common core standards and reading programs at the...
TRANSCRIPT
Author Monographs
TheCommonCoreStateStandards(CCSS,orCommonCore)haveusheredinanewerainthefieldofliteracy.Thisnewerahasthepotentialforimprovingeducationinthiscountry.Alternatively,theeracouldendwithaquietthud.Whathappensdependsonmanythings,themostimportantofwhichishowteacherswillcometoknow,understandandimplementtheCommonCoresuccessfully.Withoutteachers’knowledgeandexpertiseabouttheCommonCoreandhowtheycanimplementthemintheirclassrooms,theCCSShavelittlechanceofsuccess.
AsteacherslearnabouttheCCSS,theyarefilledwithquestions.“Doesthismeanwehavetothrowouteverythingwehavebeendoing?”“Arewebacktowholelanguage?”“Arewejustaddingmoretoourplate?”“Didn’twedothistwentyyearsago?”“Whataboutmystudentswhocan’tread?”“Dowenowhavetomakeupourwholecurriculum?”“Dowehavetofindallnewmaterialsforourstudentstoread?”“Whataboutstrategies?”“Arewesupposedtostopteachingthem?”
Thus,professionaldevelopmenthasneverbeenmoreimportantintheliteracyfieldthanitisnow.
WhileteachereducationinstitutionscanbegintoassistteachersinunderstandingtheStandards,itwillultimatelybelefttotheschooldistrictsthemselvestoeducatethealmostthreemillionelementaryteacherscurrentlyworkinginAmericanschools.
Schooldistrictswillneedhelp.ThathelpandassistancecancomefrommaterialsandreadingprogramsthatteachersusetoorganizetheirliteracyblocksaroundtheCCSS.Thereisno
inherentexpectationintheCommonCorethatteacherscreatetheirowncurriculum.Further,itisunrealisticandunfairtoexpectteacherstodeveloptheirowncurriculumaroundtheCommonCore.Teachershaveneitherthetimenorenergy,andmanydonothavetheexpertise,todevelopanewreadingcurriculumfromscratch.Besides,therearemanypositiveandevidence-basedpracticesincurrentusebyteachersandrecommendedinreadingprograms—thesepracticesneedtocontinue.
Inaddition,noinstructionalrecommendationsshouldbeinferredfromtheCommonCore.TheCCSSexplainonlywhatstudentshavetoknowandbeabletodo.Howteachersteachstudentstoknowandbeableto
Common Core Standards and Reading Programs at the Elementary
School LevelBy
Dr. Janice A. Dole
Professor, University of UtahDirector, Utah Center for Reading and Literacy
Content Facilitator, National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP)CCSS Consultant to Literacy Coaches, Salt Lake City School District, Utah
dowhatisrequiredintheCCSSisuptothemasliteracyprofessionals.HereiswherereadingprogramscanassistdistrictsandteachersintheireffortstosuccessfullyimplementtheCCSSinschoolsandclassrooms.
Thepurposeofthiswhitepaperistoassistadministrators,literacycoachesandteachersinhowtheycanassurethatthematerialsandprogramstheypurchasewill,infact,supportteachersinmeetingtheCommonCore. ThispaperbeginswithanexplanationofsomebasicprinciplesbehindtheStandards,andthendiscusseswhatprofessionalsinliteracyshouldlookforinareadingprogramtomakesureithasthequalitiesthatsupportteachersastheyteachtomeettheCCSS.
Basic Principles Behind the Common CoreImpliedbytheCommonCoreareseveralprinciplesthatarecentraltothemissionoftheCCSS.TheseprinciplesunderliethestandardsandwillneedtobecomearegularpartofclassroominstructioniftheCCSSaretobemet.Thislistisnotmeanttobeanexhaustiveone;readerscaninferotherprinciplesthatarenotmentionedhere.
