Teaching Philosophy

Amy Sorensen
CIG 697
University of Nevada Las Vegas
November 1, 2022
Are you a Science of Reading (SOR) proponent or a Balanced Literacy follower?  It feels that in

the last year so many people, news outlets, and politicians have been debating which focus is

best.  While many hoped that the reading wars were over, here we are in another round of

wondering what is truly best for students.  Over the last year I have concluded that I am a

centrist.  I strongly believe in many aspects of the SOR movement, but at the same time, I feel

strongly in the ideas put forth by the balanced literacy group.  

My teaching experience has been based in constructivist practices which are included in

balanced literacy. Our district adopted Lucy Calkins Units of Study (Calkins, 2015) as our main

curricular program about five years ago on the recommendation of the school I work at. As I

have worked with students I have come to realize that students need both aspects of SOR and

balanced literacy.  Most students need to be explicitly taught phonics and phonemic awareness,

and practice repeated readings for fluency and accuracy, but they also need time to read rich

literature that will help them become strong readers who are excited about reading.

My centrist teaching philosophy is grounded in constructionist theories including Rosenblatt’s

(1978) transactional theory, Vygotsky’s (Tracey & Morrow, 2013) social constructivist theories,

and Dewey’s (1859- 1952) inquiry learning. Philosophically, I am a definite progressive

essentialist. This means that I am mostly focused on helping students learn how they learn best,

although there are some areas of instruction that I lean more essentialist, which I will discuss

later.

I feel that my primary role in the classroom is as a facilitator of learning. Carl Rogers in Freedom

to Learn said that “The facilitation of significant learning rests upon certain attitudinal qualities

that exist in the personal relationship between the facilitator and the learner” (1995).  I feel that
one of my roles is to build strong relationships with students so that I can know how best to tailor

the learning to engage them in the learning process.  In Chapter 6 of Developing the Curriculum

it states that “education is not a product to be learned, for example, facts and motor skills, but a

process that continues as long as one lives” (Gordon, 2019).

This relates to how I run the reading instruction in my classroom. Rosenblatt argued “that every

reading experience is unique to each individual… as a result of the differences in the amount and

kinds of background schemata each possesses” (Tracey & Morrow, 2013). Transactional

Reading Response theory focuses on the active role of readers in how they make meaning while

they are reading. “Meaning is a two-way process that resides in the transaction that occurs

between the reader and text wherein the reader constructs a personal envisionment of meaning

that is guided by text” (Serafini, 2009).

As a struggling reader myself during my school years, I know that handing struggling readers a

book and forcing them to read it will not encourage them to become better readers, but rather

quite the opposite. This is important for all readers. Even my strongest readers will struggle if

forced to read a book they do not connect with. 

Furthermore, by providing students books that they are interested in, students tend to read more.

Allington suggests that “children who elect to read voluntarily develop all sorts of reading

proficiencies, not just the ability to read fluently” (2014). This connects with my philosophy

because providing opportunities for students to engage in text they can connect with and enjoy

will help students become stronger readers. Along these lines, I am highly resistant to basil

curriculums that do not offer students authentic experiences with literature. Much strategy

instruction can happen within books that students choose to read. 

Focusing on constructivist theories does not mean that I ignore that many of my students need

explicit instruction in comprehension strategies to become better readers.  Being a constructivist

means that while I feel that most of my students will be able to construct their own meaning in

text, others will need support to learn how to construct that meaning.

This leads to Vygotsky’s theories of social constructivism. He suggests that “cognitive

development depends much more on interactions with the people in the child’s world and the

tools that the culture provides to support thinking. Children’s knowledge, ideas, attitudes, and

values develop through interactions with others” (Tracey & Morrow, 2017). These interactions

are especially important when it comes to reading.  Using his theory on the Zone of Proximal

Development and the interactions with me and other children in the classroom, students are

supported in making connections to themselves and the text that they are reading.

One day I had a group of reluctant readers and I was searching for just the right book for them.  I

asked another teacher if she had copies of a particular book and she replied “No, just make them

read what you have in the classroom.”  I now know that my progressive sensibilities wouldn’t

allow me to just force these kids to read the book I wanted them to read; their preferences

mattered and would eventually help them grow as readers. I also wanted the students to know

that I supported their choices of text and would help them find books that would help them

grow.  Building that relationship of trust within the classroom between teacher and students is

essential to my philosophies as a teacher. “Progressivism shows concern for the student, society,

and subject matter, placing the students at the center of the learning process, thus it is student-

centered or learner-centered” (Gordon, 2019).

