Running Head: THEORY INTO PRACTICE 1

Theory into Practice Paper

GinaMarie Gambella

North Carolina State University

Theory into Practice 2

Abstract

Since I am not currently teaching, I partnered with Jen Rausch to complete this Common Core

Connections Project. Jen works at Mills Park Elementary in a second grade classroom. Our two

lessons were completed on February 19th and 20th. For this paper, I will discuss theories that I

used during student teaching and that I plan to use when I have a classroom of my own. I will

also discuss new theories that I would like to use in the future. I will reflect on the lessons and

the observations I made in the classroom while they were being taught. Finally, I will offer the

insights I gained about myself as a teacher after completing this project.

Theory into Practice 3

Relevant Theories

Currently Use

As I previously stated, I am not currently teaching in the education system. The theories

that I am about to discuss are theories that I used during student teaching or that I plan to use

in my future classroom. One of these theories is the schema theory. Schema theory is a

constructivist theory that explains how information is formed and utilized by learners.

According to this theory, people arrange everything they know into "knowledge structures."

These knowledge structures, or schemata, are individualized to every person. They are pliant

and expandable. Without an existing schema on a topic, it is very hard to learn new

information.

As teachers, we rely on students prior knowledge when teaching. We use what our

students already know to lead discussions and expand their thinking. I think this is evident in all

subject areas. Many of my discussions in the classroom start with the question, "Tell me what

you already know about this." Students are asked to activate their schema, which may be small

or large depending on the topic and the person. Some students may know a lot about

dinosaurs because they have read many book and have seen numerous movies on the them.

Other students that are less interested in dinosaurs may know very little about their existence.

However, the student that knows a lot about dinosaurs may not be able to contribute to the

conversation about cooking because it is not in his or her schema.

I use this theory especially during literacy in the classroom. In reading groups, I try to

use content that is familiar and interesting to my students, especially with my lower readers. If

Theory into Practice 4

the students are given content that is in their schema, they will be able to comprehend the text

more accurately. The students seem more engaged and confident when they are reading a text

that is familiar and relatable to their life. I have found that utilizing a lower readers schema

makes reading more enjoyable and encouraging.

Social Constructivism is another theory I see myself using in the classroom. This theory,

originating from Lev Vygotsky, has three key ideas that I believe I have used in my teaching.

The first key idea focuses on the social interactions students have with one another. Vygotsky

believed that children learned as a result of these social interactions. I remember using group

work in my classroom on a regular basis. I tried to give students the opportunity to work with

others and discuss ideas and thoughts.

One particular strategy I would use was "think, pair, share." In this activity, students

were given time to think about the content being discussed. They would pair with a partner in

the classroom. The two would share their thoughts and ideas with the other about the given

topic. This depicts Vygotsky's idea of students learning from one another through social

interactions. Through this activity, students may learn something new or be able to share

information that their partner did not know.

Another key idea of this theory is the concept of the zone of proximal development.

This idea refers to "the ideal level of task difficulty to facilitate learning, which is the level at

which a child can be successful with appropriate support" (Tracey & Morrow, 2012). If a child

can compete a task independently, then it does not fall within their zone of proximal

Theory into Practice 5

development. In this case, the child's development is not being promoted. Children should be

given tasks that require a certain amount of support from the teacher.

In my classroom, I try to give students work that falls within their zone of proximal

development. Students should be challenged everyday to work hard and learn new things. For

example, if a student is able to read and comprehend a text at level 10 with no support, they

should not remain reading at a level 10. The student should move up to level 11 where the text

is more challenging and he or she needs greater support from me as the teacher to

comprehend and retell the text.

The third key idea of Vygotsky's social constructivism theory is the idea of scaffolding.

Scaffolding is the support that teachers provide to students who are struggling within their zone

of proximal development. As a teacher, it is crucial to provide scaffolding to those struggling

students. I provide scaffolding to my students to help them understand the content and arrive

at the correct answer. Some students require more scaffolding than others. It is important to

encourage students, provide examples, break down content, and allow them to grow

independently as a learner.

The third theory I see myself using in the classroom is engagement theory. According to

this theory, engaged readers are intrinsically motivated to read. These individuals read

frequently, are mentally active, and are very social. Engaged readers enjoy reading and their

choice to read is self-inflicted. They also enjoy talking about what they have read to others.

Engaged readers remain on task and focused while reading.

Theory into Practice 6

Although it would be ideal to have students that are all engaged readers, we know this

is not always the case. Not everyone likes to read, and not all children are good readers. It is

our job as teachers to encourage students to read and make them believe that reading can be

fun. This can be very difficult, especially with the lower level readers. Effective strategies must

be used in order to reach engagement with all students.

There are many things I do as a teacher to get my students engaged as well as keep

them engaged. One strategy is student choice. Allowing students to choose their text lets

them pick something they are interested in and want to read. Another is giving students hands-

on activities. This allows for mobility and gives them a task so that they do not get bored and

disconnected from the text. Also, allowing students to collaborate with their peers is an

effective strategy. Letting them discuss the text together and share their thoughts with others

will keep them engaged and thinking about the story.

