Reading“the Word”and“the World”: Promoting Learner Agency through an Engagement Model of Literacy Instruction

李國芳

Abstract： Learning to read in English is not just about learning to decode words， but about learning to make sense of the world through the language. However， EFL reading instruction tends to focus on developing decoding and word knowledge in an isolated manner， neglecting learners sense making beyond the text. This text-based approach of reading instruction often leads to students low interest and engagement in English learning and low proficiency in English achievement. Drawing on examples from current research and practices in K-12 schools in the U.S. and Canada， this paper introduces an engagement model of literacy instruction， INSPIRE， that focuses on involving students in reading and writing for meaningful purposes beyond learning to decode. This integrated model of literacy instruction capitalizes on students personal interests and lives of school， allows choices in materials， and follows students lead to promote learner agency for deeper learning and comprehension. When students are more engaged in learning the world through the words， they achieve better learning outcomes in both language skills and attitudes.

Key words： English literacy； reading engagement； motivation； literacy instruction； language attitudes

Introduction： From Reading“the Word” to Reading “the World”

On one Sunday afternoon in Fall 2016， our three children， my husband， and I went to the nearby forest for a walk. As soon as we entered the woods， my seven-yearold twin sons and five-year-old daughter began to ask us to look for patterns in the forest by examining the trees， mushrooms， and leaves. My boys were focused on mushrooms， telling us names， colors， and patterns about mushrooms and asking us to record them using our cameras while my daughter looked for little doors for fairies in the forest. As my husband and I dutifully followed their instructions and were praised for having successfully found patterns， my sons had different opinions about the color of a new kind of mushroom， witches butter. One said it was yellow while the other said he read in a book that it was brown. They asked me to look it up on my phone. Based on our reading on the Internet， both of them were right： while many witches butter mushrooms are yellow， there are some brown ones.

This family walk is a perfect example of children “reading the world” beyond reading texts in the school. My kids have been reading， writing， and learning about mushrooms in school. They had turned this family walk into an extension of their learning and reading in school and engaged us in both reading “the world” （the forest as an a continuation of their school texts） and reading “the word” （the texts on the phone）. To them， reading and learning did not stop at the school or in the books they read， they were connecting and applying the language and knowledge they learned in school to everyday activities in their lives.“The word” that they learned in school， therefore， was not some static knowledge that they had to study or facts that they had to memorize， but was now a natural part of their social world. To better understand their social world， they played the role of teachers and experienced learners； they used their knowledge to discuss their findings， posed questions， and sought answers through further reading. They demonstrated tremendous learner agency by initiating the topic of exploration and inquiry， being engaged in further reading， and being motivated to learn more. The goal of this article is to discuss how to foster these essential qualities of agentic readers by proposing an engagement model of reading instruction that promotes both reading “the word” and reading “the world.”

Learner agency is “the ways in which， and the extents to which， a person is compelled to， motivated to， allowed to， and coerced to， act” （van Lier， 2010， p. X）. Learner agency is of paramount significance to reading engagement as agentic readers choose to read on their own driven by their curiosity of wanting to know more about a topic. They show more confidence in reading and are not afraid of challenges in reading. They consider reading as fun and useful and are more involved in the reading process and they enjoy sharing reading with peers and others （Cambria & Guthrie， 2010）. That is， agentic readers are intrinsically motivated by curiosity， involvement， and challenge in reading； and this intrinsic motivation will， in turn， promote more reading for personal enjoyment and improve readers text comprehension （Wang & Gutherie， 2004）.

However， not all learners demonstrate this kind of agency in reading and learning. In fact， there has been a steady decline in learner agency in reading in the past three decades around the world. According to a recent study by Common Sense Media（2015）， in the United States， the number of American teenagers who have reported to have “never” or “hardly ever” read for pleasure increased dramatically in the past 30 years. In 1984， 8% of 13-year-olds and 9% of 17-year-olds said they “never” or“hardly ever” read for pleasure. In 2014， that number had almost tripled， to 22% and 27%. Furthermore， in 2014 over 45% of 17-year-olds saying they read by choice only once or twice a year. In addition to the generational decline in voluntary reading， longitudinal studies by National Center for Educational Statistics （NCES） also found that voluntary reading rates are also in a steady decline from childhood to late adolescence among American students. In 2004， while 54 percentage of 9-yearolds reported reading almost every day for fun， this number decreased to 30% among 13-year-olds， and 22% among 17-year-olds.