Inquiry is also a big part of the classroom experience for me. “Inquiry learning… emphasizes a

problem-based learning approach to education, central to which (is) motivating learner’s

interest” (Tracey, p. 58).  Allowing students to experience educative experiences that will spark

their interest and help them grow as lifelong learners is incredibly valuable. The trick with this is

finding engaging experiences that also align with common core standards, thus hitting the

requirement of teaching the standards while also engaging the learner in experiences that will

help them become intellectually curious about the world around them.

An example of this is when I teach equivalent fractions. We always bake cookies during this

unit.  They may only remember the cookie baking experience, but part of the process is giving

them mismatched measuring cups and requiring them to figure out which ones will work in the

recipe.  This is a life skill, but it is also fun, engaging and delicious. “Dewey believed that this

process of education would best prepare students for the real-world, adult activities needed to

support a democratic society” (Tracey, p. 59).  Furthermore, these activities meet my standards

and help students to physically see the nature of equivalent fractions, more than a worksheet

would ever provide.

So, why do I have essentialist leanings?  I have found it personally fascinating as I have been

preparing this essay to consider that I really do lean a little towards the essentialists, even though

I generally haven’t adopted all aspects of their philosophies. Teaching students letter names and

sounds that they must memorize as well as phonological patterns and sight words allows students

to read fluently and thus leads students to comprehending the text they are reading. “The larger

the number of words that can be instantly recognized is in large part what separates skilled

readers from developing (or emergent) readers.  The ability to recognize many words with little

conscious effort also underlies the ability to read aloud with fluency” (Allington, 2014). This is
where I lean more heavily into the science of reading. While there are some students who can

learn to read without phonics or sight word instruction, most need help identifying the rules and

patterns that are a part of the English language. Essentialists feel that “with adequate practice, the

learner can presumably use the rule, concept, or model whenever he or she needs it” (Gordon,

2019). In this sense, the student is tailored to this curriculum, rather than the curriculum focused

more on the student.

While I wholeheartedly embrace the ideas of progressivism, focusing on my students’ interests

and needs within said curriculum is more important than just fitting my students into my

curriculum. I recognize that there is a place for requiring students to do specific work in areas

that don’t always interest them, but my goal is to find ways to make it engaging and interesting

to students so that they will want to continue learning, even without my assistance.

How does this affect my classroom structure? As previously mentioned, I help students find just-

right fit books, books that are either at their independent level or instructional level when

working with me, that they can engage with, enjoy and look forward to reading.  I provide time

for students to read uninterrupted, at least thirty minutes each day, and then provide rotations

where students can reflect and respond about the text they are reading and work with me to

explicitly teach students comprehension strategies.  This format allows me to use best practices

by providing rich text for them to think and discuss. This helps them to truly adopt strategies that

will help them to think and not only to read. These methods also allow me to quickly

differentiate instruction based on students’ immediate needs with text as well as provide explicit

instruction in how to handle challenging reading situations.

Is there a place for both constructivist and essentialist philosophies in one? Obviously, I think so.

Using both principles allows me to meet all of my students needs, their need to build meaning for

themselves as well as the foundational skills to support that meaning making. Ultimately, to be

literate means to be able to think and consider the text, whether it be an advertisement,

infographic, website, text book, article or novel. By offering students opportunities to construct

their own meaning and using constructivist theories in my teaching, I am helping students

connect to deeper levels of thinking and offering students opportunities to do the hard and

rewarding work of reading.

[Maybe add into the conclusion how your two philosophies dovetail together]
 References:

Allington, R. (2014). How Reading Volume Affects Both Reading Fluency and Reading

Achievement. International Electronic Journal of Elementary Education, 7(1), 13–26.

Calkins, L., & Audra, H., Kelly Robb,. (2015). Writing Pathways: Performance Assessments and

Learning Progressions. Heinemann.

Gordon ll, W. R., R. T., Oliva, P. F. (2019). Developing the curriculum: Improved outcomes

through systems approaches, 9th Ed. Pearson Education, INC

Morrow, L. M., & Gambrell, L. B. (2019). Best practices in literacy instruction. The Guilford

Press.

Rogers, C. R., & Freiberg, H. J. (1995). Freedom to learn. Merrill. 

Serafini, F. (2009, August 19). Informing our practice: Modernist, transactional, and critical ...

Reading Online. Retrieved October 15, 2022, from

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Frank_Serafini/publication/289874920_Informing_our_pra

ctice_Modernist_transactional_and_critical_perspectives_on_children's_literature_and_reading_i

nstruction/links/5e566a214585152ce8f036c8/Informing-our-practice-Modernist-transactional-

and-critical-perspectives-on-childrens-literature-and-reading-instruction.pdf

Tracey, D. H., & Morrow, L. M. (2017). Lenses on reading: An introduction to theories and

models. The Guilford Press.