An Inquiry of Birds

In addition to reading assigned articles and chapters, my classmates and I are required to read 5 research articles independently and summarize and analyze them on our blogs. For this, the first of my independent research articles, I read The Ties that Bind: Emergent Literacy and Scientific Education, by Phyllis Whitin, published in Language Arts (journal) in 2007. It details the experience of a teacher who switched from teaching fourth grade to teaching kindergarten specifically because the switch from half-day to full-time kindergarten gave her the time necessary to conduct scientific lessons as well as standard reading/writing/math.

For the most part, I think this article was interesting, accessible, and full of valuable ideas. For instance, the incorporation of non-fiction, and of various genres under the umbrella of non-fiction, is important from a young age. Research by Duke in 2000 showed that, “an average of only 3.6 minutes a day were devoted to non-fiction reading” in elementary classrooms (20). I think that this situation has improved and that non-fiction texts are being used increasingly even in the early primary grades. Children are curious about the world they live in and therefore they should have access to material that can teach them about such interests. From what I’ve read and observed, young children love simple non-fiction.

The teacher in this article specifically focused on learning about birds using scientific techniques, specifically “close, sustained observation, collaborative conversations with peers, and purposeful use of a wide range of resources” (20). Through inquiry into a specific topic, students learned about genre types and the value of using multiple resources, how to use different types of resources (i.e. how to read a storybook (continuous text) vs. how to look up a fact in a reference book (non-continuous text)), narrative writing, how to “read” maps, the difference between skimming and reading and the utility of each, the incorporation of numerical data in observational texts, and, what really “blew my mind” as far as what kindergartners are capable of, the ability to infer information based on what is not present in a text!

This is an example of a page from Stoke’s Beginner’s Guide to Birds: Eastern Region, the guide the students were using from the start of the school year. They began by looking at pictures, learned what each of the symbols present on the page meant, and eventually read the accompanying text (often with some help.)

In addition to gaining valid literacy skills, the focus on a “real-world” subject empowered students. They weren't just Kindergartners, they were scientists (participating in Cornell’s Project FeederWatch); they weren't the youngest member of their family, but a valued resource for bird identification at home and on family outings. Bird knowledge also gained a level of social currency; a girl who joined the classroom midway through the year picked up on this and became more accepted after she presented her first bird observations. Because of all these factors, students were motivated to finish literacy projects connected to birds. One boy, with the lowest reading level in the class, persevered the most when journaling about observing a wren nest at his cousin’s house. With teacher help, this journal entry eventually morphed into his “published” book at the end of the year.

Conclusion:

This article shows that there are many benefits to incorporating non-fiction and meaningful inquiry into the classroom. And I am a strong advocate for cross-curricular instruction. Why not use science to teach reading, thus "killing two birds with one stone"? I am not sure that I, personally, would want to study just birds for an entire year, but there is certainly something to be said for it. Any interesting subject, so long as it contains a certain breadth and depth, will become more interesting as it is studied deeply. Additionally, students become experts on a subject and gain confidence in their ability as scientists or scholars. But there is something to be said for the other end of the spectrum too, for a broader approach that introduces a few more topics on a slightly more superficial level. What if a student is completely uninterested in birds? What if one group wants to study space and another is interested in the history of potatoes? I think, perhaps, finding a middle ground might be the answer – maybe three or four inquiry topics per year rather than one. This variety would provide opportunities for different students with different interests to shine and still allow the necessary time for an in-depth inquiry project. I suppose that, as with everything to do with teaching, finding that perfect balance is contingent upon knowing your students and what will work best for them.