Benefits of using literature discussion groups in teacher education courses

This article describes using literature discussion groups with preservice teachers to provide opportunities to read and discuss quality literature and to enhance reading habits and attitudes. The authors share two models implemented in undergraduate and graduate reading methods classes and children's literature classes and provide reflections of preservice teachers regarding these experiences.

People who like to read like to talk about books (Saal,1995). Adult book clubs and reading groups have been popular for many years. Now, reading groups, i.e., literature circles, literature discussion groups, are becoming common place in K-12 classrooms (Daniels, 1994). Literature circles are usually small groups of 3 to 5 students who gather together to discuss a book they are reading or have just finished reading (Moen, 1994, p. 28). Discussions may be guided by teacher-made questions which generate a variety of responses (Rothlein and Meinbach,1996, p. 278-291), student reactions recorded in literature logs (Samway et al,1991), student responses to assigned structured roles (Daniels,1994), or discussion topics generated by the literature group (Cullinan, 1993). Cullinan writes that it is impossible to describe one right way to organize discussion groups (1993, p. 68). Literature groups have also been used successfully at the college/university level (Daniels, 1994; Andrews, 1992).

This article will describe how two models of literature discussion groups were implemented in undergraduate and graduate reading methods and children's literature classes in order to immerse students in quality literature and provide opportunities for in-depth discussion and reactions. Through an informal questionnaire about personal reading habits and attitudes given to students during the first session of reading methods and children's literature courses, the authors discovered that some college students do not like to read, feel they do not have time to read for leisure, and do not discuss books with family or friends. The authors hoped that by having students read and talk about quality literature, these preservice teachers would realize the cognitive and affective benefits and leave in be more likely to provide their students with similar experiences. For the first model, students read quality children's literature. In the second model, students discussed an adult book which modeled exemplary teaching. Students' reflections will be shared to gain a better understanding of how literature discussion groups can be used to benefit prospective teachers. Description of Models

The first model was employed in a graduate reading methods class and an undergraduate children's literature course. The instructor wanted students to enjoy discussing quality children's literature and to have an opportunity to select and read a variety of picture books and novels. She also wanted to expose students to several literature group practices, such a students assuming literature discussion roles. During the first few weeks of class, the instructor gave brief book talks describing 10-15 picture books and students selected four picture books to discuss in two literature groups sessions. Students were required to attain these books from libraries or other resources. The instructor randomly placed students in four to five groups to discuss picture books. While literary elements, criteria, and responses to literature were discussed in class, each group was responsible for determining its own focus for each session. At the end of the first picture book discussion, the group decided what the focus for the next group meeting would be and submitted it in writing to the instructor. Examples of topics included discussion of literary elements (plot, characters, setting, resolution), criteria for selection, authors and illustrators, how to use the picture books in a school setting, and personal reactions to the books. After each small group discussion, groups shared picture book authors, illustrators, literary elements, and their personal reactions with the class.

After the picture book discussion, students selected one novel to discuss for two sessions. The instructor also gave brief book talks introducing five to six novels representing genres of fantasy, historic fiction, and realistic fiction. Students selected a particular novel and those reading the same book formed groups. Groups could not exceed five members. However, different groups could read the same novel. Unlike the picture book focus, students were given roles from which to choose. These roles included discussion director, literary luminary, summarizer, illustrator, vocabulary enricher and connector (Daniels, 1994). Students decided how many pages they were to read for both sessions. For the second session, students changed roles. Discussion, however, was not limited to these roles. During the last literature discussion, students shared their novel by creating and presenting a 2-3 minute radio commercial. Literature discussion groups were scheduled for the last 30 minutes of four class periods. Points were given for participating in each session. If students were unable to attend they could make up these points by submitting a written personal reaction which also addressed the focus chosen by their group. Throughout the four sessions, the instructor rotated among the groups, observing student interactions and occasionally facilitating discussion.

The second model, used in an undergraduate reading methods class, involved slightly different procedures. The instructor wanted students to have the experience of participating in a literature discussion group and she wanted to expose them to quality examples of action research and story telling. The book, You Can't Say You Can't Play by Vivian Gussin Paley, explores issues of peer rejection in a kindergarten classroom through the use of a story telling technique. This book was required reading and was available in the university bookstore and library. Students selected their own groups which included not more than five members. The instructor provided open-ended reflective statements to focus the discussion. Examples included, "An experience I had that this book reminded me of was...," "I found the way the author...to be ...," "I'm anxious to see...,"One thing I found interesting was..." and "When I read the part about... I felt..." Students decided how many pages were to be read for each of the three discussion sessions. Students were also required to integrate the fine arts into a presentation for the other groups. Time was given in class for this assignment. Points were given for participation in the discussion groups and for the presentation. Like the first model, groups were scheduled for the last 30 minutes of three class periods and the instructor rotated among groups observing student interaction and facilitating discussion. Student Reflections

In both models students were asked to write reflections regarding their experiences in literature discussion groups. There were similarities in student reflection for both models. Overwhelmingly, students commented on the importance of gaining other perspectives when discussing books. Student comments from the first model (children's books) included: "I enjoyed sharing ideas about picture books. Each person brought up many different points, concerns and ideas. It's great because people may think or see the book in a different light."; "I was surprised how much more I got out of talking with others than just thinking about the books on my own."; "It surprises me just how differently my colleagues see things and the different things they see that I missed." Students from the second model (Paley book) indicated: "It allowed me to hear other people's views and through that I was able to examine the book from different perspectives.": "it allowed students to share their individual interpretations and acknowledge common ideologies and understandings of what was read."; "It promoted each student's ideas and voices so that it became a collaborative adventure."

