Thinking about Key Details

As the first cluster of standards for both literature and informational text fall under the umbrella of key ideas and details, it is clear that they are important concepts. But what exactly are the key details students should adhere to? In literature, the elements of narratives are delineated for primary grades, along with questioning. However, aren’t the details students need to highlight relative to the task? If students are trying to unpack the characters, then perhaps the most significant details would be different from those that depict the setting. And while significant plot points should reveal elements of the character, they may not give a complete picture. This got me thinking about how to teach key details so that we understand the gist of what we read, but also have clarity in dissecting different elements of what we read. Although the standards do not mention minor details, students must also be able to distinguish between the details that represent the crux of what they are examining and the cursory details that enhance the story. Perhaps we can examine stories with a whole-part-whole approach. What are the key details that disclose the plot? What details illuminate the characters? What details paint the setting? Which details support the theme? Were these details related to the plot, characters, setting, or all? Can we pull from those key details to determine the theme? Which details are key to answering text-dependent questions? Perhaps through our process of close reading, we can read for each purpose, map out the important details for each area, and then analyze how they cross over. Perhaps then, we could all develop more clarity! Below is an idea of how to organize a class chart examining these different elements. Of course, there are still key details to think about for informational text, but I will save that for another day!

Examining Key Details

Title of Story:

Focus	Plot/Events	Setting	Characters	Theme	Questions
Key Details

Unless…

“I speak for the trees, for the trees have no tongues.” – The Lorax by Dr. Seuss

I have been thinking about the Lorax a lot lately. It is my son’s current favorite movie, and while he enjoys the music and finds humor throughout, I find myself mulling around the inherent messages of the movie (and the book) and how it could be used in the classroom. I love the complexity of the Once-ler in the movie.  As we watch the film, my son wonders if the Once-ler is bad. In the book, that seems a little more clear cut, but the movie offers background information of the Once-ler as a dreamer, a victim of his family, and one who endures despite the odds. However, he does indeed become “bad” as he become engulfed in the greed of money. Through contrition he sees redemption. We are also offered the comparison character of Mr. O’Hare, who creates an entire city deprived of the most essential element of life, air, so that he can profit. How do we define evil? When does someone cross the line? Can someone be both good and evil? How would you characterize the Once-ler in the movie vs. the book? Why do these perspectives vary? One of the greatest goals of Common Core is to get students to think deeply and analyze from multiple perspectives. Why not use movies to support this goal? I am not saying most lessons should entail film clips, but they are an engaging way of drawing students into the world of cognition. And, while we need to consider complex texts, the use of the arts (including paintings and music) can be equally intriguing. It seems to me that the appeal of the movie could work at multiple levels.

“Which way does a tree fall? A tree falls the way it leans. Be careful which way you lean.”
– The Lorax by Dr. Seuss

“Are they sad?” This is the question my three-year old consistently asks as the animals and the Lorax mourn the loss of the tree that the Once-ler just cut down. Although he can’t articulate how he knows they are sad, older students (such as first and second graders) can. As the Once-ler hums along pulling the tufts off the tree, lying about his acts, it is clear that he feels very differently than the animals. What clues do we see and hear that tell us how the different characters feel about the first Truffula Tree being cut down? (Text-dependent question) How and why do their points of view vary? (Understanding Point of View RL 6) How does your point of view of an event affect how you behave? (Big Idea Question) In the movie, the dialogue, music, and words used to convey their thoughts reveal how each character feels. This small five-minute clip could easily be viewed several times to analyze these questions from multiple perspectives. (Close Reading)

“Unless someone like you cares a whole awful lot,
Nothing is going to get better. It’s not.” – The Lorax by Dr. Seuss

Contemplate this quote for a moment. What do you connect it to? What are your thoughts? What comes to your mind that needs change? How does this relate to our daily lives? Our current climate? How does this relate to history? Who do we know that worked to make “it” better?  The Lorax provides a lens for upper grades and beyond to delve into big ideas about change and making a difference.  What historical figures cared about transformation? How did they show that they cared? Does caring always lead to improvement? (What about those who care about negative changes?) How will you make a difference now? What issues affect your current lives that you can make better or change? (Bullying?) What are the consequences of not getting involved?