New Theories

A new theory that I would like to use in my reading instruction is constructivism. The

constructivism approach emphasizes the active construction of knowledge. One specific theory

that follows this approach that I would like to introduce in my teaching is the inquiry learning

model. From this model create by John Dewey, students would be able to participate in and

contribute to a democratic society. Much of the focus is on a students' cognitive abilities,

including his or her reasoning and decision making skills.

Another emphasis of this model is placed on problem-based learning. "Inquiry Learning

suggests that to optimize learning students need to formulate hypotheses, collect date to test

Theory into Practice 7

hypotheses, draw conclusions, and reflect on the original problem and the thinking process

needed to solve it" (Tracey & Morrow, 2012). Dewey believed that this type of learning would

best prepare students for the real-world. He also believed that students should create their

own learning in the classroom.

As a teacher, this is not an approach I take as often in my classroom. I believe students

would benefit from problem-based learning. Although it is not something I have used before, I

think it would be something I would like to try in the future. It is hard to allow students to

create their own learning when there is so much to cover in the Common Core Standards. I

think I could incorporate this method through literacy instruction.

This theory was definitely incorporated into our two literacy lessons. The students were

given time to construct their own meaning during both the whole group lessons and in their

book clubs. During the whole group lessons, students could hypothesize different things about

the children from around the world. Their data was collected while reading the stories, and

they could draw conclusions based on the text. They could then reflect on their hypothesis and

see whether or not what they originally thought was correct.

The same process could be followed during the book clubs. The student had more

freedom to hypothesize about the things being compared in their text. They could use what

they already knew about the topic to form a hypothesis, as well as information they learned

from their peers. This data could be used to draw conclusions based on the text. After reading,

the students discovered if what they originally thought was true and reflected on the new

information they learned.

Theory into Practice 8

Evaluation of Lesson

Since I worked with Jen and her classroom on this project, she knew the students and

their abilities a lot better than I did. She has been working with these students since the

beginning of the year and knows how each of her students read and comprehend a text. She

was able to chose texts that were appropriate for each of her four reading groups. There is one

below level, one at grade level, and two above grade level reading groups. I feel as if each of

the groups were given appropriate texts to read in each of the lessons.

The low reading group was given "Slithery and Slimy" to read, which has a lexile level of

580L. The medium reading group read "Frogs and Toads" at lexile level 750L. The two high

reading groups were given "Earthquakes, Tsunamis, and Volcanoes" to read, which is at lexile

level Q- 810L/T- 920L. I think these texts were complex for the students. The Common Core

Standards emphasize three important components of text complexity. These include

qualitative, quantitative, and reader and task considerations.

I think the three books had each of these components evident in the text. Following the

qualitative component, there were "levels of meaning, structure, language conventionality and

clarity, and knowledge demands" ("Defining Text Complexity," 2013). The quantitative

measures of word frequency and sentence length seemed appropriate for each of the reading

groups. Taking the reader and task into consideration, the students appeared to be interested

in their book topics and motivated to read the text.

The same can be said about the two read aloud books used during the whole group

activities. The first book, "Friends Around the World," was a content rich, informational text.

Theory into Practice 9

This text has a lexile score of 730L. This is an appropriate level for students in second grade.

The second text, "School Days Around the World," has a lexile score of 860L. The text got more

difficult the second day, but still seemed appropriate and engaging for the students in Jen's

class. Most of the students were able to recall information for the text and answer any

questions posted by Jen during the read aloud.

Jen did a very good job scaffolding her students during the read alouds as well as in their

small groups. If there was an idea she wanted the students to recall, she made sure to ask

appropriate questions and give subtle clues to help them arise to the correct answer. During

reading groups, she guided her students though the text to help them understand the different

text features and their purpose. Scaffolding was especially apparent when the students were

making their venn diagrams. Jen made sure to ask those struggling students questions about

what they read to help fill in the diagram.

The sequencing of the lessons seemed to flow well in the classroom. Jen started off

each lesson with a read aloud to the whole class. They would discuss the text as a group on the

carpet. The students would then break into their designated reading groups. First having a

chance to interact as a whole class, the students were now able to work together in a small

group where there was greater room for discussion and cooperative learning.

Jen asked several text-dependent questions throughout her lessons. These questions

were most evident during the whole group lessons and smaller, teacher-directed reading

groups. As an observer, I noticed Jen asking more text-dependant questions than were planned

in our lessons and that she probably did not realize herself. I thought the questions were

Theory into Practice 10

appropriate for her students and placed emphasis on the use of the text in order to elicit a

suitable response. Asking text-dependant questions can sometimes be difficult because they

require some higher level thinking of the students. I think Jen's students handled the questions

well and were able to respond based on her prompting and use of the text.

