Fundamentals of Literacy

Instruction and Assessment, 6–Â�12

 Fundamentals of Literacy
Instruction and Assessment, 6–Â�12

edited by

Martha C. Hougen, Ph.D.

University of Florida
Gainesville

Baltimore • London • Sydney

Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.
Post Office Box 10624
Baltimore, Maryland 21285-�0624

www.brookespublishing.com

Copyright © 2015 by Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co., Inc.

All rights reserved.

“Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.” is a registered trademark

of Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co., Inc.

Typeset by Scribe Inc., Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.

Manufactured in the United States of America by
Sheridan Books, Inc., Chelsea, Michigan.

Cover image ©istockphoto/monkeybusinessimages.

Photographs on page 48 courtesy of Michael Cerza.

Selected interior photos ©istockphoto: diego_cervo / AVAVA / zamac / arieliona / lisafx / monkeybusinessÂ�
images / mangostock / AlexRaths / 4774344sean / sumnersgraphicsinc / photodeti / JinHui1988 / vitchanan /
kadirkaplan / kali9 / Antonio_Diaz

Common Core State Standards © Copyright 2010. National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and
Council of Chief State School Officers. All rights reserved.

The individuals described in this book are composites of the authors’ actual experiences or real people. In most
instances, names and identifying information have been changed to protect confidentiality. Real names and
likenesses are used by permission.

Library of Congress Cataloging-�in-�Publication Data

The Library of Congress has cataloged the printed edition as follows:
Fundamentals of literacy instruction and assessment, 6–12 / [edited by] Martha C. Hougen, Ph.D., University
of Florida
pages  cm
Summary: “This book is an introduction to teaching reading and writing to secondary students, grades 6–12.
Based on cutting edge research, recommended practices, and the Common Core State Standards, this core
adolescent literacy textbook covers key elements of instruction and how reading and writing skills develop
in older students, then thoroughly explores disciplinary literacy, providing the understanding and strategies
future teachers need to instruct adolescents in the different reading and writing capacities required by dif-
ferent content areas. Chapters also offer guidance for supporting English language learners, working within
response to intervention and other multi-tiered systems of support to better meet the needs of struggling
learners and addressing students’ social emotional learning” —Provided by publisher.
Includes bibliographical references and index.
ISBN 978-1-59857-359-6 (hardback) — ISBN 1-59857-359-4 (hardback)
1. Language arts (Middle school—United States. 2. Language arts (Middle School—Standards—United
States. 3. Language arts (Secondary—United States. 4. Language arts (Secondary—Standards—United
States. I. Hougen, Martha Clare.
LB1631.F86 2014
428.0071'2—dc23 2014027988

British Library Cataloguing in Publication data are available from the British Library.
2018 2017 2016 2015 2014

10  9  8  7  6  5  4  3  2  1
 Contents

About the Editor................................................................................................................................................................ vii

About the Contributors......................................................................................................................................................ix
Foreword  Carol Jago.................................................................................................................................................. xiii
Preface..................................................................................................................................................................................xv
Acknowledgments.......................................................................................................................................................... xvii

1 Teaching Literacy and Content..................................................................................................................................1

Martha C. Hougen

2 Social and Emotional Consequences of Reading Disabilities..............................................................................15

Leslie C. Novosel

3 Features of Effective Instruction..............................................................................................................................27

Jennifer B. Wick Schnakenberg and Martha C. Hougen

4 Academic Vocabulary Development: Meaningful, Memorable,

and Morphological.....................................................................................................................................................41
Susan Ebbers and Martha C. Hougen

5 Fluency Development for the Older Student.........................................................................................................61

Jan Hasbrouck and Martha C. Hougen

6 “Now It Makes Sense!”: Best Practices for Reading Comprehension................................................................75

Stephen Ciullo and Colleen Klein Reutebuch

7 Learning to Write and Writing to Learn.................................................................................................................97

Joan Sedita

8 Understanding the New Demands for Text Complexity in

American Secondary Schools.................................................................................................................................115
Elfrieda H. Hiebert

9 The What and Why of Disciplinary Literacy.......................................................................................................127

Cynthia Shanahan and Timothy Shanahan

10 Disciplinary Literacy in English Language Arts Classes...................................................................................141

Leslie S. Rush

v
vi Contents

11 Teaching Disciplinary Literacy in History Classes.............................................................................................153

Abby Reisman and Bradley Fogo

12 Teaching Secondary Students to Read and Write in Science.............................................................................165

Dolores Perin

13 Reading and Writing as a Mathematician............................................................................................................179

Brian R. Bryant and Diane Pedrotty Bryant

14 Literacy in the Arts...................................................................................................................................................191

Neva Cramer

15 Teaching Adolescent English Language Learners...............................................................................................205

Desirée Pallais

16 Response to Intervention and Multi-tiered Systems for Support

in Secondary Schools...............................................................................................................................................223
Pamela Bell

17 Microblogging: An Example of Using Technology to Increase

Engagement..............................................................................................................................................................233
Hannah R. Gerber

18 Current Laws, Policies, and Initiatives.................................................................................................................239

Martha C. Hougen, Susan M. Smartt, and Jane M. Hunt

19 Ten Tips for Becoming an Effective Teacher........................................................................................................251

Martha C. Hougen

Appendix A Formative Assessment Strategies.........................................................................................................255

Appendix B Helpful Web Sites...................................................................................................................................263
Appendix C Sample Lesson Plans and Instructional Tools....................................................................................267
Appendix D Glossary...................................................................................................................................................283

Index..................................................................................................................................................................................291
 About the Editor

Martha C. Hougen, Ph.D., CEEDAR Center, University of Florida, 1403 Norman Hall/Post
Office Box 117050, Gainesville, FL 32611-�7050

Dr. Hougen is Teacher Education Professional Development Leader at the Collaboration for
Effective Educator Development, Accountability, and Reform Center (CEEDAR Center) at
the University of Florida. CEEDAR’s mission is to implement systemic reform to improve the
achievement of students who struggle with learning, particularly students with disabilities. As
a general and special education teacher, public school administrator, and university faculty
member, Dr. Hougen has dedicated her work to improving teacher effectiveness and student
achievement. Dr. Hougen earned degrees from the University of Wisconsin–Madison, Ameri-
can University, and The University of Texas at Austin. Her recent work at the Meadows Center
for Preventing Educational Risk at The University of Texas at Austin focused on improving
teacher education by providing teacher educators with professional learning and collaborative
opportunities.
Awards Dr. Hougen has received include the National Educator of the Year, 2007, from
the Council for Exceptional Children, Division of Learning Disabilities, and the Outstanding
Administrative Leadership in Reading Award from the Texas State Reading Association, 2006.
She is an active member of the International Dyslexia Association, the International Reading
Association, the Council for Exceptional Children, and the Council for Learning Disabilities.
In addition to peer-reviewed articles, curricular documents, and numerous presentations,
Dr. Hougen co-edited the college textbook Fundamentals of Literacy Instruction and Assessment,
Pre-K–6 (Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co., 2012).

vii
 About the Contributors

Pamela Bell, Ph.D., has over 40 years of experience in special education and in national, state,
and regional school improvement initiatives. Dr. Bell directs the Response to Intervention
Institute at the Meadows Center for Preventing Educational Risk at The University of Texas
at Austin. She is interested in preventing learning difficulties through effective response to
intervention implementation and in improving educational outcomes for youth in foster care.

Brian R. Bryant, Ph.D., is a research professor at The University of Texas at Austin. He served
as Research Director at PRO-�ED, Inc., in Austin, a university instructor, and a classroom teacher
in Maine. His research interests are in reading, writing, and mathematics learning disabilities;
support needs for individuals with intellectual and developmental disabilities; and assistive
technology applications across the lifespan.

Diane Pedrotty Bryant, Ph.D., holds the Mollie Villeret Davis Professorship in Learning Dis-
abilities in the Department of Special Education and is a project director for the Meadows
Center for Preventing Educational Risk, The University of Texas at Austin. She is the co-�editor-�
in-�chief of Learning Disability Quarterly. Her research interests focus on interventions in read-
ing and mathematics for students with learning disabilities and difficulties. Dr. Bryant is the
author of numerous peer-reviewed articles and coauthor of several textbooks and educational
assessments.

Stephen Ciullo, Ph.D., a former teacher, is currently an assistant professor of special education
at Texas State University and a research fellow at the Meadows Center for Preventing Educa-
tional Risk. His research interests include interventions to enhance content learning and literacy
outcomes in students with high-incidence disabilities in Grades 4–Â�12.

Neva Cramer, Ph.D., specializes in learning and teaching through the arts. With a background
in the performing arts and education, Dr. Cramer has combined her interests and studies to
promote literacy and learning through the arts at state, national, and international conferences
and through her research and publications. She was recently awarded the Elmore Whitehearst
Award for Creative Teaching at Schreiner University, where she is an assistant professor and
the director of education.

Susan Ebbers, Ph.D., is an educational consultant, author, and researcher. After 15 years in
public and private education, she began writing research-aligned vocabulary, morphology,
and decoding curricula, published by Sopris West. Vist her blog, Vocabulogic, created to connect
teachers with reserachers and to diminish the verbal gap that separates students of high and
low levels of linguistic insight.

Brad Fogo, Ph.D., is Director of Digital Curriculum for the Stanford History Education Group.
He also works as a clinical research associate for history education at the Center to Support
Excellence in Teaching. A public school history teacher for 9 years, he holds a Ph.D. in curricu-
lum and teacher education from Stanford University.

ix
x About the Contributors

Hannah R. Gerber, Ph.D., is an assistant professor in the Department of Language, Literacy,

and Special Populations at Sam Houston State University. Her scholarship focuses on the ecol-
ogies and pedagogies afforded through video-�gaming practices among adolescents. She is the
author of forthcoming books Game Night at the Library (Gerber & Abrams, VOYA Press) and
Qualitative Methods for Researching Online Learning (Gerber, Abrams, Curwood, & Magnifico,
Sage) and the edited volume Building Literate Connections Through Video Games and Virtual Envi-
ronments: Practical Ideas and Connections (Gerber & Abrams, Sense Publishers). She is the found-
ing co-editor of the Sense book series Gaming Ecologies and Pedagogies.

Jan Hasbrouck, Ph.D., has worked as a reading specialist and coach, a university professor,
and a consultant. Her research in reading fluency, assessment, and coaching has been widely
published. She currently works with schools in the United States and internationally to help
increase the academic success of students with reading difficulties.

Elfrieda “Freddy” Hiebert, Ph.D., has had a long career as a literacy educator, first as a teach-
er’s aide and teacher of primary-Â�level students in California and, subsequently, as a teacher
educator and researcher at the University of Kentucky, University of Colorado–Â�Boulder, Uni-
versity of Michigan, and University of California–Â�Berkeley. Her research, which addresses
how fluency, vocabulary, and knowledge can be fostered through appropriate texts, has been
published in numerous scholarly journals and books. Through documents such as Becoming a
Nation of Readers (Center for the Study of Reading, 1985) and Every Child a Reader (Center for
the Improvement of Early Reading Achievement, 1999), she has contributed to making research
accessible to educators (also see her web site www.textproject.org). Dr. Hiebert’s contributions
to research and practice have been recognized through awards including the American Educa-
tional Research Association’s Research to Practice Award (2013).

Jane M. Hunt, Ed.D., is a clinical assistant professor in the Teaching, Learning and Lead-
ing with Schools and Communities Teacher Preparation Program at Loyola University, Chi-
cago. She has over 30 years of experience in education, including teaching in elementary and
middle school classrooms, serving as a reading specialist and consultant, and working with
teacher candidates and school partners as a university professor. Dr. Hunt’s research and
teaching focuses on preparing literacy teachers to enter the field with the knowledge, skills,
and commitment required to be able to meet the needs of all learners, primarily those in at-�
risk populations.

Leslie C. Novosel, Ph.D., is an assistant professor in the College of Education, University of

Hawai’i at Mānoa; she received her doctorate from the University of Kansas. Dr. Novosel is a
former special educator and reading teacher for incarcerated youth with disabilities. Dr. Novo-
sel is driven to improve the literacy and life outcomes of vulnerable adolescents who are at risk
of school failure. She credits the editor of this book, Dr. Martha Hougen, for her guidance and
inspiration.

Desirée Pallais, M.A., is an independent consultant serving the needs of educators who work
with bilingual and English language learners. Ms. Pallais formerly worked at the Meadows
Center for Preventing Educational Risk and provided online supports for teachers. In her
native Nicaragua, she founded and directed an innovative school; taught college; and sup-
ported national initiatives in curriculum, training, and evaluation. Currently, she assists reading
reform efforts in Latin America.

Dolores Perin, Ph.D., is Professor of Psychology and Education in the Department of Health
and Behavior Studies at Teachers College, Columbia University. She directs the Reading Spe-
cialist master program, which prepares students for state certification as teachers of literacy.
Her research interests include the education of struggling readers and writers through the
lifespan. Dr. Perin received a Ph.D. in psychology from the University of Sussex in the United
About the Contributors xi

Kingdom and is a licensed psychologist with practical experience with individuals who have
reading and writing difficulties.

Abby Reisman, PhD., is an assistant professor at the University of Pennsylvania who focuses
on historical thinking and adolescent literacy. Her most recent inquiries center on teacher
preparation around high-�leverage practices, such as text-�based discussion, and the design and
interpretation of Common Core aligned history assessments. With Brad Fogo, she developed
the Reading Like a Historian curriculum (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wWz08mVUIt8), a
document-�based curriculum that engages students in historical inquiry. She works with dis-
tricts across the country on helping teachers implement the Reading Like a Historian approach.

Colleen Klein Reutebuch, Ph.D., is a senior research associate at The University of Texas at
Austin and director of the Literacy Institute at the Meadows Center for Preventing Educa-
tional Risk. She is a former secondary special and general education teacher. Dr. Reutebuch
coordinates and directs intervention and professional development experimental studies. She
currently serves as coinvestigator on two Institute of Education Sciences–Â�funded grants.

Leslie S. Rush, M.Ed., Ph.D., is Associate Dean for Undergraduate Programs in the College of Edu-
cation at the University of Wyoming. An experienced English teacher and English teacher educator,
Dr. Rush is the co-editor of English Education, the journal of the Conference on English Education.
Her research interests include disciplinary literacy, literacy coaching, and adolescent literacy.

Joan Sedita, M.Ed., has been a literacy specialist and nationally recognized teacher trainer for
over 35 years. She is the author of several content literacy professional development programs,
including The Key Comprehension, The Key Vocabulary, and The Key Writing routines. Prior to
founding Keys to Literacy, Joan worked at the Landmark School for 23 years, was a lead trainer
for Reading First, and was a national LETRS author and trainer. She received her M.Ed. in read-
ing from Harvard University and her B.A. from Boston College. Dr. Sedita is also an adjunct
instructor at Endicott College and Fitchburg State University.

Cynthia Shanahan, Ed.D., is Professor Emerita in the Department of Curriculum and Instruc-
tion at the University of Illinois–Â�Chicago. She is also a principal investigator for Project READI
and Institute of Education Sciences–Â�funded reading comprehension grant. The focus of her
research is on disciplinary literacy.

Timothy Shanahan, Ph.D., is Distinguished Professor Emeritus of Education at the University

of Illinois–Â�Chicago, where he was Director of the UIC Center for Literacy. Professor Shanahan
is a former director of reading for the Chicago Public Schools, and he is Past President of the
International Reading Association. He is the author of more than 200 publications on reading
and writing instruction and assessment.

Susan M. Smartt, Ph.D., has more than 30 years of teaching experience at the elementary and
university levels. She has presented, published, and provided professional development nation-
ally. She is co-editor with Martha Hougen on Fundamentals of Literacy Instruction and Assessment,
Pre-K–6 (Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co., 2012).

Jennifer B. Wick Schnakenberg, Ph.D., is the principal investigator for the Texas Literacy
Initiative at the Vaughn Gross Center for Reading and Language Arts and the project director
for Preventing School Dropout with Secondary Students: The Implementation of an Individu-
alized Reading Intervention and Dropout Prevention Intervention at the Meadows Center for
Preventing Educational Risk at The University of Texas at �Austin. Her research interests include
teacher effectiveness, the impacts of professional development on teacher learning and student
achievement, interventions for students with reading difficulties at all ages, and how leadership
influences school culture and climate.
 Foreword

I became an English teacher thinking my work would revolve primarily around interpreting
Mark Twain, Emily Dickinson, and William Shakespeare. It took a classroom of eighth graders
less than a week to disabuse me of this notion. I quickly realized that in order to teach content,
I was going to have to develop my students’ literacy. Unfortunately, I didn’t know how.
Fundamentals of Literacy Instruction and Assessment, 6–Â�12 will make your chances for suc-
cess in the classroom—Â�and ultimately your students’ chances for success in life—Â�much better
than mine were 32 years ago. It offers both guidance for what to do when students struggle
with the readings you assign and the research supporting those methods. Understanding
the theoretical underpinnings of a strategy will help you know when and where to employ
it most effectively.
As Martha Hougen and Jennifer Wick Schnakenberg explain in Chapter 3, efficacy—Â�the
ability to promote student learning—Â�is every teacher’s goal: “When instruction is ineffective,
everyone suffers—Â�students are not learning, teachers are discouraged, test results are abysmal,
and administrators and parents are not pleased.” Dr. Hougen and Dr. Wick Schnakenberg
provide a model for effective instruction that builds on what students know and supports
their acquisition of new knowledge. They also demonstrate methods for integrating formative
assessments within instruction so that providing feedback to students regarding their progress
(or lack thereof) becomes a virtuous cycle of improvement.
Many novice teachers unintentionally reproduce the kind of instruction they experienced
in school whether or not such methods were effective. The authors of Fundamentals of Literacy
Instruction and Assessment, 6–Â�12 do not hold back from warning you of ineffective practices—for
example, responding to a wrong answer from a student with “No—Â�anyone else?” Such careless,
though instinctive, responses reinforce some students’ conviction that school is not for them and
that they will never be good at that particular subject. Training oneself to respond otherwise, to
ask the student instead how he came to this idea, is an important step on the road to becoming
an effective teacher.
You probably decided to enter the profession because your own experiences in school
were largely positive. You read well; you were a decent writer; and though sometimes bored,
you rarely had difficulty staying in your seat. You may well have been the “anyone else” your
teacher could always count on for knowing the correct answer. The challenge for someone for
whom almost any instructional method worked becoming a teacher is learning how to engage
students for whom the classroom is not an easy fit—Â�students who give “wrong” answers as
a matter of course as well as those who never raise their hands at all. This textbook provides a
cornucopia of ideas and approaches to help you reach and teach every kind of student. It also
offers a road map for your own professional growth. Teaching isn’t something that can be
mastered in a 1, 2, or 5 years. It’s a craft that you will continue to develop over the course of
your entire career.
Young teachers I talk with often long for the good old days. If there is one thing I know
for sure, it’s that there have never been any “good old days.” Teenagers have always been
wacky. They’ve always been wonderful. They have always tried to do as little as possible but
loved a lively discussion. Kids haven’t changed; society has. Jobs for anyone with limited

xiii
xiv Foreword

literacy have almost disappeared. The prospects for any student whom we fail with are grim.
With stakes this high, the urgency to get it right every period and every day is immense. Let
the research, experience, and wisdom contained in this volume help you do your best for
your students.

Carol Jago, M.A.

Associate Director
California Reading and Literature Project
University of California, Los Angeles
 Preface

Since the early 2000s, there has been a strong convergence of evidence about how to teach
adolescent literacy and how to support students who struggle to learn. The editor and contrib-
utors to this text are passionate about sharing this evidence and the instructional strategies
supported by the research. Teachers and administrators, and those who prepare them, must
have knowledge of this research and evidence-�based practices to meet the needs of our diverse
student population. Support personnel, such as instructional coaches, school psychologists,
speech-�language pathologists, and reading specialists, will be able to provide more targeted
student support if they are aware of these precepts. Finally, parents will be more knowledgeable
advocates for their children after reading this book.
The editor, Martha Hougen, has dedicated her life to improving the literacy skills of our
nation’s adolescents. In this text she has combined her experiences and knowledge with that
of nationally renowned researchers and educators to synthesize the most critical aspects of
reading and writing instruction.
Fundamentals of Literacy Instruction and Assessment, 6–Â�12 is designed to be among the first
texts secondary teachers will study about literacy. To become an effective literacy teacher of all
students, additional study is required. This text provides essential background knowledge that
enables teachers to comprehend more in-�depth texts addressing complex aspects of teaching
literacy. In addition to learning about the fundamental components of literacy instruction, read-
ers learn how to address the Common Core State Standards, how to differentiate instruction for
students, and how to teach literacy in specific disciplines to better prepare students for college
and careers. Opportunities to apply evidence-�based instructional strategies with students are
encouraged while studying this text; sample lesson plans and activities are provided. Finally,
assignments to reinforce the concepts presented in each chapter are recommended.
This text is designed to provide essential foundational knowledge about literacy instruc-
tion and assessment practices and to support educators in the common goal of enabling each
student to become a competent and critical lifelong reader and writer.

xv
 Acknowledgments

I would like to acknowledge and thank the esteemed contributors to this text. I appreciate them
for sharing their vast knowledge and experience; their input has been invaluable in creating a
text to promote effective adolescent literacy instruction.
Thanks also to the innumerable literacy professionals, teachers, researchers, professors,
administrators, and colleagues who have contributed to my knowledge of literacy instruction
and practice. It has been a great privilege to work with professionals who are constantly striving
to increase our knowledge base and the success of our students.
Finally, thank you to the secondary students and teachers with whom I have had the
opportunity to work. It is from them that I have learned the most about how to become an
effective teacher—Â�they are the ones who motivate me to continue learning and striving to
become a better educator.

xvii
To the teachers and students who have enriched my life by their
dedication, motivation, perseverance, and creativity. I salute you.
 Fundamentals of Literacy
Instruction and Assessment, 6–Â�12
 1
Teaching Literacy and Content
Martha C. Hougen

Congratulations on choosing to become a teacher: one of the most important, rewarding, and
challenging occupations. You are in a unique position to change the lives of students, either by
supporting their achievement and success or by contributing to their failure. You, of course,
want to help students succeed, learn, and be prepared for college and meaningful careers when
they leave school. This text is designed to provide you with the fundamentals to teach a diverse
population of students to become literate, contributing citizens.
Ensuring all students are college and career ready upon high school graduation has become
more and more challenging. As a secondary teacher, you will be responsible for students who
speak many languages, come from diverse ethnic and economic backgrounds, and have a wide
variety of background experiences. Some will enter school unable to read the materials you
assign; others may not know how to write a complete sentence, much less an argumentative
essay or a research paper. Many will lack the skills, stamina, and motivation to tackle complex
text in your area of specialization. Yet all depend on you, their teacher, to motivate them, teach
them, encourage them, and care for them. This book will help you address this daunting chal-
lenge. It will guide you through research and practical applications to successfully teach all
your students to read and write while teaching them the content of your course. If you study

Objectives: After studying this chapter, you will be able to:

1. Provide an overview of the text and explain its purpose.
2. Articulate the big idea questions that guide the text.
3. Define and discuss what constitutes effective instruction.
4. Define and discuss what constitutes differentiated instruction, including universal
design for learning (UDL).
5. Explain the difference between content area reading and disciplinary literacy.
6. Discuss common instructional challenges presented by students at risk for educa-
tional failure, including students from economically disadvantaged backgrounds,
students who are English language learners (ELLs), and students who have
disabilities.
7. Describe the role of the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) and other relevant
standards.
8. Explain your responsibilities as a tutor and begin preparations to tutor a student.

1
2 Hougen

these chapters, complete the recommended assignments, and apply the concepts with your
students, you will become an effective teacher of literacy and of your content.
As a secondary content teacher, you are not expected to teach students the basics of read-
ing like an elementary teacher teaches students to read. However, you are expected to support
students to advance their general reading expertise and to learn to read in your discipline. By
the time you complete this text, you will be able to weave literacy assessment and instruction
into all your lessons. You will find that by teaching certain literacy skills, your students will
not only improve their reading ability but also learn the content you are teaching them.

Overview of This Text

The overarching goal of this text is to prepare you to teach both literacy skills and the content
of your discipline. To address this goal, the text is organized in three sections. You and your
instructor will decide which chapters are most relevant to your work. It is suggested that all
candidates study each chapter in Section I, as those chapters explain general literacy strategies
that are appropriate in most contexts. You may want to choose the most relevant chapters in
Section II to delve more deeply into literacy skills and strategies essential to your discipline.
Section III addresses timely topics that all teachers should be knowledgeable about. A more
detailed overview follows.

Section I: Introduction to Literacy Assessment and Instruction, Grades 6–Â�12

Chapter 1: Teaching Literacy and Content
This chapter provides the organizing framework for the text and the big idea questions
addressed by each chapter. Effective instruction, needs of diverse learners, and the concept of
disciplinary literacy are introduced.

Chapter 2: Social and Emotional Consequences of Reading Disabilities

Teaching students how to manage their social and emotional needs is paramount. Dr. Leslie
Novosel explores the importance of social and emotional learning, the effects on students when
they struggle with reading, and what educators can do to support students in developing
healthy social and emotional behaviors. By learning to recognize and address the social and
emotional needs of adolescents, you will be better prepared to motivate them to learn and to
work cooperatively with you and their peers.

Chapter 3: Features of Effective Instruction

Becoming an efficacious teacher takes years, but this learning curve can be reduced when you
learn to apply the features of effective instruction. Dr. Jennifer Wick Schnakenberg and Dr. Martha
Hougen summarize evidence-�based research and instructional practices effective teachers apply.

Chapter 4: Academic Vocabulary Development:

Meaningful, Memorable, and Morphological
There is a wide gap in vocabulary size among groups of students when they first enter school
and this gap often grows.1 Therefore, because we know that vocabulary correlates with reading
comprehension, secondary teachers must teach their students relevant, academic vocabulary in
ways that accelerate vocabulary growth. Dr. Susan Ebbers and Dr. Hougen provide an in-�depth
background on the study of morphology and other components of vocabulary to ensure your
students become independent learners of academic vocabulary.
Teaching Literacy and Content 3

Chapter 5: Fluency Development for the Older Student

Reading text easily with automaticity and expression supports comprehension and motivates
students to read. Developing fluent reading in secondary school is difficult but necessary.
Dr. Jan Hasbrouck explains that fluent reading is not speed reading but reading at a pace that
supports comprehension. This chapter describes how to assess your students’ fluency and how
to support students in reaching a reasonable rate of reading that supports comprehension.

Chapter 6: “Now It Makes Sense!”: Best Practices for Reading Comprehension

The ultimate goal of reading instruction is to ensure students can comprehend what they read.
Dr. Steve Ciullo and Dr. Colleen Reutebuch review the most effective strategies to increase
reading comprehension skills of adolescent readers. Only 44% of high school graduates tested
on the ACT met the reading-�readiness benchmark, an indication that they are not prepared to
read college-�required texts.2

Chapter 7: Learning to Write and Writing to Learn

Joan Sedita clarifies the most important aspects of teaching writing—Â�an essential skill to
communicate as well as to master new learning. Currently, significant numbers of students
are not prepared for the rigors of the new CCSS; indeed, about one-�third of first-�year college
students require remedial writing courses.3 Learning to write in all the disciplines and in a
variety of genres for different purposes is a necessity for students to be successful in college
and careers.

Chapter 8: Understanding the New Demands

for Text Complexity in American Secondary Schools
The CCSS raise the rigor of reading and writing expectations. The secondary texts that students
need to comprehend are more complex and demand critical thinking skills. Dr. Elfreida Hiebert
explains the use of Lexiles to determine text complexity and the role of the teacher in selecting
texts for students.

Section II: Disciplinary Literacy

By now you have an understanding of the research and recommended practices to teach
general literacy skills to your students. Section II of the text delves into reading in specific
disciplines.

Chapter 9: The What and Why of Disciplinary Literacy

Dr. Timothy Shanahan and Dr. Cynthia Shanahan explain what disciplinary literacy is and
why it is so important. Each discipline has its own norms and expectations: A historian reads
authentic documents differently than a chemist reads lab reports. These different approaches to
reading need to be explicitly taught to secondary students so that they can make the necessary
shifts in thinking among the disciplines.

Chapter 10: Disciplinary Literacy in English Language Arts Classes

Some may be surprised to think that there is a specialized way to read in English class. Dr. Leslie
Rush elucidates the skills needed to read literature and other genres successfully.
4 Hougen

Chapter 11: Teaching Disciplinary Literacy in History Classes

Reading and writing in history class require unique approaches and ways of thinking. Dr. Abby
Reisman and Dr. Brad Fogo explain how to teach students to reason, read, and write like a his-
torian and to apply skills such as sourcing, contextualizing, and corroborating texts.

Chapter 12: Teaching Secondary Students to Read and Write in Science

An in-�depth understanding of how to interpret scientific text is required to be an informed citizen.
Dr. Dolores Perin explains how essential literacy skills can be taught in science classes, including
how to approach scientific writing and extract information from charts, graphs, and tables.

Chapter 13: Reading and Writing as a Mathematician

For many students, a huge barrier to higher education is passing Algebra I. One reason students
struggle with mathematics is because they do not know how to read and interpret mathematical
symbols and text. Dr. Brian Bryant and Dr. Diane Bryant discuss how to teach students to read
and write in algebra, preparing the students to be successful in subsequent mathematics courses.

Chapter 14: Literacy in the Arts

The arts provide a rich opportunity to enhance literacy skills of students. Dr. Neva Cramer uses
visual and communicative arts to illustrate how to support literacy skills, including the skills
of observation, discussion, reading, and writing.

Section III: Timely Topics

These are interesting times in education—Â�some say a critical time. Changes in demography,
employment options, technology resources, and school populations provide challenges and
opportunities. By learning how to support students learning English and those with disabilities,
teachers will hone their skills while supporting the achievement of all their students. This text
addresses the following timely topics.

Chapter 15: Teaching Adolescent English Language Learners

Desiree Pallais shares effective instructional strategies for teaching ELL and explains why stu-
dents typically make certain mistakes while learning English. With this understanding, all
teachers will be more cognizant of how to support their students.

Chapter 16: Response to Intervention and

Multi-tiered Systems for Support in Secondary Schools
Current law and recommended practice dictates educators identify students who struggle and
provide timely intervention instruction. In this chapter, Dr. Pamela Bell explains a framework
for ensuring students receive the support they need to be successful in school.

Chapter 17: Microblogging: An Example

of Using Technology to Increase Engagement
Teachers are expected to integrate technology into their instruction. The challenge is making
technology available to teachers and students and ensuring the technology is used effectively to
increase achievement. Dr. Hannah Gerber explains several methods of using digital literacies
to support classroom instruction.
Teaching Literacy and Content 5

Chapter 18: Current Laws, Policies, and Initiatives

Dr. Susan Smartt and Dr. Hougen provide a brief overview of the major laws, policies, and
initiatives affecting teachers today. The history and purpose of the CCSS and the resulting
“shifts” in thinking are explained.

Chapter 19: Ten Tips for Becoming an Effective Teacher

Research has shown that it takes 5–Â�7 years for a teacher to become most effective.4 In this final
chapter, Dr. Hougen tries to shorten that time for you by sharing 10 tips for becoming an effec-
tive teacher. However, she is the first to admit that, even after 40+ years in education, she still
has a lot to learn. She hopes that you will also strive to be a lifelong learner.

Endnotes, References, Glossary, and Appendixes

At the end of each chapter are endnotes indicating the source of the information presented and
often providing additional information. Complete references are also provided, and you are
encouraged to explore in more depth areas that interest you.
A glossary that defines terms used in the text is provided at the end of the book. Appen-
dixes provide additional information.

Organization of Chapters
Classroom Scenario
Each chapter begins with a scenario describing what you may experience as a teacher. The
scenarios are designed to help you focus on one aspect of literacy, using examples of actual
students and teachers. Your instructors may supplement the scenarios with case studies, pro-
viding you additional information about students and their achievement data so that you can
make informed instructional decisions.

Objectives
Learning objectives are stated in most chapters and focus on the most important information
you need to know and apply. You will be asked to demonstrate your ability to apply your new
knowledge in class and with a student you will tutor.

Big Idea Guiding Questions

Six big idea questions are addressed in most chapters. These questions are meant to guide
your learning, clarify the most critical aspects of effective literacy instruction, and emphasize
evidence-�based recommended practices. After studying this text, you will be able to answer the
following six questions for the critical components of literacy instruction:
1. What is it (the component), why is it important, and what does the research say?
2. What should students know and be able to do in Grades 6–Â�12?
3. How do teachers assess what students know and how much they are learning?
4. How do teachers use assessments to plan instruction?
5. How do educators teach this component effectively, efficiently, and in a manner appro-
priate to the age or grade level of their students?
6. How do teachers develop instructional plans that incorporate standards and evidence-�
based strategies?5
6 Hougen

Opportunities for Application

Suggested opportunities to apply what you have learned are provided at the end of each chapter.
In-�Class Application Assignments are to be completed with your peers during class. The Tutoring
Application Assignments are to be completed with the students you will tutor. The Homework
Application Assignments are to be done on your own. The more practice you have applying the
concepts and activities presented in this text, the more effective you will be as a teacher.

Suggested Resources, Web Sites, and Readings

There are many resources available online. The most helpful ones are included in this text. Judi-
cious use of these resources will enhance your teaching and save you time. Be sure to explore them.

Tutoring
During this course you are expected to work with at least one student in Grades 6–Â�12. The text
is designed for you to tutor a student for 1 or 2 hours per week. Your instructor will help place
you with a student, provide the details about securing school and parent permission, and explain
the work you are expected to complete with your tutee. This text will discuss the elements of
tutoring, including assessing your student, determining instructional objectives, selecting appro-
priate materials, using research-�based activities and strategies, and evaluating your instruction.
You need to assemble your “Tutoring Toolbox.” The toolbox consists of materials you
should bring to every tutoring session. You will be taught how and when to use each item as
you read this text. Your toolbox should include the following:
• Paper, pencils (regular, red, and blue)
• Sticky notes
• Notecards
• Progress-Â�monitoring instruments (graphs and selected texts)
• A stopwatch
• A large, sticky board (see Appendix A)
• An assortment of quick assessments to assess phonics, spelling, fluency, and comprehension
• Other materials as determined by your instructor
There are also several inexpensive assessments that will provide a global overview of your
student’s strengths and needs. An assessment to consider is the San Diego Quick Assessment.6
Another is the Quick Phonics Screener (QPS).7 The QPS is an untimed, criterion-�referenced
assessment that measures a student’s ability to pronounce the phonetic elements in real and
nonsense words, kindergarten through adulthood. Additional screening assessments can be
found in the book CORE Assessing Reading—Â�Multiple Measures.8

Expectations and Responsibilities of a Tutor

You should work with one or more students during the semester. Each student deserves your
respect and best effort. In reality, the student will be your teacher! You are expected to be pre-
pared for each tutoring session, to dress and act as a professional educator, and to respect your
student. Your responsibilities include respecting the confidential nature of your work; you must
not discuss your student with anyone other than the student’s teacher and your instructor. Do
not include your student’s name or photograph on anything you submit in class. If you are
allowed to review test data or other personal information about the student, you must keep
the information confidential. Student confidentiality is protected by the Family Educational
Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) of 1974 (PL 93-�380). FERPA is a federal law that protects the
Teaching Literacy and Content 7

privacy of students’ education records. The law applies to all schools that receive funds under
an applicable program of the U.S. Department of Education. Stricter confidentiality laws apply
to students who qualify for special education services.

Lesson Plan Development and Delivery

Effective teachers plan and deliver thoughtful instruction to meet the instructional needs of each
student. They collect formal and informal assessment data so they know what their students
need to learn and where to start. This book includes a lesson plan template to support you in this
challenging task (see Appendix C). This lesson, appropriate for a high school English language
arts (ELA) class or a history class, focuses on the close reading of a complex, original, historical
document. Suggestions are provided to adapt the lesson for students who need additional help.

Overview of Instructional Considerations

This text discusses current research and evidence-�based effective instructional practices. This
section provides a brief overview of these considerations and initiatives including evidence-�based
effective instruction, the needs of diverse students, the UDL framework, and the CCSS Initiative.

Use of Effective Instructional Strategies Validated by Evidence-�Based Research

The selection of instructional materials and strategies must be based on sound research. There
are a myriad of programs, materials, and salespeople that will bombard you with the panacea
for all instructional needs. However, you must select carefully and spend your money and time
on materials and strategies that have been rigorously tested by scientific research. This means
that the strategies have been studied with many different types of students in different environ-
ments by several researchers. The strategies are found to be effective with most of the targeted
students (no strategy is effective with all students). Rigorous, scientific research is much more
than a single study with a small group of students, and the “it worked in my room” results are
not sufficient to make important instructional decisions for large numbers of students. Rather,
the research must be replicated with many groups of students with similar attributes to those
you teach. You can be confident that the strategies presented in this text are based on research,
have been used successfully with many students, and have a high likelihood of being effective
when used correctly with your students.

Needs of Diverse Students

In a typical secondary class, you will have students who may need acceleration as well as those
who may be at risk due to economic disadvantage or a disability or who are ELLs. Your students
will have vastly different backgrounds, rates of learning, strengths, and areas in need of inten-
sive support. Some of your students will read well; others may struggle with decoding words
or basic comprehension skills. Throughout this text, you will receive ideas about how to teach
differently—Â�or differentiate—Â�to meet the individual needs of each student. Differentiation may
mean using different materials and activities, teaching smaller groups of students, using assis-
tive technology, or sometimes even changing the objectives of what you want the students to
learn. Differentiating instruction based on student needs will ensure that your students master
the skills you teach them.
Let us explore the specialized needs of students likely to be in your class and how you can
scaffold their instruction. Scaffolding instruction refers to providing temporary support to help
the student reach the objective. When the student no longer needs the support, it is removed.
Think of training wheels on a bicycle: They are necessary for most novice riders but are quickly
removed when the child can ride independently. To provide appropriate scaffolds, you must
8 Hougen

observe and note the progress of your students

to know how to adjust instruction to keep the
students engaged and motivated while provid-
ing additional support as needed.
Accelerated students are those who learn
quickly and may need to be challenged with
more advanced material. These students may be
referred to as gifted and talented, advanced, or
exceptional. However, you will encounter stu-
dents who have not been identified as gifted yet
need accelerated instruction in certain subjects,
and you will have students who are identified
as gifted who are not gifted in all areas and may
need scaffolded instruction in specific skills.
At-�risk students include those who may
find learning challenging because they come
from economically disadvantaged homes, have
disabilities, or are ELLs.
Students from economic disadvantaged
homes often have different background knowl-
edge and have developed fewer school-�ready
skills than children from more affluent backgrounds. Often children from impoverished homes
have limited experience with literacy, and this persists through the secondary grades. Their
vocabulary knowledge is typically much less than students from the middle classes.9 You need
to target your instruction to ensure your students develop the literacy vocabulary and compre-
hension skills required to read rigorous text.
Students with disabilities will be in your class. Federal legislation has been created to
ensure that all children with disabilities have available to them a free appropriate public edu-
cation (FAPE) designed to meet their unique needs and prepare them for further education,
employment, and independent living.10
Under the federal Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA; PL 101-Â�476—
reauthorized in 2004 as PL 108-446), students may qualify for special education and related ser-
vices if they are deemed to have one or more of the following disabilities and their educational
performance is adversely affected due to the disability:11

• Autism
• Deaf-Â�blindness
• Deafness
• Emotional disturbance
• Hearing impairments
• Intellectual disabilities
• Multiple disabilities
• Orthopedic impairment
• Other health impairment
• Specific learning disability (SLD)
• Speech or language impairment
• Traumatic brain injury
• Visual impairment, including blindness

The law prescribes criteria for identification and assessment, the rights of parents and students,
and the responsibilities of school personnel.
Teaching Literacy and Content 9

Approximately 13% of schoolchildren have disabilities.12 This percentage varies by state

because each state has different criteria for placing students in special education. The most
common disabilities you will encounter in your classes are specific learning disabilities (SLDs).
An SLD is a neurological disorder that may make it difficult for students to acquire academic
and social skills. Currently, there are more than 2.5 million students diagnosed with learning
disabilities, and they represent 42% of all students with disabilities.13 Students with reading
disabilities make up approximately 85% of all children diagnosed as having an SLD.14
The definition of SLD in the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act of 2004 (PL 108-�446)
is as follows:
• The term specific learning disability means a disorder in one or more of the basic
psychological processes involved in understanding or in using language, spoken or
written, that may manifest itself in the imperfect ability to listen, think, speak, read,
write, spell, or do mathematical calculations.
• The term includes such conditions as perceptual disabilities, brain injury, minimal
brain dysfunction, dyslexia, and developmental aphasia.
• The term does not include a learning problem that is primarily the result of visual,
hearing, or motor disabilities; of intellectual disabilities; of emotional disturbance; or
of environmental, cultural, or economic disadvantage.15
Identified students must have an individualized education program (IEP), which educators
must follow. You should receive copies of the IEPs for all students with disabilities in your class.
The strategies and teaching practices suggested in this text will support students with
learning disabilities in reading and writing. It is likely that these students will need more inten-
sive instruction—Â�in smaller groups and for longer periods of time—Â�than other students. You
will be able to provide much of the instruction based on what you learn in this text. The special
education teacher may provide small group or inclusion support, and you should work with
the student’s special education teacher to determine how the two of you can collaborate.
The most common SLD is dyslexia. Dyslexia is a language-�based disability that is typically
manifested in students having difficulty with specific language skills, particularly reading. Dif-
ficulties with spelling, writing, and pronouncing words are also common factors in dyslexia. In
some states, students are diagnosed with dyslexia but deemed as not needing special education
services. Students with dyslexia may receive services and accommodations through Section
504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (PL 93-�112). Section 504 requires that individuals with a
disability that substantially limits a major life activity be provided with accommodations that
enable them to be successful in school and in the workplace.
The chances are high that you will teach students with dyslexia. Since the range of
severity of dyslexia varies from mild to severe, the student in your class may or may not be
officially identified (certified) as having an SLD, and therefore, the student may or may not
be receiving special education services. Nevertheless, you will be responsible for his or her
instruction and academic success. Typically, students with dyslexia have difficulty sequenc-
ing sounds in words, read slower than their peers, demonstrate poor spelling and handwrit-
ing, have trouble comprehending longer reading assignments, have poor reading stamina,
and/or have difficulty memorizing math facts. These difficulties are often “unexpected”
because these same students could have a large oral vocabulary and in-�depth knowledge
about certain subjects.
The most accepted definition of dyslexia is the one provided by the International Dyslexia
Association:
Dyslexia is a specific learning disability that is neurological in origin. It is characterized by dif-
ficulties with accurate and/or fluent word recognition and by poor spelling and decoding abili-
ties. These difficulties typically result from a deficit in the phonological component of language
that is often unexpected in relation to other cognitive abilities and the provision of effective
classroom instruction. Secondary consequences may include problems in reading comprehension
10 Hougen

and reduced reading experience that can impede the growth of vocabulary and background
knowledge.16

Another common disability is called attention-�deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).

Students with ADHD may have difficulties with sustaining attention and may be overly active.
They often receive special education services under “other health impaired” and/or “specific
learning disability” if appropriate. However, many children with ADHD, such as those with
dyslexia, may be protected under Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (PL 93-�112). You
will have students with ADHD in your classes, and the strategies and activities provided in this
text will support these students in learning.
ELLs are students for whom English is not their first language. People living in the United
States speak hundreds of different languages. The most common language, other than English,
is Spanish.17
Teachers have learned a great deal about how to best support students who are learning
English. Instructors know, for example, that we do not have to wait until they are proficient in
English to begin reading instruction.18 We also know that students who are learning English
need direct instruction to increase their vocabulary, and it may take several years of instruction
for them to reach academic levels of English vocabulary and comprehension.19
Another important finding is that the teacher does not have to speak the language of the
students to be a successful teacher.20 Instruction that is systematic and explicit and that provides
ample practice opportunities is necessary for English learners.21
Implementation of the features of effective instruction will ensure your students learn
the content you are teaching.22 For many years, researchers in education have studied what
constitutes good teaching. We know the skills teachers need to master to be effective. Effective
teachers manage their classroom well and make sure that all their students are engaged in
learning. The five features of effective instruction—Â�explained in detail later in the text—Â�are
the basis for excellent teaching, no matter what you teach. These features include the follow-
ing (see Figure 1.1):
1. Explicit instruction with modeling
2. Systematic instruction with scaffolding
3. Multiple opportunities for students to respond and practice
4. Ongoing progress monitoring
5. Immediate corrective feedback

Universal Design for Learning

UDL is an instructional design framework intended to reduce barriers to learning for stu-
dents with diverse learning needs, including students with disabilities, ELLs, and those from
diverse cultural and socioeconomic backgrounds. The UDL framework, originally based on
architectural principles to reduce physical barriers, is designed to enable the widest range
of students possible to participate fully in the instructional process by reducing barriers to
learning.23
The UDL framework is based on three principles that encourage teachers to plan their
instruction considering what and how students learn, how students demonstrate what they
have learned, and how to engage students. The three principles are the following:
1. Multiple means of representation provide content through multiple channels. This is the
what of learning.
2. Multiple means of action and expression provide students multiple ways to demonstrate
their understanding of the content. This is the how of learning.
3. Multiple means of engagement support effective learning. This is the why of learning.
Teaching Literacy and Content 11

1. Explicit instruction with modeling

2. Systematic instruction with scaffolding
3. Multiple opportunities for students to respond and practice
4. Ongoing progress monitoring
5. Immediate corrective feedback

Figure 1.1.â•… Features of effective instruction. (Source: Vaughn Gross

Center for Reading and Language Arts, 2007. As adapted in Hougen,
M.C., & Smartt, S.M. [2012]. The fundamentals of literacy instruction
and assessment, pre-K–6 [pp. 13, 64]. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes
Publishing Co.; reprinted by permission.)

The Higher Education Opportunity Act of 2008 (PL 110-�315) requires institutions of higher
education that receive federal funding to include teaching the principles of UDL in their edu-
cator preparation programs. The law defines UDL as
a scientifically valid framework for guiding educational practices that (a) provides flexibility in the
ways information is presented, in the ways learners respond or demonstrate knowledge and skills,
and in the ways learners are engaged: and (b) reduces barriers in instruction, provides appropriate
accommodations, supports and challenges, and maintains high achievement expectations for all In
an effort to unify curriculum.

Universal design for learning is also mentioned in the CCSS and in the IDEA 2004.24
Some teachers interpret UDL as primarily requiring students to have access to technology.
Although technology enables many students to engage in the instructional process, it is not the
only component of UDL. An important contribution of the UDL framework is the idea that teach-
ers should plan their instruction based on the needs of each of their students rather than planning
first for the “typical” learner and then devising ways for students with special needs to participate.

The Common Core State Standards Initiative

In an effort to unify curriculum, increase achievement across the nation, and ensure that all stu-
dents are college and career ready upon completion of high school, several national organizations
collaborated to create standards to guide education: the CCSS.25 The standards address mathemat-
ics and ELA and literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects, K–Â�12. The CCSS
were released in June 2010, and states are in the process of adopting the standards. Assessments
related to the standards were first implemented in 2014. The mission statement explains,
The Common Core State Standards provide a consistent, clear understanding of what students are
expected to learn, so teachers and parents know what they need to do to help them. The standards
are designed to be robust and relevant to the real world, reflecting the knowledge and skills that our
young people need for success in college and careers. With American students fully prepared for
the future, our communities will be best positioned to compete successfully in the global economy.26

Standards in education are intended to clarify the expectations of students and to increase
the rigor of instruction. The intent is that all students, no matter what state or ZIP code they
live in, receive an excellent education, preparing them for further education and/or a career.
The CCSS are referred to throughout the text.

Summary
Whether you are a general education teacher, a special education teacher, a reading specialist,
an interventionist, a math teacher, a science teacher, a history teacher, or an administrator, this
book will provide you with the basics of what you need to know to teach literacy to secondary
12 Hougen

students. Study it carefully, complete the suggested application assignments, and investigate
the suggested references and web sites, and you will learn to teach your students to read and
write in your content area.
Again, congratulations on your choice of career, and thank you for supporting and encour-
aging students to reach high levels of achievement so that they are prepared to be successful
in college, careers, and life.

Application Assignments
In-�Class Assignments
1. Review the objectives from Chapter 1. With a partner, take turns paraphrasing each
objective. Note those for which you need more information.
2. Explain the following to a partner: the expectations of you as a tutor; how you should
dress and act in the school; your responsibilities as a tutor; and how you should relate to
your student, the teachers, and the parents.
3. Brainstorm with a partner a list of your concerns about tutoring a student. Discuss your
concerns with the class and elicit suggestions from your colleagues and instructor.
4. Discuss with a partner some activities you can do with your student the first time you tutor.

Tutoring Assignments
1. Obtain a student with whom to work during the semester. Secure parental permission,
arrange a schedule with the school, and complete the requirements of your instructor
and university.
2. Create your tutoring toolbox.
3. Obtain an initial assessment tool. Your instructor will provide additional information
and training about the assessments you are to use with your student.
4. Develop a lesson plan to implement the first time you tutor your student. Include an
objective, materials, and an assessment. You may want to start by teaching your student
three to five vocabulary words related to a subject the student is studying.

Homework Assignments
1. Download and read Reading in the Disciplines: The Challenges of Adolescent Literacy by
Carol Lee and Anika Spratley27 at http://www.carnegie.org/literacy
Use a double entry journal to note your thoughts (see Appendix C).
2. Select and study an initial assessment tool appropriate for your student. Practice admin-
istering it.
3. Observe an entire reading period, usually 45–Â�90 minutes, in a local middle or high
school. Note how the teacher presented the material and assessed student learning.
Did you see evidence of the UDL framework? Of scaffolding instruction? Of the
teacher working with small groups of students? Be prepared to discuss your observa-
tions in class.
4. Write a one-�page paper describing how the teacher you observed differentiated instruc-
tion for students in the class, paying particular attention to students with disabilities,
students who are ELLs, and students who are accelerated. You may not be able to tell
which students need differentiated instruction. If all students are engaged and learning,
you are observing an effective teacher! Try to figure out what the teacher is doing to
make teaching and learning look so easy!
Teaching Literacy and Content 13
Endnotes
1. Hart & Risley (1995).
2. ACT, The Condition of College and Career Readiness (Iowa
City, IA: Author, 2013), http://www.act.org/research/policy
makers/cccr13/index.html
3. S. Graham and M. Hebert, Writing to Read: Evidence for
How Writing Can Improve Reading (Washington, DC: Alli-
ance for Excellent Education, 2010).
4. Brownell (2013). See also Ericsson (2006).
5. Deborah Simmons, Texas A&M University, created these
questions to guide her students. Dr. Simmons graciously
gave permission to use these questions in this text.
6. The San Diego Quick Assessment is available to down-
load at http://facstaff.bloomu.edu/dwalker/Documents/
San%20Diego%20Quick%20Assessment.pdf
7. Hasbrouck (2011).
8. Diamond & Thorsnes (2008).
9. Hart & Risley (1995).
10. U.S. Department of Education, http://idea.ed.gov
11. A useful web site that includes the definitions and other
information about IDEA and students with disabilities
is http://idea.ed.gov
12. U.S. Department of Education Institute of Education Sci-
ences, http://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=64
References
Argüelles, M.E., Baker, S., & Moats, L. (2011). Teaching English
learners: A supplemental LETRS module for instructional lead-
ers. Longmont, CO: Cambrium Learning Sopris.
Brownell, M. (2013). Collaboration for effective educator devel-
opment, accountability, and reform: The professional learning
systems we need. Arlington, VA: Within Year Assessment
Symposium.
Diamond, L., & Thorsnes, B.J. (2008). Assessing reading multi-
ple measures, 2nd edition. Novato, CA: Arena Press.
Fletcher, J.M., Lyon, G.R., Fuchs, L.S., & Barnes, M.A. (2007).
Learning disabilities: From identification to intervention. New
York, NY: Guilford.
Geva, E. (2000). Issues in the assessment of reading disabili-
ties in L2 children: Beliefs and research evidence. Dyslexia,
6, 13–Â�28.
Geva, E. (2006). Second-�language oral proficiency and
second-�language literacy. In D. August & T. Shanahan
(Eds.), Developing literacy in second-� language learners:
Report of the National Literacy Panel on language-�minority
children and youth (pp. 153–Â�174). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Goldenberg, C., Rueda, R.S., & August, D. (2006). Social and
cultural influences on the literacy attainment of language-�
minority children and youth. In D. August & T. Shana-
han (Eds.), Developing literacy in second-�language learners:
Report of the National Literacy Panel on language-�minority
13. The National Center for Learning Disabilities, http://
www.ncld.org
14. Fletcher et al. (2007).
15. IDEA, [34 C.F.R. 300.8(c)(10)], http://idea.ed.gov
16. International Dyslexia Association (2002).
17. Passel et al. (2011).
18. Geva (2000, 2006).
19. Scarcella (2003).
20. Goldenberg, Rueda, & August (2006).
21. Argüelles, Baker, & Moats (2011).
22. Vaughn Gross Center (2007).
23. National Center on Universal Design for Learning,
http://udlcenter.org/aboutudl/udlguidelines.
24. Common Core State Standards, http://www.core
standards.org
25. Common Core State Standards (CCSS) Initiative, http://
www.corestandards.org
26. Common Core State Standards (CCSS) Initiative, http://
www.corestandards.org/the-standards
27. Lee & Spratley (2010).
children and youth (pp. 269–Â�318). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum.
Hart, T., & Risley, B. (1995). Meaningful differences in the every-
day experience of young American children. Baltimore, MD:
Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.
Hasbrouck, J. (2011). The quick phonics screener 2. St. Paul,
MN: Read Naturally.
Higher Education Act of 2008, 20 U.S.C. § 1022d(b)(1)(K).
Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act
(IDEA) of 2004, PL 108-Â�446, 20 U.S.C. § 1400 et seq.
National Center on Universal Design for Learning. Retrieved
from http://udlcenter.org/aboutudl/udlguidelines
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices,
Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). The Common
Core State Standards. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved
from http://www.corestandards.org
Passel, J.S., Cohn, D., & Lopez, M.H. (2011). Hispanics account
for more than half of nation’s growth in the past decade. Pew
Hispanic Center. Retrieved from http://pewhispanic.org/
reports/report.php?ReportID=140
Scarcella, R. (2003). Accelerating academic English: A focus on
the English learner. Oakland, CA: Regents of the University
of California.
Vaughn Gross Center for Reading and Language Arts. (2007).
Features of effective instruction. Austin: University of Texas
System/Texas Education Agency.
 2
Social and Emotional
Consequences of Reading Disabilities
Leslie C. Novosel

Classroom Scenario
Central High School is located in a large urban community. Most of the students have teach-
ers whose racial, ethnic, and cultural background is different from their own. Most students
receive free or reduced-�price lunch, live in a single-�parent household, and speak a language
other than English at home.
Before the first bell rings at Central High, Mr. Green, a ninth-grade history teacher,
stands outside his classroom door and greets each student with a smile and a handshake
as they enter the room. Mr. Green knows all his students on a first-�name basis. He knows a
little about their cultural backgrounds, their interests, their hopes for the future, and what
gets them excited about learning. Mr. Green also has knowledge of each student’s strengths
and weaknesses and whether they might be coping with a disability or personal challenge.
His students recognize that he loves teaching and that he genuinely cares about their health
and well-�being, just as much as their academic success.
The classroom arrangement is frequently changed, but on this particular day, the desks
are pushed together into small groups of four or five. These groups are flexible, which means
that, at any given time, Mr. Green might modify the groups, shifting students from one group
to another. The reason for flexible grouping is to ensure that they are representative of the
diversity of students and include those who excel in certain subjects as well as those who
perform in the average or below-�average range of achievement.

Objectives: After studying this chapter, you will be able to:

1.
Become familiar with risk factors and socioemotional consequences of reading failure.
2.
Learn the essential components of social and emotional learning.
3.
Learn about federal initiatives that support social and emotional learning in schools.
4.
Review the research on social and emotional learning and its impact on health and
academic outcomes.
5. Become familiar with Common Core State Standards (CCSS) that address social
and emotional learning.
6. Understand how to integrate and apply social and emotional learning with adoles-
cent learners.

15
16 Novosel

At the beginning of the school year, the students viewed group activities as an opportu-
nity to slack off. They learned that if they didn’t engage, usually one student would take the
lead and complete the assignment.
If you were to observe Mr. Green’s class now, you would find students who are engaged,
respectful, encouraging, and kind to one another. Early in the year, Mr. Green noticed that his
students needed explicit instruction on the principles of working in collaborative groups. He
introduced them to SCORE, which is a mnemonic for an evidence-�based social skills strategy
where students Share ideas, Compliment others, Offer help or encouragement, Recommend
changes nicely, and Exercise self-�control.1 Prior to introducing a lesson, Mr. Green also pro-
vides the students with guided practice using a self-�regulation strategy for refocusing and
monitoring emotions.2
On one wall of the classroom is a list of adjectives for describing feelings. The students
created the word list and add to it as they come across interesting words in the course
readings. The word list prompts the students to key in on how they might be feeling (e.g.,
elated, melancholic, subdued, fervent, agitated, despondent, fatigued). Next to the word list
is a poster outlining the three steps of a self-�regulation strategy for easing stress, lessening
anxiety, refocusing emotions, and preparing for optimal learning.3 First, Mr. Green acknowl-
edges that everyone in the class has likely experienced a stressful event over the course of the
day. Then he points to the word list of adjectives and asks the students to select a word that
represents how they are feeling. Because the students know their school community fosters a
safe and caring environment, a few students decide to share. One student is exhausted from
having to work a late shift and another is distraught because her older brother ran away
from home. Another student is panicked about whether he’ll be able to take the college prepa-
ratory exam he registered for on Saturday because his mother is very ill and he might have
to stay home to care for his five younger siblings. Mr. Green acknowledges their feelings and
asks the students to shift their thinking and identify a person or thing that they appreciate.
Then he points to the poster and repeats the three steps of the emotion self-�regulation strat-
egy, “Remember, breathe calmly and slowly, visualize your heart, and hold the one person
or thing you love or appreciate in your thoughts. This is an active strategy so keep your eyes
open. I will tell you when time is up. Ready? Begin.” Mr. Green and the students engage in
the activity together. After a few minutes, he points to the word list again asks the students
how they feel. The students report feeling calm, content, happy, and reenergized.4

Being a teenager isn’t easy. Parents and teachers alike get exasperated with the irrational and
impulsive behavior of teens. Not only are teens more prone to take unhealthy risks, but they
may appear to be selfish or incapable of developing empathy for others. Fortunately, sound
scientific evidence provides us with explanations for these confounding behaviors as well as
effective ways to support teens through this tumultuous time in their lives.
In this chapter, you will learn about ways to foster students’ social and emotional well-Â�
being and potential for life success. Social and emotional learning strategies have demonstrated
positive results with students of all ages and backgrounds and are easily integrated into any
curriculum. However, for purposes of this book, we will focus specifically on the domain of
literacy and how reading achievement is directly related to a student’s emotional and physio-
logical health and well-�being.

Portrait of a Struggling Adolescent Reader

Michael has a specific learning disability in the area of reading. When he was in elementary
school, Michael spent most of the instructional day in one classroom with one teacher. The
Social and Emotional Consequences of Reading Disabilities 17

elementary teachers were familiar with Michael’s strengths and needs, how to provide support
when he didn’t understand a concept, and events that might trigger inappropriate behavior.
On occasion, a special education teacher provided Michael with assistance on assignments and
exams requiring a substantial amount of independent reading and writing.
When Michael made the transition to middle school, he was assigned to seven different
general education teachers per semester. Even though his teachers had copies of his individ-
ualized education program (IEP), he was expected to complete his work at the same rate as
his peers. Sometimes, Michael would request go to the student support center for help with
completing an assignment or to study for an exam. Eventually, he started feeling embarrassed
about leaving his friends behind and going to the “special ed” classroom for support. To accom-
modate for his learning disability, Michael quickly learned that certain students would help
him with worksheets and projects. Some students even allowed him to copy their homework
and their answers on exams. Michael weighed his options and concluded that the repercus-
sions for cheating were far less devastating than being teased about his disability. He also
discovered that if he sat in the back of the classroom, remained quiet, and never volunteered
to participate in class discussions, his teachers wouldn’t call on him. Michael learned that if he
kept to himself and tried not to stand out, his teachers would barely notice that he was there.
By the time Michael entered high school, he was performing at least five grade levels below his
peers. Feeling like a failure, Michael began to loathe going to school. The only time he felt safe
and happy was when he was hanging out with friends who understood, friends who had also
grown to despise school and had given up.
What are some of the social consequences of reading failure? Do you think Michael’s teach-
ers could have predicted that he was at risk of dropping out of school? What evidence-�based
practices might have protected Michael from dropping out of school? By the end of this chapter,
you will have all the information you need to answer these questions.

How the Adolescent Brain Develops

Human brains are not fully developed until age 25, especially the part of the brain that is respon-
sible for controlling emotions. Brains progressively develop from the back to the front, and the
parts of the brain that control reasoning and impulse are located in the front area (prefrontal cor-
tex), which develops last. Because the prefrontal cortex isn’t fully developed, young adults under
age 25 are much more likely to engage in risky behaviors.5 The adolescent years are typically a
time of internal conflict, insecurity, and stress. Add the presence of reading difficulties to the mix,
and the difficulties associated with being a teenager are magnified by enormous proportions.
Many high school students have career goals and strive to do well in school. However, life
circumstances and schools’ inadequate response to these circumstances may undermine these
goals and patterns of success and cause students to give up and drop out.6 Adolescents who
struggle with reading and writing may develop low self-�esteem, become disheartened with
their academic progress, and lose interest in school. It is essential that teachers understand and
respond to the warning signs that a student might be at risk of dropping out of school.

What Is Illiteracy? Why Is It Important?

Illiteracy affects everyone. With only 80% of public high school students graduating with high
school diplomas and approximately 3 million students dropping out of school in 2011, America
is facing a grave problem.7 Dropping out of high school can lead to a multitude of difficulties
for the individual and an enormous cost to society. Some of the consequences of early with-
drawal from school include unemployment, poverty, health problems, and involvement in the
criminal justice system.8 And because youth who drop out of school are 63 times more likely to
be incarcerated than those who complete college, early school withdrawal comes with a high
cost to taxpayers.9
18 Novosel

As an educator, you will become familiar with

the term at risk. In this case, at risk is associated with
circumstances that increase the likelihood a student
will drop out of school. It is essential that you become
aware of factors that place students at risk so you can
detect problems early and intervene before it is too
late. Since the mid-�1980s, researchers at the University
of Chicago Consortium on Chicago School Research
(CCSR) studied more than 400 high schools and iden-
tified early warning signs to identify students who
might be at risk for school failure at the end of ninth
grade.10 These factors included grades, attendance, relationships with teachers, and perceptions.
For example, almost all students with a B average or better at the end of freshman year will
graduate from high school, as compared to only one quarter of those who have a D average.
Attendance is eight times more predictive of course failure than scores on state tests of achieve-
ment. And ninth-�grade students who are absent from school for 1 week (even if that week was
spent in in-�school suspension) are eight times more likely to drop out of high school, regardless
of achieving proficiency on the state test. Grades and attendance were better in schools with
teachers who developed supportive relationships with their students and also when students
believed that their coursework was relevant to preparing them for the future.
Approximately 3 million youth are arrested in the United States each year.11 A dispro-
portionate number of these youth have deficits in the areas of reading and writing.12 Not only
is illiteracy a reason students drop out of school, but it is also the most common indicator of
involvement in the criminal justice system.13 A sobering national report found that the average
youth in confinement is in the ninth grade, 16 years of age, and reads 5 years below his or her
same-�age/grade peers.14 Variables that mitigate or eliminate risk for school failure and involve-
ment in the juvenile justice system are known as protective factors.15 The demands of modern
society require constant processing and transmitting of vast amounts of information. As such,
protective factors include highly developed oral language, reading, and writing skills.16 And
because youth are constantly faced with high-�stakes decisions that have the potential to affect
their health and well-�being, emotional competence and moral development also serve to protect
youth from dropping out of school and engaging in antisocial activities.17
As you will learn in subsequent chapters of this book, students who struggle with reading
need strategic support that is based on sound scientific evidence. Just imagine how much more
powerful this instruction is with social and emotional learning skills added to the equation.
Protective factors, such as forging positive relationships with your students, ensuring the cur-
riculum is relevant to their lives, and fostering their social and emotional skill development
will provide them with the predispositions to become resilient and effectively cope with stress
and adversity.
The Center for Social and Emotional Learning (CASEL) is a national nonprofit organization
that is affiliated with the University of Illinois at Chicago.18 CASEL provides guidance for edu-
cators, researchers, and policy makers to forward the science and practice of promoting social
and emotional learning (SEL) programs in schools. According to the CASEL web site, SEL is
based on the theory that students learn best when they feel supported and when learning is
challenging, engaging, and meaningful. The center also identified five central components of
SEL, including the following:
Self-Â�awareness: Accurately assessing one’s feelings, interests, values, and strengths; maintaining a
well-�grounded sense of self-�confidence
Self-Â�management: Regulating one’s emotions to handle stress, controlling impulses, and persevering
in addressing challenges; expressing emotions appropriately; and setting and monitoring prog-
ress toward personal and academic goals
Social and Emotional Consequences of Reading Disabilities 19

Social-�awareness: Being able to take the perspective of and empathize with others; recognizing and
appreciating individual and group similarities and differences; and recognizing and making the
best use of family, school, and community resources
Relationship skills: Establishing and maintaining healthy and rewarding relationships based on coop-
eration; resisting inappropriate social pressure; preventing, managing, and resolving interper-
sonal conflict; and seeking help when needed
Responsible decision making: Making decisions based on consideration of ethical standards, safety con-
cerns, appropriate social norms, respect for others, and likely consequences of various actions;
applying decision-�making skills to academic and social situations; and contributing to the well-�
being of one’s school and community19

Schools that implement SEL programs and embrace these principles are safe and caring
communities that set the course for students’ success in school and throughout their adult lives.
Later in the chapter, you will discover how SEL standards are integrated into the Common Core
State Standards (CCSS).

What Does the Research Say?

Since the mid-�1990s, research has confirmed a number of positive results for youth who participate
in social and emotional learning, character education, and interventions that promote students’
interpersonal and social skill development. More than 200 rigorous studies were analyzed and
the results revealed that students who received instruction in social and emotional learning had
achievement scores an average of 11 percentile points higher than students who did not.20 Addi-
tional positive outcomes were improved classroom behavior, reduced incidents of bullying, fewer
conduct problems, lessened emotional stress, and stronger connections between students and
teachers. The students developed more positive peer relationships, became more caring and empa-
thetic, and established long-�term goals for themselves. High-�risk activities such as drug abuse, vio-
lence, and criminal activity were significantly reduced.21 Compelling evidence demonstrates that
students who receive instruction in social and emotional learning excel academically, have fewer
absences, and graduate at higher rates than students who do not participate in social and emotional
learning activities. Often these programs and activities involve the very life skills and experiences
that high school dropouts reported would have kept them in school and on a path to success.22

How Do We Assess Social and Emotional Learning Competence?

It is common for student assessment measures to be included in SEL programming. In the event
that assessment tools are not provided, there are a host of alternative options. The College and
Career Readiness Center (CCRC) recommends the following resources for accessing valid and
reliable measures for assessing the SEL competencies of middle and high school students.
California Healthy Kids Survey (CHKS) is a self-�report instrument for youth that is a reliable
measure of health and resilience.23
Communities that Care Youth Survey measures the incidence and prevalence of substance
abuse, delinquency, and related challenging behaviors and the risk and protective factors that
predict those problems in communities.24
Developmental Studies Center Child Development Project Scales measure students’ social, emo-
tional, ethical, and academic development, as well as students’ involvement in high-Â�risk behav-
iors. The scales also measure aspects of school climate, including students’ perceptions of the
school community, student-Â�teacher relationships, and students’ opinions of school.25
Fast Track Compendium includes PDFs of SEL measures that are available for educators.26
Measuring Violence-�Related Attitudes, Behaviors, and Influences among Youths: A Compendium
of Assessment Tools provides measures for assessing violence-�related beliefs, behaviors, and
influences, as well as to evaluate programs to prevent youth violence.27
20 Novosel

The Individual Protective Factors Index (IPFI) is a questionnaire designed to measure adoles-
cent resiliency and protective factors associated with healthy personal and social development
among youth in high-�risk environments.28
A comprehensive analysis of tools for estimating the social and emotional skills of middle
school students can be found on the University of Washington, Social Development Research
Group web site.29 Remember, before administering an assessment to a student, it is critical that
you request permission from the school administrator.

What Should Students Know and Be Able

to Do to Be Prepared for College and Careers?
Common Core State Standards
The CASEL group conducted a review of key components of state learning standards to identify
components related to SEL.30 CASEL defines free-�standing SEL standards as explicit statements
and measurable benchmarks for what students should know and be able to do with reference
to self-�awareness, self-�management, social awareness, relationship skills, and responsible deci-
sion making. The findings revealed that most states (49) have free-�standing SEL development
standards for preschool children. However, only three states (Illinois, Kansas, and Pennsylva-
nia) have freestanding SEL development standards in Grades K–Â�12. Even so, it is common for
SEL development standards to be integrated into other sets of standards, such as the Common
Core State Standards (CCSS). Dr. Vickie Zakrzewski, Director of the Greater Good Science
Center, provided examples of how CCSS naturally align with the CASEL’s framework of SEL
outcomes.31
For example, the CCSS for Mathematical Practice 1 calls for students to make sense of
problems and persevere in solving them.32 According to Dr. Zakrzewski, mathematical problem
solving, especially word problems, is one of the most challenging skills for students to master.
Students with a well-�developed repertoire of self-�efficacy and self-�management skills tend to
feel more confident taking on a challenging task, set goals for themselves, and persevere during
difficult situations. When these students experience stress, anxiety, or frustration, they rely on
strategies to identify and manage emotions and refocus energy on solving the problem.
With reference to the CCSS in English language arts (W.7.6.),33 Dr. Zakrzewski discusses the
expectation for students to interact and collaborate with others. This CCSS standard is aligned
with the SEL development skill: relationship management.34 Students are required to demon-
strate cooperative learning, working toward group goals, effective communication, developing
and maintaining relationships, assisting others, leadership, and managing and resolving con-
flict. Dr. Zakrzewski suggests that teachers support students by inviting them to create their
own rubric for measuring collaborative efforts. This strategy is effective in helping students
take ownership of the process, and it also fosters accountability for their actions. Following
a collaborative activity, ask the students to reflect and share what worked and did not work,
role-�play possible solutions, and revisit and revise the rubric.
For additional examples of how the CCSS align with CASELs standards for SEL develop-
ment, see the web site that is provided in the reference section of this chapter. Make sure to visit
the CASEL web site to learn more about social and emotional standards in your state.

How Do We Teach Social and Emotional Learning

Skills Effectively, Efficiently, and Appropriately?
The most effective way to teach social and emotional learning is to explicitly teach students
how to recognize and manage their emotions, develop positive relationships with others, and
effectively handle challenging situations. There is a vast array of evidence-�based social and
emotional programming available. Should your school adopt one of these programs, you will
Social and Emotional Consequences of Reading Disabilities 21

be provided with professional development, follow-�up training, and guidance for implementa-
tion. Safe and Sound is a report developed by the CASEL group to provide guidance for schools
to make informed choices about the best programs for developing and implementing social,
emotional, and academic learning.35 The guidelines for implementing effective SEL in schools
are not much different from the essential components of effective instruction:
• Explicitly teaching students each skill such as recognizing and managing emotions, appreci-
ating the perspectives of others, establishing positive goals, making responsible decisions,
and handling interpersonal situations effectively
• Providing systematic instruction and opportunities for practice in everyday situations
• Implementing the program with fidelity and as it was intended
• Using diverse teaching methods to engage students in creating a classroom atmosphere where
caring, responsibility, and a commitment to learning thrive
• Providing developmentally appropriate classroom instruction, including clearly specified learn-
ing objectives
• Emphasizing cultural sensitivity and respect for diversity
• Integrating engaging teaching and learning methods, such as problem-Â�solving approaches and
cooperative learning activities that motivate students to learn and to succeed academically
• Focusing on strengthening relationships among students, teachers, other school personnel,
and families
• Encouraging students to demonstrate responsible and respectful attitudes and values about self,
others, work, health, and citizenship
• Nurturing students’ sense of emotional security and safety
• Considering the affective and social dimensions of academic learning
• Embedding the social and emotional competencies that encourage classroom participation,
positive interactions with teacher and peers, and good study habits
• Including school staff, peers, parents, and community members in applying and modeling
SEL-�related skills and attitudes at school, at home, and in the community
In addition to the guidelines for implementation, we will also consider what SEL looks
like for students with learning disabilities (LD). Dr. Sheldon Horowitz, one the directors of the
National Center for Learning Disabilities, provided insight on the social ramifications of learn-
ing disabilities and how educators can support these students in the article The Social/Emotional
Side of Learning Disabilities.36 Adolescents with LD have difficulty processing information and
may feel like they do not fit in with their peers, which contributes to stress and frustration in the
classroom. Therefore, it is critical that teachers recognize the student’s specific areas of strength
and look for opportunities to model and reinforce positive skills. Dr. Horowitz recommends
explicitly teaching awareness of nonverbal cues (e.g., gestures, body language), how to initiate
a greeting, how to ask for clarification, when it’s okay/not-Â�okay to be funny or “clown around,”
how to get someone’s attention, what types of feelings/events are okay to share with others, how
to offer and accept compliments, and how to anticipate and solve problems. Creating opportu-
nities for collaboration or shared learning is also a great way to promote social and emotional
skills and to enhance learning.
Do you remember Michael, the student with reading and writing difficulties who was at
risk for leaving school? Let us take a look how his school recognized the problem and provided
support before it was too late.
At the beginning of his seventh-�grade year, the entire staff (e.g., teachers, administrators,
related service providers, and administrative personnel) at Michael’s middle school received
professional development and coaching on how to embed conflict resolution, anger manage-
ment, and relationship building into the curriculum. There was a strong focus on effective ways
to motivate adolescents and engage them in learning. After school started, the instructional
22 Novosel

coach assisted the teachers while they imple-

mented what they learned with their students. As
a result, the entire climate of the school commu-
nity shifted from one of blaming outside factors
for students’ academic and behavior problems to
a more proactive approach. The teachers even cre-
ated a student leadership team to facilitate own-
ership and accountability for creating a socially
conscious and safe school community. The school
also adopted Check and Connect, a program
that was developed at the Institute on Commu-
nity Integration at the University of Minnesota.37
School personnel and community members were selected to receive training on how to mentor
students who were in crisis or in need of more intensive support from a caring adult. The men-
tors were trained on how to explicitly teach the students how to anticipate problems, create
solutions, build positive relationships, and reinforce the value of learning and staying in school.
The Check and Connect program involves close monitoring of two components: 1) atten-
dance and 2) social/emotional behavior and academic progress (check). Because Michael was
identified as needing support, he received individualized attention (connect) from his mentor,
who also happened to be the assistant principal. Michael’s mentor believed in his potential,
recognized his strengths, encouraged him to succeed, provided him with consistent and direct
feedback on his progress, and reached out to his family and community for support. The assis-
tant principal worked collaboratively with Michael, his family, a trusted uncle, and his teachers
to develop a support plan. Michael and his teachers discussed how to provide him with strate-
gies for understanding new concepts, reading difficult material, and completing assignments.
His teachers initiated more opportunities for paired learning activities and cooperative group
work. Because Michael felt supported by his teachers, peers, and family, he began to participate
more fully in class and to enjoy going to school.
As Michael learned how to trust and communicate with his mentor, he developed more
positive relationships with his peers, and his self-�esteem began to soar. When he sensed he was
becoming frustrated with an assignment, a student, or his teacher, he would stop, take a deep
breath, and think about the consequences before acting. If he felt he was losing control over
his emotions, he would ask permission to meet with his mentor. Because Michael knew that
his mentor would be checking his attendance records, office referrals, and grades, he started
making more of an effort to be present and worked hard to pass his classes.

Summary
Earlier in the chapter, questions were posed with reference to the 1) social consequences of read-
ing failure, 2) predictive indicators that place students at risk of school failure, and 3) evidence-�
based practices that result in improved health and well-Â�being. We know that an adolescent’s
brain is not fully developed and that they are likely to make poor decisions. We recognize the
enormous gravity of the personal and societal effects of illiteracy. And because illiteracy is one
of the most prevalent risk factors for dropping out of school, we understand that older students
with reading difficulties are at higher risk of dropping out of school and becoming involved in
the criminal justice system. We also acknowledge that building early warning systems can help
us identify students who are at risk of school failure and that protective measures such as SEL
programs can help older students with reading difficulties feel supported in school.
Students who quit school report feeling alienated from the community, depressed, and
hopeless. Educators can do their part by ensuring lessons are meaningful and relevant, forging
connections with their students, and providing the students with tools and strategies for deal-
ing with the social and academic consequences of reading failure. Schools that implement SEL
Social and Emotional Consequences of Reading Disabilities 23

programs are those that strive to create safe and caring communities. Incorporating SEL into the
curriculum will give students the boost they need to identify and manage negative emotions,
develop resiliency, overcome challenges, foster positive relationships, set goals for the future,
and make good choices that lead to success in school, work, and life.

Application Assignments
In-�Class Assignment
1. With a partner, review two or three of the web sites provided in the list that follows at the
end of the chapter. Select a few lessons that have been successfully implemented with ado-
lescent learners and discuss how you might introduce the activities in a classroom setting.

Tutoring Assignments
1. With your supervising teacher’s and your tutee’s parent/guardian’s permission, adminis-
ter one of the SEL assessments listed in this chapter with your student.
2. Score the assessment and write a report describing how you could address the issues that
were identified.

Homework Assignments
1. Select one of the assessments listed, study the administration directions, and be prepared
to share it with classmates.
2. With your university instructor’s permission, practice administering the assessments
with a peer. Articulate any concerns about the administration directions, and ask your
peer to give you feedback about how you conducted the assessment.

Endnotes
1. Vernon, Shumaker, & Deshler (1996).
2. Bradley et al. (2010).
3. Bradley et al. (2010).
4. Novosel (2012).
5. Partnership for a Drug Free America (2013).
6. Bridgeland, DiIulio, & Burke Morison (2006).
7. Education Week, Children’s Trends Database (2012).
8. Jimerson, Egeland, Sroufe, & Carlson (2000); Sum, Kha-
tiwada, McLaughlin, & Palma (2009).
9. Sum et al. (2009).
10. Bryk, Sebring, Allenworth, Luppescu, & Easton (2010).
11. Puzzanchera, Sladky, & Kang (2011).
12. Krezmien, Mulcahy, & Leone (2008); Williams, Wexler,
Roberts, & Carpenter (2011).
13. Leone et al. (2003).
14. National Criminal Justice Reference Service (1978).
15. Luthar & Zigler (1991).
16. Davis & Jordan (1994).
17. Leone et al. (2003); Spekman (1993).
18. Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional
Learning (CASEL) (n.d.).
19. CASEL (n.d.).
2 0. Durlak, Weissberg, Dymnicki, Taylor, & Schell-
inger (2011); Durlak, Weissberg, & Pachan (2010);
Dymnicki, Kendziora, & Osher (2012); Greenberg et
al. (2013).
2 1. Dishion, Nelson, Winter, & Bullock (2004).
22. Bridgeland, Bruce, & Hariharan (2013).
23. California Healthy Kids Survey (n.d.).
24. Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Adminis-
tration (n.d.).
2 5. Developmental Studies Center (n.d.).
26. Fast Track Project (n.d.).
27. Dahlberg, Toal, Swahn, & Behrens (2005).
28. Phillips & Springer (1992).
29. Haggerty, Elgin, & Woolley (2011).
30. Dusenbury, Weissberg, Goren, & Domitrovich (2014).
31. Zakrzewski (2014).
32. National Governors Association Center for Best Prac-
tices & Council of Chief State School Officers (2010b).
33. National Governors Association Center for Best Prac-
tices & Council of Chief State School Officers (2010a).
3 4. Zakrzewski (2014).
35. Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional
Learning (CASEL) (2003).
3 6. Horowitz (n.d.).
37. Sinclair, Thurlow, Christenson, & Evelo (1995).
24 Novosel
Web Sites and Reports
California Healthy Kids Survey (CHKS) is the largest state-
wide survey of resiliency, protective factors, and risk
behaviors in the nation. http://chks.wested.org/administer/
download
Character Education Partnership (CEP) includes informa-
tion related to character education, including publications;
grants and funding; assessment tools for individuals,
teachers, and schools; and strategies to engage families
and communities. http://www.character.org/
The Children of the Code (COTC) Project is a nonprofit orga-
nization dedicated to helping others understand learning
and the personal and societal costs of unhealthy learning.
Consisting of more than 100 interviews with field leading
scientists and scholars, the COTC Project has produced
more than 140 video segments that cover subjects ranging
from the origin of writing to the neurology involved in
producing the virtual language experience we call reading.
Some of the stories and interviews illustrate and exem-
plify aspects of reading shame, or feelings of blame for
not being able to read. http://www.childrenofthecode.org/
shamestories.htm
Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning
(CASEL) provides an explanation of what SEL is, import-
ant publications and research findings, policy and advo-
cacy updates, and information on current SEL initiatives
and assessment practices. http://casel.org
Edutopia provides lesson plans and videos on social and emo-
tional learning. http://www.edutopia.org/social-emotional
-learning-introduction-video
National Center on Education, Disability, and Juvenile Jus-
tice (EDJJ) examines the overrepresentation of youth with
disabilities at risk for contact with the courts or already
involved in the juvenile delinquency system. EDJJ pro-
vides professional development and technical assistance,
conducts research, and disseminates resources in three
areas of national significance: prevention of school fail-
ure and delinquency, education and special education for
References
Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning Act of 2013. HR
1875: 113th Congress, 2013–Â�2015. (Introduced). Retrieved
from http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/113/hr1875/text
Bradley, R., McCraty, R., Atkinson, M., Tomasino, D., Daugh-
erty, A., & Arguelles, L. (2010). Emotion self-�regulation,
psychophysiological coherence, and test anxiety: Results
from an experiment using electrophysiological measures.
Applied Psychophysiology & Biofeedback, 35(4), 261–Â�283.
Bridgeland, J.M., Bruce, M., & Hariharan, A. (2013). The
missing piece: A national teacher survey on how social
and emotional learning can empower children and trans-
form schools. Civic enterprises with Hart research for CASEL:
Collaborative for academic, social, and emotional learning.
Retrieved from http://blogs.edweek.org/edweek/rules
forengagement/CASEL-Report.pdf
Bridgeland, J.M., DiIulio, J.J., & Burke Morison, K. (2006). The
silent epidemic: Perspectives of high school dropouts. Washing-
ton, DC: Civic Enterprises.
Bryk, A.S., Sebring, P.B., Allenworth, E., Luppescu, S., &
Easton, J.Q. (2010). Organizing schools for improvement: Les-
sons from Chicago. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
detained and committed youth, and transition services for
youth returning to schools and communities.
National Center on Safe Supportive Learning Environments
(NCSSLE) provides information and technical assistance
to states, districts, schools, institutions of higher educa-
tion, communities, and other federal grantees programs
on how to improve conditions for learning by teaching stu-
dents SEL skills and addressing issues such as bullying,
violence, and substance abuse. http://www.tnprevent.org/
resources/the-national-center-on-safe-supportive-learning
-environments-ncssle/
National Evaluation and Technical Assistance Center for
the Education of Children and Youth Who Are Neglected,
Delinquent, or At-�Risk (NDTAC) serves as a national
resource center to provide direct assistance to states,
schools, communities, and parents seeking information on
the education of children and youth who are considered
neglected, delinquent, or at risk. http://www.neglected
-delinquent.org/nd/about.asp
National Registry of Evidence-�Based Programs and Prac-
tices (NREPP) on the Substance Abuse and Mental
Health Services Administration (SAMHSA) web site is a
searchable online registry of more than 280 interventions
supporting mental health promotion, substance abuse
prevention, and substance abuse treatment. http://www
.nrepp.samhsa.gov/
National School Climate Center (NSCC) provides resources
to measure school climate; briefs about the importance of
school climate; professional development; and strategies
to build safe, supportive, and civil schools. http://www
.schoolclimate.org/
Pinellas County Schools is located in Florida and provides
social and emotional lesson plans for teachers of high school
students. The lessons are aligned with academic standards
in English, math, and general subject areas. https://www
.pcsb.org/index.php?option=com_content&view=article
&id=978:character-lesson-plans-high-school&catid=131
California Healthy Kids Survey. (n.d.). Health and Human
Development Program, Regional Educational Laboratory.
San Francisco, CA: WestEd. Retrieved from: http://chks
.wested.org/administer/download
Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning
(CASEL). (n.d.). What is SEL? Retrieved from http://casel
.org/why-it-matters/what-is-sel/
Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning
(CASEL). (2003). Safe and sound: An educational leader’s guide
to evidence-�based social and emotional learning (SEL) programs.
Chicago, IL: Author.
Collaborative for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning
(CASEL). (2013). 2013 CASEL guide. Retrieved from http://
casel.org/guide/
Dahlberg, L.L., Toal, S.B., Swahn, M., & Behrens, C.B. (2005).
Measuring violence-�related attitudes, behaviors, and influences
among youths: A compendium of assessment tools (2nd ed.).
Atlanta, GA: Centers for Disease Control and Preven-
tion, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control.
Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/pub-res/pdf/
YV/YV_Compendium.pdf
Social and Emotional Consequences of Reading Disabilities 25
Davis, J.E., & Jordan, W.J. (1994). The effects of school con-
text, structure, and experiences on African American males
in middle and high schools. Journal of Negro Education, 63,
570–Â�587.
Developmental Studies Center. (n.d.). Child development
project scales (middle school). Retrieved from http://www
.devstu.org/sites/default/files/DSC_MidSch_scales.pdf
Dishion, T.J., Nelson, S.E., Winter, C., & Bullock, B.M. (2004).
Adolescent friendship as a dynamic system: Entropy and
deviance in the etiology and course of male antisocial
behavior. Journal of Abnormal Child Psychology, 32, 651–Â�663.
Durlak, J.A., & DuPre, E.P. (2008). Implementation matters:
A review of research on the influence of implementation
on program outcomes and the factors affecting imple-
mentation. American Journal of Community Psychology, 41,
327–Â�350.
Durlak, J.A., Weissberg, R.P., Dymnicki, A.B., Taylor, R.D.,
& Schellinger, K.B. (2011). The impact of enhancing stu-
dents’ social and emotional learning: A meta-Â�analysis of
school-�based universal interventions. Child Development,
82(1), 405–Â�432.
Durlak, J.A., Weissberg, R.P., & Pachan, M. (2010). A meta-�
analysis of after-�school programs that seek to promote
personal and social skills in children and adolescents.
American Journal of Community Psychology, 45, 294–Â�309.
Dusenbury, L., Weissberg, R.P., Goren, P., & Domitrovich, C.
(2014). State standards to advance social and emotional learn-
ing: Findings from state scan of social and emotional learning
standards, preschool through high school, 2014. Chicago,
IL: Collaborative, for Academic, Social, and Emotional
Learning.
Dusenbury, L., Zadrazil, J., Mart, A., & Weissberg, R. (2011).
State learning standards to advance social and emotional learn-
ing: The state scan of social and emotional learning standards,
preschool through high school. Chicago: Department of Psy-
chology, University of Illinois at Chicago, & Collaborative
for Academic, Social, and Emotional Learning. Retrieved
from http://casel.org/wp-content/uploads/Forum-Brief-on
-the-State-Scan-5-10-2011.pdf
Dymnicki, A.B., Kendziora, K.T., & Osher, D.M. (2012).
Adolescent development for students with learning dis-
abilities and behavioral disorders: The promise of social
emotional learning. In B.G. Cook, M. Tankersley, & T.J.
Landrum (Eds.), Classroom behavior, contexts, and interven-
tions (Advances in Learning and Behavioral Disabilities,
Vol. 25, pp. 131–Â�166). Bingley, England: Emerald Group.
Dymnicki, A.B., Sambolt, M., & Kidron, Y. (2013). Improving
college and career readiness by incorporating social and
emotional learning. Washington, DC: American Institutes for
Research College & Career Readiness and Success Center.
Education Week, Children Trends Database. (2012). High
school dropout statistics. Retrieved from http://www.statistic
brain.com/high-school-dropout-statistics/
Fast Track Project. (n.d.). Data instruments. Retrieved from
http://www.fasttrackproject.org/data-instruments.php
Greenberg, M.T., Weissberg, R.P., Utne O’Brien, M., Zins, J.E.,
Fredericks, L., Resnik, H., & Elias, M.J. (2003). Enhancing
school-�based prevention and youth development through
coordinated social, emotional, and academic learning.
American Psychologist, 58(6/7), 466–Â�474.
Haggerty, K., Elgin, J., & Woolley, A. (2011). Social-�emotional
learning assessment measures for middle school youth. Seat-
tle: Social Development Research Group, University of
Washington. Retrieved from http://raikesfoundation.org/
Documents/SELTools.pdf
Horowitz, S. (n.d.). The social/emotional side of learning dis-
abilities. Washington, DC: National Center for Learn-
ing Disabilities. Retrieved from http://www.ncld.org/
parents-child-disabilities/social-emotional-skills/social
-emotional-side-learning-disabilities
Jimerson, S., Egeland, B., Sroufe, L., & Carlson, B. (2000). A
prospective longitudinal study of high school dropouts
examining multiple predictors across development. Jour-
nal School Psychology, 38, 525–Â�549.
Krezmien, M.P., Mulcahy, C.A., & Leone, P.E. (2008).
Detained and committed youth: Examining differences in
achievement, mental health needs, and special education
status. Education & Treatment of Children, 31(4), 445–Â�464.
Leone, P.E., Christle, C.A., Nelson, C.M., Skiba, R., Frey, A., &
Jolivette, K. (2003). School failure, race, and disability: Promoting
positive outcomes, decreasing vulnerability for involvement with
the juvenile delinquency system. College Park, MD: National
Center on Education, Disability, and Juvenile Justice.
Luthar, S.S., & Zigler, E. (1991). Vulnerability and compe-
tence: A review of research on resilience in childhood.
American Journal of Orthopsychiatry, 61(1), 6–Â�22. doi:10.1037/
h0079218
National Criminal Justice Reference Service. (1978). To make
a difference. Retrieved from https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdf
files1/Digitization/49939NCJRS.pdf
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices &
Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010a). Common
Core State Standards for English language arts and literacy in
history/social studies, science, and technical subjects. Washing-
ton, DC: Authors.
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices
& Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010b). Com-
mon Core State Standards for mathematics. Washington, DC:
Authors.
Novosel, L.C. (2012). Emotion self-�regulation: A mixed-�methods
intervention study of socioemotional and reading outcomes of
high school students with reading difficulties (Doctoral dis-
sertation). Retrieved from http://kuscholarworks.ku.edu/
dspace/handle/1808/10141
Partnership for a Drug Free America. (2013). A parent’s
guide to the teen brain. Retrieved from http://teenbrain
.drugfree.org/science/behavior.html
Phillips, J., & Springer, F. (1992). Extended National Youth
Sports Program 1991–Â�92 evaluation highlights, part two: Indi-
vidual Protective Factors Index (IPFI) and risk assessment
study. Sacramento, CA: EMT Associates.
Puzzanchera, C., Sladky, A., & Kang, W. (2011). Easy access
to juvenile populations: 1990–Â�2010. Retrieved from http://
www.ojjdp.gov/ojstatbb/ezapop/
Sinclair, M.F., Thurlow, M.L., Christenson, S.L., & Evelo, D.L.
(1995). Check & connect: Partnership for school success:
Project evaluation 1990–Â�1995. In H. Thornton (Ed.), Staying
in school: A technical report of three dropout prevention projects
for middle school students with learning and emotional disabil-
ities. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Institute on
Community Integration.
Spekman, N.J. (1993). An exploration of risk and resilience in
the lives of individuals with learning disabilities. Learning
Disabilities Research & Practice, 8(1), 11–Â�18.
Substance Abuse and Mental Health Administration.
(n.d.). Communities that care survey. Retrieved from
http://store.samhsa.gov/product/Communities-That
-Care-Youth-Survey/CTC020
Sum, A., Khatiwada, I., McLaughlin, J., & Palma, S. (2009).
The consequences of dropping out of high school: Joblessness and
26 Novosel
jailing for high school dropouts and the high cost for taxpayers.
Boston, MA: Northeastern University, Center for Labor
Market Studies.
Vernon, D.S., Schumaker, J.B., & Deshler, D.D. (1996). The
SCORE skills: Social skills for cooperative groups. Lawrence,
KS: Edge Enterprises.
Williams, J.L., Wexler, J., Roberts, G., & Carpenter, C. (2011).
Intensive reading instruction in juvenile correctional
settings. Exceptionality, 19(4), 238–Â�251. doi: 10.1080/
09362835.2011.614499
Zakrzewski, V. (2014). How to integrate social-�emotional
learning into Common Core. Berkley, CA: Greater Good
Science Center. http://greatergood.berkeley.edu/article/
item/how_to_integrate_social_emotional_learning_into
_common_core
 3
Features of Effective Instruction
Jennifer B. Wick Schnakenberg and Martha C. Hougen

Classroom Scenario
Ms. Wick is starting her second month teaching confused. Some days, her classes go
perfectly—Â�students are behaved and engaged. They appear to be learning. Other days,
Ms. Wick cannot seem to do anything correctly. The students are off task, they seem bored
and disengaged, and Ms. Wick has to send several to the office for their inappropriate behav-
ior. Why, she wonders, do some lessons go well and others are complete flops? How can
she make every class period, every day, be successful? What does it take to be an effective
teacher and have an impact on student success?

For years, researchers and practitioners have pondered the question, “What makes a great
teacher?” Administrators have been in classrooms where the exact same content is being deliv-
ered, but students in one room are engaged, motivated, and learning while students in the other
room are disengaged to the point that the administrator can almost see key content and crucial
information slipping through the cracks in the floor. What is the difference? The difference is
the features of effective instruction, specifically explicit instruction with modeling, systematic
instruction with scaffolding, multiple opportunities to practice and respond, and immediate and
corrective feedback. When instruction is ineffective, everyone suffers—Â�students are not learning,
teachers are discouraged, test results are abysmal, and administrators and parents are not pleased.

Objectives: After studying this chapter, you will be able to:

1. Define the features of effective instruction and use the features to analyze your
teaching.
2. Create instructional routines to use in your class.
3. Understand the importance of making your thinking visible to students and mod-
eling metacognitive thinking to solve comprehension difficulties.
4. Apply a variety of techniques to actively engage students, increasing their
achievement.
5. Implement the features of effective instruction to differentiate instruction for
students and to deliver lessons that are of increasing intensity for students with
learning difficulties.

27
28 Wick Schnakenberg and Hougen

Content is important because it drives what we teach in the classroom. However, we must
direct more attention and awareness to how we teach in the classroom.
The five components of effective instruction this chapter discusses include explicit
instruction with modeling, systematic instruction with scaffolding, multiple opportunities
for students to practice and respond, immediate corrective feedback, and ongoing progress
monitoring. Excellent teachers make teaching and learning look easy, yet, as you will see, each
of their decisions is thoughtful, deliberate, and based on research. We will examine each of
the features and discuss ways to incorporate them into your instruction. You will notice these
features emphasized throughout this book because they are essential to effective teaching
and learning.
Although we will examine each of these features individually, it will be obvious through
the explanations and examples that these features are wholly integrated—Â�it is difficult to be
explicit without being systematic just like it is hard to provide multiple opportunities for stu-
dents to practice and respond without scaffolding. You will make those connections and obser-
vations as we work through these features.

Explicit Instruction with Modeling

The first feature, explicit instruction with modeling, has been described as “the practice of delib-
erately demonstrating and bringing to learners’ conscious awareness those covert and invisible
processes, understandings, knowledge, and skills over which they need to get control.”1 In
other words, effective teachers do not commit “assumacide”—Â�effective teachers do not assume
that students know exactly what to do or that they have mastered all the prerequisite skills.2
Through careful, deliberate modeling, showing students what to do and how to do it, students
are most likely to master new learning.
To be deliberate about instruction and bring consciousness to learning, teachers have to
provide explicit instruction. Research indicates that explicit instruction is a building block of
success in teaching and learning.3 When teachers explain concepts and skills through concrete,
visible examples; provide clear, consistent routines; and maintain high expectations that are
communicated to students, levels of both teaching and learning increase.
Explicit instruction involves modeling and explaining concepts and skills in ways that are
concrete and visible, using clear language and including many examples and nonexamples.
Teachers use consistent language when teaching the new skill or concept, and instructional
procedures are predictable and clear, with consistent instructions, known expectations, and
familiar routines. When all these attributes of effective instruction are put together, teachers
create instructional routines, the basis of explicit instruction.4
An instructional routine is an established and orderly way of “doing things” in the class-
room. The way to create an instructional routine is to decide 1) what to teach, articulating
specific instructional objectives; 2) how to teach it; and 3) what the expected outcomes are, or
what the students will do to demonstrate their knowledge and mastery of the new learning
(information, skills, concepts). Once a routine has been put into place, it should be the blueprint
to introduce new concepts and skills.
Setting an instructional routine may sound like this:
Today we are going to compare and contrast how writers of text and directors of movies set the tone.
We will begin by reading a text. We will locate the words and phrases that set the tone of the text.
Next, we will watch a video of similar content and note how the director sets the tone of the movie.
Finally, you will write a comparison/contrast essay about the two selections, distinguishing simi-
larities and differences between the author of the text and the director of the movie and the devices
each chose to create the tone in their work. Before we begin, I will model the process with the first
portion of the text.

To make learning even more explicit, introduce steps within your routine by setting an
instructional focus or objective each time you change tasks. Remember that you know what you
Features of Effective Instruction 29

want students to accomplish because you are the teacher. If you tell students what you want
them to know, do, understand, and accomplish, you set them up for success.
The essential features of an instructional routine include the following:
1. Stating the objective or focus for learning
Today we are going to compare and contrast how writers of text and directors of movies set the
tone.
2. Stating how the objective will be addressed
We will begin by reading a text. We will locate the words and phrases that set the tone of the text.
Next we will watch a video of similar content and note how the director sets the tone of the movie.
3. Stating how the new learning will be applied or how students will demonstrate their
mastery of the new skills
Finally, you will write a comparison/contrast essay about the two selections, distinguishing
similarities and differences between the author of the text and the director of the movie and devices
each chose to create the tone in their work.
4. Using explicit models, including think-�alouds and other strategies to illustrate how to
learn and apply the new skill
Before we begin, I will model the process with the first paragraph of the text.
Modeling and explicit instruction go hand in hand.
To apply the feature of explicit instruction with model-
ing, it is imperative to provide a strong model to sup-
port learning and understanding.5 Teachers implement Alert!
strong models for their students through these basic �Setting both an instruc-
principles: 1) demonstrate tasks aloud while following a tional routine and an
step-�by-�step procedure, 2) use academic language that is instructional focus in
specific to the demonstration of the skill, 3) speak clearly your classroom is inte-
while modeling, 4) ensure all your students can see you grated with systematic
from where they are sitting or standing, and 5) check for instruction with scaffold-
understanding during modeling (which will keep you ing and immediate and
from having to repeat the model multiple times). corrective feedback!
Clear and ordered demonstrations of concepts
and skills provide students with a model that makes
learning visible. In addition, it is important to utilize
student-�friendly language that is specific to the demonstration of the skill. Many strong
modeling formats can be followed to enhance effective teaching and learning. The model in
which the teacher first demonstrates the concept or skill, then leads the students through a
group practice of the concept or skill, and finally has students apply the concept or skill on
their own is a common modeling practice that is referred to in several ways, including the
following:
• Teacher led, whole group, independent
• Demonstration, prompt, practice
• I do, we do, you do
• Model, lead, test
• Model-Â�guided practice and independent practice
• Gradual release of responsibility
In a classroom implementing explicit instruction with modeling, one should notice the
teacher:6
• Providing clear, direct, and easy-Â�to-Â�follow instructions
• Setting a clear learning focus or purpose for learning
30 Wick Schnakenberg and Hougen

• Using consistent language before, during, and after modeling

• Engaging students as the students provide answers, give more information, ask questions,
share with a partner, or write a response
• Providing multiple examples of the concept, skill, or focus of instruction
• Using manipulatives, including word sorts, chips to mark text, and artifacts
• Encouraging students to use visual aids, verbal cues, graphic organizers, anchor charts, and
technological tools (e.g., computers, smart boards, cell phones)
• Providing opportunities for movement that is appropriate and adds to learning
• Arranging for students to work in multiple grouping formats, including whole group, small
group, with partners, and independently
• Engaging students in teaching and active learning

Systematic Instruction with Scaffolding

Systematic instruction refers to carefully planned instruction that builds on what students know
in a logical order. Scaffolding refers to temporary support provided to students. Think of the
platforms that support painters of tall buildings. When they no longer need the platforms, or
scaffolding, it is removed. The same concept applies to teaching students: Teachers must pro-
vide scaffolding to help the students learn the new concepts and skills, and then the scaffolding
is removed and the students apply their new learning independently.7
Systematic instruction means that teachers regulate the complexity of the task. As a teacher,
you may or may not be able to follow a textbook exactly as written because some students
may need more explicit, systematic instruction than provided by the text. As you monitor the
achievement of your students (discussed later in this chapter), you will know which students
need more support and which need accelerated instruction.
Systematic instruction takes the learner from one step to the next in an organized and
sequential way. A teacher planning a lesson from start to finish is an example of being systematic.
When we are teaching a lesson, we want to break it down, starting with the simple and moving
to the more complex. For each section of our lesson, we want to control task difficulty: We start
slowly and build on what students know until they have the skills to accomplish the objective.
The steps of systematic instruction include the following:
1. Communicate the instructional focus to reduce student confusion and anticipate poten-
tial difficulties.
In teaching the lesson, the teacher sets an instructional focus and communicates that
focus to the students in a clear and student-�friendly way, thus reducing confusion about
desired learning outcomes. The teacher then carefully and thoughtfully moves students
through the instruction by introducing skills or concepts beginning with the easiest and
moving to the more difficult. The teacher also begins with concepts of which students
have some prior knowledge. For example, a social studies teacher would first teach about
democracy, which most secondary students know something about, before discussing other
forms of government (e.g., dictatorship, oligarchy). Tap into what they already know and
help students make connections.
When planning, the teacher considers what might be confusing to the students. If the con-
fusions, misconceptions, or lack of background knowledge will cause problems, the teacher
addresses these right away before instruction is disrupted. Anita Archer refers to this step as
“anticipate and remove”—Â�anticipate what might be an obstacle to instruction and remove it!8
2. Carefully sequence instruction.
Effective teachers begin instruction with high utility skills. This means that when teach-
ing, you want to teach the skills students can use across all content areas and in life in
general. Students are more motivated to learn when they realize that they can use what
Features of Effective Instruction 31

they are learning and it is worth their time to learn

it. For example, teach the skill of paraphrasing small Alert!
chunks of text before expecting students to critically �Being systematic by care-
analyze an entire essay. fully sequencing instruc-
3. Implement assessment and feedback routines. tion and regulating the
Effective teachers often assess student progress complexity of the task
toward learning the instructional objective. These is a form of scaffolding
are called formative assessments. Such assessments instruction!
inform your instruction. Often curriculum-�based
assessments are utilized. This means that you use
what you are doing in the classroom to determine
whether or not your students have learned the material. Providing feedback will be
discussed more thoroughly in the explanation of the next feature.
An example of systematic assessment is when the teacher stops the instruction to check
for understanding. This could be done by having students share what they have learned
with a partner (think, pair, share), do a “quick write” by noting thoughts and responses
within a short time frame, or create questions they think others may have about the new
content.
4. Implement scaffolding instruction.
A scaffold is a temporary support that is grad-
Alert!
ually removed as it is no longer needed. To be suc-
�When students think,
cessful in college and careers, students must be able
pair, and share, they are
to demonstrate the ability to read and write com-
also provided with mul-
plex texts and to think critically independently. Thus
tiple opportunities to
whereas it is essential to scaffold student learning, it
practice and respond and
is also essential to remove the scaffolds. Examples of
can share immediate and
effective scaffolds include the following:
corrective feedback with
• Presenting new content in small chunks each other!
• Breaking down tasks into small components (i.e.,
when teaching the steps of writing a research
paper)
• Providing sentence starters to help students ask and answer questions
• Encouraging students to discuss their understandings with a peer
• Providing more time for students to formulate a thought
Additional examples are shown in Table 3.1.
In a classroom implementing systematic instruction with scaffolding, one should see the
following:
• Knowledge/skills presented in a logical order
• Higher-Â�utility skills taught first and then more difficult skills
• Complex tasks broken down into simpler tasks
• Support provided and gradually removed as the student attains mastery

Multiple Opportunities to Practice and Respond

Practice makes perfect? In education, we know that practice makes permanent. If practice makes
permanent, then it is the practice that needs to be perfect! In other words, in order for students
to learn and remember what they have learned, they must use the new knowledge in multiple
ways, practicing it until it becomes second nature or permanent in their minds. This requires
multiple opportunities to practice and/or respond using the new learning.
32 Wick Schnakenberg and Hougen

Table 3.1.â•… Examples of purposeful scaffolds

Examples of scaffolds Purposes
Picture support for vocabulary When appropriate and possible, applying a picture to the vocabulary word
you are teaching students helps connect the word to a visual representa-
tion of the word.
Highlighting tape When students have been asked to locate specific roots, base words, affixes,
or other words or word parts in text, providing them with highlighting tape
can help them keep track of what they have identified.
Graphic organizers Graphic organizers are a great way for students to document their thinking;
visually represent their understanding; and map out texts before, during,
and after reading.
Manipulatives Manipulatives can be useful when students are asked to do word work, sort
concepts, or match words to definitions. Manipulatives in secondary edu-
cation settings can be word cards and vocabulary cards.
Sentence stems When asking students to create sentences that include new vocabulary or
that incorporate multiple ideas, it can be helpful to provide them with the
sentence stem, or starter, so that they do not have to “start from scratch”
with difficult or challenging concepts.
Bookmarks When students have difficulty finding their place in texts or staying on track
with what they are reading, bookmarks can be a great support to keep
them on point.
Question cards When students are working through literary and expository texts, question
cards can help them maintain focus on the main idea, supporting details,
and other important facts and ideas about the text.
Before, during, and after reading lessons Focusing students’ attention on active reading helps maintain attention using
effective reading strategies before, during, and after reading.
Lists of common Greek and Latin roots When students are working to decode content area words, morphology can be
a helpful tool, and these lists can support students in their word reading.
Lists of common prefixes and suffixes When students are still striving to decode multisyllabic words, lists of affixes
can help support students as they read and try to understand words.
Discussion roles and directions When students have a clear understanding of their roles and responsibilities
during a discussion, they are able to focus on the discussion rather than
worry about what they are supposed to be doing.
Entrance and exit slips As students enter and exit the classroom, students can be held accountable
for their learning. This procedure encourages students to be on time for
class and to reflect upon their learning as they leave class.

