This makes me wonder about all of my English teachers that would have students take turns reading paragraphs in the book rather than them reading it to us. we were often choppy readers who didn't display great emotion while we read. why is it that some teachers prefer to use this method, when there is so much research that confirms the importance of read alouds?

I think this is a very important and notable point. It is sometimes difficult, especially as students get older, to get them to engage with the text. If a teacher is not creating interest by reading enthusiastically, then it is almost guaranteed the students will not gain as much from it as if the teacher were reading it with real interest and excitement. I know from personal experience that when I am tired on a particular day I do not read as excitedly to my 6 year old nanny baby, and on these days she is far less engaged with the material. However when I am energetic and excited to be reading, she watches me intently and often asks me to read additional books.

This seems linked to the importance of encouraging oral communication in emerging readers. Households that emphasize vocalization and speak frequently tend to produce children who have an easier time learning to read. it seems that with read alongs that also helps to encourage oral communication, but creates a relationship with books and learning that simply speaking to one another does not.

This hits the nail on the head. The literature circles are just a mirror for the climate within and outside of the classroom. If the students are experiencing a lot of tension and discourse in the school, classrooms, and neighborhoods, this will be reflected within activities such as literature groups. If the students are given the skills to self-assess, appreciate others, and be patient, respectful and understanding, those abilities will permeate all facets of their lives.

I love this quote and I firmly believe it. I know for me I was very defiant, as many kids are, when literature was assigned to me. Simply by being told I HAD to read something, I was less likely to do it. I love the idea of children being able to choose their own text, because they are so much more likely to be engaged with it and take ownership over it. The emotional connections that are drawn when reading something "voluntary" vs something mandatory, are often very different.

I love this idea. I think it really is a great way for students to take inventory of what they're saying and why. It is so easy for a classroom to get off task and distracted, especially when having group discussions. I think this is a really smart way to help control the situation and also make it equitable.

This is a very powerful statement and huge issue across America. So many regions, especially urban ones, are in unrest and it makes learning take a backseat to survival. Fixing this issue is most important because it is the root of so many problems within schools, and for children in general.

This seems to me to be the struggle as a teacher in general, not just as applied to literature circles.

This seems an important distinction. By summarizing the students are displaying comprehension, which, while important, does not foster a love for literature. By having the students react to their readings they are being asked to connect on an emotional level with it, which creates a relationship with literature that reaches beyond comprehension.

It seems very important to take a wholistic approach to reading, such as including it with the other aspects of language as mentioned above. Doing worksheets and workbooks to solidify reading practice and instruction is very compartmentalized and doesn't offer the same quality of connection that integration does.