Strong Foundational Skills.ThecriticalbeginningreadingskillsthatprovidetheunderlyingfoundationforteachingchildrentoreadremainstronginthenewCCSS.Fortunatelyforusall,nothinghaschangedintheearlyfoundationalskillsthatchildrenhavedevelopedtolearntoreadsuccessfully.AnowlargebodyofresearchsupportstheexplicitteachingoftheseskillstoallchildrenatgradesKindergartenthrough2(NICHD,2000;Snow,Burns,&Griffin,1998;Stanovich,2000).Threeofthe“bigfive”thattheNationalReadingPanel(NICHD,2000)identified—phonemicawareness,phonicsandfluency—allcontinuetobetaughtasteachersimplementtheCCSSintheirclassrooms.Themasteryoftheseskillsiscriticalforchildrentobeabletoreadcriticallyandanalyticallyinlatergrades.
Writing about Reading/Argumentative Writing.OneimportantprinciplethatcomesoutloudandclearintheCCSSisthefocusonwritingaboutwhatstudentsarereading.Theimportanceofwriting
ingeneral,andwritinginresponsetoreading,hasneverbeenclearer.
AcoreprincipleintheCCSSisthatstudentswriteconsistentlyabouttopicsandideasrelatedtotheirreadingandprovidetextevidencetosupporttheirideas.Thereisextensiveresearchthatconfirmstheimportanceofwritingtosupportreading.Inhisreviewoftheresearchonwritingtolearn,Newell(2006)
citedseveralstudiesthatdemonstratethatstudentscomprehendtextatadeeperlevelwhentheyhaveopportunitiestowriteaboutwhattheyread.
Inaddition,argumentativewritingtakespriorityinthenewCCSS.Writingstoriesisnolongerenough.TheCCSSexpectsstudentstoproducemoreinformativeandpersuasivewriting.TomeetthenewCCSS,studentswillneedtobeabletodrawonevidencefromthetextstodescribe,analyze,andreflectonwhattheyhaveread.
Importance of Vocabulary.AnotherfocusoftheCCSSistheintegrationofvocabularyintotheComprehensionStandards.WhilevocabularyhasitsownspaceintheCommonCore,itisalsointegratedintotheReadingStandards.Theunderlyingassumptionisthatvocabularyandcomprehensionareintricatelyrelated.Historically,readingresearchershavealwaysknownthestrongrelationshipbetweenvocabularyandcomprehension(Anderson&Freebody,1979;Anderson&Nagy,1991).Itisalsointuitivelyobvious—themorewordsweknow,thebetterourcomprehensionisgoingtobe.TheCCSSrequirestudentstomeetbenchmarksinvocabularyknowledgeandtousethatknowledgetocomprehendbetter.
TherearetwokindsofvocabularythattheCCSSaddress.First,generalTier2wordsaretargetedforstudentstolearn.Forexample,theReadingforInformationStandardsforGrade4askstudentsto“determinethemeaningofgeneralacademicanddomain-specificwordsorphrasesinatextrelevanttoaGrade4topicorsubjectarea.”Tier2wordsarewordsthatmature,adultlearnersknowanduseaspartoftheireverydayvocabulary(Beck,McKeown,&Kucan,2002).Forliteratureselections,Tier2wordscanbetargetedforinstruction,e.g.,acharactermaybeirascibleorpetulant.Forinformationaltexts,domain-specificwords
“Fortunately for us all, nothing has changed in these
early foundational skills that children
have to learn to read successfully.”
Common Core Standards and Reading Programs
centraltothetextcanbetargetedforinstruction,e.g..independence,Constitution.
Asecondkindofvocabularyisacademicvocabulary.Academicvocabularyconsistsofwordsthatareneededtounderstandtheacademiclanguageusedinliteracyclassrooms,e.g.,wordslikerealisticfiction,confirm,predict,andsummarize.ItisimportanttoteachTier2wordsaswellasacademicvocabularytohelpstudentsaccomplishtheiracademictasksproficiently.
Focus on Informational Texts.Researchhasdemonstratedthatnarrativetextsareeasiertoreadthaninformationaltexts.Thisholdstrueforadultsaswellaschildren(Graesser,Golding,&Long,1991).Thereissomethingaboutthepowerofastorythatresonateswithallhumanbeings,andthereforestoriesarerelativelyeasytoprocesscomparedtoinformationaltexts.Ingeneral,researchershavefoundthatadultstakelongertoreadandprocesstheinformationininformationaltextsandthattheyrecallandretainlessinformationfrominformationaltextsthantheydofromnarrativetexts.Thisislargelyduetothemoreoftenthannotwell-formedstorystructureofnarrativetextsandthemoreoftenthannotill-structurednatureofinformationaltexts.
