Teatro de lectores | Readers’ Theatre

~Thomas DeVere Wolsey

Available in English/inglés and adapted from: 

Lapp, D., Fisher, D., & Wolsey, T. D. (2009).  Literacy growth for every child: Differentiated small-group instruction K-6. New York, NY: Guilford Publishers.

Un teatro para lectores es una actuación informal en la que los estudiantes en grupos pequeños leen un guion en voz alta. El guion puede ser preparado por adelantado por el maestro o los estudiantes pueden crear sus propios guiones. El ensayo les permite a los estudiantes practicar ante una audiencia con sus compañeros de clase. En el proceso, vuelven a leer el texto muchas veces y aumentan su fluidez de lectura.

readers' theatre

Teachers in Guatemala City demonstrate readers’ theatre.

Los puntos fuertes del lenguaje y la lectura se desarrollan a través del teatro de lectura cuando pequeños grupos de estudiantes vuelven a leer los textos en su nivel de lectura independiente y los transforman en un guion de teatro de lectores que pueden representar más tarde para sus compañeros. La relectura, que es importante para la comprensión, también proporciona la seguridad de que los estudiantes hablen públicamente durante la actuación. Todos los estudiantes, incluidos aquellos que son muy competentes, aquellos a quienes todavía les cuesta alcanzar la competencia, y los que son estudiantes de un segundo idioma tendrán un crecimiento positivo a medida que participan en las representaciones teatrales de los lectores (Goodman, 1978). En estos grupos de colaboración, todos los niños aumentan su fluidez en la lectura y el habla al compartir textos con sus compañeros (Martinez, Roser, & Strecker, 1998/1999). Estas actuaciones se pueden compartir dentro de su clase y también con otras clases. Un beneficio para la clase que se visita es que una vez que los oyentes están expuestos a nuevos libros, a menudo claman por leerlos

El énfasis en el teatro de lectores está en apoyar el crecimiento de cada niño en fluidez de lectura y lenguaje oral. Esto sucede naturalmente si los estudiantes, con la ayuda del maestro, seleccionan sus roles y tienen tiempos de relectura y de práctica adecuados. La meta del maestro debe que todos los estudiantes trabajen dentro de sus niveles de comodidad y competencia y que tengan experiencias exitosas. Todo el grupo también puede discutir cómo actuar con el uso de títeres, personajes de fieltro o programas de animación gráfica.

Las ventajas del Teatro de lectores incluyen*:

  • Promoción de la fluidez, incluida la expresión o prosodia
  • Brinda a los estudiantes la oportunidad de elegir, ensayar y presentar guiones cortos de tipo obra ante los compañeros de clase y otras personas sin el estrés de memorizar líneas o usar disfraces o accesorios elaborados
  • Proporciona oportunidades de lectura repetida a medida que los estudiantes practican antes de la actuación
  • Maximiza el compromiso de los estudiantes ya que cada estudiante en el grupo tiene un rol.
  • Aparece menos desalentador que otros textos ya que un alumno lee una parte en lugar de todo el texto solo
  • Se adapta a una amplia gama de habilidades con roles o partes de nivel de dificultad variado.

Los profesores:

  • Seleccionan los textos. Los textos narrativos con mucho diálogo funcionan mejor.
  • Preparan los guiones (las fuentes incluyen guiones preparados comercialmente, sitios web y guiones escritos por el docente o los alumnos); resaltan las partes específicas en los guiones de los estudiantes
  • Modelan leyendo el texto en voz alta
  • Asignan los estudiantes a grupos
  • Proporcionan retroalimentación y monitorean a medida que los grupos pequeños practican

Los estudiantes:

  • Leen el guion en silencio o con un compañero
  • Vuelven a leer en grupo con los estudiantes, leyendo diferentes roles, en turnos
  • Negocian y asignan roles
  • Leen y releen de forma individual, centrándose en la parte o rol asignado (pueden practicar fuera de la escuela y en casa)
  • Practica la relectura del guion con otros en grupo
  • Hacen etiquetas, tarjetas o marionetas que los estudiantes sostienen para identificar a su personaje
  • Deciden dónde se colocarán los estudiantes durante la actuación
  • Actúan con el guion en la mano

El teatro de lectores no es una gran producción y no es necesario que los estudiantes memoricen líneas, usen un micrófono o se pongan disfraces.