For our culminating activity, the students were asked to write a blog post comparing

themselves to a different culture. We incorporated this writing ELA Common Core Standard

into our lesson so that the students could share their cultures with the other students in the

class. Having the students write on the blog was a huge success. The students loved being able

to talk about their lives as well as read about the cultures of others.

Connections Between Literacy Theories and CCS

One Common Core Standard met through our first literacy lesson was CCSS.ELA-

Literacy.RI.2.5: "Know and use various text features (e.g., captions, bold print, subheadings,

glossaries, indexes, electronic menus, icons) to locate key facts or information in a text

efficiently." Through this standard, the students are using what they already know about a text

to use new text features. In accordance with the schema theory, the students have had

numerous experiences with books and have constructed a knowledge structure for them. They

can now use that knowledge to understand what the various text features are in the book so

that they can locate information in the text.

The second Common Core Standard met through our first literacy lesson was CCSS.ELA-

Literacy.RI.2.7: "Explain how specific images (e.g., a diagram showing how a machine works)

contribute to and clarify a text." Through this standard, the students are relying on images

Theory into Practice 11

from the book to understand the text. This is using the students zone of proximal development

described in the social constructivism theory. The students need to use some support to

provide clarity to the text being read. The support in this situation are the captions and

diagrams shown throughout the text to help them better understand the content. These images

also provide scaffolding to the reader.

The third Common Core Standard met in the second literacy lesson was CCSS.ELA-

Literacy.RI.2.9: "Compare and contrast the most important points presented by two texts on

the same topic." Through this standard, the students are taking what they know about two

different things and comparing them to one another to find their similarities and differences.

This connects to the inquiry model in that the students are constructing their own meaning and

creating their own learning. They are interpreting the information in a way that makes sense to

them. They are also being actively engaged in the learning process by constructing the venn

diagrams and filling them with information from the texts.

The last standard, met in each of the literacy lessons, incorporated the Social Studies

Essential Standard related to culture for second grade. This standard was 2.C.1: "Understand

how various cultures influence communities." During the whole class read alouds, the students

heard about different cultures around the world and how their school days differ from ours.

The students were encouraged to listen for similarities and differences in each of the books.

The texts held the students attention, an important factor in the engagement theory. They

were excited to share what they learned and compare the lives of the friends from around the

world to their own lives.

Theory into Practice 12

Reflection on Student Learning

I think that each of the lessons that were taught went very well. The students seemed

engaged and excited about what they were reading. The students were able to comprehend

the texts and answer any questions posted by Jen during the lesson. They loved making the

venn diagrams and being able to discuss the similarities and differences from the text with their

peers. I think they also enjoyed learning about the different cultures in the read alouds and

comparing their lives to other children around the world.

With the new constructivist theory of inquiry learning in mind, the students were able to

hypothesize and construct their own meaning about the children from around the world as well

as their topics in the reading groups. Designing our lesson this way allowed the students to be

more open-minded and observant of their own lives. As a teacher, I never thought about

letting the students create their own meaning and discovering whether or not what they

thought was right or wrong. Now I know it is a great way to get students to collaborate and

think about their own thinking.

Looking back on the lesson, I think that students were able to support their answers

with evidence from the text. Any questions that the students were asked, they were able to

find in the text we were reading. This was especially evident while the students were making

their venn diagrams. If the students were asked, "How do you know this?," they could go back

in their book to find the answer and confirm their understanding. The students were also able

to use new vocabulary they learned from the text to fill in their venn diagram.

Theory into Practice 13

Comprehension of the text was evident through the students writing. The students

wrote facts they remembered from the text in their venn diagrams. They were able to

collaborate with their peers to add more facts and discuss the similarities and differences

between the things being compared. Comprehension was also met during the blog when

students compared their lives to another culture. They had to recall information about another

culture we read about to show their understanding of the text. The students had to take into

account various aspects of others lives they learned about to demonstrate their knowledge and

grasp the main ideas of the text.

Insights I Gained About Myself

After creating and implementing these two lessons, I realized the importance of literacy

theories and the impact they have on students learning. I have never really thought about the

theories I use in my teaching, so being able to reflect on these was a positive experience for me.

Although I am not currently teaching, this assignment helped me see the connections between

the Common Core and literacy in the classroom. I gained insight on text complexity and the use

of text-dependent questioning. I will be able to use what I have learned from this project in my

future teaching.

There is still a lot I need to learn about the Common Core Standards and ELA. I think as I

continue to study these standards and eventually implement them in my own classroom, I will

gain a better understanding of the many components. Overall, I am excited to use what I have

learned in the future and plan on incorporating new theories and practices into my teaching so

that my students become proficient learners.

Theory into Practice 14

Resources

Common core state standards initiative. (2012). Retrieved from http://www.corestandards.org/

The lexile framework for reading. (2013). Retrieved from

http://www.lexile.com/using-lexile/lexile-measures-and-the-ccssi/defining-text-

complexity/

Tracey, D. H., & Morrow, L. M. (2012). Lenses on reading: An introduction to theories and

models. New York: Guilford Press.