Students from both models also expressed an appreciation for the opportunity to engage in critical thinking. One student from the first model wrote, "I was assuming picture books were fairly simple and straight-forward. Maybe they were when I first read them, but the books we read raised all sorts of issues and questions." Students from the second group commented: "It brought a deeper level of meaning to the book and helped me to internalize the book more."; "It was a way to really dissect the story and pull out material and statements that were relevant."; It helped to summarize and organize my thoughts and brought a more in-depth analysis."

In addition, students from both models talked about how they would apply their experiences to a classroom. Reactions from the first model described how students would use a particular children's book, whereas comments from the second model related to applying the educational practices described in the book. For example, students reading picture books related, "Discussing books in a group has helped me focus on the age group, unit, and what were some additional activities that could be used," and "I liked having the chance to share ideas of ways to use the books in different situations, age groups, curriculum units." Comments from the second group focused on the content of the book. For example, one student wrote, "Mrs. Paley's desire to implement the no rejection rule made me think about how I might deal with student rejection of others in my classroom."Another student said, "I thought about the uses of storytelling in a primary classroom." A third student commented, "The topic (student rejection) was a topic that I worry about but I never hear teachers addressing it with the great sensitivity that Paley does."

Comments specific to the first model included students' reactions to the random selection of groups and literature roles. One student stated, "The random drawing for which group we were put in was a good touch, because students got to meet other students they likely wouldn't have met otherwise." All students from the first group liked the role assignments and felt this would be beneficial to students in their classroom. One student responded, "I would assign roles, but I would let the students pick which role they would like to have. I would also choose the groups to avoid the populaty deal and also to have the student interact with students that they are unfamiliar with." Another student wrote, "I especially enjoyed the roles in the literature response group. The roles give each person a different task and give students choices to participate in what their better skills are. Someone may be a better reader while another may be a better illustrator." Only one student from the second model commented on roles. She said, "I have done literature discussion groups in other classes before. I have done groups in which everyone was assigned a specific role. I enjoyed the way we did them in this class by answering thought provoking questions that were given to the group."

Finally, personal reactions were noted in both groups. In an undergraduate class that used the first model one student commented, "It decreased our nervousness. Many people are scared to discuss issues out loud and this gives us an opportunity to bond with each other which makes it more easy to bond out loud." Another wrote, "I enjoyed them but I know that as a child I would hate them. When I was a child I was always worried what others thought about what I chose, drew, or how I read." A graduate student in the first model said, "If I were king of the program, I would require more discussion groups Another graduate student described his experience in the following poem: The Picture Book Process Some titles were catchy add made me want to look.

Some titles were boring and didn't seem like a good book.

Exposure to the different books and the various stories they tell, Made me realize there are many stories for kids told well.

Students in the second model wrote: "Allowing the groups the freedom to pace themselves and to choose their own response activity made them responsible for their own learning and encouraged every member to share their gift with the whole group."; "I was encouraged to make the book become more alive to me which in turn made reading it an important and valuable part of my learning experience in this class. I will remember the book in the future."; "The literature discussion groups are important because they are an example of the learning process as a social activity." Summary

Student reflections attest to the benefits of using literature discussion groups. These benefits included an appreciation of different perspectives, an occasion to think critically, a chance to apply experiences to elementary classrooms, and an opportunity to engage in the positive social aspects of literature discussion groups. Students were able to enhance their knowledge and enjoyment of literature as well as experiment with a method which could be used in their future classrooms. Participation in literature groups brought students to a deeper understanding of the importance of book discussions. While students in the first method became familiar with the children's sections of public libraries and the wealth of children's literature which is available, students in the second model saw the benefits of reading a book by an experienced educator and appreciated the insights gained from reading and reflecting upon another teacher's practice. Students in both models looked forward to the opportunity of getting together to discuss good books. Students in both groups read quality literature, were engaged in active discussion, and made connections to their world. Decisions about which particular model to use depends upon the instructor's purpose, and these decisions may make a difference in the kind of talk that occurs in groups (Cullinan, p. 68). The important issue is that preservice teachers become people who read and talk about books and encourage the same habits and attitudes in their students. As Rothlein and Meinbach (1996) state, "Books are an adventure, and those who work with children have the privilege and responsibility of guiding them on an unforgettable journey that will last forever (p. xi)." In order to do this, preservice teachers must first have started to chart their own unforgettable journeys.

References

Andres, S.V. (1992, February). Becoming serious writer/readers: Providing encouragement and contexts for learning. Paper presented at the Annual Indiana Teachers Applying Whole Language Conference, Terre Haute, IN.

Cullinan, B. (Ed.). (1993). Children's voices: Talk in the classroom. Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association.

Daniels, H. (1994). Literature Circles and Choice in the Student-Centered Classroom, York, Maine: Stenhouse Publisher.

Paley, V.G. (1992). You Can't Say, You Can 't Play Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press. Rothlein, L. and Meinbach, A.M. (1996). Legacies: Using children's literature in the classroom. New York: Harper Collins.

Saal, R. (1995). The New York Public Library Guide to Reading Groups. New York: Crown Publisher. Samway, K., Whang, G., Cade, C., Kamil, M., Lubandia, M., Pohmmachanh, K. (1991). Reading the skeleton, the heart, and the brain of a book: Students] perspectives on literature study circles. Reading Teacher, 45, 3,19&205.

NANCY S. WILLIAMS AND ROXANNE F. OWENS Education De Paul University Chicago, Illinois 60614-3298

Copyright Project Innovation Spring 1997
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved