, or science or any subject or topic for that matter, is directly proportionate to YOUR passion, enthusiasm, attitude and love of it, trust me! It's so true and this is part of the "art" of teaching, and as much "latitude" and "shades of meaning" there is in the Common Core, the documents themselves and the words contained within them, are really just about the "science" of teaching...the formulas and suggested recipes for success. The Common Core does not tell teachers how to help develop a child's "reading identity" and this is vital for your readers to become passionate and emotional readers, the ones who LOVE books and tell you all about it, exuberantly and enthusiastically! As teachers, we must share our passion for reading with students and understand that the "heart" of reading must be taught and not overlooked just because it's not in the Common Core. Creating this reading culture and classroom community of readers must not only exist in a Common Core classroom, but will ignite the fire and passion for other learning, too, and this is key! Like I tell audiences in my presentations, the new standards do expect more of students (and teachers) than before, but the comprehension strategies that students must still do and think as a reader, are just as necessary and essential as before as well. The Big 5 areas of reading (Phonemic Awareness, Phonics, Vocabulary, Fluency and Comprehension) under No Child Left Behind are still there, just housed in different strands of the Common Core ELA. Even the instructional shifts.....
1) Building knowledge through content-rich fiction and non-fiction (50/50 split)
2) Reading, writing, and speaking grounded in evidence from the text
3) Regular practice with complex text and its academic vocabulary
....were research based best practices before the Common Core. Didn't we always tell kids to read a "balanced reading diet"...reading a mix of fiction, nonfiction, poetry, etc? Yes, we did. Didn't we always ask kids to identify where in the text they had a question, connection, inference and to jot down that part in the book that made them have that thinking? Yes, we did. And didn't we always understand the importance of all tiers of vocabulary, not just Tier 3 academic words? Yes, we did...thanks to both Marzano and Beck and McKeown. With all this said, teaching the Common Core standards for reading literature, if anything, has become a bit more focused with just about as much emphasis on the essential comprehension strategies as before. Although you will not find the terms, "predicting, background knowledge, schema, visualizing, and synthesizing" in the language of the standards, the expectation that students must predict, access background knowledge, use their schema, visualize, and synthesize are built into the framework of the anchor standards when they say...One of the things I've always tried to do as a reading teacher, through reading books by Debbie Miller and Harvey and Goudvis, and Tanny McGregor is to help my students understand the best way to show their thinking.
1) Building knowledge through content-rich fiction and non-fiction (50/50 split)
2) Reading, writing, and speaking grounded in evidence from the text
3) Regular practice with complex text and its academic vocabulary
....were research based best practices before the Common Core. Didn't we always tell kids to read a "balanced reading diet"...reading a mix of fiction, nonfiction, poetry, etc? Yes, we did. Didn't we always ask kids to identify where in the text they had a question, connection, inference and to jot down that part in the book that made them have that thinking? Yes, we did. And didn't we always understand the importance of all tiers of vocabulary, not just Tier 3 academic words? Yes, we did...thanks to both Marzano and Beck and McKeown. With all this said, teaching the Common Core standards for reading literature, if anything, has become a bit more focused with just about as much emphasis on the essential comprehension strategies as before. Although you will not find the terms, "predicting, background knowledge, schema, visualizing, and synthesizing" in the language of the standards, the expectation that students must predict, access background knowledge, use their schema, visualize, and synthesize are built into the framework of the anchor standards when they say...One of the things I've always tried to do as a reading teacher, through reading books by Debbie Miller and Harvey and Goudvis, and Tanny McGregor is to help my students understand the best way to show their thinking.