The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly of K-12 Reading Instruction

As I mentioned in my last post I have a part-time "gig" as an adjunct reading guy at a local community college. I recently asked my college-aged students to tell me what they loved and/or hated about their reading/English class experiences K-12.

Here's some of what they enjoyed throughout the K-12 pipeline:
1.  When the teacher read aloud (even in high school - a lesson I learned very quickly, btw)
2.  When the teacher would stop, pause, and discuss what was being read, "that way we can keep up with what's going on."
3.  Explanations of the text
4.  When "we were asked to keep notes"
5.  When teachers "actually taught" and not just assign work and leave "us" to do it

Here's some of what they did not appreciate throughout the K-12 pipeline:
1.  When teachers showed favoritism and only worked with those who seemed like good students
2.  When teachers made students read aloud (the person mentioned this in the context of herself...when the teacher called on her to read aloud)
3.   When high school teachers didn't explain things

Aside from the simple things of what they liked or didn't like, my college students also mentioned "affactors" I definitely did just make up that term (I think). But it makes sense for the point I--ahem--they wanted to convey.

affactors (n.) the lexical coalescence of affect & factors to mean the emotional components of
(me trying to be "deep", but I digress...)

Without knowing my thoughts, opinions, and approaches to the classroom and teaching and learning, in addition to all of the reading "stuff" they liked/hated, THEY mentioned how they learned more when the teacher CARED, an affactor.

THEY mentioned how they learned more when the teacher CONNECTED with the students, an affactor.

And one had the unmitigated gall (*wink*) to mention her positive experiences with a "guy teacher who was like you, he made it interesting!" Piquing interest? An affactor.

Ayyee!! #dontjudgeme lol