Multiple opportunities for students to practice is defined as repeated performance or system-

atic exercise for the purpose of acquiring skill or proficiency, and respond means to answer or
reply using words or an action.9 We want to provide students multiple opportunities to practice
and respond, and students who struggle learning need even more practice opportunities. Teach-
ers who have mastered this feature of effective instruction ensure that they maximize practice
by providing students opportunities to do the following:
• Practice new skills in a variety of ways
• Practice related concepts/skills
• Practice previously learned skills
• Relate skills to prior knowledge
• Actively engage in learning
Effective teachers increase opportunities for students to respond by doing the following:
• Preparing more items for practice
• Using choral responses (all students practice)
Features of Effective Instruction 33

• Providing students opportunities to do the following:

• Talk with each other, using strategies such as “think, pair, share”
• Work in small groups or with a partner
• Respond using interactive methods, such as online surveys
• Display understanding by use of signals: thumbs up/down, pinch cards
• Engage in frequent quick writes
Systematic planning for instruction includes planning multiple practice opportunities fol-
lowing each instructional step. This way, teachers can ensure that students understand the
concept being taught as it is being taught, informing the teacher when to reteach or focus more
instructional energy on a specific skill or concept.
This feature, practice and responding, is part of the “we do” step in the “I do, we do, you
do” instructional sequence.10 When teachers spend too little time on this step, students do not
master the skill and are not prepared to do the work independently. This leads to frustration
and disengagement on the part of the students, not to mention behavior problems as students
try to avoid doing work they can’t do.
In a class providing multiple opportunities to prac-
tice and respond, one would see the following: Alert!
�In order to provide stu-
• New skills practiced many times over a period of
dents with multiple
time (distributed practice)
opportunities to practice
• Active student participation and engagement and respond, it is import-
• Increased number and methods of student responses ant that teachers are
• Students responding by speaking, reading, and writing explicit and systematic
• Students practicing and responding throughout the and model expectations!
class, including upon entering and exiting the class-
room and during class discussions
Table 3.2 includes activities that are useful when providing secondary students multiple
opportunities to practice and respond. These activities can be used to increase student engage-
ment in the learning process as well as to assess student mastery of the concept or skill being
taught. Teachers can support explicit instruction with modeling with opportunities for students
to use the new learning. For example, new vocabulary should be used often in a variety of con-
texts, including when writing and during discussions and extended reading activities.11
Classroom discussions are vital occasions to provide students with multiple opportunities to
practice and respond. Teachers who capitalize on these classroom discussions provide purpose-
ful guidelines and structured roles to allow all students meaningful opportunities to engage
with the content, as well as to make the discussion more explicit and systematic. Teacher Angela
Hamblen created one such example of her discussion guidelines, which can be found at http://
www.kyteacher.org/discussion-guidelines.html.
Be sure to consider context, content, and anticipated outcomes as you work to determine
guidelines and roles for your classroom discussions.

Immediate and Corrective Feedback

There are two types of feedback typically used in classrooms: evaluative and formative. Evalua-
tive or judgmental feedback is not specific and therefore, although it is immediate, it is not cor-
rective and does not necessarily support learning. Evaluative feedback includes giving reward
and punishments or expressing approval or disapproval of student understanding. This type of
feedback can be either positive or negative. Evaluative or judgmental feedback expectations are
either implicit or explicit depending on the feedback that is given.12 Some examples of this type
of feedback include saying, “Great job, that’s it,” or “No, that is not right,” or giving a thumbs
34 Wick Schnakenberg and Hougen

Table 3.2.â•… Useful activities when providing secondary students multiple opportunities to practice and respond
Activity Description
1-�minute essay A 1-�minute essay question (or 1-�minute question) is a focused question with a specific goal that
can, in fact, be answered within a minute or two.
1-Â�minute paper The teacher decides what the focus of the paper should be. Ask students, “What was the most
important thing you learned? What important question remains unanswered?” Set aside 5–Â�10
minutes of the next class to discuss the results. This may also be used in the middle of a class.
12-�word summary In 12 words or less, students should summarize important aspects of a particular chunk of instruc-
tion or reading.
3-�2-�1 Students jot down three ideas, concepts, or issues presented.
Students jot down two examples or uses of an idea or concept.
Students write down one unresolved question or a possible confusion.
3-�minute pause The 3-�minute pause provides a chance for students to stop, reflect on the concepts and ideas
that have just been introduced, make connections to prior knowledge or experience, and seek
clarification.
• I changed my attitude about ______.
• I became more aware of ______.
• I was surprised about ______.
• I felt ______.
• I related to ______.
• I empathized with ______.
Analogy prompt Periodically, the teacher presents students with an analogy prompt: “A designated concept, princi-
ple, or process is like ______ because ______.”
Choral response In response to a cue, all students respond verbally at the same time. The response can be either to
answer a question or to repeat something the teacher has said.
Circular check Students in groups are given a problem with a definite answer (good for math and science).
Students complete the first step without contribution from others in the group and pass it to the
next student. This student corrects any mistakes and completes next step, again without input
from the group. The problem gets passed to the next student, and the process continues until the
group has the correct answer.
Class vote The teacher presents several possible answers or solutions to a question or problem and has the
students vote on what they think is best.
Concept mapping The teacher explains/models a concept map. After the lecture, explanation, or reading, the students
fill in the concept map (with a partner or individually) and report out or share with the class what
they discovered through the activity.
Debriefing This is a form of reflection immediately following an activity.
Exit card Exit cards are written student responses to questions posed at the end of a class or learning activity
or at the end of a day.
Flash cards After 10 minutes into a lecture or concept presentation, the teacher has students create a flash
card that contains the key concept or idea. Toward the end of the class, the students work in
pairs to exchange ideas and review the material.
Four corners Teacher posts questions, concepts, or vocabulary words in each of the corners of the room. Each
student is assigned a corner. Once in the corner, the students discuss the focus of the lesson in
relation to the question, concept, or words. Students may report out what they learned or move to
another corner and repeat. After students have moved, they should be encouraged to reflect on
changes in opinion or what they have learned as a writing assignment.
Give one/get one Students are given papers and asked to list three to five ideas about the learning. Students draw a
line after their last idea to separate their ideas from classmates’ lists. Students get up and interact
with one classmate at a time. Have them exchange papers, read their partner’s list, and then ask
questions about new or confusing ideas.
Idea spinner The teacher creates a spinner marked into four quadrants and labeled “Predict, Explain, Summa-
rize, Evaluate.” After new material is presented, the teacher spins the spinner and asks students
to answer a question based on the location of the spinner. For example, if the spinner lands in the
“Summarize” quadrant, the teacher might say, “List the key concepts just presented.”
Features of Effective Instruction 35

Activity Description
Idea wave Each student lists three to five ideas about the assigned topic. One volunteer begins the “idea
wave” by sharing his idea. The student to the right of the volunteer shares one idea, the next stu-
dent to the right shares another idea, and so forth. The teacher directs the idea wave until several
different ideas have been shared. At the end of the formal idea wave, a few volunteers who were
not included may contribute.
Index card summaries/ Periodically, the teacher distributes index cards and asks students to write on both sides with these
questions instructions: (Side 1) Based on our study of (unit topic), list a big idea that you understand and
word it as a summary statement. (Side 2) Identify something about (unit topic) that you do not yet
fully understand and word it as a statement or question.
Journal entry Students record in a journal their understanding of the topic, concept, or lesson taught. The teacher
reviews the entry to see if the student has gained an understanding of the topic, lesson, or concept.
Learning cell Students develop questions and answers on their own (possibly using a question matrix wherein
questions start out simple and become increasingly more complex and open ended). � Working in
pairs, the first student asks a question and the partner answers and vice versa. Each student can
correct the other until a satisfactory answer is reached. (This is a good way to encourage students
to go back to the textbook.)
Misconception check The teacher presents students with common or predictable misconceptions about a designated
concept, principle, or process. Ask them whether they agree or disagree and explain why. The
misconception check can also be presented in the form of a multiple-�choice or true-�false quiz.
Muddiest point The teacher asks students to write down the muddiest point in the lesson (up to that point, what
was unclear).
Pinch cards/response The teacher poses a question and then asks students to “pinch” the correct response and hold them
cards up for all to see. With these cards, it is easy to scan the room to see which students may need
more instruction. Pinch cards are best suited for distinguishing among a few one-�word answers
(true/false, yes/no/maybe, agree/disagree, fact/opinion, multiply/divide/subtract/add, etc.).
Portfolio check The teacher should check the progress of a student’s portfolio. A portfolio is a purposeful collec-
tion of significant work, carefully selected, dated, and presented to tell the story of a student’s
achievement or growth in well-�defined areas of performance, such as reading, writing, math, and
so forth. A portfolio usually includes personal reflections where the student explains why each
piece was chosen and what it shows about his or her growing skills and abilities.
Quick class check The teacher gives students paper plates, index cards, individual whiteboards, or large sheets of
paper when they enter. When asking a question, all students should write the answer, and at the
signal, all students should hold up the plate (or whatever) so that the teacher can see who/how
many got the correct answer. Discussion to elaborate can follow.
Quick write Students write for 2–Â�3 minutes about what they learned heard from a lecture or explanation. This
could be an open-�ended question from the teacher.
Self-�assessment This is a process in which students collect information about their own learning, analyze what it
reveals about their progress toward the intended learning goals, and plan the next steps in their
learning.
Signal cards/hand The teacher creates cards to check for understanding: Green means “I’ve got it,” yellow means “I’m
signals not sure,” and blue means “I’m lost. I have questions.” The teacher may also ask students to
display a designated hand signal to indicate their understanding of a specific concept, principal,
or process: “I understand ______ and can explain it” (e.g., thumbs up); “I do not yet understand
______” (e.g., thumbs down); “I’m not completely sure about ______” (e.g., wave hand).
Student conference This is a one-�to-�one conversation with students to check their level of understanding.
Tickets to enter and The teacher asks students a specific question about the lesson. Students then respond on the
exit ticket and give it to the teacher either on their way out or on their way into class the next day. The
teacher can then evaluate the need to reteach or questions that need to be answered.
Transfer and apply Students list what they have learned and how they might apply it to their real lives. Students list
interesting ideas, strategies, or concepts learned in class. They then write some possible ways to
apply this learning in their lives, another class, or their community.
Web or concept map This is any of several forms of graphical organizers that allow learners to perceive relationships
among concepts through diagramming key words representing those concepts.
Source: Arizona Foundation for Resource Education (2008a, 2008b).
36 Wick Schnakenberg and Hougen

up or thumbs down indicating approval or disapproval. Evaluative feedback is both appropri-

ate and necessary at times but should not be the only type of feedback a teacher provides.13 It
is not specific enough to increase student achievement.
The second type of feedback, formative feedback, is a more descriptive feedback response
in that it describes what the student is doing or should be doing. Research shows that formative
feedback makes specific references to a student’s achievement or competence and is related to
student improvement.14 This feedback style includes such aspects as informing students whether
their understanding is right or wrong, describing why an answer is correct, telling students
what they have and have not achieved, specifying or implying a better way of doing something,
and having students make suggestions on how they can improve their learning. Students need
specific feedback while they are still mindful of the learning target, and students need to be
responsible for correcting incorrect answers. there are five different levels of formative feedback.
1. Telling students they are right or wrong: The following is an example of poor practice: A
student incorrectly defines the word justice as “the state of being free within society,” which is
the definition you reviewed for the word liberty. You could say, “No—Â�anyone else?” Another
student gives incorrect responses and so forth. Or you could say, “Does the way that you
defined justice make sense in this context?” (The students say it doesn’t but do not arrive at the
correct response.) You could also say, “What is the word that is defined as ‘the state of being
free within society’? It is a word that we have worked on but it is not the definition for justice.”
(Students proceed to “guess” what word from their list is the correct response.)
Whereas these possible responses are provided immediately, they are not corrective, and
they encourage students to practice incorrectly or leave them remembering the wrong response
(especially when we ask another student to help his or her classmate by providing a different
incorrect response). Students fumble to try to guess the answer you want. Time is wasted, stu-
dents get confused, and learning opportunities are diminished.
In order to make this level of feedback more corrective, extend the response and provide
the correct answer, ensuring students learn accurate information efficiently. For example, say,
“No, the word justice means ‘fair behavior or treatment, the quality of being fair and reason-
able.’ What does the justice mean? (Student responds correctly.) That is right; it means ‘fair
behavior or treatment, the quality of being fair and reasonable.’ Let’s look at that word in the
context of the passage and review the definition while we do so.”
2. Describing why an answer is correct or incorrect: When a student has answered a question,
written a response, or worked to create questions, it is important to review the work and pro-
vide the student with explicit feedback about what is correct and incorrect. When writing a
summary, for example, a teacher might provide this level of formative feedback to a student
by saying, “You have captured the main idea within the first part of your summary; however,
there are additional happenings in the text that lead the characters to the decision that drives
the second part of the text. While you have included details leading up to that decision, you
have not included the decision or the deciding factor that shaped the second part of the text.”
3. Telling students what they have and have not achieved: When working with students to pro-
vide this level of formative feedback, feedback needs to address the learning focus explicitly and
clearly. During a lesson using the text to support a position, formative feedback could sound
like this: “You wrote a clear statement concluding that Thomas Payne was an American patriot.
Now look back at his essay and find text that supports your conclusion.”
4. Specifying or implying a better way: This feedback can be accomplished by saying, “A better
way to do this might include ______” or “Can you tell me a way that you might complete this
to make it better/cleaner/more concise/easier to understand/etc.?”
5. Helping students develop ways to improve: This is an important aspect of feedback because,
when used well, it promotes students’ metacognitive thinking—Â�their ability to reflect upon their
own work and how it can be improved. One example is demonstrating how a writing rubric
could help them examine their own writing and determine their own goals for improvement.15
Some questions/instructions to help students improve their work include the following:
Features of Effective Instruction 37

• What would make this better?

• What have you done well? What can you improve?
• Tell me how ______.
• So what if you ______?
• Describe next steps toward your target goal.

Students’ Use of Formative Feedback with Each Other

When we ask students to work in small groups or with a partner, we need to be sure that they
understand the importance of immediate and corrective feedback and how to provide such
feedback to each other respectfully. If the culture and climate in the classrooms is a supportive
one, these levels of formative feedback can be used in a strategic way to help students success-
fully encourage and correct one another.
Both forms of feedback, evaluative and formative, can
be presented in multiple grouping formats and can be ver-
bal, nonverbal, and/or written. Because it is important that
Alert!
�Immediate and corrective
the feedback that is given is as close as possible to the learn-
feedback that is formative
ing moment, it behooves busy teachers to teach their stu-
can be a strong scaffold
dents how to provide kind and relevant feedback to their
for students as they work
peers. One technique that explicitly teaches students to
16
to refine their thinking
work with a partner is “look, lean, whisper.” Teach stu-
17
and discover new ways to
dents how to work with a partner and to look at their part-
approach problems and
ner, lean toward their partner, and whisper the answer to
solutions!
their partner. Like all routines and strategies used in class-
rooms, students need to practice working with a partner.

Ongoing Progress Monitoring

It is important for a teacher to know how well students are learning, in what areas they are
struggling, and in what areas they need to be advanced. Such monitoring of student progress is
challenging for a secondary teacher with 150 or more students each day. For most students who
are achieving as expected, checking on their progress through curriculum-Â�based assessments—Â�
such as unit tests, informal observations, or written work—Â�is sufficient. Even quick writes or
exit tickets, when students write down what they learned and questions they have, provide
teachers with helpful information.
When students struggle, more systematic monitoring is required. Teachers may need to
diagnose why the student is struggling, plan instruction to meet those needs, and then monitor
progress every 2–Â�3 weeks to ensure the student is learning. For example, to check on read-
ing progress, a quick reading fluency measurement will provide information on the student’s
decoding and prosody skills. To monitor mastery of comprehension strategies, add two to
three comprehension questions based on what the student has been working on (e.g., making
inferences or finding evidence in the text to support a claim).
Appendix A includes a variety of formative assessments that can be used to support imme-
diate and corrective feedback, progress monitoring, and student-�to-�student critiques.

Summary
There are many other aspects of effective instruction; however, the five features described in
this chapter are the ones that are essential for learning and should be utilized by every teacher.18
They form the basis of student and teacher success. Students learn more when they are engaged
and successful, and they become more motivated to learn.19 Teachers feel more efficacious and
38 Wick Schnakenberg and Hougen

the learning environment is positive and supportive. When students perceive the probability
of success, which they will when instruction is scaffolded appropriately, they are more likely to
try the new task and to learn new concepts.20 As you are studying this text, note the many times
these features are discussed and utilized when planning instruction. If you routinely apply the
features of effective instruction, your students will learn and you will be an effective teacher.

Application Assignments
In-�Class Assignment
Write an instructional routine that you can use in your classroom. Make it specific to your con-
tent area. With a partner, critique your routines and ask each other the following questions: Is
this routine clear and explicit enough that all students will understand what to do and how to
do it? How can I make it even more explicit? Start by using the following template:
“Today we are going to ______. We will begin by ______. Then we will ______. And the outcome will be
______. The expectation is that you will be able to ______ by ______.”
Setting an instructional focus may sound like this: “Now that we have ______, we are going to move on
with ______.”
It may also sound like this: “So far, we have accomplished ______ in the process that we are working
through today. Let’s continue to work toward ______ by moving on to the next step, ______.”

Tutoring Assignments
1. During one of the first tutoring sessions, work with your student to develop metacogni-
tive skills. Begin by modeling think-�alouds while you read a difficult text. For example,
as you read a few sentences, think aloud the following statements: I wonder what the
title means. Hmmm, I am not sure what that word means. I am going to look for a prefix
or suffix that I know. I think the word means ______. Let me check if that makes sense
in this passage by rereading it. This is a good time to stop reading and paraphrase what
I read to make sure I understand it. I am going to make a list of questions I have about
this passage.
2. Ask your student if the modeling helped make clear what is meant by metacognitive
awareness. Assist your student in applying the think-�aloud strategy and provide appro-
priate feedback, as this chapter discusses.
3. Write a short essay explaining what you did in the lesson, what your student thought
about the lesson, and how your student demonstrated understanding of the concept of
metacognitive awareness.

Homework Assignments
1. Write five phrases providing formative feedback. Include responses to mistakes students
frequently make in your class or mistakes you anticipate they may make. For each exam-
ple of formative feedback, provide a follow-Â�up response to scaffold the students’ response.
2. Often teachers provide feedback to students starting with the phrase, “I like the way you
______.” Write two paragraphs about why this is not the best way to provide feedback.
Provide alternative phrases you can use for feedback.
3. Review the High-Leverage Teaching Practices developed by TeachingWorks at the Uni-
versity of Michigan (http://www.teachingworks.org/work-of-teaching/high-leverage
-practices). Compare and contrast these practices with the ones presented in this chapter.
Create your own list of practices you want to be sure to include in your teaching prac-
tices. Be prepared to discuss your list in class.
Features of Effective Instruction 39
Endnotes
1. Cambourne (1999), p. 126.
2. Archer & Hughes (2011).
3. Corden (2007); Feng & Powers (2005); Kamil et al. (2008).
4. Kame’enui & Carnine (1998).
5. Archer & Hughes (2011).
6. Vaughn Gross Center for Reading and Language Arts at
the University of Texas at Austin (2007).
7. Vygotsky (1978); Bruner (1975); Dickson, Chard, & Sim-
mons (1993).
8. Archer (2012).
9. Merriam-�Webster Online Dictionary (2013).
10. Archer & Hughes (2011).
References
Archer, A.L., & Hughes, C.A. (2011). Explicit instruction:
Effective and efficient teaching. New York, NY: Guilford.
Arizona Foundation of Resource Education. (2008a). Keys to
instructional excellence. Phoenix, AZ: Author.
Arizona Foundation of Resource Education. (2008b). Stan-
dards-based instructional planning and designing. Phoenix, AZ:
Author. Retrieved from http://kindie-teaching-strategies
.wikispaces.com/Assessments
Askew, S. (Ed.). (2000). Feedback for learning. London,
England: RoutledgeFalmer.
Bruner, J.S. (1975). The ontogenesis of speech acts. Journal of
Child Language, 2, 1–Â�40.
Corden, R. (2007). Developing reading-�writing connections:
The impact of explicit instruction of literary devices on the
quality of children’s narrative writing. Journal of Research in
Childhood Education, 21(3), 269–Â�289.
Cunningham, A. (2010). Class discussion guidelines. Shep-
herdsville, KY: Bullitt Central High School.
Duke, N.K., & Pearson, P.D. (2002). Effective practices for
developing reading comprehension. In S.J. Samuels & A.E.
Farstrup (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruc-
tion (3rd ed., pp. 205–Â�242). Newark, DE: International Read-
ing Association.
Feng, S., & Powers, K. (2005). The short-�and long-�term effect
of explicit grammar instruction on fifth graders’ writing.
Reading Improvement, 42(2), 67–Â�71.
Graham, S., MacArthur, C., & Fitzgerald, J. (2007). Best prac-
tices in writing instruction. New York, NY: Guilford.
Kame’enui, E.J., & Carnine, D.W. (1998). Effective teaching
strategies that accommodate diverse learners. Upper Saddle
River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
Kamil, M.L., Borman, G.D., Dole, J., Kral, C.C., Salinger, T.,
& Torgesen, J. (2008). Improving adolescent literacy: Effective
1 1. Kamil et al. (2008).
12. Tunstall & Gsipps (1996).
13. Wiggins (2012).
14. Askew (2000); Wiggins (2012).
15. Graham, MacArthur, & Fitzgerald (2007).
16. Vaughn Gross Center for Reading and Language Arts at
the University of Texas at Austin (2013).
1 7. Archer & Hughes (2011), p. 139.
18. Wick Schnakenberg (2006).
19. Guthrie & Wigfield (2000).
20. Kamil et al. (2008).
classroom and intervention practices: A practice guide (NCEE
#2008–Â�4027). Washington, DC: National Center for Educa-
tion Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute of Edu-
cation Sciences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved
from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc
Practice. (2013). In Merriam-� Webster online dictionary.
Retrieved from http://www.merriam-webster.com/
dictionary/practice
Respond. (2013). In Merriam-�Webster online dictionary. Retrieved
from http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/
respond
Richards, M. (2000). Be a good detective: Solve the case of
oral reading fluency. Reading Teacher, 53(7), 534–Â�539.
Tunstall, P., & Gsipps, C. (1996). Teacher feedback to young
children in formative assessment: A typology. British Edu-
cational Research Journal, 22(4), 389–Â�404.
Vaughn Gross Center for Reading and Language Arts at the
University of Texas at Austin. (2007). Features of effective
instruction. Austin, TX: Author.
Vaughn Gross Center for Reading and Language Arts at the
University of Texas at Austin. (2013). Features of effective
instruction: Immediate and corrective feedback. Austin, TX:
Author.
Vygotsky, L.S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of
higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard
University.
Wick Schnakenberg, J.B. (2006). Enhancing young readers’ oral
reading fluency and metacognitive sophistication: Evaluating the
effectiveness of a computer mediated self-�monitoring literacy tool
(Doctoral dissertation). Available from ProQuest Disserta-
tions and Theses database. (Accession Order No. 3342814).
Wiggins, G. (2012). 7 keys to effective feedback. Educational
Leadership, 70(1), 11–Â�16.
 4
Academic Vocabulary Development
Meaningful, Memorable, and Morphological
Susan Ebbers and Martha C. Hougen

Classroom Scenario
Three middle school teachers have observed advantages to teaching older students about
prefixes, bases, roots, and suffixes, especially if such instruction is applied to content area
reading.
Math Teacher: “For me, the most powerful piece was when students saw that they
could make connections from math terms to other words from other subject areas. It was a
big moment for them. I use a root approach a lot in geometry. Like the x/y axis—Â�they can
remember intercept from learning that the prefix inter-Â� means ‘crossing between’—Â�like in
the words intersection and interception.”
History Teacher: “One of the most important benefits of this type of instruction is that
it gives us a deeper understanding of the word, and it helps us remember it. For example,
when I taught the term Mediterranean Sea in history, I taught it this way: ‘Medi means
middle and terra means earth—Â�the sea in the middle of the earth.’ Then my students knew
how the ancients felt about their world back then. That was the known world; it was all
they knew, anyway. And they could remember to spell it—Â�Mediterranean—Â�with two r’s in
the middle, because terra has two r’s.”
Intervention English-Â�History Teacher: “One student noticed the word telegraph as we
were reading our U.S. history text. Because we had been learning the most common roots—Â�
including tele and graph—Â�he exclaimed, ‘Tele! Far away! Graph! Written down! Telegraph!’
He was pleased at this insight.”1

Objectives: After studying this chapter, you will be able to:

1.
Provide the rationale for the explicit teaching of vocabulary.
2.
Apply effective and engaging ways to select, teach, and assess vocabulary.
3.
Increase each student’s linguistic insight, including morphological awareness.
4.
Increase your students’ reading comprehension and overall academic achievement.
5. Motivate learners to develop word consciousness and engage more freely and fre-
quently in word study, word play, reading, and writing.

41
42 Ebbers and Hougen

Before you read further, complete a Dale Scale2 by performing the following steps (see Fig-
ure 4.1):
1. Fold a piece of notebook paper into four columns.
2. Number each of the columns 1–Â�4.
3. Referring to the legend in Figure 4.1, insert the following words in the appropriate col-
umn: myriad, affixes, morphemes, penultimate, and polysemy. For example, if you have
never heard the word before, write it in column 1; if you know it well and can explain it
to your peers, write it in column 4. Warning: Do not say the words aloud. Complete this
activity independently.
4. Tally your assessment, giving yourself one point for each word in column 1, two points
for each word in column 2, and so forth. Record your total.
5. Keep this paper. When you complete this chapter, you will have the opportunity to take
this self-�assessment again to monitor how your knowledge has grown.
6. While reading this chapter, note the words you sorted on the Dale Scale: myriad, affixes,
morphemes, penultimate, and polysemy. By staying word alert, you will not only learn
meanings but also develop word consciousness.
There are several sound reasons to teach vocabulary, but one main objective is to promote
reading comprehension. This objective is addressed throughout the Common Core State Stan-
dards.3 Meeting this goal will facilitate the penultimate goal of improving overall academic
achievement. In turn, this will increase the probability that your students will matriculate suc-
cessfully from high school into college and careers—Â�the ultimate goal.

What Is Vocabulary? Why Is It important?

Vocabulary refers to knowledge of word meanings, including academic words like nonnegotia-
ble, enhancement, and judiciously. Word knowledge helps to enable comprehension, and compre-
hension helps to ensure school success. However, roughly 70% of students in middle and high
school have trouble with vocabulary and reading comprehension.4 A 2003 report concluded
that about 30% of students who enter 8th grade in U.S. schools drop out before completing 12th
grade.5 Other researchers put it this way: “The learning characteristics that have the strongest
causal connection to academic failure are rooted in the area of language.”6
Researchers have found that vocabulary instruction is of utmost importance to compre-
hension and school success.7 Providing explicit vocabulary instruction is the first recommen-
dation of a professional guide for developing adolescent literacy, published by the Institute for
Education Sciences.8

What Is Morphological Awareness? Why Is It Important?

Morphology is the branch of linguistics that addresses word formation, including how humans
generate new words and how the brain processes and accesses words. Similarly, vocabulary
refers to the development and growth of a mental lexicon and the learning of words and phrases.
Thus morphology and vocabulary are tightly related—Â�two sides of the same coin.
Morphological analysis refers to examining word formation. It involves learning about
word structure, including the study of morphemes: prefixes, suffixes, bases, and roots. Mor-
phemes are indivisible units of meaning and the building blocks of words. They are the smallest
units of meaning in a word. The word friends is composed of two morphemes (friend + -�s), but
friendliness contains three morphemes (friend + -�ly + -�ness).
The majority of English words are formed with prefixes and/or suffixes—Â�collectively called
affixes. For example, consider the base word like, a morphologically simple word. It is simple
because it has no affix and cannot be further parsed or broken down. Now consider unlikelihood.
Academic Vocabulary Development 43

1 2 3   4â•…

Legend: 1) I have never heard this word before. 2) I’ve heard this word before, but I do not know what it means. 3) I know
a little about what this word means, but I need more context (a sentence at least). 4) I could teach this word to someone
else; I know its meaning and can pronounce it.

Figure 4.1.â•… Dale’s scale of word knowledge. (From Dale, E. [1965]. Vocabulary measurement: techniques and major findings.
Elementary English, 42, 895–901. As adapted in Hougen, M.C., & Smartt, S.M. [2012]. The fundamentals of literacy instruction
and assessment, pre-K–6. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.)

It has multiple morphemes. It has the base (like) but it also has a prefix (un-�) and two suffixes
(-�ly and -�hood). Thus unlikelihood has four morphemes. It is a morphologically complex word.
Older students are confronted with numerous morphologically complex words, including quad-
rilaterals, unpredictability, and interrelationships.
So what? Students who understand how words are formed and know the most common
affixes and roots tend to learn more words than their peers, and they learn them more readily.
Based on decades of research, researchers Nagy and Scott claimed the following: “It is hard
to overstate the importance of morphology in vocabulary growth.”9 Thus, in this chapter, we
discuss vocabulary and morphology together. The two mental constructs reinforce each other.
This is especially true for older students, who must read, spell, and understand myriad mor-
phologically complex words.
Researchers have defined morphological awareness (referred to as MA) as “the ability to reflect
upon and manipulate morphemes and employ word formation rules in one’s language.”10 This
type of linguistic insight is considered a type of metacognition.11 Researchers view MA as a
critical literacy construct, worthy of your teaching time. In one study, MA accounted for about
50% of the difference (variance) in vocabulary knowledge in fifth graders!12 Familiarity with
common affixes will help your students grasp derivational morphology—Â�complex words derived
from a base, especially by adding affixes to the base.
Teachers may not be familiar with derivational morphology. They may need professional
development in promoting this and other aspects of language. Required teacher knowledge is
discussed in Time to Act: An Agenda for Advancing Adolescent Literacy for College and Career Suc-
cess.13 Upon reviewing the research, the authors concluded the following:
Some of this required teacher knowledge is sociolinguistic: how to evaluate and respond to stu-
dents’ use of dialect features, or the influences of a first language on a second. Some is all-Â�purpose
academic knowledge: for example, the knowledge required to explain and to teach about the use of
discourse markers (nonetheless, however), sophisticated conjunctions (although, unless), derivational
morphology (analyzing words like disestablishmentarianism or hydrotherapy), and so on.14

As noted in the Carnegie report, you must acquire sociolinguistic knowledge in order to help
your students develop vocabulary. The report states that grasping the basics of derivational
morphology is especially important in adolescence. When a derivational suffix is added to a base
word, a new word is created. Derivational suffixes have the potential to change the grammatical
function of the word to which it was added. In many cases, the suffix -�ly creates an adverb from
an adjective, as with quickly and beautifully. Adding the suffix -�ion (mistaken as -�tion) is likely to
create an abstract noun (e.g., disrupt + -�ion, predict + -�ion, evaporate + -�ion, evaluate + -�ion). Words
ending in the suffixes -�y, -�ic, or -�ish tend to be adjectives (e.g., bumpy, heroic, childish) and words
ending in the suffix -�ize or -�ate tend to be verbs (e.g., generalize, hypothesize, calculate, enumerate).
44 Ebbers and Hougen

What Should Students Know and Be Able

to Do to Be Prepared for College and a Career?
To be prepared for any career—Â�morphologist, mechanic, or manicurist—Â�one needs to be able
to read and understand the professional materials that support his or her chosen occupation.
Vocabulary should not constrain one’s career options or hinder one’s ability to enjoy life to the
maximum. Thus graduates must matriculate from high school with a sufficiently developed
mental lexicon, knowing thousands of word meanings.
High school graduates must also possess linguistic insight. They need to know something
about how English words work—Â�how they are formed, how they are interpreted, and how they
are used. In addition to derivational morphology, students need to know about multiple mean-
ings. Dictionaries are bursting with multiple meanings—Â�some words have dozens of senses.
Consider the word bank, as seen in banking your money, visiting the bank, banking on something,
a riverbank, and cruising along the banked curve of a road. These polysemous words can confuse
your students if they are not cognizant of this aspect of how words work. Grasping the concept
of polysemy or “the coexistence of many possible meanings for a word or phrase” is an important
aspect of word learning. Understanding that polysemy abounds in English words is especially
important for your language learners.
In addition, students must know how to independently infer or “knowledgably guess”
the meaning of an unknown word encountered in text. This is a vital skill that, when combined
with dictionary and thesaurus skills, supports independent word learning.
Students also need to know about connotations and denotations, figurative and literal
language, and formal and informal register. These expectations are outlined in the Common
Core State Standards (CCSS) for English and language arts.15 A sample standard is provided
in Figure 4.2.

How Do We Assess Vocabulary Growth to Inform Instruction?

Formative assessment is entwined with effective instruction. So how will you test for vocab-
ulary growth? First, try to include your adolescents in the assessment process, meeting with
them individually to set goals, discuss progress, and plan instruction. Successful literacy inter-
ventions conducted in real-�time classrooms with at-�risk adolescents include such conferences.16
In addition to these collaborative conferences, you will use several different types of tests
and seek evidence of partial learning, for the chances are high that students have learned a thing
or two from your lessons.
Dr. Edgar Dale created a simple and informal self-�assessment tool.17 You used the Dale
Scale at the beginning of this chapter, and you will complete it again at the end of the chapter
to reevaluate your knowledge of the words myriad, affixes, morphemes, penultimate, and poly-
semy. In the same way, students can use the scale to self-�evaluate their current understanding
of meanings and again later to track their vocabulary growth. Teachers can discuss the chart
with struggling learners, collaboratively setting goals and planning lessons that best ensure
success. Use the same scale more than once, before and after a unit. Empower students to set
goals and monitor their own growth to actively participate in the learning process. By using the
Dale Scale, students and teachers are reminded that word learning is a growth construct. This
means our understanding of vocabulary becomes more nuanced as we learn how the words are
used in different contexts.18 Also, partial knowledge gradually becomes more complete as we
are exposed to word meanings in new applications. With the Dale Scale, students move words
from one column to another as they learn more about meaning and usage.
The Dale Scale is sound, but you must use a variety of tests to assess vocabulary growth.
Curtis and Longo use varied approaches to assess vocabulary growth in at-�risk adolescents.19
In brief conferences with students, they collaboratively plan instruction according to the results
of the subjective Dale Scale and objective posttests. Students are asked to write the word in a
Academic Vocabulary Development 45

Vocabulary Acquisition and Use

• CCSS.ELA-Â�Literacy.L.8.4â•… Determine or clarify the meaning of unknown and multiple-Â�meaning words or

phrases based on Grade 8 reading and content, choosing flexibly from a range of strategies.
• CCSS.ELA-Â�Literacy.L.8.4aâ•… Use context (e.g., the overall meaning of a sentence or paragraph; a word’s
position or function in a sentence) as a clue to the meaning of a word or phrase.
• CCSS.ELA-Â�Literacy.L.8.4bâ•… Use common, grade-Â�appropriate Greek or Latin affixes and roots as clues to
the meaning of a word (e.g., precede, recede, secede).
• CCSS.ELA-Â�Literacy.L.8.4câ•… Consult general and specialized reference materials (e.g., dictionaries,
glossaries, thesauruses), both print and digital, to find the pronunciation of a word, determine, or
clarify its precise meaning or its part of speech.
• CCSS.ELA-Â�Literacy.L.8.4dâ•… Verify the preliminary determination of the meaning of a word or phrase
(e.g., by checking the inferred meaning in context or in a dictionary).
• CCSS.ELA-Â�Literacy.L.8.5â•… Demonstrate understanding of figurative language, word relationships, and
nuances in word meanings.
• CCSS.ELA-Â�Literacy.L.8.5aâ•… Interpret figures of speech (e.g., verbal irony, puns) in context.
• CCSS.ELA-Â�Literacy.L.8.5bâ•… Use the relationship between particular words to better understand each of
the words.
• CCSS.ELA-Â�Literacy.L.8.5câ•… Distinguish among the connotations (associations) of words with similar
denotations (definitions) (e.g., bullheaded, willful, firm, persistent, resolute).
• CCSS.ELA-Â�Literacy.L.8.6â•… Acquire and use accurately grade-Â�appropriate general academic and
domain-�specific words and phrases; gather vocabulary knowledge when considering a word or phrase
important to comprehension or expression.

Figure 4.2.â•… Common Core State Standard for English language arts, Grade 8. (From National Governors Association Center for
Best Practices and Council of Chief State School Officers. [2010]. Common core state standards. Washington, DC: Authors. © Copy-
right 2010. National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and Council of Chief State School Officers. All rights reserved.)

sentence, scored with 2 points if the word is used correctly (The gray wolf has been hunted almost
to extinction); 1 point if the sentence reveals only partial knowledge, perhaps understanding
the meaning but not the grammatical usage (We will cry when they extinction the wolf); and
0 points if the sentence reflects minimal or no understanding of the meaning or the grammatical
function (The extinction in my hair made it grow). By measuring partial knowledge instead of
using a right-�wrong scoring technique, teachers and students are more likely to find growth and
to identify the point of confusion. In the posttest, some previously tested words are retested to
ensure they have not been forgotten.
You might ask students to use two targeted words in the same sentence, another testing
technique used by Curtis and Longo. For example, a student might demonstrate knowledge
of two words you have taught, dense and extinction, by writing “The dense layer of dust in the
atmosphere may have caused the extinction of dinosaurs.” This forces students to demonstrate a
deeper mastery of the words, to use the words in new ways, and to juxtapose one meaning
with another.
Your students might also take a multiple-�choice test. Multiple-�choice tests are easier to
grade than student-�generated sentences, but they will not provide you with as much informa-
tion about student knowledge. However, because of their expediency, they play an important
role in assessing word knowledge.
Formative assessments may be thoroughly embedded in the learning process and occasion-
ally completed by two students, collaboratively discussing and debating meanings. Ebbers and
Carroll created a word relationships test that you could adapt for any words, shown in Figure
4.3.20 Students discuss how two words are related to each other. If they choose “other,” they
must explain the relationship in writing. This test could also be completed alone.
To make assessments more meaningful and motivational, let students monitor and chart
their progress. The Dale Scale is one way to do so, but there are other ways. In one study with
three high school students classified in special education, the researcher provided instruction in
46 Ebbers and Hougen

Synonyms Antonyms Derivations Other

employment, employee xxx

salary, wages xxx

periodic, sporadic xxx

objectives, celebrations xxx

Figure 4.3.â•… Word relationships test. (Source: Ebbers & Carroll, 2009.)

common Greek roots. The students practiced the meanings with flash cards and a timer. They
charted their scores and time after each lesson, watching their accuracy and rate grow. This
was both motivating and effective for developing morphemic fluency and thereby promoting
vocabulary in older struggling readers.21

How Do We Teach Vocabulary Effectively, Efficiently,

and in a Manner Appropriate to the Student’s Age/Grade?
Always Teach Vocabulary
We must take advantage of every opportunity to model sophisticated vocabulary. If we contin-
ually ask students to “pass out the papers,” we miss the opportunity to convey something new,
such as asking them to “distribute the papers” and eventually to “distribute the documents.”
To boost word knowledge through implicit learning, teachers can infuse more academic vocab-
ulary into classroom directions and discussions. For example, the teacher might say something
along these lines to a quarrelsome group: “I note a touch of discord within your group. What
is the basis for the disagreement? How about working cooperatively, in accord with each other?”
Compare that to “Get to work.”

Selecting Words to Teach

Which words are most worthy of your limited teaching time? Several researchers provide log-
ical rationales for deciding which words to teach in school.22 Teach two types of words: Teach
discipline-Â�specific words like amoeba, hypotenuse, and allegory—Â�words that support a specific unit
of study. According to Beck, McKeown, and Kucan, these are called Tier 3 words, or the “bricks”
of content.23 Also, to support general academic growth, teach Tier 2 words, or words that occur
across the curriculum in various subject areas. These words are the scholarly “mortar” that support
our understanding of the content area bricks—Â�words like demonstrate, diminish, and extrapolate. In
sum, teach unit-Â�specific Tier 3 “bricks” and multiuse, cross-Â�disciplinary Tier 2 “mortar” words.
Another consideration when selecting words is morphology. When possible, choose words
that belong to a large morphological family. A morphological family is a set of words that share
the same base, such as vapor, evaporate, evaporation, vaporize, and evaporative. In contrast, con-
sider the lonely isolation of mistletoe and umbrella, which do not sprout from a sizable tree. We
tend to read words more quickly and more accurately if they belong to a large and semanti-
cally transparent morphological family.24 We access such words more readily; they appear to
reinforce each other in the mind.
In addition, technology provides teachers with a text-�based approach to selecting words to
teach. To find out which words are used the most frequently in a given text, create a “wordle”
by inserting the text into the empty field at http://www.wordle.net. The resulting image will
Academic Vocabulary Development 47

Figure 4.4.â•… The 20 most frequently

occurring words in the Gettysburg
Address, excluding articles, preposi-
tions, and other common words.

show the most frequently occurring words in the largest size font. If students do not know those
words, they may need to be taught them before they read the passage. For example, we created
a wordle for the text of the Gettysburg Address, shown in Figure 4.4.25

How to Teach Vocabulary: Big Ideas

One of the least effective instructional methods is to assign a list of vocabulary words on Monday
and test the students on Friday with no meaningful instruction or interaction with the words.26
This chapter provides several alternative, evidence-�based, effective strategies to enhance vocab-
ulary instruction. First, let us consider some big ideas about teaching vocabulary.

Three Overarching Qualities of Effective Vocabulary Instruction

How, then, should we teach? Bill Nagy describes three qualities of effective vocabulary instruc-
tion: integration, repetition, and meaningful use.27
1. Integration: Link the new learning with something already known so it has a cognitive
hook—Â�a place to hang its hat! Mix together and combine new concepts with old. Integrate fam-
ished, for example, with the known synonym starving. Contrast famished against antonyms, too.
Connect it with concepts, like famine and drought. Tools for integration include concept maps,
semantic feature analysis, and linear arrays, described later in this chapter.
2. Repetition: Provide multiple and varied exposures to the word in differing contexts. The
word must become an automatically recognized concept, freeing the mind for higher-�level
thinking. To learn a word, students need to experience it about 12 times, on average, via lis-
tening, speaking, reading, and/or writing. Depending on the learner and the word itself, more
than 20 exposures may be required before the word is learned and remembered.28 If you want
your students to freely say the word aloud, without fear of embarrassment, teach them how to
pronounce it. Have them say it aloud several times. That is another form of repetition.
3. Meaningful use: This quality overlaps with the other two. The more a word’s meaning is
supported by drawing associations, making connections, contrasting and comparing, making
48 Ebbers and Hougen

judgments, and so forth, the more likely we are to remember something. If your approach
makes students think, you can say that it is “cognitively engaging.”
Anita Archer, a prominent educator and researcher, helps teachers apply research to prac-
tice. She models activities to increase the explicitness of instruction and student engagement to
help students remember what they are learning.29 In a simple mnemonic, she summarized Bill
Nagy’s qualities of effective vocabulary instruction.30 Using clever motions, she pantomimes
the features of effective vocabulary instruction:
1. Provide multiple exposures
2. With deep understanding
3. Connected to what they know

Pronouncing Words with Older Students

To encourage students to confidently use new words in conversations, they may need brief guided
practice in pronouncing complicated words—Â�words like statistically, spherical, Pythagorean theorem,
and epitome. This means teachers must briefly model how to say the word, pointing out the syllabic
breaks and the stressed syllable(s). After modeling how to pronounce the word, quickly coach stu-
dents on pronunciation, providing corrective or affirmative feedback. This is particularly helpful
for English language learners (ELLs), struggling readers, and students with speech impairments.

The Four Components of a Comprehensive Vocabulary Plan

Michael Graves conducted a thorough study of the research pertaining to vocabulary instruc-
tion and determined that an effective vocabulary program needs to include four broad com-
ponents that include both explicit and implicit methodologies—Â�a design that envelopes both
intentional and incidental word learning and guides students to infer the meanings of words
unknown to them.31
1. Provide rich and varied language experiences: Provide opportunities for your students to
experience words and phrases through reading, listening, speaking, and writing across varied
genres, including prose and poetry and narrative and informational texts. Read to and with
students. Encourage students to read independently and in book clubs. Listen to and analyze
famous speeches, quoting famous lines from them. Watch a live production of Macbeth or The
Outsiders. Analyze the lyrics used in popular songs.
2. Teach individual words: Teach new words with explicit methods. Include a student-�friendly
definition, varied context, and student-�generated definitions. Instructional conversations with
peers, interactive and responsive engagement, and other methods to actively engage students in
learning and using new words help students incorporate the words into their lexicon.
Academic Vocabulary Development 49

3. Teach word-�learning strategies: Teach students the most common morphemes (prefixes,
suffixes, and bases). Model how to infer word meaning from context clues and morpheme
clues. Teach students how and when to use a dictionary and a thesaurus. Develop competence
and confidence so students are more likely to try to infer meaning rather than simply skipping
over unknown words.
4. Foster word consciousness: Word consciousness may be defined as interest in and awareness of
words and phrases.32 This construct is not new but, since 1990, it has been acknowledged as a sepa-
rate and yet integrated component of vocabulary instruction.33 Research has converged to the point
where Nagy has made the strong statement, “Vocabulary instruction needs to be more explicitly
metalinguistic—Â�that is, word consciousness is an obligatory, not an optional, component.”34

Teach Word-�Learning Strategies

Let us look at the third component in Michael Graves’s four-Â�part framework for vocabulary
development, because it is especially important for older students. If a teacher’s goal is to teach
the meanings of a group of words necessary to comprehend a given text, it is best to teach the
meanings directly. However, it is impossible to directly teach all the words in a text, so you must
teach your students how to “figure out” what an unknown word might mean when reading
independently. Teach students to use a dictionary, a thesaurus, context clues, and morphologi-
cal clues. Develop their morphemic analysis (MA). MA is described later in this chapter.
Through brief morphology lessons, we teach students to look within words, seeking out
recognizable morphemes to better read, spell, understand, and remember words. By attacking
morphological families of words, we can take a big bite out of English vocabulary. Morpholog-
ical families are related words that share the same root and are semantically similar, such as act,
action, active, react, enact, and so forth. As your students develop awareness of morphological
relationships, their vocabulary is likely to grow dramatically.35 Vocabulary and comprehension
are linked to morphological awareness.36
To develop this type of linguistic insight, avoid teaching words in isolation. Instead, teach
the target word, such as provide, and—Â�if available—Â�teach at least one related derivative, such as
provisions or provider. Teach students to look across families of morphologically related words,
finding similarities and differences. For example, you might ask, “What is similar about famished
and famine? How are they different?” Teach students the most common base words and roots,
those that form the largest morphological families. For example, knowing the Greek base geo,
meaning “rocks, earth,” facilitates our understanding of geode, geologist, geography, and many
more derivatives. From the Latin root port, meaning “to carry,” we can derive import, export,
deport, transport, support, report, porter, portable, portability, and so forth. As teachers, you will
help students learn to see words as part of a network of related concepts.
As we discussed earlier, derivational morphology provides clues about a word’s meaning
and its grammatical function, thereby supporting comprehension of the entire sentence. It is an
essential aspect of both morphology and vocabulary. When you teach new vocabulary words,
point out the derivational suffix, if applicable, and discuss the grammatical function. For exam-
ple, say, “This word mitotic is an adjective, because it ends with the suffix -Â�ic, just like angelic and
demonic. You already know that mitosis is the scientific term for ‘cell division,’ so if something
is described as a mitotic process, it works like mitosis. Mitosis and mitotic are morphologically
related derivations.” This type of instruction only takes a moment.

Inferring Word Meaning from Context and Morphemes

By explicitly teaching students a new word, we “give them a fish,” but we must also teach
them “how to fish” for a lifetime. Teach students how to infer word meaning from context clues
and morphological clues when they encounter an unknown word during independent reading.
50 Ebbers and Hougen

Research has shown that this type of instruction

is worthwhile, but the objectives are not easily
achieved.37 With explicit morphology instruc-
tion and explicit modeling, students learn how
to detect clues found in the surrounding con-
text and inside the word. An important aspect
of learning to independently infer word mean-
ing is self-�confidence: Students must be encour-
aged to look for clues and then “go with the
gut” or “take a shot at it” until they begin to
believe in themselves. As students experience
success, they will enjoy a rising sense of self-�
efficacy, which is highly motivating.38
Inferring word meaning is more effective when readers combine context clues with mor-
phemic clues. Researchers have shown that by sixth grade, just over half the unknown words
students encounter in school texts can be resolved—Â�to some extent—Â�by merging contextual
and morphemic information.39 However, Wysocki and Jenkins found that even middle school
students who were able to use both morphemic clues and context clues as separate strategies
did not necessarily combine the two when approaching an unknown word during reading.40
They needed to be taught how to do so. Teach and model the following strategy, which is based
on years of research conducted by James Baumann41 and his colleagues and more recently by
Michael Graves.42 The name of the strategy is credited to Ebbers and Denton.43

The Outside-�In Strategy

1. First, look outside the word, at context clues in the neighboring words and sentences.
2. Then look inside the word, at the word parts (prefix, root, suffix).
3. Next, reread the section, keeping the meaningful word parts in mind. Make an inference:
What do you think the word might mean?
Model this strategy with a “think-Â�aloud” so students can follow your reasoning. Use a short
excerpt from a text students are reading. Place the excerpt on the big screen for everyone to
see. Thinking aloud in a loud voice, point to the unknown word and say, “I don’t think I know
what this word means. I will read backward and forward from this spot, and look for clues in
the context.” (Do so, reading at least three sentences aloud.) Say, “Okay, I found some clues. I
found ______ and ______.” (Circle the clues.) Say, “Okay, so this word might mean something
like ______, but I am not sure yet. I will look inside the word and see if there are any mean-
ingful morphemes I recognize.” (Do so, and underline any morphemes.) Say, “Okay, I found a
prefix.” (Point to it.) “This prefix is ______ and it means ______. I also found a base.” (Point to
it.) “I know the base means ______. Hmm. I think this word might mean ______. Now I’ll insert
my assumption into the sentence and see if it makes sense.” (Do so, and talk to yourself loudly
about whether it does or does not make sense in the sentence.)
Be sure to model examples where this strategy does not work, explaining that we must
sometimes turn to the dictionary or a peer if the word meaning is critical to understanding the
passage. Continue to model the strategy until students regularly use it. Post the strategy on a
wall and/or encourage students to keep it in their binders, along with a list of common mor-
phemes and their meanings. Eventually, students should implement this practice somewhat
routinely, until it becomes habitual.
Keep in mind, this goal is not quickly achieved, even for the more proficient readers. It is
especially difficult for students with learning difficulties to infer meaning from context and/
or morphemes. However, even with at-�risk learners in high school, this type of word-�learning
strategy offers tentative promise.44
Academic Vocabulary Development 51

Foster Word Consciousness

Development of word consciousness is the fourth component in Michael Graves’s four-Â�part
framework. In the last decade, researchers have explored word consciousness, finding it difficult
to measure yet nonetheless an important contributor to vocabulary growth.45 Word conscious-
ness refers to an awareness and appreciation of the power of language, especially of words and
phrases. Students who are word conscious notice words and phrases at a higher-�than-�normal
level of awareness. They notice new and unfamiliar words, pondering their meaning. Word-�
conscious students attend to various characteristics of words, noting how they sound: majestic,
scientific, old-�fashioned and archaic, idiomatic and figurative, whimsical, silly, and so forth.
Some will wonder whether words were borrowed from Spanish or Mandarin or absorbed from
classic languages like Greek and Latin. They begin to “like” some words and “dislike” others,
for their own reasons.
Word consciousness includes an awareness of connotations, or the emotions a word
prompts, as well as denotations, or definitions. Words can incite positive, negative, or neutral
feelings. Many words and phrases are neutral, but some connote judgment or acceptance, fear
or courage, prejudice or tolerance. Would you rather be described as relaxed, inactive, or lazy?
Which word has a more positive connotation? Awareness of connotation is an important aspect
of word consciousness, social development, and language pragmatics.
Register is also an aspect of word consciousness. Older students must understand the dif-
ference between an academic word like demonstrate and an everyday word like show. They must
understand when the use of formal language is appropriate and when slang is suitable. Teach
and model respect for all dialects and for all variations of language. Indeed, for all languages.
Develop an understanding of how using formal language is similar to getting dressed up for
a wedding.
Another aspect of word consciousness is nuance and precision of meaning. Help students
learn to value each word for its unique nuance—Â�its precise shade of meaning. When writing
essays, poetry, or prose, encourage students to become picky about words: “This is the absolute
best word for my poem, and I can tell you why!” Use children’s and adolescent literature to
foster interest in words and awareness of their utility and power.
A helpful resource to encourage the development of word consciousness is The Word-�
Conscious Classroom: Building the Vocabulary Readers and Writers Need.46

Teaching English Language Learners

Specific challenges exist for English language learners (ELLs). Your job is to help your students—Â�
all populations of learnersÂ�—Â�master this large and complex language. This is not an impossible
dream. With a persistent investment of your resources, it can be accomplished. Schools must
dedicate time, energy, funds, and personnel to meet this goal.
Allocate extra time for vocabulary instruction, especially for oral language development—Â�
time for speaking and listening. Researchers have timed how long teachers spend directly teach-
ing vocabulary using oral language, not copying from a dictionary or completing worksheets.
Sadly, the average amount of time spent on verbalized and vocalized vocabulary instruction
was only 6.7% of the class period in classrooms with no English language development (ELD)
block and only 2.6% in classrooms with an ELD block.47 This is insufficient, especially for gain-
ing competence with academic language.
Make use of the ELL resources that come with your curriculum. Many educational publishers
provide story or unit summaries in various translations. Some curricula include translations for
key vocabulary. In addition, free online translation tools can help parents, teachers, and students.
Even more important, use the following strategies to promote English language develop-
ment. These suggestions vary by the student’s degree of fluency with English. Researchers48
have found that the following practices benefit ELLs:
52 Ebbers and Hougen

• Prompt students to engage in text-Â�specific conversations. Allow two or three peers to discuss
a text or picture. Provide a sentence starter, semiscript, or framed sentence to encourage the
use of formal, academic English.
• Teach words that are conceptually linked. For example, help learners develop a conceptual
framework or schema for transportation, car, truck, train, vehicle, locomotive, travel, route, map,
and delivery. This includes focusing on synonyms and antonyms, providing examples and
nonexamples. Avoid disconnected word lists.
• Use pictures to teach word meanings, and link the pictures to speech and print.
• Role-Â�play or enact the meanings of words, phrases, idiomatic expressions, and so forth.
• Model how to pronounce the word and listen to students pronounce it, providing them with
explicit feedback (e.g., “Say the second syllable the loudest, in assume”).
• Link speaking, reading, and writing together, especially for academic words. For example,
for the academic words approach, assume, and in addition, have students say the word, learn
the meaning, spell them, and write them in sentences.
• Teach the conventions of English grammar and punctuation.
• Teach the most common prefixes and suffixes; develop morphological awareness.
• Teach students to expect words to possibly have multiple meanings (polysemy).
• Teach students to recognize cognates. Cognates are words from different languages that
flow from the same root (usually Latin or Greek). Cognates share similarities in spell-
ing and meaning. For example, the Spanish word insecto is a cognate for the English
word insect. New research by Michael Graves in teaching cognate awareness to ELLs is
promising.49
• Many academic words in English can be linked to a Spanish cognate (again, see the
Academic Word List by Averil Coxhead, created with ELL in mind). Cognates are more
readily recognized in printed form, because speech flows too quickly to catch them.
Without explicit instruction, many students completely overlook cognates—Â�even when
printed and even for words they know well in their native language. One web site that
lists numerous Spanish-�English cognate pairs is Latin America Links, available at http://
www.latinamericalinks.com/spanish_cognates.htm
Finally, everything you have learned about teaching vocabulary concepts to English-�
speaking students also applies to language learners but to an even greater extent. In other
words, keep in mind Anita Archer’s mnemonic device and Bill Nagy’s principles of integration,
repetition, and meaningful use. Provide exposure—Â�and even more exposure—Â�to the word in
varied context over time. Review words, and review again—Â�even more frequently and more
deliberately. Provide more practice opportunities, beginning with listening comprehension.
Expect the transition from receptive learning to expressive, productive speech and writing to
take longer than it might for native speakers of English. If you accept this challenge and devote
yourself to the goal, there is every reason to expect your language learners will make good
progress, fairly comparable to your native speakers.

Using Graphic Organizers to Teach Specific Vocabulary Concepts

Semantic Maps
Various graphic organizers have been found to be effective tools for a range of students, includ-
ing ELLs. Semantic maps of varied types require students to draw on their background knowl-
edge and deepen their word knowledge. When using semantic maps, encourage students to
work with a peer, discussing their thinking using a text-�based conversational tone. Partners
collaborate and learn how the new word connects—Â�and does not connect—Â�with other con-
cepts. The following are several semantic maps and various other word-�learning activities. Use
them not as “silent seat work” but as socially interactive and text-Â�facilitated teaching tools.
Academic Vocabulary Development 53

Basic Concept Map

Let us use the word scaffold as our focus word. Write scaffold in the center box. Write a student-�
friendly definition under the word, such as “short-Â�term, temporary support.” Do not have
your students guess what the word might mean. Guessing incorrectly confuses many students
and takes up too much valuable class time. On the right side, ask your students to provide
concrete examples of scaffolds, such as training wheels on a bicycle, crutches for someone with
a broken leg, or a wooden structure to support painters working on an the upper story of a
building. On the left side, give examples of what scaffold does not mean (e.g., a permanent
concrete wall, an office building, or a bicycle). In the three boxes at the bottom of the concept
map, ask students to provide examples of scaffold, as used in the context of the text they are
reading. Since you are reading a book about teaching, brainstorm examples of scaffold you
might use to provide temporary support to students, such as modeling, breaking the task
into small chunks, providing concrete examples, and providing additional opportunities for
practice and feedback.

Semantic Feature Analysis

This type of mapping involves discussion and debate as peers use their background knowledge
and their textbook to analyze features and consider attributes.50 Have students place a plus sign
(+) for a match, a minus sign (–Â�) for a negative example, and a question mark (?) if there may
be a match in special circumstances, which must then be described. An example of a partially
completed map is shown in Table 4.1.

Foursquare
The foursquare model was developed by Frayer51 and may be modified as needed. This tool
prompts visual and verbal word associations. As shown in Figure 4.5, students write the tar-
geted vocabulary word in the upper left box, the definition in the left bottom box, a personal
association in the upper right box, and a nonexample in the lower right box. Teach students
how to say the targeted word, salubrious, with the stress on the second syllable: /su loob′ ree
us/. If students feel confident that they know how to pronounce it, they are more likely to use
it. Also, have them say salubrious in a sentence, using the grid as a scaffold: “Unlike smoking,
surfing is a salubrious activity; it promotes health and fitness!”
Using the Frayer or foursquare model enables students to form associations among words
and to explain the association. The word line activity, discussed next, also serves to help stu-
dents make associations.

Table 4.1.â•… Semantic feature analysis

Fur Feathers Scales Forest Ocean Desert Plains
Hare + - - + - + +
Snake - - + ? - + ?
Vulture
Coyote
Owl
Deer
Lizard
From Heimlich, J.E., & Pittelman, S.D. (1986). Semantic mapping: Classroom applications. Newark, DE: International Reading Associa-
tion; adapted by permission. As adapted in Hougen, M.C., & Smartt, S.M. (2012). The fundamentals of literacy instruction and assessment,
pre-K–6. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.
54 Ebbers and Hougen

Salubrious Surfing

Promoting Health Smoking

Figure 4.5.â•… Frayer grid. (Adapted from Frayer, D., Frederick, W.C., & Klausmeier, H.J. [1969]. A schema for testing the level
of cognitive mastery. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Center for Education. As adapted in Hougen, M.C., & Smartt, S.M. [2012]. The
fundamentals of literacy instruction and assessment, pre-K–6 [p. 163]. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.)

Word Line52
Students are expected to learn that words express degrees or shades of meaning. They are to
use words with precision, but often students are confused by the slight nuanced differences
in word meanings. For example, what is the difference between slender and thin? What about
emaciated, skinny, and gaunt? To actively involve students in pondering these differences, have
them create a word line, as shown in Figure 4.6. The teacher provides a list of words and the
students collaboratively place the words on the word line. Let us use the following words as
an example: walk, crawl, amble, run, sprint, stroll, and jog. The students place the words on the
number line with the slowest type of movement on the left and the fastest on the right. To
scaffold this task, tell students which word goes in the middle of the number line, which is run.

Visual-�Verbal Association Strategy

Edwin Ellis researched another form of a visual-�verbal association strategy he called LINCS.
LINCS is an acronym; each letter represents a step in the strategy:53
• List the word and its definition.
• Imagine a picture that includes the word.
• Note a reminding word.
• Construct a LINCing phrase related to the word.
• Self-Â�test.
For this activity, take a large index card and divide it into two rectangles by drawing a line
across the center of both sides of the card. On the top front part of the card, write the targeted
word, which is fief. On the top half of the back of the card, write the definition you want the
students to learn: land given by king for fighting in his army. Look at the front of the card again.
Under the word, write a word that may help you remember the targeted word. I wrote chief,
because that helps me pronounce the targeted word correctly, and, in a way, being given land
may make the soldier chief of his own land. That brings us to the last part. At the bottom of
the back of the card, write a story about the word, such as, “He felt he was the chief of his own
land.” Students may also draw a picture to create a visual association.
Edwin Ellis has designed a range of specialized interactive vocabulary graphic organizers
that target discipline-specific vocabulary for different K-12 developmental levels of students.
See the Vocabulary Differentiated Visual Tools at www.MakesSenseStraegies.com.54
Please note that researchers have become wary of graphic organizers. Why? Because some
teachers tend to misuse them. Use them correctly, not as “silent busy work” but as cognitively and
linguistically interactive teaching tools. Use them in a collaborative discussion-�enriched format.
Academic Vocabulary Development 55

bl e

t
wl

rin
oll

lk

n
Cra

Am

Jog
Wa

Ru
Str

Sp
Slow Fast
Figure 4.6.â•… Word line. (From Hougen, M.C., & Smartt, S.M.
[2012]. The fundamentals of literacy instruction and assess-
ment, pre-K–6 [p. 166]. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes
Publishing Co.; reprinted by permission.)

Summary
As you know, your job is challenging and yet so important. The future is in your hands. Pre-
pare your students for college, career, and a lifetime of learning. To do so, build their verbal
proficiency, word knowledge, and linguistic insight. Use meaningful, memorable, and mor-
phological methods to make words stick! Invest in vocabulary development, using implicit and
explicit teaching methods and incorporating all four of Michael Graves’s components: Create
a word-�rich learning atmosphere, teach word-�learning strategies, and foster word conscious-
ness. Do not let impediments steer you off course, but persist in the goal, because growing a
vocabulary takes time. Gradually you will see a difference in not only word knowledge but also
comprehension and general school success. You might even see your students walking a little
taller. They might even learn to love learning about words.

Application Assignments
In-�Class Assignments
1. Time to refer to your Dale Scale again. Think about the targeted words myriad, affixes,
morphemes, penultimate, and polysemy. Assess your level of knowledge of the words now.
Did your score increase? Why do you think you improved? Which word appeared the
fewest times in the chapter? How did limited exposure influence your learning?
2. Using a jigsaw activity, explore three of the following web sites. Form groups of three,
each group exploring a different web site. Discuss how you might use these web sites
with your students or to improve your professional practice.
a. Vocabulogic: http://vocablog-plc.blogspot.com
Read several of the posts, explore the videos at “See Spot,” and check out the
dozens of useful links in the footer. Share what you learned and discuss how this
information increased your linguistic insight and might benefit your students.
b. Explicit Instruction: http://explicitinstruction.org
Click on “Video—Â�Secondary.” Select the grade level and subject area that best
matches your students. Watch how Dr. Anita Archer models a vocabulary lesson. Before
starting the video, create a chart with three columns, labeled “Seems effective,” “That’s
surprising,” and “Somewhat questionable.” During the video, take notes in the appropri-
ate column. How could the lesson be improved to develop linguistic insight, including
MA, and to promote usage so students learn to use the word correctly in phrases and
sentences? Note how Dr. Archer engages the students and explicitly models what she
expects the students to do. How will you incorporate such strategies in your instruction?
c. Vocabulary: https://www.vocabulary.com
Explore this free web site, created for teachers and students by linguist Ben
Zimmerman. Read the “How It Works” section to learn about individualized les-
sons for each student in your class. Read about the “Leaderboards” and explore the
56 Ebbers and Hougen

dictionary and other tools. Be prepared to discuss how this web site might be useful.
Keep in mind, parents might want to help support vocabulary development at home.

Tutoring Assignments
Carefully select five words from a disciplinary text your student is reading that are essential to
understanding the content. Complete the following activities:
1. Have your student write the words on the Dale Scale indicating how well he or she
knows the words.
2. Use the LINCS strategy to teach three of the words.
3. Use one of the assessment methods described earlier in the chapter to test your student’s
knowledge. Discuss how to score the test, how to interpret the results, and how to plan
follow-�up instruction.

Homework Assignments
1. In this excerpt from A Tale of Two Cities,55 displayed in the original British spelling,
Charles Dickens weaves together short heartfelt words (last, long, life) with longer, mor-
phologically complex, academic words (pitiable, wilderness, expressive). Find at least three
morphologically complex words—Â�words containing more than one morpheme—Â�and
complete a graphic organizer to isolate the morphemes and illustrate how they contrib-
ute to the meaning of the words.
The faintness of the voice was pitiable and dreadful. It was not the faintness of physical weak-
ness, though confinement and hard fare no doubt had their part in it. Its deplorable peculiarity
was, that it was the faintness of solitude and disuse. It was like the last feeble echo of a sound
made long and long ago. So entirely had it lost the life and resonance of the human voice, that
it affected the senses like a once beautiful colour faded away into a poor weak stain. So sunken
and suppressed it was, that it was like a voice underground. So expressive it was, of a hopeless
and lost creature, that a famished traveller, wearied out by lonely wandering in a wilderness,
would have remembered home and friends in such a tone before lying down to die.56

Brilliant
Definition: Examples:

very bright the sun

a spotlight
lightning
a sparkling diamond
a laser
fireworks
Nonexamples: Morphological family:

a single candle brilliant

a firefly, a glow-bug brilliance
a nightlight brilliantly
the moon non-brilliant
super-brilliant
Paragraph:

We won’t look into the red light of a laser. It may appear small and harmless, but it is concentrated light, and therefore
brilliant. The brilliance of a laser is intense. It shines brilliantly.

Figure 4.7.â•… Morphological foursquare for “brilliant.” (Source: Frayer, Frederick, & Klausmeier, 1969.)
Academic Vocabulary Development 57
2. Create a morphological foursquare using one of the following words targeted in this
chapter: myriad, affixes, morphemes, penultimate, and polysemy. Figure 4.7 shows a sample
morphological foursquare, for buoyant and related derivations.
Endnotes
1. Transcribed personal communication of Susan Ebbers
with Jen Sneddon (math teacher) and Mara Vertrees
(AP history teacher on assignment). (June 14, 2006).
Fort Myers, FL. Permission to publish their comments
was granted, with the interview conducted for the stated
purpose of publishing their anecdotal observations.
2. Dale (1965).
3. NGA, Common Core State Standards (2010).
4. Biancarosa & Snow (2006).
5. Frost (2003).
6. Coyne, Kame’enui, & Carnine (2007), p. 38.
7. Biancarosa & Snow (2006); Boardman et al. (2008); Kamil
(2008).
8. Kamil (2008).
9. Nagy & Scott (2000), p. 275.
10. Kuo & Anderson (2006), p. 161.
11. McBride-�Chang et al. (2005); Nagy (2007).
12. Carlisle (2000).
13. Carnegie Corporation of New York (2009).
14. Carnegie Corporation of New York (2009), p. 21.
15. NGA, Common Core State Standards (2010).
16. Curtis & Longo (2001).
17. Dale (1965).
18. Stahl (2004).
19. Curtis & Longo (1999).
20. Ebbers & Carroll (2009).
21. Fishley, Konrad, Hessler, & Keesey (2012).
22. Beck, McKeown, & Kucan (2002); Hiebert & Kamil (2005).
23. Beck et al. (2002).
24. Carlisle & Katz (2006).
25. http://www.wordle.net/show/wrdl/2206547/Gettysburg
_Address
26. Bos & Anders (1990).
27. Nagy (1988).
28. Beck et al. (2002).
29. Archer & Hughes (2011); to see a model of Anita Archer
teaching vocabulary to middle school students, go to
http://explicitinstruction.org
References
Anglin, J.M. (1993). Vocabulary development: A morpholog-
ical analysis. Monographs of the Society for Research in Child
Development, 58(10), v–Â�165.
Archer, A., & Hughes, C. (2011). Explicit instruction: Effective
and efficient teaching. New York, NY: Guilford.
Bandura, A. (1997). Self-�efficacy: The exercise of control. New
York, NY: Freeman.
Baumann, J.F., Edwards, E.C., Boland, E., Olejnik, S., &
Kame’enui, E.J. (2003). Vocabulary tricks: Effects of instruc-
tion in morphology and context on fifth-Â�grade students’
30. A. Archer (personal communication, 2004). Used with
permission.
31. Baumann, Ware, & Edwards (2007); Graves (2000, 2006);
Graves & Sales (2012).
32. Anderson & Nagy (1992); Graves & Watts-�Taffe (2002).
33. Graves (2000, 2006).
34. Nagy (2007), p. 54.
35. Anglin (1993); Berninger, Abbott, Nagy, & Carlisle (2010).
36. Nagy, Berninger, & Abbott (2006).
37. Baumann, Edwards, Boland, Olejnik, & Kame’enui
(2003); Baumann et al. (2002); Baumann et al. (2007).
38. Bandura (1997).
39. Nagy & Anderson (1984).
40. Nagy & Anderson (1984).
41. Baumann, Edwards, Boland, Olejnik, & Kame’enui
(2003); Baumann et al. (2002); Baumann et al. (2007).
42. Graves (2012).
43. Ebbers & Denton (2008).
44. Katz & Carlisle (2009).
45. Scott & Nagy (2004).
46. Scott, Skobel, & Wells (2008).
47. Saunders, Foorman, & Carlson (2006).
48. Carlo, August, McLaughlin, Snow, Dressler, Lippman,
et al. (2004); Gersten, Baker, Haager, & Graves (2005).
49. Graves (2012).
50. Heimlich & Pittelman (1986).
51. Frayer, Frederick, & Klausmeier (1969).
52. Beck et al. (2002).
53. Edwin S. Ellis (1992, 1995, 2014). The LINCS vocabu-
lary strategy. Lawrence, KS: Edge Enterprises, Inc.; and
Edwin S. Ellis (2014). Interactive LINCS. [Software].
www.MakesSenseStrategies.com
54. Ellis & Ellis (2013). For more information about these
tools, contact MakeSenseStrategies.com, PO Box 147,
Northport, AL; phone: 205-�394-�5514; e-�mail: edwinellis1
@gmail.com.
55. Dickens (1859).
56. Dickens (1859).
ability to derive and infer word meaning. American Educa-
tional Research Journal, 40, 447–Â�494.
Baumann, J.F., Edwards, E., Font, G., Tereshinski, C.A.,
Kame’enui, E.J., & Olejnik, S. (2002). Teaching morphemic
and contextual analysis to fifth-�grade students. Reading
Research Quarterly, 37(2), 150–Â�176.
Baumann, J.F., Ware, D., & Edwards, E.C. (2007). “Bumping
into spicy, tasty words that catch your tongue”: A forma-
tive experiment on vocabulary instruction. The Reading
Teacher, 61(2), 108–Â�122.
58 Ebbers and Hougen
Beck, I., McKeown, M., & Kucan, L. (2002). Bringing words to
life: Robust vocabulary instruction. New York, NY: Guilford.
Beck, I., McKeown, M., & Kucan, L. (2008). Creating robust
vocabulary: Frequently asked questions and extended examples
(solving problems in the teaching of literacy). New York, NY:
Guilford.
Berninger, V.W., Abbott, R.D., Nagy, W., & Carlisle, J. (2010).
Growth in phonological, orthographic, and morphologi-
cal awareness in Grades 1 to 6. Journal of Psycholinguistic
Research, 39(2), 141–Â�163.
Biancarosa, G., & Snow, C. (2006). Reading next: A vision for
action and research in middle and high school literacy. A report
to Carnegie Corporation of New York (2nd ed.). Washington,
DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.
Boardman, A.G., Roberts, G., Vaughn, S., Wexler, J., Murray, C.S.,
& Kosanovich, M. (2008). Effective instruction for adolescent
struggling readers: A practice brief. Portsmouth, NH: RMC
Research Corporation, Center on Instruction.
Bos, C., & Anders, P.L. (1990). Effects of interactive vocab-
ulary instruction on the vocabulary learning and reading
comprehension of junior-�high learning disabled students.
Learning Disability Quarterly, 13, 31–Â�42.
Bryant, D.P., Goodwin, M., Bryant, B.R., & Higgins, K.
(2003). Vocabulary instruction for students with learning
disabilities: A review of the research. Learning Disability
Quarterly, 26, 117–Â�128.
Carlisle, J.F. (2000). Awareness of the structure and meaning
of morphologically complex words: Impact on reading.
Reading and Writing, 12, 169–Â�190.
Carlisle, J.F., & Katz, L. (2006). Effects of word and mor-
pheme familiarity on reading of derived words. Reading
and Writing, 19(7), 669–Â�693.
Carlo, M.S., August, D., McLaughlin, B., Snow, C.E.,
Dressler, C., Lippman, D.N., .€.€.€White, C.E. (2004). Clos-
ing the gap: Addressing the vocabulary needs of English
language learners in bilingual and mainstream classrooms.
Reading Research Quarterly, 39, 188–Â�215.
Carnegie Corporation of New York. (2009). Time to act: An
agenda for advancing adolescent literacy for college and career
success. New York, NY: Carnegie Corporation. Retrieved
October 18, 2012, from http://carnegie.org/publications/
search-�publications/pub/195
Council of Chief State School Officers & National Governors’
Association. (2010). Common Core State Standards. Washing-
ton, DC: Author.
Coxhead, A. (2000a). The academic word list. Retrieved from
http://www.victoria.ac.nz/lals/resources/academicword
list/information.aspx
Coxhead, A. (2000b). A new academic word list. TESOL
Quarterly, 34(2), 213–Â�238.
Coyne, M., Kame’enui, E., & Carnine, D. (2007). Effective
teaching strategies for accommodating diverse learners (3rd
ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.
Curtis, M.E., & Longo, A.M. (1999). When adolescents can’t
read: Methods and materials that work. Cambridge, MA:
Brookline.
Curtis, M.E., & Longo, A.M. (2001). Teaching vocabulary to
adolescents to improve comprehension. Reading Online
(Themed issue on struggling readers). Retrieved Febru-
ary 23, 2006, from http://www.readingonline.org/articles/
art_index.asp?HREF=curtis/index.html
Dale, E. (1965). Vocabulary measurement: Techniques and
major findings. Elementary English, 42, 895–Â�901.
Deshler, D. (2009). Moving the needle on adolescent literacy.
Alameda, CA: Alameda Unified School District. Retrieved
from http://www.mikemcmahon.info/Deshler09AUSD
.ppt
Dickens, C. (1859). A tale of two cities. London, England:
Chapman & Hall.
Ebbers, S.M., & Carroll, J. (2009). Daily oral vocabulary exer-
cises: A program to expand academic language in Grades 4–Â�12.
Longmont, CO: Sopris West.
Ebbers, S.M., & Denton, C.A. (2008). A root awakening: Vocab-
ulary instruction for older students with reading difficulties.
Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 23(2), 90–Â�102.
Edwards, E.C., Font, G., Baumann, J.F., & Boland, E. (2004).
Unlocking word meanings: Strategies and guidelines for
teaching morphemic and contextual analysis. In J.F. Bau-
mann, & E.J. Kame’enui (Eds.), Vocabulary instruction:
Research to practice (pp. 159–Â�176). New York, NY: Guilford.
Ellis, E.S. (1992, 1995, 2014). The LINCS vocabulary strategy.
Lawrence, KS: Edge Enterprises, Inc.
Ellis, E.S. (2014) Interactive LINCS. [Software]. Retrieved from
www.MakesSenseStrategies.com
Ellis, E.S., & Ellis, L.A. (2013). Vocabulary smart visuals.
Retrieved from http://makessensestrategies.com
Fishley, K.M., Konrad, M., Hessler, T., & Keesey, S. (2012).
Effects of GO FASTER on morpheme definition fluency
for high school students with high-�incidence disabilities.
Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 27(3), 104–Â�115.
Frayer, D., Frederick, W.C., & Klausmeier, H.J. (1969). A
schema for testing the level of cognitive mastery. Madison:
Wisconsin Center for Education.
Frost, S. (2003). Foreword. In M.L. Kamil (Ed.), Adolescents
and literacy: Reading for the 21st century. Washington, DC:
Alliance for Excellent Education.
Gersten, R., Baker, S., Haager, D., & Graves, A. (2005).
Exploring the role of teacher quality in predicting reading
outcomes for first grade English learners: An observational
study. Remedial & Special Education, 26, 197–Â�206.
Graves, M.F. (2000). A vocabulary program to complement
and bolster a middle-�grade comprehension program. In
B. Taylor, M.F. Graves, & P. van den Broek (Eds.), Reading
for meaning: Fostering comprehension in the middle grades (pp.
116–Â�135). New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Graves, M.F. (2006). The vocabulary book: Learning and instruc-
tion. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Graves, M.F. (2009). Teaching individual words: One size does
not fit all. New York, NY: Teachers College Press & IRA.
Graves, M.F. (2012, December). Teaching word-�learning strate-
gies. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Literacy
Research Association, San Diego, CA.
Graves, M.F., & Watts-�Taffe, S.M. (2002). The place of word
consciousness in a research-�based vocabulary program. In
S.J. Samuels & A.E. Farstrup (Eds.), What research has to
say about reading instruction (3rd ed., pp. 140–Â�165). Newark,
DE: International Reading Association.
Heimlich, J.E., & Pittelman, S.D. (1986). Semantic mapping:
Classroom application. Newark, DE: International Reading
Association.
Hiebert, E.H., & Kamil, M.L. (Eds.). (2005). Teaching and learn-
ing vocabulary: Bringing research to practice. Mahwah, NJ:
Lawrence Erlbaum.
Hougen, M.C., & Smartt, S.M. (2012). The fundamentals of liter-
acy instruction and assessment, pre-K–6. Baltimore, MD: Paul
H. Brookes Publishing Co.
Kamil, M.L., Borman, G.D., Dole, J., Kral, C.C., Salinger, T.,
& Torgesen, J. (2008). Improving adolescent literacy: Effec-
tive classroom and intervention practices: A practice guide
(NCEE #2008-�4027). Washington, DC: National Center for
Academic Vocabulary Development 59
Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance, Institute
of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of Education.
Retrieved January 3, 2010, from http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc
Katz, L.A., & Carlisle, J.F. (2009). Teaching students with read-
ing difficulties to be close readers: A feasibility study. Lan-
guage, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 40(3), 325–Â�340.
Kuo, L.-�J., & Anderson, R.C. (2006). Morphological aware-
ness and learning to read: A cross-�language perspective.
Educational Psychologist, 41(3), 161–Â�180.
Nagy, W.E. (1988). Teaching vocabulary to improve reading com-
prehension. Newark, DE: IRA.
Nagy, W.E. (2007). Metalinguistic awareness and the
vocabulary-�comprehension connection. In R.K. Wagner,
A.E. Muse, & K.R. Tannenbaum (Eds.), Vocabulary acquisi-
tion: Implications for reading comprehension (pp. 52–Â�77). New
York, NY: Guilford.
Nagy, W.E., Berninger, V., & Abbott, R. (2006). Contributions
of morphology beyond phonology to literacy outcomes of
upper elementary and middle school students. Journal of
Educational Psychology, 98(1), 134–Â�147.
Nagy, W.E., & Scott, J.A. (2000). Vocabulary processes. Hand-
book of reading research, 3(269–Â�284), 275.
National Institute for Literacy. (2007). What content-�area teach-
ers should know about adolescent literacy. Washington, DC:
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices
and Council of Chief State School Officers. [2010]. Common
core state standards. Washington, DC: Authors.
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices
and Council of Chief State School Officers Common core
state standards for English language arts. [2010]. Washington,
DC: Authors.
Ramirez, G., Chen, X., Geva, E., & Kiefer, H. (2010). Morpho-
logical awareness in Spanish-�speaking English language
learners: Within and cross-�language effects on word read-
ing. Reading and Writing, 23(3–Â�4), 337–Â�358.
Saunders, W.M., Foorman, B.R., & Carlson, C.D. (2006). Is a
separate block of time for oral English language develop-
ment in programs for English learners needed? Elementary
School Journal, 107(2), 181–Â�198.
Scott, J.A., & Nagy, W.E. (2004). Developing word conscious-
ness. In J.F. Baumann & E.J. Kame’enui (Eds.), Vocabulary
instruction: Research to practice (pp. 201–Â�217). New York,
NY: Guilford.
Scott, J., Skobel, B., & Wells, J. (2008). The word-�conscious class-
room: Building the vocabulary readers and writers need. New
York, NY: Scholastic.
Stahl, S.A. (2004). Scaly? Audacious? Debris? Salubrious?
Vocabulary learning and the child with learning disabil-
ities. Perspectives, 30(1), 5–Â�12.
Stahl, W.A. (1999). Vocabulary development. Newton Upper
Falls, MA: Brookline Books.
Washington Post Mensa Invitational. Retrieved from http://
www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/style/invitational/
invit980802.htm
 5
Fluency Development for the Older Student
Jan Hasbrouck and Martha C. Hougen

There is no comprehension strategy that compensates for difficulty reading words accurately and fluently.1

Classroom Scenario
In her seventh-�grade social studies class, Ms. Smith engages her students by having them read
original documents, bringing the historical period to life by studying the accounts of events
written by people who were alive during that time. Students engage in lively discussions
about the reasons people did what they did and how significant decisions were made. Most of
her students are enthusiastic about learning about history, but a few students are not. One
student, Bradley, rarely completed the readings and professed he was bored with the readings,
though he enjoyed the class discussions. Ms. Smith tried various strategies to engage him,
including offering different materials for him to read. Nothing seemed to work. One day she
asked Bradley to come see her after school. Ms. Smith asked Bradley to pick a selection and
read it to her so they could discuss it. Bradley began reading, and, though he read each word
accurately, he read very slowly. It took him 5 minutes to read two paragraphs! And then he
couldn’t recall what he had read, much less analyze it critically. No wonder Bradley didn’t like
to read—Â�his fluency rate was so slow, it was difficult for him to comprehend and remember
what he read. Ms. Smith was flummoxed; how could she help him?

What Is Reading Fluency? Why Is Fluency Important?

Reading fluency—Â�the accuracy, rate, and expression of reading—Â�has long been considered an
essential skill that must be developed by readers to facilitate the comprehension of what has

Objectives: After studying this chapter, you will be able to:

1. Explain the definition of reading fluency and how it relates to comprehension.
2. Assess a student’s level of reading fluency and determine whether or not the stu-
dent needs additional instruction and practice to read fluently.
3. Determine the reading fluency goals for students.
4. Determine reading interventions to build fluency.
5. Develop instructional lessons to increase students’ level of fluency.
6. Know why the instructional goal for students is to read fluently with comprehen-
sion and not to read as fast as they can.

61
62 Hasbrouck and Hougen

been read and to motivate engagement in the act of reading. The concept of reading fluency
has been discussed in professional literacy circles since 1886!2 Although a common component
of reading instruction in elementary and intermediate grades, recent research conducted over
the past 20 years suggests fluency is a significant variable in secondary students’ reading and
overall academic development.3
Since the 1970s, there has been a flurry of research about fluency and its relationship to
comprehension.4 It has been confirmed that the human brain has the capacity to perform tasks
such as reading at an automatic, nearly unconscious level, once sufficient learning has occurred.
Readers who have achieved automaticity—Â�immediately and effortlessly recognizing words in
print—Â�can allocate their cognitive processes (thinking) to the meaning of what is being read
rather than thinking about how to figure out the words. When readers have to devote a sig-
nificant amount of their cognitive resources to simply decoding and recognizing words, the
cognitive resources available for paying attention and for processing information are limited,
resulting in impaired comprehension. Therefore, it is important that students become fluent
readers, reading text with minimal effort so that they can concentrate on the meaning of the text.
Many reading professionals refer to the report of the National Reading Panel as being a
modern watershed in terms of reading fluency. In the section on fluency in the summary docu-
ment, the report stated, “Fluency is one of several critical factors necessary for reading compre-
hension. Despite its importance as a component of skilled reading, fluency is often neglected in
the classroom.”5 This strongly worded proclamation was a wake-Â�up call to educators to learn
more about the importance of fluency and how to provide instruction in the classroom.

What Is Reading Fluency?

Whereas reading fluency has been a topic of discussion for more than a century, there are still
many questions surrounding the definition of the term, in part because fluency has many subtle
components that are interdependent and therefore difficult to separate.6 Although there may
not be a firm consensus on a single definition of reading fluency, most definitions include three
components: rate; accuracy; and prosody, or “good expression.”

Rate
Reading rate is sometimes mistakenly used as synonymous for fluency, but rate technically refers
only to the speed with which students read text. Most teachers have had experience with stu-
dents who read quickly but still may not have good comprehension. Speed alone is not suffi-
cient to facilitate comprehension, and a fast reader is not necessarily a fluent reader. In fact, fast
readers may be reading inaccurately or perhaps are reading too quickly to think about what
they are reading. The rate or speed at which text is decoded and identified is clearly one aspect
of fluency. However, reading fast is not the same as reading fluently. Some teachers encourage
their students to “read as fast as they can”—Â�this is not good practice. Rather, students should
do their “best reading.” This will be addressed further when the instructional strategies to
improve fluency are discussed.

Accuracy
A second essential component of fluent reading is accuracy. In fact, accuracy may be considered
to be the foundation of fluency. In order for a reader to understand what is being read, the text
must be read with a certain level of accuracy—Â�that is, reading the words correctly. It is not
known exactly how accurate a reader must read to obtain adequate or even minimal compre-
hension. However, there seems to be general consensus that comprehension is impaired when
text is read with less than 95% accuracy. This means students should be able to correctly read
at least 95 out of every 100 words.7 Fluent readers should read text at an appropriate rate for
Fluency Development for the Older Student 63

the task while maintaining a reasonable level of accuracy. If the text is very difficult, slowing
down and reading more than once is an appropriate response, which should help increase the
accuracy and resulting comprehension.

Prosody
There is one additional component that is commonly considered a characteristic of a fluent
reader: the ability to read with good expression. The technical term for this is prosody. Prosody
refers to the pitch, tone, volume, emphasis, and rhythm in speech or oral reading. Teachers also
talk about “chunking” words together into appropriate phrases as being another element of
good expression. There is far less research on the contributions of prosody to comprehension
than has been conducted on rate and accuracy, but emerging findings suggest there is some
relationship. At this point, it is unclear whether prosody is a cause or an outcome of compre-
hension or if the relationship is in fact reciprocal. However, the extent to which a student uses
correct expression while reading orally can indicate how well a reader comprehends the text
being read.8 If the reader does not know what he or she is reading about, it is difficult to phrase
the words appropriately and emphasize the correct words to obtain meaning.

What Does Research Say About the Role of Reading Fluency?

As the National Reading Panel report made clear, reading fluency is an essential component
of reading because it is necessary for comprehension. The ultimate goal of reading is always
to understand what has been read—Â�and to learn from and enjoy what the author has written.
The speed and the accuracy with which text is read have an obvious effect on how well readers
can make meaning from the text they are reading. To understand the role that fluency plays in
reading comprehension, it is helpful to know how the brain processes information.
The human brain processes information (such as the visual images of printed text) using
a complex, interconnected system that begins with working memory. The working memory of
the brain temporarily stores and manages information that will be used to complete the complex
cognitive tasks involved in learning, reasoning, and comprehending. Scientists acknowledge
that, whereas individual brains differ in their function and capacity, the models of working
memory embrace the idea that, in order to function, all brains need to process information in
a manner that is manageable. If too much information comes into the brain at once, the work-
ing memory becomes overloaded, and comprehension is impaired. Conversely, if information
comes into the brain too slowly, the working memory cannot devote sufficient attention to the
information to identify a pattern or see a relationship to prior learning. Because of this, a rate
of reading that is appropriate to the task (neither too fast nor too slow) must be utilized by the
reader in order for comprehension to be facilitated. Of course, the brain must process informa-
tion that is reasonably accurate in order for comprehension to occur. Thus comprehension is
impaired or limited by reading too fast, too slowly, or inaccurately and is facilitated by reading
at an appropriate rate for the task with reasonable accuracy. In other words, fluent reading
assists comprehension.9
Reading at a rate appropriate to the task acknowledges that different types of material are
read at different rates. Think of how quickly you read a novel with a great story. Compare that
to how you might read a physics text. Most of us read a light novel quickly and accurately,
without thinking about decoding individual words. In contrast, if you are not knowledgeable
about physics and you are reading a physics textbook, you are likely to read much slower, tak-
ing time to decode difficult words and to contemplate their meaning. It is important for students
to realize that they must adjust their reading rate depending on the text.
Another way that poor fluency skills can impede comprehension has to do with what
Dr. Keith Stanovich famously referred to as the “Matthew effect.”10 The term is taken from the
Biblical passage describing the phenomenon in which it seems that in life the rich get richer
64 Hasbrouck and Hougen

and the poor get poorer. Stanovich applied this concept to struggling readers in the process of
learning to read who begin to lag behind their peers and throughout the subsequent years often
fall even further behind, in part because they simply are reading far less text. Good readers get
“richer” because they are reading significantly more text than their less capable peers and thus
strengthening their decoding and word-�recognition skills and increasing their vocabulary.11
These researchers also found that the act of reading helps create motivated or “avid” readers,
and they even go so far as to state that their data indicate that those who read a lot enhance
their verbal intelligence; that is, reading actually makes people smarter!
It can be helpful to think of fluency as a link in a chain connecting beginning decoding skills
and comprehension skills (Figure 5.1). Fluent reading enables students to progress from word-
by-word decoding to being able to read with automaticity and to concentrate on the meaning of
the text. If readers do not develop adequate levels of fluency, this progress will be interrupted,
and the student may not be able to decode accurately and quickly enough to adequately under-
stand what they are reading. These students typically become our reluctant readers, often with
dire consequences for themselves, their future families, and society.12
Researchers have noted that the role of fluency changes across the developmental stages
of reading. For beginning readers, the accuracy of reading rather than the rate is the primary
focus. Once students are reading connected text with reasonable accuracy—Â�typically by the
middle of first grade—Â�the rate and accuracy of their reading is strongly tied to their overall
reading skill, including comprehension.13 Some researchers have noted that once a student is
reading at around the sixth-�grade level, factors other than fluency become more important in
the overall reading process, including vocabulary and background knowledge.14 Unfortunately,
there are considerable numbers of adolescent readers who read at an excessively slow pace
and often struggle with accuracy as well. These students are particularly at a disadvantage
when compared with their classmates who read at a more normal rate. The nonfluent readers
require significantly more time to accomplish any reading assignment than students who read
with adequate fluency. Such poor levels of reading performance can easily lead to frustration,
avoidance of reading, and ultimately, school failure.15

What Should Students Know and Be Able

to Do to Be Prepared for College and Career?
In the era of Common Core State Standards, the overarching reading goal for all our students is
for them to be able to read increasingly complex literary and informational text independently
and proficiently. When we consider the role of fluency in achieving this goal, we can easily
understand that it is a major factor! Fluency is accuracy + rate + good expression that leads
to accurate and deep comprehension and, we all hope, motivation to read. It is likely that the
majority of students in Grades 6–Â�12 will have developed good foundational reading skills,
including fluency, and will be able to read grade-�level and even more difficult and challenging
text with a modest amount of instructional support—Â�the kind of support that you will learn
how to provide in the other chapters of this book.
To be considered “on level” in fluency, students should be able to read aloud from an
unpracticed passage from a grade-�level text (either narrative or expository, fiction or nonfic-
tion, perhaps 200–Â�300 words in length) with at least 95% accuracy and then be able to answer
questions about the content of the passage. A student’s oral reading should sound as effortless
and flowing as speech.16 If we time students during this activity for 1 minute and count the
errors made during that period, we expect to see a score of approximately 150 words correct or
higher, at least by the end of year when the student has had a chance to benefit from a year’s
worth of practice and experience at that grade level.17 If students cannot do this, if their words
correct per minute score is less than 150, if their accuracy on the entire passage is below 95%, or
if their reading is halting or labored or oddly paced, it is likely these students have not acquired
sufficient fluency skills. They may also be struggling with other reading issues as well, such as
Fluency Development for the Older Student 65

Fluency is the link between word recognition and comprehension.

Word recognition Fluency Comprehension

Figure 5.1.â•… Links to comprehension. (From Hougen, M.C.,

& Smartt, S.M. [2012]. The fundamentals of literacy instruc-
tion and assessment, pre-K–6 [p. 125]. Baltimore, MD: Paul
H. Brookes Publishing Co.; reprinted by permission.)

vocabulary, word recognition, or decoding. Poor fluency tells us there may be a problem, but
what is causing the problem cannot be known until further diagnostics are done.

How Do We Assess What Students Know and How Much They

Are Learning? How Do We Use Assessments to Inform Instruction?18
It should be clear from the information presented so far that assisting students to become flu-
ent readers also plays an important role in helping them become motivated readers who enjoy
the process of reading and who can understand and learn from what they read. The process of
assisting all students to become fluent readers logically starts with identifying which students
are already sufficiently fluent and which students would benefit from fluency instruction or
intervention. As we described, simply taking a few minutes to listen to individual students read
text aloud is an excellent way to start the process of identifying fluent and dysfluent students in
your classroom. In addition to this initial, informal assessment, there are tools available to teach-
ers to systematically and objectively identify students at various levels of need for assistance with
reading fluency. All teachers should know about these assessments and how to use them appro-
priately to both identify students who might need special assistance with fluency and to monitor
their progress in reading fluently. There are reliable, valid, and useful classroom assessments
that help teachers accomplish these important tasks by targeting the three primary components
of fluency: rate, accuracy, and prosody. Each will be discussed, beginning with prosody.

Assessing Reading Prosody

Researchers, including Ron Cole and his colleagues at Boulder Language Technologies in Boul-
der, Colorado, have developed voice recognition and evaluation software that may someday
allow teachers to objectively and precisely rate a student’s oral reading expression and even-
tually be able to compare it with some normative standards or expectations.19 However, at the
present time, there are no tools available to classroom teachers to objectively score for students’
expression or prosody. Instead, qualitative rubrics or rating scales developed by researchers to
guide the assessment process are commonly used to evaluate expression and assign a grade or
performance level. A widely used rubric is the four-�level scale from the National Assessment of
Educational Progress that ranges from well-�phrased, expressive reading at Level 4 to word-�by-�
word, monotonic reading at Level 1.20 Other scales have been created for assessing prosody that
allow teachers to rate a student’s pacing, smoothness, phrasing, expression, and intonation.21

Assessing Rate and Accuracy

One of the procedures for assessing students’ rate and accuracy is based on a body of research
conducted since the early 1980s called curriculum-�based measurement (CBM). Numerous
CBM studies have used measures of rate and accuracy to assess students’ skill development and
progress in reading, math, writing, and spelling.22 The CBM assessment process for oral reading
fluency (ORF) assessments requires using standardized procedures that involve having a stu-
dent read aloud from unpracticed, grade-�level passages or words for 1 minute, while an exam-
iner identifies errors. At the end of 1 minute, a score of words correct per minute is calculated.
66 Hasbrouck and Hougen

That score can then be compared to an established benchmark that indicates proficiency. Stu-
dents at or above the designated benchmark are considered at low risk (or are likely on track
with their skill development); students below benchmark are considered possibly at risk (if they
are slightly below the benchmark) or likely at risk (if significantly below benchmark).

Norms for Oral Reading Fluency

In 2006, Jan Hasbrouck and Jerry Tindal published a set of national norms for oral reading flu-
ency.23 These norms were created to provide educators with guidelines for what reading fluency
scores would be appropriate for students in Grades 1–Â�8 across the school year. Teachers can
compare a student’s score from a 60-Â�second assessment on an unpracticed, grade-Â�level passage
to the Hasbrouck and Tindal chart (Table 5.1) for the student’s grade level and the time of the
school year in which the assessment was administered. The researchers recommend that if a
student’s ORF score is more than 10 words below the 50th percentile, the teacher can flag that
student as one who might need some additional instructional support. The percentile number
indicates the percentage of scores that fell at or below that score. In other words, the 20th per-
centile is the score below which 20% of all the scores from the assessment can be found.
Researchers generally agree that performance at the 50th percentile serves as a reasonable
benchmark for fluency performance. However, some states and districts across the country have
set their state standards for reading fluency at the 75th
percentile or even higher. This decision possibly comes
from the belief that it is better to set higher standards for In other words, students
students’ performance or perhaps from the notion that need not read as fast as
“our state’s students are all above average, so everyone possible to become good
else’s average is not good enough for us.” While setting readers.
high standards for our students is usually a good thing to do, Students who read in
in the case of reading rate, it is a mistake. There is no con- the average range are on
clusive research to support the idea that reading faster target to become effective
is better. Whereas there is ample empirical evidence that readers.
it is essential for students to read fluently at least at the
50th percentile, there is no sufficient evidence to suggest
that we should push students to read above the 50th per-
centile. Very few students will be able to achieve such levels, so they and their teachers may
become frustrated with the attempt. More important, there is no research to indicate there is a
significant benefit to their reading if they do achieve this higher fluency level.
Research to establish benchmark ORF scores for students above Grade 8 have not been
conducted. However, if we look at the 50th percentile from the Hasbrouck and Tindal norms for
Grades 6, 7, and 8, we can see that for all three grades the score in the spring was 150–Â�151 words
correct per minute (WCPM). Remember that at each grade level, these students were reading
passages of text that were increasingly difficult, so their skill level was actually increasing, not
staying the same. With these data, we can safely extrapolate that students with fluency in an
acceptable range in Grades 9–Â�12 will likely also have scores in the range of 150 words correct
or higher. Therefore we can use 150 WCPM as a performance benchmark for rate and accuracy
at the end of the year for students in Grades 9–Â�12.

Using Oral Reading Fluency as Benchmark/Screening Decisions

Along with serving as an indicator of a student’s proficiency in rate and accuracy, CBM ORF
assessments have also been validated to use as assessments to help teachers efficiently and effec-
tively identify which of their students might need assistance with reading in general, including
comprehension, and which students appear to be on track and will likely continue to make prog-
ress without extra assistance.24 Asking students to read aloud for 1 minute from a grade-level
Fluency Development for the Older Student 67

Table 5.1.â•… National oral reading fluency norms

50th percentiles
Grade Fall WCPM Winter WCPM Spring WCPM
1 23 53
2 51 72 89
3 71 92 107
4 94 112 123
5 110 127 139
6 127 140 150
7 128 136 150
8 133 146 151
GREEN Zone ≥ 10 to –Â�4; YELLOW Zone –Â�5 to –Â�10; RED Zone >10 below
From Hasbrouck, J., & Tindal, G. (2006). ORF norms: A valuable assessment tool for reading
teachers. The Reading Teacher, 59(7), 636–Â�644; reprinted by permission. (Key: WCPM = words
correct per minute.)

text will quickly inform you which students are likely to struggle with text and which students
will be able to read the text independently. This information will help you differentiate your
instruction. For example, you can provide text at a slightly easier level for the struggling readers,
students can read electronic books that provide built-�in scaffolding by providing the pronun-
ciation and definitions of words, or students can listen to text that is especially challenging for
them. The student could also repeatedly read along as he or she listens to the text.

Confusion About Oral Reading Fluency Assessments

The labeling of these CBM measures as ORF implies these assessments measure the complete
skill of reading fluency, and this assumption has led to a lot of confusion in the ranks of profes-
sional educators.25 Some think that ORF is a measure of rate only or that using CBM benchmark/
screening measures implies that fluency is the only reading skill that should be assessed and
considered for making instructional decisions about students. Teachers often assume students
who read fast are good readers. Students who read slowly just need to be taught how to read
faster. This is not the correct way to interpret these scores.
Because rate and accuracy are used in these measures, and rate and accuracy are two of
the key components of reading fluency, this confusion is understandable. However, when used
for benchmark/screening decisions, these CBM assessments are not simply measures of fluency
skill levels and were never intended to be interpreted that way. Rather, these measures must
be understood as highly efficient and reasonably accurate indicators of general reading ability.
Measures of rate and accuracy have been identified as strongly predictive indicators of overall
reading performance, including comprehension.26 Numerous studies conducted since the early
1980s have clearly established that these fluency-�based measures that assess rate and accuracy are
strongly correlated with measures of reading comprehension and overall reading proficiency.27
It is most appropriate to think of these benchmark/screening measures as “thermometers”
that help determine students’ general academic health or wellness. They cannot provide a spe-
cific diagnosis or imply an appropriate treatment plan, but scores can be used to raise a red flag
of concern about a student. Once a student has been identified as possibly or likely at risk of
reading difficulty, a teacher should next look at another category of assessments that will help
diagnose specific skill deficits in all the key areas of reading including decoding, vocabulary,
and comprehension. Information on diagnostic assessments is widely available.28
The purpose of progress monitoring, or conducting informal formative assessments, is to
help professional educators determine if their students are benefiting sufficiently from instruc-
tion or intervention and to inform the teacher when that instruction should be adjusted. Once
68 Hasbrouck and Hougen

again, CBM fluency-�based assessments can be used to help provide this important information
for students who are receiving on-�level instruction in Tier 1 programs, as well as those students
receiving extra assistance in Tier 2 or Tier 3. Because they involve the assessment of rate and
accuracy, these assessments are also useful to monitor the progress of student’s fluency skill
development.29
Tier 1 Progress Monitoring For students who are on level or above and appear to be suc-
ceeding with their Tier 1 classroom instruction, systematic progress monitoring involves check-
ing to ensure students are maintaining their skills in both fluency and prosody. When students
continue to perform at the 50th percentile or higher on fluency norms, a teacher can safely
assume that their fluency skill progress is adequate. For students above sixth-�grade reading-�
appropriate progress, monitoring assessments include the multiple-�choice cloze, commonly
called a maze test.30

Maze Procedure
A maze assessment is created by starting with intact passages of text and then removing
words—Â�usually every seventh word—Â�starting with the second sentence. The resulting blank
spaces are each replaced with some one-�word options. The maze is different from the traditional
“cloze” assessment in which students are given a passage with blank spaces where they try to
determine the best word to put into each space. A maze functions like a cloze test with multiple-�
choice options. The options for the multiple-�choice selection usually include the actual word
that was removed from the blank spot, a random option, and one that possibly could fit but
is clearly not the most appropriate choice. These three options are presented in random order
for each item. Students read the maze passage silently and fill in as many blanks as possible in
a 3-�minute period. The maze can be administered as a group assessment. Research has estab-
lished that the maze correlates with overall reading performance better than measures of oral
reading fluency for secondary students.31 See Figure 5.2 for an example.
Tier 2 and Tier 3 Progress Monitoring Students receiving Tier 2 (supplementary instruc-
tion) or Tier 3 (more intensive intervention) assistance should also participate in the repeated
benchmark/screening assessments conducted across the school year along with their Tier 1
classmates. And of course, their teachers carefully observe them during daily instruction and
administer appropriate in-�program assessments, quizzes, and so forth. However, for students
who are struggling and/or receiving extra instruction or intervention, additional data will need
to be collected to monitor student progress on a more frequent basis. This is because of the fact
that, even when academically challenged, students are making progress; however, gains can
be small and difficult to detect. Professional educators responsible for teaching these students
simply need to determine if students are benefiting from their Tier 2 or Tier 3 instruction.
For students at these levels, many educators find that the progress-�monitoring assessments
based on CBM methodologies can provide valuable information for making key instructional
decisions.

Curriculum-�Based Measurement for Progress Monitoring

When CBM assessments are utilized for monitoring students’ progress, most of the standard-
ized procedures that are used with benchmark/screening assessments are used, but with four
differences. Perhaps the most significant variation between the two assessments is that for prog-
ress monitoring, students’ performances are compared to individually set goals and previous per-
formance rather than being compared to a set of grade level norms and benchmarks. A second
difference is that progress monitoring is conducted at more frequent intervals than benchmark/
screening. Depending on the severity of student need, current recommendations suggest that
assessments can be administered once or twice a month or as often as once a week. However,
Fluency Development for the Older Student 69

The Fox
The fox ran to the cave. The cave was inside. The fox (waited,
walked, down) into the cave. He lay down (and, if, went) to sleep.
When he woke up (the, it, in) was time to eat. So the (dog, bird,
fox) went out into the woods.

