October 1, 2013
Irene Fountas & Janet Olsen
“Reading The Image And Viewing The Words: Language Intertwined"
A Brief Overview
The article focused on a fourth grade classroom incorporating concepts and ideas that govern the way in which the classroom is managed. “Talk is allowed and encouraged as an important medium of learning. The students acquire much of their knowledge by questioning, arguing, discussing, and sharing. And this talk needn’t feed through the teacher… They seek peer feedback, pursue varying viewpoints, and value the dialogue that fuels their learning about themselves, others, and their physical and social world” (Fountas & Olsen 84). The article explores the relationships between reading, writing, viewing, and drawing, questioning how visual and verbal expression inform one another.
To investigate the extent to which the visual image could be used as a tool to inform student writing, the students critiqued Vincent Van Gogh’s “Bedroom At Arles”. The students were given a brief history of the painting along with a few of his other works and were then asked to look carefully at the work and write a description. The following day, the students critiqued the same painting using Edmund Feldman’s four-step method of visual criticism and again were asked to carefully look at the piece and write a description. The results showed a dramatic increase in the quality of their writing and even achieved a deeper level of comprehension and meaning.
To investigate the extent to which a selected piece of literature could be used as a tool to inform student drawing, the students were presented Natalie Babbit’s “Kneeknock Rise”, a Newbery Honor Book. Within the book, a short description of Uncle Ott’s bedroom was supplied. The students were asked to read the description and, using ballpoint pens, draw a picture of the room with as much detail as possible. The following day, the students read the same description using the same four-step method proposed by Feldman and again were asked to read the description and draw a picture of the room with as much detail as possible. The results were once again drastically different. “This conscious contemplation or mindful reading enables students to construct a deeper understanding… By examining and weighing possible interpretations through talk, students discover new layers of meaning” (Fountas & Olsen 91).
In both instances, the results clarify that following the steps created by Feldman engage the students. This engagement allows students to both give their interpretations and receive feedback, forcing them to process these new ways of experiencing the material at hand, forming a better personal understanding. A diagram (right) was given to explain the relationships between reading, writing, viewing, and drawing. “When learners engage in close viewing or close reading (analysis), reading the image or viewing the words (translation), and close writing or close drawing (comprehension), the verbal and visual languages intertwine naturally, each informing the other, resulting in fuller and more complete meaning” (Fountas & Olsen 96)
To investigate the extent to which the visual image could be used as a tool to inform student writing, the students critiqued Vincent Van Gogh’s “Bedroom At Arles”. The students were given a brief history of the painting along with a few of his other works and were then asked to look carefully at the work and write a description. The following day, the students critiqued the same painting using Edmund Feldman’s four-step method of visual criticism and again were asked to carefully look at the piece and write a description. The results showed a dramatic increase in the quality of their writing and even achieved a deeper level of comprehension and meaning.
To investigate the extent to which a selected piece of literature could be used as a tool to inform student drawing, the students were presented Natalie Babbit’s “Kneeknock Rise”, a Newbery Honor Book. Within the book, a short description of Uncle Ott’s bedroom was supplied. The students were asked to read the description and, using ballpoint pens, draw a picture of the room with as much detail as possible. The following day, the students read the same description using the same four-step method proposed by Feldman and again were asked to read the description and draw a picture of the room with as much detail as possible. The results were once again drastically different. “This conscious contemplation or mindful reading enables students to construct a deeper understanding… By examining and weighing possible interpretations through talk, students discover new layers of meaning” (Fountas & Olsen 91).
In both instances, the results clarify that following the steps created by Feldman engage the students. This engagement allows students to both give their interpretations and receive feedback, forcing them to process these new ways of experiencing the material at hand, forming a better personal understanding. A diagram (right) was given to explain the relationships between reading, writing, viewing, and drawing. “When learners engage in close viewing or close reading (analysis), reading the image or viewing the words (translation), and close writing or close drawing (comprehension), the verbal and visual languages intertwine naturally, each informing the other, resulting in fuller and more complete meaning” (Fountas & Olsen 96)
Reflections
I thought it was interesting to see how the article incorporated many values covered in prior readings. The classroom setting displayed Wilson’s third pedagogical site, in that the goal was to get the students to act as the teacher, student, and critic. This concept even modeled the “Reggio way” in that the students were very independent and only assisted by the aid of their educator. The lessons were directed toward a slower learning environment, deepening the students’ learning, which was another concept practiced in Reggio schools. I did find some things problematic. I do not know what the lesson was in the experiment, however how does knowing what was in the room help a child learn? I get that critically looking at words and envisioning the words to better help you understand what is going on in a reading is important, yet was there another scene that might have been better to focus on?
The experiment they organized was interesting, and the results were fantastic, however I do not believe educators have enough time to go over materials that slowly. My assumption is that educators are to spend some time to extensively explore material, and have them do this as a class, making personal connections and getting feedback from their peers. I believe their peers, if they clearly understand the curriculum, can give them better feedback than their educators can because they are able to relate to them and explain it in a way they are better able to understand. The only problem I have with this idea is that I believe students will not cover as much material as they should. Student may be able to help each other better comprehend information, however this may require more time, and the article expected this. I just do not know what should be given more time and what would you spend less time on. In theory, these ideas are solid and allow for greater growth, however doing this on a daily basis seems impossible. It would be interesting to see an extensive lesson plan for a full academic semester or even year, if it could be done that is. I also wonder if the students being educated in this method would test better on the curriculum of if they show sign of understanding at the moment.
The experiment they organized was interesting, and the results were fantastic, however I do not believe educators have enough time to go over materials that slowly. My assumption is that educators are to spend some time to extensively explore material, and have them do this as a class, making personal connections and getting feedback from their peers. I believe their peers, if they clearly understand the curriculum, can give them better feedback than their educators can because they are able to relate to them and explain it in a way they are better able to understand. The only problem I have with this idea is that I believe students will not cover as much material as they should. Student may be able to help each other better comprehend information, however this may require more time, and the article expected this. I just do not know what should be given more time and what would you spend less time on. In theory, these ideas are solid and allow for greater growth, however doing this on a daily basis seems impossible. It would be interesting to see an extensive lesson plan for a full academic semester or even year, if it could be done that is. I also wonder if the students being educated in this method would test better on the curriculum of if they show sign of understanding at the moment.