8/14/2019 20101228111243International Reading Association

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/20101228111243international-reading-association 1/4

International Reading Association (IRA)

Survey reveals a focus beyond primary gradesBy Jack Cassidy, Evan Ortlieb, and Jennifer Shettel

The older reader is definitely coming into greater focus in 2011, according to our annual survey of hotand not-so-hot topics in reading education. There is also a corresponding decrease in attention totopics often associated with early reading: phonemic awareness, phonics, and fluency. The “Whats!ot" column, which is mar#ing its 1$th anniversary, recogni%es the hottest topics in the field and ispu&lished in the 'ecem&er()anuary issue of the *nternational +eading ssociations mem&ershipnewspaper, Reading Today .

 dolescent literacy, one of this years “very hot" topics, first appeared on the survey in 2001 and in200 attained “very hot" status and has remained so ever since, according to an analysis of “Whats!ot" topics in the arch 2010 issue of *+s Journal of Adolescent & Adult Literacy . num&er ofrecent reports have pointed out the disparity in funding &etween early reading education and fundingfor older students. The additional funding targeted to early readers resulted in improved scores onnational tests, while scores for secondary students remained flat.

any educational organi%ations, e/perts, and policyma#ers agree that more emphasis should &eplaced on pushing secondary students to greater achievementespecially &ecause of the current highschool dropout rates and also &ecause of the poor showing on international assessments &y studentsin the nited tates. 3thers of the “very hot" topics in this years survey also pertain to adolescentlearners.

“4/tremely hot" topics are those that all respondents agree are receiving a great deal of attention. Thisyear, however, no topic received the “e/tremely hot" designation 5unanimous agreement6. 7ut, of thefour “very hot" topicsadolescent literacy, comprehension, +esponse to *ntervention, and corelearning(literacy standards 5those which at least 8$9 of respondents agree are receiving a great dealof attention6, three topics were “very hot" in 2010 as well. ore learning(literacy standards is new to thelist of the “very hot."

3f the topics losing heat, four are of particular significance. 7esides the early reading topics

phonemic awareness, phonics, and fluencyliteracy coaches(reading coaches is also slipping into

cooler climes. ost of our respondents agreed that too much attention had &een paid to these topics in

the past. lso, literacy coaches were often funded with monies from the +eading ;irst legislation of the

7ush era. 3ur respondents did feel, however, that literacy coaches should &e receiving attention.

What's Hot and What's Not? 2!! "es#lts $%ie& the ()*

So+e toics &ith heatCore learning/literacy standards was not only a new topic to the list this year, &ut also was considered“very hot." ore learning descri&es what <=12 pupils in the nited tates should &e achieving eachyear in 4nglish language arts, as well as literacy in history(social studies, science, and technical

su&>ects. ?rade-level standards for literacy include varied topics such as comprehension, creatingte/ts, drama, fluency, listening, phonemic awareness, phonics, spea#ing, voca&ulary, and writing.

 s part of a state-led initiative to prepare mericas students for college and future careers, the@ational ?overnors ssociation for 7est Aractices 5@?6 and the ouncil of hief tate chool3fficers 536 in )une 2010 released a set of 4nglish language arts standards called the ommonore tate tandards. This release mar#ed the &eginning of the adoption and implementation process&y the participating BC states, two territories, and the 'istrict of olum&ia of the nited tates.

8/14/2019 20101228111243International Reading Association

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/20101228111243international-reading-association 2/4

The purpose of common standards is to ensure that all students are proficient language users so theymay succeed in school, contri&ute to society, and pursue their own goals.

These standards were designed to provide clear and consistent e/pectations as well as rigorous

content and application opportunities. The finali%ed standards were also informed &y top performing

countries so students can succeed in the glo&al economy. To read more a&out the core learningstandards and to find out which states have adopted them, visit www.corestandards.org.

Response to Intervention (RTI) seems to &e a term that is uniDue to the nited tates, and evensome of our .. respondents were unsure of its definition. Ei#e many topics on the list, this termoriginated with .. legislative action.

*n order to curtail the num&er of referrals for special education, recent legislation allows for apercentage of the money normally allocated for special education to &e used for preventive measures.The most popular framewor# for this prevention is often called the three-tier +T* model.

