Welcome to 10H!
Tuesday, April 5, 2011
Power of the Spoken Word
Hi, Everyone. I truly enjoyed reading your "a-hah!" moments about what you better comprehended as a result of listening to "Roman Fever." So, as part of our "audio shorts" continued experiment, I'd like for you to post your thoughts about how listening to "The Lottery" before reading it helped or didn't help your reading comprehension. Also, let me know what worked for you best re: comprehension: reading first, then listening ("Roman Fever") OR listening first, then reading ("The Lottery"). Lastly, any other thoughts you have about the recorded version of the story are most welcome. For this assignment you may use the first person. Please post by Monday, April 11th.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Hi, Mrs. Drance! Listening to "The Lottery" before reading it did not help my reading comprehension. Personally, I though it was like watching a movie based on a book before reading the actual book. While I listened to the story I enjoyed it (until the end, which horrified me) and I could follow the plot easily. Although, as I read it afterward I didn't pick up as many details as I would have if I had read the story first and then listened to it. Therefore, I prefer to read the story and then listen to it, like we did with "Roman Fever". As I read it, I figured out the plot and the gist of the story. Then, as I listen to the recording I became more aware of details in the story and important literary elements, like conflict and characterization. Listening to the story afterward made it easier to comprehend because the recording would clear aspects of the story up that I hadn't caught while reading it.
ReplyDeleteHi Mrs Drance,
ReplyDeleteI found that listening to "The Lottery" before reading it was helpful to me. Having an idea of what is going on in the story before reading it helps me better understand what the author is trying to relay. Sometimes when I am reading a story I feel as though I am not actually absorbing any of the information which forces me to read the same thing over and over again. By having some knowledge going in to the story the second time, it helps me catch details while reading it.
Mrs. Drance,
ReplyDeleteAfter listening to "The Lottery" and then reading it I found that nothing really became more clear to me. Furthermore, I thought the plot was much more difficult to follow when listening to the story and then reading it a second time rather then the other way around. Also, while reading the story a second time after listening to it I found that when each character spoke I didn't pick up on as many personality traits as I did when listening to it first. Lastly, many elements such as conflict, foreshadowing, and characterization became clear to me while listening to "The Lottery" and after when I read it these same elements simply didn't fit. Overall, I believe that reading a story and then listening to it is much more effective then the other way around.
Hey Mrs. Drance,
ReplyDeleteI found that listening to "The Lottery" before actually reading wasn't helpful to me at all. I felt that the woman on the recording did a good job at portraying the story the way it was meant to be, but I wasn't able to pay attention that well. It reminded me of the first time you listen to a song. You can think it sounds nice but you don't really get a good understanding of it until you listen a few more times. In that case, I prefer reading a story, like we did with "Roman Fever" rather than listening to it first.
Mrs Drance-
ReplyDeleteListening to "The Lottery" before actually reading it did not help me all too much. I didn't really know what parts to look out for that I didn't really understand the first time around. I also found that it was really tough to understand some of the important literary elements, such as conflict, characterization, and setting. During the part when they described the box that they did the lottery out of, I had no idea what was going on. That part really went right over my head. However, when we read "Roman Fever" before listening to it, I found that much more helpful. I knew what parts I didn't really understand when reading, so I knew what to pay closer attention to. So overall, I fond that reading, then listening, is much more helpful than the opposite way.
Mrs. Drance,
ReplyDeleteListening to "The Lottery" before reading it did not aid in my comprehension. I prefer reading the story first and then listening to it so I can grasp the concept of the story when I read it and then listen to it and pay more attention to the details that are emphasized by the speaker. When listening to "The Lottery" I was unable to focus on the details of the story because I had no idea what a 'lottery' was. Also, I was unable to understand the tense feelings of the characters and the setting in the square. I find that when I read a story first and then listen to it, as in the case of "Roman Fever," I can grasp the concepts behind the story and more fully understand it.
Mrs Drance,
ReplyDeleteAfter listening to "The Lottery" i found that it was somewhat helpful. I felt that I partially understood the story reading it first and then I was able to pick out certain parts that I didn't understand when listening to the story. However, when I listened to it first I felt that I had a better understanding of what was going on before I read the story. Overall, it does not make a difference to me wether or not I read or listen to the story first.
Matt z
Mrs. Drance
ReplyDeleteI found listening to "The Lottery' before reading it was not at all helpful. I understood it well listening to it, but when I read it afterwards I found it difficult to focus because I already knew what was going to happen. It is far easier for me to fully grasp a story when I listen to it after I have already read it, as I did with "Roman Fever". When I do it that way I am able to focus on the story when I read it, and then pick up any details I missed by listening to it.
Hi Mrs. Drance,
ReplyDeleteListening to "The Lottery" before reading did not help me comprehend the plot too well. I felt that it was harder to follow along because I didn't know what was going to happen. In comparison, reading "Roman Fever" before listening to it greatly helped me to understand the story. Knowing the plot already enabled me to pick up on details that I missed reading it. Since I didn't know what "lottery" meant at the start of the story, I couldn't pick up on tense feelings between the townspeople. Overall, reading a story then listening to it helps me understand the plot better.
Hi Mrs Drance,
ReplyDeleteWe should listen to audio books more often because they further my comprehension of the stories! Listening to "The Lottery" before reading the actual story helped me very much. After listening, I knew what had already happened in the story; so instead of trying to understand the story while reading it, I tried ti pick up more specific things. I tried to picture the characters in my mind and also look for descriptions that I did not pick up while listening. Even reading a story first, then listening is more purposeful than to solely read the story. By doing both so many more details in the stories are brought up.
