小学低年级的阅读和语言

4区 法学 Q1 Social Sciences
C. Snow, T. J. Matthews
{"title":"小学低年级的阅读和语言","authors":"C. Snow, T. J. Matthews","doi":"10.1353/FOC.2016.0012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Summary:How does literacy develop in children’s early years, and what programs or practices promote adequate literacy for all children? These are the questions Catherine Snow and Timothy Matthews tackle in this article.Fundamental literacy skills can be grouped into two categories, Snow and Matthews write. The first category is constrained skills, which are readily teachable because they’re finite: for example, the 26 letters of the alphabet, or a set of 20 to 30 common spelling rules. These skills have a ceiling; young children can and do achieve perfect performance.As they grow older, though, children need to understand words rarely encountered in spoken language and to integrate new information they encounter with relevant background information. Vocabulary and background knowledge are examples of unconstrained skills—large domains of knowledge acquired gradually through experience. Unconstrained skills are particularly important for children’s long-term literacy success (that is, success in outcomes measured after third grade). Compared to constrained skills, they’re also more strongly predicted by children’s social class or their parents’ education, and more difficult to teach in the classroom. And because of their open-ended nature, unconstrained skills are also much harder to test for. Snow and Matthews write that a drop in literacy scores we see as US children move from elementary to middle school suggests that our schools may be focusing too much on constrained skills—and too little on unconstrained ones—in the early grades.The authors review promising programs and practices for enhancing both constrained and unconstrained skills, ranging from comprehensive school-improvement programs to efforts to improve curricula and teachers’ professional development—although they note that vast differences in programs’ scope, cost, targets, and theories of change make comparing them difficult. Another challenge is that it’s hard to maintain quality and consistency when implementing complex programs over time. Snow and Matthews suggest that to improve young children’s success with literacy, it might be better to introduce and evaluate promising practices that can be mixed and matched, rather than complex programs that are implemented as a package.","PeriodicalId":51448,"journal":{"name":"Future of Children","volume":"26 1","pages":"57 - 74"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/FOC.2016.0012","citationCount":"109","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reading and Language in the Early Grades\",\"authors\":\"C. Snow, T. J. Matthews\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/FOC.2016.0012\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Summary:How does literacy develop in children’s early years, and what programs or practices promote adequate literacy for all children? These are the questions Catherine Snow and Timothy Matthews tackle in this article.Fundamental literacy skills can be grouped into two categories, Snow and Matthews write. The first category is constrained skills, which are readily teachable because they’re finite: for example, the 26 letters of the alphabet, or a set of 20 to 30 common spelling rules. These skills have a ceiling; young children can and do achieve perfect performance.As they grow older, though, children need to understand words rarely encountered in spoken language and to integrate new information they encounter with relevant background information. Vocabulary and background knowledge are examples of unconstrained skills—large domains of knowledge acquired gradually through experience. Unconstrained skills are particularly important for children’s long-term literacy success (that is, success in outcomes measured after third grade). Compared to constrained skills, they’re also more strongly predicted by children’s social class or their parents’ education, and more difficult to teach in the classroom. And because of their open-ended nature, unconstrained skills are also much harder to test for. Snow and Matthews write that a drop in literacy scores we see as US children move from elementary to middle school suggests that our schools may be focusing too much on constrained skills—and too little on unconstrained ones—in the early grades.The authors review promising programs and practices for enhancing both constrained and unconstrained skills, ranging from comprehensive school-improvement programs to efforts to improve curricula and teachers’ professional development—although they note that vast differences in programs’ scope, cost, targets, and theories of change make comparing them difficult. Another challenge is that it’s hard to maintain quality and consistency when implementing complex programs over time. Snow and Matthews suggest that to improve young children’s success with literacy, it might be better to introduce and evaluate promising practices that can be mixed and matched, rather than complex programs that are implemented as a package.\",\"PeriodicalId\":51448,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Future of Children\",\"volume\":\"26 1\",\"pages\":\"57 - 74\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2016-09-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1353/FOC.2016.0012\",\"citationCount\":\"109\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Future of Children\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/FOC.2016.0012\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"法学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Social Sciences\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Future of Children","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/FOC.2016.0012","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"法学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 109