* Adaptado de los materiales proporcionados por la Universidad de Texas en Austin. https://buildingrti.utexas.org/instructional-materials/fluency-fourth-grade

Recursos y ejemplos:

Teatro de lectores- 02 La Honestidad

https://www.kinderbilingue.com/collections/reading-activities/products/teatro-de-lectores-01-la-responsabilidad-readers-theater-in-spanish?variant=39500372300

University of Texas at Austin Resources in Spanish and English

https://buildingrti.utexas.org/instructional-materials/fluency-spanish-readers-theater-scripts

Tareas del teatro de lectores

Readers’ Theatre Tasks en-es (descargar PDF)

El coyote y el conejo

http://bibliotecadigital.ilce.edu.mx/Colecciones/index.php?clave=huasteca&pag=7

Ejemplos

https://youtu.be/-2lyNbteztk

https://youtu.be/9i88od41w0s

https://youtu.be/bgd0ieZx4RU

Referencias

Goodman, J. A. (1978).  Teaching the total language with readers’ theatre.  [ERIC document number ED 191321].

Martinez, M., Roser, N. L., & Strecker, S. (1998/1999). I never thought I could be a star: A readers’ theatre ticket to fluency. The Reading Teacher, 52, 326-333.

 

 

Advertisements

Readers’ Theatre | Teatro de lectores

by Thomas DeVere Wolsey

This post is available in Spanish/español.

Adapted from

Lapp, D., Fisher, D., & Wolsey, T. D. (2009).  Literacy growth for every child: Differentiated small-group instruction K-6. New York, NY: Guilford Publishers.

A readers’ theatre is an informal performance as students in small groups read a script aloud.  The script may be prepared in advance by the teacher or the students may create their own scripts from narrative texts they have read. Rehearsal permits students to practice in advance for an audience of their classmates. In the process, they reread the text many times and increase their reading fluency.  In this post, a rationale and online resources are shared.

Readers' Theatre Teatro de lectores

Screencapture source: https://youtu.be/bgd0ieZx4RU

Language and reading strengths are developed through reader’s theatre as small groups of students re-read texts at their independent reading level and transform them into a readers’ theater script that they can perform at a later time for their classmates.  Rereading, which is important for comprehension, also provides the security for students to speak publicly during the performance. All students including those who are very proficient, those who are struggling toward proficiency, and second language learners will have positive growth as they engage in readers theatre performances. In these collaborative groups, all children increase their reading and speaking fluency as they share texts with their peers. These performances can be shared within your class and also with other classes. A benefit for the class being visited is that once listeners are exposed to new books they often clamor to read them.

The emphasis in readers’ theatre is on supporting each child’s growth in reading fluency and oral language. This happens naturally if students, with the aid of the teacher, select their roles and have adequate rereading and practice time. The teacher’s goal should be that all students work within their comfort and proficiency levels and have successful experiences. The entire group can also discuss how to perform it themselves with the use of puppets, felt board characters, or graphic animation programs.

The advantages of Readers’ Theatre include*:

  • Promotes fluency, including expression or prosody
  • Affords students the opportunity to choose, rehearse, and present short play-like scripts to classmates and others without the stress of memorizing lines or using elaborate costumes and props
  • Provides opportunities for repeated reading as students practice before the performance
  • Maximizes students’ engagement as every student in the group has a part
  • Appears less daunting than other texts since a student reads one part rather than the entire text alone
  • Accommodates a wide range of reading abilities with roles or parts of varying difficulty

Teachers:

  • Select texts. Narrative texts with much dialog work best.
  • Prepare scripts (sources include commercially prepared scripts, Web sites, and scripts written by teacher or students); highlight specific parts on students’ scripts
  • Model by reading text aloud
  • Assign students to groups
  • Provide feedback and monitor as small groups practice

Students:

  • Read script silently or with a partner
  • Reread in group with students taking turns reading different roles
  • Negotiate and assign roles or parts
  • Read and reread individually, focusing on assigned part or role (can practice outside of school and at home)
  • Practice rereading script with others in group
  • Make labels, cards, or puppets that students hold to identify their character
  • Decide where students will be positioned during performance
  • Perform with script in hand

Readers’ Theatre is not a big production, and students are not required to memorize lines, use a microphone, or wear costumes.