Figure 5.2.â•… Example of a maze passage (excerpt).

newer emerging research suggests that less frequent monitoring may be the most appropriate.32
More research in this area is needed so that more precise guidance can be provided.
The third difference between the two assessments is that a student’s results from progress-Â�
monitoring assessments are recorded on graphs so that teachers and specialists can easily
evaluate an individual’s progress—Â�or lack of progress—Â�over time. These graphs provide easy-Â�
to-�interpret visual displays of student progress when compared to a predetermined individ-
ual performance goal. Most important, when a graph indicates less than expected progress,
immediate adjustments can be made in the student’s instruction. It is motivating for students
to graph their own progress. These graphs can be shared with parents to demonstrate student
progress.
The final difference between CBM benchmark/screening and progress-�monitoring assess-
ments is the level of difficulty of the passages. The passages used for benchmark/screening are
always at the student’s grade level, even when it is clear the student is reading well above or
well below his or her current grade, while the level of the passages for progress monitoring
varies. Students can be assessed using passages that are easier or more difficult than their
instructional level, and the technical adequacy of the measures is not affected.33
For progress monitoring, some have suggested selecting passages at either the student’s cur-
rent instructional level (the approximate level at which the student is currently receiving instruc-
tion) or the student’s goal level (defined as one level—Â�and only one level—Â�above the student’s
current instructional level).34 Consider using goal-�level reading materials to monitor the progress
of students in Grades 6 or higher who are 1) reading more than 2 years below grade level; 2)
receiving an especially high-�intensity and high-�quality intervention program at school; 3) receiv-
ing extra practice or tutoring at home; and/or 4) highly motivated to improve. Consider using
instructional level materials for students who have been identified as having a learning disability
or dyslexia and/or who are learning to speak English.

How Do We Teach the Skills Effectively, Efficiently,

and in a Manner Appropriate to the Student’s Age/Grade?
It is well established that readers with inadequate fluency skills often struggle with com-
prehension, and it is rare that students with poorly developed fluency are highly motivated
readers who eagerly look forward to opportunities to read. However, simply increasing a
student’s levels of rate and accuracy and improving their prosody cannot guarantee that
the student’s comprehension will also increase. In other words, fluency is necessary but not
sufficient for reading comprehension. Teachers must keep this concept in mind when designing
appropriate fluency instruction or interventions for students. As Kuhn, Schwanenflugel,
and Meisinger state, “It is critical that we establish€.€.€. instruction that assist(s) learners
in becoming truly fluent readers rather than just fast ones.”35 Other researchers have also
warned teachers not to expect that if students simply read more, they will achieve adequate
levels of fluency.36 They point out that research and theory strongly suggest that at least
some students will require systematic instruction and teacher guidance in order to become
skillful and motivated fluent readers.
70 Hasbrouck and Hougen

Findings from Fluency Research

From the numerous studies that have been conducted in the past 25 years, some key points
should be considered when designing fluency instruction and intervention for students.37
• The National Reading Panel reported that guided, oral reading practice improves fluency
for typically developing students but that silent reading and independent practice is likely
not sufficient to improve students’ fluency skill.38
• Repeated reading remains the “gold standard” of fluency interventions, but Kuhn and Stahl
report that providing feedback or having the student reading along with a narrator as part
of repeated reading is more effective than independent repeated reading for improving
fluency.39
• Repeated reading can be encouraged by including some performance opportunities into the
classroom. Texts such as poetry, scripts, oratory, and song lyrics are meant to be performed
and could be incorporated into any secondary content area classroom with a bit of creative
planning by the teacher.40
• For some students, the same amount of time spent engaged in “wide reading” (sustained
reading of a variety of texts) has as much of a positive impact on fluency as rereading a
single piece of text,41 but others found that wide reading must be monitored and students
held accountable for attending to what they read.42
• Partner reading, where assigned partners can practice reading aloud in pairs, can improve
reading fluency, especially if the activity is structured by the amount of reading each partner
does, how errors will be corrected, and how partners take turns.43
• Cuing students to attend to their accuracy and rate while reading can increase students’
fluency.44
• Students can improve their fluency when the passages used for instruction are very chal-
lenging, even at a frustration level of 85% accuracy (15 out of 100 words are unknown or
read incorrectly), if teachers closely monitor the process and provide sufficient support
including feedback.45
• Instructional strategies that combine 1) reading with a model of skillful reading, 2) repeated
reading of a single text, and 3) progress monitoring feedback before and after practice can
improve students fluency and comprehension and has a positive impact on motivation to
read.46
• Whereas there has been little research specifically focused on improving prosody, some
researchers have concluded that prosody develops from acquiring efficient word-�and text-�
reading skills and that it is likely improved by guided and assisted reading activities during
which feedback on expression is provided.47

Research Applied to Classroom Settings

The type and amount of instruction that students will need to become fluent readers will of
course vary depending on their general reading skill level. For students who are receiving
instruction solely in the general education classroom (Tier 1) and successfully making prog-
ress in reading, there are some techniques, explained in the following text, that a teacher
can use to support the development of fluency. For those students who can read grade-�
level text with sufficient accuracy (91% to 97% or higher words read correctly) and generally
understand what they are reading but whose fluency rates are below expected levels, more
systematic and explicit fluency instruction should be provided, perhaps as part of a Tier 2
intervention. For students whose fluency levels are low and who also struggle with deficits
in phonics and decoding, word recognition, vocabulary, or other skill areas, a more compre-
hensive intervention will likely need to be developed and provided in a Tier 2 or Tier 3 setting
Fluency Development for the Older Student 71

outside of the classroom. In these cases, explicit and

systematic fluency instruction should be provided
as one component of a more multifaceted instruc-
tional program.

Tier 1 Fluency Instruction

Research is clear that many—Â�if not most—Â�students
will develop adequate fluency levels by simply
engaging in reading, especially if they also hear mod-
els of fluent reading and receive feedback about their
reading rate, accuracy, and prosody. Two commonly
implemented but less effective ways teachers try to
encourage reading are round robin reading and silent
sustained reading; neither is an effective method to
increase comprehension. In round robin reading, stu-
dents take turns reading aloud from unpracticed text,
often in a whole-�class, large-�group setting. Teach-
ers use this technique with varieties of text genres
including novels, social studies, or science texts. Note
only one student is reading at a time while the others
are typically losing interest and not paying attention.
Sustained silent reading (SSR), sometimes called drop everything and read (DEAR), requires
students to read silently in self-�selected texts for a designated period of time, sometimes up to
20 or 30 minutes or more daily. Often, students choose books that are either too easy or much
too difficult for them, so they are not improving their reading skills. Also, too much time can
be wasted as students choose their books, and typically students are not accountable for what
they are reading. Whereas some students might benefit from these activities, neither of these
methods provides the amount of practice that at-�risk or struggling readers will need to develop
their fluency, and both activities limit the amount of modeling and opportunities for specific
feedback that are also critical.
Teachers in Grades 6–Â�12 can consider replacing round robin reading with choral reading or
cloze reading.48 In choral reading, students read text aloud in unison along with the teacher—Â�
all students are participating. Cloze reading involves having the teacher read text aloud while
students follow along silently in their own copies of the text or from a shared text such as on
an overhead or whiteboard. From time to time, the teacher randomly pauses before reading a
word, and the students read that “omitted” word aloud in unison.
Another alternative to SSR or DEAR is structured partner reading, where assigned partners
read together and provide each other feedback, including pointing out errors and supporting
the correct pronunciation and decoding of words. Structured partner reading can take several
forms, including simultaneous oral reading; taking turns reading a sentence, paragraph, or page
aloud; sharing one book; or each student having his or her own copy of the text.49 Students can
be taught even more explicit feedback techniques that extend the practice to vocabulary and
comprehension development.

Tier 2 or 3 Fluency Instruction

For students who need a more targeted intervention to improve their fluency skills, a three-�
component strategy developed by Candyce Ihnot has been shown to be successful.50 In this
strategy, students are first assessed to determine an appropriate level of text in which to receive
instruction. Using placement guidelines, students will typically be placed in text that is at or
close to their frustration level (below 90% accuracy). The placement guidelines also help a
72 Hasbrouck and Hougen

teacher establish a specific fluency goal for each student, usually set at 40 words above the
assessed baseline ORF score for students in Grades 5 and higher.
The intervention itself begins with having a student complete a 60-Â�second “cold read” of
a self-�selected passage at their designated skill level. The student (with teacher support) cal-
culates a score of words correct per minute. This score is recorded on a graph. The next step
involves having the student quietly read aloud along with a narrator or skilled reader from
the same passage that was used for the cold read. Students typically read the entire passage
(from 80 to 350 words in length, depending on the grade level of the passage) three times. Next
the student engages in repeated reading practice by reading aloud from the practiced text for
60-�second intervals until their designated ORF goal has been achieved. This step often takes 3
to 10 attempts. Finally, the teacher listens to the student read aloud from the now well-�practiced
passage for 60 seconds. If the student is able to read the passage with no more than three errors,
reads with appropriate expression, and reaches his or her designated goal, the score is recorded
on the graph alongside the original cold read score. This process is repeated with the next pas-
sage. This strategy also incorporates prediction, retell, and question answering to hold students
accountable for comprehending the content of the passages used for practice.51

Summary
Fluency is a complex skill that includes not only rate but also accuracy and expression. Reading
fluency is an essential skill that must be adequately developed in order for a reader to be able
to comprehend what he or she has read and to benefit from and enjoy the act of reading. Unfor-
tunately, many adolescent readers still struggle with this essential reading skill. Professional
educators at all grade levels must assess their students to determine who might need assistance
in becoming fluent readers and effectively provide the instruction and intervention necessary to
help everyone achieve success. For students who are already sufficiently fluent, pushing them
to read ever faster is a futile effort and has no instructional value. Teaching students to read
faster is not the answer! As Marilyn Adams said, “If we want to induce children to read lots,
we must teach them to read well.”52

Application Assignments
In-�Class Assignments
1. Refer back to the scenario at the beginning of this chapter. Ms. Smith consulted with
the reading specialist to learn how best to help Bradley. The first thing she did was
determine how many words per minute Bradley read accurately. He read 100 words
per minute in grade-�level text. Ms. Smith noticed that he would take several seconds to
decode multisyllabic words. With a partner, make a plan for Ms. Smith. Consider the
following:
a. How many words should Bradley be reading when reading aloud?
b. How should he practice to read more fluently?
c. What could be done to help him read multisyllabic words more easily?
2. Prepare a one-Â�page plan for Ms. Smith to support Bradley’s reading.

Tutoring Assignments
1. Using a grade-�level text, ask the student whom you are tutoring to read aloud for 1 minute.
2. Determine how many words per minute the student read accurately. Describe the stu-
dent’s prosody. Assess his or her comprehension of the text just read. Determine if your
student has difficulty with fluency.
Fluency Development for the Older Student 73

3. Create an intervention plan to improve the student’s fluency. Consider methods to

increase the student’s minutes reading, strategies to help with decoding, and strategies
to encourage the student to complete repeated readings of certain text, charting his or her
progress on a graph.
4. Provide an opportunity for the student to prepare to read parts of a famous speech to
another class, a group of community members, or peers. Ensure the student practices the
passage, reading it multiple times until it is read fluently with expression.

Homework Assignments
1. Determine how many words per minute you read when reading this text aloud. Read it
for 1 minute and then stop and count the words. Now read silently for 1 minute. Did you
read more words? Which method resulted in better comprehension? Why?
2. As adults, most of us read silently, though we read each word and often add emphasis
in our mind. However, is there ever a time when you read aloud? Or “whisper read” the
text? Why do you think you do this?
3. Write a one-�page reflection explaining what you learned about your reading after doing
these exercises.

Endnotes
1. Torgesen (2007). 28. See Consortium of Reading Excellence (CORE) (2008);
2. Huey (1908/1968). Hasbrouck (2010a, 2012).
3. Rasinski et al. (2005); Rasinski, Rikli, & Johnston (2009). 29. Fuchs et al. (2001).
4. Rasinski, Reutzel, Chard, & Thompson (2011). 30. Wayman et al. (2007).
5. National Institute of Child Health and Human Develop- 31. Wayman et al. (2007).
ment (NICHD) (2000). 32. Jenkins & Terjeson (2011).
6. Kuhn, Schwanenflugel, & Meisinger (2010). 33. Wayman et al. (2007).
7. Rasinski et al. (2011). 34. Hasbrouck (2010a).
8. Hudson, Lane, & Pullen (2005); Schreiber (1991). 35. Kuhn et al. (2010), p. 246.
9. Miyake & Shah (1999). 36. Pikulski & Chard (2005).
10. Stanovich (1986). 37. Rasinski et al. (2011).
11. Cunningham & Stanovich (1998). 38. NICHD (2000).
12. Baer, Kutner, & Sabatini (2009). 39. Kuhn & Stahl (2003).
13. Fuchs, Fuchs, Hosp, & Jenkins (2001). 40. Rasinski et al. (2005).
14. Fuchs et al. (2001). 41. Kuhn et al. (2006).
15. Rasinski et al. (2005). 42. Reutzel, Jones, Fawson, & Smith (2008).
16. Hasbrouck & Glaser (2012). 43. Osborn, Lehr, & Hiebert (2002).
17. Hasbrouck & Tindal (2006). 44. O’Shea & Sindelar (1984).
18. Content from this section on assessing reading fluency 45. Stahl & Heuback (2005).
draws on material previously published in Hasbrouck 46. Hasbrouck, Ihnot, & Rogers (1999).
(2010a). 47. Kuhn et al. (2010); Schreiber (1991).
1 9. Cole, http://www.bltek.com. 48. Hasbrouck (2006).
20. National Assessment of Educational Progress (2002). 49. Fuchs, Fuchs, Mathes, & Simmons (1997).
21. Rasinski (2004). 50. The multistep strategy described here is referred to as the
22. Hosp, Hosp, & Howell (2006). “Read Naturally strategy” or RN and was developed by
Candyce Ihnot. For more information, go to http://www
23. Hasbrouck & Tindal (2006). .readnaturally.com
24. Wayman, Wallace, Wiley, Tichá, & Espin (2007). 51. See the Florida Center for Reading Research for specific
25. Hasbrouck (2010b); Rasinski & Hamman (2010). activities and materials to address fluency at http://www
26. Wayman et al. (2007). .fcrr.org
27. Fuchs et al. (2001). 52. Adams (1990), p. 5.
74 Hasbrouck and Hougen
References
Adams, M.J. (1990). Beginning to read: Thinking and learning
about print. Urbana-�Champaign, IL: University of Illinois,
Reading Research and Education Center.
Baer, J., Kutner, M., & Sabatini, J. (2009). Basic reading skills
and the literacy of America’s least literate adults: Results from
the 2003 National Assessment of Adult Literacy (NAAL) supple-
mental studies (NCES 2009–Â�481). Washington, DC: National
Center for Education Statistics.
Consortium of Reading Excellence (CORE). (2008). Assess-
ing reading: Multiple measures (2nd ed.). Novato, CA: Arena
Press.
Cunningham, A., & Stanovich, K.E. (1998). What reading
does for the mind. American Educator, 22(1–Â�2), 8–Â�15.
Diamond, L., & Thorsnes, B.J. (Eds.). (2008). Assessing read-
ing: Multiple measures. Novato, CA: Arena Press.
Fuchs, D., Fuchs, L.S., Mathes, P.G., & Simmons, D.C. (l997).
Peer-�assisted learning strategies: Making classrooms more
responsive to diversity. American Educational Research Jour-
nal, 34, 174–Â�206.
Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., Hosp, M.K., & Jenkins, J.R. (2001). Oral
reading fluency as an indicator of reading competence: A
theoretical, empirical, and historical analysis. Scientific
Studies of Reading, 5, 239–Â�256.
Hasbrouck, J. (Summer 2006). Drop everything and read: But
how? For students who are not yet fluent, silent reading
is not the best use of classroom time. American Educator,
28(2), 22–Â�31, 46–Â�47.
Hasbrouck, J. (2010a). Educators as physicians: Using RTI data
for effective decision-�making. Wellesley, MA: Gibson Has-
brouck & Associates.
Hasbrouck, J. (2010b). Response to Raskinski and Hamman.
Reading Today, 28(2), 26.
Hasbrouck, J. (2012). Quick phonics screener: A diagnostic
assessment. St. Paul, MN: Read Naturally.
Hasbrouck, J., & Glaser, D.R. (2012). Reading fluency: Teaching
and understanding this complex skill. Wellesley, MA: Gibson,
Hasbrouck & Associates.
Hasbrouck, J., Ihnot, C., & Rogers, G. (1999). Read natu-
rally: A strategy to increase oral reading fluency. Reading
Research and Instruction, 39(1), 27–Â�37.
Hasbrouck, J., & Tindal, G. (2006). ORF norms: A valuable
assessment tool for reading teachers. The Reading Teacher,
59(7), 636–Â�644.
Hosp, M., Hosp, J., & Howell, K. (2006). The ABCs of CBM: A
practical guide to curriculum-�based measurement. New York,
NY: Guilford.
Hudson, R.F., Lane, H.B., & Pullen, P.C. (2005). Reading flu-
ency assessment and instruction: What, why, and how?
The Reading Teacher, 58(8), 702–Â�714.
Jenkins, J., & Terjeson, K.J. (2011). Monitoring reading
growth: Goal setting, measurement methods of evaluation.
Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 26(1), 28–Â�35.
Kuhn, M.R., Schwanenflugel, P.J., & Meisinger, E.B. (2010).
Aligning theory and assessment of reading fluency: Auto-
maticity, prosody, and definitions of fluency. Reading
Research Quarterly, 45(2), 230–Â�251.
Kuhn, M.R., & Stahl, S.A. (2003). Fluency: A review of devel-
opmental and remedial practices. Journal of Educational
Psychology, 95, 3–Â�21.
Miyake, A., & Shah, P. (Eds.). (1999). Models of working mem-
ory: Mechanisms of active maintenance and executive control.
New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development
(NICHD). (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-�based
assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its
implications for reading instruction (NIH Publication No. 00–Â�
4769). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office.
Retrieved from https://www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/
pubs/nrp/pages/smallbook.aspx
Osborn, J., Lehr, F., & Hiebert, E. (2002). A focus on flu-
ency. Honolulu, HI: Pacific Resources for Education and
Learning.
O’Shea, L.J., & Sindelar, P.T. (1984, April). The effects of
repeated readings and attentional cuing on the reading flu-
ency and comprehension of third graders. Paper presented
at the 68th Annual Meeting of the American Educational
Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
Pikulski, J.J., & Chard, D.J. (2005). Fluency: Bridge between
decoding and comprehension. The Reading Teacher, 58(6),
510–Â�519.
Rasinski, T.V. (2004). Assessing reading fluency. Honolulu, HI:
Pacific Resources for Education and Learning.
Rasinski, T., & Hamman, P. (2010). Fluency: Why it is “not
hot.” Reading Today, 28(1), 26.
Rasinski, T.V., Padak, N.D., McKeon, C.A., Wilfong, L.G.,
Friedauer, J.A., & Heim, P. (2005). Is reading fluency a key
for successful high school reading? Journal of Adolescent &
Adult Literacy, 49, 22–Â�27.
Rasinski, T.V., Reutzel, D.R., Chard, D., & Thompson, S.L.
(2011). Reading fluency. In M. Kamil, D. Pearson, E. Moje,
& P. Afflerbach (Eds.), Handbook on reading research (Vol. 4,
pp. 286–Â�319). New York, NY: Taylor & Francis.
Rasinski, T., Rikli, A., & Johnston, S. (2009). Reading flu-
ency: More than automaticity? More than a concern for
the primary grades? Literacy Research and Instruction, 48(4),
350–Â�361.
Reutzel, D., Jones, C.D., Fawson, P.C., & Smith, J.A. (2008).
Scaffolded silent reading: A complement to guided
repeated oral reading that works! The Reading Teacher,
62(3), 194–Â�207.
Schreiber, P.A. (1991). Understanding prosody’s role in read-
ing acquisition. Theory into Practice, 30, 158–Â�164.
Stahl, S.A., & Heuback, K. (2005). Fluency-�oriented reading
instruction. Journal of Literacy Research, 37, 25–Â�60.
Stahl, S.A., & Kuhn, M.R. (2002). Center for the improve-
ment of early reading achievement: Making it sound like
language: Developing fluency. The Reading Teacher, 55(6),
582–Â�584.
Stanovich, K.E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some con-
sequences of individual differences in the acquisition of
literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 36–Â�407.
Torgesen, J.K. (2007, March). Research related to strengthening
instruction in reading comprehension: Comprehension strate-
gies and other methods. Presentation to state-�level Reading
First leaders, San Francisco, CA.
Wayman, M.M., Wallace, T., Wiley, H.I., Tichá, R., & Espin, C.A.
(2007). Literature synthesis on curriculum-�based measure-
ment in reading. Journal of Special Education, 41(2), 85–Â�120.
 6
“Now It Makes Sense!”
Best Practices for Reading Comprehension
Stephen Ciullo and Colleen Klein Reutebuch

Classroom Scenario
Mrs. Vega is introducing a unit on Greek mythology to her seventh-�grade students. She
begins by explaining that the Greeks often used storytelling to interpret events and ethical
issues. Next, Mrs. Vega directs students to silently read a story about Apollo and Daphne in
their textbook before working independently to write a summary of the story and its purpose.
Some students turn to the beginning of the story and start to read and seem to be pay-
ing attention to headings, captions, and illustrations. Several other students begin flipping
through the pages and scanning the text haphazardly. A discussion following the assignment
reveals that whereas most students read the story and recall some key details, they were
not strategic about reading for meaning. Without much guidance or modeling, students’
ability to identify the main ideas and to summarize the most important points of the story
was inhibited.
Meanwhile, Miss Candelaria was also beginning her unit on Greek mythology. Using
PowerPoint slides, she shows some pictures of Harry Potter, Luke and Leia Skywalker, Bat-
man, Zeus, Aphrodite, and Poseidon to help students connect Greek mythology with the
knowledge they already possess about modern-�day heroes and heroines. Next, she asks

Objectives: After studying this chapter, you will be able to:

1. Describe reading comprehension and its importance for academic success in
Grades 6–Â�12.
2. Explain what students should be able to perform in Grades 6–Â�12 related to profi-
ciency in reading comprehension and college and career readiness.
3. Identify the challenges encountered by secondary students comprehending com-
plex text.
4. Apply reading assessment knowledge to evaluate what students know and analyze
assessment data to plan comprehension instruction.
5. Identify evidence-�based practices and explain their significance to your teaching.
6. Design effective comprehension instruction for students in Grades 6–Â�12 based on
recommended practices.
7. Understand the importance of strategic reading.

75
76 Ciullo and Reutebuch

students to think about what these characters have in common. Miss Candelaria provides
a brief overview, explaining that mythology is the study of the stories and beliefs that a
culture uses to explain the natural world and human actions in supernatural terms. She
remarks that in ancient Greece, the people had legends and heroes to entertain them, just
as we do today.
A teacher-�guided introduction to key terms and student-�friendly definitions for myth,
god, laurel, malice, and quiver is followed by a display of pictures and a brief overview
of Apollo, Daphne, and Eros (Cupid). Miss Candelaria then reads aloud the beginning of the
myth of Apollo and Daphne, stopping and doing think-�alouds and making connections with
what she knows and what she believes she will uncover. She reads, “Apollo’s love was not
brought about by accident, but by Eros’s malice.” “Okay, so what is this saying?” the teacher
wonders aloud. She continues, “So it wasn’t by chance that Apollo fell in love with Daphne.
Eros, we know him today as Cupid, used his arrow to make Apollo fall in love. Eros did it
because of malice. I know the prefix ‘mal’ means ‘bad.’ I think I am going to read to find
out what Apollo did to make Eros mad enough that Eros wanted to punish him.” Finally,
students are assigned to continue to read the story with a partner to find the answer to the
following three questions:
1. What is the main conflict?
2. What is the significance of the laurel tree?
3. What does this myth attempt to explain?
Unlike students in Mrs. Vegas’s class, Miss Candelaria’s pupils begin reading very
purposefully, stopping to take notes on a graphic organizer as they read, question each
other to check understanding, and support each other when the meaning is unclear. After
the paired work, the teacher conducts a class discussion as a way to determine the extent
of her students’ understanding of the assigned reading. She calls on some students to
share their responses to the questions, asks for other students to comment, and provides
some additional clarification when necessary to ensure all learners have a solid grasp of
the story.

Reading comprehension—Â�understanding or making sense of text—Â�is a complicated process.

To read for understanding, readers must utilize a range of skills including setting a purpose
for reading, activating prior knowledge about the topic, organizing and attending to details,
and making inferences.1 Think of a time when you mindlessly read through a book, chapter, or
magazine article. You were probably able to read the words, but when you finished you could
not recall the majority of what you read. Unfortunately, this is the consequence of reading
without purpose or engagement. Reading comprehension should be an active process used
to gain meaning from text. This process does not simply happen for most readers but must be
developed through explicit and high-�quality comprehension instruction that is grounded in
evidence-�based practices. Evidence-�based practices are those that are shown through scientific
research to reliably increase student academic outcomes.2
Comprehension instruction is more than just asking students questions after they read.
Good educators teach students to be strategic before, during, and after reading. This chapter
describes recommended practices in reading comprehension for Grades 6–Â�12. Critical elements
to prepare you to deliver comprehension instruction are addressed, because comprehension can
be improved if you teach students to be strategic and use appropriate tools. You are encouraged
to teach thoughtfully selected evidence-�based practices to enable your students to understand
and remember what they read across various types of texts and reading demands, thus becom-
ing independent analytical readers.
“Now It Makes Sense!” 77

What Is Reading Comprehension Instruction? Why Is It Important?

Reading comprehension is a multicomponent, highly complex process that involves many inter-
actions between readers and what they bring to the text (previous knowledge, strategies) as well
as variables related to the text itself (interest in text, understanding text types).3
The ultimate goal of reading is to understand. More than 30 years of reading research
confirms that good readers are strategic. They use strategies to uncover meaning and gain new
or deeper knowledge. A strategy is a plan knowingly selected by the reader to reach a desired
goal or to complete a task. What is known about good readers is that they do the following:

1. Set a purpose for reading, preview the text before reading to make connections with what
they know, and predict what they will learn or find out.
2. Monitor and adjust while reading when understanding breaks down. This means that
good readers know why they are reading a text, and they monitor their understand-
ing as they read. They maintain focus on the text by questioning, associating ideas in
text to prior knowledge, revising their prior knowledge when new ideas conflict with
prior ones, and determining unknown words using content clues. They also use word
knowledge (e.g., root words) and reference materials or ask for help if they get stuck,
make a note of important points, reread if necessary, and interpret the text and its
quality.
3. Reflect on important points at the conclusion of reading and think about how ideas in the
text might be applied to the future (discussions, a writing assignment, or another text or
book).

That is an amazing list! Most mature readers accomplish the previously described components
while not pausing to analyze the complex process of comprehension.
In order to become strategic about reading, it is necessary for students to be provided
with the support they need to develop their skills while reading, writing, and thinking.
These skills do not come naturally for many at-�risk or struggling readers. The main pur-
pose for teaching reading comprehension strategies is to teach students how to think while
reading. Comprehension strategies can help readers enhance their thinking and improve
their understanding, overcome barriers to comprehending text, and compensate for lim-
ited knowledge related to the text. For some teachers, like Mrs. Vega, comprehension
instruction is little more than asking students to answer questions at the end of a reading
assignment. However, a more effective way to promote comprehension is to directly and
explicitly model using comprehension strategies and teach your students how to use com-
prehension strategies with the goal of gradually reducing support, as Miss Candelaria did,
to read and understand independently, as well as enjoy and learn from text. The National
Reading Panel4 and a 2012 synthesis on middle school students with learning disabilities
(LD)5 identified the effectiveness of various strategies, some taught as single strategies,
others combined into multiple strategy instruction for building comprehension. The most
effective strategies included summarizing, self-questioning, story structure instruction
(including story maps), graphic and semantic organizers, and comprehension monitoring
(see Table 6.1).
Single strategy instruction introduces each strategy individually and includes practice
for a given period, usually a few weeks, before another strategy is introduced. Over time,
the expectation is that students will master a collection of strategies. With multiple-�strategy
instruction, several strategies are introduced simultaneously and are practiced in combination
so that students learn to use them together. Your comfort level with the strategies, your stu-
dents’ needs and capabilities, and the reading purposes and type of text should be taken into
consideration when deciding which comprehension strategies to teach and when to introduce
them to your students.
78 Ciullo and Reutebuch
Table 6.1.╅ Evidence-�based practices
Strategy Description
Summarizing* Students describe, in writing or
verbally, the main points of what
they read.
Questioning* Students create their own questions Students ask questions using who, what, where, when,
about the important ideas in the
text while reading and answer
them using the text to confirm
their responses.
Single strategy instruction
Story structure Students grasp how stories are
instruction for organized in order to distinguish
narrative text between major and minor events
and details.
Graphic and Students use visual representations Students work collaboratively to complete a graphic organizer
semantic (e.g., maps, diagrams, tables,
organizers* charts) to display and/or organize
knowledge, concepts, thoughts,
or ideas about a topic.
Comprehension Students self-�assess their under-
monitoring* standing, and if they encounter
a barrier to understanding, they
clarify their understanding by
using “fix-Â�up” strategies to regain
a sense of meaning.
Reciprocal Students and teachers have a dia-
teaching6 logue regarding segments of text.
The dialogue is structured by the
use of four strategies: sum-
marizing, question generating,
clarifying, and predicting. The
teacher and students take turns
assuming the role of teacher in
Multiple strategy instruction
leading this dialogue.
Transactional Students are taught a variety of
strategies strategies over time, which are
instruction7 meant for flexible use depending
on the aim, including predict-
ing, asking questions, activating
background knowledge, visualiz-
ing, summarizing, using “fix-Â�up”
strategies, and/or using knowl-
edge of text structure.
Source: National Reading Panel, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (2000).
Note: * indicates that findings from a synthesis8 support these practices as a means to improve reading comprehension for middle school
students with learning disabilities.
Examples of classroom practice
Students identify who or what they just read about and tell
what is the most important thing or idea about the who or
what after a sentence, a section of text, or a chapter in the
book.
why, and how as they read (e.g., How are mammals and
amphibians alike? How are they different?). The key is that
students refer back to the text to confirm answers. Teachers
need to promote critical thinking by having students answer
and develop higher order questions.
Students recognize the beginning, middle, and end of story
and can identify story elements including characters, set-
ting, problem or conflict, plot, resolution, and theme.
to show a process—Â�for example, the metamorphosis of a
butterfly:
1. Egg
2. Larva
3. Pupa (chrysalis)
4. Butterfly
As difficulties occur, students stop and use a variety of tech-
niques to clarify meaning. They may reread a sentence or
section of a passage, use a reference tool to look something
up, ask others for assistance, and/or think about what they
already know (e.g., I know a horned toad is a reptile not an
amphibian, so I think I am going to learn about a type of
lizard).
When generating questions about the text, students are to test
themselves, and they must provide both a question and the
answer. Clarifying is meant to assist the readers in stopping
and applying fix-�up strategies if difficulties in understand-
ing arise. A student might reread or ask for help. When
predicting, a student is meant to link the new knowledge he
or she will encounter in the text with the knowledge he or
she already possesses (e.g., I know siege means to block
something off or surround it, so I think I am going to learn
about how the Mexican army’s siege led to their victory
at the Alamo). Students may summarize at the sentence,
paragraph, or whole passage level in order to sum up what
they just read about (e.g., After reading a paragraph about
“The Helpful Arachnids,” a student sums up the main idea
of the passage with, “Most spiders, classified as arachnids,
are harmless and help control insects.”).
In small groups, students may share what they know about
the topic of informational text to be read, then they visualize
what they will learn about after reading, and then they turn
to a neighbor before sharing their visualization. After read-
ing, students verify if they learned what they thought they
were going to in their initial predictions.
“Now It Makes Sense!” 79

Box 6.1.
What About Comprehension Instruction
for Struggling Readers or Students with Disabilities?
Research indicates that students who have reading difficulties benefit from compre-
hension instruction. Teachers should not wait until foundation or basic reading skills
are mastered (e.g., phonics, fluency) to provide instruction in comprehension, though
the amount, intensity, and duration of instruction may need to differ for struggling
readers.
Direct and explicit teaching of comprehension strategy instruction is recom-
mended, especially for students who may struggle with comprehension; however,
building background knowledge and developing students’ vocabulary knowl-
edge and abilities to be independent vocabulary learners also improve students’
comprehension.9

How Do I Address the Comprehension Needs of English Learners?

Adolescent English language learners (ELLs) are sometimes described as being able
to read words accurately but with little ability to comprehend. Though not entirely
clear on what causes these comprehension difficulties in the face of well-�developed
word reading skills, there is a working consensus that for many struggling ELLs, their
fluency, vocabulary, and other skills specific to comprehension (e.g., background
knowledge, strategy use) are not fully developed to be able to support the full under-
standing of text. Whereas the generalizability of research on English only–Â�speaking
adolescents to ELLs is limited, it is important to consider that English only–Â�speaking
students do share similar struggles with literacy and weaknesses in academic lan-
guage and vocabulary, which contribute to difficulties with comprehension.10

Student Expectations: College and Career Readiness

The Common Core State Standards (CCSS)11 are having an impact on the reading expectations
of students in U.S. schools. The CCSS are a comprehensive list of academic standards that were
developed to promote consistency among the expectations of states, to prepare students for the
requirements of college and career life, and to improve the rigor of U.S. schools.12
The CCSS contain two key components. First are grade-�level expectations and skills for the
reading of literary and informational text (which includes science and social studies text). The
second key component is the “Anchor Standards,” which summarize what students must mas-
ter when they exit high school and attend college. In Figure 6.1, we have provided the Anchor
Standards for Grades 6–Â�12.
Whereas teachers in different grade levels can analyze the CCSS for literacy in greater
detail,13 we have identified three important aspects of the standards that are predominantly
relevant to this chapter. First, text complexity, or the level of readability and difficulty, has
increased via the CCSS.14 This means that students are expected to read grade level literary
and informational texts independently for meaning (Anchor Standard 10). Second, a prevailing
theme of the CCSS is that informational and content area text is integral.15 The implication is
that teachers in English language arts (ELA) classes and content area classrooms (like social
80 Ciullo and Reutebuch

Category
Key ideas and details
Craft and structure
Integration of knowledge
and ideas
Range of reading and level
of text complexity
Skills
4. Read closely to determine what the text says explicitly and to make logical
inferences from it; cite specific textual evidence when writing or speaking to
support conclusions drawn from the text.
5. Determine central ideas or themes of a text and analyze their development;
summarize the key supporting details and ideas.
6. Analyze how and why individuals, events, and ideas develop and interact over
the course of a text.
7. Interpret words and phrases as they are used in a text, including determining
technical, connotative, and figurative meanings, and analyze how specific word
choices shape meaning or tone.
8. Analyze the structure of texts, including how specific sentences, paragraphs, and
larger portions of the text (e.g., a section, chapter, scene, or stanza) relate to each
other and the whole.
9. Assess how point of view or purpose shapes the content and style of a text.
10. Integrate and evaluate content presented in diverse formats and media, including
visually and quantitatively, as well as in words.
11. Delineate and evaluate the argument and specific claims in a text, including the
validity of the reasoning as well as the relevance and sufficiency of the evidence.
12. Analyze how two or more texts address similar themes or topics in order to build
knowledge or to compare the approaches the authors take.
10. Read and comprehend complex literary and informational texts independently
and proficiently.

Figure 6.1.â•… College and Career Readiness Grade 6–Â�12 Anchor Standards for Reading. (From National Governors Association
Center for Best Practices and Council of Chief State School Officers. [2010]. Common core state standards. Washington, DC:
Author. © Copyright 2010. National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and Council of Chief State School Officers.
All rights reserved.)

studies) must provide students with increased exposure to a variety of informational texts such
as primary source documents, related articles, textbooks, and even online readings. Finally, a
common thread across all the reading standards is that students must analyze and compare
themes and ideas across texts and cite specific evidence in the text to support ideas, statements,
or pieces of writing. This is also referred to as “close reading” because it requires that students
read the text closely and carefully and cite details to make inferences and answer questions.16
In summary, the CCSS accentuate the importance of careful assessment to understand the
strengths and weaknesses of students in reading and provide quality research-�driven instruc-
tion to help students succeed. To this end, we will discuss ways to assess students, how to use
assessments to guide instruction, and how evidence-�based practices help students succeed in
reading. Considering the diversity of contemporary inclusive classrooms (e.g., students with
disabilities, ELLs), we will provide recommendations for making instruction meaningful to
students that experience reading difficulties.

How Do We Assess How Much Students Are Learning?

How Do We Use Assessments to Guide Instruction?
Reading Comprehension Assessment
Just as comprehension demands change as students shift from “learning to read” in the lower
grades to “reading to learn” in Grades 4 and beyond, assessment of comprehension will differ
across contents, text types (e.g., narrative or expository, see the following text types box), and
reading demands. For most, performance in the classroom adequately reveals the comprehen-
sion ability of the student. However, some students may struggle across several subject areas,
and for them, a standardized comprehension reading measure will confirm whether general
reading skills are progressing.17
“Now It Makes Sense!” 81

Box 6.2.╇ Text Types

Narrative text portrays a story or sequence of events involving individuals or fictional
characters. Examples of narrative or literary texts include The Great Gatsby, Of Mice
and Men, and Animal Farm.
Expository or informational text is nonfiction and conveys information about the
natural or social world. The structure varies widely and can include descriptions,
sequences of events, problems/solutions, causes/effects, and comparisons. Examples
of common informational texts for Grades 6–Â�12 include social studies and science
textbooks, primary source documents, and biographies.

There is no single assessment that provides all the information you will need to make
decisions about your students’ comprehension abilities and needs. Presently, widely used stan-
dardized comprehension measures are focused on tasks such as basic recall and reading to identify
the main idea and/or word meaning. These measures tell us how students are performing but
do not provide insight into what kinds of comprehension instruction are needed.18 Benchmark
assessments offer checkups, usually during three different points in the year (beginning, mid-
dle, and end), on student progress and provide data for teachers to adjust their instruction to
target student weaknesses. Examples of benchmark tests may include district-�created mea-
sures based on state and district standards or a test that accompanies a core reading anthology
used by your school. Formal tests, including norm-�and criterion-�referenced tests and curriculum-�
based assessments, along with more informal assessments, such as student interviews and ques-
tionnaires, observations, and reading inventories, can all contribute to identifying students’
strengths and areas of difficulty (see Table 6.2).
Indeed, all interactions with your students provide an opportunity for informal, authentic
assessments of reading ability. Strategies for informal assessment include asking students to
summarize or retell important details; asking them to respond to the text by writing in a journal,
log, or blog; or asking them to respond to open-�ended questions. Another quick example of an
informal progress-�monitoring measure is a ticket out.19 For example, after reading a scientific
article about maintenance of the International Space Station, the teacher may say, “In the last
5 minutes, your ticket out the door is your written response to the following prompt: “Explain

Box 6.3.╇ Formal Tests

• A norm-Â�referenced test (NRT) compares a person’s score against the scores
of a group of people who have already taken the same exam, called the
“norming group.”
• A criterion-Â�referenced test (CRT) is intended to measure how well a person
has learned a specific body of knowledge and skills.
• Curriculum-Â�based assessment (CBM) is a method of monitoring student edu-
cational progress through direct assessment of academic skills. CBMs usu-
ally consist of short tests, called probes, to ascertain student achievement
on basic skills in reading, math, writing, and/or spelling. This progress can
be tracked and even graphed over time to monitor student growth (such as
tracking how many comprehension questions are answered correctly on a
quiz given each week).20
82 Ciullo and Reutebuch

Table 6.2.â•… Various reading comprehension assessments

Type Description
Formal tests Given according to a standard set of
circumstances/directions
Curriculum-�based Tests or measures student progress with what
assessment is taught in the curriculum
Progress monitoring A frequent measurement of student perfor-
mance (with class, small group, or individ-
ual) of academic tasks (e.g., teacher-made
quizzes, end-�of-�chapter or unit checks in
textbooks, or curriculum-�based measures)
Interviews and A series of questions asked individually or
questionnaires group administered to explore students’
thinking processing and various strategies
applied
Observation Recording of student reading behaviors using
anecdotal records, a checklist, or notetaking
Reading inventory Narrative and/or expository texts read aloud
and/or silently by students, who are then
asked to respond to comprehension ques-
tions and/or retell what they read
From Hougen, M.C., & Smartt, S.M. (2012). The fundamentals of literacy instruction and assessment, pre-K–6 (p. 191). Baltimore, MD:
Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.; reprinted by permission.
Purposes
Provides information on students’ reading
strengths and weaknesses, reading level, or
how well students do in comparison to prede-
termined criterion
Indicates a student’s progress toward mastery
of the curriculum and/or how effective the
instruction being provided is in moving stu-
dents toward desired learning outcomes
Determines whether students are profiting appro-
priately from instruction, including the curricu-
lum; used to develop more effective programs
for students not progressing or progressing at
an appropriate rate for the task or grade level
and to estimate rates of student improvement
Uncovers students’ understanding of the read-
ing process and their knowledge of reading
strategies and which strategies they use,
overly rely on, and/or misuse
Yields information about what students do
during reading tasks
Captures information about a student’s reading
level, word analysis skills, and comprehension
abilities; may also gauge interest or attitude
toward reading

the difficulties associated with maintaining the space station, and offer your suggestion for
enhancing this process based on one idea from the article.”
Teachers can also observe student contributions to discussions about the text or ask them
to tell you about the processes they used to respond to a question, infer meaning, draw a con-
clusion, or develop a question requiring critical thinking. The RAND Reading Study Group21
emphasized that because knowledge, application, and engagement are the critical aspects of
reading comprehension, assessments that reflect all three are needed.
Both formal and more informal assessments enlighten teachers about whether or not stu-
dents comprehend adequately and indicate red flags when students may be in need of more
intensive assistance. However, nothing is more relevant for making discoveries about levels of
comprehension than careful observation of students engaged in reading and discussions with
them about the processes they use to gain meaning. Prompting students to tell about their own
understanding or the methods they used to determine meaning from text helps you learn about
students’ strategic processes (How did you decided that was an important detail? What strategy
did you use to figure out that word or concept?). Conducting observations, on the other hand,
provides insight into what reading behaviors students actually utilize (stop and reread, use
self-�questioning when meaning is unclear, preview text before reading, paraphrase).
Regardless of assessment methods used, you should keep in mind what your purpose is for
assessing a student: monitoring progress, assessing reading level, or assessing competence in
comparison to peers or other established criteria. Ask yourself, “What is it that I want to know
and how will this knowledge help me target my instruction?” A norm-Â�referenced test cannot tell
you about a student’s attitude toward reading, whereas an informal reading inventory does not
identify a student’s progress toward meeting curriculum-Â�based learning outcomes (e.g., Does
the student understand why the belief in manifest destiny led the United States to expand in
the west?). Each assessment method has its own purpose.
“Now It Makes Sense!” 83

Teachers use a variety of assess-

ment tools to plan reading compre-
hension instruction to meet the needs
of students during various grouping
arrangements (whole class, small
groups, or individuals). In addition
to measuring learning outcomes,
assessments should also promote
learning by students and their teach-
ers. Students tend to be more actively
involved in their learning and willing
to strive for continued improvement
of comprehension skills when they
receive ongoing feedback about how
they are doing, what they are doing
well, and what they need to focus on to become better readers. Motivation to read text can be
heightened when students are encouraged to be critical thinkers about what they are reading.
For you, the teacher, this means previewing text prior to designing your lessons and develop-
ing higher-�level questions to engage students on a deeper level than identification or recall of
information requires. It also means building students’ skills so that eventually they will be able
to independently develop and respond to higher order questions (see Table 6.3).
Assessment data can help students self-�analyze and reflect on their strategy use and knowl-
edge acquisition. Students should be guided to ask themselves the following questions and then
discuss their responses during a teacher/student conference:

• Am I improving in my reading comprehension skills?

• Do I know how to succeed with this reading activity or assignment?
• What are my strengths and weaknesses when reading for understanding?
• What areas do I need help with?

When thinking about making adjustments to instruction, teachers should look at assess-
ment data (quiz and test scores, completed assignments including writing samples, and graphic
organizers, along with interview, questionnaire, or observation information). With these que-
ries in mind, it’s time to plan accordingly:

• What do these students need?

• What do I need to do differently for these students or this student?
• What strengths can I build upon?
• How should I group students?
• Am I moving too fast and for which students?
• Am I moving too slowly and for which students?
• Where did learning break down?

Use assessment data to confirm how well students have comprehended the text and, more
importantly, to inform your planning and provision of additional learning opportunities for
students to improve their reading comprehension skills. An analysis of what you taught and
to what extent students mastered your learning objectives may indicate that it is necessary for
you to do the following:

• Designate time to preteach, provide more guided practice, or reteach.

• Schedule more instructional time for certain topics that students have difficulty with or for
struggling readers who need more practice and feedback.
84 Ciullo and Reutebuch

Table 6.3.â•… Questions/tasks to develop and assess critical thinking

Skills required Question/task
Recall Who, what, when, where, how, why?
List or name ______.
Identify: Attributes/parts What are the characteristics/parts of ______?
Identify: Relationships/patterns Develop an outline/diagram/web of ______.
Compare How is ______ similar to/different from ______?
Classify How might you organize these?
Order Arrange in sequence according to ______.
Represent In what ways might you show/illustrate ______?
Infer What might you infer from ______?
What conclusions might you draw?
Predict What might happen if ______?
Elaborate What ideas/details can you add to ______?
I wonder if ______?
Summarize I learned, realized, discovered that ______.
Verify What evidence supports ______?
How might you prove/confirm ______?
Analyze Contrast ______ and ______.
Evaluate I think, believe, understand that ______.
It seems to me that ______.
From Hougen, M.C., & Smartt, S.M. (2012). The fundamentals of literacy instruction and assess-
ment, pre-K–6 (p. 196). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.; reprinted by permission.

• Build or strengthen foundational skills for students who demonstrate deficiencies (listening
comprehension, fluency, word learning strategies, or vocabulary).
• Group or regroup students to target specific skills (e.g., making inferences, identifying the
main idea, summarizing, or questioning).
• Implement more modeling and guided practice for students who do not demonstrate
knowledge or sufficient use of strategies.
Assessing for instructional purposes provides teachers with reasons to gather and interpret
useful information about both how effective instruction is and how well students comprehend.
In addition to what the outcome measures (scores, ranks, number correct or incorrect), assess-
ment results reveal insight into your students’ prior knowledge, attitude toward reading, and
ability to learn from and think about texts. Assessment data should drive your instructional
planning in order to maximize student success as readers.

Effective Reading Comprehension Instruction

Thus far, this chapter has explained skills that students should possess in Grades 6–Â�12 to foster
reading comprehension. We have also explained how teachers can use assessments to track stu-
dent growth and plan for their instruction. The next question you may be asking is, “How do I
actually teach students to become capable in reading comprehension? What techniques are based
on quality research?” This section addresses the questions according to the following framework:
1. A description of what teachers can do to facilitate understanding of text before, during,
and after reading to improve comprehension
2. Guidelines for how the students can interact with the text to provide the necessary prac-
tice and engagement with different types of reading material
“Now It Makes Sense!” 85

3. A brief summary of several research-�driven strategies that have improved the reading
comprehension ability of general education students and students with learning disabil-
ities (LD)

Before, During, and After Reading

Before Reading
Comprehension instruction begins before students begin reading an assigned chapter, book,
or text selection. Prior to reading new material, teachers must provide a preview of what the
passage will be about and link the new information to the student’s background or culture
whenever possible.22 For example, in a class where the majority of students are immigrants
from another country, prior to reading about the impact of the Bill of Rights on citizens in the
early 1800s, the teacher could invite students to share with a partner some of the rights of citi-
zens in their country of origin. In addition, showing a short video or taking advantage of other
multimedia such as Google Images can facilitate understanding and provide an anchor for the
reading and discussion to come.
Next, preteaching essential vocabulary words and reviewing important proper nouns for
informational text like science and social studies readings is a must.23 Highlighting and reviewing
with students integral proper nouns such as the names of important scientists prior to reading
a 10th grade–Â�level text about genetics and heredity would make the text more comprehensible
when students read. When reading fiction, students are encouraged to write down their pre-
dictions about the reading and refer back to the predictions later to confirm or explain what
happened.
There are several other easy ways to generate interest and prepare students for success
before they read. Taking advantage of 3-� to 5-�minute video clips from the Internet related to
the topic can build key background information and spark interest. A 5-�minute video from a
reliable resource about famous artists during the Renaissance period can facilitate interest prior
to reading a novel about the struggles of a modern-�day artist. Another way to build background
knowledge and prepare students is to connect the current story to a previously read text. This
can be done by having students generate a list of the personality traits of a character from a
previously read story and inviting them to monitor how this character’s traits correlates with
“Lonnie” as the students read Of Mice and Men.

During Reading
To ensure that students are actively engaged in the reading process and improving their
skills, certain teaching decisions must be made. First, teachers are encouraged to avoid
“round robin” approaches to reading.24 Round robin reading is when all students in the class
read the text silently as a single student reads the same text orally. This can be problematic
because only one student is truly engaged with the text, and there is no way to monitor if the
other students are actually reading. More effective strategies include independent silent read-
ing, where students are reading passages at their independent or instructional level based
on assessments. Another approach would be partner reading with corrective feedback for
reading errors. Finally, if an identical passage is being read—Â�for example, a social studies
passage—Â�the teachers could provide students with several minutes of silent reading followed
by the teacher reading the entire passage orally to the students.25 This method provides an
opportunity to practice independent grade-�level reading, with support for students with
reading difficulties.
Modeling the comprehension-�monitoring process should be done to provide students with
an idea of how to approach the task of self-�monitoring. One useful strategy that is applica-
ble across all grade levels is the “think-Â�aloud” technique. This simply means explaining to
86 Ciullo and Reutebuch

students some of the connections you

make while you read and demonstrating
the process. For example, “As I read this
paragraph, it reminds me of Hermione’s
loyalty to her friends in the Harry Potter
books.” Although this may seem basic, for
students that struggle with reading com-
prehension, it can be powerful.26 In addi-
tion, by setting predetermined “stopping
points” that are appropriate for stopping
the reading process to check for compre-
hension, to discuss, to clarify, or to sum-
marize, the teacher can effectively foster
and gauge understanding. The key to
identifying the best stopping points is teacher preparation and a careful preview of the read-
ing material prior to class. By identifying the particular spots in the text where comprehension
may be daunting, the teacher can better equip the students.27 These stopping points provide a
chance to model summarization or main idea strategies, ask questions, and complete a graphic
organizer or concept map.
Related to the CCSS, another important teaching tool is inviting students to become
“text detectives.”28 This means that whenever students state an opinion about a topic they
are reading about, they will cite specific textual evidence to support their statements. For
example, in a 12th-�grade ELA class, Martin explained how a factory worker in the book The
Jungle by Upton Sinclair was different from the nonunion workers from his social studies
book. He would be asked to select a quote or passage from The Jungle to demonstrate and
defend his example. To accomplish this task, teachers should first model the process, then
try several examples together over the course of a few days, and then gradually promote
independence.

After Reading
After students have finished reading a text or a selected passage, teachers provide opportu-
nities for students to demonstrate and expand their understanding through various activ-
ities, such as writing assignments, projects, or discussion. To promote comprehension and
academic language development (a critical skill for ELLs and students with limited English
proficiency), students can orally summarize and discuss the text in small groups.29 Another
technique is to place a series of questions on the board for students to discuss to enhance
comprehension such as, “Why do you think policy makers refused to pass laws to promote
child safety? Do you agree with the children in the story that it was more important to raise
money than to attend school to receive an education? What would you do?” Students can
then discuss this idea and respond in a quick writing assignment. Collaborative activities
following reading are a research-�based strategy for informational text.30 Teachers should
also consider the use of graphic organizers following reading to enhance comprehension
and key content.31
Now that we have discussed an overall framework that can improve reading comprehen-
sion before, during, and after text reading, we explore some specific strategies and content-�
enhancing tools based on rigorous research that you can use in your instruction. These
strategies include collaborative strategic reading, graphic organizers and concept maps
(paper and computer based), peer-�mediated instruction, and summarization and main idea
strategies for Grades 6–Â�12. We include lesson-Â�planning considerations for students with read-
ing difficulties, which include students with disabilities and students with limited English
proficiency.
“Now It Makes Sense!” 87

Research-�Based Comprehension Strategies to

Facilitate Success with the Common Core State Standards
Collaborative Strategic Reading
Collaborative strategic reading (CSR) is a multielement framework that is designed to increase
expository text comprehension.32 CSR comprehension strategies are beneficial for diverse inclu-
sive classrooms: the strategies are designed for use by all students in general education, including
students with reading disabilities and English language learners. CSR offers comprehension-
enhancing techniques and opportunities for meaningful peer learning and discussion.33
For a more comprehensive explanation of CSR, teachers are encouraged to consult addi-
tional resources.34 However, in order to help older readers comprehend a wide variety of texts,
such as expository texts emphasized by the CCSS, we provide the subsequent summary of key
CSR components that can be taught through a process of teacher modeling, joint practice, and
the gradual removal of support to promote independent practice and generalization.

Previewing
• The teacher guides students through the process of looking at all pictures, headings, and
subtitles.
• The class discusses what students already know about the topic, and then the students write
predictions based on the preview about what they will learn.
• Additional ideas to generate interest or support background knowledge about the topic can
also be included (video, pictures), as well as preteaching vocabulary and allowing students
the chance to practice the new vocabulary and discuss the concepts, essential for ELLs and
students with reading difficulties.35

During Reading Process: “Click,” “Clunk,” and “Get the Gist”

• Groups of four to six students read a passage (silently or orally as a small group).
• “Clicking” means the smooth and fluent reading evident when a student has little difficulty
with vocabulary comprehension.
• “Clunks” are challenging words or phrases encountered during reading. Students prac-
tice using “fix-Â�up strategies” to decipher clunks. These include rereading and looking for
the context clues; rereading the sentence before and after the sentence where a clunk was
located; identifying prefixes, suffixes, root words, or words within the word that students
know; and, lastly, looking for cognates (helpful for ELLs if their primary language shares
some words with English).
• The “get the gist” strategy teaches how to identify a main idea. After a paragraph or section,
students compose a “gist” statement. This is a sentence that states the main idea of that
section of text in around 10 words or less.
• Three steps are used to create a “gist.” First, students locate the most pertinent who or what
from that section of text. Next, students identify the most important information about the
who or what. Finally, the students compose a sentence stating the main idea in about 10
words.
• Next, the students are encouraged to share their gists and clunks with the students in the group.

After Reading (Wrap Up—Â�Extending Comprehension)

• Students each write three questions to extend comprehension. The first question is a “right
there” question, which is a question for which the answer can be identified in one location
88 Ciullo and Reutebuch

in the text. The next question is called “think and search” and invites students to locate infor-
mation in different parts of a text to arrive at the answer. Finally, students create an “author
and you” question, which is for higher-Â�level comprehension such as inference or evaluation.
• The final step is when students look back at their gist statements, think about the passage,
and compose several sentences that summarize the passage.
Collaborative strategic reading is a comprehensive framework that combines compre-
hension strategies, engagement with text, and collaborative learning opportunities. Given the
demands of the CCSS, which include greater exposure to grade-�level text, complex comprehen-
sion activities, and “close reading,”36 the strategies from CSR, such as “question generation,”
can be used sequentially as a comprehension package, or teachers can select the individual
elements (“get the gist,” “fix-Â�up strategies,” etc.) that meet the needs of their classrooms in
Grades 6–Â�12.

Question Generation Examples

“Right There” Questions
• What is the definition of photosynthesis?
• What was the name of President Carter’s vice president?
• Which “Tuck” was the first to meet the character named Winnie in the book Tuck Everlasting?

“Think and Search” Questions

• What are two reasons mentioned in the text that might have forced the United States to enter
World War II?
• How did the Supreme Court decision in Brown v. Board of Education affect students and law
enforcement officials?

“The Author and Me” Questions

• If you were Winnie in Tuck Everlasting, what decision would you have made and why?
• What other Supreme Court case that we have read about this year does the Brown v. Board
of Education decision remind you most of and why?

Graphic Organizers
Graphic Organizers (GOs) are visual and spatial displays that represent and capture key ideas
and information from a text. GOs can be can be used to improve students’ understanding of
narrative or informational texts (such as content area readings). Rigorous research supports
the use of GOs for improving comprehension in students, including those with disabilities and
ELLs.37 There are various different types of graphic organizers that include the following terms:
Venn diagrams, cognitive and concept maps, word maps, visual displays, and story maps.
GOs can be used as a study guide for content area information,38 for reinforcing key parts of
narrative stories (e.g., theme, plot), to provide access to complex information for students with
reading difficulties, and to enable the interaction between students and the text to facilitate the
identification of key information.
Whereas teachers can implement GOs in a variety of ways, the subsequent lesson plan
framework has been successful in enhancing student learning in diverse secondary classrooms,
based on research.39 Figure 6.2 depicts an example GO that might be selected to help students
foster expository text comprehension.
“Now It Makes Sense!” 89

1. Before reading, introduce the GO as a content-�enhancing tool to facilitate the acquisition

of key content, main ideas, and relevant details from the text.
2. Explicitly teach vocabulary prior to reading. As discussed earlier in this chapter, vocab-
ulary can be taught in various ways and should include a review of important proper
nouns that may be new or unfamiliar.
3. As a whole group or in small groups of students, the class reads the passage and stops
occasionally at “stopping points” selected by the teacher to discuss main ideas and
important information. Before students can engage in this activity independently, teach-
ers model how to identify the main idea and summary through the use of examples
and nonexamples (which may last 1–3 weeks based on the level of the class). Thereafter,
teacher support is only provided as needed.
4. During and after reading, the students review and study the completed GOs inde-
pendently or with a partner. When reviewing the GO with students, teachers ask stu-
dents to explain how they selected certain ideas for inclusion and to specify the location
of the evidence in the text. Feedback, guided support, and redirection are provided when
students make errors or provide incorrect information.
5. GOs can be used as a study guide for concepts and vocabulary in social studies and sci-
ence. In addition, the GO is a tool for assignments that extend comprehension, such as
class discussion, debates, or writing assignments.40

Box 6.4.
Tips for Students with Learning Disabilities
• When teaching students with learning or reading difficulties to use graphic
organizers (GOs), employ an “I do, we do, you do” process. This provides a
model, guided practice, and independent practice with support.
• Provide partially completed GOs, and invite students to complete them. This
makes the task less overwhelming and provides support.
• When reviewing a completed GO with the class, the teacher reviews each box
on the GO in order and elicits choral or unison responses from students to
review the information.
• Include pictures to foster vocabulary development and reinforce concepts.

Tips for English Language Learners

• Consider GOs that emphasize vocabulary. An example is a “word map” that
contains a definition, a place for students to use the word in a sentence, an
example of the word, and a nonexample.
• To foster academic language development, encourage group completion and
discussion as opposed to independent work. If independent work must be
employed, the teacher can say, “I am setting my timer for 2 minutes. Turn to
your partner and explain the most important information on the GO about
the Industrial Revolution and its impact on American life.”
• Include pictures to foster vocabulary development and reinforce concepts.
90 Ciullo and Reutebuch

Main idea

Supporting details Supporting details

from text from text

Author’s purpose

Statements/text Statements/text
evidence to support evidence to support
author’s purpose author’s purpose

Figure 6.2.â•… Graphic organizer example for adolescents.

Computer-Â�Based Graphic Organizers Since the majority of U.S. teachers and students use
technology daily to enhance learning,41 computer-�based graphic organizers are another viable
option. Research suggests that students in secondary school that have used GOs to enhance
the understanding of expository/content area text have increased their comprehension of key
concepts using a framework similar to the one we have provided in this chapter.42 With an
Internet search, teachers can access several free resources for computer-�based GOs such as
Bubbl.us and “Read, Write, Think.” There are also programs that can be purchased that have
been successfully used in research studies, such as Inspiration.43

Peer-�Mediated Learning
The National Reading Panel44 systematically reviewed reading research that is associated
with promising outcomes and delineated components of reading integral to success. Recip-
rocal teaching was one of the evidence-�based strategies reviewed that has been successful at
enhancing comprehension across grade levels for students with and without disabilities.45 To
effectively implement reciprocal teaching in secondary classrooms, the teacher first provides
explicit and direct instruction to enable students to learn the procedures and routines. The
teacher works with students to learn and apply four strategies: prediction, summarization,
“Now It Makes Sense!” 91

question generation, and clarification. We have summarized the procedures in the following
list. For more specific information, consult resources focusing exclusively on reciprocal teach-
ing.46 The subsequent framework must be modeled and practiced collectively for 2–Â�4 weeks to
promote independent student practice and generalization of the strategies.

Reciprocal Teaching Framework

Predictions
• Students are placed in small groups (four students in each). Each student is given a role for
which he or she will take responsibility in guiding the group and maintaining accountability
(previewing, questioning, summarizing, and clarifying).
• Students and the teacher preview the passage and share predictions about the passage based
on prior knowledge, the preview of the text, pictures, and vocabulary.
• The student responsible for previewing begins the group discussion with a prompt that the
teachers have provided on cue cards. For example, “What does our knowledge of stories
about the civil rights movement tell us might occur in this story?” While the students in
various groups share predictions, the teacher serves as facilitator and circulates between
different groups.47

Question Generation
• Students write questions independently about the text reading, and the questions are
answered during or after reading. This increases motivation and engagement because stu-
dents are answering their own questions. The teacher should preview questions and provide
assistance during the process to ensure students are on target.
• The student responsible for leading the questioning part uses a teacher-Â�provided cue card
to guide the group. This student poses questions to the group to help clarify unclear parts,
main ideas, and connections to concepts already learned (synthesis). An example of a ques-
tion that may be on this student’s cue card would be, “How do Harriet Tubman’s actions
remind you of Carl from the story we read yesterday? How is she different from Carl?”

Summarizing
• This involves the differentiation between important parts of the text and parts or ideas that
are less germane.
• The student in charge of the summary section leads this part. The students discuss the most
important part of the sections they read (each page or two to three paragraphs). The leader
initiates the discussion by sharing what he or she wrote down. For example, “For this page
my summary statement is ______,” or “For that section, my summary is ______.”
• Although this is a student-Â�led process, the teacher circulates and checks for accuracy and
offers guided support as needed, such as referring students back to pertinent sentences or
sections of text.

Clarifying
• Clarifying is essentially a “fix-Â�up strategy” that clarifies confusing vocabulary, words, or
sections of text.
• Clarifying helps students to monitor their understanding as they read and develop an
awareness of their metacognitive abilities.
92 Ciullo and Reutebuch

• The students write down words, phrases, or sentences that are unclear, and the student lead-
ing this section facilitates by asking the students to reread the section to search for context
clues, examine root words, and even seek external sources to help clarify such as a glossary,
dictionary, or the Internet.
Although the process of reciprocal teaching may seem basic, it takes explicit teacher model-
ing of examples and nonexamples to demonstrate and reinforce rules for behavior, the roles of
each student, and an understanding of the integral comprehension components (e.g., summa-
rizing). However, after several weeks of practice, students can gradually work in their groups
and use these strategies to build language development, discuss and analyze text, and monitor
their understanding. These skills are critical to success with the CCSS.

Student Motivation
Becoming an effective teacher of reading comprehension in Grades 6–Â�12 requires practice,
careful planning based on student data and classroom needs, and the use of evidence-�based
practices (several of which were summarized in this chapter). Although teacher behaviors and
thoughtful planning are key ingredients to student success, student motivation and engage-
ment in the process remains a prominent variable. We conclude this chapter with advice for
fostering a supportive and motivating environment with the goal of improving students’ abil-
ity to comprehend text.

Fostering Motivation
Text selection can be an important variable in student motivation.48 For example, if Miss Brown,
a ninth-�grade English teacher, wanted to support what students were learning about the Cold
War in social studies, she could have students select one of four different provided diary pas-
sages or editorials from prominent historical figures during the time period. There may be
other opportunities for students to select the books or stories they read. Research suggests that
when students select readings based on their personal interests, improved recall of information
and learning is evident.49 However, when providing choice, it is important that teachers help
students to select readings that are aligned with their independent and instructional reading
levels to avoid frustration and a lack of comprehension.
Technology can also serve as a motivating learning factor.50 Given the emergence of new
technologies, many students may be comfortable working on the computer and expanding their
learning and comprehension via the Internet. One example of a strategy that can increase moti-
vation is a “web quest.”51 Students follow a framework to investigate a topic in greater detail;
complete information such as notes, outlines, and graphic organizers; and compile information
for discussion, a presentation, or an authentic writing assignment. To adapt this for students
with disabilities, teachers should carefully monitor the process and could provide a list of web
sites for students to explore, a graphic organizer, or an outline for students to systematically
focus their learning as they progress.52

Summary
This chapter began with a comparison of two different teachers and their different approaches
to reading instruction. After reading this chapter, discussing the concepts, and investigating
some of these topics further, your instruction and approach toward reading comprehension
instruction should reflect the teacher with a more sophisticated and strategic approach: Miss
Candelaria. We emphasize the following three pieces of advice for continuing to strengthen
your instruction in Grades 6–Â�12 with informational or literary texts:
“Now It Makes Sense!” 93

1. Use assessment data to drive instruction and planning. This includes realizing what
skills need to be retaught (e.g., summarization) and using student reading ability
information to help select texts that are at the student’s instructional and independent
levels.
2. Rely on evidence-�based instruction (such as those presented in this chapter) to teach
students. Using evidence to support your teaching increases the probability of successful
learning.
3. Differentiation is key! In today’s classrooms, we teach students from various socioeco-
nomic groups, ability levels, and varying degrees of English proficiency. To meet the
needs of this diverse population, we recommend lesson adaptations for students with
learning difficulties (e.g., graphic organizers partially completed, additional vocabulary
support) and collaboration and planning with other professionals and stakeholders to
discuss the best ways to improve student learning.

Application Assignments
In-�Class Assignments
1. Working with a peer, describe the skills that must be activated when reading for
meaning.
2. Discuss with a partner or in a small group ways to informally access a student’s reading
ability and how you could use this information to plan for instruction.
3. Compare the Collaborative Strategic Reading section and the Peer-�Mediated Learning
section in this chapter. What do they have in common? What differences are there in
each approach? Which of these do you plan on integrating within your classroom and
why?

Tutoring Assignments
1. Develop one to two interview questions to use with your student(s) to assess how stu-
dents think about text and how they monitor their own understanding during each read-
ing phase—Â�before, during, and after.
a. Assign a student to read a passage and stop at strategic points and ask the interview
questions. For example, “What were you thinking about as you read that page?” Or,
“While you previewed the headings and pictures, what connections did you make to
other things you have read about or learned before?”
b. Think about how the information gathered from the student’s responses influences
how you will support the student’s instructional needs related to reading compre-
hension (what strategy needs further instruction and practice or is missing altogether
from the student’s repertoire).
c. Use the information gathered from your student interview to select and teach a read-
ing comprehension strategy to your student; provide several opportunities for the
student to practice the strategy.
2. Select a graphic organizer to supplement your tutoring session. Assign a student to
read an expository passage. Using the lesson plan framework previously described in
the Graphic Organizers section of this chapter, provide instruction on using the graphic
organizer to enhance understanding of the text passage. Provide guidance and feedback
on completing the graphic organizer throughout the reading process.
Here are some additional tips:
94 Ciullo and Reutebuch

• Show the student models of completed GOs that would be effective to enhance
understanding and study.
• Use examples and nonexamples of the correct information to be included in the
graphic organizer. Have the student explain his or her rationale for why certain infor-
mation is more important than other details.
• For students with reading difficulties, begin by providing a partially completed
graphic organizer and then gradually reduce support to promote independence.
• Ask students to refer to the section of the text where the relevant information was
located and to explain the rationale for their inferences or arguments.

Homework Assignments
1. Locate a one-� to two-�page expository reading passage that would be appropriate for a
student in Grades 6–Â�12, such as a science or social studies textbook passage or article.
Using this passage, complete the CSR steps as previously explained. First, read and cir-
cle clunks and use “fix-Â�up strategies” to decipher words or phrases that students might
find challenging. Next, write two to three gist statements for different sections of the text.
Then generate the three types of questions, and write a summary statement at the end.
This may seem like an easy task, but practicing CSR is the best way to learn it, and
practice will make it easier to introduce to your students!
2. Select two text passages, one expository and one narrative text. Refer to Table 6.3 (ques-
tions to ask to promote critical thinking).
a. Develop one question or task for each skill for each of the passage types.
b. How is the previous activity similar/different depending on the text type?
c. For each of your text selections, describe what type of preteaching and prior knowl-
edge you would provide via explicit instruction to ensure students can fully compre-
hend the passages. In other words, what would the preteaching component of your
lesson plan look like to prepare students for success?
3. In one to two pages, respond to the following scenario:
You are the new “reading specialist” assigned to support ninth-Â�grade science and
social studies classes. The teachers of science and social studies possess exceptional
content knowledge. However, they inform you that they have trouble getting some of
the students with disabilities and the students that struggle with reading to become
motivated and read for understanding when reading is assigned. The teachers ask
your advice in two areas. First, how can motivation to read be increased? Second, what
research-�based strategy would you recommend the class begin next week to increase
the amount of reading done in class and improve comprehension? How would we
model and implement this strategy?

Endnotes
1. Snow, Burns, & Griffin (2005). 1 0. Torgesen et al. (2007).
2. Cook, Smith, & Tankersley (2012). 11. NGA Center & CCSSO (2010).
3. Klinger, Vaughn, & Boardman (2007). 12. Conley, Drummond, de Gonzalez, Rooseboom, & Stout
4. National Reading Panel (U.S.), National Institute of (2011).
Child Health & Human Development (U.S.) (2000). 13. See http://www.corestandards.org/ELA-Literacy
5. Solis et al. (2012). 14. Hiebert & Grisham (2012).
6. Palincsar & Brown (1984). 15. CCSS Initiative (2012).
7. Pressley & Woloshyn (1995). 16. Hinchman & Moore (2013).
8. Solis et al. (2012). 17. Adolf, Perfetti, & Catts (2001).
9. Kamil (2008). 18. Klingner et al. (2007).
“Now It Makes Sense!” 95
1 9. Marks (1988).
20. From Hougen, M.C., & Smartt, S.M. (2012). The funda-
mentals of literacy instruction and assessment, pre-K–6 (p.
192). Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.;
reprinted by permission.
21. RAND Reading Study Group (2002).
22. Echevarria, Richards-�Tutor, Canges, & Francis (2011).
23. Simmons et al. (2010).
24. Ciullo & Reutebuch (2012).
25. Ciullo & Reutebuch (2012).
26. Oster (2001).
27. Ciullo & Reutebuch (2012).
28. Fisher, Frey, & Lapp (2011).
29. Short & Echevarria (2004).
30. Gersten, Baker, Smith-�Johnson, Dimino, & Peterson
(2006).
31. Dexter & Hughes (2011).
32. Klingner, Vaughn, & Schumm (1998).
33. Klingner, Vaughn, Dimino, Schumm, & Bryant (2001).
34. For example, Klingner et al. (2001).
35. Short & Echevarria (2004).
References
Adolf, S.M., Perfetti, C.A., & Catts, H.W. (2011). Develop-
mental changes in reading comprehension: Implications
for assessment and instruction. In S.J. Samuels & A.E. Far-
strup (Eds.), What research has to say about reading instruction
(4th ed., pp. 186–Â�214). Newark, DE: International Reading
Association.
Boon, R.T., Burke, M.D., Fore, C., & Spencer, V.G. (2006).
The impact of cognitive organizers and technology-�
based practices on student success in secondary social
studies classrooms. Journal of Special Education Technol-
ogy, 21(1), 5.
Ciullo, S., & Reutebuch, C. (2012). Reading comprehension
strategies for students in Grades 4–Â�6. In M. Hougen &
S. Smartt (Eds.), The fundamentals of literacy instruction and
assessment. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.
Conley, D.T., Drummond, K.V., de Gonzalez, A., Roose-
boom, J., & Stout, O. (2011). Reaching the goal: The
applicability and importance of the Common Core State
Standards to college and career readiness. Educational Pol-
icy Improvement Center.
Cook, B.G., Shepherd, K.G., Cook, S.C., & Cook, L. (2012).
Facilitating the effective implementation of evidence-�
based practices through teacher–Â�parent collaboration.
Teaching Exceptional Children, 44(3), 22–Â�30.
Darch, C.B., Carnine, D.W., & Kame’enui, E.J. (1986). The role
of graphic organizers and social structure in content area
instruction. Journal of Literacy Research, 18(4), 275–Â�295.
Dexter, D.D., & Hughes, C.A. (2011). Graphic organizers and
students with learning disabilities: A meta-�analysis. Learn-
ing Disability Quarterly, 34(1), 51–Â�72.
DiCecco, V.M., & Gleason, M.M. (2002). Using graphic orga-
nizers to attain relational knowledge from expository text.
Journal of Learning Disabilities, 35(4), 306–Â�320.
Duke, N.K., Pearson, P.D., Strachan, S.L., & Billman, A.K.
(2011). Essential elements of fostering and teaching read-
ing comprehension. In S.J. Samuels & A.E. Farstrup (Eds.),
3 6. Hinchman & Moore (2013).
37. Kim, Vaughn, Wanzek, & Wei (2004).
38. Boon, Burke, Fore, & Spencer (2006).
39. Dexter & Hughes (2011); Ciullo, Reutebuch, & Vaughn
(2013).
40. Darch, Carnine, & Kame’enui (1986); DiCecco & Gleason
(2002).
4 1. Gray, Thomas, & Lewis (2010).
42. For example, Boon et al. (2006); Twyman & Tindal (2006).
43. Boon et al. (2006).
44. National Reading Panel (U.S.), National Institute of
Child Health & Human Development (U.S.) (2000).
4 5. Palincsar & Brown (1984); Rosenshine & Meister (1994).
46. For example, Oczkus (2003); http://www.readingrockets
.org/strategies/reciprocal_teaching
4 7. Palincsar & Brown (1984).
48. Duke, Pearson, Strachan, & Billman (2011).
49. Jiménez & Duke (2011).
50. Okolo, Englert, Bouck, & Heutshe (2007).
51. Skylar, Higgins, & Boone (2007).
52. Skylar et al. (2007).
What research has to say about reading instruction (4th ed., pp.
286–Â�314). Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Echevarria, J., Richards-�Tutor, C., Canges, R., & Francis, D.
(2011). Using the SIOP model to promote the acquisition
of language and science concepts with English learners.
Bilingual Research Journal, 34(3), 334–Â�351.
Fisher, D., Frey, N., & Lapp, D. (2011). Teaching students to
read like detectives: Comprehending, analyzing, and discussing
text. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree.
Gersten, R., Baker, S.K., Smith-�Johnson, J., Dimino, J., &
Peterson, A. (2006). Eyes on the prize: Teaching complex
historical content to middle school students with learning
disabilities. Exceptional Children, 72(3), 264–Â�280.
Gray, L., Thomas, N., & Lewis, L. (2010). Teachers’ use of edu-
cational technology in U.S. public schools: 2009 (NCES 2010–Â�
040). Washington, DC: National Center for Education
Statistics, Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department
of Education.
Hiebert, E.H., & Grisham, D.L. (2012). What literacy teacher
educators need to know about supporting teachers in
understanding text complexity within the Common Core
State Standards. Journal of Reading Education, 37(3), 5–Â�12.
Hinchman, K.A., & Moore, D.W. (2013). Close reading: A
cautionary interpretation. Journal of Adolescent & Adult Lit-
eracy, 56(6), 441–Â�450.
Jiménez, L., & Duke, N.K. (2011). Interest matters: Fourth-Â�
graders reading multiple high-�and low-�interest texts. Manu-
script submitted for publication.
Kamil, M.L. (2008). Improving adolescent literacy: Effective class-
room and intervention practices. Washington, DC: National
Center for Education Evaluation and Regional Assistance,
Institute of Education Sciences.
Kim, A.H., Vaughn, S., Wanzek, J., & Wei, S. (2004). Graphic
organizers and their effects on the reading comprehen-
sion of students with LD: A synthesis of research. Journal
of Learning Disabilities, 37(2), 105–Â�118.
96 Ciullo and Reutebuch
Klingner, J.K., Vaughn, S., & Boardman, A. (2007). Teaching
reading comprehension to students with learning difficulties
(Vol. 4). New York, NY: Guilford.
Klingner, J.K., Vaughn, S., Dimino, J., Schumm, J., & Bryant,
D. (2001). From clunk to click: Collaborative strategic reading.
Longmont, CO: Sopris West.
Klingner, J.K., Vaughn, S., & Schumm, J.S. (1998). Collabo-
rative strategic reading during social studies in heteroge-
neous fourth-�grade classrooms. Elementary School Journal,
99(1), 3–Â�22.
Marks, M.C. (1988). Professional practice: A ticket out the
door. Strategies, 2(2), 17–Â�27.
National Reading Panel, National Institute of Child Health &
Human Development. (2000). Report of the National Reading
Panel: Teaching children to read: An evidence-�based assessment
of the scientific research literature on reading and its implica-
tions for reading instruction: Reports of the subgroups. Wash-
ington, DC: National Institute of Child Health and Human
Development, National Institutes of Health.
NGA Center & CCSSO. (2010). Common Core State Stan-
dards (English Language Arts Standards). Washington, DC:
Authors.
Oczkus, L.D. (2003). Reciprocal teaching at work: Strategies for
improving reading comprehension. Newark, DE: International
Reading Association.
Okolo, C.M., Englert, C.S., Bouck, E.C., & Heutsche, A.M.
(2007). Web-�based history learning environments helping
all students learn and like history. Intervention in School and
Clinic, 43(1), 3–Â�11.
Oster, L. (2001). Using the think-�aloud for reading instruc-
tion. The Reading Teacher, 55(1), 64–Â�69.
Palincsar, A.S., & Brown, A.L. (1984). Reciprocal teaching of
comprehension-�fostering and comprehension monitoring
activities. Cognition and Instruction, 1(2), 117–Â�175.
RAND Reading Study Group. (2002). Reading for understand-
ing: Toward a R&D program in reading comprehension. Santa
Monica, CA: Rand.
Reutebuch, C.K., Ciullo, S., & Vaughn, S.R. (2013). Graphic
organizers for the adolescent learner in content-�area, sec-
ondary inclusive classrooms. In R. Boon & V.G. Spencer
(Eds.), Reading comprehension strategies to promote adolescent
literacy in the content-�areas for the inclusive classroom. Balti-
more, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.
Rosenshine, B., & Meister, C. (1994). Reciprocal teaching: A review
of the research. Review of educational research, 64(4), 479–Â�530.
Short, D., & Echevarria, J. (2004). Teacher skills to support
English language learners. Educational Leadership, 62(4), 8–Â�13.
Simmons, D., Hairrell, A., Edmonds, M., Vaughn, S.,
Larsen, R., Willson, V., .€ .€ .€ Byrns, G. (2010). A compar-
ison of multiple-�strategy methods: Effects on fourth-�
grade students’ general and content specific reading
comprehension and vocabulary development. Journal of
Research on Educational Effectiveness, 3(2), 121–Â�156. doi:
10.1080/19345741003596890
Skylar, A.A., Higgins, K., & Boone, R. (2007). Strategies for
adapting WebQuests for students with learning disabili-
ties. Intervention in School and Clinic, 43(1), 20–Â�28.
Snow, C., Burns, M.S., & Griffin, P. (2005). Preventing read-
ing difficulties in young children. Washington, DC: National
Academy Press.
Solis, M., Ciullo, S., Vaughn, S., Pyle, N., Hassaram, B., &
Leroux, A. (2012). Reading comprehension interventions
for middle school students with learning disabilities: A
synthesis of 30 years of research. Journal of Learning Dis-
abilities, 45(4), 327–Â�340.
Torgesen, J.K., Houston, D.D., Rissman, L.M., Decker, S.M.,
Roberts, G., Vaughn, S., & Lesaux, N. (2007). Academic lit-
eracy instruction for adolescents: A guidance document from
the Center on Instruction. Portsmouth, NH: RMC Research
Corporation, Center on Instruction.
Twyman, T., & Tindal, G. (2006). Using a computer-�adapted,
conceptually based history text to increase comprehension
and problem-�solving skills of students with disabilities.
Journal of Special Education Technology, 21(2), 5.
 7
Learning to Write and Writing to Learn
Joan Sedita

Classroom Scenario
In a middle school history class, the students are writing about several pieces of text that
include a primary source, a textbook section, and a history magazine article. The writing
assignment is to answer an extended response question by synthesizing information and
using text evidence from the three sources. The teacher has given the students a set of guide-
lines that describe the purpose and type of the writing, the suggested length of the piece, and
the specific requirements, such as how many main ideas should be included. The teacher has
differentiated the assignment to meet the needs of students with a variety of writing skills.
Scaffolds such as a prewriting template have been provided for students who struggle with
planning strategies. The teacher has provided models of good writing samples and has also
provided opportunities for students to collaborate at various stages of the writing process.
This is a classroom where the teacher is teaching students to write and also using writing
to help them learn content. Unfortunately, classrooms like this are rare.

Objectives: After studying this chapter, you will:

1. Learn the difference between teaching students how to write and how to use writ-
ing to learn content.
2. Review the research on effective writing instruction practices.
3. Become familiar with the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) related to writing
instruction.
4. Learn the differences among informational, argument, and narrative types of
writing.
5. Learn how assessment can be used to determine student writing ability and how
writing can be used to assess student knowledge of content.
6. Learn what students need to be taught about writing, including the stages of the
writing process, specific writing strategies, and text structure.
7. Become familiar with components of a writing teaching routine.

97
98 Sedita

Along with reading comprehension, writing skill is a predictor of academic achievement and
essential for success in postsecondary education. Students need and use writing for many
purposes (e.g., to communicate and share knowledge, to support comprehension and learning,
to explore feelings and beliefs). Writing is also becoming a more necessary skill for success in
a number of occupations.1
Unfortunately, there are far too many students in the United States today who do not
write well enough to meet grade-�level demands. The writing assessment scores for Grades 8
and 12 of the 2011 National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) show that the number
of students who do not reach proficiency for their grade level remains very high: 73% of 8th
graders and 73% of 12th graders.2 About a third of high school students intending to enter
higher education do not meet readiness benchmarks for college-�level English composition
courses, and among certain ethnic groups, the percentage is higher: 50%.3 Once in college, 20%
of first-�year college students require a remedial writing class and more than half of them are
unable to write a paper relatively free of errors.4 At least a quarter of new community college
students enroll in remedial writing courses.5 Compounding the problem, remedial enrollments
appear to underestimate the number of students with reading and writing difficulties.
The good news is that we have a very good idea of what students need to acquire in order
to become good writers. There is a significant amount of research that has been conducted and
reviewed on effective writing instruction.6 The Common Core State Standards (CCSS) place a
significant emphasis on teaching students in all subjects how to write and how to use writing
to learn.7 The key is getting this information to teachers, including teachers of science, social
studies, math, English, and other content areas.
As the title suggests, this chapter addresses two goals for writing instruction. The first is
teaching students how to write (learning to write); the second is teaching students how to use
writing to learn content (writing to learn). Although the goals for each are different, instruction
for both needs to happen simultaneously.
It is often assumed that the job of teaching students how to write belongs to English lan-
guage arts teachers. However, the truth is that they cannot do it alone and content teachers
are needed to support learning to write. Writing to learn skills in particular are best taught by
content teachers because they understand how to show examples of subject-�specific writing,
teach students how to write about subject-�specific text, and provide feedback to students about
content-�based writing assignments. From Grade 6 to Grade 12, content teachers are in a unique
position to teach students how to write like a scientist, mathematician, historian, or literary
author. This is described in the literature as disciplinary literacy.8
In this chapter, research-�based instructional practices for teaching writing and writing to
learn skills are discussed. You will also learn how writing can be used as a tool for assessing
content learning.

What Is It? Why Is It Important?

Learning to write includes learning two sets of skills: composing skills using the writing process
(prewriting, planning, drafting, and revising) and transcription skills (punctuation, capitaliza-
tion, spelling, and handwriting/keyboarding). A foundational composing skill is the ability to
apply knowledge of text structure to write sentences (i.e., knowledge of grammar), paragraphs,
and longer passages of text. Knowledge of text structure also includes recognizing the differ-
ences among narrative, informational, and argument types of writing. Composing requires a
great deal of thinking at the prewriting, planning, and drafting stages.
Transcription skills, on the other hand, should be sufficiently developed for students by the
time they reach middle school; that is, they can automatically apply spelling and handwriting/
keyboarding skills and use proper punctuation and capitalization. Fluency in transcriptions
skills enables students to focus their thinking on the composing aspects of writing. However,
there are some students who struggle with these basic skills. When you teach students who
Learning to Write and Writing to Learn 99

struggle with writing, it is important to determine if they are having difficulty with composing
skills, transcription skills, and in some cases, both. By providing instruction in both transcrip-
tions skills and composing strategies, writing will improve by a greater degree than a focus only
on improving content quality or only on mechanical aspects of writing.
Writing to learn means using writing as a tool to promote content learning; when students
write, they think on paper. Content teachers assign writing activities to help students learn sub-
ject matter, clarify and organize their thoughts, and improve their retention of content. Writing
to learn tasks can be based on reading, classroom discussion, teacher presentation, media such as
video, or hands-�on activities. Being able to write is as important to learning as being able to read.
Subject area teachers sometimes feel overwhelmed with all the content they must cover
during a school year, and it is understandable if at some point you feel there is not enough
time to teach writing. Using a plate of food as a metaphor, content teachers may view writing
instruction as one more thing to add to an already crowded plate. However, content teachers
need to recognize that teaching students how to write about what they are learning gives the
students a strong foundation on which they can access and add more content. When students
have strong literacy skills, they have a solid plate to hold all the content that must be learned.

What Does the Research Say?

There are three broad findings that are consistent in the research on effective writing instruction:9
1. Teach the steps in the writing process.
2. Explicitly teach writing strategies that are used at each step of the writing process.
3. Increase how much students write—Â�the more they write, the better they get at writing.
You will learn more about how to teach the writing process and writing strategies in this
chapter. The CCSS writing standard 10 is directly aligned with the third finding: “Write rou-
tinely over extended time frames (time for research, reflection, and revision) and shorter time
frames (a single sitting or a day or two) for a range of tasks, purposes, and audiences.”10
In their seminal report Writing Next, Graham and Perin11 identified 11 elements of writing
instruction that were found to be effective for helping students in Grades 4–Â�12 learn to write well
and to use writing as a tool for learning. These elements were recommended based on a large-�
scale statistical review of research (called a meta-�analysis). Figure 7.1 identifies these elements.
Graham and Hebert wrote a second report, Writing to Read, based on the meta-�analysis of
research.The authors reviewed research to determine answers to these three questions:12
1. Does writing about the material students read enhance their reading comprehension?
2. Does teaching writing strengthen students’ reading skills?
3. Does increasing how much students write improve how well they read?

The report presented three recommendations. Figure 7.2 lists the recommendations.

What Should Students Know and Be Able

to Do to Be Prepared for College and Career?
Common Core State Standards
The Common Core State Standards (CCSS) related to writing are organized into several cat-
egories: Text Types and Purposes, Production and Distribution of Writing, Research to Build
and Present Knowledge, and Range of Writing.13 The specific ELA anchor writing and related
reading standards are listed in Figure 7.3. Writing standard 5 (Develop and strengthen writing as
needed by planning, revising, editing, rewriting, or trying a new approach) is directly aligned with
the research finding noted earlier that students need to be taught to apply the writing process.14
Writing standard 4 (Produce clear and coherent writing in which the development, organization, and
100 Sedita

1. Writing Strategies, which involves teaching students strategies for planning, revising, and editing their compositions
2. Summarization, which involves explicitly and systematically teaching students how to summarize texts
3. Collaborative Writing, which uses instructional arrangements in which adolescents work together to plan, draft, revise,
and edit their compositions
4. Specific Product Goals, which assigns students specific, reachable goals for the writing they are to complete
5. Word Processing, which uses computers and word processors as instructional supports for writing assignments
6. Sentence Combining, which involves teaching students to construct more complex, sophisticated sentences
7. Prewriting, which engages students in activities designed to help them generate or organize ideas for their composition
8. Inquiry Activities, which engages students in analyzing immediate, concrete data to help them develop ideas and content
for a particular writing task
9. Process Writing Approach, which interweaves a number of writing instructional activities in a workshop environment that
stresses extended writing opportunities, writing for authentic audiences, personalized instruction, and cycles of writing
10. Study of Models, which provides students with opportunities to read, analyze, and emulate models of good writing
11. Writing for Content Learning, which uses writing as a tool for learning content material

Figure 7.1.â•… Writing next: Eleven elements of effective writing instruction. (From Graham, S., & Perin, D. [2007]. Writing next:
Effective strategies to improve writing of adolescents in middle and high schools – A report to Carnegie Corporation of New York.
Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education [pp. 4–5]; reprinted by permission.)

I. HAVE STUDENTS WRITE ABOUT THE TEXTS THEY READ. Students’ comprehension of science, social studies, and
language arts texts is improved when they write about what they read, specifically when they
• Respond to a Text in Writing (Writing Personal Reactions, Analyzing and Interpreting the Text)
• Write Summaries of a Text
• Write Notes About a Text
• Answer Questions About a Text in Writing, or Create and Answer Written Questions About a Text
II. TEACH STUDENTS THE WRITING SKILLS AND PROCESSES THAT GO INTO CREATING TEXT. Students’ reading
skills and comprehension are improved by learning the skills and processes that go into creating text, specifically when
teachers
• Teach the Process of Writing, Text Structures for Writing, Paragraph or Sentence Construction Skills (Improves
Reading Comprehension)
• Teach Spelling and Sentence Construction Skills (Improves Reading Fluency)
• Teach Spelling Skills (Improves Word Reading Skills)
III. INCREASE HOW MUCH STUDENTS WRITE. Students’ reading comprehension is improved by having them increase
how often they produce their own texts.

Figure 7.2.â•… Recommendations: Writing practices that enhance students’ reading. (From Graham, S. & Hebert, M. [2010].
Writing to read: Evidence for how writing can improve reading. A Carnegie Corporation time to act report. Washington, DC:
Alliance for Excellent Education; reprinted by permission.)

style are appropriate to task, purpose, and audience) addresses the importance of the prewriting and
planning stages in order to produce organized writing pieces.15
The CCSS focus on three types of writing: argument, informational, and narrative. How-
ever, as this quote from the Common Core State Standards Appendix A points out, there is less
emphasis on narrative: “While all three text types are important, the Standards put particular
emphasis on students’ ability to write sound arguments on substantive topics and issues, as
this ability is critical to college and career readiness.”16
The extra focus on argument and informational writing is also evident in the fact that
details for standard 3 regarding narrative writing are provided only in the ELA standards for
Grades 6–Â�12 but not in the standards for history, social studies, science, and technical subjects.
For these subjects, the CCSS describes standard 3 as “not applicable as a separate requirement”
and provides this note:
Learning to Write and Writing to Learn 101

Writing Standards: Grades 6–Â�12 All Subjects

Text Types and Purposes

1. Write arguments to support claims in an analysis of substantive topics or texts using valid reasoning and relevant and
sufficient evidence.
2. Write informative/explanatory texts to examine and convey complex ideas and information clearly and accurately through
the effective selection, organization, and analysis of content.
3. Write narratives to develop real or imagined experiences or events using effective technique, well-�chosen details, and
well-Â�structured event sequences (note: for Grades 6–Â�12 ELA only).

Production and Distribution of Writing

4. Produce clear and coherent writing in which the development, organization, and style are appropriate to task, purpose,
and audience.
5. Develop and strengthen writing as needed by planning, revising, editing, rewriting, or trying a new approach.
6. Use technology, including the Internet, to produce and publish writing and to interact and collaborate with others.

Research to Build and Present Knowledge

7. Conduct short as well as more sustained research projects based on focused questions, demonstrating understanding of
the subject under investigation.
8. Gather relevant information from multiple print and digital sources, assess the credibility and accuracy of each source,
and integrate the information while avoiding plagiarism.
9. Draw evidence from literary or informational texts to support analysis, reflection, and research.

Range of Writing

10. Write routinely over extended time frames (time for research, reflection, and revision) and shorter time frames (a single
sitting or a day or two) for a range of tasks, purposes, and audiences.

Reading Standards: Grades 6–Â�12 All Subjects

1. Read closely to determine what the text says explicitly and to make logical inferences from it; cite specific textual evidence
when writing or speaking to support conclusions drawn from the text.
2. Determine central ideas or themes of a text and analyze their development; summarize the key supporting details and
ideas.
5. Analyze the structure of texts, including how specific sentences, paragraphs, and larger portions of the text (e.g., a section,
chapter, scene, or stanza) relate to each other and the whole.

Speaking and Listening Standards: Grades 6–Â�12 ELA Only

1. Prepare for and participate effectively in a range of conversations and collaborations with diverse partners, building on
others’ ideas and expressing their own clearly and persuasively.
4. Present information, findings, and supporting evidence such that listeners can follow the line of reasoning and the
organization, development, and style are appropriate to task, purpose, and audience.

Language Standards: Grades 6–Â�12 ELA Only

1. Demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English grammar and usage when writing or speaking.
2. Demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English capitalization, punctuation, and spelling when writing.
3. Apply knowledge of language to understand how language functions in different contexts, to make effective choices for
meaning or style, and to comprehend more fully when reading or listening.

Figure 7.3.â•… Common Core State Standards Anchor Standards related to writing. (Common Core State Standards © Copyright
2010. National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and Council of Chief State School Officers. All rights reserved.)
102 Sedita

Students’ narrative skills continue to grow in these grades. The Standards require that students be
able to incorporate narrative elements effectively into arguments and informative/explanatory texts.
In history/social studies, students must be able to incorporate narrative accounts into their analyses
of individuals or events of historical import. In science and technical subjects, students must be able
to write precise enough descriptions of the step-�by-�step procedures they use in their investigations
or technical work that others can replicate them and (possibly) reach the same results.17

The CCSS literacy standards also place a premium on students writing with sources, using
evidence from print and digital material in their writing pieces. Rather than asking students to
write based only on their own knowledge or experience, they should analyze and synthesize
information from sources in order to answer questions and writing prompts.18 There are a num-
ber of reading and writing standards that indicate strong expectations that students combine
reading comprehension and writing strategies. See the writing standards 7, 8, and 9, as well as
reading standards 1 and 2 in Figure 7.3, for examples.19

More About Types of Writing

Students need to learn the differences among the three types of writing, as well as the writ-
ing structure of each. Narrative writing typically tells a story of a real or imaginary expe-
rience, event, or sequence of events. Narrative text uses time as its main structure, and the
information and ideas can be organized around literary elements such as characters, setting,
problem-�solution, and theme. Examples of narrative writing genres include diary, biography
and autobiography, personal narrative, memoir, folktales, fables, myths, creative fictional sto-
ries, science fiction, poems, plays, and eyewitness accounts.
Informational writing typically examines previously learned information or provides new
information. Informational text structure tends to be hierarchical, with information being orga-
nized into topics, subtopics, and paragraph-�level main ideas. Writers use headings for topic
sections to help a reader recognize the organization of information. Examples of informational
writing genres include textbook, article, letter, speech, instructions, manual, directions, sum-
mary, subject area reports, and workplace writing such as memo, application, resume.
Like informational writing, argument provides information but for a different reason.
Argument writing uses selected information to make people believe that something is true,
whereas informational writing includes all the information to make people understand. Argu-
ment writing is used to change someone’s point of view, bring about some action, or ask some-
one to accept the writer’s evaluation of an issue or problem. Argument structure is based on
the sequenced presentation of the following elements: statement of claim (position), reasons
and evidence, counterclaim (possible opposing view), and rebuttal (refuting the counterclaim).
Examples of argument writing genres include persuasive letters, editorials, argument essays,
reviews of books or movies, and literary analysis.

How Do We Assess Writing?

Assessment is used to gather information about a student’s writing. There are three types of
assessment, each with its own purpose:
• Screening or summative: Typically a formal assessment that is group administered and norm
referenced (i.e., compares one student’s writing in comparison with a large group of peers);
used to determine if a student’s writing meets grade-Â�level standards
• Diagnostic: Can be formal or informal; administered to determine the specific strengths and
weaknesses of a student’s writing
• Formative: Can be formal or informal; used to determine if a student is responding to instruc-
tion and if writing skills are improving as they should
Content teachers should focus on informal, formative assessments that are used regularly
in their classrooms. Formative writing assessment is valuable because it helps determine which
Learning to Write and Writing to Learn 103

writing skills and strategies are problematic for

students so that the teacher can target writing
instruction to the specific needs of students. It
is also valuable because it enables the teacher
to give specific feedback to individual students
about what they need to improve their writing.
In many ways, the feedback you give
students about how to improve their writing
matters as much as the writing instruction
you provide. Without effective feedback, stu-
dents will not engage in the substantive self-�
assessment and revision that is essential to
learning to improve their writing.20 After conducting a meta-�analysis of the research regarding
the effectiveness of formative assessment to enhance student writing, the authors of the report
Informing Writing: The Benefits of Formative Assessment21 made the following recommendations.

Use Formative Assessment to Enhance Students’ Writing

• Provide feedback: Writing improves when teachers and peers provide students with feedback
about the effectiveness of their writing.
• Teach students how to assess their own writing: Writing improves when students are taught to
evaluate the effectiveness of their own writing.
• Monitor students’ writing progress: Writing improves when teachers monitor students’ prog-
ress on an ongoing basis.
Revision checklists and writing rubrics are common types of formative assessment. With a revi-
sion checklist, the teacher, student writer, or a peer student reviews a piece of writing to deter-
mine if specific writing criteria listed on the checklist have been met. Figure 7.4 is an example
of a checklist that addresses composing, text structure, and conventions.22 A writing rubric is a
chart or grid that lists a set of writing criteria like these and then offers descriptions to classify
the quality of a piece of writing according to categories that typically range from 4 to 0 points.
The scoring rubrics used for most state writing assessments are examples of this type of rubric.

How Do We Use Writing to Assess Learning?

Writing is a primary instrument that teachers use to determine how much students have learned
and evaluate academic performance. Various kinds of writing can be used for this purpose,
ranging from minimal (e.g., fill-�in-�the-�blank activities or short-�answer questions) to consid-
erable (e.g., essay tests or research papers).23 Written summaries provide insight regarding a
student’s identification of main ideas. Written answers to questions at all levels of thinking
(i.e., understanding, applying, analyzing, and evaluating) and inquiry writing tasks such as
constructed and extended response help teachers determine if students have achieved a deep
level of knowledge and have applied critical thinking.

How Do We Teach Writing and Writing to Learn

Skills Effectively, Efficiently, and Appropriately?
Teach the Steps in the Writing Process
It was noted earlier that teaching students the steps of the writing process was one of the 11
recommendations of the Writing Next report.24 It is also one of the CCSS Anchor Standards (stan-
dard 5).25 What is the writing process? In 1980, Hayes and Flower published their seminal book
chapter titled “Identifying the Organization of Writing Processes,” in which they identified the
104 Sedita

Content

Yes No

Did I meet the demands of the writing assignment?

Did I meet the needs of my audience?

If I read my writing out loud, does it sound good to me?

Are there some parts of the writing where my ideas are not clear?

Can I improve the overall organization of the writing piece?

Can I use more interesting, specific, or varied vocabulary?

Text Structure

Sentences: Do I have any sentence fragments, sentence run-�ons, or short, choppy

sentences?

Sentences: Can I add information, better explain, or rearrange wording to make my

ideas clearer?

Paragraphs: Did I use good paragraph structure, including indenting?

Paragraphs: Are my main ideas represented by changes in paragraphs?

Can I add transition words to make better connections?

Conventions

Did I use correct capitalization?

Did I use correct punctuation?

Are there some words I might have spelled incorrectly?

Other:

Other:

Figure 7.4.â•… Revising checklist. (From Sedita, J. [2013]. Keys to content writing [p. 202]. Rowley, MA: Keys to Literacy; reprint-
ed by permission.)

actual mental behaviors of experienced writers at work.26 Building upon the work of previous
writing researchers, they identified three levels of individual subskills, or stages, of the com-
posing process: planning, translating, and reviewing. Their cognitive processing model helped
teachers understand what their student writers might need to be taught and practice in order
to become better writers. Since the mid-�1980s, the model was informed by new research and
substantially reconceptualized,27 resulting in four major stages:
1. Prewriting (reflection, selecting a topic, planning what to say)
2. Text production (writing a draft)
3. Revising (reflection, making changes to improve the writing)
4. Editing (proofreading)
Learning to Write and Writing to Learn 105

The writing process is dynamic and recursive—Â�writers repeat and revisit the stages several
times as they develop a piece of writing. For example, a student may discover while writing a
first draft that he or she needs to go back to the prewriting stage to gather and organize more
information about the topic. Similarly, while revising the draft, the student may discover he
or she needs to change the way he originally planned to organize the content. Figure 7.5 is an
example of a student writing routine based on the writing process.28
Students need to be taught what each stage is and the skills and strategies they need to
apply at each stage, and they need to make sure they do not skip any of the stages when they
write. The more effort they put into prewriting, the better the finished the product will be.
Students also need to know that, in some cases, a piece of writing is never finished—Â�further
thinking and editing can always improve the piece. Whereas students should know that it is not
practical to develop multiple drafts for every writing piece (e.g., an e-�mail message or a note
to a family member), they need to get in the habit of revising and rewriting important writing
assignments, such as key homework assignments and research reports.

Explicitly Teach Writing Strategies that Are Used at Each Stage of the Writing Process
Explicitly teaching strategies for each stage of the writing process has a strong impact on the
quality of all students’ writing, and it has been found especially effective for students who have
difficulty writing. Strategy instruction can include teaching generic skills such as brainstorming
a topic or how to use transition words, or it can include teaching strategies for a specific writing
task such as how to write a summary or an argument.29 Figure 7.6 lists examples of strategies
that often require instruction before students can use them independently.

Teach Text Structure

Students need to understand text structures in order to write well. When students write, they
have to work through four structural levels: word structure, sentence structure, paragraph struc-
ture, and overall text structure. Difficulties on any level may cause writing to suffer.30 Knowledge
of word structure includes the ability to spell words correctly and join suffixes and prefixes to
root words. Students need knowledge of the other three levels of text structure in order to orga-
nize and express their ideas in writing. In this sense, text structure represents thinking.31

Sentence Structure
This level of text consists of propositions (ideas) that convey information sentence by sentence.
One by one, sentences communicate ideas that add up to make meaning. Crafting sentences
that accurately convey the intended meaning is challenging, especially for struggling writers
and English language learners (ELLs).
Syntax is the study of the rules for the formation of grammatical sentences—Â�that is, how
words are combined and arranged to make phrases and sentences. When a student has syntac-
tic awareness, it means he or she understands the rules of grammar and is aware when a sen-
tences does not follow those rules. Many students have good syntactic awareness and can tell
that there is something grammatically wrong with a sentence even if they cannot explain the
problem in grammatical terms. It just “sounds wrong” to them, and they intuitively have the
ability to add, delete, or change the word order to make it “sound right.” Young children build
syntactic awareness by listening to spoken sentences. As students move through the elementary
grades and listen to text read aloud or read more written text themselves, they are exposed to
more complex sentences. As their syntactic awareness grows, they are able to monitor the rela-
tionships among the words in a sentence that they are reading and also that they are writing.32
Students with weak syntactic awareness tend to write short, simple sentences that are generally
lower in quality, error filled, and contain less varied vocabulary.
106 Sedita

The Process Writing Routine

Think
• Identify audience and purpose
• Brainstorm the topic
• Gather information
• Take notes

Plan
• Organize ideas
• Use a planning guide

Write
• Follow the guide
• Translate ideas into sentences and paragraphs

Revise
• Review the content
• Proofread for conventions
• Rewrite

Figure 7.5.â•… The process writing routine. (From Sedita, J.

[2013]. Keys to content writing [p. 22]. Rowley, MA: Keys to
Literacy; reprinted by permission.)

How to Apply These Prewriting Strategies

• Identify the audience and purpose.

• Brainstorm and narrow down a topic.
• Gather information and take notes about a topic.
• Generate a graphic organizer to plan before writing.

How to Apply These Text-�Production Strategies

• Write complete sentences and organized paragraphs.

• Apply text structure specific to narrative, informational, or argument writing.
• Write introductions and conclusions.
• Use transition words and phrases to make connections among sentences and paragraphs.
• Use proper capitalization and punctuation.

How to Apply These Revising and Editing Strategies

• Review and revise a written draft for content.

• Proofread and edit conventions (spelling, capitalization, punctuation).

Figure 7.6.â•… Examples of writing strategies that require explicit instruction.

