Thursday, March 27, 2014

Multiple Text Comprehension in the Disciplines

image from oursmartweb.com

Naturally, our brain gathers information from multiple sources ALL the time. We are constantly getting information that contradicts itself, especially in the education world. Think about the evolution of a balanced literacy workshop approach. That stemmed from the movement from whole language to solely phonics instruction and evolved into a balanced approach. Every day, someone is publishing an article or writing a book that states what the latest and greatest instructional strategy is in the education world (Common Core, Close Reading, etc). So, it is only natural that we use multiple texts on the same topic in our classrooms. I find it hard to keep up with the latest trends in education because of the amount of research available with claims of ‘this is the next big thing in education’.

It doesn't matter what academic area or profession we are discussing or examining, in regards to reading and writing they are ALL reading and writing multiple texts in the same topics they study. If we are preparing students to be college and career ready, then it is our job to prepare students to be ready for their professions (whatever they choose). If professionals are expected to read and write multiple texts, then we should have students immersed in multiple texts in the classroom. 

Two things we need to teach in our classrooms are how to search for the proper information as well as using credible sources. With the overabundance of information that is at our students’ finger prints, we need to educate them how to analyze multiple texts and credit or discredit the information they obtain. We also need to make sure students are finding appropriate evidence for their claims or ideas that are developed through reading and writing. The world they are growing up in consists of them blogging, updating their statuses, or texting. All of these modes take away from students engaging in the formal writing process and creates writers who are immature. By having students write about the same topic in a different way, we are working towards developing those formal writing skills so many of our students lack.



Students should be reading multiple texts on the same topic that vary in reading complexity. I agree with an assertion made by Cynthia Hynd Shanahan in her article Reading and Writing across Multiple Texts that sometimes we worry about the level of a complex text instead of teaching students the strategies to navigate through a complex text. If we present various levels of text to our students and teach them how to read them with different lenses, the students will be better equipped to comprehend a wide-variety of texts. Students need specific strategies taught to them in order for them to comprehend complex text they will encounter. They need to be taught where to go when they encounter a tough vocabulary word. Students need to be taught how to build background knowledge on topics and to read multiple texts to help build that knowledge base. They need to understand the importance of looking at both sides of a topic before forming an opinion. They also need to know how to navigate through specific genres. They will be able to comprehend and take more away from an article if they have been taught the basic skills of how to change their reading lens based on the genre they are reading.    

The idea to have students read like historians fits in with the curriculum we have in my district. The students are charged to participate in a research project centering on our social studies content. Students are asked to read a wide-variety of texts and to synthesize this material to form their own thoughts and ideas. The majority of my students seem to use the computer to search for information instead of reading books published on the topic. The process historians’ uses (validate a source, contextualize the author/time written, and corroborate with other sources) is a great process to teach students when researching. This process needs to be taught and broken down for students in the classroom. They cannot be expected to know how to research and pull together all the pieces on their own. It is important that we have students participate, practice, and learn how to read across multiple texts in the classroom.

The process laid out in the article is one that we can use in any academic area. The students need to read a general article that builds background knowledge about the topic that everyone has access to in regards to reading level. Then, students need to study a second text (harder in text complexity). After that, they read a third text and study that as well. When they have read the three different texts, the fun begins. This is the time for students to compare and contrast the information presented in the three different articles and synthesize the different information. If we routinely did this in our classrooms, we would be raising critical readers and writers.

We want students to be able to read text and know that there is more information about there. Ultimately we are creating life-long learners who need to be able to find information on their own. As teachers, we are constantly reading and finding more information on new and more effective ways to instruct our students. We want students to be empowered to do that. In order for them to synthesize all of the information, we need to lay the foundations for how to do this.

Our goal is to have students be more critical when reading informational or literature. We want students to be able to synthesize the information learned from multiple sources to form their ideas and have an opinion about it. 





Friday, March 7, 2014

Text Complexity

In 2009 when David Coleman, William McCallum, Jason Zimba and Susan Pimetel sat to create the ELA Common Core Standards, one large focus was on text complexity. The ELA Anchor Standard 10 for Reading states:

Read and comprehend complex literary and informational texts independently and proficiently.

So much power is put into so little words!

One of the big debates in education is making complex text available to all students: those that excel, those that are striving readers, the whole shebang. While the focus of this post is not to go into the debate at length, it is important to know that reading and comprehending complex text is expected of all students. If it interests you, Dr. Freddy Hiebert discusses this topic and need for complex texts in the classroom in this webinar and you can also check out her website in which she explores many topics on the Common Core. 

In this post, I am going to explain the different stages of determining text complexity (according to the Common Core). 

image from teachingthecore.wordpress.com


There are 3 different ways in which you can determine text complexity: qualitatively, quantitatively, and relating to the reader & task. In short, evaluating if a text is complex or not is determined by the following factors:

Quantitative: Determined by algorithm - a numerical product of looking deeply at number of syllables in sentences, word length, word frequency/uniqueness, etc.

I used www.readabilityforumulas.com to calculate the quantitative results. I have interpreted the results using the Fry Readability Graph.

Qualitative: Determined by humans - how is the text organized, what are the deep meanings of the text, etc. In this evaluation, I will look at the quality of text using the following wordage:

Slightly Complex
Moderately Complex
Very Complex
Exceedingly Complex

I used rubrics from http://achievethecore.org/ in order to look at qualitative complexity. This is a great website that looks at the Common Core and gives resources in order to help make the standards comprehensible.