However,learninghowtoreadinformationaltextsmustbecomeapriorityforstudents.Afterall,muchofwhatadultreadersreadisinformationalratherthannarrative.Untilfairlyrecently,though,mostelementaryteacherstaughtreadingwithnarrativetexts.Thatbegantochangeinthereadingprogramsoftheearly2000s.Slowly,moreinformationaltextshavebeenaddedtoreadingprogramsandmaterials.WiththenewCCSS,thechangefromreadingmostlynarrativetoreadingacombinationofnarrativeandinformationaltextwillcontinueandaccelerate.Thisisbecauseresearchershavebeguntoacknowledgetheimportantrolethatinformationaltextplaysinadults’livesandtheimportanceofteachingstudentstoreadthesetypesoftextsfromanearlyageon(Duke,2000;2004).
Access to Complex Text.AnothercriticallyimportantunderlyingassumptionoftheCCSSisthatstudentsneedtolearnhowtoreadmorecomplextextsthantheycurrentlyread.TheCCSSciteresearchonhighschoolstudentsthatshowsthat,astheyexithighschool,twelfth-gradersarenotreadyfortheleveloftextcomplexityofcollegeandcareertexts(ACT,2006;2009;
Adams,2010–2011).Therefore,studentsneedaccesstomorecomplextextearlierintheirschoolyears.
Textcomplexityhasbeencharacterizedinthreedifferentways.First,textcomplexitycanbecharacterizedquantitativelyasvocabularydifficultyandsentencelengthincrease.Textwithlongersentencesandlow-frequencyormultisyllabicwordsisgenerallyconsideredtobemoredifficultthantextwithshortersentencesandhigh-frequencyormonosyllabicwords.ExamplesofquantitativemeasuresareseenintheoldFryandDale-ChallreadabilityformulasaswellasthenowcommonLexilelevels.
Second,textcomplexitycanbedefinedqualitativelyalonganumberofdifferentdimensions.Anauthor’spurposecanmakeatextcomplex,suchaswhenanauthorusesironyorsarcasm.Thegenreofatextcanmakeitcomplex;aninformationaltext,suchasaproceduretooperateatoy,isoftenmorecomplexthananarrativetextrelatedtoafolktale.Theorganizationofatextcanleadtodifficultyinunderstandingatext;flashbacksinnarrativestypicallygiveyoungreadersdifficultywhenfirstencounteredintexts.Thespecificvocabularywithinatextcanmakeitcomplex;atypicaldomain-specifictextbooklikechemistryorphysicsisextremelycomplextoreadandunderstand.Theamountofpriorknowledgeneededtounderstandatextcanmakeitcomplex;ifauthorsassumetoomuchpriorknowledgeonthepartoftheirreaders,thencomprehensionsuffers.Howideasandconceptsareconnectedcanmakeatextcomplex;evenifreadersunderstandtheideasandconcepts,theymaynotunderstandtheirrelationshipsandhowtheyareconnected.Thiscanleadtocomprehensionbreakdowns.Finally,thesentencestructureswithinatextcanmakeitcomplex.Forexample,compound,complexsentencesaremoredifficulttounderstandthansimplesentences.Ingeneral,sentencesinnovelsforolderreadersthataretentofifteenlineslongarehardertounderstandthanshortersentences;paragraphsthataretwopageslongarehardertounderstandthanshorterparagraphs.
Last,complextextcanbecharacterizedbyreaderandtaskconditions.Theamountofpriorknowledgeandinterestreadershaveforagiventopicwillinfluencehowcomplexatextmaybeforthosereaders.Inaddition,thetasksassignedtoreaderscanrenderatextmoreorlesscomplex.Forexample,assignmentsthatrequire
Common Core Standards and Reading Programs
1)Strongfoundationalskills.Readingprogramsshouldcontinuetoassistteachersinteachingthestrongbeginningreadingskillsthatsupportchildrenlearningtoread.Theseincludephonemicawareness,phonics,andfluencyskills.Questionseducatorsshouldaskinclude:Doestheprogramteachphonemicawarenessandphonicsskills,especiallythoseimportantblendingskills,atearlygradelevels?Doestheprogramcontainearlydecodabletextssochildrencanpracticethephonicsskillstheylearninthetextstheyread?Doestheprogramteachfluencyskillsthroughmodelingandrepeatedreading?