Grammar instruction that involves explicit instruction in identifying parts of speech was
not found in the research to improve students’ writing. Graham and Perin explain it this way:
Overall, the findings on grammar instruction suggest that, although teaching grammar is important,
alternative procedures, such as sentence combining, are more effective than traditional approaches
for improving the quality of students’ writing€.€.€. Sentence combining involves teaching students to
construct more complex and sophisticated sentences through exercises in which two or more basic
sentences are combined into a single sentence.33
Learning to Write and Writing to Learn 107

Instructional methods that involve practice with writing and manipulating parts of sen-
tences, such as sentence combining, have been found to improve students’ writing quality
more than simply labeling parts of speech. This does not mean that all grammar instruction is
bad—Â�just that teachers need to provide this instruction in a way that is most useful for students.
Teachers should focus on the function and practical application of grammar within the context
of writing.34 Prichard and Honeycutt provide this suggestion: “Teachers should pull out com-
mon grammatical errors from students’ drafts and develop mini-Â�lessons around them, rather
than turning to the next lesson in the grammar book€.€.€. The best grammar lessons are based
on sentences derived from students’ own writing.”35

Paragraph Structure
The detailed meaning from sentences is combined to develop a paragraph that represents a
main idea. Content teachers assume that upon entering middle grades, students already know
how to write a good paragraph. Unfortunately, this is not always the case. Content teachers
should teach students that a paragraph is built around a major idea, that the main idea can be
stated in a topic sentence, and that the supporting sentences contain details related to the main
idea. Each time the writer shifts to another main idea, he or she should indent or skip a line
before starting a new paragraph.
There are three basic types of paragraphs: introductory (introduces the topic of the writing
piece and may also preview the main ideas that will follow), concluding (sums up the writing
piece), and body paragraphs (present the main ideas and supporting details).

Overall Text Structure

Each type and genre of writing has a different overall structure for how the ideas and infor-
mation are organized. Earlier in this chapter, you learned how narrative, informational, and
argument text are typically organized. Some genres within these writing types also have unique
structure, such as poetry, plays, and certain types of content-�writing tasks such as a science lab
report or a biography. It is important to make a distinction between text features and text struc-
ture. Text features include things such as headings, glossaries, tables of contents, and captions
for illustrations. Text structure focuses more on how ideas and information are organized at the
sentence, paragraph, and overall text levels.
The CCSS require that students learn to use several text structures regardless of the writing
type: introductions (CCSS 1a, 2a, 3a),36 conclusions (CCSS 1e, 2f, 3e),37 and transition words and
phrases (CCSS 1c, 2c, 3c).38 Transition words and phrases can do a lot to help students make
connections among sentences and paragraphs. Content teachers can play an important role in
teaching students how to use them for content writing. Figure 7.7 is a chart of transition words
organized around writing purpose.39
It should be noted that knowledge of text structure also aids comprehension. Text struc-
ture refers to how a piece of text is built. When students are writing, they use text structure to
construct, and when they are reading, they use text structure to deconstruct in order to make
meaning. Increasing student knowledge of text structure improves reading comprehension and
writing ability.40

Have Students Write Often

It was noted earlier that a major research finding is that students need to write often in order to
improve writing skills and that CCSS Writing Anchor Standard 10 calls for students to routinely
write short and long writing pieces.41 Writing to learn activities can be based on information
from reading or from classroom instructional practices such as group discussions, teacher pre-
sentations, or use of media such as video. Writing tasks can be general (e.g., summarizing,
108 Sedita

To indicate a time relationship after, afterward, after that, at first, at this time, before, beginning with, beyond, during,
earlier, ending with, eventually, finally, following, from then on, in the meantime,
last, later, meanwhile, next, now, since, soon, then, until, while

To indicate spatial placement below, beside, between, beyond, farther on, here, next to, parallel with

To list or present a series of ideas after, after that, finally, first, lastly, next, second, third

To add information or continue a line also, another, besides, further, furthermore, in addition, likewise, moreover, similarly
of thought

To summarize or show conclusion accordingly, finally, in conclusion, in other words, in short, to conclude, to sum up,
to summarize

To show comparison by comparison, compared to, in like manner, likewise, similarly

To show contrast although, but, however, in contrast, nevertheless, on the contrary, on the other hand,
unlike

To repeat or stress a point above all, in fact, in other words, most important, once again, to repeat

To provide an example or illustrate for example, for instance, such as, to illustrate, that is
a point

To show cause and effect as a result, because, because of, caused by, consequently, for that reason, that is
why, therefore, thus

To state the obvious certainly, granted that, in fact, most certainly, naturally, obviously, of course, surely,
undoubtedly, without a doubt

Figure 7.7.â•… Transition words and phrases. (From Sedita, J. [2010]. The key comprehension routine [p. 163]. Rowley, MA: Keys to
Literacy; reprinted by permission.)

notetaking, personal reflection, compare and contrast) as well as subject specific (e.g., science
lab report, explanation of how to solve a math problem, literary analysis for English). Figure 7.8
provides suggestions for short writing tasks (quick writes that can be completed in less than
5 minutes) and longer writing tasks completed in one class or over several days.42
How do we develop instructional plans that are aligned with the CCSS and evidence-�based
instructional practices? How can we best engage all students in writing instruction?

Follow a Teaching Routine

There are a number of recommended practices that teachers of any subject should incorporate
when they assign writing tasks to students. Taken together, these practices constitute a teaching
routine. Research finds that establishing a predictable routine that permits ample practice with
skills and strategies should be an essential component of a strong writing curriculum, regard-
less of grade or student writing ability.43 Sedita has developed a teaching routine that includes
six components: set writing goals; show models; provide scaffolds; provide opportunities for
collaboration; provide feedback; and provide opportunities for revision.44 This routine embeds
the most important research findings about effective writing instruction. Table 7.1 provides
details about each component of the routine.45

Provide Scaffolds
Scaffolding describes a type of assistance offered by a teacher to support learning. It is one of
the principles of effective instruction that enables teachers to accommodate individual student
Learning to Write and Writing to Learn 109

Examples of Quick Writes

• Admit and exit tickets

• Informal notes/scribbles
• Margin notes while reading
• Lists of facts, steps, ideas
• Set of instructions or directions
• Filling in a graphic organizer, complete a set of notes
• Free-Â�writing—Â�write on a topic for a short, specified amount of time
• One-Â�paragraph summary
• Write a definition in your own words
• Draw, label, or explain pictures/diagrams
• Short-Â�answer questions
• One-Â�to two-Â�sentence reflections
• Sentence combining
• Short communication with someone else (note, e-Â�mail, tweet, text message)

Examples of Longer Writing Tasks

• Notes from reading, lecture, or classroom activity
• Multiparagraph summary
• Compare and contrast compositions
• Answering open response questions requiring analysis and interpretation
• Essays
• News article
• Set of instructions
• Profile—Â�detailed report or outline of an event or incident
• Reflection or analysis of information or events
• Letter
• Brochure
• Interview using prepared questions; write-Â�up from an interview
• Journals or learning logs
• Information logs—Â�collecting and identifying material that can help students focus on, compare, and classify
information
• Content journals/response logs—Â�record information learned about topics through reading, hands-Â�on experiences,
video, demonstrations, projects, field trips, and so forth
• “What are you thinking” journals
• Dialogue journals with a partner or the teacher—Â�sharing reflections
• Rewriting text from other points of view
• Creative writing—Â�using short stories or poetry that provide personal and imaginative ways of exploring ideas and
experiences

Figure 7.8.â•… Examples of writing tasks.

needs. When you scaffold, you help a student master a task or concept that the student is ini-
tially unable to grasp independently. The amount of scaffolding is gradually released as the
student becomes independent with his or her ability to complete the task or understand
the concept.46
There are several types of scaffolding:47
• Content scaffolding: The teacher introduces simpler concepts and skills and slowly guides
students through more challenging concepts and skills.
• Task scaffolding: The student proceeds from easier to more difficult tasks and activities.
110 Sedita

Table 7.1.â•… The key writing teaching routine

Set writing goals Identify and clarify the writing task: Set specific product goals that include characteristics
of the finished product. This includes identifying the audience and purpose as well as
providing guidelines about length, suggestions about the type of writing to be used (e.g.,
narrative, informational, argument), suggested format, and requirements for the finished
product.
Identify specific student goals: When possible, provide students individual objectives to
focus on a particular aspect of their writing.
Goal setting can be the basis for grading writing assignments.
Show models • Provide students with opportunities to read, analyze, and emulate models of good
writing.
• Show models of every step in the writing process.
• Provide models of what the completed writing assignment should look like.
Provide scaffolds Provide supports for completing a writing task such as assignment guides, steps to follow,
graphic organizers, two-�column notes, or writing templates.
Provide opportunities for Provide opportunities for students to work together and with the teacher to plan, draft,
collaboration revise, and edit their writing. Collaboration engages students more in the writing process
because writing is a social activity that is best learned in a community.
Provide feedback • The feedback you give students matters as much as the writing instruction you pro-
vide. Without feedback, students will not learn how to improve their writing.
• Students need to know if their writing is accurate and conveys the intended message.
• Feedback can be from the teacher, peers, or the student.
• Feedback should be more than marking mechanical errors on final drafts.
• Teachers should do the following:
• Provide feedback throughout the writing process
• Focus on the content of the writing first, mechanics later
• Provide feedback that is descriptive, specific, and based on the individual needs of
the student
• Provide feedback checklists
Provide opportunities Students need time to reflect on self-�assessment and feedback from others and then
for revision improve their drafts through revision. Students need explicit instruction in how to incor-
porate feedback to revise their writing. Not every writing task has to be revised to the
point of “publication ready,” but students will not improve their writing skills if they do not
have some opportunities to revise based on feedback.
From Sedita, J. (2012). The key writing routine (pp. 9–10). Rowley, MA: Keys to Literacy; reprinted by permission.

• Material scaffolding: A variety of materials are used to guide student’s thinking, including
partially completed graphic organizers or templates.
• Instructional scaffolding: The teacher demonstrates models through the use of think-Â�alouds
and provides prompts, questions, or a set of steps that students can follow by instructing
themselves through the steps.

Summary
As emphasized in the CCSS literacy standards, teachers of all subjects must play a role in
teaching students how to write better. Content teachers must also assign writing regularly as
a tool for learning content. Students need to routinely write over extended time frames and
shorter time frames. In addition, writing assignments should require students to become pro-
ficient in all three types of writing: argument, informational, and narrative. Students should
be reminded to follow all the stages in the writing process (i.e., prewriting, text production,
revising, and editing). Teachers must provide explicit instruction about how to write appro-
priate introductions and conclusions, how to effectively use transition words and phrases,
and how to develop an organized body for a writing piece. We know through research and by
Learning to Write and Writing to Learn 111

observing recommended practices in schools

that the scenario presented at the beginning of
the chapter can become the norm once teach-
ers accept the challenge of improving student
writing ability.

Application Assignments
In-�Class Assignments
1. Explain to a partner the difference between
learning to write and writing to learn.
2. Review the Common Core State Standards in Figure 7.3 and identify those standards that
are in some way related to writing about reading.
3. Discuss how having weak transcription skills (i.e., handwriting or keyboarding, spelling,
or use of capitalization/punctuation) might affect a student’s ability and motivation to
complete a lengthy writing assignment.
4. With a partner, write notes that describe each type of writing (i.e., narrative, informa-
tional, and argument), including the differences among them.

Tutoring Assignments
1. Create four examples of “quick writes” you can assign a student that are related to some-
thing he or she is reading.
2. Based on a student writing sample that is at least six sentences long, try to determine if
the student has strong or weak syntactic awareness.
3. Create a poster that includes a list of common transition words that you can make avail-
able to the student(s) you teach.

Homework Assignments
1. Refer to The Key Writing Teaching Routine in Appendix C. Develop a lesson plan for a
subject-�based writing assignment (e.g., science, social studies, English) that includes spe-
cifics for each of the six components of the routine. Be sure to do the following:
a. Set clear goals for the audience, purpose, length, and other requirements.
b. Determine what models of good writing you will show students.
c. Identify a planning scaffold (e.g., a graphic organizer, writing template).
d. Determine how you will provide at least one opportunity for students to collaborate
at the think, plan, write, or revise stage of the writing process.
e. Determine how you will provide feedback that students can use to revise the piece of
writing.
2. Complete the following writing assignments:
a. Write a 300-Â�to 500-Â�word piece that supports this statement: “Teachers of all subjects
need to play a role in teaching writing.” Include relevant text evidence from this
chapter in your response.
b. When you are finished, write a brief description of how you applied the writing
process—Â�that is, what did you do at the think, plan, write, and revise stages, and
were you recursive (revisiting an earlier stage) at any point in the process?
112 Sedita
Endnotes
1. National Commission on Writing (2004).
2. National Center for Education Statistics (2012).
3. ACT (2005).
4. Intersegmental Committee of the Academic Senates,
2002, as cited in Graham, MacArthur, & Fitzgerald (2007).
5. National Center for Education Statistics (2003).
6. Hillocks (1986); MacArthur, Graham, & Fitzgerald
(2006); Graham & Perin (2007); Graham & Hebert
(2010).
7. Common Core State Standards (CCSS) Initiative (2010a).
8. Sedita (2013).
9. Troia (2007); Graham et al. (2007).
10. CCSS Initiative (2010a), p. 41.
11. Graham & Perin (2007).
12. Graham & Hebert (2010).
13. CCSS Initiative (2010).
14. CCSS Initiative (2010).
15. CCSS Initiative (2010).
16. CCSS Initiative (2010), p. 24.
17. CCSS Initiative (2010), p.65.
18. Achieve the Core (2013).
19. CCSS Initiative (2010).
20. Beach & Friedrich (2006).
21. Graham, Harris, & Hebert (2011), p. 6.
22. Reprinted with permission from Sedita (2012).
23. Graham (1982); Graham & Perin (2007).
Helpful Resources for Effective Writing Instruction
Books
Graham, S., MacArthur, C.A., & Fitzgerald, J. (Eds.). (2007).
Best practices in writing instruction. New York, NY: Guilford.
Harris, K.R., Graham, S., Mason, L.H., & Friedlander, B.
(2008). Powerful writing strategies for all students. Baltimore,
MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.
Reports
Graham, S., Harris, K., & Hebert, M.A. (2011). Informing
writing: The benefits of formative assessment. A Carnegie Cor-
poration Time to Act report. Washington, DC: Alliance for
Excellent Education. Retrieved from http://carnegie.org/
fileadmin/Media/Publications/InformingWriting.pdf
Graham, S., & Hebert, M. (2010). Writing to read: Evidence
for how writing can improve reading. A Carnegie Corporation
Web Site
Student Achievement Partners, http://www.achievethecore.org
References
Achieve the Core. (2013). The Common Core shifts for English lan-
guage arts/literacy. Student Achievement Partners. Retrieved
February 1, 2013, from http://www.achievethecore.org
2 4. Graham & Perin (2007).
25. CCSS Initiative (2010).
26. Hayes & Flower (1980).
27. Hayes (1996); Hayes (2004).
28. Reprinted with permission from Sedita (2012).
29. Graham & Perin (2007).
30. Saddler (2007).
31. Sanders & Schilpernoord (2006).
32. Scott (2004).
33. Graham & Perin (2007), pp. 18, 21.
34. Graham & Perin (2007).
35. Pritchard & Honeycutt (2007), pp. 41, 43.
36. CCSS Initiative (2010).
37. CCSS Initiative (2010).
38. CCSS Initiative (2010).
39. Reprinted with permission from Sedita (2003).
40. Gersten, Baker, & Edwards (1999); Donovan & Smolkin
(2006).
4 1. CCSS Initiative (2010).
42. Reprinted with permission from Sedita (2012).
43. Troia (2007).
44. Sedita (2012).
45. Reprinted with permission from Sedita (2012).
46. Benson (1997); Lipscomb, Swanson, & West (2004).
47. Dickson, Simmons, & Kame’enui (1995); Chapman
(2006); Schumaker & Deshler (2009).
Mason, L.H., Reid, R., & Hagaman, J.L (2012). Building com-
prehension in adolescents: Powerful strategies for improving
reading and writing in content areas. Baltimore, MD: Paul H.
Brookes Publishing Co.
Time to Act report. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent
Education.
Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). Writing next: Effective strategies
to improve writing of adolescents in middle and high schools—Â�A
report to Carnegie Corporation of New York. Washington, DC:
Alliance for Excellent Education.
Beach, R., & Friedrich, T. (2006). Response to writing. In C.A.
MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of
writing research. New York, NY: Guilford.
Learning to Write and Writing to Learn 113
Benson, B. (1997). Scaffolding (coming to terms). English Jour-
nal, 86(7), 126–Â�127.
Chapman, M. (2006). Preschool through elementary writing.
In P. Smagorinsky (Ed.), Research on composition. New York,
NY: Teachers College.
Common Core State Standards (CCSS) Initiative. (2010a).
Common Core State Standards for English language arts and
literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects.
Washington, DC: CCSS Initiative & National Governors
Association. Retrieved March 1, 2012, from http://www.core
standards.org
Common Core State Standards (CCSS) Initiative. (2010b).
Common Core State Standards for English language arts and
literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects:
Appendix A: Research supporting key elements of the standards.
Washington, DC: CCSS Initiative & National Governors
Association. Retrieved March 1, 2012, from http://www
.corestandards.org
Dickson, W.V., Simmons, D.C., & Kame’enui, E.J. (1995).
Text organization: Curricular and instructional implications for
diverse learners. Eugene, OR: National Center to Improve
the Tools of Educators.
Donovan, C.A., & Smolkin, L.B. (2006). Children’s under-
standing of genre and writing development. In C.A.
MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of
writing research. New York, NY: Guilford.
Gersten, R., Baker, S., & Edwards, L. (1999). Teaching expres-
sive writing to students with learning disabilities. ERIC/OSEP
Digest #E590. ERIC Clearinghouse on Disabilities and
Gifted Education. Retrieved from http://files.eric.ed.gov/
fulltext/ED439532.pdf
Graham, S., Harris, K., & Hebert, M.A. (2011). Informing
writing: The benefits of formative assessment. A Carnegie Cor-
poration Time to Act report. Washington, DC: Alliance for
Excellent Education.
Graham, S., & Hebert, M. (2010). Writing to read: Evidence for
how writing can improve reading. A Carnegie Corporation Time to
Act report. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.
Graham, S., MacArthur, C.A., & Fitzgerald, J. (Eds.). (2007).
Best practice practices in writing instruction. New York, NY:
Guilford.
Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). Writing next: Effective strategies
to improve writing of adolescents in middle and high schools—Â�A
report to Carnegie Corporation of New York. Washington, DC:
Alliance for Excellent Education.
Hayes, J.R., & Flower, L. (1980). Identifying the organization
of writing processes. In L.W. Gregg & E.R. Steinberg (Eds.),
Cognitive processes in writing: An interdisciplinary approach
(pp. 3–Â�30). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Lipscomb, L., Swanson, J., & West, A. (2001). Scaffolding. In
M. Orey (Ed.), Emerging perspectives on learning, teaching,
and technology. Bloomington, IN: Association for Educa-
tional Communication and Technology. Retrieved Febru-
ary 10, 2013, from€http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt
National Center for Education Statistics. (2003, November).
Remedial education at degree-�granting postsecondary insti-
tutions in Fall 2000: Statistical analysis report (Tech. Rep.,
NCES 2004–Â�0101). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Education Institute of Education Science.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2012). The nation’s
report card: Writing 2011(NCES 2012–Â�470). Washington,
DC: Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of
Education.
Pritchard, R.J., & Honeycutt, R.L. (2007). Best practices in
implementing a process approach to teaching writing. In
S. Graham, C.A. MacArthur, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Best
practices in writing instruction. New York, NY: Guilford.
Saddler, B. (2007). Improving sentence construction skills
through sentence-�combining practice. In S. Graham, C.A.
MacArthur, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.). Best practices in writing
instruction. New York, NY: Guilford.
Sanders, T.J.M., & Schilpernoord, J. (2006). Text structure as
a window on the cognition of writing: How text analy-
sis provides insights. In C.A. MacArthur, S. Graham, &
J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of writing research. New York,
NY: Guilford.
Schumaker, J.B., & Deshler, D.D. (2009). Adolescents with
learning disabilities as writers: Are we selling them short?
Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 24(2), 81–Â�92.
Scott, C. (2004). Syntactic contributions to literacy develop-
ment. In C. Stone, E. Stillman, B. Ehren, & K. Apel (Eds.),
Handbook of language and literacy (pp. 340–Â�362). New York,
NY: Guilford.
Sedita, J. (2003). The key comprehension routine. Rowley, MA:
Keys to Literacy.
Sedita, J. (2012). The key writing routine. Rowley, MA: Keys
to Literacy.
Sedita, J. (2013). Keys to content writing. Rowley, MA: Keys
to Literacy.
Troia, G.A. (2007). Research in writing instruction: What we
know and what we need to know. In D.D. Deschler, M.F. Hock,
M. Pressley, A.K. Billman, R.H. Perry, K.E. Reffitt, &
J.M. Reynolds (Eds.), Shaping literacy achievement: Research
we have, research we need. New York, NY: Guilford.
 8
Understanding the New Demands for Text
Complexity in American Secondary Schools
Elfrieda H. Hiebert

I lingered at the gates; I lingered on the lawn; I paced backwards and forwards on the pavement;
the shutters of the glass door were closed; I could not see into the interior; and both my eyes and
spirit seemed drawn from the gloomy house—Â�from the grey-Â�hollow filled with rayless cells, as it
appeared to me—Â�to that sky expanded before me,—Â�a blue sea absolved from taint of cloud; the
moon ascending it in solemn march; her orb seeming to look up as she left the hill-�tops, from behind
which she had come, far and farther below her, and aspired to the zenith, midnight dark in its fath-
omless depth and measureless distance; and for those trembling stars that followed her course; they
made my heart tremble, my veins glow when I viewed them.1

Jane Eyre (Charlotte Brontë) is a classic British novel and one that often appears on secondary
school reading lists. As this passage shows, however, the text has several features that may pose
challenges to many students’ understanding, including its extensive use of figurative language
and its cultural and historical setting. The text also poses challenges for teachers who use it in
their classrooms. They must identify which specific features of the text will be difficult for their
students and then develop instruction that addresses those features.
Of course, these are familiar and long-�standing challenges for teachers who want to both
provide students with worthwhile texts and ensure that they understand and enjoy reading
these texts. The challenges of identifying and addressing the features that contribute to text
difficulty have become more pressing as schools begin to use the Common Core State Stan-
dards (CCSS; National Governors Association Center for Best Practices & Council of Chief State
School Officers, 2010) to shape their instruction. Indeed, the major focus of the CCSS is that over
their school careers, students encounter and become more proficient at reading increasingly
complex text.2
It is no exaggeration to say that issues related to text complexity will be a driving force in
education in the coming years. It will help determine not only the texts students read but also
the way teachers view and assess their accomplishments.

Objectives: After studying this chapter, you will be able to:

1. Explain what text complexity means.
2. Describe the rationale for the Common Core State Standards’ (CCSS’s) focus on text
complexity.
3. Explain the three overall approaches to determining text complexity.
4. Implement informed text choices by using a combination of the three approaches.

115
116 Hiebert

The Common Core State Standards Approach to Text Complexity

Since 1989, individual states have developed and mandated reading and English language arts
(ELA) standards that describe what students should know and do at particular grade levels.
These state standards specify grade-�level skills, strategies, and knowledge that students must
have to read with proficiency. Beyond the phrase “Â�grade-Â�level text,” however, they do not
specify the materials to which students should apply these skills, strategies, and knowledge.
The 2010 CCSS ELA standards take a different approach, placing equal emphasis on the
complexity of the texts students read and the proficiency with which they read them. Focusing
wholly on text complexity, CCSS standard 10 establishes a “staircase” of increasing comprehen-
sion proficiency defined for grade bands—Â�2–Â�3, 4–Â�5, 6–Â�8, 9–Â�10, and 11–Â�college and career ready
(CCR). As students move through each band, they are expected to “stretch” their proficiency
by reading (with scaffolding) increasingly complex texts keyed to that band.
The CCSS Initiative adopted this approach for several reasons, including the disparate
quality and content of standards that exist across states and the continuing lackluster perfor-
mance of American students on international reading/language arts assessments. However, it
was an ACT, Inc., report on the performance of high school seniors on college entrance exams
that provided the real impetus for an increased emphasis on text complexity. This report
showed that it was students’ ability to answer questions associated with complex texts and not
the difficulty of related comprehension questions that predicted their success in sophomore-�
level college courses. The report concluded that up to 48% of the high school graduating class
was ill-�prepared for the reading required in college courses.3
Also contributing to the CCSS Initiative’s focus on text complexity was a report from Meta-
Metrics, an educational measurement and research company. This company evaluates text
difficulty using a measure called a “Lexile,” which places a text on a scale of complexity as a
function of sentence length and word frequency/difficulty. (Lexiles are discussed in more detail
later in this chapter.) Analyzing school texts as well as workplace texts, Stenner, Koons, and
Swartz—Â�researchers at MetaMetrics—Â�found an approximate two-Â�grade gap between the texts
of the Grade 12 curriculum and the texts used in college and careers.4 This information was
used, along with information on student achievement in North Carolina analyzed by another
MetaMetrics researcher,5 to develop hypothetical paths, which, if followed, would lead to high
school seniors reading texts with complexity levels equivalent to those of college and careers.
The CCSS Initiative used one of MetaMetrics’s hypothetical paths to create the text-Â�complexity
staircase against which achievement of standard 10 is to be measured.
To accompany its standards, the CCSS include an appendix (Appendix B) that contains
lists of “exemplary texts” to illustrate the “level of complexity and quality that the Standards
require all students in a given grade band to engage with.”6 For each grade band, these lists
include stories, poetry, drama, informational texts specific to ELA, and informational texts
specific to content areas.

Determining Text Complexity

Numerous factors can contribute to text complexity. In general, these factors relate to the text
itself (e.g., its language, structure, and setting), the context in which it is read (e.g., as a class
assignment, independently), and the reader (e.g., Is the reader familiar with the subject? Does
she or he have the necessary vocabulary knowledge? Is she or he interested in or motivated
to read the text?). In addition, individual differences in reader characteristics as well as the
purposes, uses, and contexts of reading can mean that any given text varies considerably in its
comprehensibility, even for the same reader.7
To illustrate, consider again Their Eyes Were Watching God, which is one of the exemplar
texts within the CCSS for Grades 11–Â�CCR. The themes of this novel—Â�romance, individual and
community rituals, race relations, and women’s identity and sexuality—Â�may be universal and
Understanding the New Demands for Text Complexity 117

interesting to many readers, but the story’s knowl-

edge requirements (life in the early 20th-�century
rural American South), its sophisticated text struc-
ture (the moving back and forth between characters
and historical points), and its use of dialect and elab-
orate figurative language are likely to present chal-
lenges for many 21st-�century secondary students.
Similar to perspectives that researchers have
taken since the late 1930s,8 the CCSS Initiative
adopted an approach to determining text complexity
that incorporates dimensions of these varied factors
into three types of information to be considered in
measuring how easy or difficult a text is to read and
understand: quantitative, qualitative, and reader-�task
features.

Quantitative Information
Since 1923, various readability formulas have been
used in American schools to describe text difficulty.9
With few exceptions, these formulas establish read-
ability through the use of information on two fea-
tures: 1) the complexity of a text’s sentences and 2) the complexity of its vocabulary. Sentence
complexity is almost always measured in terms of the number of words in sentences. The mea-
surement of vocabulary complexity is a bit more varied. Some readability formulas, such as the
Dale-�Chall, compare the words in a text to those on a list of words that have been identified as
appropriate for different grade levels.10 Others count the number of syllables in words, the idea
being that the more syllables in a word, the harder it is.11
With the advent of the digital age, sentence complexity continues to be established through
number of words in sentences, but computer technology has made possible new ways of assess-
ing vocabulary. The Lexile framework, mentioned earlier, illustrates one of several digital read-
ability systems (others include Degrees of Reading Power [DRP] and Advantage/TASA Open
Standard [ATOS]).12 Within the Lexile system, words in text excerpts are compared to those
in a database that contains in excess of 135,000 unique words. A log of the mean frequency of
all the words in the text is used in a formula with the mean sentence length. The computation
produces a score that can be placed on a scale of text difficulty, which spans 0 (easiest texts) to
2000 (most complex texts). For example, the Lexile score for the well-�loved and award-�winning
book Julie of the Wolves is 860, whereas The Cat in the Hat has a Lexile of 260 and Great Expectations
is given a Lexile of 1200. These scores are consistent with a staircase of complexity that makes
sense to most educators: The Cat in the Hat is easy, Julie of the Wolves is somewhat harder, and
Great Expectations is highly complex.13
When an individual text is examined for purposes of instruction and independent reading,
however, particular features can mean the Lexile score is not sufficient to predict how well a
student may be able to read and understand it. For example, J.R.R. Tolkien’s The Return of the
King and Henry James’s Washington Square have the same Lexile score: 920. Whereas The Return
of the King is by no means a simple text, its subject and style likely make it more comprehensible
to a ninth grader than Washington Square.14
Scholars have long been aware of the problems with readability formulas.15 One such prob-
lem is that sentence length can influence readability level. Narratives (i.e., stories) often have
dialogue, and the sentences in dialogue are often short. Short sentences, however, do not nec-
essarily make a text easy to read. The presence of dialogue and typically shorter sentences in
118 Hiebert

narratives than in informational texts means that readability formulas such as Lexiles typically
underestimate the difficulty of a text.
Other problems with readability formulas relate to the ways in which vocabulary is com-
puted, which means that the difficulty of informational texts—Â�commonly containing special-
ized vocabulary—Â�is often overestimated. One reason that the writers of informational texts
typically repeat key words several times is because terms in social studies and science are
precise and most often do not have synonyms (e.g., photosynthesis). A readability formula, how-
ever, does not take into account that readers understand a word after they see it used several
times, and so it becomes “easier” to read. Indeed, the repetition of unique words can be an aid
to comprehension and vocabulary learning. Furthermore, the words in an informational text
usually relate to a theme or topic that also can make words easier for students to comprehend.

Qualitative Information
As a teacher, it’s important for you to bear in mind that readability formulas give an over-
all indication of the difficulty of a text relative to thousands of other texts. Once a book has
been identified as belonging to a specific grade span, your challenge begins: understanding the
demands of the book for a particular group of students.

Benchmark Texts
One way to establish whether texts are appropriate for particular students is to do a “compar-
ison” with a text that teachers generally agree represents the demands of a particular grade
level. These are often referred to as benchmark texts. The CCSS Initiative provides exemplar texts,
but these have not been validated either by teachers or through a variety of analyses, so at this
time they cannot be considered benchmark texts. Until such valid data are available to consult,
however, teachers can use their own experiences and work together—Â�in their schools, in their
districts, and through online teacher forums and discussion groups—Â�to create their own lists
of benchmark texts for different grade levels and student populations.

Qualitative Dimensions
The CCSS identified four qualitative dimensions that describe text features: 1) levels of meaning
or purpose, 2) structure, 3) language conventionality, and 4) knowledge demands. Table 8.1
provides a description of each of these dimensions along a continuum from simple to complex.
The use of dimensions such as those in Table 8.1 by human judges has a long history in
writing assessment.16 In addition to descriptions of the dimensions, teachers or raters who
evaluate students’ writing typically use existing compositions that have been selected to exem-
plify particular levels of maturity for a dimension. For example, a composition might show
a low level of language conventions but a high level of coherence around a particular theme.
The use of dimensions by raters of texts to determine their potential complexity for readers is
quite a different enterprise than evaluating student compositions. A novel such as Their Eyes
Were Watching God, consisting of 256 pages, is not necessarily uniform in the way in which a
dimension is expressed across the entire text. The first several chapters, where an author of a
novel typically develops setting, characters, and the precipitating issues, may present many
more challenges than subsequent chapters that build on this foundational knowledge. Applying
a qualitative rubric for the elementary grades where text typically does not exceed 100 pages
is quite a different enterprise than applying such systems for texts used in middle and high
school. After an exhaustive search of the models for qualitative analyses of text, Pearson and
Hiebert have suggested that text maps for different chapters of novels or different portions of
essays would be a better model than the rubrics and exemplar systems that have been used
extensively to evaluate students’ written compositions.17
Understanding the New Demands for Text Complexity 119

Table 8.1.â•… Qualitative dimensions of text complexity

Dimension Stage 1 Stage 3 Stage 5
Levels of meaning/purpose Single level of meaning More than one level of Multiple levels require draw-
(often supported by meaning (e.g., Great ing extensively on reading/
illustrations) Kapok Tree, where an experiences from other
individual’s choices relate sources
to the choices of many)
Aims/themes explicitly The inference of charac- Implicit purpose may be
stated ters’ motives and/or how hidden or obscure
features of context may
influence plot
Structure Texts follow structure of Texts include less common Traits specific to a content
common genres (e.g., genres (e.g., autobi- area discipline or use of
simple narrative, ography, cause-�effect unique chronologies/per-
enumerative expository) expository) spectives (literary)
Language conventions and Literal Figurative; some irony (e.g., Literary; high level of figura-
clarity Dahl) tive, metaphorical lan-
guage (e.g., Hemingway)
Knowledge demands Simple theme Complex ideas interwoven Interconnected theme
From Hiebert, E.H. (2012). The text complexity multi-index. Santa Cruz, CA: TextProject, Inc.; reprinted by permission.

Information About Readers and Tasks

According to the CCSS writers, the third dimension of measuring text complexity involves
teachers employing their professional judgment to match texts to particular students and tasks.
Among the reader variables identified by CCSS writers are cognitive capabilities (e.g., attention,
memory), motivation (e.g., interest in the content, self-�efficacy as a reader), and knowledge and
experiences (e.g., vocabulary, topic). Task-�related variables include type of reading (e.g., skim-
ming, studying) and the intended outcome (e.g., increased knowledge, solving a problem).18
According to the CCSS writers, assessments of readers and tasks “are best made by teach-
ers employing their professional judgment, experience, and knowledge of their students and
the subject.”19 That’s a lot of information for teachers to be processing, especially for beginning
teachers in secondary schools where they see dozens of students over the course of a day. And
further, whereas the specifics need to be identified by teachers, there are many answers from
research as to the ways of assessing aspects of readers and also tasks.
The best starting point for teachers is information from assessments as to the types of texts
that are accessible to particular students and those that challenge them. By middle school, all
but a very small percentage of American students can recognize the core vocabulary in text,
but many American students read slowly, jeopardizing comprehension.20 There’s a catch-Â�22,
as Keith Stanovich noted, in that students who read poorly read less and less in school and at
home, whereas students who read well read more and more in similar settings.21 As a result, the
poor readers become even poorer at reading relative to good readers who continue to improve
in their reading. Part of the challenge of the CCSS is to ensure that poorer readers receive appro-
priate material and are supported in taking responsibility for texts.
Teachers can also find fleshed-�out descriptions of the features of tasks that can influence
readers’ perseverance and success with tasks. Figure 8.1 illustrates three dimensions that have
been found to influence students’ reading: 1) the social configuration, 2) the form of response,
and 3) the allocation of time. Each dimension of a task does not lend itself to a scale where one
end represents “easy” and the other “difficult.” Rather, the critical component of these dimen-
sions is the degree to which students are asked to be independent in the reading task and the
level of open-�endedness there is both in the kinds of response that is required from reading
120 Hiebert

The reading space

Teacher led Peer Independent

Social configuration

Oral Oral Written Written

(comments) (assignments) (assignments) (comments)

Forms of response

Allocation of time

Fixed, short, Open ended

immediate (month-long
(e.g., tests) units)

Figure 8.1.â•… The reading space. (From Hiebert, E.H. [2012].

The text complexity multi-index. Santa Cruz, CA: TextProject, Inc.;
reprinted by permission.)

and in the time period that students have for the task. At one extreme, students are guided in
every act of reading with time prescribed and the teacher monitoring their every response. At
the other extreme, students are free to respond in whatever way they want to what they read
(or even not to respond at all) and with little guidance from their teacher and with few time
constraints. Neither of these extreme scenarios is typical of classroom life, where the features
of tasks shift from lesson to lesson.
The length of tasks also figures heavily into students’ success as readers. Teachers need
to be aware of how the amount that students are asked to read influences their perseverance
in reading and their ability to remember and reflect on ideas in texts. I return to the topic of
stamina later in the chapter since many middle and high school students may not have spent
considerable time reading on their own in previous grades.

The Common Core State Standards and

the Contexts of American Secondary Schools
The CCSS’s three-Â�part approach to addressing text complexity fits with what we know from
research and experiences about texts and readers. Even though the approach is sound, there are
several aspects of current American secondary schools that it does not take into consideration.

Student Disengagement
The vehicles that have served to move the world into the digital age (the personal computer,
the Internet, Google, YouTube, Facebook, smartphones, Twitter) have made most of the knowl-
edge amassed by human beings over centuries available 24/7—Â�a library that never closes. The
commodity of the 21st century is knowledge.22 Those with knowledge have opportunities; those
without are limited in their prospects. Schools are the places best suited to help students take
advantage of these opportunities. Yet if one adjective were to describe American adolescents’
views of their learning experiences in schools, it would be “disengaged.”
A 2013 poll of students by the Gallup organization has confirmed what common sense
tells us: Being engaged and interested in school promotes student achievement and retention.23
However, data from this poll show that student engagement in school dropped dramatically
from elementary school (8 of 10 students described themselves as engaged) to middle school
Understanding the New Demands for Text Complexity 121

(6 in 10) to high school (4 in 10). Add to these findings those from international student com-
parisons, which indicate that, by fourth grade, American students rank among the lowest (if
not the lowest, depending on the nature of the analysis) of students in developed countries in
their interest in reading.24
The levels of disengagement of American students in their schooling are not addressed in
the CCSS. Furthermore, the CCSS contain at least two potential sources of even greater disen-
gagement: CCSS-�recommended texts and the CCSS staircase of text complexity.

Common Core State Standards–Â�Recommended Texts

The CCSS in general and the Appendix B exemplars in particular contain a strong emphasis on
literary classics. Indeed, the average publication year of the exemplary texts for Grades 6–Â�12 is
1895, with a median date of 1915. Among the texts mentioned in the CCSS themselves (but not
in Appendix B) for Grades 6–Â�12, a single text has a copyright later than 1997 (The Namesake, by
Jhumpa Lahiri). Drawing attention to the average publication date of the exemplars should not
be equated with a dismissal of literature within the Western canon. Attention to the classics is
appropriate, but when recommendations favor 19th-�century and early 20th-�century literature,
texts relating to the experiences of some groups (e.g., women, immigrant groups such as His-
panics and Asians) will be underrepresented, if they appear all, giving students fewer chances
to see themselves in the literature they read.
Although the CCSS writers maintain that the exemplars are suggestive (and Appendix B
has not been adopted by most states), some states and districts are treating them as a mandated
curriculum. If the exemplars are, indeed, required, it is the first instance of a mandated reading
canon in the American ELA curriculum.

The Common Core State Standards Staircase of Text Complexity

A second potential source of student disengagement raised by the CCSS comes from standard
10’s charge that students encounter increasingly complex texts over a grade band and over a
school career. The CCSS suggest that, when students are challenged by their texts, they are more
likely to respond with higher reading levels. But what about the students for whom existing
texts are challenging? Studies show that approximately 40% of our student population strug-
gle to comprehend what they read.25 A report in 2011 by the Annie E. Casey Foundation finds
that students who are unable to read on grade level by third grade are four times less likely to
graduate than are students who had reached that level.26
Of course, a significant portion of American students receives challenging texts from the
get-�go. Contrary to the view of the CCSS, studies published in 2013 show that texts for Grades
K–Â�3 have not been “dumbed down”; rather, the difficulty levels have increased since the push
for improved early reading instruction prompted by the No Child Left Behind (PL 107-�110)
legislation.27 This pattern, however, does not hold at the secondary school level. Beginning in
middle school, there is a steady leveling off in the difficulty of texts.28
However, the solution does not lie simply in giving middle and high school students “more
complex” text as proposed by the CCSS Initiative. When these levels are tied to high school
graduation, it may be that we can anticipate even higher dropout rates.

Expanded Student Reading Experiences

Another issue that the CCSS do not address is the amount of reading in which students engage
on their own. Students may be doing more out-Â�of-Â�school reading than they get credit for—Â�
primarily various forms of online reading. It’s safe to say, however, that on their own, students
are not reading enough of the conventional genres (especially those dominant in the CCSS’s
recommended lists) to be facile with complex texts.29 The CCSS say nothing about the need for
122 Hiebert

students to have substantial experiences with such texts so as to lay the foundation for succeed-
ing in increasing complex reading tasks. They indicate no recognition of a phenomenon that
has been popularized in books such as Malcolm Gladwell’s Outliers: Expertise in complex tasks
reflects substantial involvement with the task, including deliberate practice in which learners
are guided in attending to new tasks and/or existing tasks that either have not been mastered
or become progressively more complex.30

Stamina
Building stamina is another issue the CCSS do not address. A colleague and I became interested
in why California students did remarkably well on the state’s reading proficiency examinations
but not on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP).31 Our findings disputed
the typical response that the California tests were uncomplicated or, in the language of the CCSS,
“dumbed down.” The texts on California assessments were, on average, more difficult than
those on the NAEP. In one way, though, the California texts were “easier”: They were approxi-
mately 50% shorter than those on the NAEP at Grade 4 and at Grade 8. This phenomenon can be
described as one of stamina.32 Without opportunities to read extensively in their classrooms, many
students have not developed the necessary stamina to read a lengthy passage on an assessment.
It would seem that by high school, students should have the kind of stamina that allows
them to read for an hour at a time. A single text may not take an hour to read, but tasks that
require students to use information from several passages likely require that kind of attention.
In a pilot test by one of the two consortium building tests to assess attainment of CCSS goals,
Kentucky high school students’ performances were less discrepant from those of elementary
and middle grade students taking the state proficiency examinations the previous year (13%
for high school; 23% for middle school; 28% for elementary school).33 This pattern could sug-
gest that high school students have stamina, which matches the task of the assessments. Ken-
tucky’s high school dropout rate of 22% provides an alternative explanation: Students for whom
stamina is an issue were no longer attending high school. Clearly, stamina is a feature that needs
to be considered in the drive to increase text complexity.

Ways to Support Students in Reaching

the Common Core State Standards Goals
The answer to the question of which came first—Â�a dumbed-Â�down curriculum or disengaged
students—Â�can’t be answered here. The question that can be addressed is this: What can we do
to help our students become more engaged with learning and more likely—Â�and better pre-
pared—Â�to read extended and complex texts? One place to begin is by looking at what is now
working in schools. The pedagogical literature and online communities are replete with ways
in which secondary teachers are transforming the learning experiences of their students.34 From
these reports and the work of researchers, several important considerations emerge.

Provide Reading Purposes and Choices

Although the amount of reading students do is crucial to increasing reading proficiency, true
expertise will not happen without their active participation in reading tasks. Put another way,
simply assigning students more reading isn’t enough to prepare them to meet the CCSS goals.
For students to read more and to take on more difficult reading tasks requires motivational sup-
port. This support can take the form of such simple strategies as the following:
• Giving students more reading choices: The choices do not have to be significant—Â�how long to
read, which selections in a unit to read, how to respond to the reading—Â�to get students more
actively involved in their learning.35
Understanding the New Demands for Text Complexity 123

• Ensuring that reading has a purpose: Instruction organized around big, meaningful, clear ques-
tions can be highly motivational and allows students to follow personal interests.36
• Giving opportunities for students to expand knowledge through writing: In secondary schools—Â�
especially when the content becomes more abstract—Â�opportunities for students to express
what they know through writing are crucial. Writing is how they make information their
own. Writing can take many forms, depending on the subject area and purpose. Journals,
essays, stories, and poetry are frequently used in English and social studies classes. Record-
ing ideas and observations in notebooks and preparing reports are often part of the science
curriculum.
• Communicating with others in different contexts: Allowing students to share what they are learn-
ing with others is a great way to increase engagement. A unit on the theme of conservation,
for example, can allow students to present what they are learning in talks to other classes or
in appeals to community organizations for increased recycling. Another approach that can
increase engagement is working with younger students. Students can, for example, use their
readings about a theme to write simpler texts for younger students, or they might share their
reading with another student.

Create a Context for Information

A productive and straightforward way to provide more extensive reading experiences for stu-
dents (and increase prior knowledge) is to expand the curriculum by including more materials
of the kind students often read on their own, such as magazine articles and online articles and
blogs. Teachers can expand and enhance textbook selections considerably by making available
articles tied to the same themes or topics. For example, if students are reading a story by Jack
London, they can read articles about different aspects of London’s Alaska—Â�gold mining, life
in frontier towns, traveling by dog sled. If they are reading an essay by Henry David Thoreau,
they can also read current blogs that relate to Thoreau and his ideas and times. In Thoreau’s
day, there were few essayists. Today, thanks to the web, there are thousands. These sites offer
access to articles that can give many insights into human perseverance and commitment. When
students read an informational selection about how engineers and scientists use technology
to solve problems, they can also read a range of articles that extend the idea. For example, the
articles “Hot Technology”37 and “Cool Jobs: Wide World of Robots”38 provide current and very
readable illustrations of how engineers solve immediate and compelling problems.39 These two
articles are from one source that provides free materials on various science and technology
topics. (Other sources for free materials are provided in the reference list.) Some sources, such
as EBSCO Information Services, require subscriptions but offer thousands upon thousands of
articles, documents, and e-�books. An investment of a few dollars for such a subscription will reap
numerous benefits. For teachers in the humanities and social sciences, http://www.docsteach.org
contains numerous relevant resources for lessons on a host of topics (e.g., letters from young
adolescents to Eleanor Roosevelt during the Great Depression).

Provide Opportunities to Develop Expertise and Engagement

Teachers need to have their own interests and areas of expertise and be willing to share them
with their students—Â�to show a passion for one’s own subject. A history teacher might lead
students through a review of articles, essays, and chapter selections to show how historians
integrate and use resources to support a position and illustrate their perspective. For example,
a teacher whose passion is World War II and uses this passion to describe the books by Ben
Macintyre can do much to increase her or his students’ interest in history and prompt them to
read and learn more on their own.
Teachers also need to scaffold ways of developing areas of expertise for their students.
Apprenticeships, guest speakers, videos, role-Â�playing—Â�these can all support the effort.
124 Hiebert

Summary
As teachers know well, matching students to appropriate texts is an essential part of instruc-
tion. By ensuring that students have many opportunities to read texts that stretch their reading
capabilities and interests yet do not frustrate them, teachers can help students become more
engaged in their learning as well as more proficient as readers. The CCSS, even with the limita-
tions noted, have worked to raise teachers’ awareness of the various dimensions of texts that
make them either easy or difficult for students to understand, and they have provided teachers
with valuable information about how to analyze levels of difficulty. These are important steps
toward improving instruction and bringing it more in line with the needs and requirements of
the 21st century.

Application Assignments
In-�Class Assignments
1. Bring to class two texts that are typically required reading for students in Grades 6–Â�12 in
your content area. Before class, determine the Lexile level of each text.
2. During class, discuss in a small group how you would determine the complexity of the
texts. Do the Lexile levels truly indicate the complexity of the texts? Why or why not?
Would you recommend these texts to your students? What kind of scaffolding support
might students require to be able to read the texts independently?
3. Be prepared to discuss your conclusions with the class.

Tutoring Assignments
1. With the student you are tutoring, discuss a book he or she is reading. Determine what
is challenging about the text for your student and why your student enjoys or does not
enjoy the book. Ask your student to read a few paragraphs from the book and note the stu-
dent’s fluency. Discuss that portion of the text to determine the student’s understanding.
2. Write a one-�to two-�page paper describing this activity with your student. Is your student
prepared to read complex text? If your student is in high school, is he or she likely to be
successful reading college-�level material? List four to five areas in which your student
needs additional support and recommend teaching and learning activities for each.

Homework Assignments
1. Read the ACT, Inc., report mentioned at the beginning of the chapter.
2. Review the text exemplars for a grade level of your choice (9–Â�12) provided in Appendix
B of the CCSS (http://www.corestandards.org/assets/Appendix_B.pdf).
3. Write a two-� to three-�page paper discussing 1) the reasons for the poor performance of
so many high school graduates, 2) the recommendations of the ACT, and 3) how these
concerns are being addressed by the CCSS. Include specific evidence and examples from
the texts.

Endnotes
1. Brontë (1897), chap. 22. 5. Williamson (2008).
2. NGA Center for Best Practices & CCSSO (2010), Appen- 6. NGA Center for Best Practices & CCSSO (2010), Appen-
dix A. dix B, p. 2.
3. ACT, Inc. (2006). 7. Snow (2002).
4. Stenner, Koons, & Swartz (2010). 8. Gray & Leary (1935).
Understanding the New Demands for Text Complexity 125
9. Klare (1984).
10. Dale & Chall (1948).
11. Fry (1968).
12. Koslin, Zeno, & Koslin (1987); Milone (2009).
13. Dr. Seuss (1957); George & Schoenherr (1972); Dickens
(1861).
1 4. Tolkien (1955); James (1880).
15. Gray & Leary (1935).
16. DiPardo, Storms, & Selland (2011).
17. Pearson & Hiebert (in press).
18. NGA Center for Best Practices & CCSSO (2010), Appen-
dix A.
19. NGA Center for Best Practices & CCSSO (2010), Appen-
dix B, p. 4.
2 0. Dewey, Kaminski, & Good (n.d.).
21. Stanovich (1986).
22. Kahin & Foray (2006).
23. Busteed (2013, January 7).
References
ACT, Inc. (2006). Reading between the lines: What the ACT
reveals about college readiness in reading. Iowa City: Author.
Retrieved from http://www.act.org/research/policymakers/
pdf/reading_report.pdf
Brontë, C. (1897). Jane Eyre, An autobiography (The Project
Gutenberg eBook). Retrieved from http://www.gutenberg
.org/files/1260/1260-�h/1260-�h.htm
Burke, J. (2005). ACCESSing school: Teaching struggling readers
to achieve academic and personal success. Portsmouth, NH:
Heinemann.
Busteed, B. (2013, January 7). The school cliff: Student
engagement drops with each school year. The Gallup Blog.
Retrieved from http://thegallupblog.gallup.com/2013/01/
the-school-cliff-student-engagement.html
Calfee, R.C., & Hiebert, E.H. (2011, July). Using cohort analyses
to examine long-�term effects of reading initiatives in California.
Poster presentation at the annual meeting of the Society for
the Scientific Study of Reading, Montreal, Quebec.
Dale, E., & Chall, J. (1948). A formula for predicting readabil-
ity. Educational Research Bulletin, 27, 11–Â�20, 28.
Dewey, E.N., Kaminski, R.A., & Good, R.H., III. (n.d.). 2011–Â�
2012 DIBELSnet system-�wide percentile ranks for DIBELS next.
Eugene, OR: Dynamic Measurement Group. Retrieved
from http://dibels.org/papers/DIBELSnetPercentile
Ranks2011-�2012.pdf
Dickens, C. (1861). Great expectations. London: Chapman and
Hall.
DiPardo, A., Storms, B.A., & Selland, M. (2011). Seeing
voices: Assessing writerly stance in the NWP Analytic
Writing Continuum. Assessing Writing, 16(3), 170–Â�188.
Dr. Seuss [Geisel, T., pseud.]. (1957). The cat in the hat. Boston,
MA: Houghton Mifflin.
Fry, E.B. (1968). A readability formula that saves time. Journal
of Reading, 21(3), 513–Â�516, 575.
Gallagher, K. (2011). Write like this: Teaching real-� world
writing through modeling and mentor texts. Portland, ME:
Stenhouse.
Gamson, D.A., Lu, X., & Eckert, S.A. (2013). Challenging the
research base of the Common Core State Standards: A his-
torical reanalysis of text complexity. Educational Researcher,
42(7), 381–Â�391.
24. Mullis, Martin, Gonzalez, & Kennedy (2003); Twist,
Gnaldi, Schagen, & Morrison (2004).
25. National Assessment of Educational Progress (2011).
26. Hernandez (2011).
27. Hiebert & Mesmer (2013); Gamson, Lu, & Eckert (2013).
28. Stenner, Koons, & Swartz (2010).
29. McCulley, Swanson, & Vaughn (2012, February).
30. Gladwell (2008).
31. Calfee & Hiebert (2011, July).
32. Hiebert, Wilson, & Trainin (2010).
33. Ujifusa (2012, November).
34. Burke (2005); Gallagher (2011).
35. Swan, Coddington, & Guthrie (2010).
36. Burke (2005).
37. Omes (2012).
38. Kwok (2012).
39. Omes (2012, July 29); Kwok (2012, May 9).
George, J.C., & Schoenherr, J. (1972). Julie of the wolves. New
York, NY: HarperCollins.
Gladwell, M. (2008). Outliers: The story of success. New York,
NY: Little, Brown.
Gray, W.S., & Leary, B.W. (1935). What makes a book readable.
Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Hernandez, D.J. (2011). Double jeopardy: How poverty & third
grade reading skills influence high school graduation. Balti-
more: Annie E. Casey Foundation.
Hiebert, E.H. (2008). The (mis)match between texts and students
who depend on schools to become literate. In E.H. Hiebert &
M. Sailors (Eds.), Finding the right texts for beginning and
struggling readers: Research-Â�based solutions (pp. 1–Â�21). New
York, NY: Guilford.
Hiebert, E.H. (2012). The text complexity multi-index. Santa
Cruz, CA: TextProject, Inc. Retrieved from http://text
project.org/professional-development/text-matters/
the-text-complexity-multi-index
Hiebert, E.H., & Mesmer, H.A. (2013). Upping the ante of
text complexity in the Common Core State Standards:
Examining its potential impact on young readers. Educa-
tional Researcher, 42(1), 44–Â�51.
Hiebert, E.H., Wilson, K.M., & Trainin, G. (2010). Are stu-
dents really reading in independent reading contexts? An
examination of comprehension-�based silent reading rate. In
E.H. Hiebert & D. Ray Reutzel (Eds.), Revisiting silent read-
ing: New directions for teachers and researchers (pp. 151–Â�167).
Newark, DE: International Reading Association (IRA).
James, H. (1880). Washington square. New York, NY: Harper
& Brothers.
Kahin, B., & Foray, D. (Eds.). (2006). Advancing knowledge and
the knowledge economy. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Klare, G. (1984). Readability. In P.D. Pearson, R. Barr, M.L.
Kamil, & P. Mosenthal (Eds.), Handbook of reading research
(pp. 681–Â�744). New York, NY: Longman.
Koslin, B.L., Zeno, S., & Koslin, S. (1987). The DRP: An effec-
tive measure in reading. New York, NY: College Entrance
Examination Board.
Kwok, R. (2012, May 9). Cool jobs: Wide world of robots.
Society for Science & the Public. Retrieved from€http://www
.sciencenewsforkids.org/2012/05/wide-world-of-robots
126 Hiebert
McCulley, L., Swanson, E., & Vaughn, S. (2012, February).
Text reading in secondary English language arts and social stud-
ies classes. Poster presentation at the meeting of the Pacific
Coast Research Council, Coronado, CA.
Milone, M. (2009). The development of ATOS: The Renaissance
readability formula. Wisconsin Rapids, WI: Renaissance
Learning.
Mullis, I.V.S., Martin, M.O., Gonzalez, E.J., & Kennedy, A.M.
(2003). PIRLS 2001 international report: IEA’s study of reading
literacy achievement in primary schools. Chestnut Hill, MA:
Boston College.
National Assessment of Educational Progress. (2011). The
nation’s report card 2011: Reading (Grades 4 and 8). Washing-
ton, DC: Institute of Education Sciences & National Center
for Education Statistics.
National Governors Association (NGA) Center for Best Prac-
tices & Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO).
(2010). Common Core State Standards for English language arts
& literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects
with Appendices A–Â�C. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved
from http://www.corestandards.org/the-�standards
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, PL 107-�110, 115 Stat. 1425,
20 U.S.C. §§ 6301 et seq.
Omes, S. (2012, July 29). Hot technology. Retrieved from
http://www.sciencenewsforkids.org/2012/07/a-�new-�device
-�harvests-�energy-�that-�would-�otherwise-�go-�wasted
Pearson, P.D., & Hiebert, E.H. (in press). The state of the field:
Qualitative analyses of text complexity. Elementary School
Journal.
Snow, C. (2002). Reading for understanding: Toward an R & D
program in reading comprehension. Santa Monica, CA:
Rand.
Stanovich, K.E. (1986). Matthew effects in reading: Some con-
sequences of individual differences in the acquisition of
literacy. Reading Research Quarterly, 21, 360–Â�406.
Stenner, A.J., Koons, H., & Swartz, C.W. (2010). Text com-
plexity and developing expertise in reading. Durham, NC:
MetaMetrics.
Swan, E.A., Coddington, C.S., & Guthrie, J.T. (2010). Engaged
silent reading. In E.H. Hiebert & D.R. Reutzel (Eds.), Revis-
iting silent reading: New directions for teachers and researchers
(pp. 95–Â�111). Newark, DE: IRA.
Tolkien, J.R.R. (1955). The return of the king. London, England:
George Allen & Unwin.
Twist, L., Gnaldi, M., Schagen, I., & Morrison, J. (2004). Good
readers but at a cost? Attitudes to reading in England. Jour-
nal of Research in Reading, 27, 387–Â�400.
Ujifusa, A. (2012, November). KY road-�tests Common Core.
Education Week, 32(11), 1.
Williamson, G.L. (2008). A text readability continuum for
postsecondary readiness. Journal of Advanced Academics,
19, 602–Â�632.
 9
The What and Why of Disciplinary Literacy
Cynthia Shanahan and Timothy Shanahan

Classroom Scenario
During the first days of the new school year, JoHanna presented her students with a question:
“What is history?” They thought about it, wrote answers, and then were invited to explore
the concept further over the next several days as they tried to answer another question: “Did
Columbus’s ‘discovery’ of the New World result in contact, implying an exchange between
cultures, or conflict, implying a one-Â�sided relationship that benefited only the Europeans?” In
pursuit of information to help answer this question, students read texts from historians Howard
Zinn and Henry Belk. These authors both relied on primary source evidence provided by a priest
living after the time of Columbus. That priest claimed the native peoples were victims of Euro-
pean cruelty and exploitation, but Zinn featured the priest’s writing as the main source of his
argument, and Belk used it as one of several sources as a small part of a larger discussion of
the Columbian Exchange.

Objectives: After studying this chapter, you will be able to:

1. Discuss the features of disciplinary literacy and how it differs from “content area
literacy.”
2. Explain what is meant by providing your students with an “apprenticeship into the
practice of the disciplines.”
3. Apply instructional approaches that support students in comprehending complex
texts written in the disciplines.
4. Identify the unique aspects of reading in your discipline and strategies to scaffold
students in reading complex texts you assign.

This chapter was written in part using insights gained from Project READI history team and the broader READI
group. Special thanks go to Johanna Heppler whose history lesson was described in the scenario. Members of the history
team include Michael Bolz, Gayle Cribb, Susan Goldman, MariAnne George, Gina Hale, Johanna Heppler, Jodi Hoard,
Michael Manderino, Jackie Popp, Diane Puklin, and the authors. Project or the U.S. Department of Education. READI
(Reading, Evidence, Argumentation in Disciplinary Instruction) is a multi-�institution collaboration to improve complex
comprehension of multiple forms of text in literature, history, and science. It is supported by the Institute of Education
Sciences, U.S. Department of Education, through Grant R305F100007 to University of Illinois of Chicago. The opinions
expressed are those of the authors and do not represent views of the Institute or the U.S. Department of Education.
127
128 Shanahan and Shanahan

In the previous example, a high school history teacher focused on the idea that historians use
evidence to construct a written narrative of history and that what they write is, indeed, an
interpretation of evidence rather than a chronicling of facts. Zinn used the evidence to support
his argument that Columbus’s discovery led to conflict and abuse of the native peoples by the
Europeans, whereas Belk used it to support his claim of contact between civilizations. Their
historical accounts were constructed to emphasize those points. If the students had read only
the Zinn account or only the Belk account, they likely would have thought they were reading
the truth rather than an interpretation. Reading these two historians’ accounts together, how-
ever, allowed them to come to a very different understanding: Historians disagree. And if they
disagree, then historical accounts can be contested—Â�they are not the “truth.” This realization
is a fundamental epistemological construct in history. Even in writing historical accounts—Â�
narratives about what happened—Â�historians are both selecting and ignoring evidence, weigh-
ing the evidence in conflicting accounts, making judgments about the way events are related
(e.g., cause-�effect, contingent, coincidental), and making an argument about the past. Once this
idea is grasped, then students can no longer be merely passive readers of historical facts to be
memorized. They will start to appreciate the need to know who is doing the writing, when and
under what circumstances it is written, what evidence is being used, why it is being used, and
to what end it is being used. The task in history learning reflected in the previous lesson, to
read historical narratives as arguments, is much different from the task of learning the “facts”
of history posed in many history classes. Yet this way of reading history mimics some of the
discourse practices used by historians to practice their craft.
This biology lesson aims to help students understand not only the science involved in diges-
tion but also several key concepts that guide the work of scientists. One of these concepts is that
it matters when an explanation of science was written. In 1825, scientists didn’t have the scientific
measurement tools needed to fully understand a scientific process like digestion. The first text,
then, provided “theories” or “hypotheses” based mainly on somewhat primitive observations
and logic. However, medical research requires a systematic analysis of data, and such data are
costly to obtain; as such, organizations like the National Institutes of Health and the National
Science Foundation were established to support more ambitious programs of research into such
topics. What this means is that our understanding of a phenomenon is likely to change over time
as the observations improve in depth and accuracy of measurement. Looking at the differences
in the conclusions drawn and the changing methodology that scientists use to generate evidence
to support such conclusions can be an eye-�opening experience for students.
This lesson reveals that scientific findings depend on evidence that supports and shapes
scientific theories and that this evidence needs to be collected in systematic ways, according
to established scientific methods of experimentation and observation. The linking of theory,
evidence, and research method was obvious in the 2010 article on digestion, but the textbook
mainly emphasized the findings. This contrast allowed the teacher to emphasize that textbooks
are compendiums of the knowledge about which scientists are in general agreement at a given

Dawn began her science class with a question: “When a human organism digests
food, what happens to it?” She had the class read an excerpt from a text on digestion
from 1825 and another excerpt from a text written in 2010. She asked students to
read the two explanations to determine what each was saying about digestion and to
consider the kind of evidence used. Later, she had students read a textbook passage
on the topic. Students’ purposes for reading were threefold: 1) to compare the text-
book explanation with the other texts; 2) to compare the two other texts; and 3) to
learn the science involved in digestion.
The What and Why of Disciplinary Literacy 129

time but that such materials do not provide a very deep consideration of how we know these
things or the scientific disagreements about them.
All three of the text excerpts had one common element: They all included diagrams show-
ing the processes involved in digestion, and readers needed to understand both the prose and
the diagrams to fully grasp the explanations provided in the texts. Graphic elements of this
type are a hallmark of scientific communication. Readers must learn to examine both the prose
and the graphics, considering the nature of the relationship among these forms of information
and what each is contributing to the scientific descriptions. Thus the graphic could simply be
a repetition of the stated information but in different form, it could be an example of what is
stated, it could extend the discourse by providing additional information, or it could even be
somewhat contradictory of the stated information.
Disciplinary literacy refers to the reading and writing practices used within the disciplines
(e.g., science, mathematics, history, literature) to create, communicate, and evaluate the ideas
of the discipline. Such literacy practices take into account the discourse traditions and ethics of
the various areas of academic study.
The term disciplinary literacy is relatively new in education and is often used and misused
in discussions of how literacy instruction should proceed with adolescents in middle school and
high school classrooms. However, before discussing its definition in depth, we will lay out an
argument for why it is needed. Although some educators do not believe any literacy instruction
should be provided beyond the elementary grades, most seem to accept the need for such teach-
ing. However, acknowledging the value of literacy teaching for older students and accepting that
this instruction should emphasize “reading like a historian or a scientist” are not the same thing.
Such educators believe that secondary literacy teaching should aim mainly to help students gain
ready access to the information available in textbooks and to learn this information; in other
words, they want students to learn to be good students. As such, they reject the idea that students
should be apprenticed into the uses of literacy that are central to the conduct of the disciplines.
They may dismiss disciplinary literacy with the claim that “these students aren’t going to be sci-
entists or historians, they just need to know how to be consumers of such information.”
So why disciplinary literacy? First, current approaches have not been particularly effective.
The National Assessment of Educational Progress has shown that the reading levels of middle
school students have been stagnant since 1971, whereas high school reading performance has
actually declined.1 In addition, 42% of college students now require remedial support in read-
ing, writing, and/or mathematics.2 To reverse these negative trends, money has been poured
into TRIO programs (programs that combine academic and social support, advising, informa-
tion about college, and other elements to encourage high school students to enroll in and suc-
ceed in college), small high schools, and early assessment and remediation programs for junior
and senior year. The evidence for the effectiveness any of these programs is mixed, negative,
or only marginally successful.3
There are several possible reasons why such programs have been unsuccessful. One reason
could be that students rarely engage in the reading of complex texts in their high school class-
rooms. Teachers often tell us that their students are unable or unwilling to read the texts in their
classes. Because teachers are responsible for teaching the course content anyway, whether or not
the students read, teachers often reduce or eliminate reading, providing instruction through
methods such as teacher explanation and discussion and the use of nonprose materials such as
photographs, hands-�on science demonstrations, or videos. If they do use texts, they often read
them to the students and/or have only the good readers read them aloud to the others. Students
simply do not do much reading in secondary classrooms, yet an ACT study concluded that such
reading experience was the best predictor of college success.4
The usual response from the literacy community to these problems has been the recom-
mendation of content area reading strategies—Â�that is, the teaching of general reading and stud-
ies skills that can be applied in any subject area (e.g., KWL, SQ3R).5 Over the years, reading
educators and researchers have created and studied a myriad of such strategies, and research
130 Shanahan and Shanahan

has shown that they can be effective in improving learning.6 Their practical use in middle
and high school classrooms has been somewhat less impressive, however. Studies show that
whereas strategies are effective for special education or remedial students, they may be less
effective for more proficient readers. Our hypothesis is that these strategies help poor readers
to stay focused on thinking about texts, but students who already try to understand what they
read reap little benefit from this. Thus content area strategies are of varied value across the
students in a typical classroom.
It is also evident that subject matter teachers have been wary of teaching such reading
strategies.7 These strategies do not emanate from their subject matter specializations, and in a
tight-�packed curriculum, they seem easy to jettison. The strategies often do not appear to fit
well with what they need to teach. Teachers tell us, too, that we reading professionals do not
understand their subject matter very well and try to fit strategies into content when it doesn’t
make sense. They also tell us (and show us) that they resent being told how to teach by someone
who is not in their field of study.
In our Carnegie study of expert reading in history, chemistry, and mathematics, we tried
to convince chemists and chemistry teachers to use some of these well-�known strategies.8 Each
time we showed them a strategy, they politely said that they “might” use it—Â�at least they might
devote a single class period to teach it—Â�but they wondered why English teachers couldn’t do
that instead of them. It wasn’t until we created a summarization strategy specific to the nature
of chemistry that we saw any enthusiasm. They agreed that, if they used that kind of strategy,
they’d “be teaching chemistry.” In other words, it wasn’t until we listened to what they were
telling us about their subject matter—Â�the structure of chemistry—Â�and stopped imposing general
reading approaches to their specific content that we saw strategies adopted in their classrooms.
Even when teachers do attempt to teach general reading strategies, students often choose
not to use them once they are no longer required to. Research evidence for transfer of strategy
use to new contexts is hard to find.9 One of us, previously a college developmental reading
teacher who taught students content area reading strategies, commonly observed that the stu-
dents in her classes didn’t use the strategies in their regular courses unless she assigned it and
asked them to bring in proof to receive their grade. Students would often implement strategies
in a nonthoughtful way, going through the motions but not putting the thought or effort into
applying strategies in a way that would be helpful. For instance, students were directed to make
concept cards to use when studying for an exam. But some students just copied text information
from the text without really trying to understand it. Others tried to do the right thing but chose
the wrong information or put too much or too little information on the cards, even after mod-
eling, group and independent practice, and feedback; in none of these cases was the use of the
cards for studying beneficial. It seems obvious that what we have been doing is not working very
well, and that is why educators are starting to turn to disciplinary literacy as a potential solution.

Disciplinary Literacy
It is surprising to many when we say that disciplinary literacy is not content area reading.
Although disciplinary literacy may seem like content area reading in that it is an approach for
teaching students to comprehend and think critically about the ideas in subject matter texts,
disciplinary literacy differs from content area reading in a number of ways:
Difference 1: The Texts In content area reading, it is the similarities among texts across the
disciplines that are emphasized. That is, all content texts are assumed to present similar com-
prehension challenges to students in terms of vocabulary demands, text structures, the need
to determine main ideas and key details, and so forth. Given that all the texts are so similar, all
the strategies recommended to readers are the same.
In disciplinary literacy, it is the differences among texts in the various disciplines that are
emphasized. The language and presentation approach used in history texts is different from
those evident in mathematics texts, which in turn differ from those in literature or science
The What and Why of Disciplinary Literacy 131

texts. For example, historians rely on primary documents (e.g., treaties, newspaper articles,
firsthand accounts such as interviews), artifacts (e.g., photographs, paintings, tools), and sec-
ondary accounts written by other historians. When they write, they typically write historical
accounts—Â�narratives that depict their version of what happened in the past in chronological
order—Â�writing from a particular perspective, starting the story at a particular time, including
and excluding certain parts of the story, making claims about the relationship of one event to
another (such as cause and effect), and discussing historical actors’ motivations, goals, and tac-
tics. In secondary sources such as books for the popular press, historians may cite the evidence
that they used to create their version of events, but in textbooks, they may not. Sometimes
historians write historical arguments, with identifiable claims, warrants, evidence, and coun-
terclaims, especially when they are attempting to refute someone else’s version of events. For
example, historians argue about whether or not Abraham Lincoln was our greatest president, a
racist, gay, and so forth. They assert one position, provide evidence to back that up that position,
and attack the evidence that other historians have mounted.
Often in textbooks, historians will move between an argument structure and a narrative
one. They may tell what happened chronologically before World War I and then switch to an
argument mode (“There were three reasons why World War I started when it did”) or move
from their argument mode to a chronological account that lays out the progression of events
in relation to each reason. Textbook writers can make an overarching structure chronological
but within that overarching structure discuss particular historical frameworks such as political,
social, artistic, economic, or religious aspects of an era. At other times, textbook writers will make
the overarching structure the framework elements, and within each section, they will proceed
chronologically. A section on the “Art of the Roaring Twenties” may march forward from 1920 to
1930, but that section may be followed by one on “Politics in the Roaring Twenties” that provides
a more conceptual presentation, dealing with a series of issues such as prohibition, economic pol-
icies, and corruption. These structures of history texts are not likely to be understood by students
unless they are taught, and they will not be learned from immersion in literature or science texts.
Scientists rely on different types of texts than historians—Â�for example, lab reports, scientific
articles reporting experiments and observations, and trade journals. They may write proposals
for funding, write scientific explanations, and describe science experiments and observations
for lay audiences (e.g., Omni magazine) or scientific ones (e.g., Nature journal). The structure of
scientific writing usually follows a fairly strict formula. For instance, an article in Nature begins
with an abstract written for a general scientific audience, then proceeds with an introduction
and literature review, and then discusses methodology, results, conclusions, and implications.
Scientists usually write scientific explanations and scientific arguments, and they rely on evi-
dence from objective observations of phenomena using scientific methodology.
A scientific explanation describes a process or a set of observed phenomena. It is the most
common type of the writing found in science textbooks, which are crammed full of the most
widely accepted explanations of scientific processes existing at the time of the writing. An
argument makes a case for a particular claim, just as in history, but the evidence consists of
experimental or observational findings rather than artifacts and documents. Whereas historians
weigh accounts on the basis of potential bias because they understand that bias is the norm in
historical documents and account, scientists work to eliminate bias from the onset of an inves-
tigation through a careful reliance on scientific methods; that is, they try to eliminate alterna-
tive explanations by the way they design their experiments so they can have confidence in the
explanations. That is not to say that scientific explanations do not change over time as scientists
learn more about a particular phenomenon, ask different questions, and use more sophisticated
measurements. It is just that, unlike history, their findings are capable of replication (another
scientists can find the same thing if they try the same experiment), and their findings can be
used to predict what will happen under similar conditions within a certain level of confidence.
This predictability of results allows scientific findings to be used in everyday applications such
as the building of bridges, the production of medications, and the development of household
132 Shanahan and Shanahan

products. That is why, when we asked scientists about textbook use in schools, they believed
that textbooks were necessary, since, in the best of circumstances, such texts provide students
with the best current explanations that have been vetted by scientists after experimentation
and replication.
One of the big differences in the texts that are used in science compared to those in history
or English is how the graphic material relates to the prose. In science texts, ideas are commonly
represented in several ways—Â�in written prose, in graphics (e.g., diagrams, data charts, pho-
tographs), and in equations or formulae. These different ways of representing the same ideas
are consonant with the core belief that science is only grasped if it can be understood in these
different ways. Thus scientists read these different representations reciprocally, moving from
prose to graphic to equation to graphic to prose and so forth, until all aspects of a scientific prin-
ciple or idea are understood. There may be graphic representations in history texts, too, but the
relationship between these and written prose is generally not as integral to one’s understanding
and may be considered ancillary to the text.
Mathematics texts seem less varied than those in history or science. In our study of reading
processes in science, history, and mathematics,10 the mathematicians read articles in math-
ematics journals and books that described particular mathematical methods or expounded
on mathematical proofs. An article demonstrating a proof would have a particular structure
upon which the mathematicians would rely to direct their reading. First there would be an
explication of the variables used and then the proof would be written in a rather linear fashion.
Mathematics textbooks typically provide explanations of mathematical concepts, processes, and
applications. Generally, math books appear to be much less “wordy” than scientific or history
textbooks, and such texts proceed somewhat linearly, alternating between written prose and
the step-�by-�step solutions to mathematical problems. Unlike in science texts, even the formulas
and data are embedded in the text, constraining the order in which readers access the infor-
mation. Although there is less text, mathematicians weigh every word and every aspect of an
equation, and so it can take even longer to read math texts than other more verbose materials.
For example, in our study, the mathematicians we worked with explained that they read and
reread material, looking for errors and paying attention to the meaning of every word. “The”
and “a” have different meanings, for instance, and a reader would have to pay attention to
which one was used. As one mathematician said, it might take years of reading and rereading
the same text for him to understand fully a complicated proof.
Functional linguists have described the sentence-�level differences across texts in the various
disciplines.11 History sentences convey information about actors and their goals, motivations,
and tactics, and they specify the time, place, and manner in which events take place. Both science
and history sentences may describe cause-�and-�effect relationships. Science sentences, on the
other hand, do not discuss motivations—Â�atoms do not choose and are not motivated to move
toward a goal. This may be why science texts have a high number of passive sentences. In a field
where objectivity is highly valued, it would follow that scientists would want their language to
be consistent with their goals. Scientists also try to be exact in explaining their research findings.
For example, they do not discuss proving certain principles and they try not to use absolute
modifiers such as “always” or “never.” As stated, scientists are interested in predicting what
will happen under similar conditions, and it matters greatly that they can do that. For example, a
physicist would want an engineer who is building a bridge to know how confident he should be
that the bridge would stay up under certain conditions such as high wind. So scientists try to be
accurate when they describe scientific findings rather than promise more than can be delivered.
They might state, for example, the degree of confidence they have in them.
Difference 2: How Reading Is Supported In content area reading, student strategy choices
determine the way the texts are read; that is, students are to think about the strategies they know
(e.g., summarization, questioning, visualizing) and choose one they want to use. In disciplinary
literacy, however, it is the disciplines and their discourse traditions that determine how read-
ing should unfold, and it may be that different processes will be used depending on the type
The What and Why of Disciplinary Literacy 133

of disciplinary text that is being read or the disciplinary purpose that is being served. In other
words, disciplinary priorities take precedent over strategy choices.
It is important to understand that, whereas having some prior content knowledge helps
one to read with understanding, disciplinary literacy is based on the premise that content
knowledge is not enough. It needs to be supplemented by an appreciation of the discipline. This
disciplinary knowledge includes an awareness of how the discipline creates, communicates,
and evaluates knowledge along with the beliefs experts have about their discipline. The reading
processes that experts use, at least in part, are a result of this disciplinary understanding—Â�that
is, their discourse practices seem to be a consequence of the underlying premises and practices
of the discipline as a whole. As we examine literacy practices in history, science, and mathemat-
ics, we will begin with a consideration of those fields’ disciplinary knowledge.
Because of the way knowledge is created in history, through retrospective looks at existing
data—Â�documents, artifacts, and other historians’ accounts—Â�history is forever contested and
contestable, or as one historian told us, history is “argument without end.” Historians know
that document authors may tell very different stories about the same event depending on their
perspectives. For example, a Lakota Indian would tell the story of the Black Hills and the loss
of Lakota territory much differently than a railroad mogul or a prospector would. Columbus
has been extolled, vilified, and seen as a mere product of his times, depending on what evi-
dence is used and how it is interpreted. Studies of expert readers in history have shown that
historians engage in several reading processes that help them understand the texts they read.12
They source, which means they see who the author is and where the document came from, and
they use that information to hypothesize about the author’s perspective. They also contextualize,
which means they look at the time period in which the document was written and they think
about what was happening during that time frame and what issues were important, as these
issues could sway the author’s interpretation. When reading, they look for evidence that could
be corroborated or contradicted by other documents or evidence, they see if a coherent story is
being told, they look for perspectives that are left out, and they look for language that might
help them determine the bias. They do all this at the same time they are trying to determine what
the version of the story is—Â�what the chronology is, which factors are assumed to be causative
and which are merely coincidental, and which frameworks are highlighted (e.g., economic,
political, social). Students tend not to engage in such complex reading strategies. Instead, they
read for the facts alone and regard the accounts they are reading as truth, reducing their actual
understanding of the history and reducing the possibility that they will be motivated to do
the reading. Without explicit guidance and instruction, students are not likely to read in these
sophisticated ways.
In our study of expert reading, the theoretical mathematicians we worked with told us
that their goal was to find truth; they felt they could solve problems by using logic and making
no mistakes. It follows then that the way reading proceeds for them would take this belief into
account. As mentioned, they read and reread. They also used the structure of the text to guide
their reading. For example, one of these mathematicians explained that, because the variables
were usually explained before a proof began, he memorized the variables. That way, during
the reading of the proof, he would not have to go back constantly to remind himself what was
being referred to in an equation.
Mathematicians look for error when they read. A mathematician told us that error is in
everything mathematical, and if they do not find it, they won’t be able to eventually solve the
problem. So they note what measurement units are being used, they constantly stop and ask if
what they read made sense, and they make sure they look at every word to see if it adequately
portrays meaning in the best way. Mathematicians also use conventions for reading equations
that are different from those that are used for reading prose. For example, what is inside paren-
theses is read prior to the number or letter presented before the parentheses, so “sentence”
reading is not as linear as it is in prose reading. If equations are not read that way, they won’t
make sense or be understood.
134 Shanahan and Shanahan

Finally, mathematics is necessarily abstract; an equation isn’t bounded in the particulars of

any example but can be applied to any number of examples. To truly learn mathematics then
means to learn it as a logical abstraction that can be used across problem sets. One won’t be able
to use mathematics flexibly unless that happens. Unfortunately, students may not learn math-
ematics at this level in school. One of the reasons that word problems are so hard for students,
for example, may be because they do not know the relation between the specific problems they
are given and the abstract principles they can employ to solve the problems.
In contrast, the chemists we worked with told us that they were after not truth but proba-
bility and predictability. They relied on experimentation and systematic observation to create
knowledge, and their reading practices relied to a great extent on the level of confidence they
had in what they were reading. For example, if they didn’t know much about a topic in sci-
ence, they read for understanding rather than critique—Â�purely reading to learn—Â�because they
surmised that they were reading information corroborated across a number of experiments by
a number of scientists. This is in contrast to the way historians read—Â�always with critique in
mind—Â�and the way mathematicians read—Â�always with an eye for error.
Learning about a topic entails learning it at different levels. The chemists explained that,
if they truly understand a process, they should be able to talk about it, write an explanation
of it, or show it in a graphic, data table, or equation. So when the chemists read, the diagrams,
models, and equations were as much a part of what they read as the prose. If none of those
graphic forms were provided by the text, these chemists made up their own, sometimes in the
margins of the texts or on separate notebook paper.
When reading about topics with which they were familiar, the chemists read more crit-
ically. For example, one chemist thought aloud as he read a scientific research article that
described an experiment using similar methods and asking similar questions to one that he
had engaged in but with different materials. He pored over the methods section, looking for
similarities and differences with his own methods; thought deeply about the chemical structure
of the materials used and how those contrasted with the materials he had used; and took into
account the reputation of the lab, the date of the article, the source of funding, and other items
of information external to the actual article that might contribute to differences between his
results and the results of the experiment about which he was reading. In other words, his read-
ing was much more like the reading of historians—Â�who use sourcing, contextualization, and
corroboration—Â�than it was when he was reading a scientific explanation about an unfamiliar
topic. His reading was also more like the reading of mathematicians, who looked for error in
the unit of measurement, for computational errors, or for errors of logic and wording. Other
researchers have noted this change in reading style depending on familiarity by scientists. For
example, Bazerman13 found such differences in his study of the reading of physicists.
It is important to note that reading and writing is absolutely central to all these experts in all
three disciplines. They read and wrote the majority of time they spent engaging in the practices
of their disciplines. High school students, who, heretofore, may have had very little experience
in reading and writing in their subject matter classes, are at an extreme disadvantage. Not only
do they lack knowledge of the content of the disciplines, but they also lack knowledge of the way
these disciplines create, communicate, and evaluate knowledge and do not understand how this
disciplinary knowledge, then, drives the way in which they read. All these things must be taught,
and that is fundamentally the purpose of disciplinary literacy.
Difference 3: The Role of Vocabulary Most middle and high school teachers claim vocabulary
knowledge is a big part of content knowledge. This is true especially in fields such as mathe-
matics and science, where the definitions of technical terms embody the fields’ key concepts.
However, it is also true in fields such as history and English, where there are fewer key technical
terms but where difficult general abstract vocabulary also proliferates. In content area read-
ing, vocabulary is dealt with in similar ways across disciplines. In disciplinary literacy, which
vocabulary words count as being important, what makes a word difficult, and how deeply one
must learn vocabulary differs across the various subject matters.
The What and Why of Disciplinary Literacy 135

We can think of two kinds of words important to academic study: technical terms (those
words or phrases used to refer to the key concepts and processes of a discipline, such as eutro-
phication, integer) and general academic vocabulary (those words that are used across multiple
disciplines that help someone understand the key concepts and processes of a field of study,
such as meritorious, exorbitant, classify, synthesize). However, even technical terms can be of
two types: those that help students talk about the thinking processes used in a discipline (such
as “corroboration” or “contextualization” in history and “climax” or “metaphor” in English)
and those that help students describe the content knowledge of the discipline (such as “distil-
lation” or “deoxyribonucleic acid” in science and “prime” or “factor” in mathematics). In the
following descriptions, we will differentiate these two types of technical terms.
History texts usually have fewer technical terms than science or mathematics texts. The
technical vocabulary that does exist in history texts is often borrowed from the social sciences,
such as economics (e.g., words referring to market conditions), sociology (e.g., words referring
to class systems), or political science (e.g., words referring to government structures). By way
of contrast, history texts do have a lot of general academic terms. These words are difficult
for students because knowledge of their meanings may be assumed by text authors yet may
be central to understanding the actions and goals of historical actors and the time, place, and
manner in which events occur. In addition, these words are not defined in the text or in glossa-
ries as are the technical terms, and they may not be repeated enough for students to learn their
meanings. There also may be so many of these words that students get frustrated and give up
on reading, so it’s important to help students differentiate among words that are necessary for
understanding and those that can be safely skipped.
Some of the words, especially those in primary documents, may be antiquated. For example,
the words sayeth and gilded are not used much today but exist in documents. And some of these
antiquated words may have changed their meaning or connotation over the years. Students may
be alarmed, for example, to read the term Negro in a document from the 1930s, not realizing
that the use of that term was common and not necessarily a marker for racism during that time
period. Discussions of such terms help students develop historical empathy—Â�that is, the ability
to think about a period of time in history with an understanding of how people who lived in
that time must have thought and behaved rather than using today’s standard of behavior to
interpret the past. If students are reading primary documents such as treaties, court decisions, or
constitutional amendments, they will also be confronted with legalese (e.g., heretofore, whereas).
In history (as in English), the kind of words an author uses can help students determine
an author’s perspective or biases. For example, to say that an army “ruthlessly obliterated its
rivals” is different from saying it “won the battle.” For historians, being able to use word choice
to determine perspective is a key skill because it helps them determine what weight to give a
particular historical account.
Words that signal particular relationships among events, that signal chronology, or that
signal historical significance—Â�although they may not be considered difficult words—Â�are some-
times missed by students during history reading. It is important, for example, that students
understand that phrases like “resulted in” or “due to” signal cause-Â�effect, that phrases like “in
August of that same year” signal chronology, or that phrases like “there were three factors”
signal an author’s interpretation of significance.
Technical terms used to describe disciplinary thinking processes are not usually in texts.
These words, however, are necessary to help students understand the way in which to approach
the reading of history and the kinds of thinking they need to do. Words such as sourcing, contex-
tualization, corroboration, chronology, and coherence are examples of this category of words. Also in
this category are words describing the types of sources used in historical study—Â�artifacts (e.g.,
photographs, relics, video), primary documents (from the time period), secondary accounts
(written by later historians), and tertiary documents such as history textbooks. These words
need to be taught, and students should become familiar with the affordances and limitations of
each of these types of sources. For instance, students should know that a photograph can reveal
136 Shanahan and Shanahan

some kinds of information about a time period or event but not other kinds of information. In
addition, a photograph may obscure from view what the photographer doesn’t want to be seen.
Science texts, unlike history texts, are full of technical terms. In fact, there are more tech-
nical terms in science texts than in the texts of any other discipline. Usually, these terms
are defined in context the first time they are introduced and are sometimes accompanied
by extended examples of their application to a particular topic of study. Later, however, the
definition of a technical term may be dropped and students are expected to remember the
definition because the word is now being used in the definition of a new technical term. In
addition to these terms being defined on first use, their meanings can often be surmised by
taking into account the meanings of prefixes and suffixes (e.g., geothermal), but these again
need to be taught.
One difficulty with science terms is that they can sometimes have general meanings as
well as science-Â�specific meanings. For example, distill can be used in the sense of “distilling”
an argument, but in science, its meaning is the verb form of distillation. These more general
meanings, if not confronted and discussed, can become the root of scientific misconceptions.
Technical terms used to talk about the discipline of science usually focus on scientific meth-
ods (experimentation and systematic observation). These terms are key if students are to under-
stand the way new knowledge is created in the discipline. As in history, there are also words
that signal central relationships among the ideas, such as cause-�effect or sequential processes,
which are important for students to understand. It would also be useful for students to recog-
nize when the text signals a level of confidence in the findings. For example, scientists rarely
use terms like never and always but provide more precise information about the extent to which
they are sure a particular reaction will take place or under what conditions such a reaction may
occur. Also, scientists use nominalization—Â�that is, they turn verbs such as distill, signifying an
instance in which something is distilled, into nouns such as distillation, signifying an abstract
process subsuming many different instances.
Mathematics vocabulary has very similar properties to words in science. One additional
point to consider with the technical terms in mathematics, however, is the precise nature of their
definitions. The mathematicians we studied insisted that students learn exact definitions rather
than paraphrased ones, since these less precise definitions may be inaccurate; even a one-�word
difference can render inaccurate a precise mathematical definition. Students need to know,
then, the exact properties of each of the technical terms used in mathematics texts.
Difference 4: The Role of Multiple Texts Content area reading strategies do not often help
students learn or think about information across texts, with some notable exceptions (e.g.,
I-�charts).14 The truth is, the field of reading has not done a very good job in the past of helping
students make sense of multiple messages across multiple genres. In disciplinary literacy, the
role of multiple texts is more pronounced in some fields than in others, and the way multiple
texts are used in the discipline should be a focus of instruction.
In history, multiple texts are absolutely essential. If students only read one text, they only
get one perspective, one interpretation of the past, one author’s claims about what happened
and why. It is only upon reading from multiple perspectives, including perhaps the perspec-
tives of photographers, eyewitnesses, journalists, other historians, participants, and so forth,
that readers can get a fuller (albeit still incomplete) understanding of the past. They can piece
together evidence for and against the various claims that can be made about the past and use
that information to make their own interpretations of history.
In science, multiple texts are not essential if one is trying to understand a particular scien-
tific process or the particular properties of a substance. A good explanation that includes multi-
ple representations of the process or properties described can be sufficient; however, more than
one text may be necessary if the explanations in one text are incomplete, dated, too technical for
a lay person to understand, and so forth. Also, to make the point that scientific understandings
change over time or that scientists have to write in different genres (e.g., scientific article, lab
report, article for a lay audience, research proposal) requires the use of multiple texts. Finally,
The What and Why of Disciplinary Literacy 137

students learn to critique science methods and findings by reading about these in scientific and
lay articles.
In mathematics, as in science, multiple texts are not essential, as long as the explanation
in one text is clear and accurate. However, the way that mathematics is used in everyday life
is best illustrated with multiple texts and multiple genres, and math students are better able to
understand how solutions to specific problems require the knowledge of abstract mathematical
principles if they see these problems and applications in a number of texts. Also, as in science,
students learn to critique claims made with mathematical evidence by reading articles, adver-
tisements, and other kinds of text that feature mathematical arguments.

Summary
This chapter set out to explain disciplinary literacy and how it differs from the more tradi-
tional concept of content area reading. It explored the reasons why disciplinary literacy is so
important, including a consideration of the woefully low levels of literacy attainment among
secondary school students. If this is going to change, teachers will need to engage students
more often in reading in their classes. However, typical content area reading supports for such
reading have not been convincing to many teachers, who reject them, at least in part, because
they do not reflect the purposes or contents of the disciplines. Likewise, students appear to
be less motivated by the emphasis on gaining and memorizing information—Â�the basic focus
of typical study skills. Disciplinary literacy—Â�by emphasizing the actual ways of reading and
writing within the disciplines—Â�offers potential value in convincing both teachers and students
to engage literacy more deeply. By engaging students in the actual practices of the disciplines,
they will come to appreciate the conditional nature of knowledge and the role of argument, and
the information will have a more dynamic quality about it.
The chapter detailed several important distinctions across the disciplines in terms of the
nature of the texts, strategies, purposes, vocabulary, and the role of multiple sources of infor-
mation. The literacy experiences provided in disciplinary classrooms should be more of an
apprenticeship into the practices of the disciplines than an application of a unitary set of study
skills to the diverse demands of these fields. By engaging students in these practices and pro-
viding explicit explanations of the differences, it is expected that student motivation, reading
practice, and disciplinary understanding will be increased.

Application Assignments
In-�Class Assignments
1. Form groups with others in your class planning to teach the same content (i.e., science
majors form a group, social studies majors form a group). Reread the parts of the chapter
that pertain to your discipline. Highlight four to five critical statements in the text that
address the challenges you anticipate your students encountering when reading com-
plex text in your discipline.
2. In your group take turns discussing your statements and why you think it may be a chal-
lenge for your students. Be sure to provide the page number on which it appears. The
following is an example:
I was interested in the descriptions of how specialists in the different disciplines read differ-
ently. For example, on page 74, toward the end of the first paragraph, the authors discuss how
the credibility of a historical account is measured in terms of plausibility. I think students may
have difficulty determining the plausibility of original documents.

3. As a group, pick one to two challenges and determine some instructional activities or
strategies you could use to teach your students to address the challenges you identified.
138 Shanahan and Shanahan

To continue with the previous example, you could list the following ways to help stu-
dents master this concept:
a. Divide the class in two. Give each group different texts describing an event with
which they are familiar. It could be something relatively easy for them to understand,
such as different school papers describing a recent football game. Have the class dis-
cuss, in pairs and then as a whole class, how the accounts differ. Which one is the
“true” account?
b. Ask students to read two accounts of a historical event, such as Paul Revere’s ride.
They could read Longfellow’s poem about the event and then an original document
or a text by a historian about the ride. Ask the students to consider the following
questions: How do the two accounts differ? Which account is more plausible or more
likely to be accurate? Why do you think that? Be sure the students refer back to the
text and cite specific examples to support their thinking.

Tutoring Assignments
1. Before you see your student for tutoring, review a text he or she is assigned to read.
Identify the elements of reading in this discipline that you anticipate may be difficult for
the student. Refer to the four ways disciplinary literacy is different from reading in the
content areas this chapter describes.
2. Write a lesson plan addressing at least two of the areas this chapter identifies: the text,
how reading is supported, the role of vocabulary, and the role of multiple texts. Bring the
lesson to class to discuss with your colleagues.

Homework Assignment
Read one of the following articles about disciplinary literacy. Write a one-� to two-�page sum-
mary of the main ideas, providing examples from the text to support your ideas. Be prepared
to discuss your reading in class.

Article Selections
Faggella-�Luby, M.N., Graner, P.S., Deshler, D.D., &
Drew, S.V. (2012). Building a house on sand: Why
disciplinary literacy is not sufficient to replace gen-
eral strategies for adolescent learners who struggle.
Topics in Language Disorders, 32, 7–Â�18.
Jetton, T.L., & Shanahan, C. (Eds.). (2012). Adolescent
literacy in the academic disciplines: General principles and
practical strategies. New York, NY: Guilford. (Read
one chapter of your choice.)
Lee, C.D., & Spratley, A. (2010). Reading in the
disciplines: The challenges of adolescent literacy.
New York, NY: Carnegie Corporation of New
York. Retrieved from http://www.carnegie.org/
literacy
Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2012). What is disci-
plinary literacy and why does it matter? Topics in
Language Disorders, 32, 69–Â�84.

Endnotes
1. National Center for Education Statistics (2011). 8. Shanahan & Shanahan (2008); Shanahan, Shanahan, &
2. Bettinger, Boatman, & Long (2013). Misischia (2011).
3. Venezia & Jaeger (2013). 9. Paas (1992).
4. American College Testing (2006). 10. Shanahan, Shanahan, & Misischia (2011).
5. Ogle (1986); Robinson (1946). 11. Fang & Schleppegrell (2008).
6. National Institute of Child Health and Human Develop- 12. Wineburg (1991); Shanahan, Shanahan, & Misichia (2011).
ment (NICHD) (2000). 13. Bazerman (1985, 1997).
7. Stewart (1990); O’Brien, Stewart, & Moje (1995). 14. Hoffman (1992).
The What and Why of Disciplinary Literacy 139
References
American College Testing. (2006). Reading between the lines:
What the ACT reveals about college readiness for reading.
Retrieved from http://act.org/path/policy/reports/reading
.html
Bazerman, C. (1985). Physicists reading physics: Schema-�
laden purposes and purpose-�laden schema. Written Com-
munication, 2, 3–Â�23.
Bazerman, C. (1997). Discursively structured activities. Mind,
Culture, and Activity, 4, 296–Â�308.
Bettinger, E., Boatman, A., & Long, T. (2013). Student supports:
Developmental education and other academic programs.
Postsecondary Education in the United States, 23, 92–Â�116.
Fang, Z., & Schleppegrell, M.J. (2008). Reading in secondary
content areas. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan Press.
Hoffman, J.V. (1992). Critical reading/thinking across the
curriculum: Using I-�Charts to support learning. Language
Arts, 69(2), 121–Â�127.
National Center for Education Statistics. (2011). The nation’s
report card: Reading 2011 (NCES 2012-�457). Washington,
DC: Institute of Education Sciences, U.S. Department of
Education.
National Institute of Child Health and Human Develop-
ment (NICHD). (2000). Report of the National Reading
Panel. Teaching children to read: An evidence-�based assess-
ment of the scientific research literature on reading and its
implications for reading instruction: Reports of the subgroups
(NIH No. 00-�4754). Washington, DC: U.S. Government
Printing Office.
O’Brien, D.G., Stewart, R.A., & Moje, E.B. (1995). Why con-
tent literacy is difficult to infuse into the secondary school:
Complexities of curriculum, pedagogy, and school culture.
Reading Research Quarterly, 30, 442–Â�463.
Ogle, D. (1986). K-�W-�L: A teaching model that develops
active reading of expository text. The Reading Teacher, 39,
564–Â�570.
Paas, F.G. (1992). Training strategies for attaining transfer
of a problem-�solving skill in statistics: A cognitive load
approach. Journal of Educational Psychology, 84, 429–Â�434.
Robinson, F. (1946). Effective study. New York, NY:
HarperCollins.
Shanahan, C., Shanahan, T., & Misichia, C. (2011). Analy-
sis of expert readers in three disciplines: History, math-
ematics, and chemistry. Journal of Literacy Research, 43,
393–Â�429.
Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2008). Teaching disciplinary
literacy to adolescents: Rethinking content-�area literacy.
Harvard Educational Review, 78, 40–Â�59.
Stewart, R.A. (1990). Factors in﬇uencing preservice teach-
ers’ resistance to content area reading instruction. Reading
Research and Instruction, 29, 55–Â�63.
Venezia, A., & Jaeger, L. (2013). Transitions from high school
to college. Postsecondary Education in the United States, 23,
117–Â�136.
Wineburg, S.S. (1991). On the reading of historical texts:
Notes on the breach between school and academy. Ameri-
can Educational Research Journal, 28, 495–Â�519.
 10
Disciplinary Literacy in
English Language Arts Classes
Leslie S. Rush

Classroom Scenario
Her seventh-Â�grade language arts students didn’t ask, Why are we doing this? Why should
I care about reading this? (most of the time), but Emily could read those questions in their
writing. She could see it in the ways they did and did not participate in class discussions.
Emily had become skilled at conducting read-�alouds/think-�alouds during her first year of
teaching middle school English language arts (ELA). Her go-Â�to phrase was “good readers€.€.€.”
as in, “good readers make inferences in order to glean fuller meaning from the text,” or “good
readers use context clues to figure out unfamiliar words in a text.” Over time, she watched
many students become more strategic in the reading they did in class.
As her first and second years went on, however, she became increasingly dissatisfied
with this type of instruction. It was not as rigorous as she (or the state) envisioned. It was
not helping most of her students develop a love for literature. It was not helping them to
critically analyze literary texts or to use language to communicate those analyses. And it was
not revealing to students what makes the work of ELA different from the work of science
or history or other disciplines. Many students who came to her class were already making
inferences and using context clues in their own reading. Strategy instruction just was not
enough to build their academic literacy skills.
To further complicate matters, Emily became increasingly aware of the challenges that
students experienced when reading texts of other genres and disciplines. Though many stu-
dents were competent readers of novels, especially ones that they chose, they struggled to read
poetry. The history teachers at Emily’s school would complain that students could not read the
history textbook or other documents and, as a result, the teachers often resorted to lecturing.

Objectives: After studying this chapter, you will be able to:

1. Explain how a disciplinary literacy lens applies to reading and writing in English
language arts classrooms.
2. Plan engaging instruction using the Gradual Release of Responsibility model.
3. Facilitate authentic discussions.
4. Develop and use a variety of assessment tools, including reading logs, writing and
discussion rubrics, and one-�to-�one conferring.

141
142 Rush

The science teachers would spend time teaching students technical vocabulary and then get
frustrated when students would not use the words appropriately in their writing or, even worse,
would leave their papers blank. In general, students complied with the given assignments, but
it felt like too much of the time teachers and students alike were going through the motions.
The questions lingered in her mind: What are we teaching, really? Why does it mat-
ter? How is literacy linked to students learning the content and practices of the English
language arts?1

What Is Disciplinary Literacy? How

Does It Apply to English Language Arts?
Since the 1960s, preservice and in-�service teachers like Emily have been asked to incorpo-
rate reading and writing instruction with their content area instruction. For example, history,
science, health, and other content area teachers have been asked to teach students how to
summarize textbook chapters, how to make predictions about the content that will appear in
textbook chapters based on headings and bolded text, and other similar strategies. Although
these strategies are useful and can be helpful for students who struggle with reading, a move
is under way in the field of literacy education to more carefully specify the types of strategies
used in each content area so that the strategies represent the types of reading and writing done
in those disciplines and the reading and writing students do is representative of the ways of
thinking most commonly adopted in those disciplines. This move toward encouraging teach-
ers to address discipline-�based reading and writing strategies is known as disciplinary literacy.
Disciplinary literacy focuses on the ways of thinking, the skills, and the tools that are used
by experts in a discipline.2 Research on the reading habits of disciplinary experts indicates that
the discipline makes a difference in what kinds of reading strategies those experts use. For
example, mathematicians seem to emphasize rereading and close reading, focusing on precise
understandings of every word in a text. Chemists seem to read with a focus on transforming
information from text to visual and back again. Historians tend to pay attention to the author of
a text or the source of the text in order to determine what interpretation and argument is being
made in a particular text. One goal of disciplinary literacy instruction is to help students take
on the ways of reading and writing texts that are most influential within that discipline. Unlike
what has traditionally been known as content area literacy, the kinds of strategies taught in dis-
ciplinary literacy are specific to a content area rather than assuming that all reading and writing
strategies (such as summarizing, predicting, and reading with a purpose) can be applied with
equal success across content areas.
So what does a disciplinary literacy lens provide when it is applied to reading and writing
in middle school or high school ELA classes? For many English teachers, reading and writing in
English classes is so much the norm that we have difficulty imagining that someone might read
and write in any other way. Taking a step back, however, and thinking about what we hope to
accomplish through the study of texts (both informational and literary) in English classes provides
some clarity on what it means to read and write with a particularly “English” or literary bent.
One of the goals of an English class is to help students use texts as tools to examine human
experiences. English teachers want students to not only read novels, plays, poetry, and infor-
mational texts in classes but also gain from those texts a wider understanding of the world and
apply what is learned from those texts to their perspectives on humanity, politics, cultures, and
life. In order to do this important work, English educators teach students to apply rhetorical
reading strategies—Â�such as close reading—Â�to the texts that they read. Students should be able
to analyze how an author’s craft in writing affects potential interpretations, to understand
rhetorical strategies and patterns, to draw on their own prior knowledge as well as experts’
work to develop interpretations of literature, and to use the texts that they read to reflect on
what it means to be human.
Disciplinary Literacy in English Language Arts Classes 143

Of course, in order to carry out these com-

plex types of reading, students also need to be
able to comprehend what they read, to determine
the meanings of words, and to put together their
developing understanding of texts into a synergis-
tic whole. The importance of this disciplinary lens
on instruction in English classes is in part to help
teachers recognize the unique nature of literacy
instruction in an English class; in addition, such
a perspective can help English teachers focus the
work they do around those strategies and skills that
are most likely to help students grasp and apply the
ideas present in the works they read.
A disciplinary perspective on literacy instruction
in ELA classes also allows English teachers to develop
a resolution to a tension or divide that has been pres-
ent in the field of English between those who see
English as the study of literature and those who see
English classes as developing skills for learning and
life.3 Adopting a disciplinary perspective and teach-
ing students to read and write about texts used in
English classes through a disciplinary lens combines these two worthwhile goals for instruction
in ELA classes. In addition, such a move would address the rigorous expectations for students
in the Common Core State Standards (CCSS) and would support student readiness for college
and careers.

What Should Students Know and Be Able

to Do to Be Prepared for College and a Career?
In order to be prepared for college and careers, students in English classes should be able to
read the texts that are common in ELA and should understand when to apply the literary ways
of reading unique to the discipline when appropriate. This involves understanding genres,
having a toolkit of reading techniques, and knowing when to apply those techniques. Students
should also be able to write about these texts, in both narrative and argumentative forms, citing
evidence from the texts in their interpretations.
Although not all states have adopted the CCSS, they present a rigorous and thorough set
of goals that all English teachers can use to help plan their instruction and their work with stu-
dents who are reading complex texts. The goals for students set out in these standards include
much that would cut across all disciplines, including the following:
• Comprehending key ideas and details
• Using evidence from the text when writing or speaking
• Synthesizing and summarizing key ideas or themes
• Analyzing the development of characters, storylines, and ideas across text and the texts’
structure
• Understanding the words used in a text and how the author’s word choice affects the texts’
tone
• Articulating the argument and claims in a text and evaluating them4
However, in order to be successful in college and careers, students need to master skills
specific to the discipline of English. Students should be able to do the following:
144 Rush

• Perform critical thinking tasks—Â�in relation to both informational and literary texts—
�independently
• Do close readings of complex texts, including inferring, reading critically, and distinguish-
ing between what is in the text (plot, characterization, setting) and the larger picture (theme,
connection to society)
• Develop reading endurance or the ability to read lengthy complex texts independently

How Do We Assess What Students Know and How Much They

Are Learning? How Do We Use Assessments to Inform Instruction?
There are many tools available to English teachers that can be used to assess not only students’
general reading and writing skills but also their ability to handle texts in ways that fit with
the discipline of English. These tools include reading logs or journals, writing and discussion
rubrics, and one-�to-�one conferring. Using these tools as part of instruction can help English
teachers see where students—Â�both as a group and individually—Â�are struggling so that instruc-
tion can be more carefully targeted.

Reading Logs/Journals
Reading logs or journals can be designed so that students use them as tools to help meet instruc-
tional goals while they are reading a text. A carefully constructed reading log or journal can
be developed to target specific reading skills and ways of thinking; students’ work on these
reading logs can then be evaluated and analyzed to determine students’ areas of strength and
weakness. For example, the reading log in Figure 10.1 was developed to assist students in per-
forming the close reading of a chapter in a novel.
Using this reading log, students are asked to read a section of text—Â�in this case a chapter
from a novel—Â�and note not only the plot and character development but also the author’s lan-
guage choices. Assessment of the reading log can be accomplished with a rubric or grading scale
connected to each part of the log. Once the individual reading logs are assessed, an evaluation of
the whole set of reading logs can be useful to determine where the class as a whole is struggling.
The benefit of reading logs such as these is that they are keyed to specific skills and can be
developed individually to fit both the students in a teacher’s classroom and the text under study.
These reading logs are also a helpful substitute for a study guide or a set of questions on a text
because of their skills-�targeted nature. Of course, students should be taught to complete these
reading logs, using the Gradual Release of Responsibility model laid out in the next section.

