Words: 1128
R. E. A. D. One major characteristic I like about the model is that it is so diverse. It shows that critical thinking played a major role in developing this model so that it could cover every aspect of the teaching methods of a professional. I believe that any individual can be taught, this has been one of my philosophies for a long time. A student will give the teacher what the teacher gives him/her. That’s why this model is so important because it shows the care that a teacher has for guiding a student to his best efforts.
That means that a teacher can take this model and even evaluate themselves, which is just as important as teaching itself. A teacher must know first their capabilities before they can teach another student. It is impossible to set goals and ideas that haven’t been accomplished by the person himself. That proves that he or she did not follow the rules of the R. E. A. D. In fact, the model can be used to evaluate a person’s frame of mind as well. Based on the assignments given to the students, what will they produce with the information given?
The model suggest that a teacher or student should be able to create diamonds out of coal, in other words “lemonade out of lemons. ” But in order to do this the model has to be enforced based on the principles of his/her own philosophy. The writer of the model showed that his philosophy was to “teach” and not just to “show. ” The difference is that showing a person gives him the opportunity to create the situation needed to perform a certain act, on the other hand, teaching involves self-examination of student and teacher.
This provision shows that the model can infact grasp the personal views of a teacher and at the same time make a valuable contribution to ones own specific style of method teaching. I believe that you cant make a person do something that they don’t want to do, there are certain boundaries are teacher can not cross, but a confident teacher will use the R. E. A. D model to stretch their head over the line without actually stepping over. This means that a good teacher that uses this method could actually obtain more from a student if they are encouraged to do more than what is excepted.
The model enforces philosophies that have been forgotten about in the world of teaching or so it seems. Me personally, I have experienced teacher that do not care about student and they taught for food instead of knowledge. Which is terrible because some teachers take that dependency of knowledge for granted and we are in dier need of a change. Good teacher are out there but they must be taught to administer their skills to the best of their abilities.
Good teachers have to be molded and shaped just like students, because knowledge is an everlasting variable in method teaching and the model is a constructive, narrow path of reaching our goals as teachers. I plan to use this model in my teaching because it can be very important in the critical thinking of individuals that need to be challenged. Teacher also can be challenged by this model because it can change the whole style of teaching that they normally exhibit. The main goal of this model can be achieved only if a teacher understands and studies for themselves what it actually means to R.
E. A. D. A teacher must use their personal characteristics to show the model in ways which make it fun and interesting to the teacher and the students. Teaching should flow like streams of water and I see this model as salmon running down stream to multiply. You may ask “what does he mean,” Im glad you asked. What it means is that knowledge can be taught on every basis a person can think of, but if there is nothing inside of the knowledge what purpose does it have and what benefit is it to the student.
As you can see, reading involves many complex skills that have to come together in order for the reader to be successful. For example, proficient readers recognize the purpose for reading, approach the reading with that purpose in mind, use strategies that have proven successful to them in the past when reading similar texts for similar purposes, monitor their comprehension of the text in light of the purpose for reading, and if needed adjust their strategy use. Proficient readers know when unknown words will interfere with achieving their purpose for reading, and when they won’t.
When unknown words arise and their meaning is needed for comprehension, proficient readers have a number of word attack strategies available to them that will allow them to decipher the meaning of the words to the extent that they are needed to achieve the purpose for reading. Reading is also a complex process in that proficient readers give to the text as much as they take. They make meaning from the text by using their own prior knowledge and experiences. Proficient readers are constantly making predictions while reading.
They are continuously anticipating what will come next. Their prior knowledge and experiences with texts as well as with the world around them allow them to do this. It is this continuous interaction with the text that allows readers to make sense of what they are reading. Here are some questions and aspects about reading throughout history. •What do we read? The message is not something given in advance–or given at all– but something created by interaction between writers and readers as participants in a particular communicative situation. Roy Harris in Rethinking Writing (2000) •Reading is asking questions of printed text. And reading with comprehension becomes a matter of getting your questions answered. – Frank Smith in Reading Without Nonsense (1997) •Reading is a psycholinguistic guessing game. It involves an interaction between thought and language. Efficient reading does not result from precise perception and identification of all elements, but from skill in selecting the fewest, most productive cues necessary to produce guesses which are right the first time.
The ability to anticipate that which has not been seen, of course, is vital in reading, just as the ability to anticipate what has not yet been heard is vital in listening. – Kenneth Goodman in Journal of the Reading Specialist (1967) •Literacy practices are almost always fully integrated with, interwoven into, constituted as part of, the very texture of wider practices that involve talk, interaction, values, and beliefs. – James Gee in Social Linguistics and Literacies (1996)