Before I exit my post for the week, I would like to leave you with one last quote to think about Common Core and –  in the spirit of The Lorax – our lives: “It’s not about what it is, it’s about what it can become.” 

Using Close Reading and Questioning

Earlier in the year I wrote about the importance of close readings and what they entailed. As close readings are an essential part of Common Core standards, teachers will need to rethink how they spend their shared reading time block. Teachers accustomed to using textbook models are comfortable with following the steps outlined in the text for a single reading of the story. Some teachers may have extended the reading a second time. Teachers familiar with comprehension strategy instruction may spend several days or a week on one story to focus on a specific comprehension strategy. Lifting the text and examining the text for evidence may be a norm. However, close reading goes beyond both of those. It certainly has elements of comprehension strategy instruction, but demands more time on text, and certainly more student time with challenging texts. Teachers may read the same text for 1-2 weeks for a variety of purposes, sometimes as a whole, other times in small parts. Teachers will need to strategically map out this time, selecting texts with depth, and focusing lessons around content that students need to understand. For example, if a third grade teacher was focusing on the comprehension strategy of questioning, with the objectives of readers ask questions about unknown words, parts, and key details, as well as readers find answer to their questions using the text, background knowledge, inferring, or outside source (with some questions being unanswered), a close reading of The Princess and the Beggar by Anne Sibley O’Brien may look like the following:

Day	Lesson	Charting/Activity	Standards Addressed
1	Read story aloud with students. Stop and pause throughout the reading.	Students write questions on post-it notes throughout the reading, including unknown words and phrases. Have students share and chart their deepest question.	RL 1, RL 4
2	Classifying questions: What type of questions do we ask? (e.g. clarifying, character motives/traits, unknown words or phrases (vocabulary), predicting etc.)	Analyze the questions from day one for how they relate. Group questions and determine categories. Have students work in collaborative groups to determine how they can categorize their questions. As a class discuss questions that didn’t fit into your categories and create any new ones that they may need.	RL 1
3-4	Chart story elements students remember from the day before. Read story aloud again. Discuss the categories from the day before. Tell them today they will examine the category for character traits/motives. As we reread the story, we will examine how the princess, the king, and the beggar think, speak, and behave. Then we will revisit those questions	BEFORE READING: Chart story elements (characters, setting, major events). Chart questions students have about the three different characters. DURING READING: Chart character traits’ motives along with the evidence from the text. Examine how those traits relate to the sequence of events. Revisit questions throughout the reading as they are answered. AFTER READING: Examine which questions were not answered. Can we answer them now? If not, why? Which questions seemed to get at the heart of our characters? Which types of questions got us deeper into understanding the characters? (For example, how and why vs. who)	RL 3
5	Examine just the poem within the story. What is the poem about? Pull the poem apart to determine meaning and infer the point/lesson of the poem. What does this poem reveal about the princess?	Have the poem written up separately from the story so you can pull it apart and discuss meaning as it unfolds and how it relates to the story as a whole. Include questions they have about the poem, and work to find the answers through pulling it apart. Examine the literal and nonliteral language within the poem.	RL 4, RL 5
6	New Words and Phrases: Examine their questions that related to vocabulary. Take words/phrases from day 1 that have not been addressed. Students should have text so they can look closely for evidence.	CHART: Write the new words/phrases, evidence or clues for determining meaning, and images to help us remember the meaning. Give students their own chart too. As the class discusses the words, they should write their thinking on their page and share out. For words without context, provide context (either sentences or pictures) for them to help support inferring for word meaning.	L4
7	Shared Inquiry: Examine a specific text-dependent question, such as, “How does pride play a role in the princess’s decisions?”	Students brainstorm their thinking first, citing text evidence for their answers. Class discussion starts with this question, but then probes beyond based on the conversation. Students have text to use for evidence. Ultimately, the class examines the data of their discussion and revisits their answers from before.	RL 1
8	Revisit Questions from Day 1: Answer and Sort	Whole Class: Examine some questions from day 1: Discuss the questions and their answers, citing evidence. Sort questions by the types of answers (Text, Background Knowledge, Infer, Outside Source/Unanswered)	RL 1
9	Answering Questions and Sorting by T, BK, I, and U/OS	Students work in collaborative groups to find the answers to the questions they sorted on day 2. Where did their answers come from? Cite evidence when answering and sort questions in the end by the categories from day 8.	RL 1
10	Recount	Students write a recount of the story using the brainstorm organizer. Students also determine the lesson of the story. Students share recount with a partner.	RL 2
11	Lesson Discussion	Examine the lessons students wrote from the day before. Organize by teams of similar thinking. Have them get into groups and develop an argument as to why that lesson matches the story. Have a class debate.	RL 2, W 1

Effective close reading should draw students deeper into the nuances of the text. Students should feel empowered and develop a greater understanding of the importance of exploring texts. Close readings should build students’ stamina and drive, and ultimately build a passion for reading, which is one of our foundational goals to begin with.