Writing Rubrics
Rubrics can be used to assess students’ writing abilities and can prove quite helpful in analyzing
both an individual student’s growth in writing and the strengths and weaknesses of groups of
students. Writing rubrics should be keyed to particular writing assignments. Although generic
writing rubrics have their uses, the development of genre-�specific or assignment-�specific rubrics
allow the teacher to focus on specific writing styles, writing structures, and student abilities.
For example, when students who are assigned to write an argument—Â�an essay that presents
a perspective on a topic and uses evidence to support that perspective—Â�their final product should
be evaluated with a rubric that is specific to argument writing, such as the example in Table 10.1.
The writing rubric that can be found in Table 10.1 is based on the Common Core State
Standards for English language arts focusing specifically on argument writing. The rubric can
be used to provide feedback to students, although the rubric should be supplemented with both
teacher and peer feedback so that students can see what they have been successful with and
what they need further work on. The rubric can also be used to determine where instruction
might benefit the class as a whole. For example, the teacher might see that students consistently
Disciplinary Literacy in English Language Arts Classes 145

Directions: As you read, take note of plot and character development, as well as any of the author’s language choices that
stand out to you. When you have completed the assigned reading, write your reading log here.

Part I: Write a brief summary of the plot and character development that occurred in this section.

Part II: What did you notice about the author’s language choices in this section of the text? Here you should list the words and
phrases you noticed, along with page numbers.

Part III: Why might the author have chosen to use language in that way? How does the author’s word choice affect your
interpretation of the novel?

Figure 10.1.â•… Novel reading log.

Table 10.1.â•… Argument writing rubric

CCSS for speaking/listening
CCSS.ELA-Â�Literacy.W11–Â�
12.1.a: Introduce precise,
knowledgeable claims.
CCSS.ELA-Â�Literacy.W11–Â�
12.1a: Use an organization
that logically sequences
claim, counterclaim, rea-
sons, and evidence.
CCSS.ELA-Â�Literacy.L.11–Â�
12-�.1: Demonstrate com-
mand of the conventions of
standard English grammar
and usage.
Source: National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and Council of Chief State School Officers (2010). (Common Core State
Standards © Copyright 2010. National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and Council of Chief State School Officers. All rights
reserved.)
Basic (1 point) Proficient (2 points) Distinguished (3 points)
Student’s argument writing Student’s argument writing Student’s argument writing
does little to introduce a introduces a defensible uses exceptionally sophisti-
claim that is defensible and claim and uses precise cated and precise language
use precise language to language to present a per- to present a defensible
present a perspective on spective on the topic. claim.
the topic.
Student’s argument writing Student’s argument writing Student’s argument writing
lacks a logical sequence uses a logical sequence for contains exceptional and
and/or lacks provision of a provision of a counterclaim, sophisticated structure and
counterclaim, reasons, and reasons, and evidence. content of counterclaim,
evidence. reasons, and evidence.
Student’s argument writing Student’s argument writing Student’s argument writing
contains many nonstan- contains only a few non- contains only standard
dard uses of English gram- standard uses of English English grammar and
mar and usage. grammar and usage. usage.
146 Rush

scored at a “Basic” in the standard related to the logical sequencing of claim, counterclaim,
reasons, and evidence and might provide instruction for students on how to create a logical
sequence of this information in an argumentative essay.

Discussion Rubrics
One of the most difficult and rewarding activities in an English classroom is whole-�class or
small-�group discussion of the ideas and art in a text under study. Authentic discussion, in which
students talk with each other and with a teacher about a text, has been shown to be positively
connected to growth in comprehension skills.5 More information about facilitating authentic
discussion is available in the following section.
Discussion is also difficult to assess well. One of the most promising means of assess-
ing authentic discussion in an English classroom is the use of a discussion rubric. Again, the
rubric for discussion should be targeted toward specific speaking and listening skills. Discus-
sion rubrics can be applied to whole-�class discussion or to small-�group discussion. For ease of
teacher use, evaluation of a limited number of skills or criteria is particularly important. An
example of a discussion rubric can be found in Table 10.2.
The discussion rubric in Table 10.2 is based on the 9th-� and 10th-�grade Common Core
State Standards for English language arts and focuses on two of the speaking and listening
standards.6 Each column in the rubric is given a description that is pulled from the standard,
describing for that standard the benchmark for “Basic,” “Proficient,” and “Distinguished.”
The rubric for discussion would be completed on each student in the class, during and after
a whole-Â�class discussion. This rubric is targeted at only two skills—Â�coming prepared to class
and participating effectively in the discussion. Student success in these areas should also be
supported by instruction in authentic discussions. Once individual rubrics are completed for
each student’s discussion participation, an analysis of the class as a whole will be helpful in
determining where to focus instruction on discussion next.

One-�to-�One Conferring
To target more specifically the individual skills of the students in an English class, teachers
can use one-�to-�one conferring. Conferring involves meeting briefly with individual students
in order to assess their progress on a particular assignment or their skills related to the study
of a text. In his helpful book, Conferring: The Keystone of Reader’s Workshop,7 Patrick Allen lays
out a structure that can be used for a one-�to-�one conference with a student, using the acronym
RIP. In this acronym, the letter R stands for review, read aloud, and record; the letter I stands
for instruction, insights, and intrigue; and the letter P stands for plan, progress, and purpose.

R: Review, Read Aloud, Record

In this beginning portion of a conference, the student and teacher discuss the student’s progress
by reconsidering learning from a previous conference, reading aloud a portion of the text under
study, or discussing a reading strategy or stumbling block that might be affecting the student’s
reading. Allen describes this entry into the conference as a way of beginning a conversation that
focuses on what the student is currently doing. Of course, the teacher brings to this conference
an understanding of the student’s reading task and some background information about the
student’s strengths and weaknesses.

I: Instruction, Insights, Intrigue

In the I portion of the conference, instruction is the focus, with the opportunity to pursue the
skills, thinking, and strategies that the student needs in order to be successful with the text
Disciplinary Literacy in English Language Arts Classes 147

Table 10.2.â•… Discussion rubric

CCSS for speaking/listening
CCSS.ELA-Â�Literacy.SL.9–Â�10.1a:
Come to discussions prepared,
having read and researched
material under study; explicitly
draw on that preparation by
referring to evidence from texts
and other research on the topic
or issue to stimulate a thoughtful,
well-�reasoned exchange of ideas.
CCSS.ELA-Â�Literacy.SL.9–Â�10.1c:
Propel conversations by posing
and responding to questions that
relate the current discussion to
broader themes or larger ideas;
actively incorporate others into the
discussion; and clarify, verify, or
challenge ideas and conclusions.
Source: National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and Council of Chief State School Officers (2010). (Common Core State
Standards © Copyright 2010. National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and Council of Chief State School Officers. All rights
reserved.)
Basic (0–Â�3 points)
Student comes to class
unprepared for discus-
sion and does not bring
evidence from texts
into the discussion.
Student is not a vital
part of the discussion,
in that he or she is
inattentive, doesn’t take
notes, and/or never
volunteers to share
knowledge with the
class.
Proficient (4 points)
Student comes to class
prepared for discussion
and brings evidence
from texts into
discussion.
Student poses and
responds to questions
that make connections
among the text and the
world.
Distinguished (5 points)
Student comes to class
prepared for discussion
and is a vital part of a
well-�reasoned exchange
of ideas.
Student participates effec-
tively in the discussion
and brings others into the
discussion by asking for
clarification, verification,
or challenging ideas.

and task at hand. The discussion should not be one sided! Instead, the teacher and student
discuss thinking and reading strategies the student is using, insights the student is gaining
from the text, and what the student is intrigued by. During this portion of the conference
in particular, the teacher should be taking notes on what the student is doing and thinking.
These notes are an invaluable record that the teacher can use to continue guiding future
instruction.

P: Plan, Progress, Purpose

In this closing portion of the conference, the student and teacher develop a plan that the student
will undertake between this conference and the next one. What does the student hope to work
on? What progress does the student expect to make? This portion of the conference should
consist of a specific plan that is agreeable to both the student and the teacher. Again, documen-
tation of the plan is important.
Although the process of conferring one on one is presented in light of reading, it can also
be focused on writing. This form of assessment is also, of course, an instructional tool that not
only provides the teacher with information about individual student’s progress and struggles
but also supports the student in his or her reading and writing in English.

How Do We Teach the Skills Effectively, Efficiently,

and in a Manner Appropriate to the Student’s Age/Grade?
There are perhaps many methods that can be used to teach the skills of disciplinary literacy in
an English class. In this chapter, we explore two of those: the Gradual Release of Responsibility
model and authentic discussion.

Gradual Release of Responsibility

The Gradual Release of Responsibility8 model is designed to teach students specific skills, mov-
ing from high levels of teacher support in learning these skills to student independence in
applying the skills. A well-Â�known way of understanding this model is the phrase, “I do it, we
do it, you do it.”9
148 Rush

In the “I do it” portion of this instructional model, the teacher demonstrates for students the
skill involved. In an English class, for example, this demonstration might mean that the teacher
models how to carry out a close reading of a very short portion of a text. The close reading
should be accompanied by a “think-Â�aloud,” in which the teacher describes his or her thought
processes about the close reading. Here, the teacher takes students step by step through the
process that he or she wants students to be able to take on independently, describing through-
out the process how he or she is making decisions, using the text, and developing knowledge.
This modeling of a skill may need to be repeated, depending on the nature of the skill and its
complexity.
For example, a teacher might want to use Thomas Hardy’s poem “My Spirit Will Not
Haunt the Mound” (Figure 10.2) to model close reading using a think-Â�aloud. This short poem
is perfect for such an activity, which is designed to allow students to dig deep into a text and
to make interpretations of that text. In this case, the teacher might ensure that students have
a copy of the poem and that the poem is also projected on a screen or interactive whiteboard.
The first step in this activity is to read the poem aloud, in its entirety, several times. Then the
teacher returns to the beginning of the poem and reads a line or two and stops to talk through
his or her thinking about the poem. For example, after reading the lines, “My spirit will not
haunt the mound / Above my breast,” the teacher might say, “It seems to me here that the
poet is talking about his own death. He uses the words ‘spirit’ and ‘haunt,’ which give me a
clue that he’s talking about the afterlife. He says his spirit will not haunt ‘the mound / Above
my breast.’ Because I’m pretty sure he’s talking about his death and his life after death, I think
the mound that he mentions must be the mound of dirt on his coffin or over his ‘breast’—Â�or I
guess we would say ‘chest.’” Depending on the students’ level of background and skill with
this kind of interpretive work, the teacher might continue to model his or her thinking for the
remainder of the poem.
The next portion of this instructional model is the “we do it” portion. Here the English
teacher sets up a situation in which students work collaboratively, in small groups or pairs, to
apply the skill. If the skill to be learned is quite complex, the teacher might work with a small
group of students to apply the skill, allowing the rest of the class to watch and take note of
the process. When the small groups have completed their task, it might be a good idea to ask
them to meet with another small group or pair of students to compare what they have come
up with as well as their process for doing so. Ultimately, each small group will need to have
teacher feedback on both their product and their process, so it is helpful for the teacher to cir-
culate among the groups, answering questions and making suggestions. An example of the “we
do it” portion of this model might be to build on the teacher’s modeling of the close reading
process—Â�as described previously with the poem by Thomas Hardy—Â�by asking students to work
with a partner or small group to conduct an interpretive reading of a second section of the same
poem or to complete this exercise with another poem altogether. Students should, of course,
be provided a clear task to accomplish and appropriate structure for their work. For example,
the teacher might ask students to read the remaining stanzas of “My Spirit Will Not Haunt the
Mound” and to write a two-Â�sentence interpretation or explanation of each stanza. After com-
pleting this task, students might then meet with another group to compare the sentences they
have developed. Again, the teacher should be circulating and providing feedback throughout
the process of the “we do it” task.
The final portion of this instructional model is the “you do it” segment. During the “you
do it” portion of the instructional model, individuals are tasked with applying their skill inde-
pendently. Here, students should be asked to carry out the skill that they have had modeled
and that they have practiced with a small group and on their own. It is vital that eventually
the instruction moves to the point where students are being asked to work independently; too
often, students are consistently asked to work in groups and never moved on into being asked
to work on their own. Again, the opportunity for teacher feedback is crucial at this stage of
Disciplinary Literacy in English Language Arts Classes 149

My spirit will not haunt the mound

Above my breast,
But travel, memory-�possessed,
To where my tremulous being found
Life largest, best.

My phantom-�footed shape will go

When nightfall grays
Hither and thither along the ways
I and another used to know
In backward days.

And there you’ll find me, if a jot

You still should care
For me, and for my curious air;
If otherwise, then I shall not,
For you, be there.

Figure 10.2.â•… “My Spirit Will Not Haunt the Mound,”

by Thomas Hardy.10

instruction, so the teacher should be asking them to do this work in class and circulating to give
feedback, answer questions, and point out next steps. Carrying through our example, students
might be asked to read a different poem, perhaps also by Thomas Hardy, and to carry out the
process of close, interpretive reading independently. Once students can successfully carry out
this skill independently during class, with teacher feedback, the teacher might ask students to
do the same process in a homework assignment.

Authentic Discussion
Authentic discussion is connected to literacy achievement, yet much of the discussion that
takes place in English classes, unfortunately, follows what is known as the initiation/response/
evaluation model. This cycle consists of a teacher asking a specific question, a student respond-
ing to the question, and the teacher evaluating the response. Then the cycle begins with another
question and continues on. Unlike this somewhat stilted and inauthentic process of classroom
talk, authentic discussions are characterized by open-�ended or authentic questions, follow-�up
questions, and students themselves taking on the work of critical thinking, synthesis, and eval-
uation. An authentic discussion is one in which talk is fluid, students talk with each other, and
the topic or text under discussion is thoroughly analyzed.
So how might English teachers move from an initiation/response/evaluation model of
discussion to a discussion that is authentic? Moves that can be made to facilitate authentic
discussion include providing students with the authority to make interpretive comments,
having students lead discussion or use an open format for discussion, focusing discussion
on a specific strategy or purposefully chosen questions, and using open-�ended and genuine
questions. By giving up the authority to determine who speaks and when they speak, students
are empowered to participate more fully in the discussion. In fact, with some practice, students
can become discussion leaders and can be in charge of facilitating whole-�class or small-�group
discussions on their own. Choosing to focus on open-�ended, authentic questions instead of
concrete, detailed questions will allow students to bring information from texts, to make con-
nections between texts and the larger issues in our world, and to become more fully engaged
in the discussion.
150 Rush

How Do We Develop Instructional Plans that

Incorporate the Common Core State Standards and
Evidence-�Based Strategies Leading to College and Career Readiness?
Developing instructional plans that incorporate both the CCSS and the strategies described
earlier involves following a cyclical planning sequence, as follows:
1. Determine the CCSS-�based skills that will be targeted in a lesson or sequence of lessons.
2. Choose a text that will be appropriate for the chosen skills and that will appeal to your
students and/or meet the required curriculum goals.
3. Plan to follow the Gradual Release of Responsibility model, devoting appropriate time to
modeling, collaborative work, and individual work.
4. Build into the plans opportunities for students to demonstrate their level of skill so that
assessment can be carried out.
5. Once the results of the assessment are evaluated, carry out the sequence again, either
with a new skills target or with the same one, if students were not particularly successful.

How Can We Best Engage All Students in Literacy Instruction?

A key aspect to remember for English teachers is that students come to us with varying degrees of not
only skill in reading and writing but also interest in reading and writing. In order to build engage-
ment and motivation in reading and writing, several key factors should be present in instruction.11
The first of these factors is relevance. Students should be engaged in reading and writing
that touches on something they are familiar with, a theme that affects them, or their own cul-
tural background. English teachers might pursue relevance by providing students with young
adult literature, multicultural literature, or texts related to local community history.
The second of these factors is choice. When English teachers allow students to make large or
small choices, it sends the message to students that their opinions and preferences are import-
ant. Students might be given choices of the texts they read, how they will be assessed, where
they will sit, or how they will respond to texts.
A third engaging factor for students is the opportunity for success. Success is, in and of itself,
quite motivating for students. English teachers who want to provide students with an opportu-
nity for success should provide challenging tasks with sufficient support and instruction along
the way so that success is possible, even probable, for students.
A fourth factor to consider for engaging students in literacy instruction is to provide oppor-
tunities for collaboration. English teachers can engage students in collaborative work by providing
opportunities for students to work in pairs or in small groups around texts. For example, students
might be asked to work in pairs to pull words and phrases from an informational text that support
the author’s argument. In this task, students are given the opportunity to talk with each other.
Finally, students should be provided opportunities to develop a mastery of content knowl-
edge. English teachers who introduce concepts and then help students build a complex web of
knowledge and skills around those concepts are helping students to build mastery of content
knowledge. Such mastery both is engaging for students and helps build students’ confidence
that they can learn complex concepts.

Summary
Students in English language arts classrooms deserve engaging instruction from teachers who
understand how reading and writing in English classrooms engage students in connecting the
texts they read with their own lives and with the world in which they live. This chapter has pro-
vided a variety of instructional and assessment tools that teachers can use to engage students
in meaningful ways with the texts they choose.
Disciplinary Literacy in English Language Arts Classes 151

Application Assignments
In-�Class Assignment
With a partner, examine different texts that you may be teaching in English class, such as a
poem, an argumentative essay, and an expository text. Analyze the approaches to reading and
the skills students must have to comprehend each text. What happens when students read a
poem in the same way that they might read an argumentative essay? What specific reading
strategies might assist students with reading each type of text? (You may refer to the chapter on
reading comprehension to refresh your memory about reading strategies good readers utilize.)

Tutoring Assignment
Select a text your student has been assigned at school. Review the text and identify areas that
may be challenging for your student. Create and teach a lesson plan addressing these chal-
lenges. In the next class, be prepared to discuss your lesson plan and your evaluation of your
teaching.

Homework Assignment
Choose a complex text and identify a skill to teach that addresses a Common Core State Stan-
dard and complete the following:
1. Develop a lesson plan using the Gradual Release of Responsibility model. Explain explic-
itly how you will implement the “I do it [with modeling], we do it [with feedback] and
you do it [independent work]” with your class.
2. For each lesson plan, outline an activity for each of the following:
a. An advanced student
b. A student who is a struggling reader
c. An English language learner

Endnotes
1. Adapted by permission from Rainey & Moje (2012), pp. 6. National Governors Association Center for Best Prac-
71–72. tices & Council of Chief State School Officers (2010).
2. Shanahan & Shanahan (2012). 7. Allen (2009).
3. Sperling & Dipardo (2008). 8. Duke & Pearson (2002).
4. National Governors Association Center for Best Prac- 9. Archer & Hughes (2011).
tices & Council of Chief State School Officers (2010). 10. Hardy (1914).
5. Nystrand (2006). 11. McRae & Guthrie (2009).

Web Sites
National Center for Literacy Education, http://www.ncte Teaching Channel, http://www.teachingchannel.org
.org/ncle Web English Teacher, http://www.webenglishteacher.com
ReadWriteThink, http://www.readwritethink.org

References
Allen, P. (2009). Conferring: The keystone of reader’s workshop. Duke, N.K., & Pearson, P.D. (2002). Effective practices for
Portland, ME: Stenhouse. developing reading comprehension. In A.E. Farstup &
Archer, A., & Hughes, C. (2011). Explicit instruction. New S.J. Samuels (Eds.), What research has to say about reading
York, NY: Guilford.
152 Rush
instruction (pp. 205–Â�242). Newark, DE: International Read-
ing Association.
Hardy, T. (1914). My spirit will not haunt the mound. In
Satires of circumstance: Lyrics and reveries; with miscellaneous
pieces. London, UK: Macmillan.
McRae, A., & Guthrie, J.T. (2009). Promoting reasons for
reading: Teacher practices that impact motivation. In E.H.
Hiebert (Ed.), Reading more, reading better (pp. 55–Â�76). New
York, NY: Guilford.
National Governors Association Center for Best Practices &
Council of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common Core
State Standards for English language arts. Washington, DC:
Author.
Nystrand, M. (2006). Research on the role of classroom dis-
course as it affects reading comprehension. Research in the
Teaching of English, 40(4), 392–Â�412.
Rainey, E., & Moje, E.B. (2012). Building insider knowl-
edge: Teaching students to read, write, and think within
ELA and across the disciplines. English Education, 45(1),
71–Â�90.
Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2012). What is disciplinary
literacy and why does it matter? Topics in Language Disor-
ders, 32(1), 7–Â�18.
Sperling, M., & Dipardo, A. (2008). English education
research and classroom practice: New directions for new
times. Review of Research in Education, 32(1), 62–Â�108.
 11
Teaching Disciplinary Literacy in History Classes
Abby Reisman and Bradley Fogo

Classroom Scenario
“Our job today is to try to figure out why the Homestead Strike turned violent,” a high
school history teacher explains to students who have been practicing historical reading.
Rather than ask students to read and memorize the textbook, this teacher presents students
with two conflicting accounts of the 1892 strike. The first, an excerpt from anarchist Emma
Goldman’s autobiography written in 1931, defends the “manly” strikers and blames Home-
stead manager Henry Frick for hiring “thugs” who opened fire on the strikers. The second,
a newspaper interview conducted with Frick soon after the strike, claims that strikers initi-
ated the violence. As the students read and discuss the contradictory accounts, the teacher
prompts them to consider, “How are these documents similar and different? Which account
do you trust? What makes one more believable than the other?” For homework, students
will write a paragraph describing why Homestead turned violent, supporting their claims
with evidence from the documents.

The students in this example are engaged in disciplinary, historical inquiry. They investigate
a legitimate historical question, evaluate multiple primary source documents, and question
and construct claims based on documentary evidence. In the process, these students identify
and connect historical content, themes, and concepts and practice historical reading and argu-
mentative writing. In this chapter, we examine the theoretical and practical components of a

Objectives: After studying this chapter, you will be able to:

1. Define a disciplinary approach to history instruction and discuss how this approach
differs from typical “content area literacy” approaches to reading in history.
2. Plan a document-�based lesson using historical documents that incorporate the
Common Core State Standards (CCSS), challenging students to critically evaluate
evidence from multiple sources.
3. Prepare a cognitive modeling script for historical documents that demonstrate
the skill of sourcing.
4. Use formative assessments to determine how well your students are learning the
skills needed to comprehend historical documents.

153
154 Reisman and Fogo

disciplinary approach to teaching and learning history and discuss research-�based instructional
and assessment strategies that make this approach accessible to diverse groups of students.

What Is a Disciplinary Approach to Teaching and Learning

History? Why Is It Important? What Does the Research Say?
A disciplinary approach to history instruction engages students in the creation of historical
knowledge. With this approach, students read, evaluate, and interpret historical documents
in order to determine what happened in the past. Such disciplinary literacy is important for
several reasons. First, research on adolescent literacy shows that students struggle to compre-
hend and interpret complex texts. To support the development of high-�level literacy, students
need to encounter a broad range of genres beyond the standard fictional texts that they find in
English class.1 History classrooms are natural habitats for diverse texts, from political speeches
and government reports to letters, diary entries, and newspaper editorials. Second, disciplinary
historical reading trains students to weigh and evaluate competing truth claims, to consider
the author’s motive and purpose, and to draw inferences about the broader social and political
context. In an age where information can be retrieved at the click of a mouse, we have an urgent
obligation to help students become critical consumers of information.
Research shows that such an approach to information and texts is neither natural nor auto-
matic for students. When presented with multiple documents, students are likely to regard the
textbook as most reliable. Students assume that historical knowledge exists somewhere await-
ing dutiful retrieval. Few students recognize that every historical narrative is also an argument
that reflects how an author sees and interprets the evidence.
Yet it is possible to create instructional scenarios that prompt students to engage with texts
in disciplinary ways. For example, researchers have found that students respond well to writing
prompts that ask for an argument,2 to the insertion of an author’s voice in an otherwise passive
textbook,3 to the explicit request of an author’s information,4 and to the juxtaposition of two
contrasting arguments about a historical event.5 In the following text, we combine many of these
instructional strategies into a cohesive lesson plan structure called the “document-Â�based lesson.”

What Should Students Know and Be Able

to Do to Be Prepared for College and Careers?
The Common Core State Standards (CCSS) specify reading practices that prepare students for
college. Included in the document are skills specific to reading and interpreting historical texts.
These historical reading skills include comparing explanations in multiple accounts, identifying
an author’s point of view, and evaluating the strength of the reasoning and evidence in a text.6
The CCSS’s acknowledgement of distinct, domain-Â�specific approaches to reading and writing
aligns with the research on historical thinking, which has identified key strategies that histori-
ans use when they construct an account of the past from multiple pieces of evidence.
Historians approach historical documents critically, evaluating whether and how they can be
used as evidence of what happened in the past. They use four key strategies as they read: sourcing,
corroboration, close reading, and contextualization, as shown in Table 11.1.7 When sourcing histori-
cal artifacts and documents, historians evaluate the reliability and credibility of historical evidence
by identifying and analyzing the author’s perspective, motive, and biases. They also compare and
contrast—Â�or corroborate—Â�perspectives, arguments, and evidence across multiple historical sources
and accounts. This process involves corroborating new forms of evidence with extant, historical
content knowledge, as well as comparing information in new sources with what is already known
about a particular event, time, or place. Historians also engage in the close reading of texts to identify
an author’s claims and evaluate the author’s use of evidence and rhetorical devices.
Finally, historians contextualize events, people, and artifacts within a particular historical
time and place. Contextualization involves analyzing the influence of larger social, political,
economic, cultural, and environmental forces or events on the creation of a historical document
Teaching Disciplinary Literacy in History Classes 155

Table 11.1.â•… Historical reading skills

Historical
reading skills Questions
Sourcing • Who wrote this document?
• Why did they write it?
• What is the author’s point of
view?
• Is this source reliable? Why?
Why not?
Corroboration • What do other pieces of
evidence say?
• Am I finding different ver-
sions of the story? Why or
why not?
• What pieces of evidence are
most reliable?
Contextualization • Where and when was this
document created?
• What else was going on
at the time that this was
written?
• What was it like to be alive at
this time?
• What things were different
back then? What things were
the same?
Close reading • What claims does the author
make?
• What evidence does the
author use to support those
claims?
• How is this document sup-
posed to make me feel?
• What words or phrases does
the author use to convince
me that he or she is right?
• What information does the
author leave out?
Students should be able to€.€.€.
• Identify author’s position on
historical event
• Identify and evaluate
author’s purpose in produc-
ing document
• Predict what the author
will say before reading the
document
• Evaluate source’s believ-
ability/trustworthiness by
considering genre, audience,
and author’s purpose
• Establish what is credible
by comparing documents to
each other
• Recognize disparities
between accounts
• Use context/background
information to draw more
meaning from document
• Infer historical context from
document
• Recognize that document
reflects one moment in a
changing past
• Recognize that sources must
be understood in a larger
context
• Identify author’s claims
about event
• Evaluate evidence/reason-
ing author uses to support
claims
• Evaluate author’s word
choice; understand that
language is used deliberately
Prompts
• This author probably
believes ______.
• I think the audience is
______.
• Based on the sourcing infor-
mation, I predict the author
will ______.
• I do/don’t trust this docu-
ment because ______.
• The author agrees/disagrees
with ______.
• This document was written
earlier/later than the other,
so ______.
• I already know that ______ is
happening at this time.
• From this document I would
guess that people at this
time were feeling ______.
• This document might not
give me the whole picture
because ______.
• I think the author chose
these words because they
make me feel ______.
• The author is trying to
convince me by using/saying
______.

or artifact, as well as re-Â�creating the immediate context of a particular document—Â�for example,

a political speech delivered before Congress in 1917 or the diary entry of a soldier written the
morning after the battle of Gettysburg. Chronology is a key component of contextualization,
as is the ability to make relevant connections among different times and places, people, events,
themes, and phenomena.
Finally, contextual thinking is the pathway for historical empathy. Throughout their inter-
actions with historical materials, historians attempt to understand or appreciate what it was like
to be alive at a particular time or place. Adolescents, by contrast, tend to evaluate past events
through contemporary worldviews or to equate the motivations of historical actors with their
own predilections. An important element of contextual thinking, therefore, is recognizing the
limits of understanding what life was like in the past.
156 Reisman and Fogo

How Do We Develop Instructional Plans that

Incorporate Common Core State Standards and
Evidence-�Based Strategies that Lead to College and Career Readiness?
Disciplinary literacy can be brought into the history classroom in a number of ways. In the open-
ing vignette, for example, the teacher uses conflicting accounts of the Homestead Strike of 1892 to
spark historical inquiry. The sequence of instructional activities in the Homestead vignette con-
stitutes what we call a document-�based lesson.8 These lessons9 include four primary components:
1) the explicit introduction of relevant background knowledge, 2) a central historical question
that frames the lesson’s activities and materials, 3) historical reading and analysis of multiple
documents, and 4) the development of evidence-�based claims through writing and discussion.

Background Knowledge
Each document-�based lesson begins with a review of relevant background knowledge that can
be presented to students in a range of recognizable formats—Â�including lectures, PowerPoint
presentations, videos, and textbook passages. The goal in this part of the lesson is to acquaint
students with the period, events, and issues under investigation and, in some cases, refresh their
memory of the historical context. We recommend limiting the content to information that would
prepare students to engage with the historical documents. In that sense, a history teacher would
prime students’ background knowledge in the same way that an elementary teacher would acti-
vate students’ prior knowledge before reading a story. Research on reading comprehension
has demonstrated the power of prior knowledge in helping readers generate information to fill
the gaps in incoherent texts and to build deeper conceptual understanding. Whether reading
a letter by Thomas Jefferson or a story about a trip to the zoo, the processes of comprehension
and finding meaning are facilitated by recognition and familiarity.

Central Historical Questions

A crucial step in designing history instruction around disciplinary literacy is to give students an
intellectually stimulating purpose for reading. In document-�based lessons, a central historical
question focuses students’ attention and transforms the act of reading into a process of active
inquiry. Historical questions share two key characteristics: 1) they are open to multiple interpreta-
tions, and 2) they direct students to the historical record rather than to their philosophical or moral
beliefs. For example, a good historical question would ask, “Why did the United States drop the
atomic bomb?” rather than “Should the United States have dropped the atomic bomb?” in order
to encourage students to support their claims with textual evidence. “Should” questions, while
important, too often lead students astray, and the resulting discussion leaves the text far behind.
Historical questions can be further divided into evaluative questions, which ask students to
pass judgment on historical actors and events (e.g., Was the New Deal a success? Was Lincoln
a racist?), or interpretive questions, which are more open ended (e.g., Who benefited from the
New Deal? Why did Lincoln pass the Emancipation Proclamation?). The most important con-
sideration when designing a central question is whether it can be answered with evidence from
the document or whether it diverts students’ gaze from the textual evidence.

Document Sets
We use central historical questions in document-�based lessons to introduce and frame student read-
ing and analysis of primary and secondary sources. Lessons can include between two and five
primary documents that shed light on the historical question from several perspectives. We rec-
ommend deliberately selecting documents that offer conflicting interpretations or arguments and
sequencing the documents in such a way that students are forced to change their minds and revise
Teaching Disciplinary Literacy in History Classes 157

their hypotheses. For example, if Document A in a les-

son on John Brown presents the abolitionist as a deeply
principled and moral man, Document B might charac-
terize him as unhinged and dangerous. Moreover, a
document set should represent multiple perspectives.
In the Homestead lesson, for example, Goldman
and Frick offer contrasting explanations for why the
strike turned violent from the point of view of an
anarchist and a company manager. In a lesson on
the Battle of the Somme, students read three different
accounts of the battle’s first day—Â�one from a Brit-
ish journalist who paints a rosy picture of the Allied
offensive and two from combatants that provide
starkly different portraits of the event. These conflict-
ing accounts force students to evaluate truth claims,
consider context and cause-�and-�effect relationships,
and make reasoned judgments as they construct an
account of the past.
Furthermore, we suggest assembling sets of documents that include different types of
sources and evidence. A document set should provide students with opportunities to consider
the comparative reliability, for example, of a diary entry written the day of an event in question
and a memoir written years later or of a political speech delivered at a political rally and the
recording of a confidential conversation. Finally, it is important to work with documents that
are rich in historical information—Â�the sources themselves should help illustrate the events,
people, and phenomenon that students are studying. In this regard, documents should connect
directly to the background information introduced at the beginning of the lesson.

Evidence-�Based Claims
The core objective of a document-�based lesson is for students to develop a historical claim or
argument that answers the lesson’s central question and to support the claim with legitimate
historical evidence. The entire lesson is designed to support students in reaching that goal. Stu-
dents develop a series of hypotheses as they evaluate the reliability of sources and draw from
the background information introduced or reviewed at the beginning of the lesson and evidence
presented in the documents. Each lesson culminates with students stating and defending a final
claim in writing, in classroom discussion, or both.

How Do We Teach Skills Effectively,

Efficiently, and Developmentally Appropriately?
How Can We Engage All Students in Literacy Instruction?
The document-�based lesson represents a significant departure from typical history instruction.
Students will need careful scaffolding and instructional support to begin to read historical
texts in the ways we described earlier. The present section includes key strategies that allow
teachers to introduce historical reading to diverse groups of students. These strategies include
explicit strategy instruction, whole class and small group discussion, adapting and modifying
documents, and designing targeted guiding questions and graphic organizers.

Explicit Instruction
Primary sources alone cannot generate disciplinary historical inquiry. Westhoff10 observed
many teachers using historical sources in ways that were ahistorical. In one lesson, students
158 Reisman and Fogo

were encouraged to assume that Marcus Garvey’s “Declaration of the Rights of Negro Peoples
of the World” represented the perspective of all African Americans in the 1920s; in another,
teachers asked students to rewrite the Seneca Falls Declaration of Sentiments from a modern-�
day perspective. Far from historical inquiry, these activities sometimes reinforce students’
notions that they can understand the past through a single text and that the past is no different
from the present. The point of the document-�based lesson is to underscore for students that
a single account is not sufficient; it takes careful examination of multiple sources to build an
understanding of what happened in the past.
To avoid the kind of presentism that Westhoff found, we recommend an instructional method
familiar to language arts teachers but often unfamiliar to history and social studies classrooms:
explicit strategy instruction. Explicit strategy instruction maintains that cognitive acts such as
reading strategies remain invisible unless they are brought to the surface and named.11 Just as
apprentices observe experts as they learn their craft, students must repeatedly see teachers prac-
tice the strategies of disciplinary reading. Over time, the approach emphasizes a gradual shift of
cognitive responsibility as students begin to practice disciplinary reading with teacher guidance,
in small groups, and individually. Initially, however, students must see the teacher think aloud
while reading historical documents, particularly if they have never seen anyone read in this way.
Explicit strategy instruction puts teachers in front of the class, not as authoritative lecturers,
but—Â�more vulnerably—Â�as readers. Rather than encouraging interactive student participation,
this instructional method requires that teachers first model expert reading without falling back
on the more familiar instructional method of recitation. Cognitive modeling draws a clear dis-
tinction between novice and expert practice by displaying sophisticated strategies with clarity
and precision so that students can internalize and begin to practice them. Student participation,
in this context, would blur the line between expert and novice and distract from the central
purpose of the activity: the demonstration of expert historical reading.
Teachers can use explicit strategy instruction to demonstrate any of the four strategies of
expert historical reading: sourcing (considering the document’s source and purpose), contex-
tualization (placing the document in a temporal and spatial context), corroboration (comparing
the accounts of multiple sources against each other), and close reading (considering an author’s
use of language and word choice). If using Emma Goldman’s account of the 1892 Homestead
Strike to model sourcing, for example, the teacher would highlight the source note and wonder
out loud whether the account is reliable, given that it was written in 1931 and given that her fel-
low anarchist Alexander Berkman attempted to murder plant manager Henry Frick. The teacher
may use Henry Frick’s account, published in the newspaper 7 days after the strike, to practice
close reading. In this case, the teacher might circle the words that painted a negative image of
the strikers and wonder aloud whether the people who read the newspaper sympathized with
Frick or with the strikers. Sorting through the conflicting claims in both documents, the teacher
could also model the strategy of corroboration and ask what, if anything, could be gleaned from
these accounts about the events of the Homestead Strike. Explicit strategy instruction using
cognitive modeling makes visible to students the core skills of disciplinary historical literacy.

Whole-�Class Discussion
Another core teaching practice for document-�based lessons is facilitating both small group and whole-�
class discussion. Discussion enables students to practice and internalize higher-�level ways of thinking
and reading. In this case, discussions are also opportunities for students to develop their historical
knowledge as they articulate their shifting claims, reexamine the available evidence, and interrogate
their classmates’ reasoning.12 In a discussion about historical documents, the facilitator’s primary
role is to push student thinking “consistently and consecutively in a positive direction.”13 In other
words, students should have a deeper understanding of the historical documents and the broader
historical topic at the end of the discussion than they did at the start. A list of effective teacher “moves”
(see Table 11.2) includes key strategies for facilitating effective discussion about historical texts.
Teaching Disciplinary Literacy in History Classes 159

Table 11.2.â•… Seven teacher “moves” for leading discussion in history

Teacher’s “move” What is it?
Asking for textual support The teacher requires that students back
their claims with evidence from the
documents.
Revoicing The teacher rephrases an idea that a stu-
dent is struggling to express as a means
of distilling the key argument and help-
ing other students place the comment in
the framework of the larger discussion.
Prompting The teacher poses or prompts a coun-
counterargument terargument to challenge a particular
student’s interpretation.
Uptake The teacher incorporates prior comments/ That sounds a little bit like what Thomas was
ideas into subsequent questions.
Stabilizing the content The teacher pauses discussion to review
content knowledge relevant to the dis-
cussion at hand.
Questioning the text The teacher prepares questions about
specific parts of the text that yield them-
selves to multiple interpretations.
Modeling The teacher thinks out loud and exposes
how he or she works through a compli-
cated idea in a text (e.g., how to recon-
cile a contradictory statement, decipher
difficult prose, or interpret evocative
language).
Note: Examples come from a discussion of the reasons for Texas Independence.
Example
Can you find a quote in the document that sup-
ports your argument that the Texans wanted to
keep slaves?
It sounds like you’re saying that Benjamin Lundy
was an abolitionist, so we can’t completely
take him at his word about Texas. So you agree
with Jennifer that the Texans truly believed the
Mexican government was violating their rights
because the only person who says they wanted
to expand slavery is Lundy and he’s not a
reliable source in this case?
Does anyone have a different interpretation? Who
disagrees?
saying earlier. Does anyone want to build on
Jennifer’s argument?
Let’s just make sure we’re all on the same page.
The Missouri Compromise established what?
And Texas was where? So if Texas were to
become a state, would it be a slave or free
state?
What does Lundy mean when he says, “We have
been asked to believe that the inhabitants
of Texas have been fighting to maintain the
sacred principles of Liberty, and the natural,
inalienable Rights of Man:—Â�whereas, their
motives have been exactly the opposite”?╛╛14
One of the things I’m wondering as I read this is
why the Texas Declaration of Independence
says “life, liberty, and property” instead of “life,
liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” It makes
me wonder if the Mexican government was
taking the settlers’ property, or maybe this is a
reference to the abolition of slavery?

Modifying Documents
Selection, however important, is only the first step in making documents visually and cogni-
tively accessible to secondary students. More often than not, primary and secondary historical
sources are beyond student reading levels. In order to support all students in engaging with
historical texts, we recommend a radical step: adapting them. According to results on the 2013
National Assessment of Educational Progress, 22% of eighth graders scored below “basic” on
reading. Adapting documents may be the only way to put students in touch with diaries, let-
ters, speeches, and government reports—Â�rich supplements to the intellectually thin diet of the
classroom textbook.
We recommend adapting documents according to three principles: focusing, simplification,
and presentation.15 First, excerpt each document so that students only read the portion that sheds
light on the historical question under investigation. Then simplify vocabulary, conventionalize
spelling and punctuation, and reorder sentences into straightforward sentence–Â�verb construc-
tions. Try to preserve the document’s original language and tone, and know that the extent
and degree of modifications should diminish over the course of the year, as students become
more comfortable reading primary sources with practice and as increasingly modern documents
required fewer adaptations. Furthermore, prepare the documents in ways that would invite,
160 Reisman and Fogo

rather than intimidate, struggling readers. Documents should be no longer than 250 words, writ-
ten in large font and surrounded by comforting white space. Be sure to label these documents
“Modified.” Many teachers choose to make originals available to students as well. Finally, we
suggest including background information in the form of a header to help students place the
document in historical context and consider source information that may not be apparent in
the document (see Table 11.3).

Guiding Questions
In addition to accessibility, students need help navigating and analyzing sets of documents.
Guiding questions are essential for supporting the development of historical reading skills. Such
questions should be designed in an arc, beginning with sourcing questions that ask students
to evaluate the author’s reliability and ending with a return to the central historical question.
Students should first be prompted to consider the point of view and purpose of a document’s
author. Subsequent questions might focus on important parts of the text or prompt students
to make connections among the documents, the relevant historical events and people, and the
broader historical context. Ultimately, guiding questions should help students decide whether
a particular document could be used as evidence in a historical argument and, if so, which parts
of the document would be most effective.

How Do We Assess What Students Know and How Much They

Are Learning? How Do We Use Assessment to Inform Instruction?
Traditionally, assessments in history class are summative, end-�of-�unit tests that measure stu-
dents’ understanding of a particular topic. The two most commonly used history assessments
occupy opposite poles of cognitive rigor: Either students recall facts on multiple-�choice tests
or they write elaborate argumentative essays after reading and synthesizing information in
multiple documents. Neither presents a viable option for the average social studies teacher
whose students may be able to engage in meaningful historical analysis (not captured by the
multiple-�choice test) but still struggle to synthesize 2 documents, let alone 13. Moreover, a
full-�length essay is a clumsy diagnostic tool: A teacher would be hard pressed to determine

Box 11.1.╇ Arc of Questions for Document in

Lesson on Montgomery Bus Boycott
1 What was JoAnne Robinson’s purpose for writing to the mayor? (Sourcing)
2 How long before Rosa Parks’ arrest was this letter written? (Sourcing)
3 Identify one example of segregation that Robinson and the Women’s Politi-
cal Council opposed. (Contextualization)
4 Why do you think Robinson reminds the mayor that three-�fourths of the
bus riders in Montgomery are African American? What is her intention?
(Close reading)
5 How does this document compare with the textbook account of the Mont-
gomery Bus Boycott? (Corroboration)
6 Using this document, revise your answer to the Central Historical Question:
Why was the Montgomery Bus Boycott successful? (Return to central histor-
ical question)
Teaching Disciplinary Literacy in History Classes 161

Table 11.3.â•… Original and modified documents16

Original17
The Sioux, or Dakota Nation of Indians, embracing various
tribes as the Yanktons, Yanctonnais, Brulés, Ogalallas,
Minne-�Conjou Sans Arcs, Two Kettles &c have long been
known as the most brave and warlike Savages of this
Continent. They have for centuries been pushed west-
ward by the advancing tide of civilization, till in 1868 an
arrangemt or Treaty was made with them by a Special
Commission named by Congress, whereby for certain
payments and Stipulations they agreed to surrender
their claim to all that vast Region which lays west of the
Missouri River and north of the Platte; to live at peace
with their neighbors—Â�and to restrict themselves to a
territory bounded East by the Missouri River, South by
Nebraska, West by the 104° meridian, and north by the
46th parallel, a territory as large as the State of Missouri.
The terms of this treaty have been liberally performed
on the part of the United States, and have also been
complied with by the Great Mass of the Sioux Indians.
Some of these Indians however have never recognized
the binding force of this Treaty, but have always treated
it with contempt, have continued to rove at pleasure,
attacking scattered settlements in Nebraska, Wyoming,
Montana, & Dakota, Stealing horses and Cattle, and
murdering peaceful inhabitants and travellers€.€.€.
The present Military operations are not against the
Sioux Nation at all but against certain hostile parts of it
which defy the Government, and are undertaken at the
Special request of that Bureau of the Governmt charged
with their Supervision, and wholly to make the civilization
of the remainder possible. No part of these operations
are on or near the Sioux Reservation. The accidental
discovery of Gold on the Western border of the Sioux
Reservation, and the intrusion of our people thereon have
not caused this War, and have only Complicated it by the
uncertainty of numbers to be encountered. The young
warriors love war, and frequently escape their agents to
go on the hunt, or War Path their only idea of the object
of life. The object of these Military Expeditions was in the
interest of the peaceful parts of the Sioux Nation, sup-
posed to embrace at least nine tenths of the whole, and
not one of these peaceful or Treaty Indians have been
molested by the Military authorities€.€.€.
Original passage from Simon, J.Y. (Ed). (2005). The papers of Ulysses S. Grant: Volume 27: January 1–October 31, 1876 (pp. 170–171).
Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press; republished with permission by the Ulysses S. Grant Association.
Modified
Washington, July 8, 1876
To the PRESIDENT:
The Sioux, or Dakota Nation of Indians, have long been known
as the most brave and warlike savages of this continent.
They have, for centuries, been pushed westward by the
advancing tide of civilization. In 1868, a treaty was made
with them by a special commission named by Congress. For
certain payments and stipulations, they agreed to surrender
their claim to all that vast region that lies west of the Mis-
souri River and north of the Platte to live at peace with their
neighbors and to stay within their territory.
The terms of this treaty have been honored by the United
States and have also been complied with by the great mass
of Sioux Indians. Some of these Indians, however, have
never recognized the binding force of this treaty and have
always treated it with contempt. They have continued to rove
at pleasure, attacking scattered settlements in Nebraska,
Wyoming, Montana, and Dakota; stealing horses and cattle;
and murdering peaceful inhabitants and travelers.
The present military operations are not against the Sioux
Nation at all but against certain hostile parts of it which defy
the Government. No part of these operations are on or near
the Sioux reservation. The accidental discovery of gold on the
western border of the Sioux reservation and the intrusion
of our people there have not caused this war. The young
warriors love war and frequently escape their agents to go
on the hunt, or warpath, their only idea of the object of life.
The object of these military expeditions was in the interest
of the peaceful parts of the Sioux Nation, and not one of
these peaceful or treaty Indians have been molested by the
military authorities.
Very respectfully,
J.D. CAMERON, Secretary of War
Source: The President of the United States asked the Secre-
tary of War, J.D. Cameron, for a report of the military actions
leading up to the Battle of Little Bighorn.

whether a weak essay indicates that the student struggles with the historical concepts, with
understanding the language in the documents, with basic organization and writing mechanics,
or with the interpretation of evidence.
We propose that teachers embed smart, quick formative assessments into daily instruc-
tion to gauge students’ development of historical thinking. Formative assessment—Â�a feedback
loop whereby the teacher adjusts instruction in response to evidence of student learning—Â�is
essential to effective instruction.18 The document-�based lesson includes several opportunities
for teachers to see student thinking, assess student understanding, and design instruction that
responds accordingly. Carefully designed guiding questions allow teachers to quickly pin-
point where student comprehension of a particular document fell apart. Furthermore, teachers
can pace lessons by monitoring student responses to questions and progress through graphic
162 Reisman and Fogo

organizers. Second, most lessons culminate

in students writing a single paragraph in
response to the central historical question.
This short writing exercise allows teachers
to see whether students can articulate the
connection between the documentary evi-
dence and the larger historical argument.
The exercise also allows teachers to target
core skills in historical writing, such as
establishing historical context, attributing
authorship, and weighing the evidence on
either side of an argument. Teacher feed-
back should engage directly with students’
claims and can include the following:19
• Correcting historical accuracy: “I’d say since about 1831 with a very sharp exchange in 1819.”
• Focusing on evidence: “You should state some of his beliefs here.”
• Interpretive disagreement: “I’m not sure he would say this. For Garrison it was more sickening.”
• Extension of content: “Excellent€.€.€. all the abolitionists were disappointed with the Protestant
churches.”

Historical Assessments of Thinking

A third assessment of historical thinking is now available for teachers at a web site called Beyond
the Bubble (http://beyondthebubble.stanford.edu). Historical assessments of thinking (HATs)
present students with short, carefully defined historical tasks that address specific aspects of
historical thinking. Each task can be completed in less than 15 minutes, some in less than 5. HATs
have several benefits: 1) they are quick, formative assessments that directly target the skills of
historical thinking; 2) they have been piloted and validated with actual students, and the web
site includes sample responses and rubrics for scoring them; 3) although they target the same
skills that students would practice in the guiding questions, HATs go beyond these questions to
measure students’ ability to transfer the skills of historical thinking to new documents and unfa-
miliar historical topics. In that sense, the HATs truly gauge whether students are college ready.
Consider one HAT that taps a core historical understanding: How and when a document was
created must be considered when judging its value as evidence. Students are presented with an
image of Thanksgiving painted by J.L.G. Ferris in 1932 and asked to decide whether it would be
useful to historians who want to understand the relationship between settlers and the Wampa-
noag in 1621. A 311-�year gap separates illustration from event. Yet many students ignore this
information entirely. We have found that students’ short written responses provide teachers with
rich information. Strong answers indicate that students have grasped this dimension of evaluating
historical evidence. Less developed responses also point teachers in specific directions. In both
cases, teachers have a clearer sense of where to go to improve their students’ thinking.

Summary
To bring disciplinary literacy into the history classroom is to fundamentally transform the act
of reading in history. Instead of regurgitating names and dates, this approach asks students to
read critically, evaluate the reliability of evidence, make connections with historical background
knowledge, and ultimately participate in the creation of knowledge. This approach requires that
students be able to not only answer the question “What happened?” but also respond thought-
fully to the challenge “How do you know?” and “Why do you believe your interpretation is
valid?” Such skills constitute the essence of college readiness.
Teaching Disciplinary Literacy in History Classes 163

Application Assignments
Homework Assignment
Assume you are designing a document-Â�based lesson around the United States’ involvement in
World War I. Your homework task is to 1) draft a central historical question to frame the lesson
and 2) find two primary sources that address the question from different perspectives and/or
illustrate different types of evidence.

Tutoring Assignment
Prepare a cognitive modeling script for one of the documents that demonstrates the skill of
sourcing for a student. To do so, write a paragraph detailing what you will say. Be sure to
model the following:
1. First read the document’s attribution out loud and emphasize that a key part of historical
reading is knowing who the author is and why they’re writing.
2. Identify three additional points about the source (e.g., genre, date, audience, purpose)
that shed light on the document and help you make predictions about what the docu-
ment will say and whether or not it is a reliable source of evidence.

In-�Class Assignment (After You Have Completed Homework Assignment)

1. Share your draft question, documents, and rationale for document selection with a partner.
2. Excerpt and modify documents according to the design principles discussed in this chapter.
3. Create four to five guiding questions for each document that help students source, corrobo-
rate, and contextualze the documents.

Endnotes
1. Biancarosa & Snow (2006); Heller & Greenleaf (2007). 1 0. Westhoff (2009).
2. Wiley & Voss (1999). 11. Collins, Brown, & Holum (1991); Collins, Brown, &
3. Paxton (2002). Newman (1989).
4. Britt & Aglinskas (2002). 12. Brown & Campione (1994); Wells (1999).
5. Wolfe & Goldman (2005). 13. Dewey (1990).
6. Common Core State Standards (CCSS) Initiative (2010), 14. Lundy (1836).
p. 61. 15. Wineburg & Martin (2009).
7. Wineburg (1991, 2001). 16. Adapted from Stanford History Education Group,
8. Reisman (2012). http://sheg.stanford.edu/battle-�little-�bighorn
9. We have developed more than 85 document-�based 17. Simon (2005).
lessons as part of the Stanford History Education 18. Black & Wiliam (1998); Heritage (2010); Herman,
Group’s Reading Like a Historian curriculum. These Osmundson, & Silver (2010); Sadler (1989).
lessons are available for free at http://sheg.stanford 19. Adapted from Monte-�Sano (2011), p. 234.
.edu/rlh

References
Biancarosa, C., & Snow, C.E. (2006). Reading next—Â�A vision
for action and research in middle and high school literacy: A
report to Carnegie Corporation of New York (2nd ed.). Wash-
ington, DC: Alliance for Excellent Education.
Black, P., & Wiliam, D. (1998). Assessment and classroom
learning. Assessment in Education, 5, 7–Â�74.
Britt, M.A., & Aglinskas, C. (2002). Improving students’ abil-
ity to identify and use source information. Cognition and
Instruction, 20(4), 485–Â�522.
Brown, A.L., & Campione, J.C. (1994). Guided discovery in
a community of learners. In K. McGilly (Ed.), Classroom
lessons: Integrating cognitive theory and classroom practice (pp.
229–Â�270). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Collins, A., Brown, J.S., & Holum, A. (1991). Cognitive
apprenticeship: Making thinking visible. American Educa-
tor, Winter, 6–Â�91.
Collins, A., Brown, J., & Newman, S. (1989). Cognitive
apprenticeship: Teaching the craft of reading, writing and
164 Reisman and Fogo
mathematics. In L. Resnick (Ed.), Knowing, learning, and
instruction: Essays in honor of Robert Glaser (pp. 453–Â�493).
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Common Core State Standards (CCSS) Initiative. (2010).
Common Core State Standards for English language arts and
literacy in history/social studies, science, and technical subjects.
Washington, DC: CCSS Initiative & National Governors
Association.
Dewey, J. (1990). Brigham Young educational lectures. In
J.A. Boydston (Ed.), John Dewey: The later works, 1925–Â�1953:
Vol. 17: 1885–Â�1953, miscellaneous writings. Carbondale, IL:
Southern Illinois University Press. (Original work pub-
lished 1901).
Heller, R., & Greenleaf, C.L. (2007). Literacy instruction in
the content areas: Getting to the core of middle and high school
improvement. Washington, DC: Alliance for Excellent
Education.
Heritage, M. (2010). Formative assessment: Making it happen in
the classroom. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Herman, J.L., Osmundson, E., & Silver, D. (2010). Capturing
quality in formative assessment practice: Measurement chal-
lenges (CRESST Report 770). Los Angeles: University of
California, National Center for Research on Evaluation,
Standards, and Student Testing (CRESST).
Lundy, B. (1836). The war in Texas in 1836. Philadelphia, PA:
Merrihew and Gunn. Retrieved October 12, 2008, from
http://www.tamu.edu/ccbn/dewitt/lundy.htm
Monte-�Sano, C. (2011). Beyond reading comprehension and
summary: Learning to read and write in history by focus-
ing on evidence, perspective, and interpretation. Curricu-
lum Inquiry, 41(2), 212–Â�249.
National Center for Education Statistics (2013). The nation’s
report card: A first look: 2013 mathematics and reading (NCES
2014-�451). Washington, DC: Institute of Education Sci-
ences, U.S. Department of Education.
Paxton, R.J. (2002). The influence of author visibility on high
school students solving a historical problem. Cognition and
Instruction, 20(2), 197–Â�248.
Reisman, A. (2012). “The document-Â�based lesson”: Bringing
disciplinary inquiry into high school history classrooms with
adolescent struggling readers. Journal of Curriculum Studies,
44(2), 233–Â�264.
Sadler, D.R. (1989). Formative assessment and the design of
instructional systems. Instructional Science, 18, 145–Â�165.
Simon, J.Y. (Ed). (2005). The papers of Ulysses S. Grant: Volume
27: January 1–October 31, 1876 (pp. 170–171). Carbondale:
Southern Illinois University Press.
Wells, G. (1999). Dialogic inquiry: Towards a sociocultural prac-
tice and theory of education. New York, NY: Cambridge Uni-
versity Press.
Westhoff, L. (2009). Lost in translation: Using primary
sources in the classroom. In R. Ragland & K. Woestman
(Eds.), Teaching American history: Lessons for historians and
educators (pp. 62–Â�79). New York, NY: Routledge.
Wiley, J., & Voss, J.F. (1999). Constructing arguments from
multiple sources: Tasks that promote understanding and
not just memory for text. Journal of Educational Psychology,
91(2), 301–Â�311.
Wineburg, S.S. (1991). On the reading of historical texts:
Notes on the breach between school and academy. Ameri-
can Educational Research Journal, 28(3), 495–Â�519.
Wineburg, S.S. (2001). Historical thinking and other unnatural
acts: Charting the future of teaching the past. Philadelphia, PA:
Temple University Press.
Wineburg, S.S., & Martin, D. (2009). Tampering with history:
Adapting primary sources for struggling readers. Social
Education, 73(5), 212–Â�216.
Wolfe, M.B.W., & Goldman, S.R. (2005). Relations between
adolescents’ text processing and reasoning. Cognition and
Instruction, 23(4), 467–Â�502.
 12
Teaching Secondary Students
to Read and Write in Science
Dolores Perin

Classroom Scenario
Two teachers, Mr. A., who teaches English language arts, and Ms. B., who teaches science,
were talking over lunch. Ms. B. was enthusiastic about a lesson she had just taught on pho-
tosynthesis, different ways to grow food, and the impact of various agricultural methods on
the environment. When Mr. A asked about the reading assigned for the topic, Ms. B’s face
fell. She was not sure why, but many students seemed to have problems understanding the
textbook chapter, and when she asked students to write a summary of the main ideas, many
were flummoxed. Ms. B. mentioned that she was starting to “get around” students’ reading
and writing difficulties through increasing the lecturing she did in class and having students
copy notes from the smart board. She thought it would be good if students conducted a web-�
based project on photosynthesis but had decided to reduce the amount of reading and writing
she assigned, since it was very challenging for about half of the students.

How can Mr. A. and Ms. B. address these problems in their classrooms? This chapter focuses
on how secondary education teachers can support students’ ability to read and write in the area
of science. Proficiency in literacy is essential in the science classroom. If secondary schools are

Objectives: After studying this chapter, you will be able to:

1. Explain what is involved in reading and writing in the area of science.
2. Describe key science-�related reading and writing skills secondary students should
have to be prepared for college and careers.
3. Provide examples of how science-�related literacy skills can be assessed and explain
how such an assessment can be used to plan instruction.
4. Plan instruction using contextualization and integration to teach science-�related
reading and writing skills in a grade-�and age-�appropriate manner.
5. Describe how to incorporate relevant Common Core State Standards (CCSS) and
evidence-�based strategies in planning reading and writing instruction in science.
6. Explain how teachers can engage all secondary students in science-�related reading
and writing instruction.

165
166 Perin

to help students become citizens who

understand important scientific con-
cepts in society and perhaps to become
scientists, they need to ensure that all
students can read scientific material
and write meaningfully about scien-
tific issues.1
The knowledge students need
to understand new scientific topics is
most often obtained through reading
and deepened through writing activ-
ities.2 However, national surveys and
teacher observations indicate that large
numbers of secondary students do not
have proficient reading or writing skills.3 Limited reading comprehension strategies and lack
of prior knowledge may hinder students’ use of print as a source of scientific knowledge devel-
opment. Students may lack “genre knowledge,” which helps them extract information from
charts, graphs, symbols, and text found in science textbooks, move easily between these forms,
and decide what to read first.4 Furthermore, students may not easily tell the difference between
primary scientific concepts and motivational material in textbook chapters so that interesting
examples meant by the author to motivate students actually distract them from key scientific
information.5
In addition, lack of writing proficiency creates difficulties when students attempt to report
on experiments and other experiential activities in science classrooms. Low writing skill is
an obstacle, since learning science requires that phenomena are described precisely, technical
terms are accurate, and units of measurement are correct.6
All these literacy challenges may be intensified by the nature of many science textbooks. They
often present a large amount of technical vocabulary, and their combination of text and graphic
information can be confusing for students not familiar with this style. Also, the textbooks may
cover too many topics and not utilize the background knowledge students have, even if small,
or address commonly held misconceptions about science. Furthermore, science textbooks may
not present information coherently,7 which means that the information may be difficult to follow.
From which teachers can students expect to receive help with these problems? This is a
hard question to answer. English language arts (ELA) teachers may not feel sufficiently familiar
with science topics to provide needed support in science-�related reading and writing, whereas,
at the same time, science teachers may not feel prepared to teach reading and writing skills. The
struggling secondary student can get caught in the middle of these uncertainties and end up
not receiving support. A better direction is for “both sides of the house”—Â�both ELA and science
teachers—Â�to help students read and write better in the area of science. This chapter presents sug-
gestions for how this can be done. Practical strategies will be described for the English language
arts teacher to contextualize reading and writing skills in science topics in regular ELA lessons and
for the science teacher to integrate reading and writing strategies during regular science lessons.

What Does It Mean to Read and Write Like a Scientist?

Many kinds of text are read and written by professional scientists, including raw data, bench
notes, research diaries, field notes, journal or log entries, articles and book chapters in schol-
arly and popular outlets, textbooks, laboratory workbooks, training manuals, technical docu-
ments, personal communications such as letters and digital communications, press releases,
news briefs, advertisements, pamphlets, autobiographies, and biographies.8 Some or all of these
types of text may be used in secondary science instruction, and some are more challenging than
others. The majority of literacy activities among professional scientists involve the reading of
reports written by other scientists and writing scholarly articles and laboratory reports.9
Teaching Secondary Students to Read and Write in Science 167

Scientists must read research findings with a critical eye while applying their background
knowledge of the topic and present factual information clearly in writing while following
an established text structure in order to inform other scientists and the larger community.
Both reading and writing in science involve use of technical language, including frequent
nominalization—Â�for example, if a scientist writes, “Salt goes through the process of dissolu-
tion,” rather than the simpler statement, “Salt dissolves.”10
Examples from chemists’ reflections help us understand what it means to “read like a
scientist.” When chemists read research reports, they often assess information based on when
and where the research was conducted, since there have been many advances in science and
organizations vary in the quality of research produced. Furthermore, chemists read a variety of
texts in an attempt to corroborate and assess the plausibility of scientific findings. In addition,
they identify specific information using the structure of a report to support the search for infor-
mation. They also read text closely, rereading as necessary, and distinguish carefully between
information they already know and new material. When the material is new, the scientist will
tend to read especially carefully, going back and forth between graphic material and text, tak-
ing notes, and reading the notes over. When the material is already familiar, the scientist shifts
to a different approach, critiquing the material and evaluating the authors of the work, the
organization in which the work was done, the types of materials and procedures used, and the
accuracy of details such as the units of measurement reported.11
Information is also known about chemists’ writing. These scientists frequently conduct
laboratory experiments and analyze chemical structures, writing up their findings in the form
of lab reports that follow a specific structure.12 Although types of reading and writing will vary
across different branches of science, taking literacy practices among chemists as one example,
we can see that reading and writing like a scientist requires special preparation in school. For
example, it is important for students to be able to read carefully, comprehend larger concepts
and small details, and utilize text structure in both reading and writing.

What Should Secondary Education Students Know

and Be Able to Do to Be Prepared to Read and Write in
the Area of Science to Be Ready for College and Careers?
Secondary education students must have a number of sophisticated reading and writing skills
to be prepared for the literacy demands of science for college and careers. Examples of the skills
required are listed in Figure 12.1.
Students must apply reading comprehension strategies to understanding science textbooks.
To do this, they must be sensitive to typical text structures such as descriptions of scientific phe-
nomena, lists of details, presentation of problems and solutions, and discussion of cause and
effect. While reading, students must monitor their own understanding of the scientific concepts
they are encountering and evaluate information based on their own knowledge.13 Furthermore,
reading comprehension in science involves reading critically, not just memorizing information
for a science test. This is a metacognitive skill that may need special attention, since students
may be used to memorizing or reading superficially rather than trying to understand deeply
when they read science text.
Both reading and writing in science involve the use of science-�related academic language
and vocabulary, much of which may be new to students.14 Some of the new vocabulary needs
to be taught explicitly, whereas the meanings of other terms may be inferred while reading.
Also, secondary students need to learn how to manage the demands of the close reading of
dense text typical in science.15 Furthermore, part of the process of comprehending science text
involves constructing scientific explanations and arguments.16 Students may be required to read
about controversies such as global warming, and for this, they need to understand the nature
of argumentation in science.17 They can learn this through writing persuasive essays on current
scientific controversies.
168 Perin

Be Ready for College and Careers

• Be sensitive to text structure when comprehending science text.
• Monitor your understanding while reading.
• Evaluate information based on prior knowledge.
• Read critically rather than just memorizing information.
• Understand science-Â�related academic language and technical vocabulary.
• Apply knowledge of technical vocabulary for science.
• Read actively, constructing scientific explanations and arguments.
• Understand the nature of scientific argumentation to comprehend and respond to current scientific controversies.

Figure 12.1.â•… What secondary students need to know and do to read and write in science to be ready for college and careers.

How Can Literacy Skills in the Area of Science Be Assessed,

and How Can We Use Such Assessment to Plan Instruction?
From the perspective of classroom instruction, reading assessment can take two forms. First,
teachers can assess the difficulty of books and other materials that students are required to read
when learning science.18 One reason is that, as mentioned earlier, science text is often dense and
contains technical vocabulary. Another reason is that the text may be written in an “inconsiderate”
way by placing undue demand on students’ background knowledge.19 Teachers need to assess
text characteristics in light of what they know about their students’ skills. This assessment will
reveal the degree of support and the types of strategies students will need to be taught.20
Second, the teacher can assess students’ strengths and weaknesses in science-Â�related read-
ing and writing tasks. Given the different vocabulary and writing style, it will be particularly
important to assess the reading and writing skills of English language learners (ELLs).21 How-
ever, regardless of students’ proficiency in English, it is important for teachers to use assessment
information when planning instruction. For example, if students show strength in retelling
information from science text but are less skilled at summarizing it, the teacher would empha-
size summarization instruction in lesson planning. A teacher has several options to choose
from when assessing students’ science-Â�related reading and writing skills, listed in Figure 12.2.
The first option, observations, arguably requires the greatest degree of teacher expertise.
Observations are most informative when they are made on the basis of a strong grasp of how
scientists read and write, summarized previously, and an understanding of the Common Core
State Standards (CCSS) for reading and writing in science, as we discuss later. The other assess-
ment options listed in Figure 12.2—Â�analyzing writing samples, holding interviews and confer-
ences, tracking test scores and grades, and analyzing responses to specific test items—Â�add to
and help explain teachers’ observations of students’ science-Â�related reading and writing.
Interviewing students may be a particularly useful way for teachers to understand processes
in science-�related reading and writing of ELLs. These students may understand the nature of sci-
entific writing but not be comfortable using it for expression. For example, interviews with ELLs
in one study revealed that they were aware of the characteristics and format of science laboratory
reports but did not think it was valid to write in the type of concise, dense language expected by
a scientific audience, since other readers would find it difficult to understand.22
Together, all the assessment options listed in Figure 12.2 form the basis of “diagnostic teach-
ing,”23 which is an aspect of all good instruction. When using diagnostic teaching, the teacher
tries out various techniques based on the assessment of students’ skills, especially through
ongoing classroom observations, and systematically modifies the techniques as needed over
time. An important component in the diagnostic teaching of science-�related reading includes an
analysis of the textbook and other assigned written materials so that support can be provided
as needed for students’ comprehension of difficult vocabulary and dense text.
Teaching Secondary Students to Read and Write in Science 169

Science-�Related Reading and Writing Skills

• Observations of students as they respond to science-Â�related reading comprehension questions and engage in science-Â�
based writing assignments in class
• Analysis of science-Â�related writing samples
• Interviews and conferences with students to discuss their perceptions of and processes in science-Â�related reading and
writing tasks
• Tracking of scores on science-Â�related comprehension quizzes and grades on science-Â�related writing assignments over
time

Figure 12.2. Options for assessing students’ science-Â�related reading and writing skills.

How Do We Teach Science-�Related Literacy Skills

Effectively, Efficiently, and in a Grade-�and Age-�Appropriate Manner?
Through discussion and the teaching of specific techniques, secondary teachers can help stu-
dents set purposes for reading and comprehend difficult text.24 Much of secondary science edu-
cation involves experiential activities and experiments;
proficient reading and writing skills will support stu-
dents’ ability to apply the knowledge gained through
these activities. “Science literacy instruc-
To strengthen science-�related reading skills and tion should engage chil-
help build background knowledge, teachers may assign dren and youth in making
relevant trade books and magazine articles,26 augment- sense of scientific texts
ing the science textbook. Some ways to support reading as one form of scientific
in science are to relate new science concepts in written inquiry.”25
text to students’ personal experience; ask comprehension
questions about science-�related text that are meaningful
to students; teach students how to use visual displays
and point out how they relate to the text narrative; give students an opportunity to explore
scientific ideas in writing tasks; and use the language of science in discussing science-�based
reading and writing activities.27
Importance of Explicit Instruction As discussed earlier in this chapter, scientific reading and
writing have special demands. Secondary students need to be shown how to read and write like
scientists. There is a world of difference between assigning students reading and writing tasks
and explicitly teaching them how to perform these tasks in the context of science. Low-�skilled
students may often seem unmotivated to read and write about science, but the underlying
problem may be that they simply do not know how to perform these tasks.
If teachers provide explicit instruction, this problem can be overcome, as students will now
have a clear idea of what is required and will no longer have to guess. Steps in explicit literacy
instruction29 that can be used to teach science-�based reading and writing skills are shown in
Figure 12.3.

Box 12.1.╇ Assigning versus Teaching Literacy

Skills: Students Need to Be Shown How!
“Rather than merely assigning reading, teachers need to explain, model, provide
guided practice, and engage students in independent practice.”28
170 Perin

1. Introduce the strategy, mentioning it by name and explaining when it can be useful for specific purposes in science-�related
reading and writing.
2. Model the strategy, using science material that students are currently using. Modeling involves demonstrating the strategy
while students watch. Teachers think aloud while showing exactly how the strategy is performed, revealing the thought
processes needed to apply the strategy to reading science text or writing about science.
3. After modeling the strategy, the teacher provides students with guided practice. Students can work in groups while the
teacher circulates to check understanding of how the strategy is performed.
4. When students are ready, the teacher assigns independent practice in the strategy, either in class or for homework.

Figure 12.3.╅ Steps in explicit literacy instruction for science-�related reading and writing.

Setting Purposes for Writing in Science

Science-�related writing activities provide a powerful way for students to simultaneously deepen
their knowledge of science and strengthen their writing skills.30 Prain and Hand provide a use-
ful model of elements of writing for learning in science. In this model, text can be produced by
individuals, pairs, or groups using pen and paper or computer. The audience for science-�related
writing includes fellow students, teachers, and parents. Teachers show students how to set
purposes to be accomplished at the beginning of writing, during writing, and at the completion
of writing activities, including exploration and hypothesizing, clarification and interpretation,
and demonstration and application. Setting such purposes can apply to various types of science-�
related writing: not just reports and diagrams but brochures, letters, and posters. Lower-�skilled
students may have difficulty understanding what it means to set purposes, and their limited
background knowledge of science may interfere with setting purposes at various points during
the writing assignment. For these reasons, it will be particularly important for teachers to model
the setting of purposes very clearly and carefully.

Writing Laboratory Reports

Laboratory reports provide a way for secondary students to deepen their understanding of
scientific inquiry in which they have engaged and also serve as a method of assessment for the
teacher.31 Although teachers use various formats,32 lab reports generally contain sections includ-
ing the purpose of the experiment or activity, hypotheses, the materials used, the procedure
followed, the observations that were made or findings obtained, and a conclusion. Among these
various elements, secondary students have particular difficulty with writing conclusions and
may omit this section altogether.
Drawing conclusions from scientific experiences involves making inferences from data
and providing evidence to support statements made.33 In an intervention tested by Porter and
colleagues, it was found that students improved their ability to write conclusions in a lab report
when teachers taught them how to use a checklist34 and led discussions of data analysis. The
checklist is shown in Figure 12.4. Using this checklist requires metacognitive skills of reflecting
on one’s own level of knowledge and quality of performance and awareness of the informational
needs of one’s audience. Before asking students to use the checklist, the teacher should introduce
it and explain its purpose and then model using it in detail. Students should then be given guided
practice in using the checklist with teacher feedback before being asked to use it independently.
How can secondary teachers use explicit instruction to support students’ writing of lab
reports and perform other science-�related reading and writing tasks? Research suggests that
students benefit from disciplinary literacy approaches that combine instruction in formats typ-
ically used in written communications within given groups, such as the scientific community
(see Chapters 8 and 9 in this volume). Approaches to teaching disciplinary literacy fall into two
categories: contextualized and integrated instruction.
Teaching Secondary Students to Read and Write in Science 171

☐ Did you summarize and include data or results essential to your conclusions?

☐ Did you clearly explain your conclusions using your data or results?

☐ Are there any additional experiments that you would perform to explore unanswered questions?

☐ Did you discuss any real-Â�world applications related to this information?

☐ Did you use complete sentences?

☐ Did you check for spelling and punctuation errors?

☐ Did you cite sources where necessary, and did you use the correct citation format?

☐ Did you anticipate any questions the reader may have?

Figure 12.4.â•… Checklist for writing conclusions in a science laboratory report.(From Porter, R., Guarienti, K., Brydon, B., Robb, J.,
Royston, A., Painter, H., . . . Smith, M.H. [2010]. Writing better lab reports. The Science Teacher, 77[1], 43–48; reprinted by permission.)

Contextualized and Integrated Instruction

Both contextualized and integrated instruction involve explicit instruction. The difference is
that contextualized instruction is provided by English language arts teachers and integrated
instruction by science teachers. Both groups of teachers have the same aim—Â�to teach students
useful strategies for science-�related reading and writing.
In contextualized instruction, science material is used for context but science is not
taught—Â�only the English language arts skills of reading and writing are taught. The goal
here is to give students an experience of applying reading and writing skills to the content
of science so that when they need them in a science classroom, they will have them at their
disposal. Furthermore, low-�skilled students who may have low motivation to learn literacy
in traditional formats may be more interested when the skills can be applied immediately
in the science classroom.
Integrated instruction involves the incorporation of explicit reading and writing instruc-
tion in routine science lessons. In this case, the purpose is to teach literacy skills in the service
of science learning35 so that the value of integrated literacy instruction is in helping students
develop the reading and writing skills they need to support scientific inquiry and other learning
processes in the science classroom.
The characteristics of contextualized and integrated instruction are outlined in Table 12.1.
The actual steps for the teacher in contextualized and integrated instruction are identical. What
differs is the setting (ELA classroom or science classroom) and immediate goal (skills develop-
ment or science achievement).
A secondary English language arts teacher contextualizes instruction by anchoring rele-
vant literacy skills from the ELA curriculum in science text. It is best to use text students are
currently using in the science classroom. Therefore, it will be important for ELA teachers to
talk to science teachers at the applicable grade level to obtain samples of text. For example, an
ELA teacher may consult a biology teacher to identify the textbook and chapter being used to
teach the topic of photosynthesis in the students’ science class36 and then use a passage from
the chapter as the basis for reading comprehension and vocabulary skills instruction in the ELA
class. The ELA teacher is not teaching science content. Rather, passages from science text are
used as a backdrop for teaching the ELA reading and writing skills students will need to use
the text meaningfully in a content area classroom.
Just as the ELA teacher is not teaching science when teaching contextualized ELA read-
ing and writing skills, the science teacher has not become a reading teacher when teaching
students reading and writing strategies to support classroom science learning. Integrated
instruction in science reading and writing skills has only one purpose: to assist students in
172 Perin

Table 12.1.╅ Contextualized and integrated instruction for teaching science-�related reading and writing skills
Type of instruction Contextualized instruction
Who does it English language arts teacher
What it is Teaching of traditional English language arts
(ELA) reading comprehension and writing
skills using science text as a context—Â�
science is the backdrop but is not taught
Proposed benefits to students Generalization of skill from ELA to sci-
ence classroom; increased motivation
because of immediate application
Integrated instruction
Science teacher
Teaching of routine science lessons, incor-
porating explicit instruction in reading
and writing skills needed to master the
content being taught
Increased ability to read and write in
science, leading to broader and deeper
learning of science concepts

learning science. The integrated literacy skills are taught for immediate application to the
science material at hand.
The teacher has a variety of evidence-�based techniques from which to choose in order to
support students’ science-Â�related reading and writing skills. Examples of techniques37 are sum-
marized in Table 12.2. Any one of these techniques can be contextualized or integrated. To do
this, the teacher selects an appropriate strategy and applies it to relevant science text.

Incorporating Standards and Evidence-�Based Strategies in Lesson

Plans for Teaching Science-�Related Reading and Writing Skills
The CCSS literacy standards,38 which are discussed in Chapter 1 of this textbook, include liter-
acy competencies for science and technical subjects. Examples of competencies specified for the
end of secondary education (Grades 11–Â�12) are shown in Figure 12.5. Teachers of all secondary
grade levels should be aware of the 11th-�to 12th-�grade standard in order to familiarize them-
selves with the skills required to be ready for college and careers.
In lesson planning, teachers should analyze the science text, including graphic material
(charts, diagrams, and symbols), in order to identify the key ideas and vocabulary. After formu-
lating an objective and key learning outcomes for the lesson, it will be helpful to read through
the science-�related CCSS literacy standards to find the competencies students will need in order
to attain the desired learning goals. When writing a lesson plan, the teacher should translate the
applicable competency into the four instructional steps listed in Appendix C.

Approaches to Engage All Students

in Science-�Related Literacy Instruction
Secondary education teachers have long observed diminishing motivation among their adoles-
cent students for traditional academic learning, regardless of students’ ability level or achieve-
ment history. It is possible that contextualization of reading and writing instruction in science
may improve motivation as students see an immediate use for the skills.39 Teachers can try to
relate the reading or writing skill being taught to real-�life applications and interests and include
students’ out-Â�of-Â�school science and literacy experiences in classroom reading and writing activi-
ties. Part of this process can involve having students examine and discuss their beliefs in regard
to socially important and currently relevant scientific topics.40 Furthermore, reading and writing
activities can be designed to incorporate the use of social networks such as Facebook as well
as texting and blogging. For example, students can be taught how to write blogs consisting of
short argumentative essays on issues such as global warming or the use of genetic modification
in food production. As before, the teacher needs to explain the process, model it, and provide
guided and independent practice.
Teaching Secondary Students to Read and Write in Science 173

Table 12.2.╅ Examples of evidence-�based techniques for teaching science-�related reading comprehension
Strategy Source Skill focus Summary of technique
Combined text Seifert and Espin Science-� Individualized instruction. 1) Word recognition: Teacher reads
reading and (2012) related science vocabulary words aloud and then student reads words.
vocabulary reading Teacher corrects errors. 2) Teacher reads definitions of same
compre- science vocabulary and student repeats definition. 3) Teacher
hension places each word in sentence and student repeats sentence.
and vocab- 4) Teacher asks two questions about the word and teacher
ulary devel- prompts as needed. 5) Teacher reads passage aloud and student
opment follows along. Student reads passage, teacher corrects errors,
student reads passage again.
Graphic Reed and Comprehen- Teacher creates graphic organizers that include figures, charts,
organizer for Vaughn (2012), sion of symbols, or other visual information from a science chapter.
written and based on science dia- The teacher deletes information from the graphic organizer.
symbolic/ Carnine and grams and The students fill in the blanks based on their understanding of
visual content Carnine (2004) symbols important information from the text.
Analysis of text Holbrook (1984) Reading com- The teacher shows students how to walk through the chapter or arti-
structure prehension: cle before reading it in order to understand how the text is orga-
Before nized. Students are taught how to identify specific informational/
reading explanatory text structures including chronological sequence,
compare-�contrast, cause-�effect, problem-�solution, and listing.
Question-� Raphael (1984) Reading com- The teacher shows the students how to ask literal, inferential, and
answer prehension: critical comprehension questions. As they learn to ask questions,
relationships Question the students learn to make inferences using information directly
formulation stated in the text as well as information not directly stated in the
text using background knowledge. Four types of questions are
taught: “right there” (literal information in one place in the text),
“think and search” (literal information in two or more places in the
text), “on my own” (inference needed, use prior knowledge), and
“author and me” (inference needed, use prior knowledge and
information in text).
Construct Vaughan (1982) Reading com- The teacher shows the students how to skim a science passage,
prehension: construct a skeleton diagram based on the main ideas and sub-
Use of topics, then read carefully to obtain additional information that
graphic can be added to the graphic organizer and, finally, to read the
organizer passage a third time in order to clarify difficult information.
Content Bulgren, Mar- Reading com- 1) “Cue”: Teacher introduces science topic, and teaches students
enhance- quis, Lenz, prehension: how to use a question exploration guide (QEG) for taking notes.
ment: Deshler, and Answering 2) “Do”: Students answer questions on the QEG using ANSWER
question Schumaker critical steps—Â�ask a critical question, note and explore key terms and
exploration (2011) questions basic knowledge, search for supporting questions and answer
routine through them, work out answers to questions, explore main idea in
notetaking related area, relate main idea to today’s world (p. 581). 3)
on graphic “Review”: Teacher and students review information from “Do”
organizer and process used to answer critical questions.
PLAN strategy Radcliffe, Reading com- The teacher shows students how to use reading comprehen-
Caverly, Hand, prehension: sion strategy PLAN: predict content and structure of science
and Franke Before, passage before reading it and create a “map” using the title,
(2008) during, subtitles, and graphics from the reading; locate on the map
and after the unfamiliar information; add words and phrases to the map
reading while reading, add notes to explain the unfamiliar information,
and confirm familiar information; note new understanding after
reading by changing, reproducing, or discussing the map.
Guided reading Singletary Reading com- The teacher shows students how to read a magazine article on a
in science (2010) prehension: science topic critically by providing guiding questions that stu-
classroom Answering dents answer as they read: “What is the author’s purpose in this
questions article? What message is he or she trying to convey? How is the
while science concept a part of or applied in this article? If you were
reading to respond to this author, what would you say or ask about this
article, and why?” (p. 56). Teacher discusses students’ answers
after reading is complete.
174 Perin

Reading
CCSS.ELA-Â�Literacy.RST.11–Â�12.1: Cite specific textual evidence to support analysis of science and technical texts,
attending to important distinctions the author makes and to any gaps or inconsistencies in the account.
CCSS.ELA-Â�Literacy.RST.11–Â�12.2: Determine the central ideas or conclusions of a text; summarize complex concepts,
processes, or information presented in a text by paraphrasing them in simpler but still accurate terms.
CCSS.ELA-Â�Literacy.RST.11–Â�12.3: Follow precisely a complex multistep procedure when carrying out experiments, tak-
ing measurements, or performing technical tasks; analyze the specific results based on explanations in the text.
CCSS.ELA-Â�Literacy.RST.11–Â�12.4: Determine the meaning of symbols, key terms, and other domain-Â�specific words and
phrases as they are used in a specific scientific or technical context relevant to Grades 11–Â�12 texts and topics.
CCSS.ELA-Â�Literacy.RST.11–Â�12.5: Analyze how the text structures information or ideas into categories or hierarchies,
demonstrating understanding of the information or ideas.

Writing
CCSS.ELA-Â�Literacy.WHST.11–Â�12.1: Write arguments focused on discipline-Â�specific content.
CCSS.ELA-Â�Literacy.WHST.11–Â�12.2: Write informative/explanatory texts, including€.€.€. scientific procedures/experi-
ments or technical processes.
CCSS.ELA-Â�Literacy.WHST.11–Â�12.4: Produce clear and coherent writing in which the development, organization, and
style are appropriate to task, purpose, and audience.
CCSS.ELA-Â�Literacy.WHST.11–Â�12.7: Conduct short as well as more sustained research projects to answer a question
(including a self-�generated question) or solve a problem; narrow or broaden the inquiry when appropriate; synthesize
multiple sources on the subject, demonstrating understanding of the subject under investigation.
CCSS.ELA-Â�Literacy.WHST.11–Â�12.9: Draw evidence from informational texts to support analysis, reflection, and
research.

Figure 12.5.â•… Examples of Grades 11–Â�12 science-Â�related literacy competencies. (Common Core State Standards © Copyright
2010. National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and Council of Chief State School Officers. All rights reserved.)

Certain topics—Â�such as the application of forensic science to understanding crime and

reasons for a higher representation of males over females among professional scientists—Â�may
lend themselves particularly well to instruction in science-�related reading and writing skills.
It is helpful to assess students’ level of interest in science topics41 prior to planning a lesson in
science-�related reading or writing. Furthermore, when teaching students to formulate questions
in a reading comprehension lesson (see Table 12.2), the teacher should model meaningful and
engaging questions42 that require critical thinking in order to motivate students.
The following recommendations for building academic motivation among adolescents43
can be applied to science-�related reading and writing instruction:
1. Help students develop positive beliefs about the functions of reading and writing in
order to learn science.
2. Use authentic goals and contexts related to science when planning lessons in order to
help students develop an interest in science-�related reading and writing. Express enthu-
siasm and positive opinions about reading and writing in the context of science.
3. Provide support for reading and writing through feedback and guided practice in read-
ing and writing strategies. Help students set goals for their science-�based reading and
writing and monitor progress toward their goals; provide specific feedback. Assign read-
ing and writing tasks that are neither too hard nor too easy and provide clear praise for
specific accomplishments and effort.
4. Create a pleasant emotional environment for science-�based reading and writing instruc-
tion. Involve students in setting a learning agenda for the reading and writing skills and
model positive thoughts about science reading and writing accomplishments.
Teaching Secondary Students to Read and Write in Science 175

Summary
This chapter discussed how secondary education teachers can facilitate and teach reading and
writing in the context of science instruction. The aim is that students read and write like sci-
entists, meaning that they can comprehend scientific data, technical documents, and scholarly
scientific writings, as well as produce scientific documents such as laboratory reports. In order
to prepare students for college and careers, particularly in science areas, secondary teachers
need to support the development of critical reading comprehension skills and scientific vocab-
ulary. Teachers also need to know how to conduct meaningful assessment in order to plan
instruction in science-�related literacy skills. The chapter presented two approaches to such
teaching—Â�contextualized and integrated instruction—Â�and also discussed the application of
CCSS to science-�related literacy instruction and approaches to increasing student engagement
in science-�related reading and writing.

Application Assignments

In-�Class Assignments
1. Select one contextualized reading strategy (see Table 12.2). Find a 600-� to 800-�word pas-
sage from a science textbook at a grade level in which you are interested in teaching.
Alternatively, find a 600-�to 800-�word magazine article on a topic currently being taught
in your students’ science class. Bring two copies of the passage to class.
2. In your teacher education class, work with another teacher education candidate to
develop a lesson plan teaching a reading strategy, anchored in the science text you have
selected. The contextualized instruction described in the lesson plan should include the
four steps for explicit instruction listed in Figure 12.3. Indicate in the lesson plan how you
will assess students’ learning and how you will engage in diagnostic teaching in order to
modify the technique, if needed.

Tutoring Assignment
Modify the contextualized lesson plan developed in the in-�class application assignment for
use with an individual student at the grade level you will be teaching who has reading diffi-
culties. Be sure to select science text at the student’s instructional level (not too hard, not too
easy). Provide guided and independent practice in the targeted literacy skills over several
sessions. At the end of the series of tutoring sessions, ask the student if he or she found the
tutoring helpful and to provide specific reasons. Then write three paragraphs reflecting on
the possible effects of the contextualized science-�based literacy tutoring based on your obser-
vations of any change in the student’s ability to read and write in the area of science. Also,
indicate whether the student appeared to find the instruction helpful and why. At the end of
your reflection, suggest ways in which the instruction might be modified, according to the
diagnostic teaching approach discussed in the previous section in order to meet the student’s
needs more effectively.

Homework Assignments
For both of the following assignments, go to the Common Core State Standards web site at
http://corestandards.org and click on “English Language Arts Standards.”
1. Begin by examining the Common Core Reading Standards for Literacy in Science
and Technical Subjects 6–Â�12, standards 2 and 8. Compare and contrast each of these
176 Perin

standards for Grades 6–Â�8 and Grades 11–Â�12. What changes between Grades 6–Â�8 and
11–Â�12 for each of these standards? Applicable standards: CCSS.ELA-Â�Literacy.RST.6–Â�8.2;
CCSS.ELA-Â�Literacy.RST.11–Â�12.2; CCSS.ELA-Â�Literacy RST.6–Â�8.8; CCSS.ELA-Â�Literacy.
RST.11–Â�12.8.
Then examine the Common Core Writing Standards for Literacy in History/So-
cial Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects 6–12, standards 1a and 2a. Compare and
contrast each of these standards for Grades 6–Â�8 and 11–Â�12 from the perspective of
writing about a scientific issue. What changes between Grades 6–Â�8 and 11–Â�12 for each
of these standards? Applicable standards: CCSS.ELA-Â�Literacy.WHST.6–Â�8.1a; CCSS.
ELA-Â�Literacy.WHST.11–Â�12.1a; CCSS.ELA-Â�Literacy.WHST.6–Â�8.2a; CCSS.ELA-Â�Literacy
.WHST.11–Â�12.2a.
2. Find a text of approximately 800–Â�1,000 words on the physical science topic of electric-
ity and magnetism that a typically achieving eighth-�grade student would be expected
to comprehend. Examine the way the text presents information—Â�that is, how it is
structured, the key ideas presented, and any diagrams or charts that illustrate con-
cepts discussed. Plan a lesson that addresses Common Core Reading Standard 2 in
science and technical subjects (CCSS.ELA-Â�Literacy.RST.6–Â�8.2). Your lesson will be
different depending on whether you are preparing to be an English language arts
or science teacher. If you are preparing to be an English language arts teacher, plan
a contextualized ELA reading strategy lesson that utilizes the text and addresses the
standard. The instruction should include explicit instruction following the steps in
Figure 12.3.
If you are preparing to be a science teacher, plan a science lesson that integrates literacy
instruction addressing the standard, which unfolds during the science lesson.

Endnotes
1. Webb (2010).
2. Braasch & Goldman (2010); Harris & Cote (2008); Klein
& Samuels (2010); Nieswandt & Bellomo (2009).
3. National reports and surveys?
4. McCutchen (2000), p. 13.
5. C. Shanahan (2012).
6. C. Shanahan (2012).
7. Goldman & Bisanz (2002); C. Shanahan (2012).
8. Goldman & Bisanz (2002); C. Shanahan (2012).
9. Wickman (2010); Yore, Hand, & Prain (2002).
10. T. Shanahan & C. Shanahan (2008), p. 51.
11. Lillig (2008); C. Shanahan, T. Shanahan, & Misischia
(2011).
12. C. Shanahan (2012); Wallace & Hand (2004).
13. Braasch & Goldman (2010).
14. Barton, Heidema, & Jordan (2002); Snow (2010).
15. Fang & Schleppegrell (2010).
16. Krajcik & Sutherland (2010).
17. Berland & Reiser (2011); Osborne (2010).
18. Lipson & Wixson (2009); McKenna & Robinson (2009).
19. Armbruster (1984), p. 203.
20. McKenna & Robinson (2009).
21. Shaw, Bunch, & Geaney (2010).
22. Kibler (2011).
23. Walker (2012).
2 4. Moje & Speyer (2008).
25. Pearson (2010), p. 460.
26. Singletary (2010).
27. Adapted from Krajcik & Sutherland (2010).
28. C. Shanahan (2004), p. 88.
29. C. Shanahan (2004).
30. Prain & Hand (1996); Mason, Reid, & Hagaman (2012).
31. Roberson & Lankford (2010).
32. Keys (2000).
33. Porter et al. (2010).
34. Based on Rutherford (2007).
35. Pearson (2010).
36. Such as Miller & Levine (2010), chap. 8.
37. Based on research by Bulgren, Marquis, Lenz, Desh-
ler, & Schumaker (2011); Carnine & Carnine (2004);
Holbrook (1984); Radcliffe, Caverly, Hand, & Franke
(2008); Raphael (1984); Reed & Vaughn (2012); Samp-
son, Grooms, & Walker (2011); Seifert & Espin (2012);
Vaughan (1982).
38. National Governors’ Association and Council of Chief
State School Officers (2010).
3 9. Johnson (2002).
40. Moje & Speyer (2008).
41. Guzzetti & Bang (2011).
42. Krajcik & Sutherland (2010).
43. Adapted from Bruning & Horn (2000).
Teaching Secondary Students to Read and Write in Science 177
References
Armbruster, B. (1984). The problem of inconsiderate text. In
G.G. Duffy, L.R. Roehler, & J. Mason (Eds.), Comprehension
instruction: Perspectives and suggestions (pp. 202–Â�217). White
Plains, NY: Longman.
Barton, M.L., Heidema, C., & Jordan, D. (2002). Teaching
reading in mathematics and science. Educational Leadership,
60(3), 24–Â�29.
Berland, L.K., & Reiser, B.J. (2011). Classroom communities’
adaptations of the practice of scientific argumentation. Sci-
ence Education, 95(2), 191–Â�216.
Braasch, J.L.G., & Goldman, S.R. (2010). The role of prior
knowledge in learning from analogies in science texts. Dis-
course Processes: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 47(6), 447–Â�479.
Bruning, R., & Horn, C. (2000). Developing motivation to
write. Educational Psychologist, 35(1), 25–Â�38.
Bulgren, J., Marquis, J., Lenz, B.K., Deshler, D., & Schu�
maker, J. (2011). The effectiveness of a question-�exploration
routine for enhancing the content learning of secondary
students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 103(3), 578–Â�593.
doi: 10.1037/a0023930
Carnine, L., & Carnine, D. (2004). The interaction of reading
skills and science content knowledge when teaching strug-
gling secondary students. Reading and Writing Quarterly,
20(2), 203–Â�218.
Fang, Z., & Schleppegrell, M.J. (2010). Disciplinary liter-
acies across content areas: Supporting secondary read-
ing through functional language analysis. Journal of
Adolescent & Adult Literacy, 53(7), 587–Â�597. doi: 10.1598/
JAAL.53.7.6
Goldman, S.R., & Bisanz, G.L. (2002). Toward a functional
analysis of scientific genres: Implications for under-
standing and learning processes. In J. Otero, J.A. Leon, &
A.C. Graesser (Eds.), The psychology of science text compre-
hension (pp. 19–Â�50). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Guzzetti, B.J., & Bang, E. (2011). The influence of literacy-�
based science instruction on adolescents’ interest, partic-
ipation, and achievement in science. Literacy Research and
Instruction, 50(1), 44–Â�67. doi: 10.1080/19388070903447774
Harris, R., & Cote, D.D. (2008). Science and literacy: Making
connections through writing. Science Scope, 32(3), 45–Â�48.
Holbrook, H.T. (1984). Prereading in the content areas. Jour-
nal of Reading, 27(4), 368–Â�370.
Johnson, E.B. (2002). Contextual teaching and learning: What
it is and why it’s here to stay. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin
Press.
Keys, C.W. (2000). Investigating the thinking processes of
eighth grade writers during the composition of a scientific
laboratory report. Journal of Research in Science Teaching,
37(7), 676–Â�690.
Kibler, A. (2011). “I write it in a way that people can read it”:
How teachers and adolescent L2 writers describe content
area writing. Journal of Second Language Writing, 20(3), 211–Â�
226. doi: 10.1016/j.jslw.2011.05.005
Klein, P.D., & Samuels, B. (2010). Learning about plate tec-
tonics through argument-�writing. Alberta Journal of Educa-
tional Research, 56(2), 196–Â�217.
Krajcik, J.S., & Sutherland, L.M. (2010). Supporting stu-
dents in developing literacy in science. Science, 328(5977),
456–Â�459.
Lillig, J.W. (2008). Writing across the semester: A nonstan-
dard term paper that encourages critical data analysis in
the upper-�division chemistry classroom. Journal of Chemical
Education, 85(10), 1392–Â�1394. doi: 10.1021/ed085p1392
Lipson, M.Y., & Wixson, K.K. (2009). Assessment and instruc-
tion of reading and writing difficulties: An interactive approach
(4th ed.). Boston: Pearson.
Mason, L.H., Reid, R., & Hagaman, J.L. (2012). Building compre-
hension in adolescents: Powerful strategies for improving reading
and writing in content areas. Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes.
McCutchen, D. (2000). Knowledge, processing, and working
memory: Implications for a theory of writing. Educational
Psychologist, 35(1), 13–Â�23.
McKenna, M.C., & Robinson, R.D. (2009). Teaching through
text: Reading and writing in the content areas (5th ed.). Bos-
ton: Pearson Education.
Miller, K., & Levine, J. (2010). Biology. New York, NY:
Pearson.
Moje, E.B., & Speyer, J. (2008). The reality of challenging texts
in high school science and social studies: How teachers
can mediate comprehension. In K.A. Hinchman & H.K.
Sheridan-�Thomas (Eds.), Best practices in adolescent literacy
instruction (pp. 185–Â�211). New York, NY: Guilford.
National Governors’ Association and Council of Chief State
School Officers. (2010). Common Core State Standards:
English language arts and literacy in history/social studies,
science, and technical subjects. Washington, DC: Author.
Retrieved from http://www.corestandards.org
Nieswandt, M., & Bellomo, K. (2009). Written extended-�
response questions as classroom assessment tools for
meaningful understanding of evolutionary theory. Journal
of Research in Science Teaching, 46(3), 333–Â�356. doi: 10.1002/
tea.20271
Osborne, J. (2010). Arguing to learn in science: The role of
collaborative, critical discourse. Science, 328(5977). doi:
10.1126/science.1183944
Pearson, P.D. (2010). Literacy and science: Each in the ser-
vice of the other. Science, 328(5977), 459–Â�463. doi: 10.1126/
science.1182595
Porter, R., Guarienti, K., Brydon, B., Robb, J., Royston, A.,
Painter, H., .€ .€ .€ Smith, M.H. (2010). Writing better lab
reports. Science Teacher, 77(1), 43–Â�48.
Prain, V., & Hand, B. (1996). Writing for learning in second-
ary science: Rethinking practices. Teaching and Teacher Edu-
cation, 12(6), 609–Â�626.
Radcliffe, R., Caverly, D., Hand, J., & Franke, D. (2008).
Improving reading in a middle school science classroom.
Journal of Adolescent and Adult Literacy, 51(5), 398–Â�408.
Raphael, T.E. (1984). Teaching learners about sources of
information for answering comprehension questions. Jour-
nal of Reading, pp. 303–Â�311.
Reed, D.K., & Vaughn, S. (2012). Comprehension instruction
for students with reading disabilities in Grades 4 through
12. Learning Disabilities: A Contemporary Journal, 10(1),
17–Â�33.
Roberson, C., & Lankford, D. (2010). Laboratory notebooks
in the science classroom. Science Teacher, 77(1), 38–Â�42.
Rutherford, S. (2007). Using a laboratory conclusion rubric.
Science Activities, 43(4), 9–Â�14.
Sampson, V., Grooms, J., & Walker, J.P. (2011). Argument-�
driven inquiry as a way to help students learn how to
participate in scientific argumentation and craft written
arguments: An exploratory study. Science Education, 95(2),
217–Â�257.
Seifert, K., & Espin, C. (2012). Improving reading of science
text for secondary students with learning disabilities:
Effects of text reading, vocabulary learning, and combined
178 Perin
approaches to instruction. Learning Disability Quarterly,
35(4), 236–Â�247. doi: 10.1177/0731948712444275
Shanahan, C. (2004). Teaching science through literacy. In
T.L. Jetton & J.A. Dole (Eds.), Adolescent literacy research and
practice (pp. 75–Â�93). New York, NY: Guilford.
Shanahan, C. (2012). Learning with text in science. In T.L. Jet-
ton & C. Shanahan (Eds.), Adolescent literacy in the academic
disciplines: General principles and practical strategies (pp. 154–Â�
171). New York, NY: Guilford.
Shanahan, C., Shanahan, T., & Misischia, C. (2011). Analysis
of expert readers in three disciplines: History, mathemat-
ics, and chemistry. Journal of Literacy Research, 43(4), 393–Â�
429. doi: 10.1177/1086296X11424071
Shanahan, T., & Shanahan, C. (2008). Teaching disciplinary
literacy to adolescents: Rethinking content-�area literacy.
Harvard Educational Review, 78(1), 40–Â�59.
Shaw, J.M., Bunch, G.C., & Geaney, E.R. (2010). Analyzing
language demands facing English learners on science per-
formance assessments: The SALD framework. Journal of
Research in Science Teaching, 47(8), 909–Â�928. doi: 10.1002/
tea.20364
Singletary, J. (2010). Content reading in science class. Science
Teacher, 77(1), 56–Â�58.
Snow, C.E. (2010). Academic language and the challenge of
reading for learning about science. Science, 328(5977), 450–Â�
452. doi: 10.1126/science.1182597
Vaughan, J.L. (1982). Use the ConStruct procedure to fos-
ter active reading and learning. Journal of Reading, 25(5),
412–Â�422.
Walker, B.J. (2012). Diagnostic teaching of reading: Tech-
niques for instruction and assessment (7th ed.). Boston,
MA: Pearson.
Wallace, C.W., & Hand, B. (2004). Using a science writing
heuristic to promote learning from laboratory. In C.S. Wal-
lace, B. Hand, & V. Prain (Eds.), Writing and learning in
the science classroom (pp. 67–Â�89). Dordecht, Netherlands:
Kluwer.
Webb, P. (2010). Science education and literacy: Impera-
tives for the developing and developed world. Science,
328(5977), 448–Â�450. doi: 10.1126/science.1182596
Wickman, C. (2010). Writing material in chemical physics
research: The laboratory notebook as locus of technical and
textual integration. Written Communication, 27(3), 259–Â�292.
doi: 10.1177/0741088310371777
Yore, L.D., Hand, B., & Prain, V. (2002). Scientists as writers.
Science Education, 86(5), 672–Â�692.
 13
Reading and Writing as a Mathematician
Brian R. Bryant and Diane Pedrotty Bryant

Classroom Scenario
Maria is a freshman who is enrolled in English I and Algebra I classes. She has always done
well in her previous mathematics classes, but she is finding Algebra I to be both difficult and
frustrating. Maria has never been a particularly good reader and writing has always been
difficult for her, so she is struggling in English I as well.
After school one day, she ran into her Algebra I teacher, Mr. Sanchez, who could see right
away that Maria was upset. “Maria, what’s wrong?,” he asked.
Maria responded, “I just found out I am flunking English class. I have never gotten below
a B minus in my life.”
During their conversation, Maria explained how, up to now, she was able to get by in
her classes because she was an excellent listener with a good memory. “Most of my teachers
have always lectured about what’s in the book, so I never had to read a lot. And the writing
assignments were never that tough,” she shared. “Now I’m expected to have read parts of
the novel before class, and we spend the period talking about what’s in the novel or whatever

Objectives: After studying this chapter, you will be able to:

1. Understand that mathematics can be considered a language that often involves
reading and writing.
2. Recognize that most students are challenged when they have difficulty solving a
mathematics problem, but struggling students usually give up.
3. Describe the importance of teaching mathematics using the elements of effective
instruction.
4. Determine that literacy and mathematics are related, but sometimes we must
rethink how reading and writing relate to mathematics.
5. Understand that, when teaching mathematics, sometimes “Plan A” isn’t effective
in helping students grasp skills and concepts. Sometimes teachers have to have a
Plan B, Plan C, and more.
6. Describe how teachers can differentiate instruction by making instructional adap-
tations and/or scaffolds to promote learning.

179
180 Bryant and Bryant

we’re reading at the time. And we’re all expected to keep a journal. I didn’t even know what
a journal was! And as you know, I’m not exactly doing well in algebra either.”
Mr. Sanchez nodded as he listened to Maria. “I really appreciate your honesty. You know, I
had the exact same problems when I was in high school. When it came to algebra, I struggled.
I, like you, it sounds like, really had my problems with language arts—Â�reading and writing.”
Mr. Sanchez went on to describe how, up until high school, mathematics had come easy
to him. He didn’t even have to think about solving basic computations; it just came to him—Â�
some mathematicians just “get it” holistically instead of having to break down problems
into parts. He went on to say that some mathematicians think logically by breaking down
the whole into its parts, working on the parts, and then putting the parts together again to
reform the whole. Mr. Sanchez ended the conversation by noting, “When I started applying
logical thinking to algebra and even to my English classes, I did much better.” He and Maria
set up a few meetings to talk about applying logical thinking to all her classes.
Mr. Sanchez was not the first person to talk about reading like a mathematician. In
1997, Mark Freitag talked about reading mathematically when he described how difficult it
is to read mathematics texts.1 Freitag discussed reading mathematically a little differently
than Mr. Sanchez, but the basic idea is the same: Reading is a difficult process that involves
using a variety of skills to capture the global meaning from the page.

This chapter focuses on the literacy skills essential to learning mathematics and algebra, in
particular. Algebra must be taken to graduate from high school, and it is often the course that
is most difficult for students to learn conceptually. Many students who have passed high school
algebra and other mathematics courses still have to enroll in a “developmental” or “remedial”
college mathematics class and have to pass the class in order to begin or continue their college
studies.2 Thus it is essential that mathematics teachers know not only their content very well
but also how to address the literacy challenges presented by mathematics.

Reading Like a Mathematician

In a booklet titled 10 Ways to Think Like a Mathematician, mathematician Kevin Houston3 pro-
vides the following suggestions, to which we add in parentheses a partial explanation.
1. Question everything. (In other words, check it out.)
2. Write in sentences. (Sentences allow you to make arguments.)
3. “What about the converse?” (If you are a woman, you are human; the converse states
that if you are a human, you are a woman. Is this true?)
4. Use the contrapositive. (I am not a student implies that I am not a freshman; the con-
trapositive states that if I am a freshman, then I am a student. Is that true?)
5. Consider extreme examples. (They help with understanding.)
6. Create your own examples. (This helps deepen understanding.)
7. What are the assumptions used? (Some are obvious, but some are hidden.)
8. Start with complicated side. (In an equation, start with the side of the equal sign that has
the more complicated elements in a formula.)
9. Ask, “What happens if€.€.€.€?” (Such questions help determine why a result is true.)
10. Communicate! (Be able to explain your work to others.)
Houston’s suggestions lead us to the conclusion that to read like a mathematician is to be
a strategic reader. To think like a mathematician is to interact with each problem encountered,
to question, to check, to seek understanding, to ask why and why not, and so forth. Strategic
readers, in similar fashion, interact with text and, by extension, with the writer. Strategic readers
Reading and Writing as a Mathematician 181

also seek understanding, make predictions as they read, look for reasons why and why not, self-�
check, and ask questions of the writer by asking themselves questions as they read and search
the text for the writer’s answers.
There are other similarities between mathematics and reading. In reading, some experts
view their content holistically,4 whereas others view reading analytically—Â�as a step-Â�by-Â�step
process.5 The same is true for mathematics experts in their domain. Some mathematicians are
able to grasp the whole, but some, like Mr. Sanchez, prefer logical thinking, which breaks down
“wholes” into their component parts, each part to be solved individually before piecing the
parts together to form a solution. For instance, strategic readers sometimes encounter words
they cannot recognize at sight, so they use a strategy to identify the word by breaking it into
parts, or they may not comprehend a part of text, so they call upon fix-�up strategies to under-
stand what the writer is trying to convey. In this chapter, we will use the term strategic problem
solver to describe someone who interacts with a mathematics problem with the dual goals of
understanding the problem and arriving at a correct solution. We describe how one reads like
a mathematician and becomes a strategic problem solver. We describe the relationship between
reading and mathematics, discuss the elements of effective instruction as they pertain to teach-
ing algebra, and present the roles of reading and writing in mathematical problem solving.

