On Chicago's South Side, 28 five-year-olds at the Amelia Earhart School cluster on a square of carpet, gazing up at their teacher's face as she reads aloud from Beatrix Potter's The Tale of Johnny Town-Mouse. This is the second reading of the story, a selection from the Dragon Series of the Junior Great Books Program. The kindergartners listen intently, then shoot their hands in the air to respond when their teacher pauses to question them: "Why doesn't Johnny Town-Mouse understand that Timmy Willie is miserable in the city? Why do you say that?" Later, she redirects the discussion by asking, "Do you think that Johnny Town-Mouse was kind to Timmy Willie? How do you know?" Finally, she queries, "What made Timmy Willie happy at the end?"
After every student has had a chance to speak, the teacher puts her book down. "Now," she says, "can you think of a place where both Timmy Willie with his short tail and Johnny Town-Mouse with his long tail would be happy together? Close your eyes; think about it." She listens as the students respond: A mouse bookstore. A mouse library. The zoo. Riding a bike. Swimming. At the show. Each child offers an idea. The students return to their chairs and tables to draw illustrations of Johnny Town-Mouse and Timmy Willie.
Across the city, 4th graders at the Alcott Elementary School pursue the question, What does Torto want? posed by Ted Hughes's story "How the Tortoise Became." As half the class read books or work on assignments at their seats, the remaining students sit beside their teacher and explore the story through interpretive questions: Why does Torto decide that winning races is more important than getting along with the other animals? Why do the animals grow to dislike Torto? Did Torto get the respect that he was looking for? These questions readily spark the students' thinking, and each defends his or her answer carefully: "They hated him more and more. They thought he was hurting their feelings. I have proof on page 117," says Ian. "I disagree with Ian, but I agree with Misha and Eric," says LaToya, reading from page 118: "'I shall teach them not to be snobs by making them respect me. . . .'" "No," says Charles, "I have evidence that they didn't like him at all; look on page 116." Finally, their teacher queries, "So, is he looking for revenge or respect? Why can't he have both?" After the conversation ends, the students sit silent, still attentive, chins resting on their hands, heads cocked, brows furrowed.
Back on the South Side, 26 eighth graders at Einstein Elementary School finish their second reading and note-taking exercise on Gish Jen's story "The White Umbrella." They plunge into discussion, led by their teacher through a series of Why? questions: Why does the narrator long to have the umbrella? Why does Mrs. Grossman give her the white umbrella in the first place? Why does the narrator insist on waiting outside as opposed to inside? Why do you think that Mrs. Grossman admired Eugenie? Why does the narrator lie to Mrs. Grossman about her mother being a concert pianist? Like his colleagues, this teacher asks his students for evidence: "Where in the story do you find that the narrator felt ashamed?"
Although their discussion lasts only 40 minutes, these 8th graders could continue for another half-hour. They find pleasure in talking about their ideas and in the story itself. "I love the Great Books stories," reports one student. "I love reading the whole story." Other students nod in agreement.
Reading the Whole Story
"Reading the whole story" is only one feature of Junior Great Books, a program of the Great Books Foundation. In this program, students and teachers mine a wide range of literature—including Hindu and Arabian folktales; poetry by Carl Sandburg, Federico García Lorca, and Langston Hughes; fairy tales like "Rumpelstiltskin" and "Hansel and Gretel"; and contemporary selections from Maya Angelou and Gish Jen—for questions and answers related to themes of fairness, justice, cleverness, greed, love, friendship, respect, revenge, and good and evil.
Junior Great Books, however, is more than a set of curriculum materials. Fully implemented, it provides avenues for probing literature's meaning. Sometimes these avenues include linking literature to theater and arts projects. But they always include Shared Inquiry, a discussion process through which students and teachers explore questions that arise from the text.
Shared Inquiry discussions follow close reading of the selections, vocabulary study, and directed note taking. Teachers lead heterogeneously grouped classes in extended conversations around open-ended questions that draw students into the literature. Because the questions that teachers raise have no single right answer, students must probe the text for evidence that supports their answers and listen to others who have different points of view to develop a deeper interpretation of the author's meaning and purpose. In the process, students learn to think critically and develop ideas with others.
Adopting Junior Great Books Schoolwide
Traditionally, schools adopting Junior Great Books have had middle-class enrollments, and even these have often used the program only for students deemed "gifted." More recently, funding from the Chicago-based Ameritech Foundation has allowed urban teachers to find out whether the Junior Great Books curriculum would work schoolwide in schools enrolling many low-income students. Evidence from three Chicago schools clearly shows that Junior Great Books can thrive in high-poverty schools that some argue should stick with basic skills, basal readers, and scripted instruction.
The program's success in these schools derived from four factors.
Engagement. First, before they adopted Junior Great Books, teachers at Alcott, Earhart, and Einstein already employed a variety of literature-based strategies, including a literature-based basal reader, literature circles, reading incentive programs, and Reading Recovery. In this context, teachers adopted Junior Great Books to meet a complementary, but unique, objective: to engage all students in reading for meaning. As Alcott's principal Ann Shorry explains, We want to move our students from recall to higher-order thinking. . . . It's very different to ask, "What color dress was she wearing?" than to ask, "Why do you think she decided to wear a red dress? What evidence do you have?" Junior Great Books helps us do that.
Shared leadership. Second, administrators working with teacher coordinators shared leadership for the schoolwide adoption. Principals explained clearly the place of the program in their schools' overall approach to teaching literacy, joined teachers in professional development, read selections to the whole school, led Shared Inquiry discussions in each classroom, and budgeted for books and substitutes.