*Adapted from materials provided by the University of Texas at Austin. https://buildingrti.utexas.org/instructional-materials/fluency-fourth-grade

Resources and examples:

Teatro de lectores

https://www.kinderbilingue.com/collections/reading-activities/products/teatro-de-lectores-01-la-responsabilidad-readers-theater-in-spanish?variant=39500372300

University of Texas at Austin Resources in Spanish and English

https://buildingrti.utexas.org/instructional-materials/fluency-spanish-readers-theater-scripts

Readers’ Theatre Tasks en-es (download PDF)

El coyote y el conejo

http://bibliotecadigital.ilce.edu.mx/Colecciones/index.php?clave=huasteca&pag=7

Examples on YouTube:

https://youtu.be/-2lyNbteztk

https://youtu.be/9i88od41w0s

https://youtu.be/bgd0ieZx4RU

WHAT NEW TEACHERS CAN TELL TEACHER EDUCATORS ABOUT THEIR JOURNEY INTO THE PROFESSION

By Linda Smetana, Dana L. Grisham, Roya Q. Scales, and Thomas DeVere Wolsey

Presentation from The California Council of Teacher Educators, Kona Kai Resort, October 20, 2017

A team of researchers from nine different universities pooled their resources to conduct a longitudinal study around the central questions: What tends to stick with teachers as they move from preservice course and fieldwork through student teaching and into their first year as a teacher? How might their trajectories toward becoming a professional teacher differ depending on the contexts of university, cooperating teacher, and first year teaching? Using qualitative and quantitative methods, the researchers tracked participants from their preservice days at one of nine universities across the United States to their first year of teaching.  Findings include the following: University teacher preparation programs often demonstrated a clear vision of their programs, but standards were superimposed later as they were developed or revised. Preservice candidates grasped the more visible aspects of teaching literacy (e.g., having classroom libraries, understanding top down and bottom up approaches to learning to read) but had difficulty understanding the diversity represented in the classes they would teach and their roles as professionals.

Findings  indicated that student teachers often struggled to merge their knowledge of pedagogy and practice learned at the university with the approaches expected at the school or by the cooperating teacher. Those student teachers who were most successful had participated in preparation programs with clearly articulated signature aspects and were given some autonomy with useful feedback in their student teaching roles.

In the final phase of the study, researchers noted that first year teachers employed a variety of strategies as they attempted to meld their teaching experiences and knowledge with the new teaching context.  At times, the new teachers felt they were valued and treated as emerging professionals, but some new teachers felt constrained by external factors such as the expectation to adhere to pacing guides or to teach in a certain way because that is how it was done at that particular school.

View a larger version of the poster, here. 

CCTE Presentation thumbnail

CCTE Poster Presentation, October 20, 2017

Why It Matters

A persistent problem in teacher education arises when student teachers and novice teachers encounter the specifics of, what is for them, a new teaching context.  As in many other professions, the opportunity to observe during fieldwork, engage in teaching environments in supervised settings that permit increasing autonomy for decision making, and multiple exposures to many teaching contexts (e.g., demographics, grade levels) has potential to improve the likelihood of the new teacher’s success. And with her success follows the success of the students in deep and meaningful learning. The longitudinal study presented here describes the paths participating teachers take toward becoming a professional and continuing to develop as one, as well.  The implication for teacher educators is the importance of making visible the highly variable environments of school and the role novice teachers can play in learning from that environment and helping to shape the context of teaching in that particular setting as well.

Our Inquiry

Matching school practices with what teacher preparation programs impart is a difficult, perhaps impossible task.  Rather, the challenge teacher educators face is one of preparing future teachers such that they view themselves as competent professionals capable of learning from many contexts while maintaining effective classroom environments.  How might (or how do) teacher preparation programs and faculty foster the hunger for learning and for adaptability that characterizes successful professionals in the schools?

Theoretical frameworks.

Two theoretical frameworks were employed as the researchers conducted analysis on the complete data set from this three-year study.  To describe the teacher preparation programs and the school contexts for student and novice teaching, the researchers relied on complexity theory (e.g., Spiro, Feltovich, & Coulson, 1996). Complexity theory posits that complex concepts (and school contexts as we have envisioned them here) resist simplification; that is, teaching requires a capacity for working with ever-changing variables. As a result, oversimplification of what those environments entail, or are perceived to entail, may lead future teachers to view their chosen profession in ways that lead to ossification and unwillingness to change or adapt.