2)WritingaboutReading/ArgumentativeWriting.Readingprogramsshouldassistteachersinassignmentsthataskstudentstowriteaboutwhattheyread.Questionseducatorsshouldaskinclude:Doestheprogramaskstudentstowriteaboutwhattheyhaveread?Doestheprogramaskstudentstoconductresearchbyreadingandwritingabouttopics?Doestheprogramaskstudentstospeakandwriteusingevidencefromatexttheyhavejustread?Doestheprogramshowstudentshowtomakeanargumentanddefenditwithideasandexamplesfromthetextstheyread?
3)ImportanceofVocabulary.Readingprogramshavecomealongwayintheirtreatmentofvocabularyinstructionbasedonestablishedandnewresearchonvocabularyteachingandlearning.Educatorsshouldask:DoestheprogramdirectlyteachTier2vocabularywordsthatwillbeusefulinstudents’comprehensionofthetexttheyread?Doestheprogramteachacademicwordsaswell?Doestheprogramusemorethanoneapproachforvocabularyinstruction?Istheresufficientrepetitionforvocabularyreviewandpractice?
4)FocusonInformationalTexts.Informationaltextshaveincreasedsignificantlyinnumbersintradebooksaswellasreadingprogramsoverthelastdozenorsoyears.Educatorsshouldask:Doestheprogramprovideanincreasingnumberofinformationaltextsasstudentsmovethroughthegradelevels?Doestheprogramassistteachersinteachingstudentsthedifferencesbetweennarrativeandinformationaltexts?Doestheprogramassistteachersinshowingstudentshowtoreadthosetexts?
readerstocompareandcontrastideasfromtwotextswillrenderthosetextsmorecomplexthanassignmentsthatrequirereaderstosummarizeeachtext.
Thesevariablesallcontributetomakingonetextsimpleandeasytounderstand,whilemakinganotheronecomplexandthereforedifficulttounderstand.HelpingteachersunderstandtextcomplexityisanimportantgoalforCCSSprofessionaldevelopers.
Close Reads.AfinalprincipleofthenewCCSSis“closereads.”Closereadingisareadingandrereadingofsegmentsoftextinordertodiscoverwhattheauthorsays,howtheauthorsaysit,andwhytheauthorsaysit.Closereadingdependscriticallyonprovidingevidencefromthetexttosupportwhatreaderssayaboutatext.Readersareexpectedtoprovideexamplesofkeyideasanddetailswithinatext.Readersareexpectedtoprovideinformationabouttheauthor’scraftandstructure.Finally,readersareexpectedtointegrateknowledgeandideaswithinandacrossthetextstheyread.Overarchingthesethreekeyskillsandunderstandingsistheideathatstudentsareabletoprovideevidencefromthetexttosupporttheirargumentsandideas.
Reading Programs that Address the Common CoreWhatdoalltheseunderlyingprinciplesandassumptionsmeanforthosewhoareinvolvedintheselectionandimplementationofnewreadingprograms?Shouldeducatorsexpecttheseprogramstochangecompletely?ShouldtheyexpectreadingprogramstodropeverythingtheycurrentlydoandreplacethosepracticeswithnewonesthatmirrortheCCSS?Theanswertoallthesequestionsisaresounding“No!”Therearemanyexcellentfeaturesofreadingprogramsthatneedtostayinplace.Thesefeaturesappearinreadingprogramsbecauseofyearsofbasicandappliedresearchinthefieldofreadingthatrecommendtheiruse.Thesefeaturesshouldnotbethrownout—itcanbelikenedto“throwingoutthebabywiththebathwater.”
Atthesametime,thereareimportantchangesthateducatorsshouldlookforinnewreadingprogramssothattheskillsandstrategiesneededtomeetthestandardsoftheCommonCorewillbecovered.ThesechangesmirrortheprinciplesoftheCCSSlaidoutearlierinthispaper.