A similar decline in reading engagement has also been observed among students around the world. According to a report by OECD （2011）， 15-year-old students among the OECD countries in 2009 tended to be less enthusiastic about reading than students in 2000. As many as twenty-two countries have reported a decrease in the number of students who read for enjoyment between 2000 and 2009. Another international report by Nielsen Books （2013） revealed that while three digital activities such as game apps， YouTube， and texting increased for teenagers， book reading was down nearly 8% during 2012-2013. There was also a significant rise in occasional （those who read 1-3 times a month） and non-readers（those who do not read） among children from 11-17-year-olds from 13% in 2012 to 27% in 2013. Further， there was a significant decline in the number of children whod like to read digitally： from 38% in 2012 to 28% in 2013.

In the context of English as Foreign language learning in China， several reports have revealed that a high percentage of Chinese students dislike studying English through elementary to high school （Zhou， 2013）. For example， among their 45，758 parent responses collected through the Internet， only 10.62% of them stated that their children liked studying English， while 46.66% of them reported that their children did not like learning English （Twenty-first Century Educational Research Institute， 2013）. The proportion of students who dislike studying English is reported to be higher in rural and minority regions where resources for English education are more scarce than urban districts. For example， a recent survey in a minority area shows that among 699 high school students included in the sample， over 51.5% of the high school students disliked or resisted studying English （Chen， 2016）. These emerging trends in China and around the world suggest that children are less and less engaged in reading—online or offline. Thus， we need a better engagement model of reading instruction.

Reading instruction in school directly influences students in-school reading activities. To better engage students in reading “the word” and “the world，” reading instruction in school must also influence students out-of-school reading behaviour and activities. Research has found that students are more likely to report reading to learn when they are exposed to more meaningful reading activities in class. These meaningful reading activities in class are not teacher-directed read-aloud or strategies instruction which is found to have a negatively impact on studentsdesire to read for fun outside of the school. Rather， these are instructional activities that stimulate students interest in reading and make in-class learning a more enjoyable activity that encourages out-of-class reading（Polikoff & Zhou， 2015）. In addition， these activities must also promote learner agency by allowing students choice in reading materials and allocating time for studentcentered independent reading （Polikoff & Zhou， 2015）.

The“What”of Reading“the World”： From Skills to Knowledge Competencies

Reading instruction in the school that centers around students interest requires teachers to rethink the what （the content and text） as well as the how （methods） of reading instruction in the classroom. In terms of the “what” of reading instruction， to enable students to read both “the word”and “the world，” teacher instruction must foster the skills of reading to learn so that students can apply “the word” to learn about “the world.” According to Murnane， Sawhill， & Snow （2012）， these skills entail“[the] ability to use reading to gain access to the world of knowledge， to synthesize information from different sources， to evaluate arguments， and to learn totally new subjects…skills that we call ‘deep comprehension （p. 7）.”

This deep comprehension differs from the traditional emphasis on basic reading skills such as decoding （processes for figuring out the pronunciation of an unfamiliar written word） and summarizing—a shallow process of text comprehension that “involves being able to remember （or quickly find） information to read， to summarize a paragraph， to identify the main idea of a paragraph， and perhaps to make simple inferences from information in the text” and is often assessed using multiple-choice questions based on a series of brief， neutral texts （Murnane， Sawhill， & Snow， 2012， p. 7）. Focusing on these basic procedural skills in reading， especially in early grades， often leads to readers failure to handle increasing language and knowledge demands as they move up the grade levels（Lesaux， 2012）. Therefore， in addition to being able to help readers decipher words on a page， reading instruction that fosters deep comprehension must also help readers gain knowledge-based competencies such as conceptual skills that enable them to use their accumulating knowledge to assess， evaluate， and synthesize the presented information and apply knowledge from multiple disciplines.

However， much English literacy instruction in many countries has been reported to focus on skill-based competencies， resulting in overall low achievements in literacy and widening gaps for low-income and minority students （Cummins， 2007； Reardon， Valentino， & Shores， 2012）. In the U.S.， for example， primary English literacy instruction in schools are reported to focus on the easier-to-master skills （such as word-level reading skills including phonological awareness， letter-sound knowledge， decoding； and rapid recognition of familiar words that are different from meaningful vocabulary instruction） while ignoring conceptual skills and knowledge（including vocabulary knowledge and content knowledge about and understanding of the world） that constitute preparation for comprehension and learning in the later grades （Duke & Block， 2012）. In fact， several studies on reading instruction in lowincome schools found that comprehension work was seldom observed in primary grades and across all grades， and relatively small amount of higher level questioning or writing related to stories read was observed. Similarly， in secondary schools in the U.S.， it is found that adolescents have few opportunities to be taught advanced reading comprehension as few subject-area teachers are aware of the need to teach subject-area reading comprehension skills， nor have they had opportunities to learn them themselves（Goldman， 2012）.