The researchers also viewed the work that future teachers (inclusive of preservice teachers, student teachers, and novice teachers) through the lens of activity theory (e.g., Engstrom, 1999). For example, student teachers often felt they must work quietly without advertising their approach to teaching because more senior teachers tended to enforce structures characteristic of their particular school. The actions of these teachers changed how they viewed themselves and how they were perceived by others as professionals or as members of the teaching community. Activity theory suggests conceptualizing mediation in human action in any given context. Mediated action (Gonzalez, Moll & Amanti, 2005) is the notion that individuals’ learning and development is forged in goal-directed activities, and such action is mediated by the tools, symbols, or social interactions associated with that activity (e.g., Wertsch, 2010; Wertsch & Rupert, 1993). These tools, symbols, or social interactions, sometimes called mediational means, influence and shape human learning and development. When considering mediated activity, we note that, “an inherent property of mediational means is that they are culturally, historically, and institutionally situated” (Wertsch, 1993, p. 230). Therefore, in schools, mediating means may be instrumental (e.g., schedules, assessment tools, instructional materials), social (e.g., cultural practices, interactions with others, policies, procedures), or semiotic (e.g., language systems, mathematics).  Our study examined a range of contextual features in schools, mediational means that shaped future teachers’ actions.

Participants.

Initial work on this study included participants as preservice teachers from entire cohorts of teacher preparation candidates to more narrowly selected participants who had moved from preservice candidacy to student teaching. For logistical and practical reasons, the researchers could not track every member of the initial cohorts of preservice teachers.  From the initial cohorts, teachers in their first year of teaching were selected via convenience sampling for further participation.

Data collection and analysis.

Data collection included observation data, interview data from cooperating teachers, future teachers, and teacher preparation faculty, survey data (see, Henk, et al, 2000.), syllabi collected from the teacher preparation program, and student achievement data. More than 1100 distinct files comprise the data set.

During phase one, as researchers gathered data regarding teacher preparation programs, the individual institutions were treated as cases (Yin, 2009). In phase two (student teaching) and phase three (first year or novice teachers), the individual participants became the focus of the research and their cases informed cross-case analysis (Stake, 2006). Following the activity theory theoretical frame, researchers relied primarily on verbs (Saldaña, 2013) as an initial approach to coding, particularly in phases two and three where student and novice teacher actions were a particular focus of the inquiry.

Analysis was always undertaken using a two-step process to avoid halo effects and researcher bias . Typically, there were two stages of analysis: case-level and cross-case analysis.  In the first stage, researchers participated directly in preparing a case study summary for each candidate from their teacher preparation program. During the second stage, research teams conducted several rounds of cross-case analysis with all researchers reviewing, refining, and confirming results of these analyses.

Findings.

In phase one, university teacher preparation programs often demonstrated a clear vision of their programs, but standards were superimposed later as they were developed or revised. More important, there was typically a high degree of congruence between what teacher educators intended to teach and what candidates believed they learned (TERSG). Preservice candidates grasped the visible aspects of teaching literacy (e.g., having classroom libraries, understanding top down and bottom up approaches to learning to read), but they had more difficulty understanding the diversity represented in the classes they would teach and their roles as professionals.

Phase two (student teaching) findings indicated that student teachers often struggled to merge their knowledge of pedagogy and practice learned at the university with the approaches expected at the school or by the cooperating teacher. Those student teachers who were most successful had participated in preparation programs with clearly articulated signature aspects and were given some autonomy with useful feedback in their student teaching roles.

In the final phase of the study, researchers noted that first year teachers employed a variety of strategies as they attempted to meld their teaching experiences and knowledge with the new teaching context.  At times, the new teachers felt they were valued and treated as emerging professionals, but some new teachers felt constrained by external constraints such as the expectation to adhere to pacing guides or to teach in a certain way because that is how it was done at that particular school.

Conclusions.

Increasing the experiences preservice teachers have in a variety of teaching contexts in gradually released (see Pearson & Gallagher, 1983) experiences may serve to better prepare future teachers for work in school contexts that may not represent close matches to the ideals they encounter during preparation course and fieldwork.  Similarly, planning and executing such experiences may simultaneously promote greater communication between university teacher preparation faculty and the schools where their future teachers will serve.

