Young readers can communicate their motivations for doing reading in an intervention program and offer ideas about how the program might be modified to be more motivating.When we do reading in the classroom, we usually get stuck on a word, and then we keep having to try stuff, and we try everything, but we can't raise our hand and go ask for help. In [the reading intervention room], we can point to the word and raise our hand, and the teacher will help us get it! T his was first grader Agnes' response when asked why she would rat her read in her school's reading intervention room than in her classroom (all student, teacher, and school names are pseudonyms). The availability of support from the teacher is a main reason why Agnes valued time spent in her reading intervention program. She also appreciated the books the reading specialist provided for independent reading and the quiet setting, as compared with her classroom, which she described as noisy.In contrast, second grader Henry insisted that if given the choice, he would remain in his classroom to do reading instead of attending intervention sessions. "There's not much decisions for me to make there…and my classroom is quieter," he explained. Henry's and Agnes' perceptions of intervention are clearly different; however, both students' views offer insights into their unique motivations for "doing reading" specific to the intervention program. Their insights can also serve as an important data source for modifying programs to better meet students' individual needs.In this article, we share findings from a semesterlong study in which we analyzed the motivationrelated perceptions (perceived benefits and costs of participation) of 14 young readers specific to their intervention involvement. We compared their perceptions with adult reports of their intervention engagement to infer how the program was shaping students' motivation for doing reading in the intervention setting.We begin by explaining why it is essential that students value-and maintain high motivation for-their reading intervention experience. Also, we highlight a gap in the reading motivation research-specifically, the need to examine young students' perceived costs of participation. Next, we describe the setting and the general methods that we employed in the study, and we elaborate on the two developmentally sensitive interview approaches that we employed, techniques that we strongly feel can-and should-be used in schools to understand students' perceptions of their intervention experiences. Finally, we synthesize findings across the three grade levels and emphasize a major implication of our work: Young students' perceived benefits and costs of reading intervention involvement should be elicited and taken seriously, as they offer valuable insights that can be used to modify programming to better support students' developing motivation.
This chapter describes an iterative process using writing workshops to develop preservice early childhood and elementary teachers' (1) writing pedagogy, (2) pedagogical content knowledge for teaching writing, and (3) an equity-oriented mindset. Across two teacher education literacy courses, preservice teachers engaged in writing in their discipline, specifically learning the language, tone, and content to communicate to students' caregivers on unit introductions or progress reports regarding academic performance, curricular decisions, and motivation. Analysis of preservice teachers' submissions revealed developing abilities to use an equity-oriented mindset when writing to caregivers, to apply previously learned writing skills to new content, to develop meta-awareness of their own writing experiences and process, and to communicate effectively for a less-familiar audience. The chapter concluded with suggestions for teacher educators.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.