Tier 3ne encompasses Duality in-class instruction, often called “core" instruction. *f that interventiondoes not wor#, Tier Two, or short-term, small-group or individual intervention may &e initiated, possi&ly

&y a reading specialist. *f that is not effective, Tier Three, more long-term in nature, may &e initiated,and could eventually involve referral to a special education class.

*t should &e noted that this is one e/ample of numerous +T* models. ;or more a&out +T*, see thefollowing page or *+s we&site:www.reading.org(+esources(+esources7yTopic(+esponseTo*ntervention(3verview.asp/.

Disciplinary/content area literacy  

means using specific literacy strategies within content-area classes such as math, science, and social

studies. This year, respondents thought the topic, new to the list, was not hot &ut should &e hot.

'isciplinary literacy s#ills and routines have not &een of particular interest historicallyF however,

increased attention has resulted from the repeated cross-curricular struggles of adolescent readers.

 s a result, professional communities &ased on shared values such as colla&oration, reflectivedialogue, and student learning have flourished. Wor#shops and We& seminars for professionaldevelopment are also availa&le from some of the leading literacy associations, including *+.

pecific standards designed to integrate literacy into content-area classes in grades =12 are includedin the ommon ore tate tandards. ontent-area literacy strategies are often particular to a specificdiscipline, unli#e highly generali%a&le s#ills such as decoding, fluency, and comprehension.

*+ has a special interest group, ontent rea +eading, focused on content-area literacy. ;orinformation a&out the group, contact ary por at mwsporGaol.com.

7esides disciplinary(content area literacy, other topics respondents thought “should &e hot" included

4nglish as a second language(4nglish language learners, informational(nonfiction te/ts, and writing.

*n conclusion, one would hope that this increase of interest in the more mature reader will result in adecrease in the high school dropout rate and a more productive and literate adult population.4ducators can ta#e advantage of the attention focused on some of these issues and ma#e neededchanges in their schools.

Thus, &ecause in 2011 adolescent literacy, comprehension, core learning(literacy standards, and +T*are “very hot," now seems the ideal time to involve literacy coaches, offer professional development,and facilitate learning communities in secondary schools to train classroom teachers in the use of

8/14/2019 20101228111243International Reading Association

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/20101228111243international-reading-association 3/4

content area literacy strategies and +esponse to *ntervention.

)ac# assidy, a former president of *+, is the associate dean and director of the enter for4ducational 'evelopment, 4valuation, and +esearch at Te/as H niversity=orpus hristi. 4van3rtlie& is an assistant professor at the same institution. )ennifer hettel is an assistant professor atillersville niversity in Aennsylvania. Iuestions

What’s Hot: he ma!ing of the listBy Jack Cassidy, Evan Ortlieb, and Jennifer Shettel

-bo#t the s#rvey;ifteen years ago, the original authors of “Whats !ot," )ac# assidy and )udith <. Wenrich, did notenvision that the list would &ecome a yearly event. They had no idea that “Whats !ot" would &ecomea &u%%word among reading professionals. nd they certainly never anticipated that this wor# would &ereplicated &y individual states and even other countries.

The annual list has &een cited in countless &oo# chapters, >ournal articles, and conferencepresentations. *t has &een translated into panish and has &een summari%ed and highlighted innewspapers such as 4ducation Wee# and online literacy newsletters such as ;lorida 3nline +eadingArofessional 'evelopment. *t is also mentioned on independent &logs such as Eiteracy olutions and+eading +oc#ets. Eonger discussions on topics from the list have appeared in >ournals and &oo#

chapters, including two this year, one of which will loo# at the fluctuation of “hot" and “not hot" topicsspanning the last 1$ years.

Constr#ctin. the s#rvey4ach year, since 1JJ, the 2$ literacy leaders who responded to the list of topics the previous year aresent that years list and as#ed to ma#e modifications, additions, and deletions. ;or the 2010 survey, 21of the 200J leaders provided suggestions for additions, modifications, and deletions. +espondents areselected &ased on a num&er of criteria:

• The first and most important criterion is that they must have a national or international

perspective on literacy. Thus, we often select those who serve on the &oards of prominent literacyorgani%ations or as editors of ma>or >ournals in the field.