Hi Mrs. Drance,
ReplyDeleteListening to "The Lottery" before reading it made it harder to understand. I have a hard time concentrating when I listen to something. It is much easier for me to concentrate when I read something instead. When I was listening to "The Lottery" I did not understand what the lottery was actual for. I had to read it to understand the full story. I liked how we read "Roman Fever" and then listened to it better. Personally, I would rather read along as I listened to it the best.
Hey Mrs. Drance,
ReplyDeleteI enjoyed reading "Roman Fever" and then listening to it better than listening to "The Lottery" and then reading it. I enjoyed reading the stories better then listening to them because the words are more understandable while reading than listening. Also, if I misunderstood a part I could easily reread the section, but listening was more difficult to see where you misunderstood. I often found myself not paying attention to the reader's voice. I enjoyed listening to the story after reading it because it helps describe the tone of the story and it is good to hear the characters voice.
Hi Mrs. Drance,
ReplyDeleteListening to "The Lottery" before reading the actual story didn't help me to comprehend it better. I had trouble concentrating on the reader because i didn't know what the story was about before hand. I found it more helpful to read "Roman Fever" before listening to it. Having read the story first,I didnt have to concentrate so hard on the plot, and I was able to listen and pick up on little details which was helpful.
Dear Mrs. Drance,
ReplyDeleteListening to these short stories definitely allows me to understand the text better. After first listening and then reading the story I was able to focus on key elements of the text like foreshadowing and the characterization of the villagers. While listening to the audio I closed my eyes so I could picture the story, this worked very well for me. Using both the text and the audio of a story helps me better understand key details.
Hey Mrs. Drance,
ReplyDeleteListening to "The Lottery" and then reading it to myself did not aid in my comprehension of the story. Rather, it made me more loss and confused. By listening to the story first it made it harder for me to understand the plot because I couldn't go back and re-read. Although, by listening to the audiotape I could see a more vivid picture without having read the story first I didn't know what details to focus or look for. However, with reading the story first then hearing the audiotape like what we did with "Roman Fever" further improved my reading experience. Having read the story first I could better understand why the reader was emohasizing certain attitudes and details. I also knew where the plot was going so there was better flow which gave me more of an oppurtunity to sit back and imagine the scenes. It was similar to reading the lyrics before you hear a song. By knowing the lyrics ahead of time, you can understand the true meaning. Then by listening to the actual song, you can hear where the artist wanted emphasis and passion.
-Grace-Ann
Dear Mrs. Drance,
ReplyDeleteListening to "The Lottery" first and then reading it allowed to me clearly understand the events that were transpiring. Additionally, while reading it, I was able to create a vivid picture in my head of the events. But I felt that reading the story and then listening to it, as we did with "Roman Fever", worked better for me to picture the story and also comprehend the plot.
Hi Mrs. Drance,
ReplyDeleteI felt that listening to “The Lottery” before reading the story was not as helpful as reading the story first and then listening to it as we did for “Roman Fever”. When I read the story first I thought it was easier to get the general idea of the story. Then when listening to the story the details and tone became more clear. I definitely preferred to read the story first and then listen to it because I think it helped to know what I was listening for before hearing it.
-Kerry
Hello Mrs. Drance,
ReplyDeleteListening to “The Lottery” before reading it was not as helpful as reading the story first, just like "Roman Fever". When i read i pick up more detail and can pay attention to the story rather than spacing out while listening. Its easier to pick up the story's actual tone when listening but its almost more entertaining to imagine your own version of it.
Jimbo Slice
Hi Mrs. Drance,
ReplyDeleteI found that listening to "The Lottery" before reading it did not really help in my comprehension of the story at all. I actually prefer to read the story first so that I can pick up on all of the details and elements of the story, and then listen to it so I know what to pay better attention to. I found that I better understood "Roman Fever" because we were able to read the story before listening to it. So overall, I think that it works best to read the story and then listen to it.
-Kayla
Mrs. Drance,
ReplyDeleteListening to "The Lottery" did not help my comprehension of the story. I find it much easier to understand the story when I've read it first, so that way I can get a clue of what the story will be about before listening to it. To me, listening to it first would be like, for example, watching all of the Harry Potter movies and then reading all of the books: sort of pointless, because then the depth and creativity of the novels are lost, since you compare everything to what you've previously seen/heard. Therefore, I think it was more helpful to read the story and then listen to it, like we did with "Roman Fever."
Hi, Everyone.
ReplyDeleteFirst off, I want you to know how proud I am of you. Your responses provide the necessary evidence to support your opinions. These posts show your purpose - to explain why listening first, then reading or reading/first then listening better aided your comprehension. Well done, class. Woo hoo!
One request - please proofread your comments before posting. There linger here and there some GUMS errors, particularly not capitalizing "i". I know, it's tough. You're on a computer. Just check for this and anything else, such as awkward phrasing, missing apostrophes, misspells, and revise them before pressing "enter." Believe me, I know how your finger itches to "get it done." Same here.
Keep up the good work and have a wonderful break.
Mrs. Drance
Hey Mrs. Drance,
ReplyDeleteListening to "The Lottery" before reading did not help me understand the plot better. When we read "Roman Fever" i was able to get the main plot, and listening helped me catch the details. When I listened to "The Lottery" I had trouble understanding the plot and didn't really understand the tone of it. I thought it was a happy lottery, until the last few minutes. Also, you can't really keep rewinding it, so it's easier to look back when you read. Therefore, I think it's better to read, then listen.
Ok, we've got everyone now!
ReplyDeleteAgain, thanks for being part of this experiment. Hopefully, you learned about how you best comprehend.
Mrs. Drance