At the same time, on-site teacher coordinators linked schools with resources available from the Great Books Foundation, distributed materials, arranged for coaching from Junior Great Books staff, and scheduled times for peer observations. These teachers became in-school experts on the curriculum to whom colleagues could turn with questions, ideas, and concerns, an arrangement that enhanced program credibility among skeptical faculty and helped develop more collegial practice schoolwide. As one 7th grade teacher pointed out, "If you have teachers you trust, people will buy in."
Professional development. Third, extensive and ongoing professional development was key to successful schoolwide adoption of the program. Summer institutes provided whole faculties—including music, art, and special education teachers—with guidance in using Shared Inquiry techniques. Teachers new to the schools in September attended professional development sessions during the school year, an essential opportunity for urban schools with high teacher turnover. In addition, in-school follow-up coaching helped teachers develop greater confidence in using the program. As Einstein's principal, Phyllis Tate, observed, "You're training with other adults; it doesn't simulate the real classroom. When you get into an actual classroom setting, you're never really ready." To strengthen teacher skills, Junior Great Books offered demonstration lessons and coaching tailored to the needs of individual teachers.
A multiyear adoption plan. Fourth, going schoolwide occurred over several years. The multiyear adoption allowed teachers adequate time to establish a trusting relationship with their school's coach, and over time, they saw their own skills in leading Shared Inquiry become stronger. A multiyear implementation process provided students with time to become accustomed to the new expectations that they would read for meaning and participate in Shared Inquiry discussions.
As teachers and students developed experience with the curriculum, teachers observed students become better prepared to engage with the curriculum. After one year, teachers saw the program as easier to teach because students understood the norms of reading for meaning and Shared Inquiry. As one teacher noted, "By the second year, students sit, listen, and think before making a comment. And they come up with new slants to the stories." Further benefits accumulated the longer the schools stuck with the program. Another teacher commented, The students are different now. This year with the ones who've had it before, I didn't have to explain over and over what an interpretive question is. I'm getting interpretive questions from them. Their writing is a lot better, too, more on target. And their discussions overall . . . are much better.
Changing Teacher Beliefs About Learning
Literature-based learning, shared leadership, professional development, and a multiyear time frame helped orient the Chicago schools toward successful adoption of the program schoolwide. However, schoolwide adoption involved weathering a variety of challenges related to teachers' beliefs about student learning and assumptions about pedagogy. How teachers moved beyond traditional norms to embrace the view that all students should have opportunities to read for meaning holds lessons for others adopting curriculums that pursue more ambitious learning goals for all students.
Raised expectations for learning
Junior Great Books challenged many teachers who did not immediately believe that the program would work for all students. One teacher noted, "Initially, we were concerned about whether our kids could be successful using the program because they were below grade level." However, when offered opportunities to read language-rich literature and participate in Shared Inquiry discussions, students with a wide range of reading skills began to surprise teachers. As students reacted with enthusiasm to the stories and learned to answer interpretive questions with their own opinions supported by evidence from the text, teachers began to redefine their notions of students' capacities for reading for meaning. One teacher reported, I was really surprised that it would work this well in this socioeconomic area. I thought it would be much more difficult. I have been surprised by students' answers. I've had [children with severe learning disabilities] give interesting, intuitive, thoughtful answers.
Teachers recognized that students who did not shine in traditional settings could think and communicate about literature in ways that they had previously associated only with advanced students, and they began to modify their assumptions about the potential of students to learn critical thinking. This recognition deepened teachers' commitment to the program.
The challenge of shifting practice toward reading for meaning
By adopting Junior Great Books schoolwide, the Chicago schools faced pedagogical challenges inherent in higher-order goals. If students were to read for meaning, teachers had to move away from questioning strategies that sought correct answers for open-ended questions. This shift required new perspectives on teaching itself.
First, teachers had to learn to assume what Junior Great Books calls a "posture of doubt." That is, the teachers themselves had to raise questions that genuinely puzzled them about the text. But this posture left some teachers worried that they would lose their authority as purveyors of knowledge. Teachers could no longer find evidence of student learning in factual answers to unambiguous questions because their questioning called for more interpretive responses.
Second, teachers worried that with open-ended questioning, they risked losing control over their students. Some teachers experienced the role of discussion leader as incompatible with their role as disciplinarian. One teacher summed up the dilemma: "Junior Great Books is the opposite of what we used to do. We used to say, 'Don't talk.' Now we say, 'Do talk!'"
Using Junior Great Books and Shared Inquiry pushed teachers to rethink assumptions about their roles. Teachers embraced the notion that reading for meaning requires a more open-minded stance toward learning in general, and they came to appreciate how Shared Inquiry allowed them to be learners themselves, exploring big issues along with their students. As one teacher reported, "I really like the program's higher-order questions. They're not minor questions. It makes me think."
Making Reading Cool
Using concrete resources and technical assistance from the Great Books Foundation, the faculties at Alcott, Earhart, and Einstein Schools found that Junior Great Books materials and professional development establish stronger cultures for literacy. In the process, these schools have become places where reading is cool.
Teachers have discovered that all students are capable of and welcome reading for meaning. They have seen the evidence for the program's underlying premise: All students have a hunger to read, to think, and to discuss ideas in literature as a way of understanding the world around them. Students agree. As one student reported, "I like that instead of just reading, we can discuss. We can have our own feelings." Another added, "[Junior Great Books] teaches us that not everyone has the same opinion. It's getting us ready for the world."