Common Core Standards and Reading Programs
5)AccesstoComplexTexts.TheexpectationthatteachersaskstudentstoreadincreasinglycomplextextsisacriticalpartoftheCCSS.Educatorsneedtoask:DoestheprogramprovideinformationaboutLexilelevels?Doestheprogramassistteachersinteachingcriticalcomponentsofcomplextext,suchasdifferentpurposes,genres,organization,andstructuresoftexts?Doestheprogramdiscusshowtoassiststudentsinaccessingmorecomplextext?
6)CloseReads.Finally,readingprogramsshouldassistteachersinconducting“closereads”ofsegmentsoftext.Educatorsshouldask:Doestheprogramassistteachersinaskingquestionsthatrequirestudentstoprovideevidenceandsupportfromthetext?Doestheprogramaskstudentstoanswermostlytext-dependentquestions?Doestheprogramaskstudentstointegrateknowledgeandideasfromdifferentpartsofatextandacrossmorethanonetext?
ConclusionTheReadingCommonCorehasthepotentialtochangehowreadingistaughtinmanypositiveways.Butteacherswillneedprofessionaldevelopmentaswellasreadingprogramsandmaterialsthatcanhelpthem.IftheseprogramsandmaterialsadheretotheprinciplesoftheCCSS,teacherswillhavethetextstheirstudentsneedandthetoolstohelpstudentslearntoreadthosetexts.ThatwillgoalongwaytowardsassistingstudentsinmeetingthehighbarsetbytheCCSS.
ReferencesACT(2006).Reading Between the Lines: What the ACT
Reveals About College Readiness in Reading.Retrievedfromwww.act.org/research/policymakers/pdf/reading_report.pdf.May25,2012.
ACT(2009).HowCollegeReadyaretheACT-tested2009HighSchoolGraduates?Retrievedfromwww.act.org/research/policymakers/cccr09/index.html.May25,2012.
Adams,M.J.(2010–2011).AdvancingOurStudents’LanguageandLiteracy:TheChallengeofComplexTexts.American Educator.34(4),3-11.
Anderson,R.C.,&Freebody,P.(1979).Vocabulary Knowledge.WashingtonDC:NationalInstituteofEducation.
Anderson,R.C.,&Nagy,W.E.(1991).WordMeanings.InR.
Barr,M.L.Kamil,P.Mosenthal,&P.D.Pearson(Eds.),Handbook of Reading ResearchVol.II(pp.690-724).Mahwah,NJ:Erlbaum.
Beck,I.L.,McKeown,M.G.,&Kucan,L.(2002).Bringing Words to Life.NY:Guilford.
Duke,N.K.(2000).3.6MinutesPerDay:TheScarcityofInformationalTextsinFirstGrade.Reading Research Quarterly.35(2),202-224.
Duke,N.K.(2004).TheCaseforInformationalText.Educational Leadership.61(6),40-44.
Graesser,A.,Golding,J.M.,&Long,D.L.(1991).NarrativeRepresentationandComprehension.InR.Barr,M.L.Kamil,P.Mosenthal,&P.D.Pearson(Eds.),Handbook of Reading ResearchVol.II(pp.171-205).Mahwah,NJ:Erlbaum.
NationalInstituteofChildHealthandHumanDevelopment(2000).Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching Children to Read: An Evidence-based Assessment of the Scientific Research Literature on Reading and Its Implications for Reading Instruction.WashingtonDC:NationalInstituteofChildHealthandHumanDevelopment.
Newell,G.E.(2006).WritingtoLearn.InC.A.MacArthur,S.Graham,&J.Fitzgerald(Eds.),Handbook of Writing Research(pp.235-247).NY:Guilford.
Snow,C.E.,Burns,M.S.,&Griffin,P.(1998).Preventing Reading Difficulties in Young Children.WashingtonDC:NationalAcademyPress.
Stanovich,K.E.(2000).Progress in Understanding Reading: Scientific Foundations and New Frontiers.NY:Guilford.
Common Core Standards and Reading Programs