Reader & Text: Determined by teacher - how the teacher can use the text within the classroom

I will go through one of the units I am currently teaching my 4th and 5th graders and demonstrate how I determine text complexity for the mentor texts that I am using.

Social studies is integrated into my literacy curriculum, so at the moment I am teaching through the lens of the American Revolution. My students and I are currently tackling the causes of the revolution and looking at the essential question: What causes change? Through this topic, I have been teaching point-of-view, author's purpose and text structure.

Book #1: The Scarlet Stockings Spy by Trinka Hakes Noble, Illustrated by Robert Papp
Type of Text: Historical Fiction Literature

at amazon.com

Reader & Task: 
I use this book to teach about perspective and point of view. The little girl in the book is a Patriot and devises a plan with her brother to spy on British ships in the Boston Harbor. I would recommend this book to teachers who are interested in teaching how author's play with language. There is a lot of good figurative language that is very rich and if a student were to read this in the intermediate levels, he or she may need teacher supports.

Quantitative Results:


Quantitatively, this picture book is at the 9th grade level. This may surprise some as picture books are often thought of as an "elementary" text. This book has complex words in it like "tradesfolk", "glistening" and "rebellion". This is to be expected, however, since there is a lot of domain specific vocabulary unique to the American Revolutionary war. 

Qualitative Results: 

Text Structure: Exceedingly Complex -- The structure includes subplots, time shifts, point of view of a patriot girl, and has multiple, complex characters.

Language Features: Very Complex -- Language in this text is very specific to the American Revolutionary War; therefore, the vocabulary is very domain specific.

Meaning: Exceedingly Complex -- There is a subtle, overarching theme relating to the cost of war which is very ambiguous.

Knowledge Demands: Exceedingly Complex -- There is a lot of knowledge about life during the 18th century that needs to be known, especially how allegiance was classified during that time.
----------

Book #2: The Split History of the American Revolution: A Perspectives Flip Book by Michael Burgan
Type of Text: Informational Text

     

Reader & Task:
This book is a part of a series that shows two perspectives to the same topic in history. In this particular book, one side of the book details the British point of view while the other side looks at the Patriot point of view. This text acts and looks like a typical social studies text but in a picture book form. I use excerpts from this book to teach about the Boston Riot/Massacre (wording depends on who you ask!) and the incidence of bias within historical accounts. To use with a class, use excerpts as a read aloud and analyze perspective and bias.

Quantitative Results: 

This book is considered to be at the 9th grade level, although it is "teetering" on the 10th grade side. Domain specific vocabulary that is showcased in this book includes "representatives", "smuggling" and "molasses", very discipline specific vocabulary.

Qualitative Results: 

Text StructureModerately Complex -- The structure is what to be expected in a "typical" informational text. It is in chronological order, has graphics that relates to the text, and is clear about the history of the American Revolutionary War. It does have two perspectives; therefore, making the text a bit more complex.

Language Features: Very Complex -- Language in this text is very specific to the American Revolutionary War; therefore, the vocabulary is very domain specific.

Meaning: Moderately Complex -- Meaning of the content is laid out explicitly with having two perspectives of the American Revolutionary War.

Knowledge Demands: Exceedingly Complex -- There is a lot of knowledge about life during the 18th century that needs to be known.

----------

Book #3: Woods Runner by Gary Paulsen
Type of Text: Historical Fiction/Informational Text Hybrid

at amazon.com

Reader & Task:

This novel gives a fictional historical account of a boy who is caught in between the American Revolutionary War. It is a hybrid because before every chapter, there is a small informational passage that gives real, historical context about the war to craft the setting in the book. I use this book as a read aloud and we analyze the organization of the text. This is important because the students learn how to navigate a hybrid text.

Quantitative Results: 


According to the scale, this book lands at around a seventh grade reading level. The sentences are less complex and shorter. There are not as many multisyllabic words. There are some domain specific words related to the time period, but not as much.

Qualitative Results: 

Text Structure: Moderately Complex -- This book is a hybrid novel that alternates between a fictional historic point of view and informational text that supports the setting. The weaving of the two story lines makes this text moderately complex.

Language Features: 
Moderately Complex  -- Some language is specific to the American Revolutionary War time period, but the language is conversational. There are some places where language complexity appears.

Meaning: Moderately Complex -- Theme is there and pretty much explicit but there are some subtleties within that theme.

Knowledge Demands: Very Complex -- Paulsen does a great job giving context to the reader about the American Revolutionary War, but there are parts in which a student would comprehend better if background knowledge is presented in order to make the experience more common to the reader.

----------

Looking at the evaluation of text complexity with these specific texts, I would recommend that a teacher use these texts in the intermediate elementary levels only if appropriate scaffolds are in place. I am not suggesting that we over scaffold, but in order to hit the strategies that could be taught with these books such as point of view, bias, etc., it is necessary for some scaffolds to be in place such as read alouds, shared reading, vocabulary support if needed, etc. These books are being used in my classroom at the moment and are embedded into a study of the American Revolutionary War; therefore, students have some experience with the historical time period. 


I was somewhat surprised that my picture book, after evaluation, is considered to be more complex than my chapter book. It's amazing what stigma comes with "types" of text, but this evaluation shows that text can be complex in many different ways!