The outcome of this basic skillsbased instruction was reflected in American students reading performances. Among the 8th graders， only 31% performed at the proficient level （be able to summarize main ideas and themes， make and support inferences about a text， and fully substantiate judgments about content， etc.）； 4% performed at the advanced level （be able to make connections within and across texts and to explain causal relations， evaluate and justify the strength of supporting evidence and the quality of an authors presentation， manage the processing demands of analysis and evaluation by stating， explaining， and justifying）； 65% performed at or below basic level （be able to locate information， identify statements of main idea， theme， or authors purpose， make simple inferences from texts， interpret the meaning of a word in the text， state judgments and give some support about content） in reading assessment in 2015. This pattern of achievement had remained consistent since 1992 when the national assessment data was first available（NAEP， 2016）. These findings are also reflected in another analysis of American students reading achievement patterns using the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study Data （ECLS-K） that included a sample of 25，000 students from K-8th grade. According to Reardon， Valentino， & Shores（2012）， while students can “read” with basic procedural word-reading skills by third grade， only about a third of U.S. students in middle school possess the knowledgebased competencies to “read” in more comprehensive sense， and fewer than 10% of 8th graders can evaluate complex syntax， the highest-order literacy skill assessed in the ECLS-K tests.

In particular， English learners or nonEnglish speaking immigrant students， as well as students in low-income schools， are most likely to receive the skill-based basic reading instruction， resulting in their lagging behind of their mainstream peers， never catching up. The reading scores gaps between 4th grade English leaners and their mainstream counterparts have remained close to 50 points from 2002-2015 （NAEP， 2016）. Similar to the reading instruction in the mainstream classrooms， English as a second language instruction in many of the U.S. classrooms are found to be dominated by the teachers out-loud reading from a childrens book from the front of the classroom or studying a decontextualized vocabulary word （Valdes， 2011）. As Valdes（2011） points out， neither activity （teacher read-aloud and decontextualized word learning） has much to do with the ways students will want or need to use English outside the classroom； nor do these activities build on anything students have already learned at school in their home countries. As a result， many students maintain their silence in these classrooms and fail to gain the kind of knowledge-based competencies necessary to catch up their native-English speaking peers.

Similarly in the EFL education context in China， despite Ministry of Educations （MOE） reform efforts to push to move from knowledge-transmission to competence-based instruction， English reading instruction has remained teachercentered and text-bound， focusing on teaching word recognition， grammar， and text comprehension， though some studentcentered methods are introduced in schools in more economically developed cities such as Beijing and Shanghai （Li & Ni， 2012， 2013）. At the elementary level， for example， English reading and vocabulary instruction is still taught most often by the look and say method while some learning strategies for reading comprehension are introduced at secondary schools （Hu & Baumann， 2014）. Across all levels， grammar instruction still remains the “the heart of reading instruction” in English classrooms， and becomes more and more explicit at higher-grade levels （Hu & Baumann， 2014， p. 38）. Though no national data on Chinese students reading achievement are available， the results of this kind of reading instruction that led to “mute English” and “functional illiterates” among Chinese learners after studying English as a foreign language for nearly sixteen years are rarely disputed（Qiang & Wolff， 2011）. As a Chinese student studying overseas summarizes， “[In] China there are ... a lot of vocabulary and I think really good grammar. But ... we cant speak for ourselves. We never tried it... our education system ... put everything in my brain， not participate. Theres only one way. My teacher say. I listen. Thats it. So I never say. So I cant speak very well before coming here” （Hellsten， 2007， p. 89）.

The status and outcome of literacy instruction in both the U.S. and China suggest that we need a holistic approach to reading instruction that promotes knowledge-based competencies to enable learners to read “the world” as well as basic skills in reading that support their reading“the word”. While the attention has been on teaching to read “word，” the focus of the new engagement reading model must center on how to teach children to read“the world” through rigorous training in knowledge-based competencies to achieve deep comprehension.

The “How” of Reading “the World”： INSPIRE

Freire （1977） states that “Reading is not walking on the words； its grasping the soul of them.” To Freire， the act of learning to read and write is a creative act that involves a critical comprehension of reality—“the world.” Engaged students to read “the world” must， therefore， go beyond basic skills instruction to include higherlevel engagement in reading and practices in knowledge-based competencies. In this section， I introduce a model of reading instruction. This model is based on three reading task design principles （the INs： interest， involvement， and inquiry）， three learner factors （the Ss： self-efficacy， success， and social interaction）， and three teacher roles （the Ps： Planner， Provocateur， and Provider）. I call this approach IN， S and P Informed Reading Engagement， or INSPIRE （see Figure 1）.