摘要

儿童早期的读写能力是如何发展的,哪些项目或实践可以促进所有儿童的读写能力?这是Catherine Snow和Timothy Matthews在这篇文章中要解决的问题。斯诺和马修斯写道,基本的读写能力可以分为两类。第一类是受限制的技能,因为它们是有限的,所以很容易教:例如,字母表中的26个字母,或者一组20到30个常见的拼写规则。这些技能都有上限;年幼的孩子能够而且确实取得了完美的成绩。然而,随着年龄的增长,孩子们需要理解在口语中很少遇到的单词,并将他们遇到的新信息与相关的背景信息相结合。词汇和背景知识是不受约束的技能的例子——通过经验逐渐获得的大领域的知识。不受约束的技能对儿童长期的读写能力的成功(即三年级后衡量的成功结果)尤为重要。与受限制的技能相比,这些技能更容易受到孩子的社会阶层或父母的教育程度的影响,也更难以在课堂上教授。由于它们的开放性,不受约束的技能也更难测试。斯诺和马修斯写道,随着美国孩子从小学升入中学,读写能力的下降表明,我们的学校可能在早期阶段过于关注受限制的技能,而对不受限制的技能关注得太少。作者回顾了有希望的项目和实践,以提高受约束和不受约束的技能,从全面的学校改进项目到改进课程和教师专业发展的努力,尽管他们注意到项目的范围、成本、目标和变革理论的巨大差异使得比较它们变得困难。另一个挑战是,随着时间的推移实现复杂的程序时,很难保持质量和一致性。斯诺和马修斯建议,为了提高幼儿的读写能力,最好是引入和评估有前途的做法,这些做法可以混合和匹配,而不是把复杂的计划作为一个整体来实施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Reading and Language in the Early Grades
Summary:How does literacy develop in children’s early years, and what programs or practices promote adequate literacy for all children? These are the questions Catherine Snow and Timothy Matthews tackle in this article.Fundamental literacy skills can be grouped into two categories, Snow and Matthews write. The first category is constrained skills, which are readily teachable because they’re finite: for example, the 26 letters of the alphabet, or a set of 20 to 30 common spelling rules. These skills have a ceiling; young children can and do achieve perfect performance.As they grow older, though, children need to understand words rarely encountered in spoken language and to integrate new information they encounter with relevant background information. Vocabulary and background knowledge are examples of unconstrained skills—large domains of knowledge acquired gradually through experience. Unconstrained skills are particularly important for children’s long-term literacy success (that is, success in outcomes measured after third grade). Compared to constrained skills, they’re also more strongly predicted by children’s social class or their parents’ education, and more difficult to teach in the classroom. And because of their open-ended nature, unconstrained skills are also much harder to test for. Snow and Matthews write that a drop in literacy scores we see as US children move from elementary to middle school suggests that our schools may be focusing too much on constrained skills—and too little on unconstrained ones—in the early grades.The authors review promising programs and practices for enhancing both constrained and unconstrained skills, ranging from comprehensive school-improvement programs to efforts to improve curricula and teachers’ professional development—although they note that vast differences in programs’ scope, cost, targets, and theories of change make comparing them difficult. Another challenge is that it’s hard to maintain quality and consistency when implementing complex programs over time. Snow and Matthews suggest that to improve young children’s success with literacy, it might be better to introduce and evaluate promising practices that can be mixed and matched, rather than complex programs that are implemented as a package.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Future of Children
Future of Children Multiple-
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Future of Children is a collaboration of the Woodrow Wilson School of Public and International Affairs at Princeton University and the Brookings Institution. The mission of The Future of Children is to translate the best social science research about children and youth into information that is useful to policymakers, practitioners, grant-makers, advocates, the media, and students of public policy. The project publishes two journals and policy briefs each year, and provides various short summaries of our work. Topics range widely -- from income policy to family issues to education and health – with children’s policy as the unifying element. The senior editorial team is diverse, representing two institutions and multiple disciplines.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信