Purpose Anyone?

When dissecting Common Core, I am constantly grappling with what I think I know vs. what is really truth vs. what the authors’ intend for us to do. While some ideas are clearly articulated, expanded upon, and delineated with examples, others are not. One such area is the idea of author’s purpose. If you actually search those words within the Common Core standards, it will come up blank. However, throughout the primary grades, there is a consistent reference to the author’s main purpose or reasons. I am currently examining CCSS-Literacy.RI.2.6, which states that students should be able to do the following:

Identify the main purpose of a text, including what the author wants to answer, explain, or describe.

This sounds simple enough, but my quandary lies within this – when we think about author’s purpose, we usually do not quarantine it to one genre. Generally, when broaching author’s purpose, teachers think of PIE – persuade, inform, and entertain. I also like to add in describe. However, these categories do not all work well for informational text. The terms specified in Common Core are DEA – describe, explain, or answer. Describe for expository text would be very different from describe for poetry or how an author may use a description to paint an image of scenery. The nuances within these three terms are difficult to separate. Let’s say a text was procedural, such as How to Build a Duct Tape Wallet. One could justify that the author is describing how to make the wallet. On the other hand, this procedure, while being descriptive, is also an explanation. But why did the author write this text? One could easily say to answer the question of how to make a wallet. Even in the dictionary, describe is defined as “to explain something.” So why the three different terms? Was it to be all-inclusive because in the bigger picture, students need to understanding that informational text is to inform, and DEA are three ways of teaching the reading? And what about the other reasons author’s write outside of the informational world? Why has that been left off completely?

When I searched the internet to see what other people determined, it seems the consensus is to continue making it as easy as PIE. Continue to examine narratives, poetry, and informational text for author’s purpose. However, within informational, be specific on what exactly is being taught. Perhaps we could use an organizer like the one below to think about the structure of author’s purpose:

When thinking about the purpose of Common Core, it has been made clear by the authors that there is an increased focus on critical thinking and informational text. I believe the point of the authors’ with standard RI.2.6 was to ensure that students think critically about the point of what they are reading so that they read accordingly. From my perspective, in order for students to think critically, they must also understand why author’s write any specific type of text, and through that lens, will be able to think about the organization to increase comprehension across the genres. So while author’s purpose does not make as clear of an appearance in literature, students must understand the difference between genres, and therefore understand the differences among why authors write, thereby, empowering themselves as writers to decide upon their purpose and structure their writing to that end.

Perception and the Truth

Many credit Lee Atwater with the quote, “Perception is reality.” And when viewing your own life, does this not ring true? One would never consider a turtle to be a speedy creature, but then again, that depends on who is doing the considering.

Perspectives have much to do with experiences, schema, and interpretation. Author’s bring their own unique perspectives to the texts they write. They select what they will reveal to the reader explicitly and implicitly, how the text will be organized, and how their point of view will be carried out. Often the author’s own ideas begin as incomplete thoughts, twisting and turning through the process of writing, changing and evolving until they come out the other side into a cohesive whole. At times, the characters of novels reveal themselves to the authors through the storytelling, and take on a life of their own, and yet, the author still has command over what will be revealed through the character’s dialogue, actions, and thoughts. Despite all this control, readers develop their own interpretation based upon the evidence within the text, but also their own personal perspectives. Other experiences with texts, the world, and other people affect how they view what the author reveals. Therefore, readers apply their own connections to develop their own perspective, but must also examine the evidence within the text to understand what the author directly reveals as well as infer to gain meaning from underlying messages, ideas, and themes.

Common Core emphasizes the importance of point of view, devoting standard six for Reading Literature and Informational Text to this concept. Why is it so significant? Understanding the role of point of view allows the reader to think critically about a piece. What are the author’s motives and purposes in writing a text? What context or historical background does the author emerge from? How does this affect the portrayal of events? Readers must understand the effects of their own perceptions and the author’s point of view in order to get at the truth of what they are reading. Even then, that gets us to a deeper question – what is the truth?

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.” 

Unpacking Common Core

I have spent countless hours unpacking the old standards, and in beginning to unpack the literature standards for common core, I am finding it a bit challenging. Of course, I think I could have started with a simpler standard, but as it is, I decided to kickstart my differentiated task cards for common core with reading literature standard 6, which is essentially examining point of view. To get a better understanding, I examined the standard from Kindergarten through Grade 3. I looked at what ideas kids need to know, skills kids need to be able to do, and bigger ideas they need to understand. In my research, I came across a book by Lucy Calkins, Pathway to the Common Core, Accelerating Acheivement. Her first two chapters are posted online, and one of the major changes she defines between the common core standards and old standards is the focus on textual analysis. There is much depth in the area of comprehension in common core, however, there is little in relation to personal response. That “ah-ha” for me really helped illustrate why it was so challenging to unpack and differentiate this standard. This focus on text structure is very different than what I am accustomed to. I searched a variety of places to get better acquainted with the essence of point of view. Most of what I found was the goal for upper grade and beyond, which really helped me examine how the primary grades build to that point. Therefore, point of view in the primary grades is pieces of point of view, which build towards a larger meaning. For a quick tutorial on what point of view really is, check out this video on youtube.

 You can find the results of my efforts in unpacking this standard for grades K-3, lesson ideas for grades K-3, an overview of point of view, and 8 differentiated task cards on point of view for 2nd grade by clicking on the button to the left and downloading the free packet on teacherspayteachers.com. Also , please visit my literacy tab to see examples of how this standard would look across the grade levels K-5. Please give me feedback on what you think. I would love to hear from you.

To learn more about how the differentiated task cards were developed, check out the differentiated literacy centers tab underneath the  literacy tab above.