• +espondents come from various geographical areas in the nited tates, from anada, and

from outside @orth merica. The percentage of *+ mem&ers in a given area determines the num&er

of literacy leaders we interview from that area.• 'ifferent >o& categories are represented 5such as teachers, college professors, and

administrators6, and the respondents are ethnically diverse. !owever, the main criterion for inclusion isthat a literacy leader has #nowledge of trends and issues at the national or international level.

/eaders 0#eried'uring the months of pril through eptem&er, 2$ literacy leaders are interviewed either in person or&y phone. ll are read a standard 18C=word paragraph defining “hot" and “not hot." *t is also e/plainedto respondents that their ratings of “hot" and “not hot" do not necessarily reflect their personal interest,or lac# thereof, in a given topic. +ather, the ratings refer to the level of attention that a given topic iscurrently receiving.

 fter hearing the introductory paragraph, each respondent is as#ed to rate a given topic as “hot" or“not hot." 4ach respondent is then as#ed if the topic “should &e hot" or “should not &e hot." !owever,

even the reasons for the “should &e hot" and “should not &e hot" responses are varied. ometimesrespondents will say a topic “should &e hot" not &ecause they are advocates of the practice &ut&ecause they &elieve more research needs to &e done on that topic.

The purpose of the survey has always &een to acDuaint readers with those issues that are receivingattention, thus perhaps encouraging them to investigate these topics in more depth. We also hope thatthe discrepancies &etween the “hot" list and the “what should &e hot" list will encourage our readers to&e more active advocates for the &est literacy practices in their own schools and political arenas.

 lso, educators can ta#e advantage of the attention focused on some of these issues and ma#e

8/14/2019 20101228111243International Reading Association

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/20101228111243international-reading-association 4/4

needed changes in their schools.

)ac# assidy, a former president of *+, is the associate dean and director of the enter for4ducational 'evelopment, 4valuation, and +esearch at Te/as H niversity=orpus hristi. 4van3rtlie& is an assistant professor at the same institution. )ennifer hettel is an assistant professor atillersville niversity in Aennsylvania. Iuestions or comments a&out this survey can &e directed to >ac#.cassidyGtamucc.edu.

"enmar! feels the heat# too*n 'enmar#, the @ational entre for +eading and The ssociation of Teachers of 'anish haveconducted a similar survey, as#ing 2$ respondents what they thin# is “hot" and what they thin# “should&e hot" in reading educationand to e/plain it in their own words.

The 'anish survey shows that the hottest topics in 2010 are reading tests, reading comprehension,and content-area reading.

@e/t on the list are writing and reading in the #indergarten class, the role of literacy coaches, andreading difficulties, followed &y reading and information technology and reading motivation.

The complete study is availa&le at www.videnomlaesning.d#(KCC(10C$.asp/.

Survey respondents

Aarticipants in this years survey were Richard Allington, niversity of TennesseeF "onna

Alvermann, niversity of ?eorgiaF $athryn H% Au, chool +ise *nc., !awaiiF homas &ean,

niversity of @evada, Eas LegasF Heather &ell, +ose&an# chool, @ew MealandF "avid

&loome, 3hio tate niversityF $aren &romley, 7inghamton niversity, @N, @ew Nor#F

William '% &roo, ?eorge ason niversity, LirginiaF Robert ooter, 7ellarmine niversity,

<entuc#yF *atricia A% +d,ards, ichigan tate niversityF -oyce Hinman, 7ismarc# chools,

@orth 'a#otaF -ames .% Hoffman, niversity of Te/asF /ori -amison, Toronto, anadaF

&arbara $apinus, @ational 4ducation ssociation, Washington, 'F "onald -% /eu, niversity

of onnecticutF 0arsha /e,is, 'uplin chools, @orth arolinaF *% "avid *earson, niversity of

alifornia at 7er#eleyF affy Raphael, niversity of *llinois, hicagoF imothy Rasins!i, <enttate niversity, 3hioF "% Ray Reutel, tah tate niversityF .ictoria -% Ris!o, Lander&ilt

niversity, TennesseeF 0isty Sailors, niversity of Te/as-an ntonioF imothy Shanahan,

niversity of *llinois, hicagoF "orothy Stric!land, +utgers niversity, @ew )erseyF and /inda

 1oung, !ans !err 4lementary chool, Aennsylvania.

WhatOs hot for 2011 5'ecem&er 2010()anuary 20116. Reading Today, 28( K6, 1, , 8, C.