I think that this article opens up with a very real situation. When I was reading about Jon’s situation, I found myself asking “Are you serious? Is she really making him read the same level book as everyone else, even though he’s behind?” I think that this is a problem that occurs to often. Teachers do not want to take the time to stop or slow down for those students who need extra help. They do no want to provide different instructional material because that is more work for them. When one does not start out reading at THEIR own instructional level, they will never be able to fully move forward. They will be stuck struggling over words and stories that they do not comprehend. This is why it is important to incorporate reading instructional-level text. This goes both ways. There are many children out there who are like Jon, however there are also many children out there who are ABOVE reading level. This works the same way for them. If you give them something to read or and assignment to complete that is too easy for them and does not challenge them, they will not continue to enhance their intelligence. It is important to find and cater to each type of learner. As the article says, this increases the student’s word recognition automaticity and comprehension.
Trade books are more beneficial than a regular old textbook in that they have more in-depth coverage and detail. They cover information in a more interesting way, and this motivates children. I think that this article is so helpful in that it tells a teacher how to start looking for these trade books that will reach out to both types of learners. Teachers need to know how to locate books that match the theme of the lesson or subject they are learning about, and how to find different grade level books that different children can read. A 3rd grade book and a 5th grade book on the same topic are going to be written differently, but probably cover pretty much the same information, just one in a simpler way. We should all take advantage in the lists/examples they give us, because it can only be used as a positive thing.