Reading and Mathematics

Mathematics and language arts have always been interesting to researchers.6 In the report titled Read-
ing and Writing in the Mathematics Classroom, Lois Edwards7 stated, “Reading mathematics—Â�along
with manipulatives, visual aids, and oral activities—Â�plays an essential role in learning mathematics.
The importance of reading increases as students progress to higher-Â�level mathematics courses.”
Although many students have no trouble learning to read, write, or compute, many struggle with
one or two areas, and some have difficulties in all areas. National testing results in 2013 indicated
that only 38% of students scored at or above the proficient level in Grade 12 reading assessments
and 26% of 12th graders scored at or above the proficient level in mathematics. Fewer than 30%
scored at or above the proficiency level in writing on the 2011 assessment.8 With all the time and
money spent on American education, these numbers are beyond disappointing; they are staggering.
When some people think of mathematics, especially algebra, they struggle linking reading
to mathematics performance. However, two researchers suggest that we must rethink how text,
literacy, reading, and writing are defined to understand reading’s role in mathematics. In their
chapter on Reconceptualizing Literacy and Instruction for Mathematics Classrooms, Daniel Siebert
and Roni Jo Draper9 described a scenario in which Draper, a literacy specialist, was asked to
observe instruction going on in Siebert’s mathematics classroom. Draper first noticed that stu-
dents were not using a textbook. Instead, students listened as Siebert modeled how to solve a
particular problem and then solved problems on their own. There was no reading and writing
going on, in the traditional literacy frame of reference; that is, students were not reading tradi-
tional text, nor were they writing as a literacy professional would consider writing.
After several observations, Draper noted parallels in what the students were being asked
to do in the mathematics classroom and what her students were doing in English I. The math-
ematics students were indeed deciphering “text” and providing responses by writing down
answers, yet in a very different way than English I students read literature and write stories
and/or descriptions of people, places, or events. It struck Draper that in mathematics, one must
redefine text, reading, writing, and literacy to deal with not only the written word but the var-
ious graphic symbols encountered regularly.

Effective Instruction in Algebra

For the past 10 years or so, considerable attention has been paid to what is called evidenced-�
based or research-�based instruction.10 For 2 years, we observed instruction in Algebra to identify
182 Bryant and Bryant

which elements of effective instruction were being employed.11 Although research long has
identified that struggling students respond best to instruction that is systematic and explicit,12
we found that much of the teaching that occurs in mathematics classrooms involves inquiry-�
based, student-�centered instruction, as suggested by the National Council of Teachers of Math-
ematics.13 In our work, we found that the latter, constructivist approach worked with many
students, but a segment of the class failed to understand the skills and concepts being taught.
Many of these students qualified for Tier 2 instruction, which provides supplemental interven-
tions containing many of the elements we looked for in our observations: modeling, providing
multiple examples, using think-�alouds, affording multiple opportunities to practice, check-
ing for understanding, providing praise and error correction as appropriate, and monitoring
progress on an ongoing basis. Our work has incorporated these elements during Tier 2 algebra
instruction, including literacy instruction as it pertains to algebraic problem solving and word
problems.

The Role of Reading in Algebraic Problem Solving

In algebra, deciphering involves decoding, or breaking down the parts of a problem and identi-
fying what each component is—Â�for example, “3x + 2y = 16. Solve for x and y.” This process is sim-
ilar to reading, when one identifies that the word subtraction can be broken down into multiple
syllables (sub is a closed syllable, trac is a closed syllable, tion is a final stable syllable) that result
in syllable pronunciations of /sub/ /trak/ /shun/. The reader then blends the syllables together
to pronounce the word, and the brain “hears” subtraction and makes the connection to a word
in the person’s listening vocabulary that means to take away, either numerically or by removal.
Thus recognition of the word parts leads to an understanding of what the word in print means.
With this line of thinking, consider the previously shown algebra problem, “3x + 2y = 16.
Solve for x and y.” How does one “decode” the problem’s “syllables”? What is 3x? What does
the + mean? What is meant by 2y? What does = mean? What does the 16 relate to? What does
solve mean in this context, and what does solve have to do with x and y? These are all text-�related
questions that, if not understood, almost always result in an incorrect response.
Decoding 3x, like recognizing first that sub is a closed syllable that “sounds like” /sub/, is
dependent on knowing that 3x means that you have three x’s, or x added to x added to x, or x is
multiplied by 3, in the same way that you may have 3 notepads. The plus sign signifies addition;
the 2y means that you have 2 of something (but they cannot be notepads, because notepads are
an example of x). The equal sign (=) is a curious symbol, because many students mistakenly
have learned that when you see an equal sign, it means you have to solve something. What the
equal sign really means is that, like a balance, everything on one side of = is the same amount as
everything on the other side of the symbol. So if you place a 16-�pound object on the left side of
the balance scale, in order for the scale to equalize (become level), 16 pounds of something has
to be on the other side of the balance. And in our problem, the 16 means that the other side of the
balance, or equal sign (3x + 2y), also has to equal 16 (see Figure 13.1 for a visual of what we mean).
As readers, we recognize that authors, as writers, use syntax (word order) to promote
understanding. Readers also know that authors select appropriate words (semantics) to express
the meaning they are conveying to us. The equation 3x + 2y = 16 is mathematical syntax, in the
same way that the sentence you are reading uses word order to allow you to make sense of the
sentence. And elements of the equation (for example the + and =) are semantic because each
symbol has meaning, as does the whole equation. Thus reading, when “redefined” as Siebert and
Draper14 suggested, is vital to algebraic problem solving and to being a strategic problem solver.

The Role of Reading in Solving Algebra Word Problems

When most people think of reading and mathematics, they think first of word problems, because
students who struggle with reading often not only have difficulties understanding how to solve
Reading and Writing as a Mathematician 183

3x + 2y = 16

Figure 13.1.â•… Balanced equation depiction.

the problem but also struggle with comprehending what the problem is asking them to solve.
When Mr. Sanchez spoke with Maria about logical thinking, he described to her how strategy
instruction helped him become better in his all his subjects. Specifically, he described several
mnemonic strategies to her. These strategies use acronyms to help students remember the
component parts of a strategy. In this section, we provide two such strategies—Â�one for identi-
fying unknown multisyllable words typically found in algebraic word problems and the other
designed to help students learn key vocabulary words that may appear in a word problem.
Decoding Multiple Syllable Words with SPLIT Ever since Maria was young, she had strug-
gled with long words. When she encountered a long word, she usually skipped it and tried
her best to understand the sentence without the word. Unfortunately, as she grew older, Maria
found that more and more words in her textbooks and especially word problems were com-
posed of long, multisyllable words. Maria decided to ask Mr. Sanchez if he knew of a strategy
that could help her with long words. He suggested SPLIT,15 which segments, or breaks apart,
multisyllabic words into component parts that Maria could identify. Then she could blend the
parts together to say the word, whether aloud or silently.
SPLIT is a mnemonic (see Figure 13.2) designed to help students identify a multiple-�
syllable word. Maria did not know the word tabulate in a word problem, and she knew it was
important. The first thing Maria had to do was memorize the strategy, so she could apply it on
her own. Mr. Sanchez gave her a SPLIT strategy poster, but he told Maria that she would have
to memorize it because she would not have access to a poster during a test. She also had to learn
the six syllable patterns: closed, open, vowel pair, vowel-�r, vowel-�consonant-�e, and final stable
syllables. She studied them to see how they could help her decode, or identify, a word using
knowledge of sound-�symbol relationships.
Using the SPLIT strategy, Maria saw that tabulate has three syllable patterns: <tab>, a
closed syllable; <u>, an open syllable; and <late>, a vowel-�consonant-�e syllable. She placed a
mark between and looked at each syllable (tab/u/late), identified the syllable sounds, and then
blended the syllable sounds to try to say the word. She already knew what tabulate meant,
because she had heard it several times in class, so the strategy worked.
Using a Word Map to Learn Vocabulary A word map can be used when teachers identify
key terms that students may be unfamiliar with, whether those terms are in a word problem or
in a textbook chapter. Occasionally, Mr. Sanchez will have the students participate in a math-
ematics cumulative review in his Algebra I class. On this day, he has divided his 16 students
into 4 groups to work together as they solve a word problem.
Twelve college students took a quiz in their architectural engineering class. Out of 30 items, their
scores were 30, 26, 27, 21, 30, 29, 26, 28, 26, 28, 29, and 21. Find the mean, median, and mode of the
scores, and then write at least two equations that can be used to represent the scores on the quiz.

Mr. Sanchez has identified four words in the story problem that some students may be
unfamiliar with (architectural engineering, mean, median, mode), and he used the jigsaw
cooperative learning activity to have students learn vocabulary words that are key to under-
standing the problem. Each member of the original four-�student group was assigned a num-
ber: 1, 2, 3, or 4. The ones all left their original groups and convened as a separate subgroup.
The twos, threes, and fours all did the same so that each new group was composed of one
184 Bryant and Bryant

SPLIT
• See the syllable pattern.
• Place a line between each syllable.
• Look at each syllable.
• Identify the syllable sounds.
• Try to say the word.

Figure 13.2.â•… SPLIT mnemonic. (From Bryant, D.P., Bryant, B.R., & Baker, J. [2003]. Effective instruction
for elementary struggling readers: Research-based practices. Part I & Part II. Austin, TX: Texas Center for
Reading and Language Arts; adapted by permission.)

member each from the original groupings. Mr. Sanchez assigned one word to each group, with
the instructions that the group members create a word map that they would take back to their
original groups to share.
The students then worked in their groups to create their maps. Maria’s group was assigned
mode, which was written in the middle of the map (see Figure 13.3). Above the word, students
wrote the definitions of mode as it appeared in their dictionary. Often, a word has many differ-
ent definitions, so the students wrote each one. The students then wrote the sentence that used
the word in the problem at the bottom of the map. Next, they discussed what might be the best
dictionary definition of the word that fit the word problem and highlighted it. To the left of
the word in the center of the map, they wrote as many synonyms/examples for the highlighted
word as they could think of. Then to the right of the word, they wrote as many antonyms/
nonexamples for the word that they could think of. They then looked at the sentence they wrote
at the bottom of the map, and they talked about what the sentence means and how the word
is important in the word problem. Maria noted to her groupmates that she uses word maps in
all her subjects to identify the meanings of words she doesn’t understand. Maria had applied
her “Reading like a mathematician” to all her subjects, just as Mr. Sanchez had when he was
younger. Maria was making progress as a strategic problem solver.

Writing Like a Mathematician

David Pugalee16 is a researcher who has explored the relationship between language and
mathematics learning. Pugalee suggested that writing reinforces mathematical reasoning and
problem solving and helps students understand the characteristics of effective communication,
a perception also advocated by the National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (NCTM):17
“Writing in mathematics can also help students consolidate their thinking because it requires
them to reflect on their work and clarify their thoughts about the ideas.” Strategic problem
solvers, in addition to using a variety of strategies to interact with and solve mathematical
problems, use writing to convey mathematical content, processes, and affect.18 In this section
of the chapter, we describe what it means to write like a mathematician. We examine first the
relationship between writing and mathematics; we then present examples of writing strategies
that can be applied as students engage in mathematics problem solving.

Mathematics and Writing

The Common Core State Standards (CCSS)19 address writing and mathematics. Critical Area 3
addresses writing and algebra and geometry.
7.EE.2 Understand that rewriting an expression in different forms in a problem context can shed
light on the problem and how the quantities in it are related. For example, a + 0.05a = 1.05a means
that “increase by 5%” is the same as “multiply by 1.05.”20

Critical Area 5 addresses writing and geometry: “Focus on validity of underlying reasoning
while using variety of ways of writing proofs G.CO.9, 10, 11.”21
Reading and Writing as a Mathematician 185

Dictionary definitions
1. An arrangement of the eight diatonic notes or tones
of an octave according to one of several fixed
schemes of their intervals
2. The modal form of the assertion or denial
of a logical proposition
3. A particular form or variety of something
(flying and other modes of transport)
4. A particular functioning arrangement or condition:
status (a computer operating in parallel mode)
5. The most frequent value of a set of data

Synonym/example Antonym/nonexample
The number that appears most often The numbers that appear less often
Mode
Most frequently appearing number Less frequently appearing numbers
The number seen most of the time The numbers not seen as often

Use in a sentence
Find the mean, median, and mode of the scores, and then
write an equation that can be used to represent the scores
on the quiz.

Figure 13.3.â•… Sample word map for mode. (From Bryant, D.P., Bryant, B.R., & Baker, J. [2003]. Effective
instruction for elementary struggling readers: Research-based practices. Part I & Part II. Austin, TX: Texas
Center for Reading and Language Arts; adapted by permission.)

Writing has long been seen as an effective tool for learning, a viewpoint reinforced by Steve
Graham and Dolores Perin in their 2007 report Writing Next.22 Graham and Perin advocate writ-
ing as a tool that can be used to help students learn content area material and demonstrate their
understanding of what was taught. With respect to mathematics, Lois Edwards would seem to
agree: “Writing helps students organize their knowledge and clarify their understanding. It is
a crucial aspect of doing mathematics.”23
Vicki Urquhart (2009) referred to using writing in mathematics to promote mathematics con-
tent prompts, process prompts, and affective prompts. According to Urquhart, “Content prompts
deal with mathematical concepts and relationships, process prompts focus on algorithms and
problem solving, and affective prompts center on students’ attitudes and feelings.”24 It is obvious
that writing has many uses when it is applied to mathematics, especially in today’s classrooms.
It is easy to see how writing can be a valuable tool for students to express mathematics
ideas, concepts, and their own reactions as they solve problems. The next section provides a
sampling of strategies to help teachers foster writing in the classroom.

The Role of Writing in Mathematical Problem Solving

We have already discussed how writing can help students present their thoughts graphically
regarding mathematics content, processes, and affect. Next we provide an example of a strategy
for each area.
186 Bryant and Bryant

Mathematics
Content: Magnet Summaries
Vicki Urquhart provides several tips for
helping students summarize what they
have learned in mathematics class. We
have adapted her Magnet Summaries for
purposes of algebra use.25
• Define “to the third power” in your own
words.
• How would you describe an algebraic
formula?
• Write a paragraph about the use of alge-
bra in the news.
• Write one sentence that describes an equation.
• How do you know that 1/4 is greater than 1/5? Explain your thinking.
• Write three examples of a quadratic equation and describe what each one means.
• What properties do exponents have?
• What were the key points in today’s lesson?

Mathematics Processes: Writing as a Teacher

It is important to know the processes that students use when they problem-solve. We have often
advocated students telling us what they are thinking when they do algebra problems—Â�what
we have called process assessments.26 What are the processes and procedures they engage in
when problem solving? Students who can do this keep a journal showing a problem and writ-
ing descriptions of how they solved the problem. Some students, however, have considerable
difficulty thinking about what they are thinking—Â�what is referred to as metacognition. So we
suggest something like, “You are an algebra teacher who is writing a letter to your nephew, who
is struggling with quadratic equations. When you write, include a problem and describe to him
the steps needed to solve the problem. Write like a teacher.” For some reason, some students
are able to write as a teacher far easier than they are able to write down their thoughts as they
problem-solve. The end result is the same; teachers gain an understanding of the processes that
students undertake when they solve problems.

Mathematics Affect: Self-�Expression in a Mathography

Most everyone knows that an autobiography is a story about one’s life. A mathography is sim-
ilar, but instead of telling about one’s life, a mathography tells about one’s thoughts and feel-
ings toward mathematics (Canada, 2004). Questions to be answered in a mathography might
include the following: What were your early experiences with mathematics? How much did
you enjoy mathematics classes in elementary and/or middle school? What do you find easiest
about mathematics; what is most difficult? Who has been your favorite mathematics teacher,
and why? How do you feel about your work in algebra? What part of algebra do you like most;
what part do you like the least? How do you study for algebra quizzes and tests? When you
come to a place in solving an algebra problem and you get lost, how do you get back on track?
Is there anyone you know who finds algebra easy? Talk with the student and take notes about
the discussion, and come back and write down parts of the discussion in your mathography.
Having students express their thoughts and feelings about algebra can help teachers address
student frustrations and difficulties. In addition, self-�expression is an important skill to be uti-
lized periodically by strategic problem solvers.
Reading and Writing as a Mathematician 187

Differentiating Instruction
We cannot write a chapter about teaching students without mentioning differentiating instruc-
tion or meeting the needs of all the students in today’s diverse classroom. Years ago, we designed
our Adaptations Framework27 to help professionals make assistive technology (AT) decisions for
people with disabilities. Not long after, we applied the framework to working with struggling
students as they faced classroom demands in reading28 and then “adapted” the framework to
create the ADAPT Framework (see Figure 13.4)29 for differentiating instruction in all academic
areas. When we refer to making instructional adaptations, we are using the term as synonymous
with differentiating instruction, so we will use the terms interchangeably in this section.
The basic tenet of the ADAPT Framework is that some students do not understand what is
being taught. Often, particularly at the secondary level, student difficulties result from a lack of
prerequisite skills. As we have heard time and again from teachers and administrators in focus
groups and interviews, some students are ill-�prepared for the rigors of Algebra I, English I, or many
other subjects being taught at the high school level—Â�or the middle school level for that matter.
The ADAPT Framework can be used to help teachers adapt their instruction so that they
can attempt to meet the needs of all students in their classrooms. As shown on Figure 13.4, the A
stands for “ask, ‘What is the task that I am asking my students to accomplish?’” Each day, teach-
ers have a number of lesson objectives that they hope to accomplish with their students. Donald
Deshler30 has referred to those as setting demands. Each of the objectives and setting demands
can be thought of as individual tasks for students to accomplish. So in the ADAPT Framework,
teachers start by looking at the task that has been assigned to their students. In our example,
Mr. Sanchez has asked the students to solve the word problem described earlier. The next letter,
D, stands for “determine the prerequisite skills needed to accomplish the task.” What skills did
Maria need to solve the word problem? Take a moment to think about it. She needed to be able to
decode words in the problem, understand key terms presented, separate relevant from irrelevant
information, identify what the problem was asking her to do, and make needed computations.
Of course, she also needed to be able to see, think, and write. These are skills that most teachers
assume their students have when they get to high school but that many students lack.
The next letter in ADAPT is A, for “analyze the student’s strengths and struggles as they
relate to the prerequisite skills.” As discussed earlier, many teachers discover that their stu-
dents do not have the skill sets expected to do grade-�level work, so with the ADAPT Frame-
work, Mr. Sanchez would examine each of the prerequisites and determine whether Maria
possessed them. As soon as he found skills that were challenging (such as decoding words,
understanding key vocabulary words, and so forth), a “red flag” would pop up, telling him
that he could, P, “propose and implement adaptations” from among the four adaptation cat-
egories to help the student accomplish the tasks. The categories are Instructional Delivery,
Instructional Materials, Instructional Content, and Instructional Activities. In our work,31 we
have created Escalator Lessons—Â�booster lessons designed to review prerequisite skills at the
student’s level and apply to the more advanced work being done in the classroom. These are
Instructional Activity adaptations, but perhaps all Maria needed was to have a classmate read
the problem to her and use a calculator to do computations. Adaptations, like differentiations,
depend entirely on the individual student’s strengths and needs, which is a basic idea related
to differentiating instruction—Â�it is student specific, as is the ADAPT Framework. Teachers
propose the adaptation they think will be needed for the student to be able to meet the lesson
objective. The last letter of the framework, T, stands for “test to determine if the adaptations
helped the student accomplish the task.” Teachers should not assume that just because they
differentiate or adapt instruction that the adaptation will work. So in our work at the end of
every lesson, the student is given independent practice problems—Â�in Maria’s case perhaps
four story problems for her to solve. If she gets them all right, or three out of four, Mr. San-
chez can determine that the adaptation worked. If not, he would have to try something else.
Teaching is about having Plan A, the original lesson, but being able to move to Plans B through
D if Plan A isn’t working.
188 Bryant and Bryant

A D A P T

Ask Determine Analyze Propose Test

"What is the the prerequisite skills the student’s and implement to determine if
task that I am needed to accomplish strengths and adaptations. the adaptations
asking my the task. struggles as helped the student.
students to they relate to
accomplish?” the prerequisite
skills.

Figure 13.4.â•… ADAPT Framework. (Adapted by permission from Psycho-Educational Services. [2002]. ADAPT. Austin, TX: Au-
thor and Bryant, D.P., Bryant, B.R., & Baker, J. [2003]. Effective instruction for secondary struggling readers: Research-based
practices. Part I & Part II. Austin: University of Texas Center for Reading and Language Arts.)

We want to add one more piece of information about adaptations that addresses when
adaptations are made. When teachers look at their lesson for the day, they should consider all
their students. Might some of their students struggle with the lesson as written? If so, what
kind of adaptations might be made to ensure that all students can benefit from the lesson?
Often, scaffolds can be added to the lesson because Maria, in this case, may have trouble with
a lesson segment. Mr. Sanchez might also recognize that several other students may face the
same challenges as Maria, so the scaffold might help all students. In this instance, the teacher
is making “before lesson” scaffolds or adaptations.32 During a lesson, Mr. Sanchez might
notice that, as he checks for understanding, some students are confused. So he draws upon
his experiences and implements a scaffold to help the students understand the troublesome
concept or skill. Most students have encountered a similar situation in their studies. They are
able to follow along the lecture or reading, they understand, and then for some reason they
become confused. Students understand what the teacher or text is relating and then for some
reason they get to a point where they struggle. Often, all it takes is for the teacher to repeat
the part of the lesson was missed, but more often, the teacher must do something different
to help students understand. And that “something different” is adding a scaffold or making
an adaptation to the lesson.

Summary
In this chapter, we have discussed the relationship between reading/writing and mathematics.
Algebra teachers have a variety of ways that they can incorporate reading and writing activities
to help students improve their mathematics skills. Because algebra uses a variety of symbols,
we have redefined reading as it relates to mathematics. The same holds true, in part, for writ-
ing. However, traditional writing can and should be used by students to explain mathematics
content, processes, and effects. It is also important that algebra and other mathematics teachers
incorporate the elements of effective instruction into their lessons and differentiate instruction
to help all students learn. We presented the ADAPT Framework as one method that teachers can
use to introduce scaffolds and strategies that can help facilitate learning. By effectively incor-
porating reading and writing into mathematics instruction, teachers can help all their students
become strategic problem solvers and successful in mathematics.

Application Assignments
In-�Class Assignment
Pair with a partner to complete this challenge. As a high school English I teacher, you have been
approached by a first-�year colleague who teaches Algebra I. The two of you have been friends
for years, so she feels comfortable coming to you for help. She is struggling to meet the needs
of some students in her class who have trouble completing their homework assignments. She
Reading and Writing as a Mathematician 189

explains, “Each day, I write the homework assignment on the blackboard, and the students are
responsible for writing down the assignment and completing it for the next day. Most of my
students have no trouble with this, but I have three or four students who come in every day
and either they’ve done the wrong page or they haven’t followed the instructions in the text.
These are good kids who are no trouble in class. In fact, when I go over problems in class, they
do fine. I never had this problem as a student teacher, and in my college classes, such a problem
was never addressed. I have no clue what to do.”
Think of questions you might ask your colleague about this situation and consider the
answers she may provide. Based on your questions and her answers, what advice might you
offer?

Tutoring Assignment
Create a lesson plan to use with your student, including elements of the ADAPT Framework.
Describe the lesson, the objectives, the instructional activities, and your final assessment of how
well the student learned the objectives. Include thoughts about what you would do differently
the next time you teach this lesson.
As you prepare to work with your student, consider the following:
1. Review the lesson that you will be teaching. What are the prerequisite skills that the
student must possess to be able to learn the skills and concepts you are about to teach?
Does the student have those prerequisites, based on your knowledge of the student?
How might you know one way or the other? And if the student does not have one or
more prerequisites, what changes in the lesson might you make to address the prereq-
uisite skills?
2. Decide how you will check for understanding as you teach the lesson segments, beyond
asking, “Do you understand?” Think about probing questions that you can ask that only
someone who understands will be able to respond to correctly. Determine what you can
do to help the student get back on track if the student incorrectly responds or if you sus-
pect a lack of understanding. Explain several ways you could scaffold instruction to help
the student learn the skill or concept being taught. What instructional challenges does
the student pose for you, and what resources might you access to meet these challenges?

Homework Assignment
Imagine that you are a secondary algebra teacher. Choose a mathematics objective to teach
the class. Use the ADAPT Framework to plan how you would differentiate instruction for a
student in your class who is blind. He has excellent listening skills, has no fine or gross motor
problems, and is a superb communicator. In other words, aside from his blindness, he has all
the attributes of a successful student. After you have identified the prerequisite skills associated
with your selected task, determine in what areas the student might excel and where might he
struggle? Make a list of what you could do to differentiate or adapt instruction so that the stu-
dent can complete the assignment successfully. Be sure to refer to the information contained
in this chapter.

Endnotes
1. Freitag (1997). 4. Smith (2005).
2. Bailey, Jeong, & Cho (2009); Berkner, He, & Cataldi 5. Mcnee (2007).
(2002). 6. Burton (1992).
3. Houston (2009), pp. 3–Â�12. If you want to see whether you 7. Edwards (2002), p. iv.
think like a mathematician, you can download the book- 8. National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)
let at http://www.kevinhouston.net/pdf/10ways.pdf (2013).
190 Bryant and Bryant
9. Siebert & Draper (2012).
10. Bursuck & Blanks (2010).
11. Bryant & Bryant (2013).
12.
Darch, Carnine, & Gersten (1984).
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2000).
13. 24. Urquhart (2009), p. 7.
14.
Siebert & Draper (2012).
Bryant et al. (2013); Bryant, Smith, & Bryant (2008).
15. 26. Rivera & Bryant (1992).
16.
Pugalee (2005).
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2000), p. 61.
17. 28. Psycho-Educational Services (2002); Bryant, Bryant, &
18.
Urquhart (2009).
Council of Chief State School Officers & National Gov-
19. 29. Bryant et al. (2008).
ernors’ Association (2010).
20. Council of Chief State School Officers & National Gov-
ernors’ Association (2010), p. 130.
References
Bailey, T., Jeong, D.W., & Cho, S. (2009). Referral, enrollment,
and completion in developmental education sequences in commu-
nity colleges. New York, NY: Community College Resource
Center.
Berkner, L., He, S., & Cataldi, E.F. (2002). Descriptive summary
of 1995–Â�96 beginning postsecondary students: Six years later
(NCES 2003–Â�151). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of
Education, National Center for Education Statistics.
Bryant, B.R. (1996, January). Using assistive technology to help
students with learning disabilities access instruction in a coop-
erative learning structure. Technology and Media Division,
CEC, Annual Conference, Austin, TX.
Bryant, B.R., Bryant, D.P., & Kim, M.K. (2013). English I
support for students with learning disabilities: Findings about
needed scaffolds. Manuscript in preparation.
Bryant, B.R., Kim, M.K., Ok, M., Kang, E.Y., Bryant, D.P.,
& Lang, R. (2013). A comparison of two reading interven-
tions, teacher directed and iPad applications: Effects on reading
improvement and engagement. Manuscript in preparation.
Bryant, D.P., Bryant, B.R., & Baker, J. (2003). Effective instruc-
tion for secondary struggling readers: Research-based practices.
Part I & Part II. Austin: University of Texas Center for Read-
ing and Language Arts.
Bryant, D.P., & Bryant, B.R. (2013). Algebra I support for stu-
dents with learning disabilities: Findings about needed scaffolds.
Manuscript in preparation.
Bryant, D.P., Smith, D.D., & Bryant, B.R. (2008). Teaching stu-
dents with special needs in inclusive classrooms. Boston, MA:
Allyn & Bacon.
Bursuck, W., & Blanks, B. (2010). Evidence-�based early read-
ing practices within a response to intervention system. Psy-
chology in the Schools, 47(5), 421–Â�431. doi:10.1002/pits.20480
Burton, G.M. (1992). Using language arts to promote mathe-
matics learning. Mathematics Educator, 3(2), 26–Â�31.
Canada, D.L. (2004). Elementary preservice teachers’ concep-
tions of variations. (Doctoral Dissertation). Retrieved from
http://iase-�web.org/documents/dissertations/04.Canada
.Dissertation.pdf.
Carnine, D., Jones, E., & Dixon, R. (1994). Mathematics: Edu-
cational tools for diverse learners. School Psychology Review,
23(3), 406–Â�427.
21. Council of Chief State School Officers & National Gov-
ernors’ Association (2010), p. 12.
22. Graham & Perin (2007).
23. Edwards (2002), p. iv.
25. Urquhart (2009), p. 7.
27. Bryant (1996).
Baker (2003).
30. Deshler (2006).
31. Bryant, Bryant, & Kim (2013).
32. Bryant, Bryant, & Kim (2013).
Council of Chief State School Officers & National Governors’
Association. (2010, June). Common Core Sate Standards for
mathematics. Common Core State Standards (CCSS) Initia-
tive. Retrieved from http://www.corestandards.org/assets/
CCSSI_Math%20Standards.pdf
Darch, C., Carnine, D., & Gersten, R. (1984). Explicit instruc-
tion mathematics problem solving. Journal of Educational
Research, 77(6), 351–Â�359.
Deshler, D. (2006). An interview with Don Deshler: Perspec-
tives in teaching students with learning disabilities. Inter-
vention in School and Clinic, 41(5), 302.
Edwards, L. (2002). Reading and writing in the mathematics
classroom. Columbus, OH: McGraw-�Hill.
Freitag, M. (1997). Reading and writing in the mathematics
classroom. Mathematics Educator, 8(1), 16–Â�21.
Graham, S., & Perin, D. (2007). Writing next. New York, NY:
Carnegie Corporation of New York.
Houston, K. (2009). 10 ways to think like a mathematician.
Retrieved from http://www.kevinhouston.net/pdf/10ways
.pdf
Mcnee, M. (2007). Step by step reading. Kent, UK: Galore Park
Publishing.
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Princi-
ples and standards for school mathematics. Reston, VA: Author.
Pugalee, D. (2005). Writing for mathematical understanding.
Norwood, MA: Christopher Gordon Publishers.
Psycho-Educational Services. (2002). ADAPT. Austin, TX:
Author.
Rivera, D.M., & Bryant, B.R. (1992). Mathematics instruction
for students with special needs. Intervention in School and
Clinic, 28(2), 71–Â�86.
Siebert, D., & Draper, R.J. (2012). Reconceptualizing literacy
and instruction for mathematical classrooms. In T.L. Jetton
& C. Shanahan (Eds.), Adolescent literacy in the academic dis-
ciplines: General disciplines and practical strategies (pp. 172–Â�
198). New York, NY: Guilford.
Smith, F. (2005). Reading without nonsense (4th ed.). New
York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Urquhart, V. (2009). Using writing in mathematics to deepen
student learning. Denver, CO: Midcontinental Research for
Education and Learning.
 14
Literacy in the Arts
Neva Cramer

Classroom Scenario
Walking the halls of the typical secondary school, you are likely to hear the voices of teach-
ers giving instructions, explaining these instructions, redirecting off-�task students, asking
questions and then answering them, and restating information that was supposed to have
been read the night before. However, the sound coming from the arts wing is much different.
The voices heard are those of the students, and you can feel the energy as students take on
the role of the “artist” to discover and construct knowledge and perform their understand-
ings. In the arts classroom, students gather in small groups engaged in conversation about
the image portrayed on the large monitor. Others walk among a display of products with
journals in hand, actively taking notes and sharing critiques. Project portfolios are gathered,
and students add interpretive notes and historical descriptions to a collage of images using
the mixture of books, journals, and magazines scattered throughout the room. In the music
classroom, there is the collaborative sound of performance, both vocal and instrumental.
Copies of sheet music are strewn about the room, and posters of composers cover the wall.
The theatre is a menagerie of voices and bodies in motion as hands wave scripts and stories

Objectives: After studying this chapter, you will be able to:

1. Understand literacy as a means of negotiating meaning through traditional and
nontraditional text in the visual and performing arts.
2. Describe how the arts involve unique reading and writing skills using a unique
discourse.
3. Develop literacy in the arts to read, write, and think about the arts and to create
artifacts and/or perform in the arts using specific language and discourse.
4. Use a process for building on content knowledge in the arts through disciplinary
literacy strategies.
5. Align and understand the relationship among the National Standards for Arts
Education, literacy skills, and the College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards
for Reading.
6. Utilize arts literacy strategies to develop a variety of thinking skills unique to the
arts and that transfer to other academic fields.

191
192 Cramer

come alive through music, art, and performance. Literacy is alive and well in a very different
way than in the traditional core classroom—Â�this is literacy learning through the arts.

The arts are embedded in our daily lives and provide a medium for expression in all areas of
life, from the décor of our homes to the type of clothes we wear, the music we listen and sing to
in the car, and the film or television show that touches our hearts and changes our perspective.
This chapter discusses using literacy to understand these mediums and using these mediums
to support literacy.
When we think of literacy, we usually think in terms of different forms of printed commu-
nication such as books, journals, newspapers, and electronic forms of print used on the Internet
and through social media. However, literacy in the arts includes both linguistic and nonlinguistic
forms of communication. Reading as an artist is described by Elliot Eisner as “a way of conveying
meaning through and recovering meaning from the form of representation in which it appears.”1
Reading is the process of forming a perception based on the imagery, form, and language of
the text, translated through the experience of the reader.2 This definition of reading includes more
than reading traditional printed text. Literacy in the arts refers to the unique reading and writing
skills necessary for communicating and making meaning in the arts.3 Disciplinary literacy in the
arts expands our definition of literacy to include what it means to communicate, think, perform,
and create like visual and performing artists. These unique literacy processes are fundamental to
the visual and performing arts (e.g., music, dance, or drama) and can also help students interpret
images and different forms of text to increase comprehension in nonarts courses.

What Is Literacy in the Arts and Why Is It Important?

Students who are literate in the disciplines of the arts develop a disposition for thinking, creat-
ing, evaluating, and interpreting text in its many forms. They develop a shared language and a
unique vocabulary that allows them to communicate with and about other artists. This ability
to communicate in a specialized way is referred to as a discourse. Artists of all genres belong
to a group from which they develop their identity, utilize a specialized language, and assume
a type of role to play as they communicate in the discourse of their discipline.4
The arts can set the stage for developing the thinking dispositions required for success in
college and careers; the arts create a learning environment to develop a variety of cognitive skills
that have a great impact on how we think and learn. The arts provide a form for representing
our thinking and may affect not only how we think but what we are able to think.5 Many studies
concerning the impact of the arts or arts-�rich schools have led to speculation and implications
for learning in other subjects.6 The Center for Arts Education Research at Teachers College
Columbia University examined the arts experiences of more than 2,000 public elementary and
middle school students. Their study indicated that several cognitive competencies—Â�referred to
as habits of mind—Â�were associated with arts learning.7 Immersion in the arts developed such
habits of mind as the ability to take multiple perspectives and construct meaning in different
forms such as movements, images, or musical sound. Competencies in creativity, originality,
fluency, and imagination were evident and were considered to be characteristics of the type of
thinking used in arts learning.

What Does Literacy Look Like in the Arts

and How Is It Different from Other Literacies?
Literacy in the arts includes what students interpret, create, and make sense of in order to
learn in their field.8 Becoming literate in the arts requires students to learn the unique ways of
communicating in the visual and performing arts. For example, in drama students read printed
texts unique to the field such as scripts and screenplays and also learn to “read” what people
Literacy in the Arts 193

say based on interpretations of facial expressions, tone of voice, and inflections. They then per-
form that understanding through elocution using the hands, body, and voice. Reading like a
musician involves hearing and feeling the text and translating and interpreting the music score
and watching the road signs (such as symbols for pace and volume) for direction. Specialized
vocabulary must be learned in order to understand the discourse in a discipline, such as color,
line, symmetry, and perspective in the visual arts; character, voice inflection, expression, and stage
movement in drama; and fortissimo, pianissimo, andante, tacit, and staccato in music.
Reading and writing in the arts as an artist requires a distinct, disciplinary approach to
literacy, just as reading as a historian, mathematician, or scientist involves different empha-
ses, demands, and processes. Artists interact with text for the purpose of performing meaning
through a nonlinguistic representation. Although traditional narrative and expository text
are also utilized, the arts are unique in relying on artifacts and nonlinguistic representations
of art, such as images, musical notation, painting, sculpture, graphic design, architecture,
and actual performances of the text such as plays, musicals, or symphonies. Thus students
in the arts develop a disposition for thinking, creating, evaluating, and interpreting text in
its many forms.

Frameworks for Teaching Disciplinary Literacy in the Arts

The goal is to create thoughtful artists literate in their field. A framework for teaching provides
a means of organizing and collecting data in order to achieve a desired learning outcome (see
Figure 14.1). A framework for developing a learning environment focused on developing dis-
ciplinary literacy in the arts includes opportunities for students to do the following:
• Write like an artist: Use writing formats commonly used in the arts and about the arts.
• Read like an artist: Comprehend and interpret a variety of print and nonprint texts.
• Speak and listen like an artist: Discuss the arts using an insider discourse and discipline-Â�
specific vocabulary.
• Think like an artist: Analyze and reason like an artist; recognize the critical elements of the
discipline.
• Perform and create like an artist: Apply appropriate methods, processes, and tools to perform
and create art.
Figure 14.1 provides suggestions for applying activities for reading, writing, speaking,
listening, thinking, and performing or creating in the arts classroom.
Another framework was developed by Studio Thinking, a project developed by Harvard’s
Project Zero to research how the arts are taught, what students learn, and the types of decisions
teachers make in designing and implementing instruction in the arts. The Studio Thinking
Framework consists of eight habits that support the development of artistic literacy.9
1. Develop craft: Learning to use tools, materials, artistic conventions; learning to care for tools,
materials, and space
2. Engage and persist: Learning to embrace problems of relevance within the art world or of personal
importance; learning to develop focus conducive to working and persevering at tasks
3. Envision: Learning to picture mentally what cannot be directly observed and imagine possible
next steps in making a piece
4. Express: Learning to create works that convey an idea, a feeling, or a personal meaning
5. Observe: Learning to attend to visual contexts more closely than ordinary “looking” requires and
thereby to notice things that otherwise might not be seen
6. Reflect: Learning to think and talk with others about an aspect of one’s work or working process
and learning to judge one’s own work and working process and the work of others
7. Stretch and explore: Learning to reach beyond one’s capacities, to explore playfully without a
preconceived plan, and to embrace the opportunity to learn from mistakes
194 Cramer

Six Steps for Developing

Literacy in the Arts

1. Writing 2. Reading 3. Speaking

Choose a form of writing to reflect
and communicate ideas about
the arts (journals, discussion
webs, write about art in a learning
journal)
Write about art in a format commonly
used in that field such as
critiques, reviews, comparisons,
history, or research
4. Listening
Choose traditional print readings to
explore and research the arts
(journals, books, reference books,
art history essays)
Perform a think-aloud on how to
“read” an art form—Â�a painting, a
dance position, a line from a play
5. Thinking
Participate in discussions about art
using appropriate vocabulary and
terms for that art form
Take on the role of the artist and
describe/present a work of art
6. Performing/Creating

Interview fellow artists in the
classroom about their work
Bring in guest artists from the
community to speak to the class
Listen to various forms of art to
compare and critique
Use thinking routines to enhance Perform your understanding of story,
observation and analysis of the theme, idea, or emotions through
arts, such as the four Ds of an art form (e.g., play a part, sing
determining meaning: a role, paint a representation,
Describe create an art form)
Discuss Demonstrate how to play a piece of
Defend music, interpret a line of dialogue,
create a dance movement to express
Direct a concept or idea, create a visual
representation of a concept or an idea

Figure 14.1.â•… Six steps for developing literacy in the arts. Source: Palkowski (2013).

8. Understand arts community: Learning to interact as an artist with other artists—Â�that is, in class-
rooms, in local arts organizations, across the art field, and within the broader society

Strategies for Developing Arts Literacy

As you start to develop your teaching framework in the arts and choose your structures for
learning, include the following three categories of arts literacy instruction as it applies to your
discipline—Â�the visual arts, theatre, dance, or music:
• Literacy skills specific to this art form
• Forms of text specific to this art form
• Literacy instructional strategies specific to this art form

Music
• Literacy skills in music include reading and interpreting lyrics, deciphering musical sym-
bols, knowledge of Latin-�derived music terms, reading sheet music notation, using a spe-
cialized vocabulary such as harmony, rhythm, timbre, text or lyrics, form, and phrasing. Develop
the types of interactions recommended by the National Standards for Music Education,
including performing, listening, contemplating, and creating.10
• Forms of text used in music include music theory and music history texts and essays; com-
positions; sheet music, scores, and librettos; music programs; music CD covers; and inserts.
• Literacy instructional strategies for music include participating in reading sessions, which
require researching the background of the piece; analyzing how a composer defines a char-
acter using melody, rhythm, expression, and compositional devices; and writing a personal
Literacy in the Arts 195

reflection on the piece to acknowledge how the affective aspects of the music have an impact
on performance and interpretation. Complete lesson plans are available using the CMP
(Comprehensive Musicianship through Performance) strategies, which incorporate all
aspects of music literacy.11 One such lesson explores the implications of developing a musi-
cal from a literary text or a historical event and includes suggestions for immersing students
into the creative process of building a musical. After choosing a text, students will consider
what the most important elements of the story are and how they can be brought to life on
stage and through creative movement and song.

Drama
• Drama literacy skills include using specialized vocabulary for theatre and stage directions
such as stage left, ad lib, blocking, blackout, and curtain call; voicing the meaning; oral dramatic
interpretation; and performing text through the body, face, and voice.
• Forms of text used in drama include scripts, screenplays, playbills, and theatre history.
• Literacy strategies for drama include writing an interior monologue, which is a literacy
strategy that invites students to explore the complex thoughts and feelings of a character.
Through tableaux, discussion of background information, and guided imagery, students
discover a strong first-person voice.12

Dance
• Dance literacy skills include translating story and/or emotions and ideas into choreography;
using a specialized vocabulary of French terms such as barre and arabesque along with dance
terms such as first position, bridge, fan kick, and isolations; “reading” original body sculptures,
individual movement patterns, and dance composition; and writing process journals.
• Forms of text used in dance include dance notation, biographies and autobiographies, inter-
views, articles, letters, theatre programs, journals, Internet sites, and textbooks.
• Literacy instructional strategies for dance include students “retelling” a ballet story by
quickly sketching the plot structure through storyboarding.13

Visual Arts
• Visual arts literacy skills include specialized vocabulary in the elements and principles of
design such as color, line, symmetry, and perspective and the use of questioning and dialogue,
often referred to as “art talk.”14
• Texts used in the visual arts include art history essays and texts, biographies of artists, and
artwork such as images and artifacts that students “read” for meaning.
• Literacy strategies for the visual arts include the jigsaw method for the visual arts, a method
used as an extension to the close read that contextualizes many different elements of the
artist’s life, the piece of artwork, and the historical period of a work of art.15

How Do We Assess What Students Know

and What They Are Learning in the Arts?
As students develop their knowledge and skills in the arts, they must also be able to com-
municate effectively in the arts, including using the vocabulary specific to the arts, reading
and writing about the arts, evaluating the arts, and creating art. Methods of assessment must
include multiple means of demonstrating learning and understanding such as products and
performance. Performance assessment requires active participation in the learning process and
continuous construction of meaning with scaffolding provided by the teacher or expert in the
field. Performances of understanding may include the following.
196 Cramer

1. Ongoing feedback on process through observation checklists

2. Portfolio collections of works with rubrics for project expectations
3. Interactive reviews that document discussion and comments on progress from peers and
outside reviewers such as community members, guest artists, and educators
Portfolios are collections of work chosen by the student and/or teacher to represent the stu-
dent’s level of understanding. Using a portfolio allows the student to demonstrate what he or she
has learned in multiple ways. These collections may include art products and creations, reflections
on work, videos or photographs of performances and/or products, and self-�assessment. A rubric
is used to evaluate the portfolio. The rubric is an assessment format based on several categories
of criteria along a continuum that indicate whether the student is meeting expectations for learn-
ing. Using a set of criteria for arts literacy allows the student and the instructor to make authentic
connections between the student’s knowledge and skills in the arts and their ability to read, write,
create, evaluate, and communicate in the arts as a member of this discipline. As students research
and prepare their artifacts and performances, they must also use skills in problem solving and
higher order thinking skills such as making inferences, analysis, reflection, and evaluation.
In the performing arts such as drama, music, and dance, competency is evaluated through
performance. Rubrics are utilized and expected skills delineated. Such rubrics provide the cri-
teria for the performance, thus reducing subjectivity.16
This type of assessment is referred to as authentic assessment. Authentic assessment in the
performing arts should meet the following criteria:
• The assessment task is much like one found in a real-Â�world setting.
• The assessment requires judgment and innovation. Students must create, design, and repre-
sent their ideas through performance or product rather than using only formulas or estab-
lished procedures.
• The assessment asks students to “do” the subject. Rather than regurgitating facts, students
must conduct the work of the content area. They must know and do.
• Students must use skills and knowledge to complete complex tasks. Authentic assessment
requires students to integrate skill and knowledge—Â�often from more than one content area.
• The assessment allows students to practice, get feedback, and revise performances and
products. Authentic assessments utilize the circular loop of performance, feedback, and
revision. Student work develops and evolves through this use of assessment.17
Students also learn to review and reflect upon their own and others’ work. Performance
reviews and reflection logs increase metacognitive skills and self-�efficacy because the student
must use interactive feedback to discuss evaluations. Teachers must train their students to be pos-
itive and beneficial evaluators by modeling feedback and reviews and providing lists of criteria
and language appropriate for offering feedback. Thus students learn to move beyond judgments
and opinions based on personal likes and dislikes and become articulate in supporting their
evaluations with evidence from the work. The “Arts Assessment Resource Guide” developed by
the California County Superintendents Educational Services Association is a helpful resource.18

How Do I Create a Classroom Environment that

Enhances Literacy and Learning in and Through the Arts?
Strategies for enhancing literacy and learning in and through the arts include the following:
1. Immerse students in the experience of the arts to create a motivating learning environ-
ment that promotes creative thought and risk taking.
2. Develop students’ awareness skills such as an awareness and a sensitivity to what is seen,
heard, and felt when one “reads” a work of art in any form and build students’ disposition
for being “artistic.” The ability to use careful observation to read, question, and evaluate what
Literacy in the Arts 197

one sees, hears, and feels is an essential critical thinking

skill necessary for creating and sharing information.
3. Teach specialized vocabulary necessary for communi-
cating within the group.
4. Teach specific skills to communicate in the arts, includ-
ing oral and written description, heuristic skills, crit-
ical analysis, interpretation through body movement
and gesture, and the use of inflection, volume, and rate
of speech or sound.
5. Provide opportunities to create, produce, design, or
perform the arts through an apprenticeship with other
skilled artists, much the same as providing a coach to
an athlete or a mentor chef to a culinary student. Stu-
dents need opportunities for authentic experiences,
such as rehearsing and making mistakes followed by
reflection and trying again.
The arts may also be used to support and develop lit-
eracy skills in other content areas. An example of using a
thinking routine in the arts for developing literacy skills is provided in the following text. This
example could be used in a social studies class, English language arts class, or in an art class
with all students. Teaching with artistic images allows students of all developmental levels and
language proficiencies to participate. Such guided interaction using visuals to enhance reading,
writing, speaking, and listening is meaningful to all students, including those who are English
language learners (ELLs).19
The painting in Figure 14.2 was designed to promote awareness of the thinking processes
used to interpret nonlinguistic text typically found in the visual arts. The response activity is called
the “Four Ds of Determining Meaning.” Students go through the thinking process of describing,
discussing, and defending their perception of the image. The students then demonstrate their
understanding by a performance, which they write and direct, telling the story of the image.
First, students view and describe the image (see Figure 14.2), stating a claim as to what it
portrays. The second step asks the students to discuss what they see with others, expanding
their vision and observation skills. The third step is to defend their claim based on what they
see, feel, or know. One of the author’s students described the image as a village where the
people are in conflict and surrounded by the fire of war. He defended his perception by noting
the tiny village in the bottom of the picture where no one was seen outside, with darkness and
fire surrounding the village. The final step is to have students tell the story of the image in text
through a scripted narrative or performance direction. My student wrote the conversation he
believed to have occurred in the situation and set the stage as a tiny village in Vietnam where
the people of the village prayed to a shiny star for peace. His story ended with the star granting
peace and happiness and the people becoming “amicable.” The student came from Vietnam and
was able to view the image through the lens of his own experience using a digital translator to
add the word amicable. A sample form for this kind of activity is shown in Figure 14.3.
Another example of teaching literacy skills through the arts is dramatic oral reading. Per-
forming a literary work using dramatic expression as one reads text demands more than decod-
ing and comprehending; it requires an interpretation that comes from experiencing the text.
Oral expression allows the reader to “use language to reveal what, paradoxically, words can
never say.”20 The complicated cognitive, creative, and imaginative acts required to produce an
oral interpretation is an art. It is art as a way of knowing. Since drama is an externalization of
a mental activity, the result is that the actual (words) and the externalized (the make-�believe
or, as in reading, the mental images) are translated into oral expression. Therefore, dramatic
expression is the evidence of the internal construction of meaning from the text.
198 Cramer

Figure 14.2.â•… Starry Night. (From Van Gogh, V. [1889]. Starry night [Painting]. New York, NY:
Museum of Modern Art.)

1. Examine your famous painting or illustration.

2. Fill out the list of descriptive words. What do you see?

Nouns Adjectives Verbs

3. Create a story using your word list. Make your painting “come alive.” Consider your story elements:
a. Setting
b. Characters
c. Conflict
d. Plot: Sequence of events
4. Sketch pad—draw a picture or series of pictures that visually tell your story.

Figure 14.3.â•… Make your painting come alive: Reading and writing in response to visual text. (Sources: Agee, 1988; Mantione
& Smead, 2003. From Cramer, N. [2013, April]. Literacy and learning through the arts: Engaging today’s visual learners. Paper
presented at the meeting of Professors of Reading Teacher Educators [PRTE], a special interest group of the International Read-
ing Association, San Antonio, Texas.)
Literacy in the Arts 199

How Do We Develop Instructional Plans that Incorporate the

Common Core State Standards and Evidence-�Based Literacy Strategies?
The Arts Education Partnership provides many resources for connecting the Common Core
State Standards and the arts. See the list of resources at the end of the chapter. You will also find
the Arts and the Common Core Curriculum Mapping Project that connects ELA instruction with
the arts. This resource provides suggestions how ELA skills may be enhanced by connecting a
genre, a particular text, a theme, or a unit to works of art, music, or film.21 A list of some of the
Common Core State Standards that can be taught through the arts is provided in Table 14.1. A
completed lesson plan is included in Appendix A.

Integrating the Arts: New Standards, New Ways of

Thinking, and New Connections to Other Disciplines
In June 2011, a new partnership of organizations now called the National Coalition for Core
Arts Standards (NCCAS) began revising the 1994 National Standards for Arts Education. The
new recommended standards provide the following:
• A new conceptual framework for arts literacy
• A new way of guiding curriculum, instruction, and assessment for arts education
• A new way of thinking, learning, and creating in the arts using artistic processes, creative
practices, anchor standards for what students in the arts should know and be able to do,
and enduring understandings for lifelong goals as arts-�educated citizens
• Connections with other disciplines aligned with Common Core State Standards22

How Will the National Core Standards for the Arts

Address the Criteria and Descriptors for Artistic Literacy?
According to the NCCAS’s National Core Arts Standards: A Conceptual Framework for Arts Learning,
Artistic literacy is the knowledge and understanding required to participate authentically in the
arts. Fluency in the language(s) of the arts is the ability to create, perform/produce/present, respond,
and connect through symbolic and metaphoric forms that are unique to the arts. It is embodied in
specific philosophical foundations and lifelong goals that enable an artistically literate person to
transfer arts knowledge, skills, and capacities to other subjects, settings, and contexts.23

Expectations for arts-�literate citizens are listed in the National Core Arts Standards: A Con-
ceptual Framework for Arts Learning and include the following:
1. Artistically literate citizens use a variety of artistic media, symbols, and metaphors to inde-
pendently create and perform work that expresses and communicates their own ideas and
are able to respond by analyzing and interpreting the artistic communications of others.
2. Artistically literate citizens find at least one arts discipline in which they develop suffi-
cient competence to continue active involvement in creating, performing, and respond-
ing to art as an adult.
3. Artistically literate citizens know and understand artwork from varied historical periods
and cultures and actively seek and appreciate diverse forms and genres of artwork of
enduring quality/significance. They also seek to understand relationships among the arts
and cultivate habits of searching for and identifying patterns, relationships between the
arts, and other knowledge.
4. Artistically literate citizens find joy, inspiration, peace, intellectual stimulation, meaning,
and other life-�enhancing qualities through participation in all the arts.
5. Artistically literate citizens seek artistic experience and support the arts in their local,
state, national, and global communities.24
200 Cramer

Table 14.1.â•… Alignment of standards and literacy skills for instructional strategies (based on the Common Core State Stan-
dards Anchor Standards for Reading and the National Standards for Arts Education)
Literacy and the arts alignment of standards and skills
Instructional Arts standard/
strategy achievement
Think Aloud Visual Arts Standard 1
Through Achievement: Stu-
the Arts dents initiate, define,
and solve challenging
visual arts problems
independently using
intellectual skills such
as analysis, synthesis,
and evaluation.
Standard 6: Students
make connections
between visual arts
and other disciplines.
Make Your Standard 1 Achieve-
Painting ment: Students
Come Alive intentionally take
advantage of the
qualities and charac-
teristics of art media,
techniques, and
processes to enhance
communication of
their experiences and
ideas.
Dramatic Oral Theatre Standard
Reading 1 Achievement:
Students construct
imaginative scripts
and collaborate with
actors to refine scripts
so that story and
meaning are con-
veyed to an audience.
College and Career
Readiness Anchor
Arts skill Literacy skill Standards for Reading
1. Developing 1. Fluency CCSS.ELA-�Literacy.
fluency in 2. Using discussion to CCRA.R.1
vocabulary and construct meaning Read closely to deter-
concepts asso- 3. Pragmatics–Â� mine what the text
ciated with the knowing when to says explicitly and
artistic medium use language for a to make logical
2. Appreciating specific purpose inferences from it;
multiple inter- cite specific textual
4. Sustained obser-
pretations and vation and close evidence when writing
artistic solutions attention to detail or speaking to support
3. Transforming a conclusions drawn
5. Drawing inference
concept from from text to support from the text.
one medium to a conclusion
another
1. Interpreting a 1. Schema CCSS.ELA-�Literacy.
work of art development CCRA.R.7
2. Creating a work 2. Making inferences Integrate and evaluate
of art to express 3. Problem solving content presented in
feelings and diverse media and
4. Developing sensory
present ideas images formats, including
visually and quanti-
tatively, as well as in
words.
1. Using dramatic 1. Using drama to CCSS.ELA-�Literacy.
expression to develop a personal CCRA.R.4
envision and cre- voice Interpret words and
ate an imaginary 2. Applying under- phrases as they
world standing of seman- are used in a text,
tics and syntax to including determining
construct meaning technical, connotative,
3. Using phras- and figurative mean-
ing to enhance ings, and analyze how
comprehension specific word choices
4. Creating character shape meaning or
through the voice tone.

Source: National Coalition for Core Arts Standards (2012). (Common Core State Standards © Copyright 2010. National Governors Associ-
ation Center for Best Practices and Council of Chief State School Officers. All rights reserved.)

Connections to the Common Core State Standards

Since the 2010 publication of the CCSS, the connection between arts-�based education and
the ELA and mathematics standards has been explored. Skills connections include using the
following:
1. Art as a tool for developing observation and interpretation skills25
2. The visual or performing art as text applies the same skills of analysis and interpretation
as a close reading of traditional text, therefore aligning with the CCSS Reading Standards26
3. Intersections of vocabulary from CCSS with vocabulary in the arts for the comparison of
shared cognitive skills and concepts.27
Literacy in the Arts 201

As Coleman (2012) says,

The great news is that the standards call on so many things the arts do well. The tradition of careful
observation, attention to evidence and artists’ choices, and the love of taking an artist’s work seri-
ously lies at the heart of these standards.28

Summary
Literacy in the arts enables arts students to take on the role of artist, whether it be in the visual
or performing arts, with the confidence and ability to communicate as an expert in their field.
Artists must read, write, speak, listen, think, and perform as an artist. This is art literacy.
Implementing “literacy and learning in and through the arts” strategies will help diverse
learners reach their full language potential. The arts provide a means for multiple cultures to
find common ground for understanding one another and our world. Many symbols and images
are universal. Sharing our perspectives through the arts allows us to share our experiences and
explain our view or interpretation.
The arts provide an aesthetic environment of learning, seeing, and creating where our
emotions and intuitions and feelings matter, allowing us to learn with our whole being through
our bodies, our voices, our minds, and our imaginations. Bringing aesthetic learning into the
classroom makes reading come alive for students. It helps make reading a meaningful experi-
ence and provides a map to the “places where the integration of drama (and music and dance
and the visual arts) and literacy exists—Â�places of the heart, head, voice, and hand.”29

Application Assignments
In-�Class Assignments
1. Read through 10 lessons in the “What the Arts Teach and How It Shows” chapter in Elliot
Eisner’s The Arts and the Creation of Mind and discuss them with a partner. Create a poster
together graphically representing ways to learn through the arts.30
2. With a partner, review the lesson plan in Appendix C. Using it as a guide, create a lesson
plan integrating use of the arts to teach a concept from your discipline. Include selected
Common Core State Standards and develop a rubric to evaluate student work.

Tutoring Assignment
Read aloud The Incredible Painting of Felix Clousseau written by J. Agee.31 This charming story
tells of a French painter who became famous for his paintings that came alive—Â�with eventual
disastrous effects. To create a literacy learning experience through the arts, choose an image of
a famous painting (old calendars are a great source for images of artwork) and ask the student
you are tutoring to describe what he or she sees in the painting using nouns, verbs, and adjec-
tives. Using creative and critical thinking, the student then imagines what the result would be
if his or her painting were to “come alive.” Have the student tell you the story, followed by
writing and illustrating the events of the story. Figure 14.3 may be used as the response format,
or students may write a narrative, newspaper report, or any other relevant form of media.

Learning New Knowledge by Integrating the Arts

1. With a partner, choose a topic to teach through the arts. Create a PowerPoint presenta-
tion using visual images, music, and text to create a learning experience applying literacy
through the arts. The topic may be a current event, an event in history, a discovery, or a
concept in science.
202 Cramer

2. In class, lead your fellow students through the following steps:

a. Before presenting your PowerPoint presentation, have the students in your class
write down two to three things they already know about the topic.
b. Have students discuss what they know with others and add to what they wrote.
c. After the discussion, present the visual presentation of the topic you prepared.
d. Discuss with the class their perceptions of the topic now based on your presentation.
Be sure to address what new knowledge was presented through reading, writing,
speaking, listening, and viewing.
3. Write a one-�page paper summarizing the changes of your peers in their knowledge and
perception of the topic you presented.

Creating Lessons Integrating the Common Core State Standards and the Arts
1. Choose a standard from the Common Core State Standards and illustrate how art can be
utilized to promote the knowledge and skill of that standard. Use the ArtsEdge web site
(http://artsedge.kennedy-center.org) as a resource for ideas and lesson plans to support
your activity.
For an example, see the first principle from David Coleman’s Guiding Principles for the
Arts: Grades K–Â�12.32
2. Explore the idea of STEAM, adding the arts to STEM disciplines (science, technology,
engineering, mathematics), and explore ways the arts are being used to promote inter-
est and engagement in math and science. Using one slide or visual, present a 1-minute
research report to the class on your findings.

Endnotes
1. Eisner (1997), p. 353.
2. Cramer, Ortlieb, & Cheek (2007).
3. Jetton & Shanahan (2012).
4. Gee (1996).
5. Eisner (1997).
6. Catterall (1998).
7. Burton, Horowitz, & Abeles (1999).
8. Draper & Broomhead (2010).
9. Winner, Hetland, Veenema, Sheridan, Palmer, Locher,
et al. (2006; see more at: http://www.artsedsearch.org/
summaries/studio-thinking-how-visual-arts-teaching-can
-promote-disciplined-habits-of-mind#sthash.IGul7rOV
.dpuf); Chicago Teachers’ Center (2012).
10. Broomhead (2005). A complete list of the National Music
Education standards may be found at http://musiced.nafme.
org/resources/national-standards-for-music-education
11. Wisconsin CMP web site at http://www.wmea.com/
index.php?module=cms&page=87. Lessons are also avail-
able on the Kennedy Center ArtsEdge web site at http://
artsedge.kennedy-�center.org/educators/standards.aspx
1 2. Chicago Teachers’ Center (CTC; 2012).
13. Arts Integration Solution, http://artsintegration.com
14. Althouse, Johnson, & Mitchell (2003); Community Play-
things, http://www.communityplaythings.com/resources/
articles/2006/rt-�talk-�developing-�visual-�and-�verbal-�literacy
15. The CTC, an academic educational unit within the
Northeastern Illinois University’s College of Education,
http://everyarteverychild.org for other literacy strategies
adapted for the arts, see the Greece Central School District
in New York, http://www.greece.k12.ny.us/academics
.cfm?subpage=1662
16. Maryland Fine Arts Education, http://www.mfaa.msde
.state.md.us/source/MDFAdeveloping_2e_3b.asp
17. Wiggins (1998).
18. “Arts Assessment Resource Guide,” California Super-
intendents Educational Services Association, http://www
.ccsesaarts.org/CCSESA_FILES/AssessmentToolkit
.pdf
19. Resource developed by the New Teacher Center at Univer-
sity of California, Santa Cruz (2005), http://uteach.utexas.
edu/sites/default/files/files/SixKeyStrategiesELL.pdf
20. Eisner (1991), p. 3.
21. Arts Education Partnership (2014).
22. National Art Education Association/Research and Knowl-
edge, https://www.arteducators.org/research/nccas
23. National Core Arts Standards: A Conceptual Frame-
work for Arts Learning, http://nccas.wikispaces.com
24. National Core Arts Standards: A Conceptual Frame-
work for Arts Learning, http://nccas.wikispaces.com
25. Coleman (2011).
26. Rubino, Charleroy, & Jones (2013).
27. Developed by Susan Riley and provided on the Educa-
tion Closet web site for strategies, lessons, and resources
for arts integration with the Common Core. Retrieved
from http://educationcloset.com/ultimate-common
-core-and-arts-resource
28. Coleman (2012).
29. Wolf, Edmiston, & Enciso (1997), p. 492.
30. Eisner (2002), chap. 4.
31. Agee (1988).
32. Coleman (2011).
Literacy in the Arts 203
Web Sites
The 21st Century Skills Maps, http://www.p21.org/storage/
documents/P21_arts_map_final.pdf
Arts Education Partnership, http://www.aep-�arts.org
Art Educators, http://www.arteducators.org/advocacy/10
-lessons-the-arts-teach
Artful Thinking, http://www.pzartfulthinking.org/index
.php
Arts and the Common Core Curriculum Mapping Proj-
ect, http://commoncore.org/maps/documents/Art_in_the
_Maps.pdf
Arts Integration Solutions, http://artsintegration.com
California Superintendents Educational Services Association,
http://www.ccsesaarts.org/CCSESA_FILES/Assessment
Toolkit.pdf
Creativity and the New Common Core Standards, http://
edu.moca.org/education/teachers/commoncore
Common Core State Standards Initiative College and Career
Readiness Anchor Standards for Reading, http://www.core
standards.org/ELA-�Literacy/CCRA/R
References
Agee, J. (1988). The incredible painting of Felix Clousseau. New
York, NY: Farrar, Straus & Giroux.
Althouse, R., Johnson, M.H., & Mitchell, S.T. (2003). The col-
ors of learning: Integrating the visual arts into the early child-
hood curriculum. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.
Arts Education Partnership. (2014). Common Core and the
arts. Retrieved from http://www.aep-�arts.org/resources-�2/
common-�core-�and-�the-�arts
Broomhead, P. (2005). Shaping expressive performance: A
problem solving approach. Music Educators Journal, 91(5),
63–Â�67.
Burton, J., Horowitz, R., & Abeles, H. (1999). Learning in and
through the arts: Transfer and higher order thinking. New
York, NY: Center for Arts Education Research, Teachers
College, Columbia University.
Catterall, J.S. (1998). Does experience in the arts boost aca-
demic achievement? A response to Eisner. Art Education,
51(4), 6–Â�8.
Chicago Teachers’ Center. (2012). A look at Lois Hetland’s eight
studio habits. Chicago: Northeastern Illinois University’s
College of Education. Retrieved from http://www.every-
arteverychild.org/assessment/studiohabits.html
Coleman, D. (2011). Guiding principles for the arts: Grades
K–Â�12. Retrieved from http://usny.nysed.gov/rttt/docs/
guidingprinciples-arts.pdf
Coleman, D. (2012). Common Core architect adds to blog salon
discussion. ARTSblog. Retrieved from http://blog.artsusa
.org/2012/09/17/common-core-architect-adds-to-blog
-salon-salon-discussion/#sthash.kSEGYaER.dpuf
Cramer, N. (2013, April). Literacy and learning through the
arts: Engaging today’s visual learners. Paper presented at
the meeting of Professors of Reading Teacher Educators
(PRTE), a special interest group of the International Read-
ing Association, San Antonio, Texas.
Cramer, N., Ortlieb, E.T., & Cheek, E.H. (2007, December). Multi-
ple ways of knowing: A theoretical framework for drama and
literacy in a contemporary curriculum. Reading Matrix, 7(3).
Draper, R.J., & Broomhead, G.P. (2010). (Re)imagining
content-�area literacy instruction. New York, NY: Teachers
College Press.
Community Playthings, http://www.communityplaythings
.com/resources/articles/2006/art-�talk-�developing-�visual
-�and-�verbal-�literacy See Art Talk: Developing Visual and
Verbal Literacy.
The Education Closet, http://educationcloset.com/
ultimate-common-core-and-arts-resource
Harvard’s Project Zero-Â�Visible Thinking Routines, http://
www.pz.harvard.edu
The Kennedy Center ArtsEdge, http://artsedge.kennedy
-�center.org/educators/standards.aspx
The Kennedy Center for the Arts, http://artsedge.kennedy
-center.org/educators.aspx
Maryland Fine Arts Education: Instructional Toolkit, http://
www.mfaa.msde.state.md.us/source/MDFAdeveloping
_2e_3b.asp
National Standards for Music Education, http://musiced.nafme
.org/resources/national-standards-for-music-education
Project Zero, http://www.pz.harvard.edu
Wisconsin CMP, http://www.wmea.com/index.php?module
=cms&page=87
Eisner, E.W. (1991). What the arts taught me about education.
Retrieved from http://www.arteducators.org/advocacy/10
-lessons-the-arts-teach
Eisner, E.W. (1997). Cognition and representation: A way
to pursue the American Dream. Phi Delta Kappan, 78,
349–Â�353.
Eisner, E.W. (2002). The arts and the creation of mind. New
Haven, CT: Yale University Press. Retrieved from
NAEA web site: http://www.arteducators.org/advocacy/
10-lessons-the-arts-teach
Gee, J.P. (1996). Social linguistics and literacies: Ideology in dis-
course (2nd ed.). New York, NY: RoutledgeFalmer.
International Reading Association. (2012). Adolescent literacy
(Position statement, Rev. ed.). Newark, DE: Author.
Jetton, T.L., & Shanahan, C. (2012). Adolescent literacy in the
academic disciplines: General principles and practical strategies.
New York, NY: Guilford.
National Coalition for Core Arts Standards. (2012). National
Core Arts Standards: A conceptual framework for arts learning.
Unpublished manuscript.
Palkowski, J. (2013). Disciplinary literacy-tools for in-depth
artistic study. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Department of
Public Instruction Fine Arts and Creativity. Retrieved
from http://www.wiarted.org/wisconsin-fine-arts-and
-creativity-consultant/disciplinary-literacy-tools-for-in
-depth-artistic-study
Rubino, N., Charleroy, A., & Jones, S. (2012, December). The
arts and the common core: A review of connections between
the Common Core State Standards and the National Core Arts
Standards conceptual framework. New York, NY: College
Board.
Van Gogh, V. (1889). Starry night [Painting]. New York, NY:
Museum of Modern Art. Retrieved from http://www.van
goghgallery.com/catalog/Painting/508/Starry-Night.html
Wiggins, G. (1998). Educative assessment: Designing assessment
to inform and improve student performance. San Francisco,
CA: Jossey-�Bass.
Winner, E., & Hetland, L. (2008). Art for our sake: School arts
classes matter more than ever—Â�but not for the reasons you
think. Arts Education Policy Review, 109(5), 29–Â�32.
204 Cramer
Winner, E., Hetland, L., Veenema, S., Sheridan, K., Palmer, P.,
Locher, I., .€.€.€Leontiev, D. (2006). Studio thinking: How
visual arts teaching can promote disciplined habits of
mind. New Directions in Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts,
189–Â�205.
Wisconsin Music Educators Association. (n.d.). Background of
the Wisconsin comprehensive musicianship through performance
project (est. 1977). Retrieved from http://www.wmea
.com/CMP/visitors/background.html
Wolf, S., Edmiston, B., & Enciso, P. (1997). Drama worlds:
Places of the heart, head, voice, and hand in dramatic
interpretation. In J. Flood & S.B. Heath (Eds.), Handbook
of research on teaching literacy through the communicative and
visual arts. New York, NY: Macmillan.
 15
Teaching Adolescent English Language Learners
Desirée Pallais

Classroom Scenario
Mrs. Peterson is wondering how to help the English learners in her seventh-�grade classroom
learn from nonfiction passages. Recently, to learn to compare and contrast, she had students
read an article that discussed similarities and differences between life in the city and life in
the countryside. She started the lesson with a brief discussion on the topic. Then she asked
students to take turns reading the article. She stopped after each paragraph for students to
summarize and ask questions. None of her English language learners (ELLs) participated.
For homework, students were asked to read the article again, answer two questions, and
share their answers in class. Three ELL students displayed very different levels of skill on
this assignment. Tran, a recent immigrant, wrote answers that were short and hard to
understand. Manuel, born in the United States and classified as an ELL since first grade, pro-
duced lengthy responses consisting of his opinions, citing little information from the article.
Ana, who recently passed an English as a second language (ESL) exit exam, copied exact
phrases from the text in her writing. None of the students demonstrated the literacy skills
Mrs. Peterson was expecting. How can Mrs. Peterson help these students so that they can
master the required skills?

Many children in secondary classrooms, including native English speakers, experience a

decline in reading performance after fourth grade. English language learners (ELLs), even

Objectives: After studying this chapter, you will be able to:

1. Understand the developmental process of second-�language proficiency and the
crucial role of academic language.
2. Describe language-�based challenges and research-�based approaches for English
language learners (ELLs) in the disciplines.
3. Analyze the challenges for ELLs inherent in the Common Core State Standards (CCSS).
4. Select and apply instructional supports for ELLs that address specific language
components.
5. Design, implement, assess, and reflect on a lesson for ELLs targeting specific lan-
guage needs and integrating the features of effective instruction.

205
206 Pallais

when they are considered English proficient, tend to show even lower scores on standard-
ized tests, and the achievement gaps between students of different cultural and linguistic
backgrounds remain significant.1 There are many reasons why ELLs struggle to learn English.
For some students like Tran, short or inadequate responses to basic questions may suggest a
temporary problem of learning a new language. On the other hand, Manuel seems stuck in a
permanent and frustrating state of trying to acquire English and not succeeding, resulting in
a devastating impact on his motivation. These “long-Â�term” ELLs are becoming an increasing
focus of research and instructional concern.2 The problems that confront students like Ana are
not so obvious. These students may no longer be designated as ELLs, but the quality of their
schoolwork and their grades are not acceptable. This lack of academic English portends future
challenges to their success in higher education and related professional opportunities.
Second-�language learners are now expected to reach higher levels of academic achieve-
ment than in the past. Most states have rigorous standards for all secondary students to better
prepare them for college and careers.3 All ELLs, regardless of their levels of English proficiency,
are accountable for the same end-�of-�year goals. Thus your instruction of ELLs needs to address
second-�language development and demanding content requirements. In previous chapters, you
learned techniques to help all students learn, including ELLs. This chapter focuses on additional
ideas and tools designed to support ELLs when confronted with complex text and concepts.

Stages of Second-�Language Acquisition

Acquiring a second language involves developing skills in listening, reading, speaking, and
writing. ELLs move through a continuum as they develop English knowledge and skills in these
four domains of language. Whereas there are some predictable characteristics of each stage
of the continuum, ELLs’ second-Â�language acquisition trajectories vary depending on many
factors, such as previous language and school experiences, amount of English exposure, and
motivation.4
In the first stages of second-�language acquisition, ELLs acquire a receptive vocabulary based
on high-�frequency words and routine expressions. They comprehend only a few phrases, usu-
ally needing visual or graphic support. They tend to remain silent in social interactions, under-
standing only a few isolated words. When they begin to use keywords and a few short phrases,
they enter the speech emergence stage.5
At the intermediate fluency stage, students participate more in conversations. They learn to
use colloquial expressions, the correct order of words in a sentence, and grammar, including,
for example, the difference between the past progressive “I was doing my homework” and the
simple past tense “I did my homework.” Reading tends to be slow, limited to fragments of text
containing concrete vocabulary and simple sentences.
During the advanced intermediate stages, ELLs usually acquire a specialized vocabulary and
enough knowledge of English to communicate effectively in social situations. However, when
reading, the students prefer familiar topics, and they struggle doing school tasks independently.
Some ELLs, like Manuel in the vignette, stay at the intermediate stage for long periods, strug-
gling with language concepts and vocabulary gaps, especially if they had interrupted schooling
or lacked targeted instructional supports.
In the advanced levels of the second-�language acquisition process, ELLs demonstrate suf-
ficient knowledge of everyday words and phrases and a good repertoire of common language
structures. They may display strong basic interpersonal communication skills (BICS), social
conversational skills supported by nonverbal cues, concrete references, and shared experiences.6
However, language proficiency for social interactions is insufficient to learn from subject
area text; the latter requires acquiring formal academic language, referred to as cognitive aca-
demic language skills (CALP).7 CALP involves knowing specialized vocabulary, abstract con-
cepts, and language structures common in complex text. Second-�language learners who have
sufficient opportunities to develop academic language have deep knowledge of subject area
Teaching Adolescent English Language Learners 207

words within a discipline; they can manipulate language forms with fluency and communi-
cate ideas with precision. For example, students easily select the conditional tense to construct
an argument in science, as in “If your hypothesis had
been true, we wouldn’t have obtained these unexpected
results.” They have a strong command of the functional In sharp contrast to how
language to ask specific questions using complex phrases social English skills are
such as “What would happen if we tried the experiment acquired, academic lan-
with more accurate measures?” When reading, they guage is learned in school
grasp complex ideas with ease, such as when sentences environments as a result
begin with subordinate conjunctions (e.g., “Because the of meaningful interaction
sum of the two angles must equal 180, we can figure out with complex text.9
the unknown angle”) or when complex phrases contain
a relative pronoun (e.g., “An exothermic reaction, which
releases energy in the form of heat, has many practical
applications”).8 They quickly recognize the organizational pattern in a passage suggested by
cohesive words such as notwithstanding, nevertheless, or additionally. In writing, they adeptly
apply their knowledge of genres to produce a lab report, a book summary, or an essay, address-
ing the objectives of the specific task.

Second-�Language Challenges of Learning in the Disciplines

Underdeveloped Academic Vocabulary Knowledge
Due to underdeveloped academic vocabulary knowledge and lack of English language skills,
ELLs face specific challenges during academic discussions and when trying to construct mean-
ing from subject area text.
For adequate listening and reading comprehension, 9 out of 10 words need to be known.10
However, ELLs tend to show large vocabulary gaps compared to their English-�only peers.11 A
smaller vocabulary size hinders both oral and written comprehension. During classroom dis-
cussions, ELLs may struggle more with frequently used words than native English students. In
addition, due to insufficient depth of vocabulary knowledge, many ELLs struggle with words
that have multiple meanings, such as square, right, and angle in math or energy, field, and space
in science. For the same reason, figurative phrases like shed light on the subject, boils down to,
or the crux of the matter is can be problematic. Underdeveloped oral language and vocabulary
may lead to word-�by-�word interpretation of expressions like least common multiple, multiply by,
look up, cut it out, clear off, or build on. In all these situations, vocabulary weaknesses can lead to
comprehension challenges.
When learning from subject area text, ELLs, like their native-�English peers, have to com-
prehend novel, academic words used in unfamiliar ways. For example, in the phrase “Nitrogen
deposition affects nutrient dynamics and soil respiration,” the verb deposit, a difficult concept
for many students, is converted in this academic sentence to a noun, deposition.12 The nominal-
ization (changing a verb to a noun) of abstract terms used in disciplinary writing is especially
challenging for ELLs who are learning complex content in a language they are also learning.

Native Language Interferences

Some ELLs, especially at the intermediate stages of English proficiency, struggle with grammar
conventions in English. It is important for teachers to understand these differences so that they
can explicitly teach students how English differs from their native language. Table 15.1 suggests
some areas that pose language challenges for speakers of Chinese and Spanish: irregular verbs,
subject-�verb agreement, noun/adjective conventions, and articles. Spanish-�speaking ELLs have
a potential advantage because of a shared alphabetic system with English. Still, there are some
208 Pallais

Table 15.1.â•… Syntax differences among English, Spanish, and Chinese

Area of language Syntax difference Sample language constructions
Verbs In Chinese, the adverb, not the verb, is used to mark I do the experiment yesterday.
time. English has more classes of irregular verbs I go yesterday.
than Spanish.
Subject-�verb agreement In Chinese, verbs do not change form for this kind He see me.
of agreement. She go there.
It may be hard to remember that there is less
variation in English than in Spanish.
Plural In Chinese, the noun does not change to indicate They give me 3 dollar.
the plural.
Articles Rules for definite and indefinite articles are different. I don’t know correct time.
I am going to the school.
Source: Soto-Hinman and Hetzel (2009).

differences. For example, in English there are more irregular verbs, and the verbs are less con-
jugated than in Spanish. Sometimes in English, an s is attached at the end of a verb—Â�as in “he
reads”—Â�to indicate it is the third person singular doing the action (whereas for I, you, we, or
they, the word is conjugated as “read”). In Spanish, it is much more common to attach endings
to verbs to indicate who is doing the action. In the verb to read, for example, the verb is con-
jugated for every person: yo leo, tú lees, el lee, nosotros leemos, ustedes leen, ellos leen. In addition,
Spanish has a more flexible word order than English. In an English sentence, the subject usually
goes before the verb. In a Spanish sentence, the subject can just as often go after the verb.13 Syn-
tax differences pose more challenges for speakers of nonalphabetic languages. For example, in
Mandarin Chinese, adverbs, rather than verbs, are markers for the timing of an action. Word
order conventions also are different in Chinese. For example, it would be acceptable to say or
to write, “We to lunch went after school.”14 As a result, it may be particularly challenging for
many speakers of this language to assimilate English tenses.

Language Expectations for English Language

Learners in the Common Core State Standards
The CCSS suggest a new approach to the language development of ELLs, expecting growth
in English proficiency to be a part of academic learning. Teachers need to know how to design
lessons in their content area to foster language acquisition. Effective teaching of ELLs involves
analyzing the language skills required of lesson tasks and objectives in the context of specific disci-
plinary settings. Let us discuss three types of language requirements for ELLs in the Standards for
Literacy in History/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects 6–Â�12, the Standards for English
Language Arts (ELA) 6–Â�12, and the College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards for Reading.
• Receptive language skills: Ten cross-Â�disciplinary standards in the Standards for Literacy in His-
tory/Social Studies, Science, and Technical Subjects 6–Â�12 reflect a concern to acquire a com-
mon set of reading skills across all subjects for all secondary students, including ELLs. These
10 standards address 4 areas: gathering key ideas from text, craft and structure, integration
of knowledge and ideas, and text complexity. To meet the expectations in these 10 standards,
ELLs need to acquire new receptive language skills in vocabulary, syntax, and discourse
patterns. Receptive language skills are also involved in the ELA standards, which address
learning conventions, grammar, general and domain-�specific vocabulary, and spelling.
• Productive language skills: The CCSS promotes interaction and collaboration skills. The ELA
Speaking and Listening Standards expect students to engage effectively in a range of collab-
orative discussions, follow rules, pose questions, respond, and delineate the arguments of
Teaching Adolescent English Language Learners 209

other speakers. Moreover, these standards require students to demonstrate understandings

via presentations of claims and findings, including the adaptation of speech to a variety of
contexts. Many ELLs will need practice using concept words, complex phrases, functional
vocabulary, and academic expressions within the context of the disciplines. The productive
language skills taught must include an applied knowledge of the pragmatics of communi-
cation and conversation, which involves knowing how to talk in various situations and with
different people. For example, students may use informal slang when talking with peers
in the hallways, but they should use formal English when giving classroom presentations.
• Language for higher-Â�level thinking: The CCSS outline an explicit commitment to academic rigor
and higher order thinking activities for all students, including, of course, ELLs. For example,
the College and Career Readiness Anchor Standards for Reading expect students to analyze
how and why individual ideas and events develop and interact, interpret words, analyze
text, assess points of view, integrate and evaluate content, delineate and evaluate arguments,
and compare approaches, among other expectations. To demonstrate these advanced aca-
demic abilities, ELLs need to develop sophisticated thinking skills and familiarity with the
advanced features of academic language.

Preparing Lessons with Specific

Instructional Supports for English Language Learners
The more rigorous expectations of the CCSS require dedicated attention to instructional sup-
ports for all students. In this section, we discuss essential considerations for ELLs when pre-
paring lessons to address the CCSS: teaching vocabulary, language constructs and functions,
and how to engage in academic discussions.

Teaching Vocabulary
Make Vocabulary Teaching a Priority with English Language Learners
First, carefully select words to teach explicitly. In previous chapters, you learned vocabulary
techniques to teach subject-�specific Tier 3 words like mitosis in science, hypotenuse in math,
emancipation in social science, and metaphor in language arts. In order to advance in language
skills, ELLs need to also learn many “mortar” words—Â�terms used frequently in all content areas
to connect ideas. For example, you may consider teaching the following mortar words used in
many contexts: analyze, pattern, parameter, or characteristic.
Teachers should teach and model Tier 2 words to help ELLs develop academic language,
using emerging instead of coming out or elaborate instead of tell me more.15 In addition, teachers
need to determine if there are any Tier 1 words—Â�usually not a concern with native English
speakers—Â�that should be taught to ELLs. Consider idioms and everyday expressions that may be
unfamiliar to these students. At times, teaching these words can be very basic, such as highlight-
ing the different meanings of simple homophones (to and two) or presenting a label for a familiar
concept. In other cases, you may find that before reading a passage, ELL students need explicit
instruction of idiomatic expressions such as give me a break, boils down to, or the crux of the matter
is. Refer to Table 15.2 for some considerations when selecting words to teach ELL students.16
A second aspect to consider when teaching vocabulary to ELLs is how to present the new
meanings. As discussed in previous chapters, students learn vocabulary best if you follow these
guidelines:
1. Provide a student-�friendly definition.
2. Use nonlinguistic supports—Â�a visual or a graphic—Â�to illustrate a word’s definition.
3. Highlight common Latin or Greek origins. Many ELLs can transfer knowledge for cognate
words consisting of Latin or Greek word parts from high-�frequency vocabulary in their
210 Pallais

Table 15.2.â•… Considerations when selecting words for English language learners
Tier 3 Many cognates need conceptual understanding: isotope/isotope
False cognates: assist someone/atender a alguien
Tier 2 Examples of academic connectors: however, on the other hand
Words that convey precision: emerge (versus come out)
Polysemous words: trunk
Cognates: fortunate/afortunado
Tier 1 False cognates: rope/ropa
Some homophones: weather/whether
Simple idioms: Make up your mind.
Some basic words: staple, bug
Source: Calderón (2007).

native language, especially in Spanish.17 For example, the word interact corresponds to the
Spanish term interactuar. In this case, teach students that the prefix inter means between
and that the root act means to do in order to help them understand the word interact.
4. Share two kinds of sentences, one that will help students relate the new meaning to the
text and another one that is relevant to their experiences.18 For example, when teaching
the word compromise, you could use the following sentences: To settle the border conflict,
Mexico and Texas reached a compromise, and We negotiated a compromise with the seller to buy
the car at a lower price.19
5. Involve students in a dialogue about the new vocabulary before, during, and after read-
ing. Before reading, encourage students to examine pictures, graphics, and bold print and
to share predictions about the text. During reading, provide opportunities for students
to notice new words in the context of the passage, to interact among one another using
the new meanings, and to discuss their prior knowledge of the word. After reading, have
students use graphic organizers to internalize new meanings. Promote deep-�processing
activities, where students generate sentences with the new words, using word diagrams,
cloze exercises, and/or word walls.
6. Incorporate the background experiences and personal viewpoints of your students. Word
generation researchers have demonstrated increased achievement and motivation when
incorporating topics relevant to the students into vocabulary building experiences.20
7. Create short passages that are controversial and of interest to your students, using the
targeted words. Teach these words in the context of the passage. To assess the students’
mastery of the new vocabulary, write a passage leaving blanks and have the students
insert the correct vocabulary words.

Teach Language Constructions in Academic Text

Explicitly teaching the language forms behind sophisticated sentences can help ELLs (see Table
15.3).21 For example, ELLs benefit when teachers model, emphasize, and point out the adjectives
in the phrase: Volume is three dimensional, but surface area is two dimensional. As you prepare to use
a textbook passage, notice if there are long noun phrases, complex sentences, or other advanced
constructions that may pose challenges. For long noun phrases, give students opportunities to
expand terms incrementally.22 For an art history class, an example could be Mannerism, High-�
Renaissance Mannerism, the eccentric sculptures in High-�Renaissance Mannerism, and the distorted
and eccentric sculptures in High-�Renaissance Mannerism. To promote awareness of syntactical
relations and of academic constructions, divide a challenging sentence into smaller fragments
and have students reconstruct it.
Teaching Adolescent English Language Learners 211

Table 15.3.â•… Sample academic expressions in the different disciplines

Disciplinary aspect
Math: problem solving
Language arts: persuading
History: perspective taking
Science: generating a hypothesis
Source: Zwiers (2008).
Academic expression
Let’s break it down into parts. First ______.
The advantages of ______ outweigh the disadvantages of ______.
One way to interpret this event is ______.
I hypothesize that ______ because ______.

Teach Language Functions

When teaching ELLs, consider the language involved in classroom procedures and academic
tasks, such as describing, comparing, or hypothesizing.23 Experts recommend direct teaching of
the language associated with these language functions to ELLs. Teachers need to explain the
process, model the academic language involved, provide guided practice, and provide oppor-
tunities for students to practice using the terms.

Promote Academic Discussions

Several chapters in this book discuss the benefit of peer discussions for all students, including
ELLs. With ELLs, interacting with other students as part of learning is an essential consider-
ation. Social settings can create a bridge between ELLs’ prior concepts and new learning.24 To
encourage participation by ELLs, insert pauses for language practice at all stages of a lesson.
Allow ELLs to use language to activate prior knowledge, react to new information, process and
discuss concepts, give and get feedback, and synthesize ideas. Provide ample oral language
opportunities before reading activities and before asking ELLs to demonstrate new learning.
“Think, pair, share” can be used during whole-Â�class discussions.25 Class-Â�wide peer tutoring—Â�
students working in pairs—Â�promotes engagement and meaningful learning with ELLs.26 Refer
to Table 15.4 for other examples of peer-�based discussion techniques from ESL contexts to sup-
port the development of fluency with academic terms and to promote thinking in meaningful
contexts.27
ELLs need to use sophisticated language to develop the “thinking skills” within each disci-
pline to reflect a particular way “of viewing the world.”28 Therefore, it is important to carefully
design peer discussions that stimulate the use of advanced language for the deep processing
of ideas rather than for superficial engagement with procedures or for quick verbal exchanges.
Scaffold language use for sophisticated thinking skills by providing pre-�elaborated phrases for
the beginning part of responses. Language starters specific to each discipline can help you main-
tain a high level of cognitive rigor with ELLs, promote disciplinary thinking, and approximate
the expectations outlined in the CCSS. Some examples are provided in Table 15.4.29 Discuss and
post these academic language starters before organizing peer or group activities and expecting
responses from ELLs.
Instructional accommodations for students who are in the early stages of acquiring English
proficiency need to be carefully implemented because the students may not benefit from teach-
ing efforts that focus solely on building comprehension.30 These students need linguistic accom-
modations in the four areas of language: listening, speaking, reading, and writing. Linguistic
accommodations provide supports to ELLs based on English proficiency levels to enable them to
access grade-�level content without reducing the rigor of lesson expectations. Refer to Table 15.5
for examples of some instructional supports for beginner, intermediate, advanced, and advanced
high ELLs.31
An example of an instructional accommodation for listening with students in the early
stages of English proficiency is the cloze dictation task. After discussing new vocabulary, dictate
212 Pallais

Table 15.4.╅ Peer-�based techniques that can help English language learners develop fluency with academic language
Description
Think, pair, share Form student pairs that respond to questions or prompts as part of quick activities. They
practice new language skills before whole-�class discussions.
Class-�wide peer tutoring Divide the class in two groups: ELLs and non-�ELLs. Rank each group based on English
proficiency for the ELLs and on classroom performance for the non-�ELLs. Form pairs from
similar levels in the rankings, and use these pairs for peer discussions.
Jigsaw groups Form expert groups where students at similar levels of English proficiency research a given
topic. Each member then goes to a base group, where they share knowledge.
Buddy read Form pairs to work together when reading text. One partner reads out loud, and the other
one listens; then they take notes. They stop at designated points in a passage to create a
graphic organizer. Roles may be reversed.
Conversation circles Form two circles, one inside the other, and have students discuss with the partner in front.
The circle inside rotates, providing many opportunities to listen and to use language as
they process new content.
Interview grids Students move around the whole class talking to other students and taking notes. With the
information acquired, they fill out an interview grid.
Sources: Archer and Hughes (2011); Herrell and Jordan (2012); Vaughn et al. (2009); Walqui and van Lier (2010).
Note: ELL, English language learners.

two or three paragraphs containing the new vocabulary. All students write what you dictate;
in this way, the content is kept the same for all students. Native speakers write on blank paper,
while ELL students get specific linguistic supports. Students at an intermediate level of English
proficiency and at lower levels get the same passage but with some target words and/or sen-
tences removed, or they may get a copy of the passage with blanks only for the new vocabulary
words (the rest of the words in the paragraph are provided). This listening/writing activity will
promote the content and language acquisition of your ELLs.32
Accommodations for early ELLs in reading include environmental print, labels, and signs.
Consider preparing different versions of the same text, dividing a passage into chunks, and pro-
viding additional time to process the language. Use a chart or a graphic organizer to reinforce
the vocabulary and the organization of ideas in the text.
To scaffold the oral or written responses of students who are still acquiring English,
vary the language complexity you expect in responses, depending on their language lev-
els.33 For example, students in the beginning levels may respond by thumbs up/thumbs
down, yes/no formats, single-�word responses, or labeling components in a picture. For
students in the intermediate levels, prepare simple sentence frames; for advanced students,
allow them to use more sophisticated language frames. To scaffold writing at the end of
lessons, select a paragraph of four to six sentences, write each sentence on a strip of paper,
and scramble the sentences. Direct the students to place the sentences in order to create a
coherent paragraph.

Sheltered Instruction
Sheltered instruction approaches match English proficiency levels with instructional supports
for ELLs to make content comprehensible while students develop language skills. The Sheltered
Instruction Observation Protocol (SIOP) offers a framework to guide instruction.34
Sheltered instruction approaches consider the role of background knowledge, the use of
familiar material, and the incorporation of students’ experiences in classroom discussions. SIOP
strategies make tasks very clear via the use of explicit instructional procedures. Other supports
associated with sheltered instruction techniques include the use of graphic organizers, pictures,
real objects, demonstrations, and hands-�on experiences in order to offer redundant informa-
tion that facilitates learning for ELLs. Sheltered instruction strategies include techniques for
Teaching Adolescent English Language Learners 213

Table 15.5.â•… Suggested teacher behaviors to accommodate instruction to English language learners’ different proficiency
levels
Level of English Proficiency Suggested accommodations
Advanced and Advanced High Pre-teach academic vocabulary and abstract concepts
Explain the use of idiomatic expressions in several contexts
Discuss examples of sophisticated language use in texts
Provide multiple opportunities for peer-based discussions using academic language
Organize oral presentations where students practice new language features
Intermediate Before reading text, pre-teach key vocabulary terms
During discussions, rephrase ideas using newly-learned words
Allow processing time for students to think and generate responses
Provide answer choices as options for students to use
Expand on students’ responses using more sophisticated language
Offer sentence frames that scaffold the use of new language structures
Organize writing activities that make students reflect on new language features
Beginner Use gestures and visual supports whenever possible
Use short sentences, speak slowly, and rephrase during explanations
Model pronunciation and intonation during reading activities
Use texts with familiar vocabulary
Allow native language use when appropriate
Display sample sentences illustrating specific language features
Create word walls and require students to use them during class activities
Source: Meadows Center for Preventing Educational Risk (2013)

language development and encourage teachers to establish language objectives as well as con-
tent objectives for each lesson, to use sentence frames to scaffold academic oral language, and
to promote peer discussions to provide ample language practice.
In conclusion, when preparing lessons for ELLs, consider the following ideas:
• ELLs benefit from explicit teaching of the language features involved in academic tasks.
• Vocabulary teaching should be a priority; it is important to carefully select Tier 1, Tier 2, and
Tier 3 words for ELLs.
• In order to learn from complex text, ELLs need to understand sentence constructions and
language functions.
• Inserting pauses at multiple points in lessons allows time for ELLs to process the language.
• Language starters and protocols to guide academic thinking during discussions can pro-
mote disciplinary thinking.
• Design linguistic accommodations for listening, speaking, reading, and writing tasks for
students who are in the lower levels of English proficiency.

A Sample Lesson with Specific

Instructional Supports for English-�Language Learners
This section refers to Table 15.6 and illustrates the application of specific ELL supports to a
seventh-�grade lesson in English language arts. The overall framework of the lesson and the
teacher scripts reflect ideas discussed by Hollingsworth and Ibarra when crafting explicit
instruction lessons.35
Mrs. Peterson is preparing a language arts lesson on text structure. As a first step in her
lesson preparation, she analyzes the following curriculum standards for seventh grade:
214 Pallais

• Common Core State Standard 5 for ELA: “Analyze

the structure of texts, including how specific sen-
tences, paragraphs, and larger portions of the text
(e.g., a section, chapter, scene, or stanza) relate to
each other and the whole.”
• Texas College & Career Readiness Standards, Cross-Â�
Disciplinary Standard 7: “Adapt reading strategies
according to structure of texts.”
She establishes content and language goals for her les-
son. The content goal is this: Students will learn to identify
text structure. To support ELL students, she also has a
language objective: to understand and use mortar words,
connecting terms that are used to compare text structure.
She wants her ELL students to understand the fol-
lowing terms and how they are used in sentences that
use comparison text structures: similarly, likewise, as well
as, in the same way, both, however, on the other hand, whereas,
despite, and nevertheless.
The following are scripts and descriptions of her lesson
implementation, corresponding to steps 3–Â�10 in Table 15.6.
Presenting the Learning Objectives “Today we will identify the comparison text structure in
informational text. Write down the learning objective for today’s lesson. Check your neighbor
to make sure he or she is writing it down exactly as I am showing it on the projector. Today, we
will identify the comparison text structure in informational texts.”
Activating Prior Knowledge “In the last lesson, we examined how the organization of ideas
in a text can help us remember information, and we learned how to identify some key words
that can help us identify sequential texts. Your knowledge of how clue words give hints of text
structure will help you in today’s lesson. Tell your neighbor how you think knowledge of the
comparison text structure can be useful to you in school. Write down at least two clue words
that can help you identify sequential text structure. Share your clue word with your neighbor,
and be ready to share with the class. You have 2 minutes.”
Engaging Learners During Explicit Instruction and Modeling “Let’s read this sentence
together: A comparison text structure organizes information by comparing and contrasting
two items or ideas.” The teacher uncovers the next section from the projector, containing
two overlapping circles. “When you compare two ideas, you can put them next to each
other in your head and inspect what they have in common and what they don’t have in
common.” The teacher points at the section where they overlap and where they do not
overlap and makes gestures to demonstrate how you can compare two ideas. “A compari-
son text structure often contains clue words such as similarly, likewise, as well as, in the same
way, both, however, on the other hand, whereas, despite, and nevertheless. Now, please whisper
to your neighbor how a comparison text structure organizes information and mention two
clue words that can be used.” A few ESL students are provided oral language stems adapted
to their English proficiency and a list of clue words with native language translations to
remember meanings to use when sharing. The teacher has posted other language frames
on the wall for all students:
A comparison text structure organizes information by ______.
Two clue words that can be used in a comparison text structure are ______ and ______.
To identify a comparison text structure, you ______ and ______.
I would use the comparison text structure to ______.
I found these three clue words: ______, ______, and ______.
Teaching Adolescent English Language Learners 215

Table 15.6.â•… Example of a lesson integrating supports for English language learners
Step 1: Identify curriculum standards.
Step 2: Select content and
language objectives.
Step 3: Present the learning
objectives.
Step 4: Activate prior knowledge.
Step 5: Engage learners during
explicit instruction and modeling.
Step 6: Provide support during
guided practice.
Step 7: Monitor during unprompted
practice.
Step 8: Check for understanding
during lesson review.
Step 9: Provide structured inde-
pendent practice and in-�class
intervention.
Step 10: Assessing and monitoring
learning.
Determine language objectives.
Have students read and write grade-�level text.
Have students use language for listening and speaking as they share with peers.
Students write as they activate prior knowledge.
Give choral reading of text.
Demonstrate using a graphic organizer.
Use gestures to make content accessible.
Elaborate.
Allow peer interaction.
Give language models for asking and answering questions.
Provide step-�by-�step procedures.
Provide opportunities to practice academic oral language.
Scaffold support as needed.
Apply with a variety of examples.
Monitor and provide corrective feedback.
Check for understanding.
Identify those who need additional help.
Contextualize vocabulary learning.
Align in-�class intervention with tutoring activities.
Monitor and continue support to struggling students who need more scaffolds.

“Now we are going to learn two steps you can use to identify a comparison text structure:
1. Look for comparison clue words in the text.
2. Confirm that ideas are being compared.”
The teacher provides an example and a nonexample and models the application of those
steps with both.
“Ask your neighbor, ‘What are two steps you can use to identify a comparison text struc-
ture?’ Allow them to answer the question and then ask, ‘When could you use the comparison
text structure?’”
After 3 minutes, the teacher asks students, “What do I look for in a text to verify if it has a
comparison type of structure?”
Providing Support During Guided Practice “Let’s look at some paragraphs from your sci-
ence and social science textbooks and apply the steps I demonstrated. Circle clue words only
if they belong to the comparison text structure.” The teacher uses three different examples of
comparison text structures, each with a different set of clue words, and models the steps with
the students. The teacher reminds students of a nonexample by applying the steps to a sequen-
tial type of text. Students have a graphic organizer and continue to work in pairs, sometimes
answering questions from the teacher.
Monitoring During Practice Most students start to apply the steps with teacher guid-
ance and feedback. The teacher provides more support to some students who are in the
low intermediate stage of English proficiency. The teacher monitors students and provides
corrective feedback to verify that students do not circle any clue words in the nonexample
216 Pallais

paragraph, know how to recognize clue words, and only circle clue words in comparison
text paragraphs.
Checking for Understanding During Lesson Review “Okay, students. Before I give you time
to find examples in your science and social science texts independently, I want to make sure
you are comfortable describing what a comparison text structure is, how you identify it, and
why it might help you when you are reading.”
The teacher checks for understanding and notices that most students can answer the three
questions. Six students, however, need additional support. Two are intermediate students, and
the other four are advanced intermediate but low achievers.
Providing Structured Independent Practice and In-Class Intervention The teacher distributes
a papers and announces, “Students, you have 15 minutes to determine if the 3 paragraphs on
the sheet have a comparison structure, and if they do, circle the clue words. I will be collecting
papers in 15 minutes.” She then invites the six students in need of additional support to join her.
The two intermediate ELLs need help understanding the meaning of some clue words:
similarly, despite, whereas, and nevertheless. The teacher shares their use in a variety of sentences.
Students practice matching clue words to sentences. These students complete sentences insert-
ing the right clue word. Finally, they use clue words to construct one sentence using language
frames at their level. To motivate the four advanced intermediate students who are low achiev-
ers, the teacher asks these four students to choose from partially completed phrases and exam-
ples to write a comparison text structure of their choice. She reviews procedures with them and
supports them in preparing short presentations.
Assessing and Monitoring Learning As homework, the teacher asks students to select one
paragraph using the comparison text structure from their social studies textbook and one from
their science textbook and to circle the clue words in each paragraph.
The teacher asks students to prepare to share their findings. Some ELL students are pro-
vided language frames:

The comparison text structure I chose relates to the topic of ______.

I chose it because ______.
The clue words I found were ______.

The next day, the teacher evaluates the homework, enters progress monitoring data for
all students, and writes additional notes to the ESL specialist regarding two low intermediate
students who need additional support.

Notice how students start using language from the very beginning of the lesson as part of
structured interactions. Examine the teacher scripts and the ELL supports column in steps 3,
4, and 5 of the lesson example. When being presented with the objectives, students write the
lesson objectives in their notebooks, read those of their partners, and inspect each other’s writ-
ing. In step 4, to activate prior knowledge, students listen and speak in a pair-�share discussion
and hypothesize how the comparison text structure might benefit them in school. In step 5,
during the explicit instruction component of the lesson, ELL students do choral reading and
use language again, this time to paraphrase what they have learned about the comparison text
structure.
Mrs. Peterson also prepares differentiated language frames to meet the needs of some of her
ELL students. Four ELL students are like Manuel in the introductory vignette. There are also two
recent immigrants who are low intermediates and are similar to Tran. Based on the individual
needs of these students, Mrs. Peterson prepares additional, differentiated supports. Notice that
in step 5, the teacher prepares simple sentence frames for the two low intermediate students and
also allows the use of native language. In steps 7 and 9, as part of an in-�class short intervention,
these students get targeted support. They practice inserting clue words in sentences and using
language frames to produce original sentences. The four students that are similar to Manuel
Teaching Adolescent English Language Learners 217

are invited to choose among partially completed phrases and examples as a way of raising their
motivation; they are also given extra supports in preparation for a class presentation.
For homework, ELL students are again supported with language frames as they apply and
generalize learning while looking for paragraphs in social science and science textbooks that
use the comparison text structure. The next day, Mrs. Peterson evaluates the homework and
tracks the language and content progress of her ELL students.

Assessing Progress of English Language

Learners in Acquiring English and Learning Content
The progress of ELLs needs to be assessed in two areas: acquiring English and mastering the
content. Sometimes both can be measured with the same instruments.
You should have a record of the general level of language proficiency for the ELLs in
your classroom. All states are required to measure and report annually the growth of ELLs in
speaking, listening, reading, and writing. Be sure to
determine how your district and state assesses ELLs
and your role in the assessment process. If you hav-
en’t received the results of the annual assessment of
your students, request them.
The California State Department of Education cre-
ated the Student Oral Language Observation Matrix
(SOLOM), a holistic rubric that tracks the progress of
ELL students in oral academic language use.36 This free
tool, available to everyone, consists of a 1–Â�5 rating scale
with established criteria in comprehension, fluency,
vocabulary, pronunciation, and grammar.
You may combine analytic rubrics like the
SOLOM with content knowledge assessment by
inserting standards for a given unit of study. Thus
the same rubric can address content and language
outcomes. For example, you could use the language
standards to monitor students’ use of specialized
vocabulary in the context of a unit on American his-
tory. In this case, add a section listing descriptors at
the various levels for the language expectation; add
other sections with criteria related to the content. In
this way, you may create a standards-�based rubric
that tracks progress in language and content mastery
over several units of study.
Formative assessments, such as the ones discussed earlier, are used regularly to collect
information about student progress. The information is used to inform and adapt instruction.
Any activity where students present the results of their learning can be a source of forma-
tive assessment data. In English language arts, consider vocabulary tests, grammar exercises,
journal entries, oral presentations, and essays. In mathematics, inspect students’ responses to
word problems or written notes of their explanations as they solve problems. In science and
social studies, use papers, journal entries, cloze responses, anecdotal records, short quizzes, and
homework assignments. Portfolio assessments can also help to document the progress of ELL
students in both language and content.
Summative assessments, completed at the end of a unit, semester, or year, may have to
be modified for ELLs to obtain an accurate measure of what they know but may not be able to
express well in English. It is important to measure content knowledge without the interference
of language, especially when assessing ELLs who are at lower levels of English proficiency.
218 Pallais

Table 15.7.â•… Sample English language learner supports

If you want your ELL
students to€.€.€.
.€.€. develop self-�confidence,
self-�regulation skills, and
independent thinking
.€.€. learn concepts from
complex text
.€.€. advance in academic
language proficiency
.€.€. access content in com-
plex texts in each of the
disciplines
.€.€. utilize content as part of
their explanations
Note: ELL, English language learners.
You can do the following Example
• Â�Teach self-Â�questioning techniques. Students share their background
• Â�Allow students to participate in their own experiences and opinions, make
assessments. original presentations, and assess
• Â�Provide opportunities for the independent applica- their own work.
tion of taught strategies.
• Â�Design opportunities to demonstrate knowledge.
• Â�Allow choice in presentation formats and group
membership.
• Â�Activate or build prior knowledge. After the teacher models proce-
• Â�Use the “I do, we do, you do” routine. dures, students use cue cards
• Â�Model the use of graphic organizers to extract with the question prompts “why”
meaning and organize ideas from text. and “how” to generate questions
from a text.
• Â�Have students generate why and how
questions.
• Â�Give students opportunities to process complex
information and reformulate ideas.
• Â�Give sentence stems and sentence starters. Students use sentence frames that
• Â�Provide opportunities to obtain language models use however, on the other hand,
from peers. and whereas when comparing
• Â�Share discussion cards based on language characters in a novel.
proficiency.
• Â�Preassign roles and give cue cards to students
during group discussions.
• Â�Give students opportunities to rephrase concepts
using new concepts and vocabulary.
• Â�Teach the meanings of specialized vocabulary in The teacher hands out a graphic
the context of the text. organizer with prompts and
• Â�Analyze grammar usage in the subject area and models a think-Â�aloud to show
allow students to construct sentences using sen- students how to extract and orga-
tence types. nize ideas from a text.
• Â�Adapt comprehension strategies to text features.
• Â�Teach text structures explicitly.
• Â�Discuss discourse features in a text.
• Â�Simplify language only when necessary. The teacher changes the term
• Â�Use visual supports. cookie factory to bakery in a
• Â�Use step-Â�by-Â�step procedures. math problem.
• Â�Reformulate ideas using different terms and with
other modalities.
• Â�Contextualize new concepts using videos or
graphic organizers.
• Â�Teach functional language: how to describe, ana-
lyze, compare and contrast, and so forth.

