Caitlin Ellison

Cambourne, B. (1995). Toward an educationally relevant theory of literacy learning: Twenty

years of inquiry. The Reading Teacher, 49(3). 182-190.

As teachers, we know that certain things must happen in order for learning to occur,

regardless of the subject or material. Some of these conditions of learning we come to

intuitively, while others may require more persistence into uncovering. In the article Toward an

Educationally Relevant Theory of Literacy Learning: Twenty Years of Inquiry, written by Brian

Cambourne, these learning conditions are explicitly stated for all. These conditions include:

immersion, demonstration, engagement, expectations, responsibility, approximations,

employment, and response.

Perhaps the single most important condition is that of engagement. In literacy

instruction, students can be surrounded with literacy-rich environments and have skills

demonstrated continuously to them. Without engagement, however, environment and

demonstration is meaningless. Cambourne stated Attention is unlikely if there is no perceived

need or purpose for learning in the first place, (p. 185). This is true in all cases, but especially a

concept as tricky as literacy.

My past year teaching was spent in Kindergarten. This was my first year with this level

of students, and I was unprepared for the varying levels of abilities the students demonstrated. I

had students that were already reading and students who could not identify the letters in their

name. I remember working with one little boy, who in the whole first semester, showed no

interest in reading. He was a typical 5 year old boy, constantly moving and getting into things

that he shouldnt. Reading instruction, especially decoding, was a chore for us both, because he
Caitlin Ellison

was not engaged. I would be utterly and completely exhausted after reading instruction, because

I was doing the work. Things suddenly changed for us when his older sister brought home a

Harry Potter book and began reading to him. His engagement level changed dramatically. This

child became obsessed with mastering reading. Once he became engaged, his reading ability

flourished. He went from being a low, struggling reader to one of the strongest readers in the

class. My core instruction did not change; his engagement did. There was suddenly a purpose

for the skills to be put to use.

While engagement should always be met with instruction, it is not the sole condition.

While teaching any subject, but especially literacy, demonstration occurs any time I model a new

skill. I must first model what it is that I wish for the students to achieve. Expectations are taught

simultaneously, creating buy-in for the students. Employment, or opportunities to practice the

skills, is also included in my instruction. I introduce a skill, model it before the whole class, let

students practice in a group setting, then they are offered independent practice. During this time,

I may pull students who need additional exposure before letting them perform the skill

independently.

One condition that is included in my instruction, but not explicitly addressed is response.

Students receive feedback from me constantly. I am error-handling mistakes, whether individual

or whole group, as they occur. Their responses dictate my next response to them. It is not

something that is planned; rather, it happens in conversing with them. I cannot write out or plan

exactly what I will say, as each situation will vary.

My district is extremely keen on thinking charts, even in primary grades. One instance

where successful literacy learning occurred was with the use of a thinking chart, specifically the
Caitlin Ellison

circle chart. It was Presidents Day, and I had made each student a copy of one of our Social

Studies text pages, talking about George Washington. Because the students had a copy, they

were able to mark on the text. We read and reread the text several times, underlining a fact every

time we came to something new. This helped with fluency and comprehension. We also started

annotating the text. Students made numbers by each of the facts.

The skills were modeled and students were immediately able to practice underlining and

annotating text. Engagement was extremely high. Once the text was annotated, students then

went to their tables and pulled out the required information to complete the circle chart. It was

made easier for them, as this was the text that they had underlined. Students were expected to

show five pieces of information that they learned about George Washington. They were given

the choice to draw pictures or write text. Students were even able to, with no instruction

provided, use text features for additional information to be included in their circle chart.

Students were able to demonstrate employment in a realistic manner. The next day, with a

completed circle chart, students were then able to write one to two sentences independently

about George Washington.

Not all lessons, however, were as smooth as the afore-mentioned example. Building

administration mandated that all curriculum materials were to be implemented faithfully. There

were no supplemental literacy materials; each different piece was expected to be incorporated.

While incorporating one scripted material, it became very challenging. The text assumed a level

of understanding from the students that was not in place, so no demonstration of the skill was

provided. Expectations of the skill were unclear, because there was no knowledge base. After

the teacher-led discussion, students were then asked to move on to a different subject. Students
Caitlin Ellison

were not offered any activity to practice and refine that skill. As a result, student engagement

was nonexistent, and this lesson had to be later revisited using a different method of instruction.

Because none of the conditions of learning were met, students did not learn that skill. There was

no applying of the skill or manipulating the skill to understand what it could do for them.