Figure 1. The INSPIRE model of reading instruction

The three instructional design principles. This kind of reading instruction must first and foremost attend to studentscultural capital （i.e.， their life experience， history， and language）. Students are more motivated to read when the reading tasks and activities are relevant to their lives. Personal relevance， ‘in turn， promotes intrinsic motivation to read. Intrinsic motivation （i.e.， reading for interest） has been found to predict the frequency of reading for personal enjoyment and is positively related to text comprehension. In contrast， extrinsic motivation （i.e.， reading for rewards such as gaining a higher grade or getting a toy） was negatively related to text comprehension （Wang & Guthrie， 2004）. In fact， a study done by Wigfield and Guthrie （1997） found that students who are intrinsically motivated spend 300% more time reading than students who have low intrinsic motivation for reading. Therefore， when deign reading tasks and activities， teachers must first think about how to connect them to students interests and make them enjoy reading.

Cambria & Guthrie （2010） argues that there are two forms of interest： situational and enduring. Situational interest refers to excitement about some details in the here and now such as a picture in a book， a link to a Website， a funny comment by a character， or an amazing fact about animals. An enduring interest is some excitement that is long lasting， and that stimulates students to want to learn more. According to Cambria& Guthrie （2010）， situational interest can become enduring if it recurs with teachers（and others） continuing support. While there are many ways to stimulate studentsinterest， one of the most effective means to promote enduring interest is to make reading activities relevant to students by bridging in-class reading with learning outside of school. Teachers， therefore， must learn about students communities and out of school lives to design reading instruction with real-world applications and learning opportunities that will result in enduring reading interest.

One of the most disengaging factors of basic skills-focused reading instruction is a lack of student involvement in the reading instruction—including choice of texts and activities. In many teacher-centered reading classrooms， teachers decide what to read and decide what to do for pre-， during-， and post-reading activities； students often followed teachers lead. Research has found， however， allowing students to choose topics and select their texts and reading activities has a positive impact on students engagement and reading comprehension （see Polikoff & Zhou， 2015）. When students are more involved in making decisions during the process of reading on a topic of their interest， they are also more emotionally involved and invested in the reading and become more engaged in the reading.

To foster more enduring interest and involvement in reading， reading teachers must engage students in inquiries driven by students questions， curiosities， and problem-solving. In inquiry-based reading classrooms， students questions， ideas， and observations， rather than teacherdirected curriculum， are placed at the center of learning （Ness， 2016； Ontario Education， 2013）. In inquiry-based reading classrooms， students engaged in open-ended investigations into a real-world problem or phenomenon through reading， applying knowledge， and solving problems in class and out of class. In this process， students are more in control of their reading process， see the real value of reading， and therefore are more motivated in their reading tasks.

Inquiry can take place within and beyond texts. Within-text inquiry can take the form of student generating questions about a text with teacher support. Research has found that by marking questions about reading， students interact more deeply with the text， are more focused and purposeful， and are actively involved in the reading process （Ness， 2016）. For example， before reading a story， teachers may take out some book bits or phrases significant to the story and ask students to use the sentence starters who， what， where， when， why， and how， I wonder， or Id like to know to generate questions and then share them with a class. These questions will provide a purposeful reason for students during reading when they find answers to those questions. Teachers can also engage students in analyzing some of the answers to the questions and categorize them. For example， in a story， how many events are included and what types of events are included？ After reading， students can continue to discuss unanswered questions or generate questions that are beyond the scope of the story and may require further reading， discussion， or research. The teacher can even encourage further connection to the real world by asking students to conduct follow up research or interviews of community members （see Ness， 2016 for an example of this activity）.

Inquiry can also be promoted through concepts covered in reading or a specific disciplinary area （such as science and social studies）. Concept driven inquiry can be structured （provide students with problems and methods and students use them to find a solution）， guided （give students the problems， but to find methods and solution）， and open （students pose problems， find methods and solutions）（Colburn， 2000）. An example of this inquiry-based inquiry reading instruction is Guthrie and colleagues Concept-Oriented Reading Instruction that connects reading comprehension with science concepts （e.g.， animal survival， human exploration of the earth） by using appropriate texts （Cambria& Guthrie， 2010）.

Another form of inquiry is placebased literacy education that uses the local community and environment as a starting point or a focus for literacy teaching and learning （Bartholomaeus， 2013）. By using the natural and cultural history of the community as the foundation for the curriculum， this inquiry approach places an emphasis on hands-on， real-world learning experiences grounded in local phenomena and students lived experiences. Therefore， place-based literacy inquiry engages students in gaining a deeper understanding of the local place where they live and also provides opportunities for students to participate in working for real change in their living environment， thus fostering meaningful connections between students in the classroom and their lives and community beyond the school walls （Bartholomaeus， 2013）. This place-based literacy education not only promotes intrinsic motivation for reading and learning but also enhances students awareness of their local community and their keen commitment to serving as active， contributing citizens（Sobel， 2004）. For example， a rural teacher may encourage students to read and explore issues and histories related to their landscape； students in an urban center may read and explore other issues in their community such as pollution， etc. In this place-based inquiry， students decide on questions and issues they want to focus on and how they are going to address them while teachers serve as “experienced guides， co-learners， and brokers of community resources and learning possibilities” （Smith， 2002， p. 593）. The selection of what form of inquiry to engage students in reading， however， must consider the learners age， proficiency level， cognitive development， experiences， and the content area.

The three learner factors. Attending to students interest， involving students in reading through active inquiry is a complex process that is different from traditional teacher-centered reading instruction. During this process， it is important that the selection of reading texts， the reading tasks and activities， as well as assessment and presentation of reading outcomes ensure learners feel confident that they can achieve them （self-efficacy）， experience success， and have opportunities to engage in social interactions with peers and others.

One of the most important learner factors in reading engagement is selfefficacy， that is， their beliefs about their ability to complete the reading tasks. Selfefficacy goes hand in hand with studentssense of success in reading. Students with high self-efficacy are confident and motivated to work toward a learning goal（Scott， 1996）. Students sense of selfefficacy influences the goals they set for themselves， how much effort they will expend， how long they will persevere during difficulties， and how strong their resilience to failure may be （Scott， 1996）. To increase self-efficacy， students must have ongoing successful experiences with books and other types of texts， find reading to be a source of gratification， expend effort in reading activities， seek out challenging reading materials， and persevere in pursuing comprehension. Teachers， therefore， must help students set appropriate learning goals， differentiate instruction using different levels of texts and tasks， and make reading relevant to their lives.

Teachers can engage students to create“I can” statements to construct their own specific learning targets， and use these statements to monitor their reading process. Samples of these statements include：

I can read the text and answer the questions.

I can read two texts and decide which one is more believable.

I can use the text to analyze the characters.

I can use the clues to figure out the meaning of a word I dont know.

I can discuss the main idea of the text with a classmate.

I can read the book fluently with understanding.

With these students self-generated， specific learning goals， students are more likely to experience success in reading and learning， which in turn enhances their selfefficacy and increases their motivation to tackle the next round of reading tasks and challenges.

In addition to helping students set specific learning targets that they can achieve， a variety of text， books， Internet resources， and materials relevant to the reading task and activities must also be used to ensure all students experience success（Cambria & Guthrie， 2010）. Given that each classroom has learners at multiple levels of proficiency， differentiation of texts and tasks is essential for all learners to have opportunities to experience success. When all students， especially struggling students， can read fluently with understanding at their levels， the successful experience helps them gain confidence in reading and thus increases their sense of self-efficacy.

Another vital aspect to enhance reading and learning success is to make the classroom a collaborative learning environment in which students have opportunities to engage in meaningful dialogue around reading. When students participate in meaningful dialogue with each other through reading， speaking， listening， and writing， they are more actively involved in the learning process and are more motivated to learn. Teachers can use a variety of collaborative learning activities such as partner reading， team summarizing， group projects （such as making a poster based on reading or inquiry）， and peer discussion on a text. Others such as ReadersTheater， Literature Circle， and Jigsaw activities can also be used. These social interactions will promote more student engagement and reading success.

The three teacher roles. For educators， the process requires them to play three supportive roles： to plan instruction， to provoke their interest， and to provide support when needed. For planning， the teachers first need to identify the learning standards（i.e.， knowledge， dispositions， and skills that will be taught and evaluated for the reading lesson or unit）. Here， teachers must also think what reading texts and materials are required， what other reading materials they can include to address students different levels of proficiency， as well as what reading skills will be taught or modeled for students. Following this， teachers must articulate （or help students to articulate） an essential question or real-life problem that is related to the content of the lesson or unit but also has relevance for all students to allow them to make connections with their personal and individual experiences. Here teachers must consider what type of inquiry learners can do and what the expectations are for different levels of students so they all of them can experience success. As well， teachers must consider what kind of social interactions the project can provide during the process. The next aspect of the planning is to design performance-based（not test-based） assessment activities （e.g.， presentations， posters， and artifacts etc.） to allow students to show their mastery of the learning goals in different formats.

Since students motivation is of vital importance to their success， one of the roles of the reading teacher is that of a provocateur of students interest in reading. As a provocateur， teachers must find creative ways to introduce students to ideas and to subject matter that is of interest to them and invoke long-lasting interest among students so that they engage in a sustained inquiry of their own （Ontario Education， 2013）. Teachers might do so by designing a “grabber” or kick-off activity to entice students curiosity and attention to the topic or inquiry question （Jorgensen， 2005）. Such activities can include a field trip to have an initial experience with the topic to be read in class （e.g.， a trip to the recycling station for a lesson on recycling etc.）， a guest speaker， or a hands-on activity. The teacher can also be a provocateur during the inquiry process. For example， when students have interesting findings about a project or different ways of finding information about the project， teachers can provoke further interests by engaging the class in meaningful discussions about each others discoveries.

Finally， the teacher serves as a provider of support throughout the process. Teachers must be responsive to the students learning needs， and most importantly， knowing when and how to introduce students to ideas that will move them forward in their inquiry （Ontario Education， 2013）. To do so， teachers must monitor students progress， model reading skills， strategies， and tasks， and provide mini-lessons on a certain skill or grammar points when such need arises. For a project that involves out of school activities and community involvement， teachers must also provide support for making these out of school resources available to students.

INSPIRE in an Elementary and a High School： Two Examples

The salmon project in Ms. Megans grade 1-2 classroom. Ms. Megan （pseudonym） teaches in a grade 1-2 classroom in Canada where 60% of the students are Englishas-a-second language （ESL） learners with differring levels of proficiency. For reading， Ms. Megan and her fellow teachers first spent time assessing their studentsproficiency levels and then created small learning groups based on the assessment. Ms. Megan engages learners in reading using a variety of methods. She readaloud interesting， good books that cater to students interest， uses guided reading practices where she engages students in independent reading and partner reading. she provides opportunities （such as RAZkids， an online reading program） for students to listen to stories and to read， as well as incorporates a daily family reading time at school for parents to read together with their children in the morning. Ms. Megan and her colleagues also continuously put out books on topics that relate to students emerging interests and encourage students to read with each other and inspire each others interest. In addition， she also engages students in reading inquiry through connecting reading with science learning.

For example， one of Ms. Megans inquiry projects was about salmon， which is an integral part of the local communitys environment， culture， and economy. To plan for this project， Ms. Megan and her fellow teachers identified the learning goals for the students by following the provincial education standards， identified different levels of texts that might be appropriate for various levels of learners. These included wordless books for beginning leaders， picture books for intermediate level students， information books for advanced level learners， posters that show salmons habitat， and Internet resources such as videos about salmon. Her essential question for the class was， “How do salmon eggs grow？” She designed several assessment exhibitions for students—making a salmon habitat in the classroom， students showcasing their understanding about salmon to their parents， and students engaging in reading， drawing， and writing about salmon. To engage students with hands-on experiences， she secured support from the School Board and the Department of Fishery who provided the school with fifty salmon eggs， an aquarium， and other necessary equipment. The aquaruim enabled the students to watch day-by-day as the salmon eggs incubated and then hatched. She also invited indigenous community elders to speak to the students about the importance of salmon to their culture.

To kick off the salmon project and get students excited about the study， Ms. Megan first displayed the aquarium and all the equipment and explained about all the tools and what they are for. The class also went on a field trip to a nearby stream to examine the water conditions for the salmon habitat. The teachers also displayed many books about the salmon life cycle in the classroom and told students that they were going to get some salmon eggs and would watch salmon eggs grow in their own classrooms. Students got very excited about the salmon eggs； and as a class， they read many books about salmon. For students who could not read， she encouraged them to read pictures. By the time the salmon eggs arrived， students were very curious about the topic and wanted to learn more. To help students get more engaged， students made a redd（a spawning nest built by salmon in the gravel of streams or shoreline of lakes） using stones in preparation for the arrival of salmon. Ms. Megan described， “When the salmon eggs arrived， we made quite a show of it. The lady from the Department of Fishery came， and we photographed the salmon eggs floating in， and we made our red using stones. The kids were HIGHLY motivated to see the whole process start.”

After these provocation activities， students were taught a series of mini science lessons about the salmon life cycle， which was part of the curriculum standards. For reading， students then were engaged in partner-reading with a buddy on a subject related to the salmon life cycle， starting from the topics such as the egg and the habitat. Students （and their parents） were asked to pose questions about salmon using “I wonder…” and these questions were posted on a board in the classroom and students sought answers to those questions through reading. Students were also engaged in writing about their learning using key words and vocabulary. After the salmon eggs had hatched， the class released the salmon fry in to their natural habitat in a nearby stream with the participation of local indigenous elders who came and perform a release ceremony for the class.

All students were extremely engaged in reading and learning throughout the process， even struggling learners， who could not read or write very much， acquired key vocabulary because they were so “motivated by the salmon eggs and seeing salmon develop in the tank.”

Reading motivation in a high school classroom. Ms. Gabriel （pseudonym） is an ESL teacher for 8th-12th graders at a high school in Canada where she teaches mostly learners from Chinese backgrounds who arrived in her school two to three years prior. Ms. Gabriel used a multifaceted approach to teaching reading. Given that she was teaching adolescent ESL students， one of the important aspects of her reading program was to encourage students to read widely and read for pleasure. However， in order for students to read widely and enjoy reading， reading instruction must be motivating to them. Ms. Gabriel attended to students motivation by attending to two important affective factors for adolescent learners： their opinion as readers and their identity as Chinese readers.

To attend to these two aspects of her students characteristics， in addition to the English reading required by the curriculum， students were encouraged to read books related to their thematic unit in their mother tongue. For example， in one unit， the theme was “beauty and power of nature，” and Ms. Gabriel selected several indigenous books related to the theme as part of the required reading. These books were carefully selected to connect to adolescent learnersexperiences as immigrant students. In her students words， these books “[spoke] to their hearts.” Students were engaged in partner reading， class oral reading， and individual reading， sharing their reflections and analyses to their group in class around the themes in the books. They also engaged in vocabulary learning through connotation activities where students studied the meaning of the words in context and practiced using the words through making meaningful sentences related to reading.

In addition， students were asked to choose their own books in Chinese related to the theme “beauty and power of nature，”and had to analyze the theme， characters， and literary devices， and translate thematic quotes to present to class. They were also asked to make a movie trailer for the class to “sell” the book to their peers. Students were also taught （through teacher modeling） to engage in a Socratic-style dialogue on their readings and their personal connections to the readings where the students “ruled”the conversations about the reading. Further， they visited the local Museum of Anthropology and had to do both academic and creative works around the theme based on their in-class and “real world”experiences. This kind of student-centered activities valued students first language， their opinions on the reading， as well as their ability to take more responsibilities in their own reading； thus these activities built students confidence as learners and increased their self-efficacy as readers.

In addition to in-class reading， Ms. Gabriel also engaged students in experiential learning where they would study a text in connection with their cultural heritage and their local communities. One of such example was studying the book， White Jade Tiger， a story about a Chinese girl who grew up in a Chinatown in the city of Victoria in Canada and learned about her ancestry. This story engaged the Chinese students in Ms. Gabriels class because it connected Canadian culture and their Chinese culture and served as a bridge of the two. To study the text， Ms. Gabriel took the students to a historical tour of Chinatown in their city led by an urban historian of the city. This tour helped students make “connections between the book they were reading and the real world they are seeing around them.”Students were highly motivated to read more and widely of other books on their own outside class.

Conclusion

The above two examples demonstrate that teachers of all grade-levels can INSPIRE learners to read “the word” and“the world.” They did so by making reading relevant to their interests and connected to their real world community， actively involving learners in the inquiry process， and using a variety of ways to increase learner self-efficacy and ensure the success of all learners. Both teachers carefully planned their reading instruction to find appropriate， relevant， and engaging texts， designed different reading and performance tasks， used different “grabber” activities to provoke learners interest and curiosity， and capitalized on local resources in the communities. Both teachers considered the following critical factors：

Age appropriateness （Difficulty level according to age and cognitive levels， topics of interest， provocation methods， confidence and success）

Cultural relevance （Personal and community cultural relevance）

Personal meaning （Choice in reading materials and involvement）

Local connection （The social and natural worlds around them）

As the two teachers demonstrate， INSPIRE is not a one-size-fits-all model， but a set of principles to follow when teachers engage in creative， resourceful reading instruction that links students inclass reading experiences with their real world outside the texts and the classroom. As Americas 2015 National Teacher of the Year Shanna Peeples noted， “Teachers are artists of human potential.” English literacy teachers must free themselves from the constraints of texts and classroom walls to begin the creative process， which allows them to recreate and reinvent teaching methods and materials by always taking into consideration students realities and communities outside the school to make them an integral part of reading instruction. As Juliani （2014） states， “If we want our students to change the world， we must change our classrooms to foster inquiry and innovation” （p. 1）. I encourage all teachers to open their classroom and INSPIRE their students to read in and out of school.

References：

Bartholomaeus， P. （2013）. Place-based education and the Australian curriculum. Literacy and Learning： The Middle Years， 21（3）， 17-23.

Cambria， J.， & Guthrie， J. T. （2010）. Motivating and engaging students in reading. New England Reading Association Journal， 46（1）， 16-29.

Chen， X. （2016）. 民族地區(qū)高中生英語學(xué)習(xí)厭學(xué)現(xiàn)狀及對策初探. Retrieved from http：//m.xzbu.com/9/view-3194964. htm.

Colburn， A. （2000）. An inquiry primer. Science Scope， 23（6）， 42-44.

Common Sense Media. （2015）. Common sense media census： Media use by tweens and teens. Retrieved from https：//www. commonsensemedia.org/research/thecommon-sense-census-media-use-bytweens-and-teens.