Consider providing language accommodations that are aligned to the instructional supports
used during learning.37 Include word banks, glossaries, electronic translators, visuals, graphic
organizers, or extended time (see also Table 15.7).
Many second-�language learners benefit from monitoring their own progress.38 Commu-
nicate to your ELLs the criteria for grading and the specific language components that are
addressed in a lesson or unit. Clear expectations will guide their self-�improvement efforts.
Consider involving your ELLs in the design of authentic assessments. Provide opportunities
Teaching Adolescent English Language Learners 219

for them to participate in identifying evaluation criteria for their work and in contributing to
plans to reach higher standards. Give them time to discuss their progress with peers and to rate
each other’s work using a rubric.
Some experts recommend providing information on both language proficiency and aca-
demic achievement on report cards. In this system, the percentage contribution of standards-�
related learning requirements increases as students move up in the levels of English
proficiency.39

Summary
The scenario at the beginning of this chapter described a teacher who needed help supporting
ELLs in a seventh-�grade classroom. After analyzing the stages of second-�language develop-
ment, the language challenges involved in learning content in the upper grades, instructional
techniques, and linguistic accommodations, you now have new ideas to promote content
acquisition and language development for ELLs in secondary classrooms. Students who are
acquiring foundational English knowledge and skills, in particular, will need specific linguistic
accommodations in order to learn in the upper grades. A focus on language in the context of
challenging and meaningful activities will contribute to high-�quality teaching with ELLs in
secondary classrooms.40

Application Activities
In-�Class Assignments
1. In groups, analyze and sort the following words and expressions into vocabulary Tiers 1,
2, and 3 for ELLs: lecture, exit, isotope, search, read between the lines, constitute, satire,
itemize, with bells and whistles, cede, boundary, moreover, assistance, claim, expression,
declare, running around, formulate, reservation, and meiosis. Select two words and dis-
cuss how you would teach them.
2. Analyze the lesson discussed in this chapter and use it to develop a scoring rubric con-
taining essential features to use when teaching ELLs.
3. With a partner, select a standard from your discipline to teach. Adapt the lesson example
provided in this chapter. Discuss and justify the instructional supports you develop.
4. Form expert groups, each to focus on one of the languages represented in the local
schools. Investigate two features that make these languages different from English, enu-
merate the challenges for ELLs who speak those languages, and discuss the instructional
supports that would target the differences in a content area class of your choice.
5. Form groups to read and discuss the following article on enhanced social studies lessons
developed by CREATE researchers: http://www.cal.org/create/publications/briefs/effective
-social-studies-instruction.html. Construct charts outlining routines for the following
instructional features in the lesson: language objectives, vocabulary, use of video, paired
reading, and use of graphic organizers.

Student Assignments (This May or May Not Be Your Tutee)

1. Interview an ELL to obtain information about his or her native language, school experi-
ences, and cultural background. What did you learn about the student that could inform
your instruction?
2. Obtain a writing sample from an ELL student in the subject you plan to teach. Examine
the word choice, sentence structure, and the organization of ideas. Determine areas of
linguistic support for this student.
220 Pallais

3. Design an activity to teach five academic words to a group of ELLs, adapting an example
from units provided by Word Generation researchers: http://aala.serpmedia.org/index
.php/topic-and-words
4. Select a chapter from a middle school textbook in your discipline. Design a lesson with
listening, speaking, reading, and writing accommodations to support a beginner and an
intermediate ELL. If possible, teach the lesson and reflect on your implementation. Did
your students benefit from the linguistic supports? How do you know? What would you
do differently the next time you teach this lesson?
5. Observe instruction in a secondary classroom with ELLs and use the rubric you devel-
oped (In-�Class Assignment #2) to evaluate the lesson observed.

Homework Assignments
1. Analyze the Student Oral Language Observation Matrix (SOLOM), available for download
at http://www.cal.org/twi/EvalToolkit/appendix/solom.pdf.41 What linguistic accommo-
dations would you provide for a student who scored 3 in comprehension, 3 in fluency, 3
in vocabulary, 4 in pronunciation, and 2 in grammar?
2. Form groups to analyze the unit developed by Aída Walqui, Nanette Koelsch, and Mary
Schmida, titled Persuasion Across Time and Space, available to download from Stanford
University at http://ell.stanford.edu/teaching_resources/ela
Discuss how the instructional techniques used in the unit promote language profi-
ciency while at the same time help ELL meet English language arts standards.
3. Investigate ESL practices in a nearby school. Describe the services provided and how the
ESL and classroom teachers work together. Based on what you find, propose how the
ESL teacher and the classroom teacher can improve their collaboration to support ELLs.
4. Explore the following web sites and construct a table describing at least one instructional
approach from each web site that may help you when teaching ELLs.
• http://www.cal.org/create
• http://www.colorincolorado.org/webcasts/assessment
• http://ell.stanford.edu/teaching_resources/ela
• http://www.wordsift.com/site/about
• http://wg.serpmedia.org/index.html
• http://www.readingrockets.org/research/topic/ell

Endnotes
1. Hemphill, Vanneman, & Rahman (2011). 1 5. Minaya-�Rowe (2012).
2. Calderón & Minaya-Â�Rowe (2011). 16. Calderón (2007).
3. Common Core State Standards (CCSS) Initiative (2013). 17. Dressler & Kamil (2006).
4. Gottlieb (2006). 18. Reutebuch (2010).
5. Collier (2008). 19. Meadows Center for Preventing Educational Risk (2009).
6. Cummins (1979). 20. Snow, Lawrence, & White (2009).
7. Cummins (1979). 21. Scarcella (2003).
8. Zwiers (2008). 22. Fang (2006).
9. Fillmore (2013). 23. Kinsella (2008).
10. Nation (2006). 24. Zwiers (2006).
11. Graves, August, & Mancilla-�Martinez (2013). 25. Archer & Hughes (2011).
12. Gibbons (2009). 26. Vaughn et al. (2009).
13. Hill & Bradford (1991). 27. Herrell & Jordan (2012).
14. Soto-�Hinman & Hetzel (2009). 28. Zwiers & Crawford (2011).
Teaching Adolescent English Language Learners 221
2 9. Zwiers (2008).
30. Goldenberg (2012).
31. Texas Education Agency (TEA)/Education Service Cen-
ter, Region 20 (2012).
32. Echevarria, Vogt, & Short (2010).
33. Dutro & Moran (2003).
34. Himmel, Short, Richards, & Echevarria (2009).
References
Archer, A.L., & Hughes, C.A. (2011). Explicit instruction:
Effective and efficient teaching. New York, NY: Guilford.
Calderón, M.E. (2007). Teaching reading to English language
learners, Grades 6–Â�12: A framework for improving achieve-
ment in the content areas. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin
Press.
Calderón, M.E., & Minaya-Â�Rowe, L. (2011). Preventing long-Â�
term English language learners: Transforming schools to meet
core standards. Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
California Department of Education. (2012). Student Oral
Language Observation Matrix (SOLOM). Retrieved from
http://www.cal.org/twi/evaltoolkit/appendix/solom.pdf
Collier, C. (2008). Handbook for second language acquisition.
Ferndale, WA: Crosscultural Developmental Educational
Services.
Common Core State Standards (CCSS) Initiative. (2013).
Common Core State Standards Initiative: Preparing America’s
students for college and career. Retrieved from http://www
.corestandards.org
Cummins, J. (1979). Cognitive/academic language pro-
ficiency, linguistic interdependence, the optimum age
question and some other matters. Working Papers on Bilin-
gualism, 19, 121–Â�129.
Dressler, C., & Kamil, M. (2006). First-�and second-�language
literacy. In D. August & T. Shanahan (Eds.), Developing liter-
acy in second-�language learners: Report of the National Literacy
Panel on Language Minority Children and Youth (pp. 197–Â�238).
Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Dutro, S., & Moran, C. (2003). Rethinking English language
instruction: An architectural approach. In G. García (Ed.),
English learners: Reaching the highest level of English literacy.
Newark, NJ: International Reading Association.
Echevarria, J., Vogt, M., & Short, D.J. (2010). Making content
comprehensible for secondary English language learners. Bos-
ton: Allyn & Bacon.
Fairbairn, S., & Jones-�Vo, S. (2010). Differentiating instruction
and assessment for English language learners: A guide for K-�12
teachers. Philadelphia, PA: Caslon.
Fang, Z. (2006). The language demands of science reading
in middle school. International Journal of Science Education,
28(5), 491–Â�520.
Fillmore, L.W. (2013). Common Core Standards and English
learners. National Clearinghouse for English Language
Acquisition (NCELA). Webinar. Retrieved from http://
www.ncela.gwu.edu/webinars/event/37
Gibbons, P. (2009). English learners, academic literacy, and
thinking. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
Goldenberg, C. (2012). Research on English learner instruc-
tion. In M.E. Calderón (Ed.), Breaking through: Effective
instruction & assessment for reaching English learners. Bloom-
ington, IN: Solution Tree.
3 5. Hollingsworth & Ybarra (2008).
36. California Department of Education (2012).
37. Fairbairn & Jones-�Vo (2010).
38. Walqui (2000).
39. Gottlieb (2006).
40. Walqui & van Lier (2010).
41. California Department of Education (2012).
Gottlieb, M. (2006). Assessing English language learners: Bridges
from language proficiency to academic achievement. Thousand
Oaks, CA: Corwin Press.
Graves, M.F., August, D., & Mancilla-�Martinez, J. (2013).
Teaching vocabulary to English language learners. New York,
NY: Teachers College Press, International Reading Asso-
ciation, Center for Applied Linguistics, & Teachers of
English to Speakers of Other Languages.
Hemphill, F., Vanneman, A., & Rahman, T. (2011). How His-
panic and white students in public schools perform in mathematics
and reading on the National Assessment of Educational Progress.
(NCES Report No. 2011-�459). Washington, DC: National
Center for Educational Statistics, Institute of Education Sci-
ences, U.S. Department of Education. Retrieved from http://
nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pubs/studies/2011459.asp
Herrell, A., & Jordan, M. (2012). 50 strategies for teaching
English language learners (4th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson
Education.
Hill, S., & Bradford, W. (1991). Bilingual grammar of English-�
Spanish syntax: A manual with exercises. Lanham, MD: Uni-
versity Press of America.
Himmel, J., Short, D.J., Richards, C., & Echevarria, J. (2009).
Using the SIOP model to improve middle school science instruc-
tion. Washington, DC: Center for Research on the Educa-
tional Achievement and Teaching of English Language
Learners. Retrieved from http://www.cal.org/create/
resources/pubs/siopscience.htm
Hollingsworth, J., & Ybarra, S. (2008). Explicit direct instruc-
tion (EDI): The power of the well-�crafted, well-�taught lesson.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin.
Kinsella, K. (2008). Developing academic language using
sentence frames. Keynote presentation made at the 6th
Annual Academic Success Conference, Santa Clara County
of the Office of Education. Retrieved from http://www
.sccoe.k12.ca.us/depts/ci/ela
Meadows Center for Preventing Educational Risk. (2009).
Texas history lessons: Texas revolution through reconstruction.
Austin, TX: Author.
Meadows Center for Preventing Educational Risk. (2013).
Supporting English language learners (ELLs) in secondary class-
rooms. [Online module]. Austin, TX: Author. Retrieved from:
http://resources.buildingrti.utexas.org/CAP/Secondary
_ELLs/multiscreen.html
Minaya-�Rowe, L. (2012). Effective teaching for ELs and all
students: vocabulary, reading, and writing within all sub-
jects. In M.E. Calderón (Ed.), Breaking through: Effective
instruction & assessment for reaching English learners. Bloom-
ington, IN: Solution Tree.
Nation, I.S.P. (2006). How large a vocabulary is needed for
reading and listening? Canadian Modern Language Review,
63, 59–Â�82.
222 Pallais
Reutebuch, C.K. (2010). Effective social studies instruction to pro-
mote knowledge acquisition and vocabulary learning of English
language learners in the middle grades. Houston, TX: National
Center for Research on the Educational Achievement and
Teaching of English Language Learners. Retrieved from
http://www.cal.org/create/publications/briefs/effective
-�social-�studies-�instruction.html
Scarcella, R. (2003). Accelerating academic English: A focus on
the English learner. Oakland, CA: Regents of the University
of California.
Snow, C., Lawrence, J., & White, C. (2009). Generating
knowledge of academic language among urban middle
school students. Journal of Research on Educational Effective-
ness, 2(4), 325–Â�344.
Soto-�Hinman, I., & Hetzel, J. (2009). The literacy gaps: Bridge-�
building strategies for English language learners and standard
English learners. Thousand Oaks, CA.
Strategic Education Research Partnership. (2013). A compan-
ion program to word generation series 3. Word generation mate-
rials. Retrieved from http://aala.serpmedia.org/index.php/
topic-�and-�words
Texas Education Agency (TEA)/Education Service Center,
Region 20. (2012). A framework for ELL success. Linguistic
instructional alignment guide. Austin, TX: ELPS Academy.
Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board Division for
P-16 Initiatives and Texas Education Agency Division
of Curriculum College and Career Readiness Program.
(2009). Texas college and career readiness standards. Austin:
The University of Texas at Austin.
Vaughn, S., Martinez, L.R., Linan-�Thompson, S., Reutebuch,
C.K., Carlson, C.D., & Francis, D.J. (2009). Enhancing social
studies vocabulary and comprehension for seventh-�grade
English language learners: Findings from two experimen-
tal studies. Journal of Research on Educational Effectiveness,
2(4), 297–Â�324.
Vogt, M.E., Echevarria, J., & Short, D. (2010). The SIOP model
for teaching English-�language arts to English learners. Boston,
MA: Allyn & Bacon.
Walqui, A. (2000). Strategies for success: Engaging immigrant
students in secondary schools (ERIC Digest). Washington, DC:
Center for Applied Linguistics.
Walqui, A., Koelsch, N., & Schmida, M. (2013). Persua-
sion across time and space: Analyzing and producing per-
suasive texts. Retrieved from http://ell.stanford.edu/
teaching_resources/ela
Walqui, A., & van Lier, L. (2010). Scaffolding the academic
success of adolescent English language learners: A pedagogy of
promise. San Francisco, CA: WestEd.
Zwiers, J. (2006). Integrating academic language, thinking,
and content: Learning scaffolds for non-�native speakers in
the middle grades. Journal of English for Academic Purposes,
5(4), 317–Â�332.
Zwiers, J. (2008). Building academic language: Essential practices
for content classrooms. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-�Bass.
Zwiers, J., & Crawford, M. (2011). Academic conversations:
Classroom talk that fosters critical thinking and content under-
standings. Portland, ME: Stenhouse.
 16
Response to Intervention and Multi-tiered
Systems for Support in Secondary Schools
Pamela Bell

Classroom Scenario
It is mid-�April, and Mr. Gonzales and Ms. Walker, reading specialists at Lyndon B. Johnson
Middle School, have just met with their school leadership team to review the end-�of-�year
assessment data for their students who have been receiving intervention support. They
are smiling. This is the school’s first year utilizing a response to intervention model, and it
has helped many students. They are pleased overall with their students’ progress, but their
conversation quickly turns to concerns. A total of 95 of 265 eighth graders began the year
needing intervention, and now 74 receive it. Although many are close to meeting their read-
ing intervention goals, there are many others who still struggle to keep up with their peers.
How will these students fare in high school? Both specialists share a strong sense of urgency
to accelerate closing the students’ gaps in learning. What can they do before the end of the
year? What can they do to help their students’ transition to high school?

In this chapter, we will discuss response to intervention (RTI) and its relationship to multi-
tiered systems of support. We will identify the implementation components of a RTI framework
and consider challenges and recommendations for implementation in secondary schools.

What Is Response to Intervention and

What Is a Multi-tiered System of Support?
In the educational world, RTI and multi-tiered systems of support (MTSS) are often used
interchangeably. RTI can have slightly different meanings: Used broadly, it is an instructional
framework to support learning (usually campus-�wide), or used narrowly, it is the evidence of

Objectives: After studying this chapter, you will be able to:

1. Explain the major components of a multi-tiered system of support.
2. Describe the various types and uses of assessments to inform instruction.
3. Explain how the features of effective instruction relate to response to intervention
(RTI).
4. Identify challenges and recommendations for RTI implementation in secondary schools.

223
224 Bell

a student’s response to interventions that may be considered in the determination of a learn-

ing disability in reading or mathematics. This chapter will not discuss the intricacies of using
response to intervention instruction to remediate behavior or identify students in need of spe-
cial education services. Rather, the focus of this chapter is on implementation of RTI and multi-
tiered systems of support as a campus-�wide framework for learning.
RTI is “the practice of 1) providing high quality instruction/intervention matched to stu-
dent needs, and 2) using learning rate over time and level of performance to 3) make import-
ant educational decisions.”1 Briefly, RTI is a preventive instructional approach that identifies
students who are struggling with learning and provides them with progressively more intense
instruction, often referred to as interventions, until their learning gaps are closed. It is based
on these components:
• All students receive high-Â�quality core content area instruction.
• All students are screened to identify those who are making adequate grade-Â�level progress and
those who are falling behind and at risk for learning difficulties.
• At-Â�risk students are provided with immediate, research-Â�based intervention instruction.
• At-Â�risk students’ progress is monitored frequently to ensure the intervention is meeting their
needs.
• Professional development is provided to educators to ensure the instruction and intervention
they provide is implemented effectively.2

Around 2000, research studies targeting at-�risk students in elementary grades reported
findings that indicated multi-tiered intervention approaches were effective in closing gaps in
learning and thus preventing learning difficulties.3 Whereas most of the studies focused on
students who were having difficulties in learning to read, findings from studies on elementary
students with mathematics difficulties began to be reported as well.
Studies in 2009 and 2011 examined secondary education students’ response to interven-
tions.4 In these studies, researchers identified students who were academically behind their
peers and provided the students with additional intervention instruction to determine specific
aspects of the interventions that were critical to the students’ success. The research findings
supported RTI as a framework for learning in secondary schools.5
The most common RTI model for preventing reading difficulties features three tiers and is
based on a preventive health model.6 In an effective preventive health model, all children receive
primary care through annual physicals. The physician compares a healthy child’s measurements
to other children of the same age and makes sure the child is immunized to prevent illness.
When the child has a health problem, such as an earache with fever, the doctor may provide
secondary care by prescribing a course of antibiotics to target the infection. The antibiotics are
provided immediately for a child who needs such treatment. However, for a child with fre-
quently recurring ear infections, tertiary care is needed—Â�a more intensive intervention, such as
a specialist (otorhinolaryngologist) surgically inserting tubes in the child’s eardrum to prevent
further infections. The RTI model works similarly to the health model: Prevent reading problems
by providing excellent initial instruction; intervene as soon as a student struggles; and provide
more intensive intervention if the student continues to display difficulties learning to read.
Because the three-�tier model is implemented most frequently, we will use it as an exam-
ple of how a multi-tiered system of support works to improve student outcomes in reading.
Figure 16.1 depicts a typical distribution of students among the tiers.7 In Tier 1, the general
education classroom, all students receive effective, explicit instruction, resulting in about
70–Â�80% meeting benchmark expectations. In Tier 2, approximately 20% need additional strate-
gic or supplemental intervention, and in Tier 3, which may include students receiving special
education services, approximately 5%–Â�10% need intensive intervention.
It should be noted that the principles of universal design for learning (UDL), including
customizing and adjusting instructional goals, methods, materials, and assessments to meet
Response to Intervention and Multi-tiered Systems for Support 225

Tier III:
Students with severe reading difficulties; Intensive
students who do not respond adequately to Tier II intervention

Tier II:
Students with reading Strategic
difficulties that cannot be intervention
addressed sufficiently in Tier I

Tier I:
Common content area comprehension
All students
and vocabulary strategies

High standards; effective instructions; instructional leadership;

schoolwide commitment; safe and positive school climate

Figure 16.1.â•… 3-Tier diagram. (Adapted with permission from the Vaughn Gross Center for
Reading and Language Arts at the University of Texas at Austin. [2005]. Introduction to the
3-Tier reading model: Reducing reading difficulties for kindergarten through third grade stu-
dents [4th ed.]. Austin, TX: Author.)

the needs of each student, certainly apply to meeting the needs of at-�risk students through an
RTI model.8

What Are the Critical Components of

Response to Intervention Implementation?
Schools that successfully implement RTI have all its critical components functioning as a sys-
tem. The school’s leadership team implements a campus plan with goals to increase the number
of students meeting grade-�level benchmarks (Tier 1) and to reduce the number of students
who struggle with learning (Tiers 2–Â�3). Usually the campus plan incorporates a time line that
encompasses activities in the following four components: assessment, instruction, intervention,
and professional development.

Assessment
The basic premise of RTI is that educators identify at-�risk students who are beginning to fall
behind their peers and immediately provide the students with intervention instruction to close
their gaps in learning. Assessment is a critical component. It is used to identify at-risk students,
to match students to interventions designed to meet their unique needs, to set individual stu-
dent intervention goals, and to monitor student progress or their response to the intervention.
There are four types of assessment that are essential to the implementation of an effective
RTI framework: universal screening, benchmark assessments, progress monitoring, and out-
comes based assessments. A universal screening measure is administered to all students at the
beginning of the year (BOY) to identify those who are meeting grade-�level benchmarks and
those who are at risk. The screening should take little time to administer and score. Campus
leaders use these data to set campus and grade-�level goals for meeting student needs and to set
226 Bell

a range of cutoff scores for assigning students to levels of intervention. Teachers use the data
from the universal screening to form small groups of students with similar needs for instruc-
tion. The data are also used to identify and plan for professional development needs for edu-
cators. For example, if the data demonstrate most students struggle with academic vocabulary,
the school may want to provide additional professional learning opportunities for teachers in
how to teach vocabulary explicitly and in an engaging way.
Over the course of the year, students are periodically assessed—Â�usually in the middle of
the year (MOY) and at the end of the year (EOY)—Â�to ensure they progress as expected and
stay on track to meet grade-�level benchmarks. These periodic assessments, often referred to
as benchmark assessments, allow teachers to identify those who need additional intervention
before they fall too far behind. In addition, school leadership teams use the data to monitor
progress toward campus goals by asking, “Are more students responding to intervention so
that fewer and fewer students need intervention over time?”
In addition to universal screening and benchmark measures that are administered to all
students, progress-�monitoring assessments are used with at-�risk students receiving interven-
tion instruction. Frequent progress monitoring is a hallmark of RTI: Interventionists use the
data to determine how well students are responding to the intervention. Progress monitoring
for at-�risk students receiving intervention instruction usually occurs once every 2 or 3 weeks.
The intervention teacher uses the data from frequent progress-�monitoring assessments to adjust
intervention instruction to better meet the needs of students. When students fall behind, time is
critical for closing their learning gaps. It is important to know when strategies are not working
sooner rather than later!
Finally, all schools now administer an outcome-based assessment—the accountability test
required by all states, the results of which are used to determine the overall achievement of
students in the school and district. The results of the outcome-�based assessment can be used to
determine broad instructional areas that may need to be strengthened.
Three of these assessment measures are critical in an RTI model: universal screening,
benchmark assessments, and frequent progress monitoring measures. Teachers use data from
these assessments to design instruction and intervention, and campus leaders use the data to
plan professional development.

Tier 1 Instruction
By the time students enter middle school and high school, they should have mastered the
fundamental skills needed to learn how to read disciplinary text fluently with understanding,
acquire academic vocabulary, convey ideas in writing, and apply mathematics operations to
solve complex problems. Students who are behind in reading or mathematics struggle to keep
up with their peers and may quickly fall even further behind. They need teachers to provide
explicit instruction, give immediate corrective feedback, provide multiple practice opportuni-
ties to learn, and differentiate their instruction.
Schools that are implementing RTI know that Tier 1—Â�the general content area instruction
that is provided to all students—Â�is critical to student success. When Tier 1 instruction is explicit,
effective, and evidence based (E3), fewer students fall behind and need intervention.9 You will
recognize these components as the features of effective instruction, discussed in Chapter 2. Let
us review these concepts.
• Explicit instruction: The teacher explains, models (“I do it”), practices with students (“We do
it together”), lets students practice with each other (“You do it with each other”), and then
monitors independent practice (“You do it”).10 Effective teachers often add in a few more
“I do” and “we do” exercises to the learning cycle, ensuring ample modeling and practice
opportunities. Lessons are systematic and address the highest needs using evidence-�based
teaching strategies, such as those presented earlier in this text.
Response to Intervention and Multi-tiered Systems for Support 227

• Effective instruction: Teachers use student assessment data to group students for teacher-Â�led
small group instruction during Tier 1. Students with similar needs are grouped together so
teachers can differentiate instruction, provide students additional opportunities to practice,
and give students immediate corrective feedback. Teachers monitor student progress and
adjust instruction as needed. Students practice skills previously taught until they reach
automaticity. Instruction is paced to promote student engagement, motivate students to
work toward higher achievement, and maximize learning.
• Evidence-Â�based instruction: Scientific research findings inform Tier 1 instruction. Secondary
teachers need to know research-Â�based approaches and strategies—Â�especially for vocabulary
and comprehension instruction—Â�that can be applied across the content areas to enhance
learning.
When Tier 1 instruction is explicit, effective, and evidence based, most students are able to
meet grade-�level expectations, including students who are English language learners (ELLs). In
schools with strong Tier 1 instruction, 75%–Â�80% of all students meet grade-Â�level benchmarks. If
fewer than 75% of students in a school meet grade-�level expectations, schools must strengthen
the instruction provided in Tier 1.11

Intervention Instruction
In an RTI model, intervention is provided to at-�risk students to help them close gaps in learning.
Intervention instruction is provided in progressively intensive tiers, all while students remain
in their general education classes, receiving Tier 1 instruction. In RTI, the instructional levels
or tiers progress in the level of intensity. To determine which students are at risk and require
interventions, schools use student assessment data to set a score range (or cut points). Students
are assigned to tiers of intervention based on the size of the learning gaps indicated by their
assessment scores. For example, in one middle school, sixth-�grade students who are less than
two grade levels behind their peers are assigned to Tier 2 intervention, whereas those who are
more than two grade levels behind are assigned to Tier 3.

Tier 2 Intervention
In schools using a multi-tiered model for RTI, Tier 2 provides intervention instruction often
referred to as Supplemental, Strategic, or Targeted Intervention. Tier 2 interventions, proce-
dures, personnel, and schedules vary widely from campus to campus.
Each campus determines who will be interventionists (teachers who provide the interven-
tion instruction). In some schools, classroom teachers provide Tier 2 intervention; in others,
specialists provide intervention; and in still others, a combination of teachers and specialists
meet students’ needs. Matching teacher expertise to student needs is as important as matching
the intervention to student needs. Ideally, those teachers with the greatest expertise provide
intervention to the students with the greatest needs.
Effective intervention design is based on research, and there is a strong research base that
guides intervention design for elementary students. However, there is less definitive research
about the best intervention design for secondary students. We know that in elementary schools,
Tier 2 students benefit from daily sessions of about 30 minutes for 10–Â�12 weeks in duration in
addition to Tier 1 instruction.12 Secondary at-�risk students also benefit from additional time
for basic skill and strategy instruction.13 We know that instructional group size is an important
factor: Students in small groups have more opportunities to receive direct instruction, practice
skills to automaticity, and receive immediate corrective feedback. The recommended size for
Tier 2 groups in elementary grades is three to five students, and for Tier 3, the recommended
size is one to three students.14 However, these group sizes are not always possible in secondary
schools due to the sheer numbers of at-�risk students.
228 Bell

The purpose of intervention instruction is to

systematically accelerate student learning to close
gaps in achievement. Interventionists use student
assessment data to establish intervention goals and
set intermediate points (or progress goals) during
the intervention period. They measure student
progress frequently, often every 2 weeks, to know
how students are responding to the intervention.
They use this information to adjust the interven-
tion quickly, before too much time passes and the
learning gaps widen. Frequent progress monitoring
provides critical feedback to students as well. Often,
students enjoy charting their own progress to rein-
force learning.
Intervention is provided to at-�risk students
until they meet the school’s criteria for exiting the
intervention group. Usually, this is when they meet
grade-�level benchmark criteria. Sometimes students
need another “round,” or additional period, of
intervention.15
Intervention instruction is more intensive than
the instruction provided in the general education
classroom in the following ways:

• There is increased scaffolding (smaller steps with more support) to close gaps in skills.
• There are additional opportunities for students to receive immediate corrective feedback.
• The size of the instructional group is smaller.
• The pace of the lesson is quicker.
• There is increased time for the intervention session (more minutes per day).
• The duration of the intervention period is increased (a semester or more).
• There may be additional class periods of teaching.
• The teacher is a specially trained instructor.16

Tier 3 Intervention
When at-�risk students do not adequately respond to Tier 2 intervention, they are provided
with more intense intervention, or Tier 3. Intervention can be intensified in several ways:
by increasing the expertise of the interventionist and the amount of daily intervention time
and the duration of the intervention period, decreasing the group size, and breaking down
the targeted skills into more discreet steps for learning. For example, in Tier 3, intervention
time may be increased to 45 minutes daily, with an intervention specialist providing inten-
sive, systematic, research-�based intervention instruction in reading to groups of one to three
students.17
When students have significantly large learning gaps, or they do not adequately respond
to Tier 3 intervention, they may need referral for an evaluation to determine the presence of a
disability. Whenever a disability is suspected, the student must be referred for an evaluation
without delay; teachers do not need to wait until the prescribed RTI intervention is completed.
The student can continue to receive intervention instruction while undergoing the evaluation.
Response to the intervention instruction is documented and provides rich information to facil-
itate the evaluation process.
Response to Intervention and Multi-tiered Systems for Support 229

Professional Development
To implement RTI, educators need in-�depth knowledge related to each of the RTI components
of assessment, instruction, and intervention. Successful school leadership teams develop a plan
to ensure that all educators have the knowledge and skills necessary to provide high-�quality
instruction and intervention.
In assessment, teachers need to know how to administer the assessments, how to interpret
the results to inform their instruction, how to form small instructional groups, and how to use
progress monitoring data to determine the effectiveness of the intervention. Teachers need to
be able to track and utilize student assessment data to identify areas where instruction needs
strengthening and areas in which they need to develop further expertise.
In instruction, teachers need to know how to design effective lessons, provide explicit
instruction, differentiate instruction to meet student needs, and maximize student engagement.
Classroom management is also of utmost importance. Engaging all students in productive work
while the teacher works with a small group can be challenging, but it can be done!
In intervention, the interventionists need to know how to match student needs to research-�
based strategies and intervention programs, design effective intervention lessons, address indi-
vidual student needs, and monitor student progress.

What Are Challenges that Secondary Schools

Face in Implementing Response to Intervention?
Secondary schools face many challenges in implementing RTI to meet the needs of their stu-
dents. Compared to what is known about RTI and elementary schools, there is relatively little
research about effective intervention practices and even less information available about sec-
ondary school models for RTI implementation.18 Secondary schools are far more complex, with
more students, more teachers, and more complex systems. This requires secondary schools to
be more creative in designing their RTI framework. Successful schools have leaders who are
fiercely committed to ensuring the students in their schools have the high-�quality instruction
they need to graduate prepared for careers and college.
Some secondary schools provide support through interdisciplinary teacher teams, whereas
others provide intervention instruction within an academic credit course. It is important to
note that effective literacy interventions for secondary students target basic reading skills and
strategies that can be applied across content areas. Intervention instruction is not students vol-
untarily attending tutorial periods to get additional instruction or teachers reteaching lessons
or providing assistance completing homework.19 These common practices are not sufficient to
close significant gaps in achievement.
Coordination across content areas is especially challenging for secondary teachers. Often
the class and conference time schedules for the content teachers and the interventionist may
conflict, so there is limited time for them to meet. Interventionists must schedule conference
times with teachers to share strategies that work and align efforts, to document students’
response to the intervention, and to provide professional development on effective strategies.

Scenario
The interventionists in Lyndon B. Johnson Middle School decided it was impossible to collab-
orate well with all the teachers at their school—Â�there just wasn’t enough time in the day.
They came up with a creative alternative: The interventionists worked with the guidance
counselor to build a smaller cadre of teachers who were willing and able to work with the
at-risk students throughout the day, similar to a “school within a school” approach. So, for
example, 93 students had the same teacher for English language arts, social studies, sci-
ence, math, and so forth, but at different times of the day. This freed up the interventionists:
230 Bell

instead of finding time to meet with all five teachers in the English department, they only
had to meet with one. In this way, they formed a small group of teachers across the content
areas who shared the at-�risk students, who could share insights into their progress, and who
could learn which intervention strategies had been taught so they could hold the students
accountable for using them. This organization provided the teachers with opportunities to
focus on individual student needs. In addition, the interventionist used a tool, the Collabora-
tive Instructional Log, to share student intervention progress information with the teachers,
and together they discussed how to adjust instruction to better support the students.20

Summary
The first priority in implementing a successful RTI multi-tiered system of support framework
is ensuring that the Tier 1 instruction in all general education classes is the best it can be. All
students are assessed, and students who are identified as at risk are immediately provided with
increasingly intensive intervention(s) to close their learning gaps. Frequent progress monitor-
ing ensures students are responding adequately and informs adjustment in the intervention
instruction design.

Application Assignments
In-�Class Assignments
1. In groups of three, examine the following web sites. Discuss which ones might be most
useful to you to solve different problems. For example, which web site offers teaching
strategies? Which offers professional development for teachers? Which offers tools that
you could use to implement a multi-tiered system of supports, such as RTI? Prepare a
one-�page summary of the resources available on each web site.
a. IRIS Center, http://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu/module/rti01-overview
b. National RTI Center, http://www.rti4success.org
c. Building Capacity for Response to Intervention, http://buildingRTI.utexas.org
2. In a small group, discuss the following scenario. What interventions could you utilize in
your Tier 1 instruction to address the needs of these students? Be prepared to share your
thoughts with the rest of the class.
You have a group of struggling students in your class who receive Tier 2 interven-
tion to improve their reading fluency and comprehension. Most began the year reading
between 45 and 60 words correct per minute (WCPM) in seventh grade–Â�level text; now
they are reading at rates of 60–Â�80 WCPM (their goal is 120 WCPM). In addition to fluency
building, you want to teach the students academic vocabulary and comprehension strat-
egies to apply to complex text.
Review Chapter 5 on fluency, Chapter 4 on vocabulary, and Chapter 6 on comprehen-
sion and make a list of strategies you could use in your content area general education
class to support these students.
3. With a partner, make a list of productive and worthwhile activities students in a class
in your content area could complete while the teacher works with a small group of stu-
dents. Be prepared to share your ideas with the class.

Tutoring Assignment
Review the lessons you have taught your student. Identify strategies that were most successful.
Write a hypothetical letter to one of your student’s teachers and provide suggestions for how
the teacher could differentiate instruction within the general education class to enable your
Response to Intervention and Multi-tiered Systems for Support 231

student to increase achievement. This is a hypothetical letter to be delivered to your university

instructor only; do not give it to any teachers!

Homework Assignments
1. Examine three of the example secondary lessons and strategies on the Building RTI
Capacity web sites: http://buildingRTI.utexas.org/rti/effective_instruction and http://
buildingrti.utexas.org/resources-for-secondary-teachers. Identify the elements of effec-
tive instruction they address. Write a two-�page paper listing the strategies you identified
and how you could incorporate them into your content area instruction.
2. Interview an interventionist at a middle or high school. Ask him or her to describe the
school’s process for identifying students who are at risk and determining the interven-
tions the students need. Learn what interventions are utilized and how the school deter-
mines when the students need to move into a different level. Write a two-�to three-�page
paper on your findings. Include questions and concerns you have about the process.
3. Download the collaboration log at http://buildingrti.utexas.org/PDF/At_Risk_log.pdf. Refer to
it while you follow the presentation at http://buildingrti.utexas.org/PDF/Collaboration.pdf.
How do you think a tool like this would work in a middle school? Discuss it with a teacher.
How would it need to be modified to be used as a communication tool in your school?

Endnotes
1. National Association of State Directors of Special Edu- 1 1. Reed et al. (2012).
cation (2005), p. 5. 12. Vaughn, Wanzek, Murray, & Roberts (2012).
2. Meadows Center for Preventing Educational Risk (2011). 13. Fagella-�Luby & Wardwell (2011); Fuchs & Fuchs (2007);
3. Hughes & Dexter (2013). Fuchs, Fuchs, & Compton (2010).
4. Edmonds et al. (2009); Fagella-�Luby & Wardwell (2011). 14. Vaughn et al. (2003); Vaughn et al. (2010).
5. Reed, Wexler, & Vaughn (2012). 15. Reed et al. (2012).
6. Hasbrouck (2010). 16. Vaughn et al. (2012).
7. University of Texas Center for Reading and Language 17. For more information about Tier 3 instruction, see Wil-
Arts (2005). son, Fagella-�Luby, & Wei (2013).
8. National Center on Universal Design for Learning (2013). 18. Reed et al. (2012).
9. Fletcher & Vaughn (2009). 19. Edmonds et al. (2009).
10. Reed et al. (2012). 20. Meadows Center for Preventing Educational Risk (2011).

References
Deshler, D.D., Palincsar, A.S., Biancarosa, G., & Nair, M.
(2007). Informed choices for struggling adolescent readers: A
research-�based guide to instructional programs and practices.
Newark, DE: International Reading Association.
Edmonds, M.S., Vaughn, S., Wexler, J., Reutebuch, C., Cable,
A., Klinger Tackett, K., & Wick Schnakenberg, J. (2009). A
synthesis of reading interventions and effects on reading
comprehension outcomes for older struggling readers.
Review of Educational Research, 79(1), 262–Â�300.
Fagella-�Luby, M., & Wardwell, M. (2011). RTI in middle
school: Findings and practical implications of a tier-�2 read-
ing comprehension study. Learning Disability Quarterly, 34,
35–Â�49.
Fletcher, J., & Vaughn, S. (2009). Response to intervention:
Preventing and remediating academic deficits. Child Devel-
opment Perspectives, 3, 30–Â�37.
Fuchs, L.S., & Fuchs, D. (2007). A model for implementing
responsiveness to intervention. Teaching Exceptional Chil-
dren, 39(5), 14–Â�20.
Fuchs, L.S., Fuchs, D., & Compton, D.L. (2010). Rethinking
response to intervention at middle and high school. School
Psychology Review, 39(1), 22–Â�28.
Hasbrouck, J. (2010). Educators as physicians: Using RTI data for
effective decision-�making. Wellesley, MA: Gibson Hasbrouck.
Hughes, C., & Dexter, D.D. (2013). Field studies of RTI pro-
grams, revised. RTI Action Network. Retrieved July 10,
2013, from http://www.rtinetwork.org/learn/research/
field-studies-rti-programs
Jetton, T.L., & Alexander, P.A. (2004). Domains, teaching and
literacy. In T.L. Jetton & J.A. Dole (Eds.), Adolescent literacy
research and practice. New York, NY: Guilford.
Jetton, T.L., & Lee, R. (2012). Learning from text: Adolescent
literacy from the past decade. In T.L. Jetton & C. Shanahan
(Eds.), Adolescent literacy in the academic disciplines: General
principles and practical strategies. New York, NY: Guilford.
Jetton, T.L., & Shanahan, C. (Eds.). (2012). Adolescent liter-
acy in the academic disciplines: General principles and practical
strategies. New York, NY: Guilford.
232 Bell
Meadows Center for Preventing Educational Risk. (2011).
Collaborative instructional log: Reading. Retrieved July 13,
2013, from http://buildingrti.utexas.org/PDF/At_Risk_log
.pdf
Meadows Center for Preventing Educational Risk. (2014).
Retrieved from http://buildingrti.utexas.org/resources/
secondary
National Association of State Directors of Special Education.
(2005). Response to intervention: Policy considerations and
implementation. Alexandria, VA: Author.
National Center on Universal Design for Learning. (2013).
Retrieved from http://www.udlcenter.org
Nokes, J.D., & Dole, J.A. (2004). Helping adolescent readers
through explicit strategy instruction. In T.L. Jetton & J.A.
Dole (Eds.), Adolescent literacy research and practice. New
York, NY: Guilford.
Rand Reading Study Group. (2002). Reading for understand-
ing: Toward an R & D program in reading comprehension.
Santa Monica, CA: Rand.
Reed, D.K., Wexler, J., & Vaughn, S. (2012). RTI for reading at
the secondary level: Recommended literacy practices and remain-
ing questions. New York, NY: Guilford.
Robinson, S.M. (2013). Disciplinary literacy. In R.T. Boon &
V.G. Spencer (Eds.), Adolescent literacy: Strategies for content
comprehension in inclusive classrooms. Baltimore, MD: Paul
H. Brookes Publishing Co.
Short, D.J., & Boyson, B.A. (2012). Helping newcomer students
succeed in secondary schools and beyond. Washington, DC:
Center for Applied Linguistics.
Toste, J.R., Fuchs, D., & Fuchs, L.S. (2013). Supporting strug-
gling readers in high school: A peer-�mediated approach.
In R.T. Boon & V.G. Spencer (Eds.), Adolescent literacy:
Strategies for content comprehension in inclusive classrooms.
Baltimore, MD: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co.
Underwood, T., & Pearson, P.D. (2004). Teaching struggling
adolescent readers to comprehend what they read. In T.L.
Jetton & C. Shanahan (Eds.), Adolescent literacy in the aca-
demic disciplines: General principles and practical strategies.
New York, NY: Guilford.
University of Texas Center for Reading and Language Arts.
(2005). 3-�tier reading model: Reducing reading difficulties
for kindergarten through third grade students. Austin, TX:
Author.
U.S. Department of Education. (2010). Retrieved January
11, 2011, from http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/pdf/
main2009/2011455.pdf
Vaughn, S., Linan-�Thompson, S., Kouzekanani, K., Bryant, D.P.,
Dickson, S., & Blozis, S.A. (2003). Grouping for reading
instruction for students with reading difficulties. Remedial
and Special Education, 24, 301–Â�315.
Vaughn, S., Wanzek, J., Murray, C.S., & Roberts, G. (2012).
Intensive interventions for students struggling in reading
and mathematics: A practice guide. Portsmouth, NH: RMC
Research Corporation, Center on Instruction.
Vaughn, S., Wanzek, J., Wexler, J., Barth, A., Cirino, P.T.,
Fletcher, J.M., .€.€.€Francis, D.J. (2010). The relative effects
of group size on reading progress of older students with
reading difficulties. Reading and Writing: An Interdisciplin-
ary Journal, 23, 931–Â�956.
Wilson, J.A., Fagella-�Luby, M., & Wei, Y. (2013). Planning for
adolescent tier 3 reading instruction. Teaching Exceptional
Children, 46(1).
 17
Microblogging
An Example of Using Technology to Increase Engagement
Hannah R. Gerber

Classroom Scenario
Students lean forward in their seats in the dark classroom, gripped by the action on the
screen in front of them. Through the speakers, a loud pulsating beat fills the room, and a
male voice says, “Load the spectrals.” The camera pans as Pac-Â�Man appears on the screen,
spinning quickly as he renders.1 As soon as the image of Pac-�Man has materialized and the
spectrals have loaded, Pac-�Man flies through the 360-�degree maze (versus the standard
two-�dimension flat maze that many may recall from early Pac-�Man games) and gobbles up
the items in his path.

The clip that is playing is a machinima video titled “Pac-Â�Man: The Movie (The Fan Film).”
Machinima are gamer-�created videos, created from or about an existing video game, using
screen captures, voice-�overs, and modded images. Modded, or modding, is short for modifica-
tion and is the process where individuals or groups change an existing work into something
new. The word machinima is a portmanteau for the words machine and cinema. As students in
this scenario watch the clip play, they are using the class back channel on the web site Todays-
Meet (http://www.todaysmeet.com) to address the topic of tone. The students are doing this
through microblogging. Microblogging is composing short, key ideas conveyed in 140 charac-
ters or less via a class back channel.
The students who are engaged in this dynamic activity are tenth-�grade students enrolled
in a reading intervention class that was designed to optimize their engagement in reading and
writing activities through the medium of video games and a variety of new media technologies.
The curriculum was enhanced through the media of gaming machinima clips and microblogging
to improve their traditional literacy skills—Â�which include standard print reading and writing as a
response to reading—Â�and to increase their digital literacies skills, such as working collaboratively

Objectives: After studying this chapter, you will be able to:

1. Define microblogging and back channels.
2. Effectively integrate microblogging into your lessons.
3. Evaluate pedagogical purposes of various microblogging technologies.

233
234 Gerber

within media environments to understand the text

in these environments and to convey short and con-
cise messages by analyzing dynamic online text and
images. Microblogging and short message posts allow
for these new digital literacies to be used.
This chapter focuses on the use of two approaches
to integrate digital technology into your classroom by
creating engaging lessons infused with technology:
back channels and microblogging.
A back channel is a channel set up through
social media that allows people to converse about a
common topic of interest. Twitter is an example of a popular back channel space. Using social
media can be engaging for students; however, many teachers are not able to use open social
media in classrooms because of security concerns and firewalls established by their district.
TodaysMeet solves this problem because it is closed, meaning that teachers must set up a spe-
cific name for an online back-�channel room, and unless individuals have the name to the online
back-�channel room, they cannot join. Due to this, many school firewalls allow this technology
in through their filters. This allows teachers to set up the online back-�channel room in advance
and to only provide the back-�channel name to selected students or individuals.
Microblogging is a form of blogging. However, when microblogging, you are communicat-
ing in much shorter posts, generally in less than 140 characters (not words). Some of the most
popular microblogs are Facebook status updates and Twitter feeds. These concise messages allow
the user to post thoughts, opinions, and ramblings in very short snippets that can be read quickly
by others and responded to equally as quickly. This type of quick thought flood can serve as an
excellent way for students to brainstorm ideas before launching into longer works or writings.
While video games and short writing response activities may not sound like a standard
tool to use in the classroom, it is important to note that research shows that 97% of today’s
youth play video games regularly,2 and according to Kaiser Foundation, many of today’s youth
spend more than 10 hours of their day online and engaged in texting, microblogging, and other
concise writing activities (suggesting that they take part in a form of multitasking).3 The point
of the activity in the vignette is for students to discuss a topic—Â�in this case the literary element
tone—Â�inside a multimedia environment using methods with which they are both comfortable
and familiar. This activity, however, does not have to use video games. Multiple media formats
can be used and many different topics can be discussed through the back channel.
When using a format such as microblogging, you also use class texts, such as scientific arti-
cles, primary documents in a history class, or a piece of literature, and the back channel becomes
one way students respond to the text and hone their reading skills. Therefore, choosing your
text and appropriate instructional strategies is of utmost importance.

Elements of Effective Use of Microblogging

Provide Opportunities for Student Interactions
In the scenario, students are developing the ability to quickly analyze a topic and then concisely
convey their thoughts about the topic. They are encouraged to respond to one another’s thoughts
and ideas through the teacher-�created back channel, and they are encouraged to push each oth-
er’s thinking to new levels. This is an important skill to have in a fast-Â�paced digital world because
the ability to quickly think through problems and create solutions is integral in a knowledge
economy where information is readily available and must be assessed and judgments made
about its relevancy and applicability to the task at hand.4 However, this does not mean that the
classroom should be devoid of deep, rich thinking and dialogue; rather, the elements of micro�
blogging through back channels can be used to harness students’ initial thoughts and ideas about
a topic or to maintain a trail of student thinking throughout a given assignment.
Microblogging 235

One way that teachers can tap into this idea with the use of microblogging throughout a
unit is by encouraging students to engage in a continuous dialogue across space and time. This
can be used as a complement to in-�class discussions. To do this, the teacher should structure the
type of responses required depending on the objectives of the unit. The back channel therefore
creates an additional space where students can discuss the material from any location—Â�that is,
home or school, if they have an Internet-�enabled device.

Assess Through Student Reflections

Like many assignments that rely on technologies to help foster student thought processes, the
assessment should not be the actual assignment that they did; rather, the assessment should be a
student’s reflection on the assignment. This could be done through a journal or a conference, where
the teacher asks key questions that encourage the student to think through his or her thought pro-
cesses. The teacher then engages the students in dialogue about what they learned and how they
feel it is applicable to the greater unit of study. This assessment of their learning becomes a part of
an iterative feedback loop of learning that can help you as you design future lessons.5

Important Consideration
Be sure to set up guidelines for civil conversation, such as no name calling and no flaming (using
purposefully derogatory statements toward a person/group of people to incite argument). The
students should be part of this discussion in setting up guidelines for civil conversation as well
as agreeing on the consequences should the guidelines be broken.

How to Set Up a Back Channel or Microblogging Site

Setting up a class back channel or microblogging site is quite simple. If the school allows Twitter,
the teacher can create a hashtag related to the topic at hand (e.g., #literacyccss) and provide the
students with the hashtag during class. If using Twitter as a back channel, keep in mind that Twit-
ter is an open network, and many others will have access to the students’ work and comments.
Check that the hashtag that is created is appropriate and related to the required discussion. In
addition, make alternative options available for students who do not have access to Twitter.
Another forum that is more inclusive and typically not blocked by school districts is the web
site TodaysMeet (http://www.todaysmeet.com). As mentioned previously, a teacher can set up a
private room using a keyword that denotes the topic. For example, a teacher may choose to use his
or her last name to set up the room so that students know that this is the teacher’s class space (e.g.,
http://www.todaysmeet.com/gerber). Provide all students with the information for accessing the
designated class back channel and have them proceed to post questions and material. Be sure to
provide explicit instruction about how to access the back channel and model its use for the students.

Examples of Back Channel/Microblogging

Microblogging is a great activity to use across multiple disciplines to engage students in think-
ing about topics through short writing activities. The writing can be used as springboards and
platforms for larger, more complex writing activities, such as taking one point of view and
persuading an audience to accept that position or writing a narrative from another point of
view. The following examples show how microblogging and back channel activity could be
applied in a variety of disciplines.

Physical Education
Set up a class back channel related to a particular sport and post text related to the sport.
Require students to post their short responses to the text on the class back channel. For example,
236 Gerber

students read a short editorial about the sport and post microblog comments to an opinion-�
based question posed by the teacher.

Mathematics/Science
Set up a class back channel about a theory or concept that is central to the unit being studied in
mathematics or science class. Pose a question that students have to work through and explain
in a few key terms, allowing them to express their opinion; there is no right or wrong answer.
For example, after reading the research, students may post their recommendation about the
use of genetically modified foods. Encourage students to check back in throughout the evening
or weekend and respond to the teacher-�or student-�generated thought-�provoking questions on
the topic, thus keeping the back channel and class conversation active outside of school hours.

History/Social Studies
Set up a back channel about a current event. Pose
several questions through the back channel that
will allow students to state their diverse opinions
and thoughts, and require that they engage in dia-
logue and debate with one another through the
back channel. To get this started, a teacher may
select certain students to read a common article/
blog from a liberal paper/web site and ask other
students to read a common article/blog from a con-
servative paper/web site. The teacher could then post a question that asks students to engage
in a short message debate centering only on the information collected and gathered from
reading the article/blog.

Fine Arts
Set up a back channel centering on a virtual tour of an artist’s work. Show the work in class
as a virtual tour you create. Have students comment via the back channel on the artist’s work
as you lead them on the virtual gallery walk. Allow them to comment on their opinions of the
works of art as they critique a specific artist’s work.

Summary
Microblogging through back channels is a quick and fun way to bring your students into
dialogue and debate about multiple topics related to class material. With teacher guidance,
students will learn how to use media tools respectfully and appropriately to augment their
learning, both in class and outside of class.

Application Assignments
In-�Class Assignments
1. Go to Twitter and find a topic that is trending. This will be denoted by a hashtag that
you can click on. Click on the hashtag and explore all the related threads, comments, and
posts surrounding that topic.
2. Post your thoughts via Twitter using the hashtag that you were following.
Microblogging 237

3. Discuss with a partner what you noticed about the trend and how you could use Twitter
in the classroom. What difficulties do you anticipate? How would you resolve those dif-
ficulties? Be prepared to share your thoughts with the class.

Tutoring Assignments
1. Select a reading text about a topic your tutee is studying.
2. Set up a hashtag or back channel related to a keyword in the topic/subject studied.
3. Tell your tutee the hashtag word/topic and give the student the back channel address.
4. Ask the student to read the selected reading material and to post multiple microblogs/
posts as they read. This “during reading” strategy will encourage active reading and
critical thinking.
5. After the student has read the material, have him or her review his or her microblog posts
and summarize, extend, and question what he or she has written.
6. Encourage your student to create questions about the text and post his or her questions
in the back channel.
7. Write a reflection, to be shared in class, about your experiences using the back channel
and what you would do differently the next time you use this activity with a student.

Homework Assignments
1. Determine a topic from your discipline for students to debate.
2. Set up a class back channel around this topic. Use Twitter or http://www.todaysmeet.com
3. Have 7–10 classmates/peers discuss this topic via the back channel.
4. Reflect upon what was beneficial and what was problematic when using the back channel.
5. Brainstorm what problems might arise and what might be done to address the problems
in your class.
6. Write about the experience on the class back channel (if available) or in an e-�mail that will
be shared with the class.

Web Sites
TodaysMeet, http://www.todaysmeet.com Twitter, http://www.twitter.com

Endnotes
1. “Rendering” is a computer term for generating an image 3. Lenhart (2008).
from a model. 4. Gee, Hull, & Lankshear (1996).
2. Lenhart (2008). 5. Abrams & Gerber (2013).

References
Abrams, S.S., & Gerber, H.R. (2013). How videogames can
help us understand authentic assessment and meaningful
learning. English Journal, 103(1), 95–Â�103.
Farr, J. (Dir.). (2012, April 5). Pac-�man: The movie (The fan
film). [A machinima video]. Retrieved from https://www
.youtube.com/watch?v=l7oadchZMYA
Gee, J.P., Hull, G., & Lankshear, C. (1996). The new work order:
Behind the language of the new capitalism. Boulder, CO: West-
view Press.
Lenhart, A. (2008). Teens, videogames, and civics. Washington,
DC: Pew Internet and American Life Project.
 18
Current Laws, Policies, and Initiatives
Martha C. Hougen, Susan M. Smartt, and Jane M. Hunt

Classroom Scenario
Ms. Ava can’t believe what she is hearing in the faculty meeting. She and the other teach-
ers are told they must adopt a new approach to teaching reading. The federal government
has provided funding to the district to improve reading achievement, and the district must
use an evidence-�based program. Ms. Ava is all for trying something different because so
many of her students struggle learning to read, but, she ponders, don’t states have control
over education? What is the role of the federal government versus the state versus the local
school district versus the school itself? Who decides what students are supposed to learn and
what teachers must teach? Plus, she admits she is not even sure what scientifically based
or evidence based means. Each year there are new terms and initiatives. It is hard to keep
it all straight!

Most teachers experience the confusion Ms. Ava is experiencing. Each year there seem to be
new initiatives, new programs, new standards, and new ways to teach, most of which claim to
be based on research. It is important that teachers understand these trends and how to deter-
mine what practices are based on rigorous research and most likely to increase the achieve-
ment of their students. In this chapter, important federal legislation and recent initiatives are
discussed and the definition of scientifically based research and instruction is explained.

Objectives: After studying this chapter, you will be able to:

1. Understand the background leading to the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (PL
107-�110) legislation.
2. Learn about the ongoing reauthorization process of the Elementary and Secondary
Education Act (ESEA) of 1965 (PL 89-�10).
3. Know the basics of laws protecting the rights of students, including the Individuals
with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) of 1990, Section 504 (PL 101-�476), and Family
Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) of 1974 (PL 93-�579).
4. Know your responsibilities in implementing a multitier system of support or
response to intervention (RTI) framework. (continued)

239
240 Hougen, Smartt, and Hunt

Objectives (continued)
5. Define what is meant by scientifically based reading research (SBRR).
6. Become knowledgeable about federal initiatives such as the Striving
Readers Comprehensive Literacy program.
7. Explain the origin and purpose of the Common Core State Standards
(CCSS).
8. Discuss the two primary assessment systems for the Common Core
State Standards: Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College
and Careers (PARCC) and Smarter Balanced.
9. Understand the purpose and results of the National Assessment of Edu-
cation Progress (NAEP) and the Programme for International Student
Assessment (PISA).

Historical Background of Current Educational Literacy Policies

Elementary and Secondary Education Act
Our current educational policies date back to 1965 when then president Lyndon B. Johnson initi-
ated the legislation known as the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA; PL 89-�10) as
part of the War on Poverty. This one law is a precursor of much of the legislation and focus of
instruction in our schools today. As one who had been a classroom teacher himself, President
Johnson believed we needed to provide a more level playing field for all students. Wide achieve-
ment gaps existed among students of color, those who spoke English as a second language,
children from poverty, and white middle class students. The Civil Rights Act of 1964 (PL 88-�352)
focused on the inequities in education and was a precursor of the ESEA legislation. President
Johnson believed the federal government should play a major role in providing educational
funding to local and state governments to promote a more equal distribution of educational
opportunities. An important provision of the ESEA law was Title I legislation. Title I, which is
still funded today, was designed for educating economically disadvantaged children. When
ESEA was first passed, Congress gave more than 80% of the monies set aside in the law to Title
I programs.

Education for All Handicapped Children Act

Ten years later, in 1975, Congress enacted the Education for All Handicapped Children Act of
1975 (PL 94-�142), another major milestone in student equity. The purpose of this legislation
was to protect the rights of all children with disabilities by addressing their individual learn-
ing needs and providing them a free appropriate public education (often referred to as FAPE).
Prior to passage of this law, 1.75 million children with disabilities were denied access to any
educational services at all and another 2.5 million received inappropriate instruction in the
public school system.1

Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act

When the special education law was amended, most recently in 2004, it was renamed the Indi-
viduals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA). The intent of the law remains the same: free
appropriate public education for all students with disabilities.2 Since 1975, when the Educa-
tion for All Handicapped Children Act was enacted, immeasurable progress has been made in
developing and implementing processes for early identification of students with disabilities and
Current Laws, Policies, and Initiatives 241

interventions through special education services. IDEA requires educational services and due
process for students with the following disabilities:3 “autism, deaf-Â�blindness, deafness, devel-
opmental delay, emotional disturbance, hearing impairment, intellectual disability, multiple
disabilities, orthopedic impairment, other health impaired, specific learning disability, speech
or language impairment, traumatic brain injury, and visual impairment including blindness.”

Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act,

Section 504, and the Americans with Disabilities Act
There are three additional federal laws that are important for teachers to know. The Family
Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) of 1974 (PL 93-�579) protects student confidential-
ity, including student educational records.4 It is because of this law that you may not be able to
review a student’s records unless you are his or her teacher. This is also the reason you should
not include photos or the full name of the student you are tutoring in any materials, nor should
you discuss anything about any of your students with people who have no need to know, such
as other teachers in the faculty lounge.
The second law that is crucial for educators is commonly referred to as 504. Section 504
of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (PL 93-�112) is a federal law designed to protect the rights of
individuals with disabilities in programs and activities that receive federal financial assistance
from the U.S. Department of Education.5 This law prohibits discriminating against an indi-
vidual because of a disability (i.e., a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits a
major life activity, including learning and reading), regardless of the nature or severity of the
disability. In many cases, children with dyslexia, who may not meet the disability requirements
under IDEA, receive services under 504.
The third law that is pertinent to teachers is the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA)
enacted in 1990 and amended in 2008 (PL 101-�336).6 It is a comprehensive law that prohibits
discrimination of Americans with disabilities in employment, by all public entities, in trans-
portation, and in accessing public institutions, including schools. Among the results of this law
are the ramps you see going into buildings, when prior to this law only steps were available.

No Child Left Behind Act

The quality of our public schools directly affects us all as parents, as students, and as citizens. Yet
too many children in America are segregated by low expectations, illiteracy, and self-�doubt. In a
constantly changing world that demands increasingly complex skills from its work force, children
are being left behind.7

In January 2002, major legislation was passed by President George W. Bush to reauthorize ESEA
as the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001 (PL 107-�110).8 In many respects, NCLB was a
reauthorization of President Johnson’s earlier 1965 ESEA law and President Clinton’s Reading
Excellence Act.9 Cornerstones of NCLB include the expectation that all by 2014 all students
would be reading on grade level by the end of third grade and that they would continue read-
ing on grade level. On the positive side, sweeping changes have been made in public schools
across the country to improve the teaching of reading; however, as with all large-�scale reform
efforts, there are continuing challenges. These issues are addressed later in this chapter, when
the current efforts to reauthorize the ESEA (NCLB) are discussed.
Most who look at the big picture of literacy reform conclude there were many positive
actions brought about by the NCLB legislation, especially for low-�performing and economically
disadvantaged students. NCLB was designed to do the following:
1. Increase accountability for student performance, including subgroups such as students
from poverty, students with disabilities, and ethnic subgroups
2. Focus on what works, including research-based reading programs and instruction
242 Hougen, Smartt, and Hunt

3. Reduce bureaucracy and increase flexibility in schools

4. Empower parents in choosing schools10
Through this broad NCLB lens, federal dollars were linked to specific school and stu-
dent performance goals to document improved academic results. For the first time, teacher
and school administrators were required to examine and report school performance data (e.g.,
achievement test data) by individual demographic groups such as white, Asian, Hispanic, and
black; students from poverty; students with disabilities; and students at risk. Academic expec-
tations were consistent across all demographic groups. By requiring the disaggregation of data
by demographic groups, the country could see what those in the classrooms already knew—Â�the
existence of grave disparities and inequities in our education system.
In order to “close the achievement gap,” the following requirements were included in
NCLB:

1. Accountability and high standards for all populations

2. Annual academic assessments
3. Consequences for schools that failed to educate disadvantaged students11

Even though earlier legislation had sought to remove the inequality in public education, NCLB
was the first time the federal government had imposed sanctions on schools that failed to make
adequate yearly progress (AYP).12
There are two parts of NCLB that address reading achievement: Reading First and Early
Reading First. These initiatives were geared primarily for low-�performing schools with high
populations of economically disadvantaged students and focused on Grades pre-Â�K–Â�3.13 Key ele-
ments of these two reading initiatives were the requirements to screen all students for reading
difficulties, progress monitor student achievement, implement research-�based core reading pro-
grams, and provide a 90-�minute block of uninterrupted reading instruction. Data-�based decision
making—Â�using screening and progress monitoring data to plan instruction in Grades K–Â�3—Â�was
required of all schools that received Reading First funding.
IDEA of 2004 reinforces the mandate from NCLB to provide all students with scientific,
research-�based instruction.14 Before teachers can refer a student for an evaluation to rule out
or confirm the need for special education services, the teacher has to document that they
implemented scientific, research-�based instruction in their classrooms. If students respond to
research-�based intervention and learn to read, most likely they do not have a specific learning
disability. If, on the other hand, the student does not improve in reading, despite the research-�
based intervention delivered with fidelity, the student could be referred for an evaluation to
determine if he or she does indeed have a disability and require specialized instruction.15
The guidance document for Reading First provided by the U.S. Department of Education
defines scientifically based reading research. As you will note, the standards are rigorous and
few programs meet the requirements. The What Works Clearinghouse, managed by the Institute
of Education Sciences (IES), reviews research based on these and other criteria.16
Scientifically based reading research is research that applies rigorous, systematic, and
objective procedures to obtain valid knowledge relevant to reading development, reading
instruction, and reading difficulties. This includes research that does the following:

1. Employs systematic, empirical methods that draw on observation or experiment

2. Involves rigorous data analyses that are adequate to test the stated hypotheses and justify the
general conclusions drawn
3. Relies on measurements or observational methods that provide valid data across evaluators and
observers and across multiple measurements and observations
4. Has been accepted by a peer-�reviewed journal or approved by a panel of independent experts
through a comparably rigorous, objective, and scientific review17
Current Laws, Policies, and Initiatives 243

Response to Intervention and Multi-tiered Systems of Support

An approach to providing interventions for students who struggle and identifying those who
may qualify for special education services was introduced in the IDEA of 2004 legislation.
Response to intervention (RTI) or multi-tiered systems of support (MTSS) is a framework for
ensuring students who struggle are identified and provided educational support as soon as
possible. The framework emphasizes effective reading core instruction in the general education
classroom, early identification of students at risk for learning difficulties, and early intervention
to increase the likelihood that students learn to read and continue to be successful in school.
RTI is a general education initiative, and all teachers are held responsible for designing effec-
tive instruction for all students that is based on sound scientific research. Beginning with Tier 1
instruction in general education classrooms, all students should receive high-�quality, research-�
based instruction.18 The RTI framework is thoroughly discussed in Chapter 16 of this text.

Current Laws and Policies that Have

an Impact on Classroom Instruction
The ESEA was due for reauthorization in 2007. Although most people agree changes must be
made in the law, Congress has not agreed on specific modifications. While states are “in limbo”
waiting for reauthorization, the U.S. Department of Education has offered states flexibility
in several of the most prescriptive provisions of NCLB that have been viewed as barriers to
local implementation of innovative reform. The ESEA flexibility moves away from top-�down
policies and instead supports data-�driven decisions made by states and local schools. In order
to receive a “flexibility” waiver, states have to submit a plan documenting how the state will
maintain a high bar for student achievement, close achievement gaps, improve quality of
instruction, and increase equity by better targeting support and resources to schools based on
identified needs.19
As of December 2013, 42 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico have received
approval from the U.S. Department of Education for ESEA flexibility and several more are
working toward that goal.20 A focal point of the ESEA flexibility plans is the implementation
of college-� and career-�ready standards for all students. In addition, the flexibility plans have
included increased accountability and ways to evaluate and support both teacher and principal
effectiveness in order to ensure all students have access to a high-�quality education. Graduation
rates are being used to drive supports and interventions for schools. Furthermore, states are still
required to continue exposing achievement gaps while demanding and supporting improved
performance for all students. (Be sure to check the status of the ESEA reauthorization at http://
www.ed.gov/blog/topic/esea-reauthorization)
As this book goes to press, Congress has not reauthorized NCLB. Whereas there were
many positive benefits of NCLB, such as spotlighting achievement gaps affecting low-�income
students, English language learners (ELLs), and students with disabilities, much of the nation
began to view the legislation negatively. NCLB was referred to disparagingly as a “one-Â�size-Â�
fits-Â�all” approach to education. Many schools were identified as “failing,” even though they
were demonstrating growth. This heavy negative burden seemed to hamper school reform,
growth, and innovation.
While waiting for reauthorization, President Obama put forth a blueprint for modifying
ESEA. Inherent in the proposed blueprint is the assertion that all students can learn and are
worth our investment. Schools that continue to have low student achievement and high dropout
rates face repercussions.21
There are several important components of the proposed new law found in the blueprint:
1. Recognition of the importance of teachers, mandating they be included in the decision-�
making process of what might work with low-�performing students in their classrooms
244 Hougen, Smartt, and Hunt

2. Continued emphasis on the importance of accountability, requiring evidence-�based

practices and data-�driven instruction
3. Rewards and incentives for administrators, teachers, and students when goals are
achieved22
At this time, there is strong interest in including a specific literacy section in the law, sim-
ilar to Reading First but with a broader scope. The current proposal is known as the Literacy
Education for All, Results for the Nation (LEARN) Act and targets students from birth to 12th
grade.23 Unlike Reading First, the LEARN Act focuses on all skills needed to be literate (e.g.,
reading, writing, speaking, listening, and using language effectively). The LEARN Act is com-
prehensive and includes universal preschool screening and regular assessments of students’
reading development in every K–Â�3 classroom, certified teachers of reading in every K–Â�3 class-
room, multitier systems of support in general education classrooms for students that struggle
to become grade-Â�level proficient in Grades K–Â�12, data systems to guide instruction, and teacher
preparation programs in colleges of education that follow science-�based knowledge and prac-
tice standards.24

Striving Readers Initiatives

There are two other federal programs that may influence your instruction. A competitive grant
program, Striving Readers, funded in 2006 and 2009, was initiated to raise middle and high
school students’ literacy levels in Title I schools.25 The grant supported supplemental literacy
interventions for students achieving below grade level as well as efforts to improve the reading
achievement of all students.
The Striving Readers Comprehensive Literacy (SRCL) program was authorized in 2010
to focus on advancing literacy skills for students from birth through Grade 12, including pre-
literacy skills, reading, and writing with a focus on 21st-�century readiness.26 Six states were
awarded funding: Georgia, Louisiana, Montana, Nevada, Pennsylvania, and Texas.27 The states
then awarded funding to the neediest school districts—Â�those with the highest level of poverty
and lowest reading scores. Instruction must be informed by student achievement data, and pro-
fessional development for teachers is required. Schools were instructed to use research-�based
recommended practices and select scientific-�based core reading programs.

Common Core State Standards

Recognizing that many high school graduates are entering college and careers unprepared to
meet the challenges before them, the state-�led Common Core State Standards (CCSS) Initiative
was developed to deal with this issue. The CCSS Initiative is led by the National Governors
Association (NGA) and the Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO). The development
of the standards was financed primarily by a grant from the Gates Foundation.28
In 2010, individual states began adopting the standards. Currently, 45 states, the District
of Columbia, and four territories have adopted the standards for English language arts (ELA)
and mathematics. The purpose for creating the new standards was to provide states with K–Â�12
standards that were fewer in number, clearer in expectations, and more rigorous.29 The stan-
dards were “backmapped”; that is, desired outcomes for high school graduates were first iden-
tified and standards were written backward from these desired outcomes from Grade 12 to
kindergarten.
English language arts standards are written for foundational reading skills, reading liter-
ature, reading informational text, writing, language, speaking, and listening for Grades K–Â�5.
For Grades 6–Â�12, standards are provided for reading and writing in the content areas of social
science and history, science and technical subjects, and English language arts. Thus the content
area teachers are expected to support literacy in their disciplines.
Current Laws, Policies, and Initiatives 245

Three major shifts in the ELA standards are important for literacy teachers as they revise
their practices to meet the new demands:
1. Knowledge built through content-�rich nonfiction
2. Reading, writing, and speaking grounded in evidence from the text, both literary and
informational
3. Regular practice with a complex text and its academic language
The standards represent desired outcomes and intend to raise the level of rigor in class-
rooms. They do not, however, dictate what teachers should teach with regard to a specific cur-
riculum or how the standards should be taught. This has been intentionally left up to individual
districts and schools. The introduction states,
A focus on results rather than means by emphasizing required achievements, the Standards leave
room for teachers, curriculum developers, and states to determine how those goals should be
reached and what additional topics should be addressed. Thus, the Standards do not mandate such
things as a particular writing process or the full range of metacognitive strategies that students may
need to monitor and direct their thinking and learning. Teachers are thus free to provide students
with whatever tools and knowledge their professional judgment and experience identify as most
helpful for meeting the goals set out in the Standards.30

It is important to note that all students, including those with disabilities and ELLs, are
expected to achieve the Common Core State Standards.

Partnership for Assessment of Readiness

for College and Careers and Smarter Balanced
As a result of the Common Core State Standards, new assessments are being developed in an
ongoing attempt to standardize how student performance is measured nationally. Two assess-
ment consortiums exist for the purpose of designing state assessments. Approximately half of the
states that have adopted the CCSS are partnered with each of these consortiums: the Partnership
for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) and Smarter Balanced.31 Whether
or not your state is a member of PARCC or Smarter Balanced is determined at the state level.

The Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers

PARCC is a consortium of 19 states plus the District of Columbia and the U.S. Virgin Islands
working together to develop a common set of K–Â�12 assessments in ELA and mathematics. These
new assessments measure student achievement of the CCSS and their college and career read-
iness by the end of high school. The assessments are designed to provide teachers information
they need to make instructional decisions and provide necessary student support. The PARCC
assessments will be ready for use during the 2014–Â�2015 school year and are designed to replace
states’ existing assessments in ELA in Grades 3–Â�11.32
The PARCC assessment system will have multiple components and be taken on comput-
ers. It will provide summative information such as determination of “college-Â�and-Â�career readi-
ness” and data that can be used for growth indicators. In addition, the PARCC system provides
formative assessments, administered throughout the year, to inform instruction and evaluate
the effectiveness of interventions. For example, there are diagnostic assessments that could be
administered near the beginning of a school year, there are midyear assessments, and end-�of-�
year assessments. The English language arts assessment is administered after approximately 75%
of the school year and focuses on writing effectively when analyzing text. The end-�of-�year assess-
ment is given after approximately 90% of the school year and focuses on reading comprehension.
The PARCC Model Content Frameworks for English Language Arts/Literacy is a helpful
framework to get a sense of what is taught and assessed.33
246 Hougen, Smartt, and Hunt

Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium

Smarter Balanced is a state-�led consortium working to develop next-�generation assessments
that are aligned to the Common Core State Standards (CCSS).34 The assessments are created to
accurately measure student progress toward college and career readiness in both English lan-
guage arts and mathematics. The Smarter Balanced consortium consists of educators, research-
ers, policy makers, and community groups who work jointly to ensure all students thrive in a
“knowledge-Â�driven global economy.”35
The Smarter Balanced assessment system is being developed for Grades 3–Â�8 and Grade 11. The
assessments are designed to give parents and educators accurate information about whether
students are on track to graduate from high school ready for college and the workplace.
Like the PARCC, the Smarter Balanced assessments are slated to be ready for implementa-
tion in the 2014–Â�2015 school year. The Smarter Balanced assessments offer formative, interim,
and summative components with the goal of providing teachers with information they need to
help all students succeed. A summative assessment is administered during the last 12 weeks of
the school year and consists of two parts: computer adaptive tests and performance tasks taken
on a computer that is not computer adaptive. Computer-�adaptive tests adjust the difficulty of
questions to quickly ascertain which skills the students have mastered. If a student answers a
question correctly, a more difficult task is provided. If the student answers incorrectly, an easier
task is provided.36 The summative assessments describe student achievement and growth.37
There are optional interim assessments that can be administered based on student, teacher,
and school needs. These assessments provide information about the students’ progress through-
out the school year. The interim results assist teachers in identifying which students are on track
to meet college and career goals and which students need more support.
Formative assessment practices and strategies are available for teachers who want a more
comprehensive understanding of student needs. These assessments are the basis for a digital
library of professional development materials aligned with the common core and assessment
targets. Included are specific research-�based tools provided to help teachers meet learning
challenges and differentiate instruction.
Both PARCC and Smarter Balanced go beyond simple multiple-�choice questions and
include short constructed written responses, extended constructed responses, and performance
tasks that require students to complete an in-�depth project that highlights analytical thinking
and real-�world problem solving.38 Both have developed sample items and performance tasks
to assist teachers and administrators preparing for the new assessments.39

National and International Assessments

National Assessment of Educational Progress
Beginning in 1969, national comparative data have been collected through the National Assessment
of Educational Progress (NAEP), known as the “Nation’s Report Card.” The NAEP tracks student
progress throughout the country in the areas of reading, math, science, and writing. Data are col-
lected every 2 years for mathematics and reading scores and every 4 years for science and writing
performance in Grades 4, 8, and 12. NAEP is congressionally mandated and functions under the
umbrella of the U.S. Department of Education and the National Center for Educational Statistics
(NCES). The NAEP web site provides information from different states and types of districts such
as urban or rural, along with their demographics for easy comparisons. Unlike results based on
tests mandated by individual states that would be difficult to compare, NAEP data are gathered
from the same assessments and common measures of achievement. Policy makers and educators
are able to review long-�term data trends that tell what students are or are not able to do.40
There is a pattern of significant achievement gaps on NAEP scores between middle-�class
students and students of poverty and among white, black, and Hispanic students.41 Also, the
tests indicate that there continues to be a significant gap between students with disabilities and
students without disabilities (Figure 18.1).42 In addition, there are huge differences in many
Current Laws, Policies, and Initiatives 247

2013 SD
Series 1
Series 2
Series 3
2013 Not SD Series 4

2011 SD

2011 Not SD

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70

Percent

Legend:
Series 1 = Below basic
Series 2 = Basic
Series 3 = Proficient
Series 4 = Advanced

Figure 18.1.â•… NAEP scores from 2011 and 2013: Reading eighth grade. (From U.S. Department of Edu-
cation, Institute of Education Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, & National Assessment
of Educational Progress [NAEP]. [1990–Â�2013]. Mathematics and reading assessments. Retrieved from
http://nationsreportcard.gov/reading_math_2013/#/student-groups.) (Key: SD, students with disabilities.)

states in the passing rates on state assessments and NAEP, with students performing lower on
the national assessment.43

Programme for International Student Assessment

The Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) is a worldwide program managed
by the Organisation for Economic Co-�operation and Development (OCED) to assess 15-�year-�old
students’ achievement in reading, mathematics, and science every 3 years since 2000. Sixty-Â�five
countries and economies participate (most economies are countries, though several other enti-
ties are categorized as separate economies for research purposes), measuring what students
have learned and how they can use what they have learned in solving real-�world problems.
The 2012 test results released in December 2013 indicate that the United States ranks 17th in
reading, close to the OECD average and not significantly different from previous years.44 The
United States performed below average in mathematics, ranking 29th, and in science, ranking
22nd.45 One has to wonder if difficulty reading science and mathematics text has a role in this
stagnant student performance in these content areas. U.S. Secretary of Education Arne Duncan
recommends addressing these challenges by instituting early childhood education, attracting
and retaining great teachers, instituting rigorous standards and high-�quality assessments, and
redesigning our high schools to ensure students graduate with industry-�relevant education
skills and are prepared to succeed in college.46

Summary
Although it often seems that decisions made in Washington, D.C., do not affect our professional
lives, this is not true. Policies, budgets, and legislation about education have direct effects on
what is taught and how schools are run. Be sure to keep abreast of local, state, and federal
decisions that apply to you and your students.
248 Hougen, Smartt, and Hunt

Application Assignments
In-�Class Assignments
1. With a partner, go to the informational web sites for PARCC and Smarter Balanced. Each
partner should choose one assessment and together create a graphic answering the fol-
lowing questions for each assessment:
a. What is PARCC or Smarter Balanced?
b. Why are these new assessments needed?
c. What states are in each consortium? Who decided this?
d. What are the components of the assessment system?
e. What are the performance assessments like?
f. What testing accommodations are allowed for students?
g. What subjects are tested?
h. Are sample tests available to educators? If so, how can teachers obtain them?
i. When will teachers receive the test results? How should teachers use the data to plan
instruction?
2. Share your graphic with another set of partners. Be prepared to discuss the salient points
with the whole class.
3. Compare the most recent literacy scores for Grade 8, 10, or 12 from your state outcome
assessment with the most recent NAEP results. Is there a difference in the percentage of
students who performed well? Why do you suppose there is a difference in performance
on the assessments? Be prepared to discuss your thoughts in class. A helpful web site is
http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/states

Tutoring Assignment
Visit the school your tutee attends. Interview one of the teachers or administrators about the
Common Core State Standards or, if the state has not adopted the CCSS, the standards the state
has adopted. Prepare a paper discussing the responses of the interviewee. Among the questions
you ask, include the following:
1. What standards has your school chosen?
2. What assessment will your school give—PARCC, Smarter Balanced, or something else?
When will the assessments be given?
3. How have the teachers been prepared for these assessments? Have they received profes-
sional development? What kind and how much?
4. How have your students been prepared? Do they all know how to use the computers to
complete the tasks required?
5. What accommodations have been made for students with disabilities? What about stu-
dents who are ELLs?
6. Do you feel your students are prepared for college and careers? If yes, what makes you
feel that way? If no, what skills are they lacking?

Homework Assignments
1. Review the Common Core State Standards that most directly address your content area.
The standards are evident for those of you who teach in the core disciplines; however,
all of you will find standards that apply to your content area. Choose at least two of the
Current Laws, Policies, and Initiatives 249
standards and write one lesson plan that addresses both. Be sure to include ideas about
how you would differentiate instruction for students who struggle.
2. Check to see if ESEA has been reauthorized. If so, read a summary of the new law and be
prepared to discuss how it might affect you in the classroom. If it has not been renewed,
read editorials and other information about the obstacles to reauthorization. Write
a one-�page essay presenting your argument for changes in the law to consider before
reauthorization.
Endnotes
1. Wright’s Law: A Short History of Special Education,
http://www.wrightslaw.com/bks/lawbk/ch3.history.pdf
2. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA;
1990).
3. National Dissemination Center for Children with Dis-
abilities (NICHCY; 2012).
4. Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA; 1974).
5. For more information about Section 504, go to http://
www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/504faq.html
6. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA; 1990).
7. U.S. Government Printing Office (2001).
8. No Child Left Behind Act (2001).
9. Reading Excellence Act, http://www2.ed.gov/pubs/
promisinginitiatives/rea.html
10. No Child Left Behind Act (2001).
11. No Child Left Behind Act (2001).
12. Adequate Yearly Progress, http://www2.ed.gov.nclb/
accountability/ayp/edpicks.jhtml
13. Reading First, http://www2.ed.gov/programs/reading
first/index.html; Early Reading First, http://www2.ed
.gov/programs/earlyreading/index.html
14. Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement
Act (IDEA); 2004, PL 108-Â�446, 20 U.S.C. §§ 1400 et seq.,
http://nichcy.org/wp-content/uploads/docs/IDEA2004
regulations.pdf
15. Q and A: Questions and Answers on Response to Inter-
vention (RTI) and Early Intervening Services (EIS), http://
idea.ed.gov/explore/view/p/,root,dynamic,QaCorner,8
16. What Works Clearinghouse, http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc
17. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Elementary and
Secondary Education (2002, April), http://www.ed.gov/
programs/readingfirst/guidance.doc
18. RTI Action Network: A Program of the National Center
for Learning Disabilities, http://www.rtinetwork.org/
learn/what
19. ESEA Flexibility, http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/guid/
esea-flexibility/index.html
20. ESEA Flexibility, http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/guid/
esea-flexibility/index.html
21. U.S. Department of Education (2010), http://www2
.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/blueprint/publicationtoc.html
22. Recognizing and Rewarding Our Best Teachers, http://
www2.ed.gov/nclb/methods/teachers/incentivefund
.html
23. LEARN Act, https://www.govtrack.us/congress/bills/
113/s758
24. LEARN Act. S. 758, https://www.govtrack.us/congress/
bills/113/s758/text
25. Striving Readers Comprehensive Literacy Program
(SRCL), http://www2.ed.gov/programs/strivingreaders/
index.html
26. SRCL, http://www2.ed.gov/programs/strivingreaders
-literacy/literacyprofiles.html
27. SRCL, http://www2.ed.gov/programs/strivingreaders
-literacy/awards.html
28. Common Core State Standards (CCSS) Initiative, http://
www.corestandards.org
29. Student Achievement Partners, http://www.achieve
thecore.org
30. Common Core State Standards (CCSS) Initiative, http://
www.corestandards.org
31. Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and
Careers (PARCC), http://www.parcconline.org; Smarter
Balanced Assessment Consortium, http://www.smarter
balanced.org
32. PARCC, http://www.parcconline.org
33. PARCC Model Content Frameworks for English Lan-
guage Arts/Literacy (2012, August), http://www.parcc
online.org/sites/parcc/files/PARCCMCFELALiteracy
August2012_FINAL-0.pdf
34. Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium, http://www
.smarterbalanced.org/smarter-balanced-assessments/
computer-adaptive-testing
35. Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium, http://www
.smarterbalanced.org/news/smarter-balanced-releases
-sample-assessment-items-and-performance-tasks
36. Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium, http://www
.smarterbalanced.org/smarter-balanced-assessments/
computer-adaptive-testing
37. Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium, http://www
.smarterbalanced.org/smarter-balanced-assessments
38. “Sample Items and Performance Tasks,” Smarter Bal-
anced Assessment Consortium, http://www.smarter
balanced.org/sample-items-and-performance-tasks
39. “Sample Items and Performance Tasks,” Smarter Bal-
anced Assessment Consortium, http://www.smarter
balanced.org/sample-items-and-performance-tasks
40. National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP),
http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard
41. NAEP: Student Groups, http://nationsreportcard.gov/
reading_math_2013/#/student-groups
42. NAEP Students with and without Disabilities,
http://nationsreportcard.gov/reading_math_2013/#/
gains-by-group
43. National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP),
http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard/states
250 Hougen, Smartt, and Hunt
44. Programme for International Student Assessment
(PISA), http://www.oecd.org/pisa
45. Programme for International Student Assessment
(PISA), http://www.oecd.org/pisa/keyfindings/PISA
-2012-results-US.pdf
References
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990, PL 101-�336,
42 U.S.C. §§ 12101 et seq.
Civil Rights Act of 1964, PL 88-Â�352, 20 U.S.C. §§ 241 et
seq.
Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975, PL 94-�142,
20 U.S.C. §§ 1400 et seq.
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, PL 89-�10,
20 U.S.C. §§ 241 et seq. Retrieved from http://federaleducation
policy.wordpress.com/2011/02/19/1965-elementary-and
-secondary-education-act
Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) of
1974, PL 93-Â�380, 20 U.S.C., §§ 1232g et seq. Retrieved from
www.federal-register.gov/articles/2011/04/08/2011–8205/
family-educational-rights-and-privacy
Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA) of 1990,
PL 101-Â�476, 20 U.S.C. §§ 1400 et seq. http://nichcy.org/wp
-content/uploads/docs/IDEA2004regulations.pdf
National Center for Learning Disabilities. New York, NY.
Retrieved from http://www.ncld.org
National Dissemination Center for Children with Disabili-
ties (NICHCY). (2012). Categories of Disability under IDEA.
Retrieved from http://nichcy.org/disability/categories
National Governor’s Association for Best Practices & Council
of Chief State School Officers. (2010). Common Core State
Standards. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://
www.corestandards.org
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, PL 107-�110, 115 Stat.
1425, 20 U.S.C. §§ 6301 et seq. Retrieved from http://www2
.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/107-110.pdf
Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and
Careers. (PARCC). Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://
www.parcconline.org
Organisation for Economic Co-�operation and Develop-
ment (OECD). (2013). PISA 2012 results. Paris, France:
46. See the presentation by Arne Duncan, secretary of edu-
cation, on PISA Day, December 3, 2013, at http://public
.newmediamill.com/pisa/webcast.html
Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA).
Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/pisa
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, PL 93-Â�112, 29 U.S.C. §§ 701 et seq.
Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium. Olympia, WA.
Retrieved from http://www.smarterbalanced.org
U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education Sci-
ences. (2014). What Works Clearing House. Retrieved from
http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc/default.aspx
U.S. Department of Education, Institute of Education
Sciences, National Center for Education Statistics, &
National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP).
(1990–Â�2013). Mathematics and reading assessments. Retrieved
from http://nationsreportcard.gov/reading_math_2013/#/
student-groups
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Elementary and Sec-
ondary Education. (April 2002). Guidance for the Reading
First program. Washington, DC: Author. Section B-�2.
U.S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evalua-
tion and Policy Development. (2010). ESEA blueprint for
reform. Washington, DC: Author.
U.S. Department of Education, National Assessment of Edu-
cation Progress (NAEP). (2014). National Center for Educa-
tion Statistics. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from
http://nces.ed.gov/nationsreportcard
U.S. Department of Education Reading Excellence Act.
(1998). 1999 Omnibus Appropriations Bill (H.R. 4328).
U.S. Government Printing Office. (2001). A blueprint for
new beginnings, A responsible budget for America’s priorities.
Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from http://georgew
bushwhitehouse.archives.gov/news/usbudget/blueprint/
budtoc.html
Wright, P., & Wright, P. (2006). A short history of special
education. In Wrightslaw: Special education law. Hartfield,
VA: Harbor House Law Press.
 19
Ten Tips for Becoming an Effective Teacher
Martha C. Hougen

The conclusion to this text is a personal message from me, the editor, to you, sharing some
tips I learned after many years teaching students and teachers. I provide 10 tips for becoming
an effective teacher with the hope that these tips will accelerate your becoming an effective,
efficacious teacher who enjoys a fulfilling and long career in education.
A veteran teacher defined the true test of an effective teacher: When you run into one of
your former students from years ago and you ask, “What do you remember learning in my
class?” and he or she still remembers two or three critical concepts. It’s even better if the student
adds, “You were the hardest teacher I ever had, and you were my favorite.”
I am hopeful that you learned many critical concepts while studying this text and tutoring
your student. Of course, you have much more to learn about teaching literacy, and I trust you
will endeavor to continue to improve your knowledge and expertise. There are, however, a few
crucial concepts I hope you will remember for the duration of your teaching career that will
accelerate your becoming an effective teacher.

Ten Tips to Becoming an Effective Teacher

1. Continually examine your instructional practices: If your students are not achieving as you
had hoped, consider the features of effective instruction. Do you need to be more explicit?
Teach more systematically and directly? Provide more time for practice? Be more thor-
ough in your assessments so that you are building upon what students know and need
to know? Provide more specific feedback? What else can you do to teach your students
more effectively? A reflective teacher is continuously improving.
2. Communicate a sense of urgency: Now more than ever before, all citizens need to be able to
read and write at high levels. Most students are capable of achieving college and career
readiness, and you can prepare your students for a successful life in which they have oppor-
tunities for a satisfying career and to contribute to our society. Your excellent instruction,
timely support, and high expectations motivate students to succeed. You owe it to your
students to be prepared, supportive, knowledgeable, and sensitive to their needs so that
they are given the tools to be productive. Do not waste a moment of their time with unproduc-
tive, purposeless activities. We must improve the achievement of our students and there isn’t
much time to do everything that must be done. It is particularly urgent to ensure ninth-
grade students do well in their classes. Failing one course reduces the probability that
they will graduate to 60% and failing two classes to 44%. Missing just 10 days of school
a year (which includes time spent in school suspension or cutting classes) decreases the
likelihood that they will graduate.1 Therefore, it is urgent that we teach our students well,

251
252 Hougen

monitor their progress closely, and provide sup-

port as soon as they need it so that each student
masters the required rigorous content.
3. Communicate high expectations while recognizing
the strengths and support needed by each student:
How you treat the students in your class is how
they will treat each other. When you respect
each student, differentiate instruction for them
as needed, and communicate your high expec-
tations, students will realize they are all wor-
thy. Your actions, even more than your words,
model how students are to treat each other.
High expectations must be attainable. When
students have a perceived probability of success,
they are motivated to sustain their efforts. They
develop an academic mind-�set and a belief that
they can do the work and if they work hard their
ability will improve. It is up to you to teach in a
way that allows them to be confident that they
can learn the material—Â�that they perceive they
can be successful.
4. Continue to read research, communicate with experts, and increase your knowledge to improve
your instruction: The more you know, the more you practice, the more you critique your
own teaching and improve, the more your students will benefit. Read, respect, and
implement current research and join professional organizations that will assist you in
increasing your expertise.
5. Recognize the positive intent of your students: Most of the time, people act with a positive
intent. That means that parents, students, and colleagues generally want to do good
things, though sometimes it may not appear so to you. If you discover the positive intent
of another person, your understanding of that person will increase. For example, when a
student refuses to read aloud when you ask him to, what could possibly be the student’s
positive intent? It could be he can’t read and wants to avoid embarrassment. Here’s
another example. A student copies from someone’s work. What could be her positive
intent? She may be motivated to perform well, which is a positive trait, and she is trying
to be resourceful, though in an inappropriate way. In both these cases, you can address
their positive intent by understanding their motivation and supporting them so they can
achieve their intent in appropriate rather than unacceptable ways.
6. Be a caring, creative, and courageous teacher: Effective teachers have the 3 Cs and are not
afraid to show it!
Caring You have heard the phrase “Students don’t care how much you know until
they know how much you care.” Students learn more from teachers when teachers show
they care and when students care about their teachers. Just a moment of focused time or
a quick personal comment directed at a student communicates that you care about your
students as individuals. Create a few moments to show your students how much you
care about them every day. Learning is an emotional act, and creating a comfortable,
caring milieu will enable your students to feel safe and encouraged. And since you have
structured the learning so that they can learn, they will learn.
Creative Teaching requires creativity. Every year you will have students who perplex
you. Nothing you have tried in the past works. It is time to think outside the box and
determine what will unlock learning for each student. Be creative and you will find that
key to unlock their learning. Sometimes it is something you did without even being aware
Ten Tips for Becoming an Effective Teacher 253

of it. Once a colleague teaching chemistry put a formula students had trouble remember-
ing in a gray box on a worksheet to make the formatting more attractive. The teacher also
made other adaptions that enabled the students to learn how to solve complex problems.
However, when asked, most students said what they remembered most was the gray box
formula!2
Courageous Effective teachers are courageous. They have the courage to advocate for
their students—Â�to do what is best even if it is not the norm of the school. Effective teach-
ers have the courage to share with parents and students information about the students’
progress or lack thereof. They have the courage to try new things and, more important, the
courage to cease ineffective practices. Do not develop the Semmelweis Reflex—Â�rejecting
new approaches just because they are new. Dr. Semmelweis, a 19th-�century Hungar-
ian physician, wanted doctors to wash their hands between surgeries and handling sick
patients. The doctors refused and rejected Dr. Semmelweis. At the time, no amount of evi-
dence could convince doctors that they could transmit disease (and admit that they had
inadvertently contaminated and killed patients). Have the courage to carefully evaluate
new approaches and supporting research, and then try the approaches that have a rea-
sonable evidence base, even if it is something different from what you have been doing.
7. Be explicit with your students about why they must learn what you are teaching: There is a radio
station that, if played in your classroom, will motivate your students to learn. The station
is WII-�FM. Have you heard of it?
Actually, WII-Â�FM is an acronym for a popular saying: What’s in it for me? This is what
your students are thinking. What’s in it for them to read closely and critically, especially
when it is so difficult for some? What’s in it for students to learn to write when they would
rather play video games? If you can’t convince students that what you want them to learn
is relevant to their lives, you shouldn’t be teaching it.
8. Consider doing the opposite of what you feel like doing: Remember this when you are pre-
sented with a noisy, disrespectful class and you feel like screaming. Rather, whisper,
and the class will soon become quiet as they strain to hear what you are saying. When
a student misbehaves and you feel frustrated, ask the student what seems to be frus-
trating him. When a student won’t stop talking and you are tired of her ramblings and
you want to put a muzzle on her, tell her you will arrange a special time for her to tell
you her tales later, and be sure to give her that promised time. When parents criticize
your decisions, rather than get defensive, ask them to advise you on how to handle their
child. You are human; you get tired and frustrated and impatient. That’s understand-
able, but you have to control those reactions and maintain your professional demeanor,
no matter what.
9. Engage your students in the community: Student behavior improves and learning increases
when students feel they are contributing and are connected. This is one reason teachers
assign tasks or roles to students. Being selected to clean the blackboard used to be a huge
honor. These days, it may be an honor to turn the computers on and off, to be the web-
master, or to be the guide for a new student. Students who contribute to the well-�being
of their class feel connected and empowered.
Of course, engaging your students in their learning is most important. When they
are active, thinking, and responding, they are engaged. Provide multiple opportunities
for your students to practice their new learning, to talk with others, and to be actively
engaged in the process. Students learn best when they are fully engaged.
10. Model: Model what you want your students to learn, how they should act, and how
they should treat others. For example, share your enthusiasm for reading and learning,
and your students will be enthusiastic about reading, too. Treat all students respect-
fully, and your students will treat each other with respect. Whether you are cognizant
of it or not, your students are always watching you, and you are always providing a
254 Hougen

model for them. So be thoughtful about what you do and say, as your students will do
what you do.
You are about to enter a wonderful, challenging career, one that will fulfill you in a way
no other career can do. Each time you receive a letter from a student thanking you for teaching
them to read, each time a student tracks you down to introduce you to his or her spouse and
child, telling you it is because of you that he or she got to this happy point in life, your satisfac-
tion in your profession will increase. You will make a significant difference in the lives of many
because you are becoming an effective teacher.

Endnotes
1. Allensworth (2013, July). 2. King-�Sears (2013, November).

References
Allensworth, E. (2013, July). Presentation at the SIM Pro- King-�Sears, P. (2013, November). Presentation at the Council
fessional Development Conference, University of Kansas for Learning Disabilities Conference, Austin, TX.
Center for Research on Learning, Lawrence, KS.
 A
Formative Assessment Strategies

Quick write Student writes for 2–3 minutes about what he or she learned from a lecture or explana-
tion/reading/lesson. Could be an open-�ended question from teacher.
12-�word summary In 12 words or less, students summarize important aspects of a particular chunk of
instruction or reading.
3-�2-�1 Students jot down three ideas, concepts, or issues presented.
Students jot down two examples or uses of idea or concept.
Students write down one unresolved question or a possible confusion.
Muddiest point Students are asked to write down the muddiest point in the lesson (up to that point,
what was unclear).
Quick class check Give students paper plates, index cards, or large sheets of paper when they enter.
When asking a question, all students write the answer and, at your signal, all students
hold up the plate (or whatever) so that you can see who/how many got the answer.
Discussion to elaborate can follow.
Class vote Present several possible answers or solutions to a question or problem and have stu-
dents vote on what they think is best.
Idea wave Each student lists three to five ideas about the assigned topic. One volunteer begins
the “idea wave” by sharing his or her idea. The student to the right of the volunteer
shares one idea, the next student to rights shares one idea, and so forth. The teacher
directs the idea wave until several different ideas have been shared. At the end of the
formal idea wave, a few volunteers who were not included may contribute.
Tickets to enter and/or exit The teacher asks students a specific question about the lesson. Students then respond
on the ticket and gives to the teacher, either on their way out or on their way in the
next day. The teacher can then evaluate the need to reteach or questions that need
to be answered.
Four corners The teacher posts questions, concepts, or vocabulary words in each of the corners of
the room. Each student is assigned a corner. Once in the corner, the students dis-
cuss the focus of the lesson in relation to the question, concept, or words. Students
may report out or move to another corner and repeat. After students have moved, as
a writing assignment, they should be encouraged to reflect on changes in opinion or
what they have learned.
Concept mapping Explain/model a concept map. After lecture, explanation, or reading, have students fill
in concept map (partner or individually). Report out.
Flash cards After 10 minutes into a lecture or concept presentation, have students create a flash
card that contains the key concept or idea. Toward the end of the class, have stu-
dents work in pairs to exchange ideas and review the material.
Learning cell Students develop questions and answers on their own. Working in pairs, the first stu-
dent asks a question and the partner answers and vice versa. Each student can cor-
rect the other until a satisfactory answer is reached. (This is a good way to encourage
students to go back to the text.)
1-�minute paper The teacher decides what the focus of the paper should be. The teacher should ask the
students, “What was the most important thing you learned? What important question
remains unanswered?” Set aside 5–Â�10 minutes of next class to discuss the results.
This may also be used in the middle of a class.
Signal cards/thumbs Create cards to check for understanding. Green means “I’ve got it,” yellow means “I’m
up-Â�thumbs down not sure, Maybe,” and blue means “I’m lost. I have questions.”
Transfer and apply Students list what they have learned and how they might apply it to their real lives. Stu-
dents list interesting ideas, strategies, or concepts learned in class or chunk of class.
They then write some possible way to apply this learning in their lives, another class,
or in their community.

