Education of the republic of uzbekistan termez state university foreign philology faculty the department of english language and literature



Yüklə 293,69 Kb.
səhifə1/7
tarix25.05.2022
ölçüsü293,69 Kb.
#87922
  1   2   3   4   5   6   7
ABDULLAYEV RAMAZON. KURS ISHI





THE MINISTRY OF HIGHER AND SECONDARY SPECIAL
EDUCATION OF THE REPUBLIC OF UZBEKISTAN TERMEZ STATE UNIVERSITY

FOREIGN PHILOLOGY FACULTY
THE DEPARTMENT OF ENGLISH LANGUAGE AND LITERATURE
Evaluating Sustained Silent Reading in Reading classes

DONE BY:
Abdullayev Ramazon
SCIENTIFIC SUPERVISOR:
Ziyoda Nazarova

Termez – 2022
CONTENTS
Introduction......................................................................................2
Main part
1. Theoretical Aspects and Applications of Sustained Silent Reading in the ESP Class..................................................................6
2. The use of sustained silent reading method.............................11
3. Advantages and disadvantages of sustained
silent reading.................................................................................15
Conclusion......................................................................................20
References......................................................................................22


Introduction
As reading teachers, we recognize the joy that comes from getting lost in the pages of a good book. We fondly recall the books that inspired and changed us as children and that still in-fluence us as adults. As teachers, we want to awaken that love of literacy in our students and invite them to experience that magic in our classrooms. We want them to grow into skilled, passionate, habitual, and critical readers. However, confusion over and misinterpretation of federal research on in-dependent reading have caused some to question this vision of literacy. Teachers and administrators are now wondering if reading books in school helps students increase their reading skills, much less appreciate the value of reading.There are many misconceptions about the role Sustained Silent Reading (SSR) should play in read-ing instruction. Much of the confusion stems from the research on SSR in the Report of the National Reading Panel National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. Although it was published in 2000, the report still has clout. In fact, Guidance for the Reading First Program requires five “Effective Components of Reading Instruction” based on the NRP’s findings The document also cites the NRP’s research methodology as the gold standard for Once teachers unravel the facts from the misinterpretations and opinions, they will find that Sustained. The Benefits of Sustained Silent Reading: Scientific Research and Common Sense ConvergeNRP report. Now, we will ex-amine the problems the NRP experienced in attempt-ing to gather significant research on SSR and why any statements opposed to independent reading even those made by panel members cannot be based on sound research. The NRP on SSRThere has been considerable criticism of the meth-odology behind, inherent flaws in, and reporting of the NRP’s findings, and it is not our purpose to revisit that general debate here. Rather, we will now focus on how the narrow, questionable selection criteria for studies on SSR led to a misinterpretation of the role research plays in reading. First, as consumers of research, teachers must understand that the NRP did not find that SSR is inef-fective. Nowhere did the report state that having chil-dren read in school is a bad idea. What it claimed was that there were not enough studies meeting the panel’s methodological requirements to draw any conclusions. In fact, the panel found only 14 studies that met their research criteria, and of those, several .could not be analyzed because of serious meth-odological or reporting flaws that undermined their results. Perhaps one reason the NRP had problems finding enough experimental studies on SSR and the reason its findings have not been unanimously embraced by the reading community is because it relied on a component-skills model of reading. That is, the panel operated on the assumption that read-ing skills can be taught in isolation, one at a time, and that once children accumulate knowledge of the individual letters and sounds that produce language, they will then be able to comprehend connected text as competent readers. That paradigm lends itself to the research methodology the panel chose to con-sider, and also to exclude, in its deliberations. Recall that the NRP sought causality from research and de-cided a priori on the selection criteria for the stud-ies it would analyze. In their quest for scientific certainty, the panel chose to rely solely on a medical model, using experimental treatments and control groups, even though few edu-cation researchers adopted such a model. Nevertheless, the NRP chose an experimen-tal model they believed would re sult in a direct do contaminate the research process and make it nearly impossible to apply findings to all children in all schools and to effectively standardize instruction. We will examine some of those general challenges to educational research and then apply them to the studies on SSR in particular. One of the biggest obstacles in applying an ex-perimental model to educational research is that classrooms are not laboratories. Therefore, condi-tions cannot be controlled or variables completely refined. There is a slipperines s, an illusiveness, to even the very definitions of teaching methods that create roadblocks to the goal of scientific certainty right from the beginning.That is, although teaching methods may be de-fined at their inception and in the literature, they sel-dom remain pure as teachers adjust them to fit their own beliefs and teaching st yles. T herefore, at the out-set, researchers are faced with the challenge of find-ing pure examples of any method they wish to study. This can be particularly problematic in SBRR be-cause it is based on an experimental research model that must isolate and refine variables, as cleanly as possible, so the findings can be directly attributed to the method being studied. However, because teach-ers tweak methods, the best that can be said when defining most teaching methods is “sometimes” or “often, such and such is the case.”And so it is with SSR. Like other instr uctional methods, it can and does operate along a continu-um. At one end of the continuum is pure SSR as a time devoted to free reading during which students read books of their own choice, without assessment, skill s work, monitor ing, or instruction from the teach-er. In fact, often the teacher reads a book along with the students, thus providing a model of literacy for the class. Other teachers implement SSR by monitor-ing the type and the number of books students read; they may also administer assessments, keep reading checklists, and ask questions or encourage student discussion about book s .Regardless of the amount of teacher involve-ment, however, the distinguishing feature of SSR is that every day for at least 15 to 30 minutes, students are permitted a block of time to read a book, usu-ally of their own choice.

Yüklə 293,69 Kb.

Dostları ilə paylaş:
  1   2   3   4   5   6   7




Verilənlər bazası müəlliflik hüququ ilə müdafiə olunur ©genderi.org 2024
rəhbərliyinə müraciət

    Ana səhifə