| SEARCH OnWEAC |
|---|
By Doug Buehl
As we follow the adventures of Detective Thursday Next, we find our Special Operations heroine once more arrayed against the sinister Goliath Corporation. With assistance from Hamlet, Prince of Denmark, on leave from the Shakespearean play, and a quintet of reintroduced Neanderthal clones, Thursday manages to lead the Swindon Mallets to an amazing triumph in the SuperHoop championship, a brutal take-no-prisoners team croquet tournament. Her victory thus thwarts Goliath and its henchman, the fictional character Yorrick Kaine, from establishing a dictatorship to take over England.
Huh? Jasper Fforde’s whimsical novels detail life in an alternative modern England (the country was conquered by the Nazis during World War II in his fictional version of reality). Something Rotten, his fourth Thursday Next novel, continues his parody of and playfulness with a host of works of literature, as well as actual historical events. But Fforde, like most authors, expects a great deal from his readers. His books are replete with references to authors of classic works, characters from literature, and historical figures and incidents. To enjoy a Jasper Fforde novel, readers will need to connect to his many allusions. Otherwise, much of the book won’t quite make sense.
The February 2006 Reading Room column focused on the crucial role of “hidden knowledge” in reading comprehension. “Hidden knowledge” refers to what a reader must already know to understand a written text. Because authors write for a target audience, they assume they do not need to tell their readers everything; instead they count on their readers to supply the necessary background and information to “fill in” the rest of the message.
Readers of Jasper Fforde’s novels need to rely on two types of background knowledge as they immerse themselves into his fictional world. First, they need to access some general knowledge and experiences. For example, Fforde never really explains the game of croquet; he merely mentions hoops and mallets, and striking the balls of the opponents. Readers would need a general sense of this activity to be able to visualize his parody of the game. In addition, they would need a sense of sports competitions, especially those involving very physical play, such as football or hockey, to relish Fforde’s outrageous version of the sedate Sunday-afternoon lawn pastime of croquet, rendered in his book to be a contact sport with thuggish behavior and bone-crunching fouls.
It is typical for authors to expect readers to possess some elements of general background knowledge. Of course, Fforde’s books also assume that readers will be familiar with detectives, action stories, and lots of other knowledge a person would likely obtain through participating in a society during current times.
However, Fforde’s novels will remain inaccessible to many people who do have the requisite general knowledge, because a critical second type of background knowledge may be absent. Researchers designate this second category as “academic knowledge.” Academic knowledge parallels the background a person would develop when studying various academic disciplines, and it is narrower and more prescribed than general knowledge. Many people will find Fforde’s books confusing and nonsensical because they lack the necessary academic knowledge.
Academic knowledge in our opening example includes an acquaintanceship with Shakespearean plays, in particular Hamlet. The title of Fforde’s book is derived from a famous quote in Hamlet. And the villain is named Yorrick, another Hamlet reference. Neanderthals represent a further vein of academic knowledge, as does cloning. Historic events like World War II and historical figures like the Nazis also represent academic knowledge. The Biblical character Goliath and the political science term dictator likewise are examples of academic knowledge. Readers do not necessarily need in-depth academic knowledge to enjoy Fforde’s novels, but they definitely need a modicum of familiarity with this information to appreciate and understand his stories.
The Strategy
Past Reading Room columns have emphasized strategies that help students connect their prior knowledge to what they are reading. Many of our students struggle with matching what they know with what an author is telling them. Marzano (2004) argues that instruction that emphasizes building academic knowledge is essential for increasing achievement and enhancing comprehension for many of our students.
Step 1: Initially, students need to hone their awareness of intentionally connecting their knowledge base to written texts. Three types of connections are possible. First, readers may use personal experiences, events of their lives, as a means to understand a passage (text-to-self connection). Secondly, readers may think about texts they have previously read that can help them understand a passage (text-to-text connection). And thirdly, readers may rely on their overall conception of and ideas about things they have gleaned from other sources (text-to-world connection.)