Cummins， J. （2007）. Pedagogies for the poor？ Re-aligning reading instruction for low-income students with scientifically based reading research. Educational Researcher， 36， 564–572.

Duke， N. K.， & Block， M. K. （2012）. Improving reading in the primary grades. Future of Children， 22（2）， 55-78.

Friere， P. （1977）. Pedagogy of the oppressed. London： Penguin.

Goldman， S. R. （2012）. Adolescent literacy： Learning and understanding content. Future of Children， 22（2）， 89-116.

Hellsten， M. （2007）. International student transition： Focusing on researching international pedagogy for educational sustainability. International Education Journal： Comparative Perspectives， 8（3）， 79-90.

Hu， R.， & Baumann， J. F. （2014）. English reading instruction in China： Chinese teachers perspectives and comments. The Reading Matrix， 1（4）， 29-60.

Lesaux， N. K. （2012）. Reading and reading instruction for children from lowincome and non-English-speaking households. Future of Children， 22（2）， 73-88.

Li， G.， & Ni， X. （2012）. Use of technology to support the learning and teaching of English in China. In C. Leung & J. Yuan （Eds.）， Perspectives on teaching and learning English literacy in China（pp. 145-160）. New York： Springer.

Li， G.， & Ni， X. （2013）. Effects of a technology-enriched， task-based language teaching curriculum on Chinese elementary studentsachievement in English as foreign language. International Journal of Computer-Assisted Language Learning& Teaching （IJCALLT）， 3（1）， 33-49.

Murnane， R.， Sawhill， I.， & Snow， C. （2012）. Literacy challenges for the twenty first century： Introducing the issue. Future of Children， 22（2）， 3-16.

NAEP. （2016）. The nations report card. Retrieved from http：//www.nationsreportcard. gov/reading_math_g12_2015/.

Ness， M. （2016）. When readers ask questions： Inquiry-based reading instruction. Language Arts， 70（2）， 189-196.

Nielson Books. （2013）. Is technology challenging childrens book reading？ Retrieved fromhttp：//www.nielsenbook. co.uk/uploads/press/1NielsenPR_IsTec hnologyChallengingChildrensReading_ Sept13.pdf.

OCED. （2011）. PISA in focus： Do students read for pleasure？ Retrieved from https：//www.oecd.org/pisa/ pisaproducts/pisainfocus/48624701.pdf.

Ontario Education. （2013）. Inquiry-based learning. Retrieved from http：//www. edu.gov.on.ca/eng/literacynumeracy/ inspire/research/cbs_inquirybased.pdf

Pilokoff， M. S.， & Zhou， N. （2015， October）. Using PIRLS data to investigate the relationship of teachers instruction with students out-of-school reading behaviors. Policy Brief ， No. 8， Amsterdam， IEA. Retrieved from http：// www.nl/policy_briefs.html.

Qiang， N.， & Wolff， M. （2011）. The lowdown on Chinas education. Newcastle， UK： Cambridge Scholars Publishing.

Juliani， A. J. （2014）. Inquiry and innovation in the classroom： Using 20% time， genius hour， and PBL to drive student success. New York： Routledge.

Reardon， S. F.， Valentino， R. A.， & Shores， K.A.（2012）. Patterns of literacy among U.S. students. The Future of Children， 22（2）， 17-38.

Scott， J. E. （1996）. Self-efficacy： A key to literacy learning. Reading Horizon， 36（3）， 195-212.

Smith G. （2002）. Place-based education： Learning to be where we are. Phi Delta Kappan， 83（8）， 584-594.

Twenty-first Century Educational Research Institute. （2013）. 2013年英語教育網(wǎng)絡(luò)調(diào)查報(bào)告. Retrieved from http：//learning.sohu.com/20131107/ n389731810.shtml.

Valdes， G. （2011）. Learning and not learning English： Latino students in American schools. New York： Routledge.

van Lier， L. （2010）. The ecology of language learning： Practice to theory， theory to practice. Procedia Social and Behavioural Sciences， 3， 2-6.

Wang， J. H.， & Guthrie， J. T. （2004）. Modeling the effects of intrinsic motivation， extrinsic motivation， amount of reading， and past reading achievement on text comprehension between U.S. and Chinese students. Reading Research Quarterly， 39， 162-186.

Wigfield， A.， & Guthrie， J. T. （1997）. Relations of childrens motivation for reading to the amount and breadth of their reading. Journal of Educational Psychology， 89， 420-432.

Zhou， Y. （2013）. 高中生厭學(xué)英語的原因與對策 （Why High school students hate English classes： Reasons and solutions）. Unpublished masters thesis， Huazhong Normal Uniersity， Wuhan， China.