255
256 Formative Assessment Strategies

Circular check Students in groups are given a problem with a definite answer (good for math and
science). First student completes first step without contribution from others in
group and passes it to the next student. Second student corrects any mistakes
and completes next step, again without input from the group. Problem gets passed
to next student and the process continues until the group has the correct answer.
KWL chart Students complete a chart at the beginning of a unit of study to determine what they
already know about the topic (K), and what (W) they would like to learn about the
topic. At the end of the unit, the students revisit their charts and work on the “what I
learned” column (L).
Gallery walk Students, in groups, work together to come up with a list of ideas, answers, explanations,
and so forth, on a topic assigned by the teacher. Students write their ideas on a piece
of poster paper. These posters are then posted around the class and the students all
circulate and view one another’s posters. For example, students read “Goldilocks and
the Three Bears.” They then brainstorm questions using Costa’s levels of questioning.
The groups must come up with one level-�1 question, one level-�2 question, and one
level-�3 question. The class then asks, Are the questions the level they claim to be? Are
they good? Why? Why not? This gives students the chance to apply their knowledge
while also providing students an opportunity to demonstrate their understanding of the
concepts learned.
Think, pair, share This strategy encourages students to think first and then discuss their opinions with a
small group of people. In groups, students consider a question or issue. They begin
by reflecting on their opinions and ideas on the topic and recording them on a tem-
plate, pairing up with a student next to them to discuss their ideas and opinions. The
next stage of the process requires the team to come together and share their ideas
and collate a group response. This should then be fed back to the class as a whole.
Round the clock The students are each given a piece of paper with a clock on it. Each student will
learning partners form four partnerships with students in the class. They will be 3:00, 6:00, 9:00, and
12:00. When the teacher says, “Meet with your 3:00 partner,” the two students will
pair up and discuss the topic.
Numbered tables The students are put at tables of three or four. Each student is given a number from
1 to 4. The students are then given a discussion topic to discuss in their group. The
teacher then calls a number—for instance, 2. All students with the number 2 assigned
to them stand up and discuss what their group talked about (or give the answer their
group came up with). Basically, all students have the opportunity to be the expert.
Cross the line As a review the teacher questions the students on information covered. Students
decide which side of the line to go to based on their answer to the question. For
example, “Pluto is no longer a planet, true or false.” Students believing this to be true
go to the true side; students believing this to be false go to the false side. Teacher
then calls on one from each side to state their position.
Piece it together To check for understanding before a quiz or test, the teacher places questions and
answers on separate flash cards. The students must match the question and answer.
When the teacher then asks the question, both partners (question and answer) stand
up and present their information.
Pyramid Based on the $10,000.00 Pyramid Game. One student faces the board and sees what
the teacher has put there. The other student attempts to get his or her partner to
come up with the correct answer.
Whiteboard quiz Make up inexpensive “whiteboards” for you students. How? Get a page protector and
place a piece of white card stock inside of it. In addition, you will need tissues to
wipe off the “boards” and expo markers for the students to use. Do a quick check
for understanding at the end or beginning of class. Ask questions and have students
quickly write the answer on their whiteboards. First one up gets extra credit points.
Works great for groups too.
Deck of cards The teacher passes out all 52 cards in the deck. (Some students will receive more than
one card.) The teacher then picks a card from another deck and asks a question.
Whoever has the matching card must answer the question.
Index card summaries/questions Periodically, distribute index cards and ask students to write on both sides, with these
instructions: (Side 1) Based on our study of (unit topic), list a big idea that you under-
stand and word it as a summary statement. (Side 2) Identify something about (unit
topic) that you do not yet fully understand and word it as a statement or question.
Formative Assessment Strategies 257

Hand signals Ask students to display a designated hand signal to indicate their understanding of a
specific concept, principal, or process: I understand ______ and can explain it (e.g.,
thumbs up). I do not yet understand ______ (e.g., thumbs down). I’m not completely
sure about ______ (e.g., wave hand).
1-�minute essay A 1-�minute essay question (or 1-�minute question) is a focused question with a specific
goal that can, in fact, be answered within a minute or two.
Analogy prompt Periodically, present students with an analogy prompt: (A designated concept, princi-
ple, or process) is like ______ because ______.
Web or concept map Any of several forms of graphical organizers that allow learners to perceive relationships
between concepts through diagramming key words representing those concepts.
Misconception check Present students with common or predictable misconceptions about a designated
concept, principle, or process. Ask them whether they agree or disagree and explain
why. The misconception check can also be presented in the form of a multiple-�
choice or true-�false quiz.
Student conference This is one-�to-�one conversation with students to check their level of understanding.
3-�minute pause The 3-�minute pause provides a chance for students to stop, reflect on the concepts
and ideas that have just been introduced, make connections to prior knowledge or
experience, and seek clarification.
• I changed my attitude about ______.
• I became more aware of ______.
• I was surprised about ______.
• I felt ______.
• I related to ______.
• I empathized with ______.
Observation Walk around the classroom and observe students as they work to check for learning.
Strategies include the following:
• Anecdotal records
• Conferences
• Checklists
Self-�assessment A process in which students collect information about their own learning, analyze what
it reveals about their progress toward the intended learning goals, and plan the next
steps in their learning.
Give one/get one Students are given papers and asked to list three to five ideas about the learning. Students
draw a line after their last idea to separate their ideas from classmates’ lists. Students
get up and interact with one classmate at a time. Students are instructed to exchange
papers, read their partners’ lists, and then ask questions about new or confusing ideas.
Learning journal/portfolio check Check the progress of a student’s portfolio. A portfolio is a purposeful collection of
significant work, carefully selected, dated, and presented to tell the story of a stu-
dent’s achievement or growth in well-Â�defined areas of performance, such as reading,
writing, math, and so forth. A portfolio usually includes personal reflections where
the student explains why each piece was chosen and what it shows about his or her
growing skills and abilities.
Quiz Quizzes assess students for factual information, concepts, and discrete skill. There is
usually a single best answer. Some quiz examples are the following:
• Multiple choice
• True/false
• Short answer
• Paper and pencil
• Matching
• Extended response
Journal entry Students record in a journal their understanding of the topic, concept, or lesson taught.
The teacher reviews the entry to see if the student has gained an understanding of
the topic, lesson, or concept that was taught.
Choral response In response to a cue, all students respond verbally at the same time. The response can
be either to answer a question or to repeat something the teacher has said.
258 Formative Assessment Strategies
A-�B-�C summaries
Debriefing/reflection
Idea spinner
Inside-�outside circle
Numbered heads together
One-�sentence summary
One-�word summary
Crystal ball
Riddle me this
Turn to your partner
Oral questioning
Homework, quizzes, and tests
Each student in the class is assigned a different letter of the alphabet, and they must
select a word starting with that letter that is related to the topic being studied.
A form of reflection immediately following an activity. Students will share either individu-
ally or in group based on teacher/student questions.
The teacher creates a spinner marked into four quadrants labeled “Predict,” “Explain,”
“Summarize,” and “Evaluate.” After new material is presented, the teacher spins the
spinner and asks students to answer a question based on the location of the spinner.
For example, if the spinner lands in the “Summarize” quadrant, the teacher might
say, “List the key concepts just presented.”
Inside and outside circles of students face each other. Within each pair of facing
students, students quiz each other with questions they have written. Outside circle
moves to create new pairs. Repeat.
Each student is assigned a number. Members of a group work together to agree on
an answer. The teacher randomly selects one number. Student with that number
answers for the group.
Students are asked to write a summary sentence that answers the who, what, where,
when, why, and how questions about the topic.
Select (or invent) one word that best summarizes a topic.
Students are given content clues to determine through inference what the future is for
the lesson topic.
Students write questions individually using a textbook/expository reading assignment.
Then, in small groups, students try to answer one another’s questions.
Teacher gives direction to students. Students formulate individual responses and then
turn to a partner to share their answers. Teacher calls on several random pairs to
share their answers with the class.
• How is ______ similar to/different from ______?
• What are the characteristics/parts of ______?
• In what other ways might we show/illustrate ______?
• What is the big idea, key concept, or moral in ______?
• How does ______ relate to ______?
• What ideas/details can you add to ______?
• Give an example of ______?
• What is wrong with ______?
• What might you infer from ______?
• What conclusions might be drawn from ______?
• What question are we trying to answer? What problem are we trying to solve?
• What are you assuming about ______?
• What might happen if ______?
• What criteria would you use to judge/evaluate ______?
• What evidence supports ______?
• How might we prove/confirm ______?
• How might this be viewed from the perspective of ______?
• What alternatives should be considered?
• What approach/strategy could you use to ______?
1. The easiest form of information to collect or analyze about your student’s learning is
their regular work in the form of homework, quizzes, and tests.
2. This information will be richer if you include questions that require students to
explain their thinking. It is especially helpful to ask questions that require students
to apply their thinking to a new situation that you have not discussed in class. This
requires flexible thinking on their part and should reveal how they are thinking
better than questions that allow them to say back what they have memorized.
3. Photocopy examples that helped you learn about your students in ways that helped
you adjust your teaching.
Formative Assessment Strategies 259
Exit tickets variation
Concept map
Problem-�solving observation
Survey students
1. Give students “tickets”—Â�small pieces of paper designed to look like tickets but with
space for writing.
2. Ask students two questions. One should require a factual answer about the big idea
of the day’s lesson but in their own words. A second question should require more
explanation of a concept.
3. Give students 5 minutes at the end of class to write their answers. Their names do
not go on these exit tickets.
4. They must give you an exit ticket to leave class for the day.
5. Analyze the tickets to learn how many students got the big idea and how they
understood it or misunderstood it. Photocopy four to six on a single sheet of paper
for your portfolio. Select ones that taught you something about your students that
you didn’t know before reading the exit tickets.
1. Provide small groups of students with a list of about 15 related words that might fit
well in an outline.
2. Give them small sticky notes to write the words on.
3. Ask them to create a concept map by moving the sticky notes around on a piece of
paper until they have them in the right place.
4. Model for them on the board how to draw connections between words, and
emphasize that the connections should be labeled with words describing the
nature of the relation (leads to, is an example of, sometimes goes with, can’t hap-
pen without).
5. Walk around while students are creating their concept maps and ask questions
about why they are placing words where they do. Keep in mind that the purpose of
this exercise at this point is to find out what they are thinking, not for them to get
the right answer. Do not prompt them with correct answers.
6. Collect the papers and analyze them to find out what students know, do not know,
and what their misconceptions are. Do not write on the concept maps, though you
may want to photocopy one or two for your portfolio. If you do this, select interesting
examples that helped you adapt your teaching.
7. Create your own concept map—Â�perhaps on overhead transparency.
8. The next day, hand back the concept maps and show your concept map to the
class. Emphasize that there is more than one way to organize a group of related
terms. Ask groups of students to compare theirs to yours and explain how theirs
are different and whether and in what ways they think they should change
theirs.
1. Give the class a complex problem to solve. Ask them to work in pairs.
2. Good problems will have more than one part and will require students to explain
their thinking to each other. It may be helpful to use problems that require
students to show their thinking in more than one way. Examples of showing their
thinking in more than one way might include graphing, diagramming, explaining
how someone with a different perspective might answer the question, and generat-
ing examples.
3. Join one of the groups while they work. Have in mind that you are observing and
focus in a way that you can write down later what you observed. You may find it
helpful to jot down two or three words during this observation to prompt your recall
later.
4. Prompt students to explain their thinking to each other. Ask them to say aloud what
they are thinking while they are solving the problem. Prompt them with questions
such as “Why?” “How are you deciding to do that?” or “What were you thinking
about when you did that?”
5. As soon as you are able, jot down notes about what you observed—Â�especially
including notes about student’s problem-Â�solving process and what they understand
about the process.
Although this is not formative assessment of their learning, you can learn a great deal
by surveying students.
260 Formative Assessment Strategies

Four As text protocol 1. The group reads the text silently, highlighting it and writing notes in the margin on
sticky notes in answer to the following four questions (you can also add your own
As):
• What assumptions does the author of the text hold?
• What do you agree with in the text?
• What do you want to argue with in the text?
• What parts of the text do you want to aspire to?
2. In a round, have each person identify one assumption in the text, citing the text
(with page numbers, if appropriate) as evidence.
3. Either continue in rounds or facilitate a conversation in which the group talks about
the text in light of each of the remaining As, taking them one at a time—Â�what do
people want to argue with, agree with, and aspire to in the text? Try to move seam-
lessly from one A to the next, giving each A enough time for full exploration.
4. End the session with an open discussion framed around a question such as “What
does this mean for our work with students?”
5. Debrief the text experience.
I have the question. Who has the 1. One set of cards contains questions related to the unit of study. The second set
answer? contains the answers to the questions.
2. Distribute the answer cards to the students and either you or a student will read
the question cards to the class. All students check their answer cards to see if they
have the correct answer.
Another variation is to make this into a chain activity:
1. The student chosen to begin the chain will read the given card aloud and then wait
for the next participant to read the only card that would correctly follow the progres-
sion. Play continues until all the cards are read and the initial student is ready to
read his or her card for the second time.
2. Zigzag around the room.
Signal cards Provide students with cards to signal understanding of concepts or directions or a
sense if they are lost. Send the message that it is all right not to understand every-
thing the first time around.
Cards:
• Got it!
• Confused!
• Can you repeat?
• I am learning something new!
Content frames Have the topics, themes, and so forth in a chart and have students fill in the import-
ant aspects of each topic. This is a quick way to determine if they understand main
instruction.
Framed paragraphs Start sentences for students to finish with the “meat” of the topic to determine if they
understood.
Postreading mapping Have students in groups or individually map or draw the important topics discussed.
Easy to tell at a glance if they caught the right information.
Sentence synthesis Use several new vocabulary words in one sentence to determine understanding of
words. Share orally or on overhead to discuss usage.
3-�2-�1 cards Example:
• Three things I learned about ______.
• Two questions I still have about ______ are ______.
• One way I see ______.
Graffiti walls The teacher places a large sheet of paper on a smooth surface and invites the students
to write or draw what they know about the topic. Students “sign” their work or state-
ments, allowing the teacher to see, at a glance, misconceptions, naïve conceptions,
prior knowledge, and new learning targets.
Capsule vocabulary Put students in groups and have them use and discuss the new words and then put
them in a paragraph to determine if they understand the uses.
Formative Assessment Strategies 261
Student self-�assessment
Peer assessment
Minute paper (closure)
RSQC2
Transfer and apply
Problem-�solving observations
Characteristic features
Windshield check
One-�sentence summary
Application cards
Paraphrasing
Memory matrix
Happy/sad
Most and least clear
1. The three stages most commonly followed by teachers when asking students to self-�
assess their work are the following:
• Stage 1: Students identify their own successes.
• Stage 2: Students identify a place for improvement.
• Stage 3: Students identify their successes and make an “on the spot” improvement.
2. Have students self-�assess using a few guiding sentence fragments, such as the
following:
• I am pleased with my work so far, because ______.
• Two improvements I’ve made are ______.
• Next time I revise my work, I need to focus on ______.
• I would grade myself a 1, 2, 3, 4, or 5 because I ______.
• In order to improve, I need to ______.
1. Have student’s peer assess using a few guiding sentence fragments, such as the
following:
• You did these really well: _____.
• You could have ______.
• Next time, you need to focus on ______.
2. When using peer assessment, focus on only one aspect of the assignment at a time.
For example, the peer may look for multiple pieces of evidence or only grammatical
errors.
Give students an open-Â�ended question and 3–Â�5 minutes to write an answer. For exam-
ple, What is the most important thing you learned today?
In 2 minutes, students recall and list in rank order the most important ideas from a
previous day’s class; in 2 more minutes, they summarize those points in a single
sentence, then write one major question they want answered, and then identify a
thread or theme to connect this material to the course’s major goal. Add an additional
comment, if desired.
Students write down concepts learned from the class in one column; in another column,
they provide an application of each concept.
Give students a multistep problem to solve in pairs. Try to pick problems that can be
solved in multiple ways or ones that require students to explain their thought process.
Students summarize in matrix form those traits that help define a topic and differentiate
it from others; useful for determining whether students separate items or ideas that
are easily confused.
For example,
• CLEAR = I get it!
• BUGS = I get it for the most part, but some things are still unclear.
• MUD = I still don’t get it!
Students summarize knowledge of a topic by constructing a single sentence that
answers the questions.
After introducing an important theory, principle, or procedure, ask students to write
down at least one real-�world application for what they have just learned.
Students summarize in well-chosen (their own) words a key idea presented during the
class period or the one just past.
Students fill in cells of a two-�dimensional diagram for which the instructor has provided
labels.
Students draw and color a happy face on the front of the circle, cut it out, and color the
back of the circle as a sad face. Students will place this circle on the corner of their
desk and use it as an indicator for understanding. Happy side means, “I understand
the lesson” or “I understand what I am supposed to be doing.” Sad side means con-
fusion, misunderstanding, or “I am stuck.”
Students reflect on what is most and least clear in the materials and write their com-
ments in the appropriate boxes. Students describe concepts or skills they do and do
not understand/need more practice with.
262 Formative Assessment Strategies

Huh? Students read a passage and identify aspects of the reading that they fell are still
unclear:
• I just read ______.
• Here are three things I didn’t understand completely.
• The part I didn’t understand was ______.
Under the microscope Students will pretend they are placing their work under a microscope. Have them dis-
cuss what a microscope does (enlarge images, make details visible, help us describe
things).
Role-�play Role-�play a situation using a concept to be mastered.
Runway model Students act out/model a learned concept or skill.
Popcorn Students ask questions and quickly “pop” out answers across the room, one stu-
dent after another. Answers can be captured by several students recording others’
responses.
 B
Helpful Web Sites

Assessment Resources
(Universal Screening and Progress Monitoring)
Comprehensive Test of Phonological Processing (CTOPP), http://www.proedinc.com: Designed to identify students
who need help in developing phonological awareness; ages 5–24
Curriculum-Â�Based Measurement in Reading—Â�(CBM-Â�R), http://www.rti4success.org: Descriptions and documentation
of adequacy of curriculum-�based reading measures
DIBELS, http://www.dibels.org: A formative assessment of literacy skills Grades pre-K through 9
Irregular Word Test, http://www.scoe.org/depts./ell/5thacademicsuccess/irregularwords 10_06.pdf
OSEP National Center on Response to Intervention, http://www.rti4success.org: Resources for essential components
of response to intervention (RTI): screening, progress monitoring, multilevel prevention system, and data-�based
decision making
OSEP National Center on Student Progress Monitoring, http://www.studentprogress.org: Progress monitoring tools,
web resource library with PowerPoint presentations, and links to additional resources
Reading Fluency Benchmark Assessor (RFBA), http://www.readnaturally.com: Includes benchmark passages, software
guide, and software to assist with record keeping; Grades 1–Â�8
San Diego Quick Assessment, http://www.homeschooling.gomilpitas.com/articles/060899.htm: Quick word list read-
ing assessment providing insight into independent, instructional, and frustration levels of student
Test of Reading Comprehension–Â�Fourth Edition (TORC-Â�4), http://www.proedinc.com: Tests silent reading comprehen-
sion; ages 7 years through 17 years, 11 months
TOSWRF (Test of Silent Word Reading Fluency), http://www.proedinc.com: Measures students’ ability to recognize
printed words accurately and efstciently; ages 6 years, 6 months, through 17 years, 11 months
Test of Word Reading Efstciency2, http://www.proedinc.com: Standardized test composed of subtests for sight
word reading efstciency (reading real words) and phonemic decoding efstciency (reading pseudo words);
6–24 years
WIST (Word Identistcation and Spelling Test), http://www.proedinc.com/customer/ProductView.aspx?ID=2031
&sSearchWord=Barbara+A.+: Wilson Measures word identistcation, spelling, and sound-�symbol knowledge; ages
7 years through 18 years
Word Reading Test, ni﬇.gov/readingprostles/QARI_combined.pdf: Word reading test for Grades 4 and above

Fluency Programs
Great Leaps, http://www.greatleaps.com
Quick Reads, http://www.pearsonschool.com
Read Naturally, http://www.readnaturally.com

Fluency Assessments
AIMSweb, http://www.aimsweb.com: (Pearson Education, Inc.)
Content Area Reading Indicators (CARI), https://dibels.org/research.html: (DIBELS for Grades 7–Â�9. Available in
2014–Â�2015)
Curriculum-Â�Based Measurement in Reading—Â�(CBM-Â�R), http://www.rti4success.org/screening

263
264 Helpful Web Sites

DIBELS Next http://www.dibels.org (seventh edition; Dynamic Indictors of Basic Early Literacy Skills)
Reading Fluency Benchmark Assessor (RFBA), http://www.readnaturally.com/products/rfba.htm
Reading Fluency Progress Monitor (RFPM), http://www.readnaturally.com/products/rfpm.htm

Vocabulary or Morphology Instruction

Colorín Colorado, http://www.colorincolorado.org: Ideas for teaching English language learners (ELLs)
Free Rice, http://www.freerice.com: Players earn virtual rice to feed the hungry for every vocabulary question answered
correctly; available in dozens of levels to suit every grade
More Words, http://www.morewords.com/examples: Provides a list of words that share the same spelling pattern to
stnd morphologically related words
Memidex, http://www.memidex.com: Multipurpose reference tool: dictionary, thesaurus, pronunciation by dialect,
etymology, and so forth
Online Etymology Dictionary, http://etymonline.com: Provides the roots and afstxes that make up a word and gives
word origins
PrestxSufstx.com, http://www.prestxsufstx.com: Lists common prestxes and sufstxes with meanings and origin
Spanish Cognates Dictionary, http://www.latinamericalinks.com/spanish_cognates.htm: Many words in Spanish
resemble words in English (Spanish cognates) and if studied will provide the Spanish student a quick source of
building a strong Spanish/English vocabulary
Visual Thesaurus, http://www.visualthesaurus.com: Graphic word webs, plus many other tools and teaching tips
VocabAhead, http://www.vocabahead.com/Default.aspx: Brief videos teaching academic words
Vocabulogic, http://vocablog-plc.blogspot.com: Created for teachers, published by Susan Ebbers with numerous
expert guest authors

English Language Learners

Colorín Colorado, http://www.colorincolorado.org: Ideas for teaching English language learners (ELLs); site stlled with
useful information, strategies, activities, and resources for all teachers of ELLs, whether an English as second
language (ESL) teacher or a content area teacher with one or two English learners in your class
Dave’s ESL Café, http://www.eslcafe.com.: This portal provides English as a second language (ESL) resources for
teachers, students, and the general public; also includes a job board, lesson ideas, and forums
English Language Development Standards, http://www.wida.us/standards/eld.aspx: These standards, developed by
World-�Class Instructional Design and Assessment, outline the progression of English language development and
exemplify how to teach academic language within the context of content area instruction
Everything ESL, http://www.everythingesl.net: Contains lesson plans, teaching tips, and resources to help teachers
of ELLs
Grammar Girl, http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com: Weekly podcast with tips and grammar exercises to help teach-
ers and students learn and remember the rules of punctuation, word choice, and more

Policy and Standards

The Common Core State Standards, http://www.corestandards.org: The Common Core State Standards provide a
consistent, clear understanding of what students are expected to learn so teachers and parents know what they
need to do to help them
The Elementary and Secondary Education Act, http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/esea02/index.html: Provides law
in its entirety
The Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act, http://idea.ed.gov: Provides complete law; also known as
IDEA, http://nichcy.org/disability/categories
Helpful Web Sites 265

The International Dyslexia Association, Knowledge and Practice Standards for Teachers of Reading, http://www
.interdys.org/Standards.htm: Serves as a guide to endorsing programs that prepare teachers in reading and/or
programs that specialize in preparing teachers to work with students who have difstculties or disabilities
International Reading Association Standards for Reading Professionals, http:www.reading.org/Libraries/Reports_and
_Standards/bk889.s﬇b.ashx: International Reading Association (IRA) document designed to ensure that all stu-
dents are knowledgeable and prostcient users of language so they may achieve school and life success
The Texas College and Career Readiness Standards, http://www.thecb.state.tx.us/collegereadiness/crs.pdf: These
standards specify what students must know and be able to do to succeed in entry-�level courses at postsecondary
institutions in Texas

Reading/Literacy General
Anita Archer Explicit Instruction, http://explicitinstruction.org: Literacy expert provides videos of instruction that is
explicit, systematic, direct, engaging, and success oriented and that promotes achievement for all students
Lexile Levels, http://www.lexile.com: Provides the Lexile levels for a wide range of books
Florida Center for Reading Research, http://www.fcrr.org Resources, research, and instructional materials for typically
developing readers and those who struggle, K-12
The Meadows Center for Preventing Educational Risk, http://www.meadowscenter.org: Resources, research, and
instructional materials to teach reading to students, pre-Â�K–Â�12, English language learners, and students with
reading difstculties
Neuhaus Education Center, http://www.neuhaus.org: Provides teacher continuing education online classes, onsite
classes, and effective teaching strategies and materials to prevent reading failure
Text Project, http://textproject.org: Aims to bring beginning and struggling readers to high levels of literacy through a
variety of strategies and tools, particularly the texts used for reading instruction

Disciplinary Literacy
All About Adolescent Literacy, http://www.adlit.org/article/c117: Provides resources for parents and educators of
students in Grades 4–Â�12
Alliance for Excellent Education, http://www.all4ed.org: Numerous resources to support adolescent literacy are avail-
able through this site, including Literacy Instruction in the Content Areas: Getting to the Core of Middle and High
School Improvement (2007)
Beyond the Bubble, https://beyondthebubble.stanford.edu: Unlocks the digital archive of the Library of Congress to
create a new generation of history assessments; developed by the Stanford History Education Group
Bringing Literacy Strategies into Content Instruction, http://www.centeroninstruction.org
Carnegie Corporation of New York, http://www.carnegie.org: Numerous reports about adolescent literacy are avail-
able, including Reading in the Disciplines, Reading Next, Writing Next, and Writing to Read
Council of Chief State School Officers (CCSSO), http://programs.ccsso.org/projects/adolescent_literacy_toolkit: Includes
a framework for effective lesson planning and a collection of two dozen strategies that support students’ under-
standing of content in science, social studies, mathematics, and English language arts
National History Education Clearinghouse, http://teachinghistory.org
Partnership for 21st Century Skills, http://www.p21.org/index.php: Resources and tools to fuse the three Rs and four
Cs (critical thinking and problem solving, communication, collaboration, and creativity and innovation)
Science Text that Can Be Used as the Basis for Secondary Reading and Writing Instruction
http://news.nationalgeographic.com
https://www.sciencenews.org
http://www.sciencedaily.com/news: More difficult text for upper secondary students
Stanford History Education Group, http://www.sheg.stanford.edu: Contains lessons and assessments on reading like a
historian, U.S. and world history lessons, and teaching with primary resources
266 Helpful Web Sites

Response to Intervention
Building RTI, http://buildingrti.utexas.org: Dissemination of information, resources, and tools designed to enhance
instructional decision-�making model in reading, mathematics, and behavior
Center on Instruction, http://www.centeroninstruction.org/topic.cfm?k=R: Offers materials and resources on effective
instruction within the response to intervention (RTI) framework and implementation guidelines
Florida Center for Reading Research, http://www.fcrr.org/interventions/RTI.shtm: Provides information about using
ongoing progress monitoring to improve reading outcomes
Intervention Central, http://www.interventioncentral.org: Provides tools and resources needed for all aspects of RTI
implementation
National Center on Response to Intervention, http://www.rti4success.org: Provides “all you need to know about
Response to Intervention”; learn about the essential components of RTI
National Research Center on Learning Disabilities, http://www.nrcld.org: Provides integrated research with improved
policies and classroom practices
Research Institute on Progress Monitoring, http://www.progressmonitoring.org: Progress monitoring tools and other
resources helpful for RTI implementation
RTI Wire, http://www.jmwrightonline.com/php/rti/rti_wire.php: Provides tools and resources needed for all aspects of
RTI implementation

Professional Organizations
The Association for Science Teacher Education, http://theaste.org
Council for Exceptional Children, http://www.cec.sped.org
The International Dyslexia Association, http://www.interdys.org
International Reading Association, http://www.reading.org
National Association for Research in Science Teaching, http://www.narst.org
National Center for Learning Disabilities, http://www.ld.org
National Council for History Education, http://www.nche.net
National Council for the Social Studies, http://www.socialstudies.org
National Council of Teachers of English, http://www.ncte.org
National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, https://www.nctm.org
National Science Teachers Association, http://www.nsta.org

Technical Assistance and Research Centers

Center for Applied Linguistics (National Literacy Panel on Language Minority Children and Youth), http://www.cal.org/
projects/archive/natlitpanel.html
Center on Instruction, http://www.centeroninstruction.org
Consortium on Reading Excellence, http://www.corelearn.com
Institute for Reading Research, http://www.smu.edu/teachereducation/irr.index.asp
The IRIS Center, http://iris.peabody.vanderbilt.edu
Meadows Center for Preventing Educational Risk, University of Texas at Austin http://www.meadowscenter.org
National Center on Intensive Intervention, http://www.intensiveintervention.org
Texas Center for Learning Disabilities, http://www.texasldcenter.org
University of Kansas Center for Research on Learning, http://www.ku-crl.org
 C
Sample Lesson Plans and Instructional Tools

Contents
Keys to Content Writing: Writing Assignment Guide (Example 1). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 268
Keys to Content Writing: Writing Assignment Guide (Example 2). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 270
Sample Lesson Plan to Accompany Disciplinary Literacy in Grades
6–Â�12 English/Language Arts Classes, by Leslie S. Rush. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . 272
Homestead Strike Lesson Plan: Central Historical Question:
Why Did the Homestead Strike Turn Violent?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 273
Outline for Lesson Plan: Summarization Contextualized in Science Text. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ 277
Resources and Readings: Lesson Plan for “Think Aloud Through the Arts” Strategy. . . . . . . . . 279
Observing Features of Effective Instruction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . 281

267
 Keys to Content Writing
Writing Assignment Guide (Example 1)

Grades 6–Â�8
Summary: Health
Writing Assignment
Summarize the lifestyle choices and early detection screening tests that play an important role in preventing the
progression of heart disease.
Unit of Study/Content Connection
Health: Disease prevention and control (Grades 6–Â�8)

Learning Outcomes Related to Standards

Health: Identify ways individuals can reduce risk factors related to chronic diseases. Describe the importance of
early detection in preventing the progression of a disease.
Literacy standards: Write an informative text that conveys ideas and information clearly. Summarize key ideas and
details from a text.
Set Goals for the Type of Writing
Writing Assignment _X_ informational ___ argument ___ narrative ___ combo
Audience
A family member or family friend who you think most needs this information
Purpose
To explain to the reader what he or she can do to prevent heart disease
Length and Form
• ¾ page–Â�1 page; typed
Due Dates
• Completed notes are due on Friday.
• Draft is due to a peer on Tuesday.
• Final version is due on Thursday.
• Share your writing with a family member or friend and ask him or her to
initial it by next Tuesday.
Content and Text Structure Requirements
• Produce an introductory statement that introduces the topic of the
summary.
• In the body, identify at least three lifestyle choices and at least two screen-
ing tests.
• In the body, explain how at least one lifestyle choice helps prevent heart disease.
• Include at least one paragraph that follows a cause-Â�and-Â�effect substructure.
• Use at least two transitions in each paragraph and one transition to connect
the two body paragraphs.
Requirements for Sources
• Use Chapter 6 of the textbook

268
Keys to Content Writing 269
Models
(mentor authors,
student examples)
Scaffolds
(set of steps, writing template,
topic web, two-�column notes)
Feedback Process
(when, how)
Opportunities for Revision
Opportunities for Collaboration
(set expectations for objective,
final product, behavior guide-
lines, tasks)
© 2013, Joan Sedita—Â�Keys to Literacy (www.keystoliteracy.com)
Look at These Examples
• Student sample summaries from last year
Use These Supports
• Your two-Â�column notes from Chapter 6
• Topic web to organize your main ideas
• “How to Write a Summary” guide
Feedback from Your Peers
Your peers will give you feedback on your draft, including all the major lifestyle
choices and the screening test.
Feedback from the Teacher
I will give you suggestions for revision on Friday.
You will write a final draft based on the feedback from your peers and me before
you share it with a family member or friend.
At the THINK and PLAN Stage
You will create notes, outlining your ideas and necessary information.
At the WRITE Stage
You will show your draft to a student partner.
At the REVISE Stage
You will show your finished summary to a family member or friend.
 Keys to Content Writing
Writing Assignment Guide (Example 2)

Grade 6
Science
Writing Assignment
Write and submit an argument essay about the promise of geothermal energy as an alternative to fossil fuels.
Unit of Study/Content Connection
Renewable and nonrenewable sources of energy
Learning Outcomes Related to Standards
Science standard #2.1: Energy resources in the earth system
Literacy standard W#1: Argument writing
Set Goals for the Type of Writing
Writing Assignment ___ informational _X_ argument ___ narrative ___ combo
Audience
The Harvard University Center for the Environment (HUCE) is sponsoring a middle
school argument essay contest on the topic of renewable sources of energy. The
winner of the contest will have the essay read aloud at the HUCE annual conference
on youth and the environment. The winner will also receive front-�row seats at the
conference for 10 fellow students and a teacher from his or her school. The audience
for your piece will be college student judges from HUCE.
Purpose
To write a convincing argument for why geothermal energy is a worthwhile
investment to replace fossil fuels
Length and Form
• 400–Â�600 words; argument essay format; typed or handwritten draft; typed
final copy
Due Dates
• Information from sources is due on January 15.
• First draft is due on January 20.
• Final draft is due on January 28.
Content and Text Structure Requirements
• Introduction should start with a catchy lead, identify the problem with
energy from fossil fuels, and state a positive claim about geothermal energy.
• Body development must include at least two reasons supporting geothermal
energy, including evidence to support each reason.
• Body development must include one counterclaim argument and your rebuttal.
• Conclusion should support the argument presented.
Requirements for Sources
• Use evidence from at least one source provided by the teacher.
• Reference the source in the essay.

270
Keys to Content Writing 271
Models
(mentor authors, student
examples)
Scaffolds
(set of steps, writing template,
topic web, two-�column notes)
Feedback Process
(when, how)
Opportunities for Revision
Opportunities for Collaboration
(set expectations for objective,
final product, behavior guide-
lines, tasks)
© 2013, Joan Sedita—Â�Keys to Literacy (www.keystoliteracy.com)
Look at These Examples
• Samples of contest finalist essays from the past 2 years
Use These Supports
• Set of steps
• Argument writing template
Feedback from Your Peers
You will receive feedback from two peers for the reasons and evidence you write
in your notes. They will also give you feedback on your first draft.
Feedback from the Teacher
I will give you feedback on your final draft.
You are required to type a copy that you will submit for the contest after feed-
back from the teacher.
At the THINK and PLAN Stage
You will collaborate with two peers after the gather notes stage.
At the WRITE Stage
You will collaborate with two peers to receive feedback on your rough draft.
At the REVISE Stage
You will implement collaborative peer and teacher feedback before typing your
final submission.
 Sample Lesson Plan to
Accompany Disciplinary Literacy in
Grades 6–Â�12 English/Language Arts Classes
Leslie S. Rush

This lesson plan will be conducted after students have been introduced to a literary work. During this lesson, the
teacher will model for students how to carry out a close reading exercise with the opening section of the text.

Lesson Title: Noticing and Interpreting Textual Patterns Through Close Reading
Standards
11th-Â�and 12th-Â�grade Common Core State Standards: ELA Writing—10; ELA Reading Literature—1, 2, 3; ELA Speak-
ing and Listening—1

Lesson Goals
Students will be able to summarize plot and character development and notice and interpret language patterns in
a text.

Lesson Procedures
Introduce the activity: Explain to students that the next activities are designed to help them understand how to carry
out the reading log, which they will be doing for each section of the text.

Practice summarizing: Ask students to work with a partner or with a small group to write a brief summary of plot
and/or character development from the opening section of the text. Once students have completed this work, ask
volunteers to share their summary sentences. Compare the summaries, focusing on what is essential information in
this short section and providing feedback.

Notice textual patterns: Once students are clear↜on the summary, the class will move on to Parts 2 and 3 of the
reading log, which focus on noticing textual patterns and making interpretations of those patterns. Ask students to
go back into the opening section of the text and↜to pull out words or phrases from the text that caught their attention,
made them↜ask questions, and made them curious to know more—Â�these could be things they thought were weird,
things they thought were confusing, or things they found funny or interesting. They should write their list on Part 2 of
the reading log. Ask students to report some of the words or phrases they noticed and make a list of the aspects of
the text mentioned by students on the whiteboard or document camera.

Model close reading and interpretation: Select one of the words or phrases from the list provided by students and
compose a sample reading log Part 3 entry on the board or on a document camera so that they can see and hear
you engaging with this topic or idea.

Independent practice: Give students independent practice with writing interpretations of textual patterns that they
notice. Ask students to go back to the list of words and phrases that they noticed (Part 2 in their reading log) and to
write↜a paragraph answering the question for Part 3 of the reading log: Why might the author have chosen to use that
pattern? How does the author’s word choice impact your interpretation of the text?
After this lesson is completed, students will be given the opportunity to develop a reading log for each section of
the text, and their interpretations will be the focus of class discussions about the text.

272
 Homestead Strike Lesson Plan
Central Historical Question:
Why Did the Homestead Strike Turn Violent?1

Materials
• Copies of documents A and B
• PowerPoint slides of documents A and B
• Copies of guiding questions
• Copies of Homestead time line

Objectives
• Consider historical context of the Homestead Strike
• Source two accounts of the strike
• Evaluate reliability of two accounts of the strike
• Corroborate arguments and evidence across accounts

Plan of Instruction
1. Review key concepts about labor and industry relations:
a. Workers formed labor unions to protect their rights and to give them power to collectively bargain.
b. Business owners saw labor unions as unfair because they prevent competition.
c. Throughout the industrial era, unions were involved in a number of strikes; often, these strikes turned
violent.
Today, we are going to practice the skills of sourcing and close reading and corroboration while looking at
different accounts of one of the most violent strikes of the time: the Homestead Strike.
Note that this lesson should follow a more thorough lecture on labor and industry that includes the follow-
ing concepts: rise of industrialism (including railroad expansion, steel, oil, etc.), monopolies and trusts, and
unions and strikes.
2. Hand out the Homestead time line and have students follow as you lecture on Homestead’s background:
• Andrew Carnegie (robber baron, captain of the steel industry) owned a steel mill in Homestead, Pennsyl-
vania, near Pittsburgh.
• The union at the steel mill, the Amalgamated Association (AA), formed and won a couple of early strikes.
• Homestead was run by Henry Clay Frick, whose goal was to break the union.
• When the union’s contract was up in 1892, Frick refused to negotiate a new contract and locked workers out.
• Frick hired the Pinkerton Detectives to provide security and break the strike.
• When the Pinkertons tried to enter the mill, there was conflict. The conflict lasted for 14 hours and left 16
people dead.
• The strike lasted 4 more months until the union gave in. Frick succeeded in breaking the union.
3. Transition:
Today we are going to look at two documents with different perspectives on the Homestead Strike. As we
look at these documents, we are going to decide why these documents offer such different accounts of the
strike and which account is more believable.
4. Guided practice and cognitive modeling on “Document A: Emma Goldman”: Hand out copies of Emma Gold-
man document and project a copy of the document.

From Reisman, A., & Fogo, B. (2009). Homestead strike lesson plan. Stanford, CA: Stanford History Education Group, Stanford University;
adapted by permission.

273
274 Homestead Strike Lesson Plan

a. Guided practice: sourcing

• We see here that she’s an anarchist and supports labor rights. What position do you expect her to
take on the strike?
• When was this written? How does that make you feel about the reliability of the document?
b. Cognitive modeling: close reading
• Now I’m going to demonstrate close reading. I’ve already determined that Goldman probably sup-
ports the workers. Now I’m going to see if I am right. I’m going to circle all the words that seem
particularly strong and think about what effect these words have.
• Read through the document. Circle powerful phrases such as the following:
• “men of decision and grit”
• “great wealth and prosperity”
• “open declaration of war”
• “manly”; “rebellious forebears”
• “slaughter of steelworkers”
• Do these words make one side seem “right” or “wrong”? How do I know?
• I’m also going to ask, Whose perspective is missing in this document?
5. Guided practice on “Document B: Henry Frick”: Hand out copies of Henry Frick document and guiding ques-
tions and project a copy of the document.
a. Have students complete sourcing questions. Share responses.
• Who wrote this? What’s his perspective?
• Who do you think is going to read this? How might this audience influence Frick’s story?
• How might the date of this document affect what Frick will say?
b. Have students read the document and complete the close reading questions. Share responses.
• Why, according to Frick, were wages cut?
• How does Frick describe the use of guards?
• What words stick out in this passage? How do they relate to Frick’s argument?
• Is there any evidence that he’s trying to sound reasonable and logical? Why might he want to sound
reasonable?
6. Corroboration between Goldman and Frick: Students complete corroboration questions.
7. Discussion:
• Why did the Homestead Strike turn violent?
• What are the differences between Goldman’s account and Frick’s account?
• Which account do you find more believable? Why?
• Can we ever know what happened?
• What other materials would you want to look at in order to try to figure out what happened at Homestead?

References
Frick, H. (1892). Frick’s Fracas: Henry Frick makes his case. Carnegie Steel Company during the Homestead Strike in
History Matters. Retrieved from http://historymatters.gmu 1892. History Matters. Retrieved from http://historymatters
.edu/d/5349/ .gmu.edu/d/99/
Goldman, E. (1931). “I will kill Frick”: Emma Goldman
recounts the attempt to assassinate the chairman of the

Homestead Strike Time Line

Where: Homestead, Pennsylvania
Union: Amalgamated Association of Iron and Steel Workers
Company: Carnegie Steel Company
Homestead Strike Lesson Plan 275

1876:
Amalgamated Association, a union for iron and steel workers, is formed.

1881:
Carnegie puts Frick in charge of the Homestead factory.

1882 and 1889:

Amalgamated Association wins two big strikes against the Carnegie Company. After 1889, the union becomes very
powerful and organized. They have a very strong union contract.

February 1892:
Amalgamated Association asks for a wage increase. Frick responds with a wage decrease.

June 29, 1892:

The old contract expires without the two sides reaching an agreement. Frick locks the workers out of the plant using
a high fence topped with barbed wire.

June 30, 1892:

Workers decide to strike and surround the plant to make sure that no strikebreakers will enter.

July 6, 1892:
After the local sheriff is unable to control the strikers, Frick hires guards from the National Pinkerton Detective
Agency to secure the factory so that strikebreakers can enter.
The Pinkertons arrive by boat in the middle of the night, hoping to surround the factory unnoticed.
The strikers know the Pinkertons are coming. Shots are fired and people are killed on both sides.

Document A: Emma Goldman (Modified)

It was May 1892. Trouble had broken out between the Carnegie Steel Company and its workers, organized in the
Amalgamated Association of Iron and Steel Workers. Amalgamated Association was one of the biggest and most effi-
cient unions in the country, consisting mostly of strong Americans, men of decision and grit, who stood up for their
rights. The Carnegie Company, on the other hand, was a powerful corporation. Andrew Carnegie, its president, had
turned over management to Henry Clay Frick, a man known for his hatred of unions and workers.
The Carnegie Company enjoyed great wealth and prosperity. Wages were arranged between the company and
the union according to a sliding scale based on the current market price of steel products.
Andrew Carnegie decided to abolish the sliding scale. The company would make no more agreements with the
Amalgamated Association. In fact, it would not recognize the union at all. Then, Carnegie closed the mills. It was an
open declaration of war.
The steel workers declared that they were ready to take up the challenge of Frick: they would insist on their right
to organize and to deal collectively with their employers. Their tone was manly, ringing with the spirit of their rebellious
forebears of the Revolutionary War.
Then the news flashed across the country of the slaughter of steel workers by Pinkertons. In the dead of night,
Frick sent a boat packed with strikebreakers and heavily armed Pinkerton thugs to the mill. The workers stationed
themselves along the shore, determined to drive back Frick’s hirelings. When the boat got within range, the Pinker-
tons had opened fire, without warning, killing a number of Homestead men on the shore, among them a little boy,
and wounding scores of others.

Source: Emma Goldman was a political activist and radical who fiercely supported workers’ rights. This document
comes from her autobiography, written in 1931, in which she remembers her reaction to the Homestead Strike 39
years later.
276 Homestead Strike Lesson Plan

Document B: Henry Frick (Modified)

I can say as clearly as possible that under no circumstances will we have any further dealings with the Amalgamated
Association as an organization. This is final.
The workmen in the Amalgamated Association work under what is known as a sliding scale. As the price of steel
rises, the earnings of the men also rise; as the prices fall, their wages also fall. The wages are not allowed to fall below
a certain amount, which is called the minimum. Until now, the minimum has been $25 per ton of steel produced.
We have recently changed the minimum to $23 instead of $25. We believe this is reasonable because the Carnegie
Company has spent a lot of money on new machinery that allows workers to increase their daily output and therefore
increase their earnings. The Amalgamated Association was unwilling to consider a minimum below $24, even though
the improved machinery would enable workers to earn more. We found it impossible to arrive at any agreement with
the Amalgamated Association, so we decided to close our works at Homestead.
The Amalgamated men surrounded our property and blocked all of the entrances and all roads leading to Home-
stead. We felt that for the safety of our property, it was necessary for us to hire our own guards to assist the sheriff.
We brought our guards here as quietly as possible and had them taken to Homestead at an hour of the night
when we hoped to have them enter without any interference whatever and without meeting anybody. All our efforts
were to prevent the possibilities of a confrontation between the Amalgamated Association and our guards.
We have investigated and learned that the Amalgamated men and their friends fired on our guards for 25 min-
utes before they reached our property and then again after they had reached our property. Our guards did not return
the fire until after the boats had touched the shore and after three of our guards had been wounded, one fatally.

Source: In this newspaper interview in the Pittsburgh Post on July 8, 1892, Frick explains his opposition to the
union’s demands.

The Homestead Strike: Guiding Questions

Sourcing

1. Who wrote this?

2. Who is going to read this interview, and how might this audience influence Frick’s story?
3. How might the date of this document affect what Frick has to say?

Close Reading

4. Why, according to Frick, were wages cut?

5. How does Frick describe the use of guards?
6. What words stick out in this passage? How do they relate to Frick’s argument?

Corroboration

7. What are the differences between Goldman’s account and Frick’s account?
8. Which account do you find more believable? Explain why.
9. What other materials would you need to look at to try to figure out what happened at Homestead?
 Outline for Lesson Plan
Summarization Contextualized in Science Text

This is an outline of a high school English language arts (ELA) lesson in which summarization skills are contextualized
in the science text that students are currently using in their science class. It would be best for the ELA teacher to talk
to the students’ current science teacher to identify such a text. The following lesson illustrates how a science-Â�related
reading passage can be used to teach summarization. Note that the focus of instruction is the ELA skill of summari-
zation, not the science content.

Skills acquired: Students have been asked to write summaries many times over their school years and understand
that a summary should include only the most important information. However, many students seem to have difficulty
distinguishing important from less important information in the text and condensing information from the text in their
own words.

Objectives: Teach students to identify the most important ideas in a short text, independently write a brief summary
of these ideas in their own words, and revise the summary in a collaborative group.

Materials needed: Several science reading passages of up to 600 words long, ideally from material that is currently
being used in the students’ science class. The passages should be on related topics. The passages will be used for
modeling, guided practice, and independent practice, respectively. Assume that students have read the first text for
homework.

Time for the lesson: This may take several days.

Steps for the Teacher (ELA Instruction)

1. Introduce and explain the skill. Tell students they will be reviewing written summarization skills. State that a
summary is a brief statement of the main ideas in a text. Explain that text generally contains both important
and less important ideas. The less important ideas provide examples and support for the main ideas but are
not essential. A summary contains only the most essential ideas. Explain that the science text students are
using in their science class will be used for this review of summarization skills and that this should be helpful
in their learning of science. Explain that most written reports, from research projects to descriptions of lab
work, require summarization.
2. Model the skill using the first text. Project the text on several slides or work from printed copies.
a. Tell students you are going to show them how you write a summary and they should simply watch you.
b. Tell students that you have already read the text, just as they did for homework. You start the summari-
zation process by finding and defining any vocabulary that may be unfamiliar. Pinpoint several general
academic words and define them. (Students should have learned the technical terms in the passage in
their science class. The main focus here is on general academic vocabulary.)
c. Work through the article, identifying the most essential ideas and explaining why each idea is important.
Model accepting and rejecting ideas as important (explain each decision). Jot down or underline the key
ideas.
d. Verbalize a brief summary, demonstrating how wording in the text is transformed into your own words.
e. Write the summary on the board.
f. Debrief on the modeling. Ask students if they have any questions. Hold a discussion, asking them if they
agree with the main ideas you have selected and why. Call on students who are not participating to ask
them to explain why the selected ideas are important in the text. Allow sufficient time to ensure that all
students understand the difference between important and unimportant ideas in the text.
g. Ask the students to read another text on a related science topic for homework. This will be used for guid-
ed practice the next day.

277
278 Outline for Lesson Plan

3. The next day, tell the students they will now do guided practice.
a. Explain the purpose of this activity: to practice what you demonstrated to them to make sure they are pre-
pared to do it on their own. Guided practice may be done in groups or individually.
b. Ask students to reread it the text they read for homework, locate and define unfamiliar vocabulary, under-
line the most important ideas, and then write a summary in their own words.
c. Circulate while students are working to provide corrective feedback.
d. Debrief on the guided practice.
e. Repeat guided practice on subsequent days with different texts (on related science topics) until the
majority of students are ready to write a summary independently. Debrief with students after every guided
practice activity.
4. Independent practice. Assign a summary using another text on a related science topic for homework or for
independent work in class. When you have read the summaries, verbalize feedback to the whole class, focus-
ing on the important ideas in the text and how they can be summarized in the students’ own words.

Differentiation: Some students may have difficulty with the reading demands of the summarization task. In this case,
meet separately or in small groups with these students to analyze the meanings in the text and map the main ideas
on a graphic organizer.

Subsequent lessons: Divide students into groups for guided practice on summaries of a science text at least once a
month to maintain their skills. Provide debriefing, class discussion, and verbal feedback each time.
 Resources and Readings
Lesson Plan for “Think
Aloud Through the Arts” Strategy

Target Students: Seventh grade visual arts students

Objective of the Lesson
The students will be able to make inferences to develop an interpretation of an image and communicate and defend
their perception.

Required Resources
Think Aloud Through the Arts Response Format and appropriate visual image

Prior Knowledge Reviewed

The teacher: Using your powers of observation reveals much meaning beyond the initial impression of what we “see”
in an image. Discussing what we see allows us to see through the eyes of others. What we see is based on our expe-
rience, so we can expand our experiences through sharing our ideas and perceptions with others. You will use your
observation skills today to look for the meaning behind the image using your “visual arts talk,” which includes the
sensory components used to create and talk about works of art, such as line, color, shape, texture, value, and space.

Teacher Modeling
The teacher models the think-aloud routine using an image portrayed on the overhead projector or an image large
enough for all to see.
Based on the think-aloud format of describe, discuss, defend, and direct, the teacher “thinks aloud” as he or she
describes the image. The teacher questions aloud the possible situations portrayed in the image (based on the image
in Figure 14.2), such as “I see a village at the bottom of the painting. Where is this village? And there is a something
that looks like fire. It must be an important part of the painting because it is the forefront of the picture. The stars are
a swirl of color and seem to be moving wonder if the stars have a special meaning?
The teacher then asks a student to come to the front of the room to discuss the image. The student and teacher
compare ideas about what they see. The teacher draws a line on the board and writes down the situation he or she
perceives based on the image. The student does the same on the other side of the board. Then each takes a turn
defending why he or she came to that conclusion.

Guided Practice
Using another image, the teacher gives each student a copy of the describe-�discuss-�defend-�direct format. The stu-
dents observe the image and write down their impressions on the form. The teacher then asks the students to dis-
cuss what they see within small groups of three to four students, allowing time for each student to present his or her
perception of the image and what it means. Finally, students write their justifications of their perceptions, including
artistic sensory components.

Independent Practice
Students choose an image to observe and describe. They write down their observations and develop this into a
narrative defense using appropriate visual arts terms. Students then form small groups of three to four and make a
presentation of their perceptions of the image. The others in the group serve as the reviewers and ask the presenter
questions about the defense of his or her perception.

Assessment and Feedback

The progress of students in using artistic powers of observation and literacy skills to communicate their perceptions
may be monitored through the think-aloud routine format, which also serves as a formative assessment document.
The teacher conferences with each group of students about their use of artistic terms to describe and defend the
279
280 Resources and Readings

perception of their image and adds written feedback on the form, which includes a checklist of ways each student
can improve his or her performance of understanding. Feedback must be specific and not shallow statements of
judgment.
Example of appropriate feedback: You included much detail in your description, noting colors, shapes, individual
objects, and people. You noted characteristics that made each one similar or different.
Inappropriate feedback: You did a good job of describing the image.
 Observing Features of Effective Instruction

Feature Specific examples observed

Explicit Instruction with Modeling

• Clear instructional focus
• Explains concepts and skills in clear and direct
language
• Models and demonstrates procedures using many
examples
• Predictable, clear, and consistent instructions with
familiar routines
Systematic Instruction with Scaffolding
• Introduces knowledge/skills in logical order (e.g.,
higher utility skills first, then more difficult skills)
• Provides scaffolding by breaking down complex
tasks into simpler tasks
• Extends support and gradually removes scaffolds
Multiple Opportunities to Practice and Respond
• Provides many opportunities for practice after initial
presentation of the task or skill (e.g., think-�pair-�
share, pinch cards, thumbs up/down)
• Gives individuals or groups opportunities to respond
Immediate and Corrective Feedback
• Varied feedback forms (i.e., verbal, nonverbal, and
written) are used.
• Feedback is timely and corrective, when
appropriate.
• Formative feedback is descriptive and encourages
improved student performance.
Pacing
• Paces instruction adequately by transitioning quickly
between tasks and allowing extra time when needed
From Vaughn Gross Center for Reading and Language Arts. (2013). Observing features of effective instruction. Austin, TX:
Author; reprinted by permission.

281
 D
Glossary
academic Englishâ•… The English language ability
required for academic achievement in context-�reduced
situations, such as classroom lectures and textbook
reading assignments, sometimes referred to as cogni-
tive/academic language prostciency (CALP).
accelerated studentsâ•… Those who learn quickly and
may need to be challenged with more advanced
material. These students are referred to as gifted and
talented, advanced, or exceptional.
adequate yearly progress (AYP)â•… An individual state’s
measure of yearly progress toward achieving state
academic standards. “Adequate yearly progress” is
the minimum level of improvement that states, school
districts, and schools must achieve each year.
afstxesâ•… Word parts that are “stxed to” either the
beginnings of words (prestxes) or the endings of words
(sufstxes). The word disrespectful has two afstxes: a
prestx (dis-�) and a sufstx (-�ful).
annotationâ•… Notes, explanations, or questions about a
text, often written on the text or in the margins.
argumentative writingâ•… Writing that convinces the
audience based on the logic and reasonableness of
the claims and proof offered, as opposed to persuasive
writing, which appeals to the audience’s self-Â�interest or
emotions. The Common Core State Standards (CCSS)
emphasize writing logical arguments to be prepared for
college and career writing demands.
attention destcit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD)╅ Refers to
the inability to use skills of attention effectively. Studies
suggest that 5%–Â�10% of children, adolescents, and
adults may have ADHD. Characteristics include diffi-
culty in concentrating and staying on a task and often
hyperactivity. ADHD has three subtypes: predominantly
hyperactive-�impulsive, predominantly inattentive, and
combined hyperactive-impulsive and inattentive.1
automaticityâ•… A general term that refers to any skilled
and complex behavior that can be performed rather
easily with little attention, effort, or conscious aware-
ness. Skills become automatic after extended periods of
training. For example, with practice and good effec-
tive instruction, students become automatic at word
recognition—Â�that is, retrieving words from memory—Â�
and are able to focus attention on constructing meaning
from the text rather than on decoding.
base wordsâ•… Words from which many other words are
formed. Base words can stand alone, unlike root words.
The following is an example of a base word and its var-
ious forms: migrate—Â�migration, migrant, immigration,
immigrant, migrating, and migratory.
benchmark assessmentsâ•… Periodic assessments to
measure student achievement, usually given during
three different points in the year (beginning, middle,
and end) to assess student progress and provide data
for teachers to adjust their instruction to target student
needs.
bilingual educationâ•… An educational program in which
two languages (i.e., native language and English) are
used to provide content matter instruction. Bilingual
educational programs vary in their length of time and
in the amount each language is used. The goal is that
students become ﬇uent in both languages.
breveâ•… A diacritical mark (â•›˘â•›) shaped like the bottom
half of a circle. The breve sign indicates a short vowel,
as opposed to the macron (â•›¯â•›), which indicates long
vowels in academic transcription.
cognatesâ•… Words in different languages related to the
same root—Â�for example, family (English) and familia
(Spanish); often share similar spelling, pronunciation,
and meaning.
collaborative strategic reading (CSR)â•… A framework for
a reading narrative or expository text that is based on
extensive research demonstrating success for students
with a wide range of ability levels, including English
language learners (ELLs) and students with learning
disabilities. CSR combines specistc reading compre-
hension strategies with structured cooperative learning
for students in upper-�elementary and middle school.
CSR has a highly specistc lesson format that must be
followed with integrity to achieve positive results.2
283
284 Glossary
Common Core State Standards (CCSS) Initiativeâ•…The
National Governors Association Center for Best Prac-
tices and the Council of Chief State School Ofstcers
developed a set of state-�led education standards,
called the Common Core State Standards. The English-�
language arts and mathematics standards for Grades
K–Â�12 were developed in collaboration with a variety of
stakeholders including content experts, states, teach-
ers, school administrators, and parents. The standards
destne the knowledge and skills students should have
within their K–Â�12 education careers so that they will
graduate from high school fully prepared for college
and careers. The standards are aligned with college
and work expectations; are clear, understandable, and
consistent; include rigorous content and application
of knowledge through higher order skills; build upon
strengths and lessons of current state standards; are
informed by other top-�performing countries so that
all students are prepared to succeed in the global
economy and society; and are evidence and research
�based.
comprehension strategiesâ•… Techniques to teach
students tools to comprehend text, including summa-
rization, prediction, and inferring word meanings from
context.
comprehension strategy instructionâ•… The explicit
teaching of techniques that are particularly effective for
comprehending text. Steps include direct explanation,
teacher modeling (“think-Â�aloud”), guided practice, and
application. Direct explanation (the teacher explains to
students why the strategy helps comprehension and
when to apply the strategy), modeling (the teacher
models—Â�or demonstrates—Â�how to apply the strategy,
usually by “thinking aloud” while reading the text that
the students are using), guided practice (the teacher
guides and assists students as they learn how and when
to apply the strategy), and application (the teacher
helps students practice the strategy until they can apply
it independently).
context cluesâ•… Sources of information outside of
words that readers may use to discern the meanings
of unknown terms; may be drawn from the immediate
sentence containing the word; from text already read;
from pictures accompanying the text; or from destni-
tions, restatements, examples, or descriptions in the
text.
continuous soundâ•… A speech sound that may be held or
hummed until the speaker runs out of breath (/m/ /s/ /v/).
criterion-�referenced measures (tests)╅ Intended to
measure how well a person has learned a specistc body
of knowledge and skills.
curriculum-�based assessment (CBA)╅ A method of mon-
itoring students’ educational progress through direct
assessment of academic skills. CBAs usually consist of
short tests, called probes, to ascertain student achieve-
ment on basic reading, math, writing, and/or spelling.
curriculum-�based measure (CBM)╅ Assessment of what
students have been learning. Usually has standardized
instructions, a stopwatch or timer, a set of passages,
scoring procedures, and record forms or charts. CBMs
are often used for progress monitoring because they are
well suited for repeated use.
decodingâ•… The ability to translate a word from print
to speech (written words into vocal speech), usually
by employing knowledge of sound–Â�symbol correspon-
dences. Also considered the act of deciphering a new
word by sounding it out.
diagnostic assessmentâ•… Assessments used to pinpoint
specistc areas of weakness; provide more in-�depth infor-
mation to clarify students’ skills and instructional needs.
disciplinary literacyâ•… The specialized ways of knowing
and communicating in the different disciplines. Stu-
dents need to be taught the vocabulary and routines to
read, for example, as a scientist, historian, mathemati-
cian, and literacy critic.
discrepancy modelâ•… Is used to compare a student’s
achievement to the student’s intellectual ability. A signif-
icant difference between these two scores may indicate
a learning disability. It is used to determine whether a
student qualistes for special education services—Â�that
is, whether an individualized education program (IEP)
is required. It is a measure of how far a child has fallen
behind his or her peers.
dyslexia╅ A neurological language-�based disability that
affects both oral and written language. It may also be
referred to as reading disability, reading difference, or
reading disorder; it is neurological in origin. Typically
results from an unexpected (when compared with other
cognitive abilities) destcit in the phonological component
of language, resulting in poor or inaccurate word recog-
nition and poor spelling and decoding abilities. Second-
ary problems may occur in reading comprehension and
vocabulary development.
Glossary 285
English as a second language (ESL)â•… An educational
approach in which English language learners (ELLs) are
instructed in the use of the English language.
English language learners (ELLs)╅ Students whose strst
language is not English and who are in the process of
learning English.
evidenceâ•… Facts, figures, details, quotations, or other
sources of data and information that provide support for
claims or an analysis and that can be evaluated by others;
should appear in a form and be derived from a source
widely accepted as appropriate to a particular discipline,
as in details or quotations from a text in the study of litera-
ture and experimental results in the study of science.3
expository textâ•… Nonfiction text classified as one of
the following text structures: description, sequence,
compare–Â�contrast, cause–Â�effect, problem–Â�solution.
fluencyâ•… The ability to read a text accurately, quickly,
and with proper expression (prosody) and comprehen-
sion. Because ﬇uent readers do not have to concentrate
on decoding words, they can focus their attention on
what the text means.
formal assessmentâ•… Refers to tests that have been
standardized—Â�that is, given to a comparable group of
students (the normative group) for the purpose of com-
paring one group’s performance to another.
graphemeâ•… A letter or letter combination that spells a
single phoneme (sound). In English, a grapheme may be
one, two, three, or four letters, such as e, ei, igh, or eigh.
graphic organizers (GOs)â•… Diagrams used to support
comprehension when reading narrative (stction) text or
informational and expository texts. Graphic organizers
(GOs) are linked to improving reading outcomes for stu-
dents in general education, English language learners
(ELLs), and students with disabilities. Graphic organiz-
ers include the following terms: cognitive maps, seman-
tic maps, story maps, Venn diagrams, framed outlines,
or advanced organizers.4 GOs offer a “visual-Â�spatial
display of information extracted from text passages.”5
guided practiceâ•… Typically, the teacher guides and
assists students as they learn how and when to apply
strategies.
high-�frequency words╅ Words that are encountered
frequently in the text and are important to know.
inferenceâ•… To infer or arrive at a conclusion by reason-
ing from evidence. Use inferential questions in teach-
ing comprehension—Â�that is, questions for which the
answer is implied, or not directly stated in the text.
informal assessment╅ Typically, commercial or teacher-�
made assessments that are curriculum based; there is
no normative sample for comparison.
informational textsâ•… A type of expository texts that
provides facts about the natural or social world. Stu-
dents read two types of texts: factual texts and story or
narrative text.
irregular wordsâ•… Words that do not follow typical letter–Â�
sound correspondences, usually found in the vowel
sound(s), such as cough and there.
Lexile systemâ•… A recent type of readability formula
that uses digital technology to measure the complexity
of text. To obtain Lexiles, words in samples of a text
are compared to a database that began with a group
of approximately 135,000 unique words and now has
expanded to include many more unique words. A log of
the mean frequency of the words in the text is used in
a formula with the mean sentence length. The compu-
tation produces a Lexile that can be placed on a scale,
which spans 0 (easiest texts) to 2,000 (most complex
texts).6
macronâ•… diacritical marking symbol ( ¯ ) that appears
over a vowel grapheme that indicates a long or tense
pronunciation of the vowel.
manipulatives In education, hands-�on objects used for
instruction (e.g., blocks, plastic chips, felt squares).
manuscript writingâ•… Form of handwriting; letters are
separate from one another, unlike cursive. Also called
printing.
metacognition╅ Act of re﬇ecting on and monitoring
cognitive (thinking) activity.
metalinguistic awarenessâ•… Ability to think about and
re﬇ect on the nature and function of language.
modelingâ•… Refers to the practice of teacher modeling,
or demonstrating how to apply a strategy. One strategy
often modeled is “thinking aloud”—Â�that is, sharing the
comprehension thought process verbally while reading
the text that the students are using.
286 Glossary
morphemeâ•… Smallest meaningful unit in a word.
morphologyâ•… Study of meaningful units of language and
how they are combined in forming words.
multisensory instructionâ•… Instruction that simulta-
neously links visual, auditory, and tactile–Â�kinesthetic
modalities (senses) to enhance memory and learning.
multisyllabicâ•… Having more than one syllable.
narrative textâ•… Typically tells a story. May include fables,
poems, science stction, short stories, novels, folktales,
and other text considered literary nonstction. Usually
has a predictable story structure: setting, characters,
plot, and theme; often contrasted with expository text.
No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001â•… The most
recent reauthorization of the Elementary and Second-
ary Education Act of 1965 (PL 89-�10). The act con-
tains four basic education reform principles: stronger
accountability for results, increased ﬇exibility and local
control, expanded options for parents, and an empha-
sis on teaching methods based on scientistcally based
research.
nominalizationâ•… The act of converting verbs or adjec-
tives into nouns, which can then be augmented with
adjectives. Examples include turning killed into killing
or criticize into criticism. Such writing is common in
historical and scientific writing. Use of nominalizations
causes the writing to be dense and complicated and
students need to learn how to read the text, discern
the author’s intent and bias, and make sense of all the
information provided.
norm-�referenced assessments (tests)╅ Intended to com-
pare a person’s score against the scores of a group of
people who have already taken the same exam, called
the “norming group.”
orthographyâ•… A writing system; the spelling system of
language.
outcome assessment╅ Used to provide a bottom-�line
measure of students’ progress; overall effectiveness
of reading program. Annual state tests are outcome
assessments.
percentile scoreâ•… Scores showing how a student’s
performance compares with others tested during
test development. A student who scores at the 50th
percentile performed at least as well as 50% of students
his or her age in the development of the test. A score at
the 50th percentile is within the average range.
persuasive writingâ•… Writing that appeals to the audi-
ence’s self-Â�interest or emotions and the credibility or
authority of the writer, as opposed to argumentative writ-
ing, which convinces the audience based on the logic
and reasonableness of the claims and proof offered.
The Common Core State Standards (CCSS) emphasize
writing logical arguments to be prepared for college and
career writing demands.
phonemeâ•… The smallest unit of sound that changes
the meanings of spoken words. For example, change
the strst phoneme in bat from /b/ to /p/, the word bat
is changed to pat. English has approximately 41–Â�44
phonemes. A few words, such as a or oh, have only one
phoneme. Most words have more than one phoneme.
For example, the word if has two phonemes: /i/ and /f/.
phonemic awarenessâ•… Awareness of the individual
sounds that make up words and the ability to manipu-
late those sounds in words.
phonicsâ•… A teaching method that uses letter–Â�sound
correspondences in reading and spelling; study of rela-
tionships between letters and sounds they represent.
phonologyâ•… The study (science) of speech sounds;
the rule system within a language; the speech–Â�sound
system of language.
pragmaticsâ•… System of rules and conventions for using
language and related gestures in social situations; the
study of that rule system.
prestx╅ A morpheme that comes at the beginning of a
word and changes the meaning of the word, such as
happy, unhappy.
progress-�monitoring assessment╅ Used to determine
whether students are making adequate progress. May
be curriculum embedded (measuring to what extent
students have mastered curriculum) or general/external
(measuring critical reading skills such as phonemic
awareness, phonics ﬇uency, vocabulary, or comprehen-
sion). They serve to predict success in meeting grade-�
level expectations.
prosodyâ•… One of three necessary components or char-
acteristics of a ﬇uent reader. Prosody is the ability to
Glossary 287
read with good expression; includes the pitch, tone, vol-
ume, emphasis, and rhythm in speech or oral reading.
RAFTâ•… A writing strategy; R = role, A = audience, F =
format, and T= topic.7
rapid automatized naming (RAN)â•… Refers to the rapid,
automatic naming of colors, numbers, letters, and
objects that has been shown to be related to reading
success.
reading comprehensionâ•… The goal of reading is to
understand the text. A multicomponent, highly complex
process that involves many interactions between read-
ers and what they bring to the text (previous knowledge,
strategy use) as well as variables related to the text itself
(interest in text, understanding text types).8
reading fluencyâ•… The ability to read a text accurately,
quickly, and with proper expression (prosody) and
comprehension. Because ﬇uent readers do not have to
concentrate on decoding words, they can focus their
attention on what the text means.
reading strategiesâ•… Conscious, deliberate plans that
readers use to understand text, including knowing
when and how to use the strategy and how to evaluate
its effectiveness. Essential reading strategies include
summarization, question generation, activation of prior
knowledge, and creation of mental images.
reciprocal teaching strategy╅ An evidence-�based
framework for improving reading comprehension.
Effective for students in general education, those who
speak English as a second language (ESL), and stu-
dents with disabilities. In reciprocal teaching, the adult
and students take turns serving as the teacher. This
model teaches students to apply four reading strategies:
prediction, summarization, question generation, and
claristcation.9
repeated and monitored oral readingâ•… An instructional
activity in which students read and reread a text a cer-
tain number of times or until a certain level of ﬇uency
is reached; has been shown to improve reading ﬇uency
and overall reading achievement. Four rereadings are
usually sufstcient for most students. Students can also
practice reading orally through the use of audiotapes,
tutors, an adult, or a peer.
root╅ Main part of a word; afstxes are added to make
new word. For example, sect, intersect, intersection.
scaffolded instructionâ•… Temporary support to help a
student until the student can complete the task inde-
pendently. Examples of instructional scaffolds that you
will note in this text are additional modeling, providing
more examples, breaking the task down into smaller
parts, providing part of the answer, reinforcing an easier
skill, using physical movements to reinforce a skill, pro-
viding additional practice, and providing instruction in a
small group or one to one.
schwaâ•… Neutral vowel in unaccented syllable in English;
For example, in the word asleep, the /a/ pronunciation
is the schwa sound; ə is the symbol for schwa.
scientistcally based reading strategies╅ Reading strate-
gies are said to be scientistcally based when they meet
criteria based on scientistcally based reading research
(SBRR). Scientistcally based reading research is deter-
mined when application of rigorous, systematic, and
objective procedures are applied to obtain valid knowl-
edge. SBRR studies are studies 1) that have been pub-
lished in a peer-�reviewed journal or approved by a panel
of independent experts, 2) whose results have been
replicated by other scientists, and 3) whose stndings are
supported by a critical mass of additional studies that
point to a particular conclusion.10
screening assessmentâ•… Used to identify students who
may be at risk for reading difstculty. In some cases, may
be referred to as benchmark assessment or a universal
assessment.
semantic featuresâ•… Concrete method for classi-
fying abstract ideas or features; used to enhance
comprehension.
semanticsâ•… Study of word and phrase meanings.
sight words╅ Words that can be identisted as a whole
and do not require sounding out or decoding. Students
have learned to recognize the word automatically.
signistcant discrepancy╅ A statistical term that is com-
monly used as a component to guide states/districts
in determining eligibility for special education services
for a learning disability. A signistcant discrepancy
between a student’s ability (intelligence score) and
academic achievement is used to represent the degree
a student’s achievement is affected by the student’s
disability. For example, if a student had an IQ score
of 100 (mean of 100; standard deviation of 15) and
an achievement score in basic reading of 80, then a
288 Glossary
statistically signistcant difference or discrepancy is said
to exist (more than one standard deviation). Recently,
﬇aws in the discrepancy model have resulted in differ-
ent approaches to identifying students with learning
disabilities. One approach includes data determining
a student’s response to intervention instruction. Lack
of response to specialized instruction may indicate the
student has a learning disability.
standard scoreâ•… Standard scores help teachers deter-
mine how a child performs compared with other stu-
dents. They also allow teachers to compare a student’s
performance on different tests. Test developers calcu-
late the statistical average based on the performance of
students tested in the norming process of test develop-
ment. That score is assigned a value. Different perfor-
mance levels are calculated based on the differences
among student scores from the statistical average and
are expressed as standard deviations. These standard
deviations are used to determine which scores fall
within the above-�average, average, and below-�average
ranges. Standard scores and standard deviations are
different for different tests. Many of the commonly used
tests, such as the Wechsler Intelligence Scales, have an
average score of 100 and a standard deviation of 15.
strategic instructionâ•… Instruction that aims to promote
student engagement in strategic processes. The goal is
to teach students how to be metacognitive learners, to
approach learning thoughtfully and with a plan in mind,
and to evaluate the effectiveness of their approach to
learning.
Strategic Instruction Modelâ•… A model developed by the
Center on Research and Learning at the University of
Kansas. The model includes learning strategies to assist
students in learning complex skills (i.e., word identi-
fication, paraphrasing, paragraph writing, test taking,
and many more). The three strands of strategies help
students acquire information, study information, and
express what they know. Content enhancement routines
and devices were developed for teachers to teach con-
tent to academically diverse classes in ways all students
can understand and remember key information. Learn
more at http://www.ku-crl.org
sufstx╅ Morpheme added to the end of a base (root)
word; creates new word with a different meaning or
grammatical function. For example, add or to act: actor.
changes grammatical form from verb to noun.
syllabicationâ•… Process of dividing words into syllables.
syllableâ•… A unit of speech (pronunciation) that contains
a vowel sound; may or may not have consonants before
or after the vowel. There are six syllable types students
should know: 1) open (me); 2) closed syllable (met);
3) vowel-�consonant-�e (lake); 4) vowel team or vowel pair
(read); 5) r-�controlled (car); and 6) final stable syllable,
or consonant-�le (station, stable). Knowing the types of
syllables helps students decode multisyllabic words.
syntaxâ•… The way words are put together to form
phrases, clauses, or sentences.
systematic╅ Destnite method for a procedure, carried
out by a step-�by-�step process, usually starting with
easier concepts or skills and leading to more complex
concepts or skills.
text complexityâ•… The inherent difficulty of reading and
comprehending a text combined with consideration of
reader and task variables; in the Common Core State
Standards (CCSS), a three-�part assessment of text dif-
ficulty that pairs qualitative and quantitative measures
with reader-�task considerations.11
text complexity bandâ•… A range of text difficulty corre-
sponding to grade spans within the Common Core State
Standards (CCSS); specifically, the spans from Grades
2–Â�3, Grades 4–Â�5, Grades 6–Â�8, Grades 9–Â�10, and
Grades 11–Â�CCR (college and career readiness).
text structureâ•… How information in a text is organized.
Students can more easily comprehend the text when
they recognize the structure. Common text structures
include description, sequence, problem and solution,
cause and effect, and compare and contrast. See All
About Adolescent Literacy for examples and teaching
strategies: http://www.adlit.org/strategies/23336
think-Â�aloudsâ•… The “think-Â�aloud” strategy means
encouraging students to verbalize their thoughts during
reading in order to make text connections and encour-
age active thinking and questioning. Teachers model
the think-�aloud strategy all year whenever they make
visible their thinking as they read and solve comprehen-
sion problems.12
universal screening assessments╅ Type of criterion-�
referenced assessments designed to be teacher friendly
so that they can be quickly administered to students
several times per year. The screening assessments help
determine which students are achieving as expected
and which are at risk in specistc components of reading.
Glossary 289
word identistcation╅ Pronunciation of unfamiliar words
using such methods as phonics, structural analysis, or
context clues.
Endnotes
1. National Institute of Mental Health, http://www.nimh
.nih.gov/health/topics/attention-deficit-hyperactivity
-disorder-adhd/index.shtml
2. Klingner, Vaughn, Boardman, & Swanson (2012).
3. NGA and CCSSO (2010), 42.
4. Kim, Vaughn, Wanzek, & Wei (2004).
5. Grifstn, Simmons, & Kame’enui (1991).
6. The Lexile Framework for Reading, http://www.lexile
.com/about-lexile/lexile-overview
References
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965, PL 89-�10,
20 U.S.C. §§ 241 et seq.
Grifstn, C.C., Simmons, D.C., & Kame’enui, E.J. (1991). Inves-
tigating the effectiveness of graphic organizer instruction
on the comprehension and recall of science content by
students with learning disabilities. Reading, Writing, and
Learning Disabilities, 7, 355–Â�376.
Kim, A., Vaughn, S., Wanzek, J., & Wei, S. (2004). Graphic
organizers and their effects on the reading comprehen-
sion of students with LD: A synthesis of research. Journal
of Learning Disabilities, 37, 105–Â�118.
Klingner, J.K., & Vaughn, S. (1996). Reciprocal teaching of
reading comprehension strategies for students with learn-
ing disabilities who use English as a second language. Ele-
mentary School Journal, 96(3), 275–Â�293.
Klingner, J.K., Vaughn, S., & Boardman, A. (2007). Teaching
reading comprehension to students with learning difficulties
(Vol. 4). New York, NY: Guilford.
word recognition╅ Quick identistcation (recognition) of a
previously learned word.
7. Santa, Havens, & Maycumber (1996).
8. Klingner, Vaughn, & Boardman (2007).
9. Klingner & Vaughn (1996); Palinscar & Brown (1986).
10. Evidence-�based educational interventions are reviewed
on the following web sites: The Promising Practice Net-
work, http://www. promisingpractices.net, and the What
Works Clearing House, http://ies.ed.gov/ncee/wwc
11. NGA and CCSSO (2010), 4–Â�16, 31, 57.
12. Oster (2001).
Klingner, J., Vaughn, S., Boardman, A., & Swanson, E. (2012).
Now we get it! Boosting comprehension with collaborative stra-
tegic reading. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-�Bass.
NGA & CCSSO. (2010). Common Core State Standards for
English language arts & literacy in history/social studies, sci-
ence, and technical subjects and mathematics. Washington,
DC: Author.
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, PL 107-�110, 115 Stat. 1425,
20 U.S.C. §§ 6301 et seq.
Oster, L. (2001). Using the think-�aloud for reading instruc-
tion. The Reading Teacher, 55(1), 64–Â�69.
Palinscar, A.S., & Brown, A.L. (1986). Interactive teaching
to promote independent learning from text. The Reading
Teacher, 39(8), 771–Â�777.
Santa, C., Havens, L., & Maycumber, E. (1996). Project CRISS:
Creating independence through student-�owned strategies (2nd
ed.). Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt.
 Index
Academic language
for English language learners, 210–Â�211
second-�language acquisition and, 207
Accuracy, reading fluency and, 62–Â�63, 65–Â�66
ACT, Inc., 116
ADA, see Americans with Disabilities Act
ADAPT Framework, 187–Â�188
Adaptations Framework for learning disabilities, 187–Â�188
Adolescent English language learners, teaching strategies
for, 205–Â�219
Adolescent readers
brain development ion, 18
social and emotional consequences of reading disability
in, 17–Â�18
vocabulary development in, 44–Â�46
Advanced intermediate stage, second-�language acquisition,
206–Â�207
Advantage/TASA Open Standard (ATOS), 117–Â�118
Affect in mathematics, 186–Â�188
Affixes, defined, 42–Â�43
After-�reading assessment, reading comprehension, 86
Algebra
effective instruction in, 181–Â�182
reading and problem solving in, 182–Â�183
word problems in, 182–Â�184
Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990
(PL 101-�336), 241
Argument-�based writing, 102
Arts
assessment of literacy in, 195–Â�196
classroom environment for, 196–Â�198
instructional plans for, 199
literacy in, 191–Â�202
microblogging applications in, 236
resources and readings for literacy in, 279–Â�280
Assessment routines
for arts literacy, 195–Â�196
disciplinary literacy assessment, 144–Â�147
for English-Â�language learners, 217–Â�219
in history instruction, 160–Â�162
national and international assessments, 246–Â�247
oral reading fluency, 66–Â�68
reading comprehension and, 80–Â�84
reading fluency, 65–Â�66
response to intervention, 225–Â�226
scaffolding and, 31–Â�32
science reading and writing, 168–Â�171
web resources for, 263
writing and learning, 102–Â�103
ATOS, see Advantage/TASA Open Standard
Authentic assessment, arts literacy and, 196
“The Author and Me” questions, reading comprehension,
88
Back channel setup, for microblogging, 235–Â�236
Background knowledge, in historical curriculum, 156
Basic concept map, vocabulary development, 53�
Basic interpersonal communication skills (BICS), second-�
language acquisition, 206–Â�207
Before-�reading assessment, reading comprehension, 85
Benchmark assessment
reading comprehension, 81
response to intervention, 226
text complexity, 118–Â�119
BICS, see Basic interpersonal communication skills
Big ideas approach to vocabulary development, 47–Â�49
Brain development
adolescent readers, 17
reading fluency and, 63–Â�64
California Healthy Kids Survey (CHKS), 19
CALP, see Cognitive academic language skills
Career readiness
current laws, policies and initiatives, 245–Â�246
disciplinary literacy and, 143–Â�144
history instruction, disciplinary approach to, 154–Â�157
reading comprehension and, 79–Â�80
reading fluency and, 64–Â�65
science reading and writing and, 166–Â�167
student requirements for, 20
text complexity and, 116
vocabulary development for, 44
web resources for, 265
writing and learning, 99–Â�102
Caring, communication of, 252
CASEL, see Center for Social and Emotional Learning; Safe
and Sound
Cat in the Hat, The (Dr. Seuss), 117
CBM, see Curriculum-�based measurements
CCRC, see College and Career Readiness Center
CCSR, see Chicago Consortium on Chicago School Research
CCSS, see Common Core State Standards
Center for Social and Emotional Learning (CASEL), 18
Common Core State Standards (CCSS) and, 20
Central historical questions, 158, 160
Check and Connect Program, 22
Chicago Consortium on Chicago School Research (CCSR),
18
CHKS, see California Healthy Kids Survey
Choice, in literacy instruction, 150
Clarification, reciprocal teaching framework, 91–92
Classroom settings
arts literacy and, 196–Â�198
reading fluency in, 70–Â�72
“Clicking” strategy, collaborative strategic reading, 87
Close reading techniques
in history instruction, 158, 160
science reading and writing, 167–Â�171
Clue words, for English-Â�language learners, 215–Â�217
“Clunking” strategy, collaborative strategic reading, 87
Cognitive academic language skills (CALP), second-�
language acquisition, 206–Â�207
291
292 Index

Collaboration, in literacy instruction, 150 Dale-Â�Chall readability formula, 117–Â�118

Collaborative strategic reading (CSR), 87–Â�88 Dale’s scale of world knowledge, 43, 44–Â�46
College and Career Readiness Center (CCRC), 19 Dance, literacy in, 195
College readiness DEAR, see Drop everything and read
current laws, policies and initiatives, 245–Â�246 Decoding, in algebra comprehension, 183
disciplinary literacy and, 143–Â�144 Degrees of Reading Power (DRP), 117–Â�118
history instruction, disciplinary approach to, 154–Â�157 Denotations, word consciousness and, 51
reading comprehension and, 79–Â�80 Derivational morphology, 43
reading fluency and, 64–Â�65 Derivational suffixes, vocabulary development and, 43
science reading and writing and, 166–Â�167 Developmental Studies Center Child Development Project
student requirements for, 20 Scales, 19
text complexity and, 116 Diagnostic assessment
vocabulary development for, 44 science reading and writing and, 168–Â�171
web resources for, 265 writing assessment, 102
writing and learning, 99–Â�102 Differentiating instruction, mathematics reading and writ-
Common Core State Standards (CCSS), 20 ing and, 187–Â�188
arts literacy, 199–Â�202 Disciplinary literacy
current laws, policies, and initiatives, 244–Â�245 in arts, 193–Â�202
disciplinary literacy and, 143–Â�150 authentic discussion and, 149
discussion rubrics, 146–Â�147 college and career readiness and, 143–Â�144
English language arts and, 143–Â�150 discussion rubrics, 146–Â�147
English language learners in, 208–Â�219 English language arts and, 141–Â�150
history instruction, disciplinary approach to, 154–Â�162 general applications for, 3–Â�4, 127–Â�137
mathematics and writing and, 184–Â�188 Gradual Release of Responsibility model and, 147–Â�149
reading comprehension and, 79–Â�80, 87–Â�88 in history curriculum, 127–Â�137, 153–Â�162
reading fluency and, 64–Â�65 instructional plans for, 150
reading logs/journals and, 144–Â�145 one-Â�to-Â�one conferring, 146–Â�148
recommended texts in, 121 reading logs/journals, 144
science reading and writing and, 168–Â�174 sample lesson plan for, 272
Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium and, 246 second-�language challenges in, 207
staircase of text complexity, 121 skills development for, 147–Â�149
support for student achievement of, 122–Â�123 web resources, 265
text complexity and, 116–Â�124 writing rubrics, 144–Â�145
text structure instruction and, 107 Discipline-�specific words, vocabulary development and
vocabulary development, 44–Â�45 selection of, 46
web resources, 264 Discussion
Writing Anchor Standard 10, 107 academic discussion, for English language learners,
writing and learning, 98–Â�102 211–Â�212
writing rubrics and, 144–Â�145 authentic discussion, 149
Communication, guidelines for, 252 rubrics, 146–Â�147
Communities that Care Youth Survey, 19 whole-Â�class discussion, 158–Â�159
Comprehensive Musicianship through Performance (CMP) Diverse student body, needs of, 7–Â�10
strategies, 195 Document modification, in history curriculum, 159–Â�161
Computer-�based graphic organizers, 90 Document sets
Conferring: The Keystone of Reader’s Workshop (Allen), 146–Â�147 explicit instruction using, 157–Â�158
Content area reading strategies, disciplinary literacy and, in historical curriculum, 156–Â�157
129–Â�137 Drama, literacy in, 195
Content scaffolding, writing instruction, 109 Drop everything and read (DEAR), reading fluency and, 71
Contestability, disciplinary literacy and, 133–Â�137 DRP, see Degrees of Reading Power
Contextualization During-�reading assessment, reading comprehension,
in history instruction, 154–Â�155, 158, 160 85–Â�86
for information, 123 Dyslexia, students with
in science writing instruction, 171–Â�172 needs of, 9–Â�10
word meaning and, 49–Â�50 web resources for, 265
Corrective feedback, 33, 36–Â�37
Corroboration, in history instruction, 154–Â�155, 158, 160
Courage, in teaching, 253 Education for All Handicapped Children Act of 1975
Creativity, in teaching, 252–Â�253 (PL 94-Â�142), 240
Criterion-�reference tests, reading comprehension, 81 Effective instruction
CSR, see Collaborative strategic reading in algebra, 181–Â�182
Curriculum-�based measurements (CBM) characteristics of, 2
oral reading fluency, 66–Â�68 current laws, policies and initiatives for, 243–Â�244
progress monitoring, 68–Â�69 in disciplinary literacy, 144–Â�150
reading comprehension, 81 features of, 27–Â�38, 281
reading rate and accuracy, 65–Â�66 history curriculum, disciplinary approach to, 154
Index 293
in microblogging, 234–Â�236
reading comprehension, 77–Â�79, 80–Â�86
response to intervention and, 227
science reading and writing, 169–Â�171
ten tips for, 251–Â�254
tips for, 5
vocabulary development, 44–Â�46, 47–Â�49
Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) of 1965
(PL 89-Â�10), 240, 243–Â�244, 264
ELLs, see English language learners
Emotional consequences of reading disability, 2, 15–Â�23
Engagement of students, opportunity for, 123
English language arts
assessment techniques in, 144–Â�150
authentic discussion in, 149
college and career readiness and, 143–Â�144
disciplinary literacy and, 141–Â�150
discussion rubrics, 146–Â�147
Gradual Release of Responsibility model and, 147–Â�149
instructional plans for, 150
one-Â�to-Â�one conferring, 146–Â�148
reading logs/journals and, 144–Â�145
science writing and, 171–Â�172
skills development in, 147–Â�149
text complexity and, 116
writing rubrics, 144–Â�145
English language learners (ELLs)
adolescent students as, teaching strategies for, 205–Â�219
Common Core State Standards (CCSS) for, 208–Â�219
language constructions in academic texts and, 210–Â�211
language function instruction for, 211–Â�212
lesson and instructional planning for, 209
native language interference in, 207–Â�209
reading comprehension and, 79, 89–Â�90
sample lesson plan for, 213–Â�217
science reading and writing for, 168–Â�171
sheltered instruction for, 212–Â�213
stages of second-Â�language acquisition, 206–Â�207
teaching techniques, 4
vocabulary development and, 51–Â�52, 209–Â�211
web resources, 264
ESEA, see Elementary and Secondary Education Act
Evaluative feedback, 33, 36–Â�37
Evidence-�based practices
arts literacy, 199
history instruction, 156–Â�157
reading comprehension, 78
response to intervention and, 227
science reading and writing instruction and, 172–Â�174
Exemplary texts, for text complexity, 116
Expectations from students, recognition and, 252
Expertise, development opportunities in, 123
Explicit strategy instruction
for English language learners, 214–Â�217
in historical curriculum, 157–Â�158
modeling and, 28–Â�30
response to intervention and, 226
science reading and writing and, 169–Â�171
tips for, 253
in writing, 105–Â�106
Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) of
1974 (PL 93-�380), 241
Fast Track Compendium, 19
Feedback
in arts literacy assessment, 195–Â�196
effective instruction and, 28
immediate and corrective feedback, 33, 36–Â�37
peer use of, 37
scaffolding and, 31–Â�32
writing assessment, 103
FERPA, see Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act
Fluency development
importance of, 61–Â�62
in older students, 3, 61–Â�72
Focusing principle, in history instruction, 159–Â�160
Formative assessment
English language learners, 217–Â�219
in history instruction, 161–Â�162
strategies for, 255–Â�Â�262
vocabulary development, 44–Â�46
writing, 102–Â�103
Formative feedback, examples of, 33, 36–Â�37
Foursquare model, vocabulary development, 53
FRAPE, see Free appropriate public education
Frayer grid, vocabulary development, 53
Free appropriate public education (FRAPE), 8–Â�10
Functional linguistics, disciplinary literacy and, 132–Â�137
“Get the gist” strategy, collaborative strategic reading, 87
Gradual Release of Responsibility model, 147–Â�149
Grammar instruction, writing strategies and, 106–Â�107
Graphic organizers
reading comprehension, 88–Â�90
vocabulary development and, 52–Â�55
Great Expectations (Dickens), 117
Guided practice, for English language learners, 215–Â�216
Guiding questions, in history instruction, 160–Â�162
HATs, see Historical assessment of thinking
Higher-�level thinking language skills, Common Core State
Standards (CCSS) for, 208–Â�209
Historical assessment of thinking (HATs), 162
History instruction
disciplinary literacy and, 127–Â�137, 153–Â�162
document modification issues in, 159–Â�161
explicit instruction in, 157–Â�158
guiding questions in, 160
microblogging applications in, 236
sample lesson plan for, 273–Â�276
student assessment in, 160–Â�162
whole-Â�class discussion in, 158–Â�159
IDEA, see Individuals with Disabilities Education Improve-
ment Act of 2004
IEP, see Individualized education program
Illiteracy, importance of, 17–Â�19
Immediate feedback, 33, 36–Â�37
In-�class intervention, for English-�language learners,
216–Â�217
Individual Protective Factors Index (IPFI; Phillips), 20
Individual word instruction, vocabulary development and,
48
Individualized education program (IEP), 9–Â�10
Individuals with Disabilities Education Improvement Act
(IDEA) of 2004 (PL 108-Â�446), 240–Â�241, 264
294 Index
Informational context, 123
Informational writing, 102
Instruction, insights, intrigue (RIP structure), 146–Â�147
Instructional accommodation, for English language learn-
ers, 211–Â�213
Instructional focus, integration in effective instruction, 29
Instructional overview, 7–Â�8
Instructional plans
arts literacy and, 199
English language arts, 150
for English language learners, 209, 213–Â�217
historical curriculum, 156–Â�157
response to intervention and, 227
sample plans, 267–Â�282
science reading and writing, 168–Â�171
ten tips for effective teaching and, 251
Instructional routine, guidelines for, 28–Â�30
Integrated instruction
arts literacy, 199–Â�202
for English language learners, 214–Â�217
in science writing, 171–Â�172
vocabulary development and, 47
Interactive reviews, arts literacy assessment and, 195–Â�196
Intermediate fluency stage, second-�language acquisition,
206–Â�207
International Reading Association, 265
Intervention
critical components of, 225–Â�229
for English-Â�language learners, 216–Â�217
response in secondary education, 223–Â�230
in secondary schools, 4
IPFI, see Individual Protective Factors Index
Jane Eyre (Bronte), 115
Julie of the Wolves (George), 117
Laboratory reports, writing instructions for, 170–Â�171
Language constructions, for English language learners, 210–Â�211
Language experience
science reading and writing, 167–Â�171
vocabulary development and, 48
Language functions, English language learners and instruc-
tion in, 211–Â�212
LD, see Learning disabilities
Learning
assessment, writing as tool for, 103
disciplinary literacy and assessment of, 144–Â�1450
history curriculum, disciplinary approach to, 154
monitoring in English-Â�language learners, 216–Â�217
reading comprehension and, 80–Â�84
second-�language challenges in, 207, 214
writing and, 3, 97–Â�110
Learning disabilities (LD)
legislation involving, 240–Â�247
reading comprehension and, 77, 79, 89–Â�90
social and emotional learning and, 21
Legal issues in literacy, 239–Â�247
Legislation, current law, policies and initiatives, 5
Lesson plan development and delivery, 7
for English language learners, 209, 213–Â�217
sample lesson plans, 267–Â�282
science writing and, 172–Â�174
Lexile framework, text complexity assessment, 117–Â�118
LINCS, see List, Imagine, Note, Construct, and Self-�test
Linguistics, morphology and, 42–Â�43
List, Imagine, Note, Construct, and Self-�test (LINCS),
vocabulary development, 54
Literacy
in arts, 191–Â�202
assessment and instruction, 2–Â�3
dance literacy, 195
disciplinary literacy, 3–Â�4, 127–Â�137
in drama, 195
historical background of policies concerning, 240–Â�247
in mathematics texts, 179–Â�188
in music, 194–Â�195
in science, 165–Â�175
student engagement in, 150
teaching framework, 2
in visual arts, 195
web resources, 265
“Look, lean, whisper” technique, 37
Magnet summaries, mathematics content, 186–Â�188
Mathematics literacy
differentiating instruction and, 187–Â�188
disciplinary literacy and, 132–Â�137
microblogging applications in, 236
reading and writing instruction and, 179–Â�188
Mathography, self-Â�expression using, 186–Â�188
“Matthew effect,” reading fluency and, 63–Â�64
Maze assessment, reading fluency, 68
Meaningful use
vocabulary development and, 47–Â�48
word consciousness and, 51
Measuring Violence-�Related Attitudes, Behaviors, and Influ-
ences among Youths: A Compendium of Assessment Tools
(Dahlberg,), 19
Meta-�Metrics Company, 116
Microblogging, 4, 233–Â�236
Modeling
explicit instruction with, 28–Â�30
guidelines for, 253–Â�254
Monitoring, for English language learners, 215–Â�217
Morphemes, 42–43
word meaning from, 49–Â�50
Morphological awareness, 42–Â�43
vocabulary development and word selection, 46
web resources, 264
� 50
word-Â�learning strategies and, 49–Â�
MTSS, see Multi-�tiered systems of support
Multiple texts, disciplinary literacy and, 136–Â�137
Multiple-Â�choice testing, vocabulary development and, 45–Â�46
Multi-�tiered systems of support (MTSS), 4
current laws, policies and initiatives for, 242–Â�243
response in secondary education, 223–Â�230
see also Tier 1 progress monitoring; Tier 2 progress moni-
toring; Tier 3 progress monitoring
Music, literacy development in, 194–Â�195
“My Spirit Will Not Haunt the Mound” (Hardy), 148–Â�149
NAEP, see National Assessment of Educational Progress
Narrative writing, 102
National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP), 98,
122, 129, 159, 246–Â�247
National Coalition for Core Arts Standards (NCCAS), 199–Â�202
Index 295

National Council of Teachers of Mathematics, 184 Process writing routine, 105–Â�106

National Reading Panel project report, 63–Â�64 Productive language skills, Common Core State Standards
peer-Â�mediated learning, 90–Â�92 (CCSS) for, 208–Â�209
reading comprehension and, 77 Professional development
National Standards for Arts Education, 199 response to intervention and, 229
Native language interference, in English language learning, web resources, 266
207–Â�209 Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA), 247
NCCAS, see National Coalition for Core Arts Standards Progress monitoring, 37
No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB; PL 107-Â�110), 241–Â�242 curriculum-Â�based measurement, 68–Â�69
Nominalization, disciplinary literacy and, 136–Â�137 effective instruction and, 28
Norm-�referenced tests (NRT), reading comprehension, 81 maze assessment, 68
oral reading fluency, 67–Â�68
response to intervention, 226
Objectives, in explicit instruction and modeling, 29–Â�30 Prosody
Observations, science reading and writing for, 168–Â�171 assessment of, 65
OECD, see Organization for Economic Cooperation and reading fluency and, 62–Â�63
Development Purpose in science writing, 170
Older students
fluency development in, 3, 61–Â�72
word pronunciation with, 48–Â�49 Qualitative information, text complexity, 118–Â�119
One-Â�to-Â�one conferring, 146–Â�148 Quantitative information, 117–Â�118
Opportunity for success, in literacy instruction, 150 Question generation
Oppositional behavior, as teaching strategy, 253 reading comprehension, 88
Oral reading fluency reciprocal teaching framework, 91–Â�92
benchmark/screening decisions and, 66–Â�67
confusion about assessments, 67–Â�68
norms for, 66–Â�67 Reader information, text complexity, 119–Â�120
Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development Reading and Writing in the Mathematics Classroom (Edwards),
(OECD), 247 181
Outcome-�based assessment, response to intervention, 226 Reading comprehension
Out-Â�of-Â�school reading, 121–Â�122 after-Â�reading assessment, 86
Outside-Â�in strategy, vocabulary development, 50 in algebra, 182–Â�183
arts literacy and, 191–Â�202
before-�reading assessment, 85
Paragraph structure, writing instruction and, 107 best practices, 3, 75–Â�92
Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and collaborative strategic reading, 87–Â�88
Careers (PARCC), 245 college and career readiness and, 79–Â�80
Peer-�mediated learning components of, 77
for English language learners, 211–Â�212 during-Â�reading assessment, 85–Â�86
reading comprehension and, 90–Â�92 evidence-Â�based practices, 78
Perceived probability of success, 252 fluency versus, 69–Â�72
Physical education, microblogging applications in, 235–Â�236 graphic organizers, 88–Â�90
PISA, see Programme for International Student Assessment historical reading, 154–Â�155
PL 89-Â�10, see Elementary and Secondary Education Act instruction in, 77–Â�79
(ESEA) of 1965 mathematics and, 179–Â�181
PL 93-Â�112, see Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Section 504 monitoring of, 216–Â�217
PL 93-Â�380, see Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act peer-Â�mediated learning, 90–Â�92
(FERPA) of 1974 question generation examples, 88
PL 94-Â�142, see Education for All Handicapped Children Act reciprocal teaching framework, 91–Â�92
of 1975 research-Â�based strategies, 87–Â�88
PL 101-Â�336, see Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) of 1990 science reading and writing, 165–Â�174
PL 107-�110, see No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB) of 2001 student motivation, 92
Plan, progress, purpose (RIP structure), 147 web resources, 265
Policies in literacy, current law, policies and initiatives, 5 Reading disability, social and emotional consequences, 2, 15–Â�23
Portfolio collections, arts literacy assessment and, 195–Â�196 Reading fluency
Positive intent of students, recognition of, 252 classroom settings, 70–Â�72
Practice, opportunities for, 31–Â�35 college and career preparation and, 64–Â�65
Predictions, reciprocal teaching framework, 91–Â�92 components of, 62–Â�63
Presentation, in history instruction, 159–Â�160 for English language learners, 211–Â�212
Presentism, in historical curriculum, 158 maze assessment, 68
Previewing, collaborative strategic reading, 87 oral fluency norms, 66
Prior knowledge, activation in English language learners, 214 research on role of, 63–Â�64, 70–Â�72
Problem solving skills development in, 69–Â�72
in algebra, reading and, 182–Â�183 web resources for, 263–Â�264
writing in mathematics problems, 185–Â�188 Reading levels, disciplinary literacy and, 129–Â�130
296 Index
Reading logs/journals, 144
English language arts and, 144–Â�145
Reading purposes and choices, text complexity and,
122–Â�123
Reading rate, 62
assessment of, 65–Â�66
Receptive language skills, Common Core State Standards
(CCSS) for, 208
Receptive vocabulary, second-�language acquisition and,
206–Â�207
Reciprocal teaching framework, reading comprehension,
91–Â�92
Reconceptualizing Literacy and Instruction for Mathematics
Classrooms (Siebert and Draper), 181
Rehabilitation Act of 1973, Section 504 (PL 93-�112), 241
Relationship skills, 19
Relevance, in literacy instruction, 150
Repetition, vocabulary development and, 47
Research
history curriculum, disciplinary approach to, 154
in impact of illiteracy, 19
reading comprehension strategies, 87–Â�88
web resources, 266
on writing instruction, 99
Resources on literacy, 6
Response, opportunities for, 31–Â�35
Response to intervention (RTI)
critical components of, 225–Â�229
current laws, policies and initiatives for, 242–Â�243
professional development for, 229
in secondary education, 223–Â�230
secondary education challenges for, 229–Â�230
Tier 1 intervention, 223, 226–Â�227
Tier 2 intervention, 223, 227–Â�228
Tier 3 intervention, 223, 228–Â�229
web resources, 266
Responsible decision making, 19
Return of the King, The (Tolkien), 117
Review, read aloud, record (RIP structure), 146
“Right there” questions, reading comprehension, 87–88
RTI, see Response to intervention
Rubrics
arts literacy assessment and, 195–Â�196
discussion rubrics, 146–Â�147
writing rubrics, 144–Â�146
Safe and Sound (Center for Social and Emotional Learning
[CASEL]), 20–Â�21
Scaffolding
for English language learners, 212
immediate and corrective feedback, 37
purposeful scaffolds, 31–Â�32
systematic instruction and, 28, 30–Â�31
in writing instruction, 108–Â�110
Science
contextualized and integrated instruction in, 171–Â�172
disciplinary literacy and, 128–Â�137
microblogging applications in, 236
purpose in science writing, 170
sample lesson plan for, 277–Â�278
writing for, 165–Â�175
Screening, writing assessment, 102
Secondary education
adolescent English language learners and, 205–Â�219
challenges to response to intervention in, 229–Â�230
intervention and multi-�tiered support systems, 4,
223–Â�230
science reading and writing and, 166–Â�167
text complexity requirements in, 3, 115–Â�124
Second-�language acquisition
progress assessment for, 217–Â�219
stages of, 206–Â�207
SEL, see Social and emotional learning
Self-�awareness, social and emotional learning and, 18
Self-�expression
in mathography, 186–Â�188
in microblogging, 235
Self-�management, social and emotional learning and, 18
Semantic feature analysis
in algebra, 182–Â�183
vocabulary development, 53
Semantic mapping, vocabulary development and,
52–Â�55
Semmelweis Reflex, 253
Sentence structure
text complexity and, 117–Â�118
writing instruction and, 105–Â�106
Sequencing of instruction, scaffolding and, 28, 30–Â�31
Sheltered instruction, for English language learners,
212–Â�213
Simplification, in history instruction, 159–Â�160
Single strategy instruction, reading comprehension and,
77–Â�79
Skills development
English language arts, 147–Â�149
in historical reading, 155, 157–Â�158
reading fluency, 69–Â�72
science reading and writing, 167–Â�171
social and emotional monitoring, 20–Â�21
writing, 103–Â�110
Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium, 246
Social and emotional learning (SEL)
Common Core State Standards (CCSS) and, 20
competency assessment, 19–Â�20
illiteracy and, 18–Â�19
skills development for, 20–Â�21
Social awareness, 19
Social consequences of reading disability, 2, 15–Â�23
Social studies, microblogging applications in, 236
Sociolinguistic knowledge, vocabulary development and,
43
SOLOM, see Student Oral Language Observation Matrix
Sourcing, in historical reading, 158, 160
Specialized needs of students in secondary classrooms,
7–Â�10
Speech emergence, second-�language acquisition and,
206–Â�207
SPLIT mnemonic, 183–Â�184
SSR, see Sustained silent reading
Stamina, text complexity and, 122
Standardized comprehension measures
arts literacy, 199–Â�202
reading comprehension assessment, 81
science reading and writing instruction and, 172–Â�174
web resources, 264–Â�265
Strategic problem-�solving, in mathematics texts, 181
Strategic reading, of mathematics texts, 180–Â�181
Striving Readers Comprehensive Literacy (SRCL) program,
244
Structured independent practice, for English-�language
learners, 216–Â�217
Index 297
Student age/grade
English language arts instruction and, 147–Â�148
reading fluency skills and, 69–Â�72
science reading and writing instruction and, 169–Â�171
vocabulary teaching and, 46–Â�49
Student disengagement, text complexity and, 120–Â�121
Student engagement
in community, 253
in historical literacy, 157–Â�158
in literacy instruction, 150
microblogging and, 4, 233–Â�236
science reading and writing instruction and, 172
Student motivation, reading comprehension, 92
Student Oral Language Observation Matrix (SOLOM),
217–Â�219
Student support for Common Core State Standards (CCSS)
goals, 122–Â�123
Subject matter teaching, disciplinary literacy and, 129–Â�130
Summarizing, reciprocal teaching framework, 91–Â�92
Summative assessment
English language learners, 217–Â�219
writing assessment, 102
Support for reading, disciplinary literacy and, 132–Â�137
Sustained silent reading (SSR), reading fluency and, 71
Syntactic awareness, 105–Â�106
in algebra, 182–Â�183
native language interference in English language learn-
ing and, 207–Â�209
Systematic instruction, scaffolding and, 28, 30–Â�31
Task information, text complexity, 119–Â�120
Task scaffolding, writing instruction, 109
Teaching routine
mathematics writing as, 186–Â�188
ten tips for effective teaching, 251–Â�254
in writing instruction, 108–Â�110
Technical terminology, disciplinary literacy and, 135–Â�137
Technology
engagement and achievement and, 4
microblogging for student engagement and, 4, 233–Â�236
student motivation and, 92
text complexity assessment, 116–Â�120
vocabulary development and, 46–Â�49
web resources, 266
10 Ways to Think Like a Mathematician (Houston), 180
Text complexity
Common Core State Standards (CCSS) approach to,
116–Â�124
Common Core State Standards (CCSS) staircase of, 121
determination of, 116–Â�120
expanded student reading experiences, 121–Â�122
qualitative information, 118–Â�119
quantitative information, 117–Â�118
reader and text information, 119–Â�120
in secondary schools, 3, 115–Â�124
stamina building and, 122
student disengagement and, 120–Â�121
“Text detectives,” reading comprehension assessment, 86
Text selection, student motivation and, 92
Text structure
knowledge of, 98–Â�99
overall structure, 107
teaching of, 105–Â�107
Text types, reading comprehension and, 81
“Think and search” questions, reading comprehension, 88
“Think-Â�aloud” exercise, English language arts instruction
and, 148
Thinking, historical assessment of, 162
Tier 1 progress monitoring
classroom setting, 71
for English language learners, 209–Â�211
oral reading fluency, 68
response to intervention and, 223, 226–Â�227
Tier 2 progress monitoring
for English language learners, 209–Â�211
reading fluency, 68, 71–Â�72
response to intervention and, 223, 227–Â�228
Tier 3 progress monitoring
for English language learners, 209–Â�211
reading fluency, 68, 71–Â�72
response to intervention and, 223, 228–Â�229
Time to Act: An Agenda for Advancing Adolescent Literacy for
College and Career Success (Carnegie Corporation of
New York), 43
Transcription skills, 98–Â�99
Transition words, writing instruction using, 108
TRIO programs, disciplinary literacy and, 129–Â�130
Tutoring resources, 6–Â�7
Universal Design for Learning (UDL), response to interven-
tion and, 223–Â�230
Universal screening measure, response to intervention, 225–Â�226
Urgency, communication of, 251–Â�252
Visual arts, literacy in, 195
Visual-�verbal association, vocabulary development, 54
Vocabulary development, 2, 40–Â�55
academic vocabulary knowledge, second-�language
challenges in, 207
assessment of, 44–Â�46
college and career preparation and, 44
Common Core State Standards (CCSS) , 44–Â�45
comprehensive plan components for, 48–Â�49
dance literacy, 195
disciplinary literacy and, 134–Â�137
drama literacy, 195
for English language learners, 209–Â�211
English language learners and, 51–Â�52
foursquare model, 53
graphic organizers and, 52–Â�55
importance of, 42–Â�43
mathematics reading and, 183–Â�184
maximization of teaching opportunities, 46
music literacy, 194–Â�195
outside-�in strategy, 50
receptive vocabulary, 206–Â�207
science reading and writing, 167–Â�171
semantic feature analysis, 53
semantic mapping and, 52–Â�55
student age/grade and, 46–Â�49
text complexity and, 117–Â�118
in visual arts, 195
visual-�verbal association, 54
web resources, 264
word consciousness and, 51
word line for, 54–Â�55
word meaning from context and morphemes, 49–Â�50
word pronunciation with older student, 48–Â�49
word selection for, 46
298 Index

Washington Square (James), 117 Words correct per minute (WCPM), oral reading fluency, 66
Web-�based resources Writing
assessment resources, 263 arts literacy and, 192–Â�202
disciplinary literacy, 265 assessment of, 102–Â�103
English language learners, 264 disciplinary literacy and, 134–Â�137
fluency programs, 263–Â�264 frequency of instruction in, 107–Â�110
policies and standards, 264–Â�265 laboratory reports, 170–Â�171
professional development, 266 learning and, 3, 97–Â�110
reading and literacy, 265 learning assessment using, 103
response to intervention, 266 mathematics and, 179, 184–Â�188
technical assistance and research centers, 266 purposes for science writing, 170
vocabulary/morphology instruction, 264 revising checklist, 104
WCPM, see Words correct per minute rubrics for, 144–Â�145
Whole-Â�class discussion, in history instruction, 158–Â�159 sample lesson plans for, 267–Â�271
Word consciousness, 51 scaffolding in, 108–Â�110
vocabulary development and, 48–Â�49 in science, 165–Â�175
Word line, vocabulary development, 54–Â�55 steps in writing process, 103–Â�105
Word maps, in algebra problem comprehension, 183–Â�185 strategies for, 105
Word problems, in algebra, 182–Â�184 task examples in instruction of, 109
Word relationships test, 45–Â�46 teaching routine in, 108–Â�110
Word-Â�learning strategies, vocabulary development and, text structure in, 105–Â�106
�49 types of, 102