Text Structures and Features

When I was growing up, there was little thought to the type of text we were reading. I followed assignments, read the stories in the primer, and answered questions. It did not occur to me that we should read differently for different types of text. To be honest, this thought did not occur to me until I became a teacher, and more specifically, when I first taught third grade. I remember doing a STAR practice test the week before doomsday (the actual STAR test), and my students performed horribly on an informational passage. The questions seemed really difficult unless you read the passage for the structure of expository text. Once you pulled out the supporting details each paragraph detailed about the topic, the answers were clear. This required the reader to identify the type of text, understand how the text was organized, examine the relationships within and among the paragraphs, and then relate them to the questions being asked. From then on out, I made understanding genres part of my reading instruction along with learning to distinguish among them, and determining what types of organizers would help the reader unpack the text. Common Core has clearly identified the need for students to understand diverse genres and their elements. This emphasis seems very appropriate to me given my experiences with working with students. While the fact that we have two separate categories of standards to elucidate the importance of explicitly teaching types of text, today I want to look at standard 5.

Craft and Structure: College and Career Readiness Anchor Standard 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. (CCSS)

Students are expected to know how different types of texts are organized, distinguish among types of genres, and determine how the separate parts relate to the whole. When examining standard 5 for grades K-5 for literature, the types of texts mentioned include stories, poems, dramas, and prose. Traditionally, these categories were easily distinguished by stories/prose being in paragraph format, poems being written in stanzas, and dramas including a speaker before the sentence. Modern writers certainly blur these lines and can make classifying text more challenging. However, for the elementary classroom, teachers can easily select text that keeps these categories clear to build basic building blocks. The venn diagram  examines some of the basic features that distinguish poetry and narratives. Dramas are similar to narratives except that the organization is related to the speaker rather than paragraph format and that white space may be used to signify the change in characters.

Standard five for informational texts specifically examines text features and structures. Students are expected to differentiate among the different types of texts as early as kindergarten. Throughout the grade levels, students increasingly become more responsible for understanding the structure of texts, the significance of their impact on the development of the text, and the dissection of the relationships between parts, wholes, and the text progression. The set of differentiated task cards to the left support instruction and independent practice of expository text features for primary grades. These skills are essential building blocks since students in fourth and fifth grades need to be able to identify the type of text organization or structure– i.e. cause and effect, problem/solution, comparison, etc). Although some literature standards do not examine the relationship between narratives to expository text, this distinction is later made in the informational texts standards. Therefore, it is critical that students understand the features and structures that distinguish different types of texts from a basic to more complex level throughout the grades.

So how does standard 5 impact our instruction in the classroom? Students need to analyze texts from an early age, identify features that genres have in common. Primary teachers may begin the year by having students sort books as they read them aloud, then delve into the library and examine how the books can be sorted by genre. Text identification should become part of every story that is read. Perhaps instead of scaffolding the story before reading, the class can examine the text structures and features to determine what they are reading for. What type of organizer would work to keep track of our thinking about a text? What can we expect to find in the text? Thinking about comprehension strategy instruction, this relates to predictions. Rather than just predicting events, readers can predict the type of text they will be reading. Readers of all grade levels will benefit from examining texts closely to understand and determine the features and structures to improve comprehension. And, as with all vocabulary, the language of the discipline needs to be part of their every day discussions so that it becomes how they articulate their ideas.

Tiering Vocabulary

When considering the significance of language and words, it is  important to note the three-tiered analysis outlined in Appendix A of the Common Core State Standards. These tiers represent different types of words students need to grapple with, and although some are more complex than other, requiring more support, all types of words are important for students.

