Strategies: Who needs them and can we really teach them?

Marie Clay's warning about not overdosing on "requiring children to tell us how they went about self-correcting and error or how they solved a particular problem" (Johnson, Kier 135) really got me thinking. She goes on to say that "asking the child to talk about he is thinking or acting slows up the in-the-head solving. it interferes with the fast responding that is essential for fluent reading. (Johnson, Kier 135). This made me wonder. If proficient readers do not need us to help them use metacognition to understand their comprehensive thinking, then who does? After reading farther in the chapter it became clear that it is those readers who do not think at all when they read. It is the readers who are simply saying words on a page that really need these strategies. It is the readers who are not engaged with the text. The readers who cannot put themselves in the characters shoes. Whose emotions are not evoked by what they are reading. As teachers, it is our job to tackle these students, one at a time, in order to help them become the strategic readers that we all strive for them to be.
I was also very intrigued by the section that asked the question: Can we really teach strategies? I believe the answer is yes. I agree with the book that teachers need to focus on two things in order for the strategy to be effective: 1) Teachers need to keep focus on the meaning of the text, not on students performing a particular strategy and 2) The strategy needs to be proven useful and effective for students so that they can see it is working. This is the difference between spotlighting a strategy, which is good and heavy-handing a strategy, which can be very ineffective.
It really is all about how the teacher goes about teaching the strategy, and it is so important for the teacher to know her students. We must direct different questions at different students based on their varying needs, and we must focus our conferences on the specific needs of each student in order to maximize their literacy time in the classroom.

Miscues and Reading Levels

Both of these topics have a lot of debate that surrounds them. I am going to focus on a few of the issues that I have internally when I think about these areas of literacy.
The main issue that I have surrounding miscues is the fact that it seems very hard to learn how to conduct the formal, and even informal, miscue assessments. It seems like it would take years of practice, and it could be detrimental to a student's progression in literacy if you "mess up" in your first years of miscue practice. I understand that this is what this cluster and field experience is for, but still, it's only a semester's worth of practice.
The bigger issue that I have surrounds the reading levels. While I do believe, to some extent, that they can be helpful when guiding students toward picking a "just right" book for them, I also think that reading levels can be very limiting. The story at the beginning of the article about the teacher not allowing her student to read a book at the "D" level because he was at the "C" level really frustrated me. Why would you, as a teacher, want to hold back your student if they were trying to move forward? I also think that with the help of guided reading or partner reading, it could be very beneficial for a student to read one level about their current level. With the help of others, I believe these books would be right in a student's ZPD and could actually help them progress to a higher reading level. I also agree with the article that it is quite hard to measure someone's reading ability level based on only a few characteristics that are able to be assessed. By labeling a student at a certain reading level, you may be hindering their chances to do great things with literacy. While every teacher should strive to help each student do what works best for them in order to succeed, I do not think that it necessarily needs to be done by labeling a child or books at certain reading levels.

Beyond "Sounding It Out"

I just finished reading Chapter 4 of Catching Readers, "Beyond Sounding It Out". It was truly one of the most informational and practical chapters I have read in my educational career up to this point. Especially in my field experience, I often struggle with the issue of what to do when the student is stuck on a word. As is common for many people, I often find myself saying, "Okay, let's sound it out." After reading this chapter I have realized that "sounding it out" is not the most beneficial way of making our students become life-long readers. Although the visual aspect (phonics) of making sure that the word we are saying looks like the word on the page is an important part of reading, there are other aspects that we need to help our students consider when reading.
Many times I have run into the situation where my student will look at the first few letters of the word, neglect the rest of the word, and make something up. I really liked the chapter's idea to respond to the student with a prompt such as, "Try that again and keep the story in your head as you do." (Catching Readers 59) It is so important for students to not only consider the visual aspect of the word, but also the meaning of what they are reading within the text.
Of course there are times when I have also run into a situation where my student does not pay careful enough attention to her use of letter/sound correspondence when reading. Other than just asking her to sound out the word again, you can ask the student if they are making up the word or actually looking at the page. Or, check that word again and see if it looks right to you. This is a great way to switch the responsibility of monitoring from the teacher to the student, which is the ultimate goal we are trying to reach when teaching our students to be good readers.
There were many other things that I got from this chapter that would take too much space to go into here, but if you haven't gotten a chance to read the chapter yet, I highly suggest it. It is so practical, and I really hope to use some of these suggestions in both my field experience and in my future classroom.