Selected References

TERSG

Creswell, J. W. & Plano Clark, V. L. (2007). Designing and conducting mixed methods research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

Engeström, Y. (1999). Activity theory and individual and social transformation. In Y. Engeström, R. Miettinen, & R. L. Punamäki (Eds.), Perspectives on activity theory (pp. 19-38). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Fontana, A., & Frey, J.H. (2000). The interview: From structured questions to negotiated text. In N.K. Denzin & Y.S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2nd ed.) (pp. 645-675). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Gonzales, N., Moll, L .C., & Amanti, C. (Eds.). (2005). Funds of knowledge: Theorizing practice in households, communities, and classrooms. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.

Henk, B., Moore, J. C., Marinak, B. A., & Tomasetti, B. W. (2000). A reading lesson observation framework for elementary teachers, principals, and literacy supervisors. The Reading Teacher, 53(5), 358-369.

Pearson, P. D. & Gallagher, M. (1983.) The instruction of reading comprehension.  Contemporary Education Psychology, 8, 317-344.

Saldaña, J. (2013). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.

Spiro, R. (2004). Principled pluralism for adaptive flexibility in teaching and learning to read. In R. B. Ruddell & N. Unrau (Eds.), Theoretical models and processes of reading (5th ed., pp. 654-659). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.

Stake, R. E. (2006). Multiple case study analysis. New York, NY: The Guilford Press.

Wertsch, J. V., ed. (1985).  Culture, communication, and cognition: Vygotskian perspectives.  New York:  Cambridge University Press.

Yin, R. K. (2009). Case study research: Design and methods (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

 

Using Technology to Improve Reading and Learning

Book  cover of Using Technology to Improve Reading and Learning

When friends write a book, of course, you’re excited for them and can’t wait to read it.  What’s even more wonderful is when you read the book and it’s terrific – one that you know you will use in your own teaching. Using Technology to Improve Reading and Learning by Colin Harrison and fellow Literacy Beat bloggers Bernadette Dwyer and Jill Castek is just such a book.

I found this book to be exceptionally useful for many reasons, but I will highlight just two of those reasons here.

First, Colin, Bernadette, and Jill are not only experts in technology and new media; they are first and foremost experts in literacy instruction. They have taught children how to become engaged and successful readers and writers, and they have taught and collaborated with teachers on effective literacy instruction and technology over many years. Their deep knowledge and on-the-ground experiences with children and teachers is demonstrated in every chapter. They speak directly to teachers, acknowledging the realities of today’s schools and the pressure to achieve high academic standards with all students, while offering a vision and concrete classroom examples to inspire us to embrace the challenge.

Second, this book provides a comprehensive blueprint for integrating technology so that children are more successful with print-based reading and writing AND are developing the new literacies of reading, learning, and communicating with eBooks and on the Internet. Bernadette, Jill and Colin complement a chapter on reading eBooks and digital text with two chapters on Internet inquiry – one focusing on the search process and the other focusing on how to compose and communicate through multimodal products. These are areas where we need to make tremendous progress if we are going to prepare our students for a future world that will be more multimodal, more networked, and more dependent on individuals who are creative, strategic, and collaborative.

I’ve copied the table of contents below. You will see that this book offers teachers multiple pathways for moving forward on their own journeys of technology and literacy integration. Enjoy (I know I will)!

Table of Contents

  1. Using technology to make the teaching of literacy more exciting
  2. Strategies for capitalizing on what students already know
  3. Strategies for using digital tools to support literacy development
  4. Strategies for using eReaders and digital books to expand the reading experience
  5. Strategies for teaching the information-seeking cycle: The process stage of searching for information on the Internet
  6. Strategies for teaching the information-seeking cycle: The product stage of searching for information on the Internet
  7. Strategies for encouraging peer collaboration and cooperative learning
  8. Strategies for building communities of writers
  9. Strategies for building teachers’ capacity to make the most of new technologies

Talking Drawings

by Rebekah Lonon with Karen Wood and Thomas DeVere Wolsey

This is the third in a three-part series exploring conversation and collaboration opportunities using digital tools. Rebekah Lonon describes how she uses “talking drawings” to promote academic discussions in her classes and explains how she uses the Educreations digital tool with her students.