Tier one is everyday language that young learners develop. Although English Language Learners students will need support in this area, most native speakers naturally develop this category of words. Tier two, or general academic words, are words of precision that are found within and across texts. They are not specific to a particular area of study, but are exacting in their selection to convey a message. Teachers need to examine tier two words carefully in text, as they are often the least supported by instruction and often don’t have enough context clues to support their meaning. Tier three, or domain specific words, is particular to a field of study. Often found in expository text, they are often clearly defined and documented in a glossary. These are the technical terms students learn for a specific area of study. Students learn these words best over time when applied in multiple settings. Table 3 examines the gist of these three different categories of words. For a more in-depth analysis, Appendix A of Common Core Standards gives more examples of these types of words within context.

Synopsis of Three-Tier Leveled Words

Tier	One	Two	Three
Types of Words	Everyday Language	Vocabulary that is precise and more advanced	Language of the Discipline: Specific to a field of study
Examples	Sad, happy, angry	Devasted, elated, infuriated	Geologist, sedimentary, metamorphic

The Big Changes with Common Core Standards

I realized that in my posts I have jumped into some of my findings within the standards without stepping back and discussing some of the broader changes brought by the Common Core Standards. I suppose these are the elements that are well documented and discussed frequently at any of the Common Core Support websites. However, I will address them here as well in case you haven’t had the time or energy to research out these changes.

The New York State Department of Education (www.engageny.org) cites five specific instructional shifts in literacy related to the primary grades. The first is the balancing of literature and informational text. By third grade, students should be engaging with 50% of each type of text. Secondly, when reading, students should be focusing on text-dependent questions, which require text-based answers. While skills such as main idea are still relevant, teachers should focus on questions that get deeper into the structure and craft of a particular story.  Third of all, writing should shift from personal response and narrative to writing from sources. Rather than convey feelings, students should write arguments that are deeply grounded with evidence to inform their audience. A fourth critical aspect of Common Core is text selection, demanding that teachers evaluate the quality of text so that they increase with complexity and have enough depth for students to perform close reading. The last significant shift focuses on the importance of students developing academic vocabulary at all ages. This focus on specificity of language should also help support students in accessing complex text.

The Student Achievement Partners (www.achievethecore.org) classify the instructional shifts with Common Core by three major changes, which embody those reported by New York. Essentially, students build their schema through content-rich literature and informational texts, focus both reading and writing on evidence from text, and build complexity in reading through types of text and by developing vocabulary.

While at first glance, these change may not seem sweeping, in actuality they are. The Common Core Standards really do embody what good comprehension strategy instruction has always entailed – lifting the text, examining the text from multiple perspectives, and sharing and discussing ideas. However, new guidelines on what students should be examining are inherent within these standards, and the idea of slowing down is in greater depth. Greater emphasis is place on informational text than in the past, and although vocabulary has always been deemed important, Common Core makes a resounding statement about how we must do much better for all our students by making all grade levels accountable and pulling apart the types of vocabulary students must develop. In addition, Common Core demands critical thinking rather than intuition.  “What’s your evidence?” should be a frequent question that demands textual proof. I’m not going to lie – when you teach your students to question, debate, and produce hard evidence, they may begin to question things they once accepted as “just because”…

Closing in on Close Reading

The headlining College and Career Readiness anchor standard has far more depth than may be ascertained upon the first read, which is exactly its point! CCR Standard 1 reads as follows:

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. (Common Core ELA Standards)

Calkins, Ehrenworth, and Lehman (2012) refer to this as the literal comprehension standard, emphasizing Common Core’s heavy concentration on students understanding and focusing on the meaning of the text. Although students will clearly need to delve deeper beyond the literal details as supported by grade level standards, Common Core purports that it is essential that all students have a stronghold on literal details and basic inferences first and foremost. Rather than the reader spiraling through his or her perspectives and the connections, the text should be the primary focus.

As we delve into this standard, you may notice that it begins with two seemingly innocuous words: read closely. Although teachers have supported this idea for many years, Common Core is actually referring to a more specific concept called close reading. Close reading is not a new term, having been used in both middle and high school in the past, but its focus in primary grades is a new application. This type of reading requires effective, deliberate teaching and strategy instruction. It is not enough to just tell students to look closer. They need quality text of appropriate complexity that is worth the reading, and specific ideas on how they can examine the text.

What does a close read look like? Below are three different definitions that embody similar ideas:

Rereading for the purpose of recognizing details and nuances of text that may go unnoticed during a cursory first read so that new understandings and insights may reveal themselves (Burkins and Yaris, 2013).

A careful and purposeful reading and rereading of text; an intensive analysis of a text. Reading to uncover layers of meaning that leads to deep comprehension. A focus on what the text says, how it says it, and what it means.

Close reading may include text-based questions and discussion with attention to vocabulary and word choice, context, tone, argument, and imagery (Tyson, 2013).

 Careful and purposeful rereading of a text (Fisher, 2013).

I like to think of close reading as scuba diving. When we speed through text and get the general meaning, we are swimming along the surface. Previous comprehension instruction where we paused throughout the story to discuss elements is like snorkeling. You can see beyond the surface, and depending on the clarity of the water (or your thinking) you can look into the story. But with close reading, you get to hang out for awhile and explore the wonders and nuances within texts. You have the air (or reading tools) necessary to immerse yourself completely and examine the deep structures of a text and connect your background knowledge to expand your schema.

These deep structures are the focus of Common Core, and include text organization, author’s purpose, connections among ideas, and synthesizing ideas. Readers must pay close attention to the word choice used within a text, and how the specificity of words is used to advance concepts, along with its key details, arguments, and inferences. Through close reading, students develop a deeper understanding of what the text is truly saying, and while their own ideas and schema will also affect their ideas, text analysis will really drive their thinking. Close reading entails examining complex, short passages that students and teachers can analyze from multiple perspectives through rereading. Rather than spending much time on frontloading, or activation of background knowledge, teachers and students should discuss their connections as they arise through the need to make sense of the text. Teachers should have previewed the text in advanced, and be prepared to examine the text with students using text-dependent questions. These questions include key details, general understandings, vocabulary and text structure, inferences, author’s purpose and point of view, arguments and intercontextual connections. All of these components of close reading can be found in Table 1. Close reading should not replace all types of reading, but is an essential part of the reading instruction. (Fisher & Frey 2012)

Table 1: Components of Close Reading

Deep Structures to Analyze	Modes of Teaching Accompanying Close Reading	Key Features of Close Reading	Types of Text-Dependent Questions
Text OrganizationAuthor’s Purpose Making Connections Synthesizing Inferring Key Details Arguments	Interactive Read AloudsThink Alouds Shared Reading Guided Reading (leveled texts) Collaborative Reading Independent Reading Writing	Short PassagesComplex Texts Limited Frontloading Repeated Readings Text-Dependent Questions Annotation	General Understandings Key Details Vocabulary & Text Structure Author’s Purpose & Point of View Inferences Opinions, Arguments, and Intertextual Connections

Through these close readings, students will develop the rest of the skills within CCR 1. Specifically, students will develop literal and inferential understanding of the text and be able to support their ideas with evidence from the text. Each grade level develops specific skills that students should master within this frame, but teachers must keep this bigger picture in mind when teaching students about questioning and key details.(Fisher & Frey 2012)

References

Burkins, J., Yaris, K. (Jan. 22, 2013). Defining Close Reading. Burkins and Yaris: Think tank for the 21st century Retrieved on Feb. 13, 2013. From http://www.burkinsandyaris.com/defining-close-reading/

Calkins, L., Ehrenworth, M., Lehman, C. (2012) Pathways to the Common Core. Heinemann, Portsmouth, NH.

Common Core State Standards. (2010). Common Core State Standards for English Language Arts and Literacy in History/Social Sciences, Science, and Technical Subjects. Retrieved May 14, 2012, from http://www.corestandards.org.

Fisher, D. (n.d.). Close Reading and the CCSS, Part 1. Common Core State Standards Toolbox. Retrieved on Jan. 25, 2013. From http://www.mhecommoncoretoolbox.com/close-reading-and-the-ccss-part-1.html

Fisher, D., & Frey, N. (2012). Close Reading in Elementary Schools. Reading Teacher. Vol. 66.3

Tyson, K. (2013). 25 Great Ways to Prepare for Common Core. Learning Unlimited LLC. Retrieved on February 2013. From http://www.learningunlimitedllc.com/25-ways-to-prepare-for-the-common-core/

Graphic courtesy of Mycutegraphics.com