To illustrate these three connections, when a reliance on general knowledge is needed for comprehension, consider one of the items in the opening paragraph of this column - croquet. Readers who have actually played croquet at some point in their lives will be able to draw upon a text-to-self connection. Readers who can recall reading something about croquet in the past might be able to elicit a text-to-text connection to help them understand. Readers who have heard something about croquet, who can perhaps remember encountering a croquet set in a store, or who recollect seeing the game being played on television or in a movie could possibly use a text-to-world connection.
Step 2: Helping students become practiced in making connections to their general knowledge (which Marzano calls “nonacademic” knowledge) is a critical first step to facilitating reading comprehension. Because students grow up in different circumstances, the specific general knowledge varies widely among students. Yet all students bring a personal core of general knowledge to the classroom that can be tapped to make connections to a written text. While a number of students will have no idea what croquet is, highly valuable general knowledge about competitive sports will be nearly universal.
Academic knowledge, however, is much more problematic. Marzano notes a wide disparity among students in useful academic knowledge. In short, some students display a wealth of relevant academic knowledge while others are seriously deficient in what authors expect them to know. Their general knowledge will not be sufficient to compensate for their gaps in academic knowledge.
To revisit our opening example, “Neanderthal” represents academic knowledge. Some readers will be able to recall personal experiences such as visits to museums that featured exhibits of early peoples, including Neanderthals (text-to-self). They may also recall reading materials like newspaper articles or National Geographic magazines that presented theories about the development of humans (text-to-text). And they may have seen Neanderthals portrayed in movies, realize that being called “a Neanderthal” translates to an insult about having a caveman mentality, and have developed a generalized conception about Neanderthals (text-to-world).
Marzano observes that academic knowledge need not be extensive to be helpful. “Surface-level” knowledge, which includes being conversant with some of the key terms and ideas of a topic, might be adequate for making sense of a passage, and certainly “surface-level” knowledge provides a workable foundation for adding new information from classroom learning.
But isn’t academic knowledge essentially a product of schooling? Marzano cites a profusion of research that concludes that those students who gain the most academic knowledge from school are those who already have developed some of this academic knowledge on their own. Thus, the students who can be expected to learn the most from their first encounter with “Neanderthal” in the classroom will be those students who already know something about Neanderthals before the lesson.
Step 3: Begin focusing on building academic knowledge as an integral component of teaching reading comprehension. Students who arrive at the classroom with rich reservoirs of academic knowledge tend to have been privileged to a host of invaluable first-hand experiences - visits to museums, art galleries, plays, and concerts; travel opportunities outside their home area, interactions with knowledgeable others who provide a foundation for text-to-world connections through conversation and mentoring, and ready access to print and other sources that can pique their interest and curiosity in the various domains of academic knowledge.
Students who lack such direct experiences can benefit from classroom interventions that are designed to broaden their academic knowledge base as they prepare for reading and learning content information. Certainly field trips that include debriefing sessions about the experience can build surface-level academic knowledge. Linking students to adult mentors who can provide the conversation, support, and additional field experiences is another desirable means to build academic knowledge for students who lack it.
However, Marzano asserts, most of what can happen in a classroom setting to build academic knowledge will involve more indirect methods: second-hand experiences through focused reading, through classroom discourse, and through the use of visual media, especially educational video.
Next month’s column will continue to explore classroom strategies that help narrow the gap between students in academic knowledge.
Advantages
Background knowledge has long been recognized as the key variable in reading comprehension and the ability to effectively learn meaningful content. Strategies that emphasize academic knowledge are especially necessary for students who lack this “edge.”
Further Resources:
Fforde, J. (2004). Something Rotten. New York: Viking.
Marzano, R. (2004). Building Background Knowledge for Academic Achievement. Alexandria, VA: ASCD
Doug Buehl, teacher, Madison East High School
Wisconsin State Reading Association.
Posted March 27, 2006