My second-grade students enjoy using the talking drawings strategy regularly in all content areas. I always begin by having the class close their eyes and imagine a mental image of a word or concept. Once they open their eyes, they immediately draw the image they made in their minds. This gives me great insight into their prior knowledge of the topic, and it helps me tailor my instruction for the coming unit. I recently used this strategy to introduce a unit about properties of matter, and I learned that my students associated the word “matter” with something being wrong (“What’s the matter?”). I knew then how my unit needed to be planned.

When it is available for our use, I like to incorporate a digital tool. In this case, I used www.educreations.com because it provides an online venue for creating related drawings. Educreations is also available as an app for mobile devices. After their initial drawings, students independently read a passage, entitled “Why Does Matter Matter?” by Kelly Hashway (n.d.) from the website http://www.superteacherworksheets.com about the states of matter and then they discussed their drawings and thoughts with a partner. Next, they returned to Educreations to create a new drawing, based on their new knowledge. If technology is scarce, students can create their drawings in pairs or small groups, using paper with Crayons or markers. To reflect on what they learn and, as a means of integrating writing with the reading and drawing process, I always ask them to compare their original  and after reading drawing. In this instance, one partner group exclaimed aloud, “Matter DOES matter!” as they drew examples of each state of matter. Another partner group continued their reflection process as they wrote in their journals.  Seeing their developing knowledge when using this strategy is an effective assessment tool for me.

View the video to hear Rebekah explain talking drawings using Educreations.

Bibliography: 

Hashway, K. (n.d.). Why does matter matter? [PDF]. Retrieved from http://www.superteacherworksheets.com/matter/matter-article_WMTBN.pdf

McConnell, S. (1992/3). Talking drawings: A strategy for assisting learners. Journal of Reading, 36(4), 260-269.

Wolsey, T.D., Wood, K., & Lapp, D. (in press). Conversation, collaboration, and the Common Core: Strategies for learning together. IRA e-ssentials series: What’s New?Newark, DE :International Reading Association.

Wood, K. D., & Taylor, D. B. (2006). Literacy strategies across the subject areas. (2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education, Inc.

About the contributors:

Rebekah Lonon teaches 2nd-grade for Charlotte Mecklenburg Schools, North Carolina

Karen Wood is a professor at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte.

 

WebWatch: Newtown Kindness

by Thomas DeVere Wolsey

This month, I feature some music you may have heard and a website you might like. The two go together, but you will need to make this a multimedia moment.  First, start the YouTube video, below, so you can hear the music from The Alternate Routes.

 

If you would like to read the lyrics, point your browser to The Alternate Routes website.
 

Next, click this link http://www.newtownkindness.org/ and visit Newtown Kindness.  The link will open in a new window so you can listen to the music as you explore the site.  Newtown Kindness is an organization dedicated to teaching students to be kind and recognizing those who are kind in any of many ways. The site honors Charlotte Bacon, who died at Sandy Hook Elementary School, by turning tragedy into hope. Maybe you and your students will want to become involved by supporting therapy and comfort dogs, taking a kindness pledge, or engaging in a lesson about responding with kindness. Watch the video below to learn about some of the recipients of the Charlotte Bacon Acts of Kindness Awards.
 

 

Heroes don’t look like they used to, they look like you do. -The Alternate Routes

Literacy Beat @ IRA (Monday)

At a roundtable in the Research Into Practice Series on Monday, Karen Wood, Diane Lapp, and DeVere presented some ideas about conversation, collaboration, and the Common Core State Standards. Find out more about the IRA e-ssentials series by pointing your browser here: http://www.reading.org/general/Publications/e-ssentials.aspx

If you would like a copy of our handout, please point your browser to https://app.box.com/CCCCSS

Watch and listen as teacher Jolene Graham discusses how she uses the exchange compare write strategy using TitanPad and other digital resources.

The Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy

Digital_Literacies

 

Emily Skinner and Margaret Hagood, JAAL Editors, featured three pieces from the Digital Literacies Virtual Issue at the IRA conference.  Melanine Hundley & Teri Holbrook presented Set in Stone or Set in Motion?: Multimodal and Digital Writing With Preservice English Teachers, Jill Castek & Rick Beach presented Using Apps to Support Disciplinary Literacy and Science Learning and Jessica K. Parker presented Critical Literacy and the Ethical Responsibilities of Student Media Production.  

International LITERACY Association 2015

We hope you will join us at IRA, soon to be ILA, next year in St. Louis, July 17 to 20, 2015.

#IRA2014

%d bloggers like this: