Workbooks -Worth the Time or Time Wasting?

Arghhh...technology!

I'd written a -well I thought it was- sound composition on the merits and pitfalls of using reading comprehension workbooks with your child over the summer, but thanks to a slip of the finger and the autosave feature on Blogger I've nothing left of it for you to read. 

Hmmm....maybe this is to your benefit, as it was long and most of us are pressed for time. Being too lazy this fine Saturday afternoon to recollect my thoughts, I present a list of reading comprehension workbooks you may want to use this summer. Each has a picture and a thumbnail review. While I'd rather see your child reading from authentic literature each day, there is a place for reading shorter, controlled, passages and responding to comprehension questions during a period of the year when so little focused reading and thinking often occurs -what with swimming to do, sports, travel, video games to master...

a challenge but above average

Reading Detective: Using Higher Order Thinking to Improve Comprehension by Cheryl Block (Author), Carrie Beckwith (Author), Margaret Hockett (Author), David White (Author), Susan Giacometti (Illustrator)

I've used this workbook on and off over the years and I like it. The book, as the title suggests, shoots to develop higher end thinking. It does have some straight-forward questions too. There are numerous excerpts from well-known authentic books like Island of the Blue Dolphins and The Witch of Blackbird Pond. There are also original pieces, which vary in terms of student interest. It's not perfect, however, as there are no attempts to collect materials under a theme and there's no attempt to incorporate useful graphic organizers. This workbook is also the priciest of the lot, but I would recommend it in tandem with some of the better liked workbooks below.

more of a companion, workbook

Kumon Reading Workbook Grade 6 Reading by Kumon Publishing

The cheapest of the bunch and that so often means it’s synonymous with poor quality. It’s not wholly true here as I liked much of what was in this workbook. Most of the passages are of quality and interest. I’m a fan of theme related articles that have different written forms and the writing was generally good. My knock on this book is that, like many workbooks aimed at parents, it tries to provide everything without developing enough well. Their idea is that certain skills are learned first and lead into the next, more challenging it’s presumed, skills until the reader is a dynamo by the end of the workbook. Well, that’s simply not reality. I can see this appealing to kids and the price (6.95 on Amazon) is solid, but I’m not sure it’s enough on its own.

Steck-Vaughn Core Skills: Reading Comprehension: Grade 6 by author Resnick

take a pass on this one

This was one I thumbed through in a local book store and ended up putting back on the rack. The articles were not terribly appealing and there seemed to be a shotgun method to assembling them. There weren’t examples of fiction and non-fiction articles related by theme, for example. The workbook also tried to hit at least once on every type of skill: main idea, inferring meaning, using context, etc. This gave it a diluted feel and would most likely not be of much benefit to a developing mind. I’d pass on this one.

 

Spectrum Reading: Grade 6 by Spectrum Publishing

easier fare and serviceable

I’ve used this item in class a few times. It’s important to know that it’s targeted for students ages 9-12, which is appropriate considering idea behind it is to help struggling readers. I like the variety of materials in this workbook. There are fiction and non-fiction articles ranging from recipes to science experiments. There are also often 4-6 articles at a time related by theme, bees and finance as examples. The writing is highly-controlled, again good for a student who struggles, but not so good for someone looking for authentic reading. Questions that follow each chapter tend toward the literal which disappoints me. I often had to add another layer of questions myself for deeper meaning. This is decent, but not something to run out and snap up. If you want something you can more or less give to a child to work on independently, then this could suit your needs.   

 

a firm buy, small reservations

Paired Passages: Linking Fact to Fiction Grade 6 by Ruth Foster

In all, I like this workbook.  As the title notes, there are two passages paired together each time. One is fiction and the other is non-fiction. After reading both, there are multiple choice questions hitting on each separately and both taken together as in what does each article share and how do they differ. I mainly appreciate the use of graphic organizers throughout and the fact that any part of the book can be read, it's not sequential. Most articles are interesting too, like the one on why most castles in Ireland have uneven steps. The aim, as the author, notes is to improve standardized test taking, which is one detractor for me. Not that I don't want student scores to improve but this means the collection of articles are not excerpted from authentic sources. There were also no examples of poetry, which is used in many standardized tests. While, by comparison, this book is the priciest option, it’s still a recommended buy.

IF you happen to buy and use these something, possible this very summer, I'd love to know what you think.

 

Tisk, Tisk, to Both of Us.

I cannot help myself. I don't really want to note the problems with an alphabet puzzle meant to entertain toddlers but, as a well-known philosopher often said, "I y'am what I y'am."  (Hmmm...so Popeye is not a philosopher, but he is well known.)

I'm unsure how the puzzle pictured above came into our home, but I'm the first to admit that I'm disappointed I let it remain in my house all these years. The puzzle is a Melisa & Doug creation and it's quite likely you own or have owned one of their many products. To be clear, I think the company (duo?) produces many fine educational toys, but with this one, they failed.

Well, what's wrong with it, you may wonder? It looks like a rather nice alphabet puzzle all things considered. It's colorful, made of fine, solid, wood, and quite picturesque. All true, but that's not what has me thinking tisk, tisk to both myself and the designers.

To begin, the letter E rankles me. No, I have nothing against elephants. (Does anyone?) I'm bothered by the use of the word "elephant" to teach the sound of the letter E. The word "elephant" does not allow for the discrete, clear, pronunciation of the short sound for E. What we say, and what a child mostly hears, when the word "elephant" is spoken is an L sound. Most children will certainly hear and see the letter E in many other words as they learn language, but for some even one instance such as this can cause problems. Better choices are words such as "egg" and "Eskimo." Of course, drawing any of these along the shape of the letter E is not necessarily easy. Still, is it that hard to paint a dozen eggs instead? Or an Eskimo with his body making the vertical line, his sled as the bottom horizontal line, an outstretched hand as the middle horizontal line, and maybe a cloud, some wind, or a sun as the top vertical line? If they can squish a picture of a kangaroo into the letter K and have two monkeys (holding hands?) for the letter M, then they can come up with alternatives to an elephant! Okay, I need to calm down right? It's only one letter. Oh but no. That's not true at all.

Not even two spots away sits the letter G...I think. The picture for this letter is a globe. The hard G sound is most appropriate. So no real issues for me there. However, the picture itself is baffling. A ruler of some measure (longitude? latitude?) is wrapped around the globe, and it is nearly impossible to discern from the globe. The end result is a blue and green circle better representative of a football helmet in shape than the letter G. To quote the lingo of today's youth I say, "EPIC FAILURE!" (My 5-year-old generally calls it a G. He knows G follows F because he can sing the alphabet but it doesn't stop him from saying it in a questioning voice after having paused a few seconds. It's a very troubling two seconds in both our lives.)

Hey, I can hear pleas for reason among many of you. 24 out of 26 isn't all that terrible, you say. That's 92% you rightly point out. Maybe, maaaaybe I could meet you half-way on this matter because anything above 90% just seems so credible. Sigh (and tisk, tisk Melisa & Doug) even this benchmark is not met. Enter the letter I.

The letter I is a picture of ice cream on a cone. Lovely...if you're being offered it, and as far from a treat as one can imagine if it's supposed to help a little one learn the short sound of the letter I. Every time I see that "ice cream" I scream, "What were they thinking?" The long sound of any vowel is (pardon my dessert focused mind) a piece of cake (not ice cream). One simply tells a child that all long vowel sounds say their name. So, the direct instruction, from a parent or teacher, is really set to teaching children the short vowel sounds. The letter I should have been pictured by something like an impala, or an insect, or a nice igloo to go with my Eskimo. Better yet, let's roll with an iguana! An iguana is both cool looking and rhymes with Lagana. (Hmmm...I suppose the marketing department for Melisa & Doug might balk at this particular pitch. How many Laganas are in the market for a puzzle board?)

I'm not done with Melisa & Doug and their poorly designed letter I just yet. The shape is totally unacceptable. Where's the dot over the body of the letter? Oh right, we can't have a picture with a single scoop of ice cream floating over a cone because that would be bad for a child to see. Well then, if it's supposed to be a capital letter then where are the little horizontal line thingies at the top and bottom? Apparently a picture fitting to the shape of an upper case I is beyond the creative talents of this company.

So, to the optimists I now present an updated score. The correct tally is now 23 of 26 letters, which is 88%. That's a B, and in teacher parlance not quite head-of-the-class when it comes to alphabet puzzles. You'd "B" wise to avoid this Melisa & Doug product.

Before I dismiss class and hop down from my beleaguered soapbox, let me share a better wooden alphabet puzzle. The one on the bottom is far superior and far less likely to have me in fits. I love the upper and lower case letters near one another. I also like, very much, that the letters are solid colors with pictures below. And wouldn't you know, it's another Melisa & Doug puzzle. A little redemption for them, eh?

Tisk, tisk. I've really no one but myself to blame for holding onto the first puzzle to begin with.

Multitasking is an insidious word. It's really part of an alien conspiricy.

The term multi-tasking is frequently bandied about in education. Most educators use the term in place of the more accurate phrase I-have-tons-to-handle-so-please-don't-add-more-to-my-plate; or, something to that effect. Adults can say they're multi-tasking and in large part be faithful to that statement because we have a great deal of experience in our respective areas of instruction and have years of experience juggling varied tasks. It also helps that our brains are, ehem, up to the task. (Then again, the task of speaking on a phone and driving a car at the same time is an example of multitasking that we're coming to understand is far from easy or safe.)

So, why is multitasking insidious? It's because the concept of multitasking has crept unchecked into the vocabualry of adolescents. Adolescents are not nearly as capable of stating they are multitasking and living up to it. How can this be? We see their desktops connected with all sorts of wonderful gadgets like phones, MP3 players, laptops, DVDs, and portable storage devices. Many children can make these things sing with one another in a manner that implies mastery of all things electronic. Don't be fooled. Yes, they can impress, but they cannot mulitask. At least, they cannot multitask well.

I found this statement in an article at LiveScience.com: "The part of the brain responsible for multitasking continues to develop until late adolescence, with cells making connections even after some children are old enough to drive." The article goes on to support the idea that young minds do not have the ability to prioritize and organize varied tasks as an adult would. Multitasking is beyond students in their early teen and even late teen years.

I'm sure most parents with teenagers knew this already on some level. Teenagers are wacky for lack of a better word. It's as if your kids were replaced with spot-on clones from some alien world with the grand plan of driving you nuts. I jest, but their version of an organized binder, closet, or room is far different from ours; and they honestly believe they're organized. One day I'm going to polygraph one of my boys just to prove it. 

So, next time you pop into Johnny's room and see the TV on, the iPod in one ear, and the twelve windows open on the laptop, only one of which appears to be homework, don't believe it when Johnny says, "It's okay mom. I'm multitasking." Johnny isn't multi-tasking, he's doing multiple things poorly. It's all part of the nefarious plan the aliens, who have temporairly replaced your little cherub with a food stuffing, late sleeping, know-it-all, are trying to maintain right under your nose using the guise of "multitasking".

Know that your teen has limitations when it comes to the thinking demands of home and school; and that placing one thing at a time before them is the best way to ensure success.

If you'd like to read the orginal article on the topic, which does a far better job of explaining why teens don't multitaks well, select the link which follows: http://www.livescience